alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
<PAGE>

EXHIBIT 10.36

                    REVISED RENT COMMENCEMENT DATE AGREEMENT

      THIS RENT COMMENCEMENT DATE AGREEMENT ("Agreement") dated the 16th day of
March, 2005, is between OTR, an Ohio general partnership ("Landlord"), acting as
the duly authorized nominee of the BOARD OF THE STATE TEACHERS RETIREMENT SYSTEM
OF OHIO ("STRBO") and STEEL CLOUD, INC., A VIRGINIA CORPORATION ("TENANT").

                                   WITNESSETH:

      A     Landlord and Tenant executed a certain lease dated November 5, 2004
            (the "Lease"), for the Premises known as 13960-13964 Park Center
            Road, Renaissance Park at Dulles (Building 8, Bays 3-5), Herndon,
            Virginia 20171.

      B     The Lease provides that the Rent will commence on the date that
            Landlord delivers possession of the Premises (as defined in the
            Lease) to Tenant.

      C     Landlord and Tenant now desire to set forth in writing the actual
            date of delivery of the Premises and the actual Rent Commencement
            Dale of the Lease.

      NOW THEREFORE in consideration of the mutual covenants and promises
contained herein and other valuable consideration, the parties agree that the
Rent shall commence on April 1, 2005 and shall terminate on August 31, 2009.

      This Agreement is executed by certain employees of The State Teachers
Retirement System of Ohio, not individually, but solely on behalf of Landlord,
the authorized nominee and agent for the Board of the State Teachers Retirement
System of Ohio ("STRBO"). In consideration for entering into this Agreement,
Tenant hereby waives any rights to bring a cause of action against the
individuals executing this Agreement on behalf of Landlord (except for any cause
of action based upon lack of authority or fraud), and all persons dealing with
Landlord must look solely to Landlord's assets for the enforcement of any claim
against Landlord, and the obligations hereunder are not binding upon, nor shall
resort be had to the private property of any of the trustees, officers,
directors, employees or agents of STRBO.

      IN WITNESS WHEREOF, each of the parties has caused this Agreement to be
executed on the day and year first above written.

                               LANDLORD: OTR, AN OHIO GENERAL PARTNERSHIP,
                               ACTING AS THE DULY AUTHORIZED NOMINEE OF THE
                               BOARD OF THE STATE TEACHERS RETIREMENT SYSTEM OF
                               OHIO ("STRBO")

                               By: /s/ Andrew J Paul
                                   ---------------------------------------------
                               Name: ANDREW J PAUL
                               Title: MANAGER

                               TENANT: STEEL CLOUD, INC., A VIRGINIA CORPORATION

                               By: /s/ Kevin Murphy
                                   ---------------------------------------------
                               Name: KEVIN MURPHY
                               Title: CFO
[Federal Register Volume 69, Number 239 (Tuesday, December 14, 2004)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Page 74413]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 04-27356]


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

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

Federal Aviation Administration

14 CFR Part 91

[Docket No. FAA-2001-10047; Amdt. No. 91-274]
RIN 2120-AH06


Regulation of Fractional Aircraft Ownership Programs and On-
Demand Operations; Correction

AGENCY: Federal Aviation Administration (FAA), DOT.

ACTION: Final rule; correction.

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

SUMMARY: This document makes a correction to the final rule published 
in the Federal Register on September 17, 2003 (68 FR 54520), which 
issued regulations governing operations of aircraft in fractional 
ownership programs. This correction is necessary to correct an error in 
the final rule.

DATES: Effective Date: Effective on December 14, 2004.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Katherine Hakala Perfetti, Flight 
Standards Service (AFS-200), Federal Aviation Administration, 800 
Independence Avenue, SW., Washington, DC 20591, telephone (202) 267-
3760, e-mail: <a href="/cdn-cgi/l/email-protection#5f343e2b373a2d36313a712f3a2d393a2b2b361f393e3e71383029"><span class="__cf_email__" data-cfemail="177c76637f72657e797239677265717263637e5771767639707861">[email protected]</span></a>.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

Background

    The final rule was published on September 17, 2003 and had an 
effective date of November 17, 2003. One section of the rule cites a 
compliance date that is 15 months after the publication date of the 
rule. The date was intended to be 15 months after the effective date. 
This document corrects that date.

List of Subjects in 14 CFR Part 91

    Aircraft, Airworthiness directives and standards, Aviation safety, 
Safety.

The Correcting Amendment

0
Accordingly, 14 CFR part 91 is corrected by making the following 
amendment:

PART 91--GENERAL OPERATION AND FLIGHT RULES

Subpart K--Fractional Ownership Operations

0
1. The authority citation for part 91 continues to read as follows:

    Authority: 49 U.S.C. 106(g), 1155, 40103, 40113, 40120, 44101, 
44111, 44701, 44709, 44711, 44712, 44715, 44716, 44717, 44722, 
46306, 46315, 46316, 46504, 46506-46507, 47122, 47508, 47528-47531, 
articles 12 and 29 of the Convention on International Civil Aviation 
(61 stat. 1180).


Sec.  91.1002  [corrected]

0
2. Amend Sec.  91.1002 by removing ``October 17, 2003'' and adding, in 
its place ``November 17, 2003'' and removing ``December 17, 2004'' and 
adding, in its place ``February 17, 2005''.

    Issued in Washington, DC on December 7, 2004.
Brenda D. Courtney,
Acting Director, Office of Rulemaking.
[FR Doc. 04-27356 Filed 12-13-04; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4910-13-P


</pre><script data-cfasync="false" src="/cdn-cgi/scripts/5c5dd728/cloudflare-static/email-decode.min.js"></script></body>
</html>
#### The People of the State of New York, Respondent, v. Robert Spry, Appellant.

Motion granted to prosecute appeal on original papers, five *977typewritten briefs, and Clark J. Zimmerman Esq., of Batavia, assigned as counsel to conduct appeal and time for argument of appeal enlarged to include November 1960 Term.
§ 120.65 Foreign ownership and foreign control. ( a ) *Foreign ownership* means more than 50 percent of the outstanding voting securities of the firm are owned by one or more foreign persons.
( b ) *Foreign control* means one or more foreign persons have the authority or ability to establish or direct the general policies or day-to-day operations of the firm. Foreign control is presumed to exist where foreign persons own 25 percent or more of the outstanding voting securities unless one U.S. person controls an equal or larger percentage.
UNITED STATES
SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION
Washington, D.C. 20549



FORM 10-K/A
Amendment No. 1

ANNUAL REPORT PURSUANT TO SECTION 13 OR 15(d) OF THE SECURITIES EXCHANGE
ACT OF 1934

For the fiscal year ended December 31, 2001

Commission file number 333-42127-05

ABN AMRO Mortgage Corporation (as depositor under the Pooling and Servicing Agreement,
Dated as of April 1, 2000 providing for, inter alia, the issuance of ABN AMRO Mortgage
Corporation Mortgage Pass-Through Certificates Series 2000-2)
(Exact name of registrant as specified in its charter)

Delaware
(State or other jurisdiction of  incorporation or organization)

363886007
(I.R.S. Employer  Identification No.)

181 West Madison Street, Chicago, Illinois  60602
(Address of principal executive offices)

60602
(Zip Code)

Registrant's telephone number, including area code:  (248)  643-2530

Securities registered pursuant to Section 12(b) of the Act: None

Indicate by check mark whether the registrant (1) has filed all reports required
to be filed by Section 13 or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 during
the preceding 12 months (or for such shorter period that the registrant was
required to file such reports), and (2) has been subject to such filing
requirements for the past 90 days.
           Yes [X]       No  [ ]

This Amendement No. 1 on Form 10-K/A amends Item 14 of the original
Form 10-K which was filed on March 26, 2002



Item 14.	Exhibits, Financial Statement Schedules, and Reports on Form 8-K.

	(a)	Exhibits

		(99.1)	Annual Independent Accountant's Servicing Report

		(99.2)	Annual Statement of Compliance

	(b) 	Reports on Form 8-K were filed during the last quarter of 2001 in order to provide
statements for the monthly distributions to investors on September 27, 2001,
October 25, 2001, November 27, 2001, and December 26, 2001.

Exhibits 99.1 and 99.2 are not filed herewith since documents were not received at least
three business days prior to the due date of this report.  The documents will be included in the
Form 10-K/A to be filed within 30 days of the receipt of such documents.



				SIGNATURES

Pursuant to the requirements of Section 13 or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange
Act of 1934, the registrant has duly caused this report to be signed on its
behalf by the undersigned, thereunto duly authorized.

LaSalle Bank National Association, in its
capacity as Agent for the Trustee under the Pooling and
Servicing Agreement on behalf of  ABN AMRO Mortgage
Corporation, Registrant


By:	/s/  	Cynthia Reis
	---------------------------
		Cynthia Reis
		First Vice President

Date:	May 21, 2002
J,,ISO STq~.FS 

yu 

\\~// Q 

r 0 

PROI 

UNITED STATES ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY 

WASHINGTON, D.C. 20460 

JAN - 5 2011~ 

OFFICE OF 

AIR AND RADIATION 

Mr. Matthew Todd 

American Petroleum Institute 

1220 L Street, NW 

Washington, D.C . 20005-4070 

Dear Mr. Todd: 

The U.S . Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) has received the Petition for 

Reconsideration of the final National Emission Standards for Hazardous Air Pollutants for 

Stationary Reciprocating Internal Combustion Engines (RICE) you submitted on 

October 19, 2010 . This letter is to inform you that we intend to initiate a reconsideration process 

to address the first, second, and third issues raised in that petition. We are not taking action at 

this time on the fourth issue raised in your petition. 

We received a total of six petitions for reconsideration of the August 20, 2010 final NESHAP 

for stationary RICE. We are granting reconsideration on the following issues raised in the 

petitions : 

" continuous parametric monitoring system requirements; 

" emission standard for existing four-stroke lean burn spark ignition engines; 

" methodology for considering emissions variability and establishing the floor for the 

maximum achievable control technology; 

" use of co-benefits of non-hazardous air pollutant (HAP) emissions reductions when 

determining maximum achievable control technologies and generally available control 

technologies ; 

" use of total hydrocarbons rather than formaldehyde as a surrogate for HAP emissions; 

and 

" allowance for emergency engines to operate up to 15 hours per year as part of an 

emergency demand response program. 

At this time, we are not taking action of the following issues raised in the petitions: 

" provisions prohibiting use of emergency engines for peak shaving operation; 

" EPA's decision not to distinguish between engines located in urban and rural areas in 

establishing emission standards ; and 

" EPA's decision not to have separate standards that would apply during periods of 

shutdown and malfunction. 

Internet Address (URL) " http ://www .epa .gov 

Recycled/Recyclable 9 Printed with Vegetable Oil Based Inks on 100% Postconsumer, Process Chlorine Free Recycled Paper 
The reconsideration process will allow for public participation on the issues raised under 

reconsideration. A more detailed description of the particular issues to be reconsidered and 

specific information about the process to be followed will be set out in a forthcoming Federal 

Register notice . If you have any questions regarding the reconsideration process, please contact 

Melanie King of my staff at (919) 541-2469. We thank you for your continuing interest in this 

rule and look forward to hearing from you during the reconsideration process .
§ 1104.3 Prohibited acts. ( a ) No person may excavate, remove, damage, or otherwise alter or deface any archaeological resource located on public lands unless such activity is pursuant to a permit issued under § 1104.7 or exempted by § 1104.4(b) of this part.
( b ) No person may sell, purchase, exchange, transport, or receive any archaeological resource, if such resource was excavated or removed in violation of: ( 1 ) The prohibitions contained in paragraph (a) of this section; or
( 2 ) Any provision, rule, regulation, ordinance, or permit in effect under any other provision of Federal law.
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.

§ 240.3a67-6 Definition of “financial entity.” ( a ) *General.* For purposes of section 3(a)(67) of the Act, 15 U.S.C. 78c(a)(67), and § 240.3a67-1, the term *financial entity* means: ( 1 ) A swap dealer;
( 2 ) A major swap participant;
( 3 ) A commodity pool as defined in section 1a(10) of the Commodity Exchange Act (7 U.S.C. 1a(10));
( 4 ) A private fund as defined in section 202(a) of the Investment Advisers Act of 1940 (15 U.S.C. 80b-2(a));
( 5 ) An employee benefit plan as defined in paragraphs (3) and (32) of section 3 of the Employee Retirement Income Security Act of 1974 (29 U.S.C. 1002); and
( 6 ) A person predominantly engaged in activities that are in the business of banking or financial in nature, as defined in section 4(k) of the Bank Holding Company Act of 1956 (12 U.S.C. 1843k).
( b ) *Exclusion for centralized hedging facilities* — ( 1 ) *General.* Notwithstanding paragraph (a) of this section, for purposes of this section the term *financial entity* shall not encompass a person that would be a financial entity solely as a result of the person's activities that facilitate hedging and/or treasury functions on behalf of one or more majority-owned affiliates that themselves do not constitute a financial entity.
( 2 ) *Meaning of majority-owned.* For these purposes the counterparties to a security-based swap are majority-owned affiliates if one counterparty directly or indirectly owns a majority interest in the other, or if a third party directly or indirectly owns a majority interest in both counterparties to the security-based swap, where “majority interest” includes, but is not limited to, the right to vote or direct the vote of a majority of a class of voting securities of an entity, the power to sell or direct the sale of a majority of a class of voting securities of an entity, or the right to receive upon dissolution or the contribution of a majority of the capital of a partnership.
#### § 146.100 Purpose and effective date.

The purpose of these Title IX regulations is to effectuate Title IX of the Education Amendments of 1972, as amended (except sections 904 and 906 of those Amendments) (20 U.S.C. 1681, 1682, 1683, 1685, 1686, 1687, 1688), which is designed to eliminate (with certain exceptions) discrimination on the basis of sex in any education program or activity receiving Federal financial assistance, whether or not such program or activity is offered or sponsored by an educational institution as defined in these Title IX regulations. The effective date of these Title IX regulations shall be September 29, 2000.
EXHIBIT 32.1


CERTIFICATION OF CHIEF EXECUTIVE OFFICERPURSUANT TO SECTION 906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002 (18 U.S.C. 1350)


In connection with the Annual Report on Form 10-K for the period ended December 31, 2021 (the "Report") of New Mountain Guardian III BDC, L.L.C. (the "Registrant"), as filed with the United States Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof, I, Robert A. Hamwee, the Chief Executive Officer of the Registrant, hereby certify, to the best of my knowledge, that:


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


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


/s/ ROBERT A. HAMWEEName:Robert A. HamweeDate:March 9, 2022
<partyblock><br><br><div align="center"><b><font size="+1">Acupuncture Now, P.C., as Assignee of Carlos, Illingworth, Respondent, <br><br>against<br><br>GEICO Ins. Co., Appellant.</font></b></div><br><br><p>Law Office of Goldstein &amp; Flecker (Lawrence J. Chanice of counsel), for appellant.The Rybak Firm, PLLC (Damin J. Toell of counsel), for respondent.</p><p>Appeal from an order of the Civil Court of the City of New York, Kings County (Robin Kelly Sheares, J.), entered April 15, 2016. The order, insofar as appealed from and as limited by the brief, denied the branches of defendant's cross motion seeking summary judgment dismissing so much of the complaint as sought to recover upon claims for services billed under CPT codes 97810 and 97811.</p><p>ORDERED that the order, insofar as appealed from, is reversed, with $30 costs, and the branches of defendant's cross motion seeking summary judgment dismissing so much of the complaint as sought to recover upon claims for services billed under CPT codes 97810 and 97811 are granted.</p><p>In this action by a provider to recover assigned first-party no-fault benefits, defendant appeals, as limited by its brief, from so much an order of the Civil Court as denied the branches of defendant's cross motion seeking summary judgment dismissing so much of the complaint as sought to recover upon claims for services billed under CPT codes 97810 and 97811 on the ground that the amounts plaintiff sought to recover, for services rendered prior to April 1, 2013, were in excess of the workers' compensation fee schedule.</p><p>The proof submitted by defendant in support of its cross motion was sufficient to give rise to a presumption that the denial of claim forms at issue had been timely mailed (<a href="../2008/2008_04072.htm" target="_blank"><i>see St. Vincent's Hosp. of Richmond v Government Empls. Ins. Co.</i>, 50 AD3d 1123</a> [2008]). Defendant <font color="FF0000">[*2]</font>also demonstrated that it had fully paid plaintiff for the services billed under CPT codes 97810 and 97811 in accordance with the workers' compensation fee schedule for acupuncture services performed by chiropractors (<a href="../2009/2009_29467.htm" target="_blank"><i>see Great Wall Acupuncture, P.C. v Geico Ins. Co.</i>, 26 Misc 3d 23</a> [App Term, 2d Dept, 2d, 11th &amp; 13th Jud Dists 2009]). Plaintiff failed to raise a triable issue of fact in opposition.</p><p>Accordingly, the order, insofar as appealed from, is reversed, and the branches of defendant's cross motion seeking summary judgment dismissing so much of the complaint as sought to recover upon claims for services billed under CPT codes 97810 and 97811 are granted.</p><p>PESCE, P.J., ALIOTTA and ELLIOT, JJ., concur.</p><br>ENTER:<br>Paul Kenny<br>Chief Clerk<br>Decision Date: November 16, 2018<br><br><div align="center"><form method="LINK" action="../../slipidx/at_2_idxtable.shtml"><input type="submit" value="Return to Decision List"></form></div></partyblock>
#### In the Matter of Rugby Excavators, Inc., Appellant. Stephen O’Rourke, Respondent; James M, Coppola, Appellant.

On the call of the calendar, on motion by respondent, appeal dismissed. There was no appearance for appellants, and appellants failed to comply with an order of this court, dated March 14, 1962, requiring them to perfect their appeal on March 26, 1962. Beldock, P. J., Ughetta, Kleinfeld, Brennan and Hill, JJ., concur.
<PAGE>   1




                                                                     EXHIBIT 3.3

                       CERTIFICATE OF AMENDMENT OF BYLAWS
                                OF COMPURAD, INC.

         As the Secretary of CompuRAD, Inc., the undersigned hereby certifies
that the first and second sentences of Section 3.2 of the Bylaws of this
corporation were amended by the Board of Directors pursuant to a resolution
unanimously adopted during a Board of Directors meeting on April 18, 1997 to
read in its entirety as follows:

                  "3.2     NUMBER OF DIRECTORS

         The number of directors of the corporation shall be not less than six
(6) nor more than nine (9). The exact number of directors shall be six (6) until
changed, within the limits specified above, by a bylaw amending this Section
3.2, duly adopted by the board of directors or by the shareholders. The board of
directors shall be divided into three classes, designated Class I, Class II and
Class III, as nearly equal in number as possible. No reduction of the authorized
number of directors shall have the effect of removing any director before that
director's term of office expires."


Dated:   April 18, 1997

                                                                /s/ Henky Wibowo
                                                                ----------------
                                                                Henky Wibowo,
                                                                Secretary
#### Henry Freudenberg et al. v. Emma Detjen et al.

Motion to dismiss appeal granted, with $10 costs. The request of the appellants for the appointment of a special guardian is denied. Concur — Breitel, J. P., Rabin, Valente, McNally and Bastow, JJ.
#### § 1008.105 Does this part apply to me?

(a) Portions of this part apply to you if you are either—

(1) A recipient of an assistance award from the Inter-American Foundation; or

(2) A(n) Inter-American Foundation awarding official. (See definitions of award and recipient in §§ 1008.605 and 1008.660, respectively.)

(b) The following table shows the subparts that apply to you:

| If you are . . . | see subparts . . . |
| --- | --- |
| (1) A recipient who is not an individual | A, B and E. |
| (2) A recipient who is an individual | A, C and E. |
| (3) A(n) Inter-American Foundation awarding official | A, D and E. |
Exhibit 32.1

CERTIFICATION

Pursuant to the requirement set forth in Rule 13a-14(b) of the Securities Exchange
Act of 1934, as amended, (the Exchange Act) and Section 1350 of Chapter 63 of Title 18 of the United States Code (18 U.S.C. §1350), Claes Glassell, the Chief Executive Officer of Cerus Corporation (the Company) and
William J. Dawson, the Chief Financial Officer of the Company, hereby certify that, to the best of their knowledge:

1. The
Companys Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q for the period ended March 31, 2009, and to which this Certification is attached as Exhibit 32.1 (the Periodic Report), fully complies with the requirements of
section 13(a) or section 15(d) of the Exchange Act, and

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

IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the undersigned have set their hands hereto as of the 30thday of April, 2009.



/s/ Claes GlassellClaes GlassellChief Executive Officer/s/ William J. DawsonWilliam J. DawsonChief Financial Officer
#### § 1424.1 Conditions governing review.

Pursuant to the authority contained in 22 U.S.C. 4107 (a)(3) and (c)(1) the Board will consider a direct appeal concerning whether a matter proposed to be bargained is within the obligation to bargain under the Foreign Service Act of 1980 as follows: If the Department is involved in collective bargaining with an exclusive representative and alleges that the duty to bargain in good faith does not extend to any matter proposed to be bargained because, as proposed, the matter is inconsistent with applicable law, rule or regulation the exclusive representative may appeal the allegation to the Board when it disagrees with Department's allegation that the matter as proposed to be bargained is inconsistent with applicable law, rule or regulation.