alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
§ 214.11 Establishment and chartering requirements. Provisions governing the establishment and chartering of Advisory Committees are contained in section 9 of the Act and paragraph 6 of OMB Circular A-63. In summary, these requirements include the following: ( a ) Where establishment of an Advisory Committee is not specifically authorized by statute or by the President, the need for a new A.I.D. advisory committee is determined by the A.I.D. Administrator, in accordance with the guidelines set forth in section 5(b) of the Act. The determination also includes a certification that creation of the Committee is in the public interest and a description of the nature and purpose of the Committee.
( b ) After written consultation to the OMB Secretariat and notification that the establishment of the Committee would be in accord with the Act, A.I.D. publishes the Administrator's Determination in the Federal Register at least fifteen (15) days prior to the filing of the Committee's Charter.
( c ) Each advisory committee established or used by A.I.D. is required to file a charter with the A.I.D. Administrator, the House International Relations Committee, and the Senate Foreign Relations Committee, before meeting or taking any action.
( d ) Advisory committee charters shall include the following information: ( 1 ) Committee's official title;
( 2 ) Committee's objectives and scope of activity;
( 3 ) Period of time necessary for the committee to carry out its purposes;
( 4 ) Agency official to whom the committee reports;
( 5 ) Agency responsible for providing necessary support for the committee;
( 6 ) Description of duties for which the committee is responsible, and, if such duties are not solely advisory, a specification of the authority for such functions;
( 7 ) Estimated annual operating costs in dollars and man-years for the committee;
( 8 ) Estimated number and frequency of committee meetings;
( 9 ) Committee's termination date; and
( 10 ) Date the charter is filed.
( e ) A copy of the charter is required to be sent to the Library of Congress, Exchange and Gift Division, Federal Advisory Committee Desk, Washington, DC 20540.
[40 FR 33205, Aug. 7, 1975, as amended at 40 FR 54777, Nov. 26, 1975]
(logo)SitusAMC

 

 

**MANAGEMENT'S REPORTON ASSESSMENT OF COMPLIANCE WITH SEC REGULATION AB SERVICING CRITERIA**

 

1.       SitusReal LLC (the “Company”), a wholly-owned subsidiary of SitusAMC Holdings Corporation(“SitusAMC”), is responsible for assessing compliance with the servicingcriteria applicable to it in Item 1122(d)(3)(i)(A-B) of Regulation AB of theSecurities and Exchange Commission (“SEC”), as of and for the year endedDecember 31, 2022 (the “Reporting Period”). The transactions covered by thisreport (collectively referred to as “EU Reporting Administrator Platform” orthe “Platform”) include asset-backed securities for which Situs Real LLC actedin the capacity of the EU Reporting Administrator related to the followingasset-backed transactions and securities: BMARK 2019-B10 and BMARK 2019-B11.

 

2.       TheCompany used the criteria set forth in Item 1122(d)(3)(i)(A-B) of Regulation AB“Reports to investors, including those to be filed with the Commission, aremaintained in accordance with the transaction agreements and applicableCommission requirements. Specifically, such reports: (A) Are prepared inaccordance with timeframes and other terms set forth in the transactionagreements; (B) Provide information calculated in accordance with the termsspecified in the transaction agreements” to provide an assertion on theCompany’s assessment of compliance.

 

3.       SitusReal LLC has complied in all material aspects, with the applicable servicingcriteria set forth in Item 1122(d)(3)(A-B) of Regulation AB, as of and for theyear ended December 31, 2022 and for the Reporting Period with respect to thePlatform;

 

4.       GrantThornton LLP, an independent registered public accounting firm, has issued anattestation report on the Company’s assertion on compliance with the applicableservicing criteria for the Reporting Period.

 

 

SitusReal LLC 

March1, 2023

 

/s/Parker Umsted

ParkerUmsted, Senior Director, Securitization
#### § 1003.3 Nature of program.

The selection of single purpose grantees under subpart B of this part is competitive in nature. Therefore, selection of grantees for funds will reflect consideration of the relative adequacy of applications in addressing tribally determined need. The selection of grantees of imminent threat grants under the provisions of subpart B of this part is not competitive in nature. However, applicants for funding under either subpart must have the administrative capacity to undertake the community development activities proposed, including the systems of internal control necessary to administer these activities effectively without fraud, waste, or mismanagement.
Exhibit 10.2





Exhibit 10.2




HENRY SCHEIN, INC.




August 13, 2010




Mr. David M. Mulder 
Chief
Executive Officer Biolase

Technology, Inc. 4

Cromwell

Irvine, California 92618




Dear Mr. Mulder:



Reference is made to the letter agreement between Henry Schein, Inc. (“HSIC”) and Biolase
Technology, Inc. (“Biolase”), dated as of March 9, 2010 (the “March Letter Agreement”).



Effective on August 17, 2010, Section 4 of the March Letter Agreement is hereby amended by deleting
the reference therein to “60 days advance written notice” and replacing it with “45 days’ advance
written notice.”



Please acknowledge your agreement to the foregoing by executing a counterpart of this letter
agreement.



Sincerely,



HENRY SCHEIN, INC.



	 	 	 	 
	By:  	/s/ Brian S. Watson
 	 
	 	Brian S. Watson 	 
	 	Vice President, Strategic and Business Planning 	 



BIOLASE TECHNOLOGY, INC.




	 	 	 	 
	By:  	/s/ David M. Mulder
 	 
	 	David M. Mulder 	 
	 	Chief Financial Officer
FAA PART 16 AIRPORT PROCEEDINGS DOCKET 

FEDERAL AVIATION ADMINISTRATION 

WASEIINGTON,DC 

ALCA, Inc., Cylinder Shop, Inc., 

Suncoast Aviation, Aircraft Farts 

and National Aviation, 

Complainants, 

vs. 

Miami-Dade County, Florida 

Respondent. 

> 

Docket No. 16-08-05 < ^ . 

n) g @ d lj_ j 

^ 

% 

NOV 1 3 2008 

fT^ 

FAA AIRPORTS 

PARTISDOCKETR 

^ 

MOTION FOR EXTENSION OF TIME TO TTT E REPLY BRIEF 

^ 

Petitioners, hereby file this Motion for Extension of Time to File Reply Brief 

and in support thereof would show: 

1. Petitioners have filed a Part 16 Complaint against Miami Dade County; 

2. The County filed its responsei^r a several month delay and 

received a several month time extension; 

3. On October 1,2008, a motion for extension of time was filed and granted by 

the FAA; 

4. Undersigned counsel had instructed staff to request an extension of time until 

November 15,2008; 

5. The motion inadvertently limited the extension of time to November 1,2008; 

6. On Octpber 7,2008, undmigajMi, counsel assumed duties as Mayor of Miami 

Lakes in Dade County and hak'been m|uiirifd to spend mubb of October 2008 

assuming those duties; 
7. Undersign counsel had sought extensions in all of his pending cases, until 

sometime in early mid November, due to these circumstances; 

8. There have been some changes in the status of the parties within the past 

thirty (30) days that need to be accounted for in preparing a reply; 

9. A final extension of two (2) weeks on a matter of this importance, will not 

prejudice a reply. 

WHEREFORE: undersign counsel and petitioners request an extension of up until 

November IS, 2008 to submit their reply brief in this matter. 

Respectfully submitted, 

MICHAEL A. PIZZL Jr., P.A. 

Attorney for Defendant 

15271 NW 60* Avenue 

Miami Lakes, Fl 33016 

Phone: 305 2312121 

FAX: 305 2312123 

E-mail: mpizziirtgtvahoo.com 

By:_ 

Michael A. Pizzi, Jr., E ^ 

Florida Bar No. 07954 
CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE 

I HEREBY CERTIFY that a copy of the above Motion for Extension of Time to File 

Reply Brief was mailed/FAXed to: 

Office of the Chief Counsel 

Attn: FAA Part 16 Airport Proceedings 

Docket 16-08-05 

Room 925, Federal Aviation Administration 

800 Independence Ave., SW 

Washington, DC 20591 

Jennifer Trock, Esq. 

PUlsbury Winthrop Shaw Pittman, LLP 

2300 N. Street, NW 

Washington, DC 20037 

Michael A. Pizzi, Jr.j'^Esq.
#### § 904.1 General.

The Board's jurisdiction extends to any grievance, and to any separation for cause proceeding initiated pursuant to section 610(a)(2) of the Act.

[50 FR 31355, Aug. 2, 1985]
#### § 911.3 Procedure.

Implementation disputes shall be handled by the Board in accordance with the procedures set forth in parts 901-910 of this chapter.
China Shengda Packaging Group Inc.: Exhibit 10.1 - Filed by newsfilecorp.com






Exhibit 10.1 

Maximum Debt Guarantee Contract 

(English Summary) 


	Date
      of Signing 	Sept
      28, 2010 
	Contract No 	
    萧山2010
    人保181
    号
	Parties to Contract 	
    SD Group as Guarantor and Xiaoshan BOC as
      Lender 

	Guarantee 	
    GSD 

	Guaranteed Maximum Amount 	
    RMB 150,000,000 million 

	Guaranteed Indebtedness 	
    Any indebtedness incurred by GSD to Lender
      during the term of Sept 28, 2010 and Sept 28, 2011 

	Guaranteed Scope 	
    The principal, interests, liquidated damage,
      damage, costs arising from the realisation of the debt of the relevant
      indebtedness and any cost incurred. 

	Term 	
    Two years after the expiry of the term of the
      relevant indebtedness 

	Undertakings 	
    We list below some material undertakings: 

      Guarantor shall inform Lender when any event that may affect its
      financial status or capacity to perform under the contract occurs.
      

    Guarantor shall inform Lender when any related party transaction that
      exceeds 10% of net assets exists.
#### Martin Siegal, Individually, and as Administrator of the Estate of Lita Siegal, Deceased, Appellant, v Matthew Arnao et al., Respondents, et al., Defendants.

a medical malpractice action, plaintiffs appeal, as limited by their brief, from so much of a resettled order of the Supreme Court, Kings County, dated September 26, 1977, as, *inter alia,*denied their motion to strike the answers of the respondents or, in the alternative, to recover disbursements, costs and attorneys’ fees due to respondents’ alleged obstructive and unfounded objections to questions propounded at an examination before trial. Appeal dismissed, without costs or disbursements. In effect, plaintiffs’ application was one "seeking rulings on an examination before trial” *(Klein v Schneiderman,*58 AD2d 763). Orders made upon questions propounded at an examination before trial are not appealable as of right *(Ithier v Solomon,*59 AD2d 935; *Lacerenza v Rich,*39 AD2d 716). It is the policy of this court that applications for leave to appeal from orders made with respect to the propriety of questions propounded at an examination before trial will not be granted unless the rulings were made upon a motion on notice or upon a full record, in which event the applications will be considered on their merits. No application for leave to appeal has been made in the case at bar and we would not have granted leave to appeal had such a request been made. Hopkins, J. P., Titone, Suozzi and Margett, JJ., concur.
#### The People of the State of New York, Respondent, v. William C. O’Brien, Appellant.

In a *coram nobis*proceeding, defendant appeals from an order of the County Court, Kings County, dated July 5, 1961, which denied, without a hearing, his application to vacate a judgment of said court rendered October 14, 1942, on his plea of guilty, convicting him of attempted robbery in the first degree, armed, and imposing sentence. Order affirmed. No opinion. Beldóek, P. J., Kleinfeld, Brennan, Rabin and Hopkins, JJ., concur.
### §7705d. Repealed. Pub. L. 106–503, title II, §203, Nov. 13, 2000, 114 Stat. 2305

Section, Pub. L. 95–124, §10, as added Pub. L. 101–614, §10, Nov. 16, 1990, 104 Stat. 3238, related to non-Federal cost sharing for supplemental funds.
March 20, 2015

U.S. Department of Transportation

Docket Management System

1200 New Jersey Ave., SE

Washington, DC 20590

Re: Delivery of Vine Rangers' UAS Operations Manual [Docket No. FAA-2015-

0059]

To Whom it May Concern:

As you are aware, this office represents Vine Rangers Inc., ("Vine Rangers") regarding 

the above-referenced Petition for Exemption, in which Vine Rangers seeks regulatory relief to 

allow commercial operation of small unmanned aircraft system. Please accept this letter as 

confirmation that Vine Rangers' UAS Operations Manual, which contains proprietary 

information, was hand-delivered to Jake J. Troutman, Program Analyst, Federal Aviation 

Administration, Office of Aviation Safety, Airmen and Airspace Rules Division, on March 19, 

2015. 

If you have any other questions, or need any additional information to process this

exemption request, please do not hesitate to contact us. 

Very truly yours, 

Matthew J. Clark

Lisa M. Ellman

Mark E. McKinnon 

 

Counsel for Vine Rangers, Inc.

Albany

Atlanta

Brussels

Denver

Los Angeles

Miami

New York

1676 International Drive • Penthouse

McLean, VA 22102

Tel: 703.336.8800

mckennalong.com

Northern Virginia

Orange County

Rancho Santa Fe

San Diego

San Francisco

Seoul

Washington, DC

Mark E. McKinnon

703.336.8714

Matthew J. Clark

703.336.8714

Lisa M. Ellman

202.496.7184

Email Address

mmckinnon@mckennalong.com

mclark@mckennalong.com

lellman@mckennalong.com
#### In the Matter of Diandre McNeill, Petitioner, v Stephen Rooney et al., Respondents.

[716 NYS2d 402]

—Proceeding pursuant to CPLR article 78 in the nature of prohibition, *inter alia,*to prohibit the respondents from proceeding with a retrial of a criminal action against the petitioner entitled *People v Diandre McNeill,*pending in the Supreme Court, Richmond County, under Indictment No. 57/1999, and application for poor person relief.

Ordered that the application for poor person relief is granted to the extent that the filing fee imposed by CPLR 8022 (b) is waived, and the application is otherwise denied as academic; and it is further,

Adjudged that the petition is denied and the proceeding is dismissed, without costs or disbursements.

The petitioner alleges that the prosecutor deliberately provoked his trial counsel into moving for a mistrial at the trial of Indictment No. 57/1999, and therefore a retrial is barred by the doctrine of double jeopardy *(see,*CPL 210.20 [1] [3]; *Oregon v Kennedy,*456 US 667). However, there was no evidence that the prosecutor acted with a bad faith intent to cause a mistrial when he made an improper statement in his opening, nor when the first witness gave two improper answers to his questions. “Because of its extraordinary nature, prohibition is available only where there is a clear legal right, and then only when a court — in cases where judicial authority is challenged — acts or threatens to act either without jurisdiction or in excess of its authorized powers” *(Matter of Holtzman v Goldman,*71 NY2d 564, 569; *see, Matter of Rush v Mordue,*68 NY2d 348, 352).

The petitioner has failed to demonstrate a clear legal right to the relief sought. Ritter, J. P., Florio, H. Miller and Feuerstein, JJ., concur.
I 

112TH CONGRESS 

2D SESSION H. R. 3999 

To amend the Internal Revenue Code of 1986 to extend the deduction for 

mortgage insurance. 

IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES 

FEBRUARY 9, 2012 

Mr. BARROW introduced the following bill; which was referred to the 

Committee on Ways and Means 

A BILL 

To amend the Internal Revenue Code of 1986 to extend 

the deduction for mortgage insurance. 

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

3 SECTION 1. MORTGAGE INSURANCE. 

4 (a) IN GENERAL.—Subclause (I) of section 

5 163(h)(3)(E)(iv) of the Internal Revenue Code of 1986 

6 is amended by striking ‘‘December 31, 2011’’ and insert7 ing ‘‘December 31, 2013’’. 


pwalker on DSK7TPTVN1PROD with BILLS
2 

•HR 3999 IH

1 (b) EFFECTIVE DATE.—The amendment made by 

2 this section shall apply to amounts paid or accrued after 

3 December 31, 2011. 

Æ 


pwalker on DSK7TPTVN1PROD with BILLS
§ 202.10 Governmental institutions, Government-sponsored enterprises, public housing agencies and State housing agencies. ( a ) *Federal, state, and municipal governmental agencies and Federal Reserve Banks.* A Federal, State, or municipal government agency or a Federal Reserve Bank may be an approved lender or mortgagee. A mortgagee approved under this paragraph (a) may submit applications for Title II mortgage insurance. A lender or mortgagee approved under this paragraph (a) may originate, purchase, service, or sell Title I loans and insured mortgages, respectively. A mortgagee or lender approved under this paragraph (a) is not required to meet a net worth requirement. A lender or mortgagee shall maintain fidelity bond coverage and errors and omissions insurance acceptable to the Secretary and in an amount required by the Secretary, or alternative insurance coverage approved by the Secretary, that assures the faithful performance of the responsibilities of the mortgagee. There are no additional requirements beyond the general approval requirements in § 202.5 or as provided under paragraph (c) of this section.
( b ) *Government-Sponsored Enterprises.* The Government-Sponsored Enterprises are the Federal Home Loan Banks, Federal Home Loan Mortgage Corporation, and Federal National Mortgage Association. A Government-Sponsored Enterprise may be an approved lender or mortgagee. A lender or mortgagee approved under this paragraph (b) may purchase, service, or sell Title I loans and insured mortgages, respectively. A mortgagee or lender approved under this paragraph (b) is not required to meet a net worth requirement. There are no additional requirements beyond the general approval requirements in § 202.5.
( c ) *Public housing agencies and State housing agencies.* Under such terms and conditions as the Secretary may prescribe and notwithstanding the general requirements of § 202.5 or the requirements of paragraph (a) of this section, a public housing agency or its instrumentality or a State housing agency may be approved as a mortgagee for the purpose of originating and holding multifamily mortgages funded by issuance of tax exempt obligations by the agency.
( d ) *Audit requirements.* The insuring of loans and mortgages under the Act constitutes “Federal financial assistance” (as defined in 2 CFR 200.1) for purposes of audit requirements set out in 2 CFR part 200, subpart F. Non-Federal entities (as defined in 2 CFR 200.1) that receive insurance as lenders and mortgagees shall conduct audits in accordance with 2 CFR part 200, subpart F.
[62 FR 20082, Apr. 24, 1997, as amended at 80 FR 75936, Dec. 7, 2015; 89 FR 30277, Apr. 23, 2024]
### §4593. Payments

Payments under this chapter may be made in advance or by way of reimbursement and in such installments as the Secretary may determine.

(Pub. L. 91–616, title VI, §603, formerly title V, §503, Dec. 31, 1970, 84 Stat. 1855, renumbered Pub. L. 94–371, §7, July 26, 1976, 90 Stat. 1038.)

#### **Editorial Notes**

#### References in Text

This chapter, referred to in text, was in the original "this Act", meaning Pub. L. 91–616, Dec. 31, 1970, 84 Stat. 1848, known as the Comprehensive Alcohol Abuse and Alcoholism Prevention, Treatment, and Rehabilitation Act of 1970. For complete classification of this Act to the Code, see Short Title note set out under section 4541 of this title and Tables.

#### Codification

Pub. L. 94–371, §7, July 26, 1976, 90 Stat. 1038, redesignated title V of Pub. L. 91–616, which was classified to subchapter IV of this chapter, as title VI without renumbering the sections therein. Section 503 of Pub. L. 91–616 was renumbered 603, as the probable intent of Congress.
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<ARTICLE> 5
<LEGEND>
THIS SCHEDULE CONTAINS SUMMARY FINANCIAL INFORMATION EXTRACTED FROM UNAUDITED
FINANCIAL STATEMENTS FOR THE 3RD QUARTER ENDED 9/30/97 CONTAINED IN THE
COMPANY'S FORM 10-Q AND IS QUALIFIED IN ITS ENTIRETY BY REFERENCE TO SUCH REPORT
ON FORM 10-Q.
</LEGEND>
<MULTIPLIER> 1,000
       
<S>                             <C>      <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   3-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          DEC-31-1997
<PERIOD-START>                             JAN-01-1997
<PERIOD-END>                               SEP-30-1997
<CASH>                                          26,733
<SECURITIES>                                         0
<RECEIVABLES>                                   17,206
<ALLOWANCES>                                     (448)
<INVENTORY>                                          0
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                                44,531
<PP&E>                                           9,204
<DEPRECIATION>                                 (3,215)
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                  55,691
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                            8,544
<BONDS>                                              0
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                            82
<OTHER-SE>                                      46,280
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                    55,691
<SALES>                                         19,491
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                                19,491
<CGS>                                                0
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                    9,850
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                 8,367
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                   117
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                                  50
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                  1,722
<INCOME-TAX>                                       933
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                                789
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                       789
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                     0.09
<EPS-DILUTED>                                     0.09
        

</TABLE>
§ 72.9 Responsibility if legal representative is present. ( a ) A consular officer should not act as provisional conservator if the consular officer knows that a legal representative is present in the foreign country.
( b ) If the consular officer learns that a legal representative is present after the consular officer has taken possession and/or disposed of the personal estate but prior to transmission of the proceeds and effects to the Secretary of State pursuant to § 72.25, the consular officer should follow the procedures specified in § 72.22.
### §3795a. Transferred

#### **Editorial Notes**

#### Codification

Section 3795a was editorially reclassified as section 10272 of Title 34, Crime Control and Law Enforcement.
#### HURL v. NEW YORK CENT. & H. R. R. CO.

(Supreme Court, Appellate Division, Fourth Department.

January 20, 1903.)

Action by Albert Hurl against the New York Central & Hudson River Railroad Company.

No opinion. Motion for leave to appeal to Court of Appeals granted.
### §65. Repealed. Aug. 10, 1956, ch. 1041, §53, 70A Stat. 641

Section, acts Mar. 2, 1923, ch. 178, title I, 42 Stat. 1385; Aug. 4, 1949, ch. 393, §11, 63 Stat. 559, prohibited issuance of heat or light in kind to any person in Public Health Service while such person is receiving an allowance for rental of quarters.