alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
**EXHIBIT 31.1**

 

**CERTIFICATION**

 

I, Brett D. Davis, certify that:

 

1.                                      I have reviewed this report on Form 10-K and all reports on Form 10-D required to be filed in respect of the period covered by this report on Form 10-K of CNH Equipment Trust 2011-C (the “Exchange Act periodic reports”);

 

2.                                      Based on my knowledge, the Exchange Act periodic reports, taken as a whole, do 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;

 

3.                                      Based on my knowledge, all of the distribution, servicing and other information required to be provided under Form 10-D for the period covered by this report is included in the Exchange Act periodic reports;

 

4.                                      I am responsible for reviewing the activities performed by the servicer and based on my knowledge and the compliance review conducted in preparing the servicer compliance statement required in this report under Item 1123 of Regulation AB, and except as disclosed in the Exchange Act periodic reports, the servicer has fulfilled its obligations under the servicing agreement in all material respects; and

 

5.                                      All of the reports on assessment of compliance with servicing criteria for asset-backed securities and their related attestation reports on assessment of compliance with servicing criteria for asset-backed securities required to be included in this report in accordance with Item 1122 of Regulation AB and Exchange Act Rules 13a-18 and 15d-18 have been included as an exhibit to this report, except as otherwise disclosed in this report. Any material instances of noncompliance described in such reports 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 the following unaffiliated parties: Deutsche Bank Trust Company Americas.

 

----

 

March 30, 2015

 

 
|   | By:    | /s/   Brett D. Davis                                             |
|--------|--------|------------------------------------------------------------------|
|   | Name:  | Brett   D. Davis                                                 |
|   | Title: | President   (senior officer in charge of the servicing function) |

 

----
Exhibit 99.6



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
Brookfield Canada Office Properties (the “Company”) on Form 40-F for the year ended December 31, 2013, as filed with
the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the “Report”), I, Bryan K. Davis, 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 to the best of my knowledge:



|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/ Bryan K. Davis
        Bryan
K. Davis
        Chief Financial Officer
|-------------------------------------------------------------------------------
|                                                                               



March 31, 2014





12
Exhibit 10.6


 


STOCK
TRANSFER AGREEMENT


 


This
Stock Transfer Agreement (this “Agreement”) is entered into as of _______ ___, 2021 by and between 8i Holdings 2 Pte Ltd
(the “Transferor”) and _______ (the “Transferee”).


 


RECITALS


 


WHEREAS,
the Transferor desires to transfer 7,500 ordinary shares (the “Shares”) of 8i Acquisition 2 Corp., a British Virgin
Islands business company (the “Company”) to the Transferee.


 


NOW,
THEREFORE, the parties hereto, for good and valuable consideration which each party acknowledges the receipt of, hereby agree as follows:


 


1.
Transfer of the Shares.


 


For
nominal consideration, the Transferor hereby transfers to the Transferee the Shares.


 


2.
Representations and Warranties of the Transferor.


 


The
Transferor represents and warrants that it has full legal capacity and authority to enter into the Agreement and to transfer the Shares
to the Transferee hereunder, and is not bound by any agreement, instrument or governmental order prohibiting such transfer. The Transferor
also represents that it is transferring such interests free and clear of all liens and encumbrances other than those created by the terms
of the Company’s organizational documents or imposed by applicable federal and state securities laws.


 


3.
Binding Effect.


 


This
Agreement shall be binding upon and inure to the benefit of the parties hereto and their respective legal representatives, successors
and assigns.


 


4.
Entire Agreement.


 


This
Agreement constitutes the entire agreement of the parties hereto.


 


5.
Governing Law.


 


This
Agreement shall be governed by the laws of the State of New York without regard to its conflict of laws principles.


 


6.
Modification.


 


This
Agreement may not be amended or supplemented at any time unless by a writing executed by the parties hereto.


 


7.
Headings.


 


The
headings in this Agreement are solely for convenience or reference and shall not affect its interpretation.


 


8.
Counterparts; Facsimile.


 


This
Agreement may be executed in any number of counterparts, each of which when so executed shall be deemed to be an original and all of
which taken together shall constitute one and the same instrument. This Agreement or any counterpart may be executed via facsimile or
other electronic transmission, and any such executed facsimile or electronic copy shall be treated as an original.


 


[The
balance of this page is intentionally left page.]


 




    	 



     


    

 


IN
WITNESS WHEREOF, the undersigned have executed this Agreement as of the date first set forth above.


 


	 	Transferor: 
	 	 	 
	 	 	8i
    Holdings 2 Pte Ltd
	 	 	 
	 	 	By:
    	 
	 	 	Name:
    	      
	 	 	Title:	 





 


	 	Transferee:
	 	 	 	 
	 	 	 	      
	 		Name:	


 




    	2
#### § 1000.42 Will grants always be made available to meet the planning phase requirement as described in section 402(d) of the Act?

No, grants to cover some or all of the planning costs that a Tribe/Consortium may incur, depend upon the availability of funds appropriated by Congress. Notice of availability of grants will be published in the Federal Register as described in § 1000.45.
### §236. Personal protection equipment procurement: display of budget information

(a) Budget Justification Display.—The Secretary of Defense shall submit to Congress, as a part of the defense budget materials for each fiscal year after fiscal year 2014, a consolidated budget justification display that covers all programs and activities associated with the procurement of personal protection equipment during the period covered by the future-years defense program submitted in that fiscal year under section 221.

(b) Requirements for Budget Display.—The consolidated budget justification display under subsection (a) for a fiscal year shall include the following:

(1) The amount for personal protection equipment included in both the base budget of the President and any overseas contingency operations budget of the President.

(2) A brief description of each category of personal protection equipment for each military department planned to be procured and developed.

(3) For each category planned to be procured using funds made available for operation and maintenance (whether under the base budget or any overseas contingency operations budget)—

(A) the relevant appropriations account, budget activity, and subactivity group for the category; and

(B) the funding profile for the fiscal year as requested, including cost and quantities, and an estimate of projected investments or procurements for each of the subsequent five fiscal years.

(4) For each category planned to be developed using funds made available for research, development, test, and evaluation (whether under the base budget or any overseas contingency operations budget)—

(A) the relevant appropriations account, program, project or activity; program element number, and line number; and

(B) the funding profile for the fiscal year as requested and an estimate of projected investments for each of the subsequent five fiscal years.

(c) Definitions.—In this section:

(1) The terms "budget" and "defense budget materials" have the meaning given those terms in section 234 of this title.

(2) The term "category of personal protection equipment" means the following:

(A) Body armor components.

(B) Combat helmets.

(C) Combat protective eyewear.

(D) Other items as determined appropriate by the Secretary.

(Added Pub. L. 113–66, div. A, title I, §141(a), Dec. 26, 2013, 127 Stat. 696.)
## NUMBER 13 - 14 - 00288 - CV COURT OF APPEALS THIRTEENTH DISTRICT OF TEXAS CORPUS CHRISTI - EDINBURG

____________________________________________________________ THEODORE R. MCMILLIN , A ppellant ,
v. JULIE MARIE MCMILLIN , A ppellee

.

____________________________________________________________

On a ppeal from the 444 th District Court of

Cameron County, Texas.

____________________________________________________________



## MEMORANDUM OPINION
Before Chief Justice Valdez and Justices Benavides and Perkes

Memorandum Opinion Per Curiam By two issues, appellant Theodore McMillin appeals the trial court’s dismissal of his petition for divorce. Appellee, Julie Marie McMillin , has filed a motion to dismiss this appeal on grounds that intervening events have rendered the appeal moot. Appellant has filed a response to the motion to dismiss in which he agrees that the appeal is now
moot.2

The Court, having considered the documents on file and the appellee’s unopposed
motion to dismi ss the appeal, is of the opinion that the motion should be granted. See In re Kellogg Brown & Root, Inc. , 166 S.W.3d 732, 737 (Tex. 2005) (orig. proceeding) ( “ A case becomes moot if a controversy ceases to exist between the parties at any stage of the leg al proceedings . . . ” ); State Bar of Tex. v. Gomez , 891 S.W.2d 243, 245 (Tex. 1994) (stating that, for a controversy to be justiciable, there must be a real controversy between the parties that will be actually resolved by the judicial relief sought). Appell ee’s motion to dismiss is granted and the appeal is hereby DISMISSED as moot

. Costs will be taxed against appellant. See T EX

. R. A PP

. P

. 42.1(d) ("Absent agreement of the parties, the court will tax costs against the appellant."). Pending motions, if any, are likewise DISMISSED. PER CURIAM
D elivered and filed the 22nd day of October, 2015

.
```

[Congressional Bills 106th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[H.R. 882 Enrolled Bill (ENR)]

        H.R.882

                       One Hundred Sixth Congress

                                 of the

                        United States of America

                          AT THE FIRST SESSION

         Begun and held at the City of Washington on Wednesday,
   the sixth day of January, one thousand nine hundred and ninety-nine

                                 An Act

 
    To nullify any reservation of funds during fiscal year 1999 for 
 guaranteed loans under the Consolidated Farm and Rural Development Act 
  for qualified beginning farmers or ranchers, and for other purposes.

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

SECTION 1. NULLIFICATION OF RESERVATION OF FUNDS DURING FISCAL YEAR 
              1999 FOR GUARANTEED LOANS UNDER THE CONSOLIDATED FARM AND 
              RURAL DEVELOPMENT ACT FOR QUALIFIED BEGINNING FARMERS OR 
              RANCHERS.

    Amounts shall be made available pursuant to section 346(b)(1)(D) of 
the Consolidated Farm and Rural Development Act for guaranteed loans, 
without regard to any reservation under section 346(b)(2)(B) of such 
Act.

SEC. 2. QUALIFIED BEGINNING FARMERS AND RANCHERS TO BE GIVEN PRIORITY 
              IN MAKING GUARANTEED LOANS UNDER THE CONSOLIDATED FARM 
              AND RURAL DEVELOPMENT ACT FROM SUPPLEMENTAL 
              APPROPRIATIONS FOR FISCAL YEAR 1999.

    In making guaranteed loans under the Consolidated Farm and Rural 
Development Act from funds made available pursuant to any Act making 
supplemental appropriations for fiscal year 1999, the Secretary of 
Agriculture shall, to the extent practicable, give priority to making 
such loans to qualified beginning farmers and ranchers (as defined in 
section 343(a)(11) of such Act).

                               Speaker of the House of Representatives.

                            Vice President of the United States and    
                                               President of the Senate.
```
§ 2.400 When may the reviewing official require an appeal bond? ( a ) Any interested party who may suffer a financial loss or damage to Indian Trust Assets as a result of an appeal may ask the reviewing official to require the appellant to post an appeal bond.
( b ) The reviewing official may decide on his or her own initiative to require an appeal bond in accordance with this subpart.
### §14904. Rights and procedures

(a) Procedural Rights.—Under regulations prescribed by the Secretary of Defense, an officer required under section 14902 of this title to show cause for retention in an active status—

(1) shall be notified in writing, at least 30 days before the hearing of the officer's case by a board of inquiry, of the reasons for which the officer is being required to show cause for retention in an active status;

(2) shall be allowed a reasonable time, as determined by the board of inquiry, to prepare for showing of cause for retention in an active status;

(3) shall be allowed to appear in person and to be represented by counsel at proceedings before the board of inquiry; and

(4) shall be allowed full access to, and shall be furnished copies of, records relevant to the case, except that the board of inquiry shall withhold any record that the Secretary concerned determines should be withheld in the interest of national security.

(b) Summary of Records Withheld.—When a record is withheld under subsection (a)(4), the officer whose case is under consideration shall, to the extent that the interest of national security permits, be furnished a summary of the record so withheld.

(Added Pub. L. 103–337, div. A, title XVI, §1611, Oct. 5, 1994, 108 Stat. 2959.)

#### **Statutory Notes and Related Subsidiaries**

#### Effective Date

Section effective Oct. 1, 1996, see section 1691(b)(1) of Pub. L. 103–337, set out as a note under section 10001 of this title.
EX‐34.3

 

(logo) pwc 

 

 

Report of Independent Registered Public Accounting Firm

 

To the Board of Directors, PNC Financial Services Group, Inc.:

 

We have examined management's assertion, included in the accompanying Report on Assessment of

Compliance with Regulation AB Servicing Criteria, that Midland Loan Services, a division of PNC Bank,

National Association ("Midland" or the "Company") complied with the servicing criteria set forth in Item

1122(d) of the Securities and Exchange Commission's Regulation AB for the commercial mortgage-backed

securities transactions (the "Platform"), as of December 31, 2014 and for the year then ended, excluding

criteria 1122(d)(1)(iii), 1122(d)(3)(i)(B), 1122(d)(3)(i)(C), 1122(d)(3)(i)(D), 1122(d)(3)(ii), 1122(d)(3)(iii),

1122(d)(3)(iv), and 1122(d)(4)(xv), which the Company has determined are not applicable to the servicing

activities performed by it with respect to the Platform. Management is responsible for the Company's

compliance with the servicing criteria. Our responsibility is to express an opinion on management's

assertion based on our examination.

 

Our examination was conducted in accordance with attestation 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 applicable servicing criteria and performing such other

procedures as we considered necessary in the circumstances. Our examination included testing of selected

asset-backed transactions and securities that comprise the Platform, testing of selected servicing activities

related to the Platform, and determining whether the Company processed those selected transactions and

performed those selected activities in compliance with the applicable servicing criteria. Our procedures

were limited to the selected transactions and servicing activities performed by the Company during the

period covered by this report. Our procedures were not designed to detect noncompliance arising from

errors that may have occurred prior to or subsequent to our tests that may have affected the balances or

amounts calculated or reported by the Company during the period covered by this report. We believe that

our examination provides a reasonable basis for our opinion. Our examination does not provide a legal

determination on the Company's compliance with the servicing criteria.

 

In our opinion, management's assertion that Midland complied with the aforementioned applicable

servicing criteria as of and for the year ended December 31, 2014 for the Platform is fairly stated, in all

material respects.

 

/s/ PricewaterhouseCoopers LLP

 

February 25, 2015

 

 

PricewaterhouseCoopers LLP, 1100 Walnut Street, Suite 1300, Kansas City, MO 64106

T: (816) 472 7921, F: (816) 218 1890 www.pwc.com/us
#### § 5.5 Supplement to the Code of Federal Regulations.

The Federal Register serves as a daily supplement to the Code of Federal Regulations. Each document that is subject to codification and published in a daily issue shall be keyed to the Code of Federal Regulations.
An official website of the United States government         Here's how you know         
**Official websites use .mil**
A **.mil** website belongs to an official U.S. Department of Defense organization in the United States.
**Secure .mil websites use HTTPS**
 A **lock (lock )** or **https://** means you’ve safely connected to the .mil website. Share sensitive information only on official, secure websites.

Skip to main content (Press Enter).

U.S. Indo-Pacific CommandUSINDOPACOM

U.S. Indo-Pacific Command

Search

Search
Search

-  Home		 
-  Leadership    -  Commander         
  -  Deputy Commander         
  -  Chief of Staff         
  -  Senior Enlisted Leader 
-  About USINDOPACOM    -  History         
  -  USPACOM Area of Responsibility         
  -  USPACOM Previous Commanders         
  -  Women, Peace and Security 
-  Organization    -  Organization Chart 
-  Media    -  News      -  Spotlight 
  -  Photos         
  -  Speeches / Testimony         
  -  Freedom of Information Act      -  FOIA - Reading Room         
    -  Submit FOIA Request         
    -  Request Status         
    -  FOIA FAQS 
-  Resources    -  Travel Requirements         
  -  Useful Theater Information         
  -  FAQ         
  -  Useful Links 
-  Newcomers		 
-  Contact    -  Directory         
  -  Media Inquiries         
  -  Industry Engagements 
-  JTF - Red Hill		 

Home : Media : News : News Article View

# 7th Fleet Commander Kicks Off 20th CARAT Singapore 

By Story Number: NNS140729-02Task Force 73 Public Affairs

                SINGAPORE  –              

**                    SHARE                

**                    PRINT                

pacom

news

articles
#### DAVID A. FRIEDMAN v. CONNECTICUT BAR EXAMINING COMMITTEE

(SC 17049)

Sullivan, C. J., and Borden, Norcott, Palmer and Vertefeuille, Js.

Argued May 17

officially released August 3, 2004

*458
      *Kenneth A. Votre,*with whom was *Keith Sturges,*for the appellant (petitioner).

*John B. Farley,*with whom were *Ralph W. Johnson III,*and *Dan E. LaBelle,*for the appellee (respondent).

*Opinion*

PER CURIAM

The petitioner, David A. Friedman, appeals, following our grant of certification, from the judgment of the Appellate Court affirming the judgment of the trial court denying his petition for admission to the Connecticut bar. *Friedman*v. *Connecticut Bar Examining Committee,*77 Conn. App. 526, 824 A.2d 866 (2003). We granted the petition for certification to appeal limited to the following issue: “Whether the actions of the Connecticut bar examining committee denied the petitioner due process?” *Friedman*v. *Connecticut Bar Examining Committee,*265 Conn. 909, 910, 831 A.2d 249 (2003).

After examining the entire record on appeal and considering the briefs and oral arguments of the parties, we have determined that the appeal in this case should be dismissed on the ground that certification was improvidently granted.

The appeal is dismissed.
§ 171.120 What are the authorities and responsibilities of a representative organization? ( a ) A legally established organization representing you may make rules, policies, and procedures it may find necessary to administer the activities it is authorized to perform.
( b ) An organization must not make rules, policies, or procedures that conflict with our regulations or any of our other written policies, procedures, directives, and manuals.
( c ) If this organization collects operation and maintenance assessments and construction assessments on your behalf to be paid to us, it must pay us all your past and current operation and maintenance and construction assessment charges before we will provide irrigation service to you.
§ 18.204 When will the Department approve an amendment? ( a ) We have 60 days from receipt by the Assistant Secretary of a submitted amendment to approve or disapprove the amendment.
( b ) If we do not meet the deadline in paragraphs (a) of this section, the amendment will be deemed approved, but only to the extent that it: ( 1 ) Is consistent with Federal law; and
( 2 ) Promotes the policies of the ILCA Amendments of 2000 as listed in § 18.106(b).