alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
### IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT

No. 15

- 60325 Summary Calendar

JAI PURAN SINGH , Petitioner

v. LORETTA LYNCH, U.S. ATTORNEY GENERAL , Respondent

Petition for Review of an Order of the Board of Immigration Appeals BIA No. A095 320 945

Before JOLLY, BENAVIDES, and HIGGINSON, Circuit Judges. PER CURIAM: * Jai Puran Singh, a native and citizen of Nepal , petitions this court for review of the Board of Immigration Appeals’ (BIA) decision dismissing his appeal of the Immigration Judge’s (IJ) removal order and denial of his application for asylum, withholding of removal, and relief under the Convention Agai nst Torture . He argues that the BIA allowed the IJ to disregard the REAL ID Act when assessing the credibility of the Department

* 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 R. 47.5 , the court has determined that this opinion should not be published and is not precedent except under the limited circumstances set forth in 5 TH C IR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 June 24, 2016 Lyle W. Cayce Clerk Case: 15-60325 Document: 00513564104 Page: 1 Date Filed: 06/24/2016N o. 15

- 60325

of Homeland Security’s (DHS) witnesses. He also argues that the DHS’s evidence was hearsay, unreliable, and insufficient to e stablish his removability by clear and convincing evidence. The IJ’s and BIA’s credibility determinations are substantially reasonable and supported by the record. As the BIA observed, the IJ was free to credit the testimony of Singh’s United States citi zen ex
- wife and the United States Citizenship and Immigration Service officers over that of Singh and his
three children. See United States v. DeRose Indus., Inc. , 519 F.2d 1066, 1067 (5th Cir. 1975). Singh has failed to show that, under the totality of the circumstances, “the evidence is so compelling that no reasonable fact finder
could fail to find otherwise.” Wang v. Holder , 569 F.3d 531, 53 8 (5th Cir. 2009).
Because the credible testimony and documentary evidence established that Singh entered into a fraudulent marriage with the intent to procure an immigration benefit and that he testified falsely in an attempt to secure United States citizenship, Singh has failed to show that the BIA erred in affirming the
IJ’s determination that he was removable as charged. See 8 U.S.C. § 1182(a)(6)(C)(i); Chen v. Gonzales , 470 F.3d 1131, 1134 (5th Cir. 2006). Singh also contends that the IJ and BIA erred in applying the prior adverse credibility determination to his application for relief from removal.
However , the denial of Singh’s application for relief from removal was not based solely on the prior adverse credibility determination. The IJ and BIA
also found that Singh had failed to meet his burden for the requested relief because he did not offer oral testimony in support of his application

. Singh has abandoned any challenge to the IJ’s and BIA’s alternative ruling by failing to address the issue in his petition for review. See Soadjede v. Ashcroft , 324 F.3d 830, 833 (5th Cir. 2003)

. Accordingly, the petition for review is DENIED.

2 Case: 15-60325 Document: 00513564104 Page: 2 Date Filed: 06/24/2016
T hi s di s pos i t i on i s notappr opr i a t e f orpubl i c a t i on and i s notpr e c e de nt * e xc e pta s pr ovi de d by 9th C i r . R . 36- 3.

T he pa ne l una ni m ous l y c onc l ude s thi s c a s e i s s ui t abl e f orde c i s i on ** w ith o u t o r a l a r g u m e n t. See F ed. R . A pp . P . 34 (a )( 2).

T he H onor abl e R obe rtH . W ha l e y , U ni t e d S t a t e s D i s tr i c tJ udge f orthe ** * E a s t e rn D i s tr i c tof

W a s hi ngt on, s i tt i ng by de s i gna t i on. NOT F OR P UB L I CAT I ON UN I TE D STATE S C OU RT OF APPE ALS FOR T HE NI NTH CI RC UI T A LI CI A U N G ER, P la in tif

f - A p p e lla n t, v. CI TY OF LOS ANG EL ES ; CHI EF R O N A L D J. B O Y D ; S G T . K E V IN MC C L OS KE Y, D efen d an t s - A p p el l ees. N o. 09- 55375 D . C. N o . 2 : 0 8 - c v - 0 2 1 3 9 - SV W - CT ME MOR AN DU M *

A pp ea l fr om the U ni t ed S t at es D i stri ctC ou rt f o rth e C e n tr a l D is tr ic t o f C a lif o rn ia S t e phe n V . W i l s on, D i s tr i c tJ udge , P r e s i di ng S ubm i tt e d A pr i l 9, 2010 ** P a s a d e n a , C a lif

o rn ia B e f or e : D . W . N E L S O N a nd R E I N H A R D T , C i r c ui tJ udge s , a nd W H A L E Y , S e ni or D i stri ctJudg e. *** 

# FI LED APR13 2 010 M OLLY C. DW Y ER, CLERK U . S. C O U R T OF APPE ALSP l a i nt i f f A l i c i aU nge rbr oughtthi s a c t i on pur s ua ntt o 42 U . S . C . § 1983 a l l e gi ng vi ol a t i ons of

he rF i r s ta nd F ourth A m e ndm e ntr i ght s dur i ng a n i nc i de nt thatoccurre d aft era pre ss confere nce on A ug ust3, 20 07 . S he appeal s the di stri ct c ourt ’ s de c i s i on gr a nt i ng s um m a ry j udgm e nti n f a vorof de f e nda nt s S e r ge a nt K e vi n M c C l os ke y , P ortP ol i c e C hi e f R ona l d B oy d, a nd the C i ty of L os A nge l e s on he rF i r s tA m e ndm e ntc l a i m s . W e ha ve j ur i s di c t i on pur s ua ntt o 28 U . S . C . § 1291, a n d w e a f

f i rm. B e c au s e U n g e rh a s n o t p r e s e n te d a n y e v id e n c e f r o m w h ic h ar e a s o n ab le f a c t - f i nde rc oul d i nf

e rtha tM c C l os ke y a c t e d w i th the i nt e ntt o c hi l l he rs pe e c h, s he has notcr ea t ed a genui ne i ss ue of m at er i al fa ctas t o w hether hi s c on du ctvi ol at ed h e rr ig h ts u n d e rth e F ir s t A m e n d m e n t. Se e Me ndoc i no E nv t l . C tr . v . Me ndoc i no C o u n ty , 192 F . 3d 1283, 1300- 01 ( 9th C i r . 1999) . B e c aus e U nge rha s notc r e a t e d a genu i ne i ss ue of m at er i al fa ctas t o the exi st ence of a c on st i tut i on al vi ol at i on , her s u p e rv is o ry a n d m u n ic ip a l liab ility c la im s a ls o f a il. See M

on el l v. D ep’t of So c. Servs. , 4 3 6 U .S . 6 5 8 , 6 9 0 - 9 1 ( 1 9 7 8 ) ; H an se n v. B lack , 88 5 F . 2d 64 2, 64 6 (9th C i r. 1989) . A c c or di ngl y , w e a f f i rm the gr a ntof

s um m a ry j udgm e nti n f a vorof the d efen d an t s. AF F I RME D.
[Federal Register Volume 70, Number 225 (Wednesday, November 23, 2005)]
[Notices]
[Page 70920]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 05-23207]


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

DEPARTMENT OF VETERANS AFFAIRS


Research Advisory Committee on Gulf War Veterans' Illnesses; 
Notice of Meeting

    The Department of Veterans Affairs (VA) gives notice under Public 
Law 92-463 (Federal Advisory Committee Act) that the Research Advisory 
Committee on Gulf War Veterans' Illnesses will meet on December 12-13, 
2005 in room 230 at the Department of Veterans Affairs, 810 Vermont 
Avenue, NW., Washington, DC. The sessions will convene at 8 a.m. and 
adjourn at 5 p.m. Sessions will be open to the public.
    The purpose of the Committee is to provide advice and make 
recommendations to the Secretary of Veterans Affairs on proposed 
research studies, research plans and research strategies relating to 
the health consequences of military service in the Southwest Asia 
theater of operations during the Gulf War.
    The Committee will review VA program activities related to Gulf War 
veterans' illnesses and updates on scientific research on Gulf War 
illnesses published since the last committee meeting. Additionally, 
there will be preliminary information on treatment research for Gulf 
War illnesses, research related to possible health effects of exposures 
during the 1991 Gulf War, and discussion of committee business and 
activities.
    Members of the public may submit written statements for the 
Committee's review to Dr. William J. Goldberg, Designated Federal 
Officer, Department of Veterans Affairs (121E), 810 Vermont Avenue, 
NW., Washington, DC 20420. Any member of the public seeking additional 
information should contact Dr. William J. Goldberg at (202) 254-0294.

    Dated: November 17, 2005.

    By direction of the Secretary.
E. Philip Riggin,
Committee Management Officer.
[FR Doc. 05-23207 Filed 11-22-05; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 8320-01-M
<TABLE> <S> <C>


<ARTICLE>                     5
       
<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   6-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          NOV-30-1996
<PERIOD-END>                               AUG-31-1996
<CASH>                                            337
<SECURITIES>                                        0
<RECEIVABLES>                                  30,092<F1>
<ALLOWANCES>                                        0
<INVENTORY>                                    29,243
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                                1,374
<PP&E>                                         14,296
<DEPRECIATION>                                  6,757
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                 73,568
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                          37,138
<BONDS>                                             0
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                               0
<PREFERRED>                                         0
<COMMON>                                        4,198<F2>
<OTHER-SE>                                     24,769
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                   73,568
<SALES>                                        30,877
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                               30,877
<CGS>                                          25,648
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                  25,648
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                1,739
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                    0<F3>
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                                592
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                 2,898
<INCOME-TAX>                                    1,049
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                             1,849<F4>
<DISCONTINUED>                                      0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                     0
<CHANGES>                                           0
<NET-INCOME>                                    1,849
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                     .48
<EPS-DILUTED>                                       0
<FN>
<F1>1. Accounts receivable (net)
<F2>2. Capital in excess of par value
       Retained earnings
       Treasury stock, at cost:
<F3>3. Not disclosed separately in interim reports
<F4>4. Net income
</FN>
        


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

<ARTICLE> 5
<LEGEND>
THIS SCHEDULE CONTAINS SUMMARY FINANCIAL INFORMATION EXTRACTED FROM THE
COMPANY'S STATEMENTS OF EARNINGS (LOSS) AND BALANCE SHEETS AND IS QUALIFIED IN
ITS ENTIRETY BY REFERENCE TO SUCH FINANCIAL STATEMENTS.
</LEGEND>
<MULTIPLIER> 1,000
       
<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   6-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          DEC-31-1997
<PERIOD-START>                             JAN-01-1997
<PERIOD-END>                               JUN-30-1997
<CASH>                                           3,717
<SECURITIES>                                         0
<RECEIVABLES>                                   15,066
<ALLOWANCES>                                       401
<INVENTORY>                                     14,402
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                                33,375
<PP&E>                                         105,025
<DEPRECIATION>                                  64,176
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                  84,939
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                           68,306
<BONDS>                                              0
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                      9,748
<COMMON>                                         2,113
<OTHER-SE>                                    (11,534)
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                    84,939
<SALES>                                         57,580
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                                57,580
<CGS>                                           43,516
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                   43,516
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                14,446
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                     0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                               2,795
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                (3,177)
<INCOME-TAX>                                         0
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                            (3,177)
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                   (3,177)
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                   (0.90)
<EPS-DILUTED>                                   (0.90)
        

</TABLE>
NOT PRECEDENTIAL

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE THIRD CIRCUIT

___________

No. 19-1429

___________

IN RE: FRANCISCO HERRERA-GENAO,

Petitioner

____________________________________

On Petition for Writ of Mandamus from the

United States District Court for the District of New Jersey

(Related to D.N.J. Crim. No. 3:07-cr-00454-002)

____________________________________

Submitted Pursuant to Fed. R. App. P. 21

March 18, 2019

Before: SMITH, Chief Judge, AMBRO and ROTH, Circuit Judges

(Opinion filed: August 9, 2019)

_________

OPINION*

_________

PER CURIAM

Pro se petitioner Francisco Herrera-Genao seeks a writ of mandamus to compel 

the District Court to rule on a motion he filed to correct his restitution obligation in his 

judgment of sentence. A writ of mandamus may be warranted where a district court’s 

“undue delay is tantamount to a failure to exercise jurisdiction.” See Madden v. Myers, 

 * This disposition is not an opinion of the full Court and pursuant to I.O.P. 5.7 does not 

constitute binding precedent.
2

102 F.3d 74, 79 (3d Cir. 1996). On July 30, 2019, the District Court entered an order 

directing the Government to respond to Herrera-Genao’s motion. Because the case is 

now moving forward, we find no reason to grant the “drastic remedy” of mandamus 

relief. See In re Diet Drugs Prods. Liab. Litig., 418 F.3d 372, 378 (3d Cir. 2005). We 

have full confidence that the District Court will rule on Herrera-Genao’s motion within a 

reasonable time. Accordingly, we will deny Herrera-Genao’s mandamus petition.
No. 1399, Misc.

#### Pearson *v.*New York.

Court of Appeals of New York. Certiorari denied.
#### IN RE DAVIS

No. 72 PC.

Case below: 7 N.C. App. 697.

Petition for writ of *certiorari*to North Carolina Court of Appeals allowed 14 July 1970.
#### STATE v. CHARLIE EDWARD KING.

(Filed 14 December, 1966.)

Obscenity—

Evidence that defendant intentionally exposed himself while sitting in a car parked in a parking lot of a store and was so seen by a patron of the store using the parking lot, is sufficient to overrule nonsuit in a prosecution under G.S. 14-190.

Appeal by defendant from *McConnell, J.,*at 19 September, 1966 Criminal Session of Guileoed Superior Court.

The defendant was convicted of indecent exposure in violation of G.S. 14-190. He was first tried in the Municipal-County Court of Guilford County, and upon appeal was again tried and convicted in the Superior Court. From judgment of six months imprisonment, he appealed to this Court.

The evidence for the State tended to show that defendant was sitting in his car in the parking lot at Golden Gate Shopping Center about 3:00 P.M., on 9 August, 1966, and that Mrs. Ann Warmouth parked her car beside his in front of the A & P Store, where she made some purchases. As she returned, she passed King; he was exposing himself, his private parts were out, and he was playing with himself. She saw his penis.

The defendant did not testify or offer other evidence.

He assigns as error the failure of the Court to allow his motion for judgment of nonsuit and the charge of the Court to the effect that a wilful exposure of his private parts in the shopping center where they were visible to people passing through the parking lot would be sufficient to constitute a violation of G.S. 14-190.

*T. W. Bruton, Attorney General, James F. Bullock, Assistant Attorney General for the State.*

*Herman L. Taylor for defendant appellant.*

Per Curiam.

“ ‘Public place’ means a place which in point of fact is public as distinguished from private, but not necessarily a place devoted solely to the uses of the public, a place that is visited by many persons and to which the neighboring public may have resort, a place which is accessible to the public and visited by many persons. *Ellis v. Archer,*161 N.W. 192; *People v. Lane,*32 N.Y.S. 2d 61. A mercantile establishment and the premises thereof is a public place during business hours when customers are coming and going.” *S. v. Fenner,*263 N.C. 694, 140 S.E. 2d 349.

We said in the recent case of *S. v. Lowery,*268 N.C. 162, 150 S.E. 2d 23: “Intentional exposure of private parts while sitting in *712an automobile on a public street in such manner that they could be seen by members of the passing public using the street and were seen by a passerby constitutes common law offense of indecent exposure.”

*“It*is not essential to the- crime of indecent exposure that someone shall have seen the exposure provided it was intentionally made in a public place and persons were present who could have seen if they had looked.” 33 Am. Jur. 19.

“The offense does not depend upon the number of people present and an intentional act of lewd exposure offensive to one or more persons is sufficient.” 67 C.J.S. 26.

It appears from the above that all the elements necessary to constitute the crime of indecent exposure were shown by the State’s evidence. The jury accepted it as true, and in the trial there was

No error.
Skip directly to site content Skip directly to search


Español  Other Languages


Centers for Disease Control and Prevention. CDC twenty four seven. Saving Lives, Protecting People
 Search
		×
			NIOSH
			NIOSH
				All CDC
				Submit
			For a full list of topics:A-Z Index
			Advanced Search
		Advanced Search


The National Institute for Occupational Safety and Health (NIOSH)








NIOSH Criteria Documents: Alkanes (C5-C8)						Print
																Related Pages
										March 1977
DHHS (NIOSH) Publication Number 77-151
NIOSH Criteria Documents: Alkanes (C5-C8)
							
					
							Last Reviewed:  June 6, 2014						Source: 	National Institute for Occupational Safety and Health
					Facebook
        Twitter
        LinkedIn
        Syndicate homeNIOSH Publications & Products
NIOSH-Issued Publications
Search NIOSHTIC-2 Research Database
Docket
Documents for Public Review
Peer Review Agenda
Databases
eNews
Federal Register Noticesplus icon
FRN Archive 2007-2010
FRN Archive 2005-2006
FRN Archive 2001-2004
FRN Archive 1996-2000
Press Releases and Updatesplus icon
Press Release Archives 2010-2013
Press Release Archives 2006-2009
Press Release Archives 2001-2005
Press Release Archives 1998-2000
Press Release Archives 1992-1997
Regulations
Regulatory Agenda
Science Blog
Software
Video Follow NIOSH Facebook
Pinterest
Twitter
YouTube
 NIOSH Homepage NIOSH A-Z
Workplace Safety & Health Topics
Publications and Products
Programs
Contact NIOSH


About CDC
					Contact Us
					800-232-4636
 Facebook Twitter Instagram LinkedIn Youtube Pinterest Snapchat
 CONTACT CDC
				Contact Us
							Call 800-232-4636
							Email Us
			ABOUT CDC
				About CDC
							Jobs
							Funding
			POLICIES
				Accessibility
							External Links
							Privacy
							Policies
							No Fear Act
							FOIA
							OIG
							Nondiscrimination
							Vulnerability Disclosure Policy
			CONNECT WITH US
				Facebook
								Twitter
								Instagram
								LinkedIn
							Youtube
								Pinterest
								Snapchat
								Email
			LANGUAGES
				Español
							繁體中文
							Tiếng Việt
							한국어
							Tagalog
							Русский
							العربية
							Kreyòl Ayisyen
							Français
							Polski
							Português
							Italiano
							Deutsch
							日本語
							فارسی
							English


U.S. Department of Health & Human Services
			Accessibility
			External Links
			Privacy
			Policies
			No Fear Act
			FOIA
			Nondiscrimination
			OIG
			Vulnerability Disclosure Policy
			USA.gov


Exit Notification / Disclaimer Policy Close
 Links with this icon  indicate that you are leaving the CDC website. The Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) cannot attest to the accuracy of a non-federal website.
				Linking to a non-federal website does not constitute an endorsement by CDC or any of its employees of the sponsors or the information and products presented on the website.
				You will be subject to the destination website's privacy policy when you follow the link.
				CDC is not responsible for Section 508 compliance (accessibility) on other federal or private website. Website Disclaimers
 Cancel Continue
Supplemental Indenture to the Indenture Governing the Issuers' Senior Floating



 Exhibit 10.3 
 QUALITY DISTRIBUTION, LLC 
 and 
 QD CAPITAL CORPORATION 
 as Issuers, 
 the GUARANTORS named in the Indenture (as defined herein), 
 QD RISK SERVICES, INC.

 as Guarantor 
 and 

THE BANK OF NEW YORK MELLON TRUST COMPANY, N.A., 
 as Trustee 
  
  
 SUPPLEMENTAL INDENTURE 
  
  
 Dated as of August 27, 2009

 Senior Floating Rate Notes due 2012, Series B 







 THIS SUPPLEMENTAL INDENTURE (this “Supplemental Indenture”), entered into as of
August 27, 2009, among QUALITY DISTRIBUTION, LLC, a Delaware limited liability company (the “Company”) and QD CAPITAL CORPORATION, a Delaware corporation (“QD Capital” and together with the Company, the
“Issuers”), QD RISK SERVICES, INC., a Florida Corporation (the “Undersigned”) and THE BANK OF NEW YORK MELLON TRUST COMPANY, N.A. (formerly known as The Bank of New York Trust Company, N.A.), as trustee (the
“Trustee”). 
 RECITALS 
 WHEREAS, the Company, the Guarantors party thereto and the Trustee entered into the Indenture, dated as of December 18, 2007 (the “Indenture”), relating to the Company’s Senior Floating Rate
Notes due 2012, Series B (the “Notes”); 
 WHEREAS, as a condition to the Trustee entering into the Indenture and the
purchase of the Notes by the Holders, the Company agreed pursuant to the Indenture to cause any newly acquired Domestic Restricted Subsidiaries to provide Guaranties in certain circumstances. 
 AGREEMENT 
 NOW, THEREFORE, in consideration of the premises and mutual
covenants herein contained and intending to be legally bound, the parties to this Supplemental Indenture hereby agree as follows: 
 Section 1. Capitalized terms used herein and not otherwise defined herein are used as defined in the Indenture. 
 Section 2. The Undersigned, by its execution of this Supplemental Indenture, agrees to be a Guarantor under the Indenture and to be bound by the terms of the Indenture applicable to Guarantors, including, but not limited to, Article
Ten thereof. 
 Section 3. This Supplemental Indenture shall be governed by and construed in accordance with the laws of the State of
New York. 
 Section 4. This Supplemental Indenture may be signed in various counterparts which together will constitute one and the
same instrument. 
 Section 5. This Supplemental Indenture is an amendment supplemental to the Indenture and the Indenture and this
Supplemental Indenture will henceforth be read together. 
  

 1 








 IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the parties hereto have caused this Supplemental Indenture to be duly executed
as of the date first written above. 
  

			
	QUALITY DISTRIBUTION, LLC, as Issuer
		
	By:	 	 /s/ Gary R. Enzor

	Name:	 	Gary R. Enzor
	Title:	 	Chief Executive Officer
	
	QD CAPITAL CORPORATION, as Issuer
		
	By:	 	 /s/ Gary R. Enzor

	Name:	 	Gary R. Enzor
	Title:	 	Chief Executive Officer
	
	QD RISK SERVICES, INC., as Guarantor
		
	By:	 	 /s/ Jonathan C. Gold

	Name:	 	Jonathan C. Gold
	Title:	 	Secretary
	
	THE BANK OF NEW YORK MELLON TRUST COMPANY, N.A., as Trustee
		
	By:	 	 /s/ Christie Leppert

	Name:	 	Christie Leppert
	Title:	 	Senior Associate