alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
Skip to main content    

      Federal Mine Safety and Health Review Commission    

En Español

            - About FMSHRC               - News
              - Commissioners
              - Chairman and Commissioner Tenure
              - Administrative Law Judges
            - Guides               - Frequently Asked Questions
              - FOIA Guide
              - How a Case Proceeds Before the Commission
              - Guide to Commission Proceedings
              - Requests to Reopen
              - Instructions for Electronic Filing
              - Videoconference Hearings
              - Section 105(c)(3) Complaints
            - Decisions               - Review Commission Decisions
              - ALJ Decisions
              - Blue Books
            - Review Commission Arguments & Meetings               - Oral Arguments
              - Meetings
            - The Mine Act & Procedural Rules               - The Mine Act
              - Procedural Rules
              - Changes to Procedural Rules
            - FOIA               - Submit a FOIA Request
              - FOIA Guide
              - Rules
              - FOIA References
              - FOIA Library
              - FOIA Public Liaison
              - FOIA Reports
              - Proposed FOIA Rules
            - Reports & Budget Submissions               - Strategic Plans
              - Budget and Annual Performance Reports
              - Buy American Reports
              - Performance Accountability Reports
              - Sustainability Report
              - Reports to Congress
              - Contingency Plan
              - Reports to the President
            - Cases on Review               - Cases Currently on Review Before the Commission
              - Commission Decisions On Appeal
            - Contact Us

## Breadcrumb

-  Home 
-                   Secretary of Labor v. Portable, Inc.              

#   Secretary of Labor v. Portable, Inc.

Portable EAJA 2015-1-M Meeting Notice 12-8-16.pdf

Portable EAJA 2015-1-M Meeting Notice 12-8-16.htm

secretary-labor-v-portable-inc-docket-eaja2015-1-m.mp3

##### Footer Links

-  EEO Policies 
-  No Fear Act Notice 
-  Employee Ethical Conduct 
-  Equal Access to Justice Act 
-  Motions to Approve Settlement 
-  Non-Discrimination 
-  Reasonable Accommodation Procedures 
-  Privacy Act 
-  Sunshine Act Regulations 
-  USA.gov 
-  FMSHRC Privacy Policy 
-  Vulnerability Disclosure Policy 

### The Federal Mine Safety and Health Review Commission

#### 1331 Pennsylvania Avenue, NW,Suite 520NWashington, DC 20004-1710Phone: 771-210-1887 TTY/TDD (202)434-4000 ext. 293E-mail: fmshrc@fmshrc.gov
109 A.3d 668

#### IN THE MATTER OF HERBERT JONI TAN, AN ATTORNEY AT LAW (ATTORNEY NO. 008331998).

March 12, 2015.

ORDER

The Disciplinary Review Board having filed with the Court its decision in DRB 14-103, concluding that HERBERT JONI TAN, formerly of FORT LEE, who was admitted to the bar of this State in 1998, and who has been temporarily suspended from the practice of law since November 20, 2013, should be suspended from the practice of law for a period of one year for violating *RPC*1.4(c) (failure to explain a matter to the extent reasonably necessary to allow the client to make informed decisions about the *588representation), *RPC*1.7(a)(2) (conflict of interest), *RPC*1.8(a) (business transaction with client), *RPC*1.15(d) (recordkeeping deficiencies), *RPC*8.4(a) (violating the *Rules of Professional Conduct*), and *RPC*8.4(c) (conduct involving dishonesty, fraud, deceit or misrepresentation);

And the Disciplinary Review Board having further concluded that any pending disciplinary matters against respondent should be consolidated for resolution and expedited, and that the Director of the Office of Attorney Ethics should take whatever action he considers appropriate on the matter of respondent’s request that a client submit “fake” online reviews for respondent’s legal services;

And good cause appearing;

It is ORDERED that HERBERT JONI TAN is suspended from the practice of law for a period of one year, effective immediately, and until the further Order of the Court; and it is further

ORDERED that all pending disciplinary matters against respondent be consolidated and expedited, and that the Director of the Office of Attorney Ethics take whatever action he deems appropriate on the matter of respondent’s request that his client submit “fake” online reviews for respondent’s legal service; and it is further

ORDERED that respondent comply with *Rule*1:20-20 dealing with suspended attorneys; and it is further

ORDERED that pursuant to *Rule*l:20-20(c), respondent’s failure to comply with the Affidavit of Compliance requirement of *Rule*1:20—20(b)(15) may (1) preclude the Disciplinary Review Board from considering respondent’s petition for reinstatement for a period of up to six months from the date respondent files proof of compliance; (2) be found to constitute a violation of *RPC*8.1(b) and *RPC*8.4(c); and (3) provide a basis for an action for contempt pursuant to *Rule*1:10-2; and it is further

*589ORDERED that the entire record of this matter be made a permanent part of respondent’s file as an attorney at law of this State; and it is further

ORDERED that respondent reimburse the Disciplinary Oversight Committee for appropriate administrative costs and actual expenses incurred in the prosecution of this matter, as provided in *Rule*1:20-17.
#### UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. Felipe Neri CUEVAS-ROBLEDOS, Defendant-Appellant.

No. 07-30106.

United States Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit.

Submitted May 20, 2008.*

Filed May 23, 2008.

Jennifer Martin, AUSA, Stephen F. Peifer, Esq., USPO — Office of the U.S. Attorney, Portland, OR, for Plaintiff-Appellee.

Caroline Davidson, AFPD, FPDOR— Federal Public Defender’s Office, Portland, OR, for Defendant-Appellant.

Before: PREGERSON, TASHIMA, and GOULD, Circuit Judges.

*

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

MEMORANDUM **

Felipe Neri Cuevas-Robledos appeals from the 57-month sentence imposed fol*545lowing his guilty-plea conviction for illegal reentry, in violation of 8 U.S.C. § 1326. We have jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. § 1291. We affirm the sentence and remand to correct the judgment.

Cuevas-Robledos contends that the district court did not give sufficient weight to his history and circumstances, and that the resulting sentence is unreasonable. Cuevas-Robledos also contends that his sentence is unreasonably long in light of the district court’s failure to sufficiently weigh his lost opportunity to serve his federal and state sentences concurrently due to the government’s delay in prosecuting him. The record indicates, however, that the district court specifically considered Cuevas-Robledos’ history and circumstances, his lost opportunity to serve his sentences concurrently, and other factors enumerated in 18 U.S.C. § 3553(a). The resulting sentence imposed by the district court was neither procedurally erroneous nor substantively unreasonable. *See United States v. Carty,*520 F.3d 984, 991-93 (9th Cir.2008) (en banc).

In accordance with *United States v. Rivera-Sanehez,*222 F.3d 1057, 1062 (9th Cir. 2000), we remand the case to the district court with instructions that it delete from the judgment the incorrect reference to § 1326(b)(2). *See United States v. Herrera-Bianco,*232 F.3d 715, 719 (9th Cir. 2000) (remanding sua sponte to delete the reference to § 1326(b)).

AFFIRMED; REMANDED with instructions to correct the judgment.

**

 This disposition is not appropriate for publication and is not precedent except as provided by 9th Cir. R. 36-3.
<TABLE> <S> <C>


<ARTICLE> 5

<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   YEAR
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          DEC-31-1996
<PERIOD-START>                             JAN-01-1996
<PERIOD-END>                               DEC-31-1996
<CASH>                                             176
<SECURITIES>                                         0
<RECEIVABLES>                                    3,235
<ALLOWANCES>                                     (244)
<INVENTORY>                                         87
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                                 3,434
<PP&E>                                           1,889
<DEPRECIATION>                                   1,401
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                  12,946
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                            4,289
<BONDS>                                            400
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                           157
<OTHER-SE>                                       8,100
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                    12,946
<SALES>                                          6,453
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                                11,142
<CGS>                                            3,992
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                    3,992
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                 7,435
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                    55
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                                  57
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                  (253)
<INCOME-TAX>                                         0
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                              (253)
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                     (253)
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                    (.02)
<EPS-DILUTED>                                        0



</TABLE>
CASE ANNOUNCEMENTS

*August 14, 2014*

[Cite as *0811412014 Case Announcements,*2014-Ohio-3492.]

MOTION AND PROCEDURAL RULINGS

2013-1472.

#### In re Adoption of Rules for Alternative & Renewable Energy Technology, Resources & Climate Regulations.

Public Utilities Commission, No. 08-888-EL-ORD. This cause is pending before the court as an appeal from the Public Utilities Commission of Ohio.

Upon consideration of the motion for admission pro hac vice of Robert Kelter, it is ordered by the court that the motion is granted. Pursuant to Gov.Bar R. XII(4), counsel shall file a notice of permission to appear pro hac vice with the Supreme Court’s Office of Attorney Services within 30 days of the date of this entry.
EXHIBIT 31.2

CERTIFICATIONS

I, James M. Sullivan, certify
that:

| | 1. | I have reviewed this
      Amendment No. 1 to the annual report on Form 10-K of Joy Global Inc.;
      and                                                                                                                                                                                                                          
| | -- | ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
| |   
| | 2. | Based on my
      knowledge, this report does not contain any untrue statement of a material
      fact or omit to state a material fact necessary to make the statements
      made, in light of the circumstances under which such statements were made,
      not misleading with respect to the period covered by this
  report.

Date: February 23, 2017

|/s/ James M. Sullivan                                     
|----------------------------------------------------------
|James M. Sullivan                                         
|Executive Vice President and Chief Financial
      Officer
|(Principal Financial Officer)                             

---
**FEDERALMINE SAFETY AND HEALTH REVIEW COMMISSION**

 

SUNSHINE ACT NOTICE

 

BAC 6735-01

 

May 30, 2019

 

 

TIMEAND DATE:                10:00 a.m., Wednesday, June 12, 2019

 

PLACE:                                  TheRichard V. Backley Hearing Room, Room 511N, 1331 Pennsylvania Avenue, NW,Washington, DC 20004 (enter from  F Street entrance)

 

STATUS:                                Open

 

MATTERSTO BE 

CONSIDERED:                     TheCommission will hear oral argument in the matter *Secretary of Labor v. SolarSources Mining, LLC,*Docket No. LAKE 2017-99. (Issues include whether theJudge abused his discretion and failed to adequately explain the basis for thecivil penalty he imposed.)

 

 

Any person attending this oral argument who requiresspecial accessibility features and/or auxiliary aids, such as sign languageinterpreters, must inform the Commission in advance of those needs. Subject to29 C.F.R. § 2706.150(a)(3) and § 2706.160(d).

 

 

CONTACTPERSON 

FOR MORE INFO:                EmogeneJohnson (202) 434-9935 / (202) 708-9300 for TDD

                                                Relay/ 1-800-877-8339 for toll free.

 

PHONE NUMBER

FOR LISTENING TO 

MEETING:                             1-(866)867-4769

                                                Passcode:678-100

 

 

                                                __________________________________

                                                SarahL. Stewart

                                                DeputyGeneral Counsel
73 A.3d 525

#### Gloria MARSHALL v. CITY OF PHILADELPHIA and Zoning Board of Adjustment. Petition of Archdiocese of Philadelphia.

Supreme Court of Pennsylvania.

Aug. 15, 2013.

*ORDER*

PER CURIAM.

AND NOW, this 15th day of August, 2013, the Petition for Allowance of Appeal is GRANTED, LIMITED TO the issue set forth below. Allocatur is DENIED as to the remaining issue. The issue accepted for appeal, as stated by Petitioner with slight modification, is:

> Did the Commonwealth Court plainly misapply the applicable standard of review, given the substantial public importance of, and pressing public need for, the project for which zoning relief was properly awarded (conversion of the property to apartments for low-income seniors), where the court’s reversal of the well-supported zoning relief threatens completion of the project due to potential loss of substantial and necessary federal funding?
<PAGE>

Information Analysis Incorporated                     2000 Report on Form 10-KSB
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------


Exhibit 23.1



                        CONSENT OF INDEPENDENT AUDITORS

We consent to the incorporation by reference in the Registration Form SB-2
No. 333-95775 dated September 4, 2000 and Registration Statements (Form S-8
No. 33-26249 and No. 33-305136) pertaining to the 1988 Stock Option Plan and
1996 Stock Option Plan of Information Analysis Incorporated and in the related
prospectus' of our report dated April 6, 2001, with respect to the consolidated
financial statements and schedule of information Analysis Incorporated included
in this Annual Report (Form 10-KSB) for the year ended December 31, 2000.

                                              /s/ Rubino & McGeehin, Chartered

                                              RUBINO & MCGEEHIN, CHARTERED
Bethesda, Maryland
April 13, 2001
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<ARTICLE> 5
<MULTIPLIER> 1

<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   6-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          DEC-31-2000
<PERIOD-START>                             JAN-01-2000
<PERIOD-END>                               JUN-30-2000
<CASH>                                         208,201
<SECURITIES>                                         0
<RECEIVABLES>                                   10,934
<ALLOWANCES>                                         0
<INVENTORY>                                     91,198
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                               310,333
<PP&E>                                         146,490
<DEPRECIATION>                                  88,645
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                 637,605
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                          575,311
<BONDS>                                              0
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                         3,133
<OTHER-SE>                                      59,161
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                   637,605
<SALES>                                        175,996
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                               175,996
<CGS>                                          147,967
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                  147,967
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                               403,617
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                     0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                                   0
<INCOME-PRETAX>                              (375,588)
<INCOME-TAX>                                         0
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                          (375,858)
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                 (375,588)
<EPS-BASIC>                                     (.01)
<EPS-DILUTED>                                   (.01)


</TABLE>
EXHIBIT 32.1


CERTIFICATIONS PURSUANT TO
SECTION 906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002
(18 U.S.C. SECTION 1350)

In  connection  with  the  Annual Report  of E Prime  Aerospace  Corporation, a
Colorado  corporation  (the  "Company"), on  Form 10-KSB  for  the  year  ended
September 30, 2006, as filed with the  Securities and Exchange Commission  (the
"Report"), James D Oldham III, Chief Executive Officer,  President and Director
of the Company,  does hereby certify, pursuant to ss. 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley
Act of 2002 (18 U.S.C. ss. 1350), that to his knowledge:

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

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



/s/ James D Oldham III
---------------------------------------
James D Oldham III
Chief Executive Officer, President and Director
July 17, 2007


----------------
[A signed original of this written statement  required  by Section 906 has  been
provided  to  E'Prime  Aerospace  Corporation  and will be  retained  by E'Prime
Aerospace Corporation and furnished to the Securities and Exchange Commission or
its staff upon request.]
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<PAGE>
 
<ARTICLE> 5
       
<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   6-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                         DEC-31-1997
<PERIOD-START>                            JAN-01-1997
<PERIOD-END>                              JUN-30-1997
<CASH>                                      2,508,300
<SECURITIES>                                        0 
<RECEIVABLES>                                       0 
<ALLOWANCES>                                        0 
<INVENTORY>                                         0 
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                            2,508,300       
<PP&E>                                      7,183,100      
<DEPRECIATION>                              1,364,800    
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                              8,341,100      
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                         767,900    
<BONDS>                                             0  
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                               0 
<PREFERRED>                                         0 
<COMMON>                                            0 
<OTHER-SE>                                  7,569,300       
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                8,341,100         
<SALES>                                             0          
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                              839,900          
<CGS>                                               0          
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                 465,100          
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                               38,100       
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                    0      
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                                  0       
<INCOME-PRETAX>                               209,900       
<INCOME-TAX>                                        0      
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                           209,900      
<DISCONTINUED>                                      0  
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                     0      
<CHANGES>                                           0  
<NET-INCOME>                                  209,900 
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                    1.30 
<EPS-DILUTED>                                    1.30 
        
                                  


</TABLE>
#### Julio C. FLORES, aka Julio Flores, aka Little Diablo Flores, Petitioner, v. Loretta E. LYNCH, Attorney General, Respondent.

No. 13-73906.

United States Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit.

Submitted Jan. 20, 2016.*

Filed Jan. 27, 2016.

Mario Acosta, Jr., Esquire, Law Office of Mario Acosta, Jr., Los Angeles, CA, for Petitioner.

Stefanie A. Svoren-Jay, Trial, OIL, 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, TASHIMA, and NGUYEN, Circuit Judges.

*

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

MEMORANDUM**

Julio C. Flores, a native and citizen of El Salvador, petitions for review of the Board of Immigration Appeals’ order dismissing his appeal from an immigration judge’s removal order. We have jurisdiction under 8 U.S.C. § 1252. We review de novo questions of law, *Medina-Lara v. Holder,*771 F.3d 1106, 1111 (9th Cir.2014), and we grant the petition for review and remand.

*486Under the modified categorical approach, the government has not met its burden of proving by clear and convincing evidence that Flores was convicted of possessing cocaine base. *See id.*at 1113. The amended complaint, which charged Flores with a violation of California Health & Safety Code § 11350(a), is the only document in the record that specifies that cocaine base was the drug at issue. The minute order dated February 6, 2013 records Flores’s nolo contendere plea to “Count 1,” but does not specify whether that count was set forth in the .amended complaint, or the original complaint, which is not in the record. In fact, the minute order states that Flores pleaded not guilty to the amended complaint. Because the government has submitted only the amended complaint and the link between it and the minute order is ambiguous, the government has not satisfied its burden of proof. *See id.*at 1114-15 (the government failed to carry its burden where alternate explanations for ambiguities in the record were plausible, even though the record did not suggest petitioner possessed any substance other than one controlled by federal law).

We grant the petition for review and remand for further proceedings.

PETITION FOR REVIEW GRANTED; REMANDED.

**

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