alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
#### Juan Alfredo Torres ZEPEDA; Maria Teresa Torres Hernandez, Petitioners, v. Alberto R. GONZALES, Attorney General, Respondent.

No. 05-70132.

United States Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit.

Submitted June 12, 2006.*

Filed June 21, 2006.

Juan Alfredo Torres Zepeda, Riverside, CA, pro se.

Maria Teresa Torres Hernandez, Riverside, CA, pro se.

Ronald E. Lefevre, Chief Counsel, Office of the District Counsel Department of Homeland Security, San Francisco, CA, Linda S. Wendtland, Esq., Shelley R. Goad, Esq., U.S. Department of Justice *786Civil Div./Offiee of Immigration Lit., Washington, DC, for Respondent.

Before: WALLACE, KLEINFELD, and BERZON, Circuit Judges.

*

 The panel unanimously finds this case suitable for decision without oral argument. *See*Fed. R.App. P. 34(a)(2).

MEMORANDUM **

Juan Alfredo Torres Zepeda, and his wife, Maria Teresa Torres Hernandez, natives and citizens of Mexico, petition pro se for review of the Board of Immigration Appeals’ (“BIA”) order denying their motion to reopen removal proceedings. To the extent we have jurisdiction, it is conferred by 8 U.S.C. § 1252. We review the denial of a motion to reopen for abuse of discretion. *Ordonez v. INS,*345 F.3d 777, 782 (9th Cir.2003). We deny in part and dismiss in part the petition for review.

Petitioners’ motion to reopen did not assert that their removal would cause hardship to their United States citizen children, did not include any evidence of hardship, and did not include any evidence regarding two of the ten years Petitioners claim to have been present in the United States. The BIA did not abuse its discretion in denying the motion to reopen on the ground that Petitioners failed to establish prima facie eligibility for cancellation of removal. *See Ordonez,*345 F.3d at 785 (holding that prima facie eligibility is demonstrated by showing there is a reasonable likelihood that the statutory requirements for relief have been satisfied).

To the extent Petitioners challenge the BIA’s dismissal of their direct appeal from the immigration judge’s decision denying their request for a continuance, we lack jurisdiction, as they failed to petition for review within thirty days of that decision. *See*8 U.S.C. § 1252(b)(1); *Stone v. INS,*514 U.S. 386, 405, 115 S.Ct. 1537, 131 L.Ed.2d 465 (1995).

PETITION FOR REVIEW DENIED in part; DISMISSED in part.

**

 This disposition is not appropriate for publication and may not be cited to or by the courts of this circuit except as provided by 9th Cir. R. 36-3.
EXHIBIT
32.1





CERTIFICATION
OF CHIEF EXECUTIVE OFFICER


PURSUANT
TO SECTION 906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002


(18 U.S.C
SECTION 1350)





In
connection with the Quarterly Report of China Tel Group, Inc. and its
Subsidiaries (the “Company”), on Form 10-Q for the fiscal quarter ended March
31, 2009, as filed with the United States Securities and Exchange Commission
(“Report”), I, George Alvarez, Chief Executive Officer of the Company, certify,
pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002 (18 U.S.C Section
1350), 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.





By: /s/
George Alvarez


George
Alvarez


Chief
Executive Officer


May 20,
2009





[A signed
original of this written statement required by Section 906 has been provided to
China Tel Group, Inc. and will be retained by China Tel Group, Inc. and
furnished to the United States Securities and Exchange Commission or its staff
upon request.]
### TEXAS COURT OF APPEALS, THIRD DISTRICT, AT AUSTIN

NO. 03

- 22

- 00732

- CV

Larry Patterson , Appellant

v.

Guaranty Abstract & Title Company of San Angelo , Appellee

FROM THE 340TH DISTRICT COURT OF TOM GREEN COUNTY NO. C220088C , THE HONORABLE JAY K. WEATH ERBY , JUDGE PRESIDING

M E M O R A N D U M O P I N I O N

The parties have filed a joint motion to dismiss the appeal with prejudice

. We grant the

motion and dismiss th is appeal with prejudice

. See Tex. R. App. P. 42.1(a)(2).

_________________________ _

________________ E dw ar d Smith, Justice

Before Justices Baker, Smith

, and Jones 

### *

Dismissed on Joint Motion

Filed: March 28, 2023

*Before J. Woodfin Jones, Chief Justice (Retired), Third Court of Appeals, sitting by assignment. See Tex. Gov’t Code § 74.003(b)

.
NOT FOR PUBLICATION

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT

CHARLES G. KINNEY, 

Plaintiff-Appellant, 

 v. 

TYSON TAKEUCHI; MICHELE CLARK, 

Defendants-Appellees.

No. 16-56733 

D.C. No. 2:16-cv-06172-PSG-JC 

MEMORANDUM*

Appeal from the United States District Court

for the Central District of California

Philip S. Gutierrez, District Judge, Presiding

Submitted December 18, 2017**

Before: WALLACE, SILVERMAN, and BYBEE, Circuit Judges.

Charles G. Kinney appeals pro se from the district court’s order dismissing 

his action alleging violations of the Fair Debt Collection Practices Act and the 

Racketeer Influenced and Corrupt Organizations Act. We have jurisdiction under 

28 U.S.C. § 1291. We review de novo a sua sponte dismissal for failure to state a 

 

* 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). Kinney’s request for oral 

argument, set forth in the opening brief, is denied.

FILED

DEC 28 2017

MOLLY C. DWYER, CLERK

U.S. COURT OF APPEALS
2 16-56733 

claim. Barrett v. Belleque, 544 F.3d 1060, 1061 (9th Cir. 2008). We may affirm 

on any basis supported by the record. Johnson v. Riverside Healthcare Sys., LP, 

534 F.3d 1116, 1121 (9th Cir. 2008). We affirm.

Dismissal of Kinney’s action was proper under the Rooker-Feldman doctrine 

because Kinney’s claims constitute a “de facto appeal” of prior state court 

judgments, or are “inextricably intertwined” with those judgments. See Noel v. 

Hall, 341 F.3d 1148, 1163-65 (9th Cir. 2003) (discussing application of the 

Rooker-Feldman doctrine); see also Henrichs v. Valley View Dev., 474 F.3d 609, 

616 (9th Cir. 2007) (holding that Rooker-Feldman doctrine barred claim for 

injunction based on allegedly erroneous and “void” state court judgment because 

“[g]ranting the injunction would require the district court to determine that the 

state court’s decision was wrong and thus void”).

The district court did not abuse its discretion by dismissing the complaint 

without leave to amend because amendment would be futile. Cervantes v. 

Countrywide Home Loans, Inc., 656 F.3d 1034, 1041 (9th Cir. 2011) (setting forth 

standard of review and explaining that dismissal without leave to amend is proper 

when amendment would be futile).

We reject as without merit Kinney’s challenges to the district court’s 

interlocutory orders, including the orders regarding venue, transfer, and relation of 

cases.
3 16-56733 

We reject as unsupported by the record Kinney’s contention that the district 

judge was biased.

We do not consider arguments and allegations raised for the first time on 

appeal. See Padgett v. Wright, 587 F.3d 983, 985 n.2 (9th Cir. 2009).

Appellees’ requests for sanctions and for leave to file a motion for a 

vexatious litigant pre-filing review order against Kinney, set forth in the answering 

brief, are denied.

Appellees’ corrected motion to take judicial notice (Docket Entry No. 18) is 

granted.

AFFIRMED.
Exhibit 31.1.  Certification of the Chief Executive Officer

Chief Executive Officer Certification
Pursuant To Section 302 Of 
The Sarbanes-Oxley Act Of 2002

|I, James D. Delamater, certify that:
|------------------------------------
|                                    
|1.                                  
|                                    
|2.                                  
|                                    
|3.                                  
|                                    
|4.                                  
|                                    
|                                    
|                                    
|                                    
|                                    
|                                    
|                                    
|5.                                  
|                                    
|                                    
|                                    
|                                    



|September 17, 2004 | /s/ James D. Delamater 
|------------------ | -----------------------
|                   | James D. Delamater     
|                   | Chief Executive Officer
**Exhibit 31.2**

**CERTIFICATION PURSUANT TO RULE 13-A-14 OR 15D-14 OFTHE SECURITIES EXCHANGE ACT OF 1934, AS ADOPTED PURSUANT TO SECTION 302 OFTHE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002**

I, James S. Brown,certify that:

1. I have reviewed this annual report on Form 10-KSBof WorldWater Corp.;

2. Based on my knowledge, this annual report does notcontain any untrue statement of a material fact or omit to state a materialfact necessary to make the statements made, in light of the circumstances underwhich such statements were made, not misleading with respect to the periodcovered by this annual report;

3. Based my knowledge, the financial statements, andother financial information included in this annual report, fairly present inall material respects the financial condition, results of operations and cashflows of the registrant as of, and for, the periods presented in this annualreport;

4. The registrant’s other certifying officer and I areresponsible for establishing and maintaining disclosure controls and procedures(as defined in Exchange Act Rules 13a-14 and 15d-14) for the registrantand we have:

a. designed such disclosure controls and procedures toensure the material information relating to the registrant, including itsconsolidated subsidiaries, is made known to us by others within those entities,particularly during the period in which this annual report is being prepared;

b. evaluated the effectiveness of the registrant’sdisclosure controls and procedures as of a date within 90 days prior to thefiling date of this annual report (the “Evaluation Date”); and

c. presented in this annual report our conclusionsabout the effectiveness of the disclosure controls and procedures based on ourevaluation as of the Evaluation Date.

5. The registrant’s other certifying officer and Ihave disclosed, based on our most recent evaluation, to the registrant’sauditors and the audit committee of registrant’s board of directors (or personsperforming the equivalent function):

a. all significant deficiencies in the design or operationof internal controls which could adversely affect the registrant’s ability torecord, process, summarize and report financial data and have identified forthe registrant’s auditors any material weaknesses in internal controls; and

b. any fraud, whether or not material, that involvesmanagement or other employees who have a significant role in the registrant’sinternal controls; and

6. Theregistrant’s other certifying officer and I have indicated in this annualreport whether or not there were significant changes in internal controls or inother factors that could significantly affect internal controls subsequent tothe date of our most recent evaluation, including any corrective actions withregard to significant deficiencies and material weaknesses.
| By:    | /s/ JAMES S.  BROWN                        |   |
|--------|--------------------------------------------|--------|
| Name:  | James S. Brown                             |
| Title: | Vice President and Chief Financial Officer |

 

Dated: March 30, 2005

----
@article{1209256,
  author = {Alan Keith Thompson and Mohamad Al-Sheikhly and Steven Guerin and David Bartels and Cameron Goodwin and Sangho Nam},
  title = {H2 Generation by the 10B(n,alpha)7Li Reaction in High Temperature Water},
  year = {2023},
  month = {2023-07-04 04:07:00},
  publisher = {Radiation Physics and Chemistry},
  url = {https://tsapps.nist.gov/publication/get_pdf.cfm?pub_id=936652},
  doi = {https://doi.org/10.1016/j.radphyschem.2023.111141},
  language = {en},
}
[Federal Register Volume 74, Number 122 (Friday, June 26, 2009)]
[Notices]
[Page 30643]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: E9-15212]


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

DEPARTMENT OF LABOR

Employment and Training Administration

[TA-W-65,901]


VWR International, LLC, West Chester, PA; Notice of Termination 
of Investigation

    Pursuant to Section 221 of the Trade Act of 1974, as amended, an 
investigation was initiated on May 7, 2009 in response to a petition 
filed by a state workforce official on behalf of workers of VWR 
International, LLC, West Chester, Pennsylvania.
    The petitioner has requested that the petition be withdrawn. 
Therefore, the investigation under this petition has been terminated.

    Signed at Washington, DC, this 18th day of May, 2009.
Linda G. Poole,
Certifying Officer, Division of Trade Adjustment Assistance.
[FR Doc. E9-15212 Filed 6-26-09; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4510-FN-P
Exhibit 23.1    Consent of Ernst & Young LLP, Independent Registered Public Accounting Firm   We consent to the incorporation by reference in the Registration Statements (Form S-8 Nos. 333-144962, 333-133507, 333-124187,  033-53335 and 033-53337) pertaining to the Bio-Rad Laboratories, Inc. 2007 Incentive Award Plan,  the Amended and Restated 1988 Employee Stock Purchase Plan, the 2003 Stock Option Plan of Bio-Rad Laboratories, Inc., the Amended 1988 Employee Stock Purchase Plan, the 1994 Stock Option Plan of Bio-Rad Laboratories, Inc. and Registration Statement (Form S-4 No. 333-163679) of Bio-Rad Laboratories, Inc. and related Prospectus of our reports dated February 26, 2010, with respect to the financial statements and schedules of Bio-Rad Laboratories, Inc. and the effectiveness of internal control over financial reporting of Bio-Rad Laboratories, Inc. included in this Annual Report (Form 10-K) for the year ended December 31, 2009.     /s/ Ernst & Young LLPPalo Alto, CaliforniaFebruary 26, 2010
@article{102241,
  author = {Thomas Chastek and Kazunori Iida and Eric Amis and Michael Fasolka and Kathryn Beers and Jae Chun},
  title = {Living Anionic Polymerization Using a Microfluidic Reactor},
  year = {2009},
  number = {9},
  month = {2009-01-15},
  publisher = {Lab on A Chip},
  url = {https://tsapps.nist.gov/publication/get_pdf.cfm?pub_id=854078},
  language = {en},
}
<TABLE> <S> <C>


<ARTICLE>                     5

       
<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                  12-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>              DEC-31-1996                
<PERIOD-START>                 JAN-01-1996               
<PERIOD-END>                   DEC-31-1996                
<CASH>                         180597                
<SECURITIES>                   0                
<RECEIVABLES>                  10079257                
<ALLOWANCES>                   252850                
<INVENTORY>                    0                
<CURRENT-ASSETS>               0                
<PP&E>                         0                
<DEPRECIATION>                 0                
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                 11944051                
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>          0                
<BONDS>                        0                
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>          1549033                
<PREFERRED>                    0                
<COMMON>                       0                
<OTHER-SE>                     10395018               
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>   11944051                
<SALES>                        0                
<TOTAL-REVENUES>               1167859                
<CGS>                          0                
<TOTAL-COSTS>                  108838                
<OTHER-EXPENSES>               0                
<LOSS-PROVISION>               312684                
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>             158175                
<INCOME-PRETAX>                588162                
<INCOME-TAX>                   0               
<INCOME-CONTINUING>            588162                
<DISCONTINUED>                 0                
<EXTRAORDINARY>                0                 
<CHANGES>                      0               
<NET-INCOME>                   588162               
<EPS-PRIMARY>                  .00                
<EPS-DILUTED>                  .00                
        



</TABLE>
**Exhibit 3.4**

 
| * * | *State  of Delaware*             |
|----------|----------------------------------|
| * * | *Secretary  of State*            |
| * * | *Division  of Corporations*      |
| * * | *Delivered  11:30 AM 07/07/2005* |
| * * | *FILED  11:30 AM 07/07/2005*     |
| * * | *SRV  050565580 - 3379687 FILE*  |

 

**STATE****OF****DELAWARE**

**CERTIFICATE of AMENDMENT ofCERTIFICATE of INCORPORATION********ofWORLDWATER CORP.**

 

**First:**              That at a meeting of theBoard of Directors of WorldWater Corp., resolutionswere duly adopted setting forth a proposedamendment of the Certificate of Incorporation of said corporation, declaringsaid amendment to be advisable and calling a meeting of the shareholders ofsaid corporation for consideration thereof.

 

Theresolution setting forth the proposed amendment is as follows:

 

**Resolved,** that the Certificate of Incorporation of thiscorporation be amended by changing the following two articles:

 

Article numbered*‘One’*so that, as amended, said Article shallbe and read as follows:

 

*“Name of Corporation:”  The name of the corporation is: WorldWater &Power Corp.*

 

Article numbered*‘Four’*so that, as amended, said Article shallbe and read as follows:

 

*“Authorized Capital. The total number of shares that may beissued by the Corporation is two hundred ten million (210,000,000), of which:*

 

*a)**           **twohundred million (200,000,000) shares with a par value of one-tenth of one cent ($.001)per share shall be designated as Common Stock; AND*

*b)**           **tenmillion (10,000,000) shares with a par value of one cent ($. 01) per shareshall be designated as Preferred Stock.*

 

*The designations, preferences and relative participations,options or other rights or qualifications, limitations or restrictions thereofshall be fixed by resolution of the Board of Directors.”*

 

**Second:****         **That thereafter, pursuant to resolutionof its Board of Directors, the annual meeting of the stockholders of saidcorporation was duly called and held, upon notice in accordance with Section 222of the General Corporation Law of the State of Delaware, and at which meetingthe necessary number of shares as required by statute were voted in favor ofthe amendment.

 

**Third:****           **That said amendment was duly adopted inaccordance with the provisions of Section 242 of the General CorporationLaw of the State of Delaware.

 

----

 

**Fourth:****         **Thatthe capital of said corporation shall not be reduced under or by reason of saidamendment.

 
| ** **                 | **WORLDWATER****CORP.** |
|----------------------------|-------------------------|
| ** **                 | ** **              |
| ** **                 | ** **              |
| Dated: June 29,  2005 | By:                     | /s/ Quentin  T. Kelly |   |
|                       | Name:                   | QUENTIN  T. KELLY |   |
|                       | Title:                  | Chairman &  CEO |   |

 

2

----
#### Commonwealth of the Northern Mariana Islands, Appellant, v Canadian Imperial Bank of Commerce, Respondent, et al., Defendant. The Millard Foundation, Intervenor.

Decided October 18, 2012

*See*693 F3d 274.

Certification of questions by the United States Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit, pursuant to section 500.27 of the Rules of Practice of the Court of Appeals (22 NYCRR 500.27), accepted and the issues presented are to be considered after briefing and argument.

Concur: Chief Judge Lippman and Judges Ciparick, Graffeo, Read, Smith, Pigott and Jones.
#### The People of the State of New York, Respondent, v Christopher Robbs, Appellant.

Submitted July 8, 2013;

decided August 22, 2013

Motion for an extension of the time within which to apply for permission to appeal pursuant to CPL 460.20 granted and motion papers treated as a timely CPL 460.20 application.
EXHIBIT 32.1





CERTIFICATION OF CHIEF EXECUTIVE OFFICER


PURSUANT TO SECTION 906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002


(18 U.S.C SECTION 1350)





In connection with the Quarterly Report of China Tel Group, Inc. and its Subsidiaries (the “Company”), on Form 10-Q/A for the fiscal quarter ended March 31, 2009, as filed with the United States Securities and Exchange Commission (“Report”), I, George Alvarez, Chief Executive Officer of the Company, certify, pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002 (18 U.S.C Section 1350), 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.





By: /s/ George Alvarez


George Alvarez


Chief Executive Officer


April 15, 2010





[A signed original of this written statement required by Section 906 has been provided to China Tel Group, Inc. and will be retained by China Tel Group, Inc. and furnished to the United States Securities and Exchange Commission or its staff upon request.]
Order entered July 16, 2015

In The

Court of Appeals 

Fifth District of Texas at Dallas 

No. 05-15-00111-CR

JOSEPH RIOS, Appellant

V.

THE STATE OF TEXAS, Appellee

On Appeal from the 363rd Judicial District Court

Dallas County, Texas

Trial Court Cause No. F14-52354-W

ORDER

The Court has before it appellant’s July 14, 2015 request for an extension of time to file 

his pro se response to the Anders brief filed by counsel. Appellant states that he has received a 

copy of the record. We GRANT the extension request and ORDER appellant to file his pro se 

response by AUGUST 24, 2015. If the response is not filed by that date, the appeal will be 

submitted on the Anders brief alone.

We DIRECT the Clerk to send a copy of this order, by first-class mail, to Joseph Rios, 

TDCJ No. 01981131, Fort Stockton Unit, 1536 I-10 East, Fort Stockton, Texas 79735.

/s/ ADA BROWN 

JUSTICE
# Messages about Bipolar Disorder

Follow the NIMH Director on **

Addressing  Disparities: Advancing Mental Health Care for All Americans
                                                                      By Joshua Gordon on                January 29, 2020

Mental health disparities are significant and easily documented. In this Director’s Message, Dr. Gordon discusses NIMH-funded research that aims to close the gap, ensuring that improved mental health care meets the needs of all Americans.
@misc{1212341,
  author = {Alexander Maranghides and Eric Link},
  title = {WUI Fire Evacuation and Sheltering Considerations: Assessment, Planning, and Execution (ESCAPE)},
  year = {2023},
  month = {2023-08-21 04:08:00},
  publisher = {Technical Note (NIST TN), National Institute of Standards and Technology, Gaithersburg, MD},
  url = {https://tsapps.nist.gov/publication/get_pdf.cfm?pub_id=956333},
  doi = {https://doi.org/10.6028/NIST.TN.2262},
  language = {en},
}