alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
NOT FOR PUBLICATION

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT

JAIME ROQUES

- JUAREZ,

Petitioner,

v. WILLIAM P. BARR, Attorney General,

Respondent. No. 18

- 72722
Agency No. A206

- 784

- 500

MEMORANDUM *

On Petition for Review of an Order of the Board of Immigration Appeals

Submitted September 8, 2020 * *

Before: TASHIMA , SILVERMAN , and OWENS , Circuit Judges

. Jaime Roques

- Juarez , a native and citizen of Mexico, petitions pro se for

review of the Board of Immigration Appeals’ order dismissing his appeal from an
immigration judge’s (“IJ”) decision denying his application for cancellation of
removal. Our jurisdiction is governed by 8 U.S.C. § 1252. We review de novo
questions of law. Figueroa v. Mukasey , 543 F.3d 487, 49 1 (9th Cir. 2008). We

* This disposition is not appropriate for publication and is not precedent except as provided by Ninth Circuit Rule 36

- 3.

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

# FILED

SEP 11 2020

MOLLY C. DWYER, CLERK U.S. COURT OF APPEALS2 18

- 72722

dismiss in part and deny in part the petition for review.
We lack jurisdiction to review the agency’s discretionary determination that
Roques

- Juarez did not demonstrate exceptional and extremely unusual hardship in
his application for cancellation of removal , and Roques

- Juarez does not raise a
colorable question of law that would invoke our jurisdiction

. See 8 U.S.C.
§ 1252(a)(2)(B)(i) , (D) ; Romero

- Torres v. Ashcroft , 327 F.3d 887, 888 (9th Cir.
2003) (“[A]n ‘exceptional and extremely unusual hardship’ determination is a
subjective, discretionary judgment that has been carved out of our appellate
jurisdiction.”). Because the hardship determination is dispositive, we do not reach
Roques

- Juarez’s c ontentions regarding the remaining factors for eligibility for

cancellation of removal. See Simeonov v. Ashcroft , 371 F.3d 532, 538 (9th Cir.
2004) ( the courts and the agenc y are not required to make findings on issues the

decision of which is unneces sary to the results).
Roques

- Juarez ’s contention s that t he IJ improperly denied voluntary
departure and failed to inform him of his apparent eligibility for this relief are not
supported because the record shows that he did not apply for voluntary departure

.
P ETITION FOR REVIEW DISMISSED in part; DENIED in part.
State of North Carolina v. Theodore Roosevelt Spivey, Defendant.

No. COA16-455

Court of Appeals of North Carolina.

Filed: December 6, 2016

REMANDED FOR RESENTENCING.
Rodney K. ADAMS, Elizabeth I. Allen, Joseph J. Bateman, William Paul Bateman, Gilbert A. Breedlove, Debra D. Carswell, Jason Gray Cheek, Christopher E. Duckworth, Bryan G. Farley, Melissa Ferrel, James Robert Freeman, Joshua Phillip Grant, Wanda M. Hammock, Marlene Hammond, Thomas Murphy Harris, Ronald E. Hodges, Thomas W. Holland, Gary H. Littleton, Linda B. Long, Pansy K. Martin, Sharon S. McLaurin, Bruce A. McPherson, Thomas G. Miller, Jeffrey Mitchell, Donald D. Paschall, Sr., Robert Warren Pearce, Connie C. Peele, Julian R. Poteat, Margaret L. Rathbone, Ronald Raymond Roberts, Jr., Rae Renee Rothrock, Suzanne Sheehan, Susan B. Smevog, Kenneth Spears, Steven R. Storch, Cecil Lynn Webb, Emily Alicia Westover, William Eric Whitten, and William T. Winslow, individually and on behalf of a class of similarly situated persons v. The STATE of North Carolina, Patrick L. McCrory, Governor of the State of North Carolina, in his official capacity, Lee Harris Roberts, State Budget Director, in his official capacity, and Dr. Linda Morrison Combs, State Controller, in her official capacity

No. 355P16

Supreme Court of North Carolina.

August 17, 2017

Frederick S. Barbour, Attorney at Law, W. Scott Jones, Attorney at Law, Asheville, David A. Wijewickrama, Attorney at Law, Waynesville, for Adams, Rodney K., et al.

Marc Bernstein, Special Deputy Attorney General, for State of North Carolina, et al.

***ORDER***

Upon consideration of the petition filed on the 26th of September 2016 by Plaintiffs in this matter for discretionary review of the decision of the North Carolina Court of Appeals pursuant to G.S. 7A-31, the following order was entered and is hereby certified to the North Carolina Court of Appeals:

"Denied by order of the Court in conference, this the 17th of August 2017."
Order entered January 24, 2020

In The 

## Court of Appeals Fifth District of Texas at Dallas

No. 05
- 19
- 01272
- CV
IN THE INTEREST OF K .C.E. AND L.T.E., CH ILDREN On Appeal from the 429th Judicial Distric t Court

Collin County, Texas Trial Court Cause No. 429
- 55626
- 2018



### O RDER Appellant has filed a Suggestion of Bankruptcy stating that he has filed for bankruptcy in the United States Bankruptcy Court for the Eastern District of Texas. This automatically

s uspends further action in this appeal. See T EX
. R. A PP
. P. 8.2. Accordingly, we ABATE this appeal. It may be reinstated on prompt motion by any party complying with Rule 8.3 and specifying what further action, if any, is required from this
Court. See id . 8.3.
/s/ KEN MOLBERG JUSTICE
i i i i i i



### MEM ORA ND UM OP INION No
. 04 -1 0- 00 20 7- CR Emanuel Camac ho G OM EZ , Appellant
v . The STA TE of Texas, Appellee Fr om the 226th J udicial District Court, Be x ar County , Texas

Trial Court No. 2008-CR-7391 Honora ble Sid L . Har le, J udg e Presiding PER C URI AM Sitt ing: Catherine Stone, Chief Justice

Kar en Ang elini, J ustice Marialy n Ba rnar d, J ustice Deliver ed and F iled: May 19, 2010 DI SMI SSED Appellant Emanue l Camacho Gome z pleaded nolo contende re to the of fense of murder pursuant to a plea bar g ain ag ree ment. The trial c ourt imposed sentenc e in ac corda nce w ith the plea ag ree ment, and signe d a ce rtificate stating tha t this “is a plea-ba rg ain ca se, and the defe ndant has NO rig ht of appe al.” See T EX . R. A PP . P. 25.2(a)( 2). Appe llant timely fi l ed a noti ce of

appea l. The cler k’s rec ord, which includes the plea barg ain ag ree ment and the trial court ’s R u l e 2 5.2(a) (2)04
- 10
- 00 20 7- CR

- 2- cer tification, has bee n filed. See T EX . R. A PP . P. 25.2(d). This court must dismi ss an appe al “if a
cer tification that shows the defendant has the right of appeal has not been made par t of the re cord.” Id. The c ourt g ave a

ppellant notice that the a

ppeal would be dismiss ed unless an amende d trial
c ou rt c e rt if ic a tio n s ho wi ng he ha s the ri g ht to a pp e a l we re ma de pa

rt of the a pp e llate re c or d w ith in thirty day s. See T EX . R. A PP . P. 2 5. 2( d) ; 37 .1 ; Dan iel s v . S tat e , 110 S.W .3d 174 (Tex. App.–San Antonio 2003, order) , dis

p. on me rit

s , No. 04 -0 3- 00 17 6- CR, 20 03 WL21 50 83 47 (Jul y 2, 20 03 , p e t. ref ’d) ( n o t d es i g nated f

or publication). Appe llant’s appointed appe llate counse l filed a wr itten response , stating she has reviewed the rec ord and can find no rig ht of appeal. After revie wing the
rec ord and c ounsel’s notice, we ag ree appellant does not have a rig ht to appeal. Se e De ar s v . S tat e , 154 S.W .3d 610 (Tex. Crim. App. 2005) (holding that court of appeals should re view cle rk’s re cord to determine w hether

trial court’ s cer

tification is a ccur ate) . We theref ore dismiss this appeal. See T EX . R. A PP . P. 25.2(d).

PER C URI AM Do No t Pu

bli sh
<TABLE> <S> <C>


<ARTICLE>                     5
<LEGEND>
THIS SCHEDULE  CONTAINS SUMMARY  FINANCIAL  INFORMATION  EXTRACTED FROM THE YEAR
ENDED  DECEMBER  31, 1999 AND IS  QUALIFIED IN ITS ENTIRETY BY REFERENCE TO SUCH
FORM 10-K FILED WITH THE SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION.
</LEGEND>
<MULTIPLIER>                                   1000

<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   12-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                              DEC-31-1999
<PERIOD-START>                                 JAN-01-1999
<PERIOD-END>                                   DEC-31-1999
<CASH>                                             279,823
<SECURITIES>                                             0
<RECEIVABLES>                                       27,986
<ALLOWANCES>                                        (1,446)
<INVENTORY>                                              0
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                                   380,206
<PP&E>                                              26,844
<DEPRECIATION>                                     (10,093)
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                     406,128
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                               16,508
<BONDS>                                                  0
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                    0
<PREFERRED>                                              0
<COMMON>                                           320,283
<OTHER-SE>                                         (24,905)
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                       406,128
<SALES>                                             75,383
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                                   115,514
<CGS>                                                3,703
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                       28,811
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                    71,441
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                         0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                                     599
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                     19,805
<INCOME-TAX>                                             0
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                                 19,805
<DISCONTINUED>                                           0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                          0
<CHANGES>                                                0
<NET-INCOME>                                        18,809
<EPS-BASIC>                                           0.08
<EPS-DILUTED>                                         0.07


</TABLE>
UNPUBLISHED

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

No. 06-2120

VALARIE PRICE,

Plaintiff - Appellant,

v.

FIRST STAR MORTGAGE, also known as US Bank; ANTHONY J.

CORCINI, Secretary, Department of Veterans Affairs; SAMUEL I.

WHITE,

Defendants - Appellees.

Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern

District of Virginia, at Norfolk. Rebecca Beach Smith, District

Judge. (2:03-cv-00568-RBS)

Submitted: September 25, 2008 Decided: October 9, 2008

Before WILKINSON, GREGORY, and DUNCAN, Circuit Judges.

Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion.

Valarie Price, Appellant Pro Se. Jonathan L. Hauser, TROUTMAN &

SANDERS, LLP, Virginia Beach, Virginia; George Maralan Kelley, III,

Assistant United States Attorney, Norfolk, Virginia, for Appellees.

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.
2

PER CURIAM:

Valarie Price appeals the district court’s order imposing

civil contempt and Fed. R. Civ. P. 11 sanctions on Price. We have

reviewed the record and find no reversible error. Accordingly, we

affirm for the reasons stated by the district court. Price v.

First Star Mortgage, No. 2:03-cv-00568-RBS (E.D. Va. Aug. 16,

2006). 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.

AFFIRMED
IN THE SUPREME COURT OF PENNSYLVANIA 

MIDDLE DISTRICT 

COMMONWEALTH OF PENNSYLVANIA, 

 Respondent 

 v. 

AUGUSTUS SIMMONS, 

 Petitioner 

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

No. 513 MAL 2015 

Petition for Allowance of Appeal from 

the Order of the Superior Court 

ORDER 

PER CURIAM 

AND NOW, this 14th day of October, 2015, the Petition for Allowance of Appeal 

and Motion for Leave to File Amended Section of Petition for Allowance of Appeal are 

DENIED.
----

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 

Pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350 asadopted pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, each of theundersigned officers of Yukon Gold Corporation, Inc. (the "Company"), doeshereby certify, to such officer's knowledge, that: 

The Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q forthe quarter ended July 31, 2008 (the "Form 10-Q") of the Company fullycomplies with the requirement of section 13(a) or 15(d) of the SecuritiesExchange Act of 1934 and the information contained in the Form 10-Q fairlypresents, in all material respects, the financial condition and results ofoperations of the Company. 

Dated: September 11, 2008 

/s/ Ronald K. Mann               Ronald K. Mann Chief Executive Officer Yukon Gold Corporation, Inc. 

Dated: September 11, 2008 

/s/ Rakesh Malhotra               Rakesh Malhotra, C.A., Chief Financial Officer Yukon Gold Corporation, Inc. 

A signed original of this written statement required bySection 906 has been provided to Yukon Gold Corporation, Inc. and will beretained by Yukon Gold Corporation, Inc. and furnished to the Securities andExchange Commission or its staff upon request. 

----
STATE of North Carolina v. Donna Helms LEDBETTER

No. 402PA15-2

Supreme Court of North Carolina.

November 1, 2017

Meghan Adelle Jones, Attorney at Law, for Ledbetter, Donna Helms.

Ashleigh P. Dunston, Assistant Attorney General, Christopher W. Brooks, Assistant Attorney General, Brandy Cook, District Attorney, for State of North Carolina.

***ORDER***

Upon consideration of the petition filed by Defendant on the 22nd of December 2016 for Writ of Supersedeas of the judgment of the Court of Appeals, the following order was entered and is hereby certified to the North Carolina Court of Appeals:

"Allowed by order of the Court in conference, this the 1st of November 2017."

Upon consideration of the petition filed on the 5th of January 2017 by Defendant in this matter for discretionary review of the decision of the North Carolina Court of Appeals pursuant to G.S. 7A-31, the following order was entered and is hereby certified to the North Carolina Court of Appeals:

"Allowed by order of the Court in conference, this the 1st of November 2017."

Therefore the case is docketed as of the date of this order's certification. Briefs of the respective parties shall be submitted to this Court within the times allowed and in the manner provided by Appellate Rule 15(g)(2).
In re Foreclosure of Friscia

246P16-3

Supreme Court of North Carolina.

December 8, 2016

Christopher Charles Friscia, for Friscia, Christopher C., et al.

Nathan J. Taylor, Attorney at Law, Charlotte, for Taylor, Nathan J., et al.

The following order has been entered on the motion filed on the 13th of October 2016 by Defendant to Reconsider:

"Motion Dismissed by order of the Court in conference, this the 8th of December 2016."
# Official Journal C 417A/31 O

| | ISSN 1977-091X |
| --- | --- |
| Official Journal
  of the European Union | C 417A |
| | |
| English edition | Information and Notices | Volume 6531 October 2022 |

ISSN 1977-091X

Official Journal

of the European Union

C 417A

English edition

Information and Notices

Volume 6531 October 2022

---

| Contents | page |
| --- | --- |
| | V   Announcements |
| | ADMINISTRATIVE PROCEDURES |
| | Europol |
| 2022/C 417 A/01 | Vacancy notice Europol/2022/TA/AD14/513 – Deputy Executive Director of Europol – Capabilities Directorate (Chief Information Officer) | 1 |

Contents

page

V   Announcements

ADMINISTRATIVE PROCEDURES

Europol

2022/C 417 A/01

Vacancy notice Europol/2022/TA/AD14/513 – Deputy Executive Director of Europol – Capabilities Directorate (Chief Information Officer)

1

---

| EN | |
| --- | --- |

EN
Virginia RADCLIFFE v. AVENEL HOMEOWNERS ASSOCIATION, INC., Carmelo (Tony) Buccafurri, Stephen Murray, Thomas Dinero, David Hull, Richard Progelhof, and Ron Zanzarella

No. 356P16

Supreme Court of North Carolina.

May 3, 2017

*43H. Clifton Hester, Attorney at Law, Elizabethtown, for Radcliffe, Virginia.

James B. Stephenson, II, Attorney at Law, Philip T. Gray, Attorney at Law, Cary, for Avenel Homeowners Association, Inc.

Clay A. Collier, Attorney at Law, Wilmington, for Dinero, Thomas.

Donald Ennis, Attorney at Law, for Murray, Stephen, et al.

Derek M. Crump, Attorney at Law, John S. Byrd, II, Attorney at Law, Raleigh, Reid Russell, Attorney at Law, for Hull, David.

Jeffrey H. Blackwell, Attorney at Law, Wilmington, for Zanzarella, Ron.

Stacey E. Tally, Attorney at Law, Fayetteville, for Progelhof, Richard.

***ORDER***

Upon consideration of the petition filed by Plaintiff on the 26th of September 2016 in this matter for a writ of certiorari to review the decision of the North Carolina Court of Appeals, the following order was entered and is hereby certified to the North Carolina Court of Appeals:

"Denied by order of the Court in conference, this the 3rd of May 2017."

The following order has been entered on the motion filed on the 14th of October 2016 by Plaintiff to Treat Petition for Writ of Certiorari as a Petition for Discretionary Review:

"Motion Allowed by order of the Court in conference, this the 3rd of May 2017."
# C_2008022EN.01001501.xml

| 26.1.2008 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 22/15 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

26.1.2008

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 22/15

---

Judgment of the Court (Fifth Chamber) of 29 November 2007 — Commission of the European Communities v French Republic

(Case C-67/07) (1)

1

(Failure of a Member State to fulfil obligations - Directive 2004/24/EC - Traditional herbal medicinal products - Community code - Failure to transpose within the prescribed period)

(2008/C 22/28)

Language of the case: French

Parties

Applicant: Commission of the European Communities (represented by: B. Stromsky, acting as Agent)

Applicant:

Defendant: French Republic (represented by: G. de Bergues abd R. Loosli-Surrans, Agents)

Defendant:

Re:

Failure of a Member State to fulfil obligations — Failure to adopt within the prescribed period the provisions necessary to comply with Directive 2004/24/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council of 31 March 2004 amending, as regards traditional herbal medicinal products, Directive 2001/83/EC on the Community code relating to medicinal products for human use (OJ 2004 L 136, p. 85)

Operative part of the judgment

The Court:

| 1. | Declares that, by failing to adopt, within the prescribed period, the laws, regulations and administrative provisions necessary to comply with Directive 2004/24/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council of 31 March 2004 amending, as regards traditional herbal medicinal products, Directive 2001/83/EC on the Community code relating to medicinal products for human use, the French Republic has failed to fulfil its obligations under Article 2 of that directive; |
| --- | --- |

1.

Declares that, by failing to adopt, within the prescribed period, the laws, regulations and administrative provisions necessary to comply with Directive 2004/24/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council of 31 March 2004 amending, as regards traditional herbal medicinal products, Directive 2001/83/EC on the Community code relating to medicinal products for human use, the French Republic has failed to fulfil its obligations under Article 2 of that directive;

| 2. | Orders the French Republic to pay the costs. |
| --- | --- |

2.

Orders the French Republic to pay the costs.

---

(1)  OJ C 95 of 28.4.2007.

1

---
EXHIBIT 32.1

Certification Pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002

In connection with the Quarterly Report of Mewbourne Energy Partners 04-A, L.P. (the Registrant) on Form 10-Q for the
nine months ended September 30, 2010, as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the Report), the undersigned hereby certifies, in the capacity as indicated below and 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, as amended, and
| | -- | ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

| | 2. | The information contained in the Report fairly presents, in all material respects, the financial condition and results of operations of Registrant.
| | -- | ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Date:             November 15, 2010



/s/ Curtis W. MewbourneCurtis W. MewbourneChief Executive OfficerMewbourne Development Corporation,Managing General Partner of the Registrant
<PAGE>   1

                                                                    EXHIBIT 23.1

CONSENT OF INDEPENDENT ACCOUNTANTS


We consent to the incorporation by reference in the registration statements of
Winston Hotels, Inc. on Form S-3 (File nos. 33-93516, 333-32713 and 333-60651)
and Form S-8 (File nos. 333-19197, 333-60079 and 333-60619) of our report dated
January 14, 1999, except for the information in the last paragraph of Note 5 for
which the date is February 1, 1999, on our audits of the consolidated financial
statements and the financial statement schedule of Winston Hotels, Inc. as of
December 31, 1998 and 1997, and for each of the three years in the period ended
December 31, 1998, and of our report dated February 6, 1998, on our audits of
the financial statements of Winston Hospitality, Inc. as of October 31,1997 and
for the ten months ended October 31, 1997 and the year ended December 31, 1996,
which reports are included in the Annual Report on Form 10-K.


/s/ PricewaterhouseCoopers LLP


Raleigh, North Carolina
March 22, 1999
BUFFA v. CYGNATURE CONSTRUCTION & DEVELOPMENT, INC., et al.

46P17-1

Supreme Court of North Carolina.

August 17, 2017

Daniel K. Bryson, Attorney at Law, Madisonville, KY, Matthew E. Lee, Attorney at Law, Raleigh, for Buffa, Peter, et al.

Patrick M. Wallace, Attorney at Law.

Hannah Styron Symonds, Attorney at Law, Boston, MA, for The Hardwood Company, et al.

Wilson Elser, Attorney at Law.

John I. Malone, Jr., Attorney at Law, Greensboro, for Windsor Window Company, et al.

Michael P. North, Attorney at Law, Minneapolis, MN, Jeffrey M. Markowitz, Attorney *153and Counselor at law, Minneapolis, MN, for Windsor Windows and Doors (d/b/a).

Paul E. Culpepper, Attorney at Law, Hickory, for Cygnature Construction and Development, Inc., et al.

M. Pierce Sandwith, Attorney at Law.

The following order has been entered on the motion filed on the 20th of March 2017 by Plaintiffs to Amend Petition to Add Additional Authority:

"Motion Dismissed as moot by order of the Court in conference, this the 17th of August 2017."
_________________________________________ 

 

 

Order Michigan Supreme Court

Lansing, Michigan 

October 22, 2008 Clifford W. Taylor,

 Chief Justice 

Michael F. Cavanagh 

Elizabeth A. Weaver 136694 & (59)(62) Marilyn Kelly 

Maura D. Corrigan 

Robert P. Young, Jr. 

Stephen J. Markman, 

CONSTANCE JACKSON-RUFFIN, Justices 

Plaintiff-Appellee, 

v SC: 136694 

 COA: 276144 

Wayne CC: 05-504665-NI

METRO CARS, INC., 

Defendant-Appellant. 

_________________________________________/ 

On order of the Court, the motions for leave to file brief amicus curiae and for 

miscellaneous relief are GRANTED. The application for leave to appeal the May 22, 

2008 judgment of the Court of Appeals is considered, and it is DENIED, because we are 

not persuaded that the questions presented should be reviewed by this Court. 

d1015 

I, Corbin R. Davis, 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. 

October 22, 2008 

 Clerk