alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
Editorial Note on Part 61
Editorial Note: Nomenclature changes to part 61 appear at 80 FR 74980, Dec. 1, 2015, and at 81 FR 86909, Dec. 2, 2016.

§ 61.83 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 55077, Nov. 24, 1992]
# L_2007248EN.01002602.xml

| 22.9.2007 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | L 248/26 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

22.9.2007

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

L 248/26

---

Corrigendum to Regulation No 31 (EEC), 11 (EAEC), laying down the Staff Regulations of Officials and the Conditions of employment of other servants of the European Economic Community and the European Atomic Energy Community

(
  Official Journal of the European Communities 45 of 14 June 1962
  )

(English Special Edition, Series I, Chapter 1959 to 1962, p. 135)

On page 142, in Article 27 of the Staff Regulations:

the last sentence, ‘No posts shall be reserved for nationals of any specific Member State.’ shall become a separate paragraph.

On page 169, in Annex VII of the Staff Regulations ‘Remuneration and reimbursement of expenses’, in Article 7:

The last two subparagraphs of paragraph 2, ‘An official's place of origin shall be determined ...’ and ‘The effect of such a change shall not however ...’, shall be numbered as paragraph 3.

---
T hi s di s pos i t i on i s notappr opr i a t e f orpubl i c a t i on and i s notpr e c e de nt * e xc e pta s pr ovi de d by 9th C i r . R . 36- 3.

T he pa ne l una ni m ous l yc onc l ude s thi s c a s e i s s ui t abl e f orde c i s i on ** w ith o u t o r a l a r g u m e n t. See F ed. R . A pp . P . 34 (a )( 2). NOT F OR P UB L I CAT I ON UN I TE D STATE S C OU RT OF APPE ALS FOR T HE NI NTH CI RC UI T W E S T E RN R A D IO S E R V IC E S C O . , an O r e g o n C o rp o r a tio n ; e t a l., P l ai n t i ffs - A p p el l an t s, v. UN I TE D STATE S F ORES T S ER VI CE , D ef

endant- A pp el l ee . N o. 10- 35468 D. C . No . 6 : 0 9 - c v - 0 0 8 7 2 - HO ME MOR AN DU M *

A pp ea l fr om the U ni t ed S t at es D i stri ctC ou rt

f orthe D i s tr i c tof

O r e gon M i c ha e l R . H oga n, D i s tr i c tJ udge , P r e s i di ng

S ubm i tt e d M a y5, 2011 ** P ort l a nd, O r e gon B efo re: T A S H IM A , B E A , an d IK U T A , C i rcu i tJu d g es. W es t ern R adi o S ervi ce C o. and R i char d O berdorfer , the com pany’ s ow ner a nd pr e s i de nt( c ol l e c t i ve l y “ W e s t e rn R a di o” ) , appe a l the di s tr i c tc ourt ’ s gr a ntof s u m m a ry ju d g m e n t to th e U n ite d S ta te s F o r e s t S e rv ic e ( “F o r e s t S e rv ic e ” ) . W e 

# FI LED MA Y16 2 011 M OLLY C. DW Y ER, CLERK U . S. C O U R T OF APPE ALS2

af fi rm the di stri ctcourtbecause W es t ern R adi o h as no taddu ce d evi dence s uf f i c i e ntt o r a i s e atr i abl e i s s ue of f a c ttha ti tha s s uf

f e r e d a“ c onc r e t e a nd part i cul ar i ze d” and “ ac tual and i m m i nent ” harm as re qu i re d for A rt i cl e I II s ta n d in g . L u

ja n v . D e fe n de rs o f W ild life , 504 U . S . 555, 560 ( 1992) ( c i t a t i ons o m itte d ) . A F F I R M E D .
H. Res. 422

In the House of Representatives, U.S., 

September 6, 2005.

Resolved, That the House has heard with profound sorrow of the death of the Honorable William H. Rehnquist, 

Chief Justice of the United States. 

Resolved, That the House tenders its deep sympathy to 

the members of the family of the late Chief Justice in their 

bereavement. 

Resolved, That the Clerk communicate these resolutions 

to the Senate and to the Supreme Court and transmit a copy 

of the same to the family of the late Chief Justice. 

Resolved, That when the House adjourns today, it adjourn as a further mark of respect to the memory of the late 

Chief Justice. 

Attest:

Clerk.
EXHIBIT 34.1




Report of Independent Registered Public Accounting Firm








The Management Committee


BMW Financial Services NA, LLC





We have examined BMW Financial Services NA, LLC’s (the “Company”) compliance with the servicing criteria set forth in Item 1122(d) of the Securities and Exchange  Commission's Regulation AB for Asset-Backed Securities, BMW Vehicle Lease Trust 2013-1 (except for the servicing criteria described in the following paragraph), which the Company has determined as being applicable to the activities it performs with respect to the asset-backed securities transactions being serviced as of December 31, 2014 and for the period from January 1, 2014 to December 31, 2014. Management is responsible for the Company’s compliance with those servicing criteria. Our responsibility is to express an opinion on the Company’s compliance with those servicing criteria based on our examination.





The Company has determined that the servicing criteria in Items 1122(d)(1)(ii), 1122(d)(1)(iii), 1122(d)(1)(iv), 1122(d)(2)(vi), 1122(d)(4)(ix), 1122(d)(4)(x)(A)-(C), 1122(d)(4)(xi), 1122(d)(4)(xii), 1122(d)(4)(xiii), and 1122(d)(4)(xv) are not applicable to the activities it performs with respect to the asset-backed securities transactions being serviced as of December 31, 2014 and for the period from January 1, 2014 to December 31, 2014.





Our examination was conducted in accordance with the attestation standards of the Public Company Accounting Oversight Board (United States) and, accordingly, included examining, on a test basis, evidence about the Company's compliance with the servicing criteria specified in the first paragraph of this report and performing such other procedures as we considered necessary in the circumstances. 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 specified in the first paragraph.





In our opinion, BMW Financial Services NA, LLC complied, in all material respects, with the aforementioned servicing criteria as of December 31, 2014 and for the period from January 1, 2014 to December 31, 2014.





/s/ CohnReznick LLP





Roseland, New Jersey


March 20, 2015
#### § 62.17 Elimination of repetition.

In any request under this part, the person making the request may incorporate by reference information contained in a previous application, Statement, or report filed with the Commission provided that these references are updated, clear, and specific.
Editorial Note on Part 2
Editorial Note: Nomenclature changes to part 2 appear at 79 FR 75739, Dec. 19, 2014.

§ 2.1319 Presiding Officer. ( a ) The Commission will ordinarily be the Presiding Officer at a hearing under this part. However, the Commission may provide in a hearing notice that one or more Commissioners, or any other person permitted by law, will preside.
( b ) A participant may submit a written motion for the disqualification of any person presiding. The motion shall be supported by an affidavit setting forth the alleged grounds for disqualification. If the Presiding Officer does not grant the motion or the person does not disqualify themselves and the Presiding Officer or such other person is not the Commission or a Commissioner, the Commission will decide the matter.
( c ) If any person presiding deems themselves disqualified, they shall withdraw by notice on the record after notifying the Commission.
( d ) If a Presiding Officer becomes unavailable, the Commission will designate a replacement.
( e ) Any motion concerning the designation of a replacement Presiding Officer shall be made within 5 days after the designation.
( f ) Unless otherwise ordered by the Commission, the jurisdiction of a Presiding Officer other than the Commission commences as designated in the hearing notice and terminates upon certification of the hearing record to the Commission, or when the Presiding Officer is disqualified.
[63 FR 66730, Dec. 3, 1998, as amended at 88 FR 57878, Aug. 24, 2023]
Exhibit 35.1

 

ANNUAL SERVICER’S COMPLIANCE CERTIFICATE

 

This Compliance Certificateis furnished pursuant to Section 4.10 of the Sale and Servicing Agreement (the “Agreement”), dated as of January 30,2013, by and among Hyundai Auto Receivables Trust 2013-A, Hyundai Capital America, as seller and servicer (the “Servicer”),Hyundai ABS Funding Corporation, as depositor, and U.S. Bank National Association, as indenture trustee and Item 1123 of RegulationAB. The undersigned hereby certifies that:

 

1)             I am a duly authorized officer of the Servicer.

 

2)             A review of the activities of the Servicerfrom January 1, 2014 through December 31, 2014 (the “Relevant Period”) and of the Servicer’s performance underthe Agreement during the Relevant Period has been made under my supervision.

 

3)             Based on such review, the Servicer has,to the best of my knowledge, fulfilled all of its obligations under the Agreement in all material respects throughout the RelevantPeriod.

 

IN WITNESS WHEREOF, I have duly executed thisCompliance Certificate this 17th day of March, 2015.
§ 436.13 Presuming cost-effectiveness results. ( a ) If the investment and other costs for an energy or water conservation measure considered for retrofit to an existing Federal building or a building energy system or building water system considered for incorporation into a new building design are insignificant, a Federal agency may presume that such a system is life cycle cost-effective without further analysis.
( b ) A Federal agency may presume that an investment in an energy or water conservation measure retrofit to an existing Federal building is not life cycle cost-effective for Federal investment if the Federal building is— ( 1 ) Occupied under a short-term lease with a remaining term of one year or less, and without a renewal option or with a renewal option which is not likely to be exercised;
( 2 ) Occupied under a lease which includes the cost of utilities in the rent and does not provide a pass-through of energy or water savings to the government; or
( 3 ) Scheduled to be demolished or retired from service within one year or less.
[55 FR 48220, Nov. 20, 1990, as amended at 61 FR 32650, June 25, 1996]
**Alabama**

**Alabama 09 Clarke-Washington**
#### MOORE & EVANS, Respondent, v. VAN PRAAG, Appellant.

(Supreme Court, Appellate Division, First Department.

June 5, 1914.)

Action by Moore & Evans against John Van Praag.

J. A. Lazaroe, of New York City, for appellant.

T. F. Walsh, of New York City, for respondent.

No opinion. Order affirmed, with $10 costs and disbursements. Order filed. See, also, 147 N. Y. Supp. 1128.
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<PAGE>
<ARTICLE> 9

<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   9-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          DEC-31-2000
<PERIOD-START>                             JAN-01-2000
<PERIOD-END>                               SEP-30-2000
<CASH>                                          28,746
<INT-BEARING-DEPOSITS>                               0
<FED-FUNDS-SOLD>                                 1,707
<TRADING-ASSETS>                                     0
<INVESTMENTS-HELD-FOR-SALE>                    277,772
<INVESTMENTS-CARRYING>                               0
<INVESTMENTS-MARKET>                                 0
<LOANS>                                        386,074
<ALLOWANCE>                                      3,808
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                 728,418
<DEPOSITS>                                     437,069
<SHORT-TERM>                                    85,579
<LIABILITIES-OTHER>                              5,139
<LONG-TERM>                                    155,916
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                           12,068
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                           487
<OTHER-SE>                                      32,160
<TOTAL-LIABILITIES-AND-EQUITY>                 728,418
<INTEREST-LOAN>                                 21,988
<INTEREST-INVEST>                               13,822
<INTEREST-OTHER>                                    43
<INTEREST-TOTAL>                                35,853
<INTEREST-DEPOSIT>                               9,407
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                              20,958
<INTEREST-INCOME-NET>                           14,895
<LOAN-LOSSES>                                       60
<SECURITIES-GAINS>                                 402
<EXPENSE-OTHER>                                 15,844
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                  5,342
<INCOME-PRE-EXTRAORDINARY>                       5,342
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                     3,455
<EPS-BASIC>                                       1.13
<EPS-DILUTED>                                     1.08
<YIELD-ACTUAL>                                    7.20
<LOANS-NON>                                        280
<LOANS-PAST>                                         0
<LOANS-TROUBLED>                                     0
<LOANS-PROBLEM>                                      0
<ALLOWANCE-OPEN>                                 3,701
<CHARGE-OFFS>                                    (182)
<RECOVERIES>                                       229
<ALLOWANCE-CLOSE>                                3,808
<ALLOWANCE-DOMESTIC>                             2,140
<ALLOWANCE-FOREIGN>                                  0
<ALLOWANCE-UNALLOCATED>                          1,668


</TABLE>
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<PAGE>
 
<ARTICLE> 5
<LEGEND>
THIS SCHEDULE CONTAINS SUMMARY FINANCIAL INFORMATION EXTRACTED FROM THE
REGISTRANT'S 10-QSB AS FOR THE QUARTER ENDED MARCH 31, 1997 AND IS QUALIFIED IN
ITS ENTIRETY BY REFERENCE TO SUCH FINANCIAL STATEMENTS.
</LEGEND>
<MULTIPLIER> 1
       
<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   3-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          DEC-31-1997
<PERIOD-START>                             JAN-01-1997
<PERIOD-END>                               MAR-31-1997
<CASH>                                       2,810,565
<SECURITIES>                                         0
<RECEIVABLES>                                8,292,465
<ALLOWANCES>                                  (351,719)
<INVENTORY>                                  1,059,976
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                            11,427,379
<PP&E>                                       4,387,632
<DEPRECIATION>                               3,150,064
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                              22,385,315
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                        5,661,471
<BONDS>                                              0
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                       389,708
<OTHER-SE>                                  15,870,082
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                22,385,315
<SALES>                                      4,721,977
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                             4,721,977
<CGS>                                        2,382,949
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                2,382,949
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                             3,079,925
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                56,000
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                               2,560
<INCOME-PRETAX>                               (701,738)
<INCOME-TAX>                                  (246,000)
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                           (455,738)
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                  (455,738)
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                    (0.12)
<EPS-DILUTED>                                    (0.12)
        

</TABLE>
#### State of Kansas, *Appellee,*v. Gerald Lucas, *Appellant.*

No. 48,064

Opinion filed January 24, 1976.

*Frank F. Eckdall,*of Kansas City, argued the cause and was on the brief for the appellant.

*Dennis L. Harris,*assistant district attorney, argued the cause, and *Curt T. Schneider,*attorney general, and *Nick A. Tomasic,*district attorney, were with him on the brief for the appellee.

Miller, J.

Affirmed.
| (logo) WELLS   

           FARGO

  | Commercial Mortgage Servicing

D1086-120, 12th Floor

550 South Tryon Street

Charlotte, NC 28202

1-800-326-1334 |
|-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|

 

 

ANNUAL STATEMENT OF COMPLIANCE

 

Reference is hereby made to that certain Pooling and Servicing Agreement dated as of February 1, 2013, by and among RBS Commercial Funding Inc., as Depositor, Wells Fargo Bank, National Association, as Master Servicer, Certificate Administrator, Tax Administrator and            Custodian, Midland Loan Services, a division of PNC Bank, National Association, as Special Servicer, Trimont Real Estate Advisors, Inc., as Trust Advisor and U.S. Bank National Association, as Trustee, with respect to Commercial Mortgage Pass-Through Certificates WFRBS 2013-C11 (the "Agreement"). Capitalized terms used herein not otherwise defined shall have the meanings assigned in the Agreement.

 

Pursuant to Section 11.12 of this Agreement, I, Daniel Bober, Executive Vice President of Commercial Mortgage Services do hereby certify that:

 

1.                                    A review of the activities of the Master Servicer during the period from January 1, 2014 through December 31, 2014 (the “Reporting Period”),  and of its performance per the Agreement during such period has been made under my supervision, and

 

2.         To the best of my knowledge, based on such review, the Master Servicer has fulfilled all of its obligations under the Agreement in all material respects throughout the Reporting Period.

 

 

 

 

 

IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the undersigned has executed this Certificate as of the 6th day of March 2015.

 

 

 

/s/ Daniel Bober

Daniel Bober

Executive Vice President

Wells Fargo Bank

 

 

 

 
| Wells Fargo Bank, N.A. | (logo) Together we’ll go far |
|------------------------|------------------------------------|
y



### MANDATE



## Court of Appeals

**First District of Texas**

NO. 01

- 13

- 00543

- CV

LETOSHA GALE, M.D. A ND ZOE LIFE WELLNESS CENTER, P.A. , Appellant s

V.

HECTOR LUCIO , Appellee

Appeal from the 240th District Court of Fort Bend County. (Tr. Ct. No.

12

- DCV

- 198515 ).

TO THE 240TH DISTRICT COURT OF FORT BEND COUNTY, GREETINGS:

Before this Court , on the 25th day of September 2014 , the case upon appeal to revise

or to reverse your judgment was determined. This Court made its order in these words:

This case is an appeal from the order signed by the trial court on June 11, 2013. After submitting the case on the appellate record and the arguments properly raised by the parties, the Court holds that there was reversible error in the trial court’s order. Accordingly, the Court reverses the trial

court’s order. The Court further renders judgment that appellee, Hector Lucio, take nothing by his claims against appellants, L etosha Gale, M.D. and Zoe Life Wellness Center,

P.A.The Court orders that the appellee, Hector Lucio, pay all appellate costs.

The Court orders that this decision be certified below

for observance.

Judgment rendered September 25, 2014.

Panel consis ts of Justices Keyes, Bland, and Brown. Opinion delivered by Justice Keyes.

WHEREFORE, WE COMMAND YOU to observe the order of our said Court in

this behalf and in all things to have it duly recognized, obeyed, and executed.



### December 4, 2015

Date CHRISTOPHER A. PRINE

CLERK OF THE COURT
NASA LogoNTRSNTRS - NASA Technical Reports ServerSearchmore_vertCollectionsAboutNewsHelpLogin Back to ResultsBOREAS TE-18 Landsat TM Physical Classification Image of the SSAThe BOREAS TE-18 team focused its efforts on using remotely sensed data to characterize the successional and disturbance dynamics of the boreal forest for use in carbon modeling. The objective of this classification is to provide the BOREAS investigators with a data product that characterizes the land cover of the SSA. A Landsat-5 TM image from 02-Sep-1994 was used to derive the classification. A technique was implemented that uses reflectances of various land cover types along with a geometric optical canopy model to produce spectral trajectories. These trajectories are used as training data to classify the image into the different land cover classes. These data are provided in a binary image file format. The data files are available on a CD-ROM (see document number 20010000884), or from the Oak Ridge National Laboratory (ORNL) Distributed Activity Archive Center (DAAC).Document ID20010004613Acquisition SourceGoddard Space Flight CenterDocument TypeTechnical Memorandum (TM)AuthorsHall, Forrest G.*(NASA Goddard Space Flight Center Greenbelt, MD United States)*Knapp, David*(Raytheon Information Technology and Scientific Services Greenbelt, MD United States)*Date AcquiredSeptember 7, 2013Publication DateOctober 1, 2000Subject CategoryEarth Resources And Remote SensingReport/Patent NumberNASA/TM-2000-209891/VOL176Rept-2000-03136-0/VOL176NAS 1.15:209891/VOL176Funding Number(s)PROJECT: RTOP 462-33-01Distribution LimitsPublicCopyrightWork of the US Gov. Public Use Permitted.Available DownloadsNameType20010004613.pdfSTIcloud_downloadcontent_copyvisibilityRelated RecordsThere are no records associated with this record.visibility_offNo Preview Available
 No Fear Act | Freedom of Information Act | Office of the Inspector General | Agency Financial ReportsNASA Web Privacy Policy and Important Notices | NASA Guidelines for Quality of InformationDisclaimers, Copyright, Terms of Use | Accessibility | NASA OCIO | USA.gov | NASA.govContact Us | Site MapSTI LogoNASA Official: JoAnne R. Calhoun Site Curator: STI Compliance and Distribution Services Last Modified: September 12, 2024
11TH COURT OF APPEALS

EASTLAND, TEXAS

JUDGMENT

Antonio De La Cruz, * From the 106th District Court

 of Dawson County, Texas

 Trial Court No. 15-7606.

Vs. No. 11-15-00281-CR * March 31, 2017

The State of Texas, * Memorandum Opinion by Willson, J.

 (Panel consists of: Wright, C.J.,

 Willson, J., and Bailey, J.)

This court has inspected the record in this cause and concludes that 

there is no error in the judgments below. Therefore, in accordance with this 

court’s opinion, the judgments of the trial court are in all things affirmed.
#### OTIS LITHOGRAPH CO. v. BRYAN et al.

(Supreme Court, Appellate Division, First Department.

June 19, 1914.)

Action by the Otis Lithograph Company against Ralph D. Bryan, impleaded with John C. Fischer.

Henry A. Friedman, of New York City, for appellant.

Franklin Bien, of New York City, for respondent.

No opinion. Order reversed, with $10 costs and disbursements, and motion denied, with $10 costs. Order filed.