alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
This disposition is not appropriate for publication and is not precedent *

except as provided by 9th Cir. R. 36-3.

The panel unanimously concludes this case is suitable for decision **

without oral argument. See Fed. R. App. P. 34(a)(2).

NOT FOR PUBLICATION

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

 FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT

MIGUEL ANGEL MENDOZACALVILLO,

 Petitioner,

 v.

ERIC H. HOLDER, Jr., Attorney General,

 Respondent.

No. 12-70723

Agency No. A075-666-175

MEMORANDUM*

On Petition for Review of an Order of the

Board of Immigration Appeals

Submitted May 14, 2013** 

Before: LEAVY, THOMAS, and MURGUIA, Circuit Judges.

Miguel Angel Mendoza-Calvillo, a native and citizen of Mexico, petitions

pro se for review of the Board of Immigration Appeals’ (“BIA”) order denying his

motion to reconsider and to reopen removal proceedings. Our jurisdiction is

FILED

MAY 28 2013

MOLLY C. DWYER, CLERK

U.S. COURT OF APPEALS
2 12-70723

governed by 8 U.S.C. § 1252. We review de novo claims of constitutional

violations. Ram v. INS, 243 F.3d 510, 516 (9th Cir. 2001). We dismiss in part, and

deny in part, the petition for review.

We lack jurisdiction to review the BIA’s denial of Mendoza-Calvillo’s

motion to reconsider the BIA’s discretionary hardship determination. See VilchizSoto v. Holder, 688 F.3d 642, 644 (9th Cir. 2012 (order) (“[T]he BIA’s denial of

the motion to reconsider falls outside the court’s jurisdiction because the court

cannot reconsider the discretionary, fact-based determination that petitioners failed

to demonstrate the requisite hardship.”). Mendoza-Calvillo’s contentions that the

BIA’s decision was inadequate and legally incorrect, and that the BIA should have

reopened his case are not sufficiently colorable legal or constitutional claims to

establish our jurisdiction. See Mendez-Castro v. Mukasey, 552 F.3d 975, 978 (9th

Cir. 2009) (“To be colorable in this context . . . , the claim must have some

possible validity.” (internal quotation marks and citation omitted)). 

We also lack jurisdiction to review Mendoza-Calvillo’s challenge to the

underlying orders denying his application for cancellation of removal because the

petition for review is not timely as to those orders. See 8 U.S.C. § 1252(b)(1);

Singh v. INS, 315 F.3d 1186, 1188 (9th Cir. 2003).
3 12-70723

We lack jurisdiction to consider Mendoza-Calvillo’s request for

prosecutorial discretion. See Vilchiz-Soto, 688 F.3d at 644.

Mendoza-Calvillo’s claim that the denial of cancellation of removal violated

the due process rights of his United States citizen son is foreclosed by De Mercado

v. Mukasey, 566 F.3d 810, 816 n.5 (9th Cir. 2009). 

Finally, the BIA sufficiently addressed Mendoza-Calvillo’s request to

reopen his proceedings. See Najmabadi v. Holder, 597 F.3d 983, 990 (9th Cir.

2010) (the BIA need only “announce its decision in terms sufficient to enable a

reviewing court to perceive that it has heard and thought and not merely reacted”

(internal quotations omitted)). 

PETITION FOR REVIEW DISMISSED in part; DENIED in part.
EXHIBIT 32.1

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

In connection with Florida Community Banks, Inc.'s ("Company")  Quarterly Report
on Form  10-Q  for the  period  ended  June  30,  2005  ("Report"),  each of the
undersigned certify 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.


Date:  08/08/2005                By:   /s/ Stephen L. Price
       --------------------            -----------------------------------------
                                       Stephen L. Price
                                       President, Chief Executive Officer
                                       and Chairman of the Board of Directors


                                       32
Exhibit 13.2





PRINCIPAL FINANCIAL OFFICER CERTIFICATION




PURSUANT TO 18 U.S.C. SECTION 1350





In connection with this Annual Report of Seanergy Maritime Holdings Corp. (the "Company") on Form 20-F for the year ended December 31, 2011, as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission (the "SEC") on or about the date hereof (the "Report"), I, Christina Anagnostara, 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.




A signed original of this written statement has been provided to the Company and will be retained by the Company and furnished to the SEC or its staff upon request.




Date: March 19, 2012














/s/ Christina AnagnostaraChristina AnagnostaraChief Financial Officer (Principal Financial Officer)
[Federal Register Volume 74, Number 56 (Wednesday, March 25, 2009)]
[Notices]
[Page 12902]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: E9-6535]


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

DEPARTMENT OF LABOR

Employment and Training Administration

[TA-W-65,447]


BHP Billiton, BHP Copper, Inc., Pinto Valley Operations & San 
Manuel Arizona Railroad Company, Miami, AZ; Notice of Termination of 
Investigation

    Pursuant to Section 221 of the Trade Act of 1974, as amended, an 
investigation was initiated on February 2, 2009 in response to a 
petition filed by a company official on behalf of all workers of BHP 
Billiton, BHP Copper, Inc., Pinto Valley Operations & San Manuel 
Arizona Railroad Company, Miami, Arizona.
    The petitioner requested that the petition be withdrawn. 
Consequently, the investigation has been terminated.

    Signed at Washington, DC, this 17th day of March 2009.
Richard Church,
Certifying Officer, Division of Trade Adjustment
[FR Doc. E9-6535 Filed 3-24-09; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4510-FN-P
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 Annual Report of US Energy Holdings, Inc. (the "Company")
      on
      Form 10-QSB for the period endingMarch 31, 2006 as filed with the Securities
      and
      Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the "Report"), I, Claude Eldridge,
      Chairman, Chief Executive 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 result of operations of the Company.




Date:
      August 17, 2006




By:
      /s/ Claude Eldridge Claude
      Eldridge , Chairman, Chief Executive Officer and Director
ARMED SERVICES BOARD OF CONTRACT APPEALS

Appeals of

- )

)

Hwasan Engineering & Construction Co., Ltd

. ) ASBCA Nos. 62013, 62266

)

Under Contract No. W912UM

- 17

- C

- 0043 )

APPEARANCE FOR THE APPELLANT : Song Yong Eui

, Esq.

Central IP & Law

Seoul, Korea

APPEARANCES FOR THE GOVERNMENT: Michael P. Goodman, Esq.

Engineer Chief Trial Attorney

Paul B. Taylor

, Esq.

Engineer Trial Attorney

U.S. Army Engineer District, Far East

Seoul, Korea

ORDER OF DISMISSAL

The se appeals have been withdrawn. Accordingly, they are dismissed from the

Board’s docket with prejudice.

Dated: August 13 , 2020

DAVID D’ALESSANDRIS

Administrative Judge

Armed Services Board

of Contract Appeals

I certify that the foregoing is a true copy of the Order of Dismissal of the

Armed Services Board of Contract Appeals in ASBCA Nos. 62013, 62266

, Appea ls of

Hwasan Engineering & Construction Co., Ltd. , rendered in conformance with the

Board’s Charter.

Dated: August 14, 2020

PAULLA K. GATES

- LEWIS

Recorder, Armed Services

Board of Contract Appeals
[No. 51279-0-I.

Division One.

May 24, 2004.]

#### The State of Washington, *Appellant,*v. Armond Haydel, *Respondent.*

Appeal from a judgment of the Superior Court for King County, No. 01-1-04849-6, Brian D. Gain, J., entered October 24, 2002. *Reversed*by unpublished opinion per Cox, C.J., concurred in by Appelwick and Schindler, JJ. Now published at 122 Wn. App. 365.
Transport Transports 

Canada Canada

 TP 7245E

 

AIRWORTHINESS DIRECTIVE

The following airworthiness directive (AD) may be applicable to an aircraft which our records indicate is registered in your name. ADs are issued pursuant to Canadian 

Aviation Regulation (CAR) 521 Division X. Pursuant to CAR 605.84 and the further details of CAR Standard 625, Appendix H, the continuing airworthiness of a Canadian registered aircraft is contingent upon compliance with all applicable ADs. Failure to comply with the requirements of an AD may invalidate the flight authorization of the aircraft. 

Alternative means of compliance shall be applied for in accordance with CAR 605.84 and the above-referenced Standard. 

This AD has been issued by the Continuing Airworthiness Division (AARDG), National Aircraft Certification Branch, Transport Canada, Ottawa, telephone 613 952-4357.

Pursuant to CAR 202.51 the registered owner of a Canadian aircraft shall, within seven days, notify the Minister in writing of any change of his or her name or address. 

To request a change of address, contact the Civil Aviation Communications Centre (AARC) at Place de Ville, Ottawa, Ontario K1A 0N8, or 1-800-305-2059, or www.tc.gc.ca/civilaviation/communications/centre/ address.asp 

24-0022 (01-2005)

1/1 No.

CF-2012-05

Issue Date 

 13 January 2012 

Number: CF-2012-05 

Subject: Chafing of the Wire Harness at the Wing Leading Edge

Effective: 1 February 2012 

Applicability: Bombardier Inc. DHC-8 Aeroplane Models 400, 401, and 402, Serial Numbers 4001 

through 4382.

Compliance: As indicated below, unless already accomplished. 

Background: There have been several in-service reports of chafing between the wire harness along 

the wing leading edge and the wing leading edge inboard end rib. The chafing condition 

was found to be caused by insufficient clearance between the wire harness and the 

structure. Chafing and damage to this wire harness could lead to the loss of the airframe 

de-icing system, and could be a possible ignition source causing fire and the subsequent 

loss of the aeroplane. 

This Airworthiness Directive (AD) mandates the inspection of the wire harness along the 

leading edge and the relocation of the anchor nut. 

Corrective 

Actions: 

Within 3000 hours air time or 18 months, whichever occurs first, from the effective date of 

this AD, perform a detailed inspection of the wire harness on the leading edge for chafing 

damage, repair as applicable and relocate and install new anchor nuts, all in accordance 

with the Accomplishment Instructions of Bombardier Service Bulletin 84-57-24, dated 

30 September 2011, or later revisions approved by the Chief, Continuing Airworthiness, 

Transport Canada. 

Authorization: For the Minister of Transport, Infrastructure and Communities 

ORIGINAL SIGNED BY

Derek Ferguson 

Chief, Continuing Airworthiness 

Contact: Miss Helen Tsai, Continuing Airworthiness, Ottawa, telephone 613-952-4357, facsimile 

613-996-9178 or e-mail CAWWEBFeedback@tc.gc.ca or any Transport Canada Centre.
---

EXHIBIT 32.1





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



In connection with the Annual Report of First Cash Financial Services, Inc. (the "Company") on Form 10-K for the year ended December 31, 2009, as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the "Report"), I, Rick L. Wessel, Chief Executive 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 to my knowledge:



|(1) | The Report fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) or 15(d) of the Securities 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.





Date:  March 15, 2010



/s/ Rick L. WesselRick L. Wessel
Chief Executive Officer
Richard Wesley WILLIAMS, Appellant, v. STATE of Missouri, Respondent.

WD 81517

Missouri Court of Appeals, Western District.

Order filed: April 16, 2019

Tyler P. Coyle, for Appellant

Robert J. Bartholomew, Jr., Jefferson City, for Respondent

Before Special Division: Edward R. Ardini, Jr., Presiding Judge, Anthony Rex Gabbert, Judge and Kelly Broniec, Special Judge

***ORDER***

PER CURIAM:

Richard Williams filed a motion for post-conviction relief under Rule 29.15 following his convictions for murder in the first degree and armed criminal action. An amended motion was filed by appointed counsel which was denied after an evidentiary hearing. On appeal, Williams's original post-conviction counsel was found to have untimely filed his amended motion, and the case was remanded for an abandonment inquiry. On remand, Williams waived the claims raised in the amended motion and proceeded on his *pro se* motion. The Circuit Court of Buchanan County denied all twenty-three claims alleged in the *pro se* motion. Williams raises four points on appeal. In Point I, he alleges that the motion court erred by failing to hold a second evidentiary hearing after he opted to proceed on his *pro se* motion. In Points II, III, and IV, Williams claims that the motion court erred by denying him post-conviction relief, arguing his trial counsel was ineffective for failing to seek a change of venue and during the jury selection process. We affirm. Because a published opinion would have no precedential value, we have provided the parties an unpublished memorandum setting forth the reasons for this order. Rule 84.16(b).
<PAGE>

                                                                    Exhibit 31.2

    CERTIFICATIONS OF CFO PURSUANT TO SECTION 302 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT

                                CERTIFICATIONS

I, Russell R. Lee III certify that:

1. I have reviewed this quarterly report on Form 10-QSB of SinoFresh HealthCare,
Inc.;

2. Based on my knowledge, this report does not contain any untrue statement of a
material fact or omit to state 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;

3. Based on my knowledge, the financial statements, and other financial
information included in this report, fairly present in all material respects the
financial condition, results of operations and cash flows of the registrant as
of, and for, the periods presented in this report;

4. The registrant's other certifying officer and I are responsible for
establishing and maintaining disclosure controls and procedures (as defined in
Exchange Act Rules 13a-15(e) and 15d-15(e)) for the registrant and have:

a) Designed such disclosure controls and procedures, or caused such disclosure
controls and procedures to be designed under our supervision, to ensure that
material information relating to the registrant, including its consolidated
subsidiaries, is made known to us by others within those entities, particularly
during the period in which this report is being prepared;

b) Evaluated the effectiveness of the registrant's disclosure controls and
procedures and presented in this report our conclusions about the effectiveness
of the disclosure controls and procedures, as of the end of the period covered
by this report based on such evaluation;

c) Disclosed in this report any change in the registrant's internal control over
financial reporting that occurred during the registrant's most recent fiscal
quarter (the registrant's fourth fiscal quarter in the case of an annual report)
that has materially affected, or is reasonably likely to materially affect, the
registrant's internal control over financial reporting;

5. The registrant's other certifying officer and I have disclosed, based on our
most recent evaluation of internal control over financial reporting, to the
registrant's auditors and the audit committee of registrant's board of directors
(or persons performing the equivalent functions):

a) All significant deficiencies and material weaknesses in the design or
operation of internal control over financial reporting which are reasonably
likely to adversely affect the registrant's ability to record, process,
summarize and report financial information;

b) Any fraud, whether or not material, that involves management or other
employees who have a significant role in the registrant's internal control over
financial reporting.

October 29, 2004

/s/ Russell R. Lee III
--------------------------
Russell R. Lee III
Chief Financial Officer

                                      18
Exhibit
        32.2
 
 
 CERTIFICATION
        PURSUANT TO
 18
        U.S.C. SECTION 1350,
 AS
        ADOPTED PURSUANT TO
 SECTION
        906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002
 
 
 I,
        James A. Krantz, Executive Vice President and Chief Financial Officer
        of Platinum Underwriters Holdings, Ltd., hereby certify to the best of my
        knowledge and belief that this Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q fully complies
        with
        the requirements of Section 13(a) or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act
        of
        1934 (15 U.S.C. 78m(a) or 78o(d)) and that the information contained in this
        Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q fairly presents, in all material respects,
        the
        financial condition and results of operations of Platinum Underwriters Holdings,
        Ltd.
 
 
 Date:
                      October 31, 2007
                  /s/  James
                      A. KrantzBy:
                      James A. KrantzExecutive
                      Vice President and Chief Financial
                      Officer
Motion Granted in Part; Order filed February 21, 2013 

In The

Fourteenth Court of Appeals

____________

NO. 14-12-00614-CR

____________

HERBERT GOLDSMITH, Appellant

V.

THE STATE OF TEXAS, Appellee

On Appeal from the 176th District Court

Harris County, Texas

Trial Court Cause No. 1277685

ORDER

On January 28, 2013, appellant filed a motion seeking an order directing the 

trial court to unseal the record so that appellant could have access to the record. 

Appellant asks this court to order the trial court to unseal Reporter’s Record, 

Volume 8 filed in this appeal. Appellant seeks access to the record to determine 

whether it is necessary to the appeal. The motion is granted in part. 
The record will remain sealed. All parties are granted access to the sealed

Volume 8 of the Reporter’s Record so that they may review the sealed contents to 

prepare their briefs. Attorneys or their representatives for the parties in this appeal 

may not check out the sealed record, but may review the record in the court’s 

media viewing room.

In the event the parties refer to information from this sealed record in their 

briefs, they are directed to use the procedure found in Local Rule 5, that is, to file 

a redacted brief with a sealed reference list specifying an appropriate identifier that 

corresponds uniquely to each item listed.

PER CURIAM
**EXHIBIT 32.1**

 

**CERTIFICATION PURSUANT TO**

**18 U.S.C. SECTION.1350,**

**AS ADOPTED PURSUANT TO**

**SECTION 906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002**

 

Inconnection with the Quarterly Report of Cosi, Inc. (the “Company”) on Form 10-Qfor the period ended September 27, 2010, as filed with the Securities andExchange Commission on the date hereof (the “Report”), I, James Hyatt,Chief Executive Officer, President and Director of the Company, and I, WilliamKoziel, 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 Reportfully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) or 15(d) ofthe Securities Act of 1934; and

 

2.             The informationcontained in the Report fairly presents, in all material respects, thefinancial condition and results of operations of the Company.

 

 
| Date: November 11,  2010 | /s/ JAMES HYATT                                     |
|-------------------------------|-----------------------------------------------------|
|                          | James Hyatt                                         |
|                          | President,                                          |
|                          | Chief Executive Officer,  and Director              |
|                          |                                                |
|                          |                                                |
| Date: November 11,  2010 | /s/ WILLIAM KOZIEL                                  |
|                          | William Koziel                                      |
|                          | Chief Financial Officer  (chief accounting officer) |
|                          | Treasurer and Secretary                             |

 

 

A signed original of thiswritten statement required by Section 906 has been provided to Cosi, Inc.and will be retained by Cosi, Inc. and furnished to the Securities andExchange Commission or its staff upon request.

 

The foregoing certification is being furnished to theSecurities and Exchange Commission pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350. Itis not being filed for purposes of Section 18 of the Securities ExchangeAct of 1934, as amended, and is not to be incorporated by reference into anyfiling of the Company, whether made before or after the date hereof, regardlessof any general incorporation language in such filing.

 

----
June 14, 2011

MEMORANDUM

From: William H. Maxwell EPA/SPPD/ESG (D243-01)

To: Docket Number EPA-HQ-OAR-2009-0234

Subject: Teleconference with Sunflower Electric

Attendees :

Claire Gustin, Sunflower Electric Earl Watkins, Sunflower Electric Wayne Penrod, Sunflower Electric Ralph Roberson, RMB Consulting (cons ultant to Sunflower Electric) Ellen Kurlansky, EPA/OAR/OPAR Robert Wayland, EPA/OAR/OAQPS/SPPD/ESG Bill Maxwell, EPA/OAR/OAQPS/SPPD/ESG Dave Svendsgaard, EPA/OAR/OAQPS/AQPD/NSRG Nick Hutson, EPA/OA R/OAQPS/SPPD/ESG

Discussion :

A general discussion of the Mercury and Air Toxics Standards was held.