alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
25.903 Exempted supplies.       (a) 						            Subchapters VIII and X of Chapter 98 of the Harmonized Tariff Schedule of the United States (19 U.S.C. 1202) list supplies for which exemptions from duty may be obtained when imported into the customs territory of the United States under a Government contract. For certain of these supplies, the contracting agency must certify to the Commissioner of Customs that they are for the purpose stated in the Harmonized Tariff Schedule (see 19 CFR 10.102-104, 10.114, and 10.121 and 15 CFR Part 301 for requirements and formats).                                          (b) 						            Supplies (excluding equipment) for Government-operated vessels or aircraft may be withdrawn from any customs-bonded warehouse, from continuous customs custody elsewhere than in a bonded warehouse, or from a foreign-trade zone, free of duty and internal revenue tax as provided in 19 U.S.C. 1309 and 1317. The contracting activity must cite this authority on the appropriate customs form when making purchases (see 19 CFR 10.59 - 10.65).    **Parent topic:** Subpart 25.9 - Customs and Duties
Order filed August 27, 2022 

In The

Fourteenth Court of Appeals

____________

NO. 14-20-00657-CV

____________

ALBERT ORTIZ, Appellant

V.

NATIONAL CITY HOME LOAN SERVICES, INC. D/B/A FIRST 

FRANKLIN LOAN SERVICES; AND NATIONAL CITY BANK OF 

INDIANA, Appellee

On Appeal from the 164th District Court

Harris County, Texas

Trial Court Cause No. 2006-61178

O R D E R

The clerk’s record was filed November 9, 2020. Our review has determined 

that a relevant item has been omitted from the clerk's record. See Tex. R. App. P.

34.5(c). The record does not contain 

1. Plaintiff’s No-Evidence Motion for Partial Summary Judgment, with any 

accompanying exhibits, filed on or about November 26, 2014;
2. Order Granting Plaintiff’s Motion For Partial Summary Judgment, filed on 

or about June 1, 2016; 

3. Plaintiff’s Motion For Leave To Amend Petition, with any accompanying 

exhibits, filed on or about August 5, 2016; 

4. Defendants’ Reply to Plaintiff’s Response to Plaintiff’s Motion to Disregard 

the Jury’s Response to Question No. 5 and for Entry of Final Judgment, with 

any accompany exhibits, filed on or about April 22, 2020; and 

5. Plaintiff’s Sur-Reply as to Defendants' Motion to Disregard the Jury’s 

Response to Question No. 5 and for Entry of Final Judgment, with any 

accompanying exhibits, filed on or about April 29, 2020.

The Harris County district Clerk is directed to file a supplemental clerk’s 

record on or before May 9, 2022, containing the above documents. 

If the omitted item is not part of the case file, the district clerk is directed to 

file a supplemental clerk’s record containing a certified statement that the omitted 

item is not a part of the case file.

PER CURIAM

Panel Consists of Chief Justice Christopher and Justices Wise and Hassan.
**Exhibit 33.3**




**Management’s
      Assertion on**


**Compliance
      with Regulation AB Criteria**




**ASSERTION
      OF COMPLIANCE WITH APPLICABLE SERVICING CRITERIA**




The
      Bank
      of New York and The Bank of New York Trust Company, N. A.(collectively, the
      “Company”) provides this platform-level assessment of compliance with the
      servicing criteria specified in Item 1122(d) of Regulation AB promulgated by
      the
      Securities and Exchange Commission.





Management
      has determined that the following servicing criteria are applicable in regards
      to the following servicing platform for the following period:





Platform :
      Publicly-issued (i.e., transaction-level reporting initially required under
      the Securities
      Exchange Act of 1934, as amended) residential mortgage-backed securities and
      other mortgage-related asset-backed securities issued on or after January 1,
      2006 (and like-kind transactions issued prior to January 1, 2006) for which
      the
      Company provides trustee, securities administration, paying agent or custodial
      services. The platform includes like kind transactions for which the Company
      provided trustee, securities administrator, paying agent or custodial services
      as a result of the Company’s acquisition as of October 1, 2006 of portions of
      JPMorgan Chase Bank, N.A.’s corporate trust business, including structured
      finance agency and trust transactions.





Applicable
      Servicing Criteria :
      All
      servicing criteria set forth in Item 1122(d), to the extent required by the
      related transaction agreements as to any transaction, except for the following
      criteria: 1122 (d) (1)(ii), (iii), (iv), (4) (iv), (v), (vi), (vii), (viii),
      (ix), (x), (xi), (xii) and (xiii).





Period :
      Twelve
      months ended December 31, 2006.





With
      respect to the Platform and the Period, the Company provides the following
      assessment of compliance in respect of the Applicable Servicing
      Criteria:





• The
      Company is responsible for assessing its compliance with the Applicable
      Servicing Criteria.





• The
      Company has assessed compliance with the Applicable Servicing
      Criteria.





•
A s
      of
      December 31, 2006 and for the Period, the Company was in material compliance
      with the Applicable Servicing Criteria.







Ernst
      & Young LLP, an independent registered public accounting firm, has issued an
      attestation report with respect to the Company’s foregoing assessment of
      compliance.











The
                Bank of New York
            
            The
                Bank of New YorkThe
                Bank of New York Trust
            
            The
                Bank of New York TrustCompany,
                N.A.
            
            Company,
                N.A.






March
      1,
      2007
Philip McNeely, Maricopa County Air Quality Department. Thank you for co ming to Phoenix. M ari copa County covers ove r 9,000 square miles and has over 4 million residents. We are the 14th largest cou nty in siz e and the 4th most populated county in the United States. The Air Quality De partment's m i ssion i s to provide cle an air to Maricopa County Resid e nts. We a re co mmi tted to o ur mission a nd h ave mad e great progress with improving the a ir qu a lity in the co unty. However, we st i l l have wo rk to do. The co unty is in nonattainment for 8- hr ozone and is proposed to be bum ped-up to " moderate ". We are a lso classified as a "se ri ous" nonattainment area for PM - 10

. EPA has determined that the Maricopa PM -10 Nonattai nm e nt Area atta ined the standard as of December 31, 2012 and approved our Five Percent Plan. Th is pl a n included 53 measures and re li ed o n the cooperat i on of the state, county, cities and tow ns, private sect or and public. The plan includ es stringent control measures incl udin g a un iq u e pub li c out reac h prog ram that encourages th e public to participate in a notificat ion program to re ceive five -day foreca sts and notification usin g rea l time data w h en PM - 10 levels are ri si ng at a monitor. Eve n though th e cou nty has a clean data finding, the reg i o n co ntinues to expe rien ce haboob s and other vio l en t dust sto rms . The except ional eve nt rul e was criti cal to th e attainment demonstration a nd rema in s criti ca l to dealing w ith sign ifi cant dust storms. Our department app rec iates a nd supports many of EP A's proposed revisions to this rule. At thi s tim e, we are s till a n alyzing the proposed rule a nd the assoc iated te chni ca l materia ls, as w e ll as consu ltin g with MAG a nd ADEQ. We do plan on providing add ition a l writte n co mm e nts a nd recommendations during t h e publi c co mment period

. Fina ll y, we a lso support Senator Flake's request to extend the co mment peri od to a ll ow for a more thorough review of th i s comp lex proposed rule.
#### The People of the State of New York, Respondent, v Victor Solimeo, Appellant.

— Appeal by defendant, as limited by his brief, from a sentence of the Supreme Court, Kings County, imposed March 23, 1979, upon his conviction of criminal sale of a controlled substance in the third degree, upon his plea of guilty, the sentence being a term of imprisonment *704of four years to life. Sentence modified, as a matter of discretion in the interest of justice, by reducing the minimum period of incarceration to two years. As so modified, sentence affirmed. The sentence was excessive to the extent indicated. Hopkins, J. P., Rabin, Margett and O’Connor, JJ., concur.
48.104-1 Determining sharing period.

(a) Contracting officers must determine discrete sharing periods for each VECP. If more than one

VECP is incorporated into a contract, the sharing period for each VECP need not be identical.

(b) The sharing period begins with acceptance of the first unit incorporating the VECP. Except as

provided in paragraph (c) of this subsection, the end of the sharing period is a specific calendar date

that is the later of-

(1) 36 to 60 consecutive months (set at the discretion of the contracting officer for each VECP) after

the first unit affected by the VECP is accepted; or

(2) The last scheduled delivery date of an item affected by the VECP under the instant contract

delivery schedule in effect at the time the VECP is accepted.

(c) For engineering-development contracts and contracts containing low-rate-initial-production or

early production units, the end of the sharing period is based not on a calendar date, but on

acceptance of a specified quantity of future contract units. This quantity is the number of units

affected by the VECP that are scheduled to be delivered over a period of between 36 and 60

consecutive months (set at the discretion of the contracting officer for each VECP) that spans the

highest planned production, based on planning and programming or production documentation at

the time the VECP is accepted. The specified quantity begins with the first future contract unit

affected by the VECP and continues over consecutive deliveries until the sharing period ends at

acceptance of the last of the specified quantity of units.

(d) For contracts (other than those in paragraph (c) of this subsection) for items requiring a

prolonged production schedule (e.g., ship construction, major system acquisition), the end of the

sharing period is determined according to paragraph (b) of this subsection. Agencies may prescribe

sharing of future contract savings on all future contract units to be delivered under contracts

awarded within the sharing period for essentially the same item, even if the scheduled delivery date

is outside the sharing period.

Parent topic: 48.104 Sharing arrangements.
§ 652.32 Causes for decertification. A State Conservationist, in whose State a technical service provider is certified to provide technical service, may submit a Notice of Proposed Decertification to the Deputy Chief for Programs recommending decertification of the technical service provider in accordance with these provisions if the technical service provider, or someone acting on behalf of the technical service provider: ( a ) Fails to meet NRCS standards and specifications in the provision of technical services;
( b ) Violates the terms of the Certification Agreement, including but not limited to, a demonstrated lack of understanding of, or an unwillingness or inability to implement, NRCS standards and specifications for a particular practice for which the technical service provider is certified, or the provision of technical services for which the technical service provider is not certified;
( c ) Engages in a scheme or device to defeat the purposes of this part, including, but not limited to, coercion, fraud, misrepresentation, or providing incorrect or misleading information; or
( d ) Commits any other action of a serious or compelling nature as determined by NRCS that demonstrates the technical service provider's inability to fulfill the terms of the Certification Agreement or provide technical services under this part.
[75 FR 6845, Feb. 12, 2010, as amended at 79 FR 44640, Aug. 1, 2014]
#### § 56.22 Filing of application.

An application for grading service shall be regarded as filed only when made pursuant to the regulations in this part.

[71 FR 42009, July 24, 2006]
EXHIBIT 31.1

             CERTIFICATION PURSUANT TO RULE 13A-14(D)/15D-14(D)
                  UNDER THE SECURITIES EXCHANGE ACT OF 1934

I, Anthony N. Renzi, certify that:
1. I have  reviewed  this  report  on Form  10-K and all  reports  on Form  10-D
   required to be filed in respect of the period  covered by this report on Form
   10-K of Home Loan Trust 2006-HI4 (the "Exchange Act periodic reports");
2. Based on my knowledge,  the Exchange Act periodic reports,  taken as a whole,
   do 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,  all  of  the  distribution,  servicing  and  other
   information required to be provided under Form 10-D for the period covered by
   this report is included in the Exchange Act periodic reports;
4. I am responsible for reviewing the activities  performed by the servicers and
   based on my knowledge and the compliance  reviews  conducted in preparing the
   servicer  compliance  statements  required in this report  under Item 1123 of
   Regulation AB, and except as disclosed in the Exchange Act periodic  reports,
   the servicers have fulfilled their obligations under the servicing agreements
   in all material respects; and
5. All of the reports on assessment of compliance  with  servicing  criteria for
   asset-backed  securities and their related  attestation reports on assessment
   of compliance with servicing criteria for asset-backed securities required to
   be included in this report in accordance  with Item 1122 of Regulation AB and
   Exchange Act Rules 13a-18 and 15d-18 have been included as an exhibit to this
   report,  except as otherwise disclosed in this report. Any material instances
   of noncompliance described in such reports have been disclosed in this report
   on Form 10-K.

   In giving the  certifications  above, I have reasonably relied on information
   provided to me by the following  unaffiliated  parties:  JPMorgan Chase Bank,
   N.A. and The Bank of New York Trust Company, N.A.

Date:  March 26, 2007

By:     /s/ Anthony N. Renzi
      ----------------------
Name:  Anthony N. Renzi
Title:    Managing Director
52.219-19 [Reserved]

Parent topic: 52.219 [Reserved]
DISTRICT COURT OF APPEAL OF FLORIDA

SECOND DISTRICT

RONALD HOWARD,

Appellant,

v.

STATE OF FLORIDA,

Appellee.

No. 2D21-3896

September 1, 2023

Appeal from the Circuit Court for Sarasota County; Thomas Krug, Judge.

Howard L. Dimmig, II, Public Defender, and Terri L. Backhus,

Special Assistant Public Defender, Bartow, for Appellant.

Ashley Moody, Attorney General, Tallahassee, and Alicia M. Winterkorn, 

Assistant Attorney General, Tampa, for Appellee.

PER CURIAM.

Affirmed.

NORTHCUTT, SILBERMAN, and VILLANTI, JJ., Concur.

Opinion subject to revision prior to official publication.
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<PAGE>
<ARTICLE> 5
<MULTIPLIER> 1,000
       
<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   9-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          MAY-31-1998
<PERIOD-START>                             JUN-01-1997
<PERIOD-END>                               FEB-28-1998
<CASH>                                          16,923
<SECURITIES>                                    54,899
<RECEIVABLES>                                   11,269
<ALLOWANCES>                                     4,231
<INVENTORY>                                        924
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                                86,147
<PP&E>                                          18,849
<DEPRECIATION>                                  11,321
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                  96,638
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                           24,629
<BONDS>                                              0
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                           137
<OTHER-SE>                                      71,034
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                    96,638
<SALES>                                         36,433
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                                59,426
<CGS>                                            7,855
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                   15,338
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                36,684
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                   590
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                                   2
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                 10,085
<INCOME-TAX>                                     4,035
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                              6,050
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                     6,050
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                     0.46
<EPS-DILUTED>                                     0.43
        

</TABLE>
52.222-18 Certification Regarding Knowledge of Child Labor for Listed End Products.       As prescribed in 22.1505(a), insert the following provision:          Certification Regarding Knowledge of Child Labor for Listed End Products (Feb 2021)                                       (a)                   *Definition*.                *Forced or indentured child labor* means all work or service-(1)                             Exacted from any person under the age of 18 under the menace of any penalty for its nonperformance and for which the worker does not offer himself voluntarily; or                                                                     (2)                             Performed by any person under the age of 18 pursuant to a contract the enforcement of which can be accomplished by process or penalties.                                                                                                   (b)                   *Listed end products*. The following end product(s) being acquired under this solicitation is (are) included in the List of Products Requiring Contractor Certification as to Forced or Indentured Child Labor, identified by their country of origin. There is a reasonable basis to believe that listed end products from the listed countries of origin may have been mined, produced, or manufactured by forced or indentured child labor.                Listed End Product                            Listed Countries of Origin_________________                            __________________________________                            _________________(c)                   *Certification*. The Government will not make award to an offeror unless the offeror, by checking the appropriate block, certifies to either paragraph (c)(1) or paragraph (c)(2) of this provision.                                                         (1)                         □ The offeror will not supply any end product listed in paragraph (b) of this provision that was mined, produced, or manufactured in a corresponding country as listed for that end product.                                                            (2)                         □ The offeror may supply an end product listed in paragraph (b) of this provision that was mined, produced, or manufactured in the corresponding country as listed for that product. The offeror certifies that it has made a good faith effort to determine whether forced or indentured child labor was used to mine, produce, or manufacture such end product. On the basis of those efforts, the offeror certifies that it is not aware of any such use of child labor.                                                                    (End of provision)    **Parent topic:** 52.222 [Reserved]
§ 7.15 Challenges and appeals. ( a ) Challenges and appeals by nominees regarding voter eligibility or the results of a county committee election must be handled in accordance with the Uniform Guidelines.
( b ) Any nominee has the right to challenge an election in writing, in person, or both within 15 calendar days after the results of the election are posted.
( c ) Challenges to the election must be made to the county committee, which will provide a decision on the challenge to the appellant within 7 calendar days of the receipt of the challenge.
( d ) The county committee's decision may be appealed to the State Committee within 15 calendar days of receipt of the notice of the decision if the appellant desires.
( e ) In the event that an election is nullified as a result of a challenge or appeal, or an error in the election process, a special election must be conducted by the county office and closely monitored by the FSA State office.
Page 1 of 2

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE

NORTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA

PANAMA CITY DIVISION

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA

 

vs. Case No. 5:20cr27-TKW/MJF

WILLIAM CHANDLER

_________________________________________________________________

REPORT AND RECOMMENDATION

CONCERNING PLEA OF GUILTY

The Defendant, by consent, has appeared before me pursuant to Rule 11, Fed.

R. Crim. P., and has entered a plea of guilty to Counts 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11,

12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, and 18 of the Indictment. After cautioning and examining the

Defendant under oath concerning each of the subjects mentioned in Rule 11, I

determined that the guilty plea was knowing and voluntary, and that the offenses

charged are supported by an independent basis in fact containing each of the essential

elements of such offenses. I therefore recommend that the plea of guilty be accepted

and that the Defendant be adjudicated guilty and have sentence imposed accordingly.

Dated: September 30, 2020

/s/ Michael J. Frank 

MICHAEL J. FRANK

UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE

Case 5:20-cr-00027-TKW-MJF Document 23 Filed 09/30/20 Page 1 of 2
Page 2 of 2

NOTICE

Objections to these proposed findings and recommendations must be filed within

twenty four (24) hours after being served a copy thereof. Any different deadline that

may appear on the electronic docket is for the court’s internal use only, and does not

control. A copy of objections shall be served upon all other parties. If a party fails to

object to the magistrate judge's findings or recommendations as to any particular claim

or issue contained in a report and recommendation, that party waives the right to

challenge on appeal the district court's order based on the unobjected-to factual and

legal conclusions. See 11th Cir. Rule 3-1; 28 U.S.C. § 636.

Case No.: 5:20cr27-TKW/MJF

Case 5:20-cr-00027-TKW-MJF Document 23 Filed 09/30/20 Page 2 of 2