alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
PGI 245.103-74 Contracting office

responsibilities.

(1) Prepare the GFP attachments in accordance with the procedures in PGI245.103 -72.

(2) The following require a contract modification and an update to the GFP attachment in the GFP

module of the PIEE to create a consolidated, conformed list of property to be contractually provided

under the contract.

(i) Any change to the mandatory fields of the GFP attachment (see PGI 245.103-72).

(ii) Addition or deletion of any GFP or anticipated GFP under the contract.

(iii) Transfer of GFP accountability between existing contracts (see PGI 245.103-71).

(iv) Delivery and Government acceptance of contractor-acquired property when retained by the

contractor for use under a contract (see PGI 245.402-71).

(v) Substitution of GFP for previously furnished GFP, GFP to be furnished, or property to be acquired

by the contractor for the Government under the contract.

(vi) Withdrawal of authority for contractor use of GFP.

(3) Include in applicable solicitations and contracts the CDRL provided by the requiring activity for

reporting Government inventory held under sustainment contracts (see PGI 245.103-73 ).

Parent topic: PGI 245.103 General.
SUBCHAPTER C - CONTRACTING METHODS

AND CONTRACT TYPES

PART 313 - SIMPLIFIED ACQUISITION PROCEDURES

PART 314 - SEALED BIDDING

PART 315 - CONTRACTING BY NEGOTIATION

PART 316 - TYPES OF CONTRACTS

PART 317 - SPECIAL CONTRACTING METHODS

PART 313 - SIMPLIFIED ACQUISITION PROCEDURES

313.003 Policy.

Subpart 313.3 - Simplified Acquisition Methods

313.301 Government-wide commercial purchase card.

PART 314 - SEALED BIDDING

Subpart 314.1 - Use of Sealed Bidding

314.103 Policy.

Subpart 314.4 - Opening of Bids and Award of Contract

314.404 Rejection of bids.

314.404-1 Cancellation of invitations after opening.

314.407 Mistakes in bids.

314.407-3 Other mistakes disclosed before award.

314.407-4 Mistakes after award.

PART 315 - CONTRACTING BY NEGOTIATION

Subpart 315.2 - Solicitation and Receipt of Proposals and Information

315.204-5 Part IV - Representations and instructions.

315.208 Submission, modification, revision, and withdrawal of proposals.

Subpart 315.3 - Source Selection

315.303-70 Policy.

315.304 Evaluation factors and significant subfactors.

315.305 Proposal evaluation.

Subpart 315.4 - Contract Pricing

315.404 Proposal analysis.

315.404-2 Information to support proposal analysis.

Subpart 315.6 - Unsolicited Proposals

315.605 Content of unsolicited proposals.

315.606 Agency procedures.

315.606-1 Receipt and initial review.

PART 316 - TYPES OF CONTRACTS

Subpart 316.3 - Cost-Reimbursement Contracts

316.307 Contract clauses.

Subpart 316.5 - Indefinite-Delivery Contracts

316.505 Ordering.

Subpart 316.6 - Time-and-Materials, Labor-Hour, and Letter Contracts

316.603 Letter contracts.

316.603-3 Limitations.

PART 317 - SPECIAL CONTRACTING METHODS

Subpart 317.1 - Multi-Year Contracting

317.104 General.
317.105 Policy.

317.105-1 Uses.

317.107 Options.

317.108 Congressional notification.

Subpart 317.2 - Options

317.204 Contracts.
###### Editorial Note on Part 63

#### Editorial Note:

Nomenclature changes to part 63 appear at 81 FR 86909, Dec. 2, 2016.

#### § 63.5 Interpretations.

Except as specifically authorized by the Commission in writing, no interpretation of the meaning of the regulations in this part by any officer or employee of the Commission other than a written interpretation by the General Counsel is binding on the Commission.
```

[Congressional Bills 109th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[H. Res. 342 Engrossed in House (EH)]

H. Res. 342

                 In the House of Representatives, U.S.,

                                                         June 28, 2005.
    Resolved, That at any time after the adoption of this resolution the Speaker 
may, pursuant to clause 2(b) of rule XVIII, declare the House resolved into the 
Committee of the Whole House on the state of the Union for consideration of the 
bill (H.R. 3058) making appropriations for the Departments of Transportation, 
Treasury, and Housing and Urban Development, the Judiciary, District of 
Columbia, and independent agencies for the fiscal year ending September 30, 
2006, and for other purposes. The first reading of the bill shall be dispensed 
with. All points of order against consideration of the bill are waived. General 
debate shall be confined to the bill and shall not exceed one hour equally 
divided and controlled by the chairman and ranking minority member of the 
Committee on Appropriations. After general debate the bill shall be considered 
for amendment under the five-minute rule. Points of order against provisions in 
the bill for failure to comply with clause 2 of rule XXI are waived except as 
follows: beginning with the comma on page 5, line 25, through ``and'' on line 
26; beginning with ``for'' on page 11, line 22, through the first comma on page 
12, line 1; beginning with the colon on page 12, line 12, through ``Program'' on 
line 17; beginning with ``Notwithstanding'' on page 16, line 8, through the 
comma on line 8; sections 110, 112 and 130; beginning with the colon on page 32, 
line 25, through ``Congress'' on page 33, line 3; beginning with 
``Notwithstanding'' on page 34, line 4, through the comma on line 4; and 
sections 151, 218, 808, 928, and 945. Where points of order are waived against 
part of a paragraph or section, points of order against a provision in another 
part of such paragraph or section may be made only against such provision and 
not against the entire paragraph or section. During consideration of the bill 
for amendment, the Chairman of the Committee of the Whole may accord priority in 
recognition on the basis of whether the Member offering an amendment has caused 
it to be printed in the portion of the Congressional Record designated for that 
purpose in clause 8 of rule XVIII. Amendments so printed shall be considered as 
read. When the committee rises and reports the bill back to the House with a 
recommendation that the bill do pass, the previous question shall be considered 
as ordered on the bill and amendments thereto to final passage without 
intervening motion except one motion to recommit with or without instructions.
            Attest:

                                                                          Clerk.
```
Exhibit 32

CERTIFICATION PURSUANT TO

18 U.S.C. SECTION 1350,

AS ADOPTED PURSUANT TO

SECTION 906
OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002

In connection with the Quarterly Report of Archon Corporation (the Company) on Form 10-Q
for the period ended June 30, 2009 as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the Report), we, Paul W. Lowden, Chief Executive Officer of the Company, and Grant L. Siler, Principal Accounting Officer,
of the Company, certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. section 1350, as adopted pursuant to section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2003, that to our knowledge:



| | (i) | the Report fully complies with the requirements of section 13(a) and 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934; and
| | --- | ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------



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



|                                 |  |                
|-------------------------------- |  | ---------------
|                                 | 
|Dated:                           |  | August 13, 2009
|                                
|/s/ Paul W. Lowden              
|Paul W. Lowden                  
|Chairman of the Board, President
|And Chief Executive Officer     
|                                
|/s/ Grant L. Siler              
|Grant L. Siler                  
|Principal Accounting Officer    

This certification accompanies the above-described Report on Form 10-Q pursuant to

Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002 and shall not, except to the extent required by

such Act, be deemed filed by the Company for purposes of Section 18 of the Securities Exchange

Act of 1934.
H. Res. 634 

In the House of Representatives, U. S., 

November 29, 2017. 

Resolved, That the following named Members be, and are 

hereby, elected to the following standing committees of the 

House of Representatives: 

COMMITTEE ON FOREIGN AFFAIRS: Mr. Curtis. 

COMMITTEE ON HOMELAND SECURITY: Mr. Bacon. 

COMMITTEE ON SMALL BUSINESS: Mr. Curtis. 

Attest: 

Clerk.
Exhibit 10.39


 


EXHIBIT G


 


SIXTH AMENDMENT


TO


THE TRAVELERS SEVERANCE PLAN


(Effective April 1, 2004)


 


The
Travelers Severance Plan (Effective April 1, 2004) is hereby amended Effective
January 1, 2009 as follows:


 


Section II.9
is amended to read as follows:


 


II.9       “Reduction in Force” or “RIF” means a Termination of
Employment initiated by an Employer solely due to a reduction in force or the
elimination of an Employee’s position. An Employee will not be treated as
having had a Termination of Employment due to a RIF if: (i) the Employee’s
employment is terminated due to inadequate job performance or for Conduct
Harmful or Prejudicial to the Company, even if the Employer chooses not to
replace such Employee or fill the Employee’s position or (ii) the Employee
declines an Offer of Continued Employment by the Company or an Affiliate prior
to the Employee’s Termination of Employment, whether that Offer of Continued
Employment was made before or after Written Notice of Termination was provided
to the Employee.  An Employee who is on a
personal leave of absence which commenced prior to the date of the Employee’s
Termination of Employment due to a RIF (as of such date as was established in a
Written Notice of Termination) will not be treated as having had a Termination
of Employment due to a RIF.  An Employee
who is on a disability leave at the time of a RIF will be treated as having had
a Termination of Employment due to a RIF if either (a) the date of the
Employee’s Termination of Employment due to RIF is established in a Written
Notice of Termination that was provided to the Employee prior to the start of
the disability leave, or (b) (i) the Employee recovers from his/her
disability and provides the Employer with written notice of his/her intent to
return to work for the Company or an Affiliate, along with a physician’s  certification that the Employee is able to
return to work, prior to his/her Termination of Employment (both the notice
must be given, and the Employee must be able to return to work, prior to
Termination of Employment), and (ii) the Employee does not receive an
Offer of Continued Employment by the Company or an Affiliate within sixty (60)
days after the date the Employer receives written notice of the Employee’s
intent to return to work.


 


1
#### VECHSLER v. BLITZER.

(No. 6685.)

(Supreme Court, Appellate Division, First Department.

December 31, 1914.)

Pabtnershib (§ 348*)—Dissolution Agreement—Injunction.

In a suit to annul a partly executed partnership dissolution agreement, complainant was not entitled to an injunction restraining defendant from suing on or asserting any claim under the agreement, or from assigning any claim to moneys to become due thereon, or from interfering with complainant’s rights of property; the only threatened interference being an apprehended action to enforce payment of moneys to become due under the agreement.

[Ed. Note.—For other cases, see Partnership, Cent. Dig. § 822; Dec. Dig. § 348.*]

Appeal from Special Term, New York County.

Suit by William Vechsler against Sigmund Blitzer. From an order granting a motion to continue an injunction during the pendency of the action, defendant appeals. Reversed, and motion for a temporary injunction denied.

Argued before INGRAHAM, P. J., and McLAUGHLIN, SCOTT, DOWLING, and HOTCHKISS, JJ.

Harold H. Bowman, of New York City, for appellant.

Max Brown, of New York City, for respondent.

*

For other cases see same topic & § number in Dec. & Am. Digs. 1907 to date, *&*Rep’r Indexes

PER CURIAM.

The action is to annul on the ground of fraud, and to restrain defendant from suing upon or asserting any claim under, a partly executed partnership dissolution agreement, and as well from assigning any claim to moneys’ hereafter to become due thereunder, and likewise to restrain defendant “from interfering with the rights and property of the plaintiff.” The injunction order appealed from is equally broad. The only threatened interference with plaintiff’s “rights and property” ascertainable from the record is an apprehended action to enforce payment of the moneys to become due under the agreement. Plaintiff needs no injunction to protect him from an assignment by defendant of his claim for these moneys, because any such assignment would be subject to his equities. Nor should defendant be restrained from prosecuting an independent action'to recover the unpaid moneys, and thus be driven into establishing his right to such moneys by a counterclaim in this action: (1)

Because it is doubtful whether such a counterclaim could be properly interposed herein, inasmuch as the basis of this action is fraud; and (2) defendant has a right, under the circumstances, to choose his own forum for the enforcement of his claim.

The order appealed from should be reversed, with $10 costs and disbursements, and plaintiff’s motion for a temporary injunction denied, with $10 costs.
# Subpart 816.70 [Reserved]

**Parent topic:**PART 816 - TYPES OF CONTRACTS
#### In the Matter of the Claim of Frank T. Porco, Appellant. Martin P. Catherwood, as Industrial Commissioner, Respondent.

Cooke, J.

Appeal by the claimant from a decision of the Unemployment Insurance Appeal Board, filed April 24, 1967, finding claimant ineligible to receive unemployment insurance benefits. Following the incorporation of Franvira Contracting Corporation, engaged in residential building and into which claimant and two associates had invested equal amounts, one third of its stock was issued to claimant. Shortly thereafter, a transfer thereof was made so that claimant had a certificate for one sixth of the stock and another certificate for the remaining sixth was issued to his wife. After making the claim for .benefits effective October 31, 1966, claimant stated that he was the owner of one third of the shares, although he thereafter explained that he had forgotten about the transfer to his wife, and testified that he did not think his wife put her own money into the corporation. No evidence of consideration was advanced and claimant’s associates made similar transfers to their wives. No dividends have been paid by the corporation and the associates have only received salaries. Under paragraph (d) of subdivision 2 of section 517 of the Labor Law, the compensation paid by a corporation to an employee who is a principal stockholder in that corporation is excluded from the term remuneration, unless the tax imposed by the Federal Unemployment Tax Act is payable with respect to such compensation, a principal stockholder meaning one who owns 25 per centum or more of the capital stock of the corporation. To confine this definition of a principal stockholder to record owners of stock only could result in thwarting the purposes of the statute (cf. *Matter of Wersba*[Catherwood], 27 A D 2d 890; *Matter of Berson*[Corsi], 283 App. Div. 190, 193-194). Although the stock books and books of account of said corporation are prima facie evidence of the facts therein stated in favor of a plaintiff in any action or special proceeding against it or any of its officers, directors or shareholders (Business Corporation Law, § 624), they are not conclusive as to who is a stockholder nor as to the ownership of stock *(Matter of Ringler & Co.,*204 N. Y. 30; *Campbell*v. *American Zylonite Co.,*122 N. Y. 455; *Davis*v. *Fraser,*121 N. Y. S. 2d 643, affd. 283 App. Div. 657, affd. 307 N. Y. 433; 11 N. Y. Jur., Corporations, § 128). It.is undisputed that the corporation was not subject to the Federal Unemployment Tax Act (U. S. Code, tit. 26, § 3306). The decision of the board that claimant was the actual owner of more than 25 per centum of the capital stock of the corporation was supported by substantial evidence and should not be disturbed (Labor Law, § 623; ef. *Matter of Ortiz*[Catherwood], 31 A D 2d 985; 47 N. Y. Jur., Property, § 12). Decision affirmed, without costs. Herlihy, J. P., Reynolds, Cooke and Greeúblott, JJ., concur in memorandum by Cooke, J.; Aulisi, J., not voting.
**Exhibit 31**

**SEMT 2013-1**

EX-31 Rule 13a-14(d)/15d-14(d) Certification. 

I, Christopher J. Abate, certify that: 

1. Ihave reviewed this report on Form 10-K and all reports on Form 10-D required to be filed in respect of the period covered by this report on Form 10-K of Sequoia Mortgage Trust 2013-1 (the “Exchange Act periodic reports”); 

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

3. Based on my knowledge, all of the distribution, servicing and other information required 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 required in this report under Item 1123 of Regulation AB, and except asdisclosed in the Exchange Act periodic reports, the servicers have fulfilled their obligations under the servicing agreements in all material respects; and 

5. All of the reports on assessment of compliance with servicing criteria for asset-backed securities and their related attestation reports onassessment of compliance with servicing criteria for asset-backed securities required to be included in this report in accordance with Item 1122 of Regulation AB and Exchange Act Rules 13a-18 and 15d-18 have been included as an exhibit to this report, except as otherwise disclosed in this report. Any material instances of noncompliance described in such reports have been disclosed in this report on Form 10-K.

In giving the certifications above, I have reasonably relied on information provided tome by the following unaffiliated parties: Corelogic Tax Services, LLC, Assurant, Inc., Cenlar, FSB as Servicer, First Republic Bank as Servicer, PHH Mortgage Corporation as Servicer, EverBank as Servicer, Wells Fargo Bank, N.A. as Custodian andMaster Servicer, and Citibank, N.A. as Securities Administrator and Paying Agent. 

Date: April 1, 2019 

/s/ Christopher J.Abate                                                             

Signature 

Chairman of the Board, President and Chief Financial Officer 

(senior officer in charge of securitization of the depositor)
# EUR-Lex - 31980L1276 - EN

Avis juridique important

*|*

# 31980L1276

**Council Directive 80/1276/EEC of 22 December 1980 amending, by virtue of the accession of Greece, Directives 76/893/EEC, 79/693/EEC and 80/777/EEC with regard to the majority quorum of votes within the Standing Committee of Foodstuffs procedure **

*
Official Journal L 375 , 31/12/1980 P. 0077 - 0077 Finnish special edition: Chapter 13 Volume 11 P. 0086 Greek special edition: Chapter 13 Volume 10 P. 0143 Swedish special edition: Chapter 13 Volume 11 P. 0086 Spanish special edition: Chapter 13 Volume 11 P. 0160 Portuguese special edition Chapter 13 Volume 11 P. 0160 *

COUNCIL DIRECTIVE of 22 December 1980 amending, by virtue of the accession of Greece, Directives 76/893/EEC, 79/693/EEC and 80/777/EEC with regard to the majority quorum of votes within the Standing Committee of Foodstuffs procedure (80/1276/EEC)

THE COUNCIL OF THE EUROPEAN COMMUNITIES,

Having regard to the 1979 Act of Accession, and in particular Article 146 thereof,

Having regard to the proposal from the Commission,

Whereas, by virtue of the accession of Greece, it is necessary to change the number of votes constituting a majority quorum of votes within the procedure for the Standing Committee on Foodstuffs, as laid down in Directives 76/893/EEC (1), 79/693/EEC (2) and 80/777/EEC (3),

HAS ADOPTED THIS DIRECTIVE:

Article 1

With effect from 1 January 1981, "41 votes" shall be replaced by "45 votes" in: - Article 10 (2) of Directive 76/893/EEC,

- Article 13 (2) of Directive 79/693/EEC and

- Article 12 (2) of Directive 80/777/EEC.

Article 2

This Directive is addressed to the Member States.

Done at Brussels, 22 December 1980.

For the Council

The President

J. SANTER (1)OJ No L 340, 9.12.1976, p. 19. (2)OJ No L 205, 13.8.1979, p. 5. (3)OJ No L 229, 30.8.1980, p. 1.
IN THE SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF MONTANA

No. DA 21-0517

STATE OF MONTANA,

Plaintiff and Appellee,

v.

SHANE CLARK JOHNSON,

Defendant and Appellant.

ORDER

Upon consideration of Appellant’s motion for extension of time, 

and good cause appearing,

IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that Appellant is granted an extension 

of time to and including July 14, 2023, within which to prepare, file, 

and serve Appellant’s opening brief on appeal.

Electronically signed by:

Mike McGrath

Chief Justice, Montana Supreme Court

June 6 2023

06/06/2023

Case Number: DA 21-0517
EXHIBIT 31.1




CERTIFICATION PURSUANT TO SECTION 302 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002




I, Ritu Chandy, certify that:




1.              I have reviewed this report on Form 10-K and all reports on Form 10-D required to be filed in respect of the period covered by this report on Form 10-K of BMW Vehicle Lease Trust 2013-1 (the “Exchange Act periodic reports”);
 
 2.              Based on my knowledge, the Exchange Act periodic reports, taken as a whole, do not contain any untrue statement of a material fact or omit to state a material fact necessary to make the statements made, in light of the circumstances under which such statements were made, not misleading with respect to the period covered by this report;
 
 3.              Based on my knowledge, all of the distribution, servicing and other information required to be provided under Form 10-D for the period covered by this report is included in the Exchange Act periodic reports;
 
 4.              I am responsible for reviewing the activities performed by the servicer and based on my knowledge and the compliance review conducted in preparing the servicer compliance statement required in this report under Item 1123 of Regulation AB, and except as disclosed in the Exchange Act periodic reports, the servicer has fulfilled its obligations under the servicing agreement in all material respects; and


5.              All of the reports on assessment of compliance with servicing criteria for asset-backed securities and their related attestation reports on assessment of compliance with servicing criteria for asset-backed securities required to be included in this report in accordance with Item 1122 of Regulation AB and Exchange Act Rules 13a-18 and 15d-18 have been included as an exhibit to this report, except as otherwise disclosed in this report.  Any material instances of noncompliance described in such reports have been disclosed in this report on Form 10-K.


In giving the certifications above, I have reasonably relied on information provided to me by the following unaffiliated parties: U.S. Bank National Association.




Dated:  March 20, 2015




By:  /s/ Ritu Chandy


Name:  Ritu Chandy


Title:  Vice President – Finance & CFO


BMW Financial Services NA, LLC