alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
N O T FO R PUB L ICAT IO N UNITED STATES C OUR T OF APPEALS FOR THE NINTH C IR C UIT JIE LI ZHEN, Pe titione r, v. ER IC H. HOLDER , Jr., Attorne y Ge ne ra l, R

e sponde n t . No. 12-71868 Age n c y No. A088-459-745 M EM O R ANDUM *

On Pe tition for Re vie w of a n Orde r of the B oa rd of Im m igration Appe a ls Subm itte d Oc tobe r 14, 2014 * * B e fore : LEAVY, GOULD, a n d B ER Z ON, C irc uit Judge s . Jie Li Zhe n, a

native and c itiz e n of C hina , pe titions for re vie w of the B oa rd of Im m igration Appe a l s’ (“ B IA” ) orde r dism issing his a ppe a l from

an im m i gration judge ’ s de c ision de ny ing his a pplic at ion for a s y lum , withholding of re m o va l, a nd prote c tion unde r the C onve ntion Against Torture(“ C AT” ). Our jurisdic tion is 

# FIL ED OCT 20 2014 M OLLY C. DW Y ER, CLERK U . S . CO URT O F APPEALS

* This disposition is not a ppropria te for public at ion a

nd is not pre c e de nt e xc e pt a s provide d

by 9th C ir. R . 36-3. ** The pa

ne l una nim ously c onc lude s this c a se is suita ble for de c ision without oral a

rgum e nt. Se e Fe d. R . App. P. 34(a)(2).gove rne d

by 8 U.S.C . § 1252. W e re v ie w for substa ntia l e vide nc e the a ge nc y ’ s fa c t ua l findings, a

pply ing the sta

nda rds gove rning a dve rse c re dibility de te rm i nations c re ate d

by the REAL ID Ac t. S

hre s tha v . Holde r , 590 F.3d 1034, 1039-40 (9th C ir. 2010). W e de ny in pa rt a n d dismiss in pa

rt the pe tition for re vie w. Substa ntia l e v i de nc e supports the B IA’ s a dve rse c re dibility de t e rm i nation, ba se d on the inc onsiste nc ie s be twe e n Zhe n’ s te stim ony and his a sy lum

a pplic ation re ga rding whe the r he wa s e ve r arre ste d, de ta ine d, a nd be ate n by the polic e in C hina . Se e id. at

1046-47 (“ Although insiste nc ie s no longe r ne e d to go to the he art of the pe titione r’ s c la im , whe n a n inc onsiste nc y

is a t the he art of the c la im it doubtle ss is of gre at we ight.” ). W e la c k jurisdic tion to c onside r Zhe n’ s c onte ntions m a de for the first tim e in his opening brie f that he m ay not ha ve be e n fam ilia r with thec onte nt of his de c l aration or tha t it m ay have be e n m i s-tra

nsla te d . Se e Barron v . Ashc roft , 358 F.3d 674, 677-78 (9th C ir. 2004) (c ourt la c k s jurisdic tion to c onside r issue s tha t ha ve not be e n e xha

uste d a dm inistra

tive ly ). In the a bse nc e of c re dible te stim ony , Zhe n’ s a sy l um and withholding of re

m o va l c la im s fa il. Se e Farah v . Ashc roft , 348 F.3d 1153, 1156 (9th C ir. 2003). Zhe n’ s C A T c la im

a lso fa ils be c a

use it is ba se d on the sa

m e te stim ony

the B IA found not c re dible , a nd the re c o rd doe s not othe rwise c om pe l the c onc l usion

1 2 - 7 1 8 6 8 2that

it is m o re like l y

tha n not tha t he will betorture d if re turne d to C hina . Se e id. at 1156-57. PE T IT IO N FO R RE V IE WDE NIE D in par t; DISM ISSE D in par t.

1 2 - 7 1 8 6 8 3
AGREEMENT
  IDENIX PHARMACEUTICALS, INC.
  PROF. PAOLO LA COLLA,




---



##### 



Affiliate
 First Commercial Sale
 Net Sales




---



##### 



[**] Patents
 Products
 Territory
 Valid Claim




---



##### 



Payments
 Reports   milestone payments   Net Sales   royalties
 Records. Audit .




---



##### 








---



##### 



Idenix Pharmaceuticals, Inc.By:
    /s/ Jean-Pierre SommadossiName:
    Jean-Pierre SommadossiTitle:
    Chief Executive Officer
    12/03/2008
    
 



DateProf. Paolo La CollaBy:
    /s/ Paolo La CollaProf. Paolo La CollaTitle:02/12/2008Date




---



##### 



Exhibit A
 [**] PATENT CASES
 Idenix
Ref. No.
    
    Type
Related/
Country
    
    Serial No.
    
    Filed
    
    Title
    
    Status
To the 14th Courtof Appeals,

Frank Hudson

p o box 2373

Athens Tx. 75751

903-275-2421

I am writing in regards to an address change due to change and unfortunate situation of

attorneyWilliam Maxwell..(see letter)

I Frank Hudson, the planiff in this case am requesting that any and all descions made on

case # 14-14-00073 be sent to address above..

if you have any question please don't hesitate to call me at number above.

Thank you

Frank Hudson

• •• \.
William Maxwell, P.L.L.C.

15821FM529, Box 298 Houston, Ttexas 77095

Ifetepfcone (713) 739-0663 Fax (713)904-2474

E-Maii Address: iitfttffiwffliammaiwritoltom

August 22,2014

Frank Hudson

P.O. Box 2373 '

Athens, TX

RE: Case No. 14-14-00073; Frank Hudson vLuther Forest; Inthe 14th Court ofAppeals

Dear Frank,

Dueto sudden and personal reasons beyond his control, Mr. Maxwell has beenforced to

closed his law practice." He will not be able to continue to represent you in the above

matter. You will need to find a new attorney. Please letme know if you object. We will

be filing a Motion to Withdraw as soon as we hear from you. Enclosed are your files.

Please letmeknow ifthere is anything else we candoforyou.

Regards,

-fetnaij

Vivian Huntsman

Executive Assistant ~
##### 



Exhibit 99.1

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 on Form 10-Q of Action Performance
Companies, Inc. (the Company) for the quarter ended December 31, 2002 as filed
with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the Report), I,
Fred W. Wagenhals, Chairman of the Board, President, and Chief Executive
Officer of the Company, certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. § 1350, as adopted
pursuant to § 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 (15 U.S.C.
78m(a) or 78o(d)); and  
| | --- |  | ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
|
| | (2) |  | The information contained in the Report fairly presents, in
all material respects, the financial condition and results of
operations of the Company.

|                                                                                                                       
|-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
|/s/ Fred W. Wagenhals

Fred W. Wagenhals
Chairman of the Board, President, and Chief Executive Officer
January 31, 2003
Exhibit 32.2

Certification of
Principal Financial OfficerPursuant to U.S.C. Section 1350As Adopted Pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of
2002

I,
John E. Yetter, Vice President and Chief Financial Officer of Derma Sciences, Inc., hereby
certify that the Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q for the period ended March 31, 2009 of
Derma Sciences, Inc. (the Form 10-Q) upon my best knowledge and belief fully
complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of
1934 and that the information contained in the Form 10-Q fairly presents, in all material
respects, the financial condition and results of operations of Derma Sciences, Inc.

|                     |                                                                                                              | 
|-------------------- | ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------ | 
|Dated:  May 15, 2009 | /s/ John E. Yetter                                                                                           | 
|                     | John E. Yetter, CPA
        Vice President and Chief Financial Officer
        (Principal Financial Officer) |
Exhibit 32.1

CERTIFICATION OF CHIEF EXECUTIVE OFFICERAND CHIEF FINANCIAL OFFICERPURSUANT TO 18 U.S.C. SECTION 1350,AS ADOPTED PURSUANT TOSECTION 906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002

I, Michael Bruce Hall, Chief Executive Officer and Chief Financial Officer, certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, asadopted pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that the Annual Report on Form 10-KSB of Mas Acquisition XIXCorp., for the annual period ended June 30, 2004 fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) or 15(d) of the SecuritiesExchange Act of 1934 and that the information contained in the Annual Report on Form 10-KSB fairly presents in all materialrespects the financial condition and results of operations of Mas Acquisition XIX Corp.

By:/s/ Michael Bruce Hall          Michael Bruce Hall, Chief Financial Officer,          Chief Executive Officer, President & Director

Date:  October 28, 2004
EXHIBIT 32.1

                            SECTION 906 CERTIFICATION



<PAGE>



                                  Exhibit 32.1



                  CERTIFICATION OF PRINCIPAL EXECUTIVE OFFICER
                       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  accompanying  annual  report  on Form  10-K of  Medina
International  Holdings,  Inc.  for the year ended  April 30,  2011,  I,  Daniel
Medina,  President  of  Medina  International  Holdings,  Inc.,  hereby  certify
pursuant to 18 U.S.C.  Section 1350,  as adopted  pursuant to Section 906 of the
Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, to my knowledge, that:

a)   such annual report on Form 10-K of Medina International  Holdings, Inc. for
     the year ended April 30, 2011,  fully  complies  with the  requirements  of
     section 13(a) or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934; and

b)   the  information  contained  in such  annual  report on Form 10-K of Medina
     International  Holdings,  Inc.  for the year ended April 30,  2011,  fairly
     presents, in all material respects,  the financial condition and results of
     operations of Medina International Holdings, Inc.


Date:  August 1, 2010

                           /s/ Daniel Medina
                               -------------------
                               Daniel Medina,
                               President



This  certification  accompanies  the  Report  pursuant  to  Section  906 of the
Sarbanes-Oxley  Act of 2002 and shall not,  except to the extent required by the
Sarbanes-Oxley  Act of 2002,  be deemed  filed by the  Company  for  purposes of
Section 18 of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended.
Order filed July 11, 2013

In The 

## Fourteenth Court of Appeals

____________ NO. 14

- 13

- 00463

- CV

____________ JAWED MANJLAI , Appellant

V.
NABILA HAMID MANJLAI, Appellee

On Appeal from the 312th District Court

Harris County, Texas Trial Court Cause N o. 2011

- 44182



### O R D E R
The clerk’s record was filed July 2, 2013. Our review has determined that a relevant item has been omitted from the clerk's record. See Tex. R. App. P. 34.5(c). The record does not contain Jawed Manjlai’s Motion for Judgment Notwi thstanding the Verdict, and in the Alternative, Motion for a New Trial filed on or about March 14, 2013. (The record contains the response to the motion filed April 26, 2013.)2

The Harris County District Clerk is directed to file a supplemental clerk’s

reco rd on or before July 31, 2013 , containing Jawed Manjlai’s Motion for Judgment Notwithstanding the Verdict, and in the Alternative, Motion for a New Trial filed on or about March 14, 2013

. If the omitted item is not part of the case file, the district clerk is directed to file a supplemental clerk’s record containing a certified statement that the omitted item is not a part of the case file.

PER CURIAM
<PAGE>
                                                                    Exhibit 99.1

                    Certification of Chief Executive Officer
                                   Pursuant to
                              U.S.C. Section 1350,
                             as Adopted Pursuant to
                  Section 906 of The Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002

      I, Thomas M. Nolette, Acting Chief Executive Officer of MCK
Communications, Inc., do 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 my
knowledge:

      (i)   MCK Communications' Annual Report on Form 10-K for the fiscal year
            ended April 30, 2003, (the "Report") fully complies with the
            requirements of Section 13(a) or Section 15(d), as applicable, 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 MCK Communications.

                                             Dated: June 26, 2003
                                             /s/ Thomas M. Nolette
                                             -----------------------------------
                                             Thomas M. Nolette
                                             Acting Chief Executive Officer
DISTRICT COURT OF APPEAL OF THE STATE OF FLORIDA

FOURTH DISTRICT

VENTURE CONSTRUCTION GROUP OF FLORIDA, INC. a/a/o

HOWARD FEARN and FELICE SAMUEL,

Appellant,

v.

FEDERATED NATIONAL INSURANCE COMPANY,

Appellee.

No. 4D20-256

[May 27, 2021]

Appeal from the Circuit Court for the Nineteenth Judicial Circuit, 

Martin County; William L. Roby, Judge; L.T. Case No. 18000325CAAXMX.

Nicholas A. Shannin and Carol B. Shannin of Shannin Law Firm, P.A., 

Orlando, for appellant.

Lauren J. Smith of Luks, Santaniello, Petrillo & Cohen, Stuart, for 

appellee.

PER CURIAM.

Affirmed.

WARNER, DAMOORGIAN, JJ., and ROBINSON, MICHAEL A., Associate Judge, 

concur.

* * *

Not final until disposition of timely filed motion for rehearing.
#### Owens *v.*Hudson.

Void Execution Sale.

The levy of an execution by a jailer when it is directed to the sheriff is void.

Same.

The *venditio exponas*directing the sheriff to sell the property illegally levied on by the jailor was also illegal.

Same — Estoppel.

Appellants’ surrender of his land to the jailer to sell in lieu of the personal property was without consideration, and the result of illegal coercion. The principal of estoppel does not apply to a surrender coerced by a void execution or levy. The sale and conveyance was illegal and void.

APPEAL PROM PULASKI CIRCUIT COURT.

June *21,*1866.

Opinion op the Court by

Judge Robertson :

If the jailer was the proper officer to levy the executions ought to have been directed to *him.*He had no legal right to levy an execution directed to- the sheriff. His levy on a slave and other personalty was, therefore, void. The *venditio exponas*directing the sheriff to sell that property illegally levied on by the jailer was also illegal; and, therefore, according to the principle recognized in Geoghegan v. Ditto, 2 Metc. 437, Hudson’s surrender of his land to the jailer to sell in lieu of the personalty was without consideration and the result of illegal coercion. It waived only past irregularities, not illegal and void acts. The principle of estoppel does not apply to a surrender coerced by a void execution or levy.

Moreover the jailer’s return of the sale of the land not only does not import but excludes the implication that he offered, as it was his duty tó do, any less quantity than the whole tract, worth several thousand dollars to satisfy the execution for less than $500.

We are, therefore, of the opinion that the sale and conveyance were illegal and void, and the verdict and judgment consequently right.

But, under all the circumstances, we think that Owens should hold an equitable lien on the land for securing his debt and 10 *299per cent, interest thereon which redemption would have cost. He seems to have acted in good faith, and Hudson appears to have either fraudulently or negligently trifled with his own as well as Owens’ rights; and, therefore, the 10 per cent, is considered but equitable. The equitable lien herein recognized may be in form or by approximate proceedings.

Judgment affirmed.
#### Maynard Steadman et al. *v.*Samuel Rodgers.

Verdict of Jury — Contrariety of Evidence.

Where there is a contrariety of evidence the verdict of the jury must stand, unless the court erred in giving or refusing instructions.

APPEAL EROM GREENUP CIRCUIT COURT.

September 24, 1866.

Opinion oe the Court by

Judge Williams:

This is an action upon the judgment of an Ohio court, obtained upon the service of process, and before appellee can escape from its consequence he must show affirmatively why judgment should not be rendered thereon by a court of this State; the court below, therefore, correctly determined that defendant had the affirmative.

Appellee alleged that the judgment had been obtained by fraud, that he was insolvent at the bringing of the suit in Ohio, and compromised with the plaintiff’s attorney by passing him a note *206on Kiggs for $500, a note on Wetstz for $100, and his own note for $72, and that thereupon the suit was to be dismissed and that his counsel was discharged from the case, but that afterward plaintiff’s counsel, in violation of this agreement, took judgment against him.

Upon this issue there was some contrariety of evidence but the jury have found for defendant and their finding must stand unless the court erred in giving or refusing instructions. It is contended by appellants’ counsel that their Ohio counsel had no right to compromise the claim and take anything but money.

The general duty of an attorney-at-law is to sue and collect his clients’ claims, and not to compromise without special authority; but it is not necessary in this case to determine that where the clients live at a distance from their debtor and their attorney, and when the debtor is insolvent that the power to compromise and secure the debt may not be implied, or presumed, because, however this may be, the attorney has not the right by an agreement of this kind to delude the defendant from presenting his defense, and after wraiving the agreed consideration, without any notice to the defendant, that the plaintiffs repudiate the arrangement with their attorney to proceed to judgment.

If they claim the benefit of such judgment obtained by the attorney making such arrangement they should be held responsible for his conduct in the obtainment of the judgment.

Had they notified appellee that such arrangement was repudiated and that they should still seek their judgment the judgment would then have been fairly obtained.

"Whether upon another suit seeking an original judgment on the original claim this arrangement with appellants’ attorney can be pleaded as payment need not now be decided; the only issue in this case was that the judgment was obtained by fraud, and we think the appellants are not entitled under the issue, proof, and finding to enforcement of their Ohio judgment obtained under the circumstances developed.

As the instructions given by the court below accord with this opinion, and those refused do not, the judgment is affirmed.
EXHIBIT 32-1



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 on Form 10-Q of WNC CALIFORNIA HOUSING TAX CREDITS III, L.P.; (the “Partnership”) for the quarter
ended September 30, 2012 as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the “Report”), and
pursuant to 18 U.S.C., section 1350, as adopted pursuant to section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, I, Wilfred N. Cooper,
Jr., President and Chief Executive Officer of WNC & Associates, Inc., general partner of the Partnership’s general partner,
hereby certify 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 result of operations of the Partnership.
| | -- | -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------



|/s/ WILFRED N. COOPER, JR.                                      | 
|--------------------------------------------------------------- | 
|Wilfred N. Cooper, Jr.                                          | 
|President and Chief Executive Officer of WNC & Associates, Inc.
|                                                                | 
|Date: November 13, 2012                                         |
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<ARTICLE> 9
<CIK> 0000892158
<NAME> LAUREL CAPITAL GROUP, INC.
<MULTIPLIER> 1,000
       
<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   6-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          JUN-30-1998
<PERIOD-START>                             JUL-01-1997
<PERIOD-END>                               DEC-31-1997
<CASH>                                           1,182
<INT-BEARING-DEPOSITS>                           3,273
<FED-FUNDS-SOLD>                                     0
<TRADING-ASSETS>                                     0
<INVESTMENTS-HELD-FOR-SALE>                     27,768
<INVESTMENTS-CARRYING>                          21,614
<INVESTMENTS-MARKET>                            21,739
<LOANS>                                        147,740
<ALLOWANCE>                                      1,821
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                 213,379
<DEPOSITS>                                     173,969
<SHORT-TERM>                                     1,900
<LIABILITIES-OTHER>                              3,823
<LONG-TERM>                                     11,136
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                            23
<OTHER-SE>                                      22,528
<TOTAL-LIABILITIES-AND-EQUITY>                 213,379
<INTEREST-LOAN>                                  5,869
<INTEREST-INVEST>                                1,308
<INTEREST-OTHER>                                   644
<INTEREST-TOTAL>                                 7,821
<INTEREST-DEPOSIT>                               3,778
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                               4,055
<INTEREST-INCOME-NET>                            3,766
<LOAN-LOSSES>                                        9
<SECURITIES-GAINS>                                  46
<EXPENSE-OTHER>                                  1,916
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                  2,290
<INCOME-PRE-EXTRAORDINARY>                       2,290
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                     1,449
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                      .67
<EPS-DILUTED>                                      .63
<YIELD-ACTUAL>                                    3.08
<LOANS-NON>                                        809
<LOANS-PAST>                                         0
<LOANS-TROUBLED>                                     0
<LOANS-PROBLEM>                                      0
<ALLOWANCE-OPEN>                                 1,943
<CHARGE-OFFS>                                      144
<RECOVERIES>                                        13
<ALLOWANCE-CLOSE>                                1,821
<ALLOWANCE-DOMESTIC>                             1,821
<ALLOWANCE-FOREIGN>                                  0
<ALLOWANCE-UNALLOCATED>                              0
        

</TABLE>
# Sitemap

## December 1999

- Home
- Sitemap
- 1999
- December 1999

            - 01
            - 02
            - 10
            - 17
            - 22