alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT
No. 03-2279

ROSITHA OFFELIA, Petitioner,
versus JOHN ASHCROFT, Attorney General, Respondent.
On Petition for Review of an Order of the Board of Immigration Appeals. (A78-611-603) Submitted: June 18, 2004 Decided: July 6, 2004
Before NIEMEYER, MOTZ, and KING, Circuit Judges. Petition denied by unpublished per curiam opinion. Randall L. Johnson, JOHNSON & ASSOCIATES, P.C., Arlington, Virginia, for Petitioner. Peter D. Keisler, Assistant Attorney General, Linda S. Wernery, Senior Litigation Counsel, William C. Minick, OFFICE OF IMMIGRATION LITIGATION, Washington, D.C., for Respondent. Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. See Local Rule 36(c).- 2 - PER CURIAM: Rositha Offelia, a native and citizen of Haiti, petitions for review of an order of the Board of Immigration Appeals (Board). The order affirmed, without opinion, the immigration judge’s ruling denying Offelia’s applications for asylum, withholding of removal, and protection under the Convention Against Torture. For the reasons discussed below, we deny the petition for review. Offelia first challenges the immigration judge’s finding that her asylum application was untimely with no showing of changed or extraordinary circumstances excusing the late filing. See8 U.S.C. § 1158(a)(2)(B) (2000); 8 C.F.R. § 1208.4(a)(4), (5) (2004). We conclude that we lack jurisdiction to review this claim pursuant to 8 U.S.C. § 1158(a)(3) (2000). See Tsevegmid v. Ashcroft , 336 F.3d 1231, 1235 (10th Cir. 2003); Molina-Estrada v. INS , 293 F.3d 1089, 1093 (9th Cir. 2002); Fahim v. United States Attorney Gen. , 278 F.3d 1216, 1217-18 (11th Cir. 2002); Ismailov v. Reno , 263 F.3d 851, 854-55 (8th Cir. 2001). Offelia next challenges the immigration judge’s finding that she failed to meet her burden of proof to qualify for withholding of removal or protection under the Convention Against Torture. Based on our review of the record and the immigration judge’s decision, we find that the immigration judge did not err in finding that Offelia failed to show that it is “more likely than not” that she would face torture if returned to Haiti, or show a- 3 - “clear probability of persecution.” See8 C.F.R. 1208.16(c)(2) (2004) (stating that to qualify for protection under the Convention Against Torture, an alien must show that “it is more likely than not that he . . . would be tortured if removed to the proposed country of removal”); Rusu v. INS , 296 F.3d 316, 324 n.13 (4th Cir. 2002) (“To qualify for withholding of removal, a petitioner must show that he faces a clear probability of persecution because of his race, religion, nationality, membership in a particular social group, or political opinion.”). Accordingly, we deny Offelia’s petition for review. We dispense with oral argument because the facts and legal contentions are adequately presented in the materials before the court and argument would not aid the decisional process.

PETITION DENIED
---

Exhibit 32.1

CERTIFICATION PURSUANT TO18 U.S.C. § 1350,AS ADOPTED
PURSUANT TOSECTION 906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002

In connection with the Quarterly Report of Carbiz Inc. (the
Company) on Form 10-QSB for the period ended July 31, 2006 as filed with the
Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the Report), I, Carl
Ritter, Executive Officer of the Company, certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. § 1350,
as adopted pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that:

| | (1) | The Report fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) or
      15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934; and                                     
| | --- | ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
| |     |                                                                                                                                                                 
| | (2) | The information contained in the Report fairly presents, in all
      material respects, the financial condition and results of operations of
      the Company.



| |                               | /s/
      Carl Ritter
| | ----------------------------- | ---------------------
| | Carl Ritter                  
| | Chief Executive Officer      
| | (principal executive officer)
| | September 14, 2006           

---
* 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. 97-10429 

Conference Calendar

 

REID DARWIN PHELPS, JR.,

Plaintiff-Appellant,

versus

LEE HANEY, HONORABLE, 

DISTRICT ATTORNEY 35TH JUDICIAL COURT,

Defendant-Appellee.

- - - - - - - - - -

Appeal from the United States District Court

for the Northern District of Texas

USDC No. 6:97-CV-43-C

- - - - - - - - - -

October 21, 1997

Before POLITZ, Chief Judge, and WIENER and DENNIS, Circuit Judges.

PER CURIAM:*

Reid Darwin Phelps, Jr., Texas inmate # 824168, appeals the

dismissal of his civil rights complaint as frivolous, pursuant to

28 U.S.C. § 1915A. He argues that he was denied access to the

courts. We have reviewed Phelps’s brief and the record and agree

with the reasoning set forth by the district court. Phelps v.

Haney, No. 6:96-CV-043-C (N.D. Tex. April 18, 1997).
No. 97-10429

- 2 -

Phelps’s appeal is without arguable merit and is frivolous. 

See Howard v. King, 707 F.2d 215, 219-20 (5th Cir. 1983). 

Because the appeal is frivolous, it is DISMISSED. See 5th Cir.

R. 42.2. Phelps is warned that any additional frivolous appeals

filed by him or on his behalf will invite the imposition of

sanctions. To avoid sanctions, Phelps should review any pending

appeals to ensure that they do not raise arguments that are

frivolous.

APPEAL DISMISSED; SANCTION WARNING ISSUED.
EX-31 Sarbanes-Oxley Certification.


  I, Diane Courtney, certify that:

  1.I have reviewed the report on Form 10-K and all reports on Form 10-D
    required to be filed in respect of the period covered by this report on
    Form 10-K of Merrill Lynch Alternative Note Asset Trust, Series
    2007-OAR4 (the "Exchange Act periodic reports");

  2.Based on my knowledge, the Exchange Act periodic reports, taken as a
    whole, do 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, all of the distribution, servicing and other
    information required to be provided under Form 10-D for the period
    covered by this report is included in the Exchange Act periodic reports;

  4.I am responsible for reviewing the activities performed by the
    servicers and based on my knowledge and the compliance reviews
    conducted in preparing the servicer compliance statements required in
    this report under Item 1123 of Regulation AB, and except as
    disclosed in the Exchange Act periodic reports, the servicers have
    fulfilled their obligations under the servicing agreements in all
    material respects; and

  5.All of the reports on assessment of compliance with servicing criteria
    for ABS and their related attestation reports on assessment of
    compliance with servicing criteria for asset-backed securities required
    to be included in this report in accordance with Item 1122 of
    Regulation AB and Exchange Act Rules 13a-18 and 15d-18 have been
    included as an exhibit to this report, except as otherwise disclosed in
    this report. Any material instances of noncompliance described in such
    reports have been disclosed in this report on Form 10-K.

    In giving the certifications above, I have reasonably relied on
    information provided to me by the following unaffiliated parties:
    Central Mortgage Company as Servicer, IndyMac Bank, F.S.B. as Servicer
    and Residential Funding Company, LLC as Servicer.

    Dated:   March 26, 2008


    /s/ Diane Courtney
    Signature

    Vice President
    (senior officer in charge of the servicing function of the master
    servicer)
-1-

DECL. OF COUNSEL PROVIDING FURTHER INFORMATION RE: DKT. NO. 44 – No. 3:17-cr-0043-WHA

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

26

27

28

30

Mark R. Vermeulen [CSBN 115381]

Law Office of Mark R. Vermeulen

755 Florida Street #4

San Francisco, CA 94110.2044

Phone: 415.824.7533

Fax: 415.824.4833

markrvermeulen@gmail.com

Attorney for Defendant 

DANTE SAGOTE

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

SAN FRANCISCO DIVISION

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,

 Plaintiff,

 v.

DANTE SAGOTE,

 Defendant.

No. 3:17-cr-0043-WHA

DECLARATION OF COUNSEL PROVIDING 

FURTHER INFORMATION RE: THE EARLIER 

SUBMITTED STIPULATION AND [Proposed] 

ORDER TO EARLY TERMINATE LOCATION 

MONITORING PROGRAM (Dkt. No. 44)

I, Mark R. Vermeulen, declare:

1. I am an attorney duly admitted to practice before this Court and I am appointed to 

represent Defendant Dante Sagote in this action. I provide this declaration to clarify the steps taken in 

the preparation of the earlier submitted Stipulation and [Proposed] Order to Early Terminate Location 

Monitoring Program (Dkt. No. 44; hereinafter “Stipulation”), and the steps taken following the Court’s 

issuance of the Order re Location Monitoring Request (Dkt. No. 45; hereinafter “Order”).

2. In preparing the Stipulation, I was in communication with U.S. Probation Officer Jacinta 

Hoving, who is supervising Mr. Sagote on supervised release, and with AUSA Katherine Wawrzyniak, 

who is handling the case. I prepared an initial draft of the Stipulation and provided it to them for review 

and approval. Revisions were proposed, and we arrived at language that was mutually acceptable to all 

three of us. In hindsight, it would have been wiser for me to include Ms. Hoving’s name in the 

Case 3:17-cr-00043-WHA Document 46 Filed 08/02/22 Page 1 of 2
-2-

DECL. OF COUNSEL PROVIDING FURTHER INFORMATION RE: DKT. NO. 44 – No. 3:17-cr-0043-WHA

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

26

27

28

30

Stipulation as the person providing the information on behalf of the U.S. Probation Office; apologies for 

my oversight.

3. Upon the issuance of the Order, I was again in communication with Ms. Hoving. From 

those communications we determined that since the matter was set for an in-person hearing in the near 

future (i.e., the status hearing set for August 3), we would simply address the matter at the hearing, 

rather than submit a separate additional filing.

I declare under penalty of perjury under the laws of the United States of America that the 

foregoing is true and correct. Executed on August 2, 2022 at San Francisco, CA.

/S/ 

Mark R. Vermeulen

Case 3:17-cr-00043-WHA Document 46 Filed 08/02/22 Page 2 of 2
APEX BANK, Appellant, v. RREF II CER ACQUISITIONS, LLC, Appellee.

No. 3D18-799

District Court of Appeal of Florida, Third District.

Opinion filed May 29, 2019.

**DECISION WITHOUT PUBLISHED OPINION**

Affirmed.
Sherman BALCH, Appellant, v. PENNYMAC LOAN SERVICES, LLC, Stephen Preston, Gioconda Del Socorro Flores, Shingle Creek Reserve At the Oaks Homeowners Association, Inc. and the Oaks Master Property Homeowners Association, Inc., Appellees.

Case No. 5D18-3171

District Court of Appeal of Florida, Fifth District.

Decision filed June 18, 2019

**DECISION WITHOUT PUBLISHED OPINION**

AFFIRMED.
Exhibit 33.f


                       REPORT ON ASSESSMENT OF COMPLIANCE

First American Commercial Real Estate Services, Inc. (an indirect subsidiary of
The First American Corporation, and the "Asserting Party") is responsible for
assessing compliance as of December 31, 2007, and for the period from January 1,
2007 through December 31, 2007 ("the Reporting Period") with the servicing
criteria set forth in Title 17, Sections 229.1122(d)(1)(iv), (d)(2)(v),
(d)(2)(vi), (d)(2)(vii), (d)(4)(xi), (d)(4)(xii) and (d)(4)(xiii) of the Code of
Federal Regulations applicable to the Asserting Party ("the Applicable Servicing
Criteria"). The transactions covered by this report include all loans for
commercial mortgage loan outsourcing customers for which the Asserting Party
served as the commercial tax service provider (the "Platform").

The Asserting Party has assessed its compliance with the Applicable Servicing
Criteria for the Reporting Period and has concluded that the Asserting Party has
complied, in all material respects, with the Applicable Servicing Criteria as of
December 31, 2007, and for the Reporting Period with respect to the Platform
taken as a whole.

PricewaterhouseCoopers LLP, an independent registered public accounting firm,
has issued an attestation report on the assessment of compliance with the
Applicable Servicing Criteria as of December 31, 2007, and for the Reporting
Period as set forth in this assertion.

FIRST AMERICAN COMMERCIAL REAL ESTATE SERVICES, INC.


/s/ Scott R. Friberg
-------------------------------------
Scott R. Friberg
Chief Operations Officer
February 22, 2008
Michigan Supreme Court

Lansing, Michigan

Bridget M. McCormack

, Chief Justice

David F. Viviano,

Chief Justice Pro Tem

Stephen J. Markman

Brian K. Zahra

Richard H. Bernstein

Elizabeth T. Clement

Megan K. Cavanagh,

Justices

I, Larry S. Royster, 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.

September 30, 2019

b0923 

# Order

Clerk September 30, 2019

157328(50)

WHITNEY SCHUSTER,

Plaintiff

- Appellee,

v SC: 157328

COA: 335246

Kent CC: 14

- 005418

- NO

RIVER OAKS GARDEN APARTMENTS, LLC,

Defendant

- Appellant.

_________________________________________/

On order of the Court, the motion for reconsideration of this Court’s June 12, 2019

order is considered, and it is DENIED, because we are not persuaded that reconsideration

of our previous order is warranted. MCR 7.311(G).
EXHIBIT F

Case 5:17-cv-00551-LHK Document 387-6 Filed 01/24/20 Page 1 of 7
HIGHLY CONFIDENTIAL - ATTORNEYS' EYES ONLY APL-GRACE_00000996

Case 5:17-cv-00551-LHK Document 387-6 Filed 01/24/20 Page 2 of 7
HIGHLY CONFIDENTIAL - ATTORNEYS' EYES ONLY APL-GRACE_00000997

Case 5:17-cv-00551-LHK Document 387-6 Filed 01/24/20 Page 3 of 7
HIGHLY CONFIDENTIAL - ATTORNEYS' EYES ONLY APL-GRACE_00000998

Case 5:17-cv-00551-LHK Document 387-6 Filed 01/24/20 Page 4 of 7
HIGHLY CONFIDENTIAL - ATTORNEYS' EYES ONLY APL-GRACE_00000999

Case 5:17-cv-00551-LHK Document 387-6 Filed 01/24/20 Page 5 of 7
HIGHLY CONFIDENTIAL - ATTORNEYS' EYES ONLY APL-GRACE_00001000

Case 5:17-cv-00551-LHK Document 387-6 Filed 01/24/20 Page 6 of 7
1 Infinite Loop

Cupertino, CA 95014

HIGHLY CONFIDENTIAL - ATTORNEYS' EYES ONLY APL-GRACE_00001001

Case 5:17-cv-00551-LHK Document 387-6 Filed 01/24/20 Page 7 of 7
**Exhibit32.1**

**Certifications Pursuant to**

**Section 906 of the Sarbanes-OxleyAct of 2002**

**(18U.S.C. Section 1350)**

In connection withthe Quarterly Report of National Health Partners, Inc. (the “Company”) on Form10-QSB for the fiscal quarter ended March 31, 2007, as filed with the Securitiesand Exchange Commission (the “report”), David M. Daniels, Chief ExecutiveOfficer of the Company, and Alex Soufflas, Chief Financial Officer of theCompany, do each hereby certify, pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-OxleyAct of 2002 (18 U.S.C. § 1350), that to his knowledge:

(1)                                  thereport fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) or 15(d) of theSecurities Exchange Act of 1934; and

(2)                                  theinformation contained in the report fairly presents, in all material respects,the financial condition and results of operations of the Company.
|        | /s/ David M. Daniels    |   |
|--------|-------------------------|--------|
|   | David M. Daniels        |
|   | Chief Executive Officer |
|   |                    |
|   |                    |
|   | /s/ Alex Soufflas       |   |
|   | Alex Soufflas           |
|   | Chief Financial Officer |

 

Date:  May 11,2007

----
```

[Congressional Bills 117th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[S. Res. 631 Introduced in Senate (IS)]

<DOC>

117th CONGRESS
  2d Session
S. RES. 631

    Prohibiting the imposition of vaccination, testing, and masking 
          requirements relating to COVID-19 for Senate Pages.

_______________________________________________________________________

                   IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES

                              May 12, 2022

Mr. Paul submitted the following resolution; which was referred to the 
                 Committee on Rules and Administration

_______________________________________________________________________

                               RESOLUTION

 
    Prohibiting the imposition of vaccination, testing, and masking 
          requirements relating to COVID-19 for Senate Pages.

    Resolved,

SECTION 1. PROHIBITION ON COVID-19 VACCINATION, TESTING, AND MASKING 
              REQUIREMENTS FOR SENATE PAGES.

    A Senate Page or applicant to be a Senate Page may not be required 
to--
            (1) show proof of COVID-19 vaccination status;
            (2) receive a vaccination for COVID-19;
            (3) undergo testing for COVID-19 without cause; or
            (4) wear a mask.
                                 <all>
```
United States District Court

For the Northern District of California

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

26

27

28

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

JOHN C. ETTER, individually and on behalf

of all others similarly situated,

Plaintiff,

 v.

ALLSTATE INSURANCE COMPANY, et

al.,

Defendants. /

No. C 17-00184 WHA

ORDER RE MOTION FOR

PRELIMINARY APPROVAL

OF CLASS ACTION

SETTLEMENT

Plaintiff shall please advise the Court in writing by TOMORROW AT NOON whether or

not his Motion for Preliminary Approval of Class Action Settlement (Dkt. No. 131) will be

opposed. 

IT IS SO ORDERED.

Dated: May 17, 2018. WILLIAM ALSUP

UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE

Case 3:17-cv-00184-WHA Document 132 Filed 05/17/18 Page 1 of 1
EX-33.11
(logo) WELLS FARGO

Wells Fargo Bank, NA
Document Custody
1015 - 10th Avenue SE
Minneapolis, MN 55014


ASSESSMENT OF COMPLIANCE WITH APPLICABLE SERVICING CRITERIA


Corporate Trust Services division of Wells Fargo Bank, National Association
(the "Company") is responsible for assessing compliance with the servicing
criteria set forth in Item 1122(d) of Regulation AB promulgated by the
Securities and Exchange Commission. The Company has determined that the
servicing criteria are applicable in regards to the servicing platform as of
and for the period as follows:

Platform: Publicly-issued (i.e., transaction-level reporting required under
the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended) residential mortgage-backed
securities and commercial mortgage-backed securities issued on or after
January 1, 2006 for which the Company provides document custody services,
excluding any publicly issued transactions issued by any government sponsored
entity (the "Platform").

Applicable Servicing Criteria: The servicing criteria set forth in Item
1122(d)(1)(iv), 1122(d)(4)(i) and 1122(d)(4)(ii), in regard to the activities
performed by the Company with respect to the Platform (the "Applicable
Servicing Criteria"). Management of the Company has determined that all other
servicing criteria set forth in Item 1122(d) are not applicable to the
Platform.

Period: As of and for the twelve months ended December 31, 2007 (the "Period").

With respect to the Platform and the Period, the Company provides the following
assessment of compliance with respect to the Applicable Servicing Criteria:

1. The Company is responsible for assessing its compliance with the Applicable
Servicing Criteria.

2. The Company has assessed compliance with the Applicable Servicing Criteria.
In performing this assessment, the Company used the criteria set forth by the
Securities and Exchange Commission in paragraph (d) of Item 1122 of
Regulation AB.

3. Based on such assessment, as of and for the Period, the Company has
complied, in all material respects with the Applicable Servicing Criteria.

KPMG LLP, a registered public accounting firm, has issued an attestation report
with respect to the Company's assessment of compliance as of and for the
Period.


WELLS FARGO BANK, NATIONAL ASSOCIATION
By: /s/ Shari Gillund
Its: Senior Vice President

Dated: February 29, 2008
# C_2018421EN.01000701.xml

| 21.11.2018 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 421/7 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

21.11.2018

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 421/7

---

COUNCIL DECISION

of 19 November 2018

appointing members and alternate members of the Advisory Committee on Freedom of Movement for Workers for Italy

(2018/C 421/02)

THE COUNCIL OF THE EUROPEAN UNION,

Having regard to the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union,

Having regard to Regulation (EU) No 492/2011 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 5 April 2011 on freedom of movement for workers within the Union (1), and in particular Articles 23 and 24 thereof,

Having regard to the lists of candidates submitted to the Council by the Governments of the Member States,

Whereas:

| (1) | By its Decision of 28 September 2018 (2), the Council appointed the members and alternate members of the Advisory Committee on Freedom of Movement for Workers for the period from 25 September 2018 to 24 September 2020. |
| --- | --- |

(1)

By its Decision of 28 September 2018 (2), the Council appointed the members and alternate members of the Advisory Committee on Freedom of Movement for Workers for the period from 25 September 2018 to 24 September 2020.

| (2) | The government of Italy has submitted nominations for several posts to be filled, |
| --- | --- |

(2)

The government of Italy has submitted nominations for several posts to be filled,

HAS ADOPTED THIS DECISION:

Article 1

The following are hereby appointed members and alternate members of the Advisory Committee on Freedom of Movement for Workers for the period ending on 24 September 2020:

I.   TRADE UNION REPRESENTATIVES

| Country | Members | Alternates |
| --- | --- | --- |
| Italy | Ms Ilaria Arianna FONTANIN
  Mr Giuseppe CASUCCI | Mr Emanuele GALOSSI |

Country

Members

Alternates

Italy

Ms Ilaria Arianna FONTANIN

Mr Giuseppe CASUCCI

Mr Emanuele GALOSSI

II.   EMPLOYERS' ASSOCIATIONS REPRESENTATIVES

| Country | Members | Alternates |
| --- | --- | --- |
| Italy | Ms Paola ASTORRI
  Ms Serena FACELLO | Mr Fabio ANTONILLI |

Country

Members

Alternates

Italy

Ms Paola ASTORRI

Ms Serena FACELLO

Mr Fabio ANTONILLI

Article 2

The members and alternate members not yet nominated will be appointed by the Council at a later date.

Article 3

This Decision shall enter into force on the date of its adoption.

Done at Brussels, 19 November 2018.

For the Council

The President

E. KÖSTINGER

---

(1)  OJ L 141, 27.5.2011, p. 1.

1

(2)  Council Decision of 28 September 2018 appointing the members and alternate members of the Advisory Committee on Freedom of Movement for Workers (OJ C 366, 10.10.2018, p. 3).

2

---