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NOT FOR PUBLICATION

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT

MICHAEL ANDERSON, AKA Sorin Florin 

Boroghina, 

Petitioner, 

 v. 

JEFFERSON B. SESSIONS III, Attorney 

General, 

Respondent.

No. 14-73870 

Agency No. A039-044-356 

MEMORANDUM*

On Petition for Review of an Order of the

Board of Immigration Appeals

Submitted February 13, 2018**

Before: LEAVY, FERNANDEZ, and MURGUIA, Circuit Judges.

Michael Anderson, a native and citizen of Romania, petitions pro se for 

review of the Board of Immigration Appeals’ (“BIA”) order dismissing his appeal 

from an immigration judge’s removal order, and denying a motion to remand. Our 

 

* 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

FEB 21 2018

MOLLY C. DWYER, CLERK

U.S. COURT OF APPEALS
2 14-73870 

jurisdiction is governed by 8 U.S.C. § 1252. We review de novo questions of law. 

Mohammed v. Gonzales, 400 F.3d 785, 791-92 (9th Cir. 2005). We deny in part 

and grant in part the petition for review, and we remand.

Anderson does not raise, and has therefore waived any challenge to, the 

agency’s denial of asylum, withholding of removal, and protection under the 

Convention Against Torture. See Lopez-Vasquez v. Holder, 706 F.3d 1072, 1079-

80 (9th Cir. 2013) (issues not specifically raised and argued in an opening brief are 

waived).

The BIA denied Anderson’s motion to remand, determining he had not 

demonstrated that a change in law had materially affected his removability such 

that he was no longer bound by his attorney’s concession that Anderson is 

removable because his conviction for unlawful delivery of marijuana under Oregon 

Revised Statutes § 475.860(2)(a) is an aggravated felony. However, the BIA did 

not have the benefit of our decision in Sandoval v. Sessions, 866 F.3d 986 (9th Cir. 

2017), which held that the “delivery” element of delivery of a controlled substance 

under Oregon Revised Statutes § 475.992(1)(a) was not a categorical match to a 

drug trafficking aggravated felony because it punishes conduct outside of the scope 

of the federal equivalent. Accordingly, we remand for the BIA to consider 

Anderson’s motion to remand in light of that decision. See Santiago-Rodriguez v. 

Holder, 657 F.3d 820, 830-31 (9th Cir. 2011) (absent egregious circumstances, an 
3 14-73870 

attorney’s admission or concession is binding on an alien; egregious circumstances 

include circumstances where binding the alien to the concession would be unjust, 

such as if the propriety of the concession has been undercut by intervening law).

In light of this disposition, we need not address Anderson’s remaining 

contentions.

Each party shall bear its own costs for this petition for review.

PETITION FOR REVIEW DENIED in part; GRANTED in part; 

REMANDED.
GLOVER v. The CHARLOTTE-MECKLENBURG HOSPITAL AUTHORITY, et al.

356P18-1

Supreme Court of North Carolina.

November 1, 2018

R. Kent Brown, Attorney at Law, Jon Ryan Moore, Attorney at Law, Paige L. Pahlke, Attorney at Law, Charlotte, John R. Taylor, Attorney at Law, Robert E. Zaytoun, Attorney at Law, Matthew D. Ballew, Attorney at Law, Raleigh, for Glover, Briana Washington, et al.

John H. Beyer, Attorney at Law, Katherine H. Graham, Attorney at Law, Charlotte, for The Charlotte-Mecklenburg Hospital Authority, et al.

Daniel N. Mullins, Attorney at Law, Durham.

William Conor Brockett, Associate General Counsel.

Phillip T. Jackson, Attorney at Law, Asheville, for N.C. Association of Defense Attorneys.

*559The following order has been entered on the motion filed on the 1st of November 2018 by Defendants for Temporary Stay:

"Motion Allowed by order of the Court in conference, this the 1st of November 2018."
<TABLE>
<CAPTION>

   Schedule of Year-To-Date Principal and Interest Distributions
                           to
                  Certificateholders

                                                                    Ending
Class            Interest             Principal    Losses           Balance
<S>               <C>                  <C>            <C>           <C>
A1               9847907.06      86849923.34                0       364150086.66
A2               2188319.66                0                0           92000000
A3               6957784.11                0                0          292000000
B                 823578.15                0                0           29215000
M1               1830333.59                0                0           74076000
M2               1117445.14                0                0           44248000
PR                        0                0                0                  0
R1                        0                0                0                  0
R2                        0                0                0                  0
R3                        0                0                0                  0
R4                        0                0                0                  0
X1                        0                0                0                  0
X2                     0.18                0                0                  0
X3                     0.06                0                0                  0
X4                        0                0                0                  0
Y1               2465869.35                0                0                  0
Y2               2520563.97                0                0                  0
Y3               2512198.23                0                0                  0
Y4               2454701.01                0                0                  0


</TABLE>
CHIEF JUSTICE

ROGELIO VALDEZ

JUSTICES

NELDA V. RODRIGUEZ

DORI CONTRERAS GARZA

GINA M. BENAVIDES

GREGORY T. PERKES

NORA L. LONGORIA

CLERK

DORIAN E. RAMIREZ NUECES COUNTY COURTH OUSE
901 LEOPARD, 10TH FL OOR

CORPUS CHRISTI, TEXAS 78401

361

- 888

- 0416 (TEL)

361

- 888

- 0794 (FAX)

HIDALGO COUNTY

ADMINISTRATION BLDG.
100 E. CANO, 5TH FLO OR
EDINBURG, TEXAS 7853 9

956

- 318

- 2405 (TEL)

956

- 318

- 2403 (FAX)

www.txcourts.gov/13thcoa 

# Court of Appeals

Thirteenth District of Texas

January 9, 2015

Hon. Michael W. Morris Assistant Criminal District Attorney

100 N. Closner Edinburg, TX 78539

* DELIVERED VIA E

- MAIL *

Hon. Rene A. Guerra Criminal District Attorney Hidalgo County Courthouse
100 N. Closner, Room 303 Edinburg, TX 785 39

* DELIVERED VIA E

- MAIL * Mark Anthony Moncada Estrada

TDCJ #1568684

McConnell Unit 3001 S. Emily Drive
Beeville, TX 78102

Re: Cause No. 13

- 13

- 00283

- CR

Tr.Ct.No. CR

- 712

- 08

- C Style: MARK ANTHONY MONCADA ESTRADA v. THE STATE OF TEXAS

The above

- referen ced cause has been set for submission without oral argument on Friday, January 23, 2015, before a panel consisting of Justice Gina M. Benavides, Justice Gregory T. Perkes, and Justice Nora Longoria

. Pursuant to T EX

. R. A PP

. P. 2, the Court suspends the 21 day notice requirement of Rule 39.8. See T EX

. R. A PP

. P . 2 (allowing appella te courts to suspend a rule's operation in a particular case and order a different procedure); T EX

. R. A PP

. P . 39.8 (delineating notification requirements regarding submission of a cause).

Very truly yours,

Dorian E. Ramirez, Clerk

DER: ch
Michigan Supreme Court

Lansing, Michigan

Marilyn Kelly,

 Chief Justice

Michael F. Cavanagh

Elizabeth A. Weaver

Maura D. Corrigan

Robert P. Young, Jr.

Stephen J. Markman

Diane M. Hathaway, Justices

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. 

 _________________________________________ 

 Clerk

December 18, 2009 

p1215 

Order 

 

December 18, 2009 

138925 

PEOPLE OF THE STATE OF MICHIGAN, 

Plaintiff-Appellee, 

v SC: 138925 

 COA: 288571 

Kent CC: 04-009317-FH 

DANTE ANTOINE ROGERS, 

Defendant-Appellant. 

_________________________________________/ 

 On order of the Court, the application for leave to appeal the May 5, 2009 order of 

the Court of Appeals is considered and, pursuant to MCR 7.302(H)(1), in lieu of granting 

leave to appeal, we REMAND this case to the Court of Appeals for consideration under 

the standard for direct appeals, because the defendant was deprived of his direct appeal as 

a result of constitutionally ineffective assistance of counsel. See Roe v Flores-Ortega, 

528 US 470, 477; 120 S Ct 1029; 145 L Ed 2d 985 (2000); Peguero v United States, 526 

US 23, 28; 119 S Ct 961; 143 L Ed 2d 18 (1999). 

 We do not retain jurisdiction.
Exhibit 13.2  Section 906
Certificate, Chief Financial Officer



CHIEF FINANCIAL
OFFICER

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 TM Group Holdings PLC (the
Company) on Form 20-F for the fiscal year ended November 29, 2003, as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the Annual Report), I, Russell Cox, Chief Financial Officer of the Company, certify
pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, as adopted pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that, to the best of my knowledge:



|(3) | The Annual Report fully complies with the requirements of section 13(a) or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934; and
|--- | ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------



|(4) | The information contained in the Annual Report fairly presents, in all material respects, the financial condition and results of operations of the Company.
|--- | -----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------



|       |  |  |  |                        
|------ |  |  |  | -----------------------
|       |  | 
|By:    |  |  |  | /s/    RUSSELL COX     
|       |  | 
|Name:  |  |  |  | Russell Cox            
|Title: |  |  |  | Chief Financial Officer



Date: March 26, 2004
IN THE COURT OF CRIMINAL APPEALS

OF TEXAS

NO. WR-50,314-07

EX PARTE ERIC EUGENE WARNER, Applicant

ON APPLICATION FOR A WRIT OF HABEAS CORPUS

CAUSE NO. 2021-1592-C2A IN THE 54TH DISTRICT COURT

FROM MCLENNAN COUNTY 

Per curiam.

O R D E R

Applicant was convicted of theft of less than $2,500 with two or more priors and sentenced

to twenty-four months’ imprisonment. Applicant did not appeal his conviction. Applicant filed this

application for a writ of habeas corpus in the county of conviction, and the district clerk forwarded

it to this Court. See TEX. CODE CRIM. PROC. art. 11.07. 

On November 8, 2022, the trial court entered an order designating issues. However, the

application was forwarded before the trial court obtained a response from trial counsel and made

findings of fact and conclusions of law. We remand this application to the trial court to complete

its evidentiary investigation and make findings of fact and conclusions of law.

The trial court shall make findings of fact and conclusions of law within ninety days from
the date of this order. The district clerk shall then immediately forward to this Court the trial court’s

findings and conclusions and the record developed on remand, including, among other things,

affidavits, motions, objections, proposed findings and conclusions, orders, and transcripts from

hearings and depositions. See TEX.R.APP.P. 73.4(b)(4). Any extensions of time must be requested

by the trial court and obtained from this Court. 

Filed: December 7, 2022

Do not publish
JONES v. CRANFORD

80P18-3

Supreme Court of North Carolina.

August 14, 2018

Darron J. Jones, for Jones, Darron J.

The following order has been entered on the motion filed on the 13th of July 2018 by Plaintiff to File Amended Complaint:

"Motion Dismissed as moot by order of the Court in conference, this the 14th of August 2018."
IN RE: RADCLIFF

16P19-1

Supreme Court of North Carolina.

February 28, 2019

John F. Scarbrough, Attorney at Law, James E. Scarbrough, Attorney at Law, Madeline J. Trilling, Attorney at Law, Concord, for Johnson, Michael.

Amy Purwin Hunt, Attorney at Law, Charlotte, for Wells Fargo Bank, N.A.

The following order has been entered on the motion filed on the 11th of January 2019 by Appellant for Temporary Stay:

"Motion Dissolved by order of the Court in conference, this the 28th of February 2019."
D.A.N. JOINT VENTURE PROPERTIES OF NORTH CAROLINA, LLC, Plaintiff, v. N.C. GRANGE MUTUAL INSURANCE COMPANY, Defendant.

No. COA18-265

Court of Appeals of North Carolina.

Filed: January 15, 2019

APPEAL DISMISSED.
---

EXHIBIT 32.1

CERTIFICATION OF 
  CHIEF EXECUTIVE OFFICERANDCHIEF FINANCIAL OFFICER 
  PURSUANT TO18 U.S.C. SECTION 1350, 
  AS ADOPTED PURSUANT TOSECTION 906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002

I, William Asselstine, Chief Executive Officer and Chief Financial
  Officer of Ingenium Capital Corp. (the “Company”), hereby certify
  pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, as adopted pursuant to Section 906 of the
  Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that, to the best of my knowledge:

| | (i)  | the Quarterly Report on Form 10-QSB of the Company
        for the fiscal quarter ended October 31, 2004 (the “Quarterly Report”)
        fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) or 15(d) of the
        Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended; and
| | ---- | ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
| |      |                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                         
| | (ii) | the information contained in the Quarterly Report
        fairly presents, in all material respects, the financial condition and
        results of operations of the Company.                                                                                          

| | By:    | /s/ William Asselstine     
| | ------ | ---------------------------
| |        |                            
| | Name:  | William Asselstine         
| |        |                            
| | Title: | Chief Executive Officer and
| |        | Chief Financial Officer    
| |        |                            
| | Date:  | December 15, 2004          

This written statement is being furnished to the Securities
  and Exchange Commission as an exhibit to the Company’s Quarterly Report
  on Form 10-QSB. A signed original of this statement has been provided to the
  Company and will be retained by the Company and furnished to the Securities
  and Exchange Commission or its staff upon request.

This certification accompanies this Quarterly Report on
  Form 10-QSB pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002 and shall
  not, except to the extent required by such Act, be deemed filed by the Company
  for purposes of Section 18 of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended
  (the "Exchange Act"). Such certification will not be deemed to be incorporated
  by reference into any filing under the Securities Act of 1933, as amended, or
  the Exchange Act, except to the extent that the Company specifically incorporates
  it by reference.

---
*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. United States Court of Appeals

Fifth Circuit 

## FILED April 10, 2007 Charles R. Fulbruge III Clerk IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT

No. 06-10122

SANJAY H. PATEL, Plaintiff-Appellant,

versus CONDOLEEZZA RICE, in her Official Capacity

as Secretary of State, Defendant-Appellee.

Appeal from the United States District Court for the Northern District of Texas - Dallas Division

Case No. 3:04-CV-398

Before JONES, Chief Judge, and HIGGINBOTHAM and CLEMENT, Circuit Judges. PER CURIAM: *

The court has considered this appeal in light of the briefs and pertinent portions of the record. Finding no error of fact or law, we AFFIRM the judgment of the district court.

AFFIRMED.
**Exhibit 31.1****CERTIFICATION**I, William H. Roj, certify that: 1. I have reviewed this quarterly report on Form 10-Q of ERICO International Corporation;  2. Based on my knowledge, this report does not contain any untrue statement of a materialfact or omit to state a material fact necessary to make the statements made, in light ofthe circumstances under which such statements were made, not misleading with respect to theperiod covered by this report;  3. Based on my knowledge, the financial statements, and other financial informationincluded in this report, fairly present in all material respects the financial condition,results of operations and cash flows of the registrant as of, and for, the periodspresented in this report;  4. The registrant’s other certifying officer and I are responsible for establishing andmaintaining disclosure controls and procedures (as defined in Exchange Act Rules 13a-15(e)and 15d-15(e)) for the registrant and have: a) Designed such disclosure controls and procedures, or caused such disclosurecontrols and procedures to be designed under our supervision, to ensure that materialinformation relating to the registrant, including its consolidated subsidiaries, ismade known to us by others within those entities, particularly during the period inwhich this report is being prepared;  b) Evaluated the effectiveness of the registrant’s disclosure controls andprocedures and presented in this report our conclusions about the effectiveness of thedisclosure controls and procedures, as of the end of the period covered by this reportbased on such evaluation; and  c) Disclosed in this report any change in the registrant’s internal control overfinancial reporting that occurred during the registrant’s most recent fiscal quarterthat has materially affected, or is reasonably likely to materially affect, theregistrant’s internal control over financial reporting; and 5. The registrant’s other certifying officer and I have disclosed, based on our mostrecent evaluation of internal control over financial reporting, to the registrant’sauditors and the audit committee of the registrant’s board of directors (or personsperforming the equivalent functions): a) All significant deficiencies and material weaknesses in the design oroperation of internal control over financial reporting which are reasonably likely toadversely affect the registrant’s ability to record, process, summarize and reportfinancial information; and  b) Any fraud, whether or not material, that involves management or otheremployees who have a significant role in the registrant’s internal control overfinancial reporting.       Date: November 2, 2005 By: /s/ William H. Roj           Name: William H. Roj    Title: Chief Executive Officer
<PAGE>

                                                                      EXHIBIT 32

CERTIFICATION PURSUANT TO RULE 15d - 14(b) AND SECTION 1350 OF CHAPTER 63 OF
TITLE 18 OF THE UNITED STATES CODE AS ADOPTED PURSUANT TO SECTION 906 OF THE
SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002


In connection with the Quarterly Report of Kahiki Foods, Inc. (the "Company") on
Form 10-QSB/A1 for the period ended June 30, 2006 as filed with the Securities
and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the "Report"), the undersigned
certify, pursuant to Section 1350 of Chapter 63 of Title 18 of the United States
Code 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/ Alan L. Hoover
-------------------------------------
Alan L. Hoover
President and Chief Executive Officer


September 14, 2006


/s/ Frederick A. Niebauer
-------------------------------------
Frederick A. Niebauer
Treasurer and Chief Financial Officer


September 14, 2006


This certification is being furnished as required by Rule 15d-14(b) under the
Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended (the "Exchange Act") and Section
1350 of Chapter 63 of Title 18 of the United States Code, and shall not be
deemed "filed" for purposes of Section 18 of the Exchange Act or otherwise
subject to the liability of that Section. This certification shall not be deemed
to be incorporated by reference into any filing under the Securities Act of 1933
or the Exchange Act, except as otherwise stated in such filing.

                                       38
#### Eugene JONES, Jr., Movant/Appellant, v. STATE of Missouri, Respondent/Respondent.

No. ED 80565.

Missouri Court of Appeals, Eastern District, Division Four.

Feb. 18, 2003.

Motions for Rehearing and/or Transfer to Supreme Court Denied July 3, 2003.

Application for Transfer Denied Aug. 26, 2003.

Dorothy Mae Hirzy, Clayton, MO, for Appellant.

John Munson Morris III, Nicole E. Go-rovsky, Attorney General’s Office, Jefferson City, MO, for Respondents.

Before WILLIAM H. CRANDALL, JR., P.J., SHERRI B. SULLIVAN, J., and GLENN A. NORTON, J.

*ORDER*

PER CURIAM.

Eugene Jones, Jr. (Appellant) appeals from the trial court’s judgment denying his Rule 29.151 motion for postconviction relief. Appellant claims ineffective assistance of counsel. We have reviewed the briefs of the parties and the record on appeal and conclude that the motion court’s judgment is not clearly erroneous. Rule 29.15(k). An extended opinion would have no precedential value. We have, however, provided a memorandum setting forth the reasons for our decision to the parties for their use only. We affirm the judgment pursuant to Missouri Rule of Civil Procedure 84.16(b).

1

. All rule references are to Mo.R.Crim.P 2002, unless otherwise indicated.
NATIONWIDE AFFINITY INSURANCE COMPANY OF AMERICA v. LE BEI, Administrator of the Estate of Tei Paw, Thla Aye, Administrator of the Estate of Khai Hne, Khai Tlo, Nu Cing, and Tin Aung

No. 185P18

Supreme Court of North Carolina.

October 24, 2018

George L. Simpson, IV, Attorney at Law, for Nationwide Affinity Insurance Company of America.

Paul A. Tharp, Attorney at Law, for Paw, Tei (Estate of), et al.

Glenn C. Raynor, Attorney at Law, for NC Farm Bureau Mutual Insurance Company, et al.

***ORDER***

Upon consideration of the petition filed on the 19th of June 2018 by Plaintiff 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 24th of October 2018."