alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
<PAGE>

                                                                     EXHIBIT 5.1

                            JACKSON WALKER, L.L.P.
                          1100 LOUISIANA, SUITE 4200
                             HOUSTON, TEXAS 77002
                           TELEPHONE: (713) 752-4200
                          TELECOPIER: (713) 752-4221

                                October 1, 2001

Houston American Energy Corp.
801 Travis Street, Suite 1425
Houston, Texas 77002

     Re:  Form S-4 Registration Statement

Gentlemen:

     As counsel for Houston American Energy Corp. (the "Company"), you have
requested our firm to render this opinion in connection with the Registration
Statement on Form S-4 registration no. 333-66638 (the "Registration Statement"),
filed under the Securities Act of 1933, as amended, with the Securities and
Exchange Commission relating to (i) the issuance of 596,569 shares (the "Merger
Shares") of the common stock of the Company, par value $0.001 per share (the
"Common Stock") to the shareholders of Texas Nevada Oil & Gas Co. ("TNOG") in
the merger (the "Merger") of TNOG with and into the Company as described in the
Registration Statement and the resale of the Merger Shares; and (ii) the resale
of 4,007,719 shares of the Common Stock which may be resold by the holders
thereof (the "Selling Stockholders").

     In giving this opinion, we have reviewed the Registration Statement and
such other documents and certificates of public officials and officers of the
Company with respect to the accuracy of the factual matters contained therein as
we have felt necessary or appropriate in order to render the opinions expressed
herein.  In making our examination, we have assumed the genuineness of all
signatures, the authenticity of all documents presented to us as originals, the
conformity to original documents of all documents presented to us as copies
thereof, and the authenticity of the original documents from which any such
copies were made, which assumptions we have not independently verified.

     Based upon and subject to the foregoing, and upon such other matters as we
have determined to be relevant, and subject to the assumptions, limitations and
qualifications hereinafter set forth, we are of the opinion that:

     1.  The Company has been duly incorporated, and is validly existing in good
standing under the laws of the State of Delaware.

     2.  Upon issuance of the Merger Shares upon consummation of the Merger, the
Merger Shares will be duly authorized, validly issued, fully paid and
nonassessable.

     We hereby consent to use in the prospectus/information statement forming a
part of the Registration Statement of the reference to Jackson Walker L.L.P.
under the heading "Legal Matters."  We also consent to the filing of this
opinion letter as an exhibit to the Registration Statement.

                                        Very truly yours,

                                        JACKSON WALKER L.L.P.



                                        /s/ Jackson Walker L.L.P.
June 25, 2012

No. 11-1178.

#### Fletcher et al. *v.*Lamone et al.

Affirmed on appeal from D. C. Md.
* Pursuant to 5 TH C IR . 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 5 TH C IR . R. 47.5.4. IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT

No. 97-60091 Summary Calendar

BENJAMIN EKENE NEZIANYA, Petitioner,

versus IMMIGRATION AND NATURALIZATION SERVICE, Respondent.

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

A29-400745

- - - - - - - - - - December 31, 1997 Before JOLLY, BENAVIDES, and PARKER, Circuit Judges.
PER CURIAM: * Benjamin Ekene Nezianya petitions this court to review an order of the Board of Immigration Appeals (“BIA”) dismissing his appeal seeking reversal of an order of deportation issued against him. The immigration judge issued the order of deportation based on documentary evidence showing that Nezianya had violated his nonimmigrant student status by engaging in unauthorized employment, in violation of section 241(a)(1)(C)(i) of the Immigration and Nationality Act, 8 U.S.C. § 1251(a)(1)(C)(i).No. 97-60091 -2- “An order of deportation . . . shall not be reviewed by any court if the alien has not exhausted the administrative remedies available to him as of right under the immigration laws and regulations . . . .” 8 U.S.C. § 1105a(c). As exhaustion of remedies is statutorily-mandated, this court lacks subject-matter jurisdiction to hear any unexhausted arguments. See Rodriguez v.
INS , 9 F.3d 408, 414 (5th Cir. 1993); Townsend v. INS , 799 F.2d 179, 181 (5th Cir. 1986). Nezianya argues that, although he may have been employed subsequently, the Immigration and Naturalization Service failed to prove that he was actually employed on June 4, 1991, as charged in the Order to Show Cause. Nezianya further alleges that he was a minor on June 4, 1991, and therefore lacked the capacity to enter into an enforceable employment contract on that date. Nezianya failed to raise both of these arguments in his deportation hearing and his appeal to the BIA. As Nezianya failed to exhaust all of the administrative remedies available to him regarding these arguments, we lack subject-matter jurisdiction over them and are precluded from considering them.
DISMISSED.
#### Juan SANDOVAL-CHAVEZ, Petitioner v. Jefferson B. SESSIONS, III, U.S. Attorney General, Respondent

No. 16-60737 Summary Calendar

United States Court of Appeals, Fifth Circuit.

Filed January 2, 2018

Felipe D. J. Millan, El Paso, TX, for Petitioner

Justin Robert Markel, Trial Attorney, Office of Immigration Litigation, Gregory A. Pennington, Jr., Esq., Trial Attorney, U.S. Department of Justice, Office of Immigration Litigation, Washington, DC, for Respondent

Before JONES, SMITH, and BARKSDALE, Circuit Judges.

PER CURIAM: *

Juan Sandoval-Chavez, a native and citizen of Mexico, petitions for review of the Board of Immigration Appeals’ (BIA) denial of his motion to reopen,

In 2013, in conjunction with Sandoval’s admitting to being removable for applying for admission into the United States without possession of valid travel documents, Sandoval’s counsel advised Sandoval intended to apply for derived citizenship through his father and adjustment of status through his wife, both United States citizens. His counsel, however, never filed such applications, and the IJ granted voluntary departure. The BIA dismissed Sandoval’s appeal. •

Sandoval filed a statutory motion to reopen after the 90-day deadline, asserting his counsel provided ineffective assistance of counsel. 8 U.S.C. § 1229a(c)(7)(C)(i). The BIA denied his motion to reopen as untimely and refused to exercise its discretion to grant his motion to reopen *sua sponte*under 8 C.F.R. §§ 1003.23(b) or 1003.2(a).

Sandoval does not challenge the BIA’s denial of his statutory motion to reopen as untimely. Instead, he asserts the BIA abused its discretion in refusing to reopen his removal proceedings *sua sponte*because counsel representing him during his removal proceedings provided ineffective assistance. We lack jurisdiction to review the BIA’s refusal to exercise its *sua sponte*authority to reopen removal proceedings. *Enriquez-Alvarado v. Ashcroft,*371 F.3d 246, 248-50 (5th Cir. 2004).

DISMISSED.

*

 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,
[Federal Register Volume 87, Number 66 (Wednesday, April 6, 2022)]
[Notices]
[Pages 20033-20034]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2022-07307]


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

DEPARTMENT OF THE TREASURY


Interest Rate Paid on Cash Deposited To Secure U.S. Immigration 
and Customs Enforcement Immigration Bonds

AGENCY: Departmental Offices, Treasury.

ACTION: Notice.

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

SUMMARY: For the period beginning April 1, 2022, and ending on June 30, 
2022, the U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement Immigration Bond 
interest rate is .33 per centum per annum.

DATES: Rates are applicable April 1, 2022 to June 30, 2022.

ADDRESSES: Comments or inquiries may be mailed to Will Walcutt, 
Supervisor, Funds Management Branch, Funds Management Division, Fiscal 
Accounting, Bureau of the Fiscal Services, Parkersburg, West Virginia 
26106-1328.
    You can download this notice at the following internet addresses: 
http://www.treasury.gov or http://www.federalregister.gov.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Ryan Hanna, Manager, Funds Management 
Branch, Funds Management Division, Fiscal Accounting, Bureau of the 
Fiscal Service, Parkersburg, West Virginia 261006-1328 (304) 480-5120; 
Will Walcutt, Supervisor, Funds Management Branch, Funds Management 
Division, Fiscal Accounting, Bureau of the Fiscal Services, 
Parkersburg, West Virginia 26106-1328, (304) 480-5117.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Federal law requires that interest payments 
on cash deposited to secure immigration bonds shall be ``at a rate 
determined by the Secretary of the Treasury, except that in no case 
shall the interest rate exceed 3 per centum per annum.'' 8 U.S.C. 
1363(a). Related Federal regulations state that ``Interest on cash 
deposited to secure immigration bonds will be at the rate as determined 
by the Secretary of the Treasury, but in no case will exceed 3 per 
centum per annum or be less than zero.'' 8 CFR 293.2.

[[Page 20034]]

Treasury has determined that interest on the bonds will vary quarterly 
and will accrue during each calendar quarter at a rate equal to the 
lesser of the average of the bond equivalent rates on 91-day Treasury 
bills auctioned during the preceding calendar quarter, or 3 per centum 
per annum, but in no case less than zero. (80 FR 45018). In addition to 
this Notice, Treasury posts the current quarterly rate in Table 2b--
Interest Rates for Specific Legislation on the TreasuryDirect website.
    The Deputy Assistant Secretary for Public Finance, Gary Grippo, 
having reviewed and approved this document, is delegating the authority 
to electronically sign this document to Heidi Cohen, Federal Register 
Liaison for the Department, for purposes of publication in the Federal 
Register.

Heidi Cohen,
Federal Register Liaison.
[FR Doc. 2022-07307 Filed 4-5-22; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4810-AS-P
```

[Congressional Bills 105th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[H. Con. Res. 117 Introduced in House (IH)]

105th CONGRESS
  1st Session
H. CON. RES. 117

Expressing the sense of the Congress regarding the interference of the 
 European Commission in the merger of the Boeing Company and McDonnell-
                                Douglas.

_______________________________________________________________________

                    IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

                             July 17, 1997

     Mr. Metcalf (for himself, Ms. Dunn, Mr. Dicks, Mr. White, Mr. 
Nethercutt, Mr. Hastings of Washington, Mr. McDermott, Mrs. Linda Smith 
    of Washington, and Mr. Adam Smith of Washington) submitted the 
following concurrent resolution; which was referred to the Committee on 
                        International Relations

_______________________________________________________________________

                         CONCURRENT RESOLUTION

 
Expressing the sense of the Congress regarding the interference of the 
 European Commission in the merger of the Boeing Company and McDonnell-
                                Douglas.

Whereas the Boeing Company and McDonnell-Douglas have announced their merger;
Whereas the Department of Defense has approved the merger as consistent with the 
        national security of the United States;
Whereas the Federal Trade Commission has found that the merger does not violate 
        the antitrust laws of the United States;
Whereas the European Commission has consistently criticized and threatened the 
        merger before, during, and after its consideration of the facts; and
Whereas the sole true reason for the European Commission criticism and imminent 
        disapproval of the merger is to gain unfair competitive advantage for 
        Airbus Industries, a government-owned aircraft manufacturer: Now, 
        therefore, be it
    Resolved by the House of Representatives (the Senate concurring), 
That it is the sense of Congress that--
            (1) any disapproval by the European Commission of the 
        merger of the Boeing Company and McDonnell-Douglas would 
        constitute an unwarranted and unprecedented interference in a 
        United State business transaction that would threaten thousands 
        of American aerospace jobs; and
            (2) the President should take such actions as he considers 
        to be appropriate to protect United States interests in 
        connection with this matter.
                                 <all>
```
#### UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. Tracy L. COLLIER, Defendant-Appellant.

No. 17-11227 Non-Argument Calendar

United States Court of Appeals, Eleventh Circuit.

(February 1, 2018)

*435Aine Ahmed, Kathryn Dee Risinger, U.S. Attorney’s Office, Panama City, FL, Christopher P. Canova, U.S. Attorney’s Office, Tallahassee, FL, Robert G. Davies, Lennard B. Register, III, U.S. Attorney’s Office, Pensacola, FL, for Plaintiff-Appel-lee

Tracy L. Collier, Pro Se

Before TJOFLAT, WILLIAM PRYOR, and ANDERSON, Circuit Judges.

PER CURIAM:

Rachel R. Seaton, appointed counsel for Tracy Collier in this direct criminal appeal, has moved to withdraw from further representation of Collier and has filed a brief pursuant to *Anders v. California,*386 U.S. 738, 87 S.Ct. 1396, 18 L.Ed.2d 493 (1967). Our independent review of the entire record reveals that Seaton’s assessment of the relative merit of the appeal is correct.1 Because independent examination of the entire record reveals no arguable issues of merit, the motion to withdraw from further representation is GRANTED and Collier’s total sentence is AFFIRMED.

1

. This Court has previously affirmed Collier's convictions, but we vacated his total sentence and remanded for resentencing because the District Court failed to make adequate findings as to (1) whether Collier had reason to know that the conspiracy that formed the basis for his charges involved over 50 victims, such that a number of victims enhancement was appropriate, and (2) whether Collier was entitled to a mitigating role reduction. *See United States v. Taylor,*652 Fed.Appx. 902 (11th Cir. 2016), *cert. denied sub nom. Collier v. United States,*— U.S. —, 137 S.Ct. 1232, 197 L.Ed.2d 468 (2017).
#### LaDon GRISSOM, Appellant, v. STATE of Missouri, Respondent.

No. ED 104632

Missouri Court of Appeals, Eastern District, DIVISION TWO.

FILED: January 23, 2018

Before Lisa P. Page, P.J., Roy L. Richter, J., and Philip M. Hess, J.

ORDER

PER CURIAM

LaDon Grissom (“Movant”) appeals from the motion court’s denial of his Rule 29.15 post-conviction relief motion following an evidentiary hearing. After a jury trial, Movant was convicted of two counts of murder in the second degree, assault in the first degree, and three counts of armed criminal action. This Court affirmed Mov-ant’s convictions and sentences. State v. Grissom, 423 S.W.3d 330 (Mo. App. E.D. 2014). We have reviewed the briefs of the parties' and the record on appeal and find no error of law. No jurisprudential purpose would be served by a written opinion. However, the parties have been furnished with a memorandum for their information only, setting forth the facts and reasons for this order.

The judgment is affirmed pursuant to Rule 84.16(b).
(logo) CWCapital

ASSET MANAGEMENT

 

 

**AnnualStatement as to Compliance**

**For thePeriod of January 1, 2017 to December 31, 2017**

** **

**MSBAM2014-C19**

 

In accordancewith Item 1123 of Regulation AB and with the requirements detailed in §13.9 of thePooling and Servicing Agreement (the “Agreement”) for the above-mentioned CMBSpool, (the “CMBS Pool”), CWCapital Asset Management LLC (“CWCAM”), in itscapacity as Special Servicer, is providing this Officer’s Certificate withrespect to the following: 

 

(A)    a review of CWCAM’s activities during thepreceding calendaryear or portion thereof (the "Reporting Period") and of CWCAM’sperformance under the Agreement has been made under such officer’s supervisionand;

 

(B)    to the best of such officer’s knowledge, basedon suchreview, CWCAM has fulfilled all its obligations under the Agreement in allmaterial respects throughout the Reporting Period. 

 

Should you haveany questions, please do not hesitate to contact us.   

 

Sincerely, 

CWCapital AssetManagement LLC 

 

/s/ David B. Iannarone 

David B. Iannarone

President

 

 

7501 Wisconsin Avenue, Suite 500 West, Bethesda, MD20814 

www.cwcapital.com
Document Headings

                    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.                  

###### Department of the Treasury

###### Internal Revenue Service

          - 26 CFR Part 1

### CFR Correction

This rule is being published by the Office of the Federal Register to correct an editorial or technical error that appeared in the most recent an1nual revision of the Code of Federal Regulations.

                        In Title 26 of the Code of Federal Regulations, Part 1 (§§ 1.170 to 1.300), revised as of April 1, 2021, in section 1.263A-3, remove paragraphs (                        *i*), (                        *ii*), (                        *iii*), and (2)(B) that follow paragraph (a)(2)(iii).                    

[FR Doc. 2022-06498 Filed 3-24-22; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 0099-10-P
<PAGE>


                                                                    EXHIBIT 23.2

                       Consent of Independent Accountants

     We hereby consent to the use in this Amendment No. 4 to Registration
Statement on Form S-4 of our report dated November 20, 2002 relating to the
financial statements of Hanover Equipment Trust 2001B, which appears in such
Registration Statement. We also consent to the reference to us under the heading
"Experts" in such Registration Statement.

/s/ PricewaterhouseCoopers LLP

Houston, Texas
January 10, 2003
| (logo) WELLS            FARGO | **Corporate Trust Services**MAC R1204-010 9062 Old Annapolis Road

Columbia, MD 21045

 

Tel:  410 884 2000

Fax: 410 715 2380 |
|---------------------------------------------------------------------------------|-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|

 

 

 

Deutsche Mortgage & Asset Receiving Corporation 

60 Wall Street, 

New York, NY 10005

 

 

RE:  Annual Statement of Compliance

 

The undersigned, a duly authorized officer of Wells Fargo Bank, N.A., as Certificate Administrator and Paying Agent for the Loews Miami Beach Hotel Loan Combination (in such capacities, “Wells Fargo”), hereby certifies as follows as of and for the year ending December 31, 2014 (the “reporting period”):

 

 

(a)      A review of Wells Fargo’s activities during the reporting period and of its performance under the applicable servicing agreement(s) listed on Schedule A hereto (the “Servicing Agreement(s)”) has been made under my supervision; and

 

(b)     To the best of my knowledge, based on such review, Wells Fargo has fulfilled all of its obligations under the Servicing Agreement(s) in all material respects throughout the reporting period, except as noted on Schedule B.

 

 

 

March 18, 2015

 

 

 

 

\s\ Brian Smith 

 

Brian Smith 

Vice President

 

 

 

\s\ Dave Ward

 

David J. Ward

Senior Vice President

 

 

 

To:  Deutsche Mortgage & Asset Receiving Corporation

Schedule A

 

 

List of Servicing Agreement(s) and Series

 

 

Pooling and Servicing Agreement dated as of September 1, 2014, by and among DEUTSCHE MORTGAGE & ASSET RECEIVING CORPORATION, as Depositor, WELLS FARGO BANK, NATIONAL ASSOCIATION, as Master Servicer, RIALTO CAPITAL ADVISORS, LLC, as Special Servicer, WILMINGTON TRUST, NATIONAL ASSOCIATION, as Trustee, WELLS FARGO BANK, NATIONAL ASSOCIATION, as Certificate Administrator, Paying Agent and Custodian, and SITUS HOLDINGS, LLC, as Operating Advisor  relating for  COMM 2014-UBS5 Commercial Mortgage Pass-Through Certificates, relating to the Loews Miami Beach Hotel Loan Combination, a  Pari passu portion of which is included in the Series COMM 2014-CCRE21 Commercial Mortgage Pass-Through Certificates transaction.

 

 

 

To:  Deutsche Mortgage & Asset Receiving Corporation

Schedule B

 

 

Material Non-Compliance with Servicing Obligations

 

Not Applicable
Exhibit 32.2  Certification of CFO Pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350
  
 Pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, as adopted pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, the undersigned certifies that (1) this Quarterly Report of BF Enterprises, Inc. (the "Company") on Form 10-QSB for the period ended June 30, 2004, as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (this "Report"), fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended, and (2) the information contained in this Report fairly presents, in all material respects, the financial condition of the Company and its results of operations as of and for the periods covered therein.
 
 **BF ENTERPRISES, INC.**Date: August 13, 2004
By:
/s/ S. Douglas PostVice President, Treasurer and Chief Financial Officer
 
 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 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.