alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
Document Headings

                    Document headings vary by document type but may contain                    the following:                  
                -                       the agency or agencies that issued and signed a document                    
                -                       the number of the CFR title and the number of each part                      the document amends, proposes to amend, or is directly                      related to                    
                -                       the agency docket number / agency internal file number                    
                -                       the RIN which identifies each regulatory action listed in                      the Unified Agenda of Federal Regulatory and Deregulatory                      Actions                    

                    See the                                          Document Drafting Handbook                                        for more details.                  

###### Federal Maritime Commission

# TIME AND DATE:

December 9, 2020; 10:00 a.m.

# PLACE:

This meeting will be held by video-conference only.

# STATUS:

This meeting will be closed to the public.

# MATTERS TO BE CONSIDERED:

1. Briefing by Commissioner Dye on Fact Finding No. 29.

                        2. Staff Update on General Prohibitions in the Shipping Act.                              ( print page 78333)    

3. Briefing by Inspector General Jon Hatfield.

# CONTACT PERSON FOR MORE INFORMATION:

Rachel Dickon, Secretary, (202) 523-5725.

Rachel Dickon,

Secretary.

[FR Doc. 2020-26851 Filed 12-2-20; 4:15 pm]

BILLING CODE 6730-02-P
#### Beal Bank, SSB, Appellant, v Angela Rizzuti et al., Respondents.

[716 NYS2d 339]

—In an action pursuant to Debtor and Creditor Law § 274 to set aside a conveyance of real property as fraudulent, the plaintiff appeals (1) from an order of the Supreme Court, Kings County (Jackson, J.), dated November 29, 1999, which denied its motion to restore the action to the trial calendar, and (2) from an order of the same court, dated March 28, 2000, which denied its motion for leave to renew.

Ordered that the order dated November 29, 1999, is reversed, as a matter of discretion, and the motion to restore the action to the trial calendar is granted; and it is further

Ordered that the appeal from the order dated March 28, 2000 is dismissed as academic; and it is further

Ordered that the appellant is awarded one bill of costs.

On a motion to restore an action to the trial calendar, a plaintiff must demonstrate that the default was excusable and that the action is meritorious *(see, Kramme v Brettler,*174 AD2d 712). The appellant met that standard and, under the circumstances, the Supreme Court improperly denied the appellant’s motion to restore the action to the trial calendar.

In light of this determination, we need not consider whether the Supreme Court properly denied the appellant’s motion for leave to renew. O’Brien, J. P., Goldstein, Florio and McGinity, JJ., concur.
DISMISS and Opinion Filed October 2, 2013. 

# S

In The 

## Court of Appeals Fifth District of Texas at Dallas

No. 05

- 13

- 01238

- CV

PERSIMMON TOWNHOMES, LTD. , Appellant

V.

AGNIESZKA MALECKA D/ B/A EURO DISCOUNT PAINTI NG , Appellee

On Appeal from the County Court at Law No. 5 Dallas County, Texas

Trial Court Cause No. CC

- 12

- 00422

- E



### MEMORANDUM OPINION

Before Justices Moseley, Lang, and Brown Opinion by Justice Lang

Before the Court is the parties’ j oint motion to dismiss the appeal. The parties have

informed the Court that they have settled their differences. Accordingly, we grant the parties’

motion and dismiss the appeal. See T EX

. R. A PP

. P. 42.1(a)(2).

131238F.P05 /Douglas S. Lang/

DOUGLAS S. LANG

JUSTICE– 2

– 

# S

Court of Appeals Fifth District of Texas at Dallas

JUDGMENT

PERSIMMON TOWNHOMES, LTD., Appellant

No. 05

- 13

- 01238

- CV V.

AGNIESZKA MALECKA D/B/A EURO DISCOUNT PAINTING, Appellee On Appeal from the County Court at Law No. 5, Dallas County, Texas.

Trial Court Cause No. CC

- 12

- 00422

- E. Opinion delivered by Justice Lang. Justices Moseley and Brown, participating.

In accordance with this Court’s opinion of this date, the appeal is DISMISSED

.

It is ORDERED that ea ch party bear its own costs of this appeal.

Judgment entered this 2nd day of October, 2013.

/Douglas S. Lang/

DOUGLAS S. LANG

JUSTICE
#### § 906.35 Inapplicability of section 18 of the United States Housing Act of 1937.

The provisions of section 18 of the 1937 Act (42 U.S.C. 1437p) do not apply to disposition of public housing dwelling units under a homeownership program approved by HUD under this part, or to the sale of a unit to a PRE to operate as public housing and sell to a low-income family within 5 years, under the requirements of § 906.19.
EXHIBIT 99.1 -- Annual Statement of Compliance

   National City		National City Mortgage Co.
   Mortgage			A subsidiary of National City Bank of Indiana
				3232 Newmark Drive Miamisburg, Ohio 45342
				Telephone: (937) 910-1200

				Mailing Address:
				P.O. Box 1820
				Dayton, Ohio 45401-1820





                           STATEMENT AS TO COMPLIANCE

		   Cititgroup Mortgage Loan Trust Inc.,
      		 Mortgage Pass-Through Certificates, Series 2004-NCM1
I, T. Jackson Case, Jr., hereby certify that I am a duly appointed Executive
Vice President of National City Mortgage Co. (the "Master Servicer"),
and further certify as follows:

1. This certification is being made pursuant to the terms of the Pooling
and Servicing Agreement, dated as of June 1, 2004, (the "Agreement"), among
Citigroup Mortgage Loan Trust Inc., as depositor, the Master Servicer,
as master servicer and U.S. Bank National Association, as trustee.

2. I have reviewed the activities of the Master Servicer during the preceding
year and the Master Servicer's performance under the Agreement and to the best
of my knowledge, based on such review, the Master Servicer has fulfilled all
of its obligations under the Agreement throughout the year.

Capitalized terms not otherwise defined herein have the meanings set forth
in the Agreement.


Dated: March 8, 2005


IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the undersigned has executed this Certificate as
of March 8, 2005.


						By: /s/ T. Jackson Case, Jr.
						Name: T. Jackson Case, Jr.
						Title: Executive Vice President

I, Dino Camomot, a (an) Asst Secretary of the Master Servicer, hereby certify
that T. Jackson Case, Jr. is a duly elected, qualified, and acting Executive
Vice Pres of the Master Servicer and that the signature appearing above is
his/her genuine signature.

IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the undersigned has executed this Certificate as
of March 8, 2005.

						By: /s/ Dino Camomot
						Name: Dino R. Camomot
						Title: Ass't Secretary
WARNING: THE EDGAR SYSTEM ENCOUNTERED ERROR(S) WHILE PROCESSING THIS SCHEDULE.

<TABLE> <S> <C>

<ARTICLE> 5
<CIK> 0001022174
<NAME> CLASS A
<MULTIPLIER> 1

<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   6-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          DEC-31-2000
<PERIOD-END>                               JUN-30-2000
<CASH>                                       5,655,706
<SECURITIES>                                17,762,019
<RECEIVABLES>                                        0
<ALLOWANCES>                                         0
<INVENTORY>                                          0
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                            35,744,257
<PP&E>                                               0
<DEPRECIATION>                                       0
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                              35,744,257
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                        1,919,048
<BONDS>                                              0
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                             0
<OTHER-SE>                                  33,825,209
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                35,744,257
<SALES>                                              0
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                          (11,117,760)
<CGS>                                                0
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                        0
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                             4,000,554
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                     0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                                   0
<INCOME-PRETAX>                           (15,118,314)
<INCOME-TAX>                                         0
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                       (15,118,314)
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                              (15,118,314)
<EPS-BASIC>                                   (446.62)
<EPS-DILUTED>                                 (446.62)


</TABLE>
206 A.2d 537.

#### State *vs.*Thomas J. Kilday.

JANUARY 29, 1965.

Present: Condon, C. J., Roberts, Paolino, Powers and Joslin, JJ.

Condon, C. J.

This is a criminal complaint and warrant, charging the defendant with operating a motor vehicle on *210the public highway at a speed greater than was reasonable and prudent under the conditions and having due regard to the hazards then existing in violation of G. L. 1956, §31-14-1. The case was tried to a justice of the superior court, sitting without a jury, who found the defendant guilty as charged. The case is here on the defendant’s bill of exceptions containing an exception to the denial of the defendant’s plea in abatement of the complaint for failure to properly name the state as the complainant, an exception to a ruling excluding certain testimony relative to the health of the defendant, and an exception to the decision on the merits.

At the argument before us defendant and the state briefed each of those exceptions and orally argued them. However, in response to' questions from the bench during the course of the oral argument it developed that the complaint and warrant were precisely the same as in *State*v. *Brown,*96 R. I. 236, 196 A.2d 133, and *State*v. *Campbell,*96 R. I. 72, 196 A.2d 131, which we held so indefinite as no.t to meet the constitutional requirement of reasonable certainty. In each case we directed the superior court to' dismiss the complaint and discharge the defendant. We note here that the instant case was tried before either *Brown*or *Campbell*was decided.

In view of the admission of the state that the instant complaint was based upon a constitutionally defective complaint which did not charge an offense known to the law, we are of the opinion that we should sua sponte notice such defect notwithstanding .the defendant has failed to' raise the question in his bill of exceptions. The question is akin to one of jurisdiction. In accordance with our holding in *Brown*and *Campbell*the superior court was in effect without jurisdiction to try the defendant on the charge in the complaint that had no basis in law, and if it had been called to the trial justice’s attention at any time duriup- the trial it would have been his duty to dismiss the complaint. Like*211wise in this court whenever it appears .that the trial justice did not have the defendant before him on a complaint charging an offense known to the law, we conceive it our duty in the interests of justice to do likewise.

*J. Joseph Nugent,*Attorney General, *Francis A. Kelleher,*Assistant Attorney General, for State.

*Pontarelli & Berberian, Aram K. Berberian,*for defendant.

For the above reason we reverse the decision below without regard .to the exceptions briefed and argued and remit the -ease to- the superior court with direction to dismiss the complaint and discharge the defendant.
I 

109TH CONGRESS 

1ST SESSION H. R. 33

To amend the Metric Conversion Act of 1975 to require Federal agencies 

to impose certain requirements on recipients of awards for scientific 

and engineering research. 

IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES 

JANUARY 4, 2005

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

Committee on Science 

A BILL

To amend the Metric Conversion Act of 1975 to require 

Federal agencies to impose certain requirements on recipients of awards for scientific and engineering research.

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

3 SECTION 1. AMENDMENT. 

4 Section 12(b) of the Metric Conversion Act of 1975 

5 (15 U.S.C. 205j–1(b)) is amended to read as follows: 

6 ‘‘(b) Guidelines established under subsection (a) shall 

7 require that any transaction between the Federal agency 

8 and another person providing for such person to perform 
2

•HR 33 IH 

1 scientific or engineering research with Federal funding in2 clude provisions—

3 ‘‘(1) clearly identifying the extent to which the 

4 metric system of measurement or other systems of 

5 measurement will be used under the transaction; 

6 ‘‘(2) requiring the usage of systems of measure7 ment consistent with the provisions described in 

8 paragraph (1); and 

9 ‘‘(3) assigning to the person receiving Federal 

10 funding the financial responsibility for failure to fol11 low the requirements stated in paragraph (2).’’.

Æ
```

[Congressional Bills 109th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[H.R. 3217 Introduced in House (IH)]

109th CONGRESS
  1st Session
                                H. R. 3217

               To suspend temporarily the duty on DCBTF.

_______________________________________________________________________

                    IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

                             July 12, 2005

  Mr. Buyer introduced the following bill; which was referred to the 
                      Committee on Ways and Means

_______________________________________________________________________

                                 A BILL

 
               To suspend temporarily the duty on DCBTF.

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

SECTION 1. DCBTF.

    (a) In General.--Subchapter II of chapter 99 of the Harmonized 
Tariff Schedule of the United States is amended by inserting in 
numerical sequence the following new heading:

``      9902.11.02      3,4-                Free         No change        No change        On or before 12/  ''.
                         Dichlorobenztrifl                                                  31/2008
                         uoride (CAS No.
                         328-84-7)
                         (provided for in
                         subheading
                         2903.69.08)......

    (b) Effective Date.--The amendment made by subsection (a) applies 
to goods entered, or withdrawn from warehouse for consumption, on or 
after the 15th day after the date of the enactment of this Act.
                                 <all>
```
Editorial Note on Part 982
Editorial Note: Nomenclature changes to part 982 appear at 64 FR 26640, May 14, 1999, and at 89 FR 38293, May 7, 2024.

§ 982.601 Overview. ( a ) *Special housing types.* This subpart describes program requirements for special housing types. The following are the special housing types: ( 1 ) Single room occupancy (SRO) housing;
( 2 ) Congregate housing;
( 3 ) Group home;
( 4 ) Shared housing;
( 5 ) Manufactured home;
( 6 ) Cooperative housing (excluding families that are not cooperative members); and
( 7 ) Homeownership option.
( b ) *PHA choice to offer special housing type.* ( 1 ) The PHA may permit a family to use any of the following special housing types in accordance with requirements of the program: single room occupancy (SRO) housing, congregate housing, group home, shared housing, manufactured home when the family owns the home and leases the manufactured home space, cooperative housing or homeownership option.
( 2 ) In general, the PHA is not required to permit families (including families that move into the PHA program under portability procedures) to use any of these special housing types, and may limit the number of families using special housing types.
( 3 ) The PHA must permit use of any special housing type if needed as a reasonable accommodation so that the program is readily accessible to and usable by persons with disabilities in accordance with 24 CFR part 8.
( 4 ) For occupancy of a manufactured home, see § 982.620(a).
( c ) *Program funding for special housing types.* ( 1 ) HUD does not provide any additional or designated funding for special housing types, or for a specific special housing type (e.g., the homeownership option). Assistance for special housing types is paid from program funding available for the PHA's tenant-based program under the consolidated annual contributions contract.
( 2 ) The PHA may not set aside program funding or program slots for special housing types or for a specific special housing type.
( d ) *Family choice of housing and housing type.* The family chooses whether to use housing that qualifies as a special housing type under this subpart, or as any specific special housing type, or to use other eligible housing in accordance with requirements of the program. The PHA may not restrict the family's freedom to choose among available units in accordance with § 982.353.
( e ) *Applicability of requirements.* ( 1 ) Except as modified by this subpart, the requirements of other subparts of this part apply to the special housing types.
( 2 ) Provisions in this subpart only apply to a specific special housing type. The housing type is noted in the title of each section.
( 3 ) Housing must meet the requirements of this subpart for a single special housing type specified by the family. Such housing is not subject to requirements for other special housing types. A single unit cannot be designated as more than one special housing type.
[63 FR 23865, Apr. 30, 1998, as amended at 65 FR 55162, Sept. 12, 2000; 67 FR 64493, Oct. 18, 2002; 80 FR 8247, Feb. 17, 2015]
### -78 -77 -76 -75 39 40 

## ★ ▲ ▲ ▲ ▲



## ★ ▲ ▲ ▲ ▲ 

### 500 1000 1500 100 18 12 06 00 08/18 

## NOAA HYSPLIT MODEL 

# Backward trajectory ending at 2300 UTC 18 Aug 06

EDAS Meteorological DataSource★at 39.44 N 77.04 WMeters AGL 

## ★ ■ ■ ■ ■



## ★ ■ ■ ■ ■



## ★ ● ● ●



## ★ ● ● ● ●
TURBODYNE UPDATES LITIGATION

Carpinteria, CaliforniaJanuary 11, 2001Turbodyne Technologies, Inc.
(EASDAQ:TRBD) reports the following update on legal affairs:

Bowne v. Turbodyne

On December 20, 2000 the Company was served with a Complaint for breach of contract, open book account, goods sold and delivered, account stated and
services rendered by Bowne of Los Angeles, Inc., a financial printer and former service provider to Turbodyne. The Complaint seeks approximately $50,000 in charges for past services plus
attorney's fees and costs. The action was filed in Los Angeles County, California. The Company expects to defend this action and file a timely response.

Turbodyne
Technologies, Inc., a California based high technology company, specializes in the development of charging technology for internal combustion engines and the
development and manufacturing of high-tech assemblies for electrically assisted turbochargers and superchargers. Turbodyne Technologies' headquarters is located in Carpinteria, California,
and its European office is located in Frankfurt, Germany.

Contacts:

Kenneth
FitzpatrickInvestor Relations at California Headquarters: (805) 684-4551

Markus
KumbrinkInvestor Relations at Frankfurt: +49-69-69-76-73-13

---

This
release contains forward-looking statements as defined in Section 21E of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, including statements about future business operations, financial performance
and market conditions. Such forward-looking statements involve risks and uncertainties inherent in business forecasts.

---

---
I 

109TH CONGRESS 

1ST SESSION H. R. 3368 

To designate the facility of the United States Postal Service located at 

6483 Lincoln Street in Gagetown, Michigan, as the ‘‘Gagetown Veterans 

Memorial Post Office’’. 

IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES 

JULY 20, 2005 

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

Committee on Government Reform 

A BILL 

To designate the facility of the United States Postal Service 

located at 6483 Lincoln Street in Gagetown, Michigan, 

as the ‘‘Gagetown Veterans Memorial Post Office’’. 

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

3 SECTION 1. GAGETOWN VETERANS MEMORIAL POST OF4 FICE. 

5 (a) DESIGNATION.—The facility of the United States 

6 Postal Service located at 6483 Lincoln Street in 

7 Gagetown, Michigan, shall be known and designated as 

8 the ‘‘Gagetown Veterans Memorial Post Office’’. 
2 

•HR 3368 IH 

1 (b) REFERENCES.—Any reference in a law, map, reg2 ulation, document, paper, or other record of the United 

3 States to the facility referred to in subsection (a) shall 

4 be deemed to be a reference to the ‘‘Gagetown Veterans 

5 Memorial Post Office’’. 

Æ
**Exhibit 99.4**

 

# Report of Management on Compliance

 

We, as members ofmanagement of Capital One Auto Finance, Inc. (“COAF”), a wholly ownedsubsidiary of Capital One Financial Corporation, are responsible for complyingwith the requirements of Sections 2.4(a), 2.4(b), 2.4(c), 3.7, 3.8, 3.9(a),3.11, 4.2, 4.3(a), 4.5, 4.6, and 9.2(e) of the Sale and Servicing Agreementdated as of July 27, 2004 regarding the Capital One Prime Auto ReceivablesTrust, 2004-2 Class A Notes (the “Agreement”), which was filed with theSecurities and Exchange Commission on Form 8-K on August 9, 2004. We are alsoresponsible for establishing and maintaining effective internal control overcompliance with the requirements referred to in the preceding sentence.

An evaluation of COAF’s compliancewith the requirements of Sections 2.4(a), 2.4(b), 2.4(c), 3.7, 3.8, 3.9(a),3.11, 4.2, 4.3(a), 4.5, 4.6, and 9.2(e) of the Agreement as of December 31,2004 and for the year then ended has been performed under our supervision.  Based on this evaluation, we assert that forthe year ended December 31, 2004, COAF complied with the requirements of thesections in the Agreement.

 
| Capital One Auto Finance, Inc. |                               | Capital One Auto Finance, Inc.  |   |
|--------------------------------|------------------------------------|--------------------------------------|--------|
|                           |                               |                                 |   |   |   |
| By:                            | /s/ David R. Lawson                |                                 |   | By: | /s/ W. Randolph Ellspermann |   |
| Name:                          | David R. Lawson                    |                                 |   | Name: | W. Randolph Ellspermann |   |
| Title:                         | President  Chief Executive Officer |                                 |   | Title: | Vice President  Chief Financial Officer |   |

 

 

 

 

March 10, 2005

 

----
#### George E. Brady, as Administrator of the Estate of John Brady, Deceased, Appellant, v. Patricia Du Vivier, Respondent.

Judgment unanimously affirmed, with costs to the respondent. No opinion. Concur — Botein, P. J., Rabin, Valente, Stevens and Noonan, JJ.