alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
# L_2022013EN.01007501.xml

| 20.1.2022 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | L 13/75 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

20.1.2022

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

L 13/75

---

Corrigendum to Commission Implementing Regulation (EU) 2021/1832 of 12 October 2021 amending Annex I to Council Regulation (EEC) No 2658/87 on the tariff and statistical nomenclature and on the Common Customs Tariff

(
  Official Journal of the European Union L 385 of 29 October 2021
  )

On page 694, under point 6, after subpoints (a), (b) and (c), the following paragraph is inserted:

‘This heading does not include equipment more specifically classified elsewhere in the nomenclature.’

---
COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE

FIRST DISTRICT OF TEXAS AT HOUSTON

ORDER

Appellate case name: Patrick Rombs and Crystal Rombs v. Ivan Mefford, M.D., 

Ivan Mefford, M.D., Ph.D. P.A. and Elizabeth Prather, R.N.

Appellate case number: 01-18-00360-CV

Trial court case number: 16-DCV-236728

Trial court: 434th District Court of Fort Bend County

The record in this appeal was due in this Court on June 5, 2018. See TEX. R. APP.

P. 35.1(a). A clerk’s record was filed on July 25, 2018; however, a reporter’s record has 

not been filed.

On June 13, 2018, the court reporter notified the Clerk of this Court that there is a 

reporter’s record but appellants, Patrick Rombs and Crystal Rombs, had not requested 

preparation of a reporter’s record. Also on June 13, 2018, the Clerk of this Court notified 

appellants that the court reporter responsible for preparing the reporter’s record had not 

filed a reporter’s record because appellants had not requested preparation of a reporter’s 

record or had not paid, or made arrangements to pay, the fee for preparation of the record. 

See id. 37.3(c). The Clerk further notified appellants that unless they provided written 

evidence that they had paid, or made arrangements to pay, for the reporter’s record, or 

provided proof that they are entitled to proceed without payment of costs by July 13, 

2018, the Court might consider the appeal without a reporter’s record. See id. Appellants

have not responded.

Accordingly, the Court will consider and decide those issues or points that do not 

require a reporter’s record for a decision. See id. 37.3. Appellants’ brief is due to be 

filed no later than 30 days from the date of this order. Id. 38.6(a), (d). 

It is so ORDERED.

Judge’s signature: /s/ Russell Lloyd

  Acting individually  Acting for the Court

Date: August 14, 2018
# L_2014189EN.01026101.xml

| 27.6.2014 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | L 189/261 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

27.6.2014

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

L 189/261

---

Corrigendum to Regulation (EU) No 1308/2013 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 17 December 2013 establishing a common organisation of the markets in agricultural products and repealing Council Regulations (EEC) No 922/72, (EEC) No 234/79, (EC) No 1037/2001 and (EC) No 1234/2007

(
  Official Journal of the European Union L 347 of 20 December 2013
  )

On page 732, Article 141(2)(a)(ii):

for:

| ‘(ii) | between 1 February and 31 August of the current marketing year for other quantities of beet sugar, isoglucose or inulin syrup being carried forward;’, |
| --- | --- |

‘(ii)

between 1 February and 31 August of the current marketing year for other quantities of beet sugar, isoglucose or inulin syrup being carried forward;’,

read:

| ‘(ii) | between 1 February and 31 August of the current marketing year for quantities of beet sugar or inulin syrup being carried forward;’. |
| --- | --- |

‘(ii)

between 1 February and 31 August of the current marketing year for quantities of beet sugar or inulin syrup being carried forward;’.

---
#### § 621.24 NRCS responsibility.

NRCS is responsible for providing leadership for scheduling and implementing the technical phases of the studies and preparing the reports. NRCS assists in interpreting the study results.
52.242-3 Penalties for Unallowable Costs.

As prescribed in 42.709-7, use the following clause:

Penalties for Unallowable Costs (Dec 2022)

(a) Definition. Proposal, as used in this clause, means either—

(1) A final indirect cost rate proposal submitted by the Contractor after the expiration of its fiscal

year which-

(i) Relates to any payment made on the basis of billing rates; or

(ii) Will be used in negotiating the final contract price; or

(2) The final statement of costs incurred and estimated to be incurred under the Incentive Price

Revision clause (if applicable), which is used to establish the final contract price.

(b) Contractors which include unallowable indirect costs in a proposal may be subject to penalties.

The penalties are prescribed in 10 U.S.C. 3748 or 41 U.S.C.chapter 43, as applicable, which is

implemented in Section 42.709 of the Federal Acquisition Regulation (FAR).

(c) The Contractor shall not include in any proposal any cost that is unallowable, as defined in

subpart 2.1 of the FAR, or an executive agency supplement to the FAR.

(d) If the Contracting Officer determines that a cost submitted by the Contractor in its proposal is

expressly unallowable under a cost principle in the FAR, or an executive agency supplement to the

FAR, that defines the allowability of specific selected costs, the Contractor shall be assessed a

penalty equal to–

(1) The amount of the disallowed cost allocated to this contract; plus

(2) Simple interest, to be computed-

(i) On the amount the Contractor was paid (whether as a progress or billing payment) in excess of

the amount to which the Contractor was entitled; and

(ii) Using the applicable rate effective for each six-month interval prescribed by the Secretary of the

Treasury pursuant to Pub.L.92-41 (85 Stat.97).

(e) If the Contracting Officer determines that a cost submitted by the Contractor in its proposal

includes a cost previously determined to be unallowable for that Contractor, then the Contractor will

be assessed a penalty in an amount equal to two times the amount of the disallowed cost allocated to

this contract.

(f) Determinations under paragraphs (d) and (e) of this clause are final decisions within the meaning

of 41 U.S.C. chapter 71, Contract Disputes.

(g) Pursuant to the criteria in FAR 42.709-6, the Contracting Officer may waive the penalties in

paragraph (d) or (e) of this clause.

(h) Payment by the Contractor of any penalty assessed under this clause does not constitute
repayment to the Government of any unallowable cost which has been paid by the Government to

the Contractor.

(End of clause)

Parent topic: 52.242 [Reserved]
**Exhibit 33.1**

** **

**WAMU ASSET ACCEPTANCE CORP.**

** **

**SERVICER’S REPORT ON ASSESSMENT OF COMPLIANCE**

 

 

WaMu Asset Acceptance Corp. (the “Asserting Party”) is responsible for assessing compliance as of December 31, 2006 and for theperiod from January 1, 2006 through December 31, 2006 (the “Reporting Period”) of the Platform Transactions (as defined below) with the servicing criterion set forth in Item 1122(d)(3)(i)(C) of Regulation AB (12 CFR part 229.1122(d)(3)(i)(C)) (the“Applicable Servicing Criterion”) and no others**.**  The transactions covered by this Servicer’s Assessment are those securitizations of pools of mortgage loans that were completed on or after January 1, 2006 and prior to January 1,2007 for which the Asserting Party performed servicing functions set forth in Item 1122(d) and that included one or more classes of publicly offered securities registered with the Securities and Exchange Commission pursuant to the Securities Act of 1933(the “Platform Transactions”).

 

The Asserting Party has assessed its compliance with the Applicable Servicing Criterion for the Reporting Period, using the Applicable ServicingCriterion, and has concluded that it has complied in all material respects with the Applicable Servicing Criterion with respect to the Mortgage Loans. 

 

Deloitte & Touche LLP, a registered public accounting firm, has issued an attestation report on the Asserting Party’s assessment ofcompliance with the Applicable Servicing Criterion for the Reporting Period.

 

Date:  February 22, 2007

 

  /s/ Thomas G. Lehmann_________Name:  Thomas G. LehmannTitle:    President
**Exhibit 31**

 

**WAMU ASSET ACCEPTANCE CORP.**

** **

**OFFICER’S CERTIFICATE**

 

I, Thomas G. Lehmann, 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 theperiod covered by this report on Form 10–K of WaMu Mortgage Pass-Through Certificates, Series 2006-AR12 Trust (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 ofa  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 Form10–D for the period covered by this report is included in the Exchange Act periodic reports;

 

4.         Based on my knowledge and 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 agreement(s) in all material respects; and

 

5.         All of the reports on assessment of compliance with servicing criteria for asset-backed securities and their relatedattestation 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 anexhibit 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. 

 

Date:  March 15, 2007

 

  /s/ Thomas G. Lehmann_________Name:  Thomas G. LehmannTitle:    President
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE 

 NORTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA 

 PENSACOLA DIVISION 

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, 

Plaintiff, 

v. Case No. 3:21mj3/EMT 

 

JESUS RIVERA, 

 Defendant. 

______________________________/ 

NOTICE OF APPEARANCE 

COMES NOW the undersigned attorney, Assistant Federal Public Defender 

THOMAS S. KEITH, and gives notice that he will be counsel for the defendant in the 

above-styled cause. 

 RESPECTFULLY SUBMITTED this 21st day January, 2021. 

 /s/ Thomas S. Keith 

THOMAS S. KEITH 

Florida Bar No. 0243078 

Attorney for Defendant 

3 W. Garden Street, Suite 200 

Pensacola, FL 32502 

Thomas_Keith@fd.org 

(850) 432-1418 

Case 3:21-mj-00003-EMT Document 9 Filed 01/21/21 Page 1 of 1
52.217-8 Option to Extend Services.       As prescribed in 17.208(f), insert a clause substantially the same as the following:          Option to Extend Services (Nov 1999)          The Government may require continued performance of any services within the limits and at the rates specified in the contract. These rates may be adjusted only as a result of revisions to prevailing labor rates provided by the Secretary of Labor. The option provision may be exercised more than once, but the total extension of performance hereunder shall not exceed 6 months. The Contracting Officer may exercise the option by written notice to the Contractor within _____ [*insert the period of time within which the Contracting Officer may exercise the option*].          (End of clause)    **Parent topic:** 52.217 [Reserved]
**Exhibit 34.2**

 

**REPORT OF INDEPENDENT REGISTERED PUBLIC ACCOUNTING FIRM**

Board of Directors and ShareholderWashington Mutual Bank

We have examined management’s assertion, included in the accompanying Servicer’s Report on Assessment of Compliance, that Washington Mutual Bank andsubsidiaries (the “Company”) complied with the servicing criteria set forth in Item 1122 (d) of the Securities and Exchange Commission’s (“SEC”) Regulation AB for the securitizations of pools of mortgage loans that were completed on orafter January 1, 2006, and prior to January 1, 2007, for which the Company performed servicing functions set forth in Item 1122(d), that included one or more classes of publicly offered securities registered with the SEC pursuant to the Securities Act of1933, and for which the Company has an obligation to deliver an Assessment of Compliance pursuant to Item 1122 (the “Platform”) as of and for the year ended December 31, 2006, excluding criteria 1122 (d)(1)(iii) and 1122 (d)(3)(i)(C-D), whichmanagement has determined are not applicable to the activities performed by the Company with respect to the Platform. Management is responsible for the Company’s compliance with the servicing criteria. Our responsibility is to express an opinion onmanagement’s assertion about the Company’s compliance with the servicing criteria based on our examination.

Our examination was conducted in accordance with attestation standards established by the American Institute of Certified Public Accountants, as adopted by the Public Company Accounting Oversight Board(United States) and, accordingly, included examining, on a test basis, evidence about the Company’s compliance with the applicable servicing criteria, including tests on a sample basis of the servicing activities related to the Platform, determining whether theCompany performed those selected activities in compliance with the servicing criteria during the specified period and performing such other procedures as we considered necessary in the circumstances. Our procedures were limited to selected servicing activitiesperformed by the Company during the period covered by this report and, accordingly, such samples may not have included servicing activities related to each specific asset-backed transaction included in the Platform. Further, an examination is not designed to detectnoncompliance arising from errors that may have occurred prior to the period specified above that may have affected the balances or amounts calculated or reported by the Company during the period covered by this report. We believe that our examination provides areasonable basis for our opinion. Our examination does not provide a legal determination on the Company’s compliance with the servicing criteria.

In our opinion, management’s assertion that the Company complied with the aforementioned applicable servicing criteria as of and for the year ended December 31, 2006, for the Platform is fairlystated, in all material respects.

/s/ Deloitte & Touche LLP

March 14, 2007
#### § 60.117 [Reserved]
EXHIBIT 32.1
**Certification of Principal Executive Officer pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002**
I, William J. Gervais, Chief Executive Officer of Qualstar Corporation (the “Company”), certify,pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, that:
(1)  the Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q of the Company for the fiscal quarter ended December 31,2004 (the “Report”) fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) or 15(d) of theSecurities Exchange Act of 1934 (15 U.S.C. 78m or 780(d)); and (2)  the information contained in the Report fairly presents, in all material respects, thefinancial condition and results of operations of the Company.
Dated: February 11, 2005     /s/ WILLIAM J. GERVAIS   **William J. Gervais**  **Chief Executive Officer**
21
U.S. SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION
                             Washington, D.C. 20549

                                 FORM 10-KSB /A

                               Amendment No. 1 to

                 Current Report Pursuant to Section 13 or 15(d)
                     of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934

Date of report (Date of earliest event reported): August 9, 2000

                                ANTs software.com
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
               (Exact Name of Registrant as Specified in Charter)

                                     Nevada
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                 (State or Other Jurisdiction of Incorporation)

        0-16299                                          13-3054685
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
(Commission File Number)                       (IRS Employer Identification No.)

801 Mahler Road, Suite G, Burlingame, CA                    94010
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
(Address of Principal Executive Offices)                  (Zip Code)

Registrant's telephone number, including area code: (650) 692-0219

                                 Not Applicable
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
          (Former Name or Former Address, if Changed Since Last Report)
<PAGE>

                                EXPLANATORY NOTE

      This amendment on Form 10-KSB/A is being filed to include Exhibit 24
referenced in Item 13 as originally filed in this Annual Report.
<PAGE>

                                    SIGNATURE

      Pursuant to the requirements of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, the
registrant has duly caused this report to be signed on its behalf by the
undersigned hereunto duly authorized.


Dated: August 9, 2000                  By: /s/ Frederick D. Pettit
                                           -------------------------------------
                                           Frederick D. Pettit
                                           Chairman, Chief Executive Officer and
                                           President


Dated: August 9, 2000                  By: /s/ Miles Mochizuki
                                           -------------------------------------
                                           Miles Mochizuki
                                           Acting Secretary
§ 7.23 County committee duties. ( a ) The county committee, subject to the general direction and supervision of the State committee, will be generally responsible for carrying out in the county Farm Programs and any other program or function assigned by the Secretary or a designee of the Secretary.
( b ) The county committee will: ( 1 ) Employ the county executive director, subject to standards and qualifications furnished by the State committee, except that incumbent directors must not be removed except as specified in § 7.28. There must be no employment discrimination due to race, color, national origin, gender, religion, age, disability, political beliefs, sexual orientation, or marital or family status. The county executive director may not be removed for advocating or carrying out the Department's policy on equal opportunity and civil rights, including the equal employment policy. In the event it is claimed that dismissal is for such reasons, the dismissal will not become effective until the State committee and the Deputy Administrator have determined that dismissal was not because of such reasons;
( 2 ) Direct outreach activities to reach and inform socially disadvantaged farmers and ranchers of all programs and county committee election processes;
( 3 ) Follow official instructions to review, approve, and certify forms, reports, and documents requiring such action;
( 4 ) Recommend to the State committee needed changes in boundaries of local administrative areas;
( 5 ) Make available to farmers, ranchers, and the public information concerning the objectives and operations of the programs administered through the county committee;
( 6 ) Make available to agencies of the Federal Government and others information with respect to the county committee activities in accordance with official instructions issued;
( 7 ) Give public notice of the designation and boundaries of each local administrative area within the county prior to the election of county committee members;
( 8 ) Direct the giving of notices in accordance with applicable regulations and official instructions;
( 9 ) Recommend to the State committee desirable changes in or additions to existing programs;
( 10 ) Conduct such hearings and investigations as the State committee may request; and
( 11 ) Perform such other duties as may be prescribed by the State committee.
Order issued February 13, 2014

In The 

## Court of Appeals For The 

## First District of Texas

———————————— NO. 01
- 1 3
- 00 375
- CV

——————————— RWS TRANSPORT, L.P. D/B/A REPUBLIC WASTE SERVICES AND

BOBBY R. MATTHEWS , Appellant s

V. KARLA KEITH , Appellee

O n Appeal from the 23rd District Court Brazoria County, Texas Trial Court Cause No. 50809

MEMORANDUM ORDER The parties have filed a joint motion , representing that the parties have reached a settlement agreement and requesting that the Court abate this appeal and permit proceedings in the trial court, as necessary, to effectuate their agreement

.2

Accordingly, we grant the motion , abate the appeal, and remand the cause to permit proc eedings in the trial court to effectuate the parties’ agreement. See T EX
. R. A PP
. P. 42.1(a)(2)(C). The appeal shall be abated until such time as either party file a motion to reinstate and dismiss the appeal, no later than 60 days from the date of this order. If the agreement is not finalized by that date, appellant s shall
file s a report advising the Court on the status of the proceedings in the district court and requesting an extension of the abatement

. The Court will dismiss the appeal, without further notice, if no motion to reinstate and dismiss the appeal or no status report is filed within 60 days of this order. See T EX
. R. A PP
. P. 42.3(c). PER CURIAM Panel consists of Justices Jennings, Higley, and Sharp

.
33.106 Solicitation provision and contract clause.       (a) 						            The contracting officer shall insert the provision at 52.233-2, Service of Protest, in solicitations for contracts expected to exceed the simplified acquisition threshold.                                          (b) 						            The contracting officer shall insert the clause at 52.233-3, Protest After Award, in all solicitations and contracts. If a cost reimbursement contract is contemplated, the contracting officer shall use the clause with its Alternate I.    **Parent topic:** Subpart 33.1 - Protests
#### § 65.245 Secretary.

*Secretary* means the Secretary of Agriculture of the United States or any person to whom the Secretary's authority has been delegated.
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA

PANAMA CITY DIVISION

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA

v. CASE NO. 5:03cr52/MCR

 5:03cr53/MCR

JESSE SMITH

 /

ORDER REGARDING JOINT AND SEVERAL LIABILITY FOR RESTITUTION

After Defendant Jesse Smith was sentenced and ordered to pay restitution in the

amount of $3,015.00 to the Internal Revenue Service, Defendant Madeline Stuckey, case

number 5:03cr53/MCR, was ordered to pay the same restitution obligation jointly and

severally with Defendant Smith in accordance with 18 U.S.C. § 3664(h). As a result,

Defendant Smith is still responsible for payment of restitution until the entire $3,015.00 is

paid, but payments made by Defendant Stuckey will be credited toward the restitution

obligation.

SO ORDERED this 27th day of May, 2005.

 s/ M. Casey Rodgers 

M. CASEY RODGERS

UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE

Case 5:03-cr-00052-MCR Document 47 Filed 05/31/05 Page 1 of 1