alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<ARTICLE> 5
<LEGEND>
THIS SCHEDULE CONTAINS SUMMARY FINANCIAL INFORMATION EXTRACTED FROM THE
SEPTEMBER 30, 1996 CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL STATEMENTS FOR THE NINE-MONTH PERIOD
ENDED SEPTEMBER 30, 1996 AND IS QUALIFIED IN ITS ENTIRETY BY REFERENCE TO SUCH
FINANCIAL STATEMENTS AND THE FOOTNOTES THERETO.
</LEGEND>
       
<S>                             <C>                     <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   3-MOS                   9-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          DEC-31-1996             DEC-31-1996
<PERIOD-END>                               SEP-30-1996             SEP-30-1996
<CASH>                                               0                       0
<SECURITIES>                                         0                       0
<RECEIVABLES>                                        0                       0
<ALLOWANCES>                                         0                       0
<INVENTORY>                                     451687                  451687
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                               2149184                 2149184
<PP&E>                                         2744993                 2744993
<DEPRECIATION>                                       0                       0
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                 4931502                 4931502
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                         11632602                11632602
<BONDS>                                              0                       0
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0                       0
<PREFERRED>                                          0                       0
<COMMON>                                       1581267                 1581267
<OTHER-SE>                                   (7837634)               (7837634)
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                   4931502                 4931502
<SALES>                                         155919                 3921542
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                                168224                 3933847
<CGS>                                           423561                 5671901
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                   209291                 1107691
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                     0                       0
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                     0                       0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                              179052                  512558
<INCOME-PRETAX>                               (643680)               (3358303)
<INCOME-TAX>                                         0                       0
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                                  0                       0
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0                       0
<CHANGES>                                            0                       0
<NET-INCOME>                                  (643680)               (3358303)
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                        0                       0
<EPS-DILUTED>                                        0                       0
        

</TABLE>
###### Editorial Note on Part 133

#### Editorial Note:

Nomenclature changes to part 133 appear at 68 FR 66582, Nov. 26, 2003.

#### § 133.655 Individual.

*Individual* means a natural person.
TELEPHONE CONTACT SUMMARY

Brick and Structural Clay P roducts

FROM : Richard Marinshaw

RTI International

DATE OF CONTACT: July 10 , 200 9

ORGANIZATION CONTACTED:

The Belden Brick Company (Belden)

225 East Main Street

Sugarcreek, OH 44681

PERSON CO NTACTED:

Brad Belden

, Corporate Manager

- Occupational & Regulatory Services

330

- 852

- 2424

PURPOSE OF CONTACT:

To obtain additional in formation on the operation of kilns P801, 802 and 803

.

SUMMARY OF CONTACT:

Mr. Belden was contacted for information rega rding kilns P801, P802, and P803.

These kilns are classified as small kilns (production capacity less than 10 tons/hr) and are

ducted to a common control system that consists of a spray dryer followed by an

electrostatic precipitator (ESP). The kiln s w er e tested in August 2003 for hydrogen

fluoride (HF), hydrochloric acid (HCl), particulate matter (PM), and other pollutants.

However, the results of the test were rejected by the Ohio Environmental Protection

Agency (Ohio EPA) due to improper filter temper atures in the sampling train. Since

then, the kiln s ha ve been tested for sulfur dioxide (SO 2 ), but not for HF, HCl, or PM. Mr.

Belden stated that the Ohio EPA does not require Belden to test for those pollutants, and

they have no plans to do so

.

When asked about the operational status of the kilns, he stated that two of the

three kilns are now in operation. Regarding the costs for the 2003 emission tests, Mr.

Belden indicated that he did not have that information.
§ 39.34 System safeguards for systemically important derivatives clearing organizations and subpart C derivatives clearing organizations. ( a ) Notwithstanding § 39.18(c)(2), the business continuity and disaster recovery plan described in § 39.18(c)(1) for each systemically important derivatives clearing organization and subpart C derivatives clearing organization shall have the objective of enabling, and the physical, technological, and personnel resources described in § 39.18(c)(1) shall be sufficient to enable, the systemically important derivatives clearing organization or subpart C derivatives clearing organization to recover its operations and resume daily processing, clearing, and settlement no later than two hours following the disruption, for any disruption including a wide-scale disruption.
( b ) To facilitate its ability to achieve the recovery time objective specified in paragraph (a) of this section in the event of a wide-scale disruption, each systemically important derivatives clearing organization and subpart C derivatives clearing organization must maintain a degree of geographic dispersal of physical, technological and personnel resources consistent with the following for each activity necessary for the daily processing, clearing, and settlement of existing and new contracts: ( 1 ) Physical and technological resources (including a secondary site), sufficient to enable the entity to meet the recovery time objective after interruption of normal clearing by a wide-scale disruption, must be located outside the relevant area of the physical and technological resources the systemically important derivatives clearing organization or subpart C derivatives clearing organization normally relies upon to conduct that activity, and must not rely on the same critical transportation, telecommunications, power, water, or other critical infrastructure components the entity normally relies upon for such activities;
( 2 ) Personnel, who live and work outside that relevant area, sufficient to enable the entity to meet the recovery time objective after interruption of normal clearing by a wide-scale disruption affecting the relevant area in which the personnel the entity normally relies upon to engage in such activities are located;
( 3 ) The provisions of § 39.18(d) shall apply to these resource requirements.
( c ) Each systemically important derivatives clearing organization and subpart C derivatives clearing organization must conduct regular, periodic tests of its business continuity and disaster recovery plans and resources and its capacity to achieve the required recovery time objective in the event of a wide-scale disruption. The provisions of § 39.18(e) shall apply to such testing.
( d ) The Commission may, upon request, grant an entity, which has been designated as a systemically important derivatives clearing organization or that has elected to become subject to subpart C, up to one year to comply with any provision of this section.
[78 FR 72514, Dec. 2, 2013, as amended at 81 FR 64339, Sept. 19, 2016]
###### Editorial Note on Part 240

#### Editorial Note:

Nomenclature changes to part 240 appear at 57 FR 36501, Aug. 13, 1992, and 57 FR 47409, Oct. 16, 1992.

#### § 240.12a-8 Exemption of depositary shares.

Depositary shares (as that term is defined in § 240.12b-2) registered on Form F-6 (§ 239.36 of this chapter), but not the underlying deposited securities, shall be exempt from the operation of section 12(a) of the Act (15 U.S.C. 78*l*(a)).

[62 FR 39766, July 24, 1997]
UNPUBLISHED

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

No. 19-1111

In re: RODNEY A. KOON,

Petitioner.

On Petition for Writ of Mandamus. (5:16-ct-03301-FL)

Submitted: May 23, 2019 Decided: May 28, 2019

Before KING and RICHARDSON, Circuit Judges, and SHEDD, Senior Circuit Judge.

Petition denied by unpublished per curiam opinion.

Rodney A. Koon, Petitioner Pro Se. 

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.
2

PER CURIAM:

Rodney A. Koon petitions for a writ of mandamus seeking an order compelling the 

defendants in a pending civil action to pay him an award of compensatory damages and 

attorney’s fees. We conclude that Koon is not entitled to mandamus relief.

Mandamus relief is a drastic remedy and should be used only in extraordinary 

circumstances. Kerr v. U.S. Dist. Court, 426 U.S. 394, 402 (1976); United States v. 

Moussaoui, 333 F.3d 509, 516-17 (4th Cir. 2003). Further, mandamus relief is available 

only when the petitioner has a clear right to the relief sought. In re Murphy-Brown, LLC, 

907 F.3d 788, 795 (4th Cir. 2018).

The relief sought by Koon is not available by way of mandamus, and the record 

does not reveal undue delay in the district court. Accordingly, we deny the petition for 

writ of mandamus. We dispense with oral argument because the facts and legal 

contentions are adequately presented in the materials before this court and argument 

would not aid the decisional process.

PETITION DENIED
1. I have reviewed this report
          on Form 10-K and all reports on Form 10-D required to be filed in respect of the period covered by this report on Form 10-K of BMW Vehicle Owner Trust 2019-A (the “Exchange Act periodic reports”);
  2. Based on my knowledge, the
          Exchange Act periodic reports, taken as a whole, do 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 report;
  3. Based on my knowledge, all of
          the distribution, servicing and other information required to be provided under Form 10-D for the period covered by this report is included in the Exchange Act periodic reports;
  4. I am responsible for
          reviewing the activities performed by the servicer and based on my knowledge and the compliance review conducted in preparing the servicer compliance statement required in this report under Item 1123 of Regulation AB, and except as disclosed in
          the Exchange Act periodic reports, the servicer has fulfilled its obligations under the servicing agreement in all material respects; and
 5. All of the reports on
          assessment of compliance with servicing criteria for asset-backed securities and their related attestation reports on assessment of compliance with servicing criteria for asset-backed securities required to be included in this report in
          accordance with Item 1122 of Regulation AB and Exchange Act Rules 13a-18 and 15d-18 have been included as an exhibit to this report, except as otherwise disclosed in this report.  Any material instances of noncompliance described in such reports
          have been disclosed in this report on Form 10-K.
    
 BMW FINANCIAL SERVICES NA, LLCBy:
          /s/ Stefan KramerName:
          Stefan KramerTitle:
          Vice President – Finance & CFO
Exhibit
31.2





CERTIFICATION





Pursuant
to Section 302 of the Sarbanes Oxley Act of 2002





I, Carol
Russell, certify that:





1.  I
have reviewed this quarterly report on Form 10-Q of Capital Beverage
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.  I
am 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 I have:





a)
designed such internal controls to ensure that material information relating to
the registrant and its subsidiaries (collectively, the "Company") is made known
to me by others within the Company, particularly during the period in which this
quarterly report is being prepared;





b)
evaluated the effectiveness of the registrant's internal controls as of a date
within 90 days prior to the filing date of this quarterly report (the
"Evaluation Date"); and





c)
presented in this quarterly report my conclusions about the effectiveness of the
disclosure controls and procedures based on my evaluation as of the Evaluation
Date;





5.  I
have disclosed, based on our most recent evaluation, to the registrant's
auditors and the audit committee of the registrant's board of
directors:





a) all
significant deficiencies (if any) in the design or operation of internal
controls which could adversely affect the registrant's ability to record,
process, summarize and report financial data and have identified for the
registrant's auditors any material weaknesses in internal controls;
and





b) any
fraud, whether or not material, that involves management or other employees who
have a significant role in the registrant's internal controls; and





6.  I
have indicated in this quarterly report whether or not there were significant
changes in internal controls or in other factors that could significantly affect
internal controls subsequent to the date of our most recent evaluation,
including any corrective actions with regard to significant deficiencies and
material weaknesses.








Date: August
      19, 2009
            /s/ Carol
      Russell




Carol
Russell


Treasurer
#### Darnell R. SMITH, Plaintiff—Appellant, v. Dr. Allan PINCHBACK, et al., Defendants, Dr. Allan Pinchback, Defendant—Appellee.

No. 05-41289

Summary Calendar.

United States Court of Appeals, Fifth Circuit.

June 13, 2007.

*133Darnell R. Smith, Beeville, TX, pro se.

Gerard Raphael Rawls, Beaumont, TX, for Defendant-Appellee.

Before JOLLY, DENNIS, and CLEMENT, Circuit Judges.

PER CURIAM: *

Darnell R. Smith, Texas prisoner #666016, filed the instant 42 U.S.C. § 1983 suit to seek redress for the defendants’ alleged deliberate indifference to his serious medical needs. Smith appeals the trial court’s dismissal of his suit. Smith contends that the court erred by dismissing defendant Kennedy from the suit because she denied his grievance and because she should have known of the dental defendants’ refusal to treat him but did nothing to help him. Neither of these assertions establishes a viable claim against this defendant. *See Geiger v. Jowers,*404 F.3d 371, 374 (5th Cir.2005); *Stewart v. Murphy,*174 F.3d 530, 536 (5th Cir.1999). Smith has thus failed to show that the district court acted erroneously by dismissing this claim.

Smith further argues that the trial court erred by dismissing his claims against the remaining defendants. He maintains that he did not receive proper dental care and that he endured severe pain because the defendants did not promptly treat his serious dental problems. The record evidence supports the court’s conclusions that Smith received extensive dental care and that the defendants did not exhibit deliberate indifference to his serious medical needs. *See Farmer v. Brennan,*511 U.S. 825, 837, 114 S.Ct. 1970, 128 L.Ed.2d 811 (1994). The judgment of the trial court is AFFIRMED.

*

 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.
#### Louis Fichera et al., Appellants, v 25-26 East Owners Corp. et al., Respondents.

[717 NYS2d 63]

—Order, Supreme Court, New York County (Paula Omansky, J.), entered July 28, 1999, which, in an action to recover for losses sustained in a burglary allegedly caused by inadequate building security, granted defendants’ motion for summary judgment dismissing the complaint, unanimously affirmed, without costs.

Absent evidence of any criminal history in plaintiffs’ storefront owned and leased by defendants, or in adjoining storefronts, or even in the immediate neighborhood, defendants’ duty to provide minimal security against crime was discharged, as a matter of law, through the provision of locked doors to the line of storefronts *(see, Anzalone v Pan-Am Equities,*271 AD2d 307, 309; *cf., Todorovich v Columbia Univ.,*245 AD2d 45, *lv denied*92 NY2d 805). We would also note our concurrence with the motion court’s rationale that, assuming a causal relationship between the burglary and the failure of the proprietor of a nearby storefront to lock the pull-down gate in front of his store on the day of the burglary, and assuming further that defendants had notice that the proprietor would be permanently vacating his store on the day of the burglary, it remains that defendants had no reason to believe that the proprietor would vacate his store without locking the gate, or other rea*158son for perceiving an enhanced risk of crime requiring their immediate inspection of the storefront in question for security vulnerabilities. Concur — Rosenberger, J. P., Nardelli, Ellerin, Lerner and Andrias, JJ.
### D ISTRICT 

### C OURT 

### O F 

### A PPEAL 

### O F 

### T HE 

### S TATE 

### O F 

### F LORIDA

F OURTH D ISTRICT

C.P., A Child

,

Appellant,

v.

STATE OF FLORIDA

, Appellee

.

No. 4D 16

- 1325

[ October 5, 2017 ]

Appeal from the Circuit Court for the Seventeenth Judicial Circuit,

Broward County ; Carlos S. Rebollo , Judge; L.T. Case No. 15004520 DLA

.

Carey Haughwout, Public Defender, and Virginia Murphy, Assistant

Public Defender, West Palm Beach, for appellant.

Pamela Jo Bondi, Attorney General, Tallahassee, and Kimberly T.

Acu ñ a, Assistant Attorney Genera l, West Palm Beach, for appellee.

P ER C URIAM

.

Affirmed.

T

AYLOR

, M AY and K UNTZ

, JJ., concur.

* * *

Not final until disposition of timely filed motion for rehearing.
#### § 1411.12 Annual report.

On or before March 1 of each calendar year, the Executive Director of the Authority shall submit a report of the activities of the Board, the General Counsel and the Panel with regard to public information requests during the preceding calendar year to the Speaker of the House of Representatives and the President of the Senate for referral to the appropriate committees of the Congress. The report shall include for such calendar year all information required by 5 U.S.C. 552(d) and such other information as indicates the efforts of the Board, the General Counsel and the Panel to administer fully the provisions of the Freedom of Information Act, as amended.
DIRECTV HOLDINGS LLC

Exhibit 32.2

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

In connection with the Quarterly Report of DIRECTV Holdings LLC (the "Corporation") on Form 10-Q for the
period ended March 31, 2009 as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the "Report"), I, Patrick T. Doyle, Executive Vice President and Chief Financial Officer of
the Corporation, certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. § 1350, as adopted pursuant to § 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that to the best of my
knowledge:



|                                                                                                      |  | 
|----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- |  | 
|/s/ PATRICK T. DOYLE Patrick T. Doyle Executive Vice President and Chief Financial OfficerMay 7, 2009 |  | 

---



QuickLinks
§ 1101.4 Reports on new systems of records; computer matching programs. ( a ) Before establishing any new systems of records, or making any significant change in a system of records, the Section shall provide adequate advance notice to: ( 1 ) The Committee on Government Operations of the House of Representatives;
( 2 ) The Committee on Governmental Affairs of the Senate; and
( 3 ) The Office of Management and Budget.
( b ) Before participating in any computerized information “matching program,” as that term is defined by 5 U.S.C. 552a(a)(8) the Section will comply with the provisions of 5 U.S.C. 552a(o), and will provide adequate advance notice as described in § 1101.4(a) above.
#### § 9.10 [Reserved]
### §242q. Task Force on Aging Research; establishment and duties

#### (a) Establishment

The Secretary of Health and Human Services shall establish a Task Force on Aging Research.

#### (b) Duties

With respect to aging research (as defined in section 242q–4 1 of this title), the Task Force each fiscal year shall—

(1) make recommendations to the Secretary specifying the particular projects of research, or the particular categories of research, that should be conducted or supported by the Secretary;

(2) of the projects specified under paragraph (1), make recommendations to the Secretary of the projects that should be given priority in the provision of funds; and

(3) make recommendations to the Secretary of the amount of funds that should be appropriated for such research.

#### (c) Provision of information to public

The Task Force may make available to health professionals, and to other members of the public, information regarding the research described in subsection (b).

(Pub. L. 101–557, title III, §301, Nov. 15, 1990, 104 Stat. 2768.)

#### **Editorial Notes**

#### References in Text

Section 242q–4 of this title, referred to in subsec. (b), was in the original "section 305", meaning section 305 of Pub. L. 101–557. Section 305 was renumbered section 304 by Pub. L. 109–482, title I, §104(b)(3)(B), Jan. 15, 2007, 120 Stat. 3694.

#### Codification

Section was enacted as part of the Home Health Care and Alzheimer's Disease Amendments of 1990, and not as part of the Public Health Service Act which comprises this chapter.

1 See References in Text note below.
_______________________________________ __ 

### Michigan Supreme Court 

# Order

Lansing, Michigan



## December 18, 2008 Clifford W. Taylor, Chief Justice



## 136911 Michael F. Cavanag h Elizabeth A. Weave r Marilyn Kell y Maura D. Corriga n Robert P. Young, Jr. 

## PEOPLE OF THE STATE OF MICHIGAN, Stephen J. Markman, 

## Plaintiff-Appellee, J ustices



## v SC: 136911 COA: 284321 Oakland CC: 2007-217831-FH GREGORY PATRICK ROWLAND, Defendant-Appellant.

________________ _________________________/

On order of the Court, the application for leave to appe al the May 27, 2008 order of the Court of Appeals is considered, and it is DENIED, because we are not persuaded that the question presented should be reviewed by this Court.

l1218 I, Corbin R. Davis, Clerk of the Mi chigan Supreme Cour t, certify that the foregoing is a true and complete copy of the order entered at the direction of the Court.

December 18, 2008

Clerk