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NOT FOR PUBLICATION

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

 FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT

FELICIANO GARCIA-LOPEZ,

 Petitioner,

 v.

ERIC H. HOLDER, Jr., Attorney General,

 Respondent.

No. 11-73902

Agency No. A097-126-099

MEMORANDUM*

On Petition for Review of an Order of the

Board of Immigration Appeals

Submitted July 22, 2014** 

Before: GOODWIN, CANBY, and CALLAHAN, Circuit Judges.

 Feliciano Garcia-Lopez, a native and citizen of Guatemala, petitions for

review of the Board of Immigration Appeals’ (“BIA”) order dismissing his appeal

from an immigration judge’s decision denying his application for asylum and

withholding of removal. We have jurisdiction under 8 U.S.C. § 1252. We review

FILED

JUL 30 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.

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

without oral argument. See Fed. R. App. P. 34(a)(2).
de novo questions of law and review for substantial evidence the agency’s factual

findings. Wakkary v. Holder, 558 F.3d 1049, 1056 (9th Cir. 2006). We deny the

petition for review. 

The record does not compel the conclusion that Garcia-Lopez established

changed or extraordinary circumstances to excuse his untimely asylum application.

See 8 C.F.R. §§ 1208.4(a)(4), (5); see also Ramadan v. Gonzales, 479 F.3d 646,

657-58 (9th Cir. 2007) (per curiam). Accordingly, his asylum claim fails.

Substantial evidence supports the BIA’s determination that the harassment,

robbery, and threats Garcia-Lopez experienced in Guatemala, even considered

cumulatively, did not rise to the level of persecution. See Wakkary, 558 F.3d at

1059-60. Thus, Garcia-Lopez is not entitled to a presumption of future

persecution. See Molina-Estrada v. INS, 239 F.3d 1089, 1094 (9th Cir. 2002). 

Substantial evidence also supports the BIA’s determination that Garcia-Lopez

failed to demonstrate a clear probability of future persecution on account of a

protected ground. See Hoxha v. Ashcroft, 319 F.3d 1179, 1184-85 (9th Cir. 2003)

(evidence did not compel finding that it was more likely than not petitioner would

be persecuted if returned); Sangha v. INS, 103 F.3d 1482, 1486 (9th Cir. 1997). 

Thus, Garcia-Lopez’s withholding of removal claim also fails. 

PETITION FOR REVIEW DENIED.

2 11-73902
EXHIBIT 32.2





CERTIFICATION


PURSUANT TO 18 U.S.C. SECTION 1350





In connection with the Quarterly Report of Sparta Commercial Services, Inc. (the “Company”) on Form 10-Q for the quarterly period ended January 31, 2011, as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date therein specified (the “Report”), I, Anthony W. Adler, as Principal Financial Officer of the Company, hereby certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, that:





(1)
The Report fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934; and





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





Date:  March 22, 2011





/s/ Anthony W. AdlerAnthony W. AdlerPrincipal Financial Officer
I 

118TH CONGRESS 

1ST SESSION H. R. 1896 

To provide for a limitation on availability of funds for House of 

Representatives Modernization Initiatives Account for fiscal year 2024. 

IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES 

MARCH 29, 2023 

Mr. BIGGS (for himself, Mr. ROSENDALE, Mr. GAETZ, Mr. GOOD of Virginia, 

Mr. ROY, and Mr. CRANE) introduced the following bill; which was referred to the Committee on House Administration 

A BILL 

To provide for a limitation on availability of funds for House 

of Representatives Modernization Initiatives Account for 

fiscal year 2024. 

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

3 SECTION 1. LIMITATION ON AVAILABILITY OF FUNDS FOR 

4 HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES MODERNIZA5 TION INITIATIVES ACCOUNT FOR FISCAL 

6 YEAR 2024. 

7 Notwithstanding any other provision of the law, 

8 amounts authorized to be appropriated or otherwise avail9 able for House of Representatives Modernization InitiaVerDate Sep 11 2014 03:15 Apr 20, 2023 Jkt 039200 PO 00000 Frm 00001 Fmt 6652 Sfmt 6201 E:\BILLS\H1896.IH H1896

pbinns on DSKJLVW7X2PROD with $$_JOB
2 

•HR 1896 IH

1 tives Account for fiscal year 2024 may not exceed 

2 $2,000,000. 

Æ 


pbinns on DSKJLVW7X2PROD with $$_JOB
#### In the Matter of HAWAIIAN AIRLINES, INC., Chapter 11 bankruptcy, Debtor. Robert C. Konop, Appellant, v. Hawaiian Airlines, Inc., a Hawaii Corporation, Appellee.

No. 09-16079.

United States Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit.

Submitted Oct. 19, 2010.*

Filed Oct. 27, 2010.

Robert C. Konop, Playa Del Rey, CA, pro se.

Bruce Bennett, Esquire, Sidney P. Levinson, Esquire, Joshua M. Mester, Hennigan Bennett & Dorman, LLP, Los Angeles, CA, Tom Edward Roesser, Esquire, Carlsmith Ball LLP, Honolulu, HI, for Appellee.

Before: O’SCANNLAIN, TALLMAN, and BEA, Circuit Judges.

*

 The panel unanimously concludes this case is suitable for decision without oral argument. *See*Fed. R. App. P. 34(a)(2). Accordingly, Konop’s motion to have oral argument held in Pasadena, California, is denied.

MEMORANDUM **

Robert C. Konop appeals pro se from the district court’s judgment affirming the bankruptcy court’s order sustaining Hawaiian Airlines’ Second Supplemental Objection to Claim No. 72. We have jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. § 158(d). We review decisions of the bankruptcy court independently without deference to the district court’s determinations. *Leichty v. Neary (In re Strand),*375 F.3d 854, 857 (9th Cir.2004). We affirm.

The bankruptcy court did not err in determining that it had jurisdiction to decide the Second Supplemental Objection to Claim No. 72. *See Rains v. Flinn (In re Rains),*428 F.3d 893, 904 (9th Cir.2005) (bankruptcy court retains jurisdiction as long as it does not expand or alter the prior order that is on appeal).

Further, the bankruptcy court did not err in determining that James Gardner was a “user” under the Stored Communi*243cations Act (“SCA”), who authorized James Davis to access Konop’s website. *See*18 U.S.C. § 2510(18). Because liability is not triggered by “conduct authorized” by a “user” under the SCA, the bankruptcy court did not err by disallowing damages alleged in Claim No. 72 based on Davis’s access to Konop’s website using Gardner’s password. *See*18 U.S.C. § 2701(c)(2).

Konop’s remaining contentions are unpersuasive.

Konop’s request for judicial notice is denied.

AFFIRMED.

**

 This disposition is not appropriate for publication and is not precedent except as provided by 9th Cir. R. 36-3.
_________________________________________ 

 

 

Order Michigan Supreme Court

Lansing, Michigan 

February 27, 2007 Clifford W. Taylor,

 Chief Justice 

132546 Michael F. Cavanagh 

Elizabeth A. Weaver 

Marilyn Kelly 

Maura D. Corrigan 

PEOPLE OF THE STATE OF MICHIGAN,

Plaintiff-Appellee, 

Robert P. Young, Jr. 

Stephen J. Markman,

 Justices 

v SC: 132546 

 COA: 271933 

Allegan CC: 05-014294-FH 

SCOTT BRIAN PATRICK,

Defendant-Appellant. 

_________________________________________/ 

On order of the Court, the application for leave to appeal the October 2, 2006 

order 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. 

s0220 

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. 

February 27, 2007 

 Clerk
Exhibit 32.1

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

      I, Benton H Wilcoxon, certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, as
adopted pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that this
Amended Quarterly Report of Composite Technology Corporation on Form 10-Q/A for
the period ended March 31, 2005 fully complies with the requirements of Section
13(a) or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 and that information
contained in such Form 10-Q/A fairly presents in all material respects the
financial condition and results of operations of Composite Technology
Corporation.

Date: May 31, 2006


By: /s/ Benton H Wilcoxon
Benton H Wilcoxon
Chief Executive Officer and
Acting Chief Financial Officer
#### Golden Gate Yacht Club, Appellant, v Société Nautique de Genève, Respondent, and Club Nautico Español de Vela, Intervenor-Defendant.

Submitted January 20, 2009;

decided February 11, 2009

Motion by Royal Thames Yacht Club Limited et al. for leave to file a brief amici curiae on the appeal herein dismissed as untimely *(see*Rules of Ct of Appeals [22 NYCRR] § 500.23).
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 Health and Human Services

###### National Institutes of Health

Pursuant to section 10(d) of the Federal Advisory Committee Act, as amended (5 U.S.C. App.), notice is hereby given of the following meeting.

The meeting will be closed to the public in accordance with the provisions set forth in sections 552b(c)(4) and 552b(c)(6), Title 5 U.S.C., as amended. The grant applications and the discussions could disclose confidential trade secrets or commercial property such as patentable material, and personal information concerning individuals associated with the grant applications, the disclosure of which would constitute a clearly unwarranted invasion of personal privacy.

*Name of Committee:*                         National Institute of Neurological Disorders and Stroke Initial Review Group; Neurological Sciences and Disorders C.                    

*Date:*                         February 26-27, 2015.                    

*Time:*                         8:00 a.m. to 6:00 p.m.                    

*Agenda:*                         To review and evaluate grant applications.                    

*Place:*                         Embassy Suites Alexandria, 1900 Diagonal Road, Alexandria, Virginia 22314.                    

*Contact Person:*                         William C. Benzing, Ph.D., Scientific Review Officer, Scientific Review Branch, Division of Extramural Research, NINDS/NIH/DHHS/Neuroscience Center, 6001 Executive Boulevard, Suite 3208, MSC 9529, Bethesda, MD 20892-9529, 301-496-0660,                         *benzingw@mail.nih.gov.*

(Catalogue of Federal Domestic Assistance Program Nos. 93.853, Clinical Research Related to Neurological Disorders; 93.854, Biological Basis Research in the Neurosciences, National Institutes of Health, HHS) 

Dated: December 30, 2014.

Carolyn Baum,

Program Analyst, Office of Federal Advisory Committee Policy.

[FR Doc. 2014-30876 Filed 1-5-15; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 4140-01-P
EXHIBIT 31.2CertificationI, James Linesch, certify that:1. I have reviewed this annual report on Form 10-KSB of AdStar, Inc.; 2. Based on my knowledge, this report does not contain any untrue statement of amaterial fact or omit to state a material fact necessary to make the statementsmade, in light of the circumstances under which such statements were made, notmisleading with respect to the period covered by this report; 3. Based on my knowledge, the financial statements, and other financial informationincluded in this report, fairly present in all material respects the financialcondition, results of operations and cash flows of the small business issuer as of,and for, the periods presented in this report; 4. The small business issuer’s other certifying officers and I are responsible forestablishing and maintaining disclosure controls and procedures (as defined inExchange Act Rules 13a-15(e) and 15d-15-(e)) for the small business issuer andhave: a. Designed such disclosure controls and procedures, orcaused such disclosure controls and procedures to bedesigned under our supervision, to ensure thatmaterial information relating to the small businessissuer, including its consolidated subsidiaries, ismade known to us by others within those entities,particularly during the period in which this report isbeing prepared;  b. Evaluated the effectiveness of the small businessissuer’s disclosure controls and procedures andpresented in this report our conclusions about theeffectiveness of the disclosure controls andprocedures, as of the end of the period covered bythis report based on such evaluation; and  c. Disclosed in this report any change in the smallbusiness issuer’s internal control over financialreporting that occurred during the small businessissuer’s most recent fiscal quarter (the smallbusiness issuer’s fourth fiscal quarter in the case ofan annual report) that has materially affected, or isreasonably likely to materially affect, the smallbusiness issuer’s internal control over financialreporting; and5. The small business issuer’s other certifying officer(s) and I have disclosed, basedon our most recent evaluation of internal control over financial reporting, to thesmall business issuer’s auditors and the audit committee of the small businessissuer’s board of directors (or persons performing the equivalent functions):
 

 
 a. All significant deficiencies and material weaknessesin the design or operation of internal control overfinancial reporting which are reasonably likely toadversely affect the small business issuer’s abilityto record, process, summarize and report financialinformation; and  b. Any fraud, whether or not material, that involvesmanagement or other employees who have a significantrole in the small business issuer’s internal controlover financial reporting.Date: March 30, 2007                                                                              /s/ James Linesch   James Linesch   Chief Financial Officer
<TABLE> <S> <C>


<ARTICLE>                           5
<RESTATED>
<MULTIPLIER>                        1,000

       

<S>                                 <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                       3-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                   SEP-30-1997
<PERIOD-END>                        JUN-30-1997
<CASH>                              91,598
<SECURITIES>                        0
<RECEIVABLES>                       178,396
<ALLOWANCES>                        4,165
<INVENTORY>                         179,178
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                    461,186
<PP&E>                              354,940
<DEPRECIATION>                      218,721
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                      690,871
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>               141,337
<BONDS>                             40,254
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>               0
<PREFERRED>                         0
<COMMON>                            1,027
<OTHER-SE>                          493,881
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>        690,871
<SALES>                             636,853
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                    636,853
<CGS>                               374,692
<TOTAL-COSTS>                       374,692
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                    144,998
<LOSS-PROVISION>                    407
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                  4,440
<INCOME-PRETAX>                     118,470
<INCOME-TAX>                        41,464
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                 77,006
<DISCONTINUED>                      19,416
<EXTRAORDINARY>                     0
<CHANGES>                           0
<NET-INCOME>                        57,590
<EPS-PRIMARY>                       0.63
<EPS-DILUTED>                       0.63
<FN>
This financial data schedule has been restated in accordance with SFAS No. 128
(Earnings Per Share).
</FN>


        

</TABLE>
I 

118TH CONGRESS 

1ST SESSION H. R. 2147 

To provide for a limitation on availability of funds for Independent Agencies, 

Small Business Administration, Business Loans Program Account for 

fiscal year 2024. 

IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES 

MARCH 29, 2023 

Mr. BIGGS (for himself, Mr. ROSENDALE, Mr. GAETZ, Mr. GOOD of Virginia, 

Mr. ROY, and Mr. CRANE) introduced the following bill; which was referred to the Committee on Small Business 

A BILL 

To provide for a limitation on availability of funds for Independent Agencies, Small Business Administration, Business Loans Program Account for fiscal year 2024. 

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

3 SECTION 1. LIMITATION ON AVAILABILITY OF FUNDS FOR 

4 INDEPENDENT AGENCIES, SMALL BUSINESS 

5 ADMINISTRATION, BUSINESS LOANS PRO6 GRAM ACCOUNT FOR FISCAL YEAR 2024. 

7 Notwithstanding any other provision of the law, 

8 amounts authorized to be appropriated or otherwise avail9 able for Independent Agencies, Small Business AdminisVerDate Sep 11 2014 01:11 Apr 19, 2023 Jkt 039200 PO 00000 Frm 00001 Fmt 6652 Sfmt 6201 E:\BILLS\H2147.IH H2147

pbinns on DSKJLVW7X2PROD with $$_JOB
2 

•HR 2147 IH

1 tration, Business Loans Program Account for fiscal year 

2 2024 may not exceed $4,000,000. 

Æ 


pbinns on DSKJLVW7X2PROD with $$_JOB
12199.

#### Culberson *v.*The State.

Decided April 13, 1921.

Accusation of possessing liquor; from city court of Hall county — Judge Sloan. January 5, 1921.

A policeman of the town of Lula, Georgia, testified that on a certain night two automobiles — one a Ford ana the other a Dodge car — came into Lula, and when the men driving them saw him they began to shoot and drove faster, that they ran into some brush in a road and jumped out of the cars and ran off, and he could not see them well enough to identify them; and that a few days later the defendant came to Lula to see about the car; he claimed that his car was missing. About 50 gallons of whisky were in each car. J. M. Brock testified, that after the shooting, *“*on the night that the cars came through Lula, . . some *649parties ” ran into his yard in Lula; that he could not see them well enough to know them, “ but one of them was a heavy-set man with a mustache.” “ The best I could tell, he filled the description of that man over there. I did not know Mr. Culberson. I sort of believe it was him. It was not light. . . I would not swear it was him; it fills his description.” A county policeman testified, that some days after the night mentioned he “ pointed Culberson out, and Brock said he (Culberson) was the man that ran into his yard on the night of the shooting.” The sheriff testified as to finding the whisky in the cars, and that by telephone he learned from the secretary of State that the Dodge car had a license-tag purchased by H. J. Culberson, and a warrant was sworn out for him; that not many days after the cars were captured, Culberson sent out cards, “ trying to locate his car, that he claimed had been stolen,” and some time later he gave himself up and made bond. Witnesses for the defendant testified as to his statements that his car had been stolen, and his efforts to find it. The defendant, in his statement at the trial, said: “As soon as I found that there was a warrant for me in this county I came to Gainesville and surrendered. I had not committed any crime in this county. I don’t know who drove the automobile.”

*648Broyles, C. J.

1. The amendment to the motion for a new trial is as follows: “ Because upon the trial of said case the court erred in the following point and particular: What happened is as follows: After the witness for the defendant had been examined and cross-examined by the solicitor of said court, the solicitor having excused the witnesses, the judge then, at the conclusion of the evidence of each of the said witnesses for the defendant, 'asked several questions of the said witness, being an unusual practice of said court.” This ground is too vague and indefinite to raise any question for the consideration of this court.

2. As disclosed by the record, there was no evidence to authorize the defendant’s conviction, and the court erred in overruling the motion for a new trial.

*Judgment reversed.*

*Luke and Bloodworth, JJ., concur.*

*649
      *J. B. Q. Logan,*for plaintiff in error.

*E. D. Kenyon, solicitor,*contra.
|   | · | The                Covered Report 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 Covered Report fairly presents, in all                material respects, the financial condition and results of operations                of                the Company. |

| Date:                August 4, 2005 | /s/                John R.                Biggar                                    John                R. BiggarExecutive                Vice President andChief                Financial OfficerPPL                Corporation |
|-------------------------------------|----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|