alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
#### Marlon ORELLANA-VEGA and Perla Corral-Camacho, Petitioners, v. Eric H. HOLDER, Jr., Attorney General, Respondent.

No. 08-74421.

United States Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit.

Submitted Dec. 14, 2010.*

Filed Jan. 6, 2011.

*37Sharon A. Healey, Law Office of Sharon A. Healey, Seattle, WA, for Petitioners.

OIL, Jeffrey Lawrence Menkin, Trial, U.S. Department of Justice, Washington, DC, District Counsel, Esquire, Office of the District Counsel Department of Homeland Security, Los Angeles, CA, Ronald E. Lefevre, Office of the District Counsel Department of Homeland Security, San Francisco, CA, for Respondent.

Before: GOODWIN, WALLACE, and THOMAS, Circuit Judges.

*

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

MEMORANDUM **

Marlon Orellana-Vega and Perla Corral-Camacho, natives and citizens of Guatemala and Mexico, respectively, petition for review of the Board of Immigration Appeals’ (“BIA”) order dismissing their appeal from an immigration judge’s (“IJ”) decision denying their applications for asylum, withholding of removal, relief under the Convention Against Torture (“CAT”), and cancellation of removal. Our jurisdiction is governed by 8 U.S.C. § 1252. We review for substantial evidence, *INS v. Elias-Zacarias,*502 U.S. 478, 481, 112 S.Ct. 812, 117 L.Ed.2d 38 (1992), and we deny in part and dismiss in part the petition for review.

In their opening brief, petitioners failed to raise any challenge to the agency’s determination that they did not establish extraordinary circumstances to excuse their untimely filed asylum application. *See Martinez-Serrano v. INS,*94 F.3d 1256, 1259-60 (9th Cir.1996) (issues not specifically raised and argued in a party’s opening brief are waived).

Substantial evidence supports the agency’s conclusion that petitioners failed to establish a clear probability of persecution based on the murder of OrellanaVega’s uncle by an unknown assailant. *See Hakeem v. INS,*273 F.3d 812, 816-17 (9th Cir.2001).

Substantial evidence also supports the agency’s conclusion that petitioners failed to establish it is more likely than not Orellana-Vega would be tortured if returned to Guatemala. *See Wakkary v. Holder,*558 F.3d 1049, 1067-68 (9th Cir.2009).

Finally, we lack jurisdiction to review the BIA’s discretionary determination that petitioners failed to show exceptional and extremely unusual hardship to a qualifying relative. *See Martinez-Rosas v. Gonzales,*424 F.3d 926, 930 (9th Cir.2005). Petitioners’ contention that the IJ’s denial of relief was based on speculation is not supported by the record and does not amount to a colorable claim. *See Mendez-Castro v. Mukasey,*552 F.3d 975, 980 (9th Cir.2009).

PETITION FOR REVIEW DENIED in part; DISMISSED in part.

**

 This disposition is not appropriate for publication and is not precedent except as provided by 9th Cir. R. 36-3.
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<ARTICLE>                     5
<LEGEND>
The consolidated balance sheet at March 31, 2000 and the consolidated  statement
of operations for the year end March 31, 2000.
</LEGEND>
<MULTIPLIER>                  1,000

<S>                           <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                 YEAR
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                  MAR-31-2000
<PERIOD-START>                     APR-01-1999
<PERIOD-END>                       MAR-31-2000
<CASH>                                     225
<SECURITIES>                                 0
<RECEIVABLES>                              387
<ALLOWANCES>                                 0
<INVENTORY>                                386
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                         1,114
<PP&E>                                     546
<DEPRECIATION>                               0
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                           1,660
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                   17,472
<BONDS>                                      0
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                        0
<PREFERRED>                                  0
<COMMON>                                16,405
<OTHER-SE>                              34,816
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>             1,660
<SALES>                                  4,680
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                         4,680
<CGS>                                    2,985
<TOTAL-COSTS>                            4,795
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                             0
<LOSS-PROVISION>                             0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                       1,853
<INCOME-PRETAX>                         (1,968)
<INCOME-TAX>                                 1
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                     (1,969)
<DISCONTINUED>                               0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                              0
<CHANGES>                                    0
<NET-INCOME>                            (1,969)
<EPS-BASIC>                              (0.37)
<EPS-DILUTED>                            (0.37)


</TABLE>
* 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

May 20, 2004

Charles R. Fulbruge III

Clerk

IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT

 

No. 03-20473

Summary Calendar

 

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,

Plaintiff-Appellee,

versus

RODNEY DAVIS,

Defendant-Appellant.

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

Appeal from the United States District Court

for the Southern District of Texas

USDC No. H-01-CR-867-ALL

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

Before HIGGINBOTHAM, DAVIS and PRADO, Circuit Judges.

PER CURIAM:*

Rodney Davis, also known as Arthur Carl Davis, pleaded

guilty without a written plea agreement to possession with intent

to distribute five grams or more of a mixture or substance

containing cocaine base, and he was sentenced to 90 months’

imprisonment, five years’ supervised release, and a $100 special

assessment. At rearraignment, before the district court accepted

his guilty plea, Davis asserted that he did not actually have
No. 03-20473

-2-

possession of the drugs, although he admitted that he arranged

the meeting at which the drugs were sold and that he was present

at the meeting. The district court then asked him whether he

“knew what it was they were doing,” and Davis responded

affirmatively.

Davis argues on appeal that his denial at rearraignment of

having possessed the drugs indicates that his guilty plea was not

made knowingly and voluntarily. However, aiding and abetting “is

an alternative charge in every count, whether explicit or

implicit, and the rule is well-established, both in this circuit

and others, that one who has been indicted as a principal may be

convicted on evidence showing that he merely aided and abetted

the commission of the offense.” United States v. Bullock, 451

F.2d 884, 888 (5th Cir. 1971). Davis admitted facts sufficient

to support a conviction as an aider an abettor. See 18 U.S.C. 

§ 2(a); United States v. Sorrells, 145 F.3d 744, 753 (5th Cir.

1998). Although the trial court did not inform Davis of the

elements of aiding and abetting, his substantial rights were not

violated because it is unlikely that his knowledge of the

elements of aiding and abetting would have affected his

willingness to plead guilty. See United States v. Johnson, 

1 F.3d 296, 302 (5th Cir. 1993) (en banc). Therefore, the

district court did not commit plain error and its decision is

AFFIRMED.
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<ARTICLE> 5

<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   YEAR
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          DEC-31-1996
<PERIOD-START>                             JAN-01-1996
<PERIOD-END>                               DEC-31-1996
<CASH>                                      16,265,468
<SECURITIES>                                         0
<RECEIVABLES>                               19,848,253
<ALLOWANCES>                                   665,000
<INVENTORY>                                 21,867,835
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                            62,043,870
<PP&E>                                      53,391,423
<DEPRECIATION>                              13,343,674
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                             116,749,024
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                       13,734,235
<BONDS>                                              0
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                       258,110
<OTHER-SE>                                 102,756,679
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>               116,749,024
<SALES>                                    146,089,348
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                           146,089,348
<CGS>                                       84,325,513
<TOTAL-COSTS>                               84,325,513
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                             2,208,436
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                     0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                            (58,337)
<INCOME-PRETAX>                             26,521,278
<INCOME-TAX>                                 2,938,879
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                         23,582,399
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                23,582,399
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                      .85
<EPS-DILUTED>                                      .84


</TABLE>
Organization Representative Address

American Federation of Government 

Employees

ETAC Chair Jacqueline Simon

 Policy Director

80 F Street, N.W 

Washington, DC 20001

Federally Employed Women, Inc. ETAC Vice Chair

 Althea Sprosta

455 Massachusetts Avenue, N.W. #306

Washington, D.C. 20001

American Postal Workers Union Michael Macho

Manager, Negotiations Support & Special Projects

1300 L Street, N.W.

Washington, DC 20005

Federal Managers Association Craig Carter

President

1641 Prince Street

Alexandria, VA 22314

National Active and Retired Federal 

Employees Association

Kathryn Hensley

National Secretary/Treasurer

606 North Washington Street

Alexandria, VA 22314-1914

National Association of Letter Carriers’ 

Association

Kori Blalock Keller

Chief of Staff

100 Indiana Avenue, N.W.

Washington, DC 20001-2144

National Association of Government 

Employees

Lee Blackmon

Director, Federal Division

159 Burgin Parkway

Quincy, MA 02169

National Association of Postal 

Supervisors

Chuck Mulidore

Executive Vice President

1727 King Street, Suite 400

Alexandria, VA 22314-2753

National Rural Letter Carriers’ Association Tommy Turner

National Secretary-Treasurer

1630 Duke Street

Alexandria, VA 22314-3467

National Federation of Federal 

Employees

Dave Stamey

National Secretary-Treasurer

1225 New York Avenue, N.W. Suite 450

Washington, DC 20005

National Treasury Employees Union Matt Sowards

Legislative Representative

800 K Street, N.W. Suite 1000

Washington, DC

Senior Executives Association Neil Doherty 77 K Street, N.E. Suite 2600

Washington, DC 20002

Uniformed Services Ron Garner

Assistant Director of Military Compensation 

Policy,

Retired and Annuitant Pay Policy

Office of the Under Secretary of Defense for 

Personnel and Readiness

4000 Defense Pentagon

Washington, DC 20301-4000

United Postmaster and Managers of the 

United States

Daniel Heins

National Executive Director

8 Herbert Street

Alexandria, VA 22305-2600
MEMORANDUM OPINION

No. 04-11-00743-CV

The Estate of Thomas Edward FARMER, Deceased

From the Probate Court No. 1, Bexar County, Texas

Trial Court No. 2007-PC-0655

Honorable Polly Jackson Spencer, Judge Presiding

PER CURIAM

Sitting: Karen Angelini, Justice

Sandee Bryan Marion, Justice

Phylis J. Speedlin, Justice

Delivered and Filed: November 9, 2011

DISMISSED

The parties have filed a joint motion to dismiss this appeal, stating that they no longer 

wish to prosecute this appeal. The motion asks that costs of appeal be taxed against the parties 

who incurred them. The motion is granted, and this appeal is dismissed. See TEX. R. APP. P.

42.1(a). Costs of appeal are taxed against the parties who incurred them. See id. 42.1(d).

PER CURIAM
```

[Congressional Bills 103th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[H.R. 2139 Introduced in House (IH)]

103d CONGRESS
  1st Session
                                H. R. 2139

To amend title 44, United States Code, to authorize appropriations for 
      the National Historical Publications and Records Commission.

_______________________________________________________________________

                    IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

                              May 18, 1993

 Mr. Condit (for himself, Mr. Conyers, Mr. Thomas of Wyoming, and Mr. 
    Sharp) introduced the following bill; which was referred to the 
                   Committee on Government Operations

_______________________________________________________________________

                                 A BILL

 
To amend title 44, United States Code, to authorize appropriations for 
      the National Historical Publications and Records Commission.

    Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representatives of the 
United States of America in Congress assembled, That section 2504(f) of 
title 44, United States Code is amended by striking ``(f)(1)'' and all 
that follows through the end of paragraph (1) and inserting the 
following:
    ``(f)(1) There are authorized to be appropriated to the National 
Historical Publications and Records Commission such amounts as may be 
necessary to carry out this chapter for each of fiscal years 1994, 
1995, 1996, 1997, and 1998.''.

                                 <all>
```
Exhibit 32.2

CERTIFICATION PURSUANT TO
18 U.S.C. SECTION 1350
AS ADOPTED PURSUANT TO
SECTION 906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002

In connection with the Annual Report on Form 10-K of The Sports Authority, Inc. (the "Company") for the period ended January 28,
2006, as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the "Report"), I, Thomas T. Hendrickson, Chief Financial Officer, Chief Administrative Officer and Treasurer, certify,
pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, as adopted pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that:

| |  | /s/THOMAS T. HENDRICKSONThomas T. Hendrickson Chief Financial Officer, Chief Administrative Officer
and Treasurer
Date: March 22, 2006
| |  | --------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

---



QuickLinks
II

103D CONGRESS

2D SESSION H. R. 2294

IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES

SEPTEMBER 22 (legislative day, SEPTEMBER 7), 1993

Received; read twice and referred to the Committee on Governmental Affairs

OCTOBER 8 (legislative day, SEPTEMBER 12), 1994

Committee discharged

AN ACT

To redesignate the Post Office building located at 1000

Lamar Street in Wichita Falls, Texas, as the ‘‘Graham

B. Purcell, Jr. Post Office Building’’.

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

3 SECTION 1. REDESIGNATION.

4 The Post Office building located at 1000 Lamar

5 Street in Wichita Falls, Texas, and known as the Main

6 Post Office, shall be known and designated as the

7 ‘‘Graham B. Purcell, Jr. Post Office Building’’.
2

•HR 2294 CDS

1 SEC. 2. REFERENCES.

2 Any reference in a law, map, regulation, document,

3 paper, or other record of the United States to the Post

4 Office building referred to in section 1 shall be deemed

5 to be a reference to the Graham B. Purcell, Jr. Post Office

6 Building.

Passed the House of Representatives September 21,

1993.

Attest: DONNALD K. ANDERSON,

Clerk.
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<ARTICLE>                                          5
<CIK>                                              0000911503
<NAME>                               Smith Barney Diversified Futures Fund L.P.

<S>                                                  <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                                      12-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                                  DEC-31-2000
<PERIOD-START>                                     JAN-01-2000
<PERIOD-END>                                       DEC-31-2000
<CASH>                                                     78,497,039
<SECURITIES>                                                4,215,703
<RECEIVABLES>                                                 312,122
<ALLOWANCES>                                                        0
<INVENTORY>                                                         0
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                                           83,024,864
<PP&E>                                                              0
<DEPRECIATION>                                                      0
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                             83,024,864
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                                       2,525,815
<BONDS>                                                             0
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                               0
<PREFERRED>                                                         0
<COMMON>                                                            0
<OTHER-SE>                                                 80,499,049
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                               83,024,864
<SALES>                                                             0
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                                           (4,669,368)
<CGS>                                                               0
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                                       0
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                            3,097,470
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                                    0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                                                  0
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                            (7,766,838)
<INCOME-TAX>                                                        0
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                                                 0
<DISCONTINUED>                                                      0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                                     0
<CHANGES>                                                           0
<NET-INCOME>                                               (7,766,838)
<EPS-BASIC>                                                  (89.14)
<EPS-DILUTED>                                                       0


</TABLE>
Exhibit 99.2

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


In connection with the Annual Report of The National Bank of Indianapolis
Corporation (the "Company") on Form 10-K for the period ending December 31, 2002
as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the
"Report"), I, Debra L. Ross, Chief Financial Officer of the Company, certify,
pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 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 result of operations of the
Company.


/s/ Debra L. Ross
-----------------------------------
Debra L. Ross
Chief Financial Officer
March 28, 2003


The foregoing certification is being furnished solely pursuant to 18 U.S.C.
Section 1350 and not for any other purpose, and is subject to the knowledge
standard contained in 18 U.S.C. Section 1350.
#### Flor Maria CARRASCO, AKA Flor Mancillas-Rosas, Petitioner, v. Eric H. HOLDER, Jr., Attorney General, Respondent.

No. 10-72519.

United States Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit.

Submitted April 9, 2014.*

Filed April 14, 2014.

Roni Rotholz, Esquire, Law Offices of Roni Rotholz, Walnut Creek, CA, for Petitioner.

*518Jesse Lloyd Busen, Trial, OIL, U.S. Department of Justice, Washington, DC, Chief Counsel Ice, Office of the Chief Counsel Department of Homeland Security, San Francisco, CA, for Respondent.

Before: SILVERMAN, W. FLETCHER, and BYBEE, Circuit Judges.

*

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

MEMORANDUM **

Flor Maria Carrasco petitions for review of a final order of removal from the Board of Immigration Appeals (“BIA”). The BIA upheld the Immigration Judge’s (“U”) denial of Carrasco’s application for deferral of removal under the Convention Against Torture. We have jurisdiction under 8 U.S.C. § 1252, and we deny the petition.

The record does not compel the conclusion that Carrasco is more likely than not to be tortured in Mexico for having received a reduced sentence on her 2007 drug conviction. *See Lolong v. Gonzales,*484 F.3d 1173, 1178 (9th Cir.2007) (en banc) (“We must uphold the BIA’s determination unless ‘the evidence not only supports, but *compels*the conclusion that the ... decision was incorrect.’ ”); 8 C.F.R. §§ 1208.16(c)(2), 1208.17(a) (requiring applicant for deferral of removal to prove that torture is more likely than not). Nor does the record compel the conclusion that any such torture would be accomplished with the consent or acquiescence of someone acting in an official capacity. *See*8 C.F.R. § 1208.18(a)(1). The record of Carrasco’s sentencing does not indicate that she was given a reduced sentence because she cooperated with prosecutors, but rather because of a potential disparity with her co-defendant’s sentence. Carras-co presented no specific evidence to the IJ that anyone in Mexico has threatened her or is even aware of the fact that she. received a reduced sentence. Without nonspeculative evidence of a risk of torture, Carrasco did not satisfy her burden to prove that she is more likely than not to be tortured. *See Matter of M-B-A-,*23 I. & N. Dec. 474, 479-80 (BIA 2002).

PETITION FOR REVIEW DENIED.

**

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