alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
[Federal Register Volume 82, Number 201 (Thursday, October 19, 2017)]
[Notices]
[Page 48723]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2017-22380]


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

DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR

National Park Service

[NPS-SERO-RTCA-24091; PPMPSPD1T.Y00000] [PPSESERO10]


Cancellation of September 13, 2016, Meeting of the Wekiva River 
System Advisory Management Committee

AGENCY: National Park Service, Interior.

ACTION: Cancellation of meeting.

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

SUMMARY: Notice is hereby given in accordance with the Federal Advisory 
Committee Act, that the September 13, 2016, meeting of the Wekiva River 
System Advisory Management Committee previously announced in the 
Federal Register on December 22, 2016, is cancelled.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Jaime Doubek-Racine, Community Planner 
and Designated Federal Official, Rivers, Trails, and Conservation 
Assistance Program, Florida Field Office, Southeast Region, 5342 Clark 
Road, PMB #123, Sarasota, Florida 34233, or via telephone (941) 685-
5912.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The Wekiva River System Advisory Management 
Committee was established by Public Law 106-299 to assist in the 
development of the comprehensive management plan for the Wekiva River 
System and provide advice to the Secretary of the Interior in carrying 
out management responsibilities of the Secretary under the Wild and 
Scenic Rivers Act (16 U.S.C. 1274).

Alma Ripps,
Chief, Office of Policy.
[FR Doc. 2017-22380 Filed 10-18-17; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4312-52-P
---

---

Exhibit 13.2

# Certification Pursuant
To
18 US C Section 1350,
As Adopted Pursuant To
Section 906 Of The
Sarbanes-Oxley Act Of 2002

In
connection with Amendment No.1 on Form 20-F/A to the Annual Report of Tower Semiconductor
Ltd. (the Registrant) on Form 20-F for the year ended December 31, 2008 as
filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the Report),
I, Oren Shirazi, Chief Financial Officer of the Registrant, certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.
C. Section 1350, as adopted pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002,
that to my knowledge:

| | 1. | the
Report fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) 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 Registrant.
| | -- | -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

| |  | /s/ Oren Shirazi

Oren ShiraziChief Financial Officer
| |  | -------------------------------------------------------------------

November 24, 2009

A
signed original of this written statement required by Section 906 has been provided to
the Registrant and will be retained by the Registrant and furnished to the Securities and
Exchange Commission or its staff upon request.



---

---
UNPUBLISHED

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

No. 09-6186

JOHN JAMES BELL, a/k/a Omar Abdel-Al-Mumit, Plaintiff - Appellant,

v. CECILIA REYNOLDS, Warden of Kershaw Correctional Institution, Defendant - Appellee.

Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of South Carolina, at Anderson. G. Ross Anderson, Jr., Senior District Judge. (8:08-cv-03799-GRA)

Submitted: May 20, 2009 Decided: June 15, 2009

Before WILKINSON, MICHAEL, and SHEDD, Circuit Judges.

Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion.

John James Bell, Appellant Pro Se.

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.PER CURIAM: John James Bell appeals the district court’s order denying relief on his petition for writ of mandamus. The district court referred this case to a magistrate judge pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1)(B) (2006). The magistrate judge

recommended that relief be denied and advised Bell that failure to file timely and specific objections to this recommendation could waive appellate review of a district court order based upon the recommendation. Despite this warning, Bell failed to file specific objections to the magistrate judge’s recommendation. Rather, Bell filed objections that did not address the magistrate judge’s findings and were construed by the district court as a general objection to the magistrate judge’s report and recommendation. The timely filing of specific objections to a magistrate judge’s recommendation is necessary to preserve appellate review of the substance of that recommendation when the parties have been warned of the consequences of noncompliance. Wright v. Collins , 766 F.2d 841, 845-46 (4th Cir. 1985); see also Thomas v. Arn , 474 U.S. 140 (1985). Bell has waived appellate review by failing to timely file specific objections after receiving proper notice. Accordingly, we affirm the judgment of the district court.

23 We dispense with oral argument because the facts and legal contentions are adequately presented in the materials before the court and argument would not aid the decisional

process.

AFFIRMED
#### John James BELL, a/k/a Omar Abdel-Al-Mumit, Petitioner-Appellant, v. Cecilia REYNOLDS, Warden, Kershaw Correctional Institution, Respondent-Appellee.

No. 07-7737.

United States Court of Appeals, Fourth Circuit.

Submitted: April 22, 2008.

Decided: May 9, 2008.

John James Bell, Appellant Pro Se.

Before NIEMEYER, MICHAEL, and KING, Circuit Judges.

Affirmed by unpublished PER CURIAM opinion.

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.

PER CURIAM:

John James Bell appeals the district court’s order denying relief on his petitions for writ of coram nobis and for writ of mandamus. The district court referred this case to a magistrate judge pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1)(B) (2000). The magistrate judge recommended that relief be denied and advised Bell that failure to file timely and specific objections to this recommendation could waive appellate review of a district court order based upon the recommendation. Despite this warning, Bell failed to file specific objections to the magistrate judge’s recommendation. Rather, Bell filed objections that did not address the magistrate judge’s findings and were construed by the district court as a general objection to the magistrate judge’s report and recommendation.

The timely filing of specific objections to a magistrate judge’s recommendation is necessary to preserve appellate review of the substance of that recommendation when the parties have been warned of the consequences of noncompliance. *Wright v. Collins,*766 F.2d 841, 845-46 (4th Cm. 1985); *see also Thomas v. Arn,*474 U.S. 140, 106 S.Ct. 466, 88 L.Ed.2d 435 (1985). Bell has waived appellate review by failing to timely file specific objections after receiving proper notice. Accordingly, we affirm the judgment of the district court.

We deny Bell’s request for appointment of counsel and dispense with oral argument because the facts and legal contentions are adequately presented in the materials before the court and argument would not aid the decisional process.

*AFFIRMED.*
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<PAGE>
<ARTICLE> 9
       
<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   12-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          DEC-31-1997
<PERIOD-START>                             JAN-01-1997
<PERIOD-END>                               DEC-31-1997
<CASH>                                       1,530,896
<INT-BEARING-DEPOSITS>                               0
<FED-FUNDS-SOLD>                             1,433,528
<TRADING-ASSETS>                                     0
<INVESTMENTS-HELD-FOR-SALE>                  2,690,808
<INVESTMENTS-CARRYING>                       6,325,869
<INVESTMENTS-MARKET>                                 0
<LOANS>                                     30,202,967
<ALLOWANCE>                                    480,544
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                              44,696,577
<DEPOSITS>                                  33,566,179
<SHORT-TERM>                                   500,000
<LIABILITIES-OTHER>                            207,373
<LONG-TERM>                                  4,000,000
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                            7,000
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                             0
<OTHER-SE>                                   6,416,025
<TOTAL-LIABILITIES-AND-EQUITY>              44,696,577
<INTEREST-LOAN>                              2,255,079
<INTEREST-INVEST>                              482,641
<INTEREST-OTHER>                               100,499
<INTEREST-TOTAL>                             2,838,219
<INTEREST-DEPOSIT>                           1,179,476
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                              79,841
<INTEREST-INCOME-NET>                        1,578,902
<LOAN-LOSSES>                                  433,694
<SECURITIES-GAINS>                                   0
<EXPENSE-OTHER>                              1,510,412
<INCOME-PRETAX>                              (206,340)
<INCOME-PRE-EXTRAORDINARY>                   (206,340)
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                    41,943
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                      .06
<EPS-DILUTED>                                      .06
<YIELD-ACTUAL>                                    4.91
<LOANS-NON>                                     30,805
<LOANS-PAST>                                         0
<LOANS-TROUBLED>                                     0
<LOANS-PROBLEM>                                      0
<ALLOWANCE-OPEN>                               133,342
<CHARGE-OFFS>                                   87,254
<RECOVERIES>                                       762
<ALLOWANCE-CLOSE>                              480,544
<ALLOWANCE-DOMESTIC>                                 0
<ALLOWANCE-FOREIGN>                                  0
<ALLOWANCE-UNALLOCATED>                        480,544
        

</TABLE>
#### Yovany Alberto REYES; Elvyn Arnoldo Mazariegos, Petitioners, v. Eric H. HOLDER, Jr., Attorney General, Respondent.

No. 07-72561.

United States Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit.

Submitted Feb. 15, 2011.*

Filed March 17, 2011.

*583Stephen John Coghlan, Esquire, Law Office of Stephen Coghlan, San Francisco, CA, for Petitioners.

Jesse Lloyd Busen, Trial Attorney, OIL, Emily Anne Radford, Patrick James Glen, Esquire, DOJ-U.S. Department of Justice, Washington, DC, Chief Counsel Ice, Office of the Chief Counsel Department of Homeland Security, San Francisco, CA, for Respondent.

Before: CANBY, FERNANDEZ, and M. SMITH, Circuit Judges.

*

 The panel unanimously concludes this case is suitable for decision without oral argument. *583*See*Fed. R.App. P. 34(a)(2).

MEMORANDUM **

Yovany Alberto Reyes and Elvyn Amoldo Mazariegos, natives and citizens of Guatemala, petition for review of the Board of Immigration Appeals’ order dismissing their appeal from an immigration judge’s (“IJ”) decision denying their application for asylum, withholding of removal, and protection under the Convention Against Torture (“CAT”). We have jurisdiction under 8 U.S.C. § 1252. We review for substantial evidence factual findings, *Singh v. Gonzales,*439 F.3d 1100, 1105 (9th Cir.2006), and we deny the petition for review.

The record does not compel the conclusion that petitioner’s late-filed asylum application is excused by any changed or extraordinary circumstances. *See 8*C.F.R. § 1208(a)(4)(5); *Dhital v. Mukasey,*532 F.3d 1044, 1050 (9th Cir.2008). Accordingly, we deny the petition as to their asylum claim.

Substantial evidence supports the agency’s adverse credibility determination because of inconsistencies regarding Reyes’ age when his mother was attacked, the date of the attack, and the date of his mother’s resignation letter. The inconsistencies go to the heart of petitioners’ claims. *See Chebchoub v. INS,*257 F.3d 1038, 1043 (9th Cir.2001) (sustaining adverse credibility determination where claims “were implausible in light of the background evidence”); *Pal v. INS,*204 F.3d 935, 938 (9th Cir.2000) (sustaining adverse credibility determination where inconsistencies between testimony and doeu*584mentary evidence concerned dates of the alleged incident of persecution). The IJ reasonably rejected Reyes’ explanations for the inconsistencies. *See Rivera v. Mukasey,*508 F.3d 1271, 1275 (9th Cir.2007). In the absence of credible testimony, petitioners’ withholding of removal claim fails. *See Farah v. Ashcroft,*348 F.3d 1153, 1156 (9th Cir.2003).

Because petitioners’ CAT claim is based on the same testimony found to be not credible, and they point to no other evidence the agency should have considered, substantial evidence also supports the denial of CAT relief. *See id.*at 1156-57.

PETITION FOR REVIEW DENIED.

**

 This disposition is not appropriate for publication and is not precedent except as provided by 9th Cir. R. 36-3.
BF

IN THE SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF MONTANA

No. DA 19-0712

STATE OF MONTANA,

Plaintiff and Appellee,

v.

SUSAN LEE HINRICH HAYNAL,

Defendant and Appellant.

ORDER

Upon consideration of Appellee’s motion for a 60-day extension of time, 

and good cause appearing therefor, 

IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that Appellee is granted an extension of time 

to and including January 29, 2021, within which to prepare, serve, and file its 

response brief.

Electronically signed by:

Mike McGrath

Chief Justice, Montana Supreme Court

November 18 2020

11/18/2020

Case Number: DA 19-0712
<PAGE>


                                                                  EXHIBIT 99.2

                    Certification of Chief Financial Officer
                           Pursuant to 18 U.S.C. 1350
                 (SECTION 906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002)



         I, Ethan D. Hokit,  Chief  Financial  Officer of Military Resale Group,
Inc. (the "Registrant"),  do hereby certify,  pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350
as adopted pursuant to Section 906 of the  Sarbanes-Oxley  Act of 2002, that, to
the  best  of  my  knowledge,  based  upon  a  review  of Amendment No. 3 to our
Quarterly  Report on Form 10-QSB/A for  the  period  ended  June 30, 2002 of the
Registrant, as filed with the Securities and Exchange  Commission  on  the  date
hereof (the "Report"):

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

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



                        By:  /s/ Ethan D. Hokit
                             ------------------------------
                                 Name: Ethan D. Hokit
                                 Title: Chief Financial Officer

June 9, 2003


                                       10
<PAGE>
[No. 66806-4-I.

Division One.

October 8, 2012.]

#### Nathan S. Henderson, *Respondent,*v. The Department of Licensing, *Petitioner.*

Appeal from a judgment of the Superior Court for What-com County, No. 10-2-00744-6, Charles R. Snyder, J., entered January 21, 2011. *Reversed*by unpublished per curiam opinion.
United States Court of Appeals

For the Seventh Circuit 

 Chicago, Illinois 60604

December 11, 2015 

Before 

 RICHARD A. POSNER, Circuit Judge 

 ANN CLAIRE WILLIAMS, Circuit Judge 

 DIANE S. SYKES, Circuit Judge

No. 14-1745 

LINDA REED, 

 Plaintiff-Appellant, 

 v. 

STATE OF ILLINOIS, et al.,

 Defendants-Appellees. 

 

Appeal from the United States 

District Court for the Northern 

District of Illinois, Eastern Division. 

No. 1:12-cv-07274 

Amy St. Eve, Judge. 

 

O R D E R 

 The majority opinion in Reed v. State of Illinois, Seventh Circuit No. 14-1745, decided 

October 30, 2015, is amended as follows to correct an error (brought to the court's attention by 

counsel) in the original opinion: the first full paragraph on page 11 of the majority opinion, the 

paragraph beginning "And to top it all," is deleted in its entirety. There are no other changes in 

the majority opinion, and there are no changes in the dissenting opinion. 

 So ordered.
----

Exhibit 13.1 

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 the annual report on Form 20-F ofMetallica Resources Inc. for the year ended December 31, 2006, as filed with theSecurities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof, I hereby certify,pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, as adopted pursuant to Section 906 of theSarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that: 

> 
1. The annual report fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a)  or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended; and 

2. The information contained in the annual report fairly presents, in all  material respects, the financial condition and results of operations of the  registrant. 

Date: April 2, 2007 

/s/ Richard J. Hall                                     Richard J. Hall President and Chief Executive Officer 

A signed original of this written statement required bySection 906, or other document authenticating, acknowledging, or otherwiseadopting the signature that appears in typed form within the electronic versionof this written statement required by Section 906, has been provided to theregistrant and will be retained by the registrant and furnished to theSecurities and Exchange Commission or its staff upon request. 

----
#### Ron NOWAK, Jr.; Bill Foy; Wade Barnhart; Rick Binyons; John L. Enright; Steve Holly; Roy Michael; John Mikulich; Derrick Pearson; Dan Santoni; Joe Thompson; Stephen Wahl; John Howell, Plaintiffs-Appellants, v. CLARK COUNTY, a Nevada political subdivision, Defendant-Appellee.

No. 06-16166.

United States Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit.

Argued and Submitted April 18, 2008.

Filed May 1, 2008.

Harold P. Gewerter, Esq., Harold P. Gewerter, Esq., Ltd., Allen Lichtenstein, Esq., Kristina S. Holman, Esq., Las Vegas, NV, for Plaintiffs-Appellants.

Carolyn C. Campbell, Clark County District Attorney’s Office, Criminal Division, Las Vegas, NV, Eva Garcia-Mendoza, Esq., Luther M. Snavely, Esq., Garcia-Mendoza & Snavely Chtd., Las Vegas, NV, for Defendant-Appellee.

Before: KOZINSKI, Chief Judge, N.R. SMITH, Circuit Judge, and OTERO,* District Judge.

*

 The Honorable S. James Otero, United States District Judge for the Central District of California, sitting by designation.

MEMORANDUM **

There’s no evidence that covert videotaping of police locker rooms was a “longstanding practice or custom which constitutes the standard operating procedure” of Clark County. *Menotti v. City of Seattle,*409 F.3d 1113, 1147 (9th Cir.2005) (internal quotation marks omitted). Nor have plaintiffs set forth any facts to show that Chief Broderick, “as a matter of state law,” had “final policymaking authority” over covert videotaping of the locker room. *Id.*And although Broderick consulted with Glenn Towbridge and Barbara King as to the installation of the camera, plaintiffs waived any argument that Towbridge or King had final policymaking authority over the Park Police as a matter of state law by not raising this issue before the district court. Plaintiffs have therefore not shown a material dispute of fact as to whether Clark County is liable for Broderick’s actions under *Monell v. Department of Social Services,*436 U.S. 658, 694, 98 S.Ct. 2018, 56 L.Ed.2d 611 (1978).

AFFIRMED.

**

 This disposition is not appropriate for publication and is not precedent except as provided by 9th Cir. R. 36-3.
Exhibit 32.0

# ANTARES PHARMA, INC.

# CERTIFICATION OF CHIEF
EXECUTIVE OFFICER AND CHIEF FINANCIAL OFFICER PURSUANT TOSECTION 906 OF THE
SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002 (18 U.S.C. 1350)

Each
of the undersigned, Jack E. Stover and Lawrence M. Christian, the Chief Executive Officer
and the Chief Financial Officer, respectively, of Antares Pharma, Inc. (the
Company), individually and not jointly has executed this Certification in
connection with the filing with the Securities and Exchange Commission of the
Companys Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q for the fiscal quarter ended June 30, 2005
(the Report).

Each
of the undersigned hereby certifies 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.
| | -- | -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

IN
WITNESS WHEREOF, each of the undersigned has executed this Certification as of the 15th
day of August, 2005.

| | /s/ Jack E. Stover

Jack E. Stover
President and Chief Executive Officer                                        
| | ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
| | /s/ Lawrence M. Christian

Lawrence M. Christian
Vice President - Finance, Secretary and
Chief Financial Officer
311.92465
#### In the Matter of Zachary B., a Child Alleged to be Neglected. Keith B., Appellant; St. Lawrence County Department of Social Services, Respondent.

(Appeal No. 2.)

[666 NYS2d 867]

—Order unanimously affirmed without costs. Same Memorandum as in *Matter of Stephanie B.*(245 AD2d 1062 [decided herewith]). (Appeal from Order of Herkimer County Family Court, LaRaia, J.—Neglect.) Present—Denman, P. J., Lawton, Hayes, Balio and Boehm, JJ.
UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT
No. 98-1167
LAL M'MALANI, Plaintiff - Appellant, versus NEWPORT NEWS SHIPBUILDING AND DRY DOCK COMPANY, Defendant - Appellee.Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Virginia, at Newport News. Raymond A. Jackson, District Judge. (CA-97-7-4) Submitted: April 29, 1998 Decided: May 15, 1998 Before MURNAGHAN, NIEMEYER, and WILLIAMS, Circuit Judges. Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion.Lal M'malani, Appellant Pro Se. Dean C. Berry, NEWPORT NEWS SHIPBUILDING & DRY DOCK COMPANY, Newport News, Virginia, for Appellee. Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. See Local Rule 36(c).2 PER CURIAM:Appellant M’malani appeals the district court's grant of summary judgment to Newport News Shipyard and Drydock Company on his claim of employment discrimination under the Age Discrimination in Employment Act, 29 U.S.C.A. §§ 621-634 (West Supp. 1997). We have reviewed the record and the district court's opinion accepting the recommendation of the magistrate judge and find no re versible error. Accordingly, we affirm on the reasoning of the district court. M'malani v. Newport News Shipbuilding and Dry Dock Co. , No. CA-97-7-4 (E.D. Va. Jan. 5, 1998). We dispense with oral argument because the facts and legal contentions are adequately presented inthe materials before the court and argument would not aid the decisional process.

AFFIRMED