alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<ARTICLE> 5
<CIK> 0001062363
<NAME> RENAISSANCE MEDIA
<MULTIPLIER> 1,000

<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   6-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          DEC-31-1999
<PERIOD-START>                             JAN-01-1999
<PERIOD-END>                               JUN-30-1999
<CASH>                                             792
<SECURITIES>                                         0
<RECEIVABLES>                                   10,574
<ALLOWANCES>                                        82
<INVENTORY>                                          0
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                                11,454
<PP&E>                                          67,430
<DEPRECIATION>                                 (1,322)
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                 471,240
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                            5,840
<BONDS>                                         82,644
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                             0
<OTHER-SE>                                     382,462
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                   471,240
<SALES>                                              0
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                                30,807
<CGS>                                                0
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                   29,167
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                     0
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                     0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                               8,064
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                (6,302)
<INCOME-TAX>                                        65
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                            (6,237)
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                   (6,237)
<EPS-BASIC>                                          0
<EPS-DILUTED>                                        0


</TABLE>
#### Harry M. Tabler v. James M. Yaple.

1. *Abstract—when insufficient, authorizes affirmance.*Where the abstract is not in compliance with the rule, the court is justified in ordering an affirmance.

Bill to foreclose. Appeal from the Circuit Court of McDonough County; the Hon. John A. Gray, Judge, presiding.

Heard in this court at the November term, 1904.

Affirmed.

Opinion filed April 20, 1905.

T. Z. Creel, for appellant.

Sherman, Tunnicliff *&*Gumbart, for appellee.

Mr. Presiding Justice Baume

delivered the opinion of the court.

This is a bill filed by appellee against appellant to foreclose a mortgage given to secure one principal note for §1,000 and five interest notes for $60 each. The answer of appellant alleges payment by him of the notes before maturity, to one Henry 0. Agnew, the authorized agent of appellee, and the important questions involved upon the hearing, were whether payment was in fact made to said Agnew, and if made whether said Agnew was authorized ■ to collect the said notes, or any of them, before maturity.

We are advised by the briefs and arguments of counsel for the respective parties that the chancellor sustained exceptions to the report of a special master finding that the notes involved had been paid and that appellee was not entitled to a decree of foreclosure, and entered a decree foreclosing the mortgage, but the abstract of the record filed by appellant, gives us no information upon the subject, other than such as may'be obtained from the following excerpts; “ Exceptions taken by complainant to- report by special master“ Decree.” The assignment of errors relied upon by appellant for a reversal of the decree, is abstracted thus; “ Assignment of Errors.”

Whether Henry G. Agnew was the agent of appellee authorized to collect notes before maturity, appears to have *70been sharply controverted, and it is apparent that a course of dealing between Agnew and appellee, as evidenced by certain letters, reports and checks, was relied upon by both parties as determining that issue. Twenty-three exhibits offered in evidence by appellee, appear in the abstract' as follows : *“*Defendant here offered the following exhibits, marked defendant’s exhibits 1, *2,*3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23. Exhibits objected to by plaintiff.” Eighty-four exhibits, consisting of certain letters, checks, receipts and reports and a power of attorney, are not abstracted, but merely indexed.

The abstract does not comply with the rules of this court, and we cannot determine therefrom what errors are assigned or whether there was error in the court below. The decree is therefore affirmed.

*Affirmed.*
{00039291.DOC}

SF1 1652475v.2

**EXHIBIT 31.1**

**CERTIFICATIONS**

I, Brian T. Stevens, 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 Mercedes-Benz 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 parties:  U.S. Bank, National Association, as Indenture Trustee. 

Date:  March 26, 2013 

  /s/   Brian T. Stevens

Name: Brian T. Stevens Title: Vice President and Controller                             (senior officer of Servicer in charge of servicing function)
```

[Congressional Bills 106th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[H. Res. 502 Engrossed in House (EH)]

                 In the House of Representatives, U.S.,

                                                          May 16, 2000.
    Resolved, That at any time after the adoption of this resolution the Speaker 
may, pursuant to clause 2(b) of rule XVIII, declare the House resolved into the 
Committee of the Whole House on the state of the Union for consideration of the 
bill (H.R. 4425) making appropriations for military construction, family 
housing, and base realignment and closure for the Department of Defense for the 
fiscal year ending September 30, 2001, and for other purposes. The first reading 
of the bill shall be dispensed with. Points of order against consideration of 
the bill for failure to comply with clause 4(c) of rule XIII are waived. General 
debate shall be confined to the bill and shall not exceed one hour equally 
divided and controlled by the chairman and ranking minority member of the 
Committee on Appropriations. After general debate the bill shall be considered 
for amendment under the five-minute rule. Points of order against provisions in 
the bill for failure to comply with clause 2 of rule XXI are waived. During 
consideration of the bill for amendment, the Chairman of the Committee of the 
Whole may accord priority in recognition on the basis of whether the Member 
offering an amendment has caused it to be printed in the portion of the 
Congressional Record designated for that purpose in clause 8 of rule XVIII. 
Amendments so printed shall be considered as read. The Chairman of the Committee 
of the Whole may: (1) postpone until a time during further consideration in the 
Committee of the Whole a request for a recorded vote on any amendment; and (2) 
reduce to five minutes the minimum time for electronic voting on any postponed 
question that follows another electronic vote without intervening business, 
provided that the minimum time for electronic voting on the first in any series 
of questions shall be 15 minutes. At the conclusion of consideration of the bill 
for amendment the Committee shall rise and report the bill to the House with 
such amendments as may have been adopted. The previous question shall be 
considered as ordered on the bill and amendments thereto to final passage 
without intervening motion except one motion to recommit with or without 
instructions.
    Sec. 2. For purposes of enforcement of the Congressional Budget Act of 1974 
in the House, the appropriate levels of total new budget authority and total 
budget outlays for fiscal years 2000 through 2005 prescribed by House Concurrent 
Resolution 290 pursuant to section 301(a)(1) of the Act shall be those reflected 
in the table entitled ``Conference Report Fiscal Year 2001 Budget Resolution 
Total Spending and Revenues'' on page 49 of House Report 106-577.
            Attest:

                                                                          Clerk.
```
[Federal Register Volume 76, Number 39 (Monday, February 28, 2011)]
[Notices]
[Page 10898]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2011-4120]


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

EXPORT-IMPORT BANK OF THE UNITED STATES


Sunshine Act Meeting

ACTION: Notice of a Partially Open Meeting of the Board of Directors of 
the Export-Import Bank of the United States.

TIME AND PLACE: Thursday, February 24, 2011 at 9:30 a.m. The meeting 
will be held at Ex-Im Bank in Room 1143, 811 Vermont Avenue, NW., 
Washington, DC 20571.

OPEN AGENDA ITEMS: Item No. 1: Ex-Im Bank Sub-Saharan Africa Advisory 
Committee for 2011.

PUBLIC PARTICIPATION: The meeting will be open to public observation 
for Item No. 1 only.

FURTHER INFORMATION: For further information, contact: Office of the 
Secretary, 811 Vermont Avenue, NW., Washington, DC 20571, (202) 565-
3957.

Jonathan J. Cordone,
Senior Vice President and General Counsel.
[FR Doc. 2011-4120 Filed 2-25-11; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6690-01-M
### §8704. Disposition of receipts

Amounts received under this chapter shall be credited to appropriations for maintaining naval salvage facilities. However, any amount received under this chapter in any fiscal year in excess of naval salvage costs incurred by the Navy during that fiscal year shall be deposited into the general fund of the Treasury.

(Added Pub. L. 104–106, div. A, title X, §1015, Feb. 10, 1996, 110 Stat. 425, §7364; renumbered §8704, Pub. L. 115–232, div. A, title VIII, §807(d)(3), Aug. 13, 2018, 132 Stat. 1836.)

#### **Editorial Notes**

#### Amendments

2018—Pub. L. 115–232 renumbered section 7364 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.
#### GORDON v. NORTHWEST AUTO AUCTION

No. 63A90

Case below: 97 N.C.App. 88

Petition by plaintiff for writ of certiorari to the North Carolina Court of Appeals allowed 13 June 1990.
### [§2548. Renumbered §3105]

#### **Editorial Notes**

#### Prior Provisions

A prior section 2548 was renumbered section 2558 of this title.
§ 276.4 Bondings and insurance. In administering Bureau grants, grantees shall observe their regular requirements and practices with respect to bonding and insurance. The Bureau will not impose additional bonding and insurance requirements, including fidelity bonds, except as provided in paragraphs (a) and (b) of this section. ( a ) The recipient of a Bureau grant which requires contracting for construction or facility improvement (including any Bureau grant which provides for alterations or renovations of real property) shall follow its own requirements and practices relating to bid guarantees, performance bonds, and payment bonds except for contracts exceeding $100,000. For contracts exceeding $100,000, the minimum requirements shall be as follows: ( 1 ) A bid guarantee from each bidder equivalent to five percent of the bid price. The bid guarantee shall consist of a firm commitment such as a bid bond, certified check, or other negotiable instrument accompanying a bid as assurance that the bidder will, upon acceptance of his bid, execute such contractual documents as may be required within the time specified.
( 2 ) A performance bond on the part of the contractor for 100 percent of the contract price. A performance bond is one executed in connection with a contract to secure fulfillment of all the contractor's obligations under the contract.
( 3 ) A payment bond on the part of the contractor for 100 per cent of the contract price. A payment bond is one executed in connection with a contract to assure payment as required by law of all persons supplying labor and material in the execution of the work provided for in the contract.
( b ) Where, in connection with a Bureau grant, the Bureau also guarantees the payment of money borrowed by the grantee, the Bureau may at its discretion require adequate bonding and insurance if the bonding and insurance requirements of the grantee are not deemed to be sufficient to protect adequately the interests of the Federal Government.
<PAGE>

         Exhibit 31.1


                                  CERTIFICATION





         I, Eyal Bigon, certify that:


         1. I have reviewed this quarterly report of InkSure Technologies Inc.;


         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;


         3. Based on my knowledge, the financial statements, and other financial
information included in this report, fairly present in all material respects the
financial condition, results of operations and cash flows of the registrant as
of, and for, the periods presented in this report;


         4. The registrant's other certifying officer(s) and I are responsible
for establishing and maintaining disclosure controls and procedures (as defined
in Exchange Act Rules 13a-15(e) and 15d-15(e)) for the registrant and have:


         a) designed such disclosure controls and procedures, or caused such
disclosure controls and procedures to be designed under our supervision, to
ensure that material information relating to the registrant, including its
consolidated subsidiaries, is made known to us by others within those entities,
particularly during the period in which this report is being prepared;


         b) evaluated the effectiveness of the registrant's disclosure controls
and procedures and presented in this report our conclusions about the
effectiveness of the disclosure controls and procedures, as of the end of the
period covered by this report based on such evaluation; and


         c) disclosed in this report any change in the registrant's internal
control over financial reporting that occurred during the registrant's most
recent fiscal quarter (the registrant's fourth fiscal quarter in the case of an
annual report) that has materially affected, or is reasonably likely to
materially affect, the registrant's internal control over financial reporting;
and


         5. The registrant's other certifying officer(s) and I have disclosed,
based on our most recent evaluation of internal control over financial
reporting, to the registrant's auditors and the audit committee of the
registrant's board of directors (or persons performing the equivalent
functions):


         a) all significant deficiencies and material weaknesses in the design
or operation of internal control over financial reporting which are reasonably
likely to adversely affect the registrant's ability to record, process,
summarize and report financial information; and


         b) any fraud, whether or not material, that involves management or
other employees who have a significant role in the registrant's internal control
over financial reporting.


Date: August 14, 2003


/s/ Eyal Bigon
--------------
Eyal Bigon
Chief Financial Officer, Secretary and Treasurer
#### § 515.10 Fees.

The Commission shall charge fees for duplication of records under the Privacy Act in the same way in which it charges duplication fees under § 517.9 of this chapter. No search or review fee may be charged for any record. Additionally, when the Privacy Act Officer makes a copy of a record as a necessary part of reviewing the record or granting access to the record, the Commission shall not charge for the cost of making that copy. Otherwise, the Commission may charge a fee sufficient to cover the cost of duplicating a record.

[82 FR 8141, Jan. 24, 2017, as amended at 82 FR 34403, July 25, 2017]
#### Charles H. Brown Paint Company, Respondent, v. Samuel Cohn and Simon Cohn, Appellants.

Judgment of the Municipal Court affirmed, with costs. No opinion. Woodward, Jenks, Hooker, Gaynor and Miller,-JJ., concurred.
## Breadcrumb

-  Home 
-  American Rescue Plan (ARP) Special Financial Assistance P... 
-  American Rescue Plan Webinars 

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.

# American Rescue Plan Webinars

## SFA Application Filing Process for Non-Priority Group Period

Guidance for Plans Seeking to Apply for SFA beginning March 11, 2023.

Watch the full webinar or download the presentation slides.

 

----

## Final Rule

PBGC staff discuss Permissible Investments Under the Special Financial Assistance Final Rule.

Watch the full webinar or download the presentation slides.

 

----

PBGC staff discuss SFA Applications Under the Final Rule, including an application walkthrough and differences between IFR and FR applications.

Watch the full webinar or download the presentation slides.

 

----

PBGC staff discuss special considerations for plans that applied for SFA under the Interim Final Rule and other plans currently eligible to apply.

Watch the full webinar or download the presentation slides.

 

----

PBGC Director Gordon Hartogensis and PBGC staff discuss the final rule implementing changes to the SFA Program.

Watch the full webinar or download the presentation slides.

 

----

## Interim Final Rule

PBGC Director Gordon Hartogensis and PBGC staff discuss the application and review process; restrictions, conditions, and reporting; agency guidance; and program resources, related to the agency’s interim final rule implementing a new Special Financial Assistance (SFA) Program for financially troubled multiemployer defined benefit pension plans.

Watch the full webinar or download the presentation slides.

 

----

Building on PBGC’s first SFA Program webinar, PBGC and Treasury experts further discuss details for plan practitioners on the application process, assumptions, guidance, and resources.

Watch the full webinar or download the presentation slides.

 

----

Additional information on the interim final rule and the SFA Program are available at PBGC.gov/arp-sfa.

March 13, 2023
February 4, 2015

Mr. A.J. Muldoon albert.muldoon@dot.gov EAS and Domestic Analysis Division Office ofAviation Analysis 1200 NewJersey Avenue, SE Washington, DC 20590

DearMr. Muldoon: 

### GRAND COUNTY COUNCIL MEMBERS Elizabeth Tubbs (Chair) · Chris Baird (Vice Chair) Ken Ballantyne · Jaylyn Hawks · Lynn Jackson Mary McGann · Rory Paxman

The Grand County AirportBoard and Grand County Council have reviewed the Essential Air Service (EAS) proposals submitted by Great Lakes Airlines, Redtail Aviation and Boutique Airlines. After considerable discussion, we stronglyurge your office to acceptthe Great Lakes Airlines EAS proposal.

GreatLakes Airlines has proposed multiple daily flights to and from Denver International using the pressurized, twin-engine EMB-120 Brasilia aircraft that would seat 30 passengers. This particulartype of aircraft has been serving Canyonhmds .Field for the last 10 months. Overthe last year, this size aircraft has been instrumental in the airport achieving the most number ofannual enplanements on record; a 19- seat aircraft had provided service during the previous years. This supports the notion that more people wantthe ability to fly directly to and from Moab and the rest ofSoutheastern Utah.

GreatLakes Airlines also will be flying under the FARPart 121 certification. This will enable the traveling public to be screened by T.S.A. in Moab, and then arrive in the securedterminal at Denver International. Travelers couldthen precede directly to connecting airline flights as opposedto the alternative EAS proposals that would require shuttling services from the General Aviation areas ofthe arrival airport to the curbside ofthe Airline Terminals. In addition, Great Lakes Airlines also has existing agreements with multiple airlines that will enable the traveling public to book and check in for flights, and checktheirbaggage, from their departure location all the waythrough to their destination.
While this letter is not a complete list ofthe benefitsthat Great Lakes Airlines can potentially offer our community atthis time, it is our conclusionthatthey presentthe best option for servicing our community under the current Essential Air Service bid.·Thankyou for your willingness to consider our recommendation onthis matter. Sincerely,

# r;'~r:J?r'~

# El~th A. Tubbs, Chair Grand County Council

cc: David Sakrison, Moab City Mayor William J. Groff, Grand CountyAirportBoard Chair

Council's Office· 125 E. Center 

### St.· Moab, UT 84532 · (435) 259-1346 · www.grandcountyutah.net