alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
**
Exhibit 35.1 

Servicer Compliance Statement of Nissan Motor Acceptance Company LLC 

**NISSAN MOTOR ACCEPTANCE COMPANY LLC**

**OFFICER’S CERTIFICATE**

The undersigned, Kevin J. Cullum, President and Chief Executive Officer of NISSAN MOTOR ACCEPTANCE COMPANY LLC, a Delaware limited liabilitycompany (successor by conversion to Nissan Motor Acceptance Corporation, the “Company”), does hereby certify, in his capacity as such officer, as follows: 

(1) The undersigned has caused a review of the activities of the Company, in its capacity as Servicer, during the 12-month period ended March 31, 2022 (the “Reporting Period”), and of its performance pursuant to the Sale and Servicing Agreement, dated as of May 28, 2019 (as amended, the“Agreement”), by and among the Company, individually and as servicer, Nissan Auto Receivables Company LLC II (successor by conversion to Nissan Auto Receivables Corporation II), as seller, and Nissan Auto Receivables 2019-B Owner Trust, to be conducted under his supervision; and 

(2) To the best of theundersigned’s knowledge, based upon such review, the Company has fulfilled all of its obligations under the Agreement in all material respects throughout the Reporting Period. 

This Officer’s Certificate is being furnished pursuant to Item 1123 of the Securities and Exchange Commission’s Regulation AB forpublicly-issued asset-backed securities. Capitalized terms used but not defined herein shall have the meanings assigned to such terms in the Agreement. 

IN WITNESS WHEREOF, I have set my hand effective as of the 27th day of June, 2022. 

 

/s/ Kevin J. Cullum
Kevin J. CullumPresident and Chief Executive Officer
 
20 

**
```

[Congressional Bills 112th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[H.R. 378 Introduced in House (IH)]

112th CONGRESS
  1st Session
                                H. R. 378

To reauthorize the public and assisted housing drug elimination program 
          of the Department of Housing and Urban Development.

_______________________________________________________________________

                    IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

                            January 20, 2011

Ms. Lee of California introduced the following bill; which was referred 
                 to the Committee on Financial Services

_______________________________________________________________________

                                 A BILL

 
To reauthorize the public and assisted housing drug elimination program 
          of the Department of Housing and Urban Development.

    Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representatives of the 
United States of America in Congress assembled,

SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE.

    This Act may be cited as the ``Public Housing Drug Elimination 
Program Reauthorization Act of 2011''.

SEC. 2. PUBLIC AND ASSISTED HOUSING DRUG ELIMINATION PROGRAM.

    (a) Authorization of Appropriations.--Section 5129 of the Anti-Drug 
Abuse Act of 1988 (42 U.S.C. 11908) is amended by striking subsection 
(a) and inserting the following new subsection:
    ``(a) In General.--There are authorized to be appropriated to carry 
out this chapter such sums as may be necessary for each of fiscal years 
2012, 2013, and 2014.''.
    (b) Eligible Activities.--Section 5124(a)(6) of the Anti-Drug Abuse 
Act of 1988 (42 U.S.C. 11903(a)(6)) is amended by striking the 
semicolon at the end and inserting the following: ``, except that the 
activities conducted under any program carried out in whole or in part 
with grant amounts provided pursuant to this paragraph may include 
only--
                    ``(A) providing treatment for drug abuse through 
                rehabilitation or relapse prevention;
                    ``(B) providing education about the dangers and 
                adverse consequences of drug use or violent crime;
                    ``(C) identifying drug users, assisting such users 
                in discontinuing their drug use through an education 
                program, and, if appropriate, referring the users to a 
                drug treatment program;
                    ``(D) providing after school activities for youths 
                for the purpose of discouraging, reducing, or 
                eliminating drug use or violent crime by youths;
                    ``(E) providing capital improvements for the 
                purpose of discouraging, reducing, or eliminating drug 
                use or violent crime; and
                    ``(F) providing security services for the purpose 
                of discouraging, reducing, or eliminating drug use or 
                violent crime;''.
                                 <all>
```
§ 201.340 Proposed findings, conclusions and supporting briefs. ( a ) *Opportunity to file.* Before an initial decision is issued, each party shall have an opportunity, reasonable in light of all the circumstances, to file in writing proposed findings and conclusions together with, or as a part of, its brief.
( b ) *Procedure.* Proposed findings of fact must be supported by citations to specific portions of the record. If successive filings are directed, the proposed findings and conclusions of the party assigned to file first shall be set forth in serially numbered paragraphs, and any counter statement of proposed findings and conclusions must, in addition to any other matter, indicate those paragraphs of the proposals already filed as to which there is no dispute. A reply brief may be filed by the party assigned to file first, or, where simultaneous filings are directed, reply briefs may be filed by each party, within the period prescribed therefor by the hearing officer. No further briefs may be filed except with leave of the hearing officer.
( c ) *Time for filing.* In any proceeding in which an initial decision is to be issued: ( 1 ) At the end of each hearing, the hearing officer shall, by order, after consultation with the parties, prescribe the period within which proposed findings and conclusions and supporting briefs are to be filed. The party or parties directed to file first shall make its or their initial filing within 30 days of the end of the hearing unless the hearing officer, for good cause shown, permits a different period and sets forth in the order the reasons why the different period is necessary.
( 2 ) The total period within which all such proposed findings and conclusions and supporting briefs and any counter statements of proposed findings and conclusions and reply briefs are to be filed shall be no longer than 90 days after the close of the hearing unless the hearing officer, for good cause shown, permits a different period and sets forth in an order the reasons why the different period is necessary.
#### § 210.4-02 Items not material.

If the amount which would otherwise be required to be shown with respect to any item is not material, it need not be separately set forth. The combination of insignificant amounts is permitted.
**Exhibit32**

****

**CERTIFICATION**

In connection with the periodicreport of The Clorox Company (the "Company") on Form 10-Q for theperiod ended December 31, 2003 as filed with the Securities andExchange Commission (the "Report"), we, Gerald E. Johnston, ChiefExecutive Officer and Daniel J. Heinrich, Chief FinancialOfficer****of the Company, hereby certify as of the date hereof,solely for purposes of Title 18, Chapter 63, Section 1350 of theUnited States Code, that to the best of our knowledge:

the Report fully complies with therequirements of Section 13(a) or 15(d), as applicable, of theSecurities Exchange Act of 1934, and

the information contained in the Reportfairly presents, in all material respects, the financial conditionand results of operations of the Company at the dates and for theperiods indicated. 

A signed original ofthis written statement required by Section 906 has been provided tothe Company and will be retained by the Company and furnished tothe Securities and Exchange Commission or its staff uponrequest.

This Certification has not been, andshall not be deemed, “filed” with the Securities andExchange Commission.

Dated this 10th day of February,2004.

/s/ Gerald E.Johnston         

Gerald E. Johnston

President and Chief ExecutiveOfficer

/s/ Daniel J.Heinrich

Daniel J. Heinrich

Vice President – ChiefFinancial Officer

                                               

----
LEON COUNTY,

Petitioner,

v.

JAN K. SEBASTIAN,

Respondent.

___________________________/

IN THE DISTRICT COURT OF APPEAL

FIRST DISTRICT, STATE OF FLORIDA

NOT FINAL UNTIL TIME EXPIRES TO 

FILE MOTION FOR REHEARING AND 

DISPOSITION THEREOF IF FILED

CASE NO. 1D17-1513

Opinion filed May 5, 2017.

Petition for Writ of Prohibition -- Original Jurisdiction.

Dale A. Scott and Michael J. Roper of Bell & Roper, P.A., Orlando, for Petitioner.

No appearance for Respondent.

PER CURIAM.

The petition for writ of prohibition is denied on the merits.

WETHERELL, OSTERHAUS, and M.K. THOMAS, JJ., CONCUR.
##### 



Exhibit 31.1 CERTIFICATION
Pursuant to Section 302 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002 I, David Gladstone, certify that: 1. I have reviewed this quarterly report on Form 10-Q of Gladstone
Commercial Corporation; 2. Based on my knowledge, this quarterly 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
registrant as of, and for, the periods presented in this quarterly report; 4. The registrants other certifying officer(s) and I are responsible for
establishing and maintaining disclosure controls and procedures (as defined in
Exchange Act Rules 13a-15(e) and 15d-15(e)) for the registrant 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 registrant, including its
consolidated subsidiaries, is made known to us by others within those entities,
particularly during the period in which this quarterly report is being
prepared; b) evaluated the effectiveness of the registrants disclosure controls and
procedures and presented in this quarterly 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 changes in the registrants internal
control over financial reporting that occurred during the registrants most
recent fiscal quarter (the registrants fourth fiscal quarter in the case of an
annual report) that has materially affected, or is reasonably likely to
materially affect the registrants internal control over financial reporting;
and 5. The registrants other certifying officer(s) and I have disclosed,
based on our most recent evaluation of internal control over financial
reporting, to the registrants auditors and the audit committee of registrant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 over financial reporting which are reasonably
likely to adversely affect the registrants ability to record, process,
summarize and report financial data; and b) Any fraud, whether or not material, that involves management or other
employees who have a significant role in the registrants internal control over
financial reporting. Date: November 3, 2004 /s/ DAVID GLADSTONE
Michigan Supreme Court

Lansing, Michigan

Bridget M. McCormack, Chief Justice

David F. Viviano,

Chief Justice Pro Tem

Stephen J. Markman

Brian K. Zahra

Richard H. Bernstein

Elizabeth T. Clement

Megan K. Cavanagh,

Justices

I, Larry S. Royster, Clerk of the Michigan Supreme Court, certify that the

foregoing is a true and complete copy of the order entered at the direction of the Court.

 December 4, 2019

Order 

Clerk

December 4, 2019

159205(62)

CALEB GRIFFIN,

Plaintiff-Appellant,

SC: 159205

v COA: 340480 

Genesee CC: 14-103977-NI

SWARTZ AMBULANCE SERVICE,

Defendant-Appellee,

and 

SARAH ELIZABETH AURAND,

Defendant.

_________________________________________/

On order of the Chief Justice, the motion of defendant-appellee to extend the time 

for filing its supplemental brief is GRANTED. The supplemental brief will be accepted as 

timely filed if submitted on or before December 13, 2019.
### §16158. Codes and standards

#### (a) In general

The Secretary, in cooperation with the Task Force, shall provide grants to, or offer to enter into contracts with, such professional organizations, public service organizations, and government agencies as the Secretary determines appropriate to support timely and extensive development of safety codes and standards relating to fuel cell vehicles, hydrogen energy systems, and stationary, portable, and micro fuel cells.

#### (b) Educational efforts

The Secretary shall support educational efforts by organizations and agencies described in subsection (a) to share information, including information relating to best practices, among those organizations and agencies.

#### (c) Authorization of appropriations

There are authorized to be appropriated to carry out this section—

(1) $4,000,000 for fiscal year 2006;

(2) $7,000,000 for fiscal year 2007;

(3) $8,000,000 for fiscal year 2008;

(4) $10,000,000 for fiscal year 2009;

(5) $9,000,000 for fiscal year 2010; and

(6) such sums as are necessary for each of fiscal years 2011 through 2020.

(Pub. L. 109–58, title VIII, §809, Aug. 8, 2005, 119 Stat. 851.)
[Civil No. 303.

Filed January 30, 1892.]

[29 Pac. 652.]

#### GEORGE H. BOGAN et al., Plaintiffs and Appellants, v. SALVATOR PIGNATARO, Defendant and Appellee.

1. Appeal and Error—What Appealable—Final Judgments—Order Dissolving Temporary Injunction—History Co. *v.*Dougherty, post, p. 387, 29 Pac. 649, Cited and Approved.—This court has jurisdiction on appeals from final judgments, citing *History Co.*v. Dougherty, *supra.*This court has no jurisdiction of an appeal from an order dissolving a temporary injunction; it not being a final judgment.

APPEAL from a judgment of the District Court of the First Judicial District in and for the County of Pima. R. E. Sloan, Judge.

Dismissed.

The facts are stated in the opinion.

Barnes & Martin, for Appellants.

F. J. Heney, for Appellee.

PER CURIAM.

This is an appeal from an order of the court below, dissolving 'a temporary restraining order. In the case of *History Co.*v. *Dougherty, post,*p. 387, 29 Pac. 649, (decided at this term,) we held that this court has appellate jurisdiction in appeals from final judgments. The order here appealed from is not a final judgment; hence this court has no jurisdiction, and the appeal is dismissed.

Sloan, J., not sitting.
[Federal Register Volume 69, Number 233 (Monday, December 6, 2004)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 70378-70379]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 04-26742]


=======================================================================
-----------------------------------------------------------------------

FEDERAL COMMUNICATIONS COMMISSION

47 CFR Parts 1, 27, 74, 90, and 101

[DA 04-2591; WT Docket No. 01-319; FCC 04-23]


Practice and Procedure, Miscellaneous Wireless Communications 
Services, Experimental Radio, Auxiliary, Special Broadcast and Other 
Program Distributional Services, Private Land Mobile Radio Services, 
Fixed Microwave Services

AGENCY: Federal Communications Commission.

ACTION: Final rule; correction.

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

SUMMARY: The Federal Communications Commission published in the Federal 
Register of April 6, 2004, (69 FR 17946), a document in the Quiet Zones 
proceeding, WT Docket No. 01-319, which incorrectly indicated in its 
DATES section that 47 CFR 1.924(a)(2) and 1.924(d)(2) contained 
information collection modifications that have not been approved by the 
Office of Management Budget (OMB). This document corrects the DATES 
section of the April 6, 2004 document as set forth below.

DATES: Effective June 7, 2004.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Linda C. Chang, Federal Communications 
Commission, Wireless Telecommunications Bureau, 445 12th St., 
Washington, DC 20554, (202) 418-0620.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

Background

    The FCC published a document in the Federal Register of April 6, 
2004, (69 FR 17946) regarding the adoption of changes to rules relating 
to areas known as ``Quiet Zones.'' In FR Doc. 04-7799, the document 
provided that the effective date of the document was June 7, 2004, 
except for 47 CFR 1.924(a)(2) and 1.924(d)(2) which were incorrectly 
identified as containing a new or modified information collection that 
required approval by OMB prior to becoming effective. Because 47 CFR 
1.924(a)(2) and 1.924(d)(2) are not in fact subject to approval by OMB, 
the effective date of the April 6, 2004 document became effective, in 
its entirety, on June 7, 2004. This document corrects the document 
published in the Federal Register of April 6, 2004 (69 FR 17946) and 
September 23, 2004 (69 FR 56956) in the Quiet Zones proceeding, WT 
Docket No. 01-319 by correcting the DATES section.


[[Page 70379]]


Federal Communications Commission.

Linda C. Chang,
Associate Division Chief, Mobility Division.
[FR Doc. 04-26742 Filed 12-3-04; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6712-01-P
Mary



# Fourth Court of Appeals

**San An tonio, Texas** 

July 23, 2015

N o. 04

- 15

- 00349

- CV

Steven Mitchell GARY

, Appellant

v.

Mary ROMAN : Gerald C. Moton, Esq.; Irene Hall, Grand Jury Foreman; and unidentified Prosecutors of the 175th District Court, Appellee

From the 150th Judicial Distric t Court, Bexar County, Texas
Trial Court No. 2015

- CI

- 01986 Honorable Laura Salinas, Judge Presiding



### ORDER

Steven Mitchell Gary filed th e underlying action on February 5, 2015. The clerk’s record
and docket sheet do not reflect that citation has issued or been served on any of the defendants

. See T EX

. R. C IV

. P. 99 et seq. Nevertheless, Gary filed a motion for default judgment and, on July 13, 2015, he filed a notice of appeal, complaining about the denial of his motion

.

After reviewing the clerk’s record, it appears that no final judgment has been rendered by
the trial cou rt . An order 1 denying a motion for default judgment is interlocutory. This court does
not have jurisdiction to consider an appeal from an interlocutory order unless it is expressly authorized by statute. Stary v. DeBord , 967 S.W.2d 352, 352 (T e x. 1998); Ja ck B. Anglin Co., Inc. v. Tipps , 842 S.W.2d 266, 272 (Tex. 1992). No statute or rule authorizes an appeal from an order denying a default judgment.

Accordingly, we order a response due by August 3, 2015 , showing cause why this appeal should not be dis missed for want of jurisdiction. If appellant fails to satisfactorily respond within the time provided, the appeal will be dismissed. See T EX

. R. A PP

. P. 42.3(c). All deadlines in this matter are suspended until further order of the court.

_________________________________ L uz Elena D. Chapa, Justice

1 The clerk’s record contains several letters to Gary from the Chief Staff Attorney of the Bexar County Civil District
Courts that state Gary’s motion for default judgment was denied by the Presiding District Judge. However, the record does not contain a signed order.IN WITNESS WHEREOF, I have hereunto set my hand and affixed the seal of the said
court on this 23rd day of July, 2015

.

___________________________________ Keith E. Hottle
Clerk of Court
February 27, 2015 

The Honorable Fred Upton 

Chairman, Committee on Energy 

 and Commerce 

United States House of Representatives 

Washington, DC 20515 

Dear Mr. Chairman: 

On behalf of the Commission, I am transmitting the January 2015 monthly status report 

on the U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC) activities and use of unobligated carryover 

funds appropriated from the Nuclear Waste Fund. This report describes NRC activities in 

January 2015 to address the remand by the U.S. Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia 

Circuit in In re Aiken County, regarding the licensing process for the U.S. Department of 

Energy’s Yucca Mountain license application. 

 Please feel free to contact me or Eugene Dacus, Director of the Office of Congressional 

Affairs, at 301-415-1776 if you have questions or need more information. 

 Sincerely, 

/RA/ 

 Stephen G. Burns 

Enclosure: 

As stated 

cc: Representative Frank Pallone 
Identical letter sent to: 

The Honorable Fred Upton 

Chairman, Committee on Energy 

 and Commerce 

United States House of Representatives 

Washington, DC 20515 

cc: Representative Frank Pallone 

The Honorable John Shimkus 

Chairman, Subcommittee on Environment 

 and the Economy 

Committee on Energy and Commerce 

United States House of Representatives 

Washington, DC 20515 

cc: Representative Paul Tonko 

The Honorable James Inhofe 

Chairman, Committee on Environment 

 and Public Works 

United States Senate 

Washington, DC 20510 

cc: Senator Barbara Boxer 

The Honorable Shelley Moore Capito 

Chairman, Subcommittee on Clean Air 

 and Nuclear Safety 

Committee on Environment 

 and Public Works 

United States Senate 

Washington, DC 20510 

cc: Senator Thomas R. Carper 

The Honorable Ed Whitfield 

Chairman, Subcommittee on Energy 

 and Power 

Committee on Energy and Commerce 

United States House of Representatives 

Washington, DC 20515 

cc: Representative Bobby L. Rush 

The Honorable Harold Rogers 

Chairman, Committee on Appropriations 

United States House of Representatives 

Washington, DC 20515 

cc: Representative Nita Lowey 

The Honorable Mike Simpson 

Chairman, Subcommittee on Energy 

 and Water Development 

Committee on Appropriations 

United States House of Representatives 

Washington, DC 20515 

cc: Representative Marcy Kaptur 

The Honorable Lamar Alexander 

Chairman, Subcommittee on Energy 

 and Water Development 

Committee on Appropriations 

United States Senate 

Washington, DC 20510 

cc: Senator Dianne Feinstein
### §14081. Transferred

#### **Editorial Notes**

#### Codification

Section 14081 was editorially reclassified as section 12541 of Title 34, Crime Control and Law Enforcement.
I 

112TH CONGRESS 

2D SESSION H. R. 3814 

To prohibit the Department of Justice from tracking and cataloguing the 

purchases of multiple rifles and shotguns. 

IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES 

JANUARY 24, 2012 

Mr. AMASH (for himself, Mr. BURTON of Indiana, Mr. AKIN, Mr. PAUL, Mr. 

AUSTRIA, Mr. COLE, Mr. DUNCAN of Tennessee, Mr. BENISHEK, Mr. 

FRANKS of Arizona, Mr. DUNCAN of South Carolina, Mr. CHAFFETZ, Mr. 

QUAYLE, and Mr. GOHMERT) introduced the following bill; which was referred to the Committee on the Judiciary 

A BILL 

To prohibit the Department of Justice from tracking and 

cataloguing the purchases of multiple rifles and shotguns. 

1 Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representa2 tives of the United States of America in Congress assembled, 

3 SECTION 1. PROHIBITION OF TRACKING OR CATALOGUING 

4 FIREARMS PURCHASES. 

5 For fiscal year 2012 and each fiscal year thereafter, 

6 no Federal funds may be used to require a person licensed 

7 under section 923 of title 18, United States Code, to reVerDate Mar 15 2010 03:39 Jan 25, 2012 Jkt 099200 PO 00000 Frm 00001 Fmt 6652 Sfmt 6201 E:\BILLS\H3814.IH H3814

pwalker on DSK7TPTVN1PROD with BILLS
2 

•HR 3814 IH

1 port information to the Department of Justice regarding 

2 the sale of multiple rifles or shotguns to the same person. 

Æ 


pwalker on DSK7TPTVN1PROD with BILLS