alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
#### Ferry Indra GUNAWAN, Petitioner, v. Alberto GONZALES,* Attorney General, Respondent.

No. 03-73677.

Agency No. [ AXX-XXX-XXX ].

United States Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit.

Submitted April 4, 2005.**

Decided April 7, 2005.

Allan A. Samson, Esq., San Francisco, CA, for Petitioner.

Ronald E. LeFevre, Chief Counsel, Office of the District Counsel, Department of Homeland Security, San Francisco, CA, Richard M. Evans, Esq., Thomas Fatouros, DOJ—U.S. Department of Justice, Civil Div./Office of Immigration Lit., Washington, DC, for Respondent.

*182Before KOZINSKI, HAWKINS and CLIFTON, Circuit Judges.

*

 Alberto Gonzales is substituted for his predecessor, John Ashcroft, as Attorney General of the United States, pursuant to Fed. R.App. P. 43(c)(2).

**

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

MEMORANDUM ***

Ferry Indra Gunawan, a native and citizen of Indonesia, petitions for review of the Board of Immigration Appeals’ summary affirmance of an Immigration Judge’s (“IJ”) denial of his application for asylum and withholding of removal. We have jurisdiction under 8 U.S.C. § 1252. We review for substantial evidence, and reverse only if the evidence compels a contrary conclusion. *See Lata v. INS,*204 F.3d 1241, 1245 (9th Cir.2000). We deny the petition for review.

Substantial evidence supports the IJ’s determination that Gunawan experienced discrimination, but not persecution on account of an enumerated ground. *See Nagoulko v. INS,*333 F.3d 1012, 1016 (9th Cir.2003); *Prasad v. INS,*47 F.3d 336, 339-40 (9th Cir.1995).

Substantial evidence also supports the IJ’s conclusion that Gunawan does not have a well-founded fear of persecution. *See Hakeem, v. INS,*273 F.3d 812, 816 (9th Cir.2001) (stating that continual presence of similarly-situated family members and applicant’s return to country undercuts claim of persecution). Even if Gunawan is a member of a disfavored group, *see Sael v. Ashcroft,*386 F.3d 922, 927 (9th Cir.2004), he has not established a sufficient individualized risk to compel the conclusion that he has a well-founded fear of persecution. *Cf. id.*at 927-29.

Because Gunawan failed to establish eligibility for asylum, he necessarily failed to meet the more stringent standard for withholding of removal. *See Alvarez-Santos v. INS,*332 F.3d 1245, 1255 (9th Cir.2003).

Gunawan’s December 22, 2003, motion for stay of voluntary departure is denied because the agency did not grant Gunawan voluntary departure. *See Garcia v. Ashcroft,*368 F.3d 1157, 1159-60 (9th Cir. 2004).

PETITION FOR REVIEW DENIED.

***

 This disposition is not appropriate for publication and may not be cited to or by the courts of this circuit except as provided by Ninth Circuit Rule 36-3.
Document Headings

                    Document headings vary by document type but may contain                    the following:                  
                -                       the agency or agencies that issued and signed a document                    
                -                       the number of the CFR title and the number of each part                      the document amends, proposes to amend, or is directly                      related to                    
                -                       the agency docket number / agency internal file number                    
                -                       the RIN which identifies each regulatory action listed in                      the Unified Agenda of Federal Regulatory and Deregulatory                      Actions                    

                    See the                                          Document Drafting Handbook                                        for more details.                  

###### Department of Health and Human Services

###### National Institute of Diabetes and Digestive and Kidney Diseases; Notice of Closed Meeting

Pursuant to section 10(d) of the Federal Advisory Committee Act, as amended (5 U.S.C. Appendix 2), notice is hereby given of the following meeting.

The meeting will be closed to the public in accordance with the provisions set forth in sections 552b(c)(4) and 552b(c)(6), Title 5 U.S.C., as amended. The grant applications and the discussions could disclose confidential trade secrets or commercial property such as patentable material, and personal information concerning individuals associated with the grant applications, the disclosure of which would constitute a clearly unwarranted invasion of personal privacy.

*Name of Committee:*                         National Institute of Diabetes and Digestive and Kidney Diseases Special Emphasis Panel; Program Project Review Meeting.                    

*Date:*                         December 5, 2005.                    

*Time:*                         8 a.m. to 2 p.m.                    

*Agenda:*                         To Review and evaluate grant applications.                    

*Place:*                         Hyatt Arlington, 1325 Wilson Boulevard, Arlington, VA 22209.                    

*Contact Person:*                         John F. Connaughton, PhD., Scientific Review Administrator, Review Branch, DEA, NIDDK, National Institutes of Health, Room 757, 6707 Democracy Boulevard, Bethesda, MD 20892-5452. (301) 594-7797,                         *connaughtonj@extra.niddk.nih.gov.*

(Catalogue of Federal Domestic Assistance Program Nos. 93.847, Diabetes, Endocrinology and Metabolic Research; 93.848, Digestive Diseases and Nutrition Research; 93.849, Kidney Diseases, Urology and Hematology Research, National Institutes of Health, HHS)

Dated: November 2, 2005.

Anna Snouffer, 

Acting Director, Office of Federal Advisory Committee Policy.

[FR Doc. 05-22479Filed 11-9-05; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 4140-01-M
Exhibit 99.1

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 Quarterly Report of International Leisure Hosts, Ltd.,
(the "Company") on Form 10-Q for the period ending September 30, 2002 as filed
with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the "Report"),
I, Robert L. Walker, Chief Executive Officer of the Company, certify, pursuant
to 18 U.S.C. ss. 1350, as adopted pursuant to ss. 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/ Robert L. Walker
Robert L. Walker
Chief Executive Officer

November 1, 2002
                                  Page 15 of 18
[Federal Register Volume 70, Number 216 (Wednesday, November 9, 2005)]
[Notices]
[Pages 68101-68102]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 05-22326]


-----------------------------------------------------------------------

DEPARTMENT OF LABOR

Employment and Training Administration

[TA-W-58,064]


VF Jeanswear Limited Partnership A Subsidiary Of VF Corporation 
Wilson, NC; Amended Certification Regarding Eligibility To Apply for 
Worker Adjustment Assistance and Alternative Trade Adjustment 
Assistance

    In accordance with section 223 of the Trade Act of 1974 (19 U.S.C. 
2273), and section 246 of the Trade Act of 1974 (26 U.S.C. 2813), as 
amended, the Department of Labor issued a Certification of Eligibility 
to Apply for Worker Adjustment Assistance and Alternative Trade 
Adjustment Assistance on October 17, 2005, applicable to workers of VF 
Jeanswear Limited Partnership, a subsidiary of VF Corporation, Wilson, 
North Carolina. The notice will be published soon in the Federal 
Register.
    At the request of the State agency, the Department reviewed the 
certification for workers of the subject firm. The workers are engaged 
in the production of men's, women's, and children's pants and jeans.
    New findings show that there was a previous certification, TA-W-
53,000A, issued on October 14, 2003, for workers of VF Jeanswear 
Limited Partnership, a subsidiary of VF Corporation, Wilson, North 
Carolina who were engaged in employment related to the production of 
men's, women's, and children's pants and jeans. That certification 
expired October 14, 2005. To avoid an overlap in worker group coverage, 
the certification is being amended to change the impact date from 
October 15, 2004 to October 15, 2005, for workers of the subject firm.

[[Page 68102]]

    The amended notice applicable to TA-W-58,064 is hereby issued as 
follows:

    All workers of VF Jeanswear Limited Partnership, a subsidiary of 
VF Corporation, Wilson, North Carolina who became totally or 
partially separated from employment on or after October 15, 2005, 
through October 17, 2007, are eligible to apply for adjustment 
assistance under section 223 of the Trade Act of 1974, and are also 
eligible to apply for alternative trade adjustment assistance under 
section 246 of the Trade act of 1974.

    Signed at Washington, DC, this 31st day of October 2005.
Richard Church,
Certifying Officer, Division of Trade Adjustment Assistance.
[FR Doc. 05-22326 Filed 11-8-05; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4510-30-P
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<ARTICLE> 5
<LEGEND>
THIS SCHEDULE CONTAINS SUMMARY FINANCIAL INFORMATION EXTRACTED FROM THE AUDITED
CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL STATEMENTS OF THE COMPANY FOR THE YEAR ENDED MARCH 31,
1998 AND IS QUALIFIED IN ITS ENTIRETY BY REFERENCE TO THE FORM 10-KSB FOR FISCAL
1998.


<MULTIPLIER>1
 
       
<CAPTION>
 
<S>                          <C>
 
<PERIOD-TYPE>                               YEAR
 
 
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                    MAR-31-1998
 
 
<PERIOD-START>                        APR-1-1997
 
 
<PERIOD-END>                         MAR-31-1998
 
 
<CASH>                                   812,971
 
 
<SECURITIES>                           1,056,778
 
 
<RECEIVABLES>                            392,539
 
 
<ALLOWANCES>                              23,000
 
 
<INVENTORY>                              944,013
 
 
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                       4,734,301
 
 
<PP&E>                                 3,616,928
 
 
<DEPRECIATION>                         1,769,212
 
 
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                         9,444,996
 
 
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                  1,954,819
 
 
<BONDS>                                3,766,074
 
 
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                          0
 
 
<PREFERRED>                                    0
 
 
<COMMON>                                 323,495
 
 
<OTHER-SE>                             3,214,336
 
 
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>           9,444,996
 
 
<SALES>                                3,838,351
 
 
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                      17,014,256
 
 
<CGS>                                  3,899,967
 
 
<TOTAL-COSTS>                          3,899,967
 
 
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                               0
 
 
<LOSS-PROVISION>                               0
 
 
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                       513,765
 
 
<INCOME-PRETAX>                          526,386
 
 
<INCOME-TAX>                             331,000
 
 
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                      195,386
 
 
<DISCONTINUED>                                 0
 
 
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                0
 
 
<CHANGES>                                      0
 
 
<NET-INCOME>                             195,386
 
 
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                .07
 
 
<EPS-DILUTED>                                .06
 
 
        
 

</TABLE>
[DESCRIPTION]    COVER PAGE
              U.S. SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION
                     Washington, D.C. 20549

                           FORM 10-QSB
(Mark One)

[ x ]	QUARTERLY REPORT PURSUANT TO SECTION 13 OR 15(d) OF THE
        SECURITIES EXCHANGE ACT OF 1934

        For the quarterly period ended September 30, 1999

[   ]	TRANSITION REPORT PURSUANT TO SECTION 13 OR 15(d) OF THE
        SECURITIES EXCHANGE ACT OF 1934

	For the transition period from __________ to __________

                      Commission file number: 0-2664

                       INVESTORS FINANCE, INC.
   (Exact name of small business issuer as specified in its charter)
                        ___________________

		Hawaii				   99-0112763
	(State or other jurisdiction of		(I.R.S. Employer
	incorporation or organization)		Identification No.)

	50 South Beretania Street, Honolulu, Hawaii	96813
	(Address of principal executive offices)	(Zip Code)

                 Issuer's telephone number: (808) 533-7437
___________________

Check whether the issuer (1) filed all reports required to be filed by
Section 13 or 15(d) of the Exchange Act during the past 12 months (or
for such shorter period that the registrant was required to file such
reports), and (2) has been subject to such filing requirements for the
past 90 days.  Yes [   ] No[ x ]

Number of shares outstanding of the issuer's common stock as of
September 30, 1999: 1,249,976

Transitional Small Business Disclosure Format (check one): Yes [  ]  No [ x ]
#### Brenda Sue BAILEY; John Allen Babin; Charles Francis Coleman; James Arnold Schnur; Ralph F. Schnur, Petitioners-Appellants, v. Charles ROSENTHAL, District Attorney for Harris County Texas, Respondent-Appellee. *576John Allen Babin, Petitioner-Appellant, v. Charles Rosenthal, District Attorney for Harris County Texas, Respondent-Appellee. Charles Francis Coleman, Petitioner-Appellant, v. Charles Rosenthal, District Attorney for Harris County Texas, Respondent-Appellee. James Arnold Schnur, Petitioner-Appellant, v. Charles Rosenthal, District Attorney for Harris County Texas, Respondent-Appellee. Ralph F. Schnur, Petitioner-Appellant, v. Charles Rosenthal, District Attorney for Harris County Texas, Respondent-Appellee.

No. 04-20516.

USDC Nos. 4:03-CV-1344, 4:03-CV-1343, 4:03-CV-1342, 4:03-CV-1341, 4:03-CV-1340.

United States Court of Appeals, Fifth Circuit.

Decided April 8, 2005.

George McCall Secrest, Jr., Bennett & Secrest, Houston, TX, for Petitioner-Appellant.

Michael Robert Hull, Assistant County Attorney, Linda Susan Gibson, Houston, TX, for Respondent-Appellee.

PER CURIAM: *

The appellants in this case appeal from the dismissal of their 28 U.S.C. § 2241 petitions. A certificate of appealability (“COA”) is required to appeal “the final order in a habeas corpus proceeding in which the detention complained of arises out of process issued by a State court.” 28 U.S.C. § 2253(c)(1)(A). Because the appellants are seeking release from the pending state criminal proceedings against them, a COA is required before they can proceed on appeal. *Stringer v. Williams,*161 F.3d 259, 261-262 (5th Cir.1998).

The district court must make the initial determination whether a COA should issue. *Muniz v. Johnson,*114 F.3d 43, 45 (5th Cir.1997). Accordingly, the case is REMANDED to the district court for the limited purpose of the district court’s issuance of a COA ruling. Once the district court has issued its ruling, this court will consider the case.

*

 Pursuant to 5th Cir. R. 47.5, the court has determined that this opinion should not be published and is not precedent except under the limited circumstances set forth in 5th Cir. R. 47.5.4.
#### Camden Safe Deposit and Trust Company, complainant, *v.*Atlantic Properties, Incorporated, et al., defendants.

[Decided October 29th, 1931.]

*Mr. George Reynolds,*for the complainant and receiver.

*Messrs. Oassman & Gottlieb,*for the petitioner, Stanley Atlantic Eealty Company.

Ingebsoll, V. C.

A claim was filed by the Stanley Atlantic Eealty Company against the receiver for the sum of $60.50. This is for commission at five-per cent, upon rents collected from tenants of the mortgaged premises.

At the time of the appointment of the receiver, three certain tenants were in possession of portions of the mortgaged premises by virtue of certain leases, in each of which said leases was a provision that the Stanley Atlantic Eealty Company should receive five per cent, of the amount of rent collected, it, the Stanley Atlantic Eealty Company, being the agent which secured these tenants.

The court of errors and appeals, in the case of *Atlantic Realty Co.*v. *Lott, 88 N. J. Law 694,*in a *per curiam,*opinion, affirmed the supreme court, in which such a contract was held enforceable.

It, of necessity, follows that from the rent actually paid *60by the tenants, ninety-five per cent, belonged to the lessor and five per cent, to the agent. The appointment of a receiver did not change the legal effect of these leases. The amount of $60.50 collected by the receiver will, therefore, be paid to the Stanley Atlantic Realty Company.
IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT

No. 19-40679

Conference Calendar

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,

Plaintiff-Appellee

v.

ARTURO RICO-ESPINOZA, also known as Jose Arturo Rico-Espinoza, also 

known as Rico J. Arturo, also known as Arturo E. Rico, also known as Abel 

Espinoza Rico, also known as Arturo Espinoza Rico, also known as Rico Jose 

Arturo, also known as Jose Arturo Rico, also known as Constancio Sorcio 

Romero, also known as Constancio Sorsia Aromero, also known as Arturo Rico 

Espinoza,

Defendant-Appellant

Appeal from the United States District Court

for the Southern District of Texas

USDC No. 2:19-CR-221-1

Before CLEMENT, GRAVES, and OLDHAM, Circuit Judges.

PER CURIAM:*

The Federal Public Defender appointed to represent Arturo RicoEspinoza has moved for leave to withdraw and has filed a brief in accordance 

with Anders v. California, 386 U.S. 738 (1967), and United States v. Flores, 

* Pursuant to 5TH CIR. R. 47.5, the court has determined that this opinion should not 

be published and is not precedent except under the limited circumstances set forth in 5TH 

CIR. R. 47.5.4.

United States Court of Appeals

Fifth Circuit

FILED

June 9, 2020

Lyle W. Cayce

Clerk

 Case: 19-40679 Document: 00515445694 Page: 1 Date Filed: 06/09/2020
No. 19-40679

2

632 F.3d 229 (5th Cir. 2011). Rico-Espinoza has not filed a response. We have 

reviewed counsel’s brief and the relevant portions of the record reflected 

therein. We concur with counsel’s assessment that the appeal presents no 

nonfrivolous issue for appellate review. Accordingly, counsel’s motion for leave 

to withdraw is GRANTED, counsel is excused from further responsibilities 

herein, and the APPEAL IS DISMISSED. See 5TH CIR. R. 42.2.

 Case: 19-40679 Document: 00515445694 Page: 2 Date Filed: 06/09/2020
```

                                                                    Exhibit 32.2

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

                                  August 13, 2003

      In connection with the Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q by Kaiser Aluminum
& Chemical Corporation, a Delaware corporation (the "Company"), for the
quarter ending June 30, 2003 (the "Report"), as filed on the date hereof with
the Securities and Exchange Commission, the undersigned, John T. La Duc, Chief
Financial Officer of the Company, does hereby certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C.
1350 as adopted pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that
to such officer's knowledge:

      (1)  The Report fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) or
           15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 (15 U.S.C. 78m or
           78o(d)); and

      (2)  The information contained in the Report fairly presents, in all
           material respects, the financial condition and results of operations
           of the Company as of the dates and for the periods expressed in the
           Report.

      IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the undersigned has executed this certification as of
the date first above written.

                                       /S/ John T. La Duc
                                           John T. La Duc
                                           Chief Financial Officer

A signed original of this written statement required by Section 906 has been
provided to Kaiser Aluminum & Chemical Corporation and will be retained by
Kaiser Aluminum & Chemical Corporation and furnished to the Securities and
Exchange Commission or its staff upon request.
```
United States Department of Labor

Employees’ Compensation Appeals Board

__________________________________________

In the Matter of I.S., Appellant

and

DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVY, NORFOLK 

NAVAL SHIPYARD, Portsmouth, VA, Employer

__________________________________________

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

Docket No. 20-0216

Issued: October 27, 2023

Appearances: Case Submitted on the Record

Daniel M. Goodkin, Esq., for the appellant

Office of Solicitor, for the Director

ORDER GRANTING FEE PETITION

Before:

ALEC J. KOROMILAS, Chief Judge

PATRICIA H. FITZGERALD, Deputy Chief Judge

JANICE B. ASKIN, Judge

Counsel for appellant has filed a fee petition in the amount of $1,437.00.1 The Board notes 

that all petitions for approval of fees for representatives’services are considered under the Board’s 

statutory authority found at section 8127 of the Federal Employees’ Compensation Act2(FECA) 

and under its Rules of Procedure found at 20 C.F.R. § 501.9(e).3 

As required by the Board’s regulations, appellant has been afforded written notice of the 

fee requested and provided an opportunity to comment on the fee petition. 4 Attached to the fee 

petition is a signed acknowledgement by appellant consenting to the fee in the amount of 

$1,437.50.

1 FECA (5 U.S.C. § 8127(b)) and the implementing regulations (20 C.F.R. § 501.9) require the Board to review 

each fee petition on its own merits and with regard to the unique facts and issues of each appeal.

2

5 U.S.C. § 8127.

3

20 C.F.R. § 501.9(e).

4

Id.
2

The Board has reviewed the fee petition and finds it is in compliance with the Board’s 

Rules of Procedure.

5

IT IS HEREBY ORDERED THATthe fee petition is granted in the amount of $1,437.00.

Issued: October 27, 2023

Washington, DC

Alec J. Koromilas, Chief Judge

Employees’ Compensation Appeals Board

Patricia H. Fitzgerald, Deputy Chief Judge

Employees’ Compensation Appeals Board

Janice B. Askin, Judge

Employees’ Compensation Appeals Board

5

Id.