alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
REVISED OCTOBER 31, 2017

IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT

No. 16-60618

Summary Calendar

MA DOLORES SOTO CASTRO,

Petitioner

v.

JEFFERSON B. SESSIONS, III, U.S. ATTORNEY GENERAL,

Respondent

Petition for Review of an Order of the

Board of Immigration Appeals

BIA No. A091 286 821

Before BENAVIDES, SOUTHWICK, and COSTA, Circuit Judges.

PER CURIAM:*

Ma Dolores Soto Castro, a native and citizen of Mexico, petitions for 

review of the Board of Immigration Appeals’ (BIA) order dismissing her appeal 

and affirming the Immigration Judge’s (IJ) order denying her applications for 

waiver of inadmissibility, adjustment of status, asylum, withholding of 

removal, and protection under the Convention Against Torture (CAT). Her 

 

* Pursuant to 5TH CIR. R. 47.5, the court has determined that this opinion should not 

be published and is not precedent except under the limited circumstances set forth in 5TH 

CIR. R. 47.5.4.

United States Court of Appeals

Fifth Circuit

FILED

October 30, 2017

Lyle W. Cayce

Clerk

 Case: 16-60618 Document: 00514217330 Page: 1 Date Filed: 10/31/2017
No. 16-60618

2

sole argument on appeal is that the BIA and IJ erred in determining, in 

connection with her request for withholding of removal, that her claimed 

membership in a protected social group was limited to the group comprised of 

Americanized Mexican returnees and did not include a claim based on family 

ties.

Soto Castro briefs no argument challenging the denial of her requests for 

a waiver of inadmissibility, adjustment of status, asylum, or relief under the 

CAT, and she has therefore abandoned any such challenge. See Sama v. 

Hannigan, 669 F.3d 585, 589 (5th Cir. 2012); Soadjede v. Ashcroft, 324 F.3d 

830, 833 (5th Cir. 2003). She likewise does not dispute that her prior alien 

smuggling conviction is an aggravated felony or that she is removable based 

on that conviction. See Sama, 669 F.3d at 589; Soadjede, 324 F.3d at 833. 

Because Soto was removable as an aggravated felon, this court has 

jurisdiction to consider only constitutional claims or questions of law. 

8 U.S.C. §§ 1252(a)(2)(C), (a)(2)(D); Marquez-Marquez v. Gonzales, 455 F.3d

548, 560-61 (5th Cir. 2006). Soto’s petition raises neither a legal nor 

constitutional question. We lack jurisdiction to consider her fact-based 

argument. See Siwe v. Holder, 742 F.3d 603, 613 (5th Cir. 2014); Arciniega v. 

Holder, 702 F.3d 781, 785 (5th Cir. 2012). Accordingly, the petition for review 

is DISMISSED for lack of jurisdiction.

 Case: 16-60618 Document: 00514217330 Page: 2 Date Filed: 10/31/2017
Affirmed and Memorandum Opinion filed August 23, 2016.

In The

Fourteenth Court of Appeals

NO. 14-15-00838-CR

GEORGIA LOVETT, Appellant

V.

THE STATE OF TEXAS, Appellee

On Appeal from the County Criminal Court at Law No. 5

Harris County, Texas

Trial Court Cause No. 2008856

M E M O R A N D U M O P I N I O N

After a jury trial, appellant was convicted of deadly conduct, and sentenced 

to one year in the county jail, probated for 15 months. 

Appellant was represented at trial by retained counsel. The trial court 

allowed trial counsel to withdraw following trial. Appellant’s brief was originally 

due March 9, 2016, but no brief was filed. This court abated the appeal and 

directed the trial court to conduct a hearing to determine the reason for the failure 
2

to file a brief pursuant to Texas Rule of Appellate Procedure 38.8(b). The trial 

court held the hearing, and appellant confirmed to the court that she wished to 

represent herself on appeal. At the hearing, appellant advised the court that she 

would file an appellate brief on or before April 29, 2016. The trial court found 

appellant is not indigent, and that she desires to represent herself on appeal.

On June 16, 2016, no brief had been filed, and this court ordered appellant to 

file a brief on or before July 13, 2016. The court explained that if appellant did not 

file a brief as ordered, the court would consider the appeal without briefs. See Tex. 

R. App. P. 38.8(b)(4). No brief was filed.

On the basis of the trial court’s findings, this court has considered the appeal 

without briefs. See Tex. R. App. P. 38.8(b). We find no fundamental error.

Accordingly, the judgment of the trial court is affirmed.

PER CURIAM

Panel consists of Chief Justice Frost and Justices Boyce and Christopher.

Do Not Publish — Tex. R. App. P. 47.2(b).
§ 556.560 Pyrantel. ( a ) [Reserved]
( b ) *Tolerances.* The tolerances for pyrantel are: ( 1 ) *Swine.* ( i ) Liver and kidney: 10 ppm.
( ii ) Muscle: 1 ppm.
( 2 ) [Reserved]
( c ) *Related conditions of use.* See §§ 520.2045 and 558.485 of this chapter.
Fw: Changes to MATS New Source Limits 

 RobertJ Wayland 

 to: Bill Maxwell 

 11/16/2012 11:42 AM 

 Show Details 

----- Forwarded by RobertJ Wayland/RTP/USEPA/US on 11/16/2012 11:42 AM 

----- 

From: RobertJ Wayland/RTP/USEPA/US 

To: "Higgins, Cortney" <Cortney_Higgins@omb.eop.gov> 

Date: 11/08/2012 11:00 AM 

Subject: Re: Changes to MATS New Source Limits 

MATS Reconsid Interagency_110812.pptx 

From: "Higgins, Cortney" <Cortney_Higgins@omb.eop.gov> 

To: RobertJ Wayland/RTP/USEPA/US@EPA 

Date: 11/08/2012 09:48 AM 

Subject: Changes to MATS New Source Limits 

Hi Bob, 

Do you have materials I can share with the interagency reviewers of 

changes that have been made to the new source standards, like a 

powerpoint 

or a “one pager”? 

 

 

Thanks, 

Cortney
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<ARTICLE> 5
<CIK> 0000813897
<NAME> PSH MASTER L.P.I.
<MULTIPLIER> 1
       
<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   6-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          DEC-31-1997
<PERIOD-END>                               JUN-30-1997
<CASH>                                       4,099,956
<SECURITIES>                                         0
<RECEIVABLES>                                  889,900
<ALLOWANCES>                                         0
<INVENTORY>                                    118,554
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                             6,248,574
<PP&E>                                      59,973,923
<DEPRECIATION>                              25,446,129
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                              41,609,632
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                       47,650,751
<BONDS>                                        500,000
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                             0
<OTHER-SE>                                 (6,541,119)
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                41,609,632
<SALES>                                     14,806,495
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                            14,847,524
<CGS>                                                0
<TOTAL-COSTS>                               10,450,579
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                     0
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                     0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                           2,358,139
<INCOME-PRETAX>                              2,038,806
<INCOME-TAX>                                         0
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                                  0
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                 2,038,806
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                      .65
<EPS-DILUTED>                                      .65
        

</TABLE>
NASA LogoNTRSNTRS - NASA Technical Reports ServerSearchmore_vertCollectionsAboutNewsHelpLogin Back to ResultsMultipoint Design and Optimization of a Turboshaft Engine for a Tiltwing Turboelectric Vertical Takeoff Landing Air TaxiThis paper describes the design of a turboshaft engine for a tiltwing air taxi application. In this case, the tiltwing air taxi is intended to fly a 400 nm mission with up to fifteen passengers. Engine requirements for the concept engine are taken from aircraft system studies where thrust is produced by four propellers driven by electric motors and powered by a single gas turbine engine. The purpose of this paper is to perform a cycle design optimization that minimizes fuel consumption and weight while respecting current technology limitations to meet mission requirements. To achieve results, the engine overall pressure ratio and maximum temperature at the exit of the combustor are set as the design parameters. Several sensitivity studies are also performed to visualize optimization trends. Results of the optimization study show solutions are heavily dependent on engine cooling flow requirements and exact mission requirements. This engine is intended for use in large system optimization research.Document ID20190002272Acquisition SourceGlenn Research CenterDocument TypeTechnical Memorandum (TM)AuthorsChapman, Jeffryes W.*(NASA Glenn Research Center Cleveland, OH, United States)*Date AcquiredApril 11, 2019Publication DateApril 1, 2019Subject CategoryAircraft Propulsion And PowerReport/Patent NumberNASA/TM-2019-220151AIAA Paper 2019-1948GRC-E-DAA-TN65425E-19671Meeting InformationMeeting: AIAA SciTech Forum 2019Location: San Diego, CACountry: United StatesStart Date: January 7, 2019End Date: January 11, 2019Sponsors:American Institute of Aeronautics and Astronautics (AIAA)Funding Number(s)WBS: WBS 109492.02.03.01.10Distribution LimitsPublicCopyrightWork of the US Gov. Public Use Permitted.Keywordsgas turbineoptimizationTurbomachineryAvailable DownloadsNameType20190002272.pdfSTIcloud_downloadcontent_copyvisibilityRelated RecordsThere are no records associated with this record.visibility_offNo Preview Available
 No Fear Act | Freedom of Information Act | Office of the Inspector General | Agency Financial ReportsNASA Web Privacy Policy and Important Notices | NASA Guidelines for Quality of InformationDisclaimers, Copyright, Terms of Use | Accessibility | NASA OCIO | USA.gov | NASA.govContact Us | Site MapSTI LogoNASA Official: JoAnne R. Calhoun Site Curator: STI Compliance and Distribution Services Last Modified: September 12, 2024
<PAGE>

                                     EXHIBIT 12.1




                          MERIDIAN INDUSTRIAL TRUST, INC.
                 COMPUTATION OF RATIO OF EARNINGS TO FIXED CHARGES
                 FOR THE YEARS ENDED DECEMBER 31, 1997 AND 1996 AND
            HISTORICAL AS ADJUSTED FOR THE YEAR ENDED DECEMBER 31, 1995
                                   (IN THOUSANDS)

<TABLE>
<CAPTION>

                                   1997           1996           1995
                                 -------        -------        -------
<S>                              <C>            <C>            <C>
EARNINGS:
 Net Income (Loss)               $22,688        $14,063        $10,920
    Extraordinary Item               808            411            -
    Minority Interest                 30           --              -
    Interest                      11,022          6,065          7,409
                                 -------        -------        -------
TOTAL                            $34,548        $20,539        $18,329
                                 -------        -------        -------

FIXED CHARGES:
    Interest Expense             $11,022        $ 6,065        $ 7,409
    Capitalized Interest           1,820            561            -
    Preferred Dividends            2,818          2,412            -
                                 -------        -------        -------
TOTAL                            $15,660        $ 9,038        $ 7,409
                                 -------        -------        -------

RATIO OF EARNINGS TO FIXED CHARGES
  AND PREFERRED DIVIDENDS           2.21           2.27           2.47
                                 -------        -------        -------
</TABLE>
§ 582.3041 Erythorbic acid. ( a ) *Product.* Erythorbic acid.
( b ) *Conditions of use.* This substance is generally recognized as safe when used in accordance with good manufacturing or feeding practice.
§ 520.246 Butorphanol tablets. ( a ) *Specifications.* Each tablet contains butorphanol tartrate equivalent to 1, 5, or 10 milligrams (mg) butorphanol base.
( b ) *Sponsor.* See No. 054771 in § 510.600(c) of this chapter.
( c ) *Conditions of use in dogs* — ( 1 ) *Amount.* Administer 0.25 mg butorphanol base per pound of body weight. Repeat at intervals of 6 to 12 hours as required. Treatment should not normally be required for longer than 7 days.
( 2 ) *Indications for use.* For the relief of chronic nonproductive cough associated with tracheobronchitis, tracheitis, tonsillitis, laryngitis, and pharyngitis associated with inflammatory conditions of the upper respiratory tract.
( 3 ) *Limitations.* Federal law restricts this drug to use by or on the order of a licensed veterinarian.
[79 FR 28818, May 20, 2014]
<PAGE>   1
 
                                                                   EXHIBIT 23.01
 
               CONSENT OF ERNST & YOUNG LLP, INDEPENDENT AUDITORS
 
     We consent to the reference to our firm under the caption "Experts" and to
the use of our report dated January 28, 1998, in the Registration Statement on
Form S-4 and related Prospectus of Corixa Corporation for the registration of
shares of its common stock.
 
                                          ERNST & YOUNG LLP
 
Seattle, Washington
December 22, 1998
# C_2015007EN.01005302.xml

| 12.1.2015 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 7/53 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

12.1.2015

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 7/53

---

Action brought on 10 October 2014 — ZZ v Commission

(Case F-107/14)

(2015/C 007/65)

Language of the case: French

Parties

Parties

Applicant: ZZ (represented by: S. Orlandi, lawyer)

Applicant:

Defendant: Commission

Defendant:

Subject-matter and description of the proceedings

Subject-matter and description of the proceedings

Annulment of the decision concerning the transfer of the applicants’ pension rights to the European Union pension scheme applying the new GIP relating to Articles 11 and 12 of Annex VIII to the Staff Regulations.

Form of order sought

Form of order sought

The applicant claims that the Tribunal should:

| — | declare Article 9 of the General Implementing Provisions of Article 11(2) of Annex VIII to the Staff Regulations unlawful and inapplicable; |
| --- | --- |

—

declare Article 9 of the General Implementing Provisions of Article 11(2) of Annex VIII to the Staff Regulations unlawful and inapplicable;

| — | annul the decision of 16 February 2014 concerning the calculation of accredited pension rights acquired by the applicant prior to entering the service, as part of the transfer of those rights to the pension scheme of the institutions of the European Union, pursuant to the General Implementing Provisions of Article 11(2) of Annex VIII to the Staff Regulations of 3 March 2011; |
| --- | --- |

—

annul the decision of 16 February 2014 concerning the calculation of accredited pension rights acquired by the applicant prior to entering the service, as part of the transfer of those rights to the pension scheme of the institutions of the European Union, pursuant to the General Implementing Provisions of Article 11(2) of Annex VIII to the Staff Regulations of 3 March 2011;

| — | order the Commission to pay the costs. |
| --- | --- |

—

order the Commission to pay the costs.

---
EXHIBIT 23.1

                          INDEPENDENT AUDITORS' CONSENT

We consent to the inclusion in this Amendment No. 7 to the Registration
Statement on Form S-1 of our report dated April 13, 2000 (with respect to the
second paragraph, Note (H) April 19, 2000; with respect to Note D(1) June 21,
2000), on our audits of the consolidated financial statements of Urban Cool
Network, Inc. and subsidiary as of December 31, 1999 and 1998, for year ended
December 31, 1999, for the period from January 23, 1998 (inception) through
December 31, 1998 and for the period from January 23, 1998 (inception) through
December 31, 1999 and to the reference of our firm under the caption "Experts."

Richard A. Eisner & Company, LLP

New York, New York
August 29, 2000
```

[115th Congress Public Law 296]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]

[[Page 132 STAT. 4380]]

Public Law 115-296
115th Congress

                                 An Act

 
To designate the facility of the United States Postal Service located at 
  1355 North Meridian Road in Harristown, Illinois, as the ``Logan S. 
      Palmer Post Office''. <<NOTE: Dec. 6, 2018 -  [H.R. 5935]>> 

    Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representatives of the 
United States of America in Congress assembled,
SECTION 1. LOGAN S. PALMER POST OFFICE.

    (a) Designation.--The facility of the United States Postal Service 
located at 1355 North Meridian Road in Harristown, Illinois, shall be 
known and designated as the ``Logan S. Palmer Post Office''.
    (b) References.--Any reference in a law, map, regulation, document, 
paper, or other record of the United States to the facility referred to 
in subsection (a) shall be deemed to be a reference to the ``Logan S. 
Palmer Post Office''.

    Approved December 6, 2018.

LEGISLATIVE HISTORY--H.R. 5935:
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

CONGRESSIONAL RECORD, Vol. 164 (2018):
            Sept. 13, considered and passed House.
            Nov. 15, considered and passed Senate.

                                  <all>
```
```

[Congressional Bills 118th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[H.R. 7507 Referred in Senate (RFS)]

<DOC>
118th CONGRESS
  2d Session
                                H. R. 7507

_______________________________________________________________________

                   IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES

                            December 5, 2024

Received; read twice and referred to the Committee on Homeland Security 
                        and Governmental Affairs

_______________________________________________________________________

                                 AN ACT

 
 To designate the facility of the United States Postal Service located 
 at 203 East 6th Street in Lexington, Nebraska, as the `William E. and 
                 Elsie L. Barrett Post Office Building.

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

SECTION 1. WILLIAM E. AND ELSIE L. BARRETT POST OFFICE BUILDING.

    (a) Designation.--The facility of the United States Postal Service 
located at 203 East 6th Street in Lexington, Nebraska, shall be known 
and designated as the ``William E. and Elsie L. Barrett Post Office 
Building''.
    (b) References.--Any reference in a law, map, regulation, document, 
paper, or other record of the United States to the facility referred to 
in subsection (a) shall be deemed to be a reference to the ``William E. 
and Elsie L. Barrett Post Office Building''.

            Passed the House of Representatives December 4, 2024.

            Attest:

                                             KEVIN F. MCCUMBER,

                                                                 Clerk.
```
# C_2014462EN.01001301.xml

| 22.12.2014 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 462/13 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

22.12.2014

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 462/13

---

Request for a preliminary ruling from the Amtsgericht Karlsruhe (Germany) lodged on 23 September 2014 — Nabiel Peter Bogendorff von Wolffersdorff

(Case C-438/14)

(2014/C 462/22)

Language of the case: German

Referring court

Referring court

Amtsgericht Karlsruhe

Parties to the main proceedings

Parties to the main proceedings

Applicant: Nabiel Peter Bogendorff von Wolffersdorff

Applicant:

Other parties: Standesamt der Stadt Karlsruhe, Zentraler Juristischer Dienst der Stadt Karlsruhe

Other parties:

Question referred

Question referred

Are Articles 18 TFEU and 21 TFEU to be interpreted as meaning that the authorities of a Member State are obliged to recognise the change of name of a national of that State if he is at the same time a national of another Member State and has acquired in that Member State, during habitual residence, by means of a change of name not associated with a change of family law status, a freely chosen name including several tokens of nobility, where it is possible that a future substantial link with that State does not exist and in the first Member State the nobility has been abolished by constitutional law but the titles of nobility used at the time of abolition may continue to be used as part of a name?

---
# C_2017121EN.01002401.xml

| 18.4.2017 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 121/24 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

18.4.2017

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 121/24

---

Judgment of the General Court of 28 February 2017 — Canadian Solar Emea and Others v Council

(Case T-162/14) (1)

1

((Dumping - Imports of crystalline silicon photovoltaic modules and key components (cells) originating in or consigned from China - Definitive anti-dumping duty - Undertakings - Action for annulment - Interest in bringing proceedings - Admissibility - Exporting country - Scope of the investigation - Sampling - Normal value - Definition of the product concerned - Time limit for the adoption of a decision on a market economy treatment claim - Temporal application of new provisions - Injury - Causal link))

(2017/C 121/34)

Language of the case: English

Parties

Parties

Applicants: Canadian Solar Emea GmbH (Munich, Germany), Canadian Solar Manufacturing (Changshu), Inc. (Changshu, China), Canadian Solar Manufacturing (Luoyang), Inc. (Luoyang, China) Csi Cells Co. Ltd (Suzhou, China) Csi Solar Power (China), Inc. (Suzhou) (represented initially by: A. Willems, S. De Knop and J. Charles, and subsequently by A. Willems and S. De Knop, lawyers)

Applicants:

Defendant: Council of the European Union (represented initially by J.-F. Brakeland, T. Maxian Rusche, and A. Stobiecka-Kuik, and subsequently by J.-F. Brakeland, T. Maxian Rusche, and A. Demeneix, acting as Agents)

Defendant:

Intervener in support of the defendant: European Commission, represented initially by J.-F. Brakeland, T. Maxian Rusche, and A. Stobiecka-Kuik, and subsequently by J.-F. Brakeland, T. Maxian Rusche, and A. Demeneix, acting as Agents

Intervener in support of the defendant:

Re:

Re:

Application under Article 263 TFEU for the annulment of Council Implementing Regulation (EU) No 1238/2013 of 2 December 2013 imposing a definitive anti-dumping duty and collecting definitively the provisional duty imposed on imports of crystalline silicon photovoltaic modules and key components (i.e. cells) originating in or consigned from the People’s Republic of China (OJ 2013 L 325, p. 1), in so far as it applies to the applicants.

Operative part of the judgment

Operative part of the judgment

The Court:

| 1. | Dismisses the action; |
| --- | --- |

1.

Dismisses the action;

| 2. | Orders Canadian Solar Emea GmbH, Canadian Solar Manufacturing (Changshu), Inc., Canadian Solar Manufacturing (Luoyang), Inc., Csi Cells Co. Ltd and Csi Solar Power (China), Inc. to bear their own costs and to pay those incurred by the Council of the European Union; |
| --- | --- |

2.

Orders Canadian Solar Emea GmbH, Canadian Solar Manufacturing (Changshu), Inc., Canadian Solar Manufacturing (Luoyang), Inc., Csi Cells Co. Ltd and Csi Solar Power (China), Inc. to bear their own costs and to pay those incurred by the Council of the European Union;

| 3. | Orders the European Commission to bear its own costs. |
| --- | --- |

3.

Orders the European Commission to bear its own costs.

---

(1)  OJ C 135, 5.5.2014.

1

---