alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
#### Diego Enrique MONTANO-FIMBRES, Petitioner, v. Jefferson B. SESSIONS III, Attorney General, Respondent.

No. 16-72012

United States Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit.

Submitted December 18, 2017 *

Filed December 21, 2017

Matthew Harrison Green, Esquire, Attorney, Law Offices of Matthew H. Green, Tucson, AZ, for Petitioner

*934Corey Leigh Farrell, OIL, 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: WALLACE, SILVERMAN, and BYBEE, Circuit Judges.

*

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

MEMORANDUM **

Diego Enrique Montano-Fimbres, a native and citizen of Mexico, petitions for review of the Board of Immigration Appeals’ order dismissing his appeal from an immigration judge’s decision denying cancellation of removal. Our jurisdiction is governed by 8 U.S.C. § 1252. We review for substantial evidence the agency’s factual findings. *Najmabadi v. Holder,*597 F.3d 983, 986 (9th Cir. 2010). We deny in part and dismiss in part the petition for review.

Substantial evidence supports the agency’s determination that Montano-Fimbres failed to establish the requisite ten years of continuous physical presence for cancellation of removal, where the Form 1-826, dated November 3, 2010, indicates that he accepted administrative voluntary departure in lieu of removal proceedings. *See*8 U.S.C. § 1229b(b)(l)(A); *Gutierrez v. Mukasey,*521 F.3d 1114, 1117-18 (9th Cir. 2008) (requiring some evidence that alien was informed of and accepted the terms of the voluntary departure agreement). Mon-tano-Fimbres’ testimony does not compel a contrary conclusion, where he did not dispute that he signed the Form 1-826, nor allege that immigration officials misrepresented the Form 1-826 to him. *Cf. Ibarra-Flores v. Gonzales,*439 F.3d 614, 619-20 (9th Cir. 2006) (insufficient evidence that alien knowingly and voluntarily accepted voluntary departure where record did not contain the voluntary departure form and alien’s testimony suggested that he accepted return due to misrepresentations by immigration authorities).

To the extent Montano-Fimbres contends that the agency’s determination violated due process, we lack jurisdiction to consider this unexhausted contention. *See Tijani v. Holder,*628 F.3d 1071, 1080 (9th Cir. 2010) (the court lacks jurisdiction to consider legal claims not presented in an alien’s administrative proceedings before the agency).

PETITION FOR REVIEW DENIED in part; DISMISSED in part.

**

 This disposition is not appropriate for publication and is not precedent except as provided by Ninth Circuit Rule 36-3,
#### JRW SERVICES GROUP v. CAMP, G.

2987 EDA 2016

Superior Court of Pennsylvania.

09/06/2017

15-02657 (Chester)

Affirmed
2022 EAVS Data Brief: New Jersey EAVS Jurisdictions:

21 

 Voter Registration 

Active Reg. Voters as of Nov. 8, 20221 

5,934,029 

Reg. Forms Received2* 

3,927,225 

Total Confirmation Notices Sent3* 

458,898 

Voters Removed from Reg. Rolls4* 

402,607 

Source of Registration Applications5 

Motor Vehicle Dept. 52.4% 

Other 40.9% 

Online 6.4% 

Mail, Email, Fax 0.4% 

In Person 0.0% 

 Voting and Turnout 

Voters Participating By Mode6 

7 Turnout 

41.3% 

Mail 

581,955 

21.9% 

Other 

2,076,194 

78.1% 

Total Voting Locations8: 5,111 

Total Poll Workers9: 12,454 

Election Technology 

Percentage of Jurisdictions Using...10 

100.0% 

Ballot 

Marking 

Devices 

100.0% 

Electronic 

Poll 

Books 

100.0% 

Scanners 

23.8% 

DREs w/o 

VVPAT 

0.0% 

DREs with 

VVPAT 

0.0% 

Hand 

Counting 

 Mail Ballots 

• 947,150 mail ballots transmitted11 

• 62.1% of transmitted mail ballots returned by voters12 

• 98.9% of returned mail ballots counted13 

• 1.0% of returned mail ballots rejected14 

• Did not conduct all-mail election15 

• Allowed drop boxes16 

• Allowed ballot curing17 

 Election Audits18 

-- Access audit 

-- Ballot design audit 

Ballot reconciliation ✔ audit 

Compliance/ -- procedural audit 

-- Eligibility audit 

-- Legal audit 

Logic and accuracy ✔ testing 

Post-election ✔ tabulation audit 

-- Other 

Notes 

EAVS data and reports may be downloaded at www.eac.gov 

/research-and-data/datasets-codebooks-and-surveys. 

Responses of “Does not apply,” “Data not available,” and “Valid 

skip” are shown as zeroes or dashes. Percentages may not sum 

to 100% because of missing data or rounding. 

* Close of registration for 2020 

general election to close of 

registration for 2022 general 

election. 

1 A1b of EAVS. 

2 A3a of EAVS. 

3 A8a of EAVS. 

4 A9a of EAVS. 

5 Mail, Email, Fax is A4a/A3a. 

In Person is A4b/A3a. Online is 

A4c/A3a. Motor Vehicle Dept. is 

A4d/A3a. Other is the sum of 

A4e–A4l/A3a. May not sum to 

100% because of missing data. 

6 In-Person Election Day is F1b. 

Mail is F1d+F1g. In-Person Early 

is F1f. Other is F1c+F1e+F1h. 

7 F1a of EAVS divided by citizen 

voting age population (CVAP). 

8 D2a of EAVS. 

9 D7a of EAVS. 

10 F3a–f, F5a–F9a of EAVS; 

number of jurisdictions that 

responded “Yes” divided by

number of jurisdictions in 

state/territory. 

11 C1a of EAVS. 

12 C1b/C1a of EAVS. 

13 C8a/C1b of EAVS. 

14 C9a/C1b of EAVS. 

15 Q17 and Q17a of Policy 

Survey. 

16 Q19 of Policy Survey. 

17 Q20 of Policy Survey. 

18 Q36 of Policy Survey. See 

survey questionnaire for full 

definitions of each type of 

audit.
# C_2021289EN.01004601.xml

| 19.7.2021 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 289/46 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

19.7.2021

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 289/46

---

Action brought on 31 May 2021 — FC v EASO

(Case T-303/21)

(2021/C 289/62)

Language of the case: Greek

Parties

Applicant: FC (represented by: V. Christianos, lawyer)

Defendant: European Asylum Support Office (EASO)

Form of order sought

The applicant claims that the General Court should:

| — | annul the contested measure rejecting the applicant’s complaint of 26 March 2021 under Article 90(2) of the Staff Regulations of Officials of the European Union; and |
| --- | --- |

—

annul the contested measure rejecting the applicant’s complaint of 26 March 2021 under Article 90(2) of the Staff Regulations of Officials of the European Union; and

| — | order the defendant to pay the entirety of the costs incurred by the applicant. |
| --- | --- |

—

order the defendant to pay the entirety of the costs incurred by the applicant.

Pleas in law and main arguments

In support of the action, the applicant relies on the following pleas in law:

The contested measure is vitiated by a breach of the principle of procedural economy and by an infringement of the applicant’s right to effective judicial protection, on the following grounds:

| 1. | infringement of the applicant’s right of defence, since the defendant continues not to connect the disciplinary proceedings with errors and infringements of fundamental rights committed by the defendant at the earlier stage — that is to say, at the pre-disciplinary stage — which also produce effects at the subsequent stage of the disciplinary proceedings; and |
| --- | --- |

1.

infringement of the applicant’s right of defence, since the defendant continues not to connect the disciplinary proceedings with errors and infringements of fundamental rights committed by the defendant at the earlier stage — that is to say, at the pre-disciplinary stage — which also produce effects at the subsequent stage of the disciplinary proceedings; and

| 2. | infringement of the applicant’s right to be heard. |
| --- | --- |

2.

infringement of the applicant’s right to be heard.

---
EX-31 Rule13a-14(d)/15d-14(d) Certifications.

 

 

I, Anthony Sfarra,certify that:

 

1. I have reviewedthis report on Form 10-K and all reports on Form 10-D required to be filed inrespect of the period covered by this report on Form 10-K of the Wells FargoCommercial Mortgage Trust 2014-LC18 (the "Exchange Act periodicreports");

 

2. Based on myknowledge, the Exchange Act periodic reports, taken as a whole, do not containany untrue statement of a material fact or omit to state a material factnecessary to make the statements made, in light of the circumstances underwhich such statements were made, not misleading with respect to the periodcovered by this report;

 

3. Based on myknowledge, all of the distribution, servicing and other information required tobe provided under Form 10-D for the period covered by this report is includedin the Exchange Act periodic reports;

 

4. Based on myknowledge and the servicer compliance statements required in this report underItem 1123 of Regulation AB, and except as disclosed in the Exchange Actperiodic reports, the servicers have fulfilled their obligations under theservicing agreements in all material respects; and

 

5. All of the reportson assessment of compliance with servicing criteria for asset-backed securitiesand their related attestation reports on assessment of compliance withservicing criteria for asset-backed securities required to be included in thisreport in accordance with Item 1122 of Regulation AB and Exchange Act Rules13a-18 and 15d-18 have been included as an exhibit to this report, except asotherwise disclosed in this report. Any material instances of noncompliancedescribed in such reports have been disclosed in this report on Form 10-K.

 

In giving thecertifications above, I have reasonably relied on information provided to me bythe following unaffiliated parties:

 

National CooperativeBank, N.A. (as successor to NCB, FSB), as NCB Master Servicer, Rialto CapitalAdvisors, LLC, as Special Servicer, National Cooperative Bank, N.A. (assuccessor to NCB, FSB), as NCB Special Servicer, Wilmington Trust, NationalAssociation, as Trustee, Park Bridge Lender Services LLC, as Trust Advisor,CoreLogic Commercial Real Estate Services, Inc., as Servicing FunctionParticipant, National Tax Search, LLC, as Servicing Function Participant,Prudential Asset Resources, Inc., as Primary Servicer, CWCapital AssetManagement LLC, as Special Servicer for the Colorado Mills Mortgage Loan, WilmingtonTrust, National Association, as Trustee for the Colorado Mills Mortgage Loan,TriMont Real Estate Advisors, Inc., as Trust Advisor for the Colorado MillsMortgage Loan, CoreLogic Commercial Real Estate Services, Inc., as ServicingFunction Participant for the Colorado Mills Mortgage Loan, and National TaxSearch, LLC, as Servicing Function Participant for the Colorado Mills MortgageLoan.

 

 

 

Dated: March18, 2020

 

 

/s/ AnthonySfarra

 

 

President

(seniorofficer in charge of securitization of the depositor)
|   | 1. | the      Report fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) or 15(d) of      the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended;  and |
|--------|----|----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|

|   | 2. | the      information contained in the Report fairly presents, in all material      respects, the financial condition and results of operations of the      Company. |
|--------|----|---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|

|  By:    |   /s/      A.G.      Foust                                                               Name:      A.G. Foust |
|-----------------------------|-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|
|                        | Title:  Chief      Executive and Financial      OfficerDate:   August      12, 2009                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                        |
|                        |                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                |
#### IN the MATTER of the ESTATE OF J.I. SEAY, Sr., Deceased; In the Matter of the Estate of Hilma R. Seay, Deceased; George L. Seay, *et al. v.*Helen Quinn, *et al.*

99-538

989 S.W.2d 913

Supreme Court of Arkansas

Opinion delivered May 13, 1999

*Malcolm R. Smith, P.A.,*by: *Malcolm R.*Smith; and *Mitchell, Williams, Selig, Gates & Woodyard, P.L.L.C.,*by: *Lance R. Miller,*for movants.

*Charles J. Lincoln, P.A.,*by: *Charles J. Lincoln;*and *John R. Myers,*for respondents.

Per Curiam.

 Considering the motion for a reassignment of judge filed by Helen S. Quinn and First United Bank, co-trustees and personal representatives of the Estates of J.I. Seay, Sr., and Hilma R. Seay, and the response filed by George L. Seay and James Irby Seay, Jr., this court has determined the following:

> 1. Judge Lawrence Dawson was assigned the captioned cases when the judge of the Chancery and Probate Courts of Arkansas County of the Eleventh East Judicial Circuit recused *517pursuant to Ark. Code Ann. section 16-10-101, which provides that:

> The Chief Justice of the Supreme Court shall be directly responsible for the efficient operation of the judicial branch and of its constituent courts and for the expeditious dispatch of litigation therein and the proper conduct of the business of the courts.

> 2. Judge Dawson’s term expired on December 31, 1998. Accordingly, his assignment was terminated and a new assignment was necessary.

> 3. On February 22, 1999, Judge David Switzer was assigned to the captioned cases under Orders Number 99-114 and 99-115.

> 4. On April 2, 1999, Judge Switzer held a pretrial conference and issued a pretrial order.

> 5. The first objection to Judge Switzer’s appointment was made on April 7, 1999, after he had conducted his first hearing.

> 6. This court held in *Neal v. Wilson,*321 Ark. 70, 900 S.W.2d 177 (1995), that:

> It is the parties’ or trial court’s responsibility to apprise this Court as to whether an assignment is necessary under Act 496. Once that assignment is made, that responsibility continues. Clearly, it is not this court’s task, on its own volition, to discover or monitor whether the circumstances have changed to warrant the termination of an assignment or reassignment.

The objection to Judge Switzer’s appointment was not timely filed. Accordingly, we deny the motion for a reassignment of judge.
No. 11-9959.

#### Mayes *v.*Graphic Packaging International.

C. A. 4th Cir. Certiorari denied.
[Federal Register Volume 62, Number 41 (Monday, March 3, 1997)]
[Notices]
[Page 9455]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 97-5172]


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

NATIONAL AERONAUTICS AND SPACE ADMINISTRATION

[Notice 97-025]


NASA Advisory Council (NAC), Space Science Advisory Committee 
(SScAC), Structure and Evolution of the Universe Advisory Subcommittee; 
Meeting

AGENCY: National Aeronautics and Space Administration.

ACTION: Notice of meeting.

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

SUMMARY: In accordance with the Federal Advisory Committee Act, Pub. L. 
92-463, as amended, the National Aeronautics and Space Administration 
announces a forthcoming meeting of the NASA Advisory Council, Space 
Science Advisory Committee, Structure and Evolution of the Universe 
Subcommittee.

DATES: Monday, March 24, 1997, 8:30 a.m. to 5:00 p.m., and Tuesday, 
March 25, 1997, 8:30 a.m. to 5:00 p.m.

ADDRESSES: Goddard Space Flight Center, Bldg. 26, Conference Room 212, 
Greenbelt Road, Greenbelt, MD 20771.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Dr. Alan N. Bunner, Code SA, National 
Aeronautics and Space Administration, Washington, DC 20546, 202/358-
0364.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The meeting will be open to the public up to 
the capacity of the room. The agenda for the meeting includes the 
following topics:

--Status of Ongoing Missions
--Structure and Evolution of Universe (SEU) Strategic Planning
--Plans and Concepts for Future Missions
--Development of SEU Technology ``Roadmap''
--Discussion of President's FY 1998 NASA Budget

    It is imperative that the meeting be held on these dates to 
accommodate the scheduling priorities of the key participants. Visitors 
will be requested to sign a visitor's register.

    Dated: February 25, 1997.
Leslie M. Nolan,
Advisory Committee Management Officer, National Aeronautics and Space 
Administration.
[FR Doc. 97-5172 Filed 2-28-97; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 7510-01-M
<PAGE>


                                                                    EXHIBIT 23.5

                   [H.J. GRUY AND ASSOCIATES, INC. LETTERHEAD]

                    CONSENT OF H.J. GRUY AND ASSOCIATES, INC.

We hereby consent to the use of the name H.J. Gruy and Associates, Inc. and of
references to H.J. Gruy and Associates, Inc. and to the inclusion of and
references to our reports, or information contained therein, dated March 10,
2000, and dated March 9, 2001, prepared for Stocker Resources, Inc. in the
Registration Statement on Form S-8 of Plains Exploration & Production Company
for the filing dated on January 21, 2003.

                                     H.J. GRUY AND ASSOCIATES, INC.
                                     Texas Registration Number F-000637

                                     By: /s/ Sylvia Castilleja
                                         ---------------------------------------
                                         Sylvia Castilleja, P.E.
                                         Vice President


Houston, Texas
January 21, 2003

                                       13
No. 11-10476.

#### Mojica *v.*United States.

C. A. 11th Cir. Certiorari denied.

Justice Kagan took no part in the consideration or decision of this petition.
Annual Statement of Compliance

For the Period of August 16,2021 through December 31, 2021 (Reporting Period)

 

**Re: Transactions Identifiedin Appendix A**

 

I, Kristin Bonczynski, in my capacityas Senior Director, Special Servicing of Mount Street US (Georgia) LLP (MSUS),do hereby state that:

 

·        A review of the Special Servicingactivities of MSUS during the Reporting Period and of its performance,pertaining to the Transactions and the related Agreements listed in Appendix A,has been made under my supervision, and,

 

·        To the best of my knowledge, based on suchreview, MSUS has fulfilled all of its obligations pertaining to theTransactions and the related Agreements listed in Appendix A in all materialrespects throughout the Reporting Period.

 

Date: March 1, 2022

 

By: /s/ Kristin Bonczynski

Name: Kristin Bonczynski

Title: Senior Director,Special Servicing

 

 

Appendix A

 

| **Commercial Mortgage Pass Through Certificates** | **Applicable Reporting Period**          | **MSUS Role**    |
|---------------------------------------------------|------------------------------------------|------------------|
| BAMLL 2021-JACX                                   | September 15, 2021 to December 31, 2021  | Special Servicer |
| HMH 2017-NSS                                      | August 26, 2021 to  December 31, 2021    | Special Servicer |
| MSBAM 2015-C21                                    | August 16, 2021 to December 31, 2021     | Special Servicer |
| NCMS 2018-FL1                                     | September 20, 2021 to  December 31, 2021 | Special Servicer |
An official website of the United States government         Here's how you know         
**Official websites use .mil**
A **.mil** website belongs to an official U.S. Department of Defense organization in the United States.
**Secure .mil websites use HTTPS**
 A **lock (lock )** or **https://** means you’ve safely connected to the .mil website. Share sensitive information only on official, secure websites.

Skip to main content (Press Enter).

Defense Threat Reduction Agency 

Search
Search

Search

-  Home		 
-  About    -  DTRA Leadership             
  -  DTRA History             
  -  Mission             
  -  Strategic Initiatives             
  -  Foreign Malign Influence             
  -  Agency Overview Brief (pdf)             
  -  Agency Financial Report 
-  Careers & Opportunities    -  Your Civilian Career             
  -  Your Military Career             
  -  Welcome Aboard             
  -  Diversity and Inclusion 
-  Business    -  DTRA Contract Award Data             
  -  Office of Small Business             
  -  Mentor Protege Program 
-  News & Media    -  Press Center 
-  Contact Us		 
-  Joint Operations Center		 

# Foreign Malign Influence Fact Sheets

April 14, 2023

 Biology Threat Reduction Program Nigeria Factsheet 

                                Since 2018, the program has worked with the Nigerian public health sector to enhance its diagnostic and disease detection capabilities to support both local and international efforts to diagnose, track, and respond to potential infectious disease outbreaks.            

### Stay Connected

Hosted by Defense Media Activity - WEB.mil
No. 11-10160.

#### Dionne *v.*Sampson et al.

C. A. 6th Cir. Certiorari denied.
Michigan Supreme Court

Lansing, Michigan

Robert P. Young, Jr.

, Chief Justice

Michael F. Cavanagh

Stephen J. Markman

Mary Beth Kelly

Brian K. Zahra

Bridget M. McCormack

David F. Viviano

, 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 April 29, 2013

h0422 

# Order

April 29, 2013

146276

PEOPLE OF THE STATE OF MICHIGAN,

Plaintiff

- Appellee,

v SC: 146276

COA: 310939

Monroe CC: 11

- 039043

- FH

CRAIG DANIEL SZYMKOWIAK,

Defendant

- Appellant.

____________________________________/

On order of the Court, the application for leave to appeal the October 22, 2012

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

persuaded that the question presented should be reviewed by this Court.