alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
Case 2:06-cv-00785-MHT-WC Document 1 Filed 09/01/2006 Page 1 of 24
Case 2:06-cv-00785-MHT-WC Document 1 Filed 09/01/2006 Page 2 of 24
Case 2:06-cv-00785-MHT-WC Document 1 Filed 09/01/2006 Page 3 of 24
Case 2:06-cv-00785-MHT-WC Document 1 Filed 09/01/2006 Page 4 of 24
Case 2:06-cv-00785-MHT-WC Document 1 Filed 09/01/2006 Page 5 of 24
Case 2:06-cv-00785-MHT-WC Document 1 Filed 09/01/2006 Page 6 of 24
Case 2:06-cv-00785-MHT-WC Document 1 Filed 09/01/2006 Page 7 of 24
Case 2:06-cv-00785-MHT-WC Document 1 Filed 09/01/2006 Page 8 of 24
Case 2:06-cv-00785-MHT-WC Document 1 Filed 09/01/2006 Page 9 of 24
Case 2:06-cv-00785-MHT-WC Document 1 Filed 09/01/2006 Page 10 of 24
Case 2:06-cv-00785-MHT-WC Document 1 Filed 09/01/2006 Page 11 of 24
Case 2:06-cv-00785-MHT-WC Document 1 Filed 09/01/2006 Page 12 of 24
Case 2:06-cv-00785-MHT-WC Document 1 Filed 09/01/2006 Page 13 of 24
Case 2:06-cv-00785-MHT-WC Document 1 Filed 09/01/2006 Page 14 of 24
Case 2:06-cv-00785-MHT-WC Document 1 Filed 09/01/2006 Page 15 of 24
Case 2:06-cv-00785-MHT-WC Document 1 Filed 09/01/2006 Page 16 of 24
Case 2:06-cv-00785-MHT-WC Document 1 Filed 09/01/2006 Page 17 of 24
Case 2:06-cv-00785-MHT-WC Document 1 Filed 09/01/2006 Page 18 of 24
Case 2:06-cv-00785-MHT-WC Document 1 Filed 09/01/2006 Page 19 of 24
Case 2:06-cv-00785-MHT-WC Document 1 Filed 09/01/2006 Page 20 of 24
Case 2:06-cv-00785-MHT-WC Document 1 Filed 09/01/2006 Page 21 of 24
Case 2:06-cv-00785-MHT-WC Document 1 Filed 09/01/2006 Page 22 of 24
Case 2:06-cv-00785-MHT-WC Document 1 Filed 09/01/2006 Page 23 of 24
Case 2:06-cv-00785-MHT-WC Document 1 Filed 09/01/2006 Page 24 of 24
Exhibit 35.1



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

Citibank, N.A.

388 Greenwich
Street

14th Floor

New York, New York 10013

RE: Annual Statement of Compliance for Sequoia Mortgage Trust 2013-2

Per the Amended and Restated Pooling and Servicing dated as of January 1, 2014 (the Agreement), the undersigned, a duly authorized officer of
Wells Fargo Bank, N.A., as Master Servicer (Wells Fargo), hereby certifies as follows as of and for the year ending December 31, 2014 (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 24, 2015



|                  
|------------------
|/s/ Kristen Cronin
|Kristen Cronin    
|Vice President    



|                       |  |     
|---------------------- |  | ----
|Wells Fargo Bank, N.A. |  | LOGO
Exhibit 10.4


 


AMENDMENT NO. 1 TO THE


 


VALMONT 2002 STOCK PLAN


 


Effective
April 26, 2004, Section 5.2 of the Valmont 2002 Stock Plan is amended
and restated in its entirety to read as follows:


 


“5.2  Cancelled, Terminated or Forfeited
Awards.  Any shares of Stock subject to
an Award which for any reason are cancelled, terminated or otherwise settled
without the issuance of any Stock shall again be available for Awards under the
Plan.  In the event that an Award is exercised
through the delivery of Stock or in the event that withholding tax liabilities
arising from such Award are satisfied by the withholding of Stock by the
Company, the number of shares available for Awards under the Plan shall be
increased by the number of shares delivered or withheld.  Notwithstanding the immediately preceding
sentence, the number of shares available for Awards under the Plan shall not be
increased by the number of any previously issued shares surrendered in
connection with the exercise of an Award or in connection with the tax
withholding for an Award, more than ten years after the date of the most recent
shareholder approval of the Plan.”
Sustainable Futures 

Summary Assessment 

Using 

P2 Framework Models

Chemical Assessed: 

ECOSURF LF 

(Alcohols C11-C15, secondary; alkoxylated) 

CAS Registry Number: 

1022990-65-3 

Participant Name: 

The Dow Chemical Company 

Midland, Michigan USA 

Date of Assessment: 

17 August 2010 

This document was developed to help compile estimation results from U.S. EPA OPPT’s P2 

Framework Models www.epa.gov/oppt/p2framework/ and is used by OPPT during Sustainable 

Futures (SF) training described at www.epa.gov/opptintr/newchems/sustainablefutures.htm. 

Participants in the voluntary SF Pilot Project are asked to submit the information contained in this 

assessment along with their SF PMNs in their choice of format. 

Use of this specific format is not mandatory. 
2 
3 
4 
5 
6 
7 
8 



12 
13 
14
MEDIATION REFERRALS

The following case has been returned to the regular docket pursuant to S.Ct.Prac.R. XIV(6)(E):

2007-2116.

#### State ex rel. Dolgencorp, Inc. v. Indus. Comm.

Franklin App. No. 06AP-1217, 2007-0hio-5087.
Oceaneering International, Inc. 2009 Cash Bonus Award Program



 Exhibit 10.16 
 OCEANEERING INTERNATIONAL, INC. 2009 ANNUAL CASH BONUS AWARD PROGRAM 
 The Compensation
Committee of the Board of Directors (the “Compensation Committee”) of Oceaneering International, Inc. (the “Company”) approved the 2009 Annual Cash Bonus Award Programs (a) for Executive Officers of the Company and
(b) for all other participating employees, each under the 2005 Incentive Plan of the Company. In the case of Executive Officers, cash bonuses are based on the level of achievement of net income for the company in 2009 (“Net Income”)
as compared to planned results approved by the Compensation Committee (100% of award). In the case of all other participating employees: (a) with respect to corporate employee participants, cash bonuses are based upon level of achievement as
compared to planned results of: (i) Net Income (70% of award) and (ii) Individual Goals (30% of award); (b) with respect to profit center executives, cash bonuses are based on the level of achievement as compared to planned results
of: (i) Net Income (50% of award), and (ii) goals of the executive’s profit center (50% of award), which profit center percentage amount is comprised of the level of achievement as compared to planned results of the following:
operating income of the profit center (60%), HSE goals (20%), and objectives for the profit center (20%); and (c) for all other participating employees, based upon the level of achievement as compared to planned results of: (i) Net Income
(30% of award), (ii) goals of the participant’s profit center (50%, which is comprised of the same elements as for profit center executives), and (iii) Individual Goals (20%). The Compensation Committee has discretion to award a lower
amount under the program than that amount which is otherwise determined under the terms of the program. 
 For each participant under each of
these programs, the maximum cash award achievable is a percentage approved by the Compensation Committee of the participant’s annual base salary (in US Dollars) as of March 1, 2009. A participant must be employed by the Company or a
subsidiary at the time the cash awards are approved for payment by the Compensation Committee to receive a cash award.
First Amendment to the Avis Budget Group, Inc. Deferred Compensation Plan



 Exhibit 10.19(b) 
 FIRST AMENDMENT 
 TO 
 AVIS BUDGET GROUP, INC. NON-EMPLOYEE 
 DIRECTORS DEFERRED COMPENSATION PLAN 
 Avis Budget Group, Inc. (“Avis”)
adopted the Avis Budget Group, Inc. Non-Employee Directors Deferred Compensation Plan (formerly known as Cendant Corporation 1999 Non-Employee Directors Deferred Compensation Plan) (the “Plan”) and amended and restated the Plan as of
January 1, 2007. The Firm now desires to further amend the Plan. 
 NOW, THEREFORE, the Plan is amended as follows,
effective February 1, 2010: 
  

	 	1.	Section 9 is amended to read as follows: 

 For Fees deferred prior to February 1, 2010, each Director (or his or her beneficiary) will receive a distribution of these Fees and any applicable dividends or adjustments in the form of shares of
Avis Stock, on the date which is seven months immediately following the date upon which such Director is no longer a member of the Avis Board of Directors for any reason. Distributions shall not occur prior to or following such date under any
circumstances. For Fees deferred on or after February 1, 2010, each Director (or his or her beneficiary) will receive a distribution of these Fees and any applicable dividends or adjustments in the form of shares of Avis Stock, as soon as
administratively practical after the date upon which such Director is no longer a member of the Avis Board of Directors for any reason. If applicable, each Director (or his or her beneficiary) will also receive a distribution of his or her account
(including units deferred prior to the date of any amendment to the Plan), in the form of shares of Wyndham Corporation stock, on the date which is seven months immediately following the date upon which such Director is no longer a member of
Avis’s Board of Directors for any reason. 
 The number of shares of Avis Stock payable to a Director upon distribution will
equal the number of Avis Share Units held in such Director’s account as of the date of such distribution. The number of shares of Wyndham Worldwide Corporation stock payable to a Director upon distribution will equal the number of Wyndham
Worldwide Corporation common stock units held in such Director’s account as of the date of such distribution. The Committee may, in its sole discretion, provide a Director an election to receive a cash distribution equal in value to the Wyndham
Worldwide Corporation stock which would otherwise be distributable. 
 IN WITNESS WHEREOF, Avis
Budget Group, Inc. has caused these presents to be executed by its duly authorized representative this 28th day of January 2010. 
  

			
	Avis Budget Group, Inc.
		
	By:	 	/s/ Jean M. Sera
```

[Congressional Bills 109th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[H. Res. 221 Introduced in House (IH)]

109th CONGRESS
  1st Session
H. RES. 221

                   Honoring the life of John Hainkel.

_______________________________________________________________________

                    IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

                             April 19, 2005

Mr. Jindal (for himself, Mr. Boustany, Mr. Melancon, Mr. Alexander, Mr. 
 Baker, and Mr. McCrery) submitted the following resolution; which was 
             referred to the Committee on Government Reform

_______________________________________________________________________

                               RESOLUTION

 
                   Honoring the life of John Hainkel.

Whereas John Hainkel, a friend to the State of Louisiana, passed away April 15, 
        2005;
Whereas John Hainkel was a dedicated public servant, leader, and favorite 
        Louisiana son;
Whereas John Hainkel uniquely served as both Speaker of the House and President 
        of the Senate in Louisiana;
Whereas John Hainkel championed the cause of public and private education, 
        protected the State's natural resources, and developed Louisiana's 
        economy; and
Whereas John Hainkel was respected by his colleagues as a gentleman: Now, 
        therefore, be it
    Resolved, That the House of Representatives--
            (1) honors John Hainkel for his service to the State of 
        Louisiana; and
            (2) expresses its deepest condolences to his family and 
        friends.
                                 <all>
```
```

[Congressional Bills 109th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[H. Res. 382 Introduced in House (IH)]

109th CONGRESS
  1st Session
H. RES. 382

 Expressing the sense of the House of Representatives with respect to 
                 the enforcement of restraining orders.

_______________________________________________________________________

                    IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

                             July 25, 2005

    Mrs. Capps (for herself and Mr. Nadler) submitted the following 
    resolution; which was referred to the Committee on the Judiciary

_______________________________________________________________________

                               RESOLUTION

 
 Expressing the sense of the House of Representatives with respect to 
                 the enforcement of restraining orders.

Whereas nearly one-third of American women report being physically or sexually 
        abused by a boyfriend or husband at some point in their lives;
Whereas intimate partner violence tends to be a pattern, rather than a one-time 
        occurrence;
Whereas domestic homicide is often the result of continuing abuse;
Whereas restraining orders are necessary to protect victims of violence from 
        further abuse and decrease the risk of continuing abuse or homicide;
Whereas nearly half of all victims who obtain restraining orders are abused 
        again;
Whereas restraining orders exist to protect victims of domestic violence, sexual 
        assault, stalking, and dating violence and include explicit instructions 
        that violation of such orders are cause for arrest;
Whereas law enforcement officials are directed to use every reasonable means to 
        enforce a restraining order;
Whereas the Supreme Court's recent decision in Castle Rock v. Gonzales narrowed 
        individuals' Federal court recourse against police for failing to 
        enforce a restraining order; and
Whereas this decision highlights the need to better protect victims of domestic 
        violence from violators of restraining orders: Now, therefore, be it
    Resolved, That it is the sense of the House of Representatives that 
Congress should act and encourage States to act--
            (1) to ensure that restraining orders are uniformly 
        enforced; and
            (2) to protect victims of domestic violence, sexual 
        assault, stalking, and dating violence from perpetrators.
                                 <all>
```
To: Docket No. EPA-R10-OAR-2014-0562 

From: Claudia Vergnani Vaupel 

Date: August 21, 2015 

Re: Communication with LRAPA Regarding Slash Burning in Areas Not Covered by the Oregon 

Department of Forestry Smoke Management Plan 

On July 21, 2015, John Morrissey, of LRAPA, and I had a conversation about how slash burning was 

regulated under the SIP-approved version of LRAPA title 47 (LRAPA effective dates: 1/1/1993 and 

8/14/1984) for areas that were not covered by the Oregon Department of Forestry Smoke Management 

Plan (SMP). According to Mr. Morrissey, there is very little forested land in Lane County that is not in areas 

covered by the SMP. In the early 1990s, a Lane County source in one of these areas wanted to burn slash 

and LRAPA believed that it was an unregulated form of open burning under LRAPA’s then-current rules. 

Ultimately, the source did not conduct the burn. According to Mr. Morrissey, LRAPA passed regulations 

in 1995 to ensure that slash burning in areas of Lane County not covered by the SMP would be regulated, 

and it is this change in the regulation of slash burning, with some additional minor changes since that 

time, that are now before the EPA for approval. Since that time, Mr. Morrissey recalls only one permit, 

about 15 years ago, has been issued for slash burning under these regulatory provisions. Mr. Morrissey 

does not recall that LRAPA has received any other requests for slash burning in these areas not covered 

by the SMP. 

During the conversation, I asked Mr. Morrissey if he could provide a map or a description of the areas that 

are not covered by the SMP. On July 27, 2015, Mr. Morrissey, sent an email to me with a file of the SMP 

boundary in Lane County that he received from Western Lane District Forester Mr. Link (Grant) Smith, of 

the Oregon Department of Forestry. The file delineated the two areas over which the Oregon Department 

of Forestry has jurisdiction regarding smoke management in the two districts in Lane County, the Western 

Lane District and the South Cascade District (eastern Lane County). I viewed the file using Google Earth 

Pro and saved screenshots of the images in a document, “LRAPA SMP Areas”, which is included in the 

docket for this action along with the July 27, 2015 email. The maps support Mr. Morrisey’s statement that 

there is very limited forested land in Lane County that is not covered by the SMP and would therefore be 

covered by the LRAPA forest slash burning rules.
2007-1391.

#### Myles v. Johnson.

Montgomery App. No. 21600, 2007-Ohio-2963. Reported at 115 Ohio St.3d 1444, 2007-Ohio-5567, 875 N.E.2d 104. On motion for reconsideration. Motion denied.
#### § 52.12 Scope of subpart.

This subpart sets out the requirements and procedures applicable to Commission issuance of an early site permit for approval of a site for one or more nuclear power facilities separate from the filing of an application for a construction permit or combined license for the facility.
#### PEOPLE ex rel. BOYE v. WALDO, Police Com’r.

(Supreme Court, Appellate Division, Second Department.

February 11, 1915.)

Proceeding by the People of the State of New York, on the relation of Charles G. C. Boye, against Rhinelander Waldo, as Police Commissioner of the City of New York.

PER CURIAM.

Determination confirmed, and writ dismissed, with $50 costs and disbursements.

BURR, J., not voting.
```

[Congressional Bills 109th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[H. Res. 481 Engrossed in House (EH)]

H. Res. 481

                 In the House of Representatives, U.S.,

                                                       October 7, 2005.
    Resolved, That upon the adoption of this resolution it shall be in order 
without intervention of any point of order to consider in the House the bill 
(H.R. 3893) to expedite the construction of new refining capacity in the United 
States, to provide reliable and affordable energy for the American people, and 
for other purposes. The bill shall be considered as read. The amendment in the 
nature of a substitute recommended by the Committee on Energy and Commerce now 
printed in the bill, modified by the amendment printed in part A of the report 
of the Committee on Rules accompanying this resolution, shall be considered as 
adopted. All points of order against the bill, as amended, are waived. The 
previous question shall be considered as ordered on the bill, as amended, to 
final passage without intervening motion except: (1) one hour of debate on the 
bill, as amended, equally divided and controlled by the chairman and ranking 
minority member of the Committee on Energy and Commerce; (2) the amendment in 
the nature of a substitute printed in part B of the report of the Committee on 
Rules accompanying this resolution, if offered by Representative Stupak of 
Michigan or his designee, which shall be in order without intervention of any 
point of order, shall be considered as read, and shall be separately debatable 
for 40 minutes equally divided and controlled by the proponent and an opponent; 
and (3) one motion to recommit with or without instructions.
            Attest:

                                                                          Clerk.
```
IV 

House Calendar No. 127 

109TH CONGRESS 

1ST SESSION H. RES. 583 

[Report No. 109–328] 

Providing for consideration of the bill (H.R. 4340) to implement the United 

States-Bahrain Free Trade Agreement. 

IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES 

DECEMBER 6, 2005 

Mr. HASTINGS of Washington, 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. 4340) to 

implement the United States-Bahrain Free Trade Agreement. 

1 Resolved, That upon the adoption of this resolution 

2 it shall be in order without intervention of any point of 

3 order to consider in the House the bill (H.R. 4340) to 

4 implement the United States-Bahrain Free Trade Agree5 ment. The bill shall be considered as read. The bill shall 

6 be debatable for two hours equally divided and controlled 

7 by the chairman and ranking minority member of the 
2 

•HRES 583 RH 

1 Committee on Ways and Means. Pursuant to section 151 

2 of the Trade Act of 1974, the previous question shall be 

3 considered as ordered on the bill to final passage without 

4 intervening motion. 

5 SEC. 2. During consideration of H.R. 4340 pursuant 

6 to this resolution, notwithstanding the operation of the 

7 previous question, the Chair may postpone further consid8 eration of the bill to a time designated by the Speaker 

9 in consonance with section 151 of the Trade Act of 1974. 

House Calendar No. 127 

109TH CONGRESS 

1ST SESSION H. RES. 583 

[Report No. 109–328] 

RESOLUTION 

Providing for consideration of the bill (H.R. 4340) 

Trade Agreement. to implement the United States-Bahrain Free 

DECEMBER 6, 2005 

Referred to the House Calendar and ordered to be 

printed
227 So.2d 145

#### Blanche POUNDS et al. v. Epple Jane Gordon YANCY et al.

No. 50050.

Oct. 23, 1969.

In re: Blanche Pounds et al. applying for certiorari, or writ of review to the Court of Appeal, First Circuit, Parish of St. Helena. 224 So.2d 1.

Writ refused. On the facts found by the Court of Appeal we find no error of law :vi its judgment.
PGI 209.570-1 Definitions.       The phrase “substantial portion of the work,” as used in the definition of “lead system integrator with system responsibility” in the clause at DFARS 252.209-7007, may relate to the dollar value of the effort or to the criticality of the effort to be performed.    **Parent topic:** PGI 209.570 Limitations on contractors acting as lead system integrators.