alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
Exhibit 20.1
                                                             ------------
                                     
Chase Manhattan Grantor Trust 1996-A


From: The Chase Manhattan Bank

To:   Norwest Bank Minnesota, N.A.


                   MONTHLY CERTIFICATEHOLDER'S REPORT
                   ----------------------------------

Due Period 19 Beginning Date                     08/01/1997
Due Period 19 End Date                           08/31/1997
Determination Date                               09/10/1997
Remittance Date                                  09/15/1997


I.    Monthly Principal and Principal Carryover Shortfall to Certificateholders
      (Per $1000 of Original Principal Amount)                  $ 23.0191818188

II.   Monthly Interest and Unpaid Interest to Certificateholders
      (Per $1000 of Original Principal Amount)                   $ 2.0841531375

III.  Monthly Expenses Summary

      A. Servicing Fee Disbursement                                $ 590,882.97
      B. Cash Collateral Account Expense                                 $ 0.00
      C. Total Expenses paid
         (per $1000 of Original Principal Amount)                $ 0.4007986795

IV.   Cash Collateral Account Deposit Amount                             $ 0.00

V.    Outstanding Advance Summary

      A. From Prior Period                                       $ 3,871,287.09
      B. From Current Period                                     $ 4,113,684.96
      C. Change in Amount Between Periods (Lines B - A)            $ 242,397.87

VI.   Pool Factor Information

      A. Certificate Principal Balance                         $ 675,123,220.60
      B. Initial Certificate Balance                         $ 1,474,263,764.33
      C. Pool Factor (Lines A / B)                               0.457939235118

VII.  Available Cash Collateral Account Information for Due Period

      A. Available Cash Collateral Amount                       $ 35,452,978.31
      B. Available Cash Collateral Amount Percentage            4.999999999718%

VIII. Required Cash Collateral Amount

      A. For the Current Collection Period                      $ 35,452,978.31
      B. For the Next Collection Period                         $ 33,756,161.03
OFFICE OF THE SECRETARY STATE OF DELAWARE DEPARTMENT OF NATURAL RESOURCES AND ENVIRONMENTAL CONTROL 89 KINGS HIGHWAY DOVER, DELAWARE 19901 April 27, 2011 PHONE: (302) 739-9000 FAX: (302) 739-6242

Mr. Shawn M. Garvin (3RAOO) Regional Administrator U. S. Environmental Protection Agency Region III 1650 Arch Street Philadelphia, PA 19103-2029 Dear Mr. Garvin: I am pleased to submit the enclosed revision to the State ofDelaware State Implementation Plan (SIP) for the Attainment and Maintenance ofthe 8-Hour Ozone National Ambient Air Quality Standard. The revision is to 7 DE Admin
. Code 1124- CONTROL OF VOLATILE ORGANIC COMPOUND EMISSIONS
. The revisions update relevant regulations to implement Reasonably Available Control Technology (RACT) controls on emission sources covered in EPA's Control Techniques Guidelines (CTG) or Alternate Control Techniques (ACT). EPA has updated several CTGs and the afore-mentioned revisions to 7 DE Admin Code 1124 reflect DE's efforts accordingly. Specifically, • Section 8.0, Handling, Storage, and Disposal ofVolatile Organic Compounds

(VOC). This revision updates the existing work practice standards, and adds a new generally applicable cleaning solventVOC content limit. • Section 13.0 Automobile and Light-Duty Truck Coating Operations. This revision

sets more stringent emissions limits
. • Section 16.0 Paper Coating
. The revision adds "film and foil coating" to the

regulated category. • Section 23.0 Coating ofFlat Wood Paneling. The revision sets up more stringent

emission limits. • Section 37.0 Graphic Art Systems. The revision adds "flexible packaging printing"

to the regulated category. • Section 45.0 Industrial Cleaning Solvents. The revision clarifies that the

requirements of45.0 are triggered based on "VOC emissions" rather than "solvent used." These revisions are effective March 11, 2011.**>~**

# ....,:..-.'
. . - .'- ,- -**~~**Mr. Shawn M. Garvin April 27, 2011 Page 2

The proposed amendmentto Section 47.0

- Offset Lithographic Printing was withdrawn as a SIP revision due to public comments received by the Department which resulted in substantive changes. This proposed amendment will be addressed at a future date. The requirements ofthe CAA Section 110(a)(2)(A) have beenmet through the normal public hearing process established by the State ofDelaware with propernotification (30 days) prior to the convening ofthe public hearing. Attachments A and B are copies ofaffidavits as proofofproper notification. Itis the position ofthe State ofDelaware that all minimum requirements set forth in the 1990 Clean Air Act Amendments have been met. We look forward to continuing the cooperative effort between Delaware and EPA in this important work. As always, feel free to contact me or Ali Mirzakhalili, Director, Division ofAir Quality, (302) 739-9402, ifyou have any questions concerning the enclosed documents.

Secretary Enclosures
cc: DianaEsher, EPA

### w/encl. Ali Mirzakhalili
### §780. Office of Private Grievances and Redress

#### (a) Establishment; director; statement of purpose

The Administrator shall establish and maintain an Office of Private Grievances and Redress, headed by a director, to receive and evaluate petitions filed in accordance with subsection (b) of this section, and to make recommendations to the Administrator for appropriate action.

#### (b) Petition for special redress, relief, or other extraordinary assistance; nature of remedy

Any person, adversely affected by any order, rule, or regulation issued by the Administrator in carrying out the functions assigned to him under this chapter, may petition the Administrator for special redress, relief, or other extraordinary assistance, apart from, or in addition to, any right or privilege to seek redress of grievances provided in section 766 of this title.

#### (c) Statement for annual report; recommendations to Congress

The Administrator shall submit to the Secretary for inclusion in the annual report required by section 7267 of title 42 a statement on the nature and number of the grievances which have been filed, and the action taken and relief provided, pursuant to this section; and he shall make recommendations to the Congress from time to time concerning legislative or administrative actions which may be taken to better assist persons adversely affected by the energy shortages and to distribute more equitably the burdens resulting from any measures adopted, or actions taken, by him.

(Pub. L. 93–275, §21, May 7, 1974, 88 Stat. 112; Pub. L. 96–470, title II, §203(h), Oct. 19, 1980, 94 Stat. 2244.)

#### **Editorial Notes**

#### Amendments

1980—Subsec. (c). Pub. L. 96–470 substituted "submit to the Secretary for inclusion in the annual report required by section 7267 of title 42 a statement" for "report quarterly to the Congress".

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

#### Transfer of Functions

Federal Energy Administration terminated and functions vested by law in Administrator thereof transferred to Secretary of Energy (unless otherwise specifically provided) by sections 7151(a) and 7293 of Title 42, The Public Health and Welfare.
SAMHSA Fiscal Year 2016 –

New Award Standard Terms and Reporting Requirements 

Terms/ 

Reports

Name Language

1 Remark All New Grant 

Awards

All New Grant Awards This Notice of Award (NoA) is issued to inform your 

organization that the application submitted through the (FULL PROGRAM NAME AND 

ACRONYM) funding opportunity (INSERT FOA #) has been selected for funding. The 

(INSERT ACRONYM) Program, as authorized by the (CITE ACT/STATUTE and PUBLIC 

LAW).

2 Standard 

Reporting 

Requirement 

Annual 

Federal 

Financial 

Report (FFR)

The Federal Financial Report (FFR) (SF-425) is required on an annual basis and must be 

submitted no later than 90 days after the end of the budget period. The annual FFR 

should reflect only cumulative actual federal funds authorized and disbursed, any nonfederal matching funds (if identified in the FOA), unliquidated obligations incurred, the 

unobligated balance of the federal funds for the award, as well as program income 

generated during the timeframe covered by the report. The SF-425 is available at 

(http://apply07.grants.gov/apply/forms/sample/SF425-V1.0.pdf). Additional guidance 

to complete the FFR can be found: http://www.samhsa.gov/grants/grantsmanagement/reporting-requirements.

Annual FFRs must be submitted to the applicable email:

CMHS Grants (e.g., SM-12345-01): CMHSFFR@samhsa.hhs.gov

CSAT Grants (e.g., TI-12345-01): CSATFFR@samhsa.hhs.gov

CSAP Grants (e.g., SP-12345-01): CSAPFFR@samhsa.hhs.gov

3 Standard 

Reporting 

Requirement

Performance 

Progress 

Reports

The recipient must submit Programmatic Reports (annual, semi-annual or quarterly) 

no later than the dates (i.e., January 1, 2017, January 1, 2018, etc.) as follows: 

1st Report – [date]; 2nd Report – [date]; 3rd Report - [date]; 4th Report - [date]

[Date] Please submit your Programmatic (annual, semi-annual or quarterly) Report to 

your Program Official.

Note: Recipients must also comply with the GPRA requirements that include the 

collection and periodic reporting of performance data as specified in the FOA or by the 

Grant Program Official )GPO. This information is needed in order to comply with PL 

102-62 which requires that SAMHSA report evaluation data to ensure the 

effectiveness and efficiency of its programs. 

At this time, progress reports must be sent to dgmprogressreports@samhsa.hhs.gov

with a copy to the assigned GPO. 

The grant or cooperative agreement award number MUST be included in the 

SUBJECT line of the email. 

Please contact your Government Program Official (GPO) for additional submission 

information. 
4 Standard Terms Reference 

Award 

Standard 

Terms

Insert Award Standard terms

Text in red will be filled in with the award specific information on the Notice of Award
# C_2010209EN.01002401.xml

| 31.7.2010 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 209/24 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

31.7.2010

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 209/24

---

Reference for a preliminary ruling from the Cour de cassation (Luxembourg) lodged on 12 May 2010 — Xuan-Mai Tran v Landsbanki Luxembourg SA (in liquidation)

(Case C-239/10)

()

2010/C 209/32

Language of the case: French

Referring court

Referring court

Cour de cassation

Parties to the main proceedings

Parties to the main proceedings

Applicant: Xuan-Mai Tran

Applicant:

Defendant: Landsbanki Luxembourg SA (in liquidation)

Defendant:

Questions referred

Questions referred

| 1. | Are Articles 1, 2 and 3 of Council Directive 98/59/EC of 20 July 1998 on the approximation of the laws of the Member States relating to collective redundancies (1) to be interpreted as applying to a termination of activities as a result of a declaration that the employer is insolvent or a judicial decision ordering the dissolution and winding-up, on grounds of insolvency, of the credit institution which is the employer on the basis of Article 61(l)(a) and (b) of the amended Law of 5 April 1993 relating to the financial sector, in respect of which termination the national legislation provides for the termination of employment contracts with immediate effect |
| --- | --- |

1.

Are Articles 1, 2 and 3 of Council Directive 98/59/EC of 20 July 1998 on the approximation of the laws of the Member States relating to collective redundancies (1) to be interpreted as applying to a termination of activities as a result of a declaration that the employer is insolvent or a judicial decision ordering the dissolution and winding-up, on grounds of insolvency, of the credit institution which is the employer on the basis of Article 61(l)(a) and (b) of the amended Law of 5 April 1993 relating to the financial sector, in respect of which termination the national legislation provides for the termination of employment contracts with immediate effect

1

| 2. | If the answer to the first question is in the affirmative, are Articles 1, 2 and 3 of Directive 98/59/EC to be interpreted as meaning that the administrator or liquidator is to be deemed to be in the same position as an employer who is contemplating collective redundancies and who is capable of carrying out, to that end, the acts referred to in Articles 2 and 3 of Directive 98/53/EC and of effecting such redundancies (judgment in Case C-323/08, paragraphs 39, 40 and 41)? (2) |
| --- | --- |

2.

If the answer to the first question is in the affirmative, are Articles 1, 2 and 3 of Directive 98/59/EC to be interpreted as meaning that the administrator or liquidator is to be deemed to be in the same position as an employer who is contemplating collective redundancies and who is capable of carrying out, to that end, the acts referred to in Articles 2 and 3 of Directive 98/53/EC and of effecting such redundancies (judgment in Case C-323/08, paragraphs 39, 40 and 41)? (2)

2

---

(1)  OJ 1998 L 225, p. 16.

1

(2)  Judgment of 10 December 2009 in Case C-323/08 Rodríguez Mayor and Others

2

Rodríguez Mayor and Others

---
### §6409. Pricing

In all cases, the price of propane shall be determined by market forces. Consistent with the antitrust laws, the Council may take no action, nor may any provision of this chapter be interpreted as establishing an agreement to pass along to consumers the cost of the assessment provided for in section 6405 of this title.

(Pub. L. 104–284, §10, Oct. 11, 1996, 110 Stat. 3375.)
#### The People of the State of New York, Respondent, v Joel Thornton, Appellant.

[824 NYS2d 459]

Peters, J.

Appeal from an order of the County Court of Rensselaer County (McGrath, J.), entered June 22, 2005, which classified defendant as a risk level III sex offender pursuant to the Sex Offender Registration Act.

The sole issue presented on this appeal is whether County Court’s upward departure from defendant’s presumptive risk level I sex offender status to a risk level III status was proper.* We find that it was and affirm.

A court may order an upward departure when an aggravating or mitigating factor exists which was not otherwise adequately taken into consideration by the risk assessment guidelines *(see People v Cruz,*28 AD3d 819, 819 [2006]; *People v Joslyn,*27 AD3d 1033, 1033-1034 [2006]). The court’s determination in that regard must be supported by clear and convincing evidence *(see People v Kwiatkowski,*24 AD3d 878, 879 [2005]; *People v*
      *1027
      *Miranda,*24 AD3d 909, 910 [2005]), which can be in the form of rehable hearsay *(see*Correction Law § 168-n [3]; *People v Ashley,*19 AD3d 882, 883 [2005]; *People v Arotin,*19 AD3d 845, 847 [2005] ). Here, County Court premised its upward departure on information contained in the presentence investigation report, including statements made by defendant to the Probation Department concerning his prior sexual misconduct, unrelated to this case. Inasmuch as such a report can constitute reliable hearsay *(see People v Brown,*25 AD3d 924, 924-925 [2006]; *People v Dickison,*24 AD3d 980, 981 [2005], *lv denied*6 NY3d 709 [2006]), we conclude that, under these circumstances, County Court’s determination was supported by the requisite clear and convincing evidence.

Mercure, J.P, Spain, Carpinello and Kane, JJ., concur. Ordered that the order is affirmed, without costs.

Defendant’s underlying conviction was affirmed by this Court *(People v Thornton,*263 AD2d 782 [1999]).
<PAGE>   1

Exhibit 23.02



                                      110
<PAGE>   2

                    CONSENT OF INDEPENDENT PUBLIC ACCOUNTANTS

As independent public accountants, we hereby consent to the use of our report on
the financial statements of Altsys Corporation dated November 28, 1994,
incorporated by reference in this Form 10-K, which is incorporated by reference
into the previously filed registration statements on Form S-8 and S-3 (Nos.
333-3404 and 333-24713) of Macromedia, Inc. and subsidiaries. It should be noted
that we have audited the financial statements of Altsys Corporation for the year
ended December 31, 1993 and the nine-month period ended September 30, 1994. We
have not audited any financial statements subsequent to September 30, 1994, or
performed any audit procedures subsequent to the date of our report.


Arthur Andersen LLP

Dallas, Texas
June 26, 1997


                                      111
#### § 367.4111 Account 411.1, Provision for deferred income taxes—Credit, operating income.

This account must include the amounts of those allocations of deferred taxes and deferrals of taxes, credit, that relate to service company operating income.
### §6759. Presidential oversight

#### (a) Removal of Board

If the President determines that the Association is acting in a manner contrary to the interests of the public or the purposes of this subchapter or has failed to perform its duties under this subchapter, the President may remove the entire existing Board for the remainder of the term to which the Board members were appointed and appoint, in accordance with section 6754 of this title and with the advice and consent of the Senate, in accordance with the procedures established under Senate Resolution 116 of the 112th Congress, new Board members to fill the vacancies on the Board for the remainder of the terms.

#### (b) Removal of Board member

The President may remove a Board member only for neglect of duty or malfeasance in office.

#### (c) Suspension of bylaws and standards and prohibition of actions

Following notice to the Board, the President, or a person designated by the President for such purpose, may suspend the effectiveness of any bylaw or standard, or prohibit any action, of the Association that the President or the designee determines is contrary to the purposes of this subchapter.

(Pub. L. 106–102, title III, §329, as added Pub. L. 114–1, title II, §202(a), Jan. 12, 2015, 129 Stat. 25.)

#### **Editorial Notes**

#### References in Text

Senate Resolution 116 of the 112th Congress, referred to in subsec. (a), which was agreed to June 29, 2011, provided for expedited Senate consideration of certain nominations subject to advice and consent.

#### Prior Provisions

Provisions similar to this section were contained in section 6762(b)(2)(C) of this title, prior to the general amendment of this subchapter by Pub. L. 114–1.

A prior section 6759, Pub. L. 106–102, title III, §329, Nov. 12, 1999, 113 Stat. 1430, related to assessments, prior to the general amendment of this subchapter by Pub. L. 114–1. See section 6756(1) of this title.
EXHIBIT 32.1

CERTIFICATION PURSUANT TO 18 U.S.C. SECTION 1350,  AS ENACTED PURSUANT TO  SECTION 906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002

In connection with the report on Form 10-K/A of FirstService Corporation (the "Company") dated February 11, 2004 containing the
financial statements of the Company for the year ended March 31, 2003 (the "Report") filed with the U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof, I, Jay S. Hennick,
Chief Executive Officer of the Company, certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, as enacted pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002 that, to the best of my
knowledge:

|February 11, 2004 | /s/JAY S. HENNICKJay S. Hennick President and Chief
Executive Officer
|----------------- | ---------------------------------------------------------------------

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

44

---

QuickLinks
# C_2012006EN.01001402.xml

| 7.1.2012 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 6/14 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

7.1.2012

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 6/14

---

Judgment of the General Court of 15 November 2011 — Abbot Laboratories v OHIM (RESTORE)

(Case T-363/10) (1)

1

(Community trade mark - Application for the Community word mark RESTORE - Absolute ground for refusal - Descriptive character - Article 7(1)(c) of Regulation (EC) No 207/2009 - Lack of distinctiveness - Article 7(1)(b) of Regulation (EC) No 207/2009 - Infringement of the right to be heard - Obligation to state the reasons on which the decision is based - Article 75 of Regulation No 207/2009)

2012/C 6/24

Language of the case: German

Parties

Parties

Applicant: Abbott Laboratories (Abbot Park, Illinois, United States) (represented by: M. Kinkeldey, S. Schäffler and J. Springer, lawyers)

Applicant:

Defendant: Office for Harmonisation in the Internal Market (Trade Marks and Designs) (represented by: R. Manea, agent)

Defendant:

Re:

Re:

Action brought against the decision of the First Board of Appeal of OHIM of 9 June 2010 (Case R 1560/2009-1), concerning an application for registration of the word mark RESTORE as a Community trade mark.

Operative part of the judgment

Operative part of the judgment

The Court:

| 1. | Dismisses the application; |
| --- | --- |

1.

Dismisses the application;

| 2. | Orders Abbott Laboratories to pay the costs. |
| --- | --- |

2.

Orders Abbott Laboratories to pay the costs.

---

(1)  OJ C 288, 23.10.2010

1

---
# C_2011113EN.01000701.xml

| 9.4.2011 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 113/7 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

9.4.2011

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 113/7

---

Reference for a preliminary ruling from the Tribunale Ordinario Di Milano (Italy) lodged on 31 January 2011 — Criminal proceedings against Assane Samb

(Case C-43/11)

2011/C 113/12

Language of the case: Italian

Referring court

Referring court

Tribunale Ordinario Di Milano

Defendant in the criminal proceedings

Defendant in the criminal proceedings

Assane Samb

Question referred

Question referred

In the light of the principles of sincere cooperation and of the effectiveness of directives, do Articles 15 and 16 of Directive 2008/115/EC (1) preclude the possibility that a third-country national illegally staying in a Member State may be sentenced to a term of imprisonment of up to four years where he fails to comply with the first order issued by the Questore and a term of imprisonment of up to five years for failure to comply with subsequent orders (with the corresponding obligation for the police authorities to arrest those engaged in the commission of this offence) simply on account of his lack of cooperation in the deportation procedure, in particular his simple failure to comply with a removal order issued by the administrative authorities?

1

---

(1)  OJ 2008 L 348, p. 98.

1

---