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




Certification of Senior Officer in Charge of the Servicing Function


of the Servicer Pursuant to Rule 15d-14(d)









SERVICER CERTIFICATION






I, Mark Kaczynski, certify that:




1.           I have reviewed this annual 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 Nissan Auto Lease Trust 2012-A (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 party:  U.S. Bank National Association




Date:                      June 27, 2014




By:/s/ Mark Kaczynski


Mark Kaczynski


President and Chief Executive Officer of


Nissan Motor Acceptance Corporation


(senior officer in charge of the


servicing function)
* Pursuant to 5 TH C IR . 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 5 TH C IR . R. 47.5.4. United States Court of Appeals Fifth Circuit 

## FILED February 17, 2004 Charles R. Fulbruge III Clerk IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT

No. 03-30896 Conference Calendar

MARK ANTHONY COUSINS, Petitioner-Appellant,

versus ROBERT M. TAPIA, Respondent-Appellee.

-------------------- Appeal from the United States District Court for the Western District of Louisiana

USDC No. 03-CV-746

-------------------- Before HIGGINBOTHAM, EMILIO M. GARZA, and PRADO, Circuit Judges.
PER CURIAM: * Mark Anthony Cousins, federal inmate #43109-019, appeals the district court’s dismissal of his 28 U.S.C. § 2241 petition. In his petition, Cousins argued that the sentencing court unconstitutionally varied the indictment, which charged Cousins with violating 18 U.S.C. §§ 924(c) and 2113 (a) and (d). He also averred that his sentence should be modified pursuant to Amendment 599 to the Sentencing Guidelines because the weapons enhancement he received under U.S.S.G. § 2B3.1(b)(2) and theNo. 03-30896 -2- sentence he received for the 18 U.S.C. § 924(c) counts constituted duplicative punishment for the same offense conduct. Cousins contends that his petition satisfied the criteria established in Reyes-Requena v. United States , 243 F.3d 893 (5th Cir. 2001), and that he was entitled to proceed under the “savings clause” of 28 U.S.C. § 2255. Cousins has not met his burden of showing that he meets the requirements for filing a 28 U.S.C. § 2241 petition under the savings clause of 28 U.S.C. § 2255. He has failed to point to a retroactively applicable Supreme Court decision which establishes that he may have been imprisoned for conduct that was not prohibited by law. Nor has he shown that his claims were foreclosed by circuit law at the time of his conviction, appeal, or prior 28 U.S.C. § 2255 motion.
See id. at 903-04. The true nature of Cousins’ claims is not actual innocence; he is challenging the propriety of his sentences. Relief on such claims cannot be sought by way of a 28 U.S.C. § 2241 petition. See Kinder v. Purdy , 222 F.3d 209, 211 (5th Cir. 2000). Accordingly, the judgment of the district court is affirmed.

AFFIRMED.
## Breadcrumb

-  Home 
-  Guidance Document Database 
-  Allocation of Assets 

This page has not been translated. Please go to PBGC.gov's Spanish home page for more information available in Spanish.

Esta página no ha sido traducida. Por favor vaya a la página principal del sitio de español de PBGC para ver información disponible en español.

# Allocation of assets

                  -  Opinion Letter 81-12
Addresses the meaning of “total amount contributed” for the purpose of the denominators in PBGC’s interim regulation on withdrawal liability alternative allocation methods. 
-               document            
 

                  -  Opinion Letter 77-159
An annuity contract owned by a pension plan is the plan asset, not the assets held by the insurer under the contract.  Because benefits payable under the annuity contract are revocable upon termination, assets held under the contract are included in the value of the contract.
-               document            
 

                  -  Opinion Letter 75-31
A proposed plan distribution must be in compliance with § 4044 regardless of whether the IRS has issued a determination letter regarding a plan termination.  IRS cannot issue an exception to section 4044. 
-               document            
 

                  -  Opinion Letter 85-07
Termination is not subject to the spin-off/termination requirements of the implementation guidelines involving asset reversions since no assets will revert to the plan sponsor.
-               document            
 

                  -  Opinion Letter 79-08
How to determine eligibility for a “Category 3 Benefit,” which is a benefit of a participant who retired, or could have retired, 3 years or more before the plan terminated.
-               document            
 

                  -  Opinion Letter 81-04
A plan document’s provision allowing for reversion of residual plan assets to the plan sponsor was invalid and therefore residual assets were required to be distributed to participants.
-               document            
 

                  -  Opinion Letter 86-05
Addresses the transfer of surplus assets to another trust after plan termination.
-               document            
 

                  -  Opinion Letter 76-107
Allocation of assets of terminating plan otherwise than in accordance with section 4044 is not allowed.  Transfer of asset to a defined contribution plan requires that all participants be offered option for immediate receipt of their benefits.
-               document            
 

                  -  Opinion Letter 76-03
Plan administrator must allocate assets to participant receiving early retirement benefits and may not allocate assets to participants whose benefit claims had been fully satisfied prior to termination of plan.
-               document            
 

                  -  Opinion Letter 76-31
Section 4044 asset allocation rules take precedence over any contrary plan provisions.  
-               document            
 

-  1 
-  2 
-   Next  
-   Last
Exhibit 10.4(b)

      

      

      Schedule identifying agreements substantially identical to the form of indemnification agreement files as Exhibit 10.4(a) hereto

      

      

      	
              Indemnitee

            	
              Date of Agreement

            
	
              Charles Cherington

            	
              April 14, 2021

            
	
              Kevin D’Amour

            	
              September 23, 2021

            
	
              George P. Denny III

            	
              April 14, 2021

            
	
              Howard J. Federoff

            	
              April 20, 2021

            
	
              Luba Greenwood

            	
              April 14, 2021

            
	
              Ronal Guido

            	
              April 14, 2021

            
	
              Sandra Gurrola

            	
              June 21, 2021

            
	
              Lynn Sadowski Mason

            	
              April 15, 2021

            
	
              Erich Mohr

            	
              May 7, 2021

            
	
              Yiannis Monovoukas

            	
              April 14, 2021

            
	
              Ajay Sial

            	
              September 23, 2021

            
	
              Roger Sidhu

            	
              September 23, 2021

            
	
              Nicholas Singer

            	
              April 14, 2021
## Breadcrumb

-  Home 
-  Employers & Practitioners 
-  Legal Resources 
-  PBGC Litigation Outline 

This page has not been translated. Please go to PBGC.gov's Spanish home page for more information available in Spanish.

Esta página no ha sido traducida. Por favor vaya a la página principal del sitio de español de PBGC para ver información disponible en español.

# PBGC Litigation Outline

PBGC is a frequent litigant in trial and appellate courts nationwide.  Since its creation in 1974, the agency has appeared in hundreds of state, federal, and bankruptcy cases.  The PBGC Litigation Outline offers practitioners, journalists, and researchers an extensive review of judicial decisions involving PBGC.

PENSION BENEFIT GUARANTY CORPORATIONLITIGATION OUTLINE 2022

By: Kartar S. Khalsa, Deputy General CounselMarc S. Pfeuffer, AttorneyLouisa Soulard, Attorney

Office of the General CounselPension Benefit Guaranty Corporation

March 23, 2022
### §3373. Undefinitized contractual actions: limitation on inclusion of non-urgent requirements and on modification of scope

(a) Inclusion of Non-Urgent Requirements.—Requirements for spare parts and support equipment that are not needed on an urgent basis may not be included in an undefinitized contractual action for spare parts and support equipment that are needed on an urgent basis unless the head of the agency approves such inclusion as being—

(1) good business practice; and

(2) in the best interests of the United States.

(b) Modification of Scope.—The scope of an undefinitized contractual action under which performance has begun may not be modified unless the head of the agency approves such modification as being—

(1) good business practice; and

(2) in the best interests of the United States.

(Added and amended Pub. L. 116–283, div. A, title XVIII, §1819(a), (d), Jan. 1, 2021, 134 Stat. 4189, 4190.)

#### **Editorial Notes**

#### Codification

The text of subsecs. (d) and (e) of section 2326 of this title, which were transferred to this section, redesignated as subsecs. (a) and (b), respectively, and amended by Pub. L. 116–283, §1819(d), was based on Pub. L. 99–500, §101(c) [title X, §908(d)(1)(A)], Oct. 18, 1986, 100 Stat. 1783–82, 1783–141, and Pub. L. 99–591, §101(c) [title X, §908(d)(1)(A)], Oct. 30, 1986, 100 Stat. 3341–82, 3341–141; Pub. L. 99–661, div. A, title IX, formerly title IV, §908(d)(1)(A), Nov. 14, 1986, 100 Stat. 3920, 3921, renumbered title IX, Pub. L. 100–26, §3(5), Apr. 21, 1987, 101 Stat. 273; Pub. L. 115–91, div. A, title VIII, §815(a)(1), Dec. 12, 2017, 131 Stat. 1462. Pub. L. 99–500, Pub. L. 99–591, and Pub. L. 99–661 added identical subsections.

#### Amendments

2021—Pub. L. 116–283, §1819(d), redesignated subsecs. (d) and (e) of section 2326 of this title as subsecs. (a) and (b), respectively, of this section.

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

#### Effective Date

Section and amendment by Pub. L. 116–283 effective Jan. 1, 2022, with additional provisions for delayed implementation and applicability of existing law, see section 1801(d) of Pub. L. 116–283, set out as an Effective Date of 2021 Amendment note preceding section 3001 of this title.
#### § 161.201 Is environmental compliance required?

Actions taken by BIA under this part must comply with the National Environmental Policy Act of 1969, 42 U.S.C. 4321 *et seq.,* applicable provisions of the Council on Environmental Quality, 40 CFR part 1500, and applicable tribal laws and provisions of the Navajo Nation Environmental Policy Act CAP-47-95, where the tribal laws and provisions do not violate a federal or judicial decision or conflict with the Secretary's trust responsibility under federal law.
## In the Court of Appeals Second Appellate District of Texas at Fort Worth

___________________________ No. 02

- 22

- 00246

- CV

___________________________

On Appeal from County Court at Law No. 1 Tarrant County, Texas Trial Court No. 2022

- 000502

- 1

Before Kerr, Birdwell, an d Bassel, JJ. Per Curiam Memorandum Opinion



### R EBECCA 

### L ITTLE 

### , Appellant

V



### . A VA 

### C HESSER 

### , Appellee2 MEMORANDUM OPINION AND JUDGMENT On September 22, 2022, we notified appellant that her brief had not been filed as the appellate rules require. See Tex. R. App. P. 38.6(a). We stated that we could

dismiss the ap p eal for want of prosecution unless , within ten days, appellant filed with

the court a n appellant ’ s brief and a n accompanying motion reasonably explaining the brief’s untimely filing and why an extension was needed. See Tex. R. App. P. 10.5(b), 38.8(a)( 1), 42.3(b). We have received no response. Because appellant has failed to file a brief even after we afforded an opportunity to explain the initial failure, we dismiss the appeal for want of prosecution. See Tex. R. App. P. 38.8(a)(1), 42.3(b), 43.2(f).

Per Curiam

Delivered : November 17, 2022
[if !vml]>[endif]>

[if !vml]>[endif]>

You have reached the FederalDepository Library Program Electronic Collection (FDLP/EC) Archive. Thisarchive assures ongoing access to publications in the FDLP/EC. Access topublications in the archive is available through GPO's suite of cataloging andlocator services, including the Catalog of U.S. Government Publications(CGP).  Archived copies of publications are retrieved in the event thatpublications are no longer available from the original publishing agency site. 
**Title:****Kinship guardianship as apermanency option: current through...**
 
2014
 
SuDoc Number:HE 23.1210:G 93/
Item Number:0445-L-01 (online)
CGP systemNumber:001038846
 
February 26, 2018
#### § 37.131 Who may attend an ORBS?

Any student is eligible to attend an ORBS.
### §7801. Definition

In this chapter, the term "settle" means consider, ascertain, adjust, determine, and dispose of a claim, whether by full or partial allowance or by disallowance.

(Aug. 10, 1956, ch. 1041, 70A Stat. 270, §4801; Pub. L. 100–180, div. A, title XII, §1231(19)(B), Dec. 4, 1987, 101 Stat. 1161; renumbered §7801, Pub. L. 115–232, div. A, title VIII, §808(d), Aug. 13, 2018, 132 Stat. 1839.)

| Revised section | Source (U.S. Code) | Source (Statutes at Large) |
| --- | --- | --- |
| 4801 | [No source]. | [No source]. |

The revised section is inserted for clarity, and is based on usage in the source laws for this revised chapter.

#### **Editorial Notes**

#### Amendments

2018—Pub. L. 115–232 renumbered section 4801 of this title as this section.

1987—Pub. L. 100–180 inserted "the term" after "In this chapter,".

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

#### Effective Date of 2018 Amendment

Amendment by Pub. L. 115–232 effective Feb. 1, 2019, with provision for the coordination of amendments and special rule for certain redesignations, see section 800 of Pub. L. 115–232, set out as a note preceding section 3001 of this title.
#### Louis Schlesser, Respondent, v. The Brooklyn Heights Railroad Company, Appellant.

Judgment of the Municipal Court affirmed, with costs. No opinion. Jenks, Hooker, Gaynor, Rich and Miller, JJ., concurred.
[if !vml]>[endif]>

[if !vml]>[endif]>

You have reached the FederalDepository Library Program Electronic Collection (FDLP/EC) Archive. Thisarchive assures ongoing access to publications in the FDLP/EC. Access to publicationsin the archive is available through GPO's suite of cataloging and locatorservices, including the Catalog of U.S. Government Publications (CGP). Archived copies of publications are retrieved in the event that publicationsare no longer available from the original publishing agency site. 
**Title: Servicemembersand veterans group life insurance handbook
** 
2006| 2009| 2010|2012 |2014| 2017| 2019
 
SuDoc:VA1.46/2-2:
Item Number:0983-A-21 (online)
CGP systemNumber: 001035023
 
April 9, 2024
 ****
### Geology of the southern Himalaya in Hazara, Pakistan, and adjacent areas

By: James Alfred CalkinsTerry W. OffieldS.K. AbdullahS.T. Ali

                            https://doi.org/10.3133/pp716C

#### Links

-                                                                                                                             Document:                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                  **Report**                                                                                                     (pdf)                                                                                                                                     
- Plates:                               - **Plate 1**                            (pdf)
  - **Plate 2**                            (pdf)
  - **Plate 3**                            (pdf)
  - **Plate 4**                            (pdf)
  - **Plate 5**                            (pdf)
  - **Plate 6**                            (pdf) 
- Superseded Publications:
                                        The geology of the western limb of the Hazara-Kashmir syntaxis, West Pakistan and Kashmir(1967)                                    

                                        Geology of the Tarbela damsite area, Peshawar Division, Pakistan(1973)                                    

                                        The geology and mineral resources of the Garhi Habibullah quadrangle and the Kakul area, Hazara District, Pakistan(1973)                                    

                                        Reconnaissance geology of the Balakot and Mahandri quadrangles, Hazara District, Pakistan(1973)                                    

                                        Reconnaissance geology of the Mansehra quadrangle, Hazara district, Pakistan(1973)                                    

                                        Reconnaissance geology of the Tarbela quadrangle, Hazara District, Pakistan(1973)                                    

- Download citation as:  RIS                         |                         Dublin                            Core

#### Abstract

Part or all of this report is presented in Portable Document Format                        (PDF). For best results viewing and printing PDF documents, it is recommended that you download                        the documents to your computer and open them with Adobe Reader. PDF documents opened from your                        browser may not display or print as intended. Download the latest version of Adobe Reader, free of charge. More information                        about viewing, downloading, and printing report files can be found at the common download problems FAQ.
EXHIBIT
10.3 


   


 QUALIS
INNOVATIONS, INC.  


 SUBSCRIPTION
AGREEMENT 


   


 Qualis
Innovations, Inc. 


 225
Wilmington West Chester Pike 


 Suite
200 # 145 


 Chadds
Ford, Pennsylvania 19317 


   


 RE:
Qualis Innovations, Inc. Common Stock 


   


 Ladies
and Gentlemen: 


   


 The
undersigned investor in this Subscription Agreement hereby acknowledges receipt of the Prospectus, dated __________________, 2021, of
Qualis Innovations, Inc., a Nevada corporation (the “Company”), and subscribes for the following number of shares
upon the terms and conditions set forth in the Prospectus. 


   


 The
Investor agrees that this Subscription Agreement is subject to availability and acceptance by the Company. 


   


 The
Investor hereby subscribes for ____________ shares of the Company’s common stock (“Common Stock”) at $_____
per share, for an aggregate purchase price of $____________. 


   


 Payment
of $____________ as payment in full of the purchase price is being made via check directly to the Company. 


   


 If
this subscription is rejected by the Company, in whole or in part, for any reason, all funds will be returned within three business days
of the Company’s receipt of such funds, without interest or deduction of any kind. 


   


 Purchaser
Information: 


   


	 Printed
    Name:  	   	   



   


	 Signature: 	   	   
	   	   	   
	 Date: 	   	   
	   	   	   
	 Address: 	   	   
	   	   	   
	   	   	   
		   	   
	   	   	   


   


 The
foregoing Subscription is hereby accepted in full on behalf of Qualis Innovations, Inc. 


   


 Date:
___________________ 


   


	 QUALIS
    INNOVATIONS, INC.   	   
	   	   	   
	 By: 	   	   
	 Name: 	 John
    Ballard 	   
	 Title: 	 Chief
    Financial Officer
**HAMMER FIBER OPTICS HOLDINGS CORP.**

 

**Certification of the 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 accompanying Annual Report on Form 10-K of Hammer Fiber Optics Holdings Corp. (the “Company”) for the year ended July 31, 2019 (the “Report”), I, Mark Stogdill, President and Principal Executive 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) 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.
IN THE COURT OF APPEALS OF IOWA

No. 19-1346

Filed September 1, 2021

STATE OF IOWA,

Plaintiff-Appellee,

vs.

ANDREW STEVEN JENSEN,

Defendant-Appellant.

________________________________________________________________

Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Black Hawk County, Bradley J. 

Harris and David P. Odekirk, Judges.

Following his guilty plea to possession of methamphetamine, Andrew 

Jensen appeals arguing he received ineffective assistance of counsel. 

AFFIRMED.

William J. O'Brien, Omaha, Nebraska, for appellant.

Thomas J. Miller, Attorney General, and Linda J. Hines, Assistant Attorney 

General, for appellee.

Considered by Vaitheswaran, P.J., Schumacher, J., and Doyle, S.J.*

*Senior judge assigned by order pursuant to Iowa Code section 602.9206 

(2021).
2

DOYLE, Senior Judge.

Andrew Jensen pled guilty to possession of methamphetamine, third or 

subsequent offense, a class “D” felony, in violation of Iowa Code section 

124.401(5). An order of judgment and sentence was entered in August 2019. On 

appeal Jensen argues he received ineffective assistance of counsel because (1) 

his counsel failed to adequately advise him on the nature of the proceedings and 

on the consequences of entering a guilty plea, and (2) his counsel failed to file a 

motion in arrest of judgment for a guilty plea that was not entered intelligently and 

voluntarily. This court has no authority to decide a claim of ineffective assistance 

of counsel on direct appeal. Iowa Code § 814.7 (2019); State v. Tucker, 959 

N.W.2d 140, 154 (Iowa 2021). Accordingly, Jensen’s appeal must be dismissed.

AFFIRMED.