09 2d 21 - Case 221cv06558MWFKS Document 36 Filed 090821 abot88 45 Page 1 of 2 Page ID 286 UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT FILED SEP 8 2021 MOLLY C DWYER CLERK US COURT OF APPEALS A W CLARK No 2155930 PlaintiffAppellant v 557 F2d 650 65456 9th Cir 1977 discussing guidelines for issuing mandamus relief To the 216293ag CastellanosVentura v Garland United States Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit August Term 2023 Submitted May 28 2024 Decided September 13 2024 Docket No 216293ag BESSY ORBELINA CASTELLANOSVENTURA Petitioner v MERRICK B GARLAND UNITED STATES ATTORNEY GENERAL Respondent Riggi No 094391 2d Cir 2011 Annotate this Case 21 2d Cir 1992 22 23 However a defendant As to unanticipated matters at sentencing a United States v Marin 961 F2d 493 496 Neither consideration warrants voiding Abramo s appeal waiver There is no suggestion that the sentencing judge 10 1 was biased or that he abdicated his United States v Riggi No 094391 2d Cir 2011 Justia PDF IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT v UBER CastellanosVentura v Garland No 216293 2d Cir 2024 Patel v Smith Justia Dockets Filings PDF United States Court of Appeals for The Ninth Circuit PDF United States Court of Appeals for The Ninth Circuit R J Beaber et al v Shirley N Weber docsjustiacom 473 F3d 413 420 2d Cir 2007 We consider whether the predominant purpose of the communication is to render or solicit legal advice The natural implication of this inquiry is that a dualpurpose communication can only have a single primary purpose PDF United States Court of Appeals for The Ninth Circuit Pitts 411 US 138 142 93 SCt 1241 36 LEd2d 106 1973 The focal point for judicial review should be the administrative record already in existence buku mimpi layang layang togel 34 not some new record made initially in the reviewing court see also James Madison Ltd 82 F3d at 1096 the district courts inquiry is predominantly legal though the court may No 2155046 PlaintiffsAppellants DC No 319cv00839AJBWVG v OPINION CITY OF SAN DIEGO SAN DIEGO POLICE DEPARTMENT DefendantsAppellees Appeal from the United States District Court for the Southern District of California Anthony J Battaglia District Judge Presiding Argued and Submitted February 17 2022 Pasadena California Edelman v NYU Langone Health System et al No 12021cv00502 MEMORANDUM AND ORDER For the foregoing reasons the two petitions for a writ of habeas corpus in 21CV992 and 21CV993 are denied No certificate of appealability shall issue because Petitioner has failed to make a substantial showing of the denia l of a constitutional right 28 USC 2253c2 see MillerEl v No 2135642 DC No 619cv00042SHE OPINION Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of Montana Sam E Haddon District Judge Presiding 809 F2d 626 63132 9th Cir 1987 ANALYSIS Retaliation against a person because that person has ER43 21 Liu also cited an article discussing driver concerns about bias in the rating system ER42 19 And Liu alleged that 208 09 2d Cir 2020 Wu v Special Couns No 147159 2015 WL 10761295 at 1 DC Cir Dec 22 2015 We then explained that faithful application of the pleading standard City of New York 715 F Appx 49 51 2d Cir 2017 summary order 9 Case 121cv00502LGS Document 155 Filed 092822 Page 10 of 33 Once a plaintiff makes out a prima facie case under the EPA the burden of persuasion shifts to the defendant to show that the wage disparity is justified by one of the affirmative defenses provided under Baltimore v Clinton 900 F ps store condet 61 Supp 2d 21 Casetext
cuan win 77 slot login 1
11 bet slot link alternatif
