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

FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT

No. 10-60268

Summary Calendar

QING HUA LIN,

Petitioner

v.

ERIC H. HOLDER, JR., U. S. ATTORNEY GENERAL,

Respondent

Petition for Review of an Order of the

Board of Immigration Appeals

BIA No. A094 798 808

Before WIENER, PRADO, and OWEN, Circuit Judges.

PER CURIAM:

*

Petitioner Qing Hua Lin, a citizen of the People’s Republic of China,

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

affirming an immigration judge’s (IJ) decision to deny his application for asylum,

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

Lin sought immigration relief based on his alleged persecution or fear of

persecution and torture on account of his practice or association with Falun

Gong, “a movement that professes to help its practitioners gain

United States Court of Appeals

Fifth Circuit

F I L E D

February 3, 2011

Lyle W. Cayce

Clerk

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.

Case: 10-60268 Document: 00511370494 Page: 1 Date Filed: 02/03/2011
No. 10-60268

self-understanding through spiritual and physical development.” Zhao v.

Gonzales, 404 F.3d 295, 300 (5th Cir. 2005). The IJ denied relief after finding

that Lin was not a credible witness. The BIA upheld the IJ’s adverse credibility

determinations and held that Lin had failed to meet his burden of proving

eligibility for any relief sought. Lin challenges those negative credibility

determinations. He contends that he demonstrated his eligibility for relief.

The BIA’s finding that Lin failed to provide the court with credible

evidence in support of his claim for immigration relief is supported by

substantial evidence. See Wang v. Holder, 569 F.3d 531, 536-37 (5th Cir. 2009).

The inconsistencies listed by the BIA and IJ regarding Lin’s accounts of his

persecution are supported by the record. The evidence does not compel a

conclusion that Lin’s testimony was credible. See id. at 538-39. Absent credible

evidence to the contrary, the BIA’s finding that Lin failed to carry his burden of

establishing his eligibility for asylum, withholding of deportation, or relief under

the CAT is supported by substantial evidence. See Zhang v. Gonzales, 432 F.3d

339, 343-44 (5th Cir. 2005). By failing to brief it adequately, Lin waived any

argument that he presented evidence corroborating his claims. See Chambers

v. Mukasey, 520 F.3d 445, 448 n.1 (5th Cir. 2008).

Lin’s petition for review is DENIED.

2

Case: 10-60268 Document: 00511370494 Page: 2 Date Filed: 02/03/2011
## I N T H E C O U R T O F C R I M I N A L A P P E A L S O F T E X A S
N O . P D - 0 0 5 0 - 1 2
E X P A R T E J E S S I C A T A T A
O N D I S C R E T I O N A R Y R E V I E W F R O M T H E F I R S T C O U R T O F A P P E A L S

H A R R I S C O U N T Y
Per curiam. M

eye rs, J., not participating. The pe tition for discretionar y revie w is dismis sed as improvidently grante d. Deliver ed De cembe r 5, 2012. Do not publish.
##### 



FIRST SHARES BANCORP, INC.

Exhibit 32.1

CERTIFICATION PURSUANT TO
18 U.S.C. SECTION 1350, AS ADOPTED PURSUANT TO
SECTION 906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002

The undersigned hereby certifies, in accordance with 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, as
adopted pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, in his or her
capacity as an officer of First Shares Bancorp, Inc. (First Shares), that, to
his or her knowledge:



|(1) |  | the Quarterly Report of First Shares on Form 10-QSB for the period
ended June 30, 2003, 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 such report fairly presents, in all
material respects, the financial condition and results of operations of
First Shares Bancorp, Inc.                               

|       |  |                 |  |                                                                                                 
|------ |  | --------------- |  | ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
|Dated: |  | August 14, 2003 |  |                                                                                                 
|      
|       |  |                 |  | /s/ Jerry R. Engle
Jerry R. Engle
Secretary, Treasurer and
President and Chief
Executive Officer
Amendment to Employment Agreement - Eli Ayalon



 Exhibit 10.1 

AMENDMENT TO EMPLOYMENT AGREEMENT 

Between DSP Group, Inc., DSP Group, Ltd. and Eli Ayalon (the “Executive”). Effective date May 24, 2010. 

The employment agreement effective April 22, 1996, as amended by amendments effective November 3, 1997, November 11, 1999, and
October 27, 2009 (each, an “Amendment”, such employment agreement, as amended, being herein referred to as the “Employment Agreement”), is hereby further amended as follows: 

Paragraph 3 of the November 3, 1997, Amendment is hereby amended to read as follows: 

3. At any time prior to the Executive providing notice pursuant to the November 11, 1999 Amendment, as further amended by the October 27, 2009
Amendment, if the Employment Agreement is terminated by the Corporation following a change in control of the Corporation, or by the Executive for Good Reason, or by the Corporation without Cause, all rights of the Executive under the Employment
Agreement shall continue for two years and all equity awards held by the Executive shall accelerate and immediately vest and be exercisable in whole or in part at any time during the remaining two-year term of the Employment Agreement, or such
longer period as may be provided for in the Executive’s equity award agreements. 
  

							
	 /s/ Ofer Elyakim
	 		 	 /s/ Eli Ayalon
	  	
	DSP Group, Inc.	 		 	Eli Ayalon	  	
				
	 /s/ Dror Levy
	 		 		  	
	DSP Group, Ltd.
Subordination Agreement


 Exhibit 10.9 

SUBORDINATION AGREEMENT 

THIS SUBORDINATION AGREEMENT, made as of the
11th day of March, 2010, by and between WELLS FARGO BANK,
N. A. (“Wells Fargo”), party of the first part, and THE UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, acting by and through the Secretary of Commerce, its successors and assigns as their interest may appear, Office of the Financial Services Division, National
Marine Fisheries Service, National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (the “Government”), party of the second part. 

W I T N E S S E T H : 

THAT, WHEREAS, the Government holds security interests in certain tangible personal property owned by Omega Protein, Inc.
(“Omega”), described on two (2) certain UCC financing statements, copies of which are attached hereto as Exhibit A and, by this reference, made a part hereof (such personal property, the “Specific Equipment”), as well
as similar security interests perfected by prior filings with the Commonwealth of Virginia, State Corporation Commission; and 

WHEREAS, Wells Fargo holds a security interest in substantially all assets of Omega, by a certain UCC-1 Financing Statement filed
October 26, 2009, as File # 091026-7367-6, a copy of which is attached hereto as Exhibit B, with the State Corporation Commission of Virginia; and 

WHEREAS, Wells Fargo has agreed to subordinate its security interest as to the Specific Equipment to the security interest of the
Government, such subordination to be evidenced by filing the UCC-3 financing statement in the form of Exhibit C attached hereto; 
  

 1 







 NOW, THEREFORE, for valuable consideration, the receipt and sufficiency of which is
acknowledged, Wells Fargo hereby subordinates and makes inferior its security interest in the Specific Equipment to the security interest of the Government in the Specific Equipment, and Wells Fargo hereby authorizes the Government to file the UCC-3
financing statements set forth on Exhibit C attached hereto with the Commonwealth of Virginia State Corporation Commission. 

This Subordination Agreement is for the benefit of the Government, its successors and/or assigns and the subordination contained herein
shall not be effective with respect to any other person or entity. 
 IN WITNESS WHEREOF, Wells Fargo and
the Government have caused this Subordination Agreement to be executed as of the
15th day of March, 2010. 

 

			
	 Wells Fargo Bank, N.A.

		
	By:	 	 /s/ John Kallind

		 	John Kallind, Vice President
	THE UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, acting by and through the Secretary of Commerce, Office of the Financial Services Division, National Marine Fisheries Service, National
Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration
		
	 By:
	 	  

		 	Chief Financial Services Branch,
		 	Southeast Region


  

 2
(2.te> U LffTIfJIt'J S 

I I SGCTI t> IJ 5> 

Section 5. Unavoidable equipment malfunction. 

(a) Unavoidable Equipment Malfunction. 

(i) Any source believing that any emissions in excess of established 

regulation limits or standards resulted from an unavoidable equipment malfunction shall 

notify the Division within 24 hours ofthe incident via telephone, electronic mail, fax, or 

other similar method. A detailed description ofthe circumstances ofthe incident as 

described in paragraph 5(a)(i)(A) ofthis section, including a corrective program directed 

at preventing future such incidents, must be submitted within 14 days ofthe unset ofthe 

incident. 

(A) In the incident report noted above, the source shall include any 

relevant evidence, including, but not necessarily limited to, evidence that (1) there was 

an equipment malfunction beyond the reasonable control ofthe owner or operator; (2) the 

excess emissions could not have been avoided by better operation,maintenance or 

improved design ofthe malfunctioning component; (3) to the maximum extent 

practicable, the source maintained and operated the air. pollution control equipment and 

process equipment, in a maIiner consistent with good practice for minimizing emissions, 

including minimizing any bypass emissions; (4) any necessary repairs were made as 

quickly as practicable, using off-shift labor and overtime as needed and possible; (5) all 

practicable steps were taken to minimize the potentia) impact ofthe excess emissions on 

ambient air quality; and (6) the excess emissions are not part of a recurring pattern that 

may have been caused by inadequate operation or maintenance, or inadequate design of 

the malfunctioning component. 

(ii) The burden' ofproofis on the owner or operator ofthe source to 

provide sufficient information to demonstrate that an unavoidable equipment malfunction 

occurred. 

(b) Enforcement Discretion. 

(i) The Division may elect not to pursue enforcement after considering 

whether excess emissions resulted from an unavoidable equipment malfunction. The 

Division will evaluate, on a case-by-case basis, the information submitted pursuant to 

paragraph (a)(i)(A) ofthis section to determine whether to pursue enforcement action. 

The Administrator may extend the 14-day time period for the submission ofthe incident 

report for cause. 

1-6
<PAGE>   1
                                                                    Exhibit 24.1


                                POWER OF ATTORNEY

The undersigned, acting in the capacity or capacities stated with their
respective names below, hereby constitute and appoint DAVID FREMED AND HARRY
RUBIN, and each of them severally, the attorneys-in-fact of the undersigned with
full power to them and each of them to sign for and in the name of the
undersigned in the capacities indicated below the Annual Report on Form 10-K of
Infogrames, Inc. for the fiscal year ended March 31, 2000, and any and all
amendments thereto.

This Power of Attorney may be executed in multiple counterparts, each of which
shall be deemed an original, but which taken together shall constitute one
instrument.

<TABLE>
<S>                                                  <C>                                     <C>
         /s/ Bruno Bonnell                           Chief Executive Officer                   June 27, 2000
------------------------------------                      and Director
         Bruno Bonnell

         /s/ Steven A. Denning                              Director                           June 27, 2000
------------------------------------
         Steven A. Denning

         /s/ Denis Guyennot                                 Director                           June 27, 2000
------------------------------------
         Denis Guyennot

         /s/ Thomas A. Heymann                              Director                           June 27, 2000
------------------------------------
         Thomas A. Heymann

         /s/ Ann E. Kronen                                  Director                           June 27, 2000
------------------------------------
         Ann E. Kronen

         /s/ Thomas Schmider                                Director                           June 27, 2000
------------------------------------
         Thomas Schmider
</TABLE>
**Exhibit 32.2**
**CERTIFICATION OF CHIEF FINANCIALOFFICER****PURSUANT TO SECTION 906 OF SARBANES-OXLEYACT OF 2002**
     I, Jeanne Prayther, the Chief Financial Officerof Daleen Technologies, Inc. (the “Company”),hereby certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, asadopted pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Actof 2002, that to my knowledge:
     (1) the Form 10-K of the Company forthe year ended December 31, 2003 (the“Form 10-K”) fully complies with requirements ofSection 13(a) or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of1934; and
     (2) the information contained in theForm 10-K fairly presents, in all material respects, thefinancial condition and results of operations of the Company.
 By: /s/ JEANNE PRAYTHER      Jeanne Prayther     *Chief Financial Officer*
Date: March 18, 2004
     This certification accompanies the Form 10-Kand shall not be treated as having been filed as part of theForm 10-K.
65
Exhibit 23.1





Consent of Independent Auditors





The Partners of


Star Gas Partners, L.P.:





We consent to incorporation by reference in the
registration statements Nos. 333-57994 and 333-100976 on Form S-3, No. 333-49751 on Form S-4 and Nos. 333-40138, 333-46714 and 333-53716 on Form S-8 of Star Gas Partners, L.P. of our report dated November 26, 2002, relating to the consolidated
balance sheets of Star Gas Partners, L.P. and Subsidiaries as of September 30, 2001 and 2002 and the related consolidated statements of operations, comprehensive income, partners capital and cash flows for each of the years in the three-year
period ended September 30, 2002 and related schedule, which report appears in the September 30, 2002 annual report on Form 10-K of Star Gas Partners, L.P.





/s/ KPMG LLP


Stamford, Connecticut


December 23, 2002
13976

#### OWENS v. SOVEREIGN CAMP, W. O. W.

(178 S. E., 125)

*515
      *Messrs. Hodges & Hodges,*for appellant,

*Mr. Julian D. Wyatt,*for respondent,

January 14, 1935.

The opinion of the Court was delivered by

Mr. Justice Stabler.

This action was brought by the plaintiff to recover certain disability benefits under a certificate of insurance which had been issued him by the defendant association. The sole issue made on trial of the case was. whether there was any testimony tending to show that the insured was totally disabled, as that phrase has been defined by this Court in connection with its use in insurance contracts. The defendant’s motion for a directed verdict was overruled, and the jury found for the plaintiff $500.00. The ground of the motion, that there was no evidence of such disability, is renewed here by the exceptions, and this is the only question involved in the appeal.

We have held that “what amounts to a total disability is a relative matter, and depends largely upon the circumstances of each case, and upon the occupation and employment in which the person insured is engaged” *(McCutchen v. Insurance Co.,*153 S. C., 401, 151 S. E., 67, 80) ; that the phrase is not to be literally construed, but that a person is “deemed totally disabled when he is no *516longer able to do his accustomed task, and such work as he has only been trained to do, and upon which he must depend for a living” *(Taylor v. Insurance Co.,*106 S. C., 356, 91 S. E., 326, 327, L. R. A., 1917-C, 910) ; and that the total disability contemplated by contracts of insurance “is inability to do substantially all of the material acts necessary to the prosecution of the insured’s business or occupation, in substantially his customary and usual manner” *(Berry v. Insurance Co.,*120 S. C., 328, 113 S. E., 141, 142).

The Court has read with especial care the testimony taken in the case at bar, but deems a review of it unnecessary. While it appears that the insured was an unwell man, perhaps seriously afflicted, it was conceded that, from the date he claimed his disability began to the time of the trial of the case, he had continued to work, although not on full time and with a somewhat decreased production, in the Easley mill, at his accustomed task, which he had been trained to do, and upon which he depended for a living; and we find no evidence in the record which shows, or from which the inference might be drawn, that he was unable, during the period of his alleged total disability, to do all the material acts necessary to the prosecution of such occupation or work, in substantially his customary and usual manner. The defendant therefore was entitled to a directed verdict.

The judgment of the Circuit Court is reversed, and the case remanded, with instructions that judgment be entered up for the defendant under Rule 27 of this Court.

Messrs. Justices Carter and Bonham and Mr. Acting Associate Justice A. L. Gaston, concur.
COURT OF APPEALS

EIGHTH DISTRICT OF TEXAS

EL PASO, TEXAS

WESTERN TECHNOLOGIES, INC., An

Arizona Corporation,

Appellant,

v.

OMNIVATIONS II, L.L.C., A Texas

Limited Liability Company,

Appellee. §

§

§

§

§

§ No. 08

- 17

- 00232

- CV

Appeal from the

448th District Court

of El Paso County, Texas

(TC# 2017DCV2600 )

J U D G M E N T

The Court has considered this cause on the record and concludes there was no error in the

judgment. We therefore affirm the judgment of the court below. We further order that Appellee

recover from Appellant and its sureties, if any, see T EX .R.A PP .P. 43.5 , on the judgment and all

costs of this appeal, for which let execution issue. This decision shall be certified below for

observance.

IT IS SO ORDERED THIS 5TH DAY OF APRIL, 2019.

YVONNE T. RODRIGUEZ, Justice

Before McClure, C.J., Rodriguez, and Palafox, JJ.
<PAGE>

                                                                    EXHIBIT 10.1



September 14, 1999



Dr. David C. Collins
Learning Tree International, Inc.

Dear Dr. Collins:

     This will confirm our agreement to extend, until September 30, 2002 the
term of your Employment Agreement dated as of October 1, 1995.  All of the other
terms of the Employment Agreement will remain as they have been.

Very truly yours,

Learning Tree International, Inc.



By               /s/ Mary C. Adams
    ---------------------------------------------
    Mary C. Adams, Vice President, Administration


Accepted and agreed:



By      /s/ David C. Collins
   ---------------------------
        David C. Collins

Dated   September 16, 1999
      ------------------------
#### STATE v. QUICK.

There is no law authorizing the court to imprison a person convicted of bastardy.

Before ALDRICH, J., Marlboro,

-February, 1886.

The opinion fully states the case.

*111
      *Messrs. Toivnsend McLuurin,*for appellant.

No counsel contra.

June 17, 1886.

The opinion of the court was delivered by

Mr. JustiCE MoIver.

The appellant was convicted of bastardy and judgment was rendered “that the said defendant, Addison B. Quick, be committed to prison, to wit, to the county jail of Marlboro, there to remain until he shall enter into recognizance, with two good and sufficient sureties, in the penal sum of three hundred dollars conditioned for the annual payment of the sum of twenty-five dollars, for the maintenance of the said child till it reaches the age of twelve years, and so save harmless the said county aforesaid, and that the said recognizance be made payable in annual instalments, beginning with September 4, 1885, the day said child was born, and in default of defendant giving said recognizance, that execution for the said amount and for the costs do issue against the 'property of the said defendant, as in case of defendants convicted of misdemeanor.”

From this judgment defendant appeals substantially upon the ground that the Circuit Judge erred in imposing the punishment of imprisonment in default of defendant entering into recognizance for the support of the child. The authorities cited by the counsel for appellant *(General Statutes,*section 1582, and *State*v. *Glenn,*14 *S. C.,*134) fully sustain the ground taken by him. We are not aware of any statute, and none has been brought to our notice, which authorizes the imposition of punishment by imprisonment upon a person convicted of bastardy. On the contrary, the statute above cited expressly provides that a person convicted of this offence “shall be required to give the security or recognizance hereinbefore required, and in default thereof shall be liable to execution as are defendants convicted of misdemeanors.”

The judgment of this court is, that the judgment of the Circuit Court, in so far as it requires the appellant to be imprisoned until he shall enter into the required recognizance for the maintenance of the child, be reversed.
I 

111TH CONGRESS 

1ST SESSION H. R. 3877 

To suspend temporarily the duty on 100 percent cotton dyed knit fabric. 

IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES 

OCTOBER 20, 2009 

Mr. WATT introduced the following bill; which was referred to the Committee 

on Ways and Means 

A BILL 

To suspend temporarily the duty on 100 percent cotton dyed 

knit fabric. 

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

3 SECTION 1. 100 PERCENT COTTON DYED KNIT FABRIC. 

4 (a) IN GENERAL.—Subchapter II of chapter 99 of 

5 the Harmonized Tariff Schedule of the United States is 

6 amended by inserting in numerical sequence the following 

7 new heading: 

‘‘ 9902.01.00 100 percent cotton dyed knit 

fabric, w<30cm 2 in.(w) x 8 

in.(1) (provided for in subheading 6003.20.30) ............. Free No change No change On or before 

12/31/2011 ’’. 


srobinson on DSKHWCL6B1PROD with BILLS
2 

•HR 3877 IH

1 (b) EFFECTIVE DATE.—The amendment made by 

2 subsection (a) applies to articles entered, or withdrawn 

3 from warehouse for consumption, on or after the 15th day 

4 after the date of the enactment of this Act. 

Æ 


srobinson on DSKHWCL6B1PROD with BILLS