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NOT FOR PUBLICATION

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT

ANGELE JEAN LOUIS, 

Petitioner, 

 v. 

WILLIAM P. BARR, Attorney General, 

Respondent.

No. 18-72256

Agency No. A202-099-845

MEMORANDUM*

On Petition for Review of an Order of the

Board of Immigration Appeals

Submitted December 7, 2020**

Pasadena, California

Before: KELLY***, GOULD, and R. NELSON, and Circuit Judges.

Angele Jean Louis, a native and citizen of Haiti, petitions for review of the 

Board of Immigration Appeals’ (“BIA”) denial of her application for asylum, 

withholding of removal, and protection under the Convention Against Torture 

* 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).

*** The Honorable Paul J. Kelly Jr., United States Circuit Judge of the United 

States Court of Appeals for the Tenth Circuit, sitting by designation.

FILED

DEC 9 2020

MOLLY C. DWYER, CLERK

U.S. COURT OF APPEALS
2 

(“CAT”). We have jurisdiction under 8 U.S.C. § 1252 and deny the petition for 

review.

The immigration judge (“IJ”) found Louis not credible, and the BIA 

concluded that the IJ’s finding was not clearly erroneous. Substantial evidence 

supports the adverse credibility determination based on inconsistencies in Louis’ 

testimony concerning who was raped during the December 2012 incident, whether 

the rapist was arrested and held for a brief period of hours or was jailed for two years, 

and whether she stopped attending school in June 2012 or after the December 2012 

incident.1 See Lizhi Qiu v. Barr, 944 F.3d 837, 842 (9th Cir. 2019). The record 

supports the cited inconsistencies in Louis’ testimony and asylum application. See 

Shrestha v. Holder, 590 F.3d 1034, 1048 (9th Cir. 2010). Louis failed to adequately 

explain the inconsistences. See Lata v. INS, 204 F.3d 1241, 1245 (9th Cir. 2000). 

Therefore, without credible testimony, the BIA properly denied Louis’ claims for 

asylum and withholding of removal.2 See Farah v. Ashcroft, 348 F.3d 1153, 1156

(9th Cir. 2003).

1

“We must uphold an adverse credibility determination so long as even one 

basis is supported by substantial evidence.” Lizhi Qiu v. Barr, 944 F.3d 837, 842 

(9th Cir. 2019) (internal quotation marks and citation omitted). Thus, we need not 

address Louis’ arguments about the other cited reasons for the adverse credibility 

finding.

2 Because the BIA only addressed the adverse credibility determination and 

assumed the asylum application was timely, we need not address the issue of the 
3 

The BIA also properly denied Louis’ claim for CAT relief because it was 

based on the same testimony found not credible, and Louis does not point to any 

other evidence in the record compelling a conclusion that she would be tortured by 

or with the consent or acquiescence of the Haitian government. See Singh v. 

Whitaker, 914 F.3d 654, 662–63 (9th Cir. 2019). 

PETITION DENIED.

one-year asylum bar here. See Navas v. INS, 217 F.3d 646, 658 n.16 (9th Cir. 

2000).
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<ARTICLE>              5
<LEGEND>
THE SCHEDULE CONTAINS SUMMARY FINANCIAL INFORMATION EXTRACTED FROM THE
FINANCIAL STATEMENTS CONTAINED IN ARNOLD INDUSTRIES, INC.'S FORM 10-Q
FOR THE NINE MONTHS ENDED SEPTEMBER 30, 1999, AND IS QUALIFIED IN ITS
ENTIRETY BY REFERENCE TO SUCH FINANCIAL STATEMENTS.
</LEGEND>

<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   9-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          DEC-31-1999
<PERIOD-END>                               SEP-30-1999
<CASH>                                      13,739,203
<SECURITIES>                                 4,243,805
<RECEIVABLES>                               49,219,685
<ALLOWANCES>                                 2,380,726
<INVENTORY>                                          0
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                            77,558,467
<PP&E>                                     395,573,476
<DEPRECIATION>                             154,828,743
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                             338,388,834
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                       57,615,227
<BONDS>                                              0
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                    29,942,628
<OTHER-SE>                                 211,214,365
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>               338,388,834
<SALES>                                              0
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                           315,274,859
<CGS>                                                0
<TOTAL-COSTS>                              275,563,721
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                     0
<LOSS-PROVISION>                               868,500
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                             958,797
<INCOME-PRETAX>                             39,250,356
<INCOME-TAX>                                14,424,972
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                         24,825,384
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                24,825,384
<EPS-BASIC>                                       1.00
<EPS-DILUTED>                                      .99


</TABLE>
**EXHIBIT 99.7**

**REPORT OF INDEPENDENT REGISTERED PUBLIC ACCOUNTING FIRM**

To the Shareholders and BoardDirectors of Cameco Corporation 

We have audited the accompanying consolidated statements of financial position of Cameco Corporation as ofDecember 31, 2011, December 31, 2010 and January 1, 2010 and the related consolidated statements of earnings, comprehensive income, changes in equity and cash flows for the years ended December 31, 2011 and December 31,2010. These consolidated financial statements are the responsibility of Cameco Corporation’s management. Our responsibility is to express an opinion on these consolidated financial statements based on our audits. 

We conducted our audits in accordance with the standards of the Public Company Accounting Oversight Board (United States). Those standards require thatwe plan and perform the audit to obtain reasonable assurance about whether the financial statements are free of material misstatement. An audit includes examining, on a test basis, evidence supporting the amounts and disclosures in the financialstatements. An audit also includes assessing the accounting principles used and significant estimates made by management, as well as evaluating the overall financial statement presentation. We believe that our audits provide a reasonable basis forour opinion. 

In our opinion, the consolidated financial statements referred to above present fairly, in all material respects, theconsolidated financial position of Cameco Corporation as of December 31, 2011, December 31, 2010 and January 1, 2010, and its consolidated financial performance and its consolidated cash flows for the years endedDecember 31, 2011 and December 31, 2010 in accordance with International Financial Reporting Standards as issued by the International Accounting Standards Board. 

We also have audited, in accordance with the standards of the Public Company Accounting Oversight Board (United States), Cameco Corporation’s internal control over financial reporting as ofDecember 31, 2011, based on the criteria established in Internal Control – Integrated Framework issued by the Committee of Sponsoring Organizations of the Treadway Commission (COSO), and our report dated February 8, 2012 expressed anunqualified opinion on the effectiveness of Cameco Corporation’s internal control over financial reporting. 

/s/ KPMG LLP 

Chartered Accountants 

Saskatoon, Canada

February 8, 2012
Editorial Note on Part 2
Editorial Note: Nomenclature changes to part 2 appear by USCG-2009-0702, 74 FR 49223, Sept. 25, 2009, and USCG-2013-0671, 78 FR 60144, Sept. 30, 2013.

§ 2.45-10 General. ( a ) A classification society (including an employee or agent of that society) must not review, examine, survey, or certify the construction, repair, or alteration of a vessel in the United States unless it is approved under the provisions of this subpart.
( b ) This subpart applies to a recognized organization that meets the definition of a classification society provided in § 2.45-1 of this subpart.
[Federal Register Volume 72, Number 95 (Thursday, May 17, 2007)]
[Notices]
[Page 27825]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 07-2444]


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

DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES

National Institutes of Health


National Institute on Alcohol Abuse and Alcoholism; Notice of 
Closed Meeting

    Pursuant to section 10(d) of the Federal Advisory Committee Act, as 
amended (5 U.S.C. Appendix 2), notice is hereby given of the following 
meeting.
    The meeting will be closed to the public in accordance with the 
provisions set forth in sections 552b(c)(4) and 552b(c)(6), Title 5 
U.S.C., as amended. The grant applications and the discussions could 
disclose confidential trade secrets or commercial property such as 
patentable material, and personal information concerning individuals 
associated with the grant applications, the disclosure of which would 
constitute a clearly unwarranted invasion of personal privacy.

    Name of Committee: National Institute on alcohol Abuse and 
Alcoholism Special Emphasis Panel HH-90 Alcohol Education Project 
Grants (R25).
    Date: July 26, 2007.
    Time: 8:30 a.m. to 5 p.m.
    Agenda: To review and evaluate grant applications.
    Place: Doubletree Hotel and Executive Meeting Center, Bethesda, 
MD.
    Contact Person: Lorraine Gunzerath PhD, MBA, Scientific Review 
Administrator, National Institute on Alcohol Abuse and Alcoholism, 
Office of Extramural Activities, Extramural Project Review Branch, 
5635 Fishers Lane, Room 3043, Bethesda, MD 20892-9304, 301-443-2369, 
<a href="/cdn-cgi/l/email-protection#2c404b594256495e4d6c424544024b435a"><span class="__cf_email__" data-cfemail="f8949f8d96829d8a99b8969190d69f978e">[email protected]</span></a>.

(Catalogue of Federal Domestic Assistance Program Nos. 93.271, 
Alcohol Research Career, Development Awards for Scientists and 
Clinicians; 93.272, Alcohol National Research Service Awards for 
Research Training; 93.273, Alcohol Research Programs; 93.892, 
Alcohol Research Center Grants, National Institutes of Health, HHS).

    Dated: May 11, 2007.
Jennifer Spaeth,
Director, Office of Federal Advisory Committee Policy.
[FR Doc. 07-2444 Filed 5-16-07; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4140-01-M


</pre><script data-cfasync="false" src="/cdn-cgi/scripts/5c5dd728/cloudflare-static/email-decode.min.js"></script></body>
</html>
§ 401.615 Representation. Cross Reference
Link to an amendment published at 89 FR 76353 , Sept. 17, 2024.
( a ) The U.S. Registered Pilot, designated “respondent” in a suspension or revocation hearing or “applicant” in a refusal-to-renew-registration hearing, may be represented before the Administrative Law Judge by any person who is a member in good standing of the bar of the highest court of any State, Commonwealth, Territory, Possession, or the District of Columbia, upon filing with the Administrative Law Judge a written declaration that he is currently qualified and is authorized to represent the particular party in whose behalf he acts.
( b ) Whenever a person acting in a representative capacity appears in person or signs a paper in practice before the Administrative Law Judge, Director, Commandant, the Administrator, or other official of the U.S. Coast Guard, his personal appearance or signature shall constitute a representation that under the provisions of this subpart and applicable law he is authorized and qualified to represent the particular person in whose behalf he acts.
( c ) When any Registered Pilot is represented by an attorney at law, any notice or other written communication required or permitted to be given to or by such a U.S. Registered Pilot shall be given to or by such attorney. If a U.S. Registered Pilot is represented by more than one attorney, service by or upon any one of such attorneys shall be sufficient.
[32 FR 14222, Oct. 13, 1967, as amended at 61 FR 5721, Feb. 14, 1996. Redesignated at 61 FR 32655, June 25, 1996, and further redesignated and amended by USCG-1998-3976, 63 FR 35139, 35140, June 29, 1998]
§ 32.53-3 Exemptions. ( a ) The Deputy for Operations Policy and Capabilities (CG-DCO-D) grants exemptions for crude oil tankers of less than 40,000 deadweight tons not fitted with high capacity tank washing machines, if the vessel's owner can show that compliance would be unreasonable and impracticable due to the vessel's design characteristics.
( b ) Requests for exemptions must be submitted in writing to: Commandant (CG-OES), Attn: Office of Operating and Environmental Standards, U.S. Coast Guard Stop 7509, 2703 Martin Luther King Jr. Avenue SE., Washington, DC 20593-7509.
( c ) Each request must be supported by documentation showing that: ( 1 ) The system would be detrimental to the safe operation of the vessel;
( 2 ) It is physically impracticable to install the system; or
( 3 ) Adequate maintenance of the system would be impossible.
( d ) The vessel's owner may request a conference. The exemption request file will be available for use in the conference and additional arguments or evidence in any form may be presented. The conference will be recorded. The presiding officer summarizes the material presented at the conference and submits written recommendations to the Deputy for Operations Policy and Capabilities (CG-DCO-D).
( e ) The Deputy for Operations Policy and Capabilities (CG-DCO-D) reviews the exemption request file and decides whether to grant or deny the exemption. The decision shall include an explanation of the basis on which the exemption is granted or denied, and constitutes final agency action.
[CGD 77-057a, 44 FR 66502, Nov. 19, 1979, as amended by CGD 82-063b, 48 FR 29486, June 27, 1983; CGD 88-070, 53 FR 34534, Sept. 7, 1988; CGD 95-072, 60 FR 50461, Sept. 29, 1995; CGD 96-041, 61 FR 50727, Sept. 27, 1996; CGD 97-057, 62 FR 51043, Sept. 30, 1997; USCG-2009-0702, 74 FR 49227, Sept. 25, 2009; USCG-2013-0671, 78 FR 60147, Sept. 30, 2013]
Exhibit 32.1 Certification by the Chief Executive Officer 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 of Octillion Corp. (the Company) on the Form 10-Q for the period ending May 31, 2008, as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the Report), I, Nicholas Cucinelli, President and Chief Executive Officer of the Company, certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. ss. 1350, as adopted pursuant to ss.906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that:  (i) the Report filed by the Company fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934; and (ii) The information contained in that Report fairly presents, in all material respects, the financial condition and results of operations of the Company on the dates and for the periods presented therein.  OCTILLION CORP.Date: July 10, 2008By:/s/ Nicholas CucinelliNicholas Cucinelli
President and Chief Executive Officer  This certification accompanies this Report pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002 and shall not be deemed filed by the Company for purposes of Section 18 of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended. A signed original of this written statement required by Section 906, or other document authenticating, acknowledging, or otherwise adopting the signature that appears in typed form within the electronic version 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.
Exhibit 99.01


                Written Statement of the Chief Financial Officer
                          and Chief Executive Officer
                          Pursuant to 18 U.S.C.  1350

Solely for the purposes of complying with 18 U.S.C. 1350, I,  the
undersigned  Chief  Financial Officer of  Pop  N  Go,  Inc.  (the
"Company"),  hereby  certify, based on  my  knowledge,  that  the
Quarterly  Report  on Form 10-QSB of the Company  for  the  quarter
ended June 30, 2003  (the "Report") fully  complies  with  the
requirements of Section 13(a) of the Securities Exchange  Act  of
1934   and  that  information  contained  in  the  Report  fairly
presents,  in all material respects, the financial condition  and
results of operations of the Company.


By:   /s/ Melvin Wyman
          ---------------
          Melvin Wyman
          Chief Financial Officer

Date:   August 18, 2003
Motion Denied and Order filed December 16, 2021 

In The

Fourteenth Court of Appeals

____________

NO. 14-20-00811-CV

____________

ANTHONY SAINT VAL, Appellant

V.

PATRICIA HILL, VICE-PRESIDENT OF GLENCAIRN ASSOCIATION 

BOARD OF DIRECTORS, Appellee

On Appeal from County Civil Court at Law No. 3

Harris County, Texas

Trial Court Cause No. 1129479

ORDER

Appellant’s request of November 22, 2021, that we proceed with this appeal 

as if appellee had not filed a brief is DENIED.

PER CURIAM

Panel Consists of Chief Justice Christopher, and Justices Spain and Wilson (Spain, 

J. dissenting).
[Federal Register Volume 72, Number 96 (Friday, May 18, 2007)]
[Notices]
[Page 28051]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 07-2478]


=======================================================================
-----------------------------------------------------------------------

EXPORT-IMPORT BANK OF THE UNITED STATES


Notice of Open Special Meeting of the Sub-Saharan Africa Advisory 
Committee (SAAC) of the Export-Import Bank of the Untied States 
(Export-Import Bank)

SUMMARY: The Sub-Saharan Africa Advisory Committee was established by 
Public Law 105-121, November 26, 1997, to advise the Board of Directors 
on the development and implementation of policies and programs designed 
to support the expansion of the Bank's financial commitments in Sub-
Saharan Africa under the loan, guarantee and insurance programs of the 
Bank. Further, the committee shall make recommendations on how the Bank 
can facilitate greater support by U.S. commercial banks for trade with 
Sub-Saharan Africa.
    Time and Place: June 6, 2007 at 9:30 to 1 p.m. the meeting will be 
held at the Export-Import Bank in Room 1143, 811 Vermont Avenue, NW., 
Washington, DC 20571.
    Agenda: The meeting will include a general discussion as to 
encouraging more U.S. companies to market themselves in Africa; review 
of the 2006 Competitiveness Report; update on the 2006 SAAC 
recommendations to the Bank and a report on recent Africa focused 
international business development efforts as well as the Africa IBD 
plans for the balance of the fiscal year.
    Public participation: The meeting will be open to public 
participation, and the last 10 minutes will be set aside for oral 
questions or comments. Members of the public may also file written 
statement(s) before or after the meeting. If any person wishes 
auxiliary aids (such as a sign language interpreter) or other special 
accommodations, please contact, prior to June 6, 2007, Barbara Ransom, 
Room 1241, 811 Vermont Avenue, NW., Washington, DC 20571, Voice: (202) 
565-3525 or TDD (202) 565-3377.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION: For further information, contact Barbara 
Ransom, Room 707, 811 Vermont Avenue, NW., Washington, DC 20571, (202) 
565-3525.

Kamil Cook,
Deputy General Counsel.
[FR Doc. 07-2478 Filed 5-17-07; 8:45am]
BILLING CODE 6690-01-M
Release dates | Full version (300 KB PDF)Actions by the Board | Actions 
  under delegated authority
  Applications and reports:Boston
 |
New York
 |
Philadelphia
 |
Cleveland
 |
Richmond
 |
Atlanta
Chicago
 |
St. Louis
 |
Minneapolis
 |
Kansas City
 |
Dallas
 |
San Francisco

# District: 9
Federal Reserve Bank of: Minneapolis

## Filings received during the week ending April 7, 2007

|Filer             | Filing Type    | Filing Proposal                                                                                                                                                                                                | End of Comment Period                              
|----------------- | -------------- | -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- | ---------------------------------------------------
|1ST BANK          | * 18C* Branch  | 1st Bank, Evanston, Wyoming, to merge with North Side State Bank of Rock Springs, Rock Springs, Wyoming, and incident thereto proposes to establish a branch at 601 North Front Street, Rock Springs, Wyoming. | Newspaper:04/08/2007Federal Register:Not applicable
|Newspaper:        | 04/08/2007    
|Federal Register: | Not applicable

## Availability of CRA Public Evaluations

|Institution / Location                 | RSSDID | Exam Date  | CRAPublic Date | CRARating | Exam Method
|-------------------------------------- | ------ | ---------- | -------------- | --------- | -----------
|ROOT RIVER ST BK, CHATFIELD, MINNESOTA | 309851 | 12/18/2006 | 03/29/2007     | S         | Small Bank 

## CRA Examinations scheduled for     Quarter of

|Institution | Location
|----------- | --------
|NONE       

Release dates | Full version (300 KB PDF)Actions by the Board | Actions 
  under delegated authority
  Applications and reports:Boston
 |
New York
 |
Philadelphia
 |
Cleveland
 |
Richmond
 |
Atlanta
Chicago
 |
St. Louis
 |
Minneapolis
 |
Kansas City
 |
Dallas
 |
San Francisco

---

Home Banking information and regulation  Accessibility Contact 
  us
### D ISTRICT 

### C OURT 

### O F 

### A PPEAL 

### O F 

### T HE 

### S TATE 

### O F 

### F LORIDA
F OURTH D ISTRICT

JULIAN N. MANNING , Appellant,

v.

STATE OF FLORIDA , Appellee

.

No. 4D 17

- 2035

[ October 26, 2017 ]

Appeal of order denying rule 3.850 motion from the Circuit Court for the Seventeenth Judicial Circuit, Broward County ; Ernest A. Kollra, Jr.

, Judge; L.T. Case No. O7

- 5610CF10A

.
Julian N. Manning, South Bay, pro se.

No appearance for appellee.

P ER C URIAM

.
Affirmed

.

W ARNER , G ROSS and K UNTZ , JJ., concur.

* * *

Not final until disposition of timely filed motion for rehearing.