alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
#### Nixsy Lodani MELGAR-CASTILLO, Petitioner v. Jefferson B. SESSIONS, III, U. S. Attorney General, Respondent

No. 17-60130 Summary Calendar

United States Court of Appeals, Fifth Circuit.

Filed February 23, 2018

Donglai Yang, Law Office of Donglai Yang, New Orleans, LA, for Petitioner

Aaron D. Nelson, Esq., Trial Attorney, Christina Petersen Greer, Trial Attorney, U.S. Department of Justice, Office of Immigration Litigation, Washington, DC, for Respondent

Before JOLLY, OWEN, and HAYNES, Circuit Judges.

PER CURIAM: *

Nixsy Lodani Melgar-Castillo, a native and citizen of Honduras, has filed a petition for review of the decision of the Board of Immigration Appeals (BIA) dismissing her appeal of the Immigration Judge’s (IJ) denial of her application for asylum, withholding of removal, and relief under the Convention Against Torture (CAT). Mel-gar-Castillo argues that the IJ and the BIA erred regarding the determinations that she was ineligible for withholding of removal and relief under CAT. Because she does not address the dismissal of her asylum application as time barred, the claim is deemed abandoned. *See Soadjede v. Ashcroft,*324 F.3d 830, 833 (5th Cir. 2003).

We review the decision of the BIA and will review the IJ’s decision only to the extent it influenced the BIA’s decision. *Masih v. Mukasey,*536 F.3d 370, 373 (5th Cir. 2008). The BIA’s legal conclusions are reviewed de novo, and its factual findings, such as the finding that an alien is not eligible for withholding of removal or CAT relief, are reviewed for substantial evidence. *Zhang v. Gonzales,*432 F.3d 339, 344 (5th Cir. 2005). We will not reverse the BIA’s decision on substantial-evidence review unless we conclude “not only that the evidence supports a contrary conclusion, but [also] that the evidence compels it.” *Id.*(internal quotation marks and citation omitted).

The IJ and the BIA ■ determined that Melgar-Castillo’s proposed group of “women living in Honduras” lacks the requisite particularity and social visibility. The evidence does not compel a finding that, even if Melgar-Castillo suffered past persecution by a gang of drug traffickers and Honduran officials, the persecution was on account of her “membership in the particular social group.” *See Zhang,*432 F.3d at 344; *see also Hernandez-De La Cruz v. Lynch,*819 F.3d 784, 786-87 (5th Cir. 2016).

Melgar-Castillo similarly has not shown, for purposes of relief under CAT, that the evidence compels a finding that she more likely than not will be tortured if returned to Honduras given her past ability to relocate within Honduras without incident. *See*
      *352
      *Zhang,*432 F.3d at 344; 8 C.F.R. § 208.16(c)(2), (3). Thus, the BIA’s conclusion that Melgar-Castillo was not eligible for relief under CAT is supported by substantial evidence. *See Zhang,*432 F.3d at 344.

The petition for review is DENIED. The motion for leave to file an amended brief is GRANTED.

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.
Michigan Supreme Court

Lansing, Michigan

Marilyn Kelly,

 Chief Justice

Michael F. Cavanagh

Elizabeth A. Weaver

Maura D. Corrigan

Robert P. Young, Jr.

Stephen J. Markman

Diane M. Hathaway, Justices

I, Corbin R. Davis, Clerk of the Michigan Supreme Court, certify that the 

foregoing is a true and complete copy of the order entered at the direction of the Court. 

 _________________________________________ 

 Clerk

December 21, 2009 

s1214 

Order 

 

December 21, 2009 

139708 

PEOPLE OF THE STATE OF MICHIGAN, 

Plaintiff-Appellee, 

v SC: 139708 

 COA: 278583 

Wayne CC: 06-013250-01 

DESMOND MAURICE KINDLE, 

Defendant-Appellant. 

_________________________________________/ 

 On order of the Court, the application for leave to appeal the July 30, 2009 

judgment of the Court of Appeals is considered, and it is DENIED, because we are not 

persuaded that the questions presented should be reviewed by this Court.
# C_2021228EN.01003101.xml

| 14.6.2021 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 228/31 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

14.6.2021

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 228/31

---

Action brought on 29 March 2021 — Ubisoft Entertainment v EUIPO — Huawei Technologies (FOR HONOR)

(Case T-171/21)

(2021/C 228/42)

Language of the case: English

Parties

Applicant: Ubisoft Entertainment (Carentoir, France) (represented by: J. Bourgeois, lawyer)

Defendant: European Union Intellectual Property Office (EUIPO)

Other party to the proceedings before the Board of Appeal: Huawei Technologies Co. Ltd (Shenzhen, Chine)

Details of the proceedings before EUIPO

Applicant of the trademark at issue: Applicant before the General Court

Trade mark at issue: Application for European Union figurative mark FOR HONOR — Application for registration No 14 744 338

Procedure before EUIPO: Opposition proceedings

Contested decision: Decision of the Fourth Board of Appeal of EUIPO of 25 January 2021 in Case R 1297/2020-4

Form of order sought

The applicant claims that the Court should:

| — | annul the contested decision; |
| --- | --- |

—

annul the contested decision;

| — | order EUIPO and the intervener to bear all costs and to reimburse the applicant of all costs supported for the opposition action and appeal action including appeal taxes. |
| --- | --- |

—

order EUIPO and the intervener to bear all costs and to reimburse the applicant of all costs supported for the opposition action and appeal action including appeal taxes.

Plea in law

| — | Misapplication of Article 8(1)(b) of Regulation (EU) 2017/1001 of the European Parliament and of the Council; |
| --- | --- |

—

Misapplication of Article 8(1)(b) of Regulation (EU) 2017/1001 of the European Parliament and of the Council;

| — | Misapplication of Article 8(5) of Regulation (EU) 2017/1001 of the European Parliament and of the Council. |
| --- | --- |

—

Misapplication of Article 8(5) of Regulation (EU) 2017/1001 of the European Parliament and of the Council.

---
APC 13 x 6.5E Propeller

http://www.hobbypeople.net/index.php/apc-13-x-6-5e-propeller.html [2/1/2016 4:18:05 PM] GO 

### Qualified Orders Over $75 And All APO/FPO Ship Free*
Radio Control Hobbies and More! Find A Store My Account FAQ My Wishlist My Cart Checkout Log In



### APC 13 x 6.5E Propeller Email to a Friend Be the first to review this product Availability: Out of stock 

## $5.06
No. 609293 Quick Overview



### Description Video Reviews Product Tags APC 13 x 6.5E Propeller This is a 13x6.5E Electric ONLY Composite Propeller from Advanced Precision Composites Specifications: Diameter: 13" Pitch: 6.5" Hub inner diameter: 0.25"
SKU 609293 Manufacturer APC Mfr Part Number LP13065E Video No 

### Product Tags Add Your Tags: Add Tags Use spaces to separate tags. Use single quotes (') for phrases. COMPARE PRODUCTS You have no items to compare.

MY CART You have no items in your shopping cart.



## Service Links About Us Contact Us Customer Service Affiliate Program Store Locator FAQ Privacy Policy Hobby People : Your Southern California RC Hobby Shop Since 1972 1-800-854- 8471 (International/Local Calls: 1-714- 963-0329) 

## We're Social!

Event Calendar Plane Events Home / Aircraft / Props & Prop Accy's / Electric Propellers / APC 13 x 6.5E Propeller 

### Drones/Helis Aircraft Cars/Boats Batteries Radios General Hobbies Tools/Supplies New Items SpecialsAPC 13 x 6.5E Propeller

http://www.hobbypeople.net/index.php/apc-13-x-6-5e-propeller.html [2/1/2016 4:18:05 PM] Sitemap Car Events

Disclaimer: Price, availability, and specifications of items on this website are subject to change. Hobby People is not responsible for inadvertent errors on this website. Some items are limited to stock on hand. Health Risk Warning: Some products on this site may contain chemicals known to the state of California to cause cancer, birth defects, or other reproductive harm. © 2014 Hobby People. All Rights Reserved.
<PAGE>

                       SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION
                             Washington, D.C. 20549

                                    FORM 8-K
                                 CURRENT REPORT

                       Pursuant to Section 13 or 15(d) of
                       the Securities Exchange Act of 1934

       DATE OF REPORT (DATE OF EARLIEST EVENT REPORTED): DECEMBER 2, 2002

                              DYNEGY HOLDINGS INC.
             (Exact Name of Registrant as Specified in its Charter)

           Delaware                      0-29311                 94-3248415
(State or other jurisdiction     (Commission File Number)       (IRS Employer
      of incorporation)                                      Identification No.)

                           1000 Louisiana, Suite 5800
                              Houston, Texas 77002
                    (Address of principal executive offices)

       Registrant's telephone number, including area code: (713) 507-6400

                                 Not Applicable
          (Former name or former address, if changed since last report)


<PAGE>

ITEM 5. OTHER EVENTS.

On December 2, 2002, Dynegy Inc. ("Dynegy" or the "Company"), the wholly owning
parent company of Dynegy Holdings Inc., issued a press release announcing that
Nick J. Caruso, a former Shell Oil Company executive, has been named Dynegy's
executive vice president and chief financial officer effective immediately. In
this capacity, Mr. Caruso will be responsible for Dynegy's financial affairs,
including treasury, tax, investor relations, risk management, internal audit,
and lender and credit rating agency relationships. Dynegy also announced certain
other organizational changes in finance and accounting. A copy of Dynegy's
December 2nd press release is attached hereto as exhibit 99.1 and is
incorporated herein by this reference.

ITEM 7. FINANCIAL STATEMENTS AND EXHIBITS

a) Financial Statements of Business Acquired - Not Applicable.
b) Pro Forma Financial Information - Not Applicable.
c) Exhibits:

        99.1  Press release of Dynegy Inc. dated December 2, 2002.

<PAGE>

                                    SIGNATURE

     Pursuant to the requirements of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, the
registrant has duly caused this report to be signed on its behalf by the
undersigned hereunto duly authorized.

                              DYNEGY HOLDINGS INC.

                              BY:   /s/ Keith R. Fullenweider
                                    -----------------------------------
                                    Keith R. Fullenweider
                                    Senior Vice President, Deputy General
                                    Counsel and Secretary

Dated:  December 3, 2002
EAC Decision on Request for Interpretation 2010-07

2002 VSS Vol. II, Section, 5.4.2.i 

2005 VVSG Vol. II, Section, 5.4.2.i 

Date: 

September, 24, 2010 

Question(s): 

It is not clear as to what source code properties should be used to calculate the number of 

lines in a module to comply with the requirement that “No modules exceeding 240 lines 

in length”. 

Sections of Standards or Guidelines: 

2002 VSS Volume I 4.2.3.a Software Modularity and Programming 

2005 VVSG Volume I 5.2.3.a Software Modularity and Programming 

Each module shall have a specific function that can be tested and verified independently 

of the remainder of the code. In practice, some additional modules (such as library 

modules) may be needed to compile the module under test, but the modular construction 

allows the supporting modules to be replaced by special test versions that support test 

objectives. 

2002 VSS Volume I 4.2.3.d Software Modularity and Programming 

2005 VVSG Volume I 5.2.3.d Software Modularity and Programming 

A module is small enough to be easy to follow and understand. Program logic visible on 

a single page is easy to follow and correct. Volume II, Section 5 provides testing 

guidelines for the accredited test lab to identify large modules subject to review under 

this requirement. 

2002VSS & 2005 VVSG Volume II 5.4.2.i Assessment of Coding Conventions 

Excluding code generated by commercial code generators, is written in small and easily 

identifiable modules, with no more than 50% of all modules exceeding 60 lines in length, 

no more than 5% of all modules exceeding 120 lines in length, and no modules exceeding 

240 lines in length. “Lines” in this context, are defined as executable statements or flow 

control statements with suitable formatting and comments. The reviewer should consider 

the use of formatting, such as blocking into readable units, which supports the intent of 

this requirement where the module itself exceeds the limits. The vendor shall justify any 

module lengths exceeding this standard 
Discussion: 

The 2005 VVSG states that “‘Lines’ in this context, are defined as executable statements 

or flow control statements with suitable formatting and comments.” There are three parts 

to this statement: (1) executable statements will count toward the module line length; (2) 

flow control statements and the formatting (e.g. blank lines) used to organize the code 

will be counted as lines; and (3) comments will count toward the module length. 

The 2005 VVSG, Volume I, section 5.2.3.a states, “Each module shall have a specific 

function that can be tested and verified independently of the remainder of the code.” To 

support this concept 2005 VVSG, Volume I, section 5.2.3.d requires that, “A module is 

small enough to be easy to follow and understand.” VVSG 2005, Volume II, section 

5.4.2.i of the 2005 VVSG is used to help enforce those concepts. 

 

Conclusion: 

Executable code, comments, and formatting (e.g. blank lines, continued code, etc.) shall 

count toward the overall line count of a module. 

Effective Date: 

For all systems without an approved test plan.
# C_2021228EN.01004101.xml

| 14.6.2021 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 228/41 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

14.6.2021

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 228/41

---

Action brought on 27 April 2021 — Retail Royalty v EUIPO — Fashion Energy (Device of an eagle)

(Case T-226/21)

(2021/C 228/54)

Language of the case: English

Parties

Applicant: Retail Royalty Co. (Las Vegas, Nevada, United States) (represented by: J. Bogatz and Y. Stone, lawyers)

Defendant: European Union Intellectual Property Office (EUIPO)

Other party to the proceedings before the Board of Appeal: Fashion Energy Srl (Milano, Italy)

Details of the proceedings before EUIPO

Proprietor of the trade mark at issue: Applicant before the General Court

Trade mark at issue: European Union figurative mark (Device of an eagle) — European Union trade mark No 5 066 113

Procedure before EUIPO: Cancellation proceedings

Contested decision: Decision of the Fifth Board of Appeal of EUIPO of 10 February 2021 in Case R 2813/2019-5

Form of order sought

The applicant claims that the Court should:

| — | annul the contested decision; |
| --- | --- |

—

annul the contested decision;

| — | order EUIPO and the other party to the proceedings before the Board of Appeal to pay the costs incurred by the applicant. |
| --- | --- |

—

order EUIPO and the other party to the proceedings before the Board of Appeal to pay the costs incurred by the applicant.

Pleas in law

| — | Infringement of Articles 58(1)(a), 58(2) and 18(1) of Regulation (EU) 2017/1001 of the European Parliament and of the Council, and Article 19(1) of Commission Delegated Regulation (EU) 2018/625 in conjunction with Article 10(3) of Commission Delegated Regulation (EU) 2018/625; |
| --- | --- |

—

Infringement of Articles 58(1)(a), 58(2) and 18(1) of Regulation (EU) 2017/1001 of the European Parliament and of the Council, and Article 19(1) of Commission Delegated Regulation (EU) 2018/625 in conjunction with Article 10(3) of Commission Delegated Regulation (EU) 2018/625;

| — | Infringement of Article 94(1) of Regulation (EU) 2017/1001 of the European Parliament and of the Council. |
| --- | --- |

—

Infringement of Article 94(1) of Regulation (EU) 2017/1001 of the European Parliament and of the Council.

---
| (logo)  WELLS FARGO | **CMBS  Department**

 

MAC  N9401-011

1055  10th Avenue SE

Minneapolis,  MN 55414 |
|---------------------|--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|

 

 

MorganStanley Capital I Inc. 

1585BROADWAY

NEWYORK, New York 10036-8200

 

RE:Annual Statement of Compliance for Morgan Stanley Bank of America Merrill LynchTrust 2015-C20, Commercial Mortgage Pass-Through Certificates, Series 2015-C20

 

Perthe Pooling and Servicing Agreement dated as of January 1, 2015 (the"Agreement"), the undersigned, a duly authorized officer of WellsFargo Bank, N.A., as Custodian ("Wells Fargo"), hereby certifies asfollows as of and for the year ending December 31, 2016 (the "Reporting Period"):

 

(a)A review of Wells Fargo's activities during the Reporting Period and of itsperformance under the Agreement has been made under such officer's supervision;and

 

(b)To the best of such officer's knowledge, based on such review, Wells Fargo has fulfilledall of its obligations under the Agreement in all material respects throughoutthe Reporting Period.

 

 

February27, 2017

 

/s/Gail Vannest

GAILVANNEST

VicePresident

 

 

WellsFargo Bank, N.A.
Unclassified

Unclassified

1

Nuclear Enterprise Directorate (NE) 
Unclassified

Unclassified

2

NE Mission

Provide support to the Department of Defense (DoD) and Interagency 

Stakeholders, Allies and Partners to ensure the safety, security, 

reliability, and effectiveness of the U.S. nuclear deterrent force and 

the countering weapons of mass destruction (WMD) mission
Unclassified

Unclassified

NE Focus Areas
Unclassified

Unclassified

4

NE Current Requirements

• Subject Matter Experts (to include Advisory and Assistance Services) and 

program management for all areas of the mission (e.g. nuclear weapon 

safety)

• IT application designers, system administrators, and system engineers to 

design, build, maintain, and administer U.S. nuclear weapon accounting 

system(s); cyber tools for mission assurance assessments; and 

modeling/simulation

• Security professionals and cross-domain engineers versed in facility 

protection, mission assurance assessments, and force-on-force tests

• Chemical, Biological, Radiological, and Nuclear detection and 

characterization expertise

• Professional emergency response/disaster planning/preparedness support
Unclassified

Unclassified

5

NE Future Requirements

Capacity and Capability Enhancement

• Moving forward, NE will apply resources to expanding capacity relative to 

the multiple lines of effort delineated in our current requirements on the 

previous slide

Future Initiatives

• Improve DTRA capability to provide high-fidelity cyber assessments and 

threat-based mission assurance assessments, to include Counter-small 

Unmanned Aerial Systems (C-sUAS) and solutions for nuclear physical 

security

• Expand DTRA capacity to provide educational, training, and exercise 

support that will enhance Combatant Command and Special Operations 

Forces (SOF) capabilities to plan, control, and execute U.S. and allied 

missions that integrate U.S. nuclear and non-nuclear forces
\ 

ALsgui-iSi*, ?.010 

i 'i/iitS'l .'^i.tlt'"- !)fp.">!liiiij!! ^»i "ririii-(i.;'jjnli"ii 

l.?OC- !•.*(:/.' Jersey r.-.-cnuu SE vVciShillft'Or"!. iK"" 

205DO 

..^:H ^ J 

"~':)cmRTf;^ERT'OP" 

iRANSPORWION -

OCKET OPERATIONS 

2010 OCT --g A S:25' 

feirport 

RE; ^uppotx .?.f Ihe £.oti;h Bend .Rcgic-rijl Aupor* AppJicJfc.r. te-r FLrndin-p Under ;tio D(?pDi't;iii?iiI c>: Traii£pcria!;i;ii 

SmoU Co«vin/n;iy -iir St-n'.xe DevclopmenI Pfoa/om 

IJ^asMt. SLCifi.'iiy. 

Or. behul; o: Itia l.'.jrshjil Courity Scciomic Devslopment Co.'pcra;iop.. 1 a.-a pleased ;oo"t'i ^-uppoii 6'. trii: Smal) 

Commiinity' Air Sertfic<j Os'/eiopnieni Gf^nt tippitcaiicin sucfntried t,;- tlis Si. Jossph Ccimty Airp&r% .".(ur.oriT/ fs; 

maffceting-fundiog ;o eiicci/race a new carrier to c-n;of the Sonih Bc-nd marVe-'v.'iiJi n.>.-.--?3p ser,'!Oo 10 

Denver. CO 

Ail se^vKL- dti'ttap.-nent is impoxian'. fat She economic iK-aJih AI -<JI region. Bsslneii s es ^nd rei:£.'en;s must hjv * 

access )o ihe clobal t;j.ispof«.i;ioo »y»-o!'if 12: afi Cl7dabJs -av«s Soulh Bend Regional Airpoft'.i f/npoftjnce io ;lie f.iichi-aria 

iCjion canr,o; be OioltfiMyK'ti. 

Out quaSity ol li!'? is fin'Ked Sc- the aiipor^'s gjc.-.'th row arid ir. '.ht:!-iuf6. 

This apphcaiion 15 ^"1,1 o:<ceil<'n: opporsuniv/ (oi all oi WicHiana. s diverse leglcn in pcpk-iouor. and induwy. :o Jevtiage 

scar-ce res-o'jrces ioh^rp ae'/elop a -ttserVfce al Sc'lh Bend Airporl by •supporting lr<is applicaiior* under the 

Small,CenifiuJriity W SolVice Dc-velopmeni Giant pjogtam. 

The potfirtiiai beftsiii w MnishaiiCounvy is rjieai, V.'s uigeYOU, u> fuJJ yr fnfj.d ihs r:€<ilJ-.3l trom the Soum Bend Regional 

Ai:por«. 

fciiirsftoii CciJiMy Econtmuc Oeveiop-'ner.i Coipc-'.Tj'pi*. 

2864 Miller Drive' PK'mouih.lndiana 46563. Phone: 574-935-8499. Fax: 574-936-2645' 

vwAv. Marsha I iCou nty E Dc. org 

/ennifcnraiiron 

Hiierim ExeciJtfve Direcioi 

South Bend Regional Airport, South Bend, Indiana 

Small Community Air Service Development Program Proposal - 2010 

69
**
**Exhibit 31.2**

**Certification of Principal Financial Officer Pursuant to**

**Section 302 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002**

I, Kenneth S. Parks, certify that:

1. I have reviewed this Form 10-K/A of Mylan N.V.; and

2. Based on my knowledge, this report does not contain any untrue statement of a material fact or omit tostate a material fact necessary to make the statements made, in light of the circumstances under which such statements were made, not misleading with respect to the period covered by this report. 

 

/s/ Kenneth S. Parks

Kenneth S. Parks

Chief Financial Officer
*(Principal Financial Officer)*
Date: April 30, 2018
**
Exhibit 4.12


 


English Language Summary


 


Authorization Agreement for Radiofrequency Blocks Personal Mobile Service– Termo de Outorga de Autorização de Uso de Blocos de Radiofrequências Associadas ao Serviço Móvel Pessoal No. 517/2012/SPV-ANATEL


 



	
Parties:

	
Telefônica Brasil S.A., as authorizee, and Agência Nacional de Telecomunicações (ANATEL), as grantor.


	 	 
	
Date:

	
October 16, 2012.


	 	 
	
Expiration:

	
October 18, 2027.


	 	 
	
Purpose:

	
Authorization to use blocks of radiofrequency associated with Personal Mobile Service and Multimedia Communications, without exclusivity, primarily in sub-bands 451MHz to 458 MHz and 461 MHz to 468 MHz.  This grant was pursuant to the award of Lot 3 of under the bid No. 004/2012/PVCP/SPV-ANATEL.


	 	 
	
Area:

	
Areas identified by the Area Codes 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18 and 19, in the state of São Paulo.


	 	 
	
Amount:

	
The grant amount for this authorization is established determined by the offer price for Lot 3 of the bid No. 004/2012/PVCP/SPV-ANATEL.


	 	 
	
Renewal:

	
This license may be renewed only once, for 15 years. The amount due for the renewal will be payable every two years during the extension period for an amount corresponding to 2% (two percent) of the revenues of the Personal Mobile Service provider for the year preceding payment, net of taxes and social contributions. On the 15th year the provider must pay 1% of its revenue for the previous year.


	 	 
	
Penalty:

	
Breach of the Authorization Agreement and applicable regulations to Multimedia Communication Services may result in administrative proceedings by ANATEL, the application of warning sanctions, fines, temporary suspension or revocation of licenses.