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).

 *** The Honorable Dee V. Benson, District Judge for the U.S. District

Court for Utah, sitting by designation.

NOT FOR PUBLICATION

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

 FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT

SUBHASH KUMAR,

 Petitioner,

 v.

ERIC H. HOLDER, Jr., Attorney General

 Respondent.

No. 08-70057

Agency No. A016-077-005

MEMORANDUM*

On Petition for Review of an Order of the 

Board of Immigration Appeals

Submitted July 10, 2012**

Pasadena, California

Before: TALLMAN and N.R. SMITH, Circuit Judges, and BENSON, District

Judge.*** 

FILED

JUL 26 2012

MOLLY C. DWYER, CLERK

U.S. COURT OF APPEALS
2

Subhash Kumar (“Petitioner”), a citizen and native of India, seeks review of

a decision of the Board of Immigration Appeals (BIA) affirming an immigration

judge’s (IJ) decision to deny his applications for asylum and withholding of

removal under § 241(b)(3) of the Immigration and Nationality Act, 8 U.S.C. 

§ 1231(b)(3), and for protection under the Convention Against Torture (CAT).

1. We dismiss for lack of jurisdiction Petitioner’s challenge to the BIA’s

determination that his application for asylum was untimely because that issue

involves disputed facts. 8 U.S.C. §§ 1158(a)(3), 1252(a)(2)(D); Hakeem v. I.N.S.,

273 F.3d 812, 815 (9th Cir. 2001); Hakopian v. Mukasey, 551 F.3d 843, 847 (9th

Cir. 2008).

2. We deny the petition as to withholding of removal and protection under

CAT because the adverse credibility findings are supported by substantial

evidence. Petitioner filed his applications before May 11, 2005, so we apply the

pre-REAL ID Act rules. Rizk v. Holder, 629 F.3d 1083, 1087 n.2 (9th Cir. 2011). 

“We must uphold the IJ’s adverse credibility determination so long as one of

the identified grounds is supported by substantial evidence and goes to the heart of

the alien’s claim of persecution.” Id. at 1087 (internal quotation marks and

alterations omitted). To reverse the factual findings, “the evidence must compel a

different conclusion from the one reached by the BIA.” Zheng v. Holder, 644 F.3d
3

829, 835 (9th Cir. 2011). Here the IJ relied on numerous inconsistencies in the

evidence and testimony provided by Petitioner. The irregularities contained in

Petitioner’s terrorist victim card along with general inconsistencies in his

testimony are supported by the record. These issues go to the heart of Petitioner’s

claim. Because the record does not compel reversal of the adverse credibility

finding, Petitioner has not shown that he is entitled to withholding of removal.

Because Petitioner’s CAT claim is based on the same testimony the IJ found

not credible, and he points to no other arguments showing it is more likely than not

he will be tortured if returned to India, his CAT claim also fails. See Farah v.

Ashcroft, 348 F.3d 1153, 1156-57 (9th Cir. 2003).

Petition is DISMISSED in part, and DENIED in part.
Case 4:08-cv-00761-JEJ Document 85 Filed 03/10/10 Page 1 of 13
Case 4:08-cv-00761-JEJ Document 85 Filed 03/10/10 Page 2 of 13
Case 4:08-cv-00761-JEJ Document 85 Filed 03/10/10 Page 3 of 13
Case 4:08-cv-00761-JEJ Document 85 Filed 03/10/10 Page 4 of 13
Case 4:08-cv-00761-JEJ Document 85 Filed 03/10/10 Page 5 of 13
Case 4:08-cv-00761-JEJ Document 85 Filed 03/10/10 Page 6 of 13
Case 4:08-cv-00761-JEJ Document 85 Filed 03/10/10 Page 7 of 13
Case 4:08-cv-00761-JEJ Document 85 Filed 03/10/10 Page 8 of 13
Case 4:08-cv-00761-JEJ Document 85 Filed 03/10/10 Page 9 of 13
Case 4:08-cv-00761-JEJ Document 85 Filed 03/10/10 Page 10 of 13
Case 4:08-cv-00761-JEJ Document 85 Filed 03/10/10 Page 11 of 13
Case 4:08-cv-00761-JEJ Document 85 Filed 03/10/10 Page 12 of 13
Case 4:08-cv-00761-JEJ Document 85 Filed 03/10/10 Page 13 of 13
* 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

August 21, 2007

Charles R. Fulbruge III

Clerk

IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT

No. 06-50612

Conference Calendar

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA

Plaintiff-Appellee

v.

MARIO CESAR ARENAS

Defendant-Appellant

Appeal from the United States District Court

for the Western District of Texas

USDC No. 3:05-CR-1562

Before HIGGINBOTHAM, SMITH, and CLEMENT, Circuit Judges.

PER CURIAM:*

Mario Cesar Arenas appeals his guilty-plea conviction for conspiracy to

possess and distribute one kilogram or more of heroin in violation of 21 U.S.C.

§ 846. Arenas argues that one of his attorneys, Joseph Sib Abraham, Jr.,

rendered ineffective assistance of counsel because counsel was absent during

Arenas’s sentencing. Another of Arenas’s attorneys, Luis E. Eslas, was present

during Arenas’s sentencing. 
No. 06-50612

2

This court generally will not consider claims of ineffective assistance of

counsel on direct appeal except in those “rare cases where the record allowed

[this court] to evaluate fairly the merits of the claim.” United States v. Higdon,

832 F.2d 312, 313-14 (5th Cir. 1987). This is not one of those cases. Without

prejudice to Arenas’s right to file a motion pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 2255, the

judgment of the district court is AFFIRMED.
#### Winston S. HALL, as Administrator of the Estate of Mary V. Hall, deceased, Appellant, v. The HERTZ CORPORATION, a corporation authorized to do business in the State of Florida, William K. Cash and Charles H. Denny, III, Appellees.

No. O-17.

District Court of Appeal of Florida, First District.

April 8, 1971.

Ayres, Swigert, Cluster & Tucker, Oca-la, for appellant.

Boyd, Jenerette, Leemis & Staas, Jacksonville, and Chandler, O’Neal, Carlisle, Avera, Gray & Lang, Gainesville, for ap-pellees.

PER CURIAM.

Affirmed. See Hopkins v. Lockheed Aircraft Corporation, 201 So.2d 743 (Fla. *801967), and Messinger v. Tom, 203 So.2d 357 (Fla.App.2d 1967).

RAWLS, Acting C. J., WIGGINTON, J., and GOODFRIEND, SAM, Associate Judge, concur.
[Federal Register Volume 62, Number 182 (Friday, September 19, 1997)]
[Notices]
[Page 49295]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 97-24960]


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

DEPARTMENT OF THE TREASURY


Submission for OMB Review; Comment Request

September 10, 1997.
    The Department of Treasury has submitted the following public 
information collection requirement(s) to OMB for review and clearance 
under the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995, Public Law 104-13. Copies of 
the submission(s) may be obtained by calling the Treasury Bureau 
Clearance Officer listed. Comments regarding this information 
collection should be addressed to the OMB reviewer listed and to the 
Treasury Department Clearance Officer, Department of the Treasury, Room 
2110, 1425 New York Avenue, NW., Washington, DC 20220.

Special Request

    In order to conduct the opinion survey described below in October 
1997, the Department of the Treasury is requesting that the Office of 
Management and Budget (OMB) review and approve this information 
collection by September 23, 1997. To obtain a copy of this study, 
please contact the Internal Revenue Service Clearance Officer at the 
address listed below.

Internal Revenue Service (IRS)

    OMB Number: 1545-1432.
    Project Number: M:SP:V 97-020-G.
    Type of Review: Revision.
    Title: Electronic Filing Program Opinion Survey.
    Description: The purpose of this survey is to collect information 
to determine what tax practitioners (members of the National Society of 
Accountants (NSA) and the American Institute of Certified Public 
Accountants (AICPA)) like and dislike about the Electronic Filing 
Program. In addition, practitioners' suggestions on how to improve the 
program will help the IRS provide a more effective tool to the 
practitioners which should result in more returns filed electronically.
    Respondents: Business or other for-profit.
    Estimated Number of Respondents: 45,000.
    Estimated Burden Hours Per Response: 15 minutes.
    Frequency of Response: Other (one time only).
    Estimated Total Reporting Burden: 9,000 hours.
    Clearance Officer: Garrick Shear (202) 622-3869, Internal Revenue 
Service, Room 5571, Constitution Avenue, NW., Washington, DC 20224.
    OMB Reviewer: Alexander T. Hunt (202) 395-7860, Office of 
Management and Budget, Room 10226, New Executive Office Building, 
Washington, DC 20503.
Lois K. Holland,
Departmental Reports, Management Officer.
[FR Doc. 97-24960 Filed 9-18-97; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4830-01-P
Exhibit 32.1  CERTIFICATION OF CHIEF EXECUTIVE OFFICER AND CHIEF FINANCIAL OFFICER 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 accompanying Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q of China Holdings, Inc. for the quarter ended March 31, 2009, I certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, as adopted pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, to my knowledge, that:  (1)the Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q of China Holdings, Inc. for the quarter ended March 31, 2009 fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934; and  (2)the information contained in the Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q for the quarter ended March 31, 2009, fairly presents in all material respects, the financial condition and results of operations of China Holdings, Inc.    By:/s/ Dempsey MorkName:Dempsey MorkTitle:Principal Executive Officer,
and DirectorDate:Nov. 19, 2009By:/s/ Dempsey MorkName:Dempsey MorkTitle:Principal Financial OfficerDate:Nov. 19, 2009
[Federal Register Volume 62, Number 174 (Tuesday, September 9, 1997)]
[Notices]
[Page 47485]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 97-23790]


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

DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY

Federal Energy Regulatory Commission
[Docket No RP97-484-000]


Williams Natural Gas Company; Notice of Proposed Changes in FERC 
Gas Tariff

September 3, 1997.
    Take notice that Williams Natural Gas Company (WNG) on August 27, 
1997, tendered for filing as part of its FERC Gas Tariff, Second 
Revised Volume No. 1, Second Revised Sheet No. 214, Fourth Revised 
Sheet No. 254 and Second Revised Sheet No. 255, to be effective 
September 25, 1997.
    WNG states that the purpose of this filing is to comply with Order 
No. 636-C, issued February 27, 1997. Paragraph (B) of the order 
directed that within 180 days of the issuance of the order, any 
pipeline with a right-of-first-refusal tariff provision containing a 
contract term longer than five years must revise its tariff consistent 
with the new cap therein. Ordering Paragraph (C) directed pipelines 
which have filed to recover GSR costs before the date of the order, and 
whose GSR recovery proceedings have not been resolved by settlement or 
final and non-appealable Commission order, to file a proposed 
allocation of GSR costs to its interruptible customers. WNG has 
proposed a 5% allocation of GSR costs to interruptible customers. The 
above listed tariff sheets are being filed in compliance with the 
order.
    WNG states that a copy of its filing was served on all 
jurisdictional customers and interested state commissions.
    Any person desiring to be heard or to protest this filing should 
file a motion to intervene or a protest with the Federal Energy 
Regulatory Commission, 888 First Street, NE., Washington, DC 20426, in 
accordance with Sections 385.214 and 385.211 of the Commission's Rules 
and Regulations. All such motions or protests must be filed as provided 
in Section 154.210 of the Commission's Regulations. Protests will be 
considered by the Commission in determining the appropriate action to 
be taken, but will not serve to make Protestants parties to the 
proceedings. Any person wishing to become a party must file a motion to 
intervene. Copies of this filing are on file with the Commission and 
are available for public inspection in the Public Reference Room.
Lois D. Cashell,
Secretary.
[FR Doc. 97-23790 Filed 9-8-97; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6717-01-M
Case 4:06-cv-00508-JEJ Document 16 Filed 05/10/06 Page 1 of 2
Case 4:06-cv-00508-JEJ Document 16 Filed 05/10/06 Page 2 of 2
#### UNITED SANITATION SERVICES, INC. v. WASHINGTON.

No. 38586.

Supreme Court of Florida.

Dec. 1969.

Certiorari denied without opinion.
Gowdy Brothers Aerospace, LLC Page 1

U. S. Department of Transportation July 27, 2016

Docket Management System

1200 New Jersey Ave., SE 

Washington, DC 20590

Re: FAA Docket FAA-2015-8650-0001 Petition 

To Whom it May Concern:

Gowdy Brothers Aerospace, LLC, the leading section 333 Consulting Firm in the nation, 

is the Independent Consultant for DreameX Corp.

The Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) assigned DreameX Corp. (hereafter 

“Operator”) a docket number FAA-2015-8650-0001 (the “Docket”), pursuant to Section 

333 of the FAA Modernization and Reform Act of 2012 (the Reform Act) and 14 C.F.R. 

Part 11. That Docket when granted will authorize commercial operations by Operator. 

Operator herewith requests that its Docket be amended, to the extent necessary, to make 

the following changes:

1.) Add the following new aircraft to Operator’s UAS operation/mission;

a. Reference Technologies Hummingbird - Attached

This petition indicates that there are no changes in the conditions and reasons relative 

to public interest and safety that are in the original docket number for granting of this 

Docket.

As this amended Docket request is identical to exemptions that already have granted, this 

request should qualify for summary processing. The FAA has issued grants of exemption 

in circumstances similar in all material respects to those presented in this petition.

This amended Docket application expressly fulfills Congress’ goal in passing Section 333(a) 

through (c) of the Reform Act.

AIRCRAFT AND EQUIVALENT LEVEL OF SAFETY/NATIONAL SECURITY
Gowdy Brothers Aerospace, LLC Page 2

Operator states that operating in compliance with the conditions set forth in its Manuals 

will provide an equivalent level of safety for the operation of the its approved aircraft 

type for the purposes requested herein. 

THE REQUESTED AMENDMENT IS IN THE PUBLIC INTEREST

The FAA has granted exemptions to the regulations listed above. As discussed in detail for 

each of these regulations, the public interest will be served by an exemption because, 

with respect to each, operation in compliance with the requested conditions will ensure 

an equivalent level of safety. 

*********

Pursuant to 14 C.F.R. Part 11, the following summary is provided for publication in the

Federal Register, should it be determined that publication is needed Gowdy Brothers 

Aerospace, LLC can provide a summary upon request.

Attachments deemed Confidential Information

(The following attached items will be submitted under separate cover as they contain 

proprietary and commercial information exempt from disclosure under the Freedom of 

Information Act, 5 U.S.C. § 522 et seq., and should be held in a separate file pursuant to 

14 C.F.R. § 11.35(b)). 

1.) Hummingbird Specifications Sheet

Sincerely,

Stephen Gowdy, Chief Pilot, Gowdy Brothers Aerospace, LLC, as Independent 

Consultants for Operator.

www.GowdyBrothers.com

Info@GowdyBrothers.com

763-463-5885 Office
#### STATE of Florida, Appellant, v. James Eugene MATNEY and Leo Dean Welsh, Appellees.

No. M-68.

District Court of Appeal of Florida, First District.

June 9, 1970.

Rehearing Denied June 30, 1970.

*173Earl Faircloth, Atty. Gen., and Wallace E. Allbritton, Asst. Atty. Gen., for appellant.

Joseph A. St. Ana, Jacksonville, for ap-pellees.

PER CURIAM.

The State of Florida has appealed a final judgment dismissing the information filed against appellees herein and discharging them from custody because of the State’s failure or refusal to divulge the name of its confidential informant whose information was used in part as a basis for procuring a search warrant. The judgment is reversed upon the authority of the decision of this court in the companion case of State of Florida v. James Eugene Matney, Leo Schuty a/k/a Leo Dean Welsh, and Susan Lind Hyers a/k/a Susan F. Matney, Case No. M-82, opinion filed this date, 236 So.2d 166.

JOHNSON, C. J., and WIGGINTON and SPECTOR, JJ., concur.
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 Annual Report of AirNet Communications Corporation (the Company) on Form 10-K for the period ending December 31, 2004
as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the Report), I, Joseph F. Gerrity, Chief Financial Officer of the Company, certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. § 1350, as adopted pursuant to § 906 of the
Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that to the best of my knowledge and belief:



(1) The Report fully complies with the requirements of section 13(a) or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934; and



(2) The information contained in the Report fairly presents, in all material respects, the financial condition and result of operations of
the Company.



|                                                        
|--------------------------------------------------------
|/s/ JOSEPH F. GERRITY                                   
|Joseph F. Gerrity Chief Financial Officer March 28, 2005
Exhibit
32.2





CERTIFICATION





In
connection with the periodic report of Skystar Bio-Pharmaceutical Company (the
“Company”) on Form 10-Q for the quarter ended September 30, 2010, as filed with
the Securities and Exchange Commission (the “Report”), I, Michael H. Lan, Chief
Financial Officer (Principal Financial and Accounting Officer) of the Company,
hereby certify as of the date hereof, solely for purposes of Title 18, Chapter
63, Section 1350 of the United States Code, that to the best of my
knowledge:





(1)           The
Report fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) or 15(d), as
applicable, of the Securities Exchange 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 at the dates
and for the periods indicated.





Date:  November
      15, 2010
              /s/ Michael H. LanMichael
      H. LanChief
      Financial Officer(Principal
      Financial and Accounting
Officer)
#### STANLEY BUILDERS, INC., a Florida corporation, Appellant, v. Julian H. NACRON and Sydonia Nacron, his wife, Appellees.

Nos. 69-749, 69-778.

District Court of Appeal of Florida. Third District.

Dec. 16, 1969.

Rehearing Denied Jan. 20, 1970.

PER CURIAM.

Affirmed.
[Federal Register Volume 62, Number 178 (Monday, September 15, 1997)]
[Notices]
[Page 48211]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 97-24301]


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

DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE

Natural Resources Conservation Service


Middle Deep Red Run Creek Watershed, Tillman, Comanche, and Kiowa 
Counties, OK

AGENCY: Natural Resources Conservation Service.

ACTION: Notice of availability of record of decision.

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

SUMMARY: Ronnie L. Clark, responsible Federal official for projects 
administered under the provisions of Public Law 83-566, 16 U.S.C. 1001-
1008, in the State of Oklahoma, is hereby providing notification that a 
record of decision of proceed with the installation of the Middle Deep 
Red Run Creek Watershed project is available. Single copies of this 
record of decision may be obtained from Ronnie L. Clark at the address 
shown below. For further information contact Ronnie L. Clark, State 
Conservationist, Natural Resources Conservation Service, 100 USDA, 
Suite 203, Stillwater, Oklahoma, 74074, telephone (405) 742-1204.

(This activity is listed in the Catalog of Federal Domestic 
Assistance under No. 10.904, Watershed Protection and Flood 
Prevention, and is subject to the provisions of Executive Order 
12372, which requires intergovernmental consultation with State and 
local officials.)

    Dated: September 4, 1997.
Ronnie L. Clark,
State Conservationist.
[FR Doc. 97-24301 Filed 9-12-97; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 3410-16-M
[Federal Register Volume 62, Number 171 (Thursday, September 4, 1997)]
[Notices]
[Page 46749]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 97-23477]


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

DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES

National Institutes of Health


National Heart, Lung, and Blood Institute; Notice of Meeting

    Pursuant to Public Law 92-463, notice is hereby given of the 
meeting of the following National Heart, Lung, and Blood Institute 
Special Emphasis Panel.
    The meeting will be open to the public to provide concept review of 
proposed contract or grant solicitations.
    Individuals who plan to attend and need special assistance, such as 
sign language interpretation or other reasonable accommodations, should 
inform the Contact Person listed below in advance of the meeting.

    Name of Panel: Strategies to Augment Alveolarization.
    Date: September 29, 1997.
    Time: 9:00 a.m.
    Place: II Rockledge Center, Room 10229, 6701 Rockledge Drive, 
Bethesda, Maryland 20892.
    Agenda: To discuss current concepts concerning alveolarization 
including basic science and clinical issues.
    Contact Person: Mary Anne Berberich, Ph.D., NHLBI/DLD, II 
Rockledge Center, 6701 Rockledge Drive, Rm. 10102, MSC 7952, 
Bethesda, Maryland 20892, (301) 435-0222.

(Catalog of Federal Domestic Assistance Programs Nos. 93.837, Heart 
and Vascular Diseases Research; 93.838, Lung Diseases Research; and 
93.839, Blood Diseases and Resources Research, National Institutes 
of Health)

    Dated: August 27, 1997.
LaVeen M. Ponds,
Policy Analyst, NIH CMO.
[FR Doc. 97-23477 Filed 9-3-97; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4140-01-M
#### SIGURD, INC., a corporation formerly known as S. A. Christiansen, Inc., and Norseman Shipbuilding Corporation, a corporation, Appellants, v. MORTGAGE AND TRUST, INC., a corporation, Appellee.

No. 70-155.

District Court of Appeal of Florida, Third District.

May 14, 1970.

PER CURIAM.

Appeal dismissed.