alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
# L_2023240EN.01013201.xml

| 28.9.2023 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | L 240/132 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

28.9.2023

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

L 240/132

---

DECISION OF THE EEA JOINT COMMITTEE No 245/2020

of 30 December 2020

on the entry into force of Decision of the EEA Joint Committee No 112/2020 of 14 July 2020 [2023/2047]

THE EEA JOINT COMMITTEE,

Having regard to the Agreement on the European Economic Area (‘the EEA Agreement’), and in particular Article 98 thereof,

Whereas:

| (1) | Directive (EU) 2018/410 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 14 March 2018 amending Directive 2003/87/EC to enhance cost-effective emission reductions and low-carbon investments, and Decision (EU) 2015/1814 (1) was incorporated into the EEA Agreement by Decision of the EEA Joint Committee No 112/2020 of 14 July 2020 (2). |
| --- | --- |

(1)

Directive (EU) 2018/410 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 14 March 2018 amending Directive 2003/87/EC to enhance cost-effective emission reductions and low-carbon investments, and Decision (EU) 2015/1814 (1) was incorporated into the EEA Agreement by Decision of the EEA Joint Committee No 112/2020 of 14 July 2020 (2).

| (2) | Decision of the EEA Joint Committee No 112/2020 of 14 July 2020 should enter into force on 1 February 2021, |
| --- | --- |

(2)

Decision of the EEA Joint Committee No 112/2020 of 14 July 2020 should enter into force on 1 February 2021,

HAS ADOPTED THIS DECISION:

Article 1

Notwithstanding its Article 3, Decision of the EEA Joint Committee No 112/2020 of 14 July 2020 shall enter into force on 1 February 2021.

Article 2

This Decision shall enter into force on 30 December 2020, or on the day following the last notification under Article 103(1) of the EEA Agreement (*1), whichever is the later.

Article 3

This Decision shall be published in the EEA Section of, and in the EEA Supplement to, the Official Journal of the European Union.

Done at Brussels, 30 December 2020.

For the EEA Joint Committee

The President

Sabine MONAUNI

---

(1)  
  OJ L 76, 19.3.2018, p. 3.

1

(2)  
  OJ L 172, 6.7.2023, p. 33.

2

(*1)  No constitutional requirements indicated.

*1

---
MANAGEMENT'SASSERTION
      ON COMPLIANCEWITH
      REGULATION AB CRITERIA




March
      1,2007




SunTrust
      Bank (the "Asserting Party") is responsible for assessing compliance with the
      servicing criteria set forth in Title 17, Section 229.1122(d) of the Code of
      Federal Regulations (the "CFR") for all loans serviced by SunTrust Bank's
      Commercial Mortgage
      Finance Group, which consist primarily of non-recourse, fixed rate, long term
      commercial mortgage loans (the "Platform"), except for the criteria set forth
      in
      Sections 1122(d)(l)(ii),
      1122(d)(l)(iii), 1122(d)(3)(i)(C), 1122(d)(4)(ii), 1122(d)(4)(iii), 1122(d)(4)(vi),
      1122(d)(4)(vii), and 1122(d)(4)(xv), which the Asserting Party has determined
      are not applicable to the servicing activities performed by it with respect
      to
      the Platform (the "Applicable Servicing Criteria"). Management's assertion
      identifies all loans constituting the Platform serviced by the Asserting Party
      as of and for the year ended
      December 31,2006.




The
      Asserting Party used the applicable criteria in paragraph (d) of Title 17, Section
      229.1122 of the CFR to assess compliance with the Applicable Servicing Criteria.




The
      Asserting Party has concluded that it has complied, in all material respects, with
      the
      Applicable Servicing Criteria as of and for the twelve month period ending December
      31, 2006 (the "Reporting Period"), except as described on Exhibit
      A hereto.




PricewaterhouseCoopers
      LLP, an independent registered public accounting firm, has
      issued an attestation report on the assessment of compliance with the Applicable
      Servicing Criteria for the Reporting Period as set forth in this
      assertion..




SUNTRUST
      BANK




By: /s/ John
      P. Giegerich


Name:
      John P. Giegerich


Title:
      Managing Director









EXHIBIT
        A
  The
        Asserting Party found the following material noncompliance with the servicing criteria
        set forth in Regulation AB applicable to the Asserting Party during the
        Reporting Period:
  As
        required by Item 1122(d)(4)(x)(b) of Regulation AB, interest on escrow funds
        must be paid, or credited, to obligors in accordance with applicable pool
        asset
        documents and state laws. In one instance, out of a sample of 30, the escrow
        funds were not deposited in an interest bearing account in accordance with
        the
        transaction agreement.
IV 

109TH CONGRESS 

1ST SESSION H. RES. 265

Supporting the goals and ideals of National Osteoporosis Awareness and 

Prevention Month. 

IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES 

MAY 5, 2005

Ms. BERKLEY (for herself and Mr. BURGESS) submitted the following 

resolution; which was referred to the Committee on Energy and Commerce 

RESOLUTION

Supporting the goals and ideals of National Osteoporosis 

Awareness and Prevention Month.

Whereas osteoporosis, a disease characterized by low bone 

mass, structural deterioration of bone, and increased susceptibility to fractures, is a public health threat for an estimated 44 million Americans; 

Whereas in the United States, 10 million individuals already 

have the disease and almost 34 million more are estimated to have low bone mass, placing them at increased 

risk for osteoporosis; 

Whereas one in two women and one in four men over age 50 

will have an osteoporosis-related fracture in her or his remaining lifetime; 
2

•HRES 265 IH 

Whereas building strong bones during childhood and adolescence can be the best defense against developing 

osteoporosis later; 

Whereas osteoporosis is often thought of as an older person’s 

disease, but bone health is a concern for any age; 

Whereas substantial risk has been reported in people of all 

ethnic backgrounds; 

Whereas osteoporosis is responsible for more than 1.5 million 

fractures annually; 

Whereas the Surgeon General of the Public Health Service 

says that caring for bone fractures from osteoporosis 

costs America $18 billion annually; 

Whereas the Surgeon General believes that bone health is 

critically important to the overall health and quality of 

the life of Americans; that it is in jeopardy and will only 

get worse if left unchecked; and that great improvements 

in the bone health status of Americans can be made by 

applying what is already known about early prevention, 

assessment, diagnosis, and treatment; 

Whereas optimum bone health and prevention of osteoporosis 

can be maximized by a balanced diet rich in calcium and 

vitamin D; weight-bearing exercise; and a healthy lifestyle 

with no smoking or excessive alcohol intake; and 

Whereas May 2005 would be an appropriate month to observe National Osteoporosis Awareness and Prevention 

Month: Now, therefore, be it

1 Resolved, That the House of Representatives supports 

2 the goals and ideals of National Osteoporosis Awareness 

3 and Prevention Month and urges the people of the United 

4 States to observe appropriate programs and activities with 
3

•HRES 265 IH 

1 respect to osteoporosis, including talking with their health 

2 care professionals about their bone health.

Æ
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE MIDDLE DISTRICT OF ALABAMA

NORTHERN DIVISION

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA )

vs. ) CR. NO. 2:06cr205-WHA

SEBASTIAN K. SMITH, JR. )

ORDER

The sentencing in this case, previously scheduled for February 1, 2007, at 9:00 a.m. is

RESET for February 1, 2007, at 10:00 a.m.

DONE this 30th day of January, 2007.

/s/ W. Harold Albritton 

W. HAROLD ALBRITTON

SENIOR UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE

Case 2:06-cr-00205-WHA-CSC Document 39 Filed 01/30/2007 Page 1 of 1
EX-31 Rule 13a-14(d)/15d-14(d) Certifications.

 

 

I, Nicolas Galeone, certify that:

 

1. I have reviewed this report on Form 10-K and all reports on Form 10-Drequired to be filed in respect of the period covered by this report on Form 10-K of the UBS-Barclays Commercial Mortgage Trust2013-C5 (the "Exchange Act periodic reports");

 

2. Based on my knowledge, the Exchange Act periodic reports, taken as awhole, do not contain any untrue statement of a material fact or omit to state a material fact necessary to make the statementsmade, in light of the circumstances under which such statements were made, not misleading with respect to the period covered bythis report;

 

3. Based on my knowledge, all of the distribution, servicing and other informationrequired to be provided under Form 10-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 requiredin this report under Item 1123 of Regulation AB, and except as disclosed in the Exchange Act periodic reports, the servicers havefulfilled their obligations under the servicing agreements in all material respects; and

 

5. All of the reports on assessment of compliance with servicing criteriafor asset-backed securities and their related attestation reports on assessment of compliance with servicing criteria for asset-backedsecurities required to be included in this report in accordance with Item 1122 of Regulation AB and Exchange Act Rules 13a-18 and15d-18 have been included as an exhibit to this report, except as otherwise disclosed in this report. Any material instances ofnoncompliance described in such reports have been disclosed in this report on Form 10-K.

 

In giving the certifications above, I have reasonably relied on informationprovided to me by the following unaffiliated parties:

 

Midland Loan Services, a Division of PNC Bank, National Association, asMaster Servicer, Midland Loan Services, a Division of PNC Bank, National Association, as Special Servicer, Deutsche Bank TrustCompany Americas, as Trustee, Deutsche Bank Trust Company Americas, as Certificate Administrator, Deutsche Bank Trust Company Americas,as Custodian, Situs Holdings, LLC, as Operating Advisor, and KeyBank National Association (as successor to KeyCorp Real EstateCapital Markets, Inc.), as Primary Servicer.

 

 

 

Dated: March 20, 2018

 

 

/s/ Nicolas Galeone

 

 

President

(senior officer in charge of securitization ofthe depositor)
UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 99-7250

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Plaintiff - Appellee, versus ERIC DEWON BRITT, a/k/a Anthony Gerard Wilson, a/k/a E, Defendant - Appellant.Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Virginia, at Norfolk. Rebecca B. Smith, District Judge. (CR-96-208, CA-99-778-2) Submitted: December 16, 1999 Decided: December 30, 1999Before MURNAGHAN and MOTZ, Circuit Judges, and BUTZNER, Senior Circuit Judge. Dismissed by unpublished per curiam opinion. Eric Dewon Britt, Appellant Pro Se. Fernando Groene, OFFICE OF THE UNITED STATES ATTORNEY, Norfolk, Virginia, for Appellee. Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. See Local Rule 36(c).* For the purpose of this appeal, we assume that the date appearing on the notice of appeal is the earliest date it could have been given to prison officials for mailing. See Fed. R. App. P. 4(c); Houston v. Lack , 487 U.S. 266 (1988). 2 PER CURIAM: Eric Dewon Britt seeks to appeal the district court’s order dismissing his 28 U.S.C.A. § 2255 (West Supp. 1999) motion. We dismiss the appeal for lack of jurisdiction because Britt’s notice of appeal was not timely filed. When the United States is a party to a civil case, parties are accorded sixty days after the entry of the district court’s final judgment or order to note an appeal, see Fed. R. App. P. 4(a)(1), unless the district court extends the appeal period under Fed. R. App. P. 4(a)(5) or reopens the appeal period under Fed. R. App. P. 4(a)(6). This appeal period is “mandatory and jurisdictional.” Browder v. Director, Dep’t of Corrections , 434 U.S. 257, 264 (1978) (quoting United States v. Robinson, 361 U.S. 220, 229 (1960)). The district court’s order was entered on the docket on July 2, 1999. Britt’s notice of appeal was filed on September 1, 1999. * Because Britt failed to file a timely notice of appeal or to obtainan extension or reopening of the appeal period, we deny a certificate of appealability and dismiss the appeal. We dispense with oral argument because the facts and legal contentions are adequate-3 ly presented in the materials before the court and argument would not aid the decisional process.

DISMISSED
§ 5.450 Athletics. ( a ) *General.* No person shall, on the basis of sex, be excluded from participation in, be denied the benefits of, be treated differently from another person, or otherwise be discriminated against in any interscholastic, intercollegiate, club, or intramural athletics offered by a recipient, and no recipient shall provide any such athletics separately on such basis.
( b ) *Separate teams.* Notwithstanding the requirements of paragraph (a) of this section, a recipient may operate or sponsor separate teams for members of each sex where selection for such teams is based upon competitive skill or the activity involved is a contact sport. However, where a recipient operates or sponsors a team in a particular sport for members of one sex but operates or sponsors no such team for members of the other sex, and athletic opportunities for members of that sex have previously been limited, members of the excluded sex must be allowed to try out for the team offered unless the sport involved is a contact sport. For the purposes of these Title IX regulations, contact sports include boxing, wrestling, rugby, ice hockey, football, basketball, and other sports the purpose or major activity of which involves bodily contact.
( c ) *Equal opportunity.* ( 1 ) A recipient that operates or sponsors interscholastic, intercollegiate, club, or intramural athletics shall provide equal athletic opportunity for members of both sexes. In determining whether equal opportunities are available, the designated agency official will consider, among other factors: ( i ) Whether the selection of sports and levels of competition effectively accommodate the interests and abilities of members of both sexes;
( ii ) The provision of equipment and supplies;
( iii ) Scheduling of games and practice time;
( iv ) Travel and per diem allowance;
( v ) Opportunity to receive coaching and academic tutoring;
( vi ) Assignment and compensation of coaches and tutors;
( vii ) Provision of locker rooms, practice, and competitive facilities;
( viii ) Provision of medical and training facilities and services;
( ix ) Provision of housing and dining facilities and services;
( x ) Publicity.
( 2 ) For purposes of paragraph (c)(1) of this section, unequal aggregate expenditures for members of each sex or unequal expenditures for male and female teams if a recipient operates or sponsors separate teams will not constitute noncompliance with this section, but the designated agency official may consider the failure to provide necessary funds for teams for one sex in assessing equality of opportunity for members of each sex.
( d ) *Adjustment period.* A recipient that operates or sponsors interscholastic, intercollegiate, club, or intramural athletics at the elementary school level shall comply fully with this section as expeditiously as possible but in no event later than one year from September 29, 2000. A recipient that operates or sponsors interscholastic, intercollegiate, club, or intramural athletics at the secondary or postsecondary school level shall comply fully with this section as expeditiously as possible but in no event later than three years from September 29, 2000.
Editorial Note on Part 40
Editorial Note: Nomenclature changes to part 40 appear at 79 FR 75740, Dec. 19, 2014.

§ 40.65 Effluent monitoring reporting requirements. ( a ) Each licensee authorized to possess and use source material in uranium milling, in production of uranium hexafluoride, or in a uranium enrichment facility shall: ( 1 ) Within 60 days after January 1, 1976 and July 1, 1976, and within 60 days after January 1 and July 1 of each year thereafter, submit a report to the Director, Office of Nuclear Material Safety and Safeguards, using an appropriate method listed in § 40.5, with a copy to the appropriate NRC Regional Office shown in appendix D to part 20 of this chapter; the report must specify the quantity of each of the principal radionuclides released to unrestricted areas in liquid and in gaseous effluents during the previous six months of operation, and such other information as the Commission may require to estimate maximum potential annual radiation doses to the public resulting from effluent releases. If quantities of radioactive materials released during the reporting period are significantly above the licensee's design objectives previously reviewed as part of the licensing action, the report shall cover this specifically. On the basis of such reports and any additional information the Commission may obtain from the licensee or others, the Commission may from time to time require the licensee to take such action as the Commission deems appropriate.
( 2 ) [Reserved]
( b ) [Reserved]
[40 FR 53230, Nov. 17, 1975, as amended at 41 FR 21627, May 27, 1976; 42 FR 25721, May 19, 1977; 52 FR 31611, Aug. 21, 1987; 57 FR 18391, Apr. 30, 1992; 68 FR 58807, Oct. 10, 2003; 73 FR 5721, Jan. 31, 2008]
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

MIDDLE DISTRICT OF ALABAMA

NORTHERN DIVISION

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA )

)

v ) CR. NO. 2:06CR200-WHA

)

ROSA E. RINCON )

ORDER

Upon consideration of the second motion for leave to file (doc. # 71) filed by the

defendant and the court’s dismissal of count two of the indictment on motion by the

government, it is

ORDERED that the motion for leave to file be and is hereby DENIED as moot.

Done this 7 day of December, 2006. th

 /s/Charles S. Coody 

CHARLES S. COODY

CHIEF UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE

Case 2:06-cr-00200-WHA-CSC Document 90 Filed 12/07/2006 Page 1 of 1
Case 2:06-cr-00200-WHA-CSC Document 32 Filed 08/17/2006 Page 1 of 1
PGI 242.002 Interagency agreements.       (S-70)(iii)  Upon receipt of a request for contract administration services, the CCP shall—          (A)  Determine whether the request is from a friendly foreign government or an international agency in which the United States is a participant;          (B)  Determine whether the services are consistent with the DoD mutual security program policies (the Assistant Secretary of Defense (International Security Affairs) is the source of information for questions as to the eligibility of foreign governments to receive services);          (C)  Ensure that the reimbursement arrangements are consistent with DFARS 242.002(b);          (D)  Coordinate with appropriate contract administration offices to determine whether DoD can provide the services;          (E)  Notify the request or that the request is accepted, or provide reasons why it cannot be accepted;          (F)  Distribute the acquisition documents and related materials to contract administration offices; and          (G)  Receive statements of costs incurred by contract administration offices for reimbursable services and forward them for billing to the Security Assistance Accounting Center.    **Parent topic:** PGI Part 242 - CONTRACT ADMINISTRATION
#### Hotel Sagamore Lake George, Inc., Formerly Saggolf Corporation, Respondent, v State of New York, Appellant.

(Claim No. 60524.)

Appeal from a judgment, entered October 15, 1979, upon a decision of the Court of Claims. The State and the claimant have previously been before this court as the result of a 1964 appropriation of a portion of the claimant’s land on Green Island in Lake George, New York *(Saggolf Corp. v State of New York,*42 AD2d 636). In that action the court affirmed an award for direct damages, but reversed a finding of no consequential damages and directed a new trial. The present appeal is from an award of $77,000 for direct and consequential damages resulting from the subsequent appropriation of a right of way for access purposes. The issue as to the relocation of a road prior to the taking and the ruling as to the State’s appraisal are discussed and analyzed in considerable detail in the opinion of the Court of Claims and we find no error which requires reversal. Judgment affirmed, with costs. Mahoney, P. J., Sweeney, Kane, Casey and Herlihy, JJ., concur.
**Exhibit 15.1**

**Consent of Independent Registered Public Accounting Firm**

We consent to the incorporation by reference in the Registration Statement (Form S-8 No. 333-190918) of securities to be offered to employees in employeebenefit plans of Qiwi plc of our report dated March 11, 2015, relating to the financial statements of QIWI plc and the effectiveness of internal control over financial reporting of QIWI plc, included in this Annual Report on Form 20-F of QIWI plcfor the year ended December 31, 2014. 

/s/ Ernst & Young LLC 

Moscow, Russia 

March 12, 2015
PGI 219.2 -POLICIES

Parent topic: PGI Part 219 - SMALL BUSINESS PROGRAMS

PGI 219.201 General policy.

(c)(10)(1) Agencies are not precluded from requiring that actions over the micro-purchase threshold,

but under the simplified acquisition threshold, that are totally set aside for small business be

reviewed by the small business specialist. One example of when an agency may choose to require

this review is when the agency determines that such a review is necessary to assist contracting

officers in identifying opportunities for other small business set-aside programs (e.g., HUBZone,

service-disabled veteran-owned, small disadvantaged business, women-owned small business) in

order to meet small business goals.

(2) Modifications that increase the scope of the contract, or the order under a Federal Supply

Schedule contract, should be reviewed by the small business specialist. At a minimum, these actions

might impact the small business subcontracting plan. However, funding modifications or

modifications that do not increase the scope of the contract generally should not be reviewed,

because the value that a small business specialist review would add in these instances would be

minimal compared to the resources that would be expended.

(d) Small business specialists are appointed and perform functions in accordance with DoD

Instruction (DoDI) 4205.01, DoD Small Business Programs. In the DoDI, small business specialists

are called “small business professionals.”
EXHIBIT 32.1

                            CERTIFICATION PURSUANT TO
                               18 U.S.C. SS.1350,
                             AS ADOPTED PURSUANT TO
                  SECTION 906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002

         In connection with the quarterly report of Accupoll Holding Corporation
on Form 10-Q for the period  ended March 31,  2004 as filed with the  Securities
and Exchange  Commission on the date hereof,  I, Dennis Vadura,  chief executive
officer of the registrant,  certify,  pursuant to 18 U.S.C.  ss.1350, as adopted
pursuant to Section 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
registrant.

June 7, 2004

Signed,

/s/ Dennis Vadura
-----------------------
Dennis Vadura
CEO
AccuPoll Holding Corp.

A signed  original of this written  statement  required by Section 906, or other
document authenticating, acknowledging, or otherwise adopting the signature that
appears in typed form within the  electronic  version of this written  statement
required  by  Section  906,  has been  provided  to the  registrant  and will be
retained  by the  registrant  and  furnished  to  the  Securities  and  Exchange
Commission or its staff upon request.