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

No. 05-70567.

United States Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit.

Submitted Feb. 20, 2007.*

Filed Feb. 26, 2007.

Kuldip S. Dhariwal, Esq., Fremont, CA, for Petitioner.

Ronald E. Lefevre, Chief Counsel, Office of the District Counsel Department of Homeland Security, Kathleen V. Gunning, Esq., San Francisco, CA, FDIC — Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation, Washington, DC, for Respondent.

*597Before: BEEZER, FERNANDEZ and McKEOWN, Circuit Judges.

*

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

MEMORANDUM **

Jeet Singh, a native and citizen of India, petitions for review of the Board of Immigration Appeals’ (“BIA”) decision, which summarily affirmed the Immigration Judge’s (“IJ”) order denying his application for asylum, withholding of removal and relief under the Convention Against Torture (“CAT”). We have jurisdiction under 8 U.S.C. § 1252.

Where, as here, the BIA affirms without an opinion, we review the IJ’s decision directly. *See Falcon Carriche v. Ashcroft,*350 F.3d 845, 849 (9th Cir.2003). We review for substantial evidence, *Gonzalez-Hernandez v. Ashcroft,*336 F.3d 995, 998 (9th Cir.2003), and we deny the petition for review.

The IJ found that, even assuming Singh’s testimony was credible and that past persecution was established, the government submitted evidence establishing that Singh no longer had a well-founded fear of future persecution because of changed country conditions. Because the IJ performed a sufficiently individualized analysis of the State Department’s country profile reports regarding the current treatment of Sikhs in India, substantial evidence supports this finding. *See*8 C.F.R. § 208.13(b)(1); *see also Gonzalez-Hernandez,*336 F.3d at 998-99.

Because Singh did not demonstrate that he was eligible for asylum, it follows that he did not satisfy the more stringent standard for withholding of removal. *See Alvarez-Santos v. INS,*332 F.3d 1245, 1255 (9th Cir.2003).

Substantial evidence also supports the IJ’s denial of CAT relief because Singh did not establish that it is more likely than not that he will be tortured if he returns to India. *See Malhi v. INS,*336 F.3d 989, 993 (9th Cir.2003).

PETITION FOR REVIEW DENIED.

**

 This disposition is not appropriate for publication and is not precedent except as provided by 9th Cir. R. 36-3.
[Federal Register Volume 66, Number 41 (Thursday, March 1, 2001)]
[Notices]
[Page 12954]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 01-4907]


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

DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES

National Institutes of Health


National Institute of General Medical Sciences; Notice of Closed 
Meeting

    Pursuant to section 10(d) of the Federal Advisory Committee Act, as 
amended (5 U.S.C. Appendix 2), 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 General Medical 
Sciences Special Emphasis Panel.
    Date: March 26, 2001.
    Time: 11 a.m. to 12 p.m.
    Agenda: To review and evaluate grant applications.
    Place: Natcher Building, Room 1AS-13, Bethesda, MD 20892, 
(Telephone Conference Call).
    Contact Person: Arthur L. Zachary, PhD, Scientific Review 
Administrator, Office of Scientific Review, National Institute of 
General Medical Sciences, National Institutes of Health, Natcher 
Building, Room 1AS-13H, Bethesda, MD 20892, (301) 592-2886, 
<a href="/cdn-cgi/l/email-protection#ed978c8e858c9f948cad83848a809ec3838485c38a829b"><span class="__cf_email__" data-cfemail="ef958e8c878e9d968eaf818688829cc1818687c1888099">[email protected]</span></a>.

(Catalogue of Federal Domestic Assistance Program Nos. 93.375, 
Minority Biomedical Research Support; 93.821, Cell Biology and 
Biophysics Research; 93.859, Pharmacology, Physiology, and 
Biological Chemistry Research; 93.862, Genetics and Developmental 
Biology Research; 93.88, Minority Access to Research Careers; 93.96, 
Special Minority Initiatives, National Institutes of Health, HHS)

    Dated: February 20, 2001.
LaVerne Y. Stringfield,
Director, Office of Federal Advisory Committee Policy.
[FR Doc. 01-4907 Filed 2-28-01; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4140-01-M


</pre><script data-cfasync="false" src="/cdn-cgi/scripts/5c5dd728/cloudflare-static/email-decode.min.js"></script></body>
</html>
**Exhibit 31.1**CERTIFICATIONI, Terrance J. Lillis, certify that: 1. I have reviewed this report on Form 10-K and all reports on Form 10-D requiredto be filed in respect of the period covered by this report on Form 10-K of PrincipalLife Income Fundings Trust 2007-31 (the “Exchange Act periodic reports”);  2. Based on my knowledge, the Exchange Act periodic reports, taken as whole, donot contain any untrue statement of a material fact or omit to state a material factnecessary to make the statements made, in light of the circumstances under which suchstatements were made, not misleading with respect to the period covered by this report;  3. Based on my knowledge, all of the distribution, servicing and other informationrequired to be provided under Form 10-D for the period covered by this report isincluded in the Exchange Act periodic reports;  4. Based on my knowledge and the servicer compliance statement(s) required in thisreport under Item 1123 of Regulation AB, and except as disclosed in the Exchange Actperiodic reports, the servicer has fulfilled its obligations under the servicingagreement(s) in all material respects; and  5. All of the reports on assessment of compliance with servicing criteria forasset-backed securities and their related attestation reports on assessment ofcompliance with servicing criteria for asset-backed securities required to be includedin this report in accordance with Item 1122 of Regulation AB and Exchange Act Rules13a-18 and 15d-18 have been included as an exhibit to this report, except as otherwisedisclosed in this report. Any material instances of noncompliance described in suchreports have been disclosed in this report on Form 10-K.In giving the certifications above, I have reasonably relied on information provided to me by thefollowing unaffiliated parties: Citibank, N.A. and Bankers Trust Company, N.A.Date: March 27, 2008   /s/ Terrance J. Lillis   Terrance J. Lillis  Chief Financial Officer- Retirement and Investor Services
### IN THE TENTH COURT OF APPEALS

No. 10

- 19

- 00151

- CR

CEDRICK VIDALL BROWN , Appellant
v.
THE STATE OF TEXAS , Appellee

From the 54th District Court McLennan County, Texas Trial Court No. 2017

- 745

- C2

MEMORANDUM OPINION

Cedrick Vidall Brown appeals his 2018 conviction for aggravated robbery. Brown recognizes that his appeal is untimely and requests that this Court grant him an out

- of

time appeal. We lack jurisdiction to grant an out

- of

- time appeal; that authority belongs exclusively to the Court of Criminal Appeals through a writ of habeas corpus. See Parr v.

State , 206 S.W.3d 143, 144

- 45 (Tex. App.

— Waco 2006, no pet.). Accordingly, this appeal is dismissed. Notwithstanding the dismissal , Brown may file a motion for rehearing with thisBrown v. State Page 2

Court within 15 days after this opinion and judgment are rendered if Brown believes this opinion and judgment are e rroneously based on inaccurate information or documents.

See T EX

. R. A PP

. P. 49.1. Moreover, if Brown desires to have the opinion and judgment of this Court reviewed by filing a petition for discretionary review, that petition must be

filed with the Cour t of Criminal Appeals within 30 days after either the day this Court's judgment is rendered or the day the last timely motion for rehearing is overruled by this

Court. See T EX

. R. A PP

. P . 68.2(a).

TOM GRAY Chief Justice

Before Chief Justice Gray, Justice Davis, and Justice Neill Appeal dismissed Opinion delivered and filed May 8 , 2019 Do not publish [CRPM]
<TABLE> <S> <C>


<ARTICLE>                                           7
<LEGEND>
THIS  SCHEDULE  CONTAINS  SUMMARY  INFORMATION   EXTRACTED  FROM  THE  CONDENSED
STATEMENTS  OF  OPERATIONS  AND  CONDENSED  BALANCE  SHEETS  (UNAUDITED)  AND IS
QUALIFIED IN ITS ENTIRETY BY REFERENCE TO SUCH FINANCIAL STATEMENTS
</LEGEND>
<MULTIPLIER>                                   1,000
<CURRENCY>                                     U.S. DOLLARS

<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   3-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                              DEC-31-2000
<PERIOD-START>                                 JAN-01-2000
<PERIOD-END>                                   MAR-31-2000
<EXCHANGE-RATE>                                1
<DEBT-HELD-FOR-SALE>                           27,343
<DEBT-CARRYING-VALUE>                          0
<DEBT-MARKET-VALUE>                            0
<EQUITIES>                                     0
<MORTGAGE>                                     0
<REAL-ESTATE>                                  0
<TOTAL-INVEST>                                 31,460
<CASH>                                         1,435
<RECOVER-REINSURE>                             0
<DEFERRED-ACQUISITION>                         3,534
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                 92,835
<POLICY-LOSSES>                                7,074
<UNEARNED-PREMIUMS>                            0
<POLICY-OTHER>                                 0
<POLICY-HOLDER-FUNDS>                          0
<NOTES-PAYABLE>                                0
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                          0
<PREFERRED>                                    0
<COMMON>                                       2,000
<OTHER-SE>                                     26,840
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                   92,835
<PREMIUMS>                                     0
<INVESTMENT-INCOME>                            462
<INVESTMENT-GAINS>                             (234)
<OTHER-INCOME>                                 388
<BENEFITS>                                     277
<UNDERWRITING-AMORTIZATION>                    97
<UNDERWRITING-OTHER>                           72
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                170
<INCOME-TAX>                                   60
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                            110
<DISCONTINUED>                                 0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                0
<CHANGES>                                      0
<NET-INCOME>                                   110
<EPS-BASIC>                                    0
<EPS-DILUTED>                                  0
<RESERVE-OPEN>                                 0
<PROVISION-CURRENT>                            0
<PROVISION-PRIOR>                              0
<PAYMENTS-CURRENT>                             0
<PAYMENTS-PRIOR>                               0
<RESERVE-CLOSE>                                0
<CUMULATIVE-DEFICIENCY>                        0



</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

February 14, 2007

Charles R. Fulbruge III

Clerk

IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT

No. 06-40324

Conference Calendar

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,

Plaintiff-Appellee,

versus

TIMOTHY DEWAYNE TURNER,

Defendant-Appellant.

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

Appeal from the United States District Court

for the Eastern District of Texas

USDC No. 1:05-CR-53

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

Before BARKSDALE, GARZA, and CLEMENT, Circuit Judges.

PER CURIAM:*

The attorney appointed to represent Timothy Dewayne Turner

has requested leave to withdraw and has filed a brief as required

by Anders v. California, 386 U.S. 738 (1967). Turner has not

filed a response to counsel’s Anders motion.

Our independent review of the brief and the record discloses

no nonfrivolous issue. Accordingly, the motion for leave to

withdraw is GRANTED, counsel is excused from further

responsibilities herein, and the APPEAL IS DISMISSED. See 5TH

CIR. R. 42.2.
UNPUBLISHED

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

No. 97-1340

JAMES F. JONES,

Plaintiff - Appellant,

versus

SHIRLEY S. CHATER, COMMISSIONER OF SOCIAL

SECURITY,

Respondent - Appellee.

Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of

Maryland, at Baltimore. M. J. Garbis, District Judge. (CA-96-

3009-MJG)

Submitted: May 1, 1997 Decided: May 8, 1997

Before WIDENER and MURNAGHAN, Circuit Judges, and PHILLIPS, Senior

Circuit Judge.

Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion.

James F. Jones, Appellant Pro Se. Anne von Scheven, SOCIAL SECURITY

ADMINISTRATION, Philadelphia, Pennsylvania; Lynne Ann Battaglia,

United States Attorney, Baltimore, Maryland, for Appellee.

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.

See Local Rule 36(c).
2

PER CURIAM:

Appellant appeals the district court's order dismissing as

frivolous, 28 U.S.C. § 1915(e) (1994), his suit against the Commissioner of Social Security in which he claimed that his civil rights

were violated when a clerk at the local Social Security Administration office treated him rudely. We have reviewed the record and the

district court's opinion and find no reversible error. Accordingly,

we affirm on the reasoning of the district court. Jones v. Chater,

No. CA-96-3009-MJG (D. Md., Feb. 23, 1997). In light of this disposition, Appellee's motion to dismiss this appeal as interlocutory

and to stay the briefing order are hereby denied. We deny Appellant's motion for oral argument and dispense with argument because

the facts and legal contentions are adequately presented in the materials before the court and argument would not aid the decisional

process.

AFFIRMED
Exhibit
4.59




Agreement




No.:
QT220080179




Party A:
China Electric Equipment Group Corporation




Party B:
China Sunergy (Nanjing) Co., Ltd.




Party C:
CEEG (Nanjing) New Energy Co., Ltd.





Hereinafter
referred to as Party A, Party B and Party C





Due to
the expiration of creditor’s right and debts of the three parties, and through
friendly consultations, the three parties agree to transfer creditor’s rights
and debts as below.




1. Party
A will transfer the creditor’s rights that Party B owes to Party C, totaling RMB
Nine Million Three Hundred and Twenty-Two Thousand Nine Hundred and Thirty-Six
Point Two (¥9,322,936.20).




2. Party
C will offset the creditor’s rights transferred by Party A against the debts
that Party C owes to Party B.




3. Party
B and Party C will negotiate over the balance that Party B owes to Party C after
the offset.




This
agreement is made in three duplicate copies, one page attachment, which shall be
regarded as an accounting certificate for each party.





Party A:
China Electric Equipment Group Corporation /s/




December
30, 2008




Party B:
China Sunergy (Nanjing) Co., Ltd. /s/




December
30, 2008




Party C:
China New Energy (Nanjing) Co., Ltd. /s/




December
30, 2008
EXHIBIT
32.1











CERTIFICATION
OF CHIEF EXECUTIVE OFFICER 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 Quarterly Report of Weingarten Realty Investors (the
"Company") on Form 10-Q for the period ended September 30, 2009, as filed with
the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the "Report"), I,
Andrew M. Alexander, President and Chief Executive Officer of the Company,
certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. § 1350, as adopted pursuant to
§ 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.











BY:
            /s/
      Andrew M. AlexanderAndrew
      M. AlexanderPresident/Chief
      Executive OfficerNovember
      6, 2009
#### UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. Alberto AYON-PEREZ, Defendant-Appellant.

No. 06-50110.

United States Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit.

Submitted Feb. 8, 2007.*

Filed Feb. 15, 2007.

Richard C. Cheng, Esq., Roger W. Haines, Jr., Esq., Office of the U.S. Attorney, San Diego, CA, for Plaintiff-Appellee.

*690Vince J. Brunkow, Federal Defenders of San Diego, Inc., San Diego, CA, for Defendant-Appellant.

Before KOZINSKI and TROTT, Circuit Judges, and MOLLOY,** District Judge.

*

. , . , r. , , . ' TMls Panf unanimously finds this case smtable for decision without oral argument. See ^ec*' ^-APP- 34(a)(2).

**

 The Honorable Donald W. Molloy, Chief United States District Judge for the District of Montana, sitting by designation.

MEMORANDUM ***

Defendant raised his sentencing claims in his original appeal, but we ordered a remand pursuant to *United States v. Ameline,*409 F.3d 1073, 1084-85 (9th Cir.2005) (en banc), without resolving these claims. *See United States v. Ayon-Perez,*150 Fed.Appx. 711 (9th Cir.2005) (mem.). As such, they were preserved. *See United States v. Combs,*470 F.3d 1294, 1297 (9th Cir.2006) (defendant cannot raise “new claims” after an *Ameline*remand).

In order to be eligible for safety valve relief, defendant must have “truthfully provided to the Government *all*information and evidence the defendant has concerning the offense.” U.S.S.G. § 5C1.2 (emphasis added). The district court did not clearly err in finding that defendant failed to tell all he knew. *United States v. Ajugwo,*82 F.3d 925, 929 (9th Cir.1996) (factual determinations made in assessing safety valve relief are reviewed for clear error).

Given the state of the record, which included evidence that defendant possessed a large quantity of narcotics when he was arrested, the district court did not clearly err in finding defendant ineligible for a “minor participant” adjustment pursuant to U.S.S.G. § 3B1.2(b). *See United States v. Sanchez-Lopez,*879 F.2d 541, 557 (9th Cir.1989) (a district court’s determination on a minor role adjustment is reviewed for clear error); *United States v. Lui,*941 F.2d 844, 849 (9th Cir.1991) (possession of a substantial quantity of narcotics is grounds for refusing a minor role adjustment).

AFFIRMED.

***

 This disposition is not appropriate for publication and is not precedent except as provided by 9th Cir. R. 36-3.
[Federal Register Volume 66, Number 42 (Friday, March 2, 2001)]
[Notices]
[Page 13050]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 01-5212]


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

CONSUMER PRODUCT SAFETY COMMISSION


Sunshine Act Meeting

AGENCY: Consumer Product Safety Commission.

TIME AND DATE: Wednesday, March 7, 2001, 2:30 p.m.

LOCATION: Room 410, East West Towers, 4330 East West Highway, Bethesda, 
Maryland.

STATUS: Closed to the Public--Pursuant to 5 U.S.C. 5532(f)(1) and 16 
CFR 1013.4(b) (3) (7) (9) and (10) and submitted to the Federal 
Register pursuant to 5 U.S.C. 552b(e)(3).

MATTER TO BE CONSIDERED:   

Compliance Status Report

    The staff will brief the Commission on the status of various 
compliance matters.
    For a recorded message containing the latest agenda information, 
call (301) 504-0709.

CONTACT PERSON FOR ADDITIONAL INFORMATION: Sadye E. Dunn, Office of the 
Secretary, 4330 East West Highway, Bethesda, MD 20207 (301) 504-0800.

    Dated: February 26, 2001.
Sadye E. Dunn,
Secretary.
[FR Doc. 01-5212 Filed 2-28-01; 10:03 am]
BILLING CODE 6355-01-M
<PAGE>
                                                                    EXHIBIT 15.1





                   AWARENESS LETTER OF INDEPENDENT ACCOUNTANTS




May 2, 2003




Securities and Exchange Commission
450 Fifth Street, N.W.
Washington, D.C. 20549

Re:  Southwest Bancorporation of Texas, Inc. Registrations on Form S-3 and
     Form S-8.

We are aware that our report dated April 30, 2003 on our review of interim
financial information of Southwest Bancorporation of Texas, Inc. and
subsidiaries for the period ended March 31, 2003 and included in the Company's
quarterly report on Form 10-Q for the quarter then ended is incorporated by
reference in the Company's registration statements on Form S-3 (File No.
333-53162) and Form S-8 (File Nos. 333-76269, 333-21619, 333-55685, 333-33533,
333-27891, 333-60190, 333-74452, 333-87630 and 333-36092). Pursuant to Rule
436(c) under the Securities Act of 1933, this report should not be considered a
part of the registration statement prepared or certified by us within the
meaning of Sections 7 and 11 of that Act.


/s/ PricewaterhouseCoopers LLP

Houston, Texas
May 2, 2003
<PAGE>

                                                                    Exhibit 32.1

                   ERESEARCHTECHNOLOGY, INC. AND SUBSIDIARIES

                            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 Quarterly Report of eResearchTechnology, Inc. (the
"Company") on Form 10-Q for the period ended March 31, 2007, as filed with the
Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the "Report"), I, Michael
J. McKelvey, President and Chief Executive 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, to my knowledge, that:

     The 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 Report fairly presents, in all material
     respects, the financial condition and results of operations of the Company.


Dated: May 4, 2007                      /s/ Michael J. McKelvey
                                        ----------------------------------------
                                        Michael J. McKelvey,
                                        President and Chief Executive Officer

This certification is being furnished solely to accompany the Report pursuant to
18 U.S.C. Section 1350, as adopted pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley
Act of 2002, and shall not be deemed "filed" by the Company for purposes of
Section 18 of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended, and shall not be
incorporated by reference into any filing of the Company under the Securities
Act of 1933, as amended, or the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended,
whether made before or after the date of this Report, irrespective of any
general incorporation language contained in such filing.