alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
# C_2017285EN.01020701.xml

| 29.8.2017 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 285/207 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

29.8.2017

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 285/207

---

P7_TA(2014)0115

Appointment of a member of the Court of Auditors — Oskar HERICS (AT)

European Parliament decision of 25 February 2014 on the nomination of Oskar Herics as a Member of the Court of Auditors (C7-0009/2014 — 2014/0802(NLE))

(Consultation)

(2017/C 285/32)

The European Parliament,

The European Parliament

| — | having regard to Article 286(2) of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union, pursuant to which the Council consulted Parliament (C7-0009/2014), |
| --- | --- |

—

having regard to Article 286(2) of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union, pursuant to which the Council consulted Parliament (C7-0009/2014),

| — | having regard to Rule 108 of its Rules of Procedure, |
| --- | --- |

—

having regard to Rule 108 of its Rules of Procedure,

| — | having regard to the report of the Committee on Budgetary Control (A7-0128/2014), |
| --- | --- |

—

having regard to the report of the Committee on Budgetary Control (A7-0128/2014),

| A. | whereas Parliament’s Committee on Budgetary Control proceeded to evaluate the credentials of the nominee, in particular in view of the requirements laid down in Article 286(1) of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union; |
| --- | --- |

A.

whereas Parliament’s Committee on Budgetary Control proceeded to evaluate the credentials of the nominee, in particular in view of the requirements laid down in Article 286(1) of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union;

| B. | whereas at its meeting of 17 February 2014 the Committee on Budgetary Control heard the Council’s nominee for membership of the Court of Auditors; |
| --- | --- |

B.

whereas at its meeting of 17 February 2014 the Committee on Budgetary Control heard the Council’s nominee for membership of the Court of Auditors;

| 1. | Delivers a favourable opinion on the Council’s nomination of Oskar Herics as a Member of the Court of Auditors; |
| --- | --- |

1.

Delivers a favourable opinion on the Council’s nomination of Oskar Herics as a Member of the Court of Auditors;

| 2. | Instructs its President to forward this decision to the Council and, for information, the Court of Auditors, the other institutions of the European Union and the audit institutions of the Member States. |
| --- | --- |

2.

Instructs its President to forward this decision to the Council and, for information, the Court of Auditors, the other institutions of the European Union and the audit institutions of the Member States.

---
###### Editorial Note on Part 23

#### Editorial Note:

Nomenclature changes to part 23 appear at 79 FR 27190, May 13, 2014.

#### § 23.35 Deadline for Central Office action.

Within 30 days of the receipt of grant reporting forms from the Regional Directors identifying approved and disapproved applications pursuant to subpart D of this part and recommended funding levels for approved applications, the Secretary or his/her designee shall process the Regional Directors' funding requests.
#### SUSANA F. RICE *v.*RICHARD J. RICE

The plaintiffs petition for certification for appeal from the Appellate Court (AC 24775) is denied.

*907Decided June 23, 2004

*Susana F. Rice,*pro se, in support of the petition.
#### § 2.812 May I appeal the denial of my request for an extension of time?

No. The denial of an extension of time to submit the Objection to the Statement of Performance is not appealable.
Editorial Note on Part 224
Editorial Note: Nomenclature changes to part 224 appear at 84 FR 69611, Dec. 18, 2019.

§ 224.71 What standards will the Secretary use to decide to approve a final proposed TERA? The Secretary must approve a final proposed TERA unless: ( a ) The Tribe does not meet the definition of a “qualified Tribe” in § 224.30;
( b ) A provision of the TERA violates applicable Federal law (including regulations) or a treaty applicable to the Tribe; or
( c ) The TERA fails to include the provisions required by § 224.63.
[84 FR 69612, Dec. 18, 2019]
§ 166.705 What will the BIA do if a permit violation is not cured within the required time period? ( a ) If the permittee does not cure a violation within the required time period, we will consult with the Indian landowners, as appropriate, and determine whether: ( 1 ) The permit should be canceled by us under paragraph (c) of this section and §§ 166.706 through 166.707 of this subpart;
( 2 ) We should invoke any other remedies available to us under the permit, including collecting on any available bond;
( 3 ) The Indian landowners wish to invoke any remedies available to them under the permit; or
( 4 ) The permittee should be granted additional time in which to cure the violation.
( b ) If we decide to grant a permittee additional time in which to cure a violation, the permittee must proceed diligently to complete the necessary corrective actions within a reasonable or specified time period from the date on which the extension is granted.
( c ) If we decide to cancel the permit, we will send the permittee and its sureties a written notice of cancellation within five business days of that decision. We will also provide actual or constructive notice of a cancellation decision to the Indian landowners, as appropriate. The written notice of cancellation will: ( 1 ) Explain the grounds for cancellation;
( 2 ) Notify the permittee of the amount of any unpaid rent, interest charges, or late payment penalties due under the permit;
( 3 ) Notify the permittee of its right to appeal under Part 2 of this chapter, as modified by § 166.706 of this subpart, including the amount of any appeal bond that must be posted with an appeal of the cancellation decision; and
( 4 ) Order the permittee to vacate the property within 30 days of the date of receipt of the written notice of cancellation, if an appeal is not filed by that time.
EX-31 Rule 13a-14(d)/15d-14(d) Certification.

  WFRBS Commercial Mortgage Trust 2012-C6,
  Commercial Mortgage Pass-Through Certificates
  Series 2012-C6 (the Trust)

  I, Anthony Sfarra, a President of Wells Fargo Commercial Mortgage
  Securities, Inc., the depositor into the above-referenced Trust, certify
  that:

  1.I have reviewed this annual report on Form 10-K, and all reports Form
    10-D required to be filed in respect of periods included in the year
    covered by this annual report, of the Trust;

  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 annual 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.Based on my knowledge and the servicer compliance statements required
    in this report under Item 1123 of Regulation AB, and except as
    disclosed in the Exchange Act periodic report, the servicers have
    fulfilled their obligations under the pooling and 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:
    CoreLogic Commercial Real Estate Services, Inc. as Vendor for Wells
    Fargo Bank, N.A. as Master Servicer, Deutsche Bank Trust Company
    Americas as Trustee, Midland Loan Services, Inc. a Division of PNC Bank,
     National Association as Special Servicer, National Tax Search, LLC as
    Vendor for Wells Fargo Bank, N.A. as Master Servicer, Pentalpha
    Surveillance LLC as Trust Advisor and Rialto Capital Advisors, LLC as
    Special Servicer.

    Dated:   March 31, 2014


    /s/ Anthony Sfarra
    Signature

    President
    (senior officer in charge of securitization of the depositor)
```

[Congressional Bills 106th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[H. Res. 393 Agreed to House (ATH)]

106th CONGRESS
  1st Session
H. RES. 393

                 Returning to the Senate the bill S. 4.

_______________________________________________________________________

                    IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

                           November 18, 1999

Mr. Weller submitted the following resolution; which was considered and 
                               agreed to

_______________________________________________________________________

                               RESOLUTION

 
                 Returning to the Senate the bill S. 4.

    Resolved, That the bill of the Senate (S. 4) entitled the 
``Soldiers', Sailors', Airmen's, and Marines' Bill of Rights Act of 
1999'', in the opinion of this House, contravenes the first clause of 
the seventh section of the first article of the Constitution of the 
United States and is an infringement of the privileges of this House 
and that such bill be respectfully returned to the Senate with a 
message communicating this resolution.
                                 <all>
```
### §9447. Cadets; nominees: effect of redistricting of States

If as a result of redistricting a State the domicile of a cadet, or a nominee, nominated by a Representative falls within a congressional district other than that from which he was nominated, he is charged to the district in which his domicile so falls. For this purpose, the number of cadets otherwise authorized for that district is increased to include him. However, the number as so increased is reduced by one if he fails to become a cadet or when he is finally separated from the Academy.

(Aug. 10, 1956, ch. 1041, 70A Stat. 565, §9347, renumbered §9447, Pub. L. 115–232, div. A, title VIII, §806(a)(3), Aug. 13, 2018, 132 Stat. 1832.)

| Revised section | Source (U.S. Code) | Source (Statutes at Large) |
| --- | --- | --- |
| 9347 | 10:1091–1. | July 7, 1943, ch. 193, 57 Stat. 383. |

The word "domicile" is substituted for the words "place of residence" and "residence" to conform to opinions of the Judge Advocate General of the Army (R. 29, 83; J.A.G. 351.11, Feb. 10, 1925). The words "a * * * other than that from which he was nominated" are substituted for the word "another". The words "were appointed with respect to", "of the former district", "as additional numbers", "at such academy for the Representative", "temporarily", and "in attendance at such academy under an appointment from such former district" are omitted as surplusage. The words "the district in which his domicile so falls" are substituted for the words "of the latter district". The words "to include him" are substituted for 10:1091–1 (18 words before proviso). The words "but the number as so increased" are substituted for 10:1091–1 (1st 13 words of proviso). The words "if he fails to become a cadet" are inserted for clarity.

#### **Editorial Notes**

#### Prior Provisions

A prior section 9447 was renumbered section 9497 of this title.

#### Amendments

2018—Pub. L. 115–232 renumbered section 9347 of this title as this section.

#### **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.
**EXHIBIT 34.1**

**Report of Independent Registered Public Accounting Firm**

Board of Directors and Shareholder 

The Huntington National Bank

Columbus, Ohio 

We have examined management’sassertion, included in the accompanying Management’s Report on Assessment of Compliance with SEC Regulation AB Servicing Criteria, that The Huntington National Bank (the “Company”) complied with the servicing criteria set forth inItem 1122(d) of the Securities and Exchange Commission’s Regulation AB for the Automobile Loan Platform (the “Platform”) as of and for the year ended December 31, 2013, excluding criteria 1122(d)(1)(ii), 1122(d)(1)(iii),1122(d)(2)(vi), 1122(d)( 3)(i. D), 1122(d)(4)(ix), 1122(d)(4)(x), 1122(d)(4)(xi), 1122(d)(4)(xii), 1122(d)(4)(xiii), and 1122(d)(4)(xv), which management has determined are not applicable to the activities performed by the Company with respect tothe Platform. Management’s assertion identifies the individual asset-backed transactions defined by management as constituting the Platform. Management is responsible for the Company’s compliance with the servicing criteria. Ourresponsibility is to express an opinion on management’s assertion about the Company’s compliance with the servicing criteria based on our examination. 

Our examination was conducted in accordance with attestation standards established by the American Institute of Certified Public Accountants, as adopted bythe 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, including tests on a sample basis of theservicing activities related to the Platform, determining whether the Company performed those selected activities in compliance with the servicing criteria during the specified period, and performing such other procedures as we considered necessaryin the circumstances. Our procedures were limited to selected servicing activities performed by the Company during the period covered by this report and, accordingly, such samples may not have included servicing activities related to eachasset-backed transaction included in the Platform. Further, an examination is not designed to detect noncompliance arising from errors that may have occurred prior to the period specified above that may have affected the balances or amountscalculated 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 withthe servicing criteria. 

In our opinion, management’s assertion that the Company complied with the aforementioned applicable servicing criteria as ofand for the year ended December 31, 2013 for the Automobile Loan Platform is fairly stated, in all material respects. 

/s/ Deloitte & ToucheLLP 

Columbus, Ohio 

March 17, 2014
Exhibit 18

August 13, 1999

The Board of Directors
OMI Corporation
One Station Place
Stamford, CT 06902

Dear Sirs and Madam:

At your request, we have read the description included in your Quarterly Report
on Form 10-Q to the Securities and Exchange Commission for the quarter ended
June 30, 1999 of the facts relating to OMI Corporation's (the "Company") change,
effective January 1, 1999, in its accounting policy for recognizing revenue. We
believe, on the basis of the facts so set forth and other information furnished
to us by appropriate officials of the Company, that the accounting change
described in your Form 10-Q is to an alternative accounting principle that is
preferable under the circumstances.

We have not audited any consolidated financial statements of OMI Corporation and
its consolidated subsidiaries as of any date or for any period subsequent to
December 31, 1998. Therefore, we are unable to express, and we do not express,
an opinion on the facts set forth in the above-mentioned Form 10-Q, on the
related information furnished to us by officials of the Company, or on the
financial position, results of operations, or cash flows of OMI Corporation and
its consolidated subsidiaries as of any date or for any period subsequent to
December 31, 1998.

Yours truly,

Deloitte & Touche LLP
Exhibit 32.1

CERTIFICATION OF PRINCIPAL EXECUTIVE OFFICER, SECTION 906

CERTIFICATION PURSUANT TO

18 U.S.C. SECTION 1350,

AS ADOPTED PURSUANT TO

SECTION 906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002

I, Michael Hart, the President (Principal Executive Officer) of Carlyle GMS Finance, Inc. (the Company), hereby certify, pursuant
to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, as adopted pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that:



| |  |  | the Form 10-K of the Company for the year ended December 31, 2015 as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the Form 10-K), fully complies with the requirements of
Section 13(a) or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 (15 U.S.C. 78m or 78o(d)); and
| | - |  | -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------



| |  |  | the information contained in the Form 10-K fairly presents, in all material respects, the financial condition and results of operations of the Company.
| | - |  | -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------



Dated: March 11, 2016/s/ Michael HartMichael Hart
President (Principal
Executive Officer)




|* | The foregoing certification is being furnished solely pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350 and is not being filed as part of the Report or as a separate disclosure document.
|- | ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
§ 211.28 Unitization and communitization agreements, and well spacing. ( a ) For the purpose of promoting conservation and efficient utilization of minerals, the Secretary may approve a cooperative unit, drilling or other development plan on any leased area upon a determination that approval is advisable and in the best interest of the Indian mineral owner. For the purposes of this section, a cooperative unit, drilling or other development plan means an agreement for the development or operation of a specifically designated area as a single unit without regard to separate ownership of the land included in the agreement. Such cooperative agreements include, but are not limited to, unit agreements, communitization agreements and other types of agreements that allocate costs and benefits.
( b ) The consent of the Indian mineral owner to such unit or cooperative agreement shall not be required unless such consent is specifically required in the lease. However, the Secretary shall consult with the Indian mineral owner prior to making a determination concerning a cooperative agreement or well spacing plan.
( c ) Requests for approval of cooperative agreements which comply with the requirements of all applicable rules and regulations shall be filed with the superintendent or area director.
( d ) All Indian mineral owners of any right, title or interest in the mineral resources to be included in a cooperative agreement must be notified by the lessee at the time the agreement is submitted to the superintendent or area director. An affidavit from the lessee stating that a notice was mailed to each mineral owner of record for whom the superintendent or area director has an address will satisfy this notice requirement.
( e ) A request for approval of a proposed cooperative agreement, and all documents incident to such agreement, must be filed with the superintendent or area director at least ninety (90) days prior to the first expiration date of any of the Indian leases in the area proposed to be covered by the cooperative agreement.
( f ) Unless otherwise provided in the cooperative agreement, approval of the agreement commits each lease to the unit in the area covered by the agreement on the date approved by the Secretary or the date of first production, whichever is earlier, as long as the agreement is approved before the lease expiration date.
( g ) Any lease committed in part to any such cooperative agreement shall be segregated into a separate lease or leases as to the lands committed and lands not committed to the agreement. Segregation shall be effective on the date the agreement is effective.
( h ) Wells shall be drilled in conformity with a well spacing program approved by the authorized officer.
# C_2006228EN.01000101.xml

| 22.9.2006 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 228/1 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

22.9.2006

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 228/1

---

Euro exchange rates (1)

1

21 September 2006

(2006/C 228/01)

1 euro=

1 euro

| | Currency | Exchange rate |
| --- | --- | --- |
| USD | US dollar | 1,2731 |
| JPY | Japanese yen | 148,84 |
| DKK | Danish krone | 7,4594 |
| GBP | Pound sterling | 0,6706 |
| SEK | Swedish krona | 9,2193 |
| CHF | Swiss franc | 1,5887 |
| ISK | Iceland króna | 89,43 |
| NOK | Norwegian krone | 8,281 |
| BGN | Bulgarian lev | 1,9558 |
| CYP | Cyprus pound | 0,5766 |
| CZK | Czech koruna | 28,419 |
| EEK | Estonian kroon | 15,6466 |
| HUF | Hungarian forint | 274,48 |
| LTL | Lithuanian litas | 3,4528 |
| LVL | Latvian lats | 0,696 |
| MTL | Maltese lira | 0,4293 |
| PLN | Polish zloty | 3,9466 |
| RON | Romanian leu | 3,5305 |
| SIT | Slovenian tolar | 239,61 |
| SKK | Slovak koruna | 37,505 |
| TRY | Turkish lira | 1,875 |
| AUD | Australian dollar | 1,6856 |
| CAD | Canadian dollar | 1,4302 |
| HKD | Hong Kong dollar | 9,9092 |
| NZD | New Zealand dollar | 1,9258 |
| SGD | Singapore dollar | 2,0126 |
| KRW | South Korean won | 1 202,12 |
| ZAR | South African rand | 9,4547 |
| CNY | Chinese yuan renminbi | 10,0872 |
| HRK | Croatian kuna | 7,43 |
| IDR | Indonesian rupiah | 11 636,13 |
| MYR | Malaysian ringgit | 4,6729 |
| PHP | Philippine peso | 63,789 |
| RUB | Russian rouble | 34,043 |
| THB | Thai baht | 47,638 |

Currency

Exchange rate

USD

US dollar

1,2731

JPY

Japanese yen

148,84

DKK

Danish krone

7,4594

GBP

Pound sterling

0,6706

SEK

Swedish krona

9,2193

CHF

Swiss franc

1,5887

ISK

Iceland króna

89,43

NOK

Norwegian krone

8,281

BGN

Bulgarian lev

1,9558

CYP

Cyprus pound

0,5766

CZK

Czech koruna

28,419

EEK

Estonian kroon

15,6466

HUF

Hungarian forint

274,48

LTL

Lithuanian litas

3,4528

LVL

Latvian lats

0,696

MTL

Maltese lira

0,4293

PLN

Polish zloty

3,9466

RON

Romanian leu

3,5305

SIT

Slovenian tolar

239,61

SKK

Slovak koruna

37,505

TRY

Turkish lira

1,875

AUD

Australian dollar

1,6856

CAD

Canadian dollar

1,4302

HKD

Hong Kong dollar

9,9092

NZD

New Zealand dollar

1,9258

SGD

Singapore dollar

2,0126

KRW

South Korean won

1 202,12

ZAR

South African rand

9,4547

CNY

Chinese yuan renminbi

10,0872

HRK

Croatian kuna

7,43

IDR

Indonesian rupiah

11 636,13

MYR

Malaysian ringgit

4,6729

PHP

Philippine peso

63,789

RUB

Russian rouble

34,043

THB

Thai baht

47,638

---

(1)

1

Source: reference exchange rate published by the ECB.

Source:

---