alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

26

27

28

Hyung S. Choi, State Bar 015669

Veronika Fabian, State Bar 018770

CHOI & FABIAN, PLC

90 S. Kyrene Rd., Suite #5

Chandler, Arizona 85226

tel: (480) 517-1400

fax: (480) 517-6955

Flagstaff: (928) 779-2226

hyung@choiandfabian.com

veronika@choianfabian.com

 Attorneys for Plaintiff Christina Cohen

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

DISTRICT OF ARIZONA

Christina Cohen f/k/a Christina

Gatewood,

Plaintiff,

vs.

Sallie Mae, Inc., Navient Solutions, Inc.,

Equifax Information Services, LLC, 

Experian Information Solutions, Inc.,

Defendants.

NO. 4:15-cv-00608-DCB 

STIPULATION FOR DISMISSAL

WITH PREJUDICE 

Plaintiff and Defendant Equifax Information Services, LLC (“Equifax”) hereby

stipulate that Plaintiff’s claims or causes of action against Equifax in the above-captioned

matter are hereby dismissed with prejudice pursuant to Rule 41(a)(2) of the Federal Rules

of Civil Procedure. Each party shall bear their own costs and attorneys’ fees incurred

herein. 

/ / /

/ / /

Case 4:15-cv-00608-DCB Document 48 Filed 08/16/16 Page 1 of 2
1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

26

27

28

2

DATED on August 16, 2016.

CHOI & FABIAN, PLC

/s/ Hyung S. Choi 

Hyung S. Choi

Attorneys for Plaintiff

SNELL & WILMER, LLP

 /s/ Jacob C. Jones with permission 

Jacob C. Jones

Attorneys for Defendant Equifax

CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE

I hereby certify that on August 16, 2016, I electronically transmitted the attached

documents to the Clerk’s Office using the CM/ECF System for filing and transmittal of

a Notice of Electronic Filing to the following CM/ECF registrants:

Justin Balser

Ashley Calhoun

Akerman LLP

1400 Wewatta Street, Suite 500

Denver, CO 80202

ashley.calhoun@akerman.com

Attorneys for Navient

Jonathan Dessaules

DESSAULES LAW GROUP

5353 N. 16 St., Ste. 110 th

Phoenix, AZ 85016

jdessaules@dessauleslaw.com

Attorneys for Experian

Andrea Mazingo

JONES DAY

3161 Michelson Drive, Suite 800

Irvine, CA 92612

amazingo@jonesday.com

Attorneys for Experian

Jacob C. Jones

SNELL & WILMER, LLP

One Arizona Center

400 E. Van Buren, Ste 1900

Phoenix, AZ 85004

jcjones@swlaw.com

Attorneys for Equifax 

 /s/ Dinah Lee 

Case 4:15-cv-00608-DCB Document 48 Filed 08/16/16 Page 2 of 2
1

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA

ANGELA HINES, 

Plaintiff,

v. Civil Action No. 13-560 (JEB/AK)

DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA,

 Defendant.

MEMORANDUM OPINION

This matter is before the Court on the Report and Recommendation filed by Magistrate

Judge Alan Kay on December 4, 2013. The 14-day period during which the parties may

file objections to the Report and Recommendation has expired, see Local Civil Rule 72.3(b), and

neither party has filed objections.

Plaintiff Angela Hines, on behalf of her minor child M.H., filed a Motion for Summary 

Judgment seeking reimbursement of the fees incurred by her attorney in this Individuals with 

Disabilities Education Act matter. See ECF No. 10. Defendant District of Columbia filed an 

opposition to that Motion, as well as a Cross-Motion for Summary Judgment. See ECF Nos. 11-

12. In determining whether the fees sought by Plaintiff were reasonable, Judge Kay analyzed the 

complexity of the issues and determined that an hourly rate of $217.50 – three-fourths of the 

Laffey rate – for the attorney and $108.75 for the paralegal struck a fair balance. Judge Kay 

concluded that Plaintiff should be awarded fees as follows: her counsel 85.4 hours at $217.50 per 

hour (totaling $18,574.50), her paralegal 86.4 hours at $108.75 per hour (totaling $9,396), and 

costs of $305.76. The total amount was $28,276.26. 
2

After consideration of the Report and Recommendation of Judge Kay, the absence of any 

party’s objection thereto, the entire record before the Court, and the applicable law, the Court 

will adopt Magistrate Judge Kay’s Report and Recommendation and grant in part and deny in 

part both parties’ Motions.

A separate final order accompanies this Memorandum Opinion.

 /s/ James E. Boasberg 

 JAMES E. BOASBERG

 United States District Judge

Date: January 2, 2014
423 A.2d 1302

#### Commonwealth v. Cordero, Appellant.

Submitted March 23, 1979.

Frederick S. Wolf, for appellant; David J. Brightbill, District Attorney, for Commonwealth, appellee.

Before PRICE, SPAETH and LIPEZ, JJ.

Judgment of sentence affirmed.
```

[Congressional Bills 105th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[H.R. 559 Engrossed in House (EH)]

  2d Session

                               H. R. 559

_______________________________________________________________________

                                 AN ACT

   To amend title 38, United States Code, to add bronchiolo-alveolar 
carcinoma to the list of diseases presumed to be service-connected for 
                  certain radiation-exposed veterans.
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
105th CONGRESS
  2d Session
                                H. R. 559

_______________________________________________________________________

                                 AN ACT

 
   To amend title 38, United States Code, to add bronchiolo-alveolar 
carcinoma to the list of diseases presumed to be service-connected for 
                  certain radiation-exposed veterans.

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

SECTION 1. PRESUMPTION THAT BRONCHIOLO-ALVEOLAR CARCINOMA IS SERVICE-
              CONNECTED.

    Section 1112(c)(2) of title 38, United States Code, is amended by 
adding at the end the following new subparagraph:
            ``(P) Bronchiolo-alveolar carcinoma.''.

            Passed the House of Representatives October 14, 1998.

            Attest:

                                                                 Clerk.
```
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE 

DISTRICT OF ARIZONA

Joann White,

Plaintiff,

v.

C. R. Bard Inc. and Bard Peripheral 

Vascular, Inc.,

Defendant.

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

MDL Case No. 2:15-md-02641-DGC

Civil Action No. CV-17-03645-PHX-DGC

WAIVER OF THE SERVICE OF SUMMONS

To: Freese & Goss PLLC - Birmingham, AL

(Name of plaintiff’s attorney or unrepresented plaintiff)

I have received your request to waive service of a summons in this action along with a copy of the complaint, two 

copies of this waiver form, and a prepaid means of returning one signed copy of the form to you.

I, or the entity I represent, agree to save the expense of serving a summons and complaint in this case.

I understand that I, or the entity I represent, will keep all defenses or objections to the lawsuit, the court’s 

jurisdiction, and the venue of the action, but that I waive any objections to the absence of a summons or of service.

I also understand that I, or the entity I represent, must file and serve an answer or a motion under Rule 12 within 

60 days from 11/14/2017, the date when this request was sent (or 90 days if it was sent outside the United States). If I fail 

to do so, a default judgment will be entered against me or the entity I represent.

Date: November 27, 2017 /s/ Richard B. North, Jr.

Signature of the attorney or unrepresented party

C. R. Bard, Inc. and Bard Peripheral

Vascular, Inc.

Printed name of parties waiving service of 

summons

Richard B. North, Jr. (Ga. Bar No. 545599)

Printed Name

Nelson Mullins Riley & Scarborough, LLP

201 17th St., NW, Suite 1700, Atlantic Station, Atlanta, GA 30363

Address

richard.north@nelsonmullins.com

E-mail Address

(404) 322-6155

Telephone number

Duty to Avoid Unnecessary Expenses of Serving a Summons

Rule 4 of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure requires certain defendants to cooperate in saving unnecessary expenses of serving a 

summons and complaint. A defendant who is located in the United States and who fails to return a signed waiver of service requested by a plaintiff 

located in the United States will be required to pay the expenses of service, unless the defendant shows good cause for the failure. 

“Good cause” does not include a belief that the lawsuit is groundless, or that it has been brought in an improper venue, or that the court has 

no jurisdiction over this matter or over the defendant or the defendant’s property. 

If the waiver is signed and returned, you can still make these and all other defenses and objections, but you cannot object to the absence of 

a summons or of service. 

If you waive service, then you must, within the time specified on the waiver form, serve an answer or a motion under Rule 12 on the 

plaintiff and file a copy with the court. By signing and returning the waiver form, you are allowed more time to respond than if a summons had been 

served.

Case 2:15-md-02641-DGC Document 9103 Filed 12/04/17 Page 1 of 1
MOYES SELLERS &

HENDRICKS

PHOENIX, AZ

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

26

00148584

MOYES SELLERS & HENDRICKS

Stephen Brower (No. 024908)

Joshua T. Greer (No. 025508)

1850 North Central Avenue, Suite 1100

Phoenix, Arizona 85004

Telephone: (602) 604-2141

Email: sbrower@law-msh.com

jgreer@law-msh.com

Attorneys for Appellee

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

DISTRICT OF ARIZONA

In re:

Donita Cole,

Debtor.

No. CV-15-02105-PHX-SRB

BK No. 2:15-bk-07045-EPB

Donita J. Cole,

Appellant,

v.

MR Capital, LLC,

Appellee

APPELLEE’S NOTICE REGARDING

ANSWERING BRIEF FILED [Dkt 32]

NOTICE IS HEREBY GIVEN that on June 6, 2016, Appellee MR Capital, LLC,

filed Appellee’s Response Brief [Dkt 32], which responded to Appellant’s Amended

Initial Brief. Because no extension for filing answering brief had been given, Appellee’s

responsive pleading was due on June 6, 2016. Appellee’s Response Brief was responsive

to the Amended Initial Brief submitted to the Court with Appellant’s Motion for Leave of

Court to Amend Initial Brief [Dkt 29].

Therefore, no further responsive brief will be filed by Appellee.

/ / /

/ / /

Case 2:15-cv-02105-SRB Document 36 Filed 06/22/16 Page 1 of 2
MOYES SELLERS &

HENDRICKS

PHOENIX, AZ

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

26

00148584

- 2 -

DATED this 22nd day of June 2016.

MOYES SELLERS & HENDRICKS

By /s/Joshua T. Greer

Stephen Brower

Joshua T. Greer

Attorneys for Appellee

CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE

I hereby certify that on June 22, 2016, I electronically transmitted the attached

document to the Clerk of the Court using the CM/ECF System which will send

notification of such filing and transmittal of a Notice of Electronic Filing to all CM/ECF

registrants. I further certify that a copy of the attached document was delivered via email

and First Class Mail to:

Donita J. Cole

PO Box 4907

Mesa, AZ 85211

Email: dcole@cox.net

Appellant Pro Se

/s/ Donna M. Navarro

Case 2:15-cv-02105-SRB Document 36 Filed 06/22/16 Page 2 of 2
Opinion issued August 18, 2016

In The 

## Court of Appeals For The 

## First District of Texas

———————————— NO. 01
- 1 3
- 00 12 4
- CV

——————————— XENOS YUEN AND THE L AW OFFICES OF YUEN

& ASSOCIATES , P.C., Appellant s

V. HU NG H O AND H .L.L. S
. , Appellee s

On Appeal from the 80th District Court Harris County, Texas Trial Court Ca se No. 20 10
- 5 6 898

MEMORANDUM OPINION Appellant s , Xenos Yuen and The Law Offices of Yuen & Associates , P.C.,
ha ve failed to timely file a brief. See T EX
. R. A PP
. P . 38.6(a) (governing time to file brief), 38.8(a) (governing failure of appellant to file brief). After being notified that2

this appeal was subject to dismissal, appellant s did not adequately respond. See T EX
. R. A PP
. P . 42.3(b) (allowing involuntary dismissal of case). We dismiss the appeal for want of prosecution for failure to timely file a brief. We dismiss any pending motions as moot.
PER CURIAM
Panel consists of Justices Bland , Massengale, and Llo yd

.
{"version":"1.0","provider_name":"NASA","provider_url":"https:\/\/www.nasa.gov","author_name":"Dacia Massengill","author_url":"https:\/\/www.nasa.gov\/author\/daciamassengill-2\/","title":"Faces of NASA","type":"rich","width":600,"height":338,"html":"<blockquote class=\"wp-embedded-content\" data-secret=\"am7aB9fNi6\"><a href=\"https:\/\/www.nasa.gov\/gallery\/faces-of-nasa\/\">Faces of NASA<\/a><\/blockquote><iframe sandbox=\"allow-scripts\" security=\"restricted\" src=\"https:\/\/www.nasa.gov\/gallery\/faces-of-nasa\/embed\/#?secret=am7aB9fNi6\" width=\"600\" height=\"338\" title=\"“Faces of NASA” — NASA\" data-secret=\"am7aB9fNi6\" frameborder=\"0\" marginwidth=\"0\" marginheight=\"0\" scrolling=\"no\" class=\"wp-embedded-content\"><\/iframe><script>\n\/*! This file is auto-generated *\/\n!function(d,l){\"use strict\";l.querySelector&&d.addEventListener&&\"undefined\"!=typeof URL&&(d.wp=d.wp||{},d.wp.receiveEmbedMessage||(d.wp.receiveEmbedMessage=function(e){var t=e.data;if((t||t.secret||t.message||t.value)&&!\/[^a-zA-Z0-9]\/.test(t.secret)){for(var s,r,n,a=l.querySelectorAll('iframe[data-secret=\"'+t.secret+'\"]'),o=l.querySelectorAll('blockquote[data-secret=\"'+t.secret+'\"]'),c=new RegExp(\"^https?:$\",\"i\"),i=0;i<o.length;i++)o[i].style.display=\"none\";for(i=0;i<a.length;i++)s=a[i],e.source===s.contentWindow&&(s.removeAttribute(\"style\"),\"height\"===t.message?(1e3<(r=parseInt(t.value,10))?r=1e3:~~r<200&&(r=200),s.height=r):\"link\"===t.message&&(r=new URL(s.getAttribute(\"src\")),n=new URL(t.value),c.test(n.protocol))&&n.host===r.host&&l.activeElement===s&&(d.top.location.href=t.value))}},d.addEventListener(\"message\",d.wp.receiveEmbedMessage,!1),l.addEventListener(\"DOMContentLoaded\",function(){for(var e,t,s=l.querySelectorAll(\"iframe.wp-embedded-content\"),r=0;r<s.length;r++)(t=(e=s[r]).getAttribute(\"data-secret\"))||(t=Math.random().toString(36).substring(2,12),e.src+=\"#?secret=\"+t,e.setAttribute(\"data-secret\",t)),e.contentWindow.postMessage({message:\"ready\",secret:t},\"*\")},!1)))}(window,document);\n<\/script>\n","thumbnail_url":"https:\/\/www.nasa.gov\/wp-content\/uploads\/2024\/04\/danaweigel-jsc2024e023417-crop.jpg?w=600","thumbnail_width":600,"thumbnail_height":307}
{"version":"1.0","provider_name":"NASA","provider_url":"https:\/\/www.nasa.gov","author_name":"Anthony Greicius","author_url":"https:\/\/www.nasa.gov\/author\/anthony-greicius-116962jpl-nasa-gov\/","title":"Media Get Close-Up of NASA\u2019s Jupiter-Bound Europa Clipper","type":"rich","width":600,"height":338,"html":"<blockquote class=\"wp-embedded-content\" data-secret=\"2YrGsnBhsA\"><a href=\"https:\/\/www.nasa.gov\/missions\/europa-clipper\/media-get-close-up-of-nasas-jupiter-bound-europa-clipper\/\">Media Get Close-Up of NASA\u2019s Jupiter-Bound Europa Clipper<\/a><\/blockquote><iframe sandbox=\"allow-scripts\" security=\"restricted\" src=\"https:\/\/www.nasa.gov\/missions\/europa-clipper\/media-get-close-up-of-nasas-jupiter-bound-europa-clipper\/embed\/#?secret=2YrGsnBhsA\" width=\"600\" height=\"338\" title=\"“Media Get Close-Up of NASA\u2019s Jupiter-Bound Europa Clipper” — NASA\" data-secret=\"2YrGsnBhsA\" frameborder=\"0\" marginwidth=\"0\" marginheight=\"0\" scrolling=\"no\" class=\"wp-embedded-content\"><\/iframe><script>\n\/*! This file is auto-generated *\/\n!function(d,l){\"use strict\";l.querySelector&&d.addEventListener&&\"undefined\"!=typeof URL&&(d.wp=d.wp||{},d.wp.receiveEmbedMessage||(d.wp.receiveEmbedMessage=function(e){var t=e.data;if((t||t.secret||t.message||t.value)&&!\/[^a-zA-Z0-9]\/.test(t.secret)){for(var s,r,n,a=l.querySelectorAll('iframe[data-secret=\"'+t.secret+'\"]'),o=l.querySelectorAll('blockquote[data-secret=\"'+t.secret+'\"]'),c=new RegExp(\"^https?:$\",\"i\"),i=0;i<o.length;i++)o[i].style.display=\"none\";for(i=0;i<a.length;i++)s=a[i],e.source===s.contentWindow&&(s.removeAttribute(\"style\"),\"height\"===t.message?(1e3<(r=parseInt(t.value,10))?r=1e3:~~r<200&&(r=200),s.height=r):\"link\"===t.message&&(r=new URL(s.getAttribute(\"src\")),n=new URL(t.value),c.test(n.protocol))&&n.host===r.host&&l.activeElement===s&&(d.top.location.href=t.value))}},d.addEventListener(\"message\",d.wp.receiveEmbedMessage,!1),l.addEventListener(\"DOMContentLoaded\",function(){for(var e,t,s=l.querySelectorAll(\"iframe.wp-embedded-content\"),r=0;r<s.length;r++)(t=(e=s[r]).getAttribute(\"data-secret\"))||(t=Math.random().toString(36).substring(2,12),e.src+=\"#?secret=\"+t,e.setAttribute(\"data-secret\",t)),e.contentWindow.postMessage({message:\"ready\",secret:t},\"*\")},!1)))}(window,document);\n<\/script>\n","thumbnail_url":"https:\/\/www.nasa.gov\/wp-content\/uploads\/2024\/04\/1-pia26291-clipper-floor-d2024-0411-rl8572.jpg?w=600","thumbnail_width":600,"thumbnail_height":400}
October 19, 1979.

423 A.2d 1313

#### Commonwealth v. Decker, Appellant.

Submitted March 12, 1979.

John J. Moran, II, for appellant; John C. Uhler, District Attorney, for Commonwealth, appellee.

Before CERCONE, P. J., and WIEAND and HOFFMAN, JJ.

Judgment of sentence affirmed.
QuickLinks
 -- Click here to rapidly navigate through this document
  



 
 

Exhibit 10.4(c)    
  


SECOND AMENDMENT

TO THE

TELEPHONE AND DATA SYSTEMS, INC.

1998 LONG-TERM INCENTIVE PLAN  


        WHEREAS, Telephone and Data Systems, Inc. (the "Corporation") has adopted the Telephone and Data
Systems, Inc. 1998 Long-Term Incentive Plan (the "Plan") for the benefit of certain key executives and management personnel; 


        WHEREAS, pursuant to Section 8.2 of the Plan, the Board may amend the Plan as it deems advisable; and 



        WHEREAS, the Board desires to amend the Plan in certain respects. 


        NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, that pursuant to the power of amendment contained in Section 8.2 of the Plan, the Plan hereby is
amended in the following respects, effective May 23, 2002: 


        1.    The
first sentence of Section 4.3(b) of the Plan hereby is amended (i) by the insertion of the parenthetical "(as defined in the Telephone and Data
Systems, Inc. Pension Plan)" after the first occurrence of the word "retirement" as it occurs therein, (ii) by the replacement of the number "65" as it appears therein with the number
"62," and (iii) by the replacement of the phrase "90 days" as it appears therein with the phrase "12 months." 


        2.    The
last sentence of Section 4.3(b) of the Plan hereby is amended by the replacement of the phrase "180 days after the effective date of such award
recipient's retirement or resignation" with the phrase "on the later of (i) the last day of such period and (ii) 90 days after the date of the award recipient's death." 



        3.    The
first sentence of Section 4.3(e) of the Plan hereby is amended by the insertion of the parenthetical "(as defined in the Telephone and Data
Systems, Inc. Pension Plan)" after the word "retirement" as it occurs therein, and by the replacement of the number "65" as it appears therein with the number "62." 


        IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the undersigned has executed this amendment as of this    day of May, 2002. 



	

 	
 	
TELEPHONE AND DATA SYSTEMS, INC.
	

 	
 	

By:	
 	

/s/  LEROY T. CARLSON, JR.      
 LeRoy T. Carlson, Jr.

President




 SIGNATURE PAGE TO SECOND AMENDMENT TO TELEPHONE AND DATA

SYSTEMS, INC. 1998 LONG-TERM INCENTIVE PLAN  


1











QuickLinks



Exhibit 10.4(c)
Case 2:15-mj-01851-JFM Document 4 Filed 11/24/15 Page 1 of 3
Case 2:15-mj-01851-JFM Document 4 Filed 11/24/15 Page 2 of 3
Case 2:15-mj-01851-JFM Document 4 Filed 11/24/15 Page 3 of 3
**Exhibit 99.4**

 

ANNUAL SERVICER’S CERTIFICATE

 

CAPITAL ONE BANK

 

CAPITAL ONE MASTER TRUST

 

The undersigned, a duly authorized representative of Capital One Bank,as Servicer (the “Bank”), pursuant to the Amended and Restated Poolingand Servicing Agreement, dated as of September 30, 1993, as amended andrestated as of August 1, 2002 (as amended and supplemented, the “Agreement”),among the Bank, as Servicer, Capital One Funding, LLC, as Transferor, and TheBank of New York, as Trustee, does hereby certify that:

 

1.             The Bank is, as ofthe date hereof, the Servicer under the Agreement.  Capitalized terms used in this Certificatehave their respective meanings as set forth in the Agreement.

 

2.             The undersigned isa Servicing Officer who is duly authorized pursuant to the Agreement to executeand deliver this Certificate to the Trustee.

 

3.             A review of theactivities of the Servicer during the calendar year ended December 31, 2004,and of its performance under the Agreement was conducted under my supervision.

 

4.             Based on suchreview, the Servicer has, to the best of my knowledge, performed in allmaterial respects its obligations under the Agreement throughout such year andno default in the performance of such obligations has occurred or is continuingexcept as set forth in paragraph 5 below.

 

5.             The following is adescription of each default in the performance of the Servicer’s obligationsunder the provisions of the Agreement known to me to have been made by theServicer during the year ended December 31, 2004, which sets forth in detail(i) the nature of each such default, (ii) the action taken by the Servicer, ifany, to remedy each such default and (iii) the current status of each suchdefault:

 

None.

 

IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the undersigned has duly executedthis Certificate this 10th day of March, 2005.

 
|   | CAPITAL ONE BANK,  |
|--------|--------------------|
|   |  as  Servicer |
|   |               |
|   | By:                | /s/ Steve Cunningham |   |
|   |               | Name: Steve Cunningham |
|   |               | Title: Director, Capital Markets &  Cashier |

 

----
NOT FOR PUBLICATION

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT

In re: KIMBERLY BARBOUR,

Debtor

.

______________________________

IVAN RENE MOORE,

Appellant

,

v.

KIMBERLY BARBOUR; RONALD

HILLS,

Appellees. No. 17

- 56914

D.C. No. 2:17

- cv

- 02857

- SJO

MEMORANDUM *

Appeal from the United States District Court

for the Central District of California

S. James Otero, District Judge, Presiding

Submitted January 15, 201 9 **

Before: TROTT, TALLMAN, and CALLAHAN, Circuit Judges.

Creditor Ivan Rene Moore appeals pro se from the district court’s judgment

* This disposition is not appropriate for publication and is not precedent

except as provided by Ninth Circuit Rule 36

- 3.

** The panel unanimously concludes this case is suitable for decision

without oral argument. See Fed. R. App. P. 34(a)(2). 

# FILED

JAN 23 2019

MOLLY C. DWYER, CLER K

U.S. COURT OF APPEAL S2 17

- 56914

dismissing as moot his appeal from the bankruptcy court ’s order denying his

motion for relief from the automatic stay in Barbour’s b ankruptcy case . We hav e

jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. § 1 291 . We review for clear error factual findings

about mootness, and de novo legal conclusions. Rev Op Grp. v. ML Manager LLC

(In re Mortgs. Ltd.) , 771 F.3d 1211, 1214 (9th Cir. 2014). We affirm.

The district court prope rly dismissed Moore’s appeal as moot because there

is no effective relief that can be fashioned where the property at issue has been

seized by a third party pursuant to a district court order enforcing a federal

judgment

. See Motor Vehicle Cas

. Co. v. Tho rpe Insulation Co. (In re Thorpe

Insulation Co.) , 677 F.3d 869, 880 (9th Cir. 2012) (discussing constitutional

mootness in the bankruptcy context ).

To the extent Moore is challenging the district court’ s order as a

representative of Ronald Hills , the appeal is dismissed because Moore , as a non

attorney, “has no authority to appear as a n attorney for others than him self.” C.E.

Pope Equity Tr

. v. United States , 818 F.2d 696, 697

- 98 (9th Cir. 1987).

We do not consider arguments raised for the first time on appeal or matters

not specifically and distinctly raised and argued in the opening brief. See Padgett

v. Wright

, 587 F.3d 983, 985 n.2 (9th Cir. 2009).3 17

- 56914

Moore’s requests for oral argument, set forth in his opening and reply briefs,

are denied.

AFF IRMED.