alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 98-6180

DOUGLAS RAYMOND NELSON, Plaintiff - Appellant, and KATHLENE MAE NELSON, Plaintiff, versus GANNETT NEWS SERVICE, Defendant - Appellee.Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Virginia, at Richmond. Richard L. Williams, Senior District Judge. (CA-97-905) Submitted: July 22, 1998 Decided: August 6, 1998 Before ERVIN, MICHAEL, and MOTZ, Circuit Judges. Dismissed by unpublished per curiam opinion. Douglas Raymond Nelson, Appellant Pro Se. Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. See Local Rule 36(c).2 PER CURIAM: Douglas Raymond Nelson appeals from the district court’s order dismissing without prejudice his 42 U.S.C.A. § 1983 (West 1994 &Supp. 1998) complaint. The district court dismissed Nelson’s complaint without prejudice for failure to comply with Fed. R. Civ. P. 8(a)(2). Because a dismissal without prejudice is not generally appealable, we dismiss the appeal. See Domino Sugar Corp. v. Sugar Workers Local Union 392, 10 F.3d 1064, 1066-67 (4th Cir. 1993). 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.

DISMISSED
**Exhibit 32.2**

**CERTIFICATION PURSUANT TO 18 U.S.C. SECTION1350AS ADOPTED PURSUANT TO SECTION 906 OFTHE SARBANES OXLEY ACT OF 2002**

        Inconnection with the Quarterly Report of Euramax International, Inc. (the“Company”) on Form 10-Q/A for the period ending June 27, 2003 as filedwith the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the “Report”),I, R. Scott Vansant, Chief Financial Officer of the Company, certify,pursuant to 18 U.S.C. § 1350, as adopted pursuant to section 906of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that:

(1)  the Reportfully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) or 15(d) of theSecurities Exchange Act of 1934; and

 

(2)  theinformation contained in the Report fairly presents, in all material respects,the financial position and results of operations of the Company.

 
| /s/  R. SCOTT VANSANT       |
|---------------------------------------|
| R. Scott Vansant                      |
| Chief Financial Officer and Secretary |
| February 20, 2004                     |

 

----
**Exhibit 31.2**

**CERTIFICATION**

          I,Bert L. Gusrae, certify that:

          1.     Ihave reviewed this Annual Report on Form 10-K of The Parkview Group, Inc.;

          2.     Basedon my knowledge, this report does not contain any untrue statement of amaterial fact or omit to state a material fact necessary to make the statementsmade, in light of the circumstances under which such statements were made, notmisleading with respect to the period covered by this report;

          3.     Basedon my knowledge, the financial statements, and other financial informationincluded in this report, fairly present in all material respects the financialcondition, results of operations and cash flows of the registrant as of, andfor, the periods presented in this report;

          4.     Theregistrant’s other certifying officer(s) and I are responsible for establishingand maintaining disclosure controls and procedures (as defined in Exchange ActRules 13a-15 (e) and 15d-15 (e)) for the registrant and have:

                    (a)     Designedsuch disclosure controls and procedures, or caused such disclosure controls andprocedures to be designed under our supervision, to ensure that materialinformation relating to the registrant, including its consolidated subsidiaries,is made known to us by others within those entities, particularly during theperiod in which this report is being prepared;

                    (b)     Evaluatedthe effectiveness of the registrant’s disclosure controls and procedures andpresented in this report our conclusions about the effectiveness of thedisclosure controls and procedures, as of the end of the period covered by thisreport based on such evaluation; and

                    (C)     Disclosedin this report any change in the registrant’s internal control over financialreporting that occurred during the registrant’s most recent fiscal quarter (thefourth fiscal quarter in the case of an annual report) that has materiallyaffected, or is reasonably likely to materially affect, the registrant’sinternal control over financial reporting; and

          5.     Theregistrant’s other certifying officer(s) and I have disclosed, based on ourmost recent evaluation of internal control over financial reporting, to theregistrant’s auditors and the audit committee of the registrant’s board ofdirectors (or persons performing the equivalent functions):

                    (a)     Allsignificant deficiencies and material weaknesses in the design or operation ofinternal control over financial reporting which are reasonably likely toadversely affect the registrant’s ability to record, process, summarize andreport financial information; and

                    (b)     Anyfraud, whether or not material, that involves management or other employees whohave a significant role in the registrant’s internal control over financialreporting.
II 

115TH CONGRESS 

2D SESSION S. 2857 

To designate the Nordic Museum in Seattle, Washington, as the ‘‘National 

Nordic Museum’’, and for other purposes. 

IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES 

MAY 16, 2018 

Ms. CANTWELL introduced the following bill; which was read twice and 

referred to the Committee on Energy and Natural Resources 

A BILL 

To designate the Nordic Museum in Seattle, Washington, 

as the ‘‘National Nordic Museum’’, and for other purposes. 

1 Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representa2 tives of the United States of America in Congress assembled, 

3 SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE. 

4 This Act may be cited as the ‘‘National Nordic Mu5 seum Act’’. 

6 SEC. 2. FINDINGS. 

7 Congress finds that— 

8 (1) the Nordic Museum in Seattle, Washington, 

9 is the only museum in the United States dedicated 

10 to Nordic history, culture, and art; 


pbinns on DSK79D2C42PROD with BILLS
2 

•S 2857 IS

1 (2) Nordic people have long contributed to the 

2 rich cultural heritage of the United States; 

3 (3) the Nordic Museum serves as a unique and 

4 valuable resource locally and nationally for expand5 ing knowledge relating to— 

6 (A) Nordic heritage; and 

7 (B) the impact Nordic heritage has had 

8 throughout the United States; 

9 (4) a new state-of-the-art facility was opened to 

10 house the Nordic Museum on May 5, 2018, making 

11 Nordic history, culture, and art even more engaging 

12 and accessible to the public; 

13 (5) to provide funds and exhibits for the new 

14 Nordic Museum, numerous public and private enti15 ties and many private individuals partnered to16 gether, including— 

17 (A) the State of Washington; 

18 (B) King County, Washington; 

19 (C) the Nordic Council, which is composed 

20 of representatives from the national parliaments 

21 of Nordic countries; and 

22 (D) the national museums of Denmark, 

23 Finland, Iceland, Norway, and Sweden; 

24 (6) the Nordic Museum is— 


pbinns on DSK79D2C42PROD with BILLS
3 

•S 2857 IS

1 (A) a significant resource for preserving 

2 and celebrating the history, culture, and art of 

3 Nordic immigrants in the United States; and 

4 (B) the only museum in the United States 

5 that exists for the exclusive purpose of pre6 serving, interpreting, and providing education 

7 about Nordic culture and heritage; and 

8 (7) the Nordic Museum promotes valuable 

9 international relations between the United States 

10 and the Nordic countries of Denmark, Finland, Ice11 land, Norway, and Sweden. 

12 SEC. 3. DESIGNATION OF NATIONAL NORDIC MUSEUM. 

13 (a) DESIGNATION.—The Nordic Museum located at 

14 2655 N.W. Market Street, Seattle, Washington, is des15 ignated as the ‘‘National Nordic Museum’’. 

16 (b) EFFECT OF DESIGNATION.— 

17 (1) IN GENERAL.—The museum designated by 

18 subsection (a) is not a unit of the National Park 

19 System. 

20 (2) USE OF FEDERAL FUNDS.—The designation 

21 of the museum by subsection (a) shall not require 

22 Federal funds to be expended for any purpose re23 lated to the museum. 

Æ 


pbinns on DSK79D2C42PROD with BILLS
[Federal Register Volume 66, Number 42 (Friday, March 2, 2001)]
[Notices]
[Page 13088]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 01-5084]


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

DEPARTMENT OF LABOR

Employment and Training Administration

[TA-W-38,399]


Reactive Metals & Alloys Corporation, West Pittsburg, 
Pennsylvania; Notice of Termination of Investigation

    Pursuant to Section 221 of the Trade Act of 1974, an investigation 
was initiated on December 11, 2000, in response to a petition field on 
behalf of workers at Reactive Metals & Alloys Corporation, West 
Pittsburg, Pennsylvania.
    The petitioning group of workers is subject to an ongoing 
investigation for which a determination has not yet been issued (TAW-
38,324). Consequently, further investigation in this case would serve 
no purpose, and the investigation has been terminated.

    Signed in Washington, D.C. this 26th day of January, 2001.
Linda G. Poole,
Certifying Officer, Division of Trade Adjustment Assistance.
[FR Doc. 01-5084 Filed 3-1-01; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4510-30-M
#### The State *vs.*John Beard.

*1.*An indictment for perjury is fatally defective if it does not appear, either by direct averment, or by-necessary implication, upon the face of the indictment, that the.statement upon -which the perjury is assigned was material to the matter before the court.

*2.*It is a- matter of discretion whether the court will quash an indictment; but where it is manifest that no judgment can be rendered upon the indictment, it will be quashed.

Motion to quash an indictment found in the Hudson Oyer and Terminer, and removed into this court by *certiorari.*

*385Zabriskie, for defendant, in support of motion.

The materiality of the statement upon which perjury is assigned is neither averred, nor does it appear from anything on the face of the indictment. The indictment must show not only tliat the statement *may*have been material, but that it *must*have been material. It must show that a crime has been committed, and contain all the facts necessary to constitute the crime. *Arch. Cr. Pl.*429 ; 2 *Russell on Cr.*639, 642 ; 3 *Arch Cr. Pl.(Waterman’s ed.)*598; 5 *Term R.*318 ; 2 *Chit. Cr. L.*309.

Littell, with whom was Scudder, for the state cited 1 *Davereux*519; 2 *Chit. Cr. L.*386, 391; *Wharton’s Free.*312; 8 *Wend. 637.*

The cause was argued at February term, 1856, before the Chief Justice, and Ogden, Elmer, and Haines, Justices.

The Chief Justice

delivered the opinion of the court.

The indictment is fatally defective, because it does not appear, either by direct averment or by anything stated in the indictment, that the statement upon which the perjury is assigned was material to the matter before the court. o

For all that appears upon the face of the indictment, the statement alleged to have been false may have been totally immaterial to the matter in controversy. *Arch. Cr. Pl.*429 ; 2 *Russell on Cr.*639. Neither of the precedents referred to on the argument support this indictment.

It is in all cases a matter of discretion whether the court will quash an indictment; but where it is manifest that no judgment can be rendered upon the indictment, the motion ' to quash will be allowed. *State*v. *Dayton,.*3 *Zab.*53.

Let the indictment be quashed.
CERTIFICATION PURSUANT TO

18 U.S.C. SECTION 1350

AS ADOPTED PURSUANT TO

SECTION 906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002





I, Melvin Woolley, certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, as adopted pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that the Annual Report on Form 10-KSB of Blue Mountain Resources Inc., for the fiscal year ended October 31, 2007 fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 and that the information contained in the Annual Report on Form 10-KSB fairly presents in all material respects the financial condition and results of operations of  Blue Mountain Resources Inc.



Date: January 25, 2008



/s/ Melvin Woolley

Melvin Woolley

President, C.E.O. and Director

(Principal Executive Officer)
[Nos. 22909-2-III; 23230-1-III.

Division Three.

September 27, 2007.]

#### The State of Washington, *Respondent,*v. Elmer Van Tachell, Jr., *Appellant. In the Matter of the Personal Restraint of*Elmer Van Tachell, Jr., *Petitioner.*

Appeal from a judgment of the Superior Court for Okanogan County, No. 03-1-00140-4, Jack Burchard, J., entered March 22, 2004, together with a petition for relief from personal restraint. Judgment *reversed*and petition *granted*by unpublished opinion per Kulik, J., concurred in by Schultheis, A.C.J., and Stephens, J.
#### Lian Zhong ZHANG, Petitioner, v. Alberto R. GONZALES, Attorney General, Respondent.

No. 05-75835.

United States Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit.

Submitted Feb. 20, 2007 *.

Filed Feb. 23, 2007.

Lian Zhong Zhang, Palmdale, CA, pro se.

CAC-District Counsel, Esq., Office of the District Counsel Department of Homeland Security, Los Angeles, CA, Ronald E. Lefevre, Chief Counsel, Office of the District Counsel Department of Homeland Security, San Francisco, CA, David V. Bernal, Attorney, S. Nicole Nardone, Esq., Anthony P. Nicastro, Esq., DOJ — U.S. Department of Justice Civil Div./Office of Immigration Lit., Washington, DC, for Respondent.

Before: BEEZER, FERNANDEZ, and McKEOWN, Circuit Judges.

*

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

MEMORANDUM **

Lian Zhong Zhang, a native and citizen of China, petitions for review of the order of the Board of Immigration Appeals (“BIA”) affirming the Immigration Judge’s (“U”) denial of his application for asylum, *660withholding of removal, and relief under the Convention Against Torture (“CAT”).

We dismiss Zhang’s CAT claim for lack of jurisdiction, because Zhang did not exhaust this claim before the BIA. *See Barron v. Ashcroft,*358 F.3d 674, 678 (9th Cir.2004).

We have jurisdiction under 8 U.S.C. § 1252 over the remaining claims. We review for substantial evidence, *see Guo v. Ashcroft,*361 F.3d 1194, 1199 (9th Cir.2004). We grant the petition for review and remand.

Substantial evidence does not support the BIA’s and IJ’s adverse credibility determination because it relied upon the omission of minor details, and upon minor inconsistencies in Zhang’s testimony which he explained and which do not go to the heart of his claim. *See Lopez-Reyes v. INS,*79 F.3d 908, 911 (9th Cir.1996); *see also Wang v. Ashcroft,*341 F.3d 1015, 1021 (9th Cir.2003) (rejecting inconsistencies that were not material to the heart of petitioner’s claim); *Bandari v. INS,*227 F.3d 1160, 1167 (concluding that there was no actual inconsistency between allegedly discrepant statements).

We grant the petition for review and remand to the BIA for further proceedings regarding Zhang’s eligibility for asylum and withholding of removal. *See INS v. Ventura,*537 U.S. 12, 16-17, 123 S.Ct. 353, 154 L.Ed.2d 272 (2002) (per curiam).

PETITION FOR REVIEW DISMISSED in part; and GRANTED and REMANDED in part.

**

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













July 14, 2020


Re:     Temporary Base Salary Reduction
 
Dear Jorge:
 
In response to the continuing COVID-19 global pandemic, this letter confirms our agreement regarding a voluntary reduction in Base Salary payable pursuant to the Employment Agreement, dated May 1, 2014, between yourself and ARC Document Solutions, Inc. (“ARC”), as amended (collectively, the “Executive Agreement”) on terms set forth below.  (Terms not otherwise defined in this letter shall have the meanings ascribed to them in the Executive Agreement.)
 
		
	1.
	Effective as of July 5, 2020, Base Salary payable under the Executive Agreement shall be voluntarily reduced by thirty percent (30%) (the “Base Salary Reduction”) until further agreement between the parties to the Executive Agreement (the “Effective Period”).  




		
	2.
	Notwithstanding anything to the contrary contained in this letter, if your employment with ARC is terminated by ARC without Cause or by you for Good Reason during the Effective Period, any severance benefits payment to you under the Executive Agreement shall be calculated based on the amount of Base Salary set forth in Section 3(a) of the Executive Agreement, without taking into account the Base Salary Reduction.  




Except as specifically amended by this letter, the Executive Agreement remains in full force and effect without modification.
 
Please confirm your acknowledgement and agreement with the foregoing by signing where indicated below.
 
            




Very truly yours,
        
ARC Document Solutions, Inc.


/s/ Kumarakulasingam Suriyakumar________
Kumarakulasingam Suriyakumar
Chief Executive Officer


ACKNOWLEDGED AND AGREED:
 
	
	
	 

	/s/ Jorge Avalos                

	By: Jorge Avalos








12657 Alcosta Blvd., Suite 200     San Ramon, CA 94583     925-949-5100     www.e-arc.com
Exhibit 31.2**CERTIFICATION**I, Roy Dar, certify that:1. I have reviewed this annual report on Form 10-K of EMAK Worldwide, Inc.;2. Based on my knowledge, this annual report does not contain any untrue statement of amaterial fact or omit to state a material fact necessary to make the statements made, in lightof the circumstances under which such statements were made, not misleading with respect to theperiod covered by this annual report;3. Based on my knowledge, the financial statements, and other financial information includedin this annual report, fairly present in all material respects the financial condition,results of operations and cash flows of the registrant as of, and for, the periods presentedin this annual report;4. The registrant’s other certifying officer and I are responsible for establishing andmaintaining disclosure controls and procedures (as defined in Exchange Act Rules 13a-15(e) and15d-15(e)) for the registrant and have:a. Designed such disclosure controls and procedures, or caused such disclosure controls andprocedures to be designed under our supervision, to ensure that material information relatedto the registrant, including its consolidated subsidiaries, is made known to us by otherswithin those entities, particularly during the period in which this annual report is beingprepared;b. Evaluated the effectiveness of the registrant’s disclosure controls and procedures andpresented in this annual report our conclusions about the effectiveness of the disclosurecontrols and procedures, as of the end of the period covered by this annual report based onsuch evaluation; andc. Disclosed in this report any change in the registrant’s internal control over financialreporting that occurred during the registrant’s most recent fiscal quarter (the registrant’sfourth fiscal quarter in the case of an annual report) that has materially affected, or isreasonably likely to materially affect, the registrant’s internal control over financialreporting; and5. The registrant’s other certifying officer and I have disclosed, based on our most recentevaluation of internal control over financial reporting, to the registrant’s auditors and theaudit committee of the registrant’s board of directors (or persons performing the equivalentfunction):a. All significant deficiencies and material weaknesses in the design or operation ofinternal control over financial reporting which are reasonably likely to adversely affectthe registrant’s ability to record, process, summarize and report financial information; andb. Any fraud, whether or not material, that involves management or other employees who havea significant role in the registrant’s internal control over financial reporting.                                                              /s/ Roy Dar   Roy Dar   Vice President, Controller(Principal Accounting Officer)   Dated: March 31, 2006
# Fourth Court of Appeals

**San Antonio, Texas**

JUDGMENT

No. 04

- 11

- 00696

- CV

Jaime P. MARTINEZ and Hector Carrillo,

Appellants

v.

Margaret MORAN , Purported National President of

the League of United Latin American Citizens aka (LULAC), et al.,

Appellees

From the 224th Judicial District Court, Bexar County, Texas

Trial Court No. 2010

- CI

- 19501

Honorable David A. Berchelmann, Jr., Judge Presiding 1

BEFORE JUSTICE ANGELINI

, JUSTICE ALVAREZ , AND JUSTICE CHAPA

In accordance with this court’s opinio n of this date, the orders of the trial court are

AFFIRMED. It is ORDERED that appellees recover their costs of this appeal from appellants.

SIGNED May 22, 2013.

_____________________________ Karen Angelini, Justice

1 Appellants appeal two separate orders granting pleas to the jurisdiction. The Honorable Peter Sakai signed the

order granting the first plea to the jurisdiction, and the Honorable David A. Berchelmann, Jr. signed the order

granting the second plea to the jurisdiction.
[Federal Register Volume 66, Number 37 (Friday, February 23, 2001)]
[Notices]
[Page 11313]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 01-4308]



[[Page 11313]]

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

DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR

National Park Service


Golden Gate National Recreation Area and Point Reyes National 
Seashore Advisory Commission Notice of Meeting Cancellation

    Notice is hereby given in accordance with the Federal Advisory 
Committee Act that the meeting of the Golden Gate National Recreation 
Area and Point Reyes National Seashore Advisory Commission previously 
scheduled for Tuesday, February 27, 2001 in San Francisco, California 
will be cancelled.
    The Advisory Commission was established by Public Law 92-589 to 
provide for the free exchange of ideas between the National Park 
Service and the public and to facilitate the solicitation of advice or 
other counsel from members of the public on problems pertinent to the 
National Park Service systems in Marin, San Francisco and San Mateo 
Counties. Members of the Commission are as follows:

Mr. Richard Bartke, Chairman
Ms. Susan Giacomini Allan
Mr. Michael Alexander
Ms. Lennie Roberts
Mr. Fred Rodriguez
Mr. Redmond Kernan
Mr. Gordon Bennett
Mr. John J. Spring
Mr. Doug Nadeau
Ms. Amy Meyer, Vice Chair
Mr. Douglas Siden
Mr. Dennis J. Rodoni
Ms. Yvonne Lee
Mr. Trent Orr
Ms. Betsey Cutler
Ms. Anna-Marie Booth
Dr. Edgar Wayburn

    Dated: February 8, 2001.
Mary Gibson Scott,
Acting General Superintendent, Golden Gate National Recreation Area.
[FR Doc. 01-4308 Filed 2-22-01; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4310-70-M