alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
# Familiares de Refugiados y Asilados

Si usted entró a los Estados Unidos como refugiado en los últimos 2 años o le fue concedida la condición de asilado en los últimos 2 años, usted puede solicitar que ciertos familiares obtengan el estatus derivado de refugiado o asilado. Si usted todavía no ha solicitado o no se le ha concedido estatus de refugiado o asilado, por favor, vea el enlace Refugiados y Asilados.

**Usted Puede Solicitar la Entrada a Estados Unidos de los Siguientes Familiares:**
                - Cónyuges
                - Hijos (solteros y menores de 21 años al momento de su primera solicitud de estatus de asilado o refugiado)

                    - Como peticionario, usted debe ser el refugiado o asilado principal. Esto significa que se le concedió estatus de refugiado o asilado directamente y no lo obtuvo a través de un familiar.
                    - Usted entró a los Estados Unidos como refugiado en los últimos 2 años o se le fue concedido el asilo en los últimos 2 años.
                    - Usted permanece en condición de refugiado o asilado o se ha convertido en un residente permanente (recibió una tarjeta verde). Si ya se ha convertido en ciudadano de los Estados Unidos a través de la naturalización, usted no puede solicitar que miembros de su familia obtengan un estatus derivado de refugiado o asilado. Sin embargo, sί puede ayudar a su la familia a emigrar a los Estados Unidos. Vea el enlace  Familiares de Ciudadanos Estadounidenses  para más información.
                    - La relación familiar tuvo que haber existido antes de su traslado a los Estados Unidos como refugiado asilado. Por ejemplo:	                       - Si usted desea presentar una petición para su cónyuge, debe haber estado casado antes de ingresar al país en calidad de refugiado o asilado. Vea el enlace  Cónyuges de Refugiados y Asilados  para más información.
                      - El hijo tuvo que ser concebido (esto significa que la madre ya estaba embarazada) o nacido antes de ingresar al país en calidad de refugiado o cuando se le concedió asilo. Vea la sección  Hijos de Refugiados y Asilados  para más información.

Presente el Formulario I-730, Petición de Familiares de Refugiados y Asilados (Este formulario es libre de costo. Para descargar el formulario y las instrucciones, vea la página Formulario I-730, Petición de Familiares de Refugiados y Asilados).

Para obtener más información sobre los programas de refugio y asilo, consulte la sección Programas Humanitarios.

08/06/2018

0 / 2000Para proteger su privacidad, por favor no incluya ninguna información personal en sus comentarios. Revise nuestra Política de Privacidad.
### TEXA S C OU R T OF A PPEAL S, THIR D DIST R ICT , AT AU STIN NO. 03-0 6 -00767 -CV In re Vanessa Cher ry ORIG IN A L PR OC E E D IN GFR OM WI L L IA MS ON C OU N T Y

M E M O R

A N D UM O P I N I O N Relator Va

nessa Cher

ry has filed a

motion for temporar

y emer g ency

relief and petition for writ of manda mus. SeeTex. R. App. P . 52.1, 52.10. We deny the petition for wr it of mandamus and dismiss as moot the motion for temporar y relief . SeeTex. R. App. P . 52.8, 52.10.

Bob Pembe rton, J ustice Be fore J ustices B . A. Smith, P uryear and Pember

ton Filed: De cembe r 12, 2006
Exhibit 13.2

CHINA MOBILE LIMITED

Certification

Pursuant to 18 U.S.C. § 1350, the undersigned, XUE Taohai, Executive Director, Vice President and Chief Financial Officer of China
Mobile Limited (the Company), hereby certifies, to his knowledge, that the Companys annual report on Form 20-F for the year ended December 31, 2014 (the Report) fully complies with the requirements of
Section 13(a) or 15(d), as applicable, of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, and that the information contained in the Report fairly presents, in all material respects, the financial condition and results of operations of the Company.

Date: April 24, 2015



/s/ XUE TaohaiName:

XUE TaohaiTitle:

Executive Director, Vice President and Chief Financial Officer


The foregoing certification is being furnished solely pursuant to 18 U.S.C. § 1350 and is not
being filed as part of the Report or as a separate disclosure document.
<PAGE>


EXHIBIT 99.1

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

In connection with the Annual Report of MBT Financial Corp. (the "Company") on
Form 10-K for the period ending December 31, 2002 as filed with the Securities
and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the "Report"), I, Ronald D. LaBeau,
Chief Executive Officer of the Company, certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section
1350, as enacted 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/ Ronald D. LaBeau
--------------------------------
Ronald D. LaBeau
Chief Executive Officer
March 27, 2003




                                       51
I 

114TH CONGRESS 

1ST SESSION H. R. 2333 

To authorize the Secretary of the Interior to acquire certain property related 

to the Fort Scott National Historic Site in Fort Scott, Kansas. 

IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES 

MAY 14, 2015 

Ms. JENKINS of Kansas introduced the following bill; which was referred to 

the Committee on Natural Resources 

A BILL 

To authorize the Secretary of the Interior to acquire certain 

property related to the Fort Scott National Historic Site 

in Fort Scott, Kansas. 

1 Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representa2 tives of the United States of America in Congress assembled, 

3 SECTION 1. AUTHORIZATION TO ACQUIRE LUNETTE BLAIR. 

4 The first section of the Act entitled ‘‘An Act to au5 thorize establishment of the Fort Scott National Historic 

6 Site, Kansas, and for other purposes.’’, approved October 

7 19, 1978 (Public Law 95–484) is amended by striking ‘‘: 

8 Provided, that the buildings so acquired shall not include 

9 the structure known as ‘Lunette Blair’ ’’. 

Æ 


ebenthall on DSK5SPTVN1PROD with BILLS
COURT OF APPEALS

SECOND DISTRICT OF TEXAS

FORT WORTH

NO. 02-13-00190-CR

Christopher James Hensley

v.

The State of Texas

§

§

§

§

§

From the 355th District Court

of Hood County (CR12277)

May 15, 2014

Per Curiam

(nfp)

JUDGMENT

This court has considered the record on appeal in this case and holds that 

there was error in part of the trial court’s judgment. We reverse the trial court’s 

judgment, render a judgment of misdemeanor theft, and remand this case to the 

trial court for a new punishment trial.

SECOND DISTRICT COURT OF APPEALS 

PER CURIAM
# USCIS Country-Specific Processing

Adoption rules and procedures can vary greatly by country. The rules and procedures in a particular country may affect your adoption process, so understanding the rules and procedures is an important part of selecting which country to adopt from.   

To learn about a specific country's adoption process, go to the Department of State Country Information page. This includes information on:
                    - Whether a country is party to the Hague Adoption Convention;
                    - The country’s adoption authority;
                    - The eligibility requirements for prospective adoptive parents; and
                    - Who can be adopted.

We have country-specific processing information available for the following countries: 
                    - Botswana
                    - Cambodia
                    - Democratic Republic of the Congo
                    - Ethiopia
                    - Fiji
                    - Ghana
                    - Guatemala
                    - Guyana
                    - Haiti
                    - Nepal
                    - Niger
                    - Nigeria
                    - Republic of the Congo
                    - Republic of Korea
                    - Russia
                    - St. Kitts and Nevis
                    - Taiwan
                    - Ukraine
                    - Vietnam

**More Information**
                    - USCIS Adoptions Contact Information
                    - Glossary

**Forms**
                    - I-130, Petition for Alien Relative
                    - N-600, Application for Certificate of Citizenship
                    - N-600K, Application for Citizenship and Issuance of Certificate under Section 322
                    - I-600, Petition to Classify Orphan as an Immediate Relative
                    - I-600A, Application for Advance Processing of Orphan Petition
                    - I-800A, Application for Determination of Suitability to Adopt a Child from a Convention Country
                    - I-800, Petition to Classify Convention Adoptee as an Immediate Relative

**Non-USCIS Links**
                    - Department of State: Adoption Service Providers
                    - Department of State: Intercountry Adoptions Page
                    - Department of State: Country Information

04/01/2024

0 / 2000To protect your privacy, please do not include any personal information in your feedback. Review our Privacy Policy.
UN PUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

No. 17
- 7610

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA , Plaintiff

- Appellee ,

v. LAWRENCE LEE , Defendant

- Appellant

.

Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of South Carolina , at Charleston

. Richard Mark Gergel , District Judge. ( 2:14

- cr - 00343

- RMG

- 1; 2:17

- cv 01328

- RMG )

Submitted : May 17 , 2018 Decided: May 18, 2018

Before KING and AGEE , Circuit Judges , and HAMILTON, Senior Circuit Judge

.

Dismissed by un published per curiam opinion

. Lawrence Lee, Appellant Pro Se.
Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.2 PER CURIAM:
Lawrence Lee seeks to appeal the district court’s order denying relief on his 28 U.S.C. § 2255 (2012) motion . The order is not appealable unless a circuit justice or judge issues a certificate of appealability. 28 U.S.C. § 2253(c)(1)(B) (2012). A certificate of appealability will not issue absent “a substantial showing of the denial of a constitutional right. ” 28 U.S.C. § 2253(c)(2) (2012). When the district court denies relief on the merits, a prisoner satisfies this standard by demonstrating that reasonable jurists would find that the district court’s assessment of the constitutional claims is debatable or wrong. Slack v. McDaniel , 529 U.S. 473, 484 (2000); see Miller

- El v. Cockrell , 537 U.S. 322,
336

- 38 (2003). When the district court denies relief on procedural grounds, the prisoner must demonstrate both that the dispositive procedural ruling is debatab le, and that the motion states a debatable claim of the denial of a constitutional right. Slack , 529 U.S. at
484

- 85. We have independently reviewed the record and conclude that Lee has not made the requisite showing. Accordingly, we deny Lee’s motion f or a certificate of appealability and dismiss the appeal. We dispense with oral argument because the facts and legal contentions are adequately presented in the materials before this court and argument would not aid the decisional process.
DISMISSED
I 

111TH CONGRESS 

2D SESSION H. R. 5835 

To authorize the use of subpoenas by the Office of Healthy Homes and 

Lead Hazard Control of the Department of Housing and Urban Development in investigations of potential violations of the Residential LeadBased Paint Hazard Reduction Act of 1992. 

IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES 

JULY 22, 2010 

Mr. ELLISON (for himself and Mr. BRADY of Pennsylvania) introduced the 

following bill; which was referred to the Committee on Financial Services 

A BILL 

To authorize the use of subpoenas by the Office of Healthy 

Homes and Lead Hazard Control of the Department 

of Housing and Urban Development in investigations 

of potential violations of the Residential Lead-Based 

Paint Hazard Reduction Act of 1992. 

1 Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representa2 tives of the United States of America in Congress assembled, 

3 SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE. 

4 This Act may be cited as the ‘‘Improving Lead-Based 

5 Paint Investigations Act of 2010’’. 


jbell on DSKDVH8Z91PROD with BILLS
2 

•HR 5835 IH

1 SEC. 2. SUBPOENA AUTHORITY FOR THE LEAD DISCLO2 SURE RULE. 

3 Subsection (a) of section 1018 of Subtitle A, of Title 

4 X of the Housing and Community Development Act of 

5 1992 (42 U.S.C. 4852d), is amended by adding at the end 

6 the following new paragraph: 

7 ‘‘(6) AUTHORITY OF SECRETARY.— 

8 ‘‘(A) INVESTIGATIONS.—The Secretary is 

9 authorized to conduct such investigations as 

10 may be necessary to administer and carry out 

11 the duties of the Secretary under this section. 

12 The Secretary is authorized to administer oaths 

13 and require by subpoena the production of doc14 uments, and the attendance and testimony of 

15 witnesses as the Secretary deems advisable. 

16 Nothing contained in this subparagraph shall 

17 prevent the Administrator of the Environmental 

18 Protection Agency from exercising authority 

19 under the Toxic Substances Control Act or this 

20 Act. 

21 ‘‘(B) ENFORCEMENT.—Any district court 

22 of the United States within the jurisdiction of 

23 which an inquiry is carried, on application of 

24 the Attorney General, may, in the case of con25 tumacy, failure, or refusal to obey a subpoena 

26 of the Secretary issued under this section, issue 


jbell on DSKDVH8Z91PROD with BILLS
3 

•HR 5835 IH

1 an order requiring such entry or such compli2 ance therewith; and any failure to obey such 

3 order of the court may be punished by such 

4 court as a contempt thereof.’’. 

Æ 


jbell on DSKDVH8Z91PROD with BILLS
* Pursuant to 5 TH C IR . 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 5 TH C IR . R. 47.5.4. IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT

No. 01-40527 Summary Calendar

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Plaintiff-Appellee, versus ALEJANDRO SALAS-RANGEL, Defendant-Appellant.

-------------------- Appeal from the United States District Court for the Southern District of Texas USDC No. L-00-CR-1231-1

-------------------- February 1, 2002 Before DAVIS, BENAVIDES and CLEMENT, Circuit Judges.
PER CURIAM: * The Federal Public Defender appointed to represent Alejandro Salas-Rangel has moved for leave to withdraw and has filed a brief as required by Anders v. California , 386 U.S. 738 (1967). Although Salas was notified of his right to respond to his counsel’s motion, Salas has not filed a response. Our independent review of counsel’s brief and the record discloses no nonfrivolous issue. Accordingly, the motion for leave to withdraw is GRANTED, counsel is excused from further responsibilities herein, and the APPEAL IS DISMISSED. See 5 TH C IR . R. 42.2.
Exhibit 10.5


 


同意函


SPOUSAL
CONSENT


 


本人,[   ](身份证号码:[   ]),为[   ](身份证号码:[   ])之合法配偶。本人在此无条件并不可撤销地同意[   ]于201[   ]年[   ]月[   ]日签署下列文件(下称“交易文件”),并同意按照交易文件的规定处置[   ]持有的、并登记在其名下的安徽奥凯发油脂科技股份有限公司(“内资公司”)的股权:


The
undersigned, [   ] (ID card No. [   ] ), is the lawful spouse of [   ] (ID card No. [   ]). I hereby unconditionally and irrevocably agree
to the execution of the following documents (hereinafter referred to as “Transaction Documents”) by [   ] on
August [   ], 2015, and the disposal of the equity interests of Anhui Aokai Fa Grease Technology Co., Ltd. (hereinafter referred
to as “Domestic Company”) held by [   ] and registered in [   ] name according to the Transaction Documents:


 


		(1)	与[   ](下称“WFOE”)及内资公司签署的《股权质押协议》;



Equity
Interest Pledge Agreement entered into between [   ] (hereinafter referred to as the “WFOE”) and Domestic
Company;


 


		(2)	与WFOE及内资公司签署的《独家购买权协议》;和



Exclusive
Option Agreement entered into between the WFOE and Domestic Company; and


 


		(3)	[   ]签署的《授权委托书》。



Power
of Attorney executed by [   ].


 


本人承诺不就[   ]持有的内资公司股权主张任何权利。本人进一步确认[   ]履行、修改或终止交易文件并不需要本人另行授权或同意。


I
hereby undertake not to make any assertions in connection with the equity interests of Domestic Company which are held by [   ].
I hereby further confirm that [   ] can perform the Transaction Documents and further amend or terminate the Transaction Documents
absent authorization or consent from me.


 


本人承诺将签署一切必要的文件,并采取一切必要的行动,以确保(经不时修订的)交易文件得到适当履行。


I
hereby undertake to execute all necessary documents and take all necessary actions to ensure appropriate performance of the Transaction
Documents (as amended form time to time).


 


本人同意并承诺,如本人由于任何原因获得[   ]持有的内资公司的任何股权,则本人应受(经不时修订的)交易文件以及WFOE和内资公司之间于201[   ]年[   ]月[   ]日签署的《独家业务合作协议》的约束,并遵守作为内资公司的股东在(经不时修订的)交易文件和《独家业务合作协议》下的义务,且为此目的,一旦WFOE提出要求,本人应签署格式和内容基本与(经不时修订的)交易文件和《独家业务合作协议》相同的一系列书面文件。


I
hereby agree and undertake that if I obtain any equity interests of Domestic Company which are held by [   ] for any reasons, I
shall be bound by the Transaction Documents and the Exclusive Business Cooperation Agreement entered into between the WFOE and
Domestic Company as of [   ] [   ], 201[   ] (as amended from time to time) and comply with the obligations thereunder as a shareholder
of Domestic Company. For this purpose, upon the WFOE’s request, I shall sign a series of written documents in substantially
the same format and content as the Transaction Documents and Exclusive Business Cooperation Agreement (as amended from time to
time).


	 	
	 	姓名/Name: [   ]
	 	日期:201[  ]年[  ]月[  ]日
	 	Date: [   ] [  ], 201[   ]
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 China BAK Battery, Inc. (the “Company”) on
Form 10-K/A for the period ended September 30, 2008 as filed with the Securities
and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the “Report”), I, Xiangqian Li,
Chief Executive Officer and President of the Company, certify, pursuant to 18
U.S.C. § 1350, as adopted pursuant to § 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.
  /s/ Xiangqian LiXiangqian LiPresident
      & Chief Executive Officer
 January
5, 2009
UNPUBLISHED

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

No. 17-1910

In re: SUNDARI K. PRASAD,

Petitioner.

On Petition For Writ of Mandamus. (3:17-cv-00042-JAG)

Submitted: November 21, 2017 Decided: November 27, 2017

Before WYNN and THACKER, Circuit Judges, and HAMILTON, Senior Circuit Judge.

Petition denied by unpublished per curiam opinion.

Sundari K. Prasad, Petitioner Pro Se.

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.
2

PER CURIAM:

Sundari K. Prasad petitions for a writ of mandamus seeking an order directing 

(1) the recusal of two judges of the United States District Court for the Eastern District of 

Virginia; (2) that Prasad be appointed counsel in all of her pending district court cases

and transferred to another correctional institution; and (3) the reversal of all prior adverse 

rulings in her civil actions. Mandamus relief is a drastic remedy and should be used only 

in extraordinary circumstances. Kerr v. U.S. Dist. Court, 426 U.S. 394, 402 (1976); 

United States v. Moussaoui, 333 F.3d 509, 516-17 (4th Cir. 2003). 

We have reviewed Prasad’s petition and conclude that Prasad is not entitled to 

mandamus relief. First, Prasad has failed to establish the extra-judicial bias necessary for 

this court to direct the recusal of the identified district court judges from participation in 

her pending civil actions. See In re Beard, 811 F.2d 818, 826-27 (4th Cir. 1987); see also 

United States v. Owens, 902 F.2d 1154, 1156 (4th Cir. 1990) (“Parties cannot be allowed 

to create the basis for recusal by their own deliberate actions. To hold otherwise would 

encourage inappropriate ‘judge shopping.’”). Next, Prasad has not demonstrated her 

clear entitlement to having counsel appointed in all of her pending civil cases or a 

transfer to another correctional institution, and mandamus relief is available only when 

the petitioner has a clear right to the relief sought. In re First Fed. Sav. & Loan Ass’n,

860 F.2d 135, 138 (4th Cir. 1988). Finally, because mandamus may not be used as a 

substitute for appeal, In re Lockheed Martin Corp., 503 F.3d 351, 353 (4th Cir. 2007), we 

deny Prasad’s request for reversal of all adverse rulings in her civil cases. 
3

For these reasons, we deny the petition for writ of mandamus. We further deny 

Prasad’s motions to consolidate this petition with another pending appeal and to change 

the style of this case to that of a petition for a writ of prohibition. We dispense with oral 

argument because the facts and legal contentions are adequately presented in the 

materials before this court and argument would not aid the decisional process.

PETITION DENIED
I 

111TH CONGRESS 

2D SESSION H. R. 5800 

To withdraw certain land in the State of New Mexico, and for other purposes. 

IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES 

JULY 20, 2010 

Mr. TEAGUE introduced the following bill; which was referred to the 

Committee on Natural Resources 

A BILL 

To withdraw certain land in the State of New Mexico, and 

for other purposes. 

1 Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representa2 tives of the United States of America in Congress assembled, 

3 SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE. 

4 This Act may be cited as the ‘‘Federal Law Enforce5 ment Training Center Protection Act of 2010’’. 

6 SEC. 2. WITHDRAWAL OF FEDERAL LAW ENFORCEMENT 

7 TRAINING CENTER LAND. 

8 (a) IN GENERAL.—For the purposes of protecting, 

9 operating, and maintaining the Federal Law Enforcement 

10 Training Center in Eddy County, New Mexico, and subject 

11 to valid existing rights, the Federal land described in subWReier-Aviles on DSKGBLS3C1PROD with BILLS

2 

•HR 5800 IH

1 section (b) is reserved for use by the Secretary of Home2 land Security for the Federal Law Enforcement Training 

3 Center and withdrawn from— 

4 (1) entry, appropriation, or disposal under the 

5 public land laws; 

6 (2) location, entry, and patent under the mining 

7 laws; and 

8 (3) operation of the mineral leasing, mineral 

9 materials, and geothermal leasing laws. 

10 (b) DESCRIPTION OF LAND.—The Federal land re11 ferred to in subsection (a) is the approximately 2,700 

12 acres of Federal land generally depicted as the ‘‘With13 drawal Area’’ on the map entitled ‘‘FLETC Land With14 drawal’’ and dated May 4, 2010. 

15 (c) WITHDRAWAL PERIOD.—The withdrawal of the 

16 Federal land described in subsection (b) shall remain in 

17 effect for a period of 20 years beginning on the date of 

18 enactment of this Act. 

Æ 

WReier-Aviles on DSKGBLS3C1PROD with BILLS