alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 98-6651

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Plaintiff - Appellee, versus REGINALD DAVIS, a/k/a Sinbad, a/k/a Reggie, Defendant - Appellant. Appeal from the United States District Court for the Western District of Virginia, at Roanoke. James C. Turk, District Judge. (CR-93-25, CA-97-382-R) Submitted: November 17, 1998 Decided: February 10, 1999 Before WILLIAMS and TRAXLER, Circuit Judges, and HALL, Senior Circuit Judge. Dismissed by unpublished per curiam opinion. Reginald Davis, Appellant Pro Se. Thomas Jack Bondurant, Jr., Assistant United States Attorney, Roanoke, Virginia, for Appellee. Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. See Local Rule 36(c).2 PER CURIAM: Reginald Davis seeks to appeal the district court’s order denying his motion filed under 28 U.S.C.A. § 2255 (West 1994 & Supp. 1998). We have reviewed the record and the district court’sopinion and find no reversible error. Accordingly, we deny a certificate of appealability and dismiss the appeal on the reasoning of the district court. United States v. Davis , Nos. CR-93-25; CA97-382-R (W.D. Va. Apr. 7, 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
#### The People of the State of New York, Respondent, v Arnold Morciglio, Appellant.

[813 NYS2d 680]

Appeal by the defendant from a judgment of the County Court, Orange County (DeRosa, J.), rendered August 16, 2004, convicting him of grand larceny in the fourth degree and petit larceny, upon a jury verdict, and imposing sentence. The appeal brings up for review the denial, after a hearing, of that branch *711of the defendant’s omnibus motion which was to suppress identification testimony.

Ordered that the judgment is affirmed.

The defendant failed to preserve for appellate review his precise challenge to the legal sufficiency of the evidence *(see*GPL 470.05 [2]; *People v Gray,*86 NY2d 10, 20-21 [1995]; *cf. People v Soto,*8 AD3d 683, 684 [2004]). He also failed to preserve for appellate review his claim that the verdict was repugnant, as no objection was raised before the jury was discharged *(see*GPL 470.05 [2]; *People v Jackson,*19 AD3d 614, 615 [2005]; *People v Graham,*307 AD2d 935 [2003]; *People v Balbuena,*264 AD2d 424 [1999]). In any event, these claims are without merit *(see People v Alexander,*208 AD2d 757 [1994]).

Further, contrary to the defendant’s contention, he was not deprived of the opportunity to demonstrate the suggestiveness of the identification procedure to the hearing court *(see People v Burgos,*204 AD2d 344, 345 [1994]). The alleged photocopy of the photographic array admitted into evidence at the hearing, coupled with the testimony concerning the procedure followed, provided a sufficient basis to overcome any inference that the array was invalid and to establish that the procedure was not suggestive *(see People v Coleman,*2 AD3d 1045, 1046 [2003]; *People v Young,*261 AD2d 109, 110 [1999]).

The sentence imposed was not excessive *(see People v Suitte,*90 AD2d 80 [1982]). Schmidt, J.P., Crane, Santucci and Spolzino, JJ., concur.
IV 

House Calendar No. 49 

109TH CONGRESS 

1ST SESSION H. RES. 314 

[Report No. 109–122] 

Providing for consideration of the bill (H.R. 2862) making appropriations 

for Science, the Departments of State, Justice, and Commerce, and 

related agencies for the fiscal year ending September 30, 2006, and 

for other purposes. 

IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES 

JUNE 13, 2005 

Mr. GINGREY, from the Committee on Rules, reported the following resolution; 

which was referred to the House Calendar and ordered to be printed 

RESOLUTION 

Providing for consideration of the bill (H.R. 2862) making 

appropriations for Science, the Departments of State, 

Justice, and Commerce, and related agencies for the 

fiscal year ending September 30, 2006, and for other 

purposes. 

1 Resolved, That at any time after the adoption of this 

2 resolution the Speaker may, pursuant to clause 2(b) of 

3 rule XVIII, declare the House resolved into the Committee 

4 of the Whole House on the state of the Union for consider5 ation of the bill (H.R. 2862) making appropriations for 
2 

HRES 314 RH 

1 Science, the Departments of State, Justice, and Com2 merce, and related agencies for the fiscal year ending Sep3 tember 30, 2006, and for other purposes. The first reading 

4 of the bill shall be dispensed with. All points of order 

5 against consideration of the bill are waived. General de6 bate shall be confined to the bill and shall not exceed one 

7 hour equally divided and controlled by the chairman and 

8 ranking minority member of the Committee on Appropria9 tions. After general debate the bill shall be considered for 

10 amendment under the five-minute rule. Points of order 

11 against provisions in the bill for failure to comply with 

12 clause 2 of rule XXI are waived except for section 607. 

13 During consideration of the bill for amendment, the Chair14 man of the Committee of the Whole may accord priority 

15 in recognition on the basis of whether the Member offering 

16 an amendment has caused it to be printed in the portion 

17 of the Congressional Record designated for that purpose 

18 in clause 8 of rule XVIII. Amendments so printed shall 

19 be considered as read. When the committee rises and re20 ports the bill back to the House with a recommendation 

21 that the bill do pass, the previous question shall be consid22 ered as ordered on the bill and amendments thereto to 

23 final passage without intervening motion except one mo24 tion to recommit with or without instructions. 

House Calendar No. 49 

109TH CONGRESS 

1ST SESSION H. RES. 314 

[Report No. 109–122] 

RESOLUTION 

Providing for consideration of the bill (H.R. 2862) 

tember 30, 2006, and for other purposes. lated agencies for the fiscal year ending Sepments of State, Justice, and Commerce, and remaking appropriations for Science, the DepartJUNE 13, 2005 

Referred to the House Calendar and ordered to be 

printed
|                        | Corporate Trust Services
|----------------------- | ------------------------
|                       
|MAC R1204-010          
|9062 Old Annapolis Road
|Columbia, MD 21045     
|                       
|Tel:  410 884 2000     
|Fax:  410 715 2380     







Deutsche Mortgage & Asset Receiving Corporation

60 WALL ST

NEW YORK, New York 10005-2836





|Re: | Annual Statement of Compliance for COMM 2013-LC6 Commercial Mortgage Pass- Through Certificates
|--- | -----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------



Per the Pooling and Servicing Agreement dated as of
January 1, 2013 (the "Agreement"), the undersigned, a duly authorized officer of Wells Fargo Bank, N.A., as Certificate
Administrator ("Wells Fargo"), hereby certifies as follows as of and for the year ending December 31, 2016 (the "Reporting
Period"):



(a)
A review of Wells Fargo's activities during the Reporting Period and of its performance under the Agreement has been made under
such officer's supervision; and



(b)
To the best of such officer's knowledge, based on such review, Wells Fargo has fulfilled all of its obligations under the Agreement
in all material respects throughout the Reporting Period.





February 27, 2017
§ 708.18 Dismissal for lack of jurisdiction or other good cause. ( a ) The Head of Field Element or EC Director (as applicable) may dismiss a complaint for lack of jurisdiction or for other good cause after receiving the complaint, either on his own initiative or at the request of a party named in the complaint. Such decisions are generally issued by the 20th day after the receipt of the employer's response, but not before the complainant has submitted comments on the response or his time to do so has elapsed, whichever is soonest.
( b ) The Head of Field Element or EC Director (as applicable) will notify the complainant by certified mail, return receipt requested, if the complaint is dismissed for lack of jurisdiction or other good cause, will give specific reasons for the dismissal and the contact information for the DOE's Alternative Dispute Resolution Office, and will notify other parties of the dismissal.
( c ) Dismissal for lack of jurisdiction or other good cause is appropriate if: ( 1 ) The complaint is untimely; or
( 2 ) The facts, as alleged in the complaint, do not present issues for which relief can be granted under this part; or
( 3 ) The complainant filed a complaint under State or other applicable law with respect to the same facts as alleged in a complaint under this part; or
( 4 ) The complaint is frivolous or without merit on its face; or
( 5 ) The issues presented in the complaint have been rendered moot by subsequent events or substantially resolved; or
( 6 ) The employer has made a formal offer to provide the remedy requested in the complaint or a remedy that DOE considers to be equivalent to what could be provided as a remedy under this part.
Editorial Note on Part 72
Editorial Note: Nomenclature changes to part 72 appear at 80 FR 74981, Dec. 1, 2015, and at 81 FR 86910, Dec. 2, 2016.

§ 72.28 Contents of application: Applicant's technical qualifications. Each application under this part must include: ( a ) The technical qualifications, including training and experience, of the applicant to engage in the proposed activities;
( b ) A description of the personnel training program required under subpart I;
( c ) A description of the applicant's operating organization, delegations of responsibility and authority and the minimum skills and experience qualifications relevant to the various levels of responsibility and authority; and
( d ) A commitment by the applicant to have and maintain an adequate complement of trained and certified installation personnel prior to the receipt of spent fuel, high-level radioactive waste, and/or reactor-related GTCC waste as appropriate for storage.
[53 FR 31658, Aug. 19, 1988, as amended at 66 FR 51840, Oct. 11, 2001]
Editorial Note on Part 51
Editorial Note: Nomenclature changes to part 51 appear at 80 FR 74980, Dec. 1, 2015.

§ 51.100 Timing of Commission action. ( a ) ( 1 ) Except as provided in § 51.13 and paragraph (b) of this section, no decision on a proposed action, including the issuance of a permit, license, or other form of permission, or amendment to or renewal of a permit, license, or other form of permission, or the issuance of an effective regulation, for which an environmental impact statement is required, will be made and no record of decision will be issued until the later of the following dates: ( i ) Ninety (90) days after publication by the Environmental Protection Agency of a Federal Register notice stating that the draft environmental impact statement has been filed with EPA.
( ii ) Thirty (30) days after publication by the Environmental Protection Agency of a Federal Register notice stating that the final environmental impact statement has been filed with EPA.
( 2 ) If a notice of filing of a final environmental impact statement is published by the Environmental Protection Agency within ninety (90) days after a notice of filing of a draft environmental impact statement has been published by EPA, the minimum thirty (30) day period and the minimum ninety (90) day period may run concurrently to the extent they overlap.
( b ) In any rulemaking proceeding for the purpose of protecting the public health or safety or the common defense and security, the Commission may make and publish the decision on the final rule at the same time that the Environmental Protection Agency publishes the Federal Register notice of filing of the final environmental impact statement.
#### HUGHES, Respondent, v. ROACHE, Appellant.

(Supreme Court, Appellate Division, Second Department.

July 31, 1914.)

Action by Thomas L. Hughes against J. Benedict Roache.

No opinion. Order affirmed, with $10 costs and disbursements, with leave to defendant within 10 days to withdraw demurrer and answer, upon payment of costs in this court and at the Special Term.
IV 

109TH CONGRESS 

1ST SESSION H. RES. 500 

Recognizing the 60th anniversary of the disappearance of the 5 naval Avenger 

torpedo bombers of Flight 19 and the naval Mariner rescue aircraft 

sent to search for Flight 19. 

IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES 

OCTOBER 18, 2005 

Mr. SHAW submitted the following resolution; which was referred to the 

Committee on Armed Services 

RESOLUTION 

Recognizing the 60th anniversary of the disappearance of 

the 5 naval Avenger torpedo bombers of Flight 19 and 

the naval Mariner rescue aircraft sent to search for 

Flight 19. 

Whereas on December 5, 1945, the 5 Avenger torpedo bombers of Flight 19, originating at the Naval Air Station of 

Fort Lauderdale, Florida, and its crew of 14 Navy airmen, disappeared; 

Whereas the Mariner rescue aircraft sent to search for Flight 

19, originating at the Naval Air Station of Banan River, 

Florida, and its crew of 13 Navy airmen, also disappeared on that date; 

Whereas December 5, 2005, marks the 60th anniversary of 

the disappearance of Flight 19; 
2 

•HRES 500 IH 

Whereas the loss of Flight 19 occurred during peacetime; 

Whereas the disappearance of Flight 19 sparked one of the 

largest air and sea rescue searches in history covering 

over 250,000 square miles; 

Whereas all investigations of the disappearance of Flight 19 

have failed to recover any aircraft, debris, or remains; 

Whereas there remain unanswered questions concerning the 

disappearance of Flight 19; and 

Whereas there are continuing efforts with the latest technology to determine the location of the lost aircraft and 

crews: Now, therefore be it 

1 Resolved, That the House of Representatives— 

2 (1) recognizes the 60th anniversary of the dis3 appearance of the 5 naval Avenger torpedo bombers 

4 of Flight 19 and the naval Mariner rescue aircraft 

5 sent to search for Flight 19; 

6 (2) honors the memory of the 27 Navy airmen 

7 lost in these disappearances; 

8 (3) recognizes the historical significance of 

9 Flight 19; 

10 (4) acknowledges continuing efforts to deter11 mine what caused these disappearances; and 

12 (5) commends the Naval Historical Center for 

13 preserving the history of Flight 19. 

Æ
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

M IDDLE DISTRICT OF ALABA M A

OFFICE OF THE CLERK

POST OFFICE BOX 711

MONTGOMERY, ALABAMA 36101-0711

DEBRA P. HACKETT, CLERK

TELEPHONE (334) 954-3600

March 30, 2007

NOTICE OF NON-COMPLIANCE

To: ALL COUNSEL OF RECORD

Case Style: McBroom v. Potter et al

Case Number: 2:06cv00767-MEF

Referenced Pleading: Interrogatories Propounded (55 & 59)

 Request for Admissions (56, 57, & 60)

Docket Entry Numbers: 55, 56, 57, 59, & 60

The referenced pleadings were electronically filed on ***March 29, 2007*** in this case and

are not in compliance with the local rules and/or administrative procedures of this court. 

******These pleadings are discovery and are not allowed pursuant to Local Rule 5.1 NONFILING OF CIVIL DISCOVERY.

The pleadings are hereby STRICKEN from the record and the parties are instructed to

disregard the entry of these pleadings on the court’s docket. Parties should be aware that the

striking of these entries does not affect their responsibilities as to the discovery process.

Case 2:06-cv-00767-MEF-SRW Document 61 Filed 03/30/2007 Page 1 of 1
Side Letter by and between Innophos, Inc. and Randolph Gress dated July 14, 2006



 Exhibit 10.26 
  
 July 14, 2006 
  
 Randy Gress 
 Innophos, Inc. 
 259 Prospect Plains Road, Bldg G 
 Cranbury, NJ 08512 
 Re: Bonus Payment 
 Dear Randy: 
 We refer to your Employment Agreement with Innophos, Inc. (“Innophos”) dated
August 13, 2004 (as amended, the “Employment Agreement”) and the promissory note you made in favor of Innophos Holdings, Inc. (the indirect parent company of Innophos, “Parent”) on August 13, 2004 in the
original principal amount of $151,868.50 (the “Note”). 
 As you know, Parent is exploring strategic alternatives which may
include an initial public offering (an “IPO”) of its equity securities, and in furtherance of such transaction Parent will file a registration statement on Form S-1 with the U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission (the
“Filing”). Under applicable U.S. securities laws, you will be required to repay all amounts outstanding under the Note prior to the Filing. In order to assist you repay the Note, the board of directors of Innophos (the
“Board”) has agreed to pay you a special bonus (the “Special Bonus”) in an amount sufficient to allow you to repay the entire outstanding principal amount of the Note (plus unpaid interest thereon) after reduction
for withholdings contemplated in the following paragraph. You acknowledge that the payment of the Special Bonus will be taken into account by the Board in determining the amount of any bonus to be paid to you pursuant to Section 3(e) of the
Employment Agreement for the fiscal year ending December 31, 2006. 
 The Special Bonus shall be reduced by all taxes that Innophos is
required to withhold under applicable law. The Special Bonus shall be paid prior to the Filing and, with your express authorization, may be paid directly to Parent in full satisfaction of amounts due under the Note. Upon receipt of such funds,
Parent shall deliver to you an original copy of the Note marked “canceled”. 
 Nothing in this Agreement shall be deemed to confer
any right to employment or continued employment with Innophos or any right to receive a bonus pursuant to Section 3(e) of your Employment Agreement. All terms of the Employment Agreement shall remain in full force and effect. 
 This Agreement (together with the Employment Agreement and the Note) contain the entire agreement between you, Innophos, Parent and Parent’s
affiliates with respect to the matters contemplated herein and supersedes all other prior agreements and understanding among the parties hereto relating to such matters. 







 Please acknowledge your acceptance of the terms and conditions of this letter agreement by signing below.

  
  

			
	 Very truly yours,

	
	
	
	INNOPHOS, INC.
		
	By:	 	/s/ Chuck Brodheim
	Name:	 	Chuck Brodheim
	Title:	 	Corporate Controller


  
 AGREED AND ACCEPTED:

  
                 /s/ Randy Gress                    

 Randy Gress 
  

 2
IV 

House Calendar No. 97 

115TH CONGRESS 

1ST SESSION H. RES. 601 

[Report No. 115–382] 

Providing for consideration of the bill (H.R. 3922) to extend funding for 

certain public health programs, and for other purposes. 

IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES 

NOVEMBER 1, 2017 

Mr. BURGESS, from the Committee on Rules, reported the following resolution; which was referred to the House Calendar and ordered to be printed 

RESOLUTION 

Providing for consideration of the bill (H.R. 3922) to extend 

funding for certain public health programs, and for other 

purposes. 

1 Resolved, That upon adoption of this resolution it 

2 shall be in order to consider in the House the bill (H.R. 

3 3922) to extend funding for certain public health pro4 grams, and for other purposes. All points of order against 

5 consideration of the bill are waived. In lieu of the amend6 ment in the nature of a substitute recommended by the 

7 Committee on Energy and Commerce now printed in the 


ethrower on DSK3G9T082PROD with BILLS
2 

•HRES 601 RH 

1 bill, the amendment printed in part A of the report of the 

2 Committee on Rules accompanying this resolution, modi3 fied by the amendment printed in part B of that report, 

4 shall be considered as adopted. The bill, as amended, shall 

5 be considered as read. All points of order against provi6 sions in the bill, as amended, are waived. The previous 

7 question shall be considered as ordered on the bill, as 

8 amended, and on any further amendment thereto, to final 

9 passage without intervening motion except: (1) one hour 

10 of debate equally divided and controlled by the chair and 

11 ranking minority member of the Committee on Energy 

12 and Commerce; and (2) one motion to recommit with or 

13 without instructions. 


ethrower on DSK3G9T082PROD with BILLS

ethrower on DSK3G9T082PROD with BILLS
House Calendar No. 97 

115TH CONGRESS 

1ST SESSION H. RES. 601 

[Report No. 115–382] 

RESOLUTION 

Providing for consideration of the bill (H.R. 3922) 

grams, and for other purposes. to extend funding for certain public health proNOVEMBER 1, 2017 

Referred to the House Calendar and ordered to be 

printed 


ethrower on DSK3G9T082PROD with BILLS
17-6. Ad Hoc Reports

Ad Hoc reports provide the ability for the Army and A/OPCs to access all data elements of the BO,

CH and transaction records at any time by allowing the Army A/OPCs, servicing bank, or GSA to

create reports in html, Excel, text (ASCII) formats, and/or others as defined by the Army at the task

order level. The servicing bank provides the capability for the Army to utilize the ad-hoc reporting

functionality of the EAS Systems for any additional future reporting needs that are not listed.

Parent topic: Chapter 17 – METRICS AND REPORTING
H. Res. 1102

In the House of Representatives, U. S., 

December 8, 2006.

Resolved, That the requirement of clause 6(a) of rule 

XIII for a two-thirds vote to consider a report from the Committee on Rules on the same day it is presented to the House 

is waived with respect to any resolution reported on the legislative day of December 8, 2006. 

SEC. 2. It shall be in order at any time on the legislative 

day of December 8, 2006, for the Speaker to entertain motions that the House suspend the rules. The Speaker or his 

designee shall consult with the Minority Leader or her designee on the designation of any matter for consideration pursuant to this resolution. 

Attest:

Clerk.
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<ARTICLE> 5
<LEGEND>
This schedule contains summary financial information extracted from Springhill
Lake Investors Limited Partnership 1999 First Quarter 10-QSB and is qualified in
its entirety by reference to such 10-QSB filing.
</LEGEND>
<CIK> 0000763399
<NAME> SPRINGHILL LAKE INVESTORS LIMITED PARTNERHSIP
<MULTIPLIER> 1,000
       
<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   3-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          DEC-31-1999
<PERIOD-END>                               MAR-31-1999
<CASH>                                           3,305
<SECURITIES>                                         0
<RECEIVABLES>                                        0
<ALLOWANCES>                                         0
<INVENTORY>                                          0
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                                     0<F1>
<PP&E>                                         102,523
<DEPRECIATION>                                (50,179)
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                  61,803
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                                0<F1>
<BONDS>                                         56,709
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                             0
<OTHER-SE>                                       (763)
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                    61,803
<SALES>                                              0
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                                 6,437
<CGS>                                                0
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                        0
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                 5,917
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                     0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                               1,356
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                      0
<INCOME-TAX>                                         0
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                                  0
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                       398
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                      582<F2>
<EPS-DILUTED>                                        0
<FN>
<F1>Registrant has an unclassified balance sheet.
<F2>Multiplier is 1.
</FN>
        

</TABLE>