alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
* Pursuant to 5TH CIR. R. 47.5, the court has determined

that this opinion should not be published and is not precedent

except under the limited circumstances set forth in 5TH CIR.

R. 47.5.4.

United States Court of Appeals

Fifth Circuit

FILED

January 29, 2004

Charles R. Fulbruge III

Clerk

IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT

 

No. 03-60375

Summary Calendar

 

FISEHA TAYE,

Petitioner,

versus

JOHN ASHCROFT, U.S. ATTORNEY GENERAL,

Respondent.

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

Petition for Review of an Order of the

Board of Immigration Appeals

BIA No. A74 082 560

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

Before HIGGINBOTHAM, DAVIS and PRADO, Circuit Judges.

PER CURIAM:*

Fiseha Taye petitions for review of an order from the Board

of Immigration Appeals (BIA) summarily affirming the immigration

judge's (IJ) decision to deny his application for withholding of

removal under the Convention Against Torture (CAT). 

After reviewing the record and the briefs, we conclude that

the decision is supported by substantial evidence and that the

evidence in the record does not compel a conclusion contrary to

that reached by the IJ and BIA that Taye failed to show that it
No. 03-60375

-2-

was more likely than not that he would be tortured if he were to

return to Germany or Ethiopia. See 8 C.F.R. § 208.16(c)(2), INS

v. Elias-Zacarias, 502 U.S. 478, 483-84 (1992); Mikhael v. INS,

115 F.3d 299, 302 (5th Cir. 1997). Therefore, we DENY the

petition for review.
* Pursuant to 5TH CIR. R. 47.5, the court has determined

that this opinion should not be published and is not precedent

except under the limited circumstances set forth in 5TH CIR.

R. 47.5.4.

United States Court of Appeals

Fifth Circuit

FILED

October 22, 2003

Charles R. Fulbruge III

Clerk

IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT

 

No. 03-40351

Summary Calendar

 

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,

Plaintiff-Appellee,

versus

NANCY KELLEY THETFORD COOPER,

Defendant-Appellant.

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

Appeal from the United States District Court

for the Eastern District of Texas

USDC No. 4:02-CR-101-ALL

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

Before SMITH, DeMOSS, and STEWART, Circuit Judges.

PER CURIAM:*

Nancy Kelley Thetford Cooper appeals her sentence following

her guilty plea conviction of bank fraud. Cooper argues that the

district court abused its discretion in departing upward from the

Sentencing Guidelines range and that the district court erred in

refusing to group the present offense with an offense for which

Cooper had previously been sentenced. The district court did not

abuse its discretion, as the district court relied upon
No. 03-40351

-2-

permissible factors not already taken into consideration by the

Sentencing Guidelines in deciding to depart. See United States

v. Ravitch, 128 F.3d 865, 871 (5th Cir. 1997); U.S.S.G. § 4A1.3

(1998). The district court did not err in refusing to group the

present offense with an offense for which Cooper had previously

been sentenced. See United States v. Tolbert, 306 F.3d 244, 247-

48 (5th Cir. 2002). 

AFFIRMED.
#### UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff-Appellee v. James Earl MAGERS, Defendant-Appellant.

No. 07-10940

Conference Calendar.

United States Court of Appeals, Fifth Circuit.

Jan. 30, 2008.

C. Richard Baker, Assistant U.S. Attorney, U.S. Attorney’s Office, Northern District of Texas, Lubbock, TX, for PlaintiffAppellee.

Helen Miller Liggett, Assistant Federal Public Defender, Federal Public Defender’s Office, Northern District of Texas, Lubbock, TX, for Defendant-Appellant.

Before REAVLEY, BENAVIDES, and ELROD, Circuit Judges.

PER CURIAM: *

*682Appealing the Judgment in a Criminal Case, James Earl Magers raises arguments that are foreclosed by *United States v. Hinson,*429 F.3d 114, 119 (5th Cir. 2005), which held that a defendant is not entitled to a jury trial to determine whether the terms of supervised release have been violated. The Government’s motion for summary affirmance is GRANTED, and the judgment of the district court is AFFIRMED.

*

 Pursuant to 5th Cir. R. 47.5, the court has determined that this opinion should not be published and is not precedent except under the limited circumstances set forth in 5th Cir. R. 47.5.4.
[Federal Register Volume 82, Number 168 (Thursday, August 31, 2017)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 41342-41343]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2017-18422]


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

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY

40 CFR Part 52

[EPA-R02-2017-NJ1; FRL-9967-14-Region 2]


Approval and Promulgation of Implementation Plans; New Jersey; 
Revised Format for Materials Being Incorporated by Reference; 
Correction

AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).

ACTION: Final rule; correction.

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

SUMMARY: The Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) is correcting a 
final rule; administrative change, that was published in the Federal 
Register on July 3, 2017. In that document, EPA approved the revised 
format for materials submitted by New Jersey that have been 
incorporated by reference into its State Implementation Plan (SIP). An 
error in the docket number was identified and is being corrected in 
this action.

DATES: This rule is effective on August 31, 2017.

ADDRESSES: EPA has established a docket for this action under Docket ID 
No. EPA-R02-2017-NJ1. All documents in the docket are listed on the 
www.regulations.gov Web site. Although listed in the index, some 
information is not publicly available, e.g., CBI or other information 
whose disclosure is restricted by statute. Certain other material, such 
as copyrighted material, is not placed on the Internet and will be 
publicly available only in hard copy form. Publicly available docket 
materials are available through www.regulations.gov, or please contact 
the person identified in the For Further Information Contact section 
for additional availability information.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Kirk J. Wieber, Air Programs Branch, 
Environmental Protection Agency, 290 Broadway, 25th Floor, New York, 
New York 10007-1866, (212) 637-3381.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: EPA approved a final rule; administrative 
change published on July 3, 2017 (82 FR 30758). In that document, EPA 
approved the revised format for materials submitted by New Jersey that 
have been incorporated by reference into its SIP. The regulations and 
other materials affected by this format change have all been previously 
submitted by New Jersey and approved by EPA as SIP revisions. In that 
approval, EPA erroneously added the incorrect docket number. In this 
notice, the docket

[[Page 41343]]

number is revised to reflect the correct docket number.

Correction

    In the final rule published in the Federal Register on July 3, 2017 
(82 FR 30758), the following correction is made:
    1. On page 30758, first column, ``EPA-R02-OAR-2016-0060'' is 
corrected to read ``EPA-R02-2017-NJ1''.

    Dated: August 18, 2017.
Catherine R. McCabe,
Acting Regional Administrator, Region 2.
[FR Doc. 2017-18422 Filed 8-30-17; 8:45 am]
 BILLING CODE 6560-50-P
# Patent

## Title
Vanity case

## Abstract

In order to reduce the time to color and cut the hair, heat is applied to the hair immediately after it is colored. Thus, while the hair is still gripped by the panels 18 and 20, heat is applied to the portion of the hair which extends beyond the nonlinear edge portions 34 and 36 of the panels and to which the coloring agent was applied. Heating the hair greatly reduces the time required for the coloring of the hair. The panels 18 and 20 can then be moved outwardly so that the hair can be cut in the manner previously explained.

## Background
## Claims

following is claimed:

1. A method of coloring hair, said method comprising the steps of providing a pair of panels having nonlinear edge portions with the same configuration, gripping the hair between the panels with the nonlinear edge portions of the panels in alignment and with a portion of the hair extending outwardly from the nonlinear edge portions of the panels, and applying a hair coloring agent to the portion of the hair extending outwardly from the nonlinear edge portions of the panels while continuing to grip the hair between the panels.

2. A method as set forth in claim 1 further including the step of applying heat to the portion of the hair extending outwardly from the nonlinear edge portions of the panels after performing said step of applying a hair coloring agent to the hair and while continuing to perform said step of gripping the hair between the panels.

3. A method as set forth in claim 1 wherein said step of applying a hair coloring agent to the hair includes the step of maintaining the portion of the hair between the panels substantially free of the hair coloring agent.

4. A method as set forth in claim 1 further including the step of cutting the hair along the nonlinear edge portions of the panels.

5. A method as set forth in claim 4 further including the step of applying heat to the hair after performing said step of applying a coloring agent to the hair and before performing said step of cutting the hair.

6. A method as set forth in claim 5 wherein said step of gripping the hair between the panels is continuously performed from a time prior to performing said step of applying a coloring agent to the hair until completion of said step of cutting the hair.

7. A method as set forth in claim 1 further including the step of decreasing the extent to which the hair extends outwardly from the nonlinear edge portions of the panels by sliding the panels along the hair, and, after decreasing the extent to which the hair extends outwardly from the nonlinear edge portions of the panels, cutting the hair along the nonlinear edge portions of the panels.

8. A method as set forth in claim 1 wherein said step of gripping the hair between the panels includes the step of holding the hair against sidewise movement by engaging the hair with a plurality of bristles disposed between the panels.
UN PUBLISHED
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

No. 17
- 2374

JOHN LASCHKEWITSCH , Plaintiff

- Appellant ,

v. LEGAL & GENERAL AMERICA, INC., d/b/a Banner Life Insurance Company , Defendant

- Appellee

.

Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern District of North Carolina , at Raleigh

. James C. Dever III, Chief District Judge. ( 5:15

- cv
- 00251

- D )

Submitted : May 25, 2018 Decided: June 7, 2018

Before TRAXLER, DUNCAN , and FLOYD , Circuit Judges.

Affirmed by un published per curiam opinion

.

John B. Laschkewitsch , Appellant Pro Se. Hutson Brit Smelley, MCDOWELL HETHERINGTON LLP, Houston, Texas, for Appellee.

Unpublished opinions are not binding pre cedent in this circuit.2 PER CURIAM:
John B. Laschkewitsch app eals the district court’s orders granting summary judgment to Defendant, denying his Fed. R. Civ. P. 59(e) motion, and awarding attorney’s fees to Defendant . We have reviewed the record and fi nd no reversible error. Accordingly, we affirm for the reasons stated by the district court. Laschkewitsch v. Legal and Ge n. Am. , Inc. , No. 5:15

- cv
- 00251

- D (E.D.N.C. Mar. 23 & Nov. 1, 2017) . We grant leave to proceed in formal pauperis and dispense with oral argument because the facts and legal contentions are adequately presented in the materials before this court and argument would not aid the decisional process.

AFFIRMED
Exhibit 35.1





SERVICER COMPLIANCE STATEMENT





HARLEY-DAVIDSON CREDIT CORP.





I, James Darrell Thomas, Vice President, Treasurer and Assistant Secretary of Harley-Davidson Credit Corp. (“HDCC”), certify that:





(i) a review of HDCC’s activities for the period from January 1, 2016 through December 31, 2016 (the “Reporting Period”) and of HDCC’s performance under the Sale and Servicing Agreement dated as of April 1, 2013 (the “Sale and Servicing Agreement”) among Harley-Davidson Motorcycle Trust 2013-1, Harley-Davidson Customer Funding Corp., HDCC, and The Bank of New York Mellon Trust Company, N.A., has been made under my supervision; and





(ii) to the best of my knowledge, based on such review, HDCC has fulfilled in all material respects all of its obligations under the Sale and Servicing Agreement throughout the Reporting Period.





IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the undersigned has duly executed this Certificate this 23rd day of March, 2017.








/s/ James Darrell ThomasJames Darrell ThomasVice President, Treasurer and Assistant Secretary of Harley-Davidson Credit Corp., Servicer to Harley-Davidson Motorcycle Trust 2013-1
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<ARTICLE> 5
<LEGEND>
THIS SCHEDULE CONTAINS SUMMARY FINANCIAL INFORMATION EXTRACTED FROM FORM 10-QSB
FOR THE FISCAL QUARTER JUNE 30, 1998 AND IS QUALIFIED IN ITS ENTIRETY BY
REFERENCE TO SUCH FINANCIAL STATEMENTS.
</LEGEND>
       
<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   9-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          SEP-30-1998
<PERIOD-START>                             OCT-01-1997
<PERIOD-END>                               JUN-30-1998
<CASH>                                          21,862
<SECURITIES>                                         0
<RECEIVABLES>                                  645,192<F1>
<ALLOWANCES>                                         0
<INVENTORY>                                    580,127
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                             2,085,873
<PP&E>                                       2,481,875
<DEPRECIATION>                               1,005,240
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                               3,856,675
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                        1,928,164
<BONDS>                                              0
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                     50,000
<COMMON>                                    21,195,952
<OTHER-SE>                                   (266,374)<F2>
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                 3,856,675
<SALES>                                        802,005
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                               802,005
<CGS>                                          708,442
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                  708,442
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                             2,469,199
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                     0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                               6,549
<INCOME-PRETAX>                            (1,963,003)
<INCOME-TAX>                                         0
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                        (1,963,003)
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                               (1,963,003)
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                   (0.19)
<EPS-DILUTED>                                        0
<FN>
<F1>INCLUDES STOCK SUBSCRIPTION RECEIVABLE $206,500
<F2>NOTE RECEIVABLE FOR PREFERRED STOCK OF $266,374 IS SHOWN AS CONTRA-EQUITY
ACCOUNT.
</FN>
        

</TABLE>
[Federal Register Volume 82, Number 173 (Friday, September 8, 2017)]
[Notices]
[Page 42577]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2017-19040]


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

DEPARTMENT OF VETERANS AFFAIRS


Advisory Committee on Disability Compensation; Notice of Meeting 
Cancellation

    The Department of Veterans Affairs gives notice under the Federal 
Advisory Committee Act that the meeting of the Advisory Committee on 
Disability Compensation, previously scheduled to be held at the 
Department of Veterans Affairs, 1800 G. Street NW., Conference Room 
870, Washington, DC 20006, on September 12-13, 2017, has been 
cancelled.
    For more information, please contact Stacy Boyd, Designated Federal 
Officer, Department of Veterans Affairs, Veterans Benefits 
Administration, Compensation Service, Policy Staff at (202) 461-9580 or 
via email at <a href="/cdn-cgi/l/email-protection#287b5c494b51066a47514c685e49064f475e"><span class="__cf_email__" data-cfemail="6c3f180d0f15422e0315082c1a0d420b031a">[email protected]</span></a>.

    Dated: September 5, 2017.
Jelessa M. Burney,
Federal Advisory Committee Management Officer.
[FR Doc. 2017-19040 Filed 9-7-17; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 8320-01-P


</pre><script data-cfasync="false" src="/cdn-cgi/scripts/5c5dd728/cloudflare-static/email-decode.min.js"></script></body>
</html>
1

In The

Court of Appeals

Ninth District of Texas at Beaumont

__________________

NO. 09-21-00085-CV

__________________

IN RE BARSH AUTO, LLC

__________________________________________________________________

Original Proceeding

284th District Court of Montgomery County, Texas

Trial Cause No. 19-09-12264-CV

__________________________________________________________________

ORDER

Barsh Auto, LLC, Relator, filed a petition for a writ of mandamus and a 

motion for temporary relief. See Tex. R. App. P. 52. Relator is an intervenor in Trial 

Cause Number 19-09-12264-CV, Charles Rutland, et al. v. Britton Grissom. Relator 

seeks a writ compelling the Honorable Kristin Bays, Judge of the 284th District 

Court of Montgomery County, Texas, to vacate a February 5, 2021 order granting 

the Defendant’s Motion to Exclude Undisclosed Evidence of Damages. See Tex. 

Gov’t Code Ann. § 22.221.
2

Additionally, Relator asks the Court to stay an impending hearing in the trial 

court that has been scheduled on the Defendant’s Motion to Dismiss for Want of 

Prosecution before ruling on Relator’s petition. The Court finds temporary relief is 

necessary to prevent undue prejudice. We ORDER the hearing in Trial Cause 

Number 19-09-12264-CV on the Defendant’s Motion to Dismiss Relator’s claims 

for want of prosecution STAYED pending the outcome of this Court’s ruling on 

Relator’s petition seeking a writ to require the trial court to withdraw the ruling it 

made granting Defendant’s Motion to Exclude. See Tex. R. App. P. 52.10(b). No 

bond is required of Relator as a condition for the relief we have granted by this Order.

We note, however, that Relator’s petition refers to motions and to a hearing 

not yet filed as an appendix in this Court. It appears this information should be 

included in Relator’s appendix. See Tex. R. App. P. 52.3(k). The Court directs 

Relator to file a supplemental appendix, which includes sworn copies of the docket 

sheet and all documents it refers to in its Petition that it claims are material to its 

argument claiming this Court should grant relief from the trial court’s order. 

Relator’s appendix should include an authenticated transcript of the testimony it 

claims is relevant to the claims in its petition, including any documents the parties 

offered into evidence during the hearing on the Defendant’s Motion to Exclude. See 

Tex. R. App. P. 52.7. 
3

Relator’s supplemental appendix is due May 3, 2021. The response of the Real 

Party in Interest, Britton Grissom, is due ten days after Relator files a supplemental 

appendix.

MOTION FOR TEMPORARY RELIEF GRANTED. 

ORDER ENTERED April 22, 2021.

PER CURIAM

Before Kreger, Horton and Johnson, JJ.
ex10-7.htm


Exhibit 10.7


 


RESOLUTION OF







THE BOARD OF DIRECTORS







OF







RTG VENTURES  INC







The following is a true copy of the resolution duly adopted by the Board of Directors of this Corporation at a special meeting, notice to this meeting having been waived, held this December 9th, 2011.


 


The Board of Directors who were present for this meeting & took active part therein were:







LINDA PERRY


NEIL GRAY


REGGIE JAMES







WHEREAS there has been presented to and considered by this meeting a Motion to Rescind the previously executed Share Purchase Agreement with Bitemark MC Ltd of 3rd September, 2010;







WHEREAS said Agreement was premised upon maintenance of assets and certain performances of profit margin on the part of Bitemark MC Ltd;







WHEREAS no such maintanence of the assets nor production of any profit has ensued, to the point of filing of Liquidation on the part of Bitemark; no consideration at all having been tendered on the part of Bitemark MC Ltd;







NOW THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED that the corporation having considered this matter, has opened the floor to all those who voice a preference in the issue, has decided unanimously and RESOLVED that:







Said Share Purchase Agreement, as well as ALL obligations and commitments between the companies are now hereby RECSINDED nunc pro tunc leaving the companies in a state of equipoise as was prior to the first Agreement signed between them.


 


Note additionally that the 236,228 Preferred Shares reserved for Bitemark shall herewith be returned to Treasury.







Said Motion is hereby passed and the corporate books, records and the secretary shall file this Resolution in the corporate records.


 







DATED: December 9th, 2011


 




 


____________________


David E. Price, Secretary
| (logo) WELLS FARGO | CMBS Department

 

MAC N9401-011

1055 10th Avenue SE

Minneapolis, MN 55414 |
|--------------------|------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|

 

Morgan Stanley Capital I Inc.

1585 Broadway

New York, New York 10036

 

 

RE: Annual Statement of Compliance for Morgan Stanley Bank of America Merrill Lynch Trust 2013-C11, Commercial Mortgage Pass-Through Certificates Series 2013-C11

 

Per the Pooling and Servicing Agreement dated as of August 1, 2013 (the "Agreement"), the undersigned, a duly authorized officer of Wells Fargo Bank, N.A., as Custodian ("Wells Fargo"), hereby certifies as follows as of and for the year ending December 31, 2015 (the "Reporting Period"):

 

(a) A review of Wells Fargo's activities during the Reporting Period and of its performance under the Agreement has been made under such officer's supervision; and

 

(b) To the best of such officer's knowledge, based on such review, Wells Fargo has fulfilled all of its obligations under the Agreement in all material respects throughout the Reporting Period.

 

 

March 1, 2016

/s/ GAIL VANNEST

GAIL VANNEST

Vice President

 

 

Wells Fargo Bank, N.A.
**Exhibit 32.2****CERTIFICATION**     The undersigned officer of DATATRAK International, Inc. (the “Company”), does hereby certify,to such officer’s knowledge, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, as adopted pursuant to Section 906of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that: 1. the Company’s Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q for the quarter ended September30, 2005 (the “Form 10-Q”) fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) or15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended; and  2. the information contained in the Form 10-Q fairly presents, in all materialrespects, the financial condition and results of operations of the Company as of, andfor, the periods presented in the Form 10-Q.        Dated: November 14, 2005 /s/ Terry C. Black   Terry C. Black   Chief Financial Officer
STATE OF LOUISIANA

COURT OF APPEAL, FIRST CIRCUIT

STATE OF LOUISIANA

VERSUS

WILBERT KELLY, JR. 

NO. 2021 KW 1512

JAN 3 1 2022

In Re: Wilbert Kelly, Jr., applying for supervisory writs, 

20th Judicial District Court, Parish of East

Feliciana, No. 03 - CR - 898. 

BEFORE: McDONALD, LANIER, AND WOLFE, JJ. 

WRIT DENIED. 

JMM

WIL

EW

COURT OF APPEAL, FIRST CIRCUIT

YM

DEPUCALERK OF COURT

FOR THE COURT