alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
#### Noha Ibrahim Mabrouk RAMADAN, Petitioner, v. U.S. ATTORNEY GENERAL, Respondent.

No. 10-14510

Non-Argument Calendar.

United States Court of Appeals, Eleventh Circuit.

June 10, 2011.

Sarny Beshay, Law Office of Sarny Beshay, New York, NY, for Petitioner.

*885Nairi S. Gruzenski, David Bernal, Krystal Samuels, Jennifer Paisner Williams, Assistant U.S. Attorney, Lindsay E. Williams, U.S. Department of Justice, Office of Immigration Litigation, Eric Holder, Jr., U.S. Attorney General, U.S. Department of Justice, U.S. Dept of Justice Eoir, U.S. Department of Homeland Security, Washington, DC, Dan Vara, Law Offices of Daniel N. Vara, Jr., Orlando, FL, for Respondent.

Before TJOFLAT, BARKETT and ANDERSON, Circuit Judges.

PER CURIAM:

Noha Ramadan, a native and citizen of Egypt, petitions this Court for review of a decision by the Board of Immigration Appeals (“BIA”) affirming the immigration judge’s denial of her application for withholding of removal. Ramadan alleged that she suffered past persecution and had a well-founded fear of future persecution on account of a statutorily protected ground, namely her particular social group of being a female in the Middle East. The BIA denied Ramadan’s withholding claim in part because this purported social group was “too broad to be legally cognizable” under the Immigration and Nationality Act (“INA”).

We express no view on that finding by the BIA because Ramadan fails to challenge it in her brief to this Court, and she has therefore abandoned any such argument. *See Sepulveda v. U.S. Att’y Gen.,*401 F.3d 1226, 1228 n. 2 (11th Cir.2005).1 As a result, Ramadan cannot show that any past persecution she suffered or well-founded fear of persecution she may have was on account of a statutorily protected ground, as required to obtain withholding of removal. *See Delgado v. U.S. Att’y Gen.,*487 F.3d 855, 860-61 (11th Cir.2007); INA § 241(b)(3), 8 U.S.C. § 1231(b)(3). Accordingly, we deny her petition.

PETITION DENIED.

1

. Ramadan has also abandoned on appeal any claim of asylum or relief under the Convention Against Torture.
Exhibit 32.1

CERTIFICATIONS

PURSUANT TO SECTION 906

OF

THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002 (18 U.S.C SECTION 1350)

The undersigned, as the Chief Executive Officer of Logility, Inc., certifies that, to the best of his knowledge and belief, the Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q for the
fiscal quarter ended October 31, 2006 (the Report), which accompanies this certification, fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 and the information contained in the Report
fairly presents, in all material respects, the financial condition and results of operations of Logility, Inc. at the dates and for the periods indicated. The foregoing certification is made pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of
2002 (18 U.S.C. Section 1350) and shall not be relied upon for any other purpose.



|                                |  |                                             
|------------------------------- |  | --------------------------------------------
|This 11th day of December, 2006 |  | /s/ J. Michael Edenfield                    
|                                |  | J. Michael Edenfield Chief Executive
Officer

The undersigned, as the Chief Financial Officer of Logility, Inc., certifies that, to the best of his knowledge
and belief, the Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q for the fiscal quarter ended October 31, 2006 (the Report), which accompanies this certification, fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) of the Securities Exchange
Act of 1934 and the information contained in the Report fairly presents, in all material respects, the financial condition and results of operations of Logility, Inc. at the dates and for the periods indicated. The foregoing certification is made
pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002 (18 U.S.C. Section 1350) and shall not be relied upon for any other purpose.



|                                |  |                                           
|------------------------------- |  | ------------------------------------------
|This 11th day of December, 2006 |  | /s/ Vincent C. Klinges                    
|                                |  | Vincent C. Klinges Chief Financial
Officer

A signed original of this written statement required by Section 906, or other document authenticating,
acknowledging, or otherwise adopting the signature that appears in typed form within the electronic version of this written statement required by Section 906, has been provided to Logility, Inc. and will be retained by Logility, Inc. and
furnished to the Securities and Exchange Commission or its staff upon request.

The information in this Exhibit 32.1 shall not be deemed filed
for purposes of Section 18 of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended, nor shall it be deemed incorporated by reference in any filing under the Securities Act of 1933, except as shall be expressly set forth by specific reference in such
filing.
I 

111TH CONGRESS 

2D SESSION H. R. 5958 

To direct the Secretary of Defense to allow members of the Armed Forces 

serving on active duty who are at least 18 years old and less than 

21 years old to purchase and consume beer and wine at certain locations 

on military installations. 

IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES 

JULY 29, 2010 

Mr. KINGSTON (for himself and Mr. TAYLOR) introduced the following bill; 

which was referred to the Committee on Armed Services 

A BILL 

To direct the Secretary of Defense to allow members of 

the Armed Forces serving on active duty who are at 

least 18 years old and less than 21 years old to purchase 

and consume beer and wine at certain locations on military installations. 

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

3 SECTION 1. PURCHASE AND CONSUMPTION OF BEER AND 

4 WINE BY MEMBERS OF THE ARMED FORCES 

5 ON MILITARY INSTALLATIONS. 

6 (a) PURCHASE AND CONSUMPTION OF BEER AND

7 WINE.— 


smartinez on DSKB9S0YB1PROD with BILLS
2 

•HR 5958 IH

1 (1) IN GENERAL.—The Secretary of Defense 

2 shall ensure that a member of the Armed Forces 

3 serving on active duty who is not less than 18 years 

4 old and not yet 21 years old may purchase and con5 sume beer and wine from a location on a military in6 stallation where such beer and wine is intended to 

7 be consumed at the location (including restaurants, 

8 enlisted clubs, and morale, welfare, and recreation 

9 facilities) if such member presents a valid common 

10 access card when making such purchase. 

11 (2) EXCEPTION.—Paragraph (1) shall not 

12 apply to the purchase of beer and wine at the fol13 lowing: 

14 (A) Army-Air Force Exchange Services 

15 and Navy Exchange facilities. 

16 (B) Shoppettes. 

17 (C) Other facilities that sell beer and wine 

18 to be consumed offsite. 

19 (b) OFF BASE.—Nothing in this Act shall be con20 strued so as to allow a member of the Armed Forces who 

21 is less than 21 years old to transport beer or wine off of 

22 the military installation where such member purchased the 

23 beer or wine. 

Æ 


smartinez on DSKB9S0YB1PROD with BILLS
China Packaging Technologies, Inc. - Exhibit 10.32 - Filed by
   newsfilecorp.com






Exhibit 10.32 

Lease Agreement 

(English Summary) 

	Date of Signing 	       
                 Jan 1, 2010 
	Lease Parties 	       
                 Great Shengda as lessee and Xin
      Shengda as lessor. 
	Lease Address 	       
                 2, Beitang Rd, Xiaoshan Economic
      and Technology Development Zone 
	Lease Area 	       
                 Land use right of 112,437 sqm
  
	Lease Purpose 	       
                 Industrial use 
	Term 	       
                 From Jan 1, 2010 to Dec 31, 2012
    
	Rent 	       
                 RMB 1 million per annual, payable
      at the end of each calendar year 
	
      Termination 
	
      During the term of the Agreement, if lessee terminate the
      lease agreement, the lessor shall have the right to decide if this
      Agreement will be continued or terminated. In this circumstance, if lessor
      decides to terminate the Agreement, lessor shall notify lessee in writing.
      Lessee shall make sure the validity of its mailing address and notify
      lessor of any change of mailing address in writing, otherwise, when lessor
      sends the notice to lessee’s designated mailing address, the return date
      of the mail shall be deemed as the notice date.
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<ARTICLE> 5
<MULTIPLIER> 1,000

<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   9-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          DEC-31-1999
<PERIOD-START>                             JAN-01-1999
<PERIOD-END>                               SEP-30-1999
<CASH>                                         118,949
<SECURITIES>                                         0
<RECEIVABLES>                                  694,563
<ALLOWANCES>                                    36,881
<INVENTORY>                                    115,493
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                             1,177,761
<PP&E>                                       1,624,273
<DEPRECIATION>                                 237,607
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                               3,660,612
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                          622,788
<BONDS>                                      1,914,950
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                         3,954
<OTHER-SE>                                   1,391,935
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                 3,660,612
<SALES>                                              0
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                             1,499,479
<CGS>                                                0
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                1,683,359
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                     0
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                17,128
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                              58,634
<INCOME-PRETAX>                              (248,694)
<INCOME-TAX>                                    36,984
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                          (285,678)
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                 (285,678)
<EPS-BASIC>                                     (0.72)
<EPS-DILUTED>                                   (0.72)


</TABLE>
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<ARTICLE> 5
<MULTIPLIER> 1,000,000

<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   6-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          DEC-30-2000
<PERIOD-END>                               JUN-30-2000
<CASH>                                             288
<SECURITIES>                                         5
<RECEIVABLES>                                      494
<ALLOWANCES>                                         7
<INVENTORY>                                          0
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                                 1,238
<PP&E>                                             796
<DEPRECIATION>                                     518
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                   1,645
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                              715
<BONDS>                                             18
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                             0
<OTHER-SE>                                         829
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                     1,645
<SALES>                                          2,396
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                                 2,396
<CGS>                                            2,239
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                    2,239
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                    89
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                     0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                                   0
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                    107
<INCOME-TAX>                                        43
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                                 64
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                        64
<EPS-BASIC>                                       2.01
<EPS-DILUTED>                                     1.95


</TABLE>
TEXAS COURT OF APPEALS, THIRD DISTRICT, AT AUSTIN

NO. 03-06-00767-CV

In re Vanessa Cherry

ORIGINAL PROCEEDING FROM WILLIAMSON COUNTY

M E M O R A N D U M O P I N I O N

Relator Vanessa Cherry has filed a motion for temporary emergency relief and 

petition for writ of mandamus. See Tex. R. App. P. 52.1, 52.10. We deny the petition for writ of

mandamus and dismiss as moot the motion for temporary relief. See Tex. R. App. P. 52.8, 52.10. 

 

Bob Pemberton, Justice

Before Justices B. A. Smith, Puryear and Pemberton

Filed: December 12, 2006
exv10w14






Exhibit 10.14




SECOND AMENDMENT TO AMENDED AND RESTATED EXECUTIVE

SERVICES AGREEMENT




     This Second Amendment (the “Amendment”) to that certain Amended and Restated Executive
Services Agreement dated as of December 1, 2009, as amended (the “Employment Agreement”) by and
among Chateau Holdings, Inc., an Idaho corporation (“Lender”), Robert Katz (“Executive”) and The
Film Department Holdings LLC, a Delaware limited liability company (the “Company”), is made as of
January 1, 2010, and is entered into by and between Company, Lender and Executive.



     WHEREAS, Company, Lender and Executive have previously entered into the Employment Agreement;



     WHEREAS, Company, Lender and Executive have agreed to amend specific terms of the Employment
Agreement in accordance with the terms set forth below. All capitalized terms not defined herein
shall have the meanings ascribed to such terms in the Employment Agreement.



     NOW, THEREFORE, in consideration of the agreements made herein, the parties hereto agree as
follows:



     1. The Employment Agreement is hereby amended by deleting Section 4(c) in its entirety and
replacing it with the following:




“(c) Units. Pursuant to the LLC Agreement, the Lender is the record holder
of 277 Class H Units in the Company (“Class H Units”). One hundred percent
(100%) of the Class H Units shall vest as of January 1, 2010.”



     2. This Amendment is intended to comply with Section 409A of the Internal Revenue Code of
1986, as amended (the “Code”) and the regulations and guidance promulgated thereunder
(collectively, “Code Section 409A”) and will be interpreted in a manner intended to comply with
Code Section 409A.



     3. This Amendment may be executed in any number of counterparts, each of which when so
executed shall be deemed to be an original and all of which taken together shall constitute one and
the same agreement. Delivery of an executed counterpart of a signature page hereto by facsimile or
other electronic transmission shall be effective as delivery of a manually executed counterpart
hereof.



     IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the parties have duly executed this Amendment as of the date first above
written.



	 	 	 

	2nd Amendment to Amended and Restated Exec. Srvcs Agrmt.

	 	1






 









 





	 	 	 

	THE FILM DEPARTMENT HOLDINGS LLC
	 
	 	 
	/s/ Mark Gill

	 	/s/ Robert Katz
	By: Mark Gill

	 	ROBERT KATZ
	Its: Chief Executive Officer
	 	 
	 
	 	 
	 

	 	CHATEAU HOLDINGS, INC.
	 
	 	 
	 

	 	/s/ Robert Katz
	 

	 	By: Robert Katz
	 

	 	Its: Chief Executive Officer






	 	 	 

	2nd Amendment to Amended and Restated Exec. Srvcs Agrmt.

	 	2
Exhibit 99.6


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 on Form 40-F for the fiscal year ended December 31, 2013 of Hydrogenics Corporation (the “Company”) as filed with the US Securities and Exchange Commission (the “Commission”) on the date hereof (the “Report”) and pursuant to 18 U.S.C. § 1350, as adopted pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, I, Daryl Wilson, President and Chief Executive Officer of the Company, certify, that:
  (1) the Report fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended; and
  (2) the information contained in the Report fairly presents, in all material respects, the financial condition and results of operations of the Company.
   By:
/s/ Daryl WilsonName:
Daryl WilsonTitle:
President and Chief Executive Officer
  Date: March 7, 2014
  
 A signed original of this written statement required by Section 906 has been provided to Hydrogenics Corporation and will be retained by Hydrogenics Corporation and furnished to the Securities and Exchange Commission or its staff upon request.
Order filed, February 17, 2017

.

In The 

## Fourteenth Court of Appeals

____________ NO. 14

- 16

- 01025

- CV

____________ LISA SLATER , Appellant

V.

AMERIGROUP MORTGAGE CORPORATION, GMAC MO RTGAGE, LLC, PLANET HOME LEN DING, LLC, THE SECRE TARY OF

VETERA N'S AFFAIRS , Appellee

On Appeal from the 125th District Court

Harris County, Texas Trial Court Cause No. 2016

- 12085



### ORDER

The reporter’s record in this case was due January 30, 2017

. See Tex. R. App. P. 35.1. The court has not received a request t o extend time for filing the record. The record has not been filed with the court. Because the reporter’s record has not been filed timely, we issue the following order.

We order Kendra Garcia , the official court reporter, to file the record in this appe al within 30 days of the date of this order

. PER CURIAM
I 

111TH CONGRESS 

2D SESSION H. R. 6016 

To provide for a GAO investigation and audit of the operations of the 

fund created by BP to compensate persons affected by the Gulf oil spill. 

IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES 

JULY 30, 2010 

Mr. BRADY of Texas introduced the following bill; which was referred to the 

Committee on Transportation and Infrastructure 

A BILL 

To provide for a GAO investigation and audit of the operations of the fund created by BP to compensate persons 

affected by the Gulf oil spill. 

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 ‘‘Audit the BP Fund 

5 Act of 2010’’. 

6 SEC. 2. INVESTIGATION AND AUDIT. 

7 (a) IN GENERAL.—The Comptroller General shall 

8 conduct an ongoing independent investigation and audit 

9 of the operations of the fund created by BP to compensate 

10 persons affected by the Gulf oil spill, as those operations 


srobinson on DSKHWCL6B1PROD with BILLS
2 

•HR 6016 IH

1 take place to determine their effectiveness, including the 

2 timeliness of claim payments and the accuracy of those 

3 operations in determining amounts of damages com4 pensated. 

5 (b) USE OF SUBPOENA POWER.—The Comptroller 

6 General may use any investigative powers, including those 

7 of subpoena granted to the Comptroller General for the 

8 purposes of other investigations and audits, to conduct 

9 this investigation and audit. 

10 (c) REPORT TO CONGRESS.—Each month during the 

11 operations, and once after all those operations are com12 pleted, the Comptroller General shall report to Congress 

13 on the effectiveness of those operations. 

14 SEC. 3. SENSE OF CONGRESS. 

15 It is the sense of Congress that— 

16 (1) BP should fully cooperate with the Comp17 troller General to assure that the BP relief fund is 

18 accurately, expediently, and efficiently compensating 

19 Gulf coast victims of the BP oil spill for their losses; 

20 and 

21 (2) the costs incurred by the Comptroller Gen22 eral to carry out responsibilities under this Act 

23 should be reimbursed by BP. 

Æ 


srobinson on DSKHWCL6B1PROD with BILLS
Official Form 417 (Committee Note) (12/23)

Committee Note

Parts 2 and 3 of the form are amended to conform to 

wording in the simultaneously amended Rule 8003. The 

new wording is intended to remind appellants that appeals as 

of right from orders and decrees are limited to those that are 

“appealable”―that is, either deemed final or issued under 

§ 1121(d). See 28 U.S.C. § 158(a)(2). It also seeks to avoid 

the misconception that it is necessary or appropriate to 

identify each and every order of the bankruptcy court that 

the appellant may wish to challenge on appeal. It requires 

identification of only “the judgment—or the appealable 

order or decree—from which the appeal is taken.”
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





The undersigned, Wo Hing Li, the Chief
Executive Officer of CHINA PRECISION STEEL, INC. (the “Company”), DOES HEREBY
CERTIFY that:





1.      The
Company’s Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q for the quarter ended December 31, 2009
(the “Report”), fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) of the
Securities Exchange Act of 1934; and





2.      Information
contained in the Report fairly presents, in all material respects, the financial
condition and results of operation of the Company.





IN WITNESS WHEREOF, each of the
undersigned has executed this statement this 16th day of
February, 2010.





/s/ Wo Hing LiWo
      Hing LiChief
      Executive Officer(Principal
      Executive Officer)





A signed
original of this written statement required by Section 906 has been provided to
China Precision Steel, Inc. and will be retained by China Precision Steel, Inc.
and furnished to the Securities and Exchange Commission or its staff upon
request.





The
forgoing certification is being furnished to the Securities and Exchange
Commission pursuant to § 18 U.S.C. Section 1350. It is not being filed for
purposes of Section 18 of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended, and
is not to be incorporated by reference into any filing of the Company, whether
made before or after the date hereof, regardless of any general incorporation
language in such filing.
UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 04-7075

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Plaintiff - Appellee, versus DAVID SWIFT, Defendant - Appellant. Appeal from the United States District Court for the Middle District of North Carolina, at Greensboro. Russell A. Eliason, Magistrate Judge. (CR-89-235; CA-97-116-2) Submitted: October 29, 2004 Decided: February 10, 2005 Before WILLIAMS, KING, and GREGORY, Circuit Judges. Dismissed by unpublished per curiam opinion. David Swift, Appellant Pro Se. Anna Mills Wagoner, United States Attorney, Greensboro, North Carolina, for Appellee. Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. See Local Rule 36(c).- 2 - PER CURIAM: David Swift appeals a magistrate judge’s order denying his Fed. R. Civ. P. 60(b) motion seeking reconsideration of the denial of his 28 U.S.C. § 2255 (2000) motion. This court may exercise jurisdiction only over final orders, 28 U.S.C. § 1291 (2000), and certain interlocutory and collateral orders, 28 U.S.C. § 1292 (2000); Fed. R. Civ. P. 54(b); Cohen v. Beneficial Indus. Loan Corp. , 337 U.S. 541 (1949). The magistrate judge’s order is neither a final order nor an appealable interlocutory or collateral order. United States v. Bryson , 981 F.2d 720, 723 (4th Cir. 1992) (magistrate judge may hear matters in § 2255 proceedings, but may not decide them absent explicit consent). Moreover, where a dispositive matter is referred to the magistrate judge under 28 U.S.C.A. § 636(b) (West Supp. 2004), parties must have the opportunity to object, and the district court is required to conduct de novo review of the portions of the recommendation to which objections are made. Bryson , 981 F.2d at 723. Accordingly, we dismiss the appeal for lack of jurisdiction. 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.

DISMISSED