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

                   OFFICER'S CERTIFICATE REGARDING COMPLIANCE

                          USAA AUTO OWNER TRUST 2004-2

                         1.66%, $358,000,000 CLASS A-1,

                         2.41%, $386,000,000 CLASS A-2,

                         3.03%, $418,000,000 CLASS A-3,

                         3.58%, $274,640,000 CLASS A-4,

                           4.58%, $52,109,156 CLASS B

                    AUTOMOBILE LOAN PASS-THROUGH CERTIFICATES

     The undersigned individual, a duly authorized officer of USAA Federal
Savings Bank (the "Servicer"), acting on behalf of the Servicer, hereby
CERTIFIES on behalf of the Servicer pursuant to Section 3.10(a) of the Sale and
Servicing Agreement (the "Agreement") dated as of July 1, 2004, as follows:

     1.   A review of the activities of the Servicer during the period January
          1, 2004 through December 31, 2004, and of its performance under the
          Agreement has been made under such officer's supervision, and

     2.   To the best of such officer's knowledge, based on such review, the
          Servicer has fulfilled all its obligations in all material respects
          under the Agreement throughout such period.

                                        USAA FEDERAL SAVINGS BANK
                                        ("Servicer")


                                        By: Edwin T. McQuiston
                                            ------------------------------------
                                            Edwin T. McQuiston
                                            Title:  Vice President

                                        Date: March 29, 2005


                                      7
### §55121. Transportation of merchandise and passengers on Canadian vessels

(a) Between Rochester and Alexandria Bay.—Until passenger service is established by vessels of the United States between the port of Rochester, New York, and the port of Alexandria Bay, New York, the Secretary of Homeland Security may issue annually permits to Canadian passenger vessels to transport passengers between those ports. Canadian vessels holding such a permit are not subject to section 55103 of this title.

(b) Within Alaska or Between Alaska and Other Points in the United States.—Until the Secretary of Transportation determines that service by vessels of the United States is available to provide the transportation described in paragraph (1) or (2), sections 55102 and 55103 of this title do not apply to the transportation on Canadian vessels of—

(1) passengers between ports in southeastern Alaska; or

(2) passengers or merchandise between Hyder, Alaska, and other points in southeastern Alaska or in the United States outside Alaska.

(Pub. L. 109–304, §8(c), Oct. 6, 2006, 120 Stat. 1641.)

| Revised Section | Source (U.S. Code) | Source (Statutes at Large) |
| --- | --- | --- |
| 55121(a) | 46 App.:289a. | Apr. 26, 1938, ch. 174, 52 Stat. 223; 1946 Reorg. Plan No. 3, §§101–104, eff. July 16, 1946, 11 F.R. 7875, 60 Stat. 1097. |
| 55121(b) | 46 App.:289b. | Pub. L. 87–77, June 30, 1961, 75 Stat. 196; Pub. L. 97–31, §12(22), Aug. 6, 1981, 95 Stat. 155. |

Section

In subsection (a), the Secretary of Homeland Security is substituted for the Commissioner of Customs because the functions of the Customs Service and of the Secretary of the Treasury relating thereto were transferred to the Secretary of Homeland Security by section 403(1) of the Homeland Security Act of 2002 (Pub. L. 107–296, 116 Stat. 2178). The functions of the Commissioner of Customs previously were vested in the Secretary of the Treasury under section 321(c) of title 31. For prior related transfers of functions, see the transfer of functions note under 46 App. U.S.C. 289a.
#### § 1241.9 May I appeal the ALJ's decision?

If you are adversely affected by the ALJ's decision, you may appeal that decision to the IBLA under 43 CFR part 4, subpart E.
NASA LogoNTRSNTRS - NASA Technical Reports ServerSearchmore_vertCollectionsAboutNewsHelpLogin Back to ResultsEfficient solution of parabolic equations by Krylov approximation methodsNumerical techniques for solving parabolic equations by the method of lines is addressed. The main motivation for the proposed approach is the possibility of exploiting a high degree of parallelism in a simple manner. The basic idea of the method is to approximate the action of the evolution operator on a given state vector by means of a projection process onto a Krylov subspace. Thus, the resulting approximation consists of applying an evolution operator of a very small dimension to a known vector which is, in turn, computed accurately by exploiting well-known rational approximations to the exponential. Because the rational approximation is only applied to a small matrix, the only operations required with the original large matrix are matrix-by-vector multiplications, and as a result the algorithm can easily be parallelized and vectorized. Some relevant approximation and stability issues are discussed. We present some numerical experiments with the method and compare its performance with a few explicit and implicit algorithms.Document ID19930004221Acquisition SourceLegacy CDMSDocument TypeContractor Report (CR)AuthorsGallopoulos, E.*(Illinois Univ. Urbana-Champaign., United States)*Saad, Y.*(Minnesota Univ. Minneapolis., United States)*Date AcquiredSeptember 6, 2013Publication DateMarch 1, 1990Subject CategoryNumerical AnalysisReport/Patent NumberRIACS-TR-90-14NASA-CR-191235NAS 1.26:191235Accession Number93N13409Funding Number(s)CONTRACT_GRANT: NCC2-387CONTRACT_GRANT: NSF CCR-87-17942CONTRACT_GRANT: DE-FG02-85ER-25001CONTRACT_GRANT: AF-AFOSR-0044-90Distribution LimitsPublicCopyrightWork of the US Gov. Public Use Permitted.Available DownloadsNameType19930004221.pdfSTIcloud_downloadcontent_copyvisibilityRelated RecordsThere are no records associated with this record.visibility_offNo Preview Available
 No Fear Act | Freedom of Information Act | Office of the Inspector General | Agency Financial ReportsNASA Web Privacy Policy and Important Notices | NASA Guidelines for Quality of InformationDisclaimers, Copyright, Terms of Use | Accessibility | NASA OCIO | USA.gov | NASA.govContact Us | Site MapSTI LogoNASA Official: JoAnne R. Calhoun Site Curator: STI Compliance and Distribution Services Last Modified: September 12, 2024
§ 206.145 Items deducted from payment. ( a ) There shall be deducted from the total of the added items in § 206.129 the following cash items: ( 1 ) All amounts received by the mortgagee on account of the mortgage after the institution of foreclosure proceedings or the acquisition of the property or otherwise after due and payable.
( 2 ) All amounts received by the mortgagee from any source relating to the property on account of rent or other income after deducting reasonable expenses incurred in handling the property.
( 3 ) All cash retained by the mortgagee including amounts held or deposited for the account of the borrower or to which it is entitled under the mortgage transaction that have not been applied in reduction of the outstanding loan balance.
( 4 ) With regard to claims filed pursuant to successful short sales, all amounts received by the mortgagee relating to the sale of the property.
( b ) [Reserved]
Exhibit 31.1

CERTIFICATION

I, Harpreet S. Sangha, certify that;

(1)          I have reviewed this Report on Form 10-KSB for the year ended May 31, 2007 of Douglas Lake Minerals Inc.;

(2)          Based on my knowledge, this 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 Report;

(3)          Based on my knowledge, the financial statements, and other financial information included in this Report, fairly present in all material respects the financial condition, results of operations and cash flows of the small business issuer as of, and for, the periods presented in this report;

(4)          The small business issuer's other certifying officers and I are responsible for establishing and maintaining disclosure controls and procedures (as defined in Exchange Act Rules 13a-15(e) and 15d-15(e)) for the small business issuer and have:

(a)          designed such disclosure controls and procedures, or caused such disclosure controls and procedures to be designed under our supervision, to ensure that material information relating to the small business issuer, including its consolidated subsidiaries, is made known to us by others within those entities, particularly during the period in which this report is being prepared;

(b)          evaluated the effectiveness of the small business issuer's disclosure controls and procedures and presented in this Report our conclusions about the effectiveness of the disclosure controls and procedures, as of the end of the period covered by this report based on such evaluation; and 

(c)          disclosed in this Report any change in the small business issuer's internal control over financial reporting that occurred during the small business issuer's most recent fiscal quarter (the small business issuer's fourth fiscal quarter in the case of an annual report) that has materially affected, or is reasonably likely to materially affect, the small business issuer's internal control over financial reporting; and

(5)          The small business issuer's other certifying officer(s) and I have disclosed, based on our most recent evaluation of the internal control over financial reporting, to the small business issuer's auditors and the audit committee of small business issuer's board of directors (or persons performing the equivalent functions):

(a)          all significant deficiencies and material weaknesses in the design or operation of internal control over financial reporting which are reasonably likely to adversely affect the small business issuer's ability to record, process, summarize and report financial information; and 

(b)          any fraud, whether or not material, that involves management or other employees who have a significant role in the small business issuer's internal control over financial reporting.  

Date:  September 12, 2007.

By: */s/ Harpreet S. Sangha*
Editorial Note on Part 1206
Editorial Note: Nomenclature changes to part 1206 (formerly part 206) appear at 67 FR 19111, Apr. 18, 2002.

§ 1206.144 How will ONRR determine the value of my gas for royalty purposes? If ONRR decides to value your gas, residue gas, or gas plant products for royalty purposes under § 1206.143, or any other provision in this subpart, then ONRR will determine the value, for royalty purposes, by considering any information that we deem relevant, which may include, but is not limited to: ( a ) The value of like-quality gas in the same field or nearby fields or areas.
( b ) The value of like-quality residue gas or gas plant products from the same plant or area.
( c ) Public sources of price or market information that ONRR deems to be reliable.
( d ) Information available or reported to ONRR, including, but not limited to, on form ONRR-2014 and form ONRR-4054.
( e ) Costs of transportation or processing if ONRR determines that they are applicable.
( f ) Any information that ONRR deems relevant regarding the particular lease operation or the salability of the gas.
UNPUBLISHED

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

No. 13-2239

STARSHA SEWELL,

Plaintiff – Appellant,

v.

THOMAS P. DORE, Substitute Trustee; MARK S. DEVAN, 

Substitute Trustee; SHANNON MENAPACE, Substitute Trustee; 

KRISTEN K. HASKINS, Substitute Trustee; GERARD FRANCIS 

MILES, JR.; E. GLOTH, Substitute Trustee,

Defendants - Appellees.

Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of 

Maryland, at Greenbelt. Alexander Williams, Jr., District 

Judge. (8:12-cv-02889-AW)

Submitted: February 24, 2014 Decided: March 12, 2014

Before MOTZ, DUNCAN, and DIAZ, Circuit Judges.

Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion.

Starsha Sewell, Appellant Pro Se. Brandon Matthew Kilberg, 

COVAHEY, BOOZER, DEVAN & DORE, PA, Hunt Valley, Maryland; Gerard 

Francis Miles, HUESMAN, JONES & MILES, LLC, Hunt Valley, 

Maryland, for Appellees.

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.
2

PER CURIAM:

Starsha Sewell appeals the district court’s order 

denying her Fed. R. Civ. P. 60(b) motion. We have reviewed the 

record and find no reversible error. Accordingly, we affirm for 

the reasons stated by the district court. Sewell v. Dore, No. 

8:12-cv-02889-AW (D. Md. Oct. 1, 2013). We grant leave to 

proceed in forma pauperis and 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.

AFFIRMED
* This decision is rendered by a quorum due to the retirement of then-Chief Judge Hatchett on May 14, 1999. See , 28 U.S.C. §46(d). UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff-Appellee,

v. Roy Mack WEST, a.k.a. Teeny Man, etc., Defendant-Appellant. No. 95-6960. United States Court of Appeals, Eleventh Circuit.

Jan. 26, 2000. Appeal from the United States District Court for the Northern District of Alabama (No. 95-00091-CR-AR-S); William M. Acker, Jr., Judge. ON REMAND FROM THE SUPREME COURT OF THE UNITED STATES Before GODBOLD and RONEY, Senior Circuit Judges. * PER CURIAM: This case comes before us by order of the United States Supreme Court, which has vacated the judgment of this Court as to appellant Roy Mack West , and remanded the case for our reconsideration in light of

Richardson v. United States, 526 U.S. 813, 119 S.Ct. 1707, 143 L.Ed.2d 985(1999). See United States v. West, 142 F.3d 1408 (11th Cir.1998), vacated and remanded, --- U.S. ----, 119 S.Ct. 2042, 144 L.Ed.2d 211 (1999). In Richardson, the Supreme Court held that "a jury in a federal crimin al case brought under [21 U.S.C.] § 848 must unanimously agree not only that the defendant committed some 'continuing series of violations' but also that the defendant committed each of the individual 'violations' necessary to make up that 'continuing series.' " 526 U.S. at ----, 119 S.Ct. at 1709. West was convicted of both conducting a continuing criminal enterprise ("CCE")(Count 1) and being a member of the underlying drug conspiracy (Count 2). At sentencing, the court vacated Count 2 as a lesser included offense of the CCE conviction. See United States v. Nixon, 918 F.2d 895, 908 (11th Cir.1990) (when defendant convicted on both a CCE count and a conspiracy county, the Court will merge the twooffenses by vacating the conviction of the lesser incl uded conspiracy count). The government concedes that the jury instruction given was not in accord with the requirements of Richardson and that West's conviction on the CCE count cannot stand, see also United States v. Riley, No. 96-4653, 161 F.3d 20 (11th Cir.1998)(unpublished), and requests that this Court remand to the district court with instructions to reinstate the vacated drug conspiracy count and resentence West. Accordingly, we vacate West's conviction for engaging in a continuing criminal enterprise. Since the conspiracy conviction under Count 2 was v acated only because it was a lesser included offense of the CCE conviction, and the CCE conviction no longer stands, we remand this case to the district court with instructions to reinstate West's conspir acy conviction under Count 2 and resentence him. VACATED AND REMANDED.
#### § 3288.305 Consultation with the Manufactured Housing Consensus Committee.

HUD will seek input from the MHCC when revising the HUD Manufactured Home Dispute Resolution Program regulations in this part 3288. Before publication of a proposed rule to revise these regulations, HUD will provide the MHCC with an opportunity to comment on such revision. The MHCC may send to HUD any of the MHCC's own recommendations to adopt new dispute resolution program regulations or to modify or repeal any of the regulations in this part. Along with each recommendation, the MHCC must set forth pertinent data and arguments in support of the action sought. HUD will either: accept or modify the recommendation and publish it for public comment in accordance with section 553 of the Administrative Procedure Act (5 U.S.C. 553), along with an explanation of the reasons for any such modification; or reject the recommendation entirely, and provide to the MHCC a written explanation of the reasons for the rejection. This section does not supersede section 605 of the National Manufactured Housing Construction and Safety Standards Act of 1974 (42 U.S.C. 5404).
#### § 904.121 Use of appendices.

Use of the following Appendices is mandatory for Projects developed under this subpart:
----

**CERTIFICATION      PURSUANT TO 18 U.S.C. SECTION 1350**

|   | (1) | The                Report fully complies with the requirements of section 13(a) or 15(d)                of                the Securities Exchange Act of 1934;                and |
|--------|-----|-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|

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

|   | /s/                Samuel M. Hopkins,                II                                                         Samuel                M. Hopkins, IIVice                President and Chief Accounting                Officer |
|--------|--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|
**Exhibit 31.2**
**Rule 13a-14(a) Certification of the Chief Financial Officer**
I, J. Dave DeVenny, Senior Vice President and Chief Financial Officer, certify that:
1.  I have reviewed this annual report on Form 10-KSB of Georgia Trust Bancshares, Inc. 2.  Based on my knowledge, this annual report does not contain any untrue statement of a materialfact or omit to state a material fact necessary to make the statements made, in light of thecircumstances under which such statements were made, not misleading with respect to the periodcovered by this report. 3.  Based on my knowledge, the financial statements, and other financial information included inthis report, fairly present in all material respects the financial condition, results ofoperations and cash flows of the small business issuer as of, and for, the periods presentedin this report; 4.  The small business issuer’s other certifying officers and I are responsible for establishingand maintaining disclosure controls and procedures (as defined in Exchange Act Rules 13a-15(e)and 15d-15(e)) for the small business issuer and have:
 a)  Designed such disclosure controls and procedures, or caused such disclosurecontrols and procedures to be designed under our supervision, to ensure that materialinformation relating to the small business issuer, including its consolidatedsubsidiaries, is made known to us by others within those entities, particularly duringthe period in which this report is being prepared;  b)  Evaluated the effectiveness of the small business issuer’s disclosure controlsand procedures and presented in this report our conclusions about the effectiveness ofthe disclosure controls and procedures as of the end of the period covered by thisreport based on such evaluation; and  c)  Disclosed in this report any change in the small business issuer’s internalcontrol over financial reporting that occurred during the small business issuer’sfourth fiscal quarter that has materially affected, or is reasonably likely tomaterially affect, the small business issuer’s internal control over financialreporting; and
5.  The small business issuer’s other certifying officers and I have disclosed, based on our mostrecent evaluation of internal control over financial reporting, to the small business issuer’sauditors and the audit committee of the small business issuer’s board of directors (or personsperforming the equivalent functions):
 a)  All significant deficiencies and material weaknesses in the design or operationof internal controls over financial reporting which are reasonably likely to adverselyaffect the small business issuer’s ability to record, process, summarize and reportfinancial information; and  b)  Any fraud, whether or not material, that involves management or other employeeswho have a significant role in the small business issuer’s internal control overfinancial reporting.   Date: March 31, 2005      /s/ J. Dave DeVenny   J. Dave DeVenny, Senior Vice President and C.F.O. (Principal Financial and Accounting Officer)
##### 



Exhibit 99.2

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 Firearms Training Systems, Inc.
(the Company) on Form 10-Q for the period ended June 30, 2002 as filed with
the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the Report), I,
John A. Morelli, Chief Financial Officer of the Company, certify, pursuant to
18 U.S.C. § 1350, as adopted pursuant to § 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of
2002, that:

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

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

| |                        
| | -----------------------
| | /s/ John A. Morelli    
| |                        
| | John A. Morelli        
| | Chief Financial Officer
| | August 14, 2002
### §1421n. Applicability of Federal copyright laws

The laws of the United States relating to copyrights, and to the enforcement of rights arising thereunder, shall have the same force and effect in Guam as in the continental United States.

(Aug. 1, 1956, ch. 852, §24, 70 Stat. 911.)

#### **Editorial Notes**

#### References in Text

The laws of the United States relating to copyrights, referred to in text, are classified generally to Title 17, Copyrights.

#### Codification

Section was not enacted as part of the Organic Act of Guam which comprises this chapter.