alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
#### § 1316.64 Proposed findings of fact and conclusions of law.

Any party in the hearing may file in quintuplicate proposed findings of fact and conclusions of law within the time fixed by the presiding officer. Any party so filing shall also serve one copy of his proposed findings and conclusion upon each other party in the hearing. The party shall include a statement of supporting reasons for the proposed findings and conclusions, together with evidence of record (including specific and complete citations of the pages of the transcript and exhibits) and citations of authorities relied upon.
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<PAGE>
<ARTICLE> 5
<LEGEND>
THIS SCHEDULE CONTAINS SUMMARY FINANCIAL INFORMATION EXTRACTED FROM THE
CONDENSED CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL STATEMENTS IN THE QUARTERLY REPORT ON FORM 10-Q
OF DIGITAL MICROWAVE CORPORATION FOR THE QUARTER ENDED SEPTEMBER 30, 1999 AND IS
QUALIFIED IN ITS ENTIRETY BY REFERENCE TO SUCH FINANCIAL STATEMENTS.
</LEGEND>
<MULTIPLIER> 1,000

<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   6-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          MAR-31-2000
<PERIOD-START>                             APR-01-1999
<PERIOD-END>                               SEP-30-1999
<CASH>                                          17,212
<SECURITIES>                                    13,795
<RECEIVABLES>                                   72,621
<ALLOWANCES>                                     3,484
<INVENTORY>                                     45,097
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                               156,771
<PP&E>                                         103,982
<DEPRECIATION>                                  62,676
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                 202,549
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                           64,035
<BONDS>                                          1,571
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                           643
<OTHER-SE>                                     135,991
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                   202,549
<SALES>                                        134,480
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                               134,480
<CGS>                                           95,747
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                   95,747
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                35,850
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                   433
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                                 465
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                  1,779
<INCOME-TAX>                                       356
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                              1,423
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                     1,423
<EPS-BASIC>                                       0.02
<EPS-DILUTED>                                     0.02


</TABLE>
<PAGE>   1







                                                                  EXHIBIT 23.1

                          Consent of Ernst & Young LLP

We consent to the incorporation by reference in the Registration        
Statements of Spyglass, Inc. on Form S-3 (File Nos. 333-06943, 333-08255,
333-08253, 333-14643 and 333-42511) and on Form S-8 (File Nos. 33-95164,
33-95160, 33-95162, 33-95158, 333-2312, 333-04357 and 333-40831) of Spyglass,
Inc. of our reports dated October 24, 1997, with respect to the consolidated
financial statements and schedule of Spyglass, Inc. included and incorporated
by reference in the Annual Report (Form 10-K) for the year ended September 30,
1997.

/s/ Ernst & Young LLP

Ernst & Young LLP
Chicago, Illinois
December 16, 1997
Exhibit 32.1

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 Annual Report on Form 10-K/A of Rexford Industrial Realty, Inc. (the “Company”) for the year ended December 31, 2014 as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the “Report”), I, Michael S. Frankel, Co-Chief Executive Officer of the Company, hereby certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C §1350, as adopted pursuant to §906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that to my knowledge: 

| (1) | the Report fully complies with the requirements of section 13(a) or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended; and |
|-----|-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|

 

| (2) | the information contained in the Report fairly presents, in all material respects, the financial condition and results of operations of the Company. |
|-----|------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|

 

| /s/ Michael S. Frankel     |   |   |
|----------------------------|--------|--------|
| Michael S. Frankel         |   |   |
| Co-Chief Executive Officer |   |   |
| October 29, 2015           |   |   |
#### § 1880.137 Who in NASA may grant an exception to let an excluded person participate in a covered transaction?

The Chief Acquisition Officer has the authority to grant an exception to let an excluded person participate in a covered transaction, as provided in the OMB guidance at 2 CFR 180.135.
#### James B. Maxwell *v.*The People *ex rel.*Freise, County Collector.

*Opinion filed February 20, 1901*

*Rehearing denied April 11, 1901.*

1. *Taxes—when*county court *should sustain objection to entry of judgment of sale.*Where a property owner claims his personal property to be exempt from taxation upon the ground that he is a non-resident and has no personal property in this State, and the board of review sustains his claim in accordance with the evidence, but the Auditor neither notifies the hoard of his approval of its decision nor presents the case to the Supreme Court, the county court should sustain the objection when made to judgment of sale.

2. The other questions here involved are controlled by the decision in *Maxwell*v. *People ex rel. {ante,*p. 546.)

Appeal from the County Court of Mercer county; the Hon. W. T. Church, Judge, presiding.

Robert L. Watson, and Guy C. Scott, for appellant.

James M. Brock, for appellee.

Per Curiam:

The questions involved in this case, with the exception hereinafter stated, are the same as the questions involved in and decided by the case of *Maxwell*v. *People, {ante,*p. 546). The objection, made by the pres*592ent appellant, was that the personal property owned by him was not in the State of Illinois, and that he was not a resident of the State of Illinois at the time when, under the law, his property was required to be listed for taxation. The proof shows, that the non-residence of appellant and the *situs*of his property outside of the State were as stated in the objection. This case differs from the case of Mary J. Maxwell in that the board of review sustained the objection as to the present appellant, thereby holding that his property was not liable to taxation. The clerk of the board thereupon, under the direction of the board, made out and forwarded to the Auditor a full and complete statement of all the facts in the case; but the Auditor neither notified the board of review of his approval of its decision, nor did he present the case to the Supreme Court. He took no steps in regard to the matter, except to inform the board that he could not certify the statement of facts to the Supreme Court. So far, therefore, as the present appellant is concerned, the proof presented by him in the present proceeding not only sustains his objection as here made, but it further appears that the board of review itself decided said objection in his favor. In view of this condition of things, we are of the opinion that the county court should have sustained the objection, made by the appellant to . the entry of judgment against his interest in the land in question.

Accordingly, the judgment of the county court, so far as it applies to the land of the appellant, is reversed, and the cause is remanded to that court for further proceedings in accordance with the views herein expressed.

*Reversed and remanded.*
§ 1532.890 How may I appeal my EPA debarment? ( a ) If the EPA debarring official issues a decision under 2 CFR 180.870 to debar you after you present information in opposition to a proposed debarment under 2 CFR 180.815, you can ask for review of the debarring official's decision in two ways: ( 1 ) You may ask the debarring official to reconsider the decision for material errors of fact or law that you believe will change the outcome of the matter; and/or
( 2 ) You may request the Director, Office of Grants and Debarment (OGD Director), to review the debarring official's decision to debar you within 30 days of your receipt of the debarring official's decision under 2 CFR 180.870 or paragraph (a)(1) of this section. However, the OGD Director can reverse the debarring official's decision only where the OGD Director finds that the decision is based on a clear error of material fact or law, or where the OGD Director finds that the debarring official's decision was arbitrary, capricious, or an abuse of discretion.
( b ) A request for review under this section must be in writing; state the specific findings you believe to be in error; and include the reasons or legal bases for your position.
( c ) A review under paragraph (a)(2) of this section is solely within the discretion of the OGD Director who may also stay the debarment pending review of the debarring official's decision.
( d ) The EPA debarring official and the OGD Director must notify you of their decisions under this section, in writing, using the notice procedures at 2 CFR 180.615 and 180.975.
<PAGE>


                                                                    Exhibit 22.1

                       Subsidiaries (all are 100% owned)

         Name                                                 Jurisdiction
        ------                                               --------------
Level 8 Technologies, Inc.                                      Delaware

Cicero Technologies, Inc.                                       Delaware

StarQuest Software, Inc.                                       California

Template Software UK Limited                                       UK

Template Software, S.A.                                          France

Template Software de Mexico, S.A. de C.V.                        Mexico

Template Software Pty Ltd.                                      Australia

Template Software Holding GmbH                                   Germany

  Template SoftwareGeschaftsfuhrungs GmbH                        Germany

  Template Software GmbH                                         Germany

  Milestone Software GmbH                                        Austria

Level 8 Worldwide Holdings Ltd.                                 Delaware

  Seer Technologies de Argentina S.A.                           Argentina

  Level 8 FSC, Inc.                                             Barbados

  Level 8 Benelux B.V.                                         Netherlands

  Seer Technologies do Brasil Ltda.                              Brazil

  Level 8 Canada, Inc.                                           Canada

  Level 8 Denmark ApS                                            Denmark

  Level 8 France S.A.R.L.                                        France

  Level 8 Europe (Deutschland) GmbH                              Germany

  Level 8 Ireland Limited                                        Ireland

  Level 8 Italia S.R.L.                                           Italy

  Level 8 Systems Nordic AB                                      Sweden

  Level 8 Systems (UK) Limited                                     UK

  Seer Korea Co., Limited                                         Korea

  Seer Technologies Singapore PTY, Limited                      Singapore

  Seer Technologies Hong Kong Limited                           Hong Kong

3020126 Canada, Inc. (fka Bizware)                               Canada
#### § 601.437 What method do I use to communicate to a participant the requirements described in the OMB guidance at 2 CFR 180.435?

To communicate to a participant the requirements described in 2 CFR 180.435 of the OMB guidance, you must include a term or condition in the transaction that requires the participant's compliance with subpart C of 2 CFR part 180, as supplemented by subpart C of this part, and requires the participant to include a similar term or condition in lower-tier covered transactions.
#### § 1308.42 Purpose of hearing.

If requested by any interested person after proceedings are initiated pursuant to § 1308.43, the Administrator shall hold a hearing for the purpose of receiving factual evidence and expert opinion regarding the issues involved in the issuance, amendment or repeal of a rule issuable pursuant to section 201(a) of the Act (21 U.S.C. 811(a)). Extensive argument should not be offered into evidence but rather presented in opening or closing statements of counsel or in memoranda or proposed findings of fact and conclusions of law. Additional information relating to hearings to include waivers or modification of rules, request for hearing, burden of proof, time and place, and final order are set forth in part 1316 of this chapter.

[62 FR 13968, Mar. 24, 1997]
(July 3, 1969)

#### The People of the State of New York, Respondent, v. Milton Williams, Appellant.

Order reversed, on the law and the facts, and case remanded to the County Court for hearing; on the authority of *People*v. *Wright*(32 A D 2d 847); and see *People*v. *Bagley,*(23 N Y 2d 814). Gibson, P. J., Herlihy, Staley, Jr., and Cooke, JJ., concur.
Editorial Note on Part 117
Editorial Note: Nomenclature changes to part 117 appear at 81 FR 49896, July 29, 2016.

§ 117.420 Using approved suppliers. ( a ) *Approval of suppliers.* The receiving facility must approve suppliers in accordance with the requirements of § 117.410(d), and document that approval, before receiving raw materials and other ingredients received from those suppliers;
( b ) *Written procedures for receiving raw materials and other ingredients.* ( 1 ) Written procedures for receiving raw materials and other ingredients must be established and followed;
( 2 ) The written procedures for receiving raw materials and other ingredients must ensure that raw materials and other ingredients are received only from approved suppliers (or, when necessary and appropriate, on a temporary basis from unapproved suppliers whose raw materials or other ingredients are subjected to adequate verification activities before acceptance for use); and
( 3 ) Use of the written procedures for receiving raw materials and other ingredients must be documented.
2005.502 Authority.       Before placing paid advertisements in newspapers and trade journals to publicize contract actions, written authority must be obtained from the Director, Division of Contracts and Property Management, for Headquarters activities, or the Director, Division of Resource Management and Administration, within each regional office for a regional procurement.    **Parent topic:** Subpart 2005.5 - Paid Advertisements
Editorial Note on Part 101
Editorial Note: Nomenclature changes to part 101 appear at 63 FR 14035, Mar. 24, 1998, 66 FR 17358, Mar. 30, 2001, 66 FR 56035, Nov. 6, 2001, and 81 FR 49895, July 29, 2016.

§ 101.44 What are the 20 most frequently consumed raw fruits, vegetables, and fish in the United States? ( a ) The 20 most frequently consumed raw fruits are: Apple, avocado (California), banana, cantaloupe, grapefruit, grapes, honeydew melon, kiwifruit, lemon, lime, nectarine, orange, peach, pear, pineapple, plums, strawberries, sweet cherries, tangerine, and watermelon.
( b ) The 20 most frequently consumed raw vegetables are: Asparagus, bell pepper, broccoli, carrot, cauliflower, celery, cucumber, green (snap) beans, green cabbage, green onion, iceberg lettuce, leaf lettuce, mushrooms, onion, potato, radishes, summer squash, sweet corn, sweet potato, and tomato.
( c ) The 20 most frequently consumed raw fish are: Blue crab, catfish, clams, cod, flounder/sole, haddock, halibut, lobster, ocean perch, orange roughy, oysters, pollock, rainbow trout, rockfish, salmon (Atlantic/coho/Chinook/sockeye, chum/pink), scallops, shrimp, swordfish, tilapia, and tuna.
[71 FR 42044, July 25, 2006]
### IN THE

TENTH COURT OF APPEALS

No. 10

- 17

- 00224

- CV

IN THE INTEREST OF L .D.R., A CHILD

From the County Court at Law

Bosque County, Texas

Trial Court No. CV16151

ABATEMENT ORDER

The appellant’s brief is overdue in this appeal.

We abate this appeal to the trial court to conduct any necessary hearings within 7

days of the date of this Order pursuant to Texas Rule of Appellate Procedure 38.8(b)(2)

and (3). T EX

. R. A PP

. P . 38.8(b)(2), (3).

The supplemental clerk’s and reporter’s records required by Texas Rule of

Appellate Procedure 38.8(b)(2) and (3), if any, are ordered to be filed within 14 days of

the date of this Order. See id

.

PER CURIAM

Before Chief Justice Gray,

Justice Davis, and

Justice Scoggins

Appeal abated

Order issued and filed December 2 7 , 2017
#### § 200.469 Student activity costs.

Costs incurred for intramural activities, student publications, student clubs, and other student activities, are unallowable, unless specifically provided for in the Federal award.
H. Res. 1 

In the House of Representatives, U. S., 

January 3, 2017. 

Resolved, That Karen L. Haas of the State of Maryland, 

be, and is hereby, chosen Clerk of the House of Representatives. 

Resolved, That Paul D. Irving of the State of Florida be, 

and is hereby, chosen Sergeant-at-Arms of the House of Representatives. 

Resolved, That Philip George Kiko of the State of Ohio 

be, and is hereby, chosen Chief Administrative Officer of the 

House of Representatives. 

Resolved, That Father Patrick J. Conroy of the State of 

Oregon be, and is hereby, chosen Chaplain of the House of 

Representatives. 

Attest: 

Clerk.
| (logo) PNC

REAL ESTATE | MIDLAND LOAN SERVICES |
|-------------------------|-----------------------|

 

 

ANNUAL STATEMENT OF COMPLIANCE 

 

of 

 

PNC BANK, NATIONAL ASSOCIATION 

 

d/b/a MIDLAND LOAN SERVICES 

 

Pursuant to the requirem ents of the applicable Servicing Agreement for the transactions listed on Schedule I hereto, the undersig n ed, Steven W. Smith, as Executive Vice P resident of Midland Loan Services, a division of PNC B ank, N ational Association, hereby certifies, subject to any limitations listed on Schedule I h e r eto, as of the d ate here o f, sole ly in his capacity as an offic er and not in his individual capa cit y, as follows: 

 

1.   A review of the Servicer’s activities during the calendar y ear 2014 (the “Reporting Period”) and of its performance under the A g reement has been made under the undersig n ed officer’s supervision; and 

2.   To the best of the undersigned offic er’s know l e d g e, based on such r eview, the Servicer has fulfilled all of its obligations under the A g r eement in all material respects throughout the Reporting Period.

 

 

Dated: Mar ch 1, 2015 

 

PNC B ank, National Association 

d/b/a Midland Loan Services

 

/s/ Steven W. Smith 

St e ven W. Smith 

E x ecu tive Vice P resident 

 

 

Member of The PNC Financial Services Group

10851 Mastin Boulevard  Overland Park, Kansas 66210

800-327-8083

www.pnc.com/midland

**RBS Commercial Funding, Inc.**
| Recip i ent R o le | Deal Name                                   | Series N umb er         | Midland Role |
|--------------------|---------------------------------------------|-------------------------|--------------|
| Depositor          | W F ‐ R B S Commercial Mortgage Trust | Series 2013 ‐ C11 | Special      |
EXHIBIT 32.1: CERTIFICATION OF PRINCIPAL EXECUTIVE OFFICER AND PRINCIPAL
FINANCIAL OFFICER PURSUANT TO 18 U.S.C. 1350, as adopted pursuant to Section 906
of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002.

            In connection with the accompanying Annual Report on Form 10-KSB of
Embryo Development Corporation for the year ended April 30, 2006, the
undersigned hereby certifies pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, as adopted
pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, to the best of my
knowledge and belief, that:

            (1)   such Annual Report on Form 10-QSB for the year ended April 30,
                  2006 fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) or
                  15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934; and

            (2)   the information contained in such Annual Report on Form 10-QSB
                  for the year ended April 30, 2006 fairly presents, in all
                  material respects, the financial condition and results of
                  operations of Nesco Industries, Inc.


August 3, 2006                     /s/ Matthew Harriton
                                   --------------------
                                   Name: Matthew Harriton
                                   Title: Chief Executive Officer
                                   (principal executive officer
                                   and principal financial officer)
Editorial Note on Part 112
Editorial Note: Nomenclature changes to part 112 appear at 81 FR 49896, July 29, 2016.

§ 112.210 What is the timeframe for issuing a decision on an appeal? ( a ) If the owner, operator, or agent in charge of a farm appeals the order without requesting a hearing, the presiding officer must issue a written report that includes a final decision confirming or revoking the withdrawal by the 10th calendar day after the appeal is filed.
( b ) If the owner, operator, or agent in charge of a farm appeals the order and requests an informal hearing: ( 1 ) If FDA grants the request for a hearing and the hearing is held, the presiding officer must provide a 2 calendar day opportunity for the hearing participants to review and submit comments on the report of the hearing under § 112.208(c)(4), and must issue a final decision within 10 calendar days after the hearing is held; or
( 2 ) If FDA denies the request for a hearing, the presiding officer must issue a final decision on the appeal confirming or revoking the withdrawal within 10 calendar days after the date the appeal is filed.