alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
United States Court of Appeals

for the Fifth Circuit

No. 20-61035

Summary Calendar

Bidpua Fabrisk, 

Petitioner,

versus

Merrick Garland, U.S. Attorney General, 

Respondent.

Petition for Review of an Order of the

Board of Immigration Appeals

BIA No. A213 186 553

Before Davis, Jones, and Elrod, Circuit Judges.

Per Curiam:*

Bidpua Fabrisk, a native and citizen of Cameroon, petitions for review 

of a decision of the Board of Immigration Appeals (BIA). The immigration 

judge (IJ) denied his applications for asylum, withholding of removal, and 

protection under the convention against torture (CAT) based on an adverse 

* Pursuant to 5th Circuit 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opinion should not be published and is not precedent except under the limited 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 5th Circuit Rule 47.5.4.

United States Court of Appeals

Fifth Circuit

FILED

February 18, 2022

Lyle W. Cayce

Clerk

Case: 20-61035 Document: 00516207916 Page: 1 Date Filed: 02/18/2022
No. 20-61035

2

credibility finding. The BIA upheld the credibility finding and found that he 

had failed to meet the burden of proof for asylum and withholding of removal. 

The BIA also upheld the IJ’s determination that Fabrisk was not eligible for 

protection under the CAT. 

On appeal, Fabrisk argues that the adverse credibility finding was not 

supported by substantial evidence. We generally review only decisions of the 

BIA. Singh v. Sessions, 880 F.3d 220, 224 (5th Cir. 2018). However, when 

the IJ’s ruling affects the BIA’s decision, as it does here, we review the 

decisions of both the BIA and the IJ. Id. Factual findings are reviewed for 

substantial evidence, and constitutional claims and questions of law are 

reviewed de novo. Fuentes-Pena v. Barr, 917 F.3d 827, 829 (5th Cir. 2019); 

Orellana–Monson v. Holder, 685 F.3d 511, 518 (5th Cir. 2012). 

Although Fabrisk suggests possible explanations for the 

inconsistencies identified by the IJ and BIA, the record does not compel the 

conclusion that he should have been found credible. Mwembie v. Gonzales, 

443 F.3d 405, 410 (5th Cir. 2006). The inconsistencies listed by the IJ and 

BIA are accurate reflections of the record. His explanations for the 

inconsistencies do not compel a credibility finding different from the IJ’s and 

BIA’s conclusions. Morales v. Sessions, 860 F.3d 812, 817 (5th Cir. 2017).

Additionally, Fabrisk fails to brief, and therefore has abandoned, the denial 

of protection under the CAT. See Soadjede v. Ashcroft, 324 F.3d 830, 833 (5th 

Cir. 2003); Brinkmann v. Dallas Cty. Deputy Sheriff Abner, 813 F.2d 744, 748 

(5th Cir. 1987). Accordingly, Fabrisk has failed to show that the BIA erred 

in dismissing his appeal.

The petition for review is DENIED. 

Case: 20-61035 Document: 00516207916 Page: 2 Date Filed: 02/18/2022
#### Grace Q. EDMONSTON v. A SECOND MORTGAGE COMPANY OF SLIDELL, INC., et al.

No. 53438.

Supreme Court of Louisiana.

May 17, 1973.

In re: Grace Q. Edmonston applying for certiorari, or writ of review, to the Court of Appeal, First Circuit, Parish of St. Tammany, 273 So.2d 707.

It is ordered that the writ of review issue; that the Court of Appeal send up the record in duplicate of the case; and that counsel for plaintiff and defendant be notified.
#### Eugene DOLPHUS, Petitioner, v. STATE of Florida, Respondent.

No. 40652.

Supreme Court of Florida.

Jan. 27, 1971.

Eugene Dolphus, in pro. per.

Robert L. Shevin, Atty. Gen., for respondent.

PER CURIAM.

This matter has been considered on petition for writ of habeas corpus.

Petitioner is no stranger to this Court. Prior to the present application, we decided his petition for writ of certiorari, Dolphus v. State, 237 So.2d 751, and his petition for writ of mandamus, case number 40,247, both of which raise many of the same allegations and arguments as now presented.

In the petition now before us, petitioner submits twenty allegations which are contended to be “constitutional claims, in violation of the United States Constitution, and the Constitution of the State of Florida.” Upon examination of the total record, including those portions that are resultant of petitioner’s earlier appearances before the Court, it is clear that each and every allegation presented is without merit. Therefore, the writ of habeas corpus is denied.

It is so ordered.

ROBERTS, C. J., and ERVIN, CARLTON, ADKINS and BOYD, JJ., concur.
**Exhibit 31.1****Certifications**I, Dennis R. Wolters, certify that:1. I have reviewed this quarterly report on Form 10-Q of Day International Group, Inc.;2. Based on my knowledge, this report does not contain any untrue statement of a material factor omit to state a material fact necessary to make the statements made, in light of thecircumstances under which such statements were made, not misleading with respect to the periodcovered by this report;3. Based on my knowledge, the financial statements, and other financial information included inthis report, fairly present in all material respects the financial condition, results ofoperations and cash flows of the registrant as of, and for, the periods presented in thisreport;4. The registrant’s other certifying officer and I are responsible for establishing andmaintaining disclosure controls and procedures (as defined in Exchange Act Rules 13a-15(e) and15d-15(e)) for the registrant and have:  a) Designed such disclosure controls and procedures, or caused such disclosure controls andprocedures to be designed under our supervision, to ensure that material information relatingto the registrant, including its consolidated subsidiaries, is made known to us by otherswithin those entities, particularly during the period in which this report is being prepared;   b) Evaluated the effectiveness of the registrant’s disclosure controls and procedures andpresented in this report our conclusions about the effectiveness of the disclosure controls andprocedures, as of the end of the period covered by this report based on such evaluation; and   c) Disclosed in this report any change in the registrant’s internal control over financialreporting that occurred during the registrant’s most recent fiscal quarter (the registrant’sfourth fiscal quarter in the case of an annual report) that has materially affected, or isreasonably likely to materially affect, the registrant’s internal control over financialreporting; and5. The registrant’s other certifying officer and I have disclosed, based on our most recentevaluation of internal control over financial reporting, to the registrant’s auditors and theaudit committee of the registrant’s board of directors (or persons performing the equivalentfunctions):  a) All significant deficiencies and material weaknesses in the design or operation of internalcontrol over financial reporting which are reasonably likely to adversely affect theregistrant’s ability to record, process, summarize and report financial information; and   b) Any fraud, whether or not material, that involves management or other employees who have asignificant role in the registrant’s internal control over financial reporting.      Date: May 15, 2006 By: /s/ Dennis R Wolters         Dennis R. Wolters
# C_2023035EN.01005502.xml

| 30.1.2023 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 35/55 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

30.1.2023

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 35/55

---

Judgment of the General Court of 7 December 2022 — Bora Creations v EUIPO (essence)

(Case T-738/21) (1)

(EU trade mark - Invalidity proceedings - EU figurative mark essence - Absolute grounds for refusal - Descriptive character - Article 7(1)(c) of Regulation (EU) 2017/1001 - Lack of distinctive character - Article 7(1)(b) of Regulation 2017/1001)

(2023/C 35/66)

Language of the case: German

Parties

Applicant: Bora Creations, SL (Andratx, Spain) (represented by: R. Lange and M. Ebner, lawyers)

Defendant: European Union Intellectual Property Office (represented by: M. Eberl and E. Markakis, acting as Agents)

Re:

By its action based on Article 263 TFEU, the applicant seeks annulment of the decision of the Fourth Board of Appeal the European Union Intellectual Property Office (EUIPO) of 21 September 2021 (Case R 693/2021-4).

Operative part of the judgment

The Court:

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

1.

Dismisses the action;

| 2. | Orders Bora Creations, SL to pay the costs. |
| --- | --- |

2.

Orders Bora Creations, SL to pay the costs.

---

(1)  OJ C 37, 24.1.2022.

---
252 La. 167

#### LOUISIANA STATE BOARD OF MEDICAL EXAMINERS v. Melvin D. EASTMAN.

No. 49239.

Supreme Court of Louisiana.

May 17, 1968.

In re: Melvin D. Eastman applying for writs of prohibition, certiorari and mandamus.

Writs denied. The showing in the application is insufficient to warrant the exercise of this Court’s supervisory jurisdiction.
<PAGE>

BARRISTER GLOBAL SERVICES NETWORK, INC.


EXHIBIT NO. 24

INDEPENDENT AUDITORS' REPORT


Board of Directors and Stockholders
Barrister Global Services Network, Inc.:

We have audited the accompanying statements of operations, stockholders' equity,
and cash flows of Barrister Global Services Network, Inc. for the year ended
March 31, 2000. In connection with our audit of the financial statements, we
have also audited the 2000 data included in the financial statement schedule
listed in exhibit 27 of the annual report on Form 10-K for the fiscal year ended
March 31, 2002. These financial statements and financial statement schedule are
the responsibility of the Company's management. Our responsibility is to express
an opinion on the financial statements and financial statement schedule based on
our audit.

We conducted our audit in accordance with auditing standards generally accepted
in the United States of America. Those standards require that we 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 financial
statements. 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 audit provides a
reasonable basis for our opinion.

In our opinion, the financial statements referred to above present fairly, in
all material respects, the results of its operations and its cash flows of
Barrister Global Services Network, Inc for the year ended March 31, 2000, in
conformity with accounting principles generally accepted in the United States of
America. Also, in our opinion, the 2000 data included in the related financial
statement schedule referred to above, when considered in relation to the basic
financial statements for the year ended March 31, 2000 taken as a whole, present
fairly, in all material respects, the information set forth therein.





KPMG LLP
Buffalo, New York
June 26, 2000




                                       30
**EXHIBIT 32.1**

 

CERTIFICATION

 

This certification is provided pursuant to Section 906 of theSarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002 and accompanies the annual report on Form 10-K (the “Form10-K”) for the year ended December 31, 2004 of American Insured MortgageInvestors – Series 85, L.P. (the “Issuer”).

 

I, Barry S. Blattman, Chairman of the Board and Chief ExecutiveOfficer, certify that to the best of my knowledge:

 

(i)                                     theForm 10-K fully complies with the requirements of section 13(a) or section15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 (15 U.S.C. 78m(a) or 78o(d)); and

 

(ii)                                  theinformation contained in the Form 10-K fairly represents, in all materialrespects, the financial condition and results of operations of the Issuer.

 

 
|                | AMERICAN INSURED MORTGAGE   |
|---------------------|-----------------------------|
|                | INVESTORS - SERIES 85, L.P. |
|                | (Registrant)                |
|                |                        |
|                | By:                         | CRIIMI, Inc. |
|                |                        | General Partner |
|                |                        |
|                |                        |
|                |                        |
| March  8, 2005 |                        | /s/ Barry S. Blattman |   |
| Date                | Barry S. Blattman           |
|                | Chairman of the Board and   |
|                | Chief Executive Officer     |
|                     |                             |  |  |  |

 

 

A signed original of this written statement required by Section 906 hasbeen provided to the General Partner and will be retained by the GeneralPartner and furnished to the Securities and Exchange Commission or its staffupon request.

 

----
IN THE SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF MONTANA

DA 20-0291

_________________

CITY OF RED LODGE,

 Plaintiff and Appellee,

 v.

EUGENE TIMOTHY RODMAN,

 Defendant and Appellant.

O R D E R

_________________

Pursuant to the Internal Operating Rules of this Court, this cause is classified for 

submission on briefs to a five-justice panel of this Court. 

The Clerk is directed to provide a copy hereof to Eugene Timothy Rodman, to all 

counsel of record, and to the Honorable Matthew J. Wald, District Judge.

For the Court,

Electronically signed by:

Mike McGrath

Chief Justice, Montana Supreme Court

November 18 2020

11/18/2020

Case Number: DA 20-0291
#### STATE v. Jessie Lee GAMBLE.

No. 37560.

Supreme Court of Florida.

May 1969.

Certiorari dismissed without opinion. 210 So.2d 238.
Exhibit 32.2





Statement of Chief Financial Officer Pursuant to 18 U.S.C.§ 1350






In connection with the Annual Report of Highlands Bankshares, Inc. (the “Company”) on Form 10-K for the period ending December 31, 2010, as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the “Report”), the undersigned, as the 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:





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 results of operations of the Company.





/s/ Jeffrey B. ReedyDate: March 30, 2011
Jeffrey B. Reedy, Chief Financial Officer
Document headings vary by document type but may contain
                    the following: the agency or agencies that issued and signed a document
the number of the CFR title and the number of each part
                      the document amends, proposes to amend, or is directly
                      related to
the agency docket number / agency internal file number
the RIN which identifies each regulatory action listed in
                      the Unified Agenda of Federal Regulatory and Deregulatory
                      Actions See the
                    Document Drafting Handbook
                    for more details.
 Small Business Administration [Disaster Declaration #15590 and #15591; WEST VIRGINIA Disaster Number WV-00049]
 AGENCY: U.S. Small Business Administration.
 ACTION: Notice.
 SUMMARY: This is a Notice of the Presidential declaration of a major disaster for Public Assistance Only for the State of West Virginia (FEMA-4378-DR), dated 07/12/2018. *Incident:*
                         Severe Storms, Flooding, Landslides, and Mudslides. *Incident Period:*
                         05/28/2018 through 06/03/2018.
 DATES: Issued on 07/12/2018. *Physical Loan Application Deadline Date:*
                         09/10/2018. *Economic Injury (EIDL) Loan Application Deadline Date:*
                         04/12/2019.
 ADDRESSES: Submit completed loan applications to: U.S. Small Business Administration, Processing and Disbursement Center, 14925 Kingsport Road, Fort Worth, TX 76155.
 FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: A. Escobar, Office of Disaster Assistance, U.S. Small Business Administration, 409 3rd Street SW, Suite 6050, Washington, DC 20416, (202) 205-6734.


SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Notice is hereby given that as a result of the President's major disaster declaration on 07/12/2018, Private Non-Profit organizations that provide essential services of a governmental nature may file disaster loan applications at the address listed above or other locally announced locations. The following areas have been determined to be adversely affected by the disaster: 
 
 *Primary Counties:*
                     Grant, Hampshire, Hardy, Jefferson, Mineral, Morgan, Pendleton. The Interest Rates are: Percent*For Physical Damage:*Non-Profit Organizations with Credit Available Elsewhere
2.500Non-Profit Organizations without Credit Available Elsewhere
2.500*For Economic Injury:*Non-Profit Organizations without Credit Available Elsewhere
2.500
 The number assigned to this disaster for physical damage is 155906 and for economic injury is 155910. (Catalog of Federal Domestic Assistance Number 59008) James Rivera, Associate Administrator for Disaster Assistance.


[FR Doc. 2018-15591 Filed 7-19-18; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 8025-01-P
TI M JOHNSO N SOUT H DAKOT A RAPI D CITYOFFICE : (605 ) 341-399 0 P O BO X 1098 , RAPI D CITY , S D 5770 9 ABERDEE N OFFICE : (605 ) 226-344 0 P O BO X 1554 , ABERDEEN , S D 6740 2 SIOU X FALL S OFFICE : (606 ) 332-889 6 P O BO X 1424 , SIOU X FALLS , S D 5710 1 

### /Vc c \ > 

### /^u^
. 2 7 WASHINGTO N OFFICE : 13 6 HAR TSENAT E OFFIC E BUILDIN G WASHINGTON , D C 20510-410 4 ~f:p ^ 

### ^, , , __^ARTMENTO F 

# Unite d State s ^enaffiispo ^ (202)224-584 2 TDD : (202 ) 224-827 9 WASHINGTON , D C 20510-410 4 7H| n 

## 0 P TOL L FRE E 1-800-537-002 5 1-800-819-078 8 "5 ; Q\ ^

SITE : http;//johnson.senate.gov Augusts , 201 0 Tod dHoma n Director , Offic e o f

Aviatio n Analysi s U.S
. Departmen t

o f Transportatio n 120 0 Ne w Jerse y Avenue , S E Washington , D C 2059 0 Dea r Directo r Homan : 

### b OT - OST ' ZxDoo - f 15 2

I amwritin g wit hregar dt o Essentia l Ai r Servic e provide dat

Huron , SouthDakota
. Recently , airport an dcommunit y leader s hav e raise dconcern s abou t th e leve l o f

servic e provide db y th e curren t carrier
. Grea t

Lake s Aviation
. A s yo u conside r proposal s for

ane w two-year

EA S contrac t t o serv e Huron , I woul dencourag e th e Departmen t o f Transportatio nt o closel y revie w th e concern s o f

th e communit y an dwor

k withth e carrie r

t o addres s thes e issues
. I nalette r date dJul y 14 , 2010 , Huro n Mayo r Davi dMcGirr

cite s example s o f

chronicall y delaye dflights an dmultipl e stop s e n rout e t o th e designate dhu b o f Denver
. Thes e complaint s are particularl y concerning , a s unreliabl e servic e threaten s t o revers e gain s i nth e numbe r o f passenger s utilizin g th e Huro n Airport
. A s servic e an dpassenger s decline , th e nee dfor greate r subsid y t o th e communit y wil l grow . Th e Essentia l Ai r

Servic e progra mpromise s abasi c leve l o f servic e t o smalle r

communitie s that migh t otherwis e b e overlooke db y carriers , but nonetheles s deserv e reliabl e flights. I amhopefu l that th e Departmen t

o f Transportatio n wil l closel y examin e th e city' s concern s an dwor k t o remed y an y problem s found
. Reliable , affordabl e ai r

servic e i s criticall y importan t t o economi c developmen t an dth e quality o f lif e i nSouthDakota
. Than k yo u fo r you r attentio nt o thi s importan t matter . Sincerely ,

Ti mJotmso n Unite dState s Senat e

COMMITTEES : APPROPRIATIONS ; BANKING , HOUSING , AN D URBA N AFFAIRS ; ENERG YAN D NATURA L RESOURCES : INDIA N AFFAIR S /
#### Horace FRANTZ, Petitioner, v. THUNDERBIRD DRIVE-IN THEATRES, INC. and Employers’ Liability Assurance Corporation, and Florida Department of Commerce, Industrial Relations Commission, Respondents.

No. 39420.

Supreme Court of Florida.

Feb. 3, 1971.

Philip V. Salmon, of Tobin, Salmon & Feder, Coral Gables, for petitioner.

Ronald FitzGerald, of Fleming, O’Bryan & Fleming, Fort Lauderdale, Patrick H. Mears and J. Franklin Garner, Tallahassee, for respondents.

PER CURIAM.

By petition for writ of certiorari we are requested to review an order of the Industrial Relations Commission affirming an order of the Judge of Industrial Claims denying compensation to petitioner because at the time of the accident petitioner was an independent contractor rather than an employee.

Our consideration of the petition, briefs, oral argument and the record leads us to conclude that the finding of the Judge of Industrial Claims was supported by substantial, competent evidence. Accordingly, we must hold that the affirming order of the Industrial Relations Commission does not entail a departure from the essential requirements of law.

The petition is therefore denied.

ADKINS, BOYD and DREW (Retired), JJ., and SPECTOR, District Court Judge concur.

ERVIN, Acting C. J., dissents.
**Title I Regulations Burden Hours/Cost for LEA s** 

**Citation Description**  **# of respondents**  **Av erage # of** 

**Hours per Respondent**  **Total Hours**  **Total Cost (Total Hours x $25.00)**  Section 1111(h)(2) Prepare and disseminate LEA report card 13087 16 209,392 $5,234,800

200.34, 200.43 Prepare, and make arrangements to im plem ent, a restructuring plan for schools that do not meet AYP after one full ye ar in corrective action 179 800 143,200 $3,580,000

200.36, 200.37, 200.38 and 200.46 Notify parents when schools are iden tified for im provement, corrective action, or restructuring; publish and disseminate information on any action taken by the school and LEA to address the problems that lead to such identification. 983 8 7,864 $196,600

200.52 Develop or revise im provement plan if identified for improvement. 79 800 63,200 $1,580,000

200.61(a) Notify parents that they can request information about the professional qualifications of their child’s classroom teacher. 13087 10 130,870 $3,271,750

200.63(c)(1) Maintain records on consultation with private school officials. 13087 6 78,522 $1,963,050

200.11(c) Adding NAEP data to LEA report cards 13628 24 327,072 $8,176,800
200.19(b)(1)(ii)(B)(1) Documentation that a student has transferred out

– that the student has enrolled in another school or other educational program that culminates in 13628 50 681,400 $17,035,000**Title I Regulations Burden Hours/Cost for LEA s**  the award of a regular high school diploma

200.37(b)(5)(ii)(C) Providing notice to parents that their children are eligible for SES and describing the benefits of SES 379 12 4,548 $113,700

200.39(c)(1) Provide information on public school choice and SES 983 25 24,575 $614,375

200.48(d)(3) Maintain records that the criteria are met and meet requirements for informing SEA 737 12 8,844 $221,100

200.48(d)(4) Apply to SEA to use unexpended funds 28 12 336 $8,400

**Total 1,679,823**  **$41,995,575**