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NOT FOR PUBLICATION

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT

MIGUEL ANGEL RIVERA RODRIGUEZ, AKA Miguel Rivera,

Petitioner,

v.

JEFFERSON B. SESSIONS III, Attorney General,

Respondent. No. 14

- 70189

Agency No. A205

- 716

- 512

MEMORANDUM *

On Petition for Review of an Order of the Board of Immigration Appeals

Submitted July 10, 2018 **

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

Miguel Angel Rivera Rodriguez, a native and citizen of El Salvador,

petitions for review of the Board of Immigration Appeals’ (“BIA”) order

dismissing his appeal from an immigration judge’s (“IJ”) decision denying his

* 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

JUL 13 2018

MOLLY C. DWYER, CLER K

U.S. COURT OF APPEAL S2 14

- 70189

application for asylum and relief unde r the Convention Against Torture (“CAT”).

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

the agency’s factual findings. Silaya v. Mukasey , 524 F.3d 1066, 1070 (9th Cir.

2008). We deny the petition for review.

The record does not compel the conclusion that Rivera Rodrig uez

established changed or extraordinary circumstances to excuse his untimely asylum

application. See 8 C.F.R. §§ 1208.4(a)(4), (5)

. Thus, Rivera Rodriguez ’s asylum

claim fail s

.

In his opening brief, Rivera Rodriguez does not reference withholding of

removal or otherwise challenge the agency’s denial of the claim. See Corro

Barragan v. Holder , 718 F.3d 1174, 1175 n. 5 (9th Cir. 2013) (failure to contest

issue in opening brief resulted in waiver. Thus , we deny the petition for review as

to Rivera Rodriquez’s withholding of removal claim.

Substantial evidence s upports the agency ’ s denial of CAT relief because

Rivera Rodriguez failed to s how it is more likely than not he will be tortured with

the consent or acquiescence of the government of El Salvador

. See Aden v.

Holder , 589 F.3d 1040, 1047 (2009).

Finally, w e reject as without merit Rivera Rodriguez ’s contentions as to his3 14

- 70189

membership in a class action lawsuit

, his eli gibility for the Deferred Action for

Childhood Arrivals program , or his claim for Temporary Protected Status

.

PETITION FOR REVIEW DENIED

.
ACCEPTED 03-14-00140-CR I 3697835 I IHIKUCOURI Ol-APPEALS AUSTIN. 'EXAS! 1/8/2015 1:34:52 PMi

JEFFREY D.KYLg CLERK!



### January 8, 2015 FILED IN 3rd COURT OF APPEALS AUSTIN, TEXAS 1/8/2015 1:34:52 PM

JEFFREY D. KYLE Clerk 

### Jeffrey D. Kyle Third Court ofAppeals P.O. Box 12547 

### Austin, Texas 78711
Re: Frank Howard McMarion v. State ofTexas 

### Nos. 03-14-00140-CR, 03-14-00141 -CR, 03-14-00142-CR, 

### 03-14-00143-CR, 03-14-00144-CR, 03-14-00145-CR 

### Dear Mr. Kyle: 

### I'm sending this letter in order to certify my compliance with Tex. R. App. Proc. 48.4. On December 29, 2014,1 mailed Mr. McMarion a copy of the opinion and judgments, along 

### with notifying him about his right to file a petition for discretionary review within 30 days of the issuance ofthe opinion. I've enclosed a copy of the return receipt on the certified letter that was mailed to Mr. McMarion. 

### Please let me know ifyou need any further information from me. Sincerely,

Chris Perri

1504 WestAvenue, Austin, Texas, 78701 

## Office Tel. (512) 474 4892 | Fax (512) 474 8252 chris@chrisperrilaw.com I www.chrisperrilaw.comH Complete items 1,2, and 3. Also complete item 4 if Restricted Delivery is desired.
• Print your name and address on the reverse

so that we can return the card to you. h Attachthiscard to the back of themaiipiece,

or on the front ifspace permits. 1. Article Addressed to: rfNanik u C. )of Delivery D. Isdelivery addressdifferent forfri item 1? • Yes

IfYES, enter deliveryaddress below: • No

3. Service Typo



### StCertifiedMail3 • PriorityMail Express/"
• Registered • Return ReceiptforMerchandise D Insured Mail D Collect enDelivery 4. Restricted Delivery? (Extra Fee) D Yes 2. Article Number

(Transfer from service label) 

### 7D14 Efl7D DDDE 245S 73E2 

### j PSForm 3811, July2013 Domestic Return Receipt
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








The
certification set forth below is hereby made solely for the purpose of
satisfying the requirements of Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002 and
may not be relied upon or used for any other purposes.





In
connection with the Quarterly Report of Access Pharmaceuticals, Inc. (the
“Company”) on Form 10-Q for the period ended June 30, 2010, as filed with the
Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the “Report”), I, Jeffrey
B. Davis, Chief Executive Officer certify pursuant to 18 U.S.C. 1350, as
adopted pursuant to Section 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 and (2) the information contained in the Report
fairly presents, in all material respects, the financial condition and results
of operations of the Company.





A signed
original of this written statement required by Section 906 or other document
authenticating, acknowledging or otherwise adopting the signature that appears
in typed form within the electronic version of this written statement required
by Section 906 has been provided to the Company and will be retained by the
Company and furnished to the Securities and Exchange Commission or its staff
upon request.





Signed at
the City of Dallas, in the State of Texas, this 16th day of August,
2010.





/s/ Jeffrey B. Davis


Jeffrey
B. Davis


Chief
Executive Officer
September 26, 2013

JUDGMENT

The Fourteenth Court of Appeals

DANIEL DROR II, INDIVIDUALLY AND TRUSTEE OF THE DANIEL DROR 

II TRUST OF 1998 AND DANIEL DROR, Appellants

NO. 14-12-00322-CV V.

DANIEL MUSHIN, Appellee

________________________________

This court today heard the motion for rehearing filed by Appellants. We

order that the motion be OVERRULED, this court’s former judgment of July 23, 

2013, be vacated, set aside, and annulled, and this court’s Memorandum Opinion 

of July 23, 2013 be withdrawn. 

This cause, an appeal from the judgment in favor of appellee, Daniel 

Mushin, signed January 30, 2012, was heard on the transcript of the record. We 

have inspected the record and find no error in the judgment. We order the 

judgment of the court below AFFIRMED.

We order appellants, Daniel Dror II, Individually and Trustee of the Daniel 

Dror II Trust of 1998 and Daniel Dror, jointly and severally, to pay all costs 

incurred in this appeal. 

We further order this decision certified below for observance.
EXHIBIT 99.4

                                  CERTIFICATION

         I, Victor A. De Jesus, certify that:


1.                I have reviewed this annual report on Form 10-K, and all
                  reports on Form 8-K containing distribution or servicing
                  reports filed in respect of periods included in the year
                  covered by this annual report, of WODFI LLC;
2.                Based on my knowledge, the information in these reports, taken
                  as a whole, 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 as of the last
                  day of the period covered by this annual report;
3.                Based on my knowledge, the distribution or servicing
                  information required to be provided to the trustee by the
                  servicer under the pooling and servicing agreement, or similar
                  agreement, for inclusion in these reports is included in these
                  reports;
4.                I am responsible for reviewing the activities performed by the
                  servicer under the pooling and servicing agreement, or similar
                  agreement and based upon my knowledge and the annual
                  compliance review required under that agreement, and except as
                  disclosed in the reports, the servicer has fulfilled its
                  obligations under that agreement; and
5.                The reports disclose all significant deficiencies relating to
                  the servicer's compliance with the minimum servicing standards
                  based upon the report provided by an independent public
                  accountant, after conducting a review in compliance with the
                  Uniform Single Attestation Program for Mortgage Bankers or
                  similar standard as set forth in the pooling and servicing
                  agreement, or similar agreement, that is included in these
                  reports.

Date: April 25, 2003


                                            /s/____________________________
                                            Victor A. De Jesus
                                            Vice President and Chief
                                            Financial Officer of World
                                            Omni Financial Corp., as
                                            Servicer
This memorandum is uncorrected and subject to revision before

publication in the New York Reports.

----------------------------------------------------------------- No. 205 SSM 18 In the Matter of Noel Olmosperez, Appellant, v. Andrea W. Evans, &c., Respondent.

Submitted by Cynthia H. Conti-Cook and Caroline Hsu, for appellant.

Submitted by Frank Brady, for respondent.

MEMORANDUM:

The order of the Appellate Division should be affirmed, without costs (see Matter of Linares v Evans, __NY3d__ [decided today]; Matter of Silmon v Travis, 95 NY2d 470, 476 [2000]). - 1 -- 2 - No. 18

* * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * On review of submissions pursuant to section 500.11 of the Rules, order affirmed, without costs, in a memorandum. Chief Judge Lippman and Judges Pigott, Rivera, Abdus-Salaam and Fahey concur. Judge Stein took no part. Decided October 22, 2015

- 2 -
**Exhibit 23.1**

**CONSENT OF INDEPENDENT REGISTERED PUBLIC ACCOUNTING FIRM**

The Board of Directors

PharMerica Corporation 

We consent to the incorporation by reference in the Registration Statement on Form S-8 (333-145137) of PharMerica Corporation of our report dated February 24, 2011 with respect to the consolidatedfinancial statements as of and for the year ended December 31, 2010 and the effectiveness of internal control over financial reporting as of December 31, 2010, which report appears in this Form 10-K. 

/s/ KPMG LLP 

Louisville, Kentucky 

February 24, 2011 

.
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<ARTICLE> 5
       
<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   3-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          JUN-30-1997
<PERIOD-END>                               SEP-30-1996
<CASH>                                       1,076,576
<SECURITIES>                                         0
<RECEIVABLES>                                2,348,678
<ALLOWANCES>                                   100,000
<INVENTORY>                                  1,618,632
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                             7,846,702
<PP&E>                                      80,186,770
<DEPRECIATION>                              18,251,596
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                              70,931,879
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                        6,678,896
<BONDS>                                     14,490,584
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                       163,929
<OTHER-SE>                                  50,357,816
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                70,931,879
<SALES>                                      1,339,233
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                             1,339,233
<CGS>                                        2,567,568
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                2,567,568
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                               319,083
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                     0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                             395,358
<INCOME-PRETAX>                            (1,875,754)
<INCOME-TAX>                                  (37,515)
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                        (1,838,239)
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                               (1,838,239)
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                      .11
<EPS-DILUTED>                                      .11
        

</TABLE>
|   | · | 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:  May                4, 2006 | /s/  Paul                A.                Farr                                                |
|---------------------------------------------|-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|
|                                        | Paul                A. FarrSenior                Vice President-FinancialPPL                Electric Utilities Corporation                                                                                                                                                                                                                          |
TEXAS COURT OF APPEALS, THIRD DISTRICT, AT AUSTIN

NO. 03-00-00728-CR

Joe Ovalle, Appellant

v.

The State of Texas, Appellee

FROM THE DISTRICT COURT OF HAYS COUNTY, 22ND JUDICIAL DISTRICT

NO. CR-96-0185, HONORABLE DON B. MORGAN, JUDGE PRESIDING

Appellant Joe Ovalle was convicted following his plea of guilty to aggravated assault.

See Tex. PenAL Code Ann. § 22.02 (West 1994). Punishment was assessed at imprisonment for ten

years and a $1500 fine, but imposition of sentence was suspended and Ovalle was placed on

community supervision. Ovalle appeals from an order revoking supervision and imposing sentence.

Appellant’s court-appointed attorney filed a brief concluding that the appeal is

frivolous and without merit. The brief meets the requirements of Anders v. California, 386 U.S. 738

(1967), by presenting a professional evaluation of the record demonstrating why there are no arguable

grounds to be advanced. See also Penson v. Ohio, 488 U.S. 75 (1988); High v. State, 573 S.W.2d

807 (Tex. Crim. App. 1978); Currie v. State, 516 S.W.2d 684 (Tex. Crim. App. 1974); Jackson v.

State, 485 S.W.2d 553 (Tex. Crim. App. 1972); Gainous v. State, 436 S.W.2d 137 (Tex. Crim. App.

1969). A copy of counsel’s brief was delivered to appellant, and appellant was advised of his right

to examine the appellate record and to file a pro se brief. No pro se brief has been filed.
2

We have reviewed the record and counsel’s brief and agree that the appeal is frivolous

and without merit. We find nothing in the record that might arguably support the appeal.

The order revoking community supervision is affirmed.

 

 

David Puryear, Justice

Before Justices Kidd, B. A. Smith and Puryear

Affirmed

Filed: May 31, 2001

Do Not Publish
Exhibit 31.2
**Certifications**
I, Jon D. Greenwood, certify that:
 1. I have reviewed this annual report on Form 10-Q of American BuildingControl, Inc.;  2. Based on my knowledge, this report does not contain any untruestatement of a material fact or omit to state a material fact necessaryto make the statements made, in light of the circumstances under whichsuch statements were made, not misleading with respect to the periodcovered by this report;  3. Based on my knowledge, the financial statements, and other financialinformation included in this report, fairly present in all materialrespects the financial condition, results of operations and cash flowsof the registrant as of, and for, the periods presented in this report;  4. The registrant’s other certifying officers and I are responsible forestablishing and maintaining disclosure controls and procedures (asdefined in Exchange Act Rules 13a-15(e) and 15d-15(e)) for theregistrant and have:
 a. Designed such disclosure controls and procedures, or causedsuch disclosure controls and procedures to be designed under oursupervision, to ensure that material information relating to theregistrant, including its consolidated subsidiaries, is made known tous by others within those entities, particularly during the period inwhich this report is being prepared;  b. Evaluated the effectiveness of the registrant’s disclosurecontrols and procedures and presented in this report our conclusionsabout the effectiveness of the controls and procedures, as of the endof the period covered by this report based on such evaluation; and  c. Disclosed in this report any change in the registrant’sinternal control over financial reporting that occurred during theregistrant’s most recent fiscal quarter that has materially affected,or is reasonably likely to materially affect, the registrant’sinternal control over financial reporting; and
 5. The registrant’s other certifying officers and I have disclosed,based on our most recent evaluation of internal control over financialreporting, to the registrant’s auditors and the audit committee of theregistrant’s board of directors (or persons performing the equivalentfunctions):
 a. All significant deficiencies and material weaknesses in thedesign or operation of internal control over financial reportingwhich are reasonably likely to adversely affect the registrant’sability to record, process, summarize and report financialinformation; and  b. Any fraud, whether or not material, that involves management orother employees who have a significant role in the registrant’sinternal control over financial reporting.     Dated: November 15, 2004          By /s/ Jon D. Greenwood     Jon D. Greenwood   Chief Financial Officer
EXHIBIT 32.2

CERTIFICATION OF CHIEF FINANCIAL OFFICER

PURSUANT
TO 18 U.S.C. SECTION 1350

AS ADOPTED PURSUANT TO

SECTION 906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002

The
undersigned, the Chief Financial Officer of Dune Energy, Inc. (the Company), does hereby certify under the standards set forth and solely for the purposes of 18 U.S.C. 1350, as adopted pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley
Act of 2002, that the Annual Report on Form 10-K of the Company for the year ended December 31, 2009 fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 and information contained in that
Form 10-K fairly presents, in all material respects, the financial condition and results of operations of the Company.



|                      |  |  |  |                           
|--------------------- |  |  |  | --------------------------
|                      |  | 
|Dated: March 25, 2010 |  |  |  | /S/    FRANK T. SMITH,
JR.
|                      |  |  |  | Frank T. Smith, Jr        
|                      |  |  |  | Chief Financial Officer   

A signed original of this written statement required by Section 906 has been provided to the Company and will be retained by the Company and furnished to the Securities and Exchange Commission or its staff upon request.
[DO NOT PUBLISH]

In the

United States Court of Appeals

For the Eleventh Circuit

____________________

No. 21-11874

Non-Argument Calendar

____________________

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, 

Plaintiff-Appellee,

versus

STANLEY AUBREY BAKER, 

Defendant-Appellant.

____________________

Appeal from the United States District Court

for the Southern District of Alabama

D.C. Docket No. 1:15-cr-00291-JB-MU-1

____________________

USCA11 Case: 21-11874 Date Filed: 09/14/2022 Page: 1 of 2
2 Opinion of the Court 21-11874

Before WILSON, ANDERSON, and JULIE CARNES, Circuit Judges.

PER CURIAM:

Arthur Madden, III, appointed counsel for Stanley Baker in 

this appeal from the revocation of supervised release and imposition of a 24-month sentence, has moved to withdraw from further 

representation of the appellant and filed a brief pursuant to Anders 

v. California, 386 U.S. 738 (1967). Our independent review of the 

entire record reveals that counsel’s assessment of the relative merit 

of the appeal is correct. Because independent examination of the 

entire record reveals no arguable issues of merit, counsel’s motion 

to withdraw is GRANTED, and Baker’s revocation of supervised 

release and sentence are AFFIRMED.

USCA11 Case: 21-11874 Date Filed: 09/14/2022 Page: 2 of 2
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF ALABAMA

SOUTHERN DIVISION

REY FRANCISCO ROSARIO, :

Petitioner, :

vs. : CA 15-0050-CB-C

HOUSTON COUNTY, ALABAMA, :

Respondent. 

ORDER

After due and proper consideration of the issues raised, and there having 

been no objections filed, the recommendation of the Magistrate Judge made 

under 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(l)(B) and dated February 5, 2015 is ADOPTED as the 

opinion of this Court.

DONE this 5th day of March , 2015.

s/Charles R.Butler, Jr.

SENIOR UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE

Case 1:15-cv-00050-CB-C Document 4 Filed 03/05/15 Page 1 of 1