alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
#### In Rem Tax Foreclosure Action No. 47. Sue Simmonds, Appellant; Department of Housing Preservation and Development of the City of New York et al., Respondents.

[817 NYS2d 69]

a tax lien foreclosure action pursuant to Administrative Code of City § 11-404 (a), Sue Simmonds appeals, as limited by her brief, from so much of an order of the Supreme Court, Kings County (Spodek, J.), dated December 6, 2004, as denied those branches of her motion which were to vacate a judgment of foreclosure and the sede of the subject property to Neighborhood Restore Housing Development Fund Corporation. Ordered

that the order is affirmed insofar as appealed from, with costs. Contrary

to the appellant’s contentions, the record establishes that the judgment of foreclosure against her property was duly entered in the office of the Kings County Clerk on February 20, 2003, thus creating a presumption of regularity of the proceed- ings taken in this action (see Administrative Code of City of NY § 11-411; *In Rem Tax Foreclosure Action No. 47,*19 AD3d 547, 548 [2005]). That presumption encompassed compliance by the City of New York with all applicable notice, publication and filing requirements, including its mailing of a notice of foreclosure to the appellant, and the appellant’s mere denial of receipt of such notice was insufficient to overcome the presumption (see (see *956
      *In Rem, Tax Foreclosure Action No. 47, supra).*In any event, the presumption of regularity became conclusive four months after the entry of the judgment of foreclosure *(see*Administrative Code of City of NY § 11-412.1 [h]), and the appellant did not make the underlying motion or take any action to redeem the subject property *(see*Administrative Code of City of NY § 11-412.1 [d]) within that four-month period *(see City of New York v Family House Real Estate Corp.,*2 AD3d 241 [2003]). Thus, the Supreme Court properly declined to vacate the judgment of foreclosure and the sale of the subject property to a third party. Prudenti, P.J., Santucci, Krausman and Dillon, JJ., concur.
* This order and judgment is not binding precedent, except under the

doctrines of law of the case, res judicata, and collateral estoppel. The court

generally disfavors the citation of orders and judgments; nevertheless, an order

and judgment may be cited under the terms and conditions of 10th Cir. R. 36.3.

F I L E D

United States Court of Appeals

Tenth Circuit

JUL 6 1998

PATRICK FISHER

Clerk

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

TENTH CIRCUIT

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,

Plaintiff-Appellee,

v.

MICHAEL FYKES,

Defendant-Appellant.

 

 No. 98-1103

 (D.C. No. 92-CR-149-M)

 (District of Colorado)

ORDER AND JUDGMENT *

Before PORFILIO , KELLY , and HENRY , Circuit Judges.

After examining the briefs and appellate record, this panel has determined

unanimously that oral argument would not materially assist the determination of

this appeal. See Fed. R. App. P. 34(a) and 10th Cir. R. 34.1.9. The case is

therefore ordered submitted without oral argument.

Michael Fykes appeals the district court’s denial of his motion to modify

his term of imprisonment pursuant to 18 U.S.C. § 3582(c). We affirm because his
- 2 -

argument for modification is foreclosed by our decision in United States v.

Kissick , 69 F.3d 1048 (10th Cir. 1995).

A jury convicted Mr. Fykes of conspiracy to distribute cocaine base and

possession with intent to distribute cocaine base in violation of 21 U.S.C. §§

841(a)(1) and 846. On December 4, 1992, the district court sentenced him to 100

months in prison. Mr. Fykes asks that we modify his sentence because the district

court did not have before it evidence that showed the cocaine base fit the

definition of crack in U.S.S.G. § 2D1.1 as amended by the Sentencing

Commission’s Amendment 487. In Kissick , we held that we would not apply

Amendment 487 retroactively because it is not listed in U.S.S.G. § 1B1.10 and is

substantive, rather than clarifying. See Kissick , 69 F.3d at 1052-53. The district

court sentenced Mr. Fykes in December 1992 and Amendment 487, which Kissick

held non-retroactive, did not become effective until almost a year later, in

November 1993. Therefore, Mr. Fykes may not rely on Amendment 487’s

definition of crack as a basis for modification of his sentence. We affirm the

denial of the motion to modify. The mandate shall issue forthwith.

Entered for the Court,

Robert H. Henry

Circuit Judge
#### In the Matter of Steven W., a Person Alleged to be a Juvenile Delinquent, Appellant.

Order, Family Court, Bronx County, entered July 10, 1979, adjudicating the appellant a juvenile delinquent and placing him with the Division For Youth, Title III, reversed, on the law, without costs, and the matter remanded for a new fact-finding hearing. At his plea, appellant admitted that he had committed an act which, if committed by an *757adult, would constitute the crime of criminal trespass in the third degree. However, as the respondent candidly concedes, the Judge at fact finding did not apprise the appellant or his mother of his various constitutional rights or the consequences flowing from a waiver of those rights. *(Matter of John R.,*71 AD2d 896; *Matter of Felix A.,*58 AD2d 562.) This omission requires a new fact-finding hearing before the Family Court *(Matter of Troy L.,*53 AD2d 615). Concur—Murphy, P. J., Kupferman, Birns, Lupiano and Bloom, JJ.
- /app03/pdfs/499cv/002/42/2401t/00076001.tif
- /app03/pdfs/499cv/002/42/2401t/00076002.tif
- /app03/pdfs/499cv/002/42/2401t/00076003.tif
- /app03/pdfs/499cv/002/42/2401t/00076004.tif
Exhibit 35.2

THE BANK OF NEW YORK TRUST COMPANY, N.A.

OFFICERS CERTIFICATE

ANNUAL STATEMENT OF THE TRUSTEE

GENWORTH
GLOBAL FUNDING TRUST 2005-A

SECURED MEDIUM-TERM NOTES

GENWORTH GLOBAL FUNDING TRUST 2006-A

SECURED MEDIUM-TERM NOTES

GENWORTH GLOBAL FUNDING TRUST 2006-B

SECURED
MEDIUM-TERM NOTES

GENWORTH GLOBAL FUNDING TRUST 2006-C

SECURED MEDIUM-TERM NOTES

GENWORTH GLOBAL FUNDING TRUST 2006-D

SECURED MEDIUM-TERM NOTES

GENWORTH GLOBAL
FUNDING TRUST 2006-E

SECURED MEDIUM-TERM NOTES

GENWORTH GLOBAL FUNDING TRUST 2006-F

EXTENDIBLE SECURED MEDIUM-TERM NOTES

GENWORTH GLOBAL FUNDING TRUST 2006-G

SECURED
MEDIUM-TERM NOTES

The undersigned does hereby certify that the undersigned is an officer of The Bank of New York Trust Company, N.A. (the
Trustee), and does hereby further certify pursuant to Section 4.05 of the Expense and Indemnity Agreement for the above-captioned Trusts (the Trusts) that:

(i) A review of the activities of the Trustee during the preceding calendar year and of the performance of the Trustee under the Trusts has been made under my supervision; and

(ii) To the best of my knowledge, based on such review, the Trustee has fulfilled all of its obligations under the Trusts in all material respects throughout such
calendar year.

THE BANK OF NEW YORK TRUST COMPANY, N.A.

AS
TRUSTEE



|               |  |                      
|-------------- |  | ---------------------
|/s/ R. Tarnas  |  | Dated: March 29, 2007
|               | 
|R. Tarnas      |  |                      
|Vice President |  |
```

[Congressional Bills 109th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[S. 2526 Introduced in Senate (IS)]

109th CONGRESS
  2d Session
                                S. 2526

  To extend the temporary suspension of duty with respect to Ethoprop.

_______________________________________________________________________

                   IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES

                             April 5, 2006

  Mr. Talent introduced the following bill; which was read twice and 
                  referred to the Committee on Finance

_______________________________________________________________________

                                 A BILL

 
  To extend the temporary suspension of duty with respect to Ethoprop.

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

SECTION 1. ETHOPROP.

    (a) In General.--Heading 9902.01.83 of the Harmonized Tariff 
Schedule of the United States (relating to Ethoprop) is amended by 
striking ``12/31/2006'' and inserting ``12/31/2009''.
    (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>
```
```

[Congressional Bills 109th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[S. 2640 Introduced in Senate (IS)]

109th CONGRESS
  2d Session
                                S. 2640

  To suspend temporarily the duty on Benzoic acid 3,4,5-trihydroxy-, 
                             propyl ester.

_______________________________________________________________________

                   IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES

                             April 25, 2006

  Mr. Frist (for himself and Mr. Alexander) introduced the following 
  bill; which was read twice and referred to the Committee on Finance

_______________________________________________________________________

                                 A BILL

 
  To suspend temporarily the duty on Benzoic acid 3,4,5-trihydroxy-, 
                             propyl ester.

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

SECTION 1. BENZOIC ACID 3,4,5-TRIHYDROXY-, PROPYL ESTER.

    (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:

``      9902.29.18      Benzoic acid 3,4,5- Free         No change        No change        On or before 12/  ''.
                         trihydroxy-,                                                       31/2009
                         propyl ester (CAS
                         No. 121-79-9)
                         (propyl gallate)
                         (provided for in
                         subheading
                         2918.29.75)......

    (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 enactment of this Act.
                                 <all>
```
52.219-3 Notice of HUBZone Set-Aside or

Sole-Source Award.

As prescribed in 19.1309(a), insert the following clause:

Notice of HUBZone Set-Aside or Sole-Source Award (Oct 2022)

(a) Definitions. HUBZone small business concern, as used in this clause, means a small business

concern, certified by the Small Business Administration (SBA), that appears on the List of Qualified

HUBZone Small Business Concerns maintained by the SBA (13 CFR 126.103).

(b) Applicability. This clause applies only to-

(1) Contracts that have been set aside or awarded on a sole-source basis to, HUBZone small

business concerns;

(2) Part or parts of a multiple-award contract that have been set aside for HUBZone small business

concerns; 

(3) Orders set aside for HUBZone small business concerns under multiple-award contracts as

described in 8.405-5 and 16.505(b)(2)(i)(F); and

(4) Orders issued directly to HUBZone small business concerns under multiple-award contracts as

described in 19.504(c)(1)(ii).

(c) General.

(1) Offers are solicited only from HUBZone small business concerns. Offers received from concerns

that are not HUBZone small business concerns will not be considered.

(2) Any award resulting from this solicitation will be made to a HUBZone small business concern.

(d) Joint venture. A joint venture may be considered a HUBZone concern if—

(1) At least one party to the joint venture is a HUBZone small business concern and complies with 13

CFR 126.616(c); and

(2) Each party to the joint venture qualifies as small under the size standard for the solicitation, or

the protégé is small under the size standard for the solicitation in a joint venture comprised of a

mentor and protégé with an approved mentor-protégé agreement under the SBA mentor-protégé

program.

(e) A HUBZone joint venture agrees that, in the performance of the contract, at least 40 percent of

the aggregate work performed by the joint venture shall be completed by the HUBZone small

business parties to the joint venture. Work performed by the HUBZone small business party or

parties to the joint venture must be more than administrative functions.

(End of clause)
Parent topic: 52.219 [Reserved]
#### Vigilant Insurance Company et al., Appellants, v The Bear Stearns Companies, Inc., Respondent.

Submitted October 1, 2007;

decided October 11, 2007

Reported below, 34 AD3d 300.

Motion by Securities and Exchange Commission for leave to file a brief amicus curiae on the appeal herein granted. Two copies of the brief must be served, 24 copies filed and the CPLR 8022 motion fee paid within seven days.
EXHIBIT 10.6



 Exhibit 10.6 
 Pursuant to 17 CFR 240.24-b, confidential information has been omitted in places 
 marked
“[***]” and has been filed separately with the Securities and Exchange 
 Commission pursuant to a Confidential Treatment
Application filed with the Commission 
 Amendment No: 1 to Statement of Work #     
 SBSS Integration Support 
 This Amendment of SBSS
Integration Support SOW is made this      day of December 2008 by and between Elektrobit Inc. (“Elektrobit” or “EB”) and TerreStar Networks Inc. (“TerreStar” or “TSN”) for the on-site
support of Hughes SBSS Integration activities, and is governed by the Master Development and Licensing Agreement between Elektrobit and TerreStar dated August 10, 2007 (“Agreement”). 
 1 Period of Performance 
 Terrestar has requested to extend SBSS
Integration support SOW with extra working period of [***], starting on or around [***] and ending on or [***]. 
 2 Project Overview 
 The main objectives for extended working period are: 
 [***]

 3 Schedule 
  

			
	 Milestones
	  	Target Date
	 [***]
	  	[***]
	 [***]
	  	[***]
	 [***]
	  	[***]
	 [***]
	  	[***]

 4 Acceptance of Deliverables 
 Additionally, TerreStar reserves the right to terminate the SOW at Milestone [***]. 
 5 Pricing and Payment

 If TerreStar terminates this SOW at Milestone [***]. Terrestar will pay EB a prorated amount of the price listed in Section 5.1 below. 

 


	
	 Amended No. 1 of SBSS Integration Support SOW
 12
December 2008
 Page 1 of 2










 5.1 Pricing 
 EB will
perform the Services set forth in the SOW on a hourly rate basis: 
  

	 	•	 	 The hourly rate for one EB personnel assigned to the project will be $[***] per hour. 


  

	 	•	 	 Travel, daily allowances, possible overtime work and accommodation expenses shall be authorized by Terrestar in advance. Expenses will be invoiced to Terrestar at
Elektrobit’s actual costs plus a [***]% administrative fee. 


  

						
	 Phase
	  	 Description
	  	Total
	 [***]
	  	[***]	  	$	[***]
	 [***]
	  	[***]	  	$	[***]
		  	[***]	  	$	[***]
	Not to exceed amount	  	$	48,900

  

									
		 	TerreStar Networks Inc.	 		 	Elektrobit, Inc.
					
	By:	 	 /s/ David Marshack
	 		 	By:	 	 /s/ Vesa Raudaskoski

	Name:	 	David Marshack	 		 	Name:	 	Vesa Raudaskoski
	Title:	 	SVP	 		 	Title:	 	President
	Date:	 	December 29, 2008	 		 	Date:	 	January 2, 2009

  


	
	 Amended No. 1 of SBSS Integration Support SOW
 12
December 2008
 Page 2 of 2
### Living with volcanic risk in the Cascades

By: Daniel Dzurisin**Peter H. StaufferJames W. Hendley II

                            https://doi.org/10.3133/fs16597

#### Links

- More information:  **USGS Index Page**                            (html)
- NGMDB Index Page:  **National Geologic Map Database Index Page**                            (html)
- Download citation as:  RIS                         |                         Dublin                            Core

#### Abstract

The Cascade Range of the Pacific Northwest has more than a dozen potentially active volcanoes. Cascade volcanoes tend to erupt explosively, and on average two eruptions occur per century—the most recent were at Mount St. Helens, Washington (1980–86 and 2004–8), and Lassen Peak, California (1914–17). To help protect the Pacific Northwest’s rapidly expanding population, USGS scientists at the Cascades Volcano Observatory in Vancouver, Washington, monitor and assess the hazards posed by the region’s volcanoes.

#### Study Area
Page 1 of 2

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

NORTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA

PANAMA CITY DIVISION

CHRISTOPHER BRIEN SHARPE,

Plaintiff,

v. Case No. 5:20cv311-TKW-MJF

DIAZ,

Defendant.

__________________________/

ORDER

This case is before the Court based on the magistrate judge’s Report and 

Recommendation (Doc. 28) and Plaintiff’s objection (Doc. 33). The Court reviewed 

the issues raised in the objection de novo as required by 28 U.S.C. §636(b)(1) and 

Fed. R. Civ. P. 72(b)(3).

Based on that review, and notwithstanding the argument in the objection, the 

Court finds that the magistrate judge properly applied the law to the facts alleged in 

the second amended complaint. Thus, the Court agrees with the magistrate judge’s 

determination that this case should be dismissed because the second amended 

complaint fails to state a plausible Eighth Amendment claim against the defendant.

It is, therefore, ORDERED that:

Case 5:20-cv-00311-TKW-MJF Document 35 Filed 04/25/22 Page 1 of 2
Page 2 of 2

1. The magistrate judge’s Report and Recommendation is adopted and 

incorporated by reference in this order.

2. This case is DISMISSED with prejudice pursuant to 28 U.S.C. 

§§1915A(b)(1) and 1915(e)(2)(B)(ii).

3. The Clerk shall close the case file.

DONE and ORDERED this 25th day of April, 2022.

T. Kent Wetherell, II 

T. KENT WETHERELL, II

UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE

Case 5:20-cv-00311-TKW-MJF Document 35 Filed 04/25/22 Page 2 of 2
47.103-2 Contract clause.

Complete and insert the clause at 52.247-67, Submission of Transportation Documents for Audit, in

solicitations and contracts when a cost-reimbursement contract is contemplated and the contract or

a first-tier cost-reimbursement subcontract thereunder will authorize reimbursement of

transportation as a direct charge to the contract or subcontract.

Parent topic: 47.103 Transportation Payment and Audit Regulation.
#### § 56.38 Retention authorities.

A grader may use retention tags or other devices and methods as approved by the Administrator for the identification and control of shell eggs which are not in compliance with the regulations or are held for further examination and for any equipment, utensils, rooms or compartments which are found unclean or otherwise in violation of the regulations. Any such item shall not be released until in compliance with the regulations and retention identification shall not be removed by anyone other than a grader.

[35 FR 5664, Apr. 8, 1970. Redesignated at 42 FR 32514, June 27, 1977, and further redesignated at 46 FR 63203, Dec. 31, 1981. Redesignated at 71 FR 42010, July 24, 2006]
**Report
        on Assessment of Compliance**
 **with
        Regulation AB Servicing Criteria**
 
 1.  The
        undersigned authorized officer of LandAmerica Tax and Flood Services, Inc.
        (the
“Company”) is responsible for assessing the Company’s compliance with the
        applicable servicing criteria as defined in 17 CFR Part 229 Section 1122(d)
        (4)
        (xi) and 1122(d) (4) (xii) (the “Regulation AB Servicing Criteria”) for
        residential mortgage backed securities for which the Company served as
        third-party property tax payment provider on the underlying collateral (the
        “Platform”). Except as set forth in the preceding sentence, the servicing
        criteria set forth in 17 CFR Part 229 Section 1122(d) are not applicable
        to the
        activities the Company performed with respect to the Platform.
 
 2. The
        Company used the criteria in 17 CFR Part 229 Section 1122(d) to assess the
        compliance with the Regulation AB Servicing Criteria.
 
 3.  Under
        one
        of the services offered by the Company, some customers may elect to remit
        tax
        payments directly to tax agencies without having the Company remit those
        property tax payments through our tax payment service. We refer to these
        customers as “non-outsourced servicer customers.” With respect to these
        non-outsourced customers and the services the Company delivered pursuant
        to the
        servicing criteria set forth in 17 CFR Part 229 Section 1122(d)(4)(xi), the
        Company’s assertion is strictly limited to its processing of tax payments
        submitted through the Company’s tax payment service.
 
 4. With
        respect to servicing criteria set forth in 17 CFR Part 229 Section
        1122(d)(4)(xii), the Company’s assertion is strictly limited to its processing
        of property tax penalty payments. The Company has determined that its servicer
        customers may also have access to systems that enable those servicers to
        process
        penalties through obligor escrow accounts. Management’s assessment of compliance
        does not relate to the actual or potential activities of other parties with
        access to obligor escrow accounts.
 
 5.  Based
        on
        such assessment, management believes that, as of and for the year ended December
        31, 2006, the Company has complied in all material respects with the Regulation
        AB Servicing Criteria related to the servicing of the Platform.
 
 6.  The
        registered public accounting firm of Grant Thornton, LLP, has issued an
        attestation report on the Company’s assessment of compliance with the Regulation
        AB Servicing Criteria as of and for the year ended December 31,
        2006.
 
 Date:
        February 20, 2007
 
 LandAmerica
        Tax and Flood Services, Inc.





By:
      /s/ Bob Ige


Name: Robert
      Ige


Its: Executive
      Vice President
52.229-8 Taxes-Foreign Cost-Reimbursement

Contracts.

As prescribed in 29.402-2(a), insert the following clause:

Taxes-Foreign Cost-Reimbursement Contracts (Mar 1990)

(a) Any tax or duty from which the United States Government is exempt by agreement with the

Government of ______ [insert name of the foreign government], or from which the Contractor or any

subcontractor under this contract is exempt under the laws of ______ [insert name of country], shall

not constitute an allowable cost under this contract.

(b) If the Contractor or subcontractor under this contract obtains a foreign tax credit that reduces

its Federal income tax liability under the United States Internal Revenue Code (Title26, U.S. Code)

because of the payment of any tax or duty that was reimbursed under this contract, the amount of

the reduction shall be paid or credited at the time of such offset to the Government of the United

States as the Contracting Officer directs.

(End of clause)

Parent topic: 52.229 [Reserved]