alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
§ 140.87 Violations. ( a ) The Commission may obtain an injunction or other court order to prevent a violation of the provisions of— ( 1 ) The Atomic Energy Act of 1954, as amended;
( 2 ) Title II of the Energy Reorganization Act of 1974, as amended; or
( 3 ) A regulation or order issued pursuant to those Acts.
( b ) The Commission may obtain a court order for the payment of a civil penalty imposed under section 234 of the Atomic Energy Act: ( 1 ) For violations of— ( i ) Sections 53, 57, 62, 63, 81, 82, 101, 103, 104, 107, or 109 of the Atomic Energy Act of 1954, as amended;
( ii ) Section 206 of the Energy Reorganization Act;
( iii ) Any rule, regulation, or order issued pursuant to the sections specified in paragraph (b)(1)(i) of this section;
( iv ) Any term, condition, or limitation of any license issued under the sections specified in paragraph (b)(1)(i) of this section.
( 2 ) For any violation for which a license may be revoked under section 186 of the Atomic Energy Act of 1954, as amended.
[57 FR 55080, Nov. 24, 1992]
#### West *v.*Locklear.

October 14, 1913.

Complaint. Before Judge Maddox. Floyd superior court. January 18, 1913.

*Maddox & Boyal,*for plaintiff in error.

*Benny & Wright,*contra.

Lumpkin, J.

1. The demurrer was without merit, and was properly overruled.

2. The controlling question in this case was whether a wife had paid money to the creditor of her husband, with knowledge on the part of the creditor that it was her money. The charges on this subject, of which complaints were made, were not subject to the criticisms presented, nor do they furnish ground for reversal.

3. If fuller instructions had been desired, they should have been requested. Under the pleadings and evidence, the contention that the court failed or omitted to give certain charges does not require a new trial.

*Judgment affirmed.*

*All the Justices concur.*
EX-34.4
McGladrey LLP


(logo) McGladrey


Report of Independent Registered Public Accounting Firm


To the Board of Directors
Pentalpha Surveillance, LLC


We have examined management's assertion, included in the accompanying
Management's Report on Assessment of 2012 Compliance with Applicable Servicing
Criteria (Management's Assertion), that Pentalpha Surveillance, LLC (the
Company) complied with the servicing criteria set forth in item 1122(d) of the
Securities and Exchange Commission's (SEC) Regulation AB for services by the
Company that are encompassed by contractual obligations to perform Regulation
AB reporting (the Platform), including only those asset-backed securities
transactions defined below, as of and for the year ended December 31, 2012,
excluding the following criteria set forth in items 1122(d)(1)(i-iv),
1122(d)(2)(i-vii), 1122(d)(3)(ii-iv), 1122(d)(4)(i-vi) and
1122(d)(4)(viii-xv), which management has determined are not applicable to the
activities performed by the Company with respect to the Platform. Appendix A to
Management's Assertion identifies the individual asset-backed transactions
identified by management as constituting the Platform. Management is
responsible for the Company's compliance with its contractual obligations and
its assertion. Our responsibility is to express an opinion on Management's
Assertion 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
activities related to the Platform and other procedures as we considered
necessary in the circumstances. Our procedures were limited to selected
servicing activities performed by the Company during the period covered by this
report. Further, an examination is not designed to detect noncompliance 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 a reasonable basis for our opinion.
Our examination does not provide a legal determination on the Company's
compliance with the servicing criteria or its contractual obligations.

In our opinion, Management's Assertion as of and for the year ended December
31, 2012 for the Platform, is fairly stated, in all material respects.


/s/ McGladrey LLP


Irvine, CA
February 25, 2013


Member of the RSM International network of Independent accounting, tax and
consulting firms.
1330.202-2 Impracticality of submission.

The DOC Head of Agency for Procurement is authorized to determine that it is impractical to secure

a Disclosure Statement, although submission is required, and to authorize contract award without

obtaining the Statement.

Parent topic: Subpart 1330.2 - CAS Program Requirements
### Enclosure 5

SIP completeness checklistEnclosure 5 COMPLETENESS CHECKLIST FOR SIP REVISION Progress Report on Implementation of PM2.5 State Implementation Plans (SIPs) for the South

Coast and San Joaquin Valley Air Basins and Proposed SIP Revisions

Planning Area: South Coast Air Quality Manage ment District and San Joaquin Valley Air Pollution Control District

Title 40 CFR, Part 51, Appendix V

– Criteria for Determining the Completeness

of Plan Submissions Enclosed Notes

ADMINISTRATIVE MATERIALS

2.1(a) Submittal Letter from Governor's Des ignee x See submittal letter.

2.1(b) Evidence of Adoption x ARB Resolution 11

- 24 and Executive Order S

- 11

- 010.
2.1(c) Legal Authority Citation x ARB Resolution 11

- 24 and Executive Order S

- 11

- 010.
2.1(d) Copy of :

a. Attainment Plan b: Contingency M easures N/A Not Applicable.

2.1(e) Evidence of Compliance with State's Procedural Requirements x ARB Resolution 11

- 2 4 and Executive Order S

- 11

- 010.

2.1(f) Evidence of Public Notice Consistent with 40 CFR part 51.102 x See Public Hearing Notice and tra nscripts of the April 28, 2011 ARB Board Hearing.
2.1(g) Certification of Public Hearing in Accordance with Notice x ARB Resolution 11

- 24

.

2.1(h) Compilation of Public Comments and Responses x See Public Hearing Notice and transcripts of the April 28, 2011 ARB Board Hearing

.

2.2(a) Identification of Regulated Pollutant N/A Not Applicable.

2.2(b) Identification of Attainment Area/Status N/A Not applicable.

2.2(c) Estimate of Plan's Impact on Emissions x Appendix C: Reasonable Further Progress tab les Appendix D: Transportation Conformity Budgets

2.2(d) Demonstration that Plan Approval/Implementation Protects NAAQS x Appendix B: Rulemaking Calendar Appendix C: Reasonable Further Progress tables Appendix D: Transportation Conformity Budgets
2.2(e ) Modeling Support N/A Not Applicable.

2.2(f)

- Compliance/Enforcement and 2.2(i) Justification N/A Not Applicable.
Subpart 1624.1—Protection of Individual

Privacy

Authority: 5 U.S.C. 8913; 40 U.S.C. 486(c); 48 CFR 1.301.

Parent topic: PART 1624—PROTECTION OF PRIVACY AND FREEDOM OF INFORMATION

1624.104 Contract clause.

Records retained by FEHBP carriers on Federal subscribers and members of their families serve the

carriers' own commercial function of paying health benefits claims and are not maintained to

accomplish an agency function of OPM. Consequently, the records do not fall within the provisions of

the Privacy Act. Nevertheless, OPM recognizes the need for carriers to keep certain records

confidential. The clause at 1652.224–70 shall be inserted in all FEHBP contracts.
Case 1:06-cr-00197-MEF-CSC Document 43 Filed 03/06/2007 Page 1 of 1
Pursuant to5 T H C IR . R. 47.5 , th e co urt has determined that this opinionsho uld not * be publishe d an d is not precede nt except und er the limit ed circu mstance s set forth in 5 T H C IR . R. 47.5 .4. 

### INTHE UNI TED S TATESCOU RT OFAPPEALS

FORTHE FIFTH CIRCU IT

N o. 08- 40402 C onfer enc e Cal endar UN I TE D S TA TE S OF AM ERI CA P l ai n t i f f
- A pp el l ee v. JU AN LEO N EL SAN TAY- M EN D EZ D e fe nda nt - Appe l l ant

A pp ealf

rom t h e U n i t ed S t ates D i st ri ctC ou rt f or t h e S ou t h ern D i st ri ctof T exas U SDC N o . 7 : 0 7
- CR- 1 3 1 6
- ALL B e fo r e H IG G IN B O T H A M , D E N N IS , a n d P R A D O , C ir c u it J u d g e s . P E R C U R I A M: * Th e F ede r al Pu bl i c D ef enderappoi nt ed t o r epr es ent Juan L eo nelSant ayM en d ez h a s m ov ed for l ea ve to w i th d ra w a n d h a s f i l ed a b ri ef i n acco rd a n ce w i th A n d er s v . C a lif

o rn ia , 3 86 U . S. 7 38 ( 19 67 ) . Sant ay - M e nde z ha s no tf i l e d a r e s po ns e . O uri nde pe nde ntre vi e w of t he re c o r d a nd c o uns e l ’ s b r i e f di s c l o s e s no n on frivo l ou s is s u e for ap p ea l . A ccord i n gly, cou n sel’ s m oti on f or leav e to w i t hdr aw i s G RA N TE D , c o uns e li s e xc us e d f r o m f ur t he rr e s po ns ibi l i t i e s he r e i n, a n d th e A P P E A L IS D IS M IS S E D . S ee5 T H C IR . R. 42. 2. United States Court of App eals Fifth Circuit 

### F I L E D Februar y 18, 2009 Cha rl es R. F ulb ru g e II I Clerk
II 

109TH CONGRESS 

2D SESSION S. 3377 

To extend temporarily the suspension of duty on 1,3-Bis(4- 

aminophenoxy)benzene (RODA). 

IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES 

JUNE 5, 2006 

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

to the Committee on Finance 

A BILL 

To extend temporarily the suspension of duty on 1,3-Bis(4- 

aminophenoxy)benzene (RODA). 

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

3 SECTION 1. 1,3-BIS(4-AMINOPHENOXY)BENZENE (RODA). 

4 (a) IN GENERAL.—Heading 9902.05.15 of the Har5 monized Tariff Schedule of the United States is amend6 ed— 

7 (1) by inserting ‘‘(RODA)’’ after ‘‘benzene’’; 

8 and 

9 (2) by striking ‘‘12/31/2006’’ and inserting 

10 ‘‘12/31/2009’’. 


cchase on PROD1PC60 with BILLS
2 

•S 3377 IS 

1 (b) EFFECTIVE DATE.—The amendments made by 

2 subsection (a) apply to goods entered, or withdrawn from 

3 warehouse for consumption, on or after the 15th day after 

4 the date of enactment of this Act. 

Æ 


cchase on PROD1PC60 with BILLS
II 

109TH CONGRESS 

2D SESSION S. 3218 

To reduce temporarily the duty on certain pepperoncini prepared or preserved 

by vinegar or acetic acid in concentrations at 0.5 percent or greater. 

IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES 

MAY 25, 2006 

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

referred to the Committee on Finance 

A BILL 

To reduce temporarily the duty on certain pepperoncini prepared or preserved by vinegar or acetic acid in concentrations at 0.5 percent or greater. 

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

3 SECTION 1. CERTAIN PEPPERONCINI PREPARED OR PRE4 SERVED BY VINEGAR OR ACETIC ACID IN 

5 CONCENTRATIONS AT 0.5 PERCENT OR 

6 GREATER. 

7 (a) IN GENERAL.—Subchapter II of chapter 99 of 

8 the Harmonized Tariff Schedule of the United States is 


rwilkins on PROD1PC63 with BILLS
2 

•S 3218 IS 

1 amended by inserting in numerical sequence the following 

2 new heading: 

‘‘ 9902.10.29 Pepperoncini, prepared or preserved by 

vinegar (provided for in subheading 

2001.90.38) ............................................ 2.2% No change No change On or before 

12/31/2009 ’’. 

3 (b) EFFECTIVE DATE.—The amendment made by 

4 subsection (a) applies to goods entered, or withdrawn from 

5 warehouse for consumption, on or after the 15th day after 

6 the date of the enactment of this Act. 

Æ 


rwilkins on PROD1PC63 with BILLS
§ 1015.201 Aggressive agency collection activity. ( a ) Heads of DOE Headquarters Elements and Field Elements or their designees must promptly notify the appropriate DOE finance office of claims arising from their operations. A claim will be recorded and controlled by the responsible finance office upon receipt of documentation from a competent authority establishing the amount due.
( b ) In accordance with 31 CFR Chapter IX parts 900-904 and this part, DOE will aggressively collect all debts arising out of activities. Collection activities shall be undertaken promptly with follow-up action taken as necessary.
( c ) Debts referred or transferred to Treasury, or Treasury-designated debt collection centers under the authority of 31 U.S.C. 3711(g), shall be serviced, collected, or compromised, or the collection action will be suspended or terminated, in accordance with the statutory requirements and authorities applicable to the collection of such debts.
( d ) DOE will cooperate with other agencies in its debt collection activities.
( e ) DOE will refer debts to Treasury as soon as due process requirements are complete, and should refer such debts no later than 180 days after the debt has become delinquent. On behalf of DOE, Treasury will take appropriate action to collect or compromise the referred debt, or to suspend or terminate collection action thereon, in accordance with the statutory and regulatory requirements and authorities applicable to the debt and action. Appropriate action to collect a debt may include referral to another debt collection center, a private collection contractor, or the DOJ for litigation. (See 31 CFR 285.12, Transfer of Debts to Treasury for Collection.) This requirement does not apply to any debt that: ( 1 ) Is in litigation or foreclosure;
( 2 ) Will be disposed of under an approved asset sale program;
( 3 ) Has been referred to a private collection contractor for a period of time acceptable to Treasury; or
( 4 ) Will be collected under internal offset procedures within three years after the debt first became delinquent.
( f ) Treasury is authorized to charge a fee for services rendered regarding referred or transferred debts. DOE will add the fee to the debt as an administrative cost (see § 1015.212(c)).
1601.301 Policy.

(a) Procedures, contract clauses, and other aspects of the acquisition process for contracts in the

FEHBP shall be consistent with the principles of the FAR. Changes to the FAR that are otherwise

authorized by statute or applicable regulation, dictated by the practical realities associated with the

unique nature of health care procurements, or necessary to satisfy specific needs of the Office of

Personnel Management shall be implemented as amendments to the FEHBAR and published in the

Federal Register, or as deviations to the FAR in accordance with FAR subpart 1.4.

(b) Internal procedures, instructions, and guides that are necessary to clarify or implement the

FEHBAR within OPM may be issued by agency officials specifically designated by the Director, OPM.

Normally, such designations will be specified in the OPM Administrative Manual, which is routinely

available to agency employees and will be made available to interested outside parties upon request.

Clarifying or implementing procedures, instructions, and guides issued pursuant to this section of

the FEHBAR must—

(1) Be consistent with the policies and procedures contained in this regulation as implemented and

supplemented from time to time; and

(2) Follow the format, arrangement, and numbering system of this regulation to the extent

practicable.

Parent topic: Subpart 1601.3—Agency Acquisition Regulation (FEHBAR)
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

MIDDLE DISTRICT OF ALABAMA

SOUTHERN DIVISION

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA )

)

v ) CR. NO. 2:06cr197-MEF

)

RODERICK CHARLES MELVIN )

ORDER

For good cause, it is

ORDERED that a final pretrial conference be and is hereby set for February 20,

2007 at 1:00 p.m. in Courtroom 4B, United States Courthouse Complex, One Church Street,

Montgomery, Alabama. 

That all applicable deadlines contained in the prior arraignment order and pretrial

order are adjusted accordingly, except the deadlines for dispositive motions which is not

extended.

Done this 27 day of November, 2006. th

 /s/Charles S. Coody 

CHARLES S. COODY

CHIEF UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE

Case 1:06-cr-00197-MEF-CSC Document 30 Filed 11/27/2006 Page 1 of 1
2007-1113.

#### Acordia of Ohio, LLC v. Fishel.

Hamilton App. No. C-060292. Reported at 115 Ohio St.3d 1413, 2007-Ohio-4884, 873 N.E.2d 1317. On motion for reconsideration. Motion denied.

Moyer, C.J., and O’Donnell and Lanzinger, JJ., dissent.
IN THE DISTRICT COURT OF THE UNITED STATES FOR THE

MIDDLE DISTRICT OF ALABAMA, NORTHERN DIVISION

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA )

)

v. ) CRIMINAL ACTION NO.

) 2:06cr209-MHT

BRIDGET Y. TAYLOR )

ORDER

It is ORDERED that defendant Bridget Y. Taylor’s

motion for reconsideration (doc. no. 36) is denied.

DONE, this the 26th day of January, 2007.

 /s/ Myron H. Thompson 

UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE

Case 2:06-cr-00209-MHT-CSC Document 39 Filed 01/26/2007 Page 1 of 1
# 335.070 Cost-sharing.

**Parent topic:**PART 335 - RESEARCH AND DEVELOPMENT CONTRACTING
#### Hurt *v.*Barnes.

October 15, 1913.

Action for damages. Before Judge James B. Park. Baldwin superior court. September 16, 1912.

*Sibley & Sibley,*for plaintiff.

*D. S. Sanford*and *Livingston Kenan,*for defendant.

Evans, P. J.

1. The overruling of a demurrer to a plea, and of objections to an amendment to a plea, can only be taken advantage of by timely exception; such rulings are not proper ground for new trial. *Hawkins*v. *Studdard,*132 *Ga.*265 (63 S. E. 852, 131 Am. St. R. 190); *Bullock*v. *Cordele Sash etc. Co.,*114 *Ga.*627 (40 S. E. 734).

2. Upon interlocutory orders and rulings, not excepted to pendente lite, error can not be assigned in a bill of exceptions to the overruling of a motion for new trial, certified more than thirty days after the adjournment of the court at which such interlocutory orders were passed or rulings made. *Bullock*v. *Cordele Sash etc. Co.,*supra; *City Council of Waycross*v. *Youmans,*85 *Ga.*708 (11 S. E. 865).

3. In an action for damages for an alleged malicious arrest, where the defendant denies the allegations of the petition and pleads a set-off arising in tort, an omission to charge on the effect of' the advice of counsel as bearing on the question of damages will not require á new trial; there being no request so to charge, and' the court’s charge not being sent up as a part of the record.

4. Even if it was material to prove that the plaintiff had an interest in a certain estate, testimony that he was offered a certain sum of money for such interest is incompetent to prove the factum of interest.

5. A general verdict for the defendant is supported by the evidence.

*Judgment affirmed.*

*All the Justices concur.*
MINUTES

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE

MIDDLE DISTRICT OF ALABAMA, NORTHERN DIVISION

HON. MYRON H. THOMPSON, JUDGE AT MONTGOMERY ALABAMA

DATE COMMENCED January 22, 2007 AT 10:15 A.M./P.M.

DATE COMPLETED January 22, 2007 AT 3:28 A.M./P.M.

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA Criminal Action

2:06cr206-MHT 

VS.

BRIDGET Y. TAYLOR

 

PLAINTIFF/GOVERNMENT APPEARANCES DEFENDANT(S)

AUSA Verne H. Speirs X Atty Kevin L. Butler

X

X

X

 X 

COURT OFFICIALS PRESENT:

Anthony Green, Danielle Goldstein, Mitchell Reisner,

Courtroom Clerk Law Clerk Court Reporter

PROCEEDINGS:

( ) NON-JURY TRIAL

(x) OTHER PROCEEDING: SENTENCING HEARING

10:15 a.m. Sentencing hearing commenced. Terms of plea

agreement stated on the record. Probation

concurs with plea agreement. Parties

arguments regarding restitution calculation

as stated in presentence investigation

report. Defendant's objections to PSR

overruled as stated on the record.

Defendant's ORAL MOTION for downward

departure for personal family circumstances.

Defendant's ORAL MOTION withdrawing Oral

Motion for Downward Departure. ORAL ORDER

denying Oral Motion for Downward Departure as

withdrawn by Defendant. 

11:00 a.m. Break.

1:03 p.m. Sentencing hearing continues. Defendant

withdraws objection to amount of lost re PSR.

Parties agreement to restitution as stated on

the record. Parties agree to paragraph 32

revision as stated on the record by 

Case 2:06-cr-00209-MHT-CSC Document 34 Filed 01/22/2007 Page 1 of 2
2

page 2

2:06cr209-MHT

defendant's counsel. Witnesses sworn. 

Defendant's evidence commenced. Government 

objects to defendant witness Ghostley.

2:30 p.m. Oral arguments heard.

3:00 p.m. Break.

3:15 p.m. Sentencing hearing continues. Sentence

imposed.

3:28 p.m. Hearing concluded.

Case 2:06-cr-00209-MHT-CSC Document 34 Filed 01/22/2007 Page 2 of 2
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE

MIDDLE DISTRICT OF ALABAMA, NORTHERN DIVISION

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA

v 2:06cr209-MHT

BRIDGET Y. TAYLOR

GOVERNMENT DEFENDANT

WITNESS LIST

 1. LAWRENCE TAYLOR 

 2. WILLIA TAYLOR 

 3. VALERIE HASTY 

 4. DAVID GHOSTLEY 

 

Case 2:06-cr-00209-MHT-CSC Document 34-2 Filed 01/22/2007 Page 1 of 1
#### § 983.26 Production year.

*Production year* is synonymous with “fiscal period” and means the period beginning on September 1 and ending on August 31 of each year or such other period as may be recommended by the committee and approved by the Secretary. Pistachios harvested and received in August of any year shall be applied to the subsequent production year for marketing order purposes.

[69 FR 17850, Apr. 4, 2004. Redesignated at 74 FR 56539, Nov. 2, 2009]
#### § 985.4 Spearmint oil.

*Spearmint oil,* hereinafter referred to as *oil,* means essential oil extracted by distillation from plants, grown in the production area, of the genus Mentha, species Cardiaca (commonly referred to as Scotch Spearmint), Spicata (commonly referred to as Native Spearmint), or such other species, grown in the production area, that produce a spearmint flavored oil. Oil shall be segregated into the following classes:

*Class 1:* Oil extracted from the first cutting of Scotch Spearmint.

*Class 2:* Oil extracted from the second cutting of Scotch Spearmint.

*Class 3:* Oil extracted from Native Spearmint.

*Class 4:* Oil which has a spearmint flavor, extracted from plants other than Scotch or Native Spearmint.

The Committee, with the approval of the Secretary, may change these classes to recognize new, or delete obsolete, classes.
2115.070 Negotiation authority.

The authority to negotiate FEGLI Program contracts is conferred by 5 U.S.C. 8709.

Parent topic: PART 2115 - CONTRACTING BY NEGOTIATION
Exhibit 32





CERTIFICATION PURSUANT TO


18 U.S.C. SECTION 1350,


AS ADOPTED PURSUANT TO


SECTION 906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002




In connection with the Quarterly Report of Integra Bank Corporation (the "Company") on Form 10-Q for the period ending March 31, 2011, as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the "Report"), each of the undersigned certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. § 1350, as adopted pursuant to § 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that:




(1)  The Report fully complies with the requirements of section 13(a) or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934; and





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





/s/ Michael J. AlleyChairman of the Board andChief Executive OfficerMay 2, 2011/s/ Michael B. CarrollChief Financial OfficerMay 2, 2011