alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
179 La. 757

#### JACKSON v. KELLY.

No. 32293.

Supreme Court of Louisiana.

April 23, 1934.

Phanor Breazeale, of Natchitoches, and Montgomery & Montgomery, of New 'Orleans, for appellant.

S. R. Thomas, of Natchitoches, for appellee.

OVERTON, Justice.

Plaintiff sued defendant on a promissory note for $2,750, bearing date November 15, 1926, due *one year alter date.*Suit was filed on November 15, 1932, or exactly five years, to the day, after the date of maturity of the note. Citation was served on the day the suit was brought, namely, on November 15, 1932. The service was domiciliary,

Defendant appeared and excepted to the petition on the ground that it did not set out, nor did the citation do so, the Christian name of plaintiff or defendant. Thereupon plaintiff amended its petition instanter by setting these names out. When the amendment was filed defendant answered the petition, denying liability on the ground that the note was given without consideration. Defendant also pleaded the prescription of five years.

The amended petition cured the defect, complained of, in the original proceedings.

The note recites that it was given for value received. Defendant offered no evidence showing that it was not so given. The presumption that it was so given, therefore, remains unrebutted, and suffices as a basis for judgment.

 The plea of prescription is not well grounded. Suit was filed and citation served on November 15, 1932. This was the last day before the prescription, of five years could accrue under the- law. -Plaintiff had all of that day in which to commence his suit, and he did then commence it by the filing of his petition and the service of citation. The fact that there wás a minor defect in the petition, which defendant might, and did, cure *16instanter, is of no importance. The course of prescription was interrupted by the filing of the original petition and by the service of citation on the day before the five years had elapsed from the date of the maturity of the note.

The signature of the defendant to the note was not denied, but impliedly admitted in the answer, by the plea of no consideration. Besides, the signature was proved by plaintiff’s attorney, and the note was received in evidence,

The lower court rendered judgment sustaining the exception to the petition or citation, and moreover rejected plaintiff’s demand.

The judgment is set aside, and judgment is now rendered in favor of plaintiff and against defendant for said sum of $2,750, with S per centum yearly interest thereon from November 15, 1926, and 10 per centum attorney’s fees on the principal and interest; defendant to-pay the costs in both courts.

ST. PAUL, J., absent
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 Homeland Security

###### Federal Emergency Management Agency 

          - [FEMA-1776-DR] 

# AGENCY:

Federal Emergency Management Agency, DHS. 

# ACTION:

Notice. 

# SUMMARY:

This notice amends the notice of a major disaster declaration for the State of Kansas (FEMA-1776-DR), dated July 9, 2008, and related determinations. 

# DATES:

*Effective Date:*                         August 4, 2008.                     

# FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

Peggy Miller, Disaster Assistance Directorate, Federal Emergency Management Agency, 500 C Street, SW., Washington, DC 20472, (202) 646-3886. 

# SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

The notice of a major disaster declaration for the State of Kansas is hereby amended to include the following areas among those areas determined to have been adversely affected by the catastrophe declared a major disaster by the President in his declaration of July 9, 2008. 

Elk, Haskell, Reno, and Wilson Counties for Public Assistance. 

(The following Catalog of Federal Domestic Assistance Numbers (CFDA) are to be used for reporting and drawing funds: 97.030, Community Disaster Loans; 97.031, Cora Brown Fund; 97.032, Crisis Counseling; 97.033, Disaster Legal Services; 97.034, Disaster Unemployment Assistance (DUA); 97.046, Fire Management Assistance Grant; 97.048, Disaster Housing Assistance to Individuals and Households In Presidentially Declared Disaster Areas; 97.049, Presidentially Declared Disaster Assistance—Disaster Housing Operations for Individuals and Households; 97.050, Presidentially Declared Disaster Assistance to Individuals and Households—Other Needs; 97.036, Disaster Grants—Public Assistance (Presidentially Declared Disasters); 97.039, Hazard Mitigation Grant.)

R. David Paulison, 

Administrator, Federal Emergency Management Agency.

[FR Doc. E8-18525 Filed 8-11-08; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 9110-10-P
Exhibit 31.1

CERTIFICATION

I, S. Scott Crump, certify that:

1. I have
reviewed this annual report on Form 10-K/A of Stratasys, Inc. (the
registrant);

2. Based on my knowledge, this
report does not contain any untrue statement of a material fact or omit to state
a material fact necessary to make the statements made, in light of the
circumstances under which such statements were made, not misleading with respect
to the period covered by this report;

|Date: April 27, 2012 | /s/ S. SCOTT CRUMP        | 
|-------------------- | ------------------------- | 
|                     | S. Scott
      Crump     
|                     | President and
      Chief
|                     | Executive
      Officer  

21

---
Opinion issued March 2, 2021

In The 

## Court of Appeals
For The 

## First District of Texas

———————————— NO. 01
- 21
- 00 014
- CV

——————————— IN RE JOYCE REECE AND ZACHARY PETTIT , Relator s

Original Proceeding on Petition for Writ of Mandamus

MEMORANDUM OPINION
Relator s , Joyce Reece and Zachary Pettit , ha ve filed a petition for a writ of
mandamus asserting that the trial court abused its discretion by failing to rule on relators’ plea to the jurisdiction and by granting the motion to disqualify relators’ counsel, Joseph R. Willie, II D.D.S., J.D.2

We deny relators’ petition for writ of mandamus. 1 A ll pending motions are
dismissed as moot.
PER CURIAM Panel consists of Chief Justice Radack and Justices Goodman and Farris.

1 The underlying case is Clarence Roy a s n ext f riend of Clarice A. Thomas v. Zachary Pettit and Joyce Reece , Cause No. 20 17

- 49867 , in the 281st District Court of Harris County, Texas, the Honorable Christine Weems presiding.
NOT FOR PUBLICATION

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT

JIANPING SU,

 Petitioner,

 v.

MERRICK B. GARLAND, Attorney 

General,

 Respondent.

No. 22-867

Agency No.

A206-670-855

MEMORANDUM*

On Petition for Review of an Order of the

Board of Immigration Appeals

Submitted July 18, 2023**

Before: SCHROEDER, RAWLINSON, and BADE, Circuit Judges.

Jianping Su, a native and citizen of China, petitions pro se for review of 

the Board of Immigration Appeals’ order dismissing her appeal from an 

immigration judge’s decision denying her applications for asylum, withholding 

of removal, and protection under the Convention Against Torture (“CAT”). We 

have jurisdiction under 8 U.S.C. § 1252. We review for substantial evidence 

* This disposition is not appropriate for publication and is not 

precedent except as provided by Ninth Circuit Rule 36-3.

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

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

FILED

AUG 8 2023

MOLLY C. DWYER, CLERK

U.S. COURT OF APPEALS
2 22-867

the agency’s factual findings, applying the standards governing adverse 

credibility determinations under the REAL ID Act. Shrestha v. Holder, 590

F.3d 1034, 1039‐40 (9th Cir. 2010). We deny the petition for review.

Substantial evidence supports the agency’s adverse credibility 

determination based on inconsistencies regarding Su and her daughter’s escape 

from family planning officials, and Su’s demeanor during her daughter’s 

testimony. See id. at 1048 (adverse credibility finding reasonable under the 

totality of the circumstances); Manes v. Sessions, 875 F.3d 1261, 1263-64 (9th 

Cir. 2017) (agency’s demeanor finding was supported where IJ provided 

“specific, first-hand observations”). Su’s explanations do not compel a contrary 

conclusion. See Lata v. INS, 204 F.3d 1241, 1245 (9th Cir. 2000). Thus, in the 

absence of credible testimony, in this case, Su’s asylum and withholding of 

removal claims fail. See Farah v. Ashcroft, 348 F.3d 1153, 1156 (9th Cir. 

2003). 

Substantial evidence also supports the agency’s denial of CAT protection 

because Su’s claim was based on the same testimony the agency found not 

credible, and Su does not point to any other evidence in the record that compels 

the conclusion that it is more likely than not she would be tortured in China. 

See id. at 1157.

We do not consider the materials Su references in her opening brief that 

are not part of the administrative record. See Fisher v. INS, 79 F.3d 955, 963-64 

(9th Cir. 1996) (en banc).
3 22-867

The temporary stay of removal remains in place until the mandate issues. 

PETITION FOR REVIEW DENIED.
UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 05-7781

RICHARD DOUGLAS MURRAY, SR., Plaintiff - Appellant, versus STATE OF WEST VIRGINIA, ex rel.; DARRELL V. MCGRAW, JR., Attorney General; JAMES RUBENSTEIN, Commissioner, D.O.C.; WILLIAM S. HAINES, Warden, H.C.C.; HONORABLE GRAY SILVER; HONORABLE CHRISTOPHER WILKES, Judge 23rd Judicial Circuit, Defendants - Appellees. Appeal from the United States District Court for the Southern District of West Virginia, at Charleston. John T. Copenhaver, Jr., District Judge. (CA-05-796-2) Submitted: May 10, 2006 Decided: June 1, 2006 Before WILKINSON, WILLIAMS, and MICHAEL, Circuit Judges. Dismissed by unpublished per curiam opinion. Richard Douglas Murray, Sr., Appellant Pro Se. Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. See Local Rule 36(c).- 2 - PER CURIAM: Richard D. Murray, Sr., seeks to appeal the district court’s order denying his objection to the standing order referring his case to a magistrate judge for report and recommendation. This court may exercise jurisdiction only over final orders, 28 U.S.C. § 1291 (2000), and certain interlocutory and collateral orders, 28 U.S.C. § 1292 (2000); Fed. R. Civ. P. 54(b); Cohen v. Beneficial Indus. Loan Corp. , 337 U.S. 541 (1949). The order Murray seeks to appeal is neither a final order nor an appealable interlocutory or collateral order. Accordingly, we deny Murray’s motion for appointment of counsel and dismiss the appeal for lack of jurisdiction. 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
NOT FOR PUBLICATION

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT

ANGELA SILVERIO JULIAN,

Petitioner,

v. WILLIAM P. BARR, Attorney General,

Respondent. No. 18

- 72520
Agency No. A208

- 122

- 883

MEMORANDUM *

On Petition for Review of an Order of the Board of Immigration Appeals Submitted August 19, 2019 **

Before: SCHROEDER, PAEZ, and HURWITZ, Circuit Judges.
Angela Silverio Julia n , a native and citizen of Mexico, petitions for review
of the Board of Immigration A ppeals’ (“BIA”) order dismissing h er appeal from an
immigration judge’s (“IJ”) decision denying h er application for asylum,
withholding of removal, and relief under the Convention Against Torture (“CAT”).

* This dispositio n is not appropriate for publication and is not precedent except as provided by Ninth Circuit Rule 36

- 3.

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

# FILED

AUG 23 2019
MOLLY C. DWYER, CLER K U.S. COURT OF APPEAL S2 18

- 72520

We have jurisdiction under 8 U.S.C. § 1252. We re view for substantial evidence
the agency’s factual findings. Garcia

- Milian v. Holder , 755 F.3d 1026, 1031 (9th
Cir. 2014). We deny the petition for review

.
Substantial evidence s upports the agency’s determination that any harm

Silverio Julian experienced or fears in Mexico has no nexus to a protected ground.

See Zetino v. Holder , 622 F.3d 1007, 1016 (9th Cir. 2010) (“An [applicant’s]
desire to be free from harassment by criminals motivated by theft or random
violence by gang members bears no nexus to a protected ground.”) . Thus, Silverio
Julian’s asylum and withholding of removal claims fail.
Substantial evidence supports the agency’s denial of CAT relief because

Silverio Julian failed to show it is more likely than not she will be tortured by or
with the consent or acquiescence of the government if returned to Mexico

. See

Aden v. Holder , 589 F.3d 1040, 1047 (9th Cir. 2009)

. Because these determinations are dispositive, we need not reach Silverio

Julian’s remaining contentions. See Simeonov v. Ashcroft , 371 F.3d 532, 538 (9th
Cir. 2004) ( “As a general rule courts and agencies are not req ui red to decide issues
unnecessary to the results they reach.” (citation omitted) )

. We deny Silverio Julian’s request for judicial notice as set forth in her3 18

- 72520

opening brief.

PETITION FOR REVIEW DENIED.
Michigan Supreme Court

Lansing, Michigan

Robert P. Young, Jr., Chief Justice

Michael F. Cavanagh

Marilyn Kelly

Stephen J. Markman

Diane M. Hathaway

Mary Beth Kelly

Brian K. Zahra, Justices

I, Corbin R. Davis, Clerk of the Michigan Supreme Court, certify that the

foregoing is a true and complete copy of the order entered at the direction of the Court.

 _________________________________________

 Clerk

November 7, 2012

h1031

Order 

November 7, 2012

142252

PEOPLE OF THE STATE OF MICHIGAN,

Plaintiff-Appellee,

v SC: 142252

COA: 293279

Oakland CC: 2008-222521-FC

JOHN PHILLIP BEVERLEY,

Defendant-Appellant.

_________________________________________/

On order of the Court, the application for leave to appeal the October 19, 2010 

judgment of the Court of Appeals is considered, and it is DENIED, because we are not 

persuaded that the questions presented should be reviewed by this Court.

MARILYN KELLY, J., would grant leave to appeal.
[Federal Register Volume 73, Number 160 (Monday, August 18, 2008)]
[Notices]
[Page 48221]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: E8-18873]


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

DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES

National Institutes of Health


National Institute of Environmental Health Sciences; Amended 
Notice of Meeting

    Notice is hereby given of a change in the meeting of the National 
Advisory
    Environmental Health Sciences Council, September 9, 2008, 8:30 a.m. 
to September 10, 2008, 5 p.m., Nat. Inst. of Environmental Health 
Sciences, Building 101, Rodbell Auditorium, 111 T. W. Alexander Drive, 
Research Triangle Park, NC, 27709 which was published in the Federal 
Register on August 4, 2008, E8-17728.
    Time change for September 9, 2008, open session 8:30 a.m.-3 p.m. 
and closed 3 p.m.-5 p.m.; September 10, 2008, closed session 8:30 a.m.-
4 p.m. The meeting is partially closed to the public.

    Dated: August 8, 2008.
Anna Snouffer,
Deputy Director, Office of Federal Advisory Committee Policy.
[FR Doc. E8-18873 Filed 8-15-08; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4140-01-M
#### Michael Costello, Respondent, v. The International Harvester Company, Appellant.

Judgment and order reversed and new trial ordered, with costs to appellant to abide event, unless the plaintiff within twenty days stipulates to reduce the verdict to the sum of §1,500 as of the date of the rendition thereof, in which event the judgment is modified accordingly, and as so modified is, together with the order, affirmed, without costs of this appeal to either party. All con*925curred, except McLennan, P. J., and Kruse, J., who dissented and voted for absolute reversal.
#### Joshua D’BARON, Plaintiff-Appellant, v. WACKENHUT CORRECTIONS CORPORATION; et al., Defendants-Appellees.

No. 02-17320. D.C. No. CV-00-05175-AWI/DLB.

United States Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit.

Submitted July 21, 2003.*

Decided July 24, 2003.

Before LEAVY, HAWKINS, and RAWLINSON, Circuit Judges.

*

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

MEMORANDUM**

Joshua D’Baron appeals pro se the district court’s summary judgment dismissing his prisoner civil rights action for failure to exhaust administrative remedies. We have jurisdiction pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1291. We review de novo, *Wyatt v. Terhune,*315 F.3d 1108, 1117 (9th Cir. 2003), and we affirm.

The district court properly dismissed the action because D’Baron failed to exhaust administrative remedies as required by 42 U.S.C. § 1997e(a). *See Booth v. Churner,*532 U.S. 731, 741, 121 S.Ct. 1819, 149 L.Ed.2d 958 (2001). We construe the district court’s order as dismissing the action without prejudice. *See Wyatt,*315 F.3d at 1120.

AFFIRMED.

**

 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.
[Federal Register Volume 73, Number 155 (Monday, August 11, 2008)]
[Notices]
[Pages 46637-46638]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: E8-18438]


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

DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND SECURITY

Federal Emergency Management Agency

[FEMA-1773-DR]


Missouri; Amendment No. 8 to Notice of a Major Disaster 
Declaration

AGENCY: Federal Emergency Management Agency, DHS.

ACTION: Notice.

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

SUMMARY: This notice amends the notice of a major disaster declaration 
for the State of Missouri (FEMA-1773-DR), dated June 25, 2008, and 
related determinations.

DATES: Effective Date: July 29, 2008.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Peggy Miller, Disaster Assistance 
Directorate, Federal Emergency Management Agency, 500 C Street, SW., 
Washington, DC 20472, (202) 646-3886.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Notice is hereby given that pursuant to the 
President's June 30, 2008, amended declaration authorizing Federal 
funds for emergency protective measures, including direct Federal 
assistance, at 90 percent Federal funding of total eligible costs under 
the Public Assistance program, the National Oceanic and Atmospheric 
Administration's National Weather Service River Forecast Center has 
established that the rivers in the State of Missouri, which have 
experienced historical flooding, fell below flood stage on July 18, 
2008.

(The following Catalog of Federal Domestic Assistance Numbers (CFDA) 
are to be used for reporting and drawing funds: 97.030, Community 
Disaster Loans; 97.031, Cora Brown Fund; 97.032, Crisis Counseling; 
97.033, Disaster Legal Services; 97.034, Disaster Unemployment 
Assistance (DUA); 97.046, Fire Management Assistance Grant; 97.048, 
Disaster Housing Assistance to Individuals and Households In 
Presidential Declared Disaster Areas; 97.049, Presidential Declared 
Disaster Assistance--Disaster Housing Operations for Individuals and 
Households; 97.050, Presidential Declared Disaster Assistance to 
Individuals and Households--Other Needs; 97.036, Disaster Grants--
Public Assistance (Presidentially

[[Page 46638]]

Declared Disasters); 97.039, Hazard Mitigation Grant.)

R. David Paulison,
Administrator, Federal Emergency Management Agency.
[FR Doc. E8-18438 Filed 8-8-08; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 9110-10-P
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE THIRD CIRCUIT

June 2, 2011

No. 10-3539

Dr. Karen Malleus, Appellant

v.

Dr. John J. George, et al.

(E.D. Pa. No. 10-cv-01357)

Present: FISHER, JORDAN and COWEN, Circuit Judges

1. Motion by Appellees to amend the opinion.

Respectfully,

Clerk/tyw

_________________________________ORDER________________________________

The foregoing motion is granted.

By the Court,

/s/ D. Michael Fisher

Circuit Judge

Dated: June 6, 2011

tyw/cc: Andrea C. Farney, Esq.

Sharon R. Lopez, Esq.

Paul J. Cianci, Esq.

Michael I. Levin, Esq.

Leonard G. Brown, III, Esq.
---

|CERTIFICATION OF                                                 
|-----------------------------------------------------------------
|PRINCIPAL EXECUTIVE OFFICER AND PRINCIPAL FINANCIAL
      OFFICER
|PURSUANT TO                                                      
|18 U.S.C. SECTION 1350,                                          
|AS ADOPTED PURSUANT TO                                           
|SECTION 906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002                    

I, Richard W. Donaldson, the Principal Executive Officer and
Principal Financial Officer of Pengram Corporation (the Company), hereby
certify pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, as adopted pursuant to Section 906
of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that, to the best of my knowledge:

| | (i)  | the Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q of the Company, for the
      fiscal quarter ended August 31, 2009, and to which this certification is
      attached as Exhibit 32.1 (the Report) fully complies with the
      requirements of Section 13(a) or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of
      1934, as amended; and
| | ---- | -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
| |      |                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                          
| | (ii) | the information contained in the Report fairly presents,
      in all material respects, the financial condition and results of
      operations of the Company.                                                                                                                                                         

| | By:    | /s/ Richard W. Donaldson       
| | ------ | -------------------------------
| |        |                                
| | Name:  | RICHARD W. DONALDSON           
| |        |                                
| | Title: | Principal Executive Officer and
| |        | Principal Financial Officer    
| |        |                                
| | Date:  | October 19, 2009               
| |        |                                

A signed original of this written statement required by
Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002 has been provided to the Company
and will be retained by the Company and furnished to the Securities and Exchange
Commission or its staff upon request.

This certification accompanies the Form 10-Q to which it
relates, is not deemed filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission and is
not to be incorporated by reference into any filing of the Company under the
Securities Act of 1933 or the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 (whether made
before or after the date of the Form 10-Q), irrespective of any general
incorporation language contained in such filing.

---