alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
#### MEIYA ZHENG, Petitioner, v. Alberto R. GONZALES, Attorney General, Respondent.

No. 04-72890.

United States Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit.

Submitted Oct. 16, 2006.*

Filed Oct. 23, 2006.

CAC-District Counsel, Esq., Office of the District Counsel, Department of Homeland Security, Los Angeles, CA, Ronald E. LeFevre, Chief Counsel, Office of the District Counsel, Department of Homeland Security, San Francisco, CA, Terri J. Scadron, Esq., Genevieve Holm, Esq., Greg D. Mack, Esq., U.S. Department of Justice, Civil Div./Office of Immigration Lit., Washington, DC, for Respondent.

*802Before: LEAVY, W. FLETCHER, and RAWLINSON, Circuit Judges.

*

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

MEMORANDUM **

Meiya Zheng, a native and citizen of China, petitions pro se for review of the Board of Immigration Appeals’ order dismissing her appeal from an immigration judge’s decision denying her applications for asylum, withholding of removal, and protection under the Convention Against Torture (“CAT”). We have jurisdiction under 8 U.S.C. § 1252. We review for substantial evidence, *Li v. Ashcroft,*378 F.3d 959, 962 (9th Cir.2004), and we deny the petition for review.

The agency found Zheng’s testimony incredible based on discrepancies between her credible fear interview and her written statement and testimony regarding when her father became a Falun Gong practitioner, when a protest demonstration occurred, and whether authorities learned of her father’s participation in the demonstration. Because these discrepancies go to the heart of Zheng’s claim, substantial evidence supports the agency’s adverse credibility determination. *See Li,*378 F.3d at 962-63 (upholding adverse credibility determination based on discrepancies between alien’s statements in interview and subsequent testimony). Since the credible fear interview was conducted under oath, with the benefit of an interpreter, and recorded in question and answer format, the agency reasonably determined that the interview statement was a reliable impeachment source. *See id.*at 963 (“Our inquiry ends if the [agency] could reasonably conclude that the sworn interview statement was a reliable impeachment source.”); *cf. Singh v. Gonzales,*403 F.3d 1081, 1089-90 (9th Cir.2005).

In the absence of credible testimony, Zheng has failed to establish eligibility for asylum, withholding of removal, or protection under the CAT. *See Farah v. Ashcroft,*348 F.3d 1153, 1156-57 (9th Cir. 2003).

PETITION FOR REVIEW DENIED.

**

 The disposition is not appropriate for publication and may not be cited to or by the courts of this circuit except as provided by 9th Cir. R. 36-3.
Filed by Automated Filing Services Inc. (604) 609-0244 - Image Innovations Holdings Inc. -  Exhibit 10.2





 PROMISSORY NOTE

 Vancouver, B.C.

  September 30, 2004

 PRINCIPAL AMOUNT: $5,000,000 (United States currency) 

 FOR VALUE RECEIVED, IMAGE INNOVATIONS HOLDINGS INC. (the "Borrower")
  hereby promises to pay to the order of H.E. CAPITAL S.A. (the "Lender"), at
  Casa del Sol, MJ19 Paseo Marino, Perla Marina, Sosua, Dominican Republic, ON
  DEMAND, the sum of FIVE MILLION DOLLARS in lawful money of the United States
  ($5,000,000) (the "Principal Sum"), or the aggregate unpaid principal amount
  of all loans made by the Lender to the Borrower pursuant to that certain loan
  agreement dated for reference September 30, 2004 (the "Loan Agreement") between
  the Borrower and the Lender, together with interest on the Principal Sum both
  before and each of demand, default and judgment at the Interest Rate (hereinafter
  defined). All loans made by the Lender under the aforementioned Loan Agreement
  and all payments of principal and interest made hereon shall be noted by the
  holder hereof on the Schedule attached hereto which is a part of this Note.


 For the purpose hereof "Interest Rate" means nine percent
  (9%) per annum.

 The Borrower hereby waives presentment, protest, notice of
  protest and notice of dishonor of this Promissory Note. 

	 	 IMAGE INNOVATIONS 
        HOLDINGS  INC.: 

       \s\ Derick Sinclair  

        Authorized Signatory  






Schedule of Loans and Payments of Principal and Interest 

	 Date  	 Amount of Loan  	 Amount of  Principal Paid  or
      Prepaid  	 Amount of  Interest  	 Unpaid  Principal  Balance of
       Loans  	 Notation  Made By  Lender 
    
	 As of 9/29/04  	 $1,760,716.10  	  	  	  	  
	 9/30/04  	 $225,000
#### State v. Brockett

Case below: 185 N.C. App.-(7 August 2007)

No. 448P07

Def’s PDR Under N.C.G.S. 7A-31 (COA06-1005)

Denied 11/08/07
#### Michael J. Clark, Respondent, v Blacktop Maintenance Corp. et al., Appellants.

[871 NYS2d 716]

*664In an action to recover damages for personal injuries, the defendants appeal from an order of the Supreme Court, Dutchess County (Brands, J.), dated December 12, 2007, which denied their motion for summary judgment dismissing the complaint.

Ordered that the order is affirmed, with costs.

The defendants failed to make a prima facie showing of entitlement to judgment as a matter of law (see *Winegrad v New York Univ. Med. Ctr.,*64 NY2d 851 [1985]). The deposition testimony of various witnesses submitted by the defendants in support of the motion showed that the parties did not agree as to how the accident occurred. At the time of the accident, the defendant Douglas Cameron was operating a tractor-trailer owned by the defendant Blacktop Maintenance Corp. Cameron alleged that the plaintiffs motorcycle crossed the double yellow line and struck the tractor-trailer. An acquaintance of the plaintiff, who was riding his motorcycle behind the plaintiffs motorcycle and allegedly witnessed the accident, stated that the tractor-trailer crossed the double yellow line and struck the plaintiffs motorcycle. Under the circumstances, the defendants’ expert evidence was insufficient to establish, prima facie, that the plaintiffs negligent operation of his vehicle was the sole proximate cause of the accident *(cf. Dorazio v Delbene,*37 AD3d 645 [2007]). Rivera, J.E, Santucci, Garni and Dickerson, JJ., concur.
IN THE SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF MONTANA No. DA 22 - 0245 STATE OF MONTANA,

Plaintiff and Appellee, v. ZECHARIAH JUSTIN DANIEL SMITH,

Defendant and Appellant.

**O RDER**  Upon consideration of Appellant’s motion for extension of time, and good cause appearing, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that Appellant is granted an extension of time to and including November 13 , 2023, within which to prepare, file, and serve Appellant’s opening brief on appeal.

.

Electronically signed by: Mike McGrath Chief Justice, Montana Supreme Court

October 3 2023

10/03/2023
Case Number: DA 22-0245
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 State

          - [PUBLIC NOTICE 6614]

# SUMMARY:

                        Notice is hereby given of the following determinations: Pursuant to the authority vested in me by the Act of October 19, 1965 (79 Stat. 985; 22 U.S.C. 2459), Executive Order 12047 of March 27, 1978, the Foreign Affairs Reform and Restructuring Act of 1998 (112 Stat. 2681,                         *et seq.*; 22 U.S.C. 6501 note,                         *et seq.*), Delegation of Authority No. 234 of October 1, 1999, Delegation of Authority No. 236 of October 19, 1999, as amended, and Delegation of Authority No. 257 of April 15, 2003 [68 FR 19875], I hereby determine that the objects in the exhibition: “Scripture for the Eyes: Bible Illustration in Netherlandish Prints of the Sixteenth Century,” imported from abroad for temporary exhibition within the United States, are of cultural significance. The objects are imported pursuant to loan agreements with the foreign owners or custodians. I also determine that the exhibition or display of the exhibit objects at the Museum of Biblical Art, New York, NY, from on or about June 4, 2009, until on or about September 27, 2009; Michael C. Carlos Museum, Atlanta, GA, from on or about October 17, 2009, until on or about January 24, 2010, and at possible additional exhibitions or venues yet to be determined, is in the national interest. Public Notice of these Determinations is ordered to be published in the                         **Federal Register**                        .                    

# FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

For further information, including a list of the exhibit objects, contact Julie Simpson, Attorney-Adviser, Office of the Legal Adviser, U.S. Department of State (telephone: 202-453-8050). The address is U.S. Department of State, SA-44, 301 4th Street, SW., Room 700, Washington, DC 20547-0001.

Dated: May 8, 2009.

C. Miller Crouch,

Acting Assistant Secretary for Educational, and Cultural Affairs, Department of State.

[FR Doc. E9-11300 Filed 5-13-09; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 4710-05-P
<PAGE>


                                                                   Exhibit 21.1

                    SUBSIDIARIES OF THE COMPANY


SUBSIDIARIES                                JURISDICTION OF ORGANIZATION

Health Management, Inc.                              Delaware
Steri-Pharm, Inc.                                    New York
The PromptCare Companies, Inc.                       New Jersey
Allied Healthcare Group Limited                      England
  Transworld Healthcare (UK) Limited                 England
    Nightingale Nursing Bureau Limited               England
    Balfor Medical Limited                           England
    Staffing Enterprise (PSV) Limited                England
    Staffing Enterprise Limited                      England
    Crystalglen Limited                              England
    Omnicare Limited                                 England
      Allied Healthcare (UK) Limited                 England
      Allied Oxycare Limited                         England
       Medigas Limited                               England
### NUMBER 13
- 20
- 0037 6
- CV
COURT OF APPEALS

THIRTEENTH DISTRICT OF TEXAS

CORPUS CHRISTI

- EDINBURG

____________________________________________________________ CERTAIN UNDERWRITERS AT LLOYD'S OF LONDON SUBSCRIBING TO POLICY NO. NAJL05000016
- H87 Appellant ,

v. MAYSE & ASSOCIATES, INC. Appellee

.

_

___________________________________________________________ On appeal from the 343rd Judicial District of Aransas County, Texas.

_

___________________________________________________________ 

### MEMORANDUM OPINION

Before Justices Benavides, Longoria , and Tijerina Memorandum Opinion by Justice Longoria

This matter is before the Court on its own motion . The appellant's brief in the above

cause was due on June 9, 2020 . On December 7, 2020 , the Clerk of the Court notified2 appellant that the order appellant is attempting to appeal is not appealable . On December
28, 2020, the Court received a letter from a ppellant’s counsel indicating appellant will not

continue to pursue the appeal of the orde r granting the motion to strike, motion to modify,

and motion for reconsideration signed on August 24, 2020 which was the order at issue

in this appeal

. Furthermore, a ppellant has not taken any action to prosecute this appea l

since the letter.
Accordingly, the appeal is dismissed for want of prosecution

. See T EX

. R. A PP

. P

. 42.3(b).

NORA L. LONGORIA Justice

D elivered and filed on the 25th day of February, 2021.
#### In the Matter of Oyster Bay Associates Limited Partnership et al., Appellants, v Town Board of Town of Oyster Bay et al., Respondents. Birchwood Civic Association at Jericho, Inc., et al., Intervenors-Respondents.

Submitted May 26, 2009;

decided June 30, 2009

Motion by Long Island Association for leave to file a brief amicus curiae on the motion for leave to appeal herein granted and the brief is accepted as filed.
##### 



Exhibit 13.1
 Certification of the Principal Executive Officer of
Videotron Ltd.
pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350,
as adopted pursuant to
Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002
  (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 Company.
  /s/ Robert DépatieName: Robert Dépatie
Title: President and Chief Executive Officer The foregoing certification is being furnished solely pursuant to section 906 of the
Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002 (subsections (a) and (b) of section 1350, chapter 63 of title 18, United
States Code) and is not being filed as part of the Report or as a separate disclosure document.
[Federal Register Volume 74, Number 91 (Wednesday, May 13, 2009)]
[Notices]
[Page 22600]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: E9-11033]


=======================================================================
-----------------------------------------------------------------------

SMALL BUSINESS ADMINISTRATION

[Disaster Declaration <greek-i>11732 and <greek-i>11733]


Florida Disaster Number FL-00040

AGENCY: U.S. Small Business Administration.

ACTION: Amendment 1.

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

SUMMARY: This is an amendment of the Presidential declaration of a 
major disaster for the State of Florida (FEMA-1831-DR), dated 04/28/
2009.
    Incident: Severe Storms, Flooding, Tornadoes, and Straight-line 
Winds.
    Incident Period: 03/26/2009 and continuing.
    Effective Date: 05/01/2009.
    Physical Loan Application Deadline Date: 06/29/2009.
    EIDL Loan Application Deadline Date: 01/28/2010.

ADDRESSES: Submit completed loan applications to: U.S. Small Business 
Administration, Processing And Disbursement Center, 14925 Kingsport 
Road, Fort Worth, TX 76155.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: A. Escobar, Office of Disaster 
Assistance, U.S. Small Business Administration, 409 3rd Street, SW., 
Suite 6050, Washington, DC 20416.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The notice of the Presidential disaster 
declaration for the State of Florida, dated 04/28/2009 is hereby 
amended to include the following areas as adversely affected by the 
disaster:

Primary Counties: (Physical Damage and Economic Injury Loans): Dixie, 
Gilchrist.
Contiguous Counties: (Economic Injury Loans Only):
    Florida: Alachua, Levy.

    All other information in the original declaration remains 
unchanged.

(Catalog of Federal Domestic Assistance Numbers 59002 and 59008)

James E. Rivera,
Acting Associate Administrator for Disaster Assistance.
[FR Doc. E9-11033 Filed 5-12-09; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 8025-01-M
### THE THIRTEENTH COURT OF APPEALS

13

- 13

- 00156

- CR

COURTNEY LEV v. THE STATE OF TEXAS
On Appeal from the 347th District Court of Nueces County , Texas Trial Cause No. 11

- CR

- 3433

- H

JUDGMENT THE THIRTEENTH COURT OF APPEALS, having considered this cause o n appeal, concludes that the judgment of the trial court should be AFFIRMED . The Court orders the judgment of the trial court AFFIRMED

. We further order this decision certified below for observance.

February 20 , 2015
EX-34.13
(logo) Deloitte

Deloitte & Touche LLP
Suite 1500
191 Peachtree Street NE
Atlanta, GA 30303-1943
USA

Tel: +1 404 220 1500
www.deloitte.com


REPORT OF INDEPENDENT REGISTERED PUBLIC ACCOUNTING FIRM


To the Board of Directors of
LNR Partners Inc.
Miami Beach, Florida

We have examined management's assertion, included in the accompanying
Management's Report on Assessment of Compliance with SEC Regulation AB
Servicing Criteria, that LNR Partners Inc. (the "Company") complied with the
servicing criteria set forth in Item 1122(d) of the Securities and Exchange
Commission's Regulation AB for the commercial mortgage-backed securities
transactions for which the Asserting Party served as special servicer, that
were completed on or after January 1, 2006, and that were registered with the
Securities and Exchange Commission pursuant to the Securities Act of 1933 (the
"Platform") as of and for the year ended December 31, 2007, excluding criteria
229.1122(d)(1)(iii), (3)(i)(C), (3)(i)(D), (3)(ii), (3)(iii), (3)(iv), (4)(v),
(4)(ix), (4)(x), (4)(xi), (4)(xii), (4)(xiii) and (4)(xv), which management
has determined are not applicable to the activities performed by the Company
with respect to the Platform. Management is responsible for the Company's
compliance with the 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 attestation standards
established by the American Institute of Certified Public Accountants, as
adopted by 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, including tests on a sample
basis of the servicing activities related to the Platform, determining whether
the Company performed those selected activities in compliance with the
servicing criteria during the specified period, and performing such other
procedures as we considered necessary in the circumstances. Our procedures were
limited to selected servicing activities performed by the Company during the
period covered by this report and, accordingly, such samples may not have
included servicing activities related to each asset-backed transaction included
in the Platform. Further, an examination is not designed to detect
noncompliance arising from errors that may have occurred prior to the period
specified above that may have affected the balances or amounts calculated or
reported by the Company during the period covered by this report. 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 applicable servicing criteria as of and for the year ended
December 31, 2007 for the commercial mortgage-backed securities Platform is
fairly stated, in all material respects.


/s/ Deloitte & Touche LLP
February 22, 2008


Member of
Deloitte Touche Tohmatsu
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 Labor

###### Employment and Training Administration

          - [TA-W-65,814]

In accordance with Section 221 of the Trade Act of 1974, as amended, an investigation was initiated on April 17, 2009 in response to a petition filed by a company official on behalf of workers of Sperian Protective Gloves, USA, Buffalo, New York.

The petitioner has requested that the petition be withdrawn. Consequently, the investigation has been terminated.

Signed in Washington, DC, this 21st day of April 2009.

Richard Church,

Certifying Officer, Division of Trade Adjustment Assistance.

[FR Doc. E9-10895 Filed 5-8-09; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 4510-FN-P
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<ARTICLE>                     5

<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   YEAR
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                              MAY-31-1999
<PERIOD-END>                                   MAY-31-1999
<CASH>                                                571
<SECURITIES>                                            0
<RECEIVABLES>                                   2,075,796
<ALLOWANCES>                                       30,414
<INVENTORY>                                     1,670,459
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                                4,060,915
<PP&E>                                          4,600,999
<DEPRECIATION>                                  3,147,777
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                  5,782,374
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                           4,676,321
<BONDS>                                           369,041
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                   0
<PREFERRED>                                       738,296
<COMMON>                                           19,920
<OTHER-SE>                                        (21,204)
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                    5,782,374
<SALES>                                        13,818,563
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                               13,818,563
<CGS>                                           8,788,331
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                   8,788,331
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                4,983,576
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                        0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                                310,755
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                  (264,099)
<INCOME-TAX>                                      (50,498)
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                              (213,601)
<DISCONTINUED>                                          0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                         0
<CHANGES>                                               0
<NET-INCOME>                                     (213,601)
<EPS-BASIC>                                       (0.13)
<EPS-DILUTED>                                       (0.13)


</TABLE>