alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
National City                          National City Mortgage Co.
Mortgage                               3232 Newmark Drive Miamisburg, Ohio 45342
                                       Telephone (937) 910-1200

                                       Mailing Address:
                                       P.O. 1820
                                       Dayton, Ohio 45401-1820



                    Management's Assertion on Compliance with
                  Minimum Servicing Standards Set Forth in the
             Uniform Single Attestation Program for Mortgage Bankers

                              Report of Management

We, as members  of  management  of  National  City  Mortgage  Co.  (NCM), are
responsible for complying with the minimum  servicing  standards as set forth in
the Mortgage Bankers Association of America's UNIFORM SINGLE ATTESTATION PROGRAM
FOR MORTGAGE BANKERS (USAP). We are also responsible for establishing and
maintaining effective internal control over compliance with these standards.  We
have  performed an evaluation  of NCM's  compliance  with the minimum  servicing
standards  as set  forth in the USAP as of  December  3l,  1997 and for the year
then  ended.  Based on this evaluation,  we assert  that  during the year ended
December 3l, 1997,  NCM  complied,  in all material  respects,  with the minimum
servicing standards set forth in the USAP.

As of and for this same period,  NCM had in effect a fidelity bond policy in the
amount of $50  million and an errors and  omissions  policy in the amount of $20
million.

                                         /s/Leo E. Knight, Jr.
                                         Leo E. Knight, Jr., President

                                         /s/T. Jackson Case Jr.
                                         T. Jackson Case Jr., Sr. Vice President

January 29,1998


                               No one Cares More !
### §§3, 4. Omitted

#### **Editorial Notes**

#### Codification

Section 3, act Aug. 8, 1911, ch. 5, §3, 37 Stat. 14, which related to election by districts, expired by its own limitation on enactment of Reapportionment Act of June 18, 1929, ch. 28, §22, 46 Stat. 21 (section 2a of this title). It was not restated in act June 18, 1929, providing for reapportionment under Fifteenth Census, and hence it was not applicable thereto. See Wood v. Broom, 1932 (53 S. Ct. 1, 287 U.S. 1, 77 L. Ed. 131).

Section 4, act Aug. 8, 1911, ch. 5, §4, 37 Stat. 14, which related to additional Representatives at large, expired by its own limitation on enactment of Reapportionment Act of June 18, 1929, ch. 28, §22, 46 Stat. 21 (section 2a of this title). It was not restated in act June 18, 1929, providing for reapportionment under Fifteenth Census, and hence it was not applicable thereto. See Wood v. Broom, 1932 (53 S. Ct. 1, 287 U.S. 1, 77 L. Ed. 131).
* Pursuant to 5TH CIR. R. 47.5, the court has determined

that this opinion should not be published and is not precedent

except under the limited circumstances set forth in 5TH CIR.

R. 47.5.4.

United States Court of Appeals

Fifth Circuit

FILED

February 18, 2004

Charles R. Fulbruge III

Clerk

IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT

 

No. 03-50824

Conference Calendar

 

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,

Plaintiff-Appellee,

versus

MARTIN BENITO FRIAS-SALAZAR,

Defendant-Appellant.

--------------------

Appeal from the United States District Court

for the Western District of Texas

USDC No. DR-03-CR-104-1

--------------------

Before HIGGINBOTHAM, EMILIO M. GARZA, and PRADO, Circuit Judges.

PER CURIAM:*

 Martin Benito Frias-Salazar appeals the sentence imposed

following his guilty plea conviction of being found in the United

States after deportation/removal in violation of 8 U.S.C. § 1326. 

Frias-Salazar contends that 8 U.S.C. § 1326(a) and 8 U.S.C.

§ 1326(b) define separate offenses. He argues that the prior

conviction that resulted in his increased sentence is an element

of a separate offense under 8 U.S.C. § 1326(b) that should have

been alleged in his indictment. Frias-Salazar maintains that he
No. 03-50824

-2-

pleaded guilty to an indictment which charged only simple reentry

under 8 U.S.C. § 1326(a). He argues that his sentence exceeds

the two-year maximum term of imprisonment which may be imposed

for that offense.

In Almendarez-Torres v. United States, 523 U.S. 224, 235

(1998), the Supreme Court held that the enhanced penalties in

8 U.S.C. § 1326(b) are sentencing provisions, not elements of

separate offenses. The Court further held that the sentencing

provisions do not violate the Due Process Clause. Id. at 239-47. 

Frias-Salazar acknowledges that his argument is foreclosed by

Almendarez-Torres, but asserts that the decision has been cast

into doubt by Apprendi v. New Jersey, 530 U.S. 466, 490 (2000). 

He seeks to preserve his argument for further review. 

Apprendi did not overrule Almendarez-Torres. See Apprendi,

530 U.S. at 489-90; United States v. Dabeit, 231 F.3d 979, 984

(5th Cir. 2000). This court must follow Almendarez-Torres

“unless and until the Supreme Court itself determines to overrule

it.” Dabeit, 231 F.3d at 984 (internal quotation marks and

citation omitted). The judgment of the district court is

AFFIRMED.

The Government has moved for a summary affirmance in lieu of

filing an appellee’s brief. In its motion, the Government asks

that an appellee’s brief not be required. The motion is GRANTED. 

AFFIRMED; MOTION GRANTED.
Editorial Note on Part 10
Editorial Note: Nomenclature changes to part 10 appear by CBP Dec. 16-26, 81 FR 93010, Dec. 20, 2016.

§ 10.934 Goods re-entered after repair or alteration in Peru. ( a ) *General.* This section sets forth the rules which apply for purposes of obtaining duty-free treatment on goods returned after repair or alteration in Peru as provided for in subheadings 9802.00.40 and 9802.00.50, HTSUS. Goods returned after having been repaired or altered in Peru, whether or not pursuant to a warranty, are eligible for duty-free treatment, provided that the requirements of this section are met. For purposes of this section, “repairs or alterations” means restoration, addition, renovation, re-dyeing, cleaning, re-sterilizing, or other treatment that does not destroy the essential characteristics of, or create a new or commercially different good from, the good exported from the United States.
( b ) *Goods not eligible for duty-free treatment after repair or alteration.* The duty-free treatment referred to in paragraph (a) of this section will not apply to goods which, in their condition as exported from the United States to Peru, are incomplete for their intended use and for which the processing operation performed in Peru constitutes an operation that is performed as a matter of course in the preparation or manufacture of finished goods.
( c ) *Documentation.* The provisions of paragraphs (a), (b), and (c) of § 10.8 of this part, relating to the documentary requirements for goods entered under subheading 9802.00.40 or 9802.00.50, HTSUS, will apply in connection with the entry of goods which are returned from Peru after having been exported for repairs or alterations and which are claimed to be duty free.
NRC NEWS

 UNITED STATES NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION

OFFICE OF PUBLIC AFFAIRS, REGION II

61 Forsyth Street SW, Atlanta GA 30303

Web Site: www.nrc.gov/OPA

 

No: II-01-042 October 16, 2001

CONTACT: Ken Clark (404) 562-4416

 Roger Hannah (404) 562-4417

NRC STAFF PROPOSES $88,000 CIVIL PENALTY AGAINST TVA

 BASED UPON DEPARTMENT OF LABOR FINDING OF DISCRIMINATION 

 The Nuclear Regulatory Commission staff has proposed an $88,000 civil penalty against the

Tennessee Valley Authority based upon U. S. Department of Labor findings that TVA wrongly

discriminated against a nuclear power plant employee because the employee had raised safety concerns

at the Watts Bar nuclear power plant near Spring City, Tennessee.

 NRC officials informed TVA in a letter dated October 15 that DOL findings related to a

discrimination complaint, filed by the employee, indicated TVA discriminated against the employee in

1995 and 1996, because the employee had engaged in protected activities, by arranging the

employeeís transfer to TVA Services and failing to re-employ the employee once the employee had

been transferred, resulting in the employeeís eventual lay-off from TVA. 

 Based on NRC review of the DOL findings and TVAís responses, the NRC has determined that a

violation of NRC requirements occurred. 

 NRC officials said that because TVA has filed an appeal of the DOL decision in the U.S. Court of

Appeals, TVA may defer payment of the civil penalty until the appeal process has been completed.

###
[Federal Register Volume 69, Number 205 (Monday, October 25, 2004)]
[Notices]
[Page 62294]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 04-23776]


-----------------------------------------------------------------------

DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE

U.S. Antitrust Division


Notice Pursuant to the National Cooperative Research and 
Production Act of 1993--North American Association of Food Equipment 
Manufacturers

    Notice is hereby given that, on September 16, 2004, pursuant to 
Section 6(a) of the National Cooperative Research and Production Act of 
1993, 15 U.S.C. 4301 et seq. (``the Act''), North American Association 
of Food Equipment Manufacturers (``NAFEM'') has filed written 
notifications simultaneously with the Attorney General and the Federal 
Trade Commission disclosing (1) the name and principal place of 
business of the standards development organization and (2) the nature 
and scope of its standards development activities. The notifications 
were filed for the purpose of invoking the Act's provisions limiting 
the recovery of antitrust plaintiffs to actual damages under specified 
circumstances.
    Pursuant to section 6(b) of the Act, the name and principal place 
of business of the standards development organization is: North 
American Association of Food Equipment Manufacturers, Chicago, IL. The 
nature and scope of NAFEM's standards development activities are: NAFEM 
Data Protocol--a standard set of rules that governs data exchange 
between commercial food service equipment and a computer.

Dorothy B. Fountain,
Deputy Director of Operations, Antitrust Division.
[FR Doc. 04-23776 Filed 10-22-04; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4410-11-M
Editorial Note on Part 134
Editorial Note: Nomenclature changes to part 134 appear at 72 FR 50042, Aug. 30, 2007.

§ 134.709 When will a Judge dismiss an appeal? ( a ) The presiding Judge must dismiss the appeal if the appeal is untimely filed under § 134.703.
( b ) The matter has been decided or is the subject of adjudication before a court of competent jurisdiction over such matters. However, once an appeal has been filed, initiation of litigation of the matter in a court of competent jurisdiction will not preclude the Judge from rendering a final decision on the matter.
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<ARTICLE> 5
<LEGEND>
THIS SCHEDULE CONTAINS SUMMARY FINANCIAL INFORMATION EXTRACTED FROM THE
COMPANY'S FINANCIAL STATEMENTS AS OF AND FOR THE YEAR ENDED DECEMBER31,
1998 FILED WITH THIS ANNUAL REPORT ON FORM 10-K AND IS QUALIFIED IN ITS
ENTIRETY BY REFERENCE TO SUCH FINANCIAL STATEMENTS.
</LEGEND>
       
<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   12-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          DEC-31-1998
<PERIOD-END>                               DEC-31-1998
<CASH>                                           3,333
<SECURITIES>                                         0
<RECEIVABLES>                                   10,766
<ALLOWANCES>                                   (1,075)
<INVENTORY>                                      6,113
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                                23,204
<PP&E>                                          52,837
<DEPRECIATION>                                 (6,596)
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                  85,346
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                           17,497
<BONDS>                                              0
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                           160
<OTHER-SE>                                      45,411
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                    85,346
<SALES>                                         73,207
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                                73,207
<CGS>                                           57,724
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                   74,329
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                     0
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                     0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                               1,683
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                (2,524)
<INCOME-TAX>                                     (706)
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                            (1,818)
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                   (1,800)
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                   (0.11)
<EPS-DILUTED>                                   (0.11)
        


</TABLE>
#### § 111.37 Misuse of license or permit.

A broker must not allow his license, permit or name to be used by or for any unlicensed person (including a broker whose license or permit is under suspension), other than his own employees authorized to act for him, in the solicitation, promotion or performance of any customs business or transaction.
##### 






Exhibit 32.1


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






(i)
    
    The Form 10-Q fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) or Section
15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 (15 U.S.C. 78m(a) or 78o(d)); and(ii)
    
    The information contained in the Form 10-Q fairly presents, in all material
respects, the financial condition and results of operations of the Issuer.


Dated: November 8, 2007
    
    
    
    /s / Michael J. Ross

Michael J. RossPresident and Chief Executive Officer,Dearborn Bancorp, Inc.


45
NRC NEWS

 U.S. NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION 

 Office of Public Affairs Telephone: 301/415-8200

 Washington, DC 20555-0001 E-mail: opa@nrc.gov 

 Web Site: www.nrc.gov

No. 02-021 February 19, 2002

 

NRC ANNOUNCES AVAILABILITY OF LICENSE RENEWAL APPLICATION

FOR FORT CALHOUN NUCLEAR POWER STATION

The Nuclear Regulatory Commission is announcing the availability of an application for a

20-year renewal of the operating license for the Fort Calhoun Station, Unit 1, nuclear power plant. The

Omaha Public Power District, which operates the plant, submitted the application on January 11.

Ft. Calhoun is located in Washington County, Nebraska. The current operating license for the

plant expires on August 9, 2013.

Copies of the application are available for public inspection at the Commission's Public

Document Room, located at One White Flint North, 11555 Rockville Pike, Rockville, Maryland, or

electronically through the NRC's Agencywide Documents Access and Management System (ADAMS). 

The ADAMS Public Electronic Reading Room is accessible from the NRC web site at

http://www.nrc.gov/reading-rm/adams.html

Help in using ADAMS is also available through the NRC Public Document Room by calling 

1-800-397-4209, 301-415-4737 or by e-mail to pdr@nrc.gov. A copy of the license renewal

application is also available to local residents at the Blair Public Library in Blair, NE, and the W. Dale

Clark Library in Omaha, NE.

The NRC staff is currently conducting an initial review of the application to determine whether

it contains sufficient information to start the required formal review. If the application has sufficient

information, the NRC will formally ìdocket,î or file, the application and will announce an opportunity

to request a hearing.

###
U.S. NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION

Region III Office of Public Affairs

801 Warrenville Road, Lisle, IL 60532-4351

NEWS ANNOUNCEMENT: RIII-97-89 October 2, 1997

CONTACT: Jan Strasma 630/829-9663

Angela Dauginas 630/829-9662

NRC TO HOLD PREDECISIONAL ENFORCEMENT CONFERENCE

WITH CENTERIOR ON AN APPARENT VIOLATION AT PERRY

The Nuclear Regulatory Commission staff will meet October 7

with representatives of Centerior Service Company for a

predecisional enforcement conference on an apparent violation at

the Perry Nuclear Power Station. The plant is located seven

miles northeast of Painesville, Ohio.

The meeting will start at 12:30 p.m. in the Third Floor

Conference Room of the NRC Region III Office, 801 Warrenville

Road, Lisle, Illinois. It is open to public observation. NRC

officials will be available at its conclusion to answer questions

from the news media and other interested observers.

The discussion will focus on Centerior’s failure to evaluate

the safety implications when it changed procedures affecting the

emergency closed cooling system. This system supplies cooling

water to equipment that would be used during certain accidents.

NRC’s concerns relate to an analysis done by Centerior in

1993, when it concluded that--because of leakage through valves

from one system into another--this cooling water system could

only be relied on for 30 minutes, rather than the seven days

specified in plant design documents. The utility made this change

in plant procedures and licensing records.

During a special design inspection in February and March,

NRC questioned the utility’s analysis. Inspectors also noted that

the procedure changes resulted in new safety questions that

needed to be formally reviewed. In an apparent violation of NRC

requirements, Centerior apparently failed to identify these

unreviewed safety questions during its own safety evaluation of

the procedural changes.

As a result of the NRC inspection, the utility retested the

system, measured the valve leakage, and determined that there

would be more than a seven-day supply of water in the system’s

tank. Accordingly, Centerior has rescinded the changes to

Perry’s licensing documents and procedures.
At the conference, Centerior will also provide additional

information regarding its corrective actions for some apparent

violations that were discussed at a predecisional enforcement

conference on April 18.

The decision to hold an enforcement conference does not mean

the NRC has determined that a violation has occurred or that

enforcement action will be taken. Rather, the purpose is to

discuss apparent violations, their causes and safety

significance; to provide the licensee an opportunity to point out

any errors that may have been made in the NRC inspection report;

and to enable the company to outline its proposed corrective

actions.

No decision on the apparent violations or any contemplated

enforcement action, such as a fine, will be made at this

conference. Those decisions will be made by senior NRC officials

at a later date.

####
### §281. Establishment

There is established in the House of Representatives an office to be known as the Office of the Legislative Counsel, referred to hereinafter in this subchapter as the "Office".

(Pub. L. 91–510, title V, §501, Oct. 26, 1970, 84 Stat. 1201.)

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

#### Effective Date

Subchapter effective Oct. 26, 1970, see section 601(5) of Pub. L. 91–510, set out as an Effective Date of 1970 Amendment note under section 4301 of this title.

#### Transfer of Functions; Nonapplicability of Sections 271 to 277 to the House

Pub. L. 91–510, title V, §531, Oct. 26, 1970, 84 Stat. 1203, provided that anyone serving as Legislative Counsel on Oct. 26, 1970 would continue as Legislative Counsel in accordance with this subchapter, and that all personnel, positions, property, records, and unexpended balances of appropriations of or for that part of the Office of the Legislative Counsel established under sections 271 to 277 of this title employed or held in or for the House of Representatives would be transferred to the Office established under this subchapter and, effective Oct. 26, 1970, those sections were without further appicability.
#### §§ 111.43-111.44 [Reserved]
----

----

III Paziņojumi

Komisija

----

PAZIŅOJUMA PUBLICĒŠANA PAR KOPIENAS AUGU ŠĶIRŅU BIROJA PRIEKŠSĒDĒTĀJA AMATA VAKANCI

(kategorija A*14)

(Civildienesta noteikumu 29. panta 2. punkts)

KOM/2005/10015

(2005/C 297 A/01)

Kopienas Augu šķirņu birojam ir vajadzīgs priekšsēdētājs.

Pretendentiem ir jābūt kādas Eiropas Savienības dalībvalsts pilsoņiem.

Augu šķirņu biroja priekšsēdētāju iecels Padome, to izraugoties no kandidātu saraksta, ko pēc Biroja administratīvās padomes atzinuma saņemšanas piedāvās Komisija. Atalgojums un nodarbinātības nosacījumi ir tādi, kā to paredz Eiropas Kopienu Civildienesta noteikumi A*14 kategorijas amatpersonām. Kopienas Augu šķirņu birojs un Komisija savā praksē īsteno iespēju vienlīdzības politiku.

Darba aprakstu, pieteikuma anketas un norādījumus, kā šie pieteikumi jānosūta, var lejupielādēt no šādas interneta adreses:

http://europa.eu.int/comm/dgs/personnel_administration/working_senior_mgt_en.htm

vai

http://europa.eu.int/comm/food/plant/propertyrights/index_en.htm

Pieteikumu iesniegšanas termiņš ir 2005. gada 31. decembris (sīkāku informāciju skat. pieteikumu nosūtīšanas norādījumos).

----
### §479. Coordination of activities with National Science Foundation

The Office shall maintain a continuing liaison with the National Science Foundation with respect to—

(1) grants and contracts formulated or activated by the Foundation which are for purposes of technology assessment; and

(2) the promotion of coordination in areas of technology assessment, and the avoidance of unnecessary duplication or overlapping of research activities in the development of technology assessment techniques and programs.

(Pub. L. 92–484, §10(a), Oct. 13, 1972, 86 Stat. 802.)
### [§9013. Repealed. Pub. L. 115–141, div. U, title IV, §401(d)(8), Mar. 23, 2018, 132 Stat. 1212]

Section, added Pub. L. 92–178, title VIII, §801, Dec. 10, 1971, 85 Stat. 572, provided that this chapter would take effect on Jan. 1, 1973.

A prior section 9021, added by Pub. L. 92–178, title VIII, §801, Dec. 10, 1971, 85 Stat. 572, established Presidential Election Campaign Fund Advisory Board, prior to repeal by Pub. L. 93–443, title IV, §408(c), Oct. 15, 1974, 88 Stat. 1297. For effective date of repeal see section 410(c)(1) of Pub. L. 93–443, set out as an Effective Date of 1974 Amendment note under section 30101 of Title 52, Voting and Elections.

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

#### Savings Provision

For provisions that nothing in repeal by Pub. L. 115–141 be construed to affect treatment of certain transactions occurring, property acquired, or items of income, loss, deduction, or credit taken into account prior to Mar. 23, 2018, for purposes of determining liability for tax for periods ending after Mar. 23, 2018, see section 401(e) of Pub. L. 115–141, set out as a note under section 23 of this title.
[if !vml]>[endif]>

[if !vml]>[endif]>

You have reached the FederalDepository Library Program Electronic Collection (FDLP/EC) Archive. Thisarchive assures ongoing access to publications in the FDLP/EC. Access to publicationsin the archive is available through GPO's suite of cataloging and locatorservices, including the Catalog of U.S. Government Publications (CGP). Archived copies of publications are retrieved in the event that publicationsare no longer available from the original publishing agency site. 
**Title:****Annual report**
 
2002 | 2003 | 2004 | 2005
 
SuDoc:ID 1.27:EL 7/
Item Number:0900-I-18 (online)
CGP systemNumber:000637958
 
November 1, 2017