alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
(February 15, 1955.)

#### Ada U. Renkoff, Appellant, *v.*Herman Renkoff, Respondent.

*Per Curiam.*

The present decree for alimony was procured in 1937, and, therefore, was subject to the power of the court to annul, modify or vary same (Civ. Prac. Act, § 1170). It was unlike the decree in *Livingston*v. *Livingston*
      *877(173 N. Y. 377), which had been procured in 1892 before the present provisions of section 1170 had been adopted (see *Griffin*v. *Griffin,*327 U. S. 220; *Karlin*v. *Karlin,*280 N. Y. 32, and *Fox*v. *Fox,*263 N. Y. 68).

Accordingly, Special Term was not compelled to award a *money*judgment for the full amount of past due installments of alimony, even those which had accrued prior to the 1948 amendment of section 1171-b of the Civil Practice Act.

However, the wife should not be deprived of the benefit of her decree unless the husband disclosed facts warranting the exercise of the court’s discretion in his favor. Mere delay of the wife in entering judgment if due to or contributed to by the absence of the husband from the State would not be sufficient basis for refusing her relief.

We deem that it would be preferable to have the Oficial Referee inquire into all the facts and circumstances as to nonpayment of alimony and nonentry of judgment over the years as well as into the husband’s present financial circumstances before disposing of the wife’s application for judgment, and the wife’s application to modify the decree.

The orders appealed from should be modified accordingly. Settle order on notice.

Peck, P. J., Callahan, Breitel, Bastow and Botein, JJ., concur.

Orders appealed from modified so as to refer matter to Official Referee in accordance with opinion. Settle order.
### §13773. Transferred

#### **Editorial Notes**

#### Codification

Section 13773 was editorially reclassified as section 12143 of Title 34, Crime Control and Law Enforcement.
UNITED STATES

NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION 

WASHINGTON, D.C. 20555-0001 

MEMORANDUM TO: Victor M. McCree 

 Executive Director for Operations 

FROM: Annette L. Vietti-Cook, Secretary /RA/ 

SUBJECT: STAFF REQUIREMENTS – SECY-15-0094 – HISTORICAL AND 

CURRENT ISSUES RELATED TO DISPOSAL OF GREATERTHAN-CLASS C LOW-LEVEL RADIOACTIVE WASTE 

The staff should prepare a draft response, for processing as Commission correspondence but to 

be signed by the Director of NMSS, to the Texas Commission on Environmental Quality (TCEQ) 

in response to TCEQ’s letter to the NRC dated January 30, 2015. The draft response should 

include a description of the regulatory basis directed below, explain that this regulatory basis will 

inform our answer to TCEQ’s jurisdictional questions about disposal of GTCC waste, and invite 

TCEQ staff to provide input to the regulatory basis during the course of its development. 

Within six months of the completion of the ongoing 10 CFR Part 61 rulemaking, the staff should 

prepare a regulatory basis for the disposal of GTCC waste through means other than deep 

geologic disposal, including near-surface disposal, and provide this regulatory basis to the 

Commission for information. The regulatory basis should analyze whether, in accordance with 

section 274c.(4) of the Atomic Energy Act, disposal of GTCC waste presents a hazard such that 

the NRC should retain authority over its disposal. If the staff concludes, as a result of its 

analysis, that some or all GTCC waste is potentially suitable for near-surface disposal, the staff 

should proceed with the development of a proposed rule to include disposal criteria for licensing 

the disposal of such waste under 10 CFR Part 61. The staff should also conduct a public 

workshop during the development of the regulatory basis to receive input from the State of 

Texas and any other interested stakeholders. The Commission affirms that the case-by-case 

review contemplated in 10 CFR 61.55(a)(2)(iv) is available to parties who seek to dispose of 

GTCC waste in the near term. 

The Commission approves the staff’s recommendation to address transuranic waste in 10 CFR 

section 61.2. 

cc: Chairman Burns 

 Commissioner Svinicki 

 Commissioner Ostendorff 

 Commissioner Baran 

 OGC 

 CFO 

 OCA 

 OPA 

 Office Directors, Regions, ACRS, ASLBP (via E-Mail) 

 PDR 

December 22, 2015
#### Nathan A. Harris et al., Copartners Doing Business as N. A. Harris & Son, Appellants, v. 500 Fifth Avenue, Inc., Respondent.

No opinion. Present — Peck, P. J., Glennon, Dore, Cohn and Callahan, JJ.; Dore, J., dissents and votes to reverse.
### §13613. Secondary preferences

#### (a) Insufficient elderly families

If an owner of a covered section 8 housing project in which elderly families are given a preference for occupancy pursuant to section 13611 of this title determines (in accordance with regulations established by the Secretary) that there are insufficient numbers of elderly families who have applied for occupancy in the housing to fill all the units in the project not reserved under section 13612 of this title, the owner may give preference for occupancy of such units to disabled families who are near-elderly families and have applied for occupancy in the housing.

#### (b) Insufficient non-elderly disabled families

If an owner of a covered section 8 housing project in which elderly families are given a preference for occupancy pursuant to section 13611 of this title determines (in accordance with regulations established by the Secretary) that there are insufficient numbers of disabled families who are not elderly or near-elderly families and have applied for occupancy in the housing to fill all the units in the project reserved under section 13612 of this title, the owner may give preference for occupancy of units so reserved to disabled families who are near-elderly families and have applied for occupancy in the housing.

(Pub. L. 102–550, title VI, §653, Oct. 28, 1992, 106 Stat. 3824.)

#### **Editorial Notes**

#### References in Text

Covered section 8 housing, referred to in text, is defined in section 13619 of this title.
|   | (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 results of operations of the Company. |
|--------|-----------------|------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|

|   |   |                                                         |   |
|--------|--------|--------------------------------------------------------------|--------|
|   | By:    | /s/Gadi Aner                                  |   |
|   |   | Gadi Aner            |   |
|   |   | Chief Executive Officer and Chairman     |   |
|   |   |                                                         |   |

|   |   |                                                                                  |   |
|--------|--------|---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|--------|
|   | By:    | /s/Gabby Klausner                                                                     |   |
|   |   | Gabby Klausner                                               |   |
|   |   | Treasurer and Chief Financial Officer         |   |
|   |   |                                                                                  |   |

----
Magnetotelluric Data Release, Across the Hubbell Springs Fault Area, Middle Rio Grande Basin, New Mexico*By* Jackie M. Williams *and* Brian D. Rodriguez 
**U.S. Geological Survey Open-File Report 03-115**

 Version 1.0 
 The text of this report is presented here in Portable Document Format. The latest    version of Adobe Acrobat Reader or similar software is required to view it.    If you wish to download the latest version of Acrobat Reader free of charge,    click here     . 

 Readme TXT file (3 KB)

OFR-03-115 Text-only PDF file (852 KB)(This version of the report is accessible as defined in Section 508.) 
 OFR-03-115 PDF file (3.2 MB)
AccessibilityFOIAPrivacyPolicies and Notices
U.S. Department of the Interior | U.S. Geological Survey      URL: https://pubsdata.usgs.gov/pubs/of/2003/ofr-03-115/Questions or Assistance: USGS Web ContactPage Last Modified: Sat Jan 12 23:01 EDT 2013
EXHIBIT 32.1


Written Statement of the Chief Executive Officer


of CNA Financial Corporation


Pursuant to 18 U.S.C. § 1350


(As adopted by Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002)


The undersigned, the Chief Executive Officer of CNA Financial Corporation (the Company), hereby certifies that, to his knowledge:


• the Company’s Annual Report on Form 10-K for the year ended December 31, 2023 filed on the date hereof with the Securities and Exchange Commission (the Report) fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934; and


• the information contained in the Report fairly presents, in all material respects, the financial condition and results of operations of the Company.


Dated:February 6, 2024By/s/ Dino E. RobustoDino E. RobustoChief Executive Officer


The foregoing certification is being furnished solely pursuant to 18 U.S.C. § 1350 and is not being filed as part of the Report or as a separate disclosure document.
United States Court of Appeals

FOR THE EIGHTH CIRCUIT

___________

No. 03-1210

___________

United States of America, *

*

Plaintiff-Appellee, *

*

v. *

* Appeal from the United States

$29,000, also known as Elita * District Court for the Western

Crossland, also known as Thomas Scott * District of Arkansas.

Crossland, in United States Currency; *

* [UNPUBLISHED]

Defendant, *

*

Scott Crossland, also known as Thomas *

Scott Crossland, *

*

Claimant-Appellant. *

___________

 Submitted: September 2, 2003

 Filed: September 15, 2003

___________

Before WOLLMAN, FAGG, and MORRIS SHEPPARD ARNOLD, Circuit Judges.

___________

PER CURIAM.
*

The Honorable Robert T. Dawson, United States District Judge for the

Western District of Arkansas.

-2-

Scott Crossland appeals from the district court’s* adverse grant of summary

judgment in Crossland's civil forfeiture action, contending there was evidence in the

record to establish the $29,000 at issue represented proceeds from legitimate business

ventures, the district court wrongly denied his motion to stay the summary judgment

motion, and the forfeiture action was untimely. After careful review, we affirm.

The district court did not abuse its discretion in denying a stay, because

Crossland did not identify the discovery he was lacking and how a continuance would

have enabled him to obtain needed discovery. See Alexander v. Pathfinder, Inc., 189

F.3d 735, 744 (8th Cir. 1999). We also conclude summary judgment was proper

because the government presented unrebutted evidence of probable cause, and

Crossland failed to create a genuine issue of material fact as to whether the money

represented proceeds from a legitimate business. See United States v. Premises

Known as 7725 Unity Ave. N., Brooklyn Park, Minn., 294 F.3d 954, 958 (8th Cir.

2002). Finally, the forfeiture action was timely filed. See United States v. TwentySeven Parcels of Real Prop. Located in Sikeston, Mo., 236 F.3d 438, 440 (8th Cir.

2001) (statute of limitations).

Accordingly, we affirm.

A true copy.

Attest:

CLERK, U.S. COURT OF APPEALS, EIGHTH CIRCUIT.
Presidential Documents

Federal Register / Vol. 84, No. 15 / Wednesday, January 23, 2019 / Presidential Documents 203 

Presidential Determination No. 2019–08 of January 16, 2019 

Presidential Determination Pursuant to Section 303 of the Defense Production Act of 1950, as Amended 

Memorandum for the Secretary of Defense 

By the authority vested in me as President by the Constitution and the 

laws of the United States of America, including section 303 of the Defense 

Production Act of 1950, as amended (the ‘‘Act’’) (50 U.S.C. 4533), I hereby 

determine, pursuant to section 303(a)(5) of the Act, that the domestic production capability for energetic materials for munitions is essential to the national 

defense. 

Without Presidential action under section 303 of the Act, United States 

industry cannot reasonably be expected to provide the production capability 

for energetic materials for munitions adequately and in a timely manner. 

Further, purchases, purchase commitments, or other action pursuant to section 303 of the Act are the most cost-effective, expedient, and practical 

alternative method for meeting the need for this critical capability. 

You are authorized and directed to publish this memorandum in the Federal 

Register. 

THE WHITE HOUSE, 

Washington, January 16, 2019 

[FR Doc. 2019–00098 

Filed 1–22–19; 8:45 am] 

Billing code 5001–06–P 


khammond on DSK30JT082PROD with PRESDOC2Trump.EPS</GPH>
(logo)**BERKADIA®**

 

 

Annual Statement as to Compliance

For the Year Ended December 31, 2023 (the “ReportingPeriod”)

 

*GS Mortgage Securities Corporation II,*

*Series 2019-GC39*

 

Pursuant to Section 3.01 (32)of the Subservicing Agreement governing the referenced transaction (the“Servicing Agreement”), as an authorized officer of Berkadia CommercialMortgage LLC (“Berkadia”), I hereby attest that:

 

i. A review of the activitiesand performance of Berkadia as Subservicer during the Reporting Period has beenmade under my supervision.

 

ii. To the best of myknowledge, based on such review, Berkadia as Subservicer has fulfilled, in allmaterial respects, its obligations under this Subservicing Agreement throughoutthe Reporting Period and no default by the Subservicer under the SubservicingAgreement has occurred and is continuing.

 

Berkadia Commercial MortgageLLC,

 

/s/ Mark E. McCool

Mark E. McCool 

President 

February 10, 2024

 

 

 

Inv. 19045 Lib. A
No: II-16-003 March 2, 2016

CONTACT: Roger Hannah 404-997-4417 

Joey Ledford 404-997-4416 

NRC Names New Resident Inspector for Oconee Nuclear Power Station

Nuclear Regulatory Commission officials in Atlanta have selected 

Jason Parent as a resident inspector for the Oconee Nuclear Station, located 

near Seneca, S.C., about 30 miles west of Greenville. The three units at the 

Oconee site are licensed to Duke Energy.

Parent began his career with the NRC in the agency’s Resident 

Inspector Development Program and qualified as a reactor operations 

inspector in the agency’s Region II office in Atlanta. Prior to being assigned 

as the resident inspector at Oconee, he performed rotations as acting resident 

inspector at the Catawba Nuclear Station and the Robinson Nuclear Plant, 

both in South Carolina.

Before joining the NRC, he worked for the U.S. Navy’s Norfolk Naval Shipyard. He holds a 

bachelor’s degree in Aeronautical & Mechanical Engineering from Clarkson University in Potsdam, 

N.Y.

“Jason Parent has the experience and dedication to help ensure the Oconee plant is operated 

according to NRC regulations and in a way that protects people and the environment,” said NRC 

Region II Administrator Cathy Haney.

Parent joins NRC Senior Resident Inspector Eddy Crowe and Resident Inspector Natasha 

Childs at the Oconee Station.

Each operating U.S. commercial nuclear power plant site has at least two NRC resident 

inspectors. They serve as the agency’s eyes and ears at the facility, conducting regular inspections, 

monitoring significant work projects, and interacting with plant workers and the public. Inspectors can 

serve for up to seven years at any one site.

The Oconee resident inspectors can be reached at 864-882-6927.
BARRY L. FRIEDMAN, P.C.
                        Certified Public Accountant


1582 TULITA DRIVE                           OFFICE (702) 361-8414
LAS VEGAS, NEVADA 89123                    FAX NO. (702) 896-0278


                      CONSENT OF INDEPENDENT AUDITORS


To Whom It May Concern:
                                                          January 2, 2001

     The  firm  of  Barry  L. Friedman, P.C., Certified  Public  Accountant
consents  to  the inclusion of their report of  January 2,  2001,  on  the
Financial Statements of Interbank Capital Corp., as of December 31, 2000, in
any filings  that are  necessary  now  or  in the near future with the U.S.
Securities and Exchange Commission.



Very truly yours,

/s/ Barry L. Friedman

Barry L. Friedman
Certified Public Accountant
FOR PUBLICATION

JUDICIAL COUNCIL

OF THE NINTH CIRCUIT

IN RE COMPLAINT OF JUDICIAL  Nos. 08-90038,

MISCONDUCT 08-90050,  08-90051, 08-90054

and 08-90135

ORDER 

Filed June 16, 2009

Before: David R. Thompson, Sidney R. Thomas,

Susan P. Graber, M. Margaret McKeown, and

Johnnie B. Rawlinson, Circuit Judges, Audrey B. Collins,

Irma E. Gonzalez, Robert S. Lasnik, and

Robert H. Whaley, Chief District Judges, and

Terry J. Hatter, Senior District Judge.

ORDER

On April 1, 2009, the Chief Judge entered an order that

required complainant to show cause why he should not be

sanctioned for his abuse of the misconduct complaint procedure. Complainant filed a response that does not respond sufficiently to the order to show cause.

We have carefully reviewed the record. Complainant has

filed at least ten misconduct complaints over the last five

years, all but one of which have been dismissed because complainant’s allegations were conclusory and/or related to the

merits of the subject judges’ rulings. Pursuant to Rule 10(a)

of the Rules for Judicial-Conduct and Judicial-Disability Proceedings, we conclude that complainant’s right to file further

7175
misconduct complaints should be restricted. We direct the

Clerk to enter the following pre-filing review order:

Pre-Filing Review Order

(1) This pre-filing review order shall apply to all misconduct complaints or petitions for review filed by complainant.

(2) Any future misconduct complaint or petition for review

filed by complainant shall comply with the requirements of

the Rules for Judicial-Conduct and Judicial-Disability Proceedings, and shall contain the sentence “THIS COMPLAINT/PETITION IS FILED SUBJECT TO PRE-FILING

REVIEW ORDER Nos. 08-90038, 08-90050, 08-90051, 08-

90054 and 08-90135” in capital letters in the caption of the

complaint or petition. 

(3) If complainant submits a misconduct complaint or petition for review in compliance with this order, the Clerk shall

lodge the complaint or petition and accompanying documents.

The Clerk shall not file the complaint or petition until complainant’s submission is reviewed and a determination is

made as to whether it merits further review and should be

filed.

(4) This pre-filing review order shall remain in effect until

further order of the Judicial Council. Complainant may, no

earlier than June 1, 2011, petition the Judicial Council to lift

this pre-filing review order, setting forth the reasons why the

order should be lifted.

Complainant’s failure to comply with this order shall result

in any new misconduct complaints or petitions for review

being dismissed or not being filed and other sanctions being

levied as the Judicial Council may deem appropriate.

7176 IN RE COMPLAINT OF JUDICIAL MISCONDUCT

PRINTED FOR

ADMINISTRATIVE OFFICE—U.S. COURTS

BY THOMSON REUTERS/WEST—SAN FRANCISCO

The summary, which does not constitute a part of the opinion of the court, is copyrighted

© 2009 Thomson Reuters/West.
§ 1202.7 Prohibited stockpiling. Section 9(d)(2) of the Consumer Product Safety Act (15 U.S.C. 2058(d)(2)) authorizes the Commission to prohibit manufacturers and importers from stockpiling a product subject to a consumer product safety standard between its date of issuance and its effective date. A manufacturer or importer is in violation of Section 9(d)(2) and of this section if it fails to comply with the following: ( a ) *Definitions.* ( 1 ) *Base period* means, at the option of the manufacturer or importer concerned, any period of 365 consecutive days beginning on or after January 1, 1973, and ending on or before December 31, 1975.
( 2 ) *Rate of production (or importation)* means the total number of matchbooks manufactured (or imported) during a stated time period. In determining whether a matchbook was manufactured during a stated time period, the date on which the cover and combs were assembled to form a matchbook shall be used. In the event that a manufacturer currently operates a matchbook manufacturing plant that it did not operate during the base period, or that it did not operate for an entire base period, that manufacturer shall use, as the rate of production during the base period for that plant, either ( i ) the average daily rate of production (including nonproduction days such as Sundays, holidays, and vacations) for the part of the base period he did operate that plant, multiplied by 365 or
( ii ) the rate of production during the base period of his most nearly similar matchbook manufacturing plant.
( b ) *Prohibited act.* Manufacturers and importers of matchbooks, as these products are defined in § 1202.3(i), shall not manufacture or import matchbooks that do not comply with the requirements of this part between the date that this part is issued and the date that it becomes effective at a rate that is greater than the rate of production or importation during the base period plus 15 percent of that rate.
( c ) *Documentation.* Manufacturers and importers shall maintain, for a period of six (6) months after the effective date specified in § 1202.1(b), appropriate documentation to be able to substantiate to the Commission that they are in compliance with the provisions of this section.
United States Court of Appeals

For the First Circuit

No. 07-2670

RICHARD DENNIS,

Plaintiff, Appellant,

v.

OSRAM SYLVANIA, INC.,

Defendant, Appellee.

ERRATA SHEET

The opinion of this Court issued on December 10, 2008, is

amended as follows:

On p.7, line 17: Change heading "Dennis' Motion for Summary

Judgment" to "Sylvania's Motion for Summary Judgment."