alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT
No. 07-2148
CLAYTON CLEMONS, Plaintiff - Appellant,
v. J. N. BRADLEY, Corporal, South Carolina Highway Patrol; CHRIS SCALZO, Public Defender's Office; C. R. GARRETT, Judge, Greenville County Summary Court; PAUL B. WICKENSIMER, Greenville County Clerk of Court; ROBERT M. ARIAIL, Greenville County Solicitor; BARBARA H. TIFFIN, Assistant Solicitor; JOHN L. BREEDEN, Jr., Judge, Circuit Court Judge; JOSEPH L. SAVITZ, Chief Attorney, Division of Appellate Defense; KENNETH A. RICHSTAD, Clerk of South Carolina Court of Appeals; HAROLD MINCH COOMBS, Jr., Senior Assistant Attorney General; JASPER CURETON, AJ South Carolina Court of Appeals; KAYE GORENFLO HEARN, CJ South Carolina Court of Appeals; JEAN HOEFER TOAL, CJ South Carolina Supreme Court, Defendants - Appellees,
v. HENRY MCMASTER, Attorney General, South Carolina, Third Party Defendant - Appellee.
Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of South Carolina, at Greenville. G. Ross Anderson, Jr., District Judge. (6:07-cv-03286-GRA) Submitted: June 19, 2008 Decided: June 23, 2008- 2 - Before WILKINSON, NIEMEYER, and MICHAEL, Circuit Judges. Dismissed by unpublished per curiam opinion. Clayton Clemons, Appellant Pro Se. Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.- 3 - PER CURIAM: Clayton Clemons seeks to appeal the district court’s order granting his motion to extend time to file objections to the magistrate judge’s report and recommendation and denying his motion to subpoena. This court may exercise jurisdiction only over final orders, 28 U.S.C. § 1291 (2000), and certain interlocutory and collateral orders, 28 U.S.C. § 1292 (2000); Fed. R. Civ. P. 54(b); Cohen v. Beneficial Indus. Loan Corp. , 337 U.S. 541 (1949). The order Clemons seeks to appeal is neither a final order nor an appealable interlocutory or collateral order. Accordingly, we dismiss the appeal for lack of jurisdiction. We dispense with oral argument because the facts and legal contentions are adequately presented in the materials before the court and argument would not aid the decisional process. DISMISSED
### §§2219, 2219a. Repealed. Pub. L. 95–424, title I, §104(b), Oct. 6, 1978, 92 Stat. 947

Section 2219, Pub. L. 87–195, pt. I, §291, as added Pub. L. 90–137, pt. I, §109, Nov. 14, 1967, 81 Stat. 452, set forth a general statement of policy concerning population growth and family planning.

Section 2219a, Pub. L. 87–195, pt. I, §292, as added Pub. L. 90–137, pt. I, §109, Nov. 14, 1967, 81 Stat. 453; amended Pub. L. 90–554, pt. I, §107, Oct. 8, 1968, 82 Stat. 962; Pub. L. 91–175, pt. I, §107, Dec. 30, 1969, 83 Stat. 818; Pub. L. 92–226, pt. I, §106, Feb. 7, 1972, 86 Stat. 23; Pub. L. 93–189, §8, Dec. 17, 1973, 87 Stat. 718; Pub. L. 93–559, §4(2), Dec. 30, 1974, 88 Stat. 1795, related to the availability of funds on a loan or grant basis to carry out the purposes of this subpart.

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

#### Effective Date of Repeal

Repeal effective Oct. 1, 1978, see section 605 of Pub. L. 95–424, set out as an Effective Date of 1978 Amendment note under section 2151 of this title.
----

**OFFICER'S      CERTIFICATE**

|        1. | A                review of the activities of the Master Servicer during the period                from May                1, 2005 through December 31, 2005 and of its performance under the                Agreement during such period has been made under our supervision;                and                                                                                                                                                                                           |
|----------------------------------------------|--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|
|        2. | To                the best of our knowledge, based on such review, the Master Servicer                has                fulfilled all of its material obligations under this Agreement in                all                material respects throughout the period May 1, 2005 through December                31,                2005; and                                                                                                                                              |
|        3. | The                Master Servicer has received no notice regarding qualification, or                challenging the status, of the ED Loan REMIC, REMIC I or REMIC II                as a                REMIC under the REMIC Provisions or of the Grantor Trust as a "Grantor                Trust" for income tax purposes under the Grantor Trust Provisions                from the                Internal Revenue Service or any other governmental agency or                body. |

|  /s/              Timothy Ryan                   |  /s/              Clyde M. Alexander             |
|-------------------------------------------------------|-------------------------------------------------------|
|  Timothy              Ryan, Managing Director    |  Clyde              M. Alexander, Director       |
|  Wachovia              Bank National Association |  Wachovia              Bank National Association |

----
§ 404.612 Who may sign an application. We will determine who may sign an application according to the following rules: ( a ) A claimant who is 18 years old or over, mentally competent, and physically able to do so, must sign his or her own application. If the claim is for child's benefits for a person who is not yet 22 years old, the application may be signed by a parent or a person standing in place of the parent.
( b ) A claimant who is between 16 and 18 years old may sign his or her own application if he or she is mentally competent, has no court appointed representative, and is not in the care of any person.
( c ) If the claimant is under age 18, or mentally incompetent, or physically unable to sign, the application may be signed by a court appointed representative or a person who is responsible for the care of the claimant, including a relative. If the claimant is in the care of an institution, the manager or principal officer of the institution may sign the application.
( d ) If a person who could receive disability benefits or who could have a period of disability established dies before filing, an application for disability benefits or for a period of disability may be signed by a person who would be qualified to receive any benefits due the deceased.
( e ) If a written statement showing an intent to claim benefits is filed with us, but the person for whom the benefits are claimed dies before an application is filed, an application may be filed as explained in § 404.630(d).
( f ) If a person who could receive benefits on the basis of a “deemed” filing date of an application under § 404.633 (b)(1)(i) or (b)(2)(i) dies before an application for the benefits is filed, the application may be signed by a person who would be qualified to receive any benefits due the deceased person as explained in § 404.633 (b)(1)(ii) and (b)(2)(ii).
( g ) If it is necessary to protect a claimant from losing benefits and there is good cause for the claimant not signing the application, we may accept an application signed by some one other than a person described in this section.
Example: Mr. Smith comes to a social security office a few days before the end of a month to file an application for old-age benefits for his neighbor, Mr. Jones. Mr. Jones, a 63 year old widower, just suffered a heart attack and is in the hospital. He asked Mr. Smith to file the application for him. We will accept an application signed by Mr. Smith since it would not be possible to have Mr. Jones sign and file the application until the next calendar month and a loss of one month's benefits would result.
[44 FR 37209, June 26, 1979, as amended at 59 FR 44923, Aug. 31, 1994; 61 FR 41330, Aug. 8, 1996]
1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

26

27

28

29

30

31

DAY HIGH

 31,554

 31,679

 32,014

 30,849

 31,134

 30,406

 28,010

 25,706

 25,317

 26,103

 28,144

 30,595

 31,568

 29,232

 28,621

 28,455

 27,901

 27,254

 27,453

 26,801

 27,036

 22,464

 22,209

 24,629

 28,354

 30,286

 30,178

 30,075

 30,389

 30,480

 28,547

 17,477

 17,994

 17,408

 16,519

 16,576

 17,178

 17,372

 17,328

 14,886

 14,751

 16,338

 18,597

 17,247

 15,363

 14,637

 14,690

 14,132

 13,867

 13,543

 13,343

 14,176

 16,756

 12,504

 12,773

 16,916

 17,070

 8,286

 16,459

 15,721

 14,235

 14,401

 24,619

 24,236

 25,102

 24,256

 24,329

 24,306

 23,567

 21,942

 20,251

 19,972

 22,088

 24,488

 24,957

 22,924

 22,201

 21,891

 21,298

 20,677

 20,488

 20,750

 21,722

 19,760

 18,777

 19,405

 21,954

 23,728

 23,014

 23,559

 23,507

 23,735

 22,380

LOW MEAN

UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR

U.S. BUREAU OF RECLAMATION-CENTRAL VALLEY PROJECT-CALIFORNIA

DECEMBER 2009 WATER QUALITY REPORT RUN DATE: January 4, 2010

ELECTRICAL CONDUCTIVITY, UMHOS 

Comments:

0 reading indicates that the station was out of service.

PORT CHICAGO BOTTOM IN SUISUN BAY
ex10-1.htm


Exhibit 10.1

 

 

AMENDMENT TO MANAGEMENT SERVICES AGREEMENT

 

This Amendment to Management Services Agreement (this "Amendment") is dated as of June 29, 2015, and is between SP Corporate Services LLC ("SP Corporate"), a Delaware limited liability company having an office at 590 Madison Avenue, 32nd Floor, New York, New York

10022, and ModusLink Global Solutions, Inc. (the "Company"), a Delaware corporation having an office at 1601 Trapelo Road, Suite 170, Waltham, Massachusetts 02451.

 

RECITALS

 

The Company and SP Corporate are parties to a Management Services Agreement dated as of January 1, 2015 (the "Management Services Agreement"), whereby SP Corporate furnishes the Company and its subsidiaries with certain Services. The parties desire to amend the Management Services Agreement to extend the term of the Management Services Agreement.

 

1.      Defined Terms.    Defined terms used but not defined in this Amendment are as defined in the Management Services Agreement.

 

2.      Amendment to Section 2.01.      Section 2.01 of the Management Services Agreement is hereby amended in its entirety to read as follows:

 

"This Agreement shall commence effective as of January 1, 2015, and shall continue through December 31, 2015, and shall automatically renew for successive one (1) year periods unless and until terminated as provided in Section 2.02 below; provided, however, the fees hereunder shall be subject to an annual review and adjustment as agreed upon by the parties hereto."

 

3.       Confirmation of Agreement.    All other terms of the Management Services Agreement shall remain in full force and effect.

 

4.      Counterparts.    This Amendment may be executed in two or more counterparts, each of which shall be deemed an original but all of which together shall constitute one and the same instrument.

 

[Signature Page Follows]

 


 

 




 


 

IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the parties have duly executed this Agreement as of the date first above written.

 

	 	SP CORPORATE SERVICES LLC
	 	 	 
	 	 	 
	
 
	
By:
	  
	
 
	
 
	
James F. McCabe, Jr.

	 	 	 
	
 
	
 
	
Chief Financial Officer

	 	 	 
	 	 	 
	 	MODUSLINK GLOBAL SOLUTIONS, INC.
	 	 	 
	 	 	 
	 	By:	 
	 	 	Name:  John J. Boucher
	 	 	Title:    President and Chief Executive Officer


 

 

 

 

 

[Signature Page to Amendment to Management Services Agreement]
- All
            - Title
            - Author
            - Subject
            - Date
            - Full-Text

            -                              Explore                            ******                - Educational Resources
              - Archival Collections
              -                                      Themes                                    ******                  - Economic Data
                - Federal Reserve
                - View all 
              - Timelines 
            -                              Browse                            ******                - Titles
              - Authors
              - Subjects
              - Dates 
            -                              About                            ******                - About FRASER
              - FAQ
              - Contact Us
              -                                      FRASER API                                    ******                  - REST API
                - OAI-PMH 
            - Inside FRASER Blog

            - **

Home                 > Browse by Title > Securities Exchange Act of 1934

              														Securities Exchange Act of 1934, June 6, 1934.						https://fraser.stlouisfed.org/title/1120,			accessed on August 26, 2024.						    

        - **FRASER**
        - About
        - FAQ
        - Legal and Privacy
        - FRASER API

          -                              @FedFRASER 
          - ** Contact Us
          -  **  What's New  
          -  **  Inside FRASER
This memorandum opinion was not selected for pub lication in the New Mexico Appellate Reports. Please see Rule 12-405 NMRA for restricti ons on the citation of unpublished memorandum opinions. Please also note that this electronic memorandum opinion may contain computer-generated errors or other deviations fr om the official paper version filed by the Court of Appeals and does not include the filing date. IN THE COURT OF APPEALS OF THE STATE OF NEW MEXICO 1 STATE OF NEW MEXICO, 2 Plaintiff-Appellee, 3 v. No. 32,834 4 ADRIAN LUCERO, 5 Defendant-Appellant. 6 APPEAL FROM THE DISTRICT COURT OF SAN JUAN COUNTY 7 William C. Birdsall, District Judge 8 Gary K. King, Attorney General 9 Santa Fe, NM 10 for Appellee 11 Bennett J. Baur, Acting Chief Public Defender 12 Kathleen T. Baldridge, Assistant Appellate Defender 13 Santa Fe, NM 14 for Appellant 15

MEMORANDUM OPINION 16 BUSTAMANTE, Judge. 172 {1} Defendant appeals from a conditional di scharge order following his conditional 1 guilty plea to possession of methamphetami ne, where he reserved the right to 2 challenge the district court’s denial of hi s motion to suppress. [RP 74, 80] Our notice 3 proposed to affirm and Defendant file d a memorandum in opposition. We remain 4 unpersuaded by Defendant’s arguments and therefore affirm. 5
{2} Defendant continues to disagree with the district court’s ruling that the officer 6 had reasonable suspicion to stop Defendantfor driving a vehicle in an unsafe 7 condition, under NMSA 1978, § 66-3-801(A) (1991), based on a significant crack in 8 Defendant’s windshield. [DS 4; MIO 3; RP 60] As set forth in our notice, the officer 9 testified that he saw “amber light from th e street light coming through the crack within 10 the driver’s immediate view,” which, the officer testified, “could impair [the driver’s] 11 ability to operate the vehicle safely, dependi ng on if the driver was looking at the spot 12 or not.” [DS 3; MIO 5-6] We hold that this testimony supports a reasonable suspicion 13 that Defendant violated Section 66-3-801(A). See State v. Munoz , 1998-NMCA-140, 14 ¶ 11, 125 N.M. 765, 965 P.2d 349 (holding that windshield cracks that obscure the 15 driver’s vision are enough to constitute a safety hazard in violation of Section 66-3- 16 801). While Defendant does not believe the crack presente d a safety hazard [MIO 5- 17 7], whether the crack in the windshield madethe vehicle unsafe to drive is a question 18 for the finder of fact, notan appellate court. See id. , 1998-NMCA-140, ¶ 14 (making 193 it clear that whether the officer’s “obs ervation of the . . . windshield provided 1 reasonable grounds to believe that the crack in the windshield made the vehicle unsafe 2 to drive . . . is a question for the finder of fact, not an appellate court”). We 3 accordingly affirm. 4
{3} IT IS SO ORDERED. 5 6

_______________________________________ 7 MICHAEL D. BUSTAMANTE, Judge 8 WE CONCUR: 9

10 JONATHAN B. SUTIN, Judge 11

12 TIMOTHY L. GARCIA, Judge 13
149

117 108

162

235

40

24

44

18

160

96 94

3

78

132

This product is reproduced from geospatial information prepared by

the U.S. Department of Agriculture, Forest Service. GIS data and

product accuracy may vary. They may be: developed from

sources of differing accuracy, interpretation, incomplete while

being created or revised, etc. Using GIS products for purposes

other than those for which they were created may yield inaccurate

or misleading results. The Forest Service reserves the right to

correct, update, modify, or replace GIS products without notification.

For more information contact the Umatilla National Forest Supervisors Office.

Depicts forest roads. PWA boundaries were located

300 feet either side of semi-permanent, human made

forest roads to facilitate easy on-the-ground identification.

This boundary also excludes stumps c reated by road construction,

danger tree maintenance, and personal-use firewood gathering.

(FSH 1909. 12 ch.71 and 71.11 (9))).

Legend

Cobbler II Project Planning Area

Dis trict Boundary

Fores t Roads

300' each side of Fores t Road

Grande Ronde IRA

Wenaha-Tucannon Wi lderness

Walla Walla RD, Cobbler II Project Planning Area

Existing Forest Plan Inventoried Roadless Areas

Appendix C - 2001 Roadless Rule

Legend

Cobbler II Project Planning Area

District Boundary

Forest Roads

Grande Ronde IRA

Wenaha-Tucannon Wilderness

Depicts Walla Walla Ranger District's

past harves t and Inventoried Roadless Areas.

Past harvest areas where logging and

roads are evident will be removed from

further examination per (FSH 1909.12 71.11(9)).

Legend

Cobbler IIProjectPlanningArea

DistrictBoundary

Forest Roads

Wenaha-Tucannon Wilderness

Grande Ronde IRA

PastTimber Harvest

Depicts acres not containing past timber harvest

or forest roads. These acres will be examined

using inventory criteria at FSH 1909.12 ch. 71.

Legend

Cobbler II Project Planning Area

District Boundary

Forest Roads

Wenaha-Tucannon Wilderness

Acres not containing past timber

harvest or forest roads

Grande Ronde IRA

Map displays potential wilderness areas and

other undeveloped lands.

Cobbler II Project Planning Area

Inventory of Potential Wilderness Areas

 ́

Legend

Cobbler II Project Planning Area

District Boundary

Grande Ronde IRA

Forest Roads

Potential Wilderness Areas

Other Undeveloped Lands

Wenaha-Tucannon Wilderness

5 2.5 0 5 Miles

H-3 H-4 H-5

H-6 H-7

H-2
###### Editorial Note on Part 416

#### Editorial Note:

Nomenclature changes to part 416 appear at 68 FR 53509, Sept. 11, 2003.

#### § 416.1423 Expedited appeals process—general.

By using the expedited appeals process you may go directly to a Federal district court without first completing the administrative review process that is generally required before the court will hear your case.
Exhibit 99.1
                                 ------------


                      COUNTRYWIDE HOME LOANS SERVICING LP


                             OFFICERS' CERTIFICATE
                    ANNUAL STATEMENT OF THE MASTER SERVICER


                                  CWALT, INC.
                       ALTERNATIVE LOAN TRUST 2005-22T1
             MORTGAGE PASS-THROUGH CERTIFICATES, SERIES 2005-22T1


         The undersigned do hereby certify that they are each an officer of
Countrywide GP, Inc., general partner of Countrywide Home Loans Servicing LP
(a "Master Servicer"), and do hereby further certify pursuant to Section 3.16
of the Pooling and Servicing Agreement for the above-captioned Series (the
"Agreement") that:

(i) A review of the activities of the Master Servicer during the preceding
calendar year and of the performance of the Master Servicer under the
Agreement has been made under our supervision; and

(ii) To the best of our knowledge, based on such review, the Master Servicer
has fulfilled all its obligations under the Agreement throughout such year.




/s/ Craig Baingo                                       Dated: March 29, 2006
----------------

CRAIG BAINGO
EXECUTIVE VICE PRESIDENT



/s/ Kevin Meyers                                       Dated: March 29, 2006
----------------

KEVIN MEYERS
MANAGING DIRECTOR, CHIEF FINANCIAL
OFFICER, LOAN ADMINISTRATION
### §7941. Short title

This subpart may be cited as the "Paul D. Coverdell Teacher Protection Act of 2001".

(Pub. L. 89–10, title VIII, §8551, formerly title II, §2361, as added Pub. L. 107–110, title II, §201, Jan. 8, 2002, 115 Stat. 1667; renumbered title IX, §9541, renumbered title VIII, §8551, Pub. L. 114–95, title II, §2001(a)(3)(A), (B), (D), title VIII, §8001(a)(7), Dec. 10, 2015, 129 Stat. 1913, 2088, 2089.)

#### **Editorial Notes**

#### Codification

Section was classified to section 6731 of this title prior to renumbering by Pub. L. 114–95.

#### Prior Provisions

A prior section 7941, Pub. L. 89–10, title IX, §9601, as added Pub. L. 107–110, title IX, §901, Jan. 8, 2002, 115 Stat. 1985, which related to evaluations, was renumbered section 8601 of title VIII of Pub. L. 89–10 by Pub. L. 114–95, title VIII, §8001(a)(10), Dec. 10, 2015, 129 Stat. 2088, 2089, and transferred to section 7981 of this title.
§ 404.524 Review of our records related to the overpayment. ( a ) *Notification by the overpaid individual.* An overpaid individual who intends to inspect or copy our records related to the overpayment as determined by us must notify us stating his or her intention to inspect or copy.
( b ) *Our response.* In response to a notification by the overpaid individual as described in paragraph (a) of this section, we will notify the overpaid individual of the location and time when the overpaid individual may inspect or copy our records related to the overpayment. We may also, at our discretion, mail copies of the overpayment-related records to the overpaid individual.
[56 FR 52469, Oct. 21, 1991]
§ 418.3101 How do you become eligible for a subsidy? Unless you are deemed eligible as explained in § 418.3105 and 42 CFR 423.773(c), you are eligible for a Medicare Part D prescription drug subsidy if you meet all of the following requirements: ( a ) You are entitled to or enrolled in Medicare Part A (Hospital Insurance) or enrolled in Medicare Part B (Supplementary Medical Insurance) or both under title XVIII of the Act.
( b ) You are enrolled in a Medicare prescription drug plan or Medicare Advantage plan with prescription drug coverage. We can also determine your eligibility for a subsidy before you enroll in one of the above programs. However, as explained in § 418.3225(b), if we determine that you would be eligible for a subsidy before you have enrolled in a Medicare prescription drug plan or Medicare Advantage plan with prescription drug coverage, you must enroll in one of these plans to actually receive a subsidy.
( c ) You reside in the United States as defined in § 418.3010.
( d ) You (and your spouse, if applicable) meet the income requirements as explained in §§ 418.3301 through 418.3350 and 42 CFR 423.773.
( e ) You (and your spouse, if applicable) meet the resources requirements as explained in §§ 418.3401 through 418.3425 and 42 CFR 423.773.
( f ) You or your personal representative file an application for a subsidy as explained in §§ 418.3201 through 418.3230.