Task: Wrong Candidate Generation
Input (English): Substantial compliance with the requirements for immigrant status as a conditional permanent resident, even if true, cannot excuse plaintiffs failure to maintain a full course of study pursuant to his student status. The intent for status as a conditional permanent resident and as a non-immigrant student are mutually exclusive; the former encompasses a desire to permanently remain in the United States while the latter does not. Moreover, the two sets of requirements are separate and independent. Compare 8 C.F.R. § 245 with 8 C.F.R. § 214.2(f). Compliance with the requirements for being a conditional permanent resident does not constitute substantial compliance with the requirements for being a non-immigrant student. See, e.g., Ghajar v. I.N.S., 652 F.2d 1347, 1348 (9th Cir.1981) (<HOLDING>). Here, plaintiff violated specific regulations 
 Holding statements: (A) holding that substantial compliance with the requirements for maintaining nonimmigrant student status under 8 cfr  2142f does not constitute substantial compliance with the requirements for obtaining an extension of stay under 8 cfr  2141c (B) recognizing that when the employer had failed to comply with the reporting requirements of 29 cfr  5162 an order requiring prospective compliance was proper but that additional sanctions for the past violation were not necessary (C) holding that substantial compliance is sufficient to satisfy the notice requirements of sdcl 3212 and 3 (D) holding that substantial compliance with notice is sufficient (E) holding that substantial compliance with the requirements for exempting a lessors personal property from a lien is not enough
Output (English): recognizing that when the employer had failed to comply with the reporting requirements of 29 cfr  5162 an order requiring prospective compliance was proper but that additional sanctions for the past violation were not necessary