alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
This disposition is not appropriate for publication and is not precedent *

except as provided by 9th Cir. R. 36-3.

The panel unanimously concludes this case is suitable for decision **

without oral argument. See Fed. R. App. P. 34(a)(2).

MVD/Inventory

NOT FOR PUBLICATION

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

 FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT

JOSE PEDRO GONZALEZ, aka Jose

Pedro Gonzalez Menjivar,

 Petitioner,

 v.

ERIC H. HOLDER Jr., Attorney General,

 Respondent.

No. 08-74909

Agency No. A095-140-914

MEMORANDUM *

On Petition for Review of an Order of the

Board of Immigration Appeals

Submitted December 15, 2009** 

Before: GOODWIN, WALLACE and FISHER, Circuit Judges.

Jose Pedro Gonzalez, a native and citizen of El Salvador, petitions for

review of a Board of Immigration Appeals order dismissing his appeal from an

FILED

DEC 28 2009

MOLLY C. DWYER, CLERK

U.S. COURT OF APPEALS
MVD/Inventory 2 08-74909

immigration judge’s decision denying his 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 factual findings for substantial

evidence, Santos-Lemus v. Mukasey, 542 F.3d 738, 742 (9th Cir. 2008), and deny

the petition for review.

Substantial evidence supports the IJ’s determination that no exceptions

applied to excuse Gonzalez’s untimely asylum application. See 8 U.S.C.

§ 1158(a)(2)(B) (requiring petitioner to apply for asylum within one year of arrival

in United States unless prevented by extraordinary circumstances or changed

circumstances materially affecting eligibility for relief).

Substantial evidence supports the Board’s denial of asylum and withholding

of removal because Gonzalez failed to show his alleged persecutors threatened him

on account of a protected ground. His fear of future persecution based on an actual

or imputed anti-gang or anti-crime opinion is not on account of the protected

ground of either membership in a particular social group or political opinion. See

Ramos Barrios v. Holder, 581 F.3d 849, 854-56 (9th Cir. 2009); Santos-Lemus at

745-46; see Ochave v. INS, 254 F.3d 859, 865 (9th Cir. 2001) (“Asylum generally

is not available to victims of civil strife, unless they are singled out on account of a

protected ground.”)
MVD/Inventory 3 08-74909

Substantial evidence also supports the Board’s denial of CAT relief based on

the Board’s finding that Gonzalez did not establish a likelihood of torture by, at the

instigation of, or with the consent or acquiescence of the El Salvadoran

government. See Arteaga v. Mukasey, 511 F.3d 940, 948-49 (9th Cir. 2007).

PETITION FOR REVIEW DENIED.
IN THE SUPREME COURT OF TEXAS

- - - - - - - -

NO. 15-0812

FRANCIS W.S. CHAN

v.

J. SHELBY SHARPE, HENRY

CHANG, KAREN CHANG & THE

LAW OFFICES OF J. SHELBY

SHARPE, A PROFESSIONAL

CORPORATION §

§

§

§

§

§ Tarrant County,

2nd District.

January 8, 2016

Petitioner 's petition for review, filed herein in the above numbered and styled case,

having been duly considered, is ordered, and hereby is, denied.

         

I, BLAKE A. HAWTHORNE

, Clerk of the Supreme Court of Texas, do hereby certify

that the above and attached is a true and correct copy of the orders of the Supreme Court of

Texas in the case numbered and styled as above, as the same appear of record in the minutes of

said Court under the date shown.

It is further ordered that petitioner, FRANCIS W.S. CHAN, pay all costs incurred on this

petition.

WITNESS my hand and seal of the Supreme Court of Texas, at the City of Austin, this

the 18th day of February, 2016

.

Blake A. Hawthorne, Clerk

By Monica Zamarripa, Deputy Clerk
**Exhibit 31(b)****CERTIFICATIONS****CERTIFICATION OF PRINCIPAL FINANCIAL OFFICER**I, David C. Stuebe, certify that:1. I have reviewed this quarterly report on Form 10-Q (this “Report”) of Alpha NR Holding, Inc.(the “Registrant”); 2. Based on my knowledge, this Report does not contain any untrue statement of a material factor omit to state a material fact necessary to make the statements made, in light of thecircumstances under which such statements were made, not misleading with respect to the periodcovered by this Report; 3. Based on my knowledge, the financial statements, and other financial information included inthis Report, fairly present in all material respects the financial condition, results ofoperations and cash flows of the Registrant as of, and for, the periods presented in thisReport; 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 relatingto the Registrant, including its consolidated subsidiaries, is made known to us by otherswithin those entities, particularly during the period in which this Report is being prepared;b. Evaluated the effectiveness of the Registrant’s disclosure controls and procedures andpresented in this Report our conclusions about the effectiveness of the disclosure controlsand procedures, as of the end of the period covered by this Report based on such 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;5. 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 equivalentfunctions):a. All significant deficiencies and material weaknesses in the design or operation of internalcontrol over financial reporting which are reasonably likely to adversely affect theRegistrant’s ability to record, process, summarize and report financial information; and
EXHIBIT 32.2

        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  IGENE  Biotechnology,  Inc.  (the
"Company") Annual on Form 10-KSB/A for the period ended  December
31, 2003, as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on
the  date  hereof (the "Report"), I, Edward J. Weisberger,  Chief
Financial  Officer of the Company, 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:

          (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 Company.


Date: August 25, 2005          By:  /S/ EDWARD J. WEISBERGER
                                    _____________________________
                                        EDWARD J. WEISBERGER
                                        Chief Financial Officer

A  signed original of this written statement required by  Section
906  has been provided to the Company and will be retained by the
Company  and furnished to the Securities and Exchange  Commission
or its staff upon request.
§ 250.21 Distributing agency reviews. ( a ) *Scope of review requirements.* The distributing agency must ensure that subdistributing agencies, recipient agencies, and other entities comply with applicable requirements in this part, and in other Federal regulations, through the on-site reviews required in paragraph (b) of this section, and the review of required reports or audits. However, the distributing agency is not responsible for the review of school food authorities and other recipient agencies in child nutrition programs. The State administering agency is responsible for the review of such recipient agencies, in accordance with review requirements of part 210 of this chapter.
( b ) *On-site reviews.* The distributing agency must conduct an on-site review of: ( 1 ) Charitable institutions, whenever the distributing agency identifies actual or probable deficiencies in the use of donated foods by such institutions, through audits, investigations, complaints, or any other information;
( 2 ) Storage facilities at the distributing agency level (including commercial storage facilities under contract with the distributing or subdistributing agency), on an annual basis; and
( 3 ) Subdistributing and recipient agencies in CSFP, TEFAP, and FDPIR, in accordance with 7 CFR parts 247, 251, and 253, respectively.
( c ) *Identification and correction of deficiencies.* The distributing agency must inform each subdistributing agency, recipient agency, or other entity of any deficiencies identified in its reviews, and recommend specific actions to correct such deficiencies. The distributing agency must ensure that such agencies or entities implement corrective actions to correct deficiencies in a timely manner.
[Federal Register Volume 75, Number 223 (Friday, November 19, 2010)]
[Notices]
[Pages 70935-70936]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2010-29183]


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

DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND SECURITY

U.S. Customs and Border Protection


Accreditation and Approval of Intertek USA, Inc., as a Commercial 
Gauger and Laboratory

AGENCY: U.S. Customs and Border Protection, Department of Homeland 
Security.

ACTION: Notice of accreditation and approval of Intertek USA, Inc., as 
a commercial gauger and laboratory.

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

SUMMARY: Notice is hereby given that, pursuant to 19 CFR 151.12 and 19 
CFR 151.13, Intertek USA, Inc., 1941 Freeman Ave., Suite A, Signal 
Hill, CA 90755, has been approved to gauge and accredited to test 
petroleum and petroleum products, for customs purposes, in accordance 
with the provisions of 19 CFR 151.12 and 19 CFR 151.13. Anyone wishing 
to employ this entity to conduct laboratory analyses and gauger 
services should request and receive written assurances from the entity 
that it is accredited or approved by the U.S. Customs and Border 
Protection to conduct the specific test or gauger service requested. 
Alternatively, inquires regarding the specific test or gauger service 
this entity is accredited or approved to perform may be directed to the 
U.S. Customs and Border Protection by calling (202) 344-1060. The 
inquiry may also be sent to <a href="/cdn-cgi/l/email-protection#5b38392b75373a39332a1b3f3328753c342d"><span class="__cf_email__" data-cfemail="fa99988ad4969b98928bba9e9289d49d958c">[email protected]</span></a>. Please reference the Web 
site listed below for a complete listing of CBP approved gaugers and 
accredited laboratories. 
http:[sol][sol]cbp.gov[sol]xp[sol]cgov[sol]import[sol]operations--
support[sol]labs--scientific--svcs[sol]commercial--gaugers[sol].

DATES: The accreditation and approval of Intertek USA, Inc., as 
commercial gauger and laboratory became effective

[[Page 70936]]

on July 21, 2010. The next triennial inspection date will be scheduled 
for July 2013.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Anthony Malana, Laboratories and 
Scientific Services, U.S. Customs and Border Protection, 1300 
Pennsylvania Avenue, NW., Suite 1500N, Washington, DC 20229, 202-344-
1060.

    Dated: November 8, 2010.
Ira S. Reese,
Executive Director, Laboratories and Scientific Services.
[FR Doc. 2010-29183 Filed 11-18-10; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 9111-14-P


</pre><script data-cfasync="false" src="/cdn-cgi/scripts/5c5dd728/cloudflare-static/email-decode.min.js"></script></body>
</html>
Exhibit 32.1

CERTIFICATION PURSUANT TO

18 U.S.C. 1350

AS ADOPTED PURSUANT TO

SECTION 906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002

In connection with the
Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q of Solera Holdings, Inc. (the Company) for the quarter ended September 30, 2009, as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the Report), each of the
undersigned chief executive officer and chief financial officer of the Company, certifies, to the best knowledge and belief of the signatory, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. 1350, as adopted pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002,
that:

1. The Report fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) or 15(d) of the
Securities 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.



|                        |  |  |  |                                      
|----------------------- |  |  |  | -------------------------------------
|/s/ Tony Aquila         |  |  |  | /s/ Dudley Mendenhall                
|Tony Aquila             |  |  |  | Dudley Mendenhall                    
|Chief Executive Officer |  |  |  | Chief Financial Officer and Treasurer
|                        |  | 
|Date: November 5, 2009  |  |  |  | Date: November 5, 2009
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

NORTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA

PANAMA CITY DIVISION

DERRICK CHARLESTON,

Plaintiff,

v. Case No. 5:20cv92-TKW-MJF 

TRISHA MEGGS PATE, et al.,

Defendants.

/

OR D E R

This case is before the Court based upon the magistrate judge’s Report and 

Recommendation (Doc. 6). No objections to the Report and Recommendation were 

filed. Upon due consideration of the Report and Recommendation and the case file, 

I agree with the magistrate judge’s determination that this case should be dismissed 

based on Plaintiff’s failure to pay the filing fee and failure to comply with court 

orders. Accordingly, it is 

ORDERED that:

1. The magistrate judge’s Report and Recommendation is adopted and 

incorporated by reference in this Order.

2. This case is DISMISSED, and the Clerk shall close the case file.

Case 5:20-cv-00092-TKW-MJF Document 7 Filed 07/27/20 Page 1 of 2
2

DONE and ORDERED this 27th day of July, 2020.

T. Kent Wetherell, II 

T. KENT WETHERELL, II

UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE

Case 5:20-cv-00092-TKW-MJF Document 7 Filed 07/27/20 Page 2 of 2
Consent of Independent Registered Public Accounting Firm

The Board of Directors
Research Frontiers Incorporated:


We consent to the incorporation by reference in the registration
statements (No. 33-53030, 33-86910, 333-08623, 333-34163, 333-80575,
333-63374 and 333-106754) on Form S-8 and (No. 333-40369, 333-115052
and 333-65219) on Form S-3 of Research Frontiers Incorporated and
subsidiary of our reports dated March 15, 2005, with respect to
the consolidated balance sheet of Research Frontiers Incorporated
and subsidiary as of December 31, 2004, and the related
consolidated statements of operations, shareholders' equity and
cash flows for each of the years in the two-year period ended
December 31, 2004, and the related financial statement schedule,
which report appears in the December 31, 2004 annual report
on Form 10-K of Research Frontiers Incorporated and subsidiary.


                              /s/ KPMG LLP
                                  KPMG LLP

  Melville, New York
  March 29, 2006
# ALABAMA COURT OF CRIMINAL APPEALS

September 6, 2024 CR-2022-1338Yesha Kenya James v. State of Alabama (Appeal from Covington Circuit Court: CC20-149) 

## NOTICE You are hereby notified that on September 6, 2024, the following action was taken in the above-referenced cause by the Court of Criminal Appeals: Application for Rehearing Overruled.

D. Scott Mitchell, Clerk
Document Headings

                    Document headings vary by document type but may contain                    the following:                  
                -                       the agency or agencies that issued and signed a document                    
                -                       the number of the CFR title and the number of each part                      the document amends, proposes to amend, or is directly                      related to                    
                -                       the agency docket number / agency internal file number                    
                -                       the RIN which identifies each regulatory action listed in                      the Unified Agenda of Federal Regulatory and Deregulatory                      Actions                    

                    See the                                          Document Drafting Handbook                                        for more details.                  

###### Department of Homeland Security

###### U.S. Customs and Border Protection

# AGENCY:

U.S. Customs and Border Protection, Department of Homeland Security.

# ACTION:

Notice of accreditation and approval of Inspectorate America Corporation, as a commercial gauger and laboratory.

# SUMMARY:

                        Notice is hereby given that, pursuant to 19 CFR 151.12 and 19 CFR 151.13, Inspectorate America Corporation, 4041 Home Road, Suite A, Bellingham, WA 98226, has been approved to gauge and accredited to test petroleum and petroleum products for customs purposes, in accordance with the provisions of 19 CFR 151.12 and 19 CFR 151.13. Anyone wishing to employ this entity to conduct laboratory analyses and gauger services should request and receive written assurances from the entity that it is accredited or approved by the U.S. Customs and Border Protection to conduct the specific test or gauger service requested. Alternatively, inquires regarding the specific test or gauger service this entity is accredited or approved to perform may be directed to the U.S. Customs and Border Protection by calling (202) 344-1060. The inquiry may also be sent to                         *cbp.labhq@dhs.gov.*                         Please reference the Web site listed below for a complete listing of CBP approved gaugers and accredited laboratories.                         *http://cbp.gov/​xp/​cgov/​import/​operations_​support/​labs_​scientific_​svcs/​commercial_​gaugers/​.*

# DATES:

The accreditation and approval of Inspectorate America Corporation, as commercial gauger and laboratory became effective on August 06, 2010. The next triennial inspection date will be scheduled for August 2013.

# FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

Anthony Malana, Laboratories and Scientific Services, U.S. Customs and Border Protection, 1300 Pennsylvania Avenue, NW., Suite 1500N, Washington, DC 20229, 202-344-1060.

Dated: November 8, 2010.

Ira S. Reese,

Executive Director, Laboratories and Scientific Services. 

[FR Doc. 2010-29179 Filed 11-18-10; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 9111-14-P
Chesapeake Bay Program

The Chesapeake Bay Watershed

The Chesapeake Bay Watershed - Chesapeake Bay Program Page 1 of 3

http://www.chesapeakebay.net/discover/baywatershed 9/21/2015
The Chesapeake Bay Watershed - Chesapeake Bay Program Page 2 of 3

http://www.chesapeakebay.net/discover/baywatershed 9/21/2015
What is a watershed?

A watershed is an area of land that drains into a particular river, lake or other body of water. Watersheds are sometimes 

called “basins” or “drainage basins.”

We all live in a watershed. Some watersheds, like that of a stream or creek, are small. Others, like the Chesapeake Bay 

watershed, are large.

We asked people in Alexandria, Virginia, to share their definition of a watershed. Find out what they said in the video below.

Chesapeake Unscripted: What is a Watershed? (Alexandria, VA) from Chesapeake Bay Program on Vimeo.

What is the Chesapeake Bay watershed?

The Chesapeake Bay watershed spans more than 64,000 square miles. It encompasses parts of six states—Delaware, 

Maryland, New York, Pennsylvania, Virginia and West Virginia—and the entire District of Columbia. Almost 18 million people 

live in the Chesapeake Bay watershed.

The Chesapeake Bay’s land-to-water ratio is 14:1: the largest of any coastal water body in the world. This is why our actions 

on land have such a big impact on the Bay’s health.

What are the major rivers in the Chesapeake Bay watershed?

The Susquehanna, Potomac, Rappahannock, York and James rivers are the five largest rivers in the Chesapeake Bay 

watershed.

Altogether, more than 100,000 streams, creeks and rivers (also called “tributaries”) thread through this watershed. Each 

watershed resident lives within a few miles of one of these local waterways, which act like pipelines that connect our 

communities to the Bay.

Each of the streams, creeks and rivers in the Bay watershed has its own watershed. These are sometimes called “subwatersheds,” “small watersheds” or “local watersheds.”

What watershed do I live in?

Enter your zip code into the Surf Your Watershed widget below to learn about the watershed(s) you live in!

From Around the Web

• Watersheds – U.S. Environmental Protection Agency

• Why Watersheds? – Center for Watershed Protection

• What is a Watershed? (Video) - U.S. Department of Agriculture 

The Chesapeake Bay Watershed - Chesapeake Bay Program Page 3 of 3

http://www.chesapeakebay.net/discover/baywatershed 9/21/2015
```

[Congressional Bills 113th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[H.R. 187 Introduced in House (IH)]

113th CONGRESS
  1st Session
                                H. R. 187

    To correct the boundaries of the John H. Chafee Coastal Barrier 
          Resources System Unit L06, Topsail, North Carolina.

_______________________________________________________________________

                    IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

                            January 4, 2013

  Mr. Jones introduced the following bill; which was referred to the 
                     Committee on Natural Resources

_______________________________________________________________________

                                 A BILL

 
    To correct the boundaries of the John H. Chafee Coastal Barrier 
          Resources System Unit L06, Topsail, North Carolina.

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

SECTION 1. REPLACEMENT OF JOHN H. CHAFEE COASTAL BARRIER RESOURCES 
              SYSTEM MAP.

    (a) In General.--The map included in the set of maps entitled 
``Coastal Barrier Resources System'' referred to in section 4(a) of the 
Coastal Barrier Resources Act (16 U.S.C. 3503(a)) and relating to Unit 
L06 in North Carolina is hereby replaced by another map relating to the 
same unit entitled ``John H. Chafee Coastal Barrier Resources System 
Corrected Unit L06'' and dated ______.
    (b) Availability.--The Secretary of the Interior shall keep the 
replacement map referred to in subsection (a) on file and available for 
inspection in accordance with section 4(b) of the Coastal Barrier 
Resources Act (16 U.S.C. 3503(b)).
                                 <all>
```
#### § 28.59 Lost memorandum or certificate may be replaced by duplicate.

Upon the written request of the last holder of a valid Form A or Form D memorandum, or Form C Certificate and a showing to the satisfaction of the Area Director of the Classing Office which issued such memorandum or certificate that it has been lost or destroyed and, if lost, that diligent effort has been made to find it without success, a new memorandum or certificate shall be issued without the reclassification of the cotton. Such new memorandum or certificate shall bear the same number and date of issuance as the lost or destroyed memorandum or certificate and shall include a statement to the effect that it is a duplicate issued in lieu of the lost or destroyed original, as the case may be.

[52 FR 30882, Aug. 18, 1987]