alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
**ASSIGNMENT OF AGREEMENTS,**

**PERMITS AND CONTRACTS**

 

**THIS ASSIGNMENT OF AGREEMENTS, PERMITS AND CONTRACTS**(“Assignment”) is made as of the ___day of August, 2006, by EVEREST BAYBERRY, LP, a California limited partnership, having its principal place of business at c/o Everest Properties, 199 S. Los Robles Avenue, Suite 200, Pasadena, California 91101 Attn: W. Robert Kohorst (“Borrower”), to LEHMAN BROTHERS BANK, FSB, a federal stock savings bank, having an address at c/o Lehman Brothers, Inc., 1000 West Street, Wilmington, Delaware 19801 (“Lender”).

 

**RECITALS:**

 

A.        Borrower, by its promissory note of even date herewith given to Lender (the note together with all extensions, renewals, modifications, substitutions and amendments thereof shall collectively be referred to as the “Note”), is indebted to Lender in the principal sum of Three Million One Hundred Twenty-Five Thousand and 00/100 Dollars ($3,125,000.00) in lawful money of the United States of America, with interest from the date thereof at the rates set forth in the Note (the indebtedness evidenced by the Note, together with such interest accrued thereon, shall collectively be referred to as the “Loan”), principal and interest to be payable in accordance with the terms and conditions provided in the Note.

 

B.        The Loan is secured by, among other things, the Security Instrument (as defined in the Note), which grants Lender a first lien on the property encumbered thereby (the “Property”).

 

C.        Lender was unwilling to make the Loan to Borrower unless Borrower in the manner hereinafter set forth assigned to Lender as additional security for the payment of the Loan and the observance and performance by Borrower of the terms, covenants and conditions of the Note, the Security Instrument and the other Loan Documents (as defined in the Note) on the part of Borrower to be observed and performed, all of Borrower’s right, title and interest in and to all permits, license agreements, operating contracts, licenses (including liquor licenses, to the extent assignable by Borrower), franchise agreements and all management, service, supply and maintenance contracts and agreements, and any other agreements, permits or contracts of any nature whatsoever now or hereafter obtained or entered into by Borrower with respect to the ownership,operation, maintenance and administration of the Property (collectively, the “Agreements”).

 

**AGREEMENT:**

 

For good and valuable consideration the parties hereto agree as follows:

 

----
**Exhibit
      32.1**




**CERTIFICATION
      PURSUANT TO**


**SECTION
      906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002**




**(18
      U.S.C. SECTION 1350)**





Pursuant
      to 18 U.S.C. § 1350, the undersigned officer of Liberty Renewable Fuels LLC (the
“ ***Company*** ”)
      hereby
      certifies that, to the best of his knowledge:




(i)  the
      Company’s Annual Report on Form 10-K for the year ended December 31,
      2007 **** (the
      “ ***Report*** ”)
      fully
      complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) or 15(d) of the Securities
      Exchange Act of 1934; and




(ii)  the
      information contained in the Report fairly presents, in all material respects,
      the consolidated financial condition and results of operations of the Company.




This
      certification has not been, and shall not be deemed “filed” with the Securities
      and Exchange Commission.




Date:
                April 15, 2008
            By:
            /s/ David M. Skjaerlund**Name:
              David M. Skjaerlund****Title:
                Chief Executive Of**ficer****




**CERTIFICATION
      PURSUANT TO**


**SECTION
      906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002**


**(18
      U.S.C. SECTION 1350)**




Pursuant
      to 18 U.S.C. § 1350, the undersigned officer of Liberty Renewable Fuels LLC (the
“ ***Company*** ”)
      hereby
      certifies that, to the best of his knowledge:




(i)  the
      Company’s Annual Report on Form 10-K for the year ended December 31,
      2007 **** (the
      “ ***Report*** ”)
      fully
      complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) or 15(d) of the Securities
      Exchange Act of 1934; and




(ii)  the
      information contained in the Report fairly presents, in all material respects,
      the consolidated financial condition and results of operations of the Company.




This
      certification has not been, and shall not be deemed “filed” with the Securities
      and Exchange Commission.


Date:
                  April 15, 2008
              By:
              /s/ Scott W. Crumbaugh**Name:
                Scott W. Crumbaugh****Title:
                  **Chief
                  Financial
                  Officer****
§ 4287.345 Default by Borrower. The Lender's primary responsibilities in Default are to act reasonably and expeditiously, to work with the Borrower to bring the account current or cure the Default through restructuring if a realistic plan can be developed, or to accelerate the account and conduct a liquidation in a manner that will minimize any potential loss. The Lender may initiate liquidation in accordance with § 4287.357. ( a ) The Lender must notify the Agency in writing when a Borrower is more than 30 days past due on a payment and the Delinquency cannot be cured within 30 days or when a Borrower is otherwise in Default of covenants in the Loan Agreement by submitting Form RD 1980-44, “Guaranteed Loan Borrower Default Status,” or processing the Default Status report in LINC. The Lender must provide this notification to the Agency within 15 calendar days of when a Borrower is 30 days past due on a payment or is otherwise in Default of the Loan Agreement. The Lender must update the loan's status each month using either Form RD 1980-44 or the LINC Default Status report until such time as the loan is no longer in Default. If a monetary Default exceeds 60 days, the Lender must meet with the Agency and, if practical, the Borrower to discuss the situation.
( b ) In considering options, the prospects for providing a permanent cure without adversely affecting the risk to the Agency and the Lender are the paramount objective. ( 1 ) Curative actions (subject to the rights of any Holder) include, but are not limited to: ( i ) Deferment of principal or Interest payments;
( ii ) An additional unguaranteed temporary loan by the Lender to bring the account current;
( iii ) Reamortization of or rescheduling the payments on the loan (subject to the rights of any Holder) excluding capitalization of accrued Interest;
( iv ) Transfer and Assumption of the loan in accordance with § 4287.334;
( v ) Reorganization;
( vi ) Liquidation; and
( vii ) Changes in Interest rates with the Agency's, the Lender's, and Holder's approval. Any Interest rate changes must be adjusted proportionately between the guaranteed and unguaranteed portion of the loan.
( 2 ) The term of any deferment, rescheduling, reamortization, or moratorium will be limited to the lesser of the remaining life of the Collateral or remaining limits as set forth in § 4279.234 of this chapter (excluding paragraph (d)). Balloon payments are permitted as a loan servicing option as long as there is a reasonable prospect for success and the remaining life of the Collateral supports the action.
( 3 ) In the event of a loss or a repurchase, the Lender cannot claim Default or penalty Interest, late payment fees, or Interest on Interest.
( c ) Debt write-downs by the lender are prohibited when the Lender will continue with the Project loan, except as directed or ordered by a final court order.
( d ) In the event of a loss, the guarantee will not cover Interest to the Lender accruing after the Interest Termination Date.
( e ) For repurchases of guaranteed loans, refer to § 4279.225 of this chapter.
#### § 51.3066 Fairly well colored.

*Fairly well colored* means that the avocado shows a shade of color which is fairly characteristic of the variety.
Page 1 of 2

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA

GAINESVILLE DIVISION

JULIUS DUNMORE and ANGELA

FETCHER, on behalf of

themselves and others similarly

situated,

Plaintiffs,

 CASE NO.: 1:05-cv-150-SPM

vs.

 

THE PROGRESSIVE CORPORATION,

et al.,

Defendants.

_______________________________/

SECOND ORDER CONSOLIDATING CASES

THIS CAUSE comes sua sponte before the Court. By order dated

November 22, 2005 (doc. 9), the Court granted the parties’ motion to consolidate

this case (1-05-cv-150-SPM) with case number 1-00-cv-210-MMP (Smith, et al.,

v. The Progressive, et al.), as they share common questions of fact or law. 

However, case 1-00-cv-210-MMP has also been consolidated into case number

1-03-cv-1519-MMP, which is the lead case for all litigation involving Progressive

Corporation’s insurance underwriting and rating practices (MDL-1519). Thus, the

instant case is properly consolidated with lead case 1-03-cv-1519-MMP. 

Case 1:00-cv-00210-MP-AK Document 142 Filed 12/21/05 Page 1 of 2
Page 2 of 2

Accordingly, it is

ORDERED AND ADJUDGED as follows:

1. Case number 1:05-cv-150-SPM is consolidated into case number

1-03-cv-1519-MMP.

2. Case number 1-03-cv-1519-MMP is the lead case. The parties 

shall file all further documents in case number 1-03-cv-1519-MMP

(MDL-1519).

DONE AND ORDERED this twenty-first day of December, 2005.

 s/ Stephan P. Mickle 

Stephan P. Mickle

United States District Judge

/pao

Case 1:00-cv-00210-MP-AK Document 142 Filed 12/21/05 Page 2 of 2
Page 1 of 2

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE

NORTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA

PENSACOLA DIVISION

ASMAR NAFIS NEWSOME,

Plaintiff,

vs. Case No.: 3:20cv5783/LAC/EMT

M. JOSEPH, et al.,

Defendants.

 /

ORDER

The chief magistrate judge issued a Report and Recommendation on

December 1, 2020 (ECF No. 5). Plaintiff was furnished a copy of the Report and

Recommendation and afforded an opportunity to file objections pursuant to Title

28, United States Code, Section 636(b)(1). No objections have been filed.

Having considered the Report and Recommendation, I have determined it

should be adopted.

Accordingly, it is ORDERED:

1. The chief magistrate judge’s Report and Recommendation (ECF No.

5) is adopted and incorporated by reference in this order.

2. This case is DISMISSED without prejudice for Plaintiff’s failure to

Case 3:20-cv-05783-LC-EMT Document 7 Filed 01/15/21 Page 1 of 2
Page 2 of 2

 comply with court orders.

3. The clerk is directed to close this case.

DONE AND ORDERED this 15th day of January, 2020.

 s/L.A. Collier 

LACEY A. COLLIER

SENIOR UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE

Case No.: 3:20cv5783/LAC/EMT

Case 3:20-cv-05783-LC-EMT Document 7 Filed 01/15/21 Page 2 of 2
[Federal Register Volume 75, Number 225 (Tuesday, November 23, 2010)]
[Notices]
[Page 71454]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2010-29665]


=======================================================================
-----------------------------------------------------------------------

INTERNATIONAL TRADE COMMISSION

 [USITC SE-10-031]


Sunshine Act Meeting

AGENCY HOLDING THE MEETING: United States International Trade 
Commission.

TIME AND DATE: November 30, 2010 at 11 a.m.

PLACE: Room 101, 500 E Street, SW., Washington, DC 20436, Telephone: 
(202) 205-2000.

STATUS: Open to the public.

MATTERS TO BE CONSIDERED: 
    1. Agendas for future meetings: None.
    2. Minutes.
    3. Ratification List.
    4. Vote in Inv. No. 731-TA-1058 (Review) (Wooden Bedroom Furniture 
from China). The Commission is currently scheduled to transmit its 
determination and Commissioners' opinions to the Secretary of Commerce 
on or before December 14, 2010.
    5. Outstanding action jackets: None.
    In accordance with Commission policy, subject matter listed above, 
not disposed of at the scheduled meeting, may be carried over to the 
agenda of the following meeting.

    By order of the Commission.

    Issued: November 19, 2010.
William R. Bishop,
Hearings and Meetings Coordinator.
[FR Doc. 2010-29665 Filed 11-19-10; 4:15 pm]
BILLING CODE 7020-02-P
#### §§ 3555.11-3555.49 [Reserved]
16.105 Solicitation provision.       The contracting officer shall complete and insert the provision at 52.216-1, Type of Contract, in a solicitation unless it is for-                                       (a)                    						            A fixed-price acquisition made under simplified acquisition procedures; or                                          (b)                    						            Information or planning purposes.    **Parent topic:** Subpart 16.1 - Selecting Contract Types
#### § 51.5 Who may obtain inspection service.

An application for inspection service may be made by any interested party including, but not limited to, the United States and any instrumentality or agency thereof, any State, county, municipality, or common carrier, and any authorized agent in behalf of the foregoing.
* Pursuant to Local Rule 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 Local Rule

47.5.4.

IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT

__________________

No. 95-50322

Summary Calendar

__________________

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,

 Plaintiff-Appellee,

versus

JOE HERRERA-DOMINGUEZ,

 Defendant-Appellant.

- - - - - - - - - -

Appeal from the United States District Court

for the Western District of Texas

USDC No. EP-94-215-DB

- - - - - - - - - -

January 22, 1996

Before WIENER, PARKER and DENNIS, Circuit Judges.

PER CURIAM:*

Joe Herrera-Dominguez appeals his convictions for

importation of marijuana and possession with the intent to

distribute marijuana. He argues that the evidence was

insufficient to prove the requisite knowledge for both offenses. 

We have reviewed the arguments and the record. We conclude that

the evidence was sufficient.

AFFIRMED.
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.                  

###### Department of Agriculture

###### Forest Service

# AGENCY:

Forest Service, USDA.

# ACTION:

Notice of meeting.

# SUMMARY:

Pursuant to the authorities in the Federal Advisory Committee Act (Pub. L. 92-463) and under the Secure Rural Schools and Community Self-Determination Act of 2000 (Pub. L. 110-343) the Idaho Panhandle Resource Advisory Committee will meet Friday, December 3, 2010, at 9 a.m. in Coeur d'Alene, Idaho for a business meeting. The business meeting is open to the public.

# DATES:

December 3, 2010.

# ADDRESSES:

                        The meeting location is the Idaho Panhandle National Forests'                               ( print page 74001)                            Supervisor's Office, located at 3815 Schreiber Way, Coeur d'Alene, Idaho 83815.                    

# FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

Ranotta K. McNair, Forest Supervisor and Designated Federal Official, at (208) 765-7369.

# SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

The meeting agenda will focus on reviewing proposals for forest projects and recommending funding during the business meeting.

The public forum begins at 11 a.m.

Dated: November 22, 2010.

Ranotta K. McNair,

Forest Supervisor.

[FR Doc. 2010-30025 Filed 11-29-10; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 3410-11-M
EXHIBIT
32.1





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 The Saint James Company on Form 10-Q for
the period ending June 30, 2009, as filed with the Securities and Exchange
Commission on the date hereof, I, Richard Hurst, Chief Executive Officer of the
Company, certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. ss. 1350, as adopted pursuant to ss. 906
of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that:





1. The
Report 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.





July 30,
2009





/s/ Richard HurstRichard
      Hurst,Chief
      Executive Officer
  A signed
original of this written statement required by Section 906, or other document
authenticating, acknowledging, or otherwise adopting the signature that appears
in typed form within the electronic version of this written statement has been
provided to the Company and will be retained by the Company and furnished to the
Securities and Exchange Commission or its staff upon request.
#### In the Matter of Jackson Kruse, Petitioner, v New York State Human Rights Appeal Board et al., Respondents.

Proceeding instituted in this court, pursuant to section 298 of the Executive Law, to review a determination of respondent State Human Rights Appeal Board which annulled an order of the State Division of Human Rights and dismissed petitioner’s complaint in all respects. On April 4, 1978, petitioner filed with the State Division of Human Rights a complaint alleging that respondent Agway, Inc., had engaged in an unlawful discriminatory practice relating to employment based upon petitioner’s age and disability. Four hundred twenty-one days later, on May 30, 1979, the State Division issued a determination and order after investigation wherein it concluded that there was no probable cause to believe that Agway engaged in or was engaging in the unlawful discriminatory practice charged by petitioner, and, accordingly, it ordered the dismissal of the complaint and the closing of the file. Petitioner thereupon appealed this determination to the State Human Rights Appeal Board, and on July 9, 1979, the board annulled the division’s order and dismissed petitioner’s complaint, pursuant to section 297-a (subd 7, par c) of the Executive Law, upon finding that the State Division had unreasonably exceeded the statutory time limit contained in subdivision 2 of section 297 of the Executive Law, wherein it is provided that the State Division shall make its probable cause determination within 180 days after the filing of a complaint. This proceeding ensued. We hold that the determinaion of the board should be annulled. In this instance, the board grounded its dismissal of the complaint upon the mere passage of time in excess of the statutory guidelines and without any showing that the delay resulted in actual injury to respondent Agway, Inc. Under these circumstances, petitioner should not be denied a determination by the board on the merits of his complaint, and, accordingly, this matter should be remitted to the board so that such a determination can be made *(Matter of Sarkisian Bros, v State Div. of Human Rights,*48 NY2d 816). Determination annulled, without costs, and matter remitted to State Human Rights Appeal Board for further proceedings not inconsistent herewith. Kane, J. P., Staley, Jr., Main, Mikoll and Herlihy, JJ., concur.
C OURT OF A PPEALS FOR THE

F IRST D ISTRICT OF T EXAS AT H OUSTON

O RDER

Appellate case name: Terrance Odell Reese v. The State of Texas

Appellate case number: 01

- 12

- 00 627

- CR

Trial court case number: 48070F

Trial court: County Court at Law No. 2 of Wichita County

This case was abated and remanded to the trial court on September 24 , 201 3

. I n the

abatement order, we directed the trial court to determine whether appellant wishe d to pursue the appeal, and, if so , to determine whether or not appellant’s trial counsel

, Holly Gail Crampton

, intended to abandon the appeal

. In response, appellant filed a motion to dismiss the appeal. Appellant and the State now have filed a “Joint Motion to Lift Stay in Order to Take Up the Pending Motion to Dismiss Appeal,” requesting that the Court lift the abatement and reinstate the appeal in order to determine appellant’s pending motion to dismiss his appeal. We grant the joint motion to lift stay and REINSTATE this case on the Court’s active docket.

It is so ORDERED

.

Judge’s signature: /s/ Justice Terry Jennings

 Acting individually  Acting for the Court

Date: November 5, 2013
#### WILLIS et al., Respondents, v. TISHMAN, Appellant.

(Supreme Court, Appellate Division, First Department.

June 25, 1906.)

Action by Israel Willis and others against Julius Tishman.

No opinion. Application denied, with $10 costs. Order signed.
#### § 51.912 Export.

When designated as Export, grapes shall be packed with any of the customary protective materials such as cushions, liners, or wraps, or properly packed in sawdust or granulated cork. The so-called “semi-sawdust packs” which are cushioned and/or covered with sawdust are not approved as protective packaging for export.

[36 FR 9126, May 20, 1971. Redesignated at 42 FR 32514, June 27, 1977, and further redesignated at 46 FR 63203, Dec. 31, 1981. Redesignated at 56 FR 15802, Apr. 18, 1991]
#### § 51.1357 Seriously deformed.

*Seriously deformed* means that the pear is so badly misshapen as to cause a loss during the usual commercial preparation for use of over 20 percent, by weight, of the pear in excess of that which would occur if the pear were well formed. Round or apple-shaped pears shall not be considered seriously deformed.
Exhibit 32.2 CERTIFICATION PURSUANT TO SECTION 1350, CHAPTER 63 OF TITLE 18, UNITED STATES CODE, AS ADOPTED PURSUANT TO SECTION 906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002 In connection with the accompanying Annual Report of KCAP Financial, Inc.(the Company) on Form 10-K for the year ended December 31, 2015 (the Report), I, Edward U. Gilpin, 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 Section 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended; and (2)

          The information contained in the Report fairly presents, in all material respects, the financial condition and results of operations of the Company.  Date: March 9, 2016

          

          By:/s/ Edward U. GilpinEdward U. GilpinChief Financial Officer(Principal Financial Officer)
Exhibit 23.1

LOGO

Consent of Independent Registered Public Accounting Firm

The Board of Directors

and
Stockholders

First Capital Bancorp, Inc.

Richmond, Virginia

We consent to the incorporation by reference in Registration Statements
No.333-150776 and 333-158943 on Form S-3 and No. 333-146305 and 333-169202 on Form S-8 of First Capital Bancorp, Inc. of our reports dated March 30, 2011, relating to our audits of the consolidated financial statements, which appear in
this Annual Report on Form 10-K of First Capital Bancorp, Inc. for the year ended December 31, 2010.

/S/ Cherry,
Bekaert & Holland, L.L.P

Richmond, Virginia

March 30, 2011