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

EXHIBIT 99.3

           CERTIFICATION PROVIDED BY THE ADMINISTRATOR WITH FORM 10-K

Re:  Origen Manufactured Housing Contract Trust 2005-B (the "Trust" or
     the"Issuer"), Origen Manufactured Housing Contract Trust Collateralized
     Notes, Series 2005-B

I, W. Anderson Geater, Jr., the senior officer of Origen Servicing, Inc., the
Administrator for Origen Manufactured Housing Contract Trust 2005-B (the
"Registrant"), certify that:

1. I have reviewed this annual report on Form 10-K, and all reports on Form 8-K
containing distribution and servicing reports filed in respect of periods
included in the year covered by this annual report, of Registrant;

2. Based on my knowledge, the information in these reports, taken as a whole,
does not contain any untrue statement of a material fact or omit to state a
material fact necessary to make the statements made, in the light of the
circumstances under which such statements were made, not misleading as of the
last day of the period covered by this annual report;

3. Based on my knowledge, the distribution information required to be provided
by the Indenture Trustee under the Indenture, and the servicing information
required to be provided to the Indenture Trustee by the Servicer under the
Servicing Agreement for inclusion in these reports, is included in these
reports;

4. Based on my knowledge and upon the annual compliance statements included in
the report and required to be delivered to the indenture trustee in accordance
with the terms of the Servicing Agreement, and except as disclosed in the
reports, the Servicer has fulfilled its obligations under the Servicing
Agreement, and

5. The reports disclose all significant deficiencies relating to the servicer's
compliance with the minimum servicing standards based upon the report provided
by an independent public accountant, after conducting a review in compliance
with the Uniform Single Attestation Program for Mortgage Bankers or similar
procedure, as set forth in the servicing, or similar, agreement, that is
included in these reports.

In giving the certification above, I have reasonably relied on information
provided to me by the Indenture Trustee and the Servicer.

Capitalized terms used but not defined herein have the meanings ascribed to them
the Indenture, dated December 1, 2005 (the "Indenture"), among Origen
Manufactured Housing Contract Trust 2005-B as issuer, and JPMorgan Chase Bank,
N.A., as indenture trustee.

                                        Origen Servicing, Inc


                                        By: /s/ W. Anderson Geater, Jr.
                                            ------------------------------------
                                        Name: W. Anderson Geater, Jr.
                                        Title: Chief Financial Officer
                                        Date: March 16, 2006
Exhibit 10.4


                                 ZENASCENT, INC.
                                1 Montauk Highway
                              Southampton, NY 11968


September 10, 2002

Mr. Chester English
Livingston Investments, LLC
C/o Law Offices of Harrison K. Chauncey, Jr.
241 Bradley Place
Palm Beach, Florida 33480

Re: Warrant To Purchase Common Stock

Dear Chester:

Reference is hereby made to the Warrant To Purchase Common Stock, dated April
30, 2002 (the "Warrant"), executed by Zenascent, Inc. ("Zenascent") in favor of
Livingston Investments, LLC ("Livingston").

The parties hereto hereby agree as follows:

1.   The reference to "One Million (1,000,000)" in the Paragraph of the Warrant
     immediately preceding "Section 1." shall be deleted and replaced with "Five
     Hundred Thousand (500,000)."

2.   The reference to "$1.24" in the definition of "Exercise Price" shall be
     deleted and replaced with "$.62."

3.   The execution, delivery and effectiveness of this letter agreement shall
     not operate as a waiver of any right, power or remedy of the parties, nor
     constitute a waiver of any provision of the Warrant. Except as expressly
     amended and modified hereby, the provisions of the Warrant are and shall
     remain in full force and effect.

4.   This Amendment may be executed in multiple counterparts each of which shall
     be deemed to be an original and all of which when taken together shall
     constitute one and the same agreement. Facsimile machine copies of this
     letter agreement may be executed by the parties and shall be deemed as
     binding as if originals had been executed.


<PAGE>


5.   This letter agreement and all rights, obligations and liabilities hereunder
     shall be governed by the laws of the State of New York.


IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the parties have executed this letter agreement on the day
and year first written above.


ZENASCENT, INC.


By: /s/ James DiLorenzo
    ----------------------------
Name:  James DiLorenzo
Title:  Executive Vice President


LIVINGSTON INVESTMENTS, LLC


By: /s/ Chester English
    ----------------------------
Name:  Chester English
Title:     Managing Member
Pursuant to 5TH CIR. R. 47.5, the court has determined that this opinion should not *

be published and is not precedent except under the limited circumstances set forth in 5TH CIR.

R. 47.5.4.

IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT

No. 08-20746

RUDY LOVE, doing business as Rudy Love Distributing Company,

Plaintiff - Appellant

v.

D F STAUFFER BISCUIT COMPANY, INC,

Defendant - Appellee

v.

BARBCO, INC,

Intervenor - Appellant

Appeal from the United States District Court 

for the Southern District of Texas

Before REAVLEY, JOLLY, and WIENER, Circuit Judges.

PER CURIAM:*

Vanilla wafers are at the center of this dispute. Rudy Love (“Love”) and

Barbco, Inc. (“Barbco”) claim that D. F. Stauffer Biscuit Company, Inc.

(“Stauffer”) agreed to sell the snacks to them, but Stauffer disagrees. The

United States Court of Appeals

Fifth Circuit

F I L E D

October 22, 2009

Charles R. Fulbruge III

Clerk
No. 08-20746

2

district court sided with Stauffer and granted summary judgment without a

written opinion. Love and Barbco now appeal. After reviewing the record,

hearing oral argument, and considering the context of negotiations, we agree

with the otherwise taciturn district court that there was no contract and affirm.

First, Love and Barbco conceded at oral argument—and we agree—that

the district court had jurisdiction, so we proceed to the merits.

When negotiations take place in writing, we can evaluate offer and

acceptance as a matter of law. Gilbert v. Pettiette, 838 S.W.2d 890, 893 (Tex.

App. 1992). Love and Barbco point to a May 3, 2006, e-mail from a Stauffer

employee and characterize it as a year-long firm offer. We disagree. Texas law

caps firm offers at thirty days. We think a more reasonable interpretation is to

read the e-mail as at best a modification of a previous rejected offer, limited to

acceptance within thirty days just as the previous offer required. Neither Love

nor Barbco accepted within that time. When Stauffer offered to honor the

expired price if Barbco would show the contract to Stauffer, Barbco apparently

failed to do so. We can find no Stauffer offer that Barbco accepted.

We find Love and Barbco’s other arguments similarly unpersuasive. First,

although we agree that the district court erred in ruling sua sponte on all of their

claims when only presented with a motion for summary judgment on the

contract claim, the error was harmless. Second, whether the district court

abused its discretion in refusing to continue discovery is a closer issue, but we

are not convinced that further discovery would have changed the outcome. Any

error was harmless. Third, the district court did not abuse its discretion when

it denied Love and Barbco’s motion to amend the pleadings. They had ample

time to amend, and their amendments would have had no effect.

For these reasons, the judgment of the district court is AFFIRMED.
§ 57.6404 Separation of blasting circuits from power source. ( a ) Switches used to connect the power source to a blasting circuit shall be locked in the open position except when closed to fire the blast.
( b ) Lead wires shall not be connected to the blasting switch until the shot is ready to be fired.
#### The People of the State of New York, Plaintiff, v. Robert F. Marshall, Defendant.

Motion to direct the County Clerk of Westchester County to deliver to defendant, without charge, a certified copy of the records and proceedings in connection with the judgment of conviction rendered against him. Motion denied. Nolan, P. J., Beldoek, Ughetta, Christ and Pette, JJ., concur.
Exhibit 23.2











CONSENT OF INDEPENDENT REGISTERED PUBLIC ACCOUNTING FIRM





We hereby consent to the incorporation by reference in Post-Effective Amendment No. 13 to the Registration Statement on Form S-14 (File No. 2-96149) and in the Registration Statements on Form S-3 (File No. 333-199694) and Form S-8 (File Nos. 333-28631, 33-10218, 33-13210, 33-14561, 33-48781, 33-59109, 333-43478, 333-43484, 333-128494, 333-139523, 333-148070, 333-156188, 333-167516, 333-170185, 333-204477 and 333-209701) of Altria Group, Inc. of our report dated 14 March, 2016 relating to the financial statements, which appears in Anheuser-Busch InBev SA/NV’s Annual Report on Form 20-F for the year ended December 31, 2016, which is incorporated by reference into this Amendment No. 1 to Altria Group, Inc.’s Annual Report on Form 10-K for the year ended December 31, 2016.





Sint-Stevens-Woluwe, Belgium


15 June 2017





PricewaterhouseCoopers Bedrijfsrevisoren BCVBA


Represented by





/s/ Koen Hens


Koen Hens


Bedrijfsrevisor
Exhibit 31.1



CERTIFICATIONS PURSUANT TO RULE 13a-14(A) OF THE EXCHANGE ACT



I, Jeffrey Kang, Chief Executive Officer of Comtech Group, Inc., certify that:



1. I have reviewed this quarterly report on Form 10-Q of Comtech Group,
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 registrant as of, and for, the periods presented in this report;



4. The registrants other certifying officer 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 registrant 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 registrant, 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 registrant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 registrants internal
control over financial reporting that occurred during the registrants most recent fiscal quarter that has materially affected, or is reasonably likely to materially affect, the registrants internal control over financial reporting; and



5. The registrants other certifying officer and I have
disclosed, based on our most recent evaluation of internal control over financial reporting, to the registrants auditors and the audit committee of registrants board of directors:



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 registrant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 registrants internal control over financial reporting.



|                   |  |                              
|------------------ |  | -----------------------------
|Date: May 15, 2005 |  | /s/ Jeffrey Kang             
|                   |  | Jeffrey Kang                 
|                   |  | Chief Executive Officer      
|                   |  | (Principal Executive Officer)
#### Kenneth R. Martin et al., Appellants, v County of Delaware et al., Respondents.

Appeals from judgments of the County Court of Delaware County, entered January 6, 1977, upon a decision of the court at a Trial Term, without a jury, in favor of defendants. At issue on this appeal is the nature of a 1914 transaction by which an interest in certain real property was granted to the County of Delaware "for purposes of right of way and construction” of a highway ultimately known as State Route 23. In their action under article 15 of the Real Property Actions and Proceedings Law, plaintiffs contended the subject document created an easement that enabled its grantor to pass title to the premises to them following the subsequent abandonment of that highway use, whereas defendants maintained the conveyance transferred an estate in fee simple to the county that remained unaffected by later events thereby vesting title in them according to the terms of their respective deeds from the county. The claim was tried and determined in defendants’ favor. We agree with the conclusion of the trial court that the fee of the disputed property was in the County of Delaware and affirm its judgment. The instrument in question was, in form, a quitclaim deed which is generally effective to convey all the title its grantor possesses. Unlike the situation presented in *Bradley v Crane*(201 NY 14), the county had no prior interest in the property and the lands involved were specifically described by reference to a map. In addition, the instant conveyance contained no express limitation in the wording of the grant or in the habendum clause. Even when an instrument reflects a dedication "for highway purposes, *and not otherwise”*(emphasis supplied), the use of such language will not suffice to transform the conveyance of a fee into the grant of an easement *(Matter of Fusaro v D’Angelo,*41 AD2d 567). Lastly, it should be observed that the deed under review recited a consideration of $600, a substantial sum at the time, and it hardly seems likely that the grantor would be expected to surrender anything other than his entire estate in exchange for that amount of money. None of the surrounding circumstances developed at the trial persuade us that what appears on its face to be the transference of a fee was, in reality, intended to be the grant of something less. Judgments affirmed, without costs. Mahoney, P. J., Sweeney, Kane, Main and Larkin, JJ., concur.
NOT FOR PUBLICATION

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

 FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT

WALTER MIRA, a.k.a. Walter Ernesto

Mira Garcia,

 Petitioner,

 v.

ERIC H. HOLDER, Jr., Attorney General,

 Respondent.

No. 11-72897

Agency No. A095-025-405

MEMORANDUM*

On Petition for Review of an Order of the

Board of Immigration Appeals

Submitted June 12, 2014** 

Before: McKEOWN, WARDLAW, and M. SMITH, Circuit Judges.

Walter Mira, a native and citizen of El Salvador, petitions for review of the

Board of Immigration Appeals’ (“BIA”) order dismissing his appeal from an

immigration judge’s decision denying his application for asylum, withholding of

removal, and protection under the Convention Against Torture (“CAT”). We have

FILED

JUN 17 2014

MOLLY C. DWYER, CLERK

U.S. COURT OF APPEALS

 * This disposition is not appropriate for publication and is not precedent

except as provided by 9th Cir. R. 36-3.

 ** The panel unanimously concludes this case is suitable for decision

without oral argument. See Fed. R. App. P. 34(a)(2).
jurisdiction under 8 U.S.C. § 1252. We review for substantial evidence the

agency’s factual findings. Zehatye v. Gonzales, 453 F.3d 1182, 1184-85 (9th Cir.

2006). We deny the petition for review.

In his opening brief, Mira failed to raise any substantive challenge to either

the agency’s determination that his asylum claim was time-barred, or the agency’s

denial of his withholding of removal claim. See Martinez-Serrano v. INS, 94 F.3d

1256, 1259-60 (9th Cir. 1996) (issues not supported by argument are deemed

waived).

Finally, substantial evidence supports the agency’s denial of CAT relief

because Mira failed to establish it is more likely than not he would be tortured by

or with the acquiescence of the government if returned to El Salvador. See Silaya

v. Mukasey, 524 F.3d 1066, 1073 (9th Cir. 2008). Mira contends the agency erred

by failing to consider the two articles he submitted regarding gang-related violence

and other “human rights problems.” We reject this contention because Mira does

not point to any information in the articles relevant to his claim that he faces a

likelihood of torture with the consent or acquiescence of the Salvadorean

government. We also reject Mira’s contention that the BIA applied an incorrect

standard for government acquiescence. 

PETITION FOR REVIEW DENIED.

2 11-72897
METAL / NONMETAL

Near Miss Accident

Clay – A miner was operating a forklift when the forklift fell from the loading 

dock onto the bulk bag. The fork lift operator was wearing his seat belt and 

this prevented an injury or possibly death.

 

Best Practices

• Examine your work places for all possible hazards and correct them before you 

perform work.

• Always operate forklifts according to established safety procedures.

• Obey the safety instructions and warnings on decals, labels, plates, and safety 

signs.

• Ensure that mobile equipment operators are adequately task trained in all phases 

of mobile equipment operation before performing work.

• Operate equipment within its designed limitations. Slow down or drop to a lower 

gear when necessary. Post areas where lower speeds are warranted.

• Always wear a seat belt when operating self-propelled mobile equipment.
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<ARTICLE> 5
<LEGEND>
This schedule contains summary financial information extracted from the
Company's Form 10-KSB for the year ended December 31, 1998 and is qualified in
it entirety by reference to such financial statements.
</LEGEND>
       
<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   YEAR
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          DEC-31-1998
<PERIOD-END>                               DEC-31-1998
<CASH>                                       1,036,429
<SECURITIES>                                         0
<RECEIVABLES>                                  399,855
<ALLOWANCES>                                    13,000
<INVENTORY>                                     18,020
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                             1,520,829
<PP&E>                                         165,337
<DEPRECIATION>                                 299,663
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                               2,402,352
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                           56,070
<BONDS>                                              0
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                       932,333
<OTHER-SE>                                   1,413,949
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                 2,402,352
<SALES>                                      1,802,638
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                             1,802,638
<CGS>                                          161,069
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                2,912,831
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                     0
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                     0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                                 647
<INCOME-PRETAX>                            (1,110,840)
<INCOME-TAX>                                   (3,681)
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                        (1,114,521)
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                               (1,114,521)
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                    (.07)
<EPS-DILUTED>                                        0
        

</TABLE>
```

[Congressional Bills 118th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[H.R. 9493 Introduced in House (IH)]

<DOC>

118th CONGRESS
  2d Session
                                H. R. 9493

 To name the Department of Veterans Affairs community-based outpatient 
  clinic in Las Cruces, New Mexico, the ``Las Cruces Bataan Memorial 
                               Clinic''.

_______________________________________________________________________

                    IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

                           September 6, 2024

 Mr. Vasquez introduced the following bill; which was referred to the 
                     Committee on Veterans' Affairs

_______________________________________________________________________

                                 A BILL

 
 To name the Department of Veterans Affairs community-based outpatient 
  clinic in Las Cruces, New Mexico, the ``Las Cruces Bataan Memorial 
                               Clinic''.

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

SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE.

    This Act may be cited as the ``Las Cruces Bataan Memorial Clinic 
Act''.

SEC. 2. NAME OF DEPARTMENT OF VETERANS AFFAIRS COMMUNITY-BASED 
              OUTPATIENT CLINIC, LAS CRUCES, NEW MEXICO.

    The Department of Veterans Affairs community-based outpatient 
clinic in Las Cruces, New Mexico, shall, after the date of the 
enactment of this Act, be known and designated as the ``Las Cruces 
Bataan Memorial Clinic''. Any reference to such clinic in any law, 
regulation, map, document, record, or other paper of the United States 
shall be considered to be a reference to the Las Cruces Bataan Memorial 
Clinic.
                                 <all>
```
§ 57.4230 Surface self-propelled equipment. ( a ) ( 1 ) Whenever a fire or its effects could impede escape from self-propelled equipment, a fire extinguisher shall be on the equipment.
( 2 ) Whenever a fire or its effects would not impede escape from the equipment but could affect the escape of other persons in the area, a fire extinguisher shall be on the equipment or within 100 feet of the equipment.
( b ) A fire suppression system may be used as an alternative to fire extinguishers if the system can be manually activated.
( c ) Fire extinguishers or fire suppression systems shall be of a type and size that can extinguish fires of any class in their early stages which could originate from the equipment's inherent fire hazards. Fire extinguishers or manual actuators for the suppression system shall be located to permit their use by persons whose escape could be impeded by fire.