alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
NOT FOR PUBLICATION

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT

VERONICA SANCHEZ TORRES,

Petitioner,

v.
MERRICK B. GARLAND, Attorney General,

Respondent. No. 17

- 73008

Agency No. A201

- 212

- 091

MEMORANDUM *

On Petition for Review of an Order of the Board of Immigration Appeals

Submitted December 8, 2022 * *

Before: WALLACE, TALLMAN, and BYBEE, Circuit Judges

. Veronica Sanchez Torres, a native and citizen of Mexico , petitions pro se for
review of the Board of Immigration Appeals’ (“ BIA ”) order dismissing her appeal
from an immigration judge’s decision denying her applications for cancellation of

removal
, asylum, withholding of removal, and protection under the Convention

* This disposition is not appropriate for publication and is not precedent except as provided by Ninth Circuit Rule 36

- 3.

** The panel unanimously concludes this case is suitable for decision without oral argument. See Fed. R. App. P. 34(a)(2). 

# FILED

DEC 19 2022

MOLLY C. DWYER, CLERK U.S. COURT OF APPEALS2 17

- 73008

Against Torture ( “ CAT ”). Our jurisdiction is governed by 8 U.S.C. § 1252. We
review de novo questions of law, including claims of due process violations in

immigration proceedings. Padilla

- Martinez v. Holder , 770 F.3d 825, 830 (9th Cir.

2014). We deny in part and dismiss in part the petition for review.

The BIA did not err in concluding that Sanchez Torres ’s convictions for

petty theft under California Penal Code sections 484 and 666 are crimes involving

moral turpitude that render her ineligible for cancellation o f removal. See 8 U.S.C.

§ 1229b(b)(1)(C); Silva v. Garland , 993 F.3d 705 , 710 , 717 (9th Cir. 2021)

( California theft constitutes a crime involving moral turpitude ).

We do not address Sanchez Torres ’s contentions as to exceptional and

extremely unusual hardship or other eligibility requirements for cancellation of

removal because the BIA did not deny relief on these grounds. See Santiago

Rodriguez v. Holder , 657 F.3d 820, 829 (9th Cir. 2011) (“In reviewing the decision

of the BIA, we consider on ly the grounds relied upon by that agency.”).

We lack jurisdiction to consider Sanchez Torres ’s contention that she is

eligible for asylum, withholding of removal, or CAT protection because she failed

to raise the se issue s before the BIA. See Barron v. Ashcroft , 358 F.3d 674, 677

- 78
(9th Cir. 2004) (court lacks jurisdiction to review claims not presented to the BIA )

.
To the extent Sanchez Torres contends that the BIA violated due process
,
she has not shown error. See Padi lla

- Martinez , 770 F.3d at 830 (“To prevail on a3 17

- 73008

due

- process claim, a petitioner must demonstrate both a violation of rights and
prejudice.”).

We do not consider the materials Sanchez Torres references and attaches to

her opening brief that are not part of the administrative record. See Fisher v. INS
, 79 F.3d 955, 963

- 64 (9th Cir. 1996) (en banc).

The stay of removal remains in place until the mandate issues.

PETITION FOR REVIEW DENIED in part; DISMISSED in part

.
IN THE SUPREME COURT OF PENNSYLVANIA

MIDDLE DISTRICT

JAMES E. ROSE JR., PETITONER

v.

STEVIE HARRIS,

Respondent

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

No. 408 MAL 2022

Petition for Allowance of Appeal 

from the Order of the Superior Court

ORDER

PER CURIAM

AND NOW, this 8th day of November, 2022, the Petition for Allowance of Appeal 

and the Petition for Leave to Proceed In Forma Pauperis are DENIED.
#### § 53.3 Notification.

A banking organization must notify the appropriate OCC supervisory office, or OCC-designated point of contact, about a notification incident through email, telephone, or other similar methods that the OCC may prescribe. The OCC must receive this notification from the banking organization as soon as possible and no later than 36 hours after the banking organization determines that a notification incident has occurred.
#### Alice Flynn, Respondent, *v.*The Dry Dock, East Broadway and Battery Railroad Company, Appellant.

Appeal from a judgment, entered on a verdict, rendered by a jury, and from an order denying the defendant’s motion for a new trial on the minutes.

Henry A. Robinson (John T. Little, of counsel), for appellant.

Dailey, Bell *&*Crane (James D. Bell, of counsel), for respondent.

*Per Curiam.*

The appellant claims a reversal on the ground that the verdict is against the weight of evidence.

*809The questions involved have been submitted to a jury by the judge’s charge properly, and we decline to interfere with the verdict.

Judgment and order appealed from affirmed, with costs.'

Present: Conlan, McCarthy and Schuchman, JJ.

Judgment and order affirmed, with costs.
EXHIBIT
      32.1





CERTIFICATION
      OF CHIEF EXECUTIVE OFFICER PURSUANT TO 18 U.S.C. SECTION 1350 AS ADOPTED
      PURSUANT TO SECTION 906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002





Pursuant
      to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, as adopted pursuant to Section 906 of the
      Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, the undersigned hereby certifies that, to his
      knowledge, the quarterly report on Form 10-Q (the “Report”) of ANTs software
      inc., a Delaware corporation (the “Company”), for the quarter ended June 30,
      2006:





1.  Fully
      complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) or 15(d), as applicable, 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.





This
      certification is being provided pursuant to 18 U.S.C. 1350 and is not to be
      deemed a part of this Report, nor is it to be deemed to be “filed” for any
      purpose whatsoever.









Date: 
              August 14, 2006
            /s/
                Boyd PearceBoyd
              Pearce, Chief Executive Officer







A
      signed
      original of this written statement required by Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley
      Act of 2002 has been provided to the Company, and will be retained by the
      Company, and furnished to the Securities and Exchange Commission upon
      request.
<PAGE>   1

EXHIBIT 12.1


                 Ratio of Earnings to Fixed Charges Calculation
                         (Dollar Amounts in Thousands)
                                  (Unaudited)

<TABLE>
<CAPTION>
                                                                                      Fiscal Year(a)
                                                           ----------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                             2000            1999           1998          1997            1996
                                                           --------        --------       --------       -------         --------
<S>                                                        <C>             <C>            <C>            <C>             <C>
Earnings to fixed charges:
     Earnings:
          Pre-tax income from continuing operations          23,738          14,699         11,369        13,899            5,036
          Add fixed charges                                  28,316          27,788         28,538        21,085           20,042
                                                           --------        --------       --------       -------         --------
     Earnings                                                52,054          42,487         39,907        34,984           25,078
                                                           --------        --------       --------       -------         --------
     Fixed charges:

          Net interest expense per financial statement       17,035          17,461         19,285        12,442           11,482
          Add:
             Interest income                                    736             606              -             -                -
             Rents(1/3)                                      10,545           9,721           9,253        8,643            8,560
                                                           --------        --------        --------      -------          -------
     Fixed charges                                           28,316          27,788          28,538       21,085           20,042
                                                           --------        --------        --------      -------          -------
Ratio of earnings to fixed charges                              1.8             1.5             1.4          1.7              1.3

</TABLE>


(a) The Company's fiscal year is a 52 or 53 week year ending on the Sunday
    closest to the calendar year end. Fiscal years 1996, 1997, 1999 and 2000
    consist of 53 weeks and fiscal year 1998 consists of 53 weeks.
#### § 602.3 Definitions.

*Appeal* means a request under the FOIA asking for the reversal of a decision.

*Business information* means trade secrets or other commercial or financial information that is privileged or confidential.

*Business submitter* means any person or entity that gives business information to the Government.

*FOIA request* means a written request for FCA records, made by any person or entity that either directly or indirectly invokes the FOIA or this part.

*Record* means all documentary materials, such as books, papers, maps, photographs, and machine-readable materials, regardless of physical form or characteristics (for example, electronic format) in our possession and control when we receive your FOIA request.
#### § 625.28 Judicial review.

Judicial review of final FCA decisions on awards may be sought as provided in 5 U.S.C. 504(c)(2).
EXHIBIT 5

SECOND LETTER

Case:17-03283-LTS Doc#:22615-5 Filed:10/17/22 Entered:10/17/22 09:10:24 Desc:

Exhibit 5 - Second Letter Page 1 of 3
Case 17-03283-LTS9 Claim 1539-2 Part 2 Filed 06/25/18 Desc Exhibit A - Ledger

 and other docs. Page 2 of 4

Case:17-03283-LTS Doc#:22615-5 Filed:10/17/22 Entered:10/17/22 09:10:24 Desc:

Exhibit 5 - Second Letter Page 2 of 3
CERTIFIED TRANSLATION

I, Juan E. Segarra, USCCI #06-067/translator, certify that the foregoing is a true and accurate 

translation, to the best of my abilities, of the document in Spanish which I have seen.

Case 17-03283-LTS9 Claim 1539-2 Part 2 Filed 06/25/18 Desc Exhibit A - Ledger

and other docs. Page 2 of 4

[coat of arms: 

GOVERNMENT OF 

PUERTO RICO]

GOVERNMENT OF PUERTO RICO

Public Service Commission

June 13, 2017

Mr. Antonio Betancourt Capó, Esq.

La Electrónica Building

[signature]

Esteban E. Lomba Rodríguez M.B.A 

General Services Office Director

Public Service Commission

DELIVERY OF LA ELECTRONICA BUILDING KEYS

Greetings. The purpose of this letter is to carry out the delivery of La Electrónica Building keys.

[signature] June 13, 2017

Person who received them Date

Luz S. Ortiz

[LOGO]

1 0 0 

YEARS

SERVING PUERTO RICO

Road 1 Bori Street #1608 [Electrónica Bldg.] San Juan, P.R. 00919-0870 * P.O. Box 190870 San Juan, P.R. 00919-0870

P: 787 756 1919 F: office fax E: email personal@csp pr gov W: www csp pr gov

Case:17-03283-LTS Doc#:22615-5 Filed:10/17/22 Entered:10/17/22 09:10:24 Desc:

Exhibit 5 - Second Letter Page 3 of 3
H. R. 3340

One Hundred Eighth Congress

of the

United States of America

AT THE SECOND SESSION

Begun and held at the City of Washington on Tuesday,

the twentieth day of January, two thousand and four

An Act

To redesignate the facilities of the United States Postal Service located at 7715

and 7748 S. Cottage Grove Avenue in Chicago, Illinois, as the ‘‘James E. Worsham

Post Office’’ and the ‘‘James E. Worsham Carrier Annex Building’’, respectively,

and for other purposes.

Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representatives of

the United States of America in Congress assembled,

SECTION 1. JAMES E. WORSHAM POST OFFICE.

(a) REDESIGNATION.—The facility of the United States Postal

Service located at 7715 S. Cottage Grove Avenue in Chicago, Illinois,

shall be known and designated as the ‘‘James E. Worsham 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 this section shall be deemed to be a reference to

the ‘‘James E. Worsham Post Office’’.

SEC. 2. JAMES E. WORSHAM CARRIER ANNEX BUILDING.

(a) REDESIGNATION.—The facility of the United States Postal

Service located at 7748 S. Cottage Grove Avenue in Chicago, Illinois,

shall be known and designated as the ‘‘James E. Worsham Carrier

Annex 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 this section shall be deemed to be a reference to

the ‘‘James E. Worsham Carrier Annex Building’’.

Speaker of the House of Representatives.

Vice President of the United States and

President of the Senate.
<PAGE>

                                                                   EXHIBIT 10.30

                  [North Carolina State University Letterhead]


                                December 30, 1999



Dr. Stephen J. Burden
Vice President, Semiconductor Materials
Isonics
5906 McIntyre St
Golden, CO 80403

     Re:  GIFT # 990027689

Dear Dr. Burden:

     On behalf of the College of Engineering, I would like to thank Isonics for
the very generous gift of $50,000. In accordance with your instructions, we have
deposited your contribution in the Corporate Research - ECE / Baliga fund. An
official receipt is enclosed for your records.

     Your company's support helps us maintain and build upon the tradition of
excellence in engineering education for which NC State prides itself. Thank you
again for your generosity and for your confidence in our academic programs. If I
can ever be of assistance to you here in the College of Engineering, please do
not hesitate to call or write.


                                        Sincerely,

                                        /s/ Ben H. Hughes

                                        Ben H. Hughes
                                        Executive Director of Development
                                        and College Relations

BHH/saw

Enclosure
<PAGE>

                                       Date: December 30, 1999  Gift # 990027689
                                       Donor ID:9900004673
                                       Gift Amount: $50,000.00

North Carolina Engineering Foundation, Inc. Corporate
Research-ECE/Baliga Please consult your tax advisor and
I.R.S. form 1040 for gifts of Cash and listed securities;
and I.R.S. form 8283 for non-cash gifts. Any goods or
services which you may have received in consideration of
this contribution are considered insubstantial under I.R.S.
regulations.

                                       IF you have any questions regarding this
                                       receipt, please call (919) 515-7827.



                                       IF you or your spouse work for a matching
                                       gift company, you could double or triple
                                       your gift to NC State! Please contact
                                       your personnel office for information on
                                       how to initiate a match.

Isonics Corporation
5906 McIntyre St Golden CO 80403


                   PLEASE DETACH AND RETAIN FOR YOUR RECORDS.

Name:              Isonics Corporation                           ID# 9900004673

Preferred Address: 5906 McIntyre St
                   Golden          CO 80403

Home Ph# (303) 279-7900                 Bus. Ph# (303) 279-7900

Employer's Address:




Occupation/position/title:
Spouse's Name:


Your gift may be matched by:
§ 611.525 Stockholder reconsideration. ( a ) Stockholders have the right to reconsider the approval of the transfer provided that a petition signed by 15 percent of the stockholders of either institution involved in the transfer is filed with the Farm Credit Administration within 35 days after the date of mailing of the notification of the final results of the stockholder vote required under § 611.505(d) and such petition is approved by the Farm Credit Administration.
( b ) A special stockholders meeting shall be called by the institution to vote on the reconsideration following the Farm Credit Administration's approval of a stockholder petition to reconsider the transfer. If a majority of stockholders of any institution involved in the transfer votes against the transfer, the transfer is not approved.
#### LIESE et al. v. HADDEN, Gdn.

No. 30954.

Jan. 5, 1943.

*132 P. 2d 654.*

*667Raymond A. Trapp, of Blackwell, and Tom L. Irby, of Ponca City, for plaintiffs in error.

R. A. Barney, of Pawhuska, for defendant in error.

PER CURIAM.

This is an appeal from the order and judgment of the trial court entered on October 23, 1941, overruling the objections to the report of the commissioners in partition. Thereafter, on the 27th day of October, 1941, a motion for new trial was filed, and on December 12, 1941, the trial court entered an order purporting to overrule said motion for new trial. The appeal is from the order overruling the motion for new trial. The defendants did not appeal from the order entered by the trial court on the 23rd day of October, 1941.

Under the rule announced many times by this court, the filing and determination of a motion for new trial arising not upon the pleadings but upon a motion is unnecessary, and the determination of the motion for new trial does not extend the time in which the appeal can be taken. See Powell v. Nichols, 26 Okla. 734, 110 P. 762; Grimes v. Ward, 179 Okla. 5, 64 P. 2d 894; Butler v. Archard, 130 Okla. 241, 266 P. 1106; Ginn v. Knight, 106 Okla. 4, 232 P. 936; Fliedner v. Hinchee, 157 Okla. 90, 11 P. 2d 110. Under the rule laid down in the above-cited cases, it was not necessary to file a motion for a new trial in order to appeal from the order and judgment made on the report of the commissioners.

Since the determination of the motion for new trial on December 12, 1941, did not extend the time in which to file the appeal in this court, and since the appeal was not filed within six months from and after the date of the judgment on October 23, 1941, this court is without jurisdiction, and the appeal must be, and the same is hereby, dismissed.

WELCH, C. J., and OSBORN, GIBSON, HURST, DAVISON, and ARNOLD, JJ., concur. CORN, V. C. J., and RILEY and BAYLESS, JJ., absent.
<TABLE> <S> <C>


<ARTICLE>                     5

       
<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   3-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                              JUN-30-1998
<PERIOD-START>                                 JUL-01-1997
<PERIOD-END>                                   SEP-30-1997
<CASH>                                             254,978   
<SECURITIES>                                             0   
<RECEIVABLES>                                    2,216,149   
<ALLOWANCES>                                       178,643   
<INVENTORY>                                      6,346,055   
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                                 9,515,317   
<PP&E>                                          13,041,059   
<DEPRECIATION>                                   5,138,690   
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                  17,653,152   
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                            9,630,521   
<BONDS>                                          5,465,768   
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                    0   
<PREFERRED>                                              0   
<COMMON>                                               605   
<OTHER-SE>                                       5,521,516   
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                    17,653,152   
<SALES>                                         10,866,306   
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                                10,896,886   
<CGS>                                            9,428,915   
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                   10,123,045   
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                    (2,720)  
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                         0   
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                                 234,566   
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                    541,995   
<INCOME-TAX>                                             0   
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                                      0   
<DISCONTINUED>                                           0   
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                          0   
<CHANGES>                                                0   
<NET-INCOME>                                       541,995   
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                         0.09
<EPS-DILUTED>                                         0.09
                                               


</TABLE>
§ 368.2 Definitions. ( a ) *Bank that is a government securities broker or dealer* means a state nonmember bank or an insured state branch of a foreign bank that has filed notice, or is required to file notice, as a government securities broker or dealer pursuant to section 15C of the Securities Exchange Act (15 U.S.C. 78o-5) and Department of the Treasury rules under section 15C (17 CFR 400.1(d) and part 401).
( b ) *Customer* does not include a broker or dealer or a government securities broker or dealer.
( c ) *Government security* has the same meaning as this term has in section 3(a)(42) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 (15 U.S.C. 78c(a)(42)).
( d ) *Non-institutional customer* means any customer other than: ( 1 ) A bank, savings association, insurance company, or registered investment company;
( 2 ) An investment adviser registered under section 203 of the Investment Advisers Act of 1940 (15 U.S.C. 80b-3); or
( 3 ) Any entity (whether a natural person, corporation, partnership, trust, or otherwise) with total assets of at least $50 million.
Editorial Note on Part 249
Editorial Note: Nomenclature changes to part 249 appear at 79 FR 61539, Oct. 10, 2014.

§ 249.1 Purpose and applicability. ( a ) *Purpose.* This part establishes a minimum liquidity standard and a minimum stable funding standard for certain Board-regulated institutions on a consolidated basis, as set forth herein.
( b ) *Applicability.* ( 1 ) A Board-regulated institution is subject to the minimum liquidity standard and a minimum stable funding standard, and other requirements of this part if: ( i ) It is a: ( A ) Global systemically important BHC;
( B ) GSIB depository institution;
( C ) Category II Board-regulated institution;
( D ) Category III Board-regulated institution; or
( E ) Category IV Board-regulated institution with $50 billion or more in average weighted short-term wholesale funding;
( ii ) It is a covered nonbank company; or
( iii ) The Board has determined that application of this part is appropriate in light of the Board-regulated institution's asset size, level of complexity, risk profile, scope of operations, affiliation with foreign or domestic covered entities, or risk to the financial system.
( 2 ) This part does not apply to: ( i ) A bridge financial company as defined in 12 U.S.C. 5381(a)(3), or a subsidiary of a bridge financial company; or
( ii ) A new depository institution or a bridge depository institution, as defined in 12 U.S.C. 1813(i).
( 3 ) In making a determination under paragraph (b)(1)(iii) of this section, the Board will apply, as appropriate, notice and response procedures in the same manner and to the same extent as the notice and response procedures set forth in 12 CFR 263.202.
( c ) *Covered nonbank companies.* The Board will establish a minimum liquidity standard and minimum stable funding standard and other requirements for a designated company under this part by rule or order. In establishing such standards, the Board will consider the factors set forth in sections 165(a)(2) and (b)(3) of the Dodd-Frank Act and may tailor the application of the requirements of this part to the designated company based on the nature, scope, size, scale, concentration, interconnectedness, mix of the activities of the designated company, or any other risk-related factor that the Board determines is appropriate.
[86 FR 9210, Feb. 11, 2021]