alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT

No. 16-60744

Summary Calendar

LONGRU WEI; YIBIAO LIAO,

Petitioners

v.

JEFFERSON B. SESSIONS, III, U. S. ATTORNEY GENERAL,

Respondent

Petition for Review of an Order of the

Board of Immigration Appeals

BIA No. A201 260 360

Before BENAVIDES, CLEMENT, and GRAVES, Circuit Judges.

PER CURIAM:*

Longru Wei and Yibiao Liao, natives and citizens of China, petition this 

court for review of the decision by the Board of Immigration Appeals (BIA)

dismissing their appeal from the immigration judge’s (IJ) order denying their

asylum application. Wei contends that she was persecuted in China when 

family planning officials forced her to have three abortions and that she would 

be involuntarily sterilized if she were to return to China with her second child, 

 

* 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

November 21, 2017

Lyle W. Cayce

Clerk

 Case: 16-60744 Document: 00514245038 Page: 1 Date Filed: 11/21/2017
No. 16-60744

2

who was born while she was in the United States. Wei’s son, Yibiao, seeks 

asylum as a derivative applicant.

Because the BIA agreed with the IJ’s denial of relief, we will review both 

decisions. See Wang v. Holder, 569 F.3d 531, 536 (5th Cir. 2009). We review 

factual findings under the substantial evidence standard, and legal questions 

de novo. Orellana-Monson v. Holder, 685 F.3d 511, 517-18 (5th Cir. 2012).

An alien seeking asylum must demonstrate past persecution or a wellfounded fear of persecution because of one of five protected grounds including 

political opinion. 8 U.S.C. § 1158(b)(1)(A), (B)(i). A forced abortion or an 

involuntary sterilization qualifies as persecution on account of political opinion 

under 8 U.S.C. § 1101(a)(42)(A). In this case, the IJ’s and BIA’s denial of Wei’s 

claim for asylum is supported by substantial evidence. The IJ and BIA 

provided numerous specific, cogent reasons in support of the IJ’s adverse 

credibility decision against Wei. See Zhang v. Gonzales, 432 F.3d 339, 344 (5th 

Cir. 2005). The evidence does not compel a conclusion that Wei demonstrated 

past persecution through her claim of having three abortions while in China or 

that she demonstrated a well-founded fear of persecution based on her alleged 

fear of involuntary sterilization or economic penalties if she were to return to 

China with her two children. See Zhu v. Gonzales, 493 F.3d 588, 597-98 (5th 

Cir. 2007); Zhao v. Gonzales, 404 F.3d 295, 306 (5th Cir. 2005).

The petition for review is DENIED.

 Case: 16-60744 Document: 00514245038 Page: 2 Date Filed: 11/21/2017
----

----

I Informacija

Komisija

----

Euro kursas (1)

2004 m. gruodžio 29 d.

(2004/C 323/01)

1 euro= 

----

(1)

Šaltinis: valiutų perskaičiavimo kursai paskelbti ECB.

----

----

PATVIRTINTŲ ĮMONIŲ SĄRAŠAS

Komisijos Reglamento (EB) Nr. 1623/2000 92 straipsnio 3 dalies pirmas punktas (alkoholio, skirto naudoti vietoje bioetanolio, skirto naudoti Europos Bendrijos kuro sektoriuje, viešasis pardavimas)

(2004/C 323/02)

----

----

Komisijos priimti KOM dokumentai, išskyrus teisės aktų projektus

(2004/C 323/03)

Šiuos tekstus galima rasti EUR-Lex: http://europa.eu.int/eur-lex

----

II Parengiamieji aktai

Komisija

----

Komisijos priimti teisės aktų projektai

(2004/C 323/04)

Šiuos tekstus galima rasti EUR-Lex: http://europa.eu.int/eur-lex

----
THE THIRTEENTH COURT OF APPEALS

13-13-00426-CV

IN THE MATTER OF S. B. JR., A CHILD

On Appeal from the

357th District Court of Cameron County, Texas

Trial Cause No. 2012-03-106-JE

JUDGMENT

THE THIRTEENTH COURT OF APPEALS, having considered this cause on 

appeal, concludes that the appeal should be DISMISSED. The Court orders the appeal 

DISMISSED in accordance with its opinion. No costs are assessed as appellant filed an 

affidavit of inability to pay costs.

We further order this decision certified below for observance.

July 17, 2014
**UN PUBLISHED** 

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

**No. 15** 
**- 6011** 

GORDON SCOTT STATON ,
Plaintiff

- Appellant ,

v.

COMMONWEALTH OF VIRGINIA; UVA POLICE DEPARTMENT; DISTRICT 9 PROBATION AND PAROLE; DEPARTMENT OF CORRECTIONS ,
Defendants

- Appellees

.

Appeal from the United States District Court for the Western District of Virginia , at Roanoke

. Glen E. Conrad , Chief District Judge. ( 7:14

- cv
- 00622

- GEC )

Submitted : March 12, 2015 Decided: March 17, 2015

Before GREGORY , DIAZ, and HARRIS , Circuit Judges.

Affirmed by un published per curiam opinion

.

Gordon Scott Staton, Appellant Pro Se.

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.2 PER CURIAM:

Gordon Scott Staton appeals the district court ’ s or der
dismissing his 42 U.S.C. § 1983 (20 12 ) action without prejudice *

under 28 U.S.C. § 1915A(b) (2) (20 12 ). We have reviewed the
record and find no reversible error. Accordingly, we deny
Staton’s motion to appoint counsel and affirm for the reasons

stated by the district court. Staton v. Virginia , No. 7:14

- cv
00622

- GEC (W.D. Va. Nov. 26, 2014)

. We dispense with oral
argument because the facts and legal contentions are adequately
presented in the materials before th is court and argument would

not aid the decisional process.

AFFIRMED

* Although it is well established that orders dismissing complaints without prejudice are ordinarily interlocutory and not appealable, see Domino Sugar Corp. v. Sugar Workers Local Union 392 , 10 F.3d 1064, 1066

- 67 (4th Cir. 1993), orders dismissing actions without prejudice are generally final and appealable. See Chao v. Rivendell Woods, Inc. , 415 F.3d 342, 345 (4th Cir. 2005).
----

Action brought on 17 January 2005 by Ekabe International SCA against the Office for Harmonisation in the Internal Market

(Case T-28/05)

(2005/C 82/72)

Language in which the application was submitted: French

An action against the Office for Harmonisation in the Internal Market (OHIM) was brought before the Court of First Instance of the European Communities on 17 January 2005 by Ekabe International SCA, established in Luxembourg, represented by Charles de Haas, lawyer.

Puleva SA was also a party to the proceedings before the Fourth Board of Appeal.

The applicant claims that the Court should:

Pleas in law and main arguments:

----
Description of Management Services Arrangement



 Exhibit 10.20 
 In May 2013, Midasplayer.com Ltd (“Company”), a subsidiary of King Digital Entertainment plc, on behalf of the Company and its group of companies (collectively, “Group”),
entered into an unwritten management services agreement (“Agreement”) with Apax Partners LLP (“Apax”). The Agreement was terminated on November 30, 2013. Pursuant to the terms of the Agreement, Apax agreed to
provide certain management and consulting services to the Group, including strategic advice, secondment of certain Apax personnel to the Group (“Apax Personnel”), financial organization and planning, operations consulting, and
advisory services related to public company readiness and such other management and administrative services as the parties mutually determined as necessary (collectively, “Services”). The Company’s senior management supervised
Apax Personnel and Apax’s performance of the Services. In consideration for the Services, the Company and Apax agreed to a rate of £3,000.00 per day, for which Apax would invoice the Company. Additionally, the Company agreed to
reimburse Apax for Apax’s reasonable out-of-pocket expenses incurred in connection with the Services. The Agreement also required Apax and Apax Personnel who signed confidentiality agreements to hold the Group’s confidential and
proprietary information in strict confidence, except if such disclosure was approved in writing by the Company’s senior management. Apax and Apax Personnel were independent contractors of the Company and nothing in the Agreement was to be
construed as creating a partnership, joint venture or employment relationship between the Company, the Group, Apax and Apax Personnel.
EXHIBIT 32





CERTIFICATION PURSUANT TO 18 U.S.C. SECTION 1350





In connection with the quarterly Report on Form 10-Q of Transatlantic Acquisition Corporation (the “Company”) for the quarter ended December 31, 2010, as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the “Report”), I, Joseph Rozelle, President of the Company, certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C Section 1350, as adopted pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, to the best of my knowledge that:





1.
The Report fully complies with the requirements of Sections 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.








Date: February 8, 2011





/s/ Joseph RozelleJoseph Rozelle

President

(Principal Executive and Financial Officer)











The foregoing certification is being furnished as an exhibit to the Report pursuant to Item 601(b)(32) of Regulation S-K and  Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002 (subsections (a) and (b) of Section 1350, Chapter 63 of Title 18, United States Code) and, accordingly, is not being filed as part of the Report for purposes of Section 18 of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended, and is not incorporated by reference into any filings of the Company, whether made before or after the date hereof, regardless of any general incorporation language in such filing.
## F IRST 

## D ISTRICT 

## C OURT OF 

## A PPEAL 

## S TATE OF 

## F LORIDA

_____________________________
No. 1D 21

- 690

_____________________________
D AMON W ALKER , Appellant,

v.

S HERIFF OF B AY C OUNTY , F LORIDA e t a l

. , Appellee s

.

_____________________________

On appeal from the Circuit Court for Bay County

. William S. Henry , Judge

. September 29, 2022

P ER C URIAM

.
A FFIRMED

.
L EWIS , M AKAR , and B ILBREY , JJ., concur

.

_____________________________ Not final until disposition of any timely and authorized motion under Fla. R. App. P. 9.330 or 9.331

.

_____________________________2 Damon Walker, pro se
, Appellant.

Ashley Moody, Attorney General, Tallahassee; Robert Waylon Thompson of Bay County Sheriff's Office, Panama City
, for Appellee s

.
----

Removal from the Register of Case T-189/04 (1)

(2005/C 69/47)

(Language of the case: French)

By order of 16 December 2004, the President of the Fourth Chamber of the Court of First Instance of the European Communities has ordered the removal from the Register of Case T-189/04, Christian van der Haegen v European Economic and Social Committee.

----

(1)OJ C 217 of 28.8.2004.

----
ex10_hh-ii.htm














Exhibit 10-hh(ii)

















AT&T INC.


HUMAN RESOURCES COMMITTEE


June 26, 2008







Second Amendment to BellSouth Corporation


Stock and Incentive Compensation Plan












RESOLVED, that the Human Resources Committee of AT&T Inc. ("Corporation") hereby authorizes and directs the Senior Executive Vice President-Human Resources to provide that, notwithstanding anything to the contrary in the plan, payments of Restricted Stock Units under the BellSouth Corporation Stock and Incentive Compensation Plan must be delayed six months from when they would otherwise be payable when such amounts are to be paid to a Specified Employee, as that term is used in Treasury Regulation §1.409A; and







RESOLVED FURTHER, that the appropriate officers of the Corporation are authorized to do or cause to be done any and all such acts and things, and to execute and deliver any and all documents and papers that they may deem necessary, proper or advisable to carry out the foregoing resolutions.
# United States Court of Appeals **For the First Circuit**

Nos. 01-1176 01-1332 SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION, Plaintiff, Appellant,

v. SG LTD. ET AL., Defendants, Appellees.

ERRATA SHEET The opinion of this Court issued on September 13, 2001 is corrected as follows: On page 23, line 2, of the slip opinion, delete "and reliance."
# LAW OFFICE OF JOHN MIETUS, LLc 6701 DEMOCRACY BOULEVARD, SWTE 300 BETHESDA, MD 20817-7500 JOHN 

### R.1wErus, JR. (202) 747-5212 john@mietuslaw.com

October 1, 2014 BY ELECTRONIC MAIL Mr. Robert Finamore Office of International Aviation U.S. Department of Transportation 1200 New Jersey Avenue, SE Washington DC 20590 Re: Dockets OST-2014-0170/0171, Joint Applications of Aeromexico and Delta Dear Mr. Finamore: The Joint Applicants, Aerovias de Mexico, S.A. de C.V. and Delta Air Lines, Inc., have completed their poll of the U.S. carriers served on September 26, 2014 with the abovecaptioned applications. There were no objections. The Joint Applicants would appreciate expedited Department action on their applications. Respectfully submitted,

John R. Mietus, Jr. Counsel for Aeromexico

cc: Docket Sascha Van der Bellen, Delta Chris Walker, Delta
I

103D CONGRESS

1ST SESSION H. R. 394

To amend title 38, United States Code, to change the date for the beginning

of the Vietnam era for the purpose of veterans benefits from August

5, 1964, to December 22, 1961.

IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

JANUARY 5, 1993

Mr. SOLOMON introduced the following bill; which was referred to the

Committee on Veterans’ Affairs

A BILL

To amend title 38, United States Code, to change the date

for the beginning of the Vietnam era for the purpose

of veterans benefits from August 5, 1964, to December

22, 1961.

1 Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representa2 tives of the United States of America in Congress assembled,

3 That section 101(29) of title 38, United States Code, is

4 amended by striking out ‘‘August 5, 1964’’ and inserting

5 in lieu thereof ‘‘December 22, 1961’’.

Æ
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA

______________________________

HAMID AL RAZAK, et al., :

:

Petitioner, :

:

v. : Civil Action No. 05-1601 (GK) 

 :

BARACK H. OBAMA, et al., :

:

Respondents. :

______________________________:

ORDER

A Joint Status Report [Dkt. No. 188] was filed in this case on

March 2, 2009. Upon consideration of the representations of the

parties, and the entire record herein, it is hereby

ORDERED, that, consistent with the wishes of the Petitioner,

habeas corpus litigation will proceed under the guidelines

prescribed by the Court’s Case Management Order #3 (“CMO”), as

modified herein; and it is further

ORDERED, that Respondents have until March 20, 2009, to submit

any revision of their legal justification for detention; and it is

further

ORDERED, that by no later than 5:00 p.m., March 13, 2009,

parties shall submit a brief containing their position as to the

appropriate definition of "enemy combatant." Parties are also

required to indicate what, if any, response they have to footnote

one of the recent Court of Appeals decision in Kiyemba v. Obama,

No. 08-5424, slip op. at 3 n.1 (D.C. Cir. Feb. 18, 2009); and it is

further
-2-

ORDERED, that Respondents have until April 1, 2009, to comply

with their obligations under §§ I.D.1 and I.E.1 of the CMO; and it

is further

ORDERED, that Petitioner must file his traverse within 30 days

of the date on which Respondents certify their compliance with §

I.D.1 of the CMO; and it is further

ORDERED, that motions for judgment under § III.A.1 of the CMO

are due within 14 days of the completion of all discovery, as

provided for in §§ I.D.1, I.E.1, and I.E.2.

 /s/ 

March 4, 2009 Gladys Kessler

United States District Judge

Copies to: Attorneys of Record via ECF
DISTRICT COURT OF APPEAL OF THE STATE OF FLORIDA

FOURTH DISTRICT

BEVERLY A. ELLIS and FREDERICK J. ELLIS,

Appellants,

v.

U.S. BANK TRUST, N.A., AS TRUSTEE FOR LSF9 MASTER 

PARTICIPATION TRUST and HSBC MORTGAGE SERVICES INC.,

Appellees.

No. 4D22-86

[June 29, 2023]

Appeal from the Circuit Court for the Nineteenth Judicial Circuit, St. 

Lucie County; Elizabeth A. Metzger, Judge; L.T. Case No. 2019CA001371. 

Garrett Kesl, Michael Vater, and Edner Geffrard of The Ticktin Law 

Group, Deerfield Beach, for appellants.

Zachary Ullman, Matthew Ciccio, and Julia Poletti of Aldridge Pite, LLP,

for appellee U.S. Bank Trust, N.A., as Trustee for LSF9 Master 

Participation Trust.

PER CURIAM.

Affirmed. 

MAY, CIKLIN and CONNER, JJ., concur.

* * *

Not final until disposition of timely filed motion for rehearing.
**EXHIBIT 13.2**

 

**CERTIFICATION OF PRINCIPAL 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 Annual Report of Embotelladora Andina S.A. (the “Company”) on Form 20-F for the fiscal year ended December 31, 2012, as filed with the U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the “Report”), I, Andrés Wainer, Chief Financial Officer of the Company, certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. § 1350, as adopted pursuant to Section 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/   ANDRÉS WAINER    |   |   |
|-----------------------------|--------|--------|
| Andrés   Wainer        |   |   |
| Chief   Financial Officer   |   |   |
| Embotelladora   Andina S.A. |   |   |
| Dated:   April 30, 2013     |   |   |

 

 

A signed original 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.

 

----
TEXAS COURT OF APPEALS, THIRD DISTRICT, AT AUSTIN

NO. 03-12-00176-CR

Curtis Adams, Appellant

v.

The State of Texas, Appellee

FROM THE DISTRICT COURT OF TRAVIS COUNTY, 299TH JUDICIAL DISTRICT

NO. D-1-DC-11-904084, HONORABLE BOB PERKINS, JUDGE PRESIDING

M E M O R A N D U M O P I N I O N

Curtis Adams appeals a judgment of conviction dated November 17, 2011. Notice

of appeal was due 30 days from the date sentence was imposed. See Tex. R. App. P. 26.2(a). Notice

of appeal in this case was due by December 19, 2011, and not filed until February 17, 2012. Because

the notice of appeal was not timely filed, this Court does not have jurisdiction over the appeal.

Accordingly, we dismiss this appeal for want of jurisdiction.

__________________________________________

Diane M. Henson, Justice

Before Justices Puryear, Henson and Goodwin

Dismissed for Want of Jurisdiction

Filed: May 9, 2012

Do Not Publish
Exhibit 32.1  SECTION 1350 CERTIFICATION  In connection with the quarterly report of First Titan Corp. (the “Company”) on Form 10-Q for the period ended June 30, 2014 as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission (the “Report”), I, G. Jonathan Piña, President of the Company, certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. SS. 1350, as adopted pursuant to Section 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; and2.The information contained in the Report fairly presents, in all material respects, the financial condition and result of operations of the Company.  Date: August 19, 2014BY: /s/ G. Jonathan PiñaG. Jonathan PiñaChief Executive Officer, President, Secretary, Treasurer, Principal Executive Officer, Principal Finance and Accounting Officer and Sole Director  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 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.
VI 

113TH CONGRESS 

1ST SESSION S. 594 

For the relief of Javier Lopez-Urenda and Maria Leticia Arenas. 

IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES 

MARCH 18, 2013 

Mrs. FEINSTEIN introduced the following bill; which was read twice and 

referred to the Committee on the Judiciary 

A BILL 

For the relief of Javier Lopez-Urenda and Maria Leticia 

Arenas. 

1 Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representa2 tives of the United States of America in Congress assembled, 

3 SECTION 1. PERMANENT RESIDENT STATUS FOR JAVIER 

4 LOPEZ-URENDA AND MARIA LETICIA ARENAS. 

5 (a) IN GENERAL.—Notwithstanding subsections (a) 

6 and (b) of section 201 of the Immigration and Nationality 

7 Act (8 U.S.C. 1151), Javier Lopez-Urenda and Maria 

8 Leticia Arenas shall each be eligible for issuance of an 

9 immigrant visa or for adjustment of status to that of an 

10 alien lawfully admitted for permanent residence upon fil11 ing an application for issuance of an immigrant visa under 


rfrederick on DSK6VPTVN1PROD with BILLS
2 

•S 594 IS

1 section 204 of such Act (8 U.S.C. 1154) or for adjustment 

2 of status to lawful permanent resident. 

3 (b) ADJUSTMENT OF STATUS.—If Javier Lopez4 Urenda or Maria Leticia Arenas enter the United States 

5 before the filing deadline specified in subsection (c), that 

6 alien shall be considered to have entered and remained 

7 lawfully and shall, if otherwise eligible, be eligible for ad8 justment of status under section 245 of the Immigration 

9 and Nationality Act (8 U.S.C. 1255) as of the date of the 

10 enactment of this Act. 

11 (c) DEADLINE FOR APPLICATION AND PAYMENT OF

12 FEES.—Subsections (a) and (b) shall apply only to an ap13 plication for issuance of an immigrant visa or an applica14 tion for adjustment of status that is filed, with appropriate 

15 fees, within 2 years after the date of the enactment of 

16 this Act. 

17 (d) REDUCTION OF IMMIGRANT VISA NUMBER.— 

18 Upon the granting of an immigrant visa or permanent res19 idence to Javier Lopez-Urenda and Maria Leticia Arenas, 

20 the Secretary of State shall instruct the proper officer to 

21 reduce by two, during the current or next following fiscal 

22 year, the total number of immigrant visas that are made 

23 available to natives of the country of the aliens’ birth 

24 under section 203(a) of the Immigration and Nationality 

25 Act (8 U.S.C. 1153(a)) or, if applicable, the total number 


rfrederick on DSK6VPTVN1PROD with BILLS
3 

•S 594 IS

1 of immigrant visas that are made available to natives of 

2 the country of the aliens’ birth under section 202(e) of 

3 such Act (8 U.S.C. 1152(e)). 

4 (e) PAYGO.—The budgetary effects of this Act, for 

5 the purpose of complying with the Statutory Pay-As-You6 Go Act of 2010, shall be determined by reference to the 

7 latest statement titled ‘‘Budgetary Effects of PAYGO 

8 Legislation’’ for this Act, submitted for printing in the 

9 Congressional Record by the Chairman of the Senate 

10 Budget Committee, provided that such statement has been 

11 submitted prior to the vote on passage. 

Æ 


rfrederick on DSK6VPTVN1PROD with BILLS