alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
#### Gauriben Jaydevbhai PATEL Petitioner v. Jefferson B. SESSIONS, III, Attorney General of the United States Respondent

No. 17-1532

United States Court of Appeals, Eighth Circuit.

Submitted: January 10, 2018

Filed: January 22, 2018

Marc Prokosch, Karam <& Associates, Bloomington, MN, for Petitioner

Scott Baniecke, U.S. Immigration & Naturalization Service, Bloomington, MN, Jesse Lloyd Busen, Trial Attorney, Carl

H. McIntyre, OIL, U.S. Department of Justice, Civil Division, Office of Immigration Litigation, Washington, DC, for Respondent

Before LOKEN, BEAM, and KELLY, Circuit Judges.

PER CURIAM.

Gauriben Jaydevbhai Patel, a citizen of India, petitions for review of an order of the Board of Immigration Appeals (BIA) dismissing her appeal from the decision of an immigration judge (IJ) that denied her asylum and withholding of removal.1 Patel *417sought immigration relief based on membership in the Patidar caste. While the IJ and BIA found Patel credible, each held that she failed to establish that the alleged harm she experienced rose to the level of persecution required to . obtain relief, and she failed to demonstrate a well-founded fear of persecution in India.

After careful consideration, we conclude that substantial evidence supports the BIA’s finding that Patel failed to show past persecution in India, or a well-founded fear of future persecution there, due to her membership in the Patidar caste. 8 U.S.C. § 1158(b)(1); Wondmneh v. Ashcroft, 361 F.3d 1096, 1097-98 (8th Cir. 2004) (standard of review). The unfortunate incidents described by Patel, that resulted in (among other things) a minor injury and unfulfilled threats of violence, and the fact that her family (including her sisters) remain unharmed in India are key considerations in this conclusion. See Tawm v. Ashcroft, 363 F.3d 740, 742-43 (8th Cir. 2004) (no past persecution where applicant twice was detained and beaten and sought medical treatment, and fear of future persecution was not well-founded or reasonable, in part, because alien’s family continued to live in Lebanon without incident). Patel fails to present facts “ ‘so compelling that no reasonable factfinder could fail to find the requisite fear of persecution.’ ” Melecio-Saquil v. Ashcroft, 337 F.3d 983, 986 (8th Cir. 2003) (quoting INS v. Elias-Zacarias, 502 U.S. 478, 483-84, 112 S.Ct. 812, 117 L.Ed.2d 38 (1992)). And, having failed to establish her eligibility for asylum, Patel necessarily cannot satisfy the more rigorous standard for withholding of removal. Wondmneh, 361 F.3d at 1099 (“The standard for withholding removal, a clear probability of persecution, is more burdensome than a request for asylum.”).

Accordingly, the petition for review is denied. See 8th Cir. 47B.

1

. The IJ’s denial of relief under the Convention Against Torture is not before this court because the BIA held the issue was not adequately raised on appeal and thus did not rule *417on the matter. See Doe v. Holder, 651 F.3d 824, 830 (8th Cir. 2011) (holding that we generally may not consider issues not raised before the BIA).
CERTIFICATION 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 Quarterly Report of Windswept Environmental
Group, Inc. (the "Company") on Form 10-Q for the period ended April 1, 2003 as
filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the
"Report"), I , Charles L. Kelly, Jr., Chief Financial Officer 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, 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/ Charles L. Kelly, Jr.
                                                    ----------------------------
                                                    Charles L. Kelly, Jr.
                                                    Chief Financial Officer

                                                    Dated: May 15, 2003
#### ALEXSAM, INC., Plaintiff-Appellant v. WILDCARD SYSTEMS, INC., eFunds Corporation, Fidelity National Information Services, Inc., Defendants-Appellees

2017-1682

United States Court of Appeals, Federal Circuit.

January 9, 2018

W. Lee Gresham, III, Heninger Garrison Davis, LLC, Birmingham, AL, argued for plaintiff-appellant. Also represented by Jacqueline Knapp Burt, Atlanta, GA; Steven Whitefield.Ritcheson, Insight, Chats-worth, CA.

James R. Barney, Finnegan, Henderson, Farabow, Garrett & Dunner, LLP, Washington, DC argued for defendants-appel-lees. Also represented by Robert B. Cassa-dy; Jeffrey A. Berkowitz, Reston, VA; Robert Eric Bilik, Daniel M. Mahfood, McGuireWoods LLP, Jacksonville, FL; Deborah Segers, Fidelity National Information Systems, Inc., Jacksonville, FL.

(Dyk, Bryson, and Taranto, Circuit Judges).

JUDGMENT

Per Curiam

This Cause having been heard and considered, it is Ordered and Adjudged:

AFFIRMED. *See*Fed. Cir. R. 36.
#### STEPHEN J. LANDA *v.*DEPARTMENT OF MOTOR VEHICLES

(AC 20685)

Foti, Schaller and Flynn, Js.

Submitted on briefs April 6

officially released May 8, 2001

Per Curiam.

The judgment is affirmed.
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<PAGE>
<ARTICLE> 5
<MULTIPLIER> 1,000
       
<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   9-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          DEC-31-1997
<PERIOD-START>                             JAN-01-1997
<PERIOD-END>                               SEP-30-1997
<CASH>                                           3,497
<SECURITIES>                                         0
<RECEIVABLES>                                   14,103
<ALLOWANCES>                                       954
<INVENTORY>                                      2,605
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                                21,573
<PP&E>                                         141,518
<DEPRECIATION>                                  73,134
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                 299,761
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                           35,155
<BONDS>                                        171,744
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                           131
<OTHER-SE>                                      88,731
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                   299,761
<SALES>                                         88,360
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                                88,360
<CGS>                                            9,909
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                   33,035
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                87,977
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                     0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                              13,405
<INCOME-PRETAX>                               (45,856)
<INCOME-TAX>                                       173
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                           (46,029)
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                  (46,029)
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                   (3.65)
<EPS-DILUTED>                                   (3.65)
        

</TABLE>
|WELLS FARGO(logo) | Commercial
Mortgage ServicingD1050-084, 8th Floor401 South Tryon St.Charlotte,
NC 282021-800-326-1334
|----------------- | -----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------



ANNUAL STATEMENT OF COMPLIANCE



Reference is hereby made to that certain Pooling and Servicing Agreement dated as of September 1, 2014, by
and among WELLS FARGO COMMERCIAL MORTGAGE SECURITIES, INC., as Depositor, WELLS FARGO BANK, NATIONAL ASSOCIATION, as General Master
Servicer, CWCAPITAL ASSET MANAGEMENT LLC, as General Special Servicer, NCB,
FSB, as NCB Master Servicer, NCB, FSB, as NCB Special Servicer, PENTALPHA SURVEILLANCE LLC, as Trust Advisor, WELLS FARGO BANK,
NATIONAL ASSOCIATION, as Certificate Administrator, as Tax Administrator and as Custodian, and WILMINGTON TRUST, NATIONAL ASSOCIATION,
as Trustee, with respect to Commercial Mortgage Pass-Through Certificates Series 2014-C22 (the “Agreement”). Capitalized
terms used herein not otherwise defined shall have the meanings assigned in the Agreement.



Pursuant to Section 11.12 of this Agreement, I, Daniel Bober, Executive Vice President of Commercial Mortgage
Services do hereby certify that:



|1. |  | A review of the activities of the General Master Servicer during the period from January 1, 2016 through December
31, 2016, (the “Reporting Period”), and of its performance per the Agreement during such period has been made under
my supervision, and
|-- |  | ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
|   |  |                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                          
|2. |  | To the best of my knowledge, based on such review, the General Master Servicer has fulfilled all of its obligations
under this Agreement in all material respects throughout the Reporting Period.                                                       



IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the undersigned has executed this Certificate as of
the 28th day of February 2017.



|/s/ Daniel Bober         | 
|------------------------ | 
|Daniel Bober             | 
|Executive Vice President | 
|Wells Fargo Bank         | 



|Wells Fargo Bank, N.A. | Together we’ll go far
|---------------------- | ---------------------
<PAGE>

                                                                  Exhibit 32



                          CERTIFICATION 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 quarterly report of The Jones Financial
Companies, L.L.L.P. on Form 10-Q for the period ending June 27, 2003 as
filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the
"Report"), I, Steven Novik, Chief Financial Officer of the Company, certify
to the best of my knowledge, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 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/ John W. Bachmann
                                    ----------------------------------------
                                    Chief Executive Officer
                                    The Jones Financial Companies, L.L.L.P.
                                    August 8, 2003


                                    /s/ Steven Novik
                                    ----------------------------------------
                                    Chief Financial Officer
                                    The Jones Financial Companies, L.L.L.P.
                                    August 8, 2003


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 Jones
Financial Companies, L.L.L.P. and will be retained by the Jones Financial
Companies, L.L.L.P. and furnished to the Securities and Exchange Commission
or its staff upon request.
#### Vilma Leticia Santos DIAZ, Petitioner, v. Jefferson B. SESSIONS III, Attorney General, Respondent.

No. 15-73452

United States Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit.

Submitted January 16, 2018 *

Filed January 19, 2018

James Todd Bennett, El Cerrito, CA, for Petitioner

Jessica Dawgert, Trial Attorney, DOJ— U.S. Department of Justice, Civil Division/Office of Immigration Litigation, Washington, DC, Chief Counsel ICE, Office of the Chief Counsel, Department of Homeland Security, San Francisco, CA, for Respondent

Before: REINHARDT, TROTT, and HURWITZ, Circuit Judges.

*

 The panel unanimously concludes this case is suitable for decision without oral argument. *491*See*Fed. R. App. P. 34(a)(2).

*491MEMORANDUM **

Vilma Leticia Santos Diaz, a native and citizen of Guatemala, petitions for review of the Board of Immigration Appeals’ (“BIA”) order dismissing her appeal from an immigration judge’s decision denying her application for withholding of removal, relief under the Convention Against Torture (“CAT”), and administrative closure. Our jurisdiction is governed by 8 U.S.C. § 1252. We review for substantial evidence the agency’s factual findings. *Silaya v. Mukasey,*524 F.3d 1066, 1070 (9th Cir. 2008). We dismiss in part and deny in part the petition for review.

We lack jurisdiction to consider Santos Diaz’s challenge to the agency’s .denial of administrative closure. *See Diaz-Covarrubias v. Mukasey,*551 F.3d 1114, 1118-20 (9th Cir. 2009).

Substantial evidence supports the agency’s determination that Santos Diaz failed to demonstrate a nexus between the harm she fears and a protected ground. *See Barajas-Romero v. Lynch,*846 F.3d 351, 357 (9th Cir. 2017) (applicant seeking withholding of removal must prove that a protected ground was a reason for persecution); *Zetino v. Holder,*622 F.3d 1007, 1016 (9th Cir. 2010) (applicant’s “desire to be free from harassment by criminals motivated by theft or random violence by gang members has no nexus to a protected ground”). Thus, Santos Diaz’s withholding of removal claim fails.

Substantial evidence also supports the agency’s denial of CAT relief because Santos Diaz failed to show it is more likely than not that she would be tortured by or with the consent or acquiescence of the government of Guatemala. *See Aden v. Holder,*589 F.3d 1040, 1047 (9th Cir. 2009).

We reject Santos Diaz’s contention that the BIA violated due process by failing to rule on her “motion to remand” as raised in her appeal brief to the BIA. *See Lata v. INS,*204 F.3d 1241, 1246 (9th Cir. 2000) (requiring error and substantial prejudice to prevail on a due process claim).

PETITION FOR REVIEW DISMISSED in part; DENIED in part.

**

 This disposition is not appropriate for publication and is not precedent except as provided by Ninth Circuit Rule 36-3.
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<PAGE>
 
<ARTICLE> 5
       
<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   9-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          MAR-31-1997
<PERIOD-START>                             APR-01-1996
<PERIOD-END>                               DEC-31-1996
<CASH>                                         115,746
<SECURITIES>                                         0
<RECEIVABLES>                                    2,653
<ALLOWANCES>                                         0
<INVENTORY>                                          0
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                               129,632
<PP&E>                                          14,735
<DEPRECIATION>                                   9,194
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                 135,173
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                          258,616
<BONDS>                                              0
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                    210,000
<COMMON>                                       344,831
<OTHER-SE>                                   (678,880)
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                   135,173
<SALES>                                              0
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                                 9,419
<CGS>                                                0
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                        0
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                     0
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                     0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                                   0
<INCOME-PRETAX>                              (204,014)
<INCOME-TAX>                                         0
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                          (204,014)
<DISCONTINUED>                                 570,347
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                   366,333
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                      .01
<EPS-DILUTED>                                      .01
        

</TABLE>
<PAGE>
 
                                                                    EXHIBIT 21.1



                         UNITED FINANCIAL GROUP, INC.
                        SUBSIDIARIES OF THE REGISTRANT

                --------------------------------------------------
                                                State of Incorporation
                                Name
                --------------------------------------------------
                PLC Stockholding, Inc.                  Delaware
                Group Investors Trust Company           Texas
                PennCorp Financial, Inc.                Texas
                United Savings Association of Texas     Texas
IV

105TH CONGRESS

2D SESSION H. CON. RES. 349

Expressing the sense of Congress that the United States strongly supports

any assistance that can be provided to the Government and people

of Turkmenistan to build pipelines or take any other measures that

will lead to the resumption of natural gas exports.

IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

OCTOBER 10, 1998

Mr. TOWNS submitted the following concurrent resolution; which was referred

to the Committee on International Relations

CONCURRENT RESOLUTION

Expressing the sense of Congress that the United States

strongly supports any assistance that can be provided

to the Government and people of Turkmenistan to build

pipelines or take any other measures that will lead to

the resumption of natural gas exports.

1 Resolved by the House of Representatives (the Senate

2 concurring), That it is the sense of Congress that the

3 United States strongly supports any assistance that can

4 be provided to the Government and people of

5 Turkmenistan to build pipelines or take any other meas6 ures that will lead to the resumption of natural gas ex7 ports, particularly measures involving United States busi-
2

•HCON 349 IH

1 nesses, thereby leading to improvement of the economy

2 and infrastructure of Turkmenistan, the standard of living

3 of the people of Turkmenistan, and the promotion of de4 mocratization and economic and political stability in the

5 region.

Æ
(logo) Rialto 

         CAPITAL

 

 

**2018 Annual Statement of Servicer Compliance (Item1123)**

** **

 

Pooling and ServicingAgreement (the “Pooling and Servicing Agreement”) dated as of December 1, 2014 byand among Wells Fargo Commercial Mortgage Securities, Inc., as Depositor, WellsFargo Bank, National Association as General Master Servicer, Rialto CapitalAdvisors, LLC as General Special Servicer, NCB, FSB as NCB Master Servicer,NCB, FSB as NCB Special Servicer, Park Bridge Lender Services LLC, as TrustAdvisor, Wells Fargo Bank, National Association as Certificate Administrator,as Tax Administrator and as Custodian and Wilmington Trust, NationalAssociation as Trustee relating to the Wells Fargo Commercial Mortgage Trust2014-LC18, Commercial Mortgage Pass-Through Certificates, Series 2014-LC18 **(WFCM2014-LC18)**

 

The undersigned, a dulyauthorized officer of Rialto Capital Advisors, LLC, as special servicer (the“Special Servicer”) herein certifies to the following:

 

1.     All servicing activities and performanceof such servicing activities under the Pooling and Servicing Agreement are  performed on behalf of the Special Servicer.

 

2.     A review of the servicing activities andperformance by the Special Servicer for the period of January 1, 2018 toDecember 31, 2018 (the “Reporting Period”) in accordance with the Pooling andServicing Agreement has been conducted under my supervision.

 

3.     To the best of my knowledge, based onsuch review, the Special Servicer has fulfilled all of its obligations underthe terms of the Pooling and Servicing Agreement, in all material respects forthe Reporting Period and if there has been a failure to fulfill any suchobligations in any material respect, each failure and the nature and statusthereof has been specifically identified herein.

 

 

Certified by: /s/ Adam Singer 

Adam Singer, Managing Director

 

Date: March 1, 2019
#### David Bruce JONES *v.*STATE of Arkansas

CR 99-320

988 S.W.2d 496

Supreme Court of Arkansas

Opinion delivered April 15, 1999

*Larry W. Horton,*for appellant.

No response.

Per Curiam.

On March 12, 1999, the record was tendered to the clerk’s office for filing. It was not accepted because the time for filing had exceeded seven months from the date of judgment. Counsel for the appellant moved the Circuit Court of Hot Spring County, Arkansas, for additional time to lodge the transcript, and was granted additional time to March 16, 1999, to file the transcript. The record was again tendered to the clerk’s office on March 19, 1999, after the extended time for filing had lapsed.

The appellant has filed a motion for rule on the clerk to compel the clerk’s office to accept the record. In his motion, appellant states the reason the record was tendered late is that the Hot Spring County Circuit Clerk was unable to prepare the transcript in time for proper filing.

This court has held that it will grant a motion for rule on the clerk when the attorney admits that the record was not timely filed due to an error on his part. *See, e.g., Tarry v. State,*
      *310288 Ark. 172, 702 S.W.2d 804 (1986). Here, the attorney does not admit fault on his part, but instead implies the Hot Spring County Circuit Clerk failed to prepare the transcript for proper filing. We have held that a statement that it was someone else’s fault or no one’s fault will not suffice. *Clark v. State,*289 Ark. 382, 711 S.W.2d 162 (1986). Therefore, appellant’s motion must be denied.

The appellant’s attorney shall file within thirty days from the date of this per curiam a motion and affidavit in this case accepting full responsibility for not timely filing the transcript, and upon filing same, the motion will be granted and a copy of the opinion will be forwarded to the Committee on Professional Conduct.