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

SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION

Washington, D.C. 20549





FORM 8-K/A





CURRENT REPORT

Pursuant to Section 13 OR 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934





Date of report (Date of earliest event reported) June 5th, 2007

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

HIGH END VENTURES, INC.

(Name of Small Business issuer in its charter)





COLORAD0333-13391620-343739 1

(State or other jurisdiction of            (Commission File No.)    (IRS Employer

incorporation or organization)                                                 Identification No.)





|1066 West Hastings Street, Suite 2610, Vancouver, BC v6e 3x2
|------------------------------------------------------------
|Vancouver, British Columbia                                 
|Canada                                           T2H 2K6    

(Address of principal executive offices)



(604)602-1717

(Registrants telephone number)

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







Item 8 01. Other Events



Nadir Walji of Vancouver, BC is appointed to the Board of Directors to serve until the next annual meeting and is herby elected CEO, President, Secretary/Treasurer of the corporation and its Chief Accounting Officer. Thomas Forzani resigned as of 5 pm Eastern time on June 5, 2007



A copy of the minutes of the meeting is including in this document as Exhibit 99.1



ITEM 9.01. FINANCIAL STATEMENTS AND EXHIBITS.







Exhibit 99.1   Board Minutes  June 5,2007





SIGNATURES



Pursuant to the requirements of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, the registrant has duly caused this report to be signed on its behalf by the undersigned hereunto duly authorized.



June 5 /2007



HIGH END VENTURES, INC.







/s/Nadir Walji

Nadir Walji, CEO, President   and Secretary/Treasurer







Exhibit 99.1



Board of Directors Minutes



MINUTES OF THE BOARD OF DIRECTORS

OF

HIGH END VENTURES, INC.

June 5th, 2007



A telephone meeting of the Board of Directors of High End Ventures Inc. (the Corporation), was held on June 5, 2007 at 11:00 a.m. Eastern Standard Time.



Directors participating in the meeting were:





Thomas Forzani and Nadir Walji



The Board unanimously resolved the following:



RESOLVED:

That Nadir Walji of Vancouver, BC be appointed to the Board of Directors to serve until the next annual meeting and is herby elected CEO, President, Secretary/Treasurer of the corporation and its Chief Accounting Officer.



Thomas Forzani resigned as of 5 pm Eastern time on June 5, 2007



There being no further business, the meeting was adjourned.





/s/ Nadir Walji/s/ Thomas Forzani

Nadir Walji, Secretary

Nadir Walji,  President and Chairman of the Board



June 5th,  2007
**EXHIBIT 32.2**

 

**Certification of Periodic Financial Report**

**Pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350**

 

Forpurposes of 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, as adopted pursuant toSection 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, the undersigned, DannetteHenning, the Chief Financial Officer of Integrated ManagementInformation, Inc. (the “Company”), hereby certifies that, to hisknowledge:

 

(i)             the Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q of theCompany for the quarterly period ended June 30, 2010, as filed with theSecurities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the “Report”) fullycomplies with the requirements of section 13(a) or 15(d) of theSecurities Exchange Act of 1934; and

 

(ii)          the information contained in the Report fairlypresents, in all material respects, the financial condition and results ofoperations of the Company.

 
| Date:  August 12, 2010                |
|--------------------------------------------|
| /s/  Dannette Henning                      |   |
| Dannette  Henning, Chief Financial Officer |

 

----
(More)

No. 23-3 For Immediate Release

April 2023

RRB’s Field Service Recognized for Improved Employee Satisfaction

The annual Best Places to Work in the Federal Government® rankings showed the 

Bureau of Field Service at the U.S. Railroad Retirement Board (RRB) as the most 

improved among all agency subcomponents governmentwide. Its leadership was 

recognized in Washington, D.C. on April 12 at an event scheduled to coincide with the 

release of the governmentwide employee engagement and satisfaction scores for 2022, 

with full rankings for all participating agencies and related analysis of several critical 

workplace issues.

In response to the recognition, RRB Director of Field Service Mark Blythe said, 

“I’m very excited for our field office and operations support employees to be able to 

share this moment together. While this award reinforces what we are trying to 

accomplish, we acknowledge that there is more work to be done to improve further. 

This is proof that we are seeing returns in our retention efforts, which will have a 

positive impact to providing improved service to the railroad community.”

For 2022, the RRB’s field service saw its employee satisfaction index score jump 

from 47.1 to 60.8. The 13.7-point improvement was the highest among all 432 

subcomponents within the federal government; in contrast, the average satisfaction 

index score across the federal government declined 1.1 points from the prior year.

The RRB’s Bureau of Field Service is comprised of a national network of 53 field 

offices and more than 200 employees that provide frontline customer service by taking 

applications for retirement and survivor benefits, along with unemployment and 

sickness benefits, for railroad employees and their family members.

The survey results are part of the annual Partnership for Public Service Best Places 

to Work in the Federal Government® rankings that measure whether employees would 

recommend their agencies as good places to work and whether they are satisfied with 

their jobs and organizations. The rankings spotlight agencies that are successfully 

engaging employees, provide insights for job seekers considering federal employment, 

U.S. Railroad Retirement Board

RRB News

844 North Rush Street Chicago, Illinois 60611-1275

RRB.gov

General Information: 877-772-5772

Public Affairs

Media Inquiries: opa@rrb.gov

312-751-4777
-2-

and identify approaches government leaders can take to improve customer service 

within their own organizations.

Additional information on the program and the most recent results can be found 

online at bestplacestowork.org.

# # #
T hi s di s pos i t i on i s notappr opr i a t e f orpubl i c a t i on and i s notpr e c e de nt * e xc e pta s pr ovi de d by9th C i r . R . 36- 3.

T he pa ne l una ni m ous l yc onc l ude s thi s c a s e i s s ui t abl e f orde c i s i on ** w ith o u t o r a l a r g u m e n t. See F ed. R . A pp . P . 34 (a )( 2). NOT F OR P UB L I CAT I ON UN I TE D STATE S C OU RT OF APPE ALS FOR T HE NI NTH CI RC UI T R OB E R T S E S MA, P e titio n e r- A p p e lla n t, v. G E O R G E A . N E O T T I, R es po nd ent- A pp el l ee . N o. 07- 56727 D . C . N o. C V - 07- 00539- WQH( J MA) ME MOR AN DU M *

A pp ea l fr om the U ni t ed S t at es D i stri ctC ou rt f o rth e S o u th e rn D is tr ic t o f C a lif o rn ia W i l l i a m Q . H a y e s , D i s tr i c tJudge , P r e s i di ng S ubm i tt e d June 15, 2011 ** B efo re: C A N B Y , O ’ S C A N N L A IN an dF IS H E R , C i rcu i tJu d g es. C alifo rn ia state p riso n erR o b er t S es m a ap p ea ls fr o m th e d istrict co u rt’s j udgm e ntde ny i ng hi s 28 U . S . C . § 2254 habe a s pe t i t i on. W e ha ve j ur i s di c t i on u n d e r2 8 U . S. C. § 2 2 5 3 , a n dw e a f f i rm. 

# FI LED JU N 24 2011 M OLLY C. DW Y ER, CLERK U . S. C O U R T OF APPE ALS2 07- 56727

S e s m ac ont e nds tha tthe B oa r d’ s 2005 de c i s i on t o de nyhi m pa r ol e f orthe t e nth t i m e w a s nots upport e d by“ s om e e vi de nc e ” a nd the r e f or e vi ol a t e d hi s due p r o c e s s r ig h ts . T h e o n lyf e d e r a l r ig h t a t is s u e in th e p a r o le c o n te x t is p r o c e du r a l, a nd the onl ypr ope ri nqui ryi s w ha tpr oc e s s the i nm a t e r e c e i ve d, notw he the rthe s ta te c o u rt d e c id e dth e c a s e c o rr e c tly . Sw artho utv. C oo ke , 139 S . C t . 859, 863 ( 2 0 1 1 ) ; se e R ob er t

s v . H art ley , 2011 W L 1365811 a t*2- 3 ( 9th C i r . A pr . 12, 2011) ( appl y i ng C oo ke ) . Be c au s e Se s mar a i s e s n o p r o c e du r a l c h a l l e n g e s , w e a f f i rm. AF F I RME D.
Exhibit 10.1


 


ADDENDUM TO


SECOND AMENDED AND RESTATED EMPLOYMENT
AGREEMENT


 


THIS ADDENDUM TO
SECOND AMENDED AND RESTATED EMPLOYMENT AGREEMENT (the “Addendum”) is made as of the 3rd
day of July, 2013 by and between UNIVERSAL SECURITY INSTRUMENTS, INC., a Maryland corporation (the “Company”)
and HARVEY B. GROSSBLATT (the “Executive”).


 


INTRODUCTORY STATEMENT


 


The Company and Executive entered into a
Second Amended and Restated Employment Agreement dated as of July 18, 2005, as amended (the “Original Agreement”).
The parties desire to extend the term of the Original Agreement for an additional one-year term and amend certain provisions of
the “Bonus Formula” set forth therein.


 


NOW, THEREFORE, for good and valuable consideration,
the receipt and sufficiency of which are hereby acknowledged, the parties agree as follows:


 


A.All capitalized terms not otherwise defined in this
Addendum shall have the meanings set forth in the Original Agreement.


 


B.The first sentence of Section 1(b) of the Original
Agreement is hereby amended in it entirety to read as follows:


 


Subject to Section 7, the Company shall
employ the Executive pursuant to the terms hereof for the period commencing as of the date hereof and ending on July 31, 2014.


 


C.With respect to any Bonus to which the Executive is
entitled with respect to the fiscal year of the Company beginning April 1, 2013, the Bonus Threshold as set forth on Exhibit
A to the Original Agreement shall be the amount of Pre-Tax Net Income equal to 4% of shareholders’ equity as of April
1, 2013. With respect to any Bonus to which the Executive is entitled with respect to subsequent fiscal years of the Company, the
Bonus Threshold as set forth on Exhibit A to the Original Agreement shall determined by the Compensation Committee
of the Board of Directors of the Company prior to the beginning of each such fiscal year.


 


D.In all other respects, the Original Agreement, as
amended hereby, shall remain in full force and effect.


 


IN WITNESS WHEREOF,
the parties have executed this Addendum as of the day and year first above written.


  


	 	UNIVERSAL SECURITY INSTRUMENTS, INC.
	 	 
	 	 
	 	By: 	       /s/ 
	 	 	James B. Huff, Vice President
	 	 	 
	 	 	 
	 	         /s/
	 	Harvey B. Grossblatt
S05Y1988.

#### IN THE MATTER OF RODNEY B. GLASS.

(619 SE2d 677)

Per curiam.

This disciplinary matter is before the Court on Respondent Rodney B. Glass’ Petition for Voluntary Discipline in which he requests a six to twelve-month suspension for his admitted violation of Rule 8.4 (a) (4) of Bar Rule 4-102 (d) with reinstatement automatic upon proof of receipt of a medical release. The State Bar recommends acceptance of Glass’ petition with the imposition of a twelve-month suspension.

In his petition, Glass who has been a member of the State Bar of Georgia since 1997, admits that he misappropriated $47,000 of his former law firm’s money for his own use. He asserts that, since leaving the firm in October 2003 he has made full restitution to the firm and has paid additional monies to reimburse the firm for the fees it expended in performing an internal audit. Respondent admits that his actions were wrongful, but notes that no clients were harmed since the misappropriated money came from the firm’s operating accounts rather than its trust accounts. While admitting that his actions violated Rule 8.4 (a) (4), respondent submits that his misbehavior stemmed from mental disabilities and chemical imbalances that he had been suffering under for years; that he is now under the care of mental health professionals who are treating his conditions; and that he has voluntarily refrained from practicing law since leaving his former firm.

Based on the record as a whole, we agree that respondent’s actions violate Rule 8.4 (a) (4). Although such a violation may be punished by disbarment, we find in mitigation that Glass has no prior disciplinary record; that he has been cooperative in these disciplinary proceedings; that his misconduct was in part the result of mental or emotional difficulties; that he has taken responsibility for his actions, including making full restitution; that his actions harmed no client; and that he is truly remorseful for his conduct. We further note that suspensions have been ordered by this Court in similar matters. See *In the Matter of Ross,*272 Ga. 448 (531 SE2d 356) (2000); *In the Matter of Lombard-Clarke,*266 Ga. 555 (468 SE2d 373) (1996).

Therefore, we accept Glass’ petition and order that Glass be suspended from the practice of law in Georgia for a period of twelve months from the date of this opinion with his reinstatement conditioned on his proof to the State Bar of Georgia that he has obtained, from his personal physician and from the mental health specialists providing his care, reports indicating that he is fit to return to the practice of law. Glass is reminded of his duties under Bar Rule 4-219 (c).

*667Decided September 19, 2005.

*William P. Smith III, General Counsel State Bar, Jonathan W. Hewett, Assistant General Counsel State Bar,*for State Bar of Georgia.

*Beltran & Associates, Douglas V. Chandler,*for Glass.

*Twelve-month suspension with conditions.*

*All the Justices concur.*
À“×Ã¤‹ ÕÃflÃ¤Õ ›—ÀŒÃ —⁄ fl––¤fl‘Õ

⁄—Œ Ãÿ¤ “×“Ãÿ ›×Œ›À×Ã

”×‘Ã—“ ‘—”¤‘×Û›fl–¤Ã×‘‘—Ù

 –a ̈· ̈·±2aÆÙ

TMÚ

‘—Œ¤ÃÃfl ¤Ú ‘«“›ÿÙ fl ̈ ̈±Æ2aß Ÿa2aÆø¥Ù

 Œa­°±2oa2 ̈Ú

“±Ú ÔðÛÈðÁÏÏ

fl1a21⁄2ß “±Ú flðÌÈÛÏÓÁÛÈÍÔ

—Œ‹¤Œ

fiao±ÆaÊ ›fl“fi«Ù Ÿ—À‘‹Ù ø2o “ÚŒÚ Õ”×ÃÿÙ ›·Æ1⁄2 ́· ̈ ÷ ́o1a­Ú

‘±3a¥·Û›ø°a ̈·¥¥±é­ °a ̈· ̈·±2 o±Æ °ø2a¥ Æa ̧aøÆ·21 ·­ 1Æø2 ̈aoÚ

Ã ̧a 3a3±Æø2o ́3 o·­°±­· ̈·±2 o·¥ao ±2 ÷ø2 ́øÆß ÓÁÙ ÓðÔÎÙ ·­ ©· ̈ ̧oÆø©2Ú fl

Æa°¥ø1⁄2a3a2 ̈ 3a3±Æø2o ́3 o·­°±­· ̈·±2 ·­ æa·21 o·¥ao 1⁄2±21⁄2 ́ÆÆa2 ̈¥ß ©· ̈ ̧  ̈ ̧·­ ±ÆoaÆÚ 

‘±3a¥·Û›ø°a ̈·¥¥±é­ °a ̈· ̈·±2 o±Æ Æa ̧aøÆ·21 a2 æø21⁄2 ·­ oa2·ao ø­ 3±± ̈Ú 

fl2ß °a ̈· ̈·±2 o±Æ Æa ̧aøÆ·21 ±o  ̈ ̧a Æa°¥ø1⁄2a3a2 ̈ 3a3±Æø2o ́3 o·­°±­· ̈·±2 3 ́­ ̈

æa o·¥ao ©· ̈ ̧·2 ÏÎ oøß­ ±o  ̈ ̧a o·¥·21 oø ̈a ±o  ̈ ̧·­ ±ÆoaÆÚ 

⁄×‘¤‹

÷À‘ ÓÔ ÓðÔÎ

”—‘‘« ›Ú ‹...«¤ŒÙ ›‘¤Œ’

ÀÚÕÚ ›—ÀŒÃ —⁄ fl––¤fl‘Õ
“—Ã ⁄—Œ –Àfi‘×›flÃ×—“

À“×Ã¤‹ ÕÃflÃ¤Õ ›—ÀŒÃ —⁄ fl––¤fl‘Õ

⁄—Œ Ãÿ¤ “×“Ãÿ ›×Œ›À×Ã

”×‘Ã—“ ‘—”¤‘×Û›fl–¤Ã×‘‘—Ù

 –a ̈· ̈·±2aÆÙ

TMÚ

¤Œ×› ÿÚ ÿ—‘‹¤ŒÙ ÷ÆÚÙ fl ̈ ̈±Æ2aß Ÿa2aÆø¥Ù

 Œa­°±2oa2 ̈Ú

“±Ú ÔðÛÈðÁÏÏ

fl1a21⁄2ß “±Ú flðÌÈÛÏÓÁÛÈÍÔ

”¤”—Œfl“‹À”ˆ

—2 –a ̈· ̈·±2 o±Æ ŒaTM·a© ±o ø2 —ÆoaÆ ±o  ̈ ̧a

fi±øÆo ±o ×33·1Æø ̈·±2 fl°°aø¥­

÷ø2 ́øÆß ÓÔÙ ÓðÔÎˆˆ 

fiao±ÆaÊ ›fl“fi«Ù Ÿ—À‘‹Ù ø2o “ÚŒÚ Õ”×ÃÿÙ ›·Æ1⁄2 ́· ̈ ÷ ́o1a­Ú

”·¥ ̈±2 ‘±3a¥·Û›ø°a ̈·¥¥±Ù ø 2ø ̈·TMa ø2o 1⁄2· ̈·¶a2 ±o ”a®·1⁄2±Ù °a ̈· ̈·±2­ o±Æ ÆaTM·a©

±o  ̈ ̧a fi±øÆo ±o ×33·1Æø ̈·±2 fl°°aø¥­é ±ÆoaÆ o·­3·­­·21  ̧·­ ø°°aø¥ oÆ±3 ø2

·33·1Æø ̈·±2 ¶ ́o1aé­ Æa3±TMø¥ ±ÆoaÆÚ ...a  ̧øTMa ¶ ́Æ·­o·1⁄2 ̈·±2  ́2oaÆ Ë ÀÚÕÚ›Ú y ÔÓÎÓÚ

⁄×‘¤‹

÷À‘ ÓÔ ÓðÔÎ

”—‘‘« ›Ú ‹...«¤ŒÙ ›‘¤Œ’

ÀÚÕÚ ›—ÀŒÃ —⁄ fl––¤fl‘Õ

 ˆ Ã ̧·­ o·­°±­· ̈·±2 ·­ 2± ̈ ø°°Æ±°Æ·ø ̈a o±Æ ° ́æ¥·1⁄2ø ̈·±2 ø2o ·­ 2± ̈ °Æa1⁄2aoa2 ̈

a®1⁄2a° ̈ ø­ °Æ±TM·oao æß Á ̈ ̧ ›·ÆÚ ŒÚ ÌÍÛÌÚ

 ˆˆ Ã ̧a °ø2a¥  ́2ø2·3± ́­¥ß 1⁄2±21⁄2¥ ́oa­  ̈ ̧·­ 1⁄2ø­a ·­ ­ ́· ̈øæ¥a o±Æ oa1⁄2·­·±2

©· ̈ ̧± ́ ̈ ±Æø¥ øÆ1 ́3a2 ̈Ú Õaa ⁄aoÚ ŒÚ fl°°Ú –Ú ÌÏ ̄ø ̃ ̄Ó ̃Ú
...a ÆaTM·a© oa 2±TM± Ø ́a­ ̈·±2­ ±o ¥ø©Ú ”ao·2øÛ‘øÆø TMÚ ÿ±¥oaÆÙ ÈÈÔ ⁄ÚÌo ÔÔðÍÙ

ÔÔÔÔ  ̄Á ̈ ̧ ›·ÆÚ ÓðÔÏ ̃Ú 

À2oaÆ  ̈ ̧a 3±o·o·ao 1⁄2ø ̈a1±Æ·1⁄2ø¥ ø°°Æ±ø1⁄2 ̧Ù  ̈ ̧a 1±TMaÆ23a2 ̈  ̧ø­ 2± ̈ 3a ̈ · ̈­

æ ́Æoa2 ±o °Æ±TM·21 æß 1⁄2¥aøÆ ø2o 1⁄2±2TM·21⁄2·21 aTM·oa21⁄2a  ̈ ̧ø ̈ ‘±3a¥·Û›ø°a ̈·¥¥± ©ø­

1⁄2±2TM·1⁄2 ̈ao ±o  ̈Æø2­°±Æ ̈ø ̈·±2 ±o 3a ̈ ̧ø3° ̧a ̈ø3·2aÚ Õaa ·oÚ ø ̈ ÔÔÔÌÚ Ã ̧a 1⁄2±3°¥ø·2 ̈

1⁄2 ̧øÆ1ao ‘±3a¥·Û›ø°a ̈·¥¥± ©· ̈ ̧ ­·® 1⁄2± ́2 ̈­ ±o 3·­1⁄2±2o ́1⁄2 ̈Ú ŒaTM·a©·21  ̈ ̧a øæ­ ̈Æø1⁄2 ̈

±o ¶ ́o13a2 ̈Ù · ̈ ­aa3­  ̈ ̧ø ̈ ‘±3a¥·Û›ø°a ̈·¥¥± °¥aøoao 1 ́·¥ ̈ß  ̈± ±2¥ß  ̈©± ±o  ̈ ̧±­a

1⁄2± ́2 ̈­Ú ÿ±©aTMaÆÙ ÆaTM·a©·21  ̈ ̧a Æa1⁄2±ÆoÙ · ̈ ·­  ́21⁄2¥aøÆ © ̧a ̈ ̧aÆ  ̈ ̧a 1⁄2± ́2 ̈­ ±o  ̈ ̧a

1⁄2±3°¥ø·2 ̈ 3ø ̈1⁄2 ̧  ̈ ̧a 1⁄2± ́2 ̈­ ·2  ̈ ̧a øæ­ ̈Æø1⁄2 ̈ ±o ¶ ́o13a2 ̈Ú × ̈ ·­ o ́Æ ̈ ̧aÆ  ́21⁄2¥aøÆ  ̈±

© ̧·1⁄2 ̧ 1⁄2± ́2 ̈­ ‘±3a¥·Û›ø°a ̈·¥¥± °¥aøoao 1 ́·¥ ̈ßÚ Õaa ·oÚ ø ̈ ÔÔÔÏÛÔÎÚ

...a  ̈ ̧aÆao±Æa 1Æø2 ̈  ̈ ̧a °a ̈· ̈·±2 o±Æ ÆaTM·a© ø2o Æa3ø2o o±Æ o ́Æ ̈ ̧aÆ

°Æ±1⁄2aao·21­Ú

–¤Ã×Ã×—“ ⁄—Œ Œ¤ ×¤... ŸŒfl“Ã¤‹Â Œ¤”fl“‹¤‹Ú 

Ó ÔðÛÈðÁÏÏ
#### FLORENCE LAZARUS AND MANNIS LAZARUS, PLAINTIFFS-RESPONDENTS, v. RAYMOND C. STILLGER AND GLADYS I. STILLGER, DEFENDANTS-APPELLANTS.

Superior Court of New Jersey Appellate Division

Argued November 2, 1953

Decided November 27, 1953.

Before Judges Clapp, Goldmann and Bwakt.

*Mr. Alfred Brener*argued the cause for plaintiffs *(Mr. Sydney*Shulman, attorney).

*Mr. George J. Kaplan*argued the cause for defendants *(Mr. Louis*Steisel, attorney).

*435The opinion of the court was delivered hy

Clapp, S. J. A. D.

The only question we need deal with is whether the defendants Raymond C. and Gladys I. Stillger are liable for an alleged nnisance on property adjoining theirs, because their predecessor in title may have created the nuisance.

The Stillgers’ predecessor in title built a sidewalk in front of 673/2 West 33rd Street, Bayonne, extending it west 1 foot 9%th inches beyond his property line into the property of one Arthur Prank at 69 West 33rd Street. Prom the time the Stillgers bought their property, the sidewalk at the end of this extension has been one inch to a half-inch higher than the sidewalk immediately to the west thereof, thus making a slight step-up at that point. The plaintiffs, husband and wife, sue for injuries of the wife caused when she, walking east toward 673/2 West 33rd Street, tripped over this step-up and fell.

At the close of the plaintiffs’ case and again at the close of the entire case, motion was made on the Stillgers’ behalf to dismiss the action, raising, *inter alia,*the question above stated. The motions were denied, and defendants appeal. The jury brought in a verdict for the plaintiffs. The only wrongdoing charged against the Stillgers on the appeal is the maintenance of this step-up in the sidewalk on Prank’s property.

In some situations at any event *(Gainfort v.*229 *Raritan Avenue Corp.,*127 *N. J. L.*409, 413 *(Sup. Ct.*1941); *Trondle v. Ward,*129 *N. J. L.*179, 184 *(E. & A.*1942); *cf. Morris Canal and Banking Company v. Ryerson,*27 *N. J. L.*457*(Sup. Ct.*1859); *Restatement of*Torts, *sec.*839; *Prosser on*Torts, 553, 603), a person may be held liable for a nuisance due to a structural fault in his own sidewalk, where the faulty construction is chargeable to his predecessor in title. *Braelow v. Klein,*100 *N. J. L.*156*(E. & A.*1924); *Garvey v. Public Service etc. Transport,*115 *N. J. L.*280, 284 *(E. & A.*1935); *Schwartz v. Howard Savings Institution,*117 *N. J. L.*180*(E. & A.*1936); *Fasano v. Prudential Ins. Co.,*117 *N. J. L.*539*(Sup. Ct.**4361937); *McHugh v. Hawthorne B.*& *L. Assn.,*118 *N. J. L.*78*(Sup. Ct.*1937); *Fredericks v. Dover,*125 *N. J. L.*288*(E. & A.*1940). The theory of the matter need not be inquired into here. But no theory can be conceived of, which would render the Stillgers chargeable for an alleged nuisance created by their grantor on adjoining property or render them liable for not abating that nuisance. The denial of the motion to dismiss was error.

Judgment reversed, with directions to enter judgment below for defendants Stillgers.
* This disposition is not appropriate for publication and is not precedent

except as provided by 9th Cir. R. 36-3.

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

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

NOT FOR PUBLICATION

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

 FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT

CARLOS EDUARDO ZARCENO; IRIS

JEANNETTE ZARCENO, AKA Iris Janet

Hernandez de Zarceno; ANDREA SOFIA

ZARCENO HERNANDEZ, aka Andrea

Zarceno Hernandez,

 Petitioners,

 v.

ERIC H. HOLDER, Jr., Attorney General,

 Respondent.

No. 09-74002

Agency Nos. A094-999-228

 A094-999-229

 A094-999-230

MEMORANDUM*

On Petition for Review of an Order of the

Board of Immigration Appeals

Submitted June 6, 2011** 

Seattle, Washington

FILED

JUN 10 2011

MOLLY C. DWYER, CLERK

U.S. COURT OF APPEALS
 *** The Honorable Irma E. Gonzalez, Chief District Judge for the U.S.

District Court for the Southern District of California, sitting by designation.

2

Before: W. FLETCHER and RAWLINSON, Circuit Judges, and 

GONZALEZ, Chief District Judge.*** 

Petitioner Eduardo Zarceno appeals from the BIA’s denial of his asylum

petition. Zarceno alleges persecution by the Salvadoran “Mara 18” gang. He

alleges that he was targeted by the gang because he is a lawyer and he refused to

represent members of the gang in criminal matters.

We review a denial of asylum by the BIA for substantial evidence. Zehatye

v. Gonzales, 453 F.3d 1182, 1184-85 (9th Cir. 2006). This means that “unless any

reasonable adjudicator would be compelled to conclude to the contrary,” 8 U.S.C.

§ 1252(b)(4)(B), we must affirm. 

Even if we assume that lawyers who refuse to represent gang members are a

particular social group as contemplated by the asylum laws, and even if we assume

that Mara 18 was a state actor or could not be controlled by state authorities, there

was sufficient evidence for the BIA to conclude that Zarceno was not persecuted

on account of his membership in a particular social group. At his asylum hearing,

Zarceno testified that he was approached by the gang for money. When asked by

the government’s lawyer why he was targeted, Zarceno responded, “It was not for

political motivations, it was for monetary motivation. They thought because I’m a
3

lawyer that I have money.” This was sufficient for the BIA to conclude that

Zarceno was not persecuted on account of a protected ground. See INS v. EliasZacarias, 502 U.S. 478, 481-82 (1992). For similar reasons, this was sufficient for

the BIA to deny Zarceno’s application for withholding of removal. 

As Zarceno provides no argument on appeal why the BIA’s denial of

protection under CAT was in err, we do not address his CAT claim. See MartinezSerrano v. INS, 94 F.3d 1256, 1259 (9th Cir. 1996) (“Issues raised in a brief that

are not supported by argument are deemed abandoned.”).

PETITION DENIED.
#### DELLAMEO v. GREAT LAKES S. S. CO.

Civ. No. 25698.

United States District Court N. D. Ohio, E. D.

Feb. 14, 1949.

*78See also D.C., 9 F.R.D. 30.

Harry G. Fuerst, of Cleveland, Ohio, for plaintiff.

Robert G. McCreary, Jr. and Leckie, McCreary, Schlitz & Hinslea, all of Cleveland, Ohio, for defendant.

JONES, Chief Judge.

That information and hospital records are not readily available is not enough to -support “good cause” under Federal Rules of -Civil Procedure, rule 34, 2-8 U.S.C.A. By the -exercise -of any reasonable amount of diligence and -energy the plaintiff has every opportunity of securing the information that he seeks from the papers possessed by the defendant. The names of all witnesses canvassed by the defendant were -made available; the hospital -records really were primarily under -control of the plaintiff and still can be had by him.

There is no showing here that the plaintiff is -entitled to ifavorable action on his motion for production. Hickman v. Taylor, 329 U.S. 495, at page 512, 67 S.Ct. 385, 91 L.Ed. 451.

Motion -denied.