alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
* This disposition is not appropriate for publication and is not precedent except as provided by 9th Cir. R. 36-3.

** The panel granted plaintiff’s motion to submit this case on the briefs without argument. NOT FOR PUBLICATION UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT EDWARD HUNGA, Plaintiff - Appellant,
v. COMMISSIONER OF SOCIAL SECURITY ADMINISTRATION, Defendant - Appellee. No. 11-15110 D.C. No. 1:09-cv-01852-DLB
MEMORANDUM *

Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern District of California Dennis L. Beck, Magistrate Judge, Presiding Submitted February 13, 2012 ** San Francisco, California BEFORE: THOMAS, FISHER, and IKUTA, Circuit Judges. Edward Hunga appeals the judgment of the district court affirming the decision of an administrative law judge denying his application for social security 

# FILED
FEB 15 2012 MOLLY C. DWYER, CLERK

U.S. COURT OF APPEALS-2- disability benefits. Because the parties ar e familiar with the factual and procedural history of the case, we need not recount it here. After a careful review of the record, we affirm the judgment of the district court for the reasons set forth in the thorough order filed on December 2, 2010 by Magistrate Judge Beck.

AFFIRMED.
[Federal Register Volume 61, Number 130 (Friday, July 5, 1996)]
[Notices]
[Page 35211]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 96-17113]


=======================================================================
-----------------------------------------------------------------------

FEDERAL COMMUNICATIONS COMMISSION


Fourth Meeting of the WRC-97 Advisory Committee

AGENCY: Federal Communications Commission.

ACTION: Notice.

-----------------------------------------------------------------------

SUMMARY: In accordance with the Federal Advisory Committee Act, this 
notice advises interested persons that the next meeting of the WRC-97 
Advisory Committee will be held on Monday, July 8, 1996, at the Federal 
Communications Commission. The purpose of the meeting is to continue 
preparations for the 1997 World Radiocommunication Conference.

DATES: July 8, 1996; 2:00 p.m.-5:00 p.m.

ADDRESSES: Federal Communications Commission, 1919 M Street, N.W., Room 
856, Washington, D.C. 20554

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Crystal Foster, FCC International 
Bureau, Satellite and Radiocommunication Division, at (202) 418-0749.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

    1. The Federal Communications Commission (FCC) established the 
Advisory Committee for the 1997 World Radiocommunication Conference to 
provide advice, technical support and recommendations relating to the 
preparation of recommended United States proposals and positions for 
the 1997 World Radiocommunication Conference (WRC-97). In accordance 
with the Federal Advisory Committee Act, Public Law 92-463, as amended, 
this notice advises interested persons of the fourth meeting of the 
WRC-97 Advisory Committee.
    2. This meeting will continue reviewing the work of the Advisory 
Committee. It will provide an update on the FCC's preparatory process 
for WRC-97 and discuss issues for the agenda of WRC-99.
    3. The WRC-97 Advisory Committee has an open membership. All 
interested parties are invited to participate in the Advisory Committee 
and to attend its meetings. Further information regarding the WRC-97 
Advisory Committee is available on the World Wide Web at: <a href="http://
www.fcc.gov/ib/wrc97/">http://
www.fcc.gov/ib/wrc97/</a>.
    4. The proposed agenda for the fourth meeting is as follows:

Agenda

Fourth Meeting of the WRC-97 Advisory Committee, Federal Communications 
Commission, 1919 M Street, N.W., Room 856, Washington, D.C. 20554, 
Monday, July 8, 1996; 2:00 p.m.-5:00 p.m.
Remarks
2. Agenda Approval
3. Administrative Matters
4. Update on NTIA's Radiocommunication Conference Subcommittee
5. Report of the Chairs of the Informal Working Groups
6. Consideration of Draft Proposals of the Informal Working Groups
7. Discussion of Issues for the Agenda of WRC-99
8. Meeting Schedules
9. Other Business

Federal Communications Commission.
William F. Caton,
Acting Secretary.
[FR Doc. 96-17113 Filed 7-3-96; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6712-01-P
[Federal Register Volume 61, Number 124 (Wednesday, June 26, 1996)]
[Notices]
[Page 33097]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 96-16212]



=======================================================================
-----------------------------------------------------------------------

DEPARTMENT OF DEFENSE

Office of the Secretary


Defense Intelligence Agency, Scientific Advisory Board Closed 
Meeting

AGENCY: Defense Intelligence Agency, Department of Defense.

ACTION: Notice.

-----------------------------------------------------------------------

SUMMARY: Pursuant to the provisions of Subsection (d) of Section 10 of 
Public Law 92-463, as amended by Section 5 of Public Law 94-409, notice 
is hereby given that a closed meeting of the DIA Scientific Advisory 
Board has been scheduled as follows:

DATES: July 9, 1996 (8:30 am to 4:30 pm).

ADDRESS: The Defense Intelligence Agency, 200 MacDill Blvd., 
Washington, DC 20340-5100.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
M.G. Mathews, CAPT, USN, Executive Secretary, DIA Scientific Advisory 
Board, Washington, D.C. 20340-1328 (202) 231-4930.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The entire meeting is devoted to the 
discussion of classified information as defined in Section 552b(c)(I), 
Title 5 of the U.S. Code and therefore will be closed to the public, 
The Board will receive briefings on and discuss several current 
critical intelligence issues and advise the Director, DIA, on related 
scientific and technical matters.

    Dated: June 20, 1996.
L.M. Bynum,
Alternate OSD Federal Register Liaison Officer, Department of Defense.
[FR Doc. 96-16212 Filed 6-25-96; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 5000-04-M
#### The STATE of Texas, Appellant, v. Ron Edward BRITTON, Appellee.

No. 10-96-150-CR.

Court of Appeals of Texas, Waco.

Aug. 30, 1996.

*780Before DAVIS, C.J., and CUMMINGS and VANCE, JJ.

MEMORANDUM OPINION

PER CURIAM.

The State attempts to appeal from an order quashing six subpoenas *duces tecum.*Tex.Code Crim. Proc. Ann. art. 24.02 (Vernon 1989), art. 44.01 (Vernon Supp.1996). Because the Court of Criminal Appeals has held that the State cannot appeal from such an order, we must dismiss this appeal. *State ex rel. Healey v. McMeans,*884 S.W.2d 772, 775 (Tex.Crim.App.1994).

Ron Britton stands accused of two counts of aggravated sexual assault and two counts of indecency with a child. Tex. Penal Code Ann. §§ 21.11, 22.021 (Vernon 1994 & Supp.1996). The State believes that Britton’s wife, his attorneys, or his attorneys’ employees have possession of videotapes relevant to the offense and caused subpoenas *duces tecum*to be issued instructing each to produce any of Britton’s videotapes in their possession. On the motion of the wife, attorneys, and employees, the court quashed the subpoenas. The State filed a notice of appeal, alleging that the court’s order was, in effect, an order granting a motion to suppress evidence. Tex.Code Crim. Proc. Ann. art. 44.01(a)(5). Britton has responded by filing a motion to dismiss for want of jurisdiction, arguing that the court did not suppress evidence, but merely denied the State the ability to “discover” the evidence. *See State v. Howard,*908 S.W.2d 602, 604 (Tex.App.—Amarillo 1995, no pet.); *State v. Kaiser,*822 S.W.2d 697, 699-700 (Tex.App.—Fort Worth 1991, pet. ref'd). However, we will not reach this issue framed by the parties.

In *McMeans,*the State caused subpoenas to be issued to four local television newsmen, instructing them to appear to testify and produce any videotapes they possessed regarding the underlying offense, an abuse-of-a-corpse prosecution. *McMeans,*884 S.W.2d at 773. The newsmen moved to quash the subpoenas on the grounds that they were protected by a “newsman’s privilege” to refuse to testify or produce evidence at a criminal trial. *Id.*at 774. The trial court granted the motions, and the State sought a writ of mandamus from the Court of Criminal Appeals requiring the court to vacate its orders quashing the subpoenas. *Id.*In the process of granting the writ, the court found that the State did not have an adequate remedy at law, saying “[the State] cannot appeal [the trial court’s] orders under Article 44.01.” *Id.*at 775. Thus, the Court of Criminal Appeals has specifically held that an order granting a motion to quash a subpoena is not appealable by the State. *Id.*

Therefore, Britton’s motion is granted and we dismiss the State’s appeal for want of jurisdiction.
EXHIBIT 23.1



                    CONSENT OF INDEPENDENT PUBLIC ACCOUNTANTS


         As independent public accountants, we hereby consent to the
incorporation of our report dated February 15, 2002 with respect to the
consolidated financial statements of HBOA Holdings, Inc. included in this Annual
Report on From 10-KSB into the Company's previously filed Registration Statement
on Form S-8 filed on December 21, 2000 (Registration No. 333-52424) and the
Company's Post-Effective No. 1 to its Registration Statement on Form S-8 filed
on December 14, 2000 (Registration No. 333-50076).

/s/ SEWELL AND COMPANY, P.A.

Hollywood, Florida
April 15, 2002
Exhibit 32.1

CERTIFICATION BY CHIEF EXECUTIVE OFFICER

PURSUANT TO 18 U.S.C. SECTION 1350,

AS ADOPTED PURSUANT TO

SECTION 906
OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002

In connection with the Quarterly Report of CAI International, Inc. (the Company) on
Form 10-Q for the period ended June 30, 2008 as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the Report), I, Masaaki (John) Nishibori, President and Chief Executive Officer of the Company, certify,
pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, as adopted pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that:



| | (1) | The Report fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934; and
| | --- | ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------



| | (2) | The information contained in the Report fairly presents, in all material respects, the financial condition and results of operations of the Company.
| | --- | ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Date: August 7, 2008



/s/ MASAAKI (JOHN) NISHIBORIMasaaki (John) NishiboriPresident and Chief Executive Officer
104TH CONGRESS

2D SESSION H. R. 3710

AN ACT

To designate the United States courthouse under

States Courthouse’’.Tampa, Florida, as the ‘‘Sam M. Gibbons Unitedconstruction at 611 North Florida Avenue in
104TH CONGRESS

2D SESSION H. R. 3710

AN ACT

To designate the United States courthouse under construction at 611 North Florida Avenue in Tampa, Florida,

as the ‘‘Sam M. Gibbons United States Courthouse’’.

1 Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representa2 tives of the United States of America in Congress assembled,
2

•HR 3710 EH

1 SECTION 1. DESIGNATION.

2 The United States courthouse under construction at

3 611 North Florida Avenue in Tampa, Florida, shall be

4 known and designated as the ‘‘Sam M. Gibbons United

5 States Courthouse’’.

6 SEC. 2. REFERENCES.

7 Any reference in a law, map, regulation, document,

8 paper, or other record of the United States to the United

9 States courthouse referred to in section 1 shall be deemed

10 to be a reference to the ‘‘Sam M. Gibbons United States

11 Courthouse’’.

12 SEC. 3. EFFECTIVE DATE.

13 This Act shall become effective on January 3, 1997.

Passed the House of Representatives August 2,

1996.

Attest:

Clerk.
**Exhibit
      10.3(a)**




**AMENDMENT
      NO. 1**


**TO
      THE**


**LINKWELL
      CORPORATION**


**2005
      EQUITY COMPENSATION PLAN**




**THIS
      AMENDMENT NO. 1** to the
      Linkwell Corporation (the “ **Company** ”)
      2005
      Equity Compensation Plan (the “ **Plan** ”)
      amends
      the Plan as set forth below effective as of February 28, 2008. All capitalized
      terms not specifically defined in this Amendment shall have the meanings
      provided to them in the Plan.




**NOW,
      THEREFORE** ,
      the
      Plan is hereby amended as follows:




**1.**
            **The
                first sentence of Section 3.1 of the Plan is hereby amended in its
                entirety to read as follows:**




“The
      total number of shares of Common Stock reserved and available for issuance
      under
      the Plan shall be 15,000,000 shares.”




**2.**
            **Except
                to the extent amended hereby, the terms and provisions of the Plan
                shall
                remain in full force and effect.**
CERTIFICATION
PURSUANT TO


18
U.S.C. SECTION 1350,


AS
ADOPTED PURSUANT TO


SECTION
906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002





In
connection with this Quarterly Report of Exclusive Apparel, Inc. (the “Company”)
on Form 10-Q for the period ending March 31, 2009, as filed with the Securities
and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the “Report”), I, Sharon M. Lynch,
Chief Executive Officer and Chief Accounting Officer of the Company, certifies
to the best of his knowledge, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, as adopted
pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002 that:





1.
            The
      Report fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) or 15(d) of
      the Securities Exchange Act of 1934;
and





2.
            The
      information contained in the Report fairly presents, in all material
      respects, the financial condition and result of operations of the
      Company.





By:   /s/
Sharon M. Lynch


Sharon
M. Lynch


Chief
Executive Officer


Chief
Accounting Officer





Dated:
March 31, 2009
[Federal Register Volume 61, Number 128 (Tuesday, July 2, 1996)]
[Notices]
[Page 34445]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 96-16868]


-----------------------------------------------------------------------

DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR
Bureau of Reclamation


Animas-La Plata Project, Colorado and New Mexico

Agency: Bureau of Reclamation, Interior.

Action: Notice of availability of supporting Appendices for the Final 
Supplement to the 1980 Final Environmental Statement (FSFES): FSFES 96-
23.

-----------------------------------------------------------------------

Summary: Pursuant to section 102(2) of the National Environmental 
Policy Act of 1969, as amended, the Bureau of Reclamation (Reclamation) 
filed the Final Supplement to the 1980 Final Environmental Statement 
and published a notice of availability for the FSFES for the Animas-La 
Plata Project in Colorado and New Mexico on May 2, 1996.
    The purpose of this notice of availability is to inform the public 
of the supporting Appendices to the FSFES and how to acquires copies or 
review this information.
    The supporting Appendices include:

A-Hydrology
B-Water Quality
C-Socioeconomic Analysis
D-Indian Trust Assets
E-Cultural Resources
F-Soils and Trace Element Analysis
G-Vol. 1 Recreation
    Vol. 2 Recreation
    Vol. 3 Recreation
    Vol. 4 Recreation
    Vol. 5 Recreation
    Vol. 6 Recreation
H-Vol. 1 Wetland, Riparian, and Vegetation Resources
    Vol. 2 Wetland, Riparian, and Vegetation Resources
I-Aquatic and Wildlife Resources
J-Wild and Scenic Rivers
K-Threatened and Endangered Species
L-Geological Resources
M-Conceptual Mitigation and Monitoring Plan

Addresses: Single copies of the supporting documents may be obtained on 
request to the following addresses: Western Colorado Area Office--
Southern Division, Bureau of Reclamation, PO Box 460, Durango CO 81302-
0640.
    Copies are available for inspection at the following locations:

Bureau of Reclamation, Denver Office Library, Denver Federal Center, 
Building 67, Room 167, Denver Colorado 80225
Bureau of Reclamation, Upper Colorado Regional Office, 125 South State 
Street, Room 6107, Salt Lake City Utah 84138
Bureau of Reclamation, Western Colorado Area Office--Southern Division, 
835 East Second Avenue, Durango, Colorado 81301
Bureau of Reclamation, Western Colorado Area Office--Northern Division, 
2764 Compass Drive, Grand Junction, Colorado 81506.

For Further Information Contact: Mr. Ken Beck, Planning Team Leader, 
Bureau of Reclamation, PO Box 640, Durango, Colorado 81302-0640, Phone 
(970) 385-6558.

Supplementary Information: The supporting Appendices provide detailed 
information for the FSFES.

    Dated: June 24, 1996.
Charles A. Calhoun,
Regional Director.
[FR Doc. 96-16868 Filed 7-1-96; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4310-94-M
[Federal Register Volume 61, Number 124 (Wednesday, June 26, 1996)]
[Notices]
[Page 33110]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 96-16227]



-----------------------------------------------------------------------

DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY
[Docket No. RP96-280-000]


Tuscarora Gas Transmission Company; Notice of Proposed Changes in 
FERC Gas Tariff

June 20, 1996.
    Take notice that on June 18, 1996, Tuscarora Gas Transmission 
Company (Tuscarora) tendered for filing as part of its FERC Gas Tariff, 
Original Volume No. 1, the following tariff sheets, to become effective 
August 1, 1996:

First Revised Sheet Nos. 4 & 5
First Revised Sheet No. 31
Original Sheet Nos. 91-93.

    Tuscarora states that the tariff sheets which it is submitting 
reflect a Gas Research Institute Adjustment Provision.
    Tuscarora further states it has served a copy of this filing upon 
all interested state regulatory agencies and Tuscarora's jurisdictional 
customers.
    Any person desiring to be heard or protest said filing should file 
a motion to intervene or protest with the Federal Energy Regulatory 
Commission, 888 First Street, N.E., Washington, D.C. 20426, in 
accordance with Sections 385.214 and 385.211 of the Commission's Rules 
of Practice and Procedure. All such motions or protests must be filed 
as provided in Section 154.210 of the Commission's Regulations. 
Protests will be considered by the Commission in determining the 
appropriate action to be taken, but will not serve to make protestants 
parties to the proceeding. Any person wishing to become a party must 
file a motion to intervene. Copies of this filing are on file with the 
Commission and are available for public inspection in the Public 
Reference Room.
Lois D. Cashell,
Secretary.
[FR Doc.96-16227 Filed 6-25-96; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6717-01-M
II 

111TH CONGRESS 

1ST SESSION S. 1205 

To exempt guides for hire and other operators of uninspected vessels on 

Lake Texoma from Coast Guard and other regulations, and for other 

purposes. 

IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES 

JUNE 8, 2009 

Mr. INHOFE (for himself and Mr. COBURN) introduced the following bill; 

which was read twice and referred to the Committee on Commerce, 

Science, and Transportation 

A BILL 

To exempt guides for hire and other operators of uninspected 

vessels on Lake Texoma from Coast Guard and other 

regulations, and for other purposes. 

1 Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representa2 tives of the United States of America in Congress assembled, 

3 SECTION 1. EXEMPTION OF FISHING GUIDES AND OTHER 

4 OPERATORS OF UNINSPECTED VESSELS ON 

5 LAKE TEXOMA FROM COAST GUARD AND 

6 OTHER REGULATIONS. 

7 (a) EXEMPTION.— 

8 (1) EXEMPTION OF STATE LICENSEES FROM

9 COAST GUARD REGULATION.—Residents or nonVerDate Nov 24 2008 05:45 Jun 09, 2009 Jkt 079200 PO 00000 Frm 00001 Fmt 6652 Sfmt 6201 E:\BILLS\S1205.IS S1205

tjames on PRODPC75 with BILLS
2 

•S 1205 IS

1 residents who assist, accompany, transport, guide, or 

2 aid persons in the taking of fish for monetary com3 pensation or other consideration on Lake Texoma 

4 who are licensed by the State in which they are op5 erating shall not be subject to any requirement es6 tablished or administered by the Coast Guard with 

7 respect to that operation. 

8 (2) EXEMPTION OF COAST GUARD LICENSEES

9 FROM STATE REGULATION.—Residents or non10 residents who assist, accompany, transport, guide, or 

11 aid persons in the taking of fish for monetary com12 pensation or other consideration on Lake Texoma 

13 who are currently licensed by the Coast Guard to 

14 conduct such activities shall not be subject to State 

15 regulation for as long as the Coast Guard license for 

16 such activities remains valid. 

17 (b) STATE REQUIREMENTS NOT AFFECTED.—Ex18 cept as provided in subsection (a)(2), this section does not 

19 affect any requirement under State law or under any li20 cense issued under State law. 

21 SEC. 2. WAIVER OF BIOMETRIC TRANSPORTATION SECU22 RITY CARD REQUIREMENT FOR CERTAIN 

23 SMALL BUSINESS MERCHANT MARINERS. 

24 Section 70105(b)(2) of title 46, United States Code, 

25 is amended— 


tjames on PRODPC75 with BILLS
3 

•S 1205 IS

1 (1) in subparagraph (B), by inserting ‘‘and 

2 serving under the authority of such license, certifi3 cate of registry, or merchant mariners document on 

4 a vessel for which the owner or operator of such ves5 sel is required to submit a vessel security plan under 

6 section 70103(c) of this title’’ before the semicolon; 

7 (2) by striking subparagraph (D); and 

8 (3) by redesignating subparagraphs (E), (F), 

9 and (G) as subparagraphs (D), (E), and (F), respec10 tively. 

Æ 


tjames on PRODPC75 with BILLS
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

EASTERN DISTRICT OF MICHIGAN

NORTHERN DIVISION

GREGORY LAMAR PRICE-IL,

Plaintiff,

Case Number 08-14472-BC

v. Honorable Thomas L. Ludington

PHILLIP A. RAGAN, JR.,

Defendant.

______________________________________ /

ORDER ADOPTING MAGISTRATE JUDGE’S REPORT AND RECOMMENDATION

AND SUA SPONTE DISMISSING PLAINTIFF’S COMPLAINT

On December 5, 2008, Magistrate Judge Charles E. Binder issued a report and

recommendation that the Court sua sponte dismiss Plaintiff’s complaint as for lack of subject matter

jurisdiction. None of the parties to this action filed objections to the report and recommendation.

A party’s failure to file objections to the report and recommendation waives any further right to

appeal. Smith v. Detroit Federation of Teachers Local 231, 829 F.2d 1370, 1373 (6th Cir. 1987).

 Likewise, the failure to object to the magistrate judge’s report releases the Court from its duty to

independently review the record. Thomas v. Arn, 474 U.S. 140, 149 (1985). 

Accordingly, it is ORDERED that the magistrate judge’s report and recommendation [Dkt.

# 5] is ADOPTED. Plaintiff’s complaint is DISMISSED.

 It is further ORDERED that Defendant’s motion to dismiss [Dkt. # 3] is DENIED as moot.

s/Thomas L. Ludington 

THOMAS L. LUDINGTON

United States District Judge

Dated: December 22, 2008
-2-

PROOF OF SERVICE

The undersigned certifies that a copy of the foregoing order was served

upon each attorney or party of record herein by electronic means or first

class U.S. mail on December 22, 2008.

s/Tracy A. Jacobs 

TRACY A. JACOBS
2:09-cv-10454-VAR-LJM Doc # 157-3 Filed 06/21/13 Pg 1 of 3 Pg ID 3358
2:09-cv-10454-VAR-LJM Doc # 157-3 Filed 06/21/13 Pg 2 of 3 Pg ID 3359
2:09-cv-10454-VAR-LJM Doc # 157-3 Filed 06/21/13 Pg 3 of 3 Pg ID 3360