alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
```

[Federal Register Volume 90, Number 11 (Friday, January 17, 2025)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Page 5590]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2025-01145]

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

DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES

Food and Drug Administration

21 CFR Part 16

[Docket No. FDA-2024-N-3654]
RIN 0910-AI97

Regulatory Hearing Before the Food and Drug Administration; 
General Provisions; Amendments; Withdrawal

AGENCY: Food and Drug Administration, HHS.

ACTION: Direct final rule; withdrawal.

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

SUMMARY: The Food and Drug Administration (FDA or Agency) published in 
the Federal Register of September 20, 2024, a direct final rule 
amending the Scope section of our regulation that provides for a 
regulatory hearing before the Agency. The comment period closed 
December 4, 2024. FDA is withdrawing the direct final rule because the 
Agency received significant adverse comment.

DATES: The direct final rule published at September 20, 2024, 89 FR 
77019, is withdrawn effective January 17, 2025.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Robert Schwartz, Center for Tobacco 
Products, Food and Drug Administration, 10903 New Hampshire Ave., 
Silver Spring, MD 20993-0002, 1-877-287-1373, 
[email protected].

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Therefore, under the Federal Food, Drug, and 
Cosmetic Act, and under authority delegated to the Commissioner of Food 
and Drugs, the direct final rule published on September 20, 2024, 89 FR 
77019 is withdrawn.

    Dated: January 13, 2025.
P. Ritu Nalubola,
Associate Commissioner for Policy.
[FR Doc. 2025-01145 Filed 1-16-25; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4164-01-P
```
#### Moises Enrique SOLORIO-SELVA, Petitioner, v. John ASHCROFT, Attorney General, Respondent.

No. 03-70312.

United States Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit.

Submitted April 12, 2004*

Decided April 27, 2004.

Frank M. Tse, Law Office of Frank M.K. Tse, San Francisco, CA, for Petitioner.

Regional Counsel, Western Region, Immigration *&*Naturalization Service, Laguna Niguel, CA, Ronald E. LeFevre, Chief Legal Officer, Office of the District Counsel, Department of Homeland Security, San Francisco, CA, Terri J. Seadron, Esq., Joshua E. Braunstein, U.S. Department of Justice, Civil Div./Office of Immigration Lit., Washington, DC, for Respondent.

Before: HALL, O’SCANNLAIN, and RYMER, Circuit Judges.

*

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

MEMORANDUM **

Moisés Enrique Solorio-Selva, a native and citizen of Mexico, petitions for review of the Board of Immigration Appeals’ (“BIA”) decision summarily affirming an immigration judge’s (“IJ”) denial of his application for asylum and withholding of removal. We have jurisdiction under 8 U.S.C. § 1252. We review for substantial evidence adverse credibility findings, *Gui v. INS,*280 F.3d 1217, 1225 (9th Cir.2002), and we deny the petition.

Substantial evidence supports the IJ’s adverse credibility finding because Solorio-Selva' provided information in his asylum application that was inconsistent with his hearing testimony, and he failed to adequately explain the discrepancies as to whether he was detained or mistreated by Mexican police. Because these factual discrepancies went to the heart of his asylum claim, *see Chebchoub v. INS*257 F.3d 1038, 1043 (9th Cir.2001), substantial evidence supports the denial of asylum, *see Lata v. INS,*204 F.3d 1241, 1245 (9th Cir.2000).

In addition, Solorio-Selva testified that in 1986, he was beaten by Mexican soldiers, whereas his asylum application does not mention this fact. *See Pal v. INS,*204 F.3d 935, 940 (9th Cir.2000) (upholding adverse credibility finding and noting material omission from asylum application).

It follows that Navarijo-Cardenas did not satisfy the more stringent standard for withholding of removal. *See Lata,*204 F.3d at 1244.

PETITION FOR REVIEW DENIED.

**

 This disposition is not appropriate for publication and may not be cited to or by the courts of this circuit except as may be provided by 9th Cir. R. 36-3.
Alexander BROWN, Appellant, v. STATE of Florida, Appellee.

No. 1D18-4018

District Court of Appeal of Florida, First District.

April 24, 2019

**DECISION WITHOUT PUBLISHED OPINION**

AFFIRMED.
EXHIBIT 31.2

                                  CERTIFICATION

I, Kathleen P. McSherry, certify that:


1. I have reviewed this Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q/A of Ridgewood Energy M
Fund, LLC;


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(s) 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; and

(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; and

5. The registrant's other certifying officer(s) 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 the 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; and

(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.



Dated:  April 5, 2007


   /s/  KATHLEEN P. MCSHERRY
 Name:  Kathleen P. McSherry

Title:  Senior Vice President and Chief Financial Officer
        (Principal Financial and Accounting Officer)
Opinion filed April 18 , 201 9



### In The 

# Eleventh Court of Appeals

______ _ ___ No. 11

- 1 9

- 00 130

- C R

__________ IN RE BILLY CHARLES WILKINS

Original Mandamus Proceeding

M E M O R A N D U M O P I N I O N Relator, Billy Charles Wilkins
, has filed in this court a pro se petit ion for writ
of mandamus

. He requests that we compel the Honorable James Eidson , sitting by assignment to the 35th District Court of Taylor County, to rescind Relator’s 1996 judgment of conviction for the felony offense of burglary of a habitation. Relator
asserts that Judge Eidson erred by denying Relator’s motion to rescind the 1996 judgment because it was void

. We dismiss Relator ’ s petition for want of jurisdicti on

. We can find no authority that would enable this court to grant the relief requested by Relator

. See T EX

. C ONST

. art. V, §§ 5, 6 (providing that Court of Criminal Appeals has the power to issue writs of habeas corpus and that intermediate courts of appeals only have original jurisdiction as prescribed by law); T EX

. G OV ’ T C ODE A NN

. § 22.221 (West Supp. 2018 ) (limited writ powers granted to the courts2 of appeals). An intermediate appellate court has no jurisdiction to release a person from confinement when that person has been finally convicted of a felony; the Court of Criminal Appeals has exclusive jurisdiction in s uch matters. Hoang v. State , 872 S.W.2d 694, 697 (Tex. Crim. App. 1993); see T EX

. C ODE C RIM

. P ROC

. A NN

. art. 11.07 (West 2015). Furthermore, a n intermediate appellate court has no jurisdiction to review the denial of a petition for relief that is “in the nature of an attack on the final felony conviction” and is essentially an application for an 11.07 writ of habeas corpus. Ex parte Lucas , No. 10

- 09

- 00374

- CR, 2009 WL 5156221, at *1 (Tex. App.

— Waco Dec. 30, 2009, no pet.) (mem. op., not designated for publication); see C RIM

. P ROC

. art. 11.07. Accordingly, Relator’s petition for writ of mandamus is dismissed for want of jurisdiction.

PER CURIAM

April 18 , 201 9 Do not publish. See T EX

. R. A PP

. P. 47.2(b).
Panel consists of: Bailey, C.J., Stretcher , J., and Wright, S.C.J. 1
Willson, J., not participating.

1 Jim R. Wright, Senior Chief Justice (Retired), Court of Appeals, 11th District of Texas at Eastland, sitting by assignment.
Anthony James PEEBLES v. STATE

CR-16-1132

Court of Criminal Appeals of Alabama.

December 8, 2017

**DECISION WITHOUT PUBLISHED OPINION**

Affirmed.
**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**

|   | (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 the operation of                the                Company. |
|--------|-----|---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|

|                                       |                                            |                                     |
|--------------------------------------------|-------------------------------------------------|------------------------------------------|
|                                       |                                            |
|                                  |                                       |                                |
| Date: September              26, 2007 | By:                                   | /s/ Lincoln              M. Dastrup |
|                                       | Lincoln              M. Dastrup                 |
|                                       | Title Chief              Financial Officer |
Rashad Dominic BATTLES, DOC #H50723, Appellant, v. STATE of Florida, Appellee.

Case No. 2D18-2788

District Court of Appeal of Florida, Second District.

Opinion filed May 8, 2019

**DECISION WITHOUT PUBLISHED OPINION**

Affirmed.
EXHIBIT 32.0




SECTION 1350 CERTIFICATIONS




Each of the undersigned Chief Executive Officer and Chief Financial Officer of Prudential Bancorp, Inc. of Pennsylvania (the “Registrant”) hereby certifies that the Registrant’s Form 10-Q for the quarter ended December 31, 2009 fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of
1934 and that the information contained therein fairly presents, in all material respects, the financial condition and results of operations of the Registrant.


/s/ Thomas A. VentoName: Thomas A. VentoTitle: President and Chief Executive OfficerDate: February 16, 2010





/s/ Joseph R. CorratoName: Joseph R. CorratoTitle: Executive Vice President and ChiefFinancial OfficerDate: February 16, 2010





A signed original of this written statement required by Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act has been provided to Prudential Bancorp, Inc. of Pennsylvania and will be retained by Prudential Bancorp, Inc. of Pennsylvania and furnished to the Securities and Exchange Commission or its staff upon request.
EXHIBIT 32.2

                        CERTIFICATION OF VICE-PRESIDENT
                                  PRIDE, INC.
                      PURSUANT TO 18 U.S.C. SECTION 1350



     In connection with the Quarterly Report of Pride, Inc. (the "Company") on
Form 10-QSB for the period ended March 31, 2005, as filed with the Securities
and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the "Report"), I, George Powell,
Vice-President 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 the
best of my knowledge:

     (1)  The Report fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) or
15(d), as applicable, 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/ George A. Powell
George A. Powell
Vice-President, Secretary
and Director

May 20, 2005
STATE of Louisiana v. Michael BAUGH

NO. 2019-K-0109

Supreme Court of Louisiana.

April 29, 2019

Denied.

GUIDRY, J., would grant.
# C_2018022EN.01001603.xml

| 22.1.2018 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 22/16 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

22.1.2018

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 22/16

---

Request for a preliminary ruling from the Oberlandesgericht Köln (Germany) lodged on 31 July 2017 — Gabriela Verena Glanzmann, Sara Glanzmann, Loris Glanzmann v Deutsche Lufthansa AG

(Case C-456/17)

(2018/C 022/22)

Language of the case: German

Referring court

Referring court

Oberlandesgericht Köln

Parties to the main proceedings

Parties to the main proceedings

Applicants: Gabriela Verena Glanzmann, Sara Glanzmann, Loris Glanzmann

Applicants:

Defendant: Deutsche Lufthansa AG

Defendant:

By order of 6 October 2017, the case was removed from the Register of the Court of Justice.

---
* 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.

IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT

 

No. 96-50911

Conference Calendar

 

RONALD J. FARRELLY,

Plaintiff-Appellant,

versus

ANTONIO SIFUENTES, EL PASO POSTAL INSPECTOR,

Defendant-Appellee.

- - - - - - - - - -

Appeal from the United States District Court

for the Western District of Texas

USDC No. EP-96-CV-142

- - - - - - - - - -

August 15, 1997

Before KING, HIGGINBOTHAM, and DUHÉ, Circuit Judges. 

PER CURIAM:*

Postal Service employee Ronald J. Farrelly appeals from the

dismissal of his civil action for failure to state a claim. 

Farrelly contends that Postal Inspector Antonio Sifuentes was not

entitled to qualified immunity; that the district court erred by

analyzing his factual allegations separately rather than as a

whole; and that the district court erred by applying a heightened

pleading standard to his complaint without allowing him leave to

amend the complaint.
No. 96-50911

-2-

Farrelly’s action under Bivens v. Six Unknown Names Agents

of Federal Bureau of Narcotics, 403 U.S. 388 (1971), was

precluded by the Civil Service Reform Act (CSRA). Rollins v.

Marsh, 937 F.2d 134, 138-39 (5th Cir. 1991). Because Farrelly

had no Bivens cause of action, the district court did not err by

dismissing his complaint. Because Farrelly was notified in

Sifuentes’s motion to dismiss of the defects in his complaint he

sought to remedy but waited until after the dismissal of his

complaint to move for leave to amend, the denial of his motion

for leave to amend was not an abuse of discretion. In re Beef

Indus. Antitrust Litig., 600 F.2d 1148, 1162 (5th Cir. 1979). 

Finally, Farrelly’s motion to supplement his reply brief is

DENIED.

AFFIRMED.
<Page>


INDEPENDENT AUDITORS' CONSENT

We consent to the use in this Pre-Effective Amendment No. 1 to Registration
Statement No. 333-105253 of Hartford Life Insurance Company Separate Account
Two of our report dated February 19, 2003, relating to the financial
statements of Hartford Life Insurance Company, and of our report dated
February 21, 2003, relating to the financial statements of Hartford Life
Insurance Company Separate Account Two, appearing in the Statement of
Additional Information, which is a part of such Registration Statement, and
to the reference to us under the heading "Independent Public Accountants" in
such Statement of Additional Information.

Deloitte & Touche LLP
Hartford, Connecticut
July 31, 2003
Exhibit 10.10  


July
17, 2003 


EarlyBirdCapital, Inc.

600 Third Avenue

33rd Floor

New York, New York 10016 



	Re:
	Millstream Acquisition Corporation




Gentlemen: 


        This
letter will confirm the agreement of the undersigned to purchase warrants ("Warrants") of Millstream Acquisition Corporation ("Company") included in the units ("Units") being sold
in the Company's initial public offering ("IPO") upon the terms and conditions set forth herein. Each Unit is comprised of one share of Common Stock and two Warrants. The shares of Common Stock and
Warrants will not be separately tradeable until 90 days after the effective date of the Company's IPO unless EarlyBirdCapital, Inc. ("EBC") informs the Company of its decision to allow
earlier separate trading ("Separation Date"). 


        The
undersigned agrees that this letter agreement constitutes an irrevocable order for EBC to purchase for his account during the twenty-day period commencing on the
Separation Date up to 1,000,000 Warrants at market prices not to exceed $0.65 per Warrant ("Maximum Warrant Purchase"). EBC agrees to fill such order in such amounts and at such times as it may
determine, in its sole discretion, during the twenty-day period commencing on the Separation Date. The undersigned may notify EBC that all or part of his Maximum Warrant Purchase will be
made by an affiliate of the undersigned (or another person or entity introduced to EBC by the undersigned (a "Designee")) who (or which) has an account at EBC and, in such event, EBC will make such
purchase on behalf of said affiliate or Designee; provided, however, that the undersigned hereby agrees to make payment of the purchase price of such purchase in the event that the affiliate or
Designee fails to make such payment. 



	 	 	Very truly yours,
	

 	
 	

 
	

 	
 	

/s/ Arthur Spector
 Arthur Spector
Lanica BURCH, Appellant/Petitioner(s), v. STATE of Florida, Appellee/Respondent(s).

CASE NO.: 2D19-0044

District Court of Appeal of Florida, Second District.

May 6, 2019

**DECISION WITHOUT PUBLISHED OPINION**

Dismissed.
J.A.F., Appellant/Petitioner(s), v. DEPT. OF CHILDREN & FAMILIES, IN the INTEREST OF: P.C.F., Appellee/Respondent(s).

CASE NO.: 2D19-0785

District Court of Appeal of Florida, Second District.

June 06, 2019

**FLORIDA DECISION WITHOUT PUBLISHED OPINION**

Dismissed.
May 29, 2014

JUDGMENT

The Fourteenth Court of Appeals

VICTORIA NORTON, Appellant

NO. 14-13-00289-CR V.

THE STATE OF TEXAS, Appellee

________________________________

This cause was heard on the transcript of the record of the court below. We 

have inspected the record and find that there is a clerical error in the judgment 

because it does not contain appellant’s thumbprint as required by article 42.01 of 

the Texas Code of Criminal Procedure. Otherwise, there is no error in the 

judgment. The trial court is ordered to modify the judgment to include appellant’s 

thumbprint taken in accordance with article 38.33 of the Texas Code of Criminal 

Procedure, and the judgment is affirmed subject to modification of the judgment. 

We further order this decision certified below for observance.
Case 3:05-cv-02459-B Document 10 Filed 02/23/06 Page 1 of 2 PageID 41
 

 Case 3:05-cv-02459-B Document 10 Filed 02/23/06 Page 2 of 2 PageID 42
Heather KYZER v. ARONOV REALTY MANAGEMENT, INC.

2160800

Court of Civil Appeals of Alabama.

November 2, 2017

**DECISION WITHOUT PUBLISHED OPINION**

Dismissed.
`[Federal Register Volume 90, Number 14 (Thursday, January 23, 2025)]
[Notices]
[Pages 8097-8101]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2025-01595]


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

DEPARTMENT OF THE TREASURY

Office of Foreign Assets Control


Notice of OFAC Sanctions Action

AGENCY: Office of Foreign Assets Control, Treasury.

ACTION: Notice.

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

SUMMARY: The U.S. Department of the Treasury's Office of Foreign Assets 
Control (OFAC) is publishing the names of one or more persons that have 
been placed on OFAC's Specially Designated Nationals and Blocked 
Persons List (SDN List) based on OFAC's determination that one or more 
applicable legal criteria were satisfied. All property and interests in 
property subject to U.S. jurisdiction of these persons are blocked, and 
U.S. persons are generally prohibited from engaging in transactions 
with them. Additionally, OFAC is publishing updates to the identifying 
information of two persons currently included on the SDN List.

DATES: This action was issued on January 16, 2025. See Supplementary 
Information for relevant dates.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: OFAC: Associate Director for Global 
Targeting, 202-622-2420; Assistant Director for Sanctions Compliance, 
202-622-2490; or https://ofac.treasury.gov/contact-ofac.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

Electronic Availability

    The SDN List and additional information concerning OFAC sanctions 
programs are available on OFAC's website: https://ofac.treasury.gov.

Notice of OFAC Action

    On January 16, 2025, OFAC determined that the property and 
interests in property subject to U.S. jurisdiction of the following 
persons are blocked under the relevant sanctions authorities listed 
below.
BILLING CODE 4810-AL-P

[[Page 8098]]

[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TN23JA25.000


[[Page 8099]]


[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TN23JA25.001


[[Page 8100]]


[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TN23JA25.002



[[Page 8101]]


Lisa M. Palluconi,
Acting Director, Office of Foreign Assets Control.
[FR Doc. 2025-01595 Filed 1-22-25; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4810-AL-C`