alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
CAP CANAL

CAP CANAL

Manville Rd.

Reservation Rd.

Mile Wide Rd.

Trico Rd.

Pump Station Rd.

El Tiro Rd.

Trico-Marana Rd.

Sasco Rd.

Anway Rd.

Avra Valley Rd.

Silverbell Rd.

Curtis Rd.

Picacho Hwy.

Baumgartner Rd.

Cripple Creek Rd. Coachway Rd.

Aries Dr.

Sunland Gin Rd.

Greene Reservoir Rd.

Sandario Rd.

Twin Peaks Rd.

TOHONO O'ODHAM NATION BOUNDARY

TOHONO O'ODHAM NATION BOUNDARY

TOHONO O'ODHAM NATION BOUNDARY

TOHONO O'ODHAM NATION BOUNDARY

Saguaro

National

Park

R6E R7E R8E R9E R10E

T11S T10S T9S T12S

T13S T14S

R11E

Pinal County

Pima County

No warranty is made by the Bureau of Land Management (BLM) for the use

of this map for purposes not intended by BLM, or to the accuracy,

reliability, or completeness of the information shown. Spatial

information may not meet National Map Accuracy Standards. This

information may be updated without notification.

Universal Tranverse Mercator

Zone 12, Units Meters

Clark 1866 Spheroid

NAD27 Datum

Map 2-19

Data Source:

OHV Designations: BLM 2003

Route Inventory: Gimblett 2004

Base Information: BLM 2003

Quadrangle Image: U.S. Geological Survey 1977 Tucson

P:\BLM\Ironwood\GIS\Plots\RMP_EIS\Chapter_2\OHV.pdf

Location in Arizona

Ironwood Forest National Monument

Draft RMP/EIS

Travel Management

Alternative A

0 1 2 4 Miles

0 2 4 8 Kilometers

Planning Area

Ironwood Forest National Monument

Central Arizona Project (CAP) Canal

River

General Reference

County Boundaries

Main public access routes to monument. County administered

roads connecting monument travel route system to public

highways.

Interstate 10

Special

Restriction

Area

Legend

Off-highway Vehicle Designations

Limited to Existing Roads and Trails

Limited to Designated Roads and Trails

Closed 

Reference Information

Surface Management

American Indian Reservation

Military Reservations

State Trust Lands

State, County, City; Wildlife, Park and Outdoor Recreation

Areas

Private

Bureau of Land Management

Pima County

National Park Service

Bureau of Reclamation

Note: 

 Land use allocations, designations, and management 

 prescriptions apply only to public lands administered

 by the BLM. If non-Federal lands are acquired, they

 would be managed according to the allocations

 depicted on the map. 

Roads, Trails, or Routes not on BLM-Administered Land
### §1701z–9. Expansion of home ownership opportunities in urban areas

In carrying out activities under section 1701z–1 of this title, the Secretary is authorized to conduct demonstrations to determine the feasibility of expanding homeownership opportunities in urban areas and encouraging the creation and maintenance of decent, safe, and sanitary housing in such areas by utilizing techniques including, but not limited to, the conversion of multifamily housing properties to condominium or cooperative ownership by individuals and families.

(Pub. L. 91–609, title V, §510, as added Pub. L. 95–557, title III, §305(b), Oct. 31, 1978, 92 Stat. 2097.)

#### **Editorial Notes**

#### Codification

Section was enacted as part of the Housing and Urban Development Act of 1970, and not as part of the National Housing Act which comprises this chapter.

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

#### Study To Determine Feasibility of Underground Construction of Residential Housing

Pub. L. 95–557, title III, §305(c), Oct. 31, 1978, 92 Stat. 2097, required the Secretary to study the feasibility of underground construction of residential housing and necessary changes in housing codes and financing, and report to Congress no later than one year after Oct. 31, 1978 as to the findings and recommendations of legislative enactments as a result of the study.
§ 162.338 What documents are required for BIA approval of a residential lease? A lessee or the Indian landowners must submit the following documents to us to obtain BIA approval of a residential lease: ( a ) A lease executed by the Indian landowners and the lessee that meets the requirements of this part;
( b ) For tribal land, a tribal authorization for the lease and, if applicable, meeting the requirements of §§ 162.320(a), 162.326(b), and 162.328(a), or a separate signed certification meeting the requirements of §§ 162.320(a), 162.326(b), and 162.328(a);
( c ) A valuation, if required under § 162.320 or § 162.321;
( d ) A statement from the appropriate tribal authority that the proposed use is in conformance with applicable tribal law, if required by the tribe;
( e ) Reports, surveys, and site assessments as needed to facilitate compliance with applicable Federal and tribal environmental and land use requirements, including any documentation prepared under § 162.027(b);
( f ) A preliminary site plan identifying the proposed location of residential development, roads, and utilities, if applicable, unless the lease is for housing for public purposes;
( g ) A legal description of the land under § 162.317;
( h ) If the lease is being approved under 25 U.S.C. 415, information to assist us in our evaluation of the factors in 25 U.S.C. 415(a); and
( i ) If the lessee is a corporation, limited liability company, partnership, joint venture, or other legal entity, except a tribal entity, information such as organizational documents, certificates, filing records, and resolutions, that demonstrates that: ( 1 ) The representative has authority to execute a lease;
( 2 ) The lease will be enforceable against the lessee; and
( 3 ) The legal entity is in good standing and authorized to conduct business in the jurisdiction where the land is located.
# C_2006331EN.01004001.xml

| 30.12.2006 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 331/40 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

30.12.2006

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 331/40

---

Judgment of the Court of First Instance of 29 November 2006 — Campoli v Commission

(Case T-135/05) (1)

1

(Officials - Pensions - Weighting calculated by reference to the average cost of living in the country of residence - Transitional arrangements set up by the new Staff Regulations of Officials from 1 May 2004 - Act adversely affecting an official - Objection of illegality - Legitimate expectations - Legal certainty - Equal treatment)

(2006/C 331/87)

Language of the case: French

Parties

Applicant: Franco Campoli (London, United Kingdom) (represented by: S. Rodrigues and A. Jaume, lawyers)

Applicant:

Defendant: Commission of the European Communities (represented by: V. Joris and H. Tserepa-Lacombe, Agents)

Defendant:

Intervener in support of the defendant: Council of the European Union (represented by: M. Arpio Santacruz and I. Sulce, Agents)

Intervener in support of the defendant:

Re:

In essence, annulment of the applicant's pension statements of May to July 2004 in so far as they apply for the first time a weighting calculated illegally by reference to the average cost of living in the applicant's country of residence, and no longer in relation to the cost of living in the capital of that country.

Operative part of the judgment

The Court:

| 1. | Dismisses the action. |
| --- | --- |

1.

Dismisses the action.

| 2. | Orders each of the parties to bear its own costs. |
| --- | --- |

2.

Orders each of the parties to bear its own costs.

---

(1)  OJ C 132, 28.5.2005.

1

---
Exhibit 35.5










ANNUAL STATEMENT OF COMPLIANCE



Reference is hereby made
to that certain Pooling and Servicing Agreement dated as of December 1, 2011, by and among Citigroup Commercial Mortgage Securities
Inc., as Depositor, Wells Fargo Bank, National Association, as Master Servicer and Midland Loan Services, A Division of PNC Bank,
NA, as Special Servicer, Deutsche Bank Trust Company Americas, as Trustee, Certificate Administrator, Paying Agent and Custodian,
and Trimont Real Estate Advisors, Inc., as Operating Advisor, with respect to Commercial Mortgage Pass-Through Certificates Series
2011-C1 (the "Agreement"). Capitalized terms used herein not otherwise defined shall have the meanings assigned in the
Agreement.



Pursuant to Section 10.11
of this Agreement, I, Daniel Bober, Executive Vice President of Commercial Mortgage Services do hereby certify that:



| | 1. | A review of the activities of the Master Servicer during the period from January 1, 2015 through December 31, 2015 (the “Reporting
Period”), and of its performance per the Agreement during such period has been made under my supervision, and
| | -- | ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------



| | 2. | To the best of my knowledge, based on such review, the Master Servicer has fulfilled all of its
obligations under the Agreement in all material respects throughout the Reporting Period.
| | -- | -----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------









IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the
undersigned has executed this Certificate as of the 4thday of March 2016.







Daniel Bober

Executive Vice President

Wells Fargo Bank
# C_2006310EN.01000101.xml

| 16.12.2006 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 310/1 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

16.12.2006

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 310/1

---

Reference for a preliminary ruling from the Corte Suprema di Cassazione (Italy) lodged on 20 March 2006 — Ministero dell'Economia e delle Finanze and Agenzia delle Entrate v Porto Antico di Genova SPA

(Case C-149/06)

(2006/C 310/01)

Language of the case: Italian

Referring court

The Corte Suprema di Cassazione

Parties to the main proceedings

Appellants: Ministero dell'Economia e delle Finanze and Agenzia delle Entrate

Appellants:

Respondant: Porto Antico di Genova SPA

Respondant:

Questions referred

| 1. | Must the second sentence of Article 21(3) of Regulation (EEC) No 4253/88, as amended by Regulation (EEC) No 2082/93 (1), under which payments of funds to final beneficiaries are to be made without any deduction or retention which could reduce the final amount of financial assistance to which they are entitled, be interpreted as meaning that such funds cannot be taken into account even for the purposes of determining income tax or any other tax subsequently owing by the beneficiaries under national tax legislation? |
| --- | --- |

1.

Must the second sentence of Article 21(3) of Regulation (EEC) No 4253/88, as amended by Regulation (EEC) No 2082/93 (1), under which payments of funds to final beneficiaries are to be made without any deduction or retention which could reduce the final amount of financial assistance to which they are entitled, be interpreted as meaning that such funds cannot be taken into account even for the purposes of determining income tax or any other tax subsequently owing by the beneficiaries under national tax legislation?

1

| 2. | If the answer to the first question is 'yes': does that exemption scheme apply solely to the part of the funds payable by Community bodies or also to the part granted, in the course of the same development programme, by national, regional or local authorities? |
| --- | --- |

2.

If the answer to the first question is 'yes': does that exemption scheme apply solely to the part of the funds payable by Community bodies or also to the part granted, in the course of the same development programme, by national, regional or local authorities?

---

(1)  OJ L 193, p. 20.

1

---
Pension Benefit Guaranty Corporation 

76-104 

August 27, 1976 

REFERENCE: 

 [*1] 4044(a) Allocation of Assets. Requirement of Following Statutory Allocation Provisions 

OPINION: 

 This is in reference to your letter of August 3, 1976 commenting on a form letter used by the Pension Benefit

Guaranty Corporation (the "PBGC"). 

As you know, the PBGC utilizes a special procedure to expedite the processing of certain terminated plans which

appear to have sufficient assets to satisfy all guaranteed benefits. The first step under this procedure involves the

completion of a Certification of Sufficiency (the * * * "Certification") by the plan administrator. The form letter referred

to in your letter is the cover letter which is sent along with the Certification. The cover letter briefly sets forth the steps

involved in the procedure including the basic terms of the Certification. 

Based on your comments and those from other interested persons the PBGC has revised the Certification, a copy

of which is enclosed. As I'm sure you can appreciate, the cover letter to the Certification also will be revised. 

The Certification in paragraphs 3, 4 and 7, as revised, now emphasizes, inter alia, not only that distribution of

annuity contracts is an acceptable "distribution of Plan [*2] assets" but that the purchase of annuity contracts is the

preferred method of distribution. 

Your letter correctly states the PBGC's position concerning the distribution of annuity contracts. That is, the PBGC

will not approve the purchase and retention by the Trustees of individual or group annuity contracts, as opposed to the

distribution to participants. Rather, the PBGC requires that annuity contracts be distributed to participants. It is our

opinion that this requirement is the best method of guaranteeing that each participant will receive his or her retirement

benefit. 

 The PBGC does not believe that a Trustee necessarily is better able to judge the best interests of a participant than

that participant himself. We also do not believe that a participant necessarily is not as capable as a Trustee of exercising

any available options under an annuity contract as and when necessary to suit his own needs. As a general matter,

therefore, we believe that a participant should be allowed to decide in what form and in what manner he receives and

disposes of his benefit entitlement under a terminated plan. In recognition of the fact that in some cases a Trustee may

be better able [*3] to protect and preserve a participant's benefits than that participant himself, however, the PBGC

would have no objection if a participant himself chose to receive his benefit in the form of an annuity to be held by a

Trustee willing to do so. Furthermore, the PBGC would not prohibit a Trustee, who is concerned that participants will

dissipate their retirement benefits, from providing to participants only those annuity contracts which would prevent such

dissipation under the terms of the contract. 

We hope this information is of assistance to you. 

Henry Rose 

General Counsel
Exhibit 13.1



CERTIFICATION PURSUANT TO 18 U.S.C. SECTION
1350

AS ADOPTED PURSUANT TO SECTION 906
OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002





The undersigned, Keyan
Yan, the Chief Executive Officer of KBS FASHION GROUP LIMITED (the “Company”), DOES HEREBY CERTIFY that:



1.       The
Company’s Annual Report on Form 20-F/A for the fiscal year ended December 31, 2015 (the “Report”), fully complies
with the requirements of Section 13(a) or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934; and



2.       Information
contained in the Report fairly presents, in all material respects, the financial condition and results of operation of the Company.



IN WITNESS WHEREOF,
the undersigned has executed this statement this 30th day of November, 2016.





| | /s/ Keyan Yan                
| | -----------------------------
| | Keyan Yan                    
| | Chief Executive Officer      
| | (Principal Executive Officer)



A signed original of this written statement
required by Section 906 has been provided to KBS Fashion Group Limited and will be retained by KBS Fashion Group Limited and furnished
to the Securities and Exchange Commission or its staff upon request.



The forgoing certification is being furnished
to the Securities and Exchange Commission pursuant to § 18 U.S.C. Section 1350. It is not being filed for purposes of Section
18 of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended, and is not to be incorporated by reference into any filing of the Company,
whether made before or after the date hereof, regardless of any general incorporation language in such filing.
### §8864. Delivery of property on stipulation

(a) Prize property may be delivered to a claimant on stipulation, deposit, or other security, if—

(1) the claimant satisfies the court that the property has a peculiar and intrinsic value to him, independent of its market value;

(2) the court is satisfied that the rights and interests of the United States or of other claimants will not be prejudiced;

(3) an opportunity is given to the United States attorney and the naval prize commissioner or the naval special prize commissioner to be heard as to the appointment of appraisers; and

(4) a satisfactory appraisal is made.

(b) Money collected on a stipulation, or deposited instead of it, that does not represent costs shall be deposited with the Treasurer of the United States or a public depositary in the same manner as proceeds of a sale.

(Aug. 10, 1956, ch. 1041, 70A Stat. 479, §7664; renumbered §8864, Pub. L. 115–232, div. A, title VIII, §807(d)(9), Aug. 13, 2018, 132 Stat. 1837.)

| Revised section | Source (U.S. Code) | Source (Statutes at Large) |
| --- | --- | --- |
| 7664 | 34 U.S.C. 1142. | R.S. 4626. |

34 U.S.C. 1142 and this section reflect the Act of March 3, 1899, ch. 413, §13, 30 Stat. 1007, which repealed laws authorizing distribution of prize proceeds to captors, and the Act of May 29, 1920, ch. 214, §1, 41 Stat. 654, which requires substitution of "Treasurer of the United States or public depositary" for "assistant treasurer".

#### **Editorial Notes**

#### Amendments

2018—Pub. L. 115–232 renumbered section 7664 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.
Pension Benefit Guaranty Corporation 

87-7 

July 21, 1987 

REFERENCE: 

 [*1] Miscellaneous 

OPINION: 

This relates to your recent letter and our subsequent conversations on the binding effect of the opinion letters issued

by the Pension Benefit Guaranty Corporation (the "PBGC"). 

As you are aware, the PBGC issues opinion letters to advise the public of its views of the meaning of the provisions

of Title IV of the Employee Retirement Income Security Act ("ERISA"). Such letters are not intended to dispose of

particular controversies between private parties. Moreover, because they are the PBGC's interpretations of Title IV and

not substantive rules promulgated in accordance with the notice and comment requirements of the Administrative

Procedure Act, they are not binding on the public or on the courts. However, interpretative rulings of government

agencies "do constitute a body of experience and informed judgment to which courts and litigants may properly resort

for guidance." Skidmore v. Swift & Co., 323 U.S. 134, 140 (1944). As the agency charged with the responsibility for

enforcing the provisions of Title IV, the PBGC's construction of Title IV is entitled to deference. Belland v. PBGC, 726

F.2d 839, 843 (D.C. Cir. 1984); see also, Red Lion Broadcasting [*2] Co. v. FCC, 395 U.S. 367, 381 (1969). 

In addition to issuing opinion letters, the PBGC, in light of its responsibility to see that Title IV of ERISA is properly

interpreted, will take other action to support its interpretation of statutory terms, e.g., filing amicus briefs. 

I hope this response is of assistance. 

Gary M. Ford 

General Counsel
Exhibit 32.1



Certification Pursuant to

18 U.S.C. Section 1350,

as added by



Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002



In connection with the quarterly report of Pulaski Financial Corp. (the
Company) on Form 10-Q for the period ended December 31, 2003 as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission (the Report), I, William A. Donius, Chairman, President and Chief Executive Officer of the Company, certify,
pursuant to 18 U.S.C. § 1350, as added by § 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that:



|1. | The Report fully complies with the requirement of Section 13(a) or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934; and
|-- | --------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------



|2. | To my knowledge, the information contained in the Report fairly presents, in all material respects, the financial condition and results of operations of the Company as of and for
the period covered by the Report.
|-- | --------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------



|                        |  |                                                       
|----------------------- |  | ------------------------------------------------------
|Date: February 13, 2004 |  | /s/ William A. Donius                                 
|                        |  | Name: William A. Donius                               
|                        |  | Title: Chairman, President and Chief Executive Officer
###### Editorial Note on Part 900

#### Editorial Note:

Nomenclature changes to part 900 appear at 67 FR 34602, May 15, 2002.

#### § 900.23 Can the Secretary decline a proposal where the Secretary's objection can be overcome through the contract?

No. The Secretary may not decline to enter into a contract with an Indian tribe or tribal organization based on any objection that will be overcome through the contract.