alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
Exhibit 34.1

ERNST & YOUNG


Report of Independent Registered Public Accounting Firm

The Board of Directors

U.S. Bank National Association

We have examined management's assertion, included in the accompanying Report onCompliance with Applicable Servicing Criteria Pursuant to Item 1122 of Regulation AB underthe Securities Exchange Act of 1934, that U.S. Bank National Association (the Company)complied with the servicing criteria set forth in Item 1122(d) of the Securities and ExchangeCommission's Regulation AB for the Structured Repackaging platform (the Platform) as ofDecember 31, 2009, and for the period from January 1, 2009 through December 31, 2009, exceptfor servicing criteria 1122(d)(1)(i), 1122(d)(1)(iii), 1122(d)(2)(iii), 1122(d)(4)(i), 1122(d)(4)(vi),and 1122(d)(4)(ix)-(xv), which the Company has determined are not applicable to the activitiesperformed by them with respect to the servicing Platform covered by this report. Management isresponsible for the Company's compliance with those servicing criteria. Our responsibility is toexpress an opinion on management's assertion about the Company's compliance with theservicing criteria based on our examination.

Our examination was conducted in accordance with attestation standards established by theAmerican Institute of Certified Public Accountants, as adopted by the Public CompanyAccounting Oversight Board (United States) and, accordingly, included examining, on a test basis, evidence about the Company's compliance with the applicable servicing criteria andperforming such other procedures as we considered necessary in the circumstances. Ourexamination included testing of less than all of the individual asset-backed transactions andsecurities that comprise the Platform, testing of less than all of the servicing activities related tothe Platform, and determining whether the Company processed those selected transactions and performed those selected activities in compliance with the servicing criteria. Furthermore, ourprocedures were limited to the selected transactions and servicing activities performed by theCompany during the period covered by this report. Our procedures were not designed todetermine whether errors may have occurred either prior to or subsequent to our tests that mayhave affected the balances or amounts calculated or reported by the Company during the periodcovered by this report for the selected transactions or any other transactions. We believe that ourexamination provides a reasonable basis for our opinion. Our examination does not provide alegal determination on the Company's compliance with the servicing criteria.




---






In our opinion, management's assertion that the Company complied with the aforementioned servicing criteria as of December 31, 2009, and for the period from January 1, 2009 throughDecember 31, 2009, for the Structured Repackaging platform is fairly stated, in all materialrespects.





/s/ Ernst & Young LLP

March 5, 2010




---
###### Editorial Note on Subchapter A of Chapter VIII

#### Authority:

7 U.S.C. 71-87K, 1621-1627.

###### Editorial Note on Subchapter A of Chapter VIII

#### Editorial Note:

Nomenclature changes to subchapter A appear at 84 FR 45645, Aug. 30, 2019.

#### § 868.9 Provisions for hearings.

Opportunities shall be provided for hearings either in accordance with the Rules of Practice Governing Formal Adjudicatory Proceedings Instituted by the Secretary under Various Statutes (7 CFR part 1, subpart H) or in accordance with FGIS procedures as appropriate.
Subpart 219.0 - Reserved

Parent topic: Part 219 - SMALL BUSINESS PROGRAMS
#### § 945.87 Agents.

The Secretary may, by designation in writing, name any person, including any officer or employee of the Government, or name any bureau or division in the United States Department of Agriculture, to act as his agent or representative in connection with any of the provisions of this subpart.
#### Adkins v. Myers & Co.

Appeal from Jackson Circuit Court.

Tried before the Hon. William L. Stephens, Special Judge.

No counsel marked as appearing for appellant.

J. E. B-rown, for appellees.

In this case, after the recovery of a judgment against the appellees, they moved the court to retax the costs in said cause.. The motion was granted, and from the judgment granting said motion, the appeal is prosecuted. The judgment is affirmed for the want of assignment of errors.

Opinion

Per Curiam.
[Federal Register Volume 75, Number 235 (Wednesday, December 8, 2010)]
[Notices]
[Page 76482]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2010-30687]


-----------------------------------------------------------------------

DEPARTMENT OF HOUSING AND URBAN DEVELOPMENT

[Docket No. FR-5469-N-01]


Federal Housing Administration (FHA): FHA Maximum Loan Limits for 
2011

AGENCY: Office of the Assistant Secretary for Housing--Federal Housing 
Commissioner, HUD.

ACTION: Notice.

-----------------------------------------------------------------------

SUMMARY: This notice announces that FHA has posted on its Web site the 
single-family maximum loan limits for 2011. The loan limit limits can 
be found at http://www.hud.gov/offices/adm/hudclips/letters/mortgagee/.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Karin B. Hill, Director, Office of 
Single Family Program Development, Office of Housing, Department of 
Housing and Urban Development, 451 7th Street, SW., Washington, DC 
20410-8000; telephone number 202-708-2121 (this is not a toll-free 
number). Persons with hearing or speech impairments may access this 
number through TTY by calling the toll-free Federal Information Relay 
Service at 800-877-8339.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The FHA maximum loan limits for 2011 apply 
to mortgages insured under the following sections of the National 
Housing Act: Sections 203(b) (FHA's basic 1-4 family mortgage insurance 
program, including condominiums), 203(h) (mortgages for disaster 
victims), 203(k) (rehabilitation mortgage insurance) and 255 (Home 
Equity Conversion Mortgages). The loan limits apply to forward loans 
that were originated and received credit approval within the stated 
effective date for all programs herein except for Section 255 (HECM). 
The loan limits are applicable to all HECMs that have been assigned a 
FHA case number within the period January 1, 2011 through September 30, 
2011.
    FHA's regulations at 24 CFR 203.18b provide for requests to be made 
to FHA to change the established area loan limits. The regulations at 
24 CFR 203.18b provide the procedures by which changes are to be 
requested and the procedures can also be found in FHA Mortgagee Letter 
2007-01. Requests to changes to the maximum area loan limits should be 
made no later than the date specified in the mortgagee letter 
announcing the 2011 maximum loan limits. The 2007-01 Mortgagee Letter 
and, again, the Mortgagee Letter announcing 2011 maximum loan limits 
can be found at http://www.hud.gov/offices/adm/hudclips/letters/mortgagee/ mortgagee/.

    Dated: November 29, 2010.
Karin Hill,
Director, Office of Single Family Program Development.
[FR Doc. 2010-30687 Filed 12-7-10; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4210-67-P
UNPUBLISHED

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

No. 98-7638

RUSSELL D. RHYNE,

Petitioner - Appellant,

versus

CHARLES CREECY,

Respondent - Appellee.

Appeal from the United States District Court for the Western

District of North Carolina, at Charlotte. Graham C. Mullen, Chief

District Judge. (CA-98-333-3-2-MU)

Submitted: February 11, 1999 Decided: February 24, 1999

Before ERVIN, NIEMEYER, and TRAXLER, Circuit Judges.

Dismissed by unpublished per curiam opinion.

Russell D. Rhyne, Appellant Pro Se.

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.

See Local Rule 36(c).
2

PER CURIAM:

Russell Rhyne seeks to appeal the district court’s order denying relief on his petition filed under 28 U.S.C.A. § 2254 (West

1994 & Supp. 1998). We have reviewed the record and the district

court’s opinion and find no reversible error. Accordingly, we deny

a certificate of appealability and dismiss the appeal on the reasoning of the district court. See Rhyne v. Creecy, No. CA-98-333-

3-2-MU (W.D.N.C. Sept. 30, 1998). We dispense with oral argument

because the facts and legal contentions are adequately presented in

the materials before the court and argument would not aid the

decisional process.

DISMISSED
#### In the Matter of the Arbitration between Ferna Levine et al., Appellants, and Motor Vehicle Accident Indemnification Corporation, Respondent.

Order of the 'Supreme Court, Westchester County, dated October 25, 1968, *779affirmed, without costs. In our opinion, the record indicates a meritorious defense to the demand for arbitration, no intention on the .part of respondent to abandon the preliminary trial, and otherwise diligent prosecution thereof. There being no demonstrated prejudice to appellants, we conclude that Special Term did not abuse its discretion, in this proceeding by respondent to stay arbitration, in granting respondent’s motion to restore the proceeding to the calendar after it had been marked off the calendar and automatically dismissed, because not restored within a year, pursuant to CPLR 3404 *(Marco*v. *Sachs,*10 N Y 2d 542; *Ackerman*v. *Perchikoff,*30 A D 2d 672; *Blau v. Levine,*28 AD 2d 1137). Christ, Acting P. J., Brennan, Rabin, Benjamin and Martuscello, JJ., concur.
Case 1:06-cv-00682-TFM Document 16 Filed 09/27/2006 Page 1 of 2
Case 1:06-cv-00682-TFM Document 16 Filed 09/27/2006 Page 2 of 2
Case 2:06-cv-00621-MHT-CSC Document 2 Filed 07/17/2006 Page 1 of 4
Case 2:06-cv-00621-MHT-CSC Document 2 Filed 07/17/2006 Page 2 of 4
Case 2:06-cv-00621-MHT-CSC Document 2 Filed 07/17/2006 Page 3 of 4
Case 2:06-cv-00621-MHT-CSC Document 2 Filed 07/17/2006 Page 4 of 4
Editorial Note on Part 91
Editorial Note: Nomenclature changes to part 91 appear at 61 FR 51350, Oct. 2 1996.

§ 91.26 Issuance of certificates. ( a ) The person signing and issuing the certificate of analysis shall be one of the following: ( 1 ) The scientist who performed the analysis;
( 2 ) Another technician of the laboratory facility, who has been given power of attorney by the scientist who performed the analytical testing and been authorized by the Deputy Administrator to affix the scientist's signature to a certificate. The power of attorney shall be on file with the employing office or laboratory of the Science and Technology program;
( 3 ) A person designated as the “laboratory director in charge,” when the certificate represents composite analyses by several technicians.
( b ) The laboratory certificate shall be prepared in accordance with the facts set forth in the official memoranda made by the scientist or technicians in connection with the analysis.
( c ) Whenever a certificate is signed by a person under a power of attorney, the certificate should so indicate. The signature of the holder of power shall appear under the name of the scientist who personally analyzed the sample, and whenever a certificate issued is signed by a scientist in charge, that title must appear in connection with the signature.
[58 FR 42415, Aug. 9, 1993, as amended at 65 FR 64311, Oct. 26, 2000]
IN THE DISTRICT COURT OF THE UNITED STATES

FOR THE MIDDLE DISTRICT OF ALABAMA

NORTHERN DIVISION

JEREMIAH W. GREEN, )

)

 Plaintiff, )

)

v. ) CIVIL ACTION NO. 2:06-CV-667-WKW

)

ELMORE COUNTY JAIL, et al., )

)

 Defendants. )

O R D E R

A review of the complaint filed in this case reveals that the plaintiff lists several

“Doe” defendants as parties. The Federal Rules of Civil Procedure do not provide for

fictitious party practice as it is incompatible with federal procedure. See Rule 10(a) ("[i]n

the complaint, the title of the action shall include the names of all the parties ..."); New v.

Sports and Recreation, Inc., 114 F.3d 1092, 1094 at n.1 (11th Cir. 1997) (fictitious party

practice not permitted in federal court and plaintiff's failure to name parties required that

court strike parties.); Watson v. Unipress, 733 F.2d 1386, 1388 (10th Cir. 1984)(plaintiff did

not amend the complaint with identities of unknown defendants, and, therefore, no one

directly involved in incident was named as defendant.). Accordingly, it is ORDERED that

on or before August 22, 2006 the plaintiff shall file with this court an amendment to his

complaint which:

Case 2:06-cv-00667-WKW-WC Document 5 Filed 07/28/2006 Page 1 of 2
1. Informs the court of the true names of each “Doe” defendant who allegedly

violated his constitutional rights. 

2. Specifically describes how each of these individuals violated his constitutional

rights.

The plaintiff is cautioned that if he fails to properly respond to this order service on

the fictitious parties will not be effectuated, these persons will not be considered parties to

this cause of action, and this case will proceed only against those defendants properly named

and on whom service is perfected. 

Done this 28th day of July, 2006.

/s/ Vanzetta Penn McPherson

UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE 

Case 2:06-cv-00667-WKW-WC Document 5 Filed 07/28/2006 Page 2 of 2
§ 925.60 Reports. ( a ) Each handler shall furnish to the committee, at such times and for such periods as the committee may designate, certified reports covering, to the extent necessary for the committee to perform its functions, each shipment of grapes as follows: ( 1 ) The name of the shipper and the shipping point;
( 2 ) The car or truck license number (or name of the trucker), and identification of the carrier;
( 3 ) The date and time of departure;
( 4 ) The variety;
( 5 ) The number and type of containers in the shipment;
( 6 ) The destination; and
( 7 ) Identification of the inspection certificate pursuant to which the grapes were handled.
( b ) Upon request of the committee, made with the approval of the Secretary, each handler shall furnish to the committee, in such manner and at such times as it may prescribe, such other information as may be necessary to enable the committee to perform its duties under this part.
( c ) Each handler shall maintain for at least two succeeding fiscal periods after the end of the fiscal period in which the transactions occurred, such records of the grapes received and disposed of by such handler as may be necessary to verify the reports such handler submits to the committee pursuant to this section.
( d ) All reports and records submitted by handlers pursuant to the provisions of this section shall be received by, and at all times be in custody of one or more designated employees of the committee. No such employee shall disclose to any person, other than the Secretary upon request therefor, data or information obtained or extracted from such reports and records which might affect the trade position, financial condition, or business operation of the particular handler from whom received: *Provided,* That such data and information may be combined, and made available to any person, in the form of general reports in which the identities of the individual handlers furnishing the information are not disclosed and may be revealed to any extent necessary to effect compliance with the provisions of this part and the regulations issued thereunder.
II 

109TH CONGRESS 

2D SESSION S. 3061 

To extend the patent term for the badge of the American Legion Women’s 

Auxiliary, and for other purposes. 

IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES 

MAY 25, 2006 

Mr. TALENT introduced the following bill; which was read twice and referred 

to the Committee on the Judiciary 

A BILL 

To extend the patent term for the badge of the American 

Legion Women’s Auxiliary, and for other purposes. 

1 Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representa2 tives of the United States of America in Congress assembled, 

3 SECTION 1. PATENT TERM EXTENSION FOR THE BADGE OF 

4 THE AMERICAN LEGION WOMEN’S AUXIL5 IARY. 

6 The term of a certain design patent numbered 55,398 

7 (for the badge of the American Legion Women’s Auxiliary) 

8 is renewed and extended for a period of 14 years beginning 


sroberts on PROD1PC69 with BILLS
2 

•S 3061 IS

1 on the date of enactment of this Act, with all the rights 

2 and privileges pertaining to such patent. 

Æ 


sroberts on PROD1PC69 with BILLS
406.501 Requirements.

(a) The Chief, Procurement Policy Division, Office of Procurement and Property Management, has

been designated as the Competition Advocate for USDA.

(b) Each HCA shall designate a competition advocate for the contracting activity. The HCA shall

forward a copy of the designation memorandum to the Competition Advocate for USDA.

Parent topic: Subpart 406.5 - Competition Advocates
SUBCHAPTER F—SPECIAL CATEGORIES OF

CONTRACTING

PART 734—MAJOR SYSTEM ACQUISITION

PART 736—CONSTRUCTION AND ARCHITECT-ENGINEER CONTRACTS

PART 737 [RESERVED]

PART 734—MAJOR SYSTEM ACQUISITION

734.002-70 USAID policy.

PART 736—CONSTRUCTION AND ARCHITECT-ENGINEER CONTRACTS

Subpart 736.5—Contract Clauses

736.570 Disability standards in construction contracts.

Subpart 736.6—Architect-Engineer Services

736.602-2 Evaluation boards.

736.602-3 Evaluation board functions.

736.602-4 Selection authority.

736.602-5 Short selection process for procurements not to exceed the simplified

acquisition threshold.

736.603 [Reserved]

736.605 Government cost estimate for architect-engineer work.

PART 737 [RESERVED]
#### § 51.1172 Slightly spongy.

*Slightly spongy* means that the fruit is puffy or slightly wilted but not flabby.
#### § 795.1 [Reserved]
#### In the Matter of Peter F. Crispino et al., Respondents, v. Mario J. Marino et al., Appellants, and James M. Power et al., Constituting the Board of Elections of the City of New York, Respondents. (Proceeding No. 1.) In the Matter of Mario J. Marino et al., Appellants, v. James M. Power et al., Constituting the Board of Elections of the City of New York, Respondents. (Proceeding No. 2.)

In consolidated proceedings, proceeding No. 1 being to invalidate petitions designating appellant Marino as a candidate in the Republican Party Primary Election to be held on June 17, 1969 for nomination for the public office of Councilman at Large for the Borough of Brooklyn, City of New York, and for an injunction, and proceeding No. 2 being to validate said designating petitions, the appeal is from an order of the Supreme Court, Kings County, entered June 6, 1969, which (1) declared said designating petitions null and void and enjoined the respondent Board of Elections accordingly and (2) dismissed proceeding No. 2. Order affirmed, without costs. No opinion. Appellants are granted leave to appeal to the Court of Appeals. Questions of law have arisen which ought to be reviewed. Beldock, P. J., Rabin, Hopkins, Benjamin and Martuscello, JJ., concur.
5213.000 Scope of part.

NAVSUP created the DON Simplified Acquisition Procedures Guide containing procedures that

supplement existing policy for simplified acquisitions. The procedures apply to all HCAs that award

and administer contracts (including task and delivery orders). The Guide is available on the

ASN(RDA) website.

Parent topic: Part 5213 - SIMPLIFIED ACQUISITION PROCEDURES
```

[Congressional Bills 109th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[S. 2641 Introduced in Senate (IS)]

109th CONGRESS
  2d Session
                                S. 2641

            To suspend temporarily the duty on 2,4-Xylidine.

_______________________________________________________________________

                   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 2,4-Xylidine.

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

SECTION 1. 2,4-XYLIDINE.

    (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:

``      9902.29.21      2,4-Xylidine (CAS   Free         No change        No change        On or before 12/  ''.
                         No. 95-68-1)                                                       31/2009
                         (provided for in
                         subheading
                         2921.49.10)......

    (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>
```
**EXHIBIT 31.1****CERTIFICATION**I, Crit S. DeMent, certify that:1. I have reviewed this annual report on Form 10-K for the year ended December 31, 2007 of LEAFEquipment Leasing Income Fund III, L.P.; 2. Based on my knowledge, this report does not contain any untrue statement of a material factor omit to state a material fact necessary to make the statements made, in light of thecircumstances under which such statements were made, not misleading with respect to the periodcovered by this report; 3. Based on my knowledge, the financial statements, and other financial information included inthis report, fairly present in all material respects the financial condition, results ofoperations and cash flows of the registrant as of, and for, the periods presented in thisreport; 4. The registrant’s other certifying officer(s) and I are responsible for establishing andmaintaining disclosure controls and procedures (as defined in Exchange Act Rules 13a-15(e) and15d-15(e)) [omission in accordance with SEC Release No. 33-8760 (December 15, 2006)] for theregistrant and have: (a) Designed such disclosure controls and procedures, or caused such disclosure controlsand procedures to be designed under our supervision, to ensure that material informationrelating to the registrant, including its consolidated subsidiaries, is made known to us byothers within those entities, particularly during the period in which this report is beingprepared;  (b) [omission in accordance with SEC Release No. 33-8760 (December 15, 2006)];  (c) Evaluated the effectiveness of the registrant’s disclosure controls and procedures andpresented in this report our conclusions about the effectiveness of the disclosure controlsand procedures, as of the end of the period covered by this report based on suchevaluation; and  (d) Disclosed in this report any change in the registrant’s internal control over financialreporting that occurred during the registrant’s most recent fiscal quarter (theregistrant’s fourth fiscal quarter in the case of an annual report) that has materiallyaffected, or is reasonably likely to materially affect, the registrant’s internal controlover financial reporting; and5. The registrant’s other certifying officer(s) and I have disclosed, based on our most recentevaluation of internal control over financial reporting, to the registrant’s auditors and theaudit committee of the registrant’s board of directors (or persons performing the equivalentfunctions): (a) All significant deficiencies and material weaknesses in the design or operation ofinternal control over financial reporting which are reasonably likely to adversely affectthe registrant’s ability to record, process, summarize and report financial information;and  (b) Any fraud, whether or not material, that involves management or other employees whohave a significant role in the registrant’s internal control over financial reporting.        Date: March 31, 2008 /s/ Crit S. DeMent   Name:  Crit S. DeMent   Title:  Chief Executive Officer of the General Partner
PART 35 –– RESEARCH AND DEVELOPMENT

CONTRACTING
Case 3:06-cv-00627-WKW-SRW Document 8 Filed 09/19/2006 Page 1 of 1