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NOT FOR PUBLICATION

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT

INGRID JANETH CERRATO

- PINEDA; et al.,

Petitioners,

v.

MATTHEW G. WHITAKER, Acting Attorney General,

Respondent. No. 18

- 70588

Agency Nos. A202

- 080

- 950

A202

- 080

- 951 A208

- 751

- 492

MEMORANDUM *

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

Submitted January 15, 2019 **

Before: TROTT, TALLMAN, and CALLAHAN, Circuit Judges.

Ingrid Cerrato

- Pineda and her family , natives and citizens of Honduras,

petition for review of the Board of Immigration Appeals’ order dismissing their

appeal from an immigration judge’s decision denying their a pplication for asylum,

* 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

JAN 17 2019

MOLLY C. DWYER, CLER K U.S. COURT OF APPEAL S2 18

- 70588

withholding of removal , and relief under the Convention Against Torture (“CAT”).

We have jurisdiction under 8 U.S.C. § 1252. We review for substantial evidence

the agency’s factual findings. Zehatye v. Gonzales, 453 F.3d 1182, 1184

- 85 (9 th

Cir. 2006). We deny the petition f or review.

Petitioners do not challenge the agency’s denial of Cerrato

- Pineda’s son’s

separate asylum application. See Corro

- Barragan v. Holder , 718 F.3d 1174, 1177

n.5 (9th Cir. 2013) (failure to contest issue in opening brief resulted in waiver).

Cerrato

- Pineda testified that her ex

- husband raped her, and that she suffered

other physical attacks and verbal harassment. Substantial evidence supports the

agency’s finding that Cerrato

- Pineda did not establish the Honduran government

was unwilling or u nable to protect her from her ex

- husband. See Rahimzadeh v.

Holder , 613 F.3d 916, 92 0 (9 th Cir. 2010) ( applicant bears the burden of

establishing that abuse was committed by the government or an agent

the government is unwilling or unable to control )

. Thus, petitioners’ asylum claim

fails.

In this case, b ecause Cerrato

- Pineda did not establish eligibility for asylum,

she did not establish eligibility for withholding of removal. See Zehatye , 453 F.3d

at 1190. Thus, her withholding of removal claim fails.3 18

- 70588

Finally, s ubstantial evidence also supports the agency’s denial of CAT relief

because Cerrato

- Pineda failed to show it is more likely than not she would be

tortured by or with the consent o r acquiescence of the Honduran government. See

Aden v. Ho lder

, 589 F.3d 1040, 1047 (9th Cir. 2009).

PETITION FOR REVIEW DENIED.
259 La. 795

#### Thomas A. DONELON et al. v. NEW ORLEANS TERMINAL COMPANY.

No. 51785.

Supreme Court of Louisiana.

Oct. 13, 1971.

In re: New Orleans Terminal Company, applying for writs of certiorari, prohibition and mandamus.

Writs denied. The ruling of the Court of Appeal is correct.
<TABLE> <S> <C>


<ARTICLE>                     5
<LEGEND>
     This  schedule  contains  summary  financial   information  extracted  from
financial  statements for the three month period ended November 30, 1994 and is
qualified in its entirety by reference to such financial statements.
</LEGEND>
<CIK>                         0000027850
<NAME>                        MARITIME TRANSPORT & TECHNOLOGY, INC.
<MULTIPLIER>                                   1
<CURRENCY>                                     $
       
<S>                                            <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                                  3-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                              May-31-1995
<PERIOD-START>                                 Sep-01-1994
<PERIOD-END>                                   Nov-30-1994
<EXCHANGE-RATE>                                1
<CASH>                                         0
<SECURITIES>                                   0
<RECEIVABLES>                                  0
<ALLOWANCES>                                   0
<INVENTORY>                                    0
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                               0
<PP&E>                                         0
<DEPRECIATION>                                 0
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                 0
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                          0
<BONDS>                                        0
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                          0
<PREFERRED>                                    0
<COMMON>                                       0
<OTHER-SE>                                     0
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                   0
<SALES>                                        0
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                               0
<CGS>                                          0
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                  0
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                               0
<LOSS-PROVISION>                               0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                             0
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                0
<INCOME-TAX>                                   0
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                            0
<DISCONTINUED>                                 0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                0
<CHANGES>                                      0
<NET-INCOME>                                   0
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                  .00
<EPS-DILUTED>                                  .00
        



</TABLE>
#### Byron LIND, Guardian ad litem of Jay S. Rogers, Incompetent, Petitioner, v. Robert F. HALE, Respondent.

No. 42556.

Supreme Court of Florida.

Sept. 19, 1972.

Certiorari denied.

ROBERTS, C. J., and ERVIN, CARLTON, ADKINS and DEKLE, JJ., concur.
EXHIBIT 32.1
 
 CERTIFICATION OF THE CHIEF EXECUTIVE OFFICER AND
 CHIEF FINANCIAL OFFICER OF CYBERONICS, INC.
 PURSUANT TO 18 U.S.C. SECTION 1350
 
 Daniel J. Moore, the President and Chief Executive Officer of Cyberonics, Inc. (the Company), and Gregory H. Browne, the Senior Vice President, Finance and Chief Financial Officer of the Company each hereby certifies pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, as adopted pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that:
 
 (a) the Company’s Annual Report on Form 10-K for the fiscal year ended April 29, 2011 as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the Report) fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended; and
 
 (b) the information contained in the Report fairly presents, in all material respects, the financial condition and results of operations of the Company.
 
 Date:  June 16, 2011
 
 
 /s/ DANIEL J. MOOREDaniel J. MoorePresident and Chief Executive Officer(Principal Executive Officer)
 
 
 
 
 /s/ GREGORY H. BROWNEGregory H. BrowneSenior Vice President, Financeand Chief Financial Officer(Principal Financial Officer)
### TEXAS COURT OF APPEALS, THIRD DISTRICT, AT AUSTIN

JUDGMENT RENDERED NOVEMBER 10, 2021

NO. 03

- 21

- 00277

- CV

Eureka Holdings Acquisitions, L.P. , Appellant

v.

Rio Grande Street Partners, LP, and Bruning, Ltd. , Appellee s

APPEAL FROM THE 200TH DISTRIC T COU RT OF TRAVIS COUNTY

BEFORE JUSTICES GOODWIN, BAKER, AND SMITH

DISMISSED ON APPELLANT’ S MOTION

-- OPINION BY JUSTICE SMITH

This is an appeal from the judgment signed by the tr i a l court on June 2, 2021

. Eureka Holdings

Ac quisitions, L.P. ha s filed a motion to dismiss the appeal, and having c onsidered the motion

,

the Court agrees that the motion should be granted . There fore, the Court grants the motion and

dismiss es the appeal

. The appellant shall pay all costs relating to this appeal, both in this Court

and in the court below.
**EXHIBIT32.1**

 

**CERTIFICATION OF CHIEF EXECUTIVE OFFICERPURSUANT TO RULE 13a-14(b) OR RULE 15d-14(b)OF THE SECURITIES EXCHANGE ACT OF 1934 AND 18 U.S.C. SECTION 1350**

 

Inconnection with the Annual Report of Cascade Microtech, Inc. (the “Company”) onForm 10-K for the year ended December 31, 2004 as filed with the Securities andExchange Commission on the date hereof (the “Report”), I, Eric W. Strid, ChiefExecutive Officer of the Company, certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. § 1350, asadopted pursuant to § 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that, to the bestof my knowledge,:

 

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

 

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

 

 
| /s/  Eric W. Strid       |   |
|--------------------------|--------|
| Eric  W. Strid           |
| Chief  Executive Officer |
| Cascade  Microtech, Inc. |
| March  29, 2005          |

 

Thiscertification is made solely for the purpose of 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, and notfor any other purpose.  A signed originalof this written statement required by Section 906 has been provided to CascadeMicrotech, Inc. and will be retained by Cascade Microtech, Inc. and furnishedto the Securities and Exchange Commission or its staff upon request.

 

----
2008 2012

BP Not reported 24.41

Chevron 2.35 0.29

Exxon 0.05 2.01

P66 Carson Not reported Not submitted

Tesoro Not reported 4.93

Valero Not reported Not reported

Total (tons) 2.40 31.63

Coker VOC Emissions R. 1114  Form B4
[Federal Register Volume 62, Number 37 (Tuesday, February 25, 1997)]
[Notices]
[Pages 8455-8456]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 97-4550]


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


DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR

North American Wetlands Conservation Council; Meeting 
Announcement

AGENCY: Fish and Wildlife Service, Interior.

ACTION: Notice of meeting.

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

SUMMARY: The North American Wetlands Conservation Council (Council) 
will meet on March 27 to review proposals for funding submitted 
pursuant to the North American Wetlands Conservation Act. Upon 
completion of the Council's review, proposals will be submitted to the 
Migratory Bird Conservation Commission for funding approval. The 
meeting is open to the public.

DATES: March 27, 1997, 1 p.m.

ADDRESSES: The meeting will be held at 4401 N. Fairfax Drive, Room 200, 
Arlington, Virginia 22203. The North

[[Page 8456]]

American Wetlands Conservation Council Coordinator is located at Fish 
and Wildlife Service, Arlington Square Building, 4401 N. Fairfax Drive, 
Room 110, Arlington, Virginia 22203.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Byron Kenneth Williams, Coordinator, 
North American Wetlands Conservation Council, (703) 358-1784.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: In accordance with the North American 
Wetlands Conservation Act (Pub. L. 101-233, 103 Stat. 1968, December 
13, 1989, as amended), the North American Wetlands Conservation Council 
is a Federal-State-private body which meets to consider wetland 
acquisition, restoration, enhancement and management projects for 
recommendation to and final approval by the Migratory Bird Conservation 
Commission. Proposals from State, Federal, and private sponsors require 
a minimum of 50 percent non-Federal matching funds.

    Dated: February 13, 1997.
Jay L. Gerst,
Acting Director, U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service.
[FR Doc. 97-4550 Filed 2-24-97; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4310-55-P
FEDERAL TRADE COMMISSION
WASHINGTON, D.C, 20580

NOTICE OF APPEARANCE

CASE NAME

FTC v. Chicago Bridge & Iron Co., N.V.

FILE/DOCKET NUMBER
Docket No. 9300

> Pursuant to Section 4.1 of the Commission's Rule of Practice, enter in the above pre

the appearance of

counsel or representative for the respondent (Complete items 1, 2, 4, and 5 below)

IX] counsel supporting the complaint (Complete items 1, 3, 4, and 5 below)

41. COUNSEL OR REPRESENTATIVE

2. RESPONDENTS

Include name, address and telephone of each

Morris A. Bloom, Esq.

Federal Trade Commission

601 New Jersey Avenue, N.W., Room 6117
Washington, D.C. 20001

Robert Tovsky, Esq.
Federal Trade Commission

601 New Jersey Avenue, N.W., Room 6113
Washington, D.C. 20001

April Tabor, Esq.
Federal Trade Commission

601 New Jersey Avenue, N.W., Room 6143
‘Washington, D.C. 20001

Eric Sprague, Esq.
Federal Trade Commission

601 New Jersey Avenu, N.W., Room 6181
Washington, D.C. 20001

(202) 326-2707

(202) 326-2634

(202) 326-2956

(202) 326-2101

Include address and telephone numbers of all persons, partnerships,
corporations, or associations

3. ASSOCIATE/ASSISTANT DIRECTOR

Morris A. Bloom, Deputy Assistant Director, Mergers II, Bureau of Competition

4. ee TP

5. DATE SIGNED

Retuitfthis, to: H-159
Federal Trade Commission
600 Pennsylvania Ave. NW
Washington, D.C. 20580

1925/02

ETC Ener 929 froas RO)


CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE

Thereby certify that on October 25, 2002, I caused copies of the foregoing Notice of
Appearance to be delivered to:

The Honorable D. Michael Chappell
Office of Administrative Law Judges
Federal Trade Commission

600 Pennsylvania Avenue, N.W.
Washington, D.C. 20580

and by facsimile and by first-class mail to:

Jeffrey A. Leon, Esq.

Duane M. Kelley, Esq.
Winston & Strawn

35 W. Wacker Drive
Chicago, Illinois 60601-9703

Dither Oo Aosles

Mary Cc. Forst¢r

Industry Anal

Federal Trade Commission
601 New Jersey Avenue, N.W.
Washington, D.C. 20001
(202) 326-2212
<PAGE>   1
                                                                     Exhibit 12

                              Dean Foods Company
              Computation of Ratio of Earnings to Fixed Charges



<TABLE>
<CAPTION>
                                      39 Weeks Ended
                                    February 23, 1997
                                    -----------------
<S>                                     <C>                           

Income before taxes                     $ 96,844
                                        --------
Fixed charges:

        Interest expense                  19,745
        Portion of rentals (33%)           7,606
                                        --------
        Total fixed charges               27,351
                                        --------
Earnings before taxes and
        fixed charges                   $124,195
                                        ========
Ratio of earnings to 
        fixed charges                        4.5
                                        ========

</TABLE>
[Federal Register Volume 62, Number 39 (Thursday, February 27, 1997)]
[Notices]
[Page 9003]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 97-4841]


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

OFFICE OF PERSONNEL MANAGEMENT


Submission for OMB Review; Comment Request; Standard Form 87

AGENCY: Office of Personnel Management.

ACTION: Proposed collection; comment request.

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

SUMMARY: In accordance with the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 (Public 
Law 104-13, May 22, 1995), this notice announces that the Office of 
Personnel Management (OPM) has submitted to the Office of Management 
and Budget (OMB) a request for a clearance of an information 
collection. Standard Form 87, Fingerprint Chart, is completed by 
applicants for Federal positions throughout the Government. OPM uses 
the information to conduct checks of the Federal Bureau of 
Investigation (FBI) fingerprint files as required by Executive Order 
10450, Security Requirements for Government Employment, issued April 
27, 1953, or required or authorized under other authority.
    It is estimated that 250,000 individuals will respond annually for 
a total burden of 20,833 hours. To obtain copies of this proposal 
please contact James M. Farron at (202) 418-3208 or by E-mail to 
<a href="/cdn-cgi/l/email-protection#7c16111a1d0e0e13123c130c11521b130a"><span class="__cf_email__" data-cfemail="563c3b3037242439381639263b78313920">[email protected]</span></a>.

DATES: Comments on this proposal should be received by March 31, 1997.

ADDRESSES: Send or deliver comments to--

Richard A. Ferris, Office of Personnel Management, Investigations 
Service, 1900 E. Street NW., Room 5416, Washington, DC 20004

    and

Joseph Lackey, OPM Desk Officer, Office of Information and Regulatory 
Affairs, Office of Management and Budget, New Executive Office 
Building, NW., Room 10235, Washington, DC 20503.

Office of Personnel Management.
James B. King,
Director.
[FR Doc. 97-4841 Filed 2-26-97; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6325-01-M


</pre><script data-cfasync="false" src="/cdn-cgi/scripts/5c5dd728/cloudflare-static/email-decode.min.js"></script></body>
</html>
EXHIBIT 10.7.1
                                 PROMISSORY NOTE

$50,000                                                     San Jose, California
                                                            August 20, 1998


         FOR VALUE RECEIVED, the undersigned, Charles S. Duncheon, ("Employee"),
promises to pay to the order of ADEPT TECHNOLOGY, INC., (the "Corporation"),  at
its office at 150 Rose Orchard Way, San Jose,  California  95134,  the principal
sum of FIFTY THOUSAND DOLLARS  ($50,000),  with interest on the unpaid principal
amount outstanding from the date hereof,  initially at the current Federal short
term  rate,  and  thereafter  during  the term  hereof,  each  January  1 at the
applicable  Federal  short  term  rate  in  effect  on  such  date,   compounded
semi-annually,  and each July 1 at the  applicable  Federal  short  term rate in
effect  on such  date,  compounded  semi-annually.  Interest  shall  be  payable
annually  commencing  August 20, 1999. Any interest for a partial month shall be
prorated  based on the  number of days in such  month.  All  accrued  and unpaid
interest, and all unpaid principal, shall be due and payable on or before August
20, 1999. All money paid toward the  satisfaction  of this Note shall be applied
first  to the  payment  of  interest  as  required  hereunder  and  then  to the
retirement of principal.
         The  undersigned  further agrees that, in the event that his employment
by or association with the Company is terminated for any reason prior to payment
in full of this Note,  this Note shall be accelerated  and all remaining  unpaid
principal shall become due and payable immediately after such termination.
         If an action is instituted for collection of the Note, the  undersigned
agrees to pay court costs and reasonable  attorneys' fees incurred by the holder
hereof.
         This note may be prepaid at any time without penalty.


                         /s/ Charles S. Duncheon
                         --------------------------------------------
                         Borrower, Charles S. Duncheon


                         /s/ Betsy A. Lange
                         --------------------------------------------
                         Witness, Betsy A. Lange
#### Willie B. MITCHELL, Appellant, v. STATE of Florida, Appellee.

No. 70-892.

District Court of Appeal of Florida, Fourth District.

Nov. 12, 1970.

Appeal from Court of Record, Broward County; Russell E. Seay, Jr., Judge.

Appeal quashed.
* Pursuant to Local Rule 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 Local Rule

47.5.4. IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT

No. 96-30040

Summary Calendar

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,

Plaintiff-Appellee,

versus

PATRICK O. OGBEIDE,

Defendant-Appellant.

____________________________________________

Appeal from the United States District Court

for the Middle District of Louisiana

USDC No. 95-CR-18

____________________________________________

August 19, 1996 Before SMITH, DUHÉ, and BARKSDALE, Circuit Judges.

PER CURIAM: *

Patrick Ogbeide appeals his conviction for making false claims

against the United States (submitting false income tax returns for

three persons). He contends that the district court erred by

admitting his 1991 1040 income-tax return and accompanying refund

check into evidence, and that the evidence was insufficient to- 2 -

support his conviction.

Ogbeide’s 1040 form was intrinsic evi dence; it was prepared

along with the returns forming the basis of Ogbeide’s conviction as

part of a single scheme to defraud. The admission of the form was

not an abuse of discretion. U nited States v. Coleman

, 78 F.3d 154,

156 (5th Cir. 1996). Ogbeide did not object in the district court

to the admission of the refund check, and he has not shown that its

admission was plain error. S ee United States v. Calverley

, 37 F.3d

160, 162-64 (5th Cir. 1994)(en banc), cert. denied

,

__ U.S.

__, 115

S. Ct. 1266 (1995).

Regarding sufficiency of the evidence, Ogbeide contends only

that the evidence did not show that he was the perpetrator. The

evidence was sufficient for a reasonable jury to have found beyond

a reasonable doubt that Ogbeide prepared the false income-tax

returns on which his conviction was based. S ee United States v.

Okoronkwo , 46 F.3d 426, 430 (5th Cir.), cert. denied , __ U.S. __,

116 S. Ct. 107 (1995).

AFFIRMED
Subtitle 

C. ss
 

whose name to entry 
.. .) 

\;\/; ...

matter case over 

states 

1), 1 a11d 1 15 . c. 99
 

621 FCRA, 15 U. 1 s: 

1... 

314. 
( J
 

successors 

over 
I .
 

event 

interest 1 -­

not 

amount 

In such an 
.

1. to
 

out 

concert or 

are 

are currently 

1.. 

or modified be a 

313: or 

31 . 

or as they the event 
nature the 

consumers: 

assurance 

be prepared 

as a
 

or as
 
Order: 

to . 

111eaJ1S not 

.t . 

,"-J 
structure 

not 

not 111 

a successor 

narne or 

sworn to 
to: 

matter 

assumes secure 
, or 

to contest \vas 
Dated: 

Dated:
#### Otis H. LANDRUM, Appellant, v. John CICCI, Appellee.

No. 72-970.

District Court of Appeal of Florida, Second District.

Nov. 14, 1973.

Rehearing Denied Nov. 30, 1973.

PER CURIAM.

Affirmed.
#### STATE of Florida ex rel., Robert W. BALL, Jr., Relator, v. Honorable Murray GOODMAN, Judge, Criminal Court of Record in and for Dade County, Florida, Respondent.

No. 71-477.

District Court of Appeal of Florida, Third District.

June 4, 1971.

Rehearing Denied July 9, 1971.

*482Milton E. Grusmark, Miami Beach, for relator.

Robert L. Shevin, Atty. Gen., and Joel Rosenblatt, Asst. Atty. Gen., for respondent.

Before PEARSON, C. J., and CHARLES CARROLL and HENDRY, JJ-

PER CURIAM.

This is an original proceeding in prohibtion. The suggestion alleged there was an initial prosecution of the relator by information filed in the criminal court of record of Dade County, charging the relator with having committed the crime of perjury on July 27, 1967; that the initial prosecution was commenced within the two year limitation period provided by § 932.05 Fla.Stat., F.S.A., and that it had been terminated by the state by nolle prosequi at a time which was more than two years after the date of said alleged offense; that thereafter the present information had been filed in the criminal court of record charging the relator with said offense of July 27, 1967; and that notwithstanding relator’s claim the statute of limitation had run, the trial court has ordered relator to be tried thereon.

This court issued a rule nisi in prohibition, to which the respondent filed a response. On consideration thereof after argument on notice we hold the response fails to show cause why prohibition should not issue. Accordingly, we grant judgment in prohibition in favor of the relator, on authority of State v. Guerra, Fla.App.1971, 245 So.2d 889; and State v. Garcia, Fla.App.1971, 245 So.2d 293. We assume that in view of our holding in this matter it will not become necessary to issue a formal writ of prohibition herein.

It is so ordered.