alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
Exhibit 34.2 

**Report of Independent Registered Public Accounting Firm**

The Board of Directors 

Citibank, N.A.: 

We have examined management’s assertion, included in the accompanying Management’s Assertion of Compliance, that the Agency and Trust division ofCitibank, N.A. (the “Company”) complied with the servicing criteria set forth in Item 1122(d) of the Securities and Exchange Commission’s Regulation AB for publicly-issued (*i.e.*, transaction-level reporting initiallyrequired under the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended) and certain privately-issued (*i.e.*, for which transaction-level reporting is required pursuant to contractual obligation) automobile loan or lease-backed securities, equipmentloan-backed securities and student loan-backed securities issued on or after January 1, 2006, as listed in Appendix A of the accompanying Management’s Assertion of Compliance, for which the Company provides trustee and paying agentservices (the “Platform”), except for servicing criteria 1122(d)(1)(i)-1122(d)(1)(iv), 1122(d)(2)(i), 1122(d)(2)(iii), 1122(d)(2)(vi)-1122(d)(2)(vii), 1122(d)(3)(i) and 1122(d)(4)(i)-1122(d)(4)(xv), which the Company has determined are notapplicable to the activities it performs with respect to the Platform, as of and for the twelve months ended December 31, 2013. Management is responsible for the Company’s compliance with the servicing criteria. Our responsibility is toexpress an opinion on management’s assertion about the Company’s compliance based on our examination. 

Our examination was conducted inaccordance with the standards of the Public Company Accounting Oversight Board (United States) and, accordingly, included examining, on a test basis, evidence about the Company’s compliance with the servicing criteria specified above andperforming such other procedures as we considered necessary in the circumstances. Our examination included testing selected asset-backed transactions and securities that comprise the Platform, testing selected servicing activities related to thePlatform, and determining whether the Company processed those selected transactions and performed those selected activities in compliance with the servicing criteria. Furthermore, our procedures were limited to the selected transactions andservicing activities performed by the Company during the period covered by this report. Our procedures were not designed to determine whether errors may have occurred either prior to or subsequent to our tests that may have affected the balances oramounts calculated or reported by the Company during the period covered by this report for the selected transactions or any other transactions. We believe that our examination provides a reasonable basis for our opinion. Our examination does notprovide a legal determination on the Company’s compliance with the servicing criteria. 

In our opinion, management’s assertion that the Companycomplied with the aforementioned servicing criteria as of and for the twelve months ended December 31, 2013 is fairly stated, in all material respects. 

/s/ KPMG LLP 

Chicago, Illinois 

February 28, 2014
[Federal Register Volume 76, Number 34 (Friday, February 18, 2011)]
[Notices]
[Page 9630]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2011-3771]


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

SMALL BUSINESS ADMINISTRATION

[License No. 05/05-0293]


Convergent Capital Partners II, L.P.; Notice Seeking Exemption 
Under Section 312 of the Small Business Investment Act, Conflicts of 
Interest

    Notice is hereby given that Convergent Capital Partners II, L.P., 
505 North Highway 169, Suite 245, Minneapolis, MN, a Federal Licensee 
under the Small Business Investment Act of 1958, as amended (``the 
Act''), in connection with the financing of a small concern, has sought 
an exemption under Section 312 of the Act and Section 107.730, 
Financings which Constitute Conflicts of Interest of the Small Business 
Administration (``SBA'') Rules and Regulations (13 CFR 107.730). 
Convergent Capital Partners II, L.P., proposes to provide debt security 
financing to Progressive Rail, Inc., 21778 Highview Avenue, Lakeville, 
MN 55044. The financing is contemplated for growth and general 
corporate purposes.
    The financing is brought within the purview of Sec.  107.730(a)(1) 
of the Regulations because Convergent Capital Partners II, L.P.'s 
financing will discharge an obligation of Progressive Rail, Inc., owed 
to Convergent Capital Partners I, L.P., which is considered an 
Associate of Convergent Capital Partners II, L.P., as defined in Sec. 
105.50 of the regulations.
    Notice is hereby given that any interested person may submit 
written comments on the transaction to the Associate Administrator for 
Investment and Innovation, U.S. Small Business Administration, 409 
Third Street, SW., Washington, DC 20416.

    Dated: February 11, 2011.
Sean J. Greene,
Associate Administrator for Investment and Innovation.
[FR Doc. 2011-3771 Filed 2-17-11; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 8025-01-P
# C_2015230EN.01011801.xml

| 14.7.2015 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 230/118 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

14.7.2015

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 230/118

---

Opinion of the European Economic and Social Committee on the ‘Proposal for a regulation of the European Parliament and of the Council suspending certain concessions relating to the import into the Union of agricultural products originating in Turkey (Codification)’

(COM(2014) 593 final — 2014/0275 (COD))

(2015/C 230/19)

On 20 October 2014 the European Parliament decided to consult the European Economic and Social Committee, under Article 207(2) of the TFEU, on the

‘Proposal for a regulation of the European Parliament and of the Council suspending certain concessions relating to the import into the Union of agricultural products originating in Turkey (Codification)’

‘Proposal for a regulation of the European Parliament and of the Council suspending certain concessions relating to the import into the Union of agricultural products originating in Turkey (Codification)’

COM(2014) 593 final — 2014/0275 (COD).

Since the Committee unreservedly endorses the content of the proposal and feels that it requires no comment on its part, it decided, at its 503rd plenary session of 10 and 11 December 2014 (meeting of 10 December 2014), by 145 votes to 2 with 5 abstentions, to issue an opinion endorsing the proposed text.

Brussels, 10 December 2014

The President of the European Economic and Social Committee

Henri MALOSSE

---
Exhibit 13.2

Certification of the Principal Financial
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 annual report of Eros International Plc (the “Company”) on Form 20-F for the year ended March 31, 2016 accompanying
this Certification, as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the “Report”), I, Prem
Parameswaran, Group Chief Financial Officer of the Company, certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. § 1350, as adopted pursuant to
Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that:

| | (1) | I am the Group Chief Financial Officer of the Company;
| | --- | ------------------------------------------------------

| | (2) | The Report fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) or 15(d) of the Securities
Exchange Act of 1934; and
| | --- | ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

| | (3) | The information contained in the Report fairly presents, in all material respects, the financial
condition and results of operations of the Company.
| | --- | ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------



Date: July 26, 2016



/s/ Prem Parameswaran

Name:   Prem Parameswaran

Title:     Group Chief Financial
Officer
#### § 162.548 May a WSR lease allow compatible uses?

The lease may provide for the Indian landowners to use, or authorize others to use, the leased premises for other uses compatible with the purpose of the WSR lease and consistent with the terms of the WSR lease. This may include the right to lease the premises for other compatible purposes. Any such use or authorization by the Indian landowners will not reduce or offset the monetary compensation for the WSR lease.
#### § 162.216 When will a BIA decision to approve an agricultural lease be effective?

Our decision to approve an agricultural lease will be effective immediately, notwithstanding any appeal that may be filed under part 2 of this chapter.
# C_2013058EN.01000501.xml

| 28.2.2013 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 58/5 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

28.2.2013

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 58/5

---

Notice of the expiry of certain anti-dumping measures

2013/C 58/05

Further to the publication of a notice of impending expiry (1) following which no duly substantiated request for a review was lodged, the Commission gives notice that the anti-dumping measure mentioned below will shortly expire.

1

This notice is published in accordance with Article 11(2) of Council Regulation (EC) No 1225/2009 of 30 November 2009 on protection against dumped imports from countries not members of the European Community (2).

2

| Product | Country(ies) of origin or exportation | Measures | Reference | Date of expiry (3) |
| --- | --- | --- | --- | --- |
| Ferro-silicon | Egypt and Kazakhstan | Anti-dumping duty | Council Regulation (EC) No 172/2008 (OJ L 55, 28.2.2008, p. 6) as amended by Council Implementing Regulation (EU) No 1297/2009 (OJ L 351, 30.12.2009, p. 1) | 1.3.2013 |

Product

Country(ies) of origin or exportation

Measures

Reference

Date of expiry (3)

3

Ferro-silicon

Egypt and Kazakhstan

Anti-dumping duty

Council Regulation (EC) No 172/2008 (OJ L 55, 28.2.2008, p. 6) as amended by Council Implementing Regulation (EU) No 1297/2009 (OJ L 351, 30.12.2009, p. 1)

1.3.2013

---

(1)  OJ C 186, 26.6.2012, p. 8.

1

(2)  OJ L 343, 22.12.2009, p. 51.

2

(3)  The measure expires at midnight of the day mentioned in this column.

3

---
P.1 

OAR Box 1500 

Prepped by Ollie Stewart 

Document Number: 

56) ll-C-82 

Docket Number: 

A-94-52 

Printed 8/5/2008 1:51:29 PM Sheet 56 of 343 
P.2 

•f rr. 

i' 

A-94-52 

W-C-n 

/ A \ UNITED STATES ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY 

' ^Sfi2_ I RESEARCH TRIANGLE PARK. NC 27711 

\ cf 

°K ! ;Q97 

OF 

PLANNING 

iNOAROS 

Mr. Mike From«in 

Ashland Chemical Company 

Post Office Box 2219 

Columbus, Ohio 43216 

Dear Mr. Froman: 

Thank you for discussing methods for determining the cost of switching to lower styrene 

resins at the Composites '97 conference in Orlando, Florida. I appreciate your willingness to help 

us determine the cost difference iimong resins with various monomer contents. You had agreed 

to provide us with costs of various resin types at various styrene contents upon receiving a written 

request which fully details the infonnation needed. The purpose of this letter is to describe the 

information we need. 

The information needed would be the cost per pound of resin at various styrene contents 

for the resin types listed in the enclosed table. Because the cost per pound of resin often depends 

on the quantity purchased, we have indicated several quantities for which we would like costs. If 

the given quantities do not effect the cost, please provide the quantities that do affect the cost per 

pound. It would dso help if you could provide a list, for each resin type, ofthe VOTOUS (most 

common) composite products for which each resin type is used. Space is provided in the 

Enclosure for you to include this information. 

We plan to use the cost information to develop an equation to estimate the resin cost at 

different styrene contents. Because we do not have information on the resin type used by many 

composites manufacturers, we may treat all resins, except isophthalic and vinyl ester resins, as 

"general purpose" resins to do this calculation. We would be interested if you have any other 

suggestions on how to estimate costs. 

Internet Address (URL) • http://www.epa.gov 

R»cycle<J/Recyclabls • Printed with Vegetable Oil Based Inks on Recycled P84tM>r nur.i. 
Would you be able to provide this information to us by J.anu4ary 15, 1998? Please call me 

at (919) 541-2383 to discuss this timing and any other questions or comments reg«arding this 

request. Th.wk you for your sissistance. 

Sincerely, 

Madeleine Strum 

Environment^ Engineer 

Coating and Consumer Products Group 

Enclosure 

^ 
Enclosure 

Resin Quantity 

Purchased 

(Tons per Year) 

300 

1,000 

1,500 

Common products for 

each resin type 

Orthophthalic 

i 

Resrn Cost Per Pound by Resin Type (Dollars) 

Isophthalic Vinyl ester Blend (Specify) 

' 4 j 

1 

i: 

Blend (Specify) 

^P 

TJ
#### § 162.371 What will BIA do if a lessee remains in possession after a residential lease expires or is terminated or cancelled?

If a lessee remains in possession after the expiration, termination, or cancellation of a residential lease, we may treat the unauthorized possession as a trespass under applicable law in consultation with the Indian landowners. Unless the Indian landowners of the applicable percentage of interests under § 162.012 have notified us in writing that they are engaged in good faith negotiations with the holdover lessee to obtain a new lease, we may take action to recover possession on behalf of the Indian landowners, and pursue any additional remedies available under applicable law, such as a forcible entry and detainer action.
I

106TH CONGRESS

1ST SESSION H. R. 918

To amend the Internal Revenue Code of 1986 to increase to 100 percent

the amount of the deduction for the health insurance costs of selfemployed individuals.

IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

MARCH 2, 1999

Mr. HOLDEN introduced the following bill; which was referred to the

Committee on Ways and Means

A BILL

To amend the Internal Revenue Code of 1986 to increase

to 100 percent the amount of the deduction for the

health insurance costs of self-employed individuals.

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

3 SECTION 1. INCREASED DEDUCTION FOR HEALTH INSUR4 ANCE COSTS OF SELF-EMPLOYED INDIVID5 UALS.

6 (a) IN GENERAL.—Paragraph (1) of section 162(l)

7 of the Internal Revenue Code of 1986 is amended to read

8 as follows:
2

•HR 918 IH

1 ‘‘(1) ALLOWANCE OF DEDUCTION.—In the case

2 of an individual who is an employee within the

3 meaning of section 401(c)(1), there shall be allowed

4 as a deduction under this section an amount equal

5 to 100 percent of the amount paid during the tax6 able year for insurance which constitutes medical

7 care for the taxpayer, his spouse, and dependents.’’

8 (b) EFFECTIVE DATE.—The amendment made by

9 this section shall apply to taxable years beginning after

10 December 31, 1998.

Æ
#### Henry H. Shufeldt *v.*John S. Sutphen.

*Assignor—insolvency of maker.*In an action against the assignor of a note for $1000, where it was sought to recover on the ground of the insolvency of the maker, and that a suit against him would have been unavailing, it appeared the maker had some fine oil paintings, a fine library which filled two large book cases, worth $150 to $200 each, and furniture worth $2500 to $3000: *Held,*the assignor was not liable, although the maker may have been heavily in debt.

Appeal from the Superior Court of Chicago; the Hon. Joseph E. Gary, Chief Justice, presiding.

The facts in this case are fully stated in the opinion.

Messrs. Story *&*King, for the appellant.

Messrs. Goudy *&*Chandler, for the appellee.

Mr. Justice Lawrence

delivered the opinion of the Court :

We are obliged to reverse this judgment because the verdict is clearly against the evidence. It was incumbent on the plaintiff to prove a suit against the maker of the note would have been unavailing, but the witness called by him for that purpose showed it would not have been. The note matured May 1, 1867. The witness testified the maker of the note kept house in Chicago in 1866 and 1867, and had handsome furniture, some fine oil paintings, and a fine library which, the witness says, filled two large book cases, worth §150 to $200 each. He thinks the furniture was worth §2500 to $3000. He says the horse and carriage which the maker of the note also owned, may have been sold before May, 1867, though he *256can not state positively, "but it does not appear what has become of the furniture and library further than that after the owner ceased to keep house he stored his furniture. For aught that appears in the record he owned this furniture and library at the time of the trial.

On this evidence the jury were not justified in finding that a suit agáinst him would have been unavailing, although he may have been heavily in debt. The judgment must be reversed and the cause remanded.

*Judgment reversed.*
§ 166.402 Why must the BIA determine the fair annual rental of Indian land? The BIA must determine the fair annual rental of Indian land to: ( a ) Assist the Indian landowner in negotiating a permit with potential permittees; and
( b ) Enable us to determine whether a permit is in the best interests of the Indian landowner.
### SUBCHAPTER I—DEFENSE COMMISSARY AND EXCHANGE SYSTEMS

Sec.
2481.
Defense commissary and exchange systems: existence and purpose.
2482.
Commissary stores: criteria for establishment or closure; store size.
2483.
Commissary stores: use of appropriated funds to cover operating expenses.
2484.
Commissary stores: merchandise that may be sold; uniform surcharges and pricing.
2485.
Commissary stores: operation.

#### **Editorial Notes**

#### Amendments

**2006**—Pub. L. 109–364, div. A, title X, §1071(a)(18), Oct. 17, 2006, 120 Stat. 2399, inserted period at end of item 2481.

**2004**—Pub. L. 108–375, div. A, title VI, §651(a)(3), Oct. 28, 2004, 118 Stat. 1964, added subchapter heading and items 2481 to 2485.
EXHIBIT 31.1

RULE 13a-14(a)/15d-14(a) CERTIFICATION

I, Steve Hoffman, certify that:



|1. | I have reviewed this Annual Report on Form 10-K/A of Tyme Technologies, Inc.; and
|-- | ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------



|2. | Based on my knowledge, this report does not contain any untrue statement of a material fact or omit to state a material fact necessary to make the statements made, in light of the circumstances under which such
statements were made, not misleading with respect to the period covered by this report.
|-- | ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------



|                    |  |  |  |  |  |                              
|------------------- |  |  |  |  |  | -----------------------------
|Date: July 28, 2017 |  |  |  |  |  | /s/ Steve Hoffman            
|                    |  |  |  |  |  | Steve Hoffman                
|                    |  |  |  |  |  | Chief Executive Officer      
|                    |  |  |  |  |  | (Principal Executive Officer)



26
§ 162.516 How will BIA enforce removal requirements in a WEEL? We may take appropriate enforcement action to ensure removal of the permanent improvements and restoration of the premises at the lessee's expense: ( a ) In consultation with the tribe, for tribal land or, where feasible, with Indian landowners for individually owned Indian land; and
( b ) After termination, cancellation, or expiration of the WEEL.
§ 166.1001 How must a records associated with this part be preserved? ( a ) Any organization, including tribes and tribal organizations, that have records identified in § 166.1000(a) of this part must preserve the records in accordance with approved Departmental records retention procedures under the Federal Records Act, 44 U.S.C. Chapters 29, 31 and 33. These records and related records management practices and safeguards required under the Federal Records Act are subject to inspection by the Secretary and the Archivist of the United States.
( b ) A tribe or tribal organization should preserve the records identified in § 166.1000(b) of this part for the period of time authorized by the Archivist of the United States for similar Department of the Interior records in accordance with 44 U.S.C. Chapter 33. If a tribe or tribal organization does not preserve records associated with its conduct of business with the Department of the Interior under this part, it may prevent the tribe or tribal organization from being able to adequately document essential transactions or furnish information necessary to protect its legal and financial rights or those of persons directly affected by its activities.
### §1564b. Security vetting for foreign nationals

(a) Standards and Process.—(1) The Secretary of Defense, in coordination with the Security Executive Agent established pursuant to Executive Order 13467 (73 Fed. Reg. 38103; 50 U.S.C. 3161 note), shall develop uniform and consistent standards and a centralized process for the screening and vetting of covered foreign individuals requiring access to systems, facilities, personnel, information, or operations, of the Department of Defense, including with respect to the background investigations of covered foreign individuals requiring access to classified information.

(2) The Secretary shall ensure that the standards developed under paragraph (1) are consistent with relevant directives of the Security Executive Agent.

(3) The Secretary shall designate an official of the Department of Defense to be responsible for executing the centralized process developed under paragraph (1) and adjudicating any information discovered pursuant to such process.

(b) Other Uses.—In addition to using the centralized process developed under subsection (a)(1) for covered foreign individuals, the Secretary may use the centralized process in determining whether to grant a security clearance to any individual with significant foreign influence or foreign preference issues, in accordance with the adjudicative guidelines under part 147 of title 32, Code of Federal Regulations, or such successor regulation.

(c) Covered Foreign Individual Defined.—In this section, the term "covered foreign individual" means an individual who meets the following criteria:

(1) The individual is—

(A) a national of a foreign state;

(B) a national of the United States (as such term is defined in section 101 of the Immigration and Nationality Act (8 U.S.C. 1101)) and also a national of a foreign state; or

(C) an alien who is lawfully admitted for permanent residence (as such term is defined in section 101 of the Immigration and Nationality Act (8 U.S.C. 1101)).

(2) The individual is either—

(A) a civilian employee of the Department of Defense or a contractor of the Department; or

(B) a member of the armed forces.

(Added Pub. L. 115–232, div. A, title XVI, §1622(a), Aug. 13, 2018, 132 Stat. 2117.)

#### **Editorial Notes**

#### References in Text

Executive Order 13467, referred to in subsec. (a)(1), is Ex. Ord. No. 13467, June 30, 2008, 73 F.R. 38103, which is set out as a note under section 3161 of Title 50, War and National Defense.
§ 15.108 If the decedent was not an enrolled member of a tribe or was a member of more than one tribe, who prepares the probate file? Unless otherwise provided by Federal law, the agency that has jurisdiction over the tribe with the strongest association with the decedent will serve as the home agency and will prepare the probate file if the decedent owned interests in trust or restricted land or trust personalty and either: ( a ) Was not an enrolled member of a tribe; or
( b ) Was a member of more than one tribe.