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NOT FOR PUBLICATION

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

 FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT

WEI WANG,

 Petitioner,

 v.

ERIC H. HOLDER, Jr., Attorney General,

 Respondent.

No. 11-73578

Agency No. A088-558-337

MEMORANDUM*

On Petition for Review of an Order of the

Board of Immigration Appeals

Argued and Submitted July 10, 2013

San Francisco, California

Before: FERNANDEZ, PAEZ, and BERZON, Circuit Judges.

Wei Wang, a native and citizen of China, petitions for review of the Board

of Immigration Appeals (BIA)’s order dismissing his appeal of an immigration

judge’s decision denying his application for asylum, withholding of removal, and

relief under the Convention Against Torture. We deny the petition. 

FILED

AUG 01 2013

MOLLY C. DWYER, CLERK

U.S. COURT OF APPEALS

 * This disposition is not appropriate for publication and is not precedent

except as provided by 9th Cir. R. 36-3.
1. The BIA did not err in concluding that Wang failed to establish past

persecution on account of political opinion, membership in a particular social

group, or religion. The primary harm Wang alleges is the forced abortion and

sterilization to which his wife was subjected, with consequent impact on him. The

BIA correctly recognized that such harm could not alone establish that Wang was

entitled to asylum. See Jiang v. Holder, 611 F.3d 1086, 1095 (9th Cir. 2010);

Matter of J-S-, 24 I. & N. Dec. 520, 534–35 (Att’y Gen. 2008). The BIA did

recognize that Wang may have been eligible for asylum if his wife had been

targeted to punish him, but correctly determined that Wang never made such an

allegation.

Nor did the BIA err in concluding that Wang did not demonstrate a wellfounded fear of future persecution. After his wife was forcibly sterilized, he

suffered no punishment; he subsequently received an important position at a

government-run university. His wife continues to live in China without further

incident. The record evidence of country conditions establishes no pattern or

practice of persecution of a group of persons similarly situated to Wang, namely

men whose spouses have suffered forced abortions or sterilizations. See 8 C.F.R. §

1208.13(b)(2)(iii).

The BIA therefore did not err in rejecting Wang’s asylum application. 
2. Because Wang failed to qualify for asylum, he necessarily failed to

satisfy the more stringent standard for withholding of removal. Alvarez–Santos v.

INS, 332 F.3d 1245, 1255 (9th Cir.2003).

3. For similar reasons that the BIA did not err in determining that Wang had

not established a well-founded fear of future persecution, substantial evidence also

supports the BIA’s conclusion that it was not “more likely than not” that Wang

would be tortured if he were removed to China. See 8 C.F.R. § 1208. 16(c)(2). 

DENIED.
IA 

110TH CONGRESS 

1ST SESSION H. J. RES. 23 

Proposing an amendment the Constitution of the United States relative to 

abolishing personal income, estate, and gift taxes and prohibiting the 

United States Government from engaging in business in competition 

with its citizens. 

IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES 

FEBRUARY 7, 2007 

Mr. PAUL (for himself and Mr. MILLER of Florida) introduced the following 

joint resolution; which was referred to the Committee on the Judiciary 

JOINT RESOLUTION 

Proposing an amendment the Constitution of the United 

States relative to abolishing personal income, estate, and 

gift taxes and prohibiting the United States Government 

from engaging in business in competition with its citizens. 

1 Resolved by the Senate and House of Representatives 

2 of the United States of America in Congress assembled

3 (two-thirds of each House concurring therein), That the fol4 lowing article is proposed as an amendment to the Con5 stitution of the United States, which shall be valid to all 

6 intents and purposes as part of the Constitution when 

7 ratified by the legislatures of three-fourths of the several 


bajohnson on PROD1PC69 with BILLS
2 

•HJ 23 IH 

1 States within seven years after the date of its submission 

2 for ratification: 

3 ‘‘ARTICLE — 

4 ‘‘SECTION 1. The Government of the United States 

5 shall not engage in any business, professional, commercial, 

6 financial, or industrial enterprise except as specified in the 

7 Constitution. 

8 ‘‘SECTION 2. The constitution or laws of any State, 

9 or the laws of the United States, shall not be subject to 

10 the terms of any foreign or domestic agreement which 

11 would abrogate this amendment. 

12 ‘‘SECTION 3. The activities of the United States Gov13 ernment which violate the intent and purposes of this 

14 amendment shall, within a period of three years from the 

15 date of the ratification of this amendment, be liquidated 

16 and the properties and facilities affected shall be sold. 

17 ‘‘SECTION 4. Three years after the ratification of this 

18 amendment the sixteenth article of amendments to the 

19 Constitution of the United States shall stand repealed and 

20 thereafter Congress shall not levy taxes on personal in21 comes, estates, and gifts.’’. 

Æ 


bajohnson on PROD1PC69 with BILLS
<PAGE>

                                                                    EXHIBIT 12.1

                                BEA Systems, Inc.
                       Ratio of Earnings to Fixed Charges
                                 (in thousands)

<TABLE>
<CAPTION>
                                                                              Fiscal years ended January 31,
                                                           ----------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                               2002              2001            2000         1999        1998
                                                           ----------------------------------------------------------------------
<S>                                                           <C>             <C>             <C>         <C>          <C>
Income (loss) before income taxes                           $ (4,268)         $ 47,462        $ (5,657)   $ (46,726)   $ (20,068)
Add fixed charges                                             45,814            35,426          29,385       16,615        8,531
                                                           ----------------------------------------------------------------------
Earnings (as defined)                                       $ 41,546          $ 82,888        $ 23,728    $ (30,111)   $ (11,537)
                                                           ======================================================================
Fixed charges:
     Interest expense(1)                                    $ 22,259          $ 22,674        $ 12,363    $  10,426    $   6,054
     Portion of rent expense representative
        of interest                                           21,395            10,321           7,779        5,528        2,477
     Amortization of debt premium and issuance costs           2,160             2,431           9,243          661            -
                                                           ----------------------------------------------------------------------
          Total fixed charges                               $ 45,814          $ 35,426        $ 29,385    $  16,615    $   8,531
                                                           ======================================================================

Ratio of earnings to fixed charges                                 *              2.34               *            *            *
                                                           ======================================================================
</TABLE>
 *   Earnings (as defined) were insufficient to cover fixed charges by $4,268,
     $5,657, $46,726 and $20,068 for the fiscal years ended January 31, 2002,
     2000, 1999 and 1998, respectively.
(1)  Excludes debt conversion premium of $236 and $8,054 in fiscal 2001 and
     2000, respectively, which is included in amortization of debt premium and
     issuance costs.
NOT FOR PUBLICATION

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

 FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,

 Plaintiff - Appellee,

 v.

JAMES ALBERT WILDE,

 Defendant - Appellant.

No. 13-30360

D.C. No. 4:10-cr-00021-RRB-1

MEMORANDUM*

Appeal from the United States District Court

for the District of Alaska

Ralph R. Beistline, Chief District Judge, Presiding

Argued and Submitted August 12, 2014

Anchorage, Alaska

Before: FARRIS, D.W. NELSON, and NGUYEN, Circuit Judges.

Defendant James Albert Wilde was convicted of violating 36 C.F.R. §§

2.32(a)(1), (2) and 3.2(b). See also 16 U.S.C. § 3; Alaska Stat. § 05.25.055(a), (d);

Alaska Stat. § 05.25.090(b)(2). Wilde appeals his conviction, arguing that the

National Park Service does not have authority to enforce these regulations on the

FILED

OCT 06 2014

MOLLY C. DWYER, CLERK

U.S. COURT OF APPEALS

 * This disposition is not appropriate for publication and is not precedent

except as provided by 9th Cir. R. 36-3.
part of the Yukon River that runs within the geographic boundaries of the

Yukon-Charley Rivers National Preserve. We have jurisdiction pursuant to 28

U.S.C. § 1291 and affirm.

According to 16 U.S.C. § 3103, “[o]nly those lands within the boundaries of

any conservation system unit which are public lands . . . shall be deemed to be

included as a portion of such unit.” Id. (emphasis added). The statute necessarily

divides “lands within the boundaries of any conservation system unit” into “public

lands” and non-public lands. See id. While only “public lands” are “included as a

portion of such unit,” any non-public lands nevertheless are “lands within the

boundaries of [the] conservation system unit.” See id.; see also 16 U.S.C. § 3102.

Wilde is correct that certain “regulations [are] applicable solely to public

lands within such units.” 16 U.S.C. § 3103; see, e.g., 50 C.F.R. §§ 100.10,

100.26(n)(1)(v). But Wilde was not convicted pursuant to any such regulation. 

Instead, Wilde was convicted pursuant to generally applicable “regulations

concerning boating and other activities on or relating to waters located within areas

of the National Park System, including waters subject to the jurisdiction of the

United States.” 16 U.S.C. § 1a-2(h); see also 16 U.S.C. §§ 1, 2; 36 C.F.R.

§ 1.2(a)(3).

2
There can be no dispute that the relevant part of the Yukon River is located

within the geographic boundaries of the Yukon-Charley Rivers National Preserve,

a “unit[] of the National Park System [to] be administered by the Secretary under

the laws governing the administration of such lands . . . .” 16 U.S.C. § 410hh(10);

see also 16 U.S.C. § 3201. Consequently, Wilde was “under the jurisdiction of the

National Park Service,” regardless of whether he was on “public lands” or nonpublic lands. See 16 U.S.C. § 3; Sturgeon v. Masica, No. 13-36165+, Slip op. at

22–23.

AFFIRMED.

3
```

[Congressional Record Volume 141, Number 86 (Tuesday, May 23, 1995)]
[Extensions of Remarks]
[Pages E1097-E1098]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]

                      A TRIBUTE TO ROBERT SESSIONS

                                 ______

                            HON. JERRY LEWIS

                             of california

                    in the house of representatives

                         Tuesday, May 23, 1995
  Mr. LEWIS of California. Mr. Speaker, I would like to bring to your 
attention the untimely passing of a fine man and an outstanding public 
servant, chief of police Robert Sessions of Barstow, CA. Chief 
Sessions, a 28-year member of the department and an inspiring presence 
to the city of Barstow, died on May 20 after a brief battle with 
cancer.
  Bob Sessions was born on March 23, 1940 and received a A.A. degree in 
education from Barstow Community College and a B.S. degree in sociology 
from Chapman College. He also graduated from the FBI's National 
Academy. In 1963, Bob married Carol Dawson and later they adopted two 
children, Jon and Jennifer. Together they moved to Barstow to make 
their home and work for Atchison, Topeka & Santa Fe Railway. Four years 
later, Bob became a reserve officer with the Barstow Police Department 
and was sworn in as a full time peace officer in 1968.
  Over the years, Bob worked his way through the ranks of the Barstow 
Police Department assuming the position of patrol officer, K-9 officer, 
detective, sergeant, lieutenant, and captain. In September 1985 Bob was 
promoted to chief of police. During his tenure, Chief Sessions 
implemented numerous programs and projects including the Drug Abuse 
Resistance and Education [DARE] Program, the Retired Senior Volunteer 
Program [RSVP], the Community Oriented Policing and Problem Solving 
Program, and many others.
  Chief Sessions' involvement in and support for numerous professional 
organizations is well known. He was a past president of the San 
Bernardino County Chief's Association, as well as a member of the 
California Chiefs of Police Association, the International Association 
of Chiefs of Police, the California Peace Officer's Association, and 
many others. In addition, Chief Sessions played an extraordinary and 
active role in our civic and community life as a member of the Church 
of Jesus Christ [[Page E1098]] and Latter Day Saints, and participating 
in the Barstow Rodeo, scouting programs, and the reading program in 
local schools.
  Mr. Speaker, I ask that you join me, our colleagues, and Bob's family 
and many friends in paying tribute to this fine man. Chief Sessions was 
dearly loved and respected by the entire Barstow community and he will 
be greatly missed. Indeed, he touched and protected the lives of many 
people and it is only fitting that the House of Representatives honor 
him today.

                          ____________________
```
```

[Congressional Record Volume 141, Number 84 (Friday, May 19, 1995)]
[Senate]
[Page S7023]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]

                    ORDERS FOR MONDAY, MAY 22, 1995

  Mr. DOMENICI. I ask unanimous consent that when the Senate completes 
its business today, it stand in recess until the hour of 8:30 a.m. on 
Monday, May 22, 1995; that following the prayer the Journal of 
proceedings be deemed approved to date, the time for the two leaders be 
reserved for their use later in the day, and the Senate then resume 
consideration of Senate Concurrent Resolution 13, the concurrent budget 
resolution.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. Is there objection? Without objection, it is 
so ordered.

                          ____________________
```
Exhibit 34.8



|     |  |                                                                                                                              
|---- |  | -----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
|LOGO |  | Plante & Moran, PLLC
10 South Riverside Plaza 9th floor Chicago, IL 60606
Tel: 312.207.1040 Fax:
312.207.1066 Plantemoran.com

Report of Independent Registered Public Accounting Firm

To the Board of Directors

National Tax Search, LLC

We have examined National Tax Search, LLCs (the Company) compliance with the Securities and Exchange Commissions Regulation AB
Servicing Criteria, set forth in Item 1122(d) of the Security and Exchange Commissions Regulation AB for the National Tax Search TaxQ system (the Platform) as of and for the year ended December 31, 2016. The Company has
determined that only certain servicing criteria, 1122(d)(l)(ii), 1122(d)1(iv), 1122(d)2(ii), 1122(d)2(v), 1122(d)2(vi), 1122(d)(4)(xi), and 1122(d)(4)(xii), are applicable to the activities performed by it with respect to the Platform covered by
this report. The Company has determined that the remaining servicing criteria set forth in Item 1122(d) of the SEC Regulation AB are not applicable to the activities performed by it with respect to the Platform covered by this report.

Management is responsible for the Companys compliance with those servicing criteria. Our responsibility is to express an opinion on managements
assertion about the Companys compliance with the servicing criteria based on our examination. Our examination was conducted in accordance with standards of the Public Company Accounting Oversight Board (United States) and, accordingly,
included examining, on a test basis, evidence about the Companys compliance with the applicable servicing criteria and performing such other procedures as we considered necessary in the circumstances. Our examination included a selection of a
sample of transactions and compliance activities related to the Platform during the examination period and determining whether the Company processed those transactions and performed those activities in compliance with the servicing criteria. Our
testing of selected transactions and compliance activities was limited to calculations, reports, and activities performed by the Company during the period covered by this report. Our procedures did not include determining whether errors may have
occurred prior to our tests that may have affected the balances or amounts calculated or reported by the Company during the period covered by this report for the selected transactions or any other transactions. We believe that our examination
provides a reasonable basis for our opinion. Our examination does not provide a legal determination on the Companys compliance with the servicing criteria.

In our opinion, managements assertion that the Company complied with the aforementioned servicing criteria as of and for the year ended
December 31, 2016 for the Platform is fairly stated in all material respects.



LOGO

Chicago, IL

January 27,
2017



LOGO
#### ANDREW D. HORUN v. THE WATCHUNG HILLS REGIONAL HIGH SCHOOL BOARD OF EDUCATION.

February 28, 1984.

Petition for certification denied.
EXHIBIT 32.1



March 22, 2024



Via EDGAR



Securities and Exchange Commission

100 F Street, N.E.

Washington, D.C. 20549



Re: Certification pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, as adopted
pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002



Ladies and Gentlemen:



In connection with the Annual Report of Permianville
Royalty Trust (the “Trust”) on Form 10-K for the year ended December 31, 2023 as filed with the Securities and Exchange
Commission on the date hereof (the “Report”), the undersigned, not in its individual capacity but solely as the Trustee of
the Trust, certifies pursuant to 18 U.S.C. 1350, as adopted pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that to its
knowledge:



| | (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
| | --- | ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------



| | (2) | The information contained in the Report fairly presents, in all material respects, the financial condition and results of operations
of the Trust.
| | --- | --------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------



The above certification is furnished solely pursuant
to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002 (18 U.S.C. 1350) and is not being filed as part of the Report or as a separate
disclosure document.



|The Bank of
    New York Mellon Trust Company, N.A., Trustee
    for Permianville Royalty Trust |                                     
|----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- | ------------------------------------
|                                                                                                |                                     
|By:                                                                                             | /s/
    SARAH NEWELL                
|                                                                                                | Sarah Newell                        
|                                                                                                | Vice
    President and Trust Officer
IB 

House Calendar No. 24 

110TH CONGRESS 

1ST SESSION H. R. 1045 

[Report No. 110–46] 

To designate the Federal building located at 210 Walnut Street in Des 

Moines, Iowa, as the ‘‘Neal Smith Federal Building’’. 

IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES 

FEBRUARY 14, 2007 

Mr. BOSWELL (for himself and Mr. REGULA) introduced the following bill; 

which was referred to the Committee on Transportation and Infrastructure 

MARCH 12, 2007 

Additional sponsors: Mr. BRALEY of Iowa, Mr. LOEBSACK, and Mr. LATHAM

MARCH 12, 2007 

Referred to the House Calendar and ordered to be printed 

A BILL 

To designate the Federal building located at 210 Walnut 

Street in Des Moines, Iowa, as the ‘‘Neal Smith Federal 

Building’’. 

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

mstockstill on PROD1PC66 with BILLS

2 

•HR 1045 RH

1 SECTION 1. DESIGNATION. 

2 The Federal building located at 210 Walnut Street 

3 in Des Moines, Iowa, shall be known and designated as 

4 the ‘‘Neal Smith Federal Building’’. 

5 SEC. 2. REFERENCES. 

6 Any reference in a law, map, regulation, document, 

7 paper, or other record of the United States to the Federal 

8 building referred to in section 1 shall be deemed to be 

9 a reference to the ‘‘Neal Smith Federal Building’’. 

mstockstill on PROD1PC66 with BILLS

mstockstill on PROD1PC66 with BILLS

House Calendar No. 24 

110TH CONGRESS 

1ST SESSION H. R. 1045 

[Report No. 110

–46] 

A BILL 

To designate the Federal building located at 210 

Smith Federal Building’’. Walnut Street in Des Moines, Iowa, as the ‘‘Neal 

MARCH 12, 2007 

Referred to the House Calendar and ordered to be 

printed 

mstockstill on PROD1PC66 with BILLS
News United States Air Force
 F-15 crashes, pilot safe on groundPublished Oct. 8, 2014
                **ROYAL AIR FORCE STATION LAKENHEATH, England (AFNS) --**
                An F-15D Eagle from the 48th Fighter Wing at Royal Air Force Station Lakenheath, England crashed at approximately 3:28 p.m. (10:28 a.m. EST) today, while conducting a combat training mission.
One person was on board the aircraft at the time and ejected safely. A board of qualified officers will investigate the accident.
Additional details will be provided as soon as they become available.Lakenheath 



USAFE 



England 



crash 



F-15 Eagle Related Links
        F-15 Eagle
                                March 14, 2005
                                The F-15 Eagle is an all-weather, extremely maneuverable, tactical fighter designed to permit the Air Force to gain and maintain air supremacy over the battlefield.