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NOT FOR PUBLICATION

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT

YIQIN CHEN,

Petitioner,

v.

MERRICK B. GARLAND, Attorney General,

Respondent. No. 16

- 72966

Agency No. A099

- 967

- 281

MEMORANDUM *

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

Submitted May 17, 2022 * *
Pasadena, California

Before: OWENS and BRESS, Circuit Judges, and FITZWATER, ** * District Judge.

Yiqin Chen, a native and citizen of China, petitions for rev iew of the Board

of Immigration Appeals’ decision dismissing his appeal of the immigration judge’s

* 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).

*** The Honorable Sidney A. Fitzwater, United States District Judge for the Northern District of Texas, sitting by designation. 

# FILED

MAY 19 2022

MOLLY C. DWYER, CLERK

U.S. COURT OF APPEALS2

decision denying his application for asylum and withholding of removal. “ We

review factual findings, including adverse credibility determinations, for

subst antial evidence. ” Iman v. Barr , 972 F.3d 1058, 1064 (9th Cir. 2020). As the

parties are familiar with the facts, we do not recount them here. We deny the

petition for review.

Under the totality of the circumstances, substantial evidence supports the

a gency’s adverse credibility determination. See id. at 1064

- 65. The agency

determined that Chen was not credible because of numerous material

inconsistencies between Chen’s testimony and asylum application declaration.

Chen does not dispute that these in consistencies exist, and he only argues that his

explanation

—

that the inconsistencies were the result of his faulty memory because

of the passage of time

— is “plausible.”

However, substantial evidence supports the agency’s determination that

Chen’s faulty memory explanation was not reasonable. Although “t he normal

limits of human understanding and memory may make some inconsistencies or

lack of recall present in any witness ’ s case ,” the inconsistencies between Chen’s

testimony and declaration concer ned significant discrepancies regarding material

details. Shrestha v. Holder , 590 F. 3 d 1034, 104 4

- 45 (9th Cir. 2010) . For example,

despite being given numerous opportunities to clarify, Chen was inconsistent

regarding whether the land dispute protest occ urred in 1996, shortly after the birth3

of his son, or a decade later in 2006, shortly before he left China. Chen was also

inconsistent regarding whether he was physically abused while detained, how long

he was detained, and how often he was interrogated w hile detained.

Without credible testimony, substantial evidence supports that Chen has not

met his burden to demonstrate eligibility for relief. See Wang v. Sessions , 861 F.3d

1003, 1009 (9th Cir. 2017).

PETITION FOR REVIEW DENIED

.
## In the

Court of Appeals

Second Appellate District of Texas

at Fort Worth

___________________________

No. 02

- 24

- 00149

- CV

___________________________

Original Procee din g

322nd District Court of Tarrant County, Texas

Trial Court No. 322

- 744263

- 23

Before Walker, Bassel , and Womack , JJ.

Per Curiam Memorandum Opinion 

### I N RE 

### C.M. , Relator2 MEMORANDUM OPINION

The court has considered relator’s petition for writ of mandamus and motion

for emergen c y relief and is of the opinion that relief should be denied. Accordingly,

relator’s petition for writ of mandamus and motion for emergency relief are denied.

Per Curiam

Delivered : April 1 0 , 2024
UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 04-2033
ROSALIE T. JOHNSON, Evang., Plaintiff - Appellant, versus BERKELEY COUNTY SHERIFF, Department and Detention Center, Defendant - Appellee. Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of South Carolina, at Charleston. Patrick Michael Duffy, District Judge. (CA-03-2846-2-23AJ) Submitted: November 17, 2004 Decided: December 22, 2004 Before WILKINSON, LUTTIG, and SHEDD, Circuit Judges. Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion. Rosalie T. Johnson, Appellant Pro Se. Stephanie Pendarvis McDonald, Charleston, South Carolina, for Appellee. Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. See Local Rule 36(c).- 2 - PER CURIAM: Rosalie T. Johnson appeals the district court’s order accepting the recommendation of the magistrate judge and denying relief on her 42 U.S.C. § 1983 (2000) complaint. We have reviewed the record and find no reversible error. Accordingly, we affirm on the reasoning of the district court. See Johnson v. Berkeley County Sheriff , No. CA-03-2846-2-23AJ (D.S.C. Aug. 6, 2004). 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 T he Court of Appeals Seventh District of Texas at Amarillo

No. 07 - 23 - 00418 - CV MARY MARGARET SMITH , A PPELLANT V. HAPPY STATE BANK , APPELLEE On Appeal from the 251st District Court Randall County, Texas Trial Court No . 80713C , Honorable Ana Estevez , Presiding



### April 30 , 2024 MEMORANDUM OPINION Before QUINN, C.J., and PARKER and YARBROUGH, JJ. Appellant, Mary Margaret Smith, appeals from the trial court’s Default Judgment . We previously abated the appeal to permit the parties to finalize a settlement a greement . Now pending before the Court is Smith’s unopposed motion seeking to voluntar ily dismiss the appeal because the parties have settled the matter. The Court finds that the motion complies with the requirements of Rule of Appellate Proce dure 42.1(a)(1) and that granting the motion will not prevent any party from seeking2

relief to which it would otherwise be entitled. As no decision of the Court has been delivered to date, we reinstate the appeal, grant Smith’s motion , and dismiss the app eal . The appeal is dismissed. As requested by the parties, costs shall be taxed against the parties who incurred them. See T EX . R. A PP . P . 42.1(d). No motion for rehearing will be entertained and our mandate will issue forthwith. Per Curiam
Exhibit








EXHIBIT 10.1 
[Steelcase Inc. Letterhead] 




November 12 , 2013                                            




Eddy Schmitt
901 44th Street, SE
Grand Rapids, MI 49508


Dear Eddy,


Steelcase will provide you and your family with round trip coach class airfare once per year to return to France.  Ground transportation, hotel and meals are not eligible for reimbursement.  This benefit will be provided for your children until the age of 18.


In the event of family emergency, Steelcase will provide airfare for you and your family.


Sincerely,
	
	
	/s/ Laurent Bernard

	Laurent Bernard

	Vice President, Global Talent Management

	Steelcase Inc.












I accept and agree to the terms offered in this letter.
	
		
	/s/ Eddy Schmitt
	November 19, 2013

	Eddy Schmitt
	Date
Case: 19-30088 Doc# 1377 Filed: 04/15/19 Entered: 04/15/19 10:54:42 Page 1 of

19
Case: 19-30088 Doc# 1377 Filed: 04/15/19 Entered: 04/15/19 10:54:42 Page 2 of

19
Case: 19-30088 Doc# 1377 Filed: 04/15/19 Entered: 04/15/19 10:54:42 Page 3 of

19
Case: 19-30088 Doc# 1377 Filed: 04/15/19 Entered: 04/15/19 10:54:42 Page 4 of

19
Case: 19-30088 Doc# 1377 Filed: 04/15/19 Entered: 04/15/19 10:54:42 Page 5 of

19
Case: 19-30088 Doc# 1377 Filed: 04/15/19 Entered: 04/15/19 10:54:42 Page 6 of

19
Case: 19-30088 Doc# 1377 Filed: 04/15/19 Entered: 04/15/19 10:54:42 Page 7 of

19
Case: 19-30088 Doc# 1377 Filed: 04/15/19 Entered: 04/15/19 10:54:42 Page 8 of

19
Case: 19-30088 Doc# 1377 Filed: 04/15/19 Entered: 04/15/19 10:54:42 Page 9 of

19
Case: 19-30088 Doc# 1377 Filed: 04/15/19 Entered: 04/15/19 10:54:42 Page 10

of 19
Case: 19-30088 Doc# 1377 Filed: 04/15/19 Entered: 04/15/19 10:54:42 Page 11

of 19
Case: 19-30088 Doc# 1377 Filed: 04/15/19 Entered: 04/15/19 10:54:42 Page 12

of 19
Case: 19-30088 Doc# 1377 Filed: 04/15/19 Entered: 04/15/19 10:54:42 Page 13

of 19
Case: 19-30088 Doc# 1377 Filed: 04/15/19 Entered: 04/15/19 10:54:42 Page 14

of 19
Case: 19-30088 Doc# 1377 Filed: 04/15/19 Entered: 04/15/19 10:54:42 Page 15

of 19
Case: 19-30088 Doc# 1377 Filed: 04/15/19 Entered: 04/15/19 10:54:42 Page 16

of 19
Case: 19-30088 Doc# 1377 Filed: 04/15/19 Entered: 04/15/19 10:54:42 Page 17

of 19
Case: 19-30088 Doc# 1377 Filed: 04/15/19 Entered: 04/15/19 10:54:42 Page 18

of 19
Case: 19-30088 Doc# 1377 Filed: 04/15/19 Entered: 04/15/19 10:54:42 Page 19

of 19
No. 03-12-00070-CV 

In the Third Court of Appeals

Austin, Texas

DESTRY KITTMAN, GLENDEE KITTMAN, AND MARTHA KITTMAN,

Appellants

V.

W. SHANE KITTMAN, DONALD E. ARTHUR, AND GWEN B. ARTHUR,

Appellees

APPEAL FROM CAUSE NO. 36643

33RD JUDICIAL DISTRICT OF BURNET COUNTY, TEXAS

HON. GUILFORD L. JONES PRESIDING

AGREED, JOINT MOTON TO ABATE PENDING SETTLEMENT 

TO THE HONORABLE THIRD COURT OF APPEALS:

The parties to this appeal, through their undersigned counsel of record, file 

this agreed, joint motion to abate this appeal for 30 days to allow the parties to 

reach and effectuate a settlement. The parties have conferred and have agreed to 

this joint motion, and no party opposes the relief jointly requested in this motion.

The parties have entered into settlement negotiations that, if successful, 

would resolve this matter without a decision from the Court. Upon any settlement, 

the parties would file an agreed, joint motion for disposition pursuant to the terms 

ACCEPTED

03-12-00070-CV

8375668

THIRD COURT OF APPEALS

AUSTIN, TEXAS

12/28/2015 12:23:55 PM

JEFFREY D. KYLE

CLERK

 FILED IN 3rd COURT OF APPEALS AUSTIN, TEXAS 12/28/2015 12:23:55 PM JEFFREY D. KYLE Clerk
of their agreement after the final settlement documents have been executed. The

parties bring this motion to advise the Court about their negotiations so the Court

will not expend further time or resources on this matter in the interim.

REQUEST FOR RELIEF

The parties jointly request that the Court abate this appeal for 30 days

pending conclusion of their anticipated settlement and the filing of an agreed, joint

motion for disposition pursuant to the terms of any agreement.

Respectfully submitted,

J. Bruce Bennett

State Bar No. 02145500

Cardwell, Hart & Bennett LLP

807 Brazos, Suite 1001

Austin, Texas 7870

Telephone: (512)322-0011

Telecopier: (512)322-0808

Counsel for Appellants

/s/D. Todd Smith *~

D. Todd Smith

State Bar No. 00797451

todd@appealsplus.com

Smith Law Group LLLP

1250 Capital of Texas Hwy South

Three Cielo Center, Suite 601

Austin, Texas 78746

Telephone: (512)439-3230

Telecopier: (512)439-3232

Counsel for Appellees
3

CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE

On December 28, 2015, in compliance with Texas Rule of Appellate 

Procedure 9.5, I served this document on the following counsel of record by eservice, e-mail, and/or first-class United States mail:

J. Bruce Bennett

CARDWELL, HART & BENNETT LLP

807 Brazos, Suite 1001

Austin, Texas 78701

Counsel for Appellants

/s/ D. Todd Smith

D. Todd Smith
EXHIBIT 99(i)

                            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 Monroe Bancorp (the "Company") on
Form 10-Q for the period ending June 30, 2002 as filed with the Securities and
Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the "Report"), I, Mark D. Bradford,
Chief Executive 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

     (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 operation of the
Company.




/s/ Mark D. Bradford
------------------------
Mark D. Bradford
Chief Executive Officer
August 12, 2002


The foregoing certification is being furnished solely pursuant to 18 U.S.C.
Section 1350 and is not being filed for any other purpose.
Case: 19-30088 Doc# 2000-10 Filed: 05/14/19 Entered: 05/14/19 17:18:10 Page 1

of 2
Case: 19-30088 Doc# 2000-10 Filed: 05/14/19 Entered: 05/14/19 17:18:10 Page 2

of 2
[Federal Register Volume 75, Number 103 (Friday, May 28, 2010)]
[Notices]
[Page 30061]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2010-12965]


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

INTERNATIONAL TRADE COMMISSION

[USITC SE-10-017]


Government in the Sunshine Act Meeting Notice

AGENCY HOLDING THE MEETING: United States International Trade 
Commission.

TIME AND DATE: June 8, 2010 at 11 a.m.

PLACE: Room 101, 500 E Street, SW., Washington, DC 20436, Telephone: 
(202) 205-2000.

STATUS: Open to the public.

MATTERS TO BE CONSIDERED:
    1. Agenda for future meetings: None.
    2. Minutes.
    3. Ratification List.
    4. Inv. Nos. 731-TA-1043-1045 (Review) (Polyethylene Retail Carrier 
Bags from China, Malaysia, and Thailand)--briefing and vote. (The 
Commission is currently scheduled to transmit its determinations and 
Commissioners' opinions to the Secretary of Commerce on or before June 
22, 2010.)
    5. Outstanding action jackets: none.
    In accordance with Commission policy, subject matter listed above, 
not disposed of at the scheduled meeting, may be carried over to the 
agenda of the following meeting.

    By order of the Commission.

    Issued: May 25, 2010.
William R. Bishop,
Hearings and Meetings Coordinator.
[FR Doc. 2010-12965 Filed 5-26-10; 11:15 am]
BILLING CODE 7020-02-P
[DO NOT PUBLISH]

In the

United States Court of Appeals

For the Eleventh Circuit

____________________

No. 22-10494

Non-Argument Calendar

____________________

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, 

Plaintiff-Appellee,

versus

MATHEW CREIGHTON MYERS, 

Defendant- Appellant.

____________________

Appeal from the United States District Court

for the Southern District of Florida

D.C. Docket No. 1:21-cr-20053-MGC-1

____________________

USCA11 Case: 22-10494 Document: 26-1 Date Filed: 12/22/2022 Page: 1 of 2
2 Opinion of the Court 22-10494

Before WILSON, JORDAN, and BRANCH, Circuit Judges.

PER CURIAM:

Jose-Carlos Antonia Villanueva, appointed counsel for 

Mathew Creighton Myers in this direct criminal appeal, has moved 

to withdraw from further representation of the appellant and filed 

a brief pursuant to Anders v. California, 386 U.S. 738 (1967). Our 

independent review of the entire record reveals that counsel’s assessment of the relative merit of the appeal is correct. Because independent examination of the entire record reveals no arguable issues of merit, counsel’s motion to withdraw is GRANTED, and 

Myers’s conviction and sentence are AFFIRMED.

USCA11 Case: 22-10494 Document: 26-1 Date Filed: 12/22/2022 Page: 2 of 2
113TH CONGRESS 

2D SESSION H. R. 5106 

AN ACT 

To designate the facility of the United States Postal Service 

located at 100 Admiral Callaghan Lane in Vallejo, California, as the ‘‘Philmore Graham Post Office Building’’. 

1 Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representa2 tives of the United States of America in Congress assembled, 
2 

•HR 5106 EH

1 SECTION 1. PHILMORE GRAHAM POST OFFICE BUILDING. 

2 (a) DESIGNATION.—The facility of the United States 

3 Postal Service located at 100 Admiral Callaghan Lane in 

4 Vallejo, California, shall be known and designated as the 

5 ‘‘Philmore Graham Post Office Building’’. 

6 (b) REFERENCES.—Any reference in a law, map, reg7 ulation, document, paper, or other record of the United 

8 States to the facility referred to in subsection (a) shall 

9 be deemed to be a reference to the ‘‘Philmore Graham 

10 Post Office Building’’. 

Passed the House of Representatives September 8, 

2014. 

Attest: 

Clerk. 

113TH CONGRESS 

2D SESSION H. R. 5106 

AN ACT 

To designate the facility of the United States PostGraham Post Office Building’’. Lane in Vallejo, California, as the ‘‘Philmore al Service located at 100 Admiral Callaghan
I 

113TH CONGRESS 

2D SESSION H. R. 4964 

To direct the Commissioner of Social Security to continue to make Social 

Security number printouts and benefit verification letters available at 

field offices of the Social Security Administration. 

IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES 

JUNE 25, 2014 

Mr. BRALEY of Iowa introduced the following bill; which was referred to the 

Committee on Ways and Means 

A BILL 

To direct the Commissioner of Social Security to continue 

to make Social Security number printouts and benefit 

verification letters available at field offices of the Social 

Security Administration. 

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

3 SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE. 

4 This Act may be cited as the ‘‘Seniors’ Access to So5 cial Security Act of 2014’’. 

6 SEC. 2. AVAILABILITY OF DOCUMENTS. 

7 The Commissioner of Social Security shall continue 

8 to make available at field offices of the Social Security 


tjames@gpo.gov on DSK5VPTVN1PROD with BILLS
2 

•HR 4964 IH

1 Administration Social Security number printouts through 

2 at least July 31, 2015, and benefit verification letters 

3 through at least September 30, 2015. 

Æ 


tjames@gpo.gov on DSK5VPTVN1PROD with BILLS
EXHIBIT 32.1



CERTIFICATION OF CHIEF EXECUTIVE OFFICER

AND CHIEF FINANCIAL OFFICER

PURSUANT TO

SECTION 906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002

(18 U.S.C. 1350)



In connection with the Quarterly Report on
Form 10-Q of Wells Real Estate Fund I (the Registrant) for the quarterly period ended June 30, 2005, as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission (the Report), the undersigned, Leo F. Wells, III, Chief Executive
Officer of the corporate General Partner of the Registrant, and Douglas P. Williams, Chief Financial Officer of the corporate General Partner of the Registrant, hereby certify, pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002 (18 U.S.C.
1350), that, to the best of our knowledge and belief:



| | (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 Registrant.
| | --- | -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------



|                          
|--------------------------
|/s/    LEO F. WELLS, III  
|Leo F. Wells, III         
|Chief Executive Officer   
|August 12, 2005           
|                          
|/s/    DOUGLAS P. WILLIAMS
|Douglas P. Williams       
|Chief Financial Officer   
|August 12, 2005
uqm_Ex10_1


		
			Exhibit 10.1
		

		
			The SECOND AMENDMENT TO THE UQM TECHNOLOGIES, INC.
EMPLOYMENT AGREEMENT
		

		
			THIS SECOND AMENDMENT TO THE AGREEMENT (the “Amendment”) dated as of June 27, 2016, is between UQM Technologies, Inc., a Colorado corporation (“Employer”), and Adrian P. Schaffer (“Executive”).
		

		
			Recitals
		

		
			A.Executive and Employer are currently parties to an Employment Agreement, dated July 20, 2015, as amended by agreement dated January 5, 2016 (the “Agreement”).
		

		
			B.Employer and Executive wish to modify the terms of the Agreement as provided herein.
		

		
			Agreement
		

		
			In consideration of the mutual promises, covenants and conditions hereinafter set forth, Employer and Executive agree as follows:
		

			
	
			
				 1.
			Section 6(d) of the Agreement is hereby deleted in its entirety and replaced to read as follows: 




		
			d.Additional Benefits.  Executive shall receive usual and customary additional benefits in accordance with Employer's policies and practices for employees generally (including, without limitation, participation in any stock option plans, stock purchase plans, life and disability insurance plans, health care and hospitalization plans, medical and dental reimbursement plans, profit sharing plans, retirement plans and other employee benefit plans) for which Executive is qualified. Employer shall reimburse Executive for one medical exam every year. In addition to the foregoing, Executive shall receive an automobile allowance of $810 per month for the use of an automobile for combined business and personal use.  In addition, effective January 1, 2016, and for the remainder of the term of this Agreement, Employer shall be entitled to use an apartment provided by and paid for by the Company (the “Housing Benefit”).  Further, to the extent provision of the Housing Benefit results in taxable income to Executive (without any offsetting deduction), Employer shall pay to Executive an additional amount (the “Housing Gross-Up”) such that the net after-tax proceeds to Executive of the Housing Benefit and the Housing Gross-Up (at his then-current combined state and federal marginal income tax rates, taking into account the deductibility of state and local income taxes for federal income tax purposes) is equal to Executive’s reimbursable Housing Benefit.
		

		
			 
		

		
			All other terms of the Agreement not modified herein shall remain in full force and effect.  
		

		
			 
		

		
			 
		

		
			
		

		
			


		 


 


IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the parties have executed this Amendment the day and year first above written.
		

		
			 
		

		
			EXECUTIVE:
		

		
			 
		

		
			 
		

		
			/s/ADRIAN P. SCHAFFER
		

		
			Adrian P. Schaffer
		

		
			 
		

		
			 
		

		
			 
		

		
			EMPLOYER:
		

		
			 
		

		
			UQM TECHNOLOGIES, INC.
		

		
			 
		

		
			 
		

		
			By:/s/JOSEPH R. MITCHELL
		

		
			     Joseph R. Mitchell
		

		
			     President and  CEO
		

		
			 
		

		
			 
		

		
			 
		

		
			 
		

		
			 
		

		
			 
		

		
			 
		

		
			 
		

		
			 
		

		
			 
		

		
			 
		

		
			 
		

		
			 
		

		
			 
		


		 


		

			2
Exhibit32.2

Certification Pursuant To Section 906 Of TheSarbanes-Oxley Act Of 2002 (Chapter 63, Title 18 U.S.C. Section1350(A) And (B))

Pursuant to Section 906 of theSarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002 (Chapter 63, Title 18 U.S.C. Section 1350(a)and (b)), the undersigned hereby certifies in his capacity as anofficer of Metaldyne Corporation (the"Company") that the Quarterly Report of theCompany on Form 10-Q for the period ended June 27, 2004 fully complieswith the requirements of Section 13(a) of the Securities Exchange Actof 1934, as amended, and that the information contained in such reportfairly presents, in all material respects, the financial condition andresults of operations of the Company at the end of and for the periodscovered by such Report.

|                        |  |                                                                                                                                                |  |  |  |  |
|------------------------|--|------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|--|--|--|--|
| Date:November 10, 2004 |  | /s/ Jeffrey M.Stafeil Jeffrey M. Stafeil Executive Vice President andChief Financial Officer(Chief Accounting Officer and AuthorizedSignatory) |
|                        |

----