alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
[DO NOT PUBLISH]

IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE ELEVENTH CIRCUIT

________________________

No. 16-15416

Non-Argument Calendar

________________________

D.C. Docket No. 1:15-cv-04477-MHC

ALEXANDER HARVIN, 

 Plaintiff-Appellant,

 versus

JP MORGAN CHASE BANK N.A., 

 Defendant-Appellee.

________________________

Appeal from the United States District Court

for the Northern District of Georgia

________________________

(August 25, 2017)

Before TJOFLAT, MARTIN and ANDERSON, Circuit Judges.

PER CURIAM: 

Case: 16-15416 Date Filed: 08/25/2017 Page: 1 of 3 
2

On May 29, 2003, Alexander Harvin bought a residence in Conyers, 

Georgia, with the proceeds of a mortgage loan he obtained from SouthTrust 

Mortgage Corporation. On October 11, 2013, JP Morgan Chase Bank NA 

(“Chase”) became the assignee of the mortgage. On July 3, 2014, Harvin sued 

Nationwide Title Clearing, Chase, and others in the United States District Court for 

the Northern District of Georgia, claiming that the assignment to Chase was invalid

and seeking damages on the theory that Chase “violated the [Fair Debt Collection 

Practices Act, 15 U.S.C. § 1692(e)] by attempting to foreclose on his home without 

holding a valid security interest in it.” Harvin v. Nationwide Title Clearing, 632 

Fed. App’x 599 (11th Cir. 2016). The District Court dismissed his lawsuit, and 

Harvin appealed. 

While the appeal was pending,1 Harvin returned to the District Court on 

December 29, 2015, and filed this action, seeking to enforce the rescission of the 

2003 mortgage loan he had allegedly perfected pursuant to the Truth in Lending 

Act, 15 U.S.C. § 1635(a), and Regulation Z promulgated thereunder, when Chase 

failed to respond to the notice of rescission he delivered to Chase on February 2, 

2015. 

 1 We affirmed the District Court’s dismissal of Harvin’s case on January 28, 2016. Harvin v. 

Nationwide Title Clearing, 632 Fed. App’x 599 (11th Cir. 2016).

Case: 16-15416 Date Filed: 08/25/2017 Page: 2 of 3 
3

Chase responded by moving the District Court to dismiss Harvin’s

complaint.

2 The Court referred the motion to a Magistrate Judge, and she 

recommended its dismissal. The District Court followed her recommendation and 

entered judgment for Chase. Harvin appeals, contending that the Court erred in 

considering documents attached to his complaint (which were referenced in the 

complaint’s allegations), and abused its discretion in staying discovery pending the 

resolution of Chase’s motion to dismiss and in denying his motion for recusal,

which was based in part on the Court’s dismissal of his complaint in Harvin v. 

Nationwide Title Clearing. Harvin’s contentions are patently meritless. The 

District Court’s judgment is accordingly 

AFFIRMED.

 2

 We refer to Harvin’s amended complaint.

Case: 16-15416 Date Filed: 08/25/2017 Page: 3 of 3
Exhibit 10.16



 Exhibit 10.16 
  
 SUNTRUST BANKS, INC. 
 DEFERRED COMPENSATION
PLAN 
  
 DEFERRAL COMMITTEE CERTIFICATION 
  
 WHEREAS, SunTrust Banks, Inc. (the “Corporation”) established the
SunTrust Banks, Inc. Deferred Compensation Plan effective October 1, 1999 (the “Deferral Plan”), a plan whereby participants in certain selected bonus and incentive programs sponsored may defer receipt of all or a portion of their future
awards; and 
  
 WHEREAS, paragraph 8.7 of the Deferral Plan
authorizes the Deferral Committee to amend the Deferral Plan in any manner that is consistent with the Deferral Plan’s purpose, except as to any matter that the Deferral Plan Committee determines may result in a material increased cost to the
Corporation; and 
  
 WHEREAS, on November 11, 2003, the
Compensation Committee of the Board of Directors of the Corporation was asked to approve and it did approve certain changes to the Deferral Plan which were recommended on behalf of the Deferral Committee. 
  
 NOW, THEREFORE, IN WITNESS HEREOF, the Deferral Committee, through its
authorized delegate, certifies that the Compensation Committee has approved the following changes to the Deferral Plan, which are implemented effective as of the dates set forth below: 
  
 First, effective for Plan Years beginning January 1, 2004 and later, “Eligible Employee” means for purposes of
deferrals under the Deferral Plan for awards earned under the Corporation’s Management Incentive Plan or Performance Unit Plan, an employee who is in grade 53 or higher. 
  
 Second, effective February 1, 2004, the Deferral Plan includes the following investment funds: 
  

	 	•	STI Classic Capital Appreciation Fund 

  

	 	•	STI Classic Prime Quality Money Market 

  

	 	•	STI Classic Investment Grade Bond Fund 

  

	 	•	STI Classic Small Cap Growth Stock Fund 

  

	 	•	STI Classic Mid-Cap Equity Fund 

  

	 	•	STI Classic Growth and Income Fund 

  

	 	•	STI Classic Value Income Stock Fund 

  

	 	•	STI Classic Short-Term Fund 

  

									
	 SUNTRUST BANKS, INC.
 DEFERRAL PLAN COMMITTEE
	 	 	 	 
					
	By:	 	 /s/ Mary S. Harrell
	 	 	 	 	 	 
	 	 	
	 	 	 	 	 	 
					
	Attest:	 	 /s/ Margaret U. Hodgson
	 	 	 	 	 	[Corporate Seal]
# L_2016341EN.01004501.xml

| 15.12.2016 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | L 341/45 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

15.12.2016

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

L 341/45

---

DECISION OF THE EEA JOINT COMMITTEE

No 152/2015

of 11 June 2015

amending Annex II (Technical regulations, standards, testing and certification) to the EEA Agreement [2016/2187]

THE EEA JOINT COMMITTEE,

Having regard to the Agreement on the European Economic Area (‘the EEA Agreement’), and in particular Article 98 thereof,

Whereas:

| (1) | Commission Regulation (EU) 2015/491 of 23 March 2015 amending Regulation (EU) No 605/2014 amending, for the purposes of introducing hazard and precautionary statements in the Croatian language and its adaptation to technical and scientific progress, Regulation (EC) No 1272/2008 of the European Parliament and of the Council on classification, labelling and packaging of substances and mixtures (1) is to be incorporated into the EEA Agreement. |
| --- | --- |

(1)

Commission Regulation (EU) 2015/491 of 23 March 2015 amending Regulation (EU) No 605/2014 amending, for the purposes of introducing hazard and precautionary statements in the Croatian language and its adaptation to technical and scientific progress, Regulation (EC) No 1272/2008 of the European Parliament and of the Council on classification, labelling and packaging of substances and mixtures (1) is to be incorporated into the EEA Agreement.

| (2) | Annex II to the EEA Agreement should therefore be amended accordingly, |
| --- | --- |

(2)

Annex II to the EEA Agreement should therefore be amended accordingly,

HAS ADOPTED THIS DECISION:

Article 1

The following indent is added in point 12zze (Regulation (EC) No 1272/2008 of the European Parliament and of the Council) of Chapter XV of Annex II to the EEA Agreement:

| ‘— | 32015 R 0491: Commission Regulation (EU) 2015/491 of 23 March 2015 (OJ L 78, 24.3.2015, p. 12).’ |
| --- | --- |

‘—

32015 R 0491: Commission Regulation (EU) 2015/491 of 23 March 2015 (OJ L 78, 24.3.2015, p. 12).’

Article 2

The text of Regulation (EU) 2015/491 in the Icelandic and Norwegian languages, to be published in the EEA Supplement to the Official Journal of the European Union, shall be authentic.

Article 3

This Decision shall enter into force on 12 June 2015, provided that all the notifications under Article 103(1) of the EEA Agreement have been made (*1).

Article 4

This Decision shall be published in the EEA Section of, and in the EEA Supplement to, the Official Journal of the European Union.

Done at Brussels, 11 June 2015.

For the EEA Joint Committee

The President

Gianluca GRIPPA

---

(1)  
  OJ L 78, 24.3.2015, p. 12.

1

(*1)  No constitutional requirements indicated.

*1

---
* 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

April 24, 2003

Charles R. Fulbruge III

Clerk

IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT

 

No. 02-11119

Conference Calendar

 

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,

Plaintiff-Appellee,

versus

FRANCISCO ISMAEL CORONA-MARTINEZ,

Defendant-Appellant.

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

Appeal from the United States District Court

for the Northern District of Texas

USDC No. 6:02-CR-6-ALL-C

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

Before DAVIS, BARKSDALE, and STEWART, Circuit Judges. 

PER CURIAM:*

Francisco Ismael Corona-Martinez 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. Corona-Martinez 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. 

Corona-Martinez maintains that he pleaded guilty to an indictment
No. 02-11119

-2-

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. 

Corona-Martinez 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.

In lieu of filing an appellee’s brief, the Government has

filed a motion asking this court to dismiss this appeal or, in

the alternative, to summarily affirm the district court’s

judgment. The Government’s motion to dismiss is DENIED. The

motion for a summary affirmance is GRANTED. The Government need

not file an appellee’s brief. 

AFFIRMED; MOTION TO DISMISS DENIED; MOTION FOR SUMMARY

AFFIRMANCE GRANTED.
```

[House Report 107-247]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]

107th Congress                                                   Report
                        HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES
 1st Session                                                    107-247

======================================================================

 
WAIVING POINTS OF ORDER AGAINST THE CONFERENCE REPORT TO ACCOMPANY H.R. 
 2217, DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR AND RELATED AGENCIES APPROPRIATIONS 
                               ACT, 2002

                                _______
                                

  October 16, 2001.--Referred to the House Calendar and ordered to be 
                                printed

                                _______
                                

Mr. Hastings of Washington, from the Committee on Rules, submitted the 
                               following

                              R E P O R T

                       [To accompany H. Res. 267]

    The Committee on Rules, having had under consideration 
House Resolution 267, by a nonrecord vote, report the same to 
the House with the recommendation that the resolution be 
adopted.

                SUMMARY OF PROVISIONS OF THE RESOLUTION

    The resolution waives all points of order against the 
conference report and against its consideration.

                                

```
#### § 723.149 Program accessibility: Discrimination prohibited.

Except as otherwise provided in § 723.150, no qualified individual with handicaps shall, because the agency's facilities are inaccessible to or unusable by individuals with handicaps, be denied the benefits of, be excluded from participation in, or otherwise be subjected to discrimination under any program or activity conducted by the agency.
**EXHIBIT
      31.2**


Certifications





I,
      Li
      Hua, Wang, Chief Financial Officer of NF Energy Saving Corporation of America,
      certify that:


1.
      I have
      reviewed this quarterly report on Form 10-Q of NF Energy Saving Corporation
      of
      America (the "Company")





2.
      Based
      on my knowledge, the report does not contain any untrue statement of a material
      fact or omit to state a material fact necessary to make the statements made,
      in
      light of the circumstances under which such statements were made, not misleading
      with respect to the period covered by this quarterly report;





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





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





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





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





c)
      Disclosed in this report any change in the Company's internal control over
      financial reporting that occurred during the Company's most recent fiscal period
      that has materially affected, or is reasonably likely to materially affect,
      the
      Company's internal control over financial reporting; and





5.
      The
      Company's other certifying officers and I have disclosed, based on our most
      recent evaluation, to the Company's auditors and the audit committee of
      Company's board of directors (or persons performing the equivalent
      functions):





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





b)
      Any
      fraud, whether or not material, that involves management or other employees
      who
      have a significant role in the Company's internal controls, (all of which do
      not
      apply);





Date:
      November 10, 2008


/s/
      Li
      Hua, Wang


Li
      Hua,
      Wang


Chief
      Financial Officer and Director
Exhibit 32.1

                            CERTIFICATION PURSUANT TO
                             18 U.S.C. SECTION 1350,
                             AS ADOPTED PURSUANT TO
                  SECTION 906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2003

In connection with the Quarterly Report of Delightfully Frozen Corp. a Nevada
corporation (the "Company") on Form 10-QSB for the period ending June 30, 2004,
as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the
"Report"), Ken Graham, Chief Executive Officer and Chief Financial Officer of
the Company, certifies to the best of his knowledge, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. ss.
1350, as adopted pursuant to ss. 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2003, that:

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

         (2)      The information contained in the Report fairly presents, in
                  all material respects, the financial condition and result of
                  operations of the Company.

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




/s/  Ken Graham
--------------------------
Ken Graham
Chief Executive Officer and Chief Financial Officer
August 6, 2004
**Exhibit 31.1**

 

**CERTIFICATIONS**

 

I, James E. Plack, certifythat:

 

1.               I have reviewed this quarterly report onForm 10-QSB of American Bank Holdings, Inc.;

 

2.               Based on my knowledge, this report doesnot contain any untrue statement of a material fact or omit to state a materialfact necessary to make the statements made, in light of the circumstances underwhich such statements were made, not misleading with respect to the periodcovered by this report;

 

3.               Based on my knowledge, the financialstatements, and the financial information included in this report, fairlypresent in all material respects the financial condition, results of operationsand cash flows of the registrant as of, and for, the periods presented in thisreport;

 

4.               The registrant’s other certifyingofficer and I are responsible for establishing and maintaining disclosurecontrols and procedures (as defined in Exchange Act Rules 13a-15(e) and15d-15(e)) for the registrant and have:

 

a)              Designed such disclosure controls andprocedures, or caused such disclosure controls and procedures to be designedunder our supervision, to ensure that material information relating to theregistrant, including its consolidated subsidiaries, is made known to us byothers within those entities, particularly during the period in which thisreport is being prepared;

 

b)             Evaluated the effectiveness of theregistrant’s disclosure controls and procedures and presented in this reportour conclusions about the effectiveness of the disclosure controls andprocedures, as of the end of the period covered by this report based on suchevaluation; and

 

c)              Disclosed in this report any change inthe registrant’s internal control over financial reporting that occurred duringthe registrant’s most recent fiscal quarter (the registrant’s fourth fiscalquarter in the case of an annual report) that has materially affected, or isreasonably likely to materially affect, the registrant’s internal control overfinancial reporting; and

 

5.               The registrant’s other certifyingofficer(s) and I have disclosed, based on our most recent evaluation ofinternal control over financial reporting, to the registrant’s auditors and theaudit committee of the registrant’s board of directors (or persons performingthe equivalent function):

 

a)              All significant deficiencies and materialweaknesses in the design or operation of internal control over financialreporting which are reasonably likely to adversely affect the registrant’sability to record, process, summarize and report financial information; and

 

a)                      Any fraud, whether or notmaterial, that involves management or other employees who have a significantrole in the registrant’s internal controls over financial reporting.

 

Date: August 12, 2005

 
| /s/  James E. Plack                    |   |
|----------------------------------------|--------|
| James  E. Plack                        |
| President  and Chief Executive Officer |

 

----
### §10530. Patrick Leahy Bulletproof Vest Partnership Grant Program

The program under this subchapter shall be known as the "Patrick Leahy Bulletproof Vest Partnership Grant Program".

(Pub. L. 90–351, title I, §2500, as added Pub. L. 116–18, §1(b), May 23, 2019, 133 Stat. 869.)
### §1281a. Total treatment system funding

Notwithstanding any other provision of law, in any case where the Administrator of the Environmental Protection Agency finds that the total of all grants made under section 201 of the Federal Water Pollution Control Act [33 U.S.C. 1281] for the same treatment works exceeds the actual construction costs for such treatment works (as defined in that Act [33 U.S.C. 1251 et seq.]) such excess amount shall be a grant of the Federal share (as defined in that Act) of the cost of construction of a sewage collection system if—

(1) such sewage collection system was constructed as part of the same total treatment system as the treatment works for which such section 201 [33 U.S.C. 1281] grants were approved, and

(2) an application for assistance for the construction of such sewage collection system was filed in accordance with section 3102 of title 42 before all such section 201 grants were made and such grant under section 3102 of title 42 could not be approved due to lack of funding under such section 3102 of title 42.

The total of all grants for sewage collection systems made under this section shall not exceed $2,800,000.

(Pub. L. 95–217, §78, Dec. 27, 1977, 91 Stat. 1611.)

#### **Editorial Notes**

#### References in Text

That Act, meaning the Federal Water Pollution Control Act, referred to in text, is act June 30, 1948, ch. 758, as amended generally by Pub. L. 92–500, §2, Oct. 18, 1972, 86 Stat. 816, which is classified generally to this chapter. For complete classification of this Act to the Code, see Short Title note set out under section 1251 of this title and Tables.

Section 3102 of title 42, referred to in par. (2), was omitted from the Code pursuant to section 5316 of Title 42, The Public Health and Welfare, which terminated the authority to make grants or loans under that section after Jan. 1, 1975.

#### Codification

Section was enacted as part of the Clean Water Act of 1977, Pub. L. 95–217, and not as part of the Federal Water Pollution Control Act which comprises this chapter.