alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
This disposition is not appropriate for publication and is not precedent *

except as provided by 9th Cir. R. 36-3.

The panel unanimously concludes this case is suitable for decision **

without oral argument. See Fed. R. App. P. 34(a)(2).

NOT FOR PUBLICATION

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

 FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT

JASWINDER SINGH,

 Petitioner,

 v.

ERIC H. HOLDER Jr., Attorney General,

 Respondent.

No. 07-72608

Agency No. A073-612-378

MEMORANDUM*

On Petition for Review of an Order of the

Board of Immigration Appeals

Submitted May 25, 2010** 

Before: CANBY, THOMAS, and W. FLETCHER, Circuit Judges. 

Jaswinder Singh, a native and citizen of India, petitions for review of the

Board of Immigration Appeals’ (“BIA”) order denying his motion to reopen

removal proceedings. Our jurisdiction is governed by 8 U.S.C. § 1252. We review

for abuse of discretion the denial of a motion to reopen. Iturribarria v. INS, 321

FILED

JUN 07 2010

MOLLY C. DWYER, CLERK

U.S. COURT OF APPEALS
2 07-72608

F.3d 889, 894 (9th Cir. 2003). We deny in part and dismiss in part the petition for

review. 

The BIA did not abuse its discretion in denying Singh’s motion to reopen as

untimely where the motion was filed over one year after the BIA’s final decision,

see 8 C.F.R. § 1003.2(c)(2), and Singh failed to establish changed circumstances in

India to qualify for the regulatory exception to the time limitation, see 8 C.F.R. 

§ 1003.2(c)(3)(ii); see also Toufighi v. Mukasey, 538 F.3d 988, 996-97 (9th Cir.

2008) (underlying adverse credibility determination rendered evidence of changed

circumstances immaterial).

We lack jurisdiction to review Singh’s contention that he did not receive a

full and fair removal hearing before the immigration judge because Singh failed to

exhaust this contention to the BIA during his underlying removal proceedings. See

Barron v. Ashcroft, 358 F.3d 674, 678 (9th Cir. 2004). 

PETITION FOR REVIEW DENIED in part; DISMISSED in part.
Fialka-Feldman v. Oakland University Board of Trustees Doc. 65

Dockets.Justia.com
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

EASTERN DISTRICT OF MICHIGAN

Summons in a Civil Case

Weather Underground,

Incorporated,

Plaintiff(s),

v. Case No. 2:09−cv−10756−MOB−VMM

Hon. Marianne O Battani

Navigation Catalyst Systems,

Incorporated, et al.,

Defendant(s).

Notice to Defendant Basic Fusion, Incorporated

This summons is notification that you are being sued by the above named plaintiff(s). You are

required to:

1. Serve upon the plaintiff's attorney:

Craig E. Schaefer

810 Cottageview Drive

Suite G−20

Traverse City, MI

49684

an answer to the complaint within twenty (20) days after receiving this summons, or

take other actions that are permitted by the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure.

2. File with the court any answer that you serve on the parties to this action within the time

limits specified.

Failure to answer or take other actions permitted by the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure may

result in the issuance of a judgment by default against you for the relief demanded in the

complaint.

David J. Weaver, Clerk of Court By: s/ L. Behringer 

Deputy Clerk

Date of Issuance: February 27, 2009

Weather Underground, Incorporated v. Navigation Catalyst Systems, Incorporated et al Doc. 

Dockets.Justia.com
Summons and Complaint Return of Service

Case No. 2:09−cv−10756−MOB−VMM

Hon. Marianne O Battani

A copy of the Summons and Complaint has been served upon the Defendant in the manner

indicated below:

Name of Defendant Served: Basic Fusion, Incorporated

Date of Service:

Method of Service

Personally served at this address:

Left copies at defendant's usual place of abode with (name of person):

Other (specify):

Returned unexecuted (reason):

Service Fees: Travel $ Service $ Total $ 

Declaration of Server

I declare under the penalty of perjury that the information contained in this Return of Service is

true and correct.

Name of Server:

Signature of Server:

Date:

Server's Address:
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 

EASTERN DISTRICT OF MICHIGAN 

SOUTHERN DIVISION 

ADIL SHAFI, an individual, 

 Counter- Plaintiff, 

v. 

BRAINTECH INC., and 

FREDERICK WEIDINGER, an individual, 

 Counter-Defendant. 

_____________________________________/ 

Case No. 09-10454 

Honorable Victoria A. Roberts 

STIPULATED ORDER REGARDING ISSUANCE OF LETTERS ROGATORY

 On September 15, 2010, the Court held a Status Conference. Attending were 

James Murphy representing Shafi; Susan Koval representing Braintech and Geoffrey 

Greeves representing Weidinger. Following the status conference, Mr. Murphy 

circulated a proposed form of Letter Rogatory for witnesses located in Vancouver, 

British Columbia, Canada. On October 6, 2010 Mr. Greeves and Ms. Koval approved of 

the form of Letter Rogatory. Submitted with this stipulated order are 4 Letters Rogatory 

for witness depositions in Vancouver, British Columbia, Canada. Counsel approve of 

the form of the Letters Rogatory and therefore Defendant Shafi requests the Court is 

sign the Letters Rogatory. It will be Mr. Murphy’s responsibility to arrange with the 

Clerk’s office to obtain copies under seal of the Court. It will also be Mr. Murphy’s 

responsibility to arrange for the proper filing and service of Canadian process for each 

witness. 

I hereby consent to the entry of this Order: 

Case 2:09-cv-10454-VAR-VMM Document 50 Filed 10/13/10 Page 1 of 2
2 

_/s/James P. Murphy____ 

JAMES P. MURPHY (P36728) 

Attorneys for Adil Shafi 

 /s/Susan D. Koval________________ 

SUSAN D. KOVAL (P59297) 

Attorneys for Braintech 

_/s/Geoffrey J. Greeves______________ 

GEOFFREY J. GREEVES 

Attorneys for Frederick Weidinger 

 /s/Anne Bagno Widlak________________

ANNE BAGNO WIDLAK (P35763) 

Attorneys for Braintech 

IT IS ORDERED. 

 S/Victoria A. Roberts

 United States District Judge 

Dated: 10/13/2010 

Case 2:09-cv-10454-VAR-VMM Document 50 Filed 10/13/10 Page 2 of 2
EXHIBIT 32.1


CERTIFICATION OF CHIEF EXECUTIVE OFFICER


Section 906 Certification





Pursuant to 18 U.S.C. § 1350, the undersigned officer of DISH DBS Corporation (the “Company”) hereby certifies that to the best of his knowledge the Company's Annual Report on Form 10-K for the year ended December 31, 2010 (the “Report”) fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) or 15(d), as applicable, of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 and that the information contained in the Report fairly presents, in all material respects, the financial condition and results of operations of the Company.











Dated: February 25, 2011





Name: /s/ Charles W. Ergen





Title: Chairman, President and


Chief Executive Officer








The foregoing certification is being furnished solely pursuant to 18 U.S.C. § 1350 and is not being filed as part of the Report or as a separate disclosure document.





A signed original of this written statement required by Section 906, or other document authenticating, acknowledging, or otherwise adopting the signature that appears in typed form within the electronic version of this written statement required by Section 906, 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.
Case 2:09-cr-20001-RHC-SDP ECF No. 1 filed 05/20/08 PageID.1 Page 1 of 17
Case 2:09-cr-20001-RHC-SDP ECF No. 1 filed 05/20/08 PageID.2 Page 2 of 17
Case 2:09-cr-20001-RHC-SDP ECF No. 1 filed 05/20/08 PageID.3 Page 3 of 17
Case 2:09-cr-20001-RHC-SDP ECF No. 1 filed 05/20/08 PageID.4 Page 4 of 17
Case 2:09-cr-20001-RHC-SDP ECF No. 1 filed 05/20/08 PageID.5 Page 5 of 17
Case 2:09-cr-20001-RHC-SDP ECF No. 1 filed 05/20/08 PageID.6 Page 6 of 17
Case 2:09-cr-20001-RHC-SDP ECF No. 1 filed 05/20/08 PageID.7 Page 7 of 17
Case 2:09-cr-20001-RHC-SDP ECF No. 1 filed 05/20/08 PageID.8 Page 8 of 17
Case 2:09-cr-20001-RHC-SDP ECF No. 1 filed 05/20/08 PageID.9 Page 9 of 17
Case 2:09-cr-20001-RHC-SDP ECF No. 1 filed 05/20/08 PageID.10 Page 10 of 17
Case 2:09-cr-20001-RHC-SDP ECF No. 1 filed 05/20/08 PageID.11 Page 11 of 17
Case 2:09-cr-20001-RHC-SDP ECF No. 1 filed 05/20/08 PageID.12 Page 12 of 17
Case 2:09-cr-20001-RHC-SDP ECF No. 1 filed 05/20/08 PageID.13 Page 13 of 17
Case 2:09-cr-20001-RHC-SDP ECF No. 1 filed 05/20/08 PageID.14 Page 14 of 17
Case 2:09-cr-20001-RHC-SDP ECF No. 1 filed 05/20/08 PageID.15 Page 15 of 17
Case 2:09-cr-20001-RHC-SDP ECF No. 1 filed 05/20/08 PageID.16 Page 16 of 17
Case 2:09-cr-20001-RHC-SDP ECF No. 1 filed 05/20/08 PageID.17 Page 17 of 17
11TH COURT OF APPEALS

EASTLAND, TEXAS

JUDGMENT

Keith Bernard Walker, * From the 106th District Court

of Gaines County,

Trial Court No. 11-4144.

Vs. No. 11-15-00216-CR * December 31, 2015

The State of Texas, * Per Curiam Memorandum Opinion

(Panel consists of: Wright, C.J., 

Willson, J., and Bailey, J.)

 This court has inspected the record in this cause and concludes that the 

appeal should be dismissed. Therefore, in accordance with this court’s opinion, 

the appeal is dismissed.
Exhibit 32.2



Chief Financial Officers Certification required under Section 906 of Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002



In connection with the annual report of PanAmerican Bancorp (the Company) on Form 10-KSB for the period ended December 31, 2004, as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission (the Report), I, Robert L. Nichols, Chief Financial Officer of the Company, certify pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that this Report fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 and that, to my knowledge, the information contained in the Report fairly presents, in all material respects, the financial condition and results of operation of the Company.







Date: March 16, 2005







/s/ROBERTL. NICHOLS

Robert L. Nichols

Chief Financial Officer
[Federal Register Volume 61, Number 20 (Tuesday, January 30, 1996)]
[Notices]
[Page 3060]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 96-1671]



=======================================================================
-----------------------------------------------------------------------

SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION


Agency Information Collection Activities; Request For Public 
Comment

    Upon Written Request, Copies Available From: Securities and 
Exchange Commission, Office of Filings and Information Services, 
Washington, DC 20549.

    Extension: Form 40-F, SEC File No. 270-335, OMB Control No. 3235-
0381.
    Notice is hereby given that pursuant to the Paperwork Reduction Act 
of 1995 (44 U.S.C. 3501 et seq.), the Securities and Exchange 
Commission (``Commission'') is publishing the following summary of 
collection for public comment.
    Form 40-F is used by certain Canadian issuers to register 
securities pursuant to Section 12 of the Securities Exchange Act of 
1934 (``Exchange Act'') or as an annual report pursuant to Section 
13(a) or 15(d) of the Exchange Act. An estimated 320 submissions are 
made pursuant to Form 40-F, resulting in an estimated annual total 
burden of 640 hours.
    Written comments are invited on: (a) Whether the proposed 
collection of information is necessary for the proper performance of 
the functions of the agency, including whether the information shall 
have practical utility; (b) the accuracy of the agency's estimate of 
the burden of the proposed collection of information; (c) ways to 
enhance the quality, utility, and clarity of the information to be 
collected; and (d) ways to minimize the burden of the collection of 
information on respondents, including through the use of automated 
collection techniques or other forms of information technology. 
Consideration will be given to comments and suggestions submitted in 
writing within 60 days of this publication.
    Direct your written comments to Michael E. Bartell, Associate 
Executive Director, Office of Information Technology, Securities and 
Exchange Commission, 450 5th Street, N.W. Washington, DC 20549.

    Dated January 23, 1996.
Margaret H. McFarland,
Deputy Secretary.
[FR Doc. 96-1671 Filed 1-29-96; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 8010-01-M
United States Court of Appeals FOR THE EIGHTH CIRCUIT

___________ No. 97-3634

___________ James Spann, * * Appellant, * * v. * * Appeal from the United States James Purkett, Superintendent, FCC; * District Court for the Mike Gann, CCA, Farmington * Eastern District of Missouri. Correctional Center; Don Smith, CCA, * [UNPUBLISHED] Farmington Correctional Center; * Gordon Lewis, Lt., Farmington * Correctional Center; Marvin Johnson, * CO 1, Farmington Correctional Center, * * Appellees. *

___________ Submitted: May 6, 1998 Filed: May 11, 1998

___________ Before BOWMAN, Chief Judge, WOLLMAN, and MORRIS SHEPPARD ARNOLD, Circuit Judges.

___________The Honorable E. Richard Webber, United States Distr ict Judge for the Eastern 1 District of Missouri. -2- PER CURIAM. Missour iinmate James Spann appeals the district court & s grant of summary 1 judgmen t in favor of defendants in his 42 U.S.C. § 1983 action. After careful review of the record and the parties & submissions, we conclude that the district court properly granteddefendants summary judgment on Spann & s failure-to-protect claim, as Spann failed to produce evidence from which a jury could conclude that de fendants acted with deliberate indifference to a substantial risk of harm from other inmates. See Jackson v. E verett , No. 97-2359, 1998 WL 156395, slip op. at 3 (8th Cir. Apr. 7, 1998)
. Accordingly, the judgment is affirmed. See 8th Cir. R. 47B. A true copy. Attest: CLERK, U.S. COURT OF APPEALS, EIGHTH CIRCUIT.
UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 98-7271

VAUN SHAVELLE RODWELL, Petitioner - Appellant, versus DIRECTOR, DEPARTMENT OF CORRECTIONS, Respondent - Appellee.Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Virginia, at Alexandria. Claude M. Hilton, Chief District Judge. (CA-97-1448-AM) Submitted: December 17, 1998 Decided: January 7, 1999 Before WILKINS, NIEMEYER, and TRAXLER, Circuit Judges. Dismissed by unpublished per curiam opinion. Vaun Shavelle Rodwell, Appellant Pro Se. Vaughan Christopher Jones, OFFICE OF THE ATTORNEY GENERAL OF VIRGINIA, Richmond, Virginia, for Appellee. Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. See Local Rule 36(c).* Although the district court’s judgment is marked as “filed” on August 4, 1998, the district court’s records show that it was entered on the docket sheet on August 6, 1998. Pursuant to Rules 58 and 79(a) of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure, it is the date that the judgment was entered on the docket sheet that we take as the effective date of the district court’s decision. Wilson v. Murray , 806 F.2d 1232, 1234-35 (4th Cir. 1986). 2 PER CURIAM: Vaun Shavelle Rodwell seeks to appeal the district court’s order denying relief on his petition filed under 28 U.S.C.A. § 2254 (West 1994 & Supp. 1998). We have reviewed the record and the district court’s order and find no reversible error. Accordingly, we deny a certificate of appealability and dismiss the appeal on the reasoning of the district court. See Rodwell v. Director, Dept. of Corrections , No. CA-97-1448-AM (E.D. Va. Aug. 6, 1998). *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.

DISMISSED
Administrative Office of the United States Courts FOR COURT USE ONLY

TRANSCRIPT ORDER

DUE DATE:

OAO 435

AZ Form (Rev. 1/2015)

1. NAME 2. PHONE NUMBER 3. DATE

4. FIRM NAME

5. MAILING ADDRESS 6. CITY 7. STATE 8. ZIP CODE

9. CASE NUMBER 10. JUDGE DATES OF PROCEEDINGS

11. 12. 

13. CASE NAME LOCATION OF PROCEEDINGS

14. 15. STATE

16. ORDER FOR

9 APPEAL 9 CRIMINAL

9 NON-APPEAL 9 CIVIL

9 CRIMINAL JUSTICE ACT

9 

IN FORMA PAUPERIS

BANKRUPTCY

OTHER (Specify)

17. TRANSCRIPT REQUESTED (Specify portion(s) and date(s) of proceeding(s) for which transcript is requested.)

PORTIONS DATE(S) PORTION(S) DATE(S)

9TESTIMONY (Specify)

9PRE-TRIAL PROCEEDING

9OTHER (Specify)

9VOIR DIRE

9OPENING STATEMENT (Plaintiff)

9OPENING STATEMENT (Defendant)

9CLOSING ARGUMENT (Plaintiff)

9CLOSING ARGUMENT (Defendant)

9OPINION OF COURT

9JURY INSTRUCTIONS

9SENTENCING

9BAIL HEARING

18. ORDER

CATEGORY

ORIGINAL + 1

(original to Court,

copy to ordering party)

FIRST

COPY

# OF

ADDITIONAL

COPIES

DELIVERY INSTRUCTIONS

(Check all that apply.)

ESTIMATED COSTS

30 DAYS 9 9 PAPER COPY

PDF (e-mail)

ASCII (e-mail)

14 DAYS 9 9

7 DAYS 9 9

DAILY 9 9

HOURLY 9 9

REALTIME 9 9

CERTIFICATION (19. & 20.)

By signing below, I certify that I will pay all charges

(deposit plus additional).

E-MAIL ADDRESS

NOTE: IF ORDERING MORE THAN ONE FORMAT, 

THERE WILL BE AN ADDITIONAL CHARGE.

19. SIGNATURE

20. DATE

TRANSCRIPT TO BE PREPARED BY

ESTIMATE TOTAL

PROCESSED BY PHONE NUMBER

ORDER RECEIVED DATE BY

DEPOSIT PAID DEPOSIT PAID

TRANSCRIPT ORDERED TOTAL CHARGES

TRANSCRIPT RECEIVED LESS DEPOSIT

ORDERING PARTY NOTIFIED

TO PICK UP TRANSCRIPT

TOTAL REFUNDED

PARTY RECEIVED TRANSCRIPT TOTAL DUE

DISTRIBUTION: COURT COPY TRANSCRIPTION COPY ORDER RECEIPT ORDER COPY

Case 2:18-cr-00422-DJH Document 451 Filed 02/05/19 Page 1 of 1
[Federal Register Volume 61, Number 126 (Friday, June 28, 1996)]
[Notices]
[Pages 33783-33784]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 96-16768]


=======================================================================
-----------------------------------------------------------------------

UNITED STATES POSTAL SERVICE BOARD OF GOVERNORS


Sunshine Act Meetings; Notice of Vote to Amend Agenda

    At the June 3, 1996, meeting of the Board of Governors, noticed in 
the Federal Register on May 14, 1996 (61 FR 24341), and May 23, 1996, 
(61 FR 25928), the members voted unanimously to add to its agenda 
consideration of an officer change and officers' compensation, and that 
no earlier public announcement of the new item on the agenda was 
possible.
    The Board determined that discussion of the matters would likely 
disclose information relating to internal personnel practices.

[[Page 33784]]

    The Board further determined that public access to the discussion 
would likely disclose information of a personal nature where disclosure 
would constitute a clearly unwarranted invasion of personal privacy, 
not only in regard to the privacy of the person immediately affected, 
but also in regard to the privacy of others who might be discussed.
    Accordingly, the Board determined that in accordance with section 
552b(c)(2) and (6) of title 5, United States Code; and section 7.3 (b) 
and (f) of title 39, Code of Federal Regulations, discussion of the 
matters were properly closed to public observation.
    Requests for information concerning the meeting should be addressed 
to the Secretary of the Board, Thomas J. Koerber, at (202) 268-4800.
Thomas J. Koerber,
Secretary.
[FR Doc. 96-16768 Filed 6-26-96; 3:54 pm]
BILLING CODE 7710-12-M
<PAGE>


EXHIBIT 32.1

CERTIFICATION PURSUANT TO RULE 13a-14(b) OF THE SECURITIES EXCHANGE ACT OF 1934,
AS AMENDED, AND 18 U.S.C. SECTION 1350, AS ADOPTED PURSUANT TO SECTION 906 OF
THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002

The undersigned officer of Consorteum Holdings, Inc. (hereinafter the "Company")
hereby certifies to such officer's knowledge that the Company's Quarterly Report
on Form 10-Q for the quarter ended September 30, 2009 (the "Report"), as filed
with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof, fully complies
with the requirements of Section 13(a) or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act
of 1934, as amended, and the information contained in the Quarterly Report
fairly presents, in all material respects, the financial condition and results
of operations of the Company. This certification is provided solely pursuant to
18 U.S.C. Section 1350, as adopted pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley
Act of 2002, and shall not be deemed to be part of the Report or "filed" for any
purpose whatsoever.


Date: December 10, 2009                        /s/ Craig A. Fielding
-----------------------                        ---------------------------------
                                               Name:  Craig A. Fielding
                                               Title: Chief Executive Officer
Order entered December 1 7 , 2018

In The 

## Court of Appeals Fifth District of Texas at Dallas

No. 05
- 17
- 00654
- CV JUSTIN D. BURGESS, Appellant

V. WILMINGTON SAVINGS F UND SOCIETY, FSB, D/ B/A CHRISTIANA TRUST, NOT INDIVIDUALLY BUT AS TRUSTEE FOR PRETIUM MORTGAGE ACQUISITION TRUST, Appellee On Appeal from the County Court at Law No. 2

Dallas County, Texas Trial Court Cause No. CC
- 17
- 00664
- B



### O RDER Appellant’s motion to cap security on appeal at $15,000 and to refund funds posted in excess of that amount is DENIED without prejudice to refiling after appellant pursues relief in the trial court pursuant to Texas Rule of Appellate Procedure 24.3(a)

.
/s/ LANA MYERS JUSTICE
[Federal Register Volume 61, Number 124 (Wednesday, June 26, 1996)]
[Notices]
[Page 33092]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 96-16305]



=======================================================================
-----------------------------------------------------------------------

COMMISSION ON CIVIL RIGHTS


Agenda and Notice of Public Meeting of the Alabama Advisory 
Committee

    Notice is hereby given, pursuant to the provisions of the rules and 
regulations of the U.S. Commission on Civil Rights, that a meeting of 
the Alabama Advisory Committee to the Commission will convene at 5:30 
p.m. and adjourn at 10:30 p.m. on Tuesday, July 2, 1996, at the 
Paramount High School, Highway 20, Boligee, Alabama. The purpose of the 
meeting is to allow Committee members to receive a briefing on race 
relations issues in the aftermath of church burnings.
    Persons desiring additional information, or planning a presentation 
to the Committee, should contact Melvin L. Jenkins, Director of the 
Central Regional Office, 913-551-1400 (TDD 913-551-1414). Hearing-
impaired persons who will attend the meeting and require the services 
of a sign language interpreter should contact the Regional Office at 
least five (5) working days before the scheduled date of the meeting.
    The meeting will be conducted pursuant to the provisions of the 
rules and regulations of the Commission.

    Dated at Washington, DC, June 20, 1996.
Carol-Lee Hurley,
Chief, Regional Programs Coordination Unit.
[FR Doc. 96-16305 Filed 6-25-96; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6335-01-P