alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
Editorial Note on Part 866
Editorial Note: Nomenclature changes to part 866 appear at 73 FR 35341, June 23, 2008.

§ 866.1700 Culture medium for antimicrobial susceptibility tests. ( a ) *Identification.* A culture medium for antimicrobial susceptibility tests is a device intended for medical purposes that consists of any medium capable of supporting the growth of many of the bacterial pathogens that are subject to antimicrobial susceptibility tests. The medium should be free of components known to be antagonistic to the common agents for which susceptibility tests are performed in the treatment of disease.
( b ) *Classification.* Class II (performance standards).
§ 820.25 Personnel. ( a ) *General.* Each manufacturer shall have sufficient personnel with the necessary education, background, training, and experience to assure that all activities required by this part are correctly performed.
( b ) *Training.* Each manufacturer shall establish procedures for identifying training needs and ensure that all personnel are trained to adequately perform their assigned responsibilities. Training shall be documented. ( 1 ) As part of their training, personnel shall be made aware of device defects which may occur from the improper performance of their specific jobs.
( 2 ) Personnel who perform verification and validation activities shall be made aware of defects and errors that may be encountered as part of their job functions.
(logo) CURCIO

+COHEN

  

CERTIFIED PUBLIC ACCOUNTANTS PC 7 PENN PLAZA, SUITE 1500, NEW YORK NY 10001

TEL:212 557-9800 · FAX: 212 557-9819 · website: www.cwccpsfirm.com 

 

 

Report of Independent Registered Public Accounting Firm

  

Managing Member

Park Bridge Lender Services LLC

Montclair, NJ

  

We have examined management’s assertion, included in the accompanying Management’s Report on Assessment of 2015 Compliance by Park Bridge Lender Services LLC with Regulation AB Servicing Criteria (“Management’s Report”), that Park Bridge Lender Services LLC (the “Company”) complied with the servicing criteria set forth in Item 1122(d) of the U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission’s Regulation AB as of and for the year ended December 31, 2015, excluding those criteria noted as not applicable (N/A) within Exhibit B to Management’s Report. The transactions covered by this report are only those transactions processed by the Company in its capacity as trust advisor or operating advisor for the asset backed securities transactions (the “Platform”) identified in Management’s Report. Reference Exhibit A to Management’s Report for the transactions covered by this examination. Management is responsible for the Company’s compliance with the applicable servicing criteria. Our responsibility is to express an opinion on management’s assertion based on our examination.

 

Our examination was conducted in accordance with attestation standards of the Public Company Accounting Oversight Board (United States) and, accordingly, including examining, on a test basis, evidence about the Company’s compliance with the applicable servicing criteria and performing such other procedures as we considered necessary in the circumstances. Our examination included testing of a selected sample of the servicing activities related to the Platform, determining whether the Company performed those selected activities in compliance with the applicable servicing criteria during the specified period. Our procedures were limited to the selected transactions and servicing activities performed by the Company during the period covered by this report. Our examination was not designed to detect material noncompliance arising from errors that may have occurred prior to or subsequent to our tests, that may have affected the Company’s servicing activities during the period covered by this report. 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 applicable servicing criteria.

 

In our opinion, management’s assertion that the Company complied with the aforementioned applicable servicing criteria identified in Exhibit B to Management’s Report with respect to the transactions identified in Exhibit A to Management’s Report as of and for the year ended December 31, 2015, for the Platform, is fairly stated in all material aspects.

 

 /s/ Curcio & Cohen, CPA’S, P.C.

Curcio & Cohen, CPA’S, P.C.

New York, NY 

February 15, 2016

 

 

MEMBER OF THE AMERICAN INSTITUTE OF CERTIFIED PUBLIC ACCOUNTANTS
# C_2015381EN.01006301.xml

| 16.11.2015 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 381/63 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

16.11.2015

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 381/63

---

Judgment of the Civil Service Tribunal (Second Chamber) of 8 October 2015 — FT v ESMA

(Case F-39/14) (1)

1

((Civil service - Member of the temporary staff - Accounting Officer - Non-renewal of a fixed term contract - Competent authority - Manifest error of assessment - Burden of proof - Rule of correspondence between the application and the complaint))

(2015/C 381/88)

Language of the case: English

Parties

Parties

Applicant: FT (represented by: S. Pappas, lawyer)

Applicant:

Defendant: European Securities and Markets Authority (initially represented by R. Vasileva Hoff, acting as Agent, assisted by D. Waelbroeck and A. Duron, lawyers, and subsequently by R. Vasileva Hoff and A. Lorenzet, acting as Agents, assisted by D. Waelbroeck and A. Duron, lawyers)

Defendant:

Re:

Re:

Application for annulment of the decision not to renew the applicant’s contract and for the award of damages in respect of the material loss allegedly suffered.

Operative part of the judgment

Operative part of the judgment

The Tribunal:

| 1. | Dismisses the action; |
| --- | --- |

1.

Dismisses the action;

| 2. | Declares that FT shall bear her own costs and orders her to pay the costs incurred by the European Securities and Markets Authority. |
| --- | --- |

2.

Declares that FT shall bear her own costs and orders her to pay the costs incurred by the European Securities and Markets Authority.

---

(1)  OJ C 421, 24.11.2014, p. 58.

1

---
UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 03-1327

MICHAEL A. SCOTT; TERRY SCOTT, Plaintiffs - Appellants, versus WELLS FARGO & COMPANY; WELLS FARGO HOME MORTGAGE, INCORPORATED; GENERAL ELECTRIC COMPANY; GE CAPITAL MORTGAGE SERVICES, INCORPORATED, Defendants - Appellees. Appeal from the United States Dist rict Court for the Eastern District of Virginia, at Norfolk. Raymond A. Jackson, District Judge. (CA-02-789-2) Submitted: May 8, 2003 Decided: June 27, 2003 Before WIDENER, NIEMEYER, and MICHAEL, Circuit Judges. Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion. Michael A. Scott, Terry Scott, Appellants Pro Se. Stanley Graves Barr, Jr., KAUFMAN & CANOLES, Norfolk, Virginia, for Appellees. Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. See Local Rule 36(c).2 PER CURIAM: Michael and Terry Scott appeal the district court’s judgment granting partial summary judgment to the Appellees and dismissing their complaint. We have reviewed the record and find no reversible error. Accordingly, we affirm in part for the reasons stated by the district court. SeeScott v. Wells Fargo & Co. , No. 02-789-2 (E.D. Va., filed Jan. 14, 2003, entered Jan. 15, 2003). Although the Scotts may have been entitled to amend the complaint as of right, see Fed. R. Civ. P. 15(a), we have reviewed the additional claims raised in the proposed amended complaint and find the amendment futile. We also deny the Scotts’ motions for summary reversal and an injunction. We dispense with oral argument because the facts and legal contentions are adequately presented in the materials before the court and argument would not aid the decisional process.

AFFIRMED
FROM:                                        FOR:
Swenson/Falker Associates Inc.               CNS, Inc.
1111 TCF Tower, 121 S. 8th Street            1250 Park Rd.
Minneapolis, Minn. 55402                     Chanhassen, Minn. 55417
Contact - Curt Swenson 612/371-0000          Contact - Richard E. Jahnke or
                                                       Daniel E. Cohen
                                                       612/474-7600

FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE

CNS, INC., SAYS FDA HAS CLEARED BREATHE RIGHT(R)
NASAL STRIP FOR MARKETING AS SNORING REMEDY

     MINNEAPOLIS, Nov. 8 -- CNS, Inc. (NASDAQ/NM:CNXS) announced today that the
U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA) has cleared thed company's Breathe
Right(R) nasal strip for marketing with a new indication for use of the strip
for the reduction or elimination of snoring.

     "We have believed for some time that snorers represented on of the largest
markets for the Breathe Right strip, and this clearance will enable us to 
address them directly in our advertising," said Daniel E. Cohen, M.D., CNS
chairman and chief executive officer. "We believe this is the only over-the-
counter product in wide retail distribution that has been cleared by the FDA
for marketing as a snoring treatment."

     Under the product's original FDA marketing clearance, received in late
1993, the company was able to claim only that the product improved nasal
breathing by reducing nasal airway resistance, and could not directly claim a
benefit to snorers.

     Recent clinical studies showed that 75 percent of participants snored less
often and less loudly when wearing the Breathe Right strip.

     Cohen said 80 percent of U.S. households contain at least one snorer and
there are approximately 40 million chronic snorers in the U.S.  Many people, 
unable to get enough air through their noses, open their mouths to breathe,
which promotes snoring. Breathe Right strips decrease nasal airway resistance by
31 percent, making nasal breathing easier so the mouth can be closed and 
snoring can be reduced or eliminated.

     CNS, based in Minneapolis, designs, manuafactures and markets consumer
products, including the Breathe Right nasal strip.

                                     # # #

11/08/95
Editorial Note on Part 870
Editorial Note: Nomenclature changes to part 870 appear at 73 FR 35341, June 23, 2008.

§ 870.4310 Cardiopulmonary bypass coronary pressure gauge. ( a ) *Identification.* A cardiopulmonary bypass coronary pressure gauge is a device used in cardiopulmonary bypass surgery to measure the pressure of the blood perfusing the coronary arteries.
( b ) *Classification.* Class II (performance standards).
Editorial Note on Part 868
Editorial Note: Nomenclature changes to part 868 appear at 73 FR 35341, June 23, 2008.

§ 868.2900 Gas pressure transducer. ( a ) *Identification.* A gas pressure transducer is a device intended for medical purposes that is used to convert gas pressure into an electrical signal for subsequent display or processing.
( b ) *Classification.* Class I. The device is exempt from the premarket notification procedures in subpart E of part 807 of this chapter.
[47 FR 31142, July 16, 1982, as amended at 61 FR 1120, Jan. 16, 1996]
#### State of Connecticut *v.*Albert Criscuolo et al.

*Howard A. Jacobs,*in support of the petition.

*Joseph D. Harbaugh,*special assistant chief prosecuting attorney, in opposition.

Submitted November 12

decided November 20, 1968

The petition by the defendants for certification for appeal from the Appellate Division of the Circuit Court is granted limited to the questions raised in article III of the defendants’ petition for certification.
EXHIBIT 32.2

                            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 CEC  Entertainment,  Inc. (the
"Company")  on Form 10-Q for the quarter ended October 2, 2005 as filed with the
Securities  and  Exchange  Commission  on the date  hereof (the  "Report"),  the
undersigned  certifies,  pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, as adopted pursuant
to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that:


     (1)  The Report 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 the  Report  fairly  presents,  in all
          material respects,  the financial  condition and results of operations
          of the Company.



                                            /s/ Christopher D. Morris
                                            ------------------------------
                                            Christopher D. Morris
                                            Chief Financial Officer
                                            November 14, 2005



A signed  original of this  written  statement  required by Section 906 has been
provided to CEC  Entertainment,  Inc. and will be retained by CEC Entertainment,
Inc. and furnished to the Securities  and Exchange  Commission or its staff upon
request.
Editorial Note on Part 872
Editorial Note: Nomenclature changes to part 872 appear at 73 FR 35341, June 23, 2008.

§ 872.5500 Extraoral orthodontic headgear. ( a ) *Identification.* An extraoral orthodontic headgear is a device intended for use with an orthodontic appliance to exert pressure on the teeth from outside the mouth. The headgear has a strap intended to wrap around the patient's neck or head and an inner bow portion intended to be fastened to the orthodontic appliance in the patient's mouth.
( b ) *Classification.* Class II.
July 22, 2014

JUDGMENT

The Fourteenth Court of Appeals

GARY BERNARD ALLEN, Appellant

NO. 14-12-01086-CR V.

THE STATE OF TEXAS, Appellee

________________________________

This cause was heard on the transcript of the record of the court below. 

Having considered the record, this Court holds that there was no error in the 

judgment. The Court orders the judgment AFFIRMED.

We further order this decision certified below for observance.
#### Brown et al. *v.*Armfield et al.

[No. 19,282.

Filed June 21, 1900.]

Appeal and *Error.*— Record.—Precipe.—Bill *of Exceptions.*— Cer*tificate.*— Where the clerk was directed by precipe to prepare a transcript of the proceedings and of certain papers and motions to be used on appeal to the Supreme Court, without direction to certify any bill of exceptions, a bill of exceptions containing the evidence embraced in the transcript is not properly a part thereof, and is not identified or covered by the clerk’s certificate authenticating the papers named in the precipe.

From tbe Headricks Circuit Court.

*Affirmed.*

*Thomas J. Cofer*and *L. A. Barnett,*for appellauts.

*T. S. Adams*and *S. A. Enlow,*for appellees.

*151Monks, J.

— The only error assigned and not waived is that the court erred in overruling appellants’ motion for a new trial. All the causes assigned for a new trial depend for their determination upon the evidence.

Appellants (under §661 Burns 1894, §649 R. S. 1881 and Horner 1897) directed the clerk “to prepare and certify full, true, and complete transcript of the proceedings, and of the following papers, to wit, original complaint, third paragraph of complaint as amended, motion to make third paragraph of complaint more specific, demrirrers to each paragraph of complaint, answer and cross-complaint, decree and motion for a new trial of this cause, in this cause to be used on appeal to the Supreme Court.”

Only such papers and entries as are embraced in the precipe are properly a part of the record on appeal. *Allen*v. *Gavin,*130 Ind. 190; *Reid*v. *Houston,*49 Ind. 181. The certificate of the clerk to the transcript recites that the same “contains full, true, and complete copies of all the papers ordered transcribed, and entries in said cause.” It will be observed that the precipe contains no direction to the clerk to certify any bill of exceptions, and that the certificate of the clerk only authenticates the papers named in the precipe. It is evident, therefore, that what purports to be a bill of exceptions containing the evidence, embraced in the transcript, is not properly a part thereof and is not identified or covered by the clerk’s certificate, and cannot therefore be considered by us. *Allen*v. *Gavin, supra; Reid*v. *Houston, supra;*Ewbank’s Manual, §§10, 115.

Binding no available error in the record the judgment is affirmed.

Hadley, J., took no part in the decision of this cause.
WARNING: THE EDGAR SYSTEM ENCOUNTERED ERROR(S) WHILE PROCESSING THIS SCHEDULE.

<TABLE> <S> <C>


<ARTICLE>                     5

<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   6-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                              DEC-31-1999
<PERIOD-START>                                 APR-01-1999
<PERIOD-END>                                   JUN-30-1999
<CASH>                                             958,834
<SECURITIES>                                             0
<RECEIVABLES>                                       99,617
<ALLOWANCES>                                             0
<INVENTORY>                                              0
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                                 1,168,344
<PP&E>                                         <blank>
<DEPRECIATION>                                 <blank>
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                 <blank>
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                              116,013
<BONDS>                                                  0
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                    0
<PREFERRED>                                              0
<COMMON>                                            12,601
<OTHER-SE>                                       1,193,650
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                     1,373,018
<SALES>                                                  0
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                                   184,797
<CGS>                                                    0
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                      146,968
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                 6,297,001
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                         0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                                 222,070
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                 (6,481,242)
<INCOME-TAX>                                         1,160
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                             (6,482,402)
<DISCONTINUED>                                           0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                          0
<CHANGES>                                                0
<NET-INCOME>                                    (6,482,402)
<EPS-BASIC>                                          (0.64)
<EPS-DILUTED>                                        (0.64)



</TABLE>
Editorial Note on Part 868
Editorial Note: Nomenclature changes to part 868 appear at 73 FR 35341, June 23, 2008.

§ 868.6820 Patient position support. ( a ) *Identification.* A patient position support is a device intended to maintain the position of an anesthetized patient during surgery.
( b ) *Classification.* Class I (general controls). The device is exempt from the premarket notification procedures in subpart E of part 807 of this chapter subject to the limitations in § 868.9.
[47 FR 31142, July 16, 1982, as amended at 61 FR 1121, Jan. 16, 1996; 66 FR 38796, July 25, 2001]
Editorial Note on Part 870
Editorial Note: Nomenclature changes to part 870 appear at 73 FR 35341, June 23, 2008.

§ 870.2640 Portable leakage current alarm. ( a ) *Identification.* A portable leakage current alarm is a device used to measure the electrical leakage current between any two points of an electrical system and to sound an alarm if the current exceeds a certain threshold.
( b ) *Classification.* Class I (general controls). The device is exempt from the premarket notification procedures in subpart E of part 807 of this chapter subject to the limitations in § 870.9.
[45 FR 7907, Feb. 5, 1980, as amended at 61 FR 1121, Jan. 16, 1996; 66 FR 38796, July 25, 2001]
#### § 1301.29 [Reserved]
㪫㪪㪄㪟㪉㪇㪈㪧㪧 㩷㩷㩷㩷㩷㩷㩷㩷㩷㩷㩷㩷㩷㩷㩷㩷㩷㩷㩷㩷㩷㩷㩷㩷㩷㩷㩷㩷㩷㩷㩷㩷㩷㩷㩷㩷㪘㫋㫋㪸㪺㪿㫄㪼㫅㫋㩷㪉

㩷㩷㩷㩷㩷㩷㩷㩷㩷㩷㩷㩷㩷㩷㩷㩷㩷㩷㩷㩷㩷㩷㩷㩷㩷㩷㩷㩷㩷㩷㩷㩷㩷㩷㩷㩷㩷㩷㩷㩷㩷㩷㩷㩷㪧㪸㪾㪼㩷㪈㪆㪈

CBI

CBI

CBI
Exhibit 32.1
 CERTIFICATION PURSUANT TO RULE 13a-14(b) OF
THE SECURITIES EXCHANGE ACT OF 1934
  (1)
    
    the Report fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) 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.
 August 11, 2008
    By:
    /s/ Michael BrodskyMichael BrodskyChief Executive OfficerAugust 11, 2008
    By:
    /s/ James A. BurkJames A. BurkChief Financial Officer
_______________________________________ __ Michigan Supreme Court 

# Order

Lansing, Michigan

June 23, 2008 Clifford W. Taylor, Chief Justice
Michael F. Cavanagh Elizabeth A. Weaver 130599 Marilyn Kelly Maura D. Corrigan Robert P. Young, Jr. Stephen J. Markman, Justices PEOPLE OF THE STATE OF MICHIGAN, Plaintiff-Appellee,

v SC: 130599 COA: 266178 Kent CC: 02-005771-FH JESUS JUVENCIO QUINTANILLA, Defendant-Appellant.

________________ _______________ __________/

On order of the Court, the amended applic ation for leave to appeal the February 3, 2006 order of the Court of Appeals is cons idered, and it is DENIED, because we are not persuaded that the question presented s hould be reviewed by this Court.

K ELLY , J., would grant leave to appeal for the reasons set forth in her dissenting statement in People v Houlihan , 480 Mich 1165 (2008).

d0616 I, Corbin R. Davis, Clerk of the Mi chigan Supreme Cour t, certify that the foregoing is a true and complete copy of the order entered at the direction of the Court.

June 23, 2008

Clerk
Exhibit 32.1

# CERTIFICATION PURSUANT
TO

# 18 U.S.C.
SECTION 1350,

# AS ADOPTED PURSUANT TOSECTION 906
OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002

In
connection with the accompanying Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q of Penn Treaty
American Corporation (the Company) for the period ended June 30, 2004 as filed
with the Securities and Exchange Commission, I, William W. Hunt, President and Chief
Executive Officer of the Company, certify pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section §1350,
as adopted pursuant to §906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002 that to the best of my
knowledge:

|(1) | the Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q for the period ended June 30, 2004 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 the Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q for the
          period ended June 30, 2004 fairly presents, in all material respects, the
          Companys financial condition and results of operations.
|--- | -----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

|                       |  |                                      
|---------------------- |  | -------------------------------------
|Date:  August 13, 2004 |  | /s/ William W. Hunt                  
|                       |  | William W. Hunt                      
|                       |  | President and Chief Executive Officer