alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
NO. 07-11-0138-CV IN THE COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE SEVENTH DISTRICT OF TEXAS AT AMARILLO PANEL D APRIL 18, 2011

__________________ ____________
In re LUIS S. LAGAITE JR., Relator

__________________ ____________ Original Proceeding for Writ of Mandamus

__________________ ____________ Before QUINN, C.J., and CAMPBELL and PIRTLE, JJ.
Pending before the tr ial court is the petiti on for writ of mandamus filed by Luis S. Lagaite, Jr. He asks us to order the Honorable Ana Estevez, Judge, 251 st District Court, Potter County, to convene trial and enter a judgment in cause number 97,061-C pending in said court. Attached to the petition was an “Order Denying Plaintiff’s Motion for Hearing and Motion for Trial” signed by t he trial court on March 9, 2011. In it, the trial court observed that “...none of the defendants have been served in this case, and none have appeared.” Moreover, Lagai te did not dispute this determination through the petition filed with us. Given this, we cannot grant him the relief sought for neither a trial can begin against defendants nor final judgment be entered against them if they have yet to be served with citation. It is a matter of due process.2 Accordingly, the petition fo r writ of mandamus is denied.
Per Curiam
SCPW-22-0000327

IN THE SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF HAWAI # I

S TEFANIE B. HILDRETH, Petitioner

vs. THE HONORABLE FREDERICK MATSON KELLEY, Judge of the Family Court of the Second Circuit,

State of Hawai # i, Respondent Judge.

ORIGINAL PROCEEDING (FC-M NO. 22-1-0058)

ORDER DENYING AMENDED PETITION FOR WRITS OF PROHIBITION AND MANDAMUS (By: Recktenwald, C.J., Nakayama, McKenna, Wilson, and Eddins, JJ.)

Upon consideration of petitioner Stefanie B. Hildreth’s amended petition for writs of prohibition and mandamus, filed on May 17, 2022, the documents attached and submitted in support, and the record, petitioner fails to demonstrate she has a clear and indisputable right to relief or that she lacks alternative means to seek relief. It also cannot be said that the respondent judge exceeded his jurisdiction, committed a flagrant and manifest abuse of discretion, or refused to act on a matter properly before the court under circumstances in which the judge Electronically Filed Supreme Court SCPW-22-0000327 25-MAY-2022 02:36 PM Dkt. 30 ODDPhas a legal duty to act. Petitioner is thus not entitled to the

requested extraordinary writs. See Kema v. Gaddis, 91 Hawai # i 200, 204, 982 P.2d 334, 338 (1999) (explaining that a writ of mandamus is an extraordinary remedy that will not issue unless the petitioner demonstrates a clear and indisputable right to relief and a lack of alternative means to redress adequately the alleged wrong or obtain the requested action; such a writ is meant to restrain a judge who has exceeded the judge’s jurisdiction, has committed a flagrant and manifest abuse of discretion, or has refused to act on a subject properly before the court under circumstances in which the judge has a legal duty to act); Honolulu Advertiser, Inc. v. Takao, 59 Haw. 237, 241, 580 P.2d 58, 62 (1978) (a writ of prohibition “is an extraordinary remedy . . . to restrain a judge of an inferior court from acting beyond or in excess of his jurisdiction”). Accordingly,

It is ordered that the amended petition for writs of prohibition and mandamus is denied.

DATED: Honolulu, Hawai # i, May 25, 2022. /s/ Mark E. Recktenwald /s/ Paula A. Nakayama /s/ Sabrina S. McKenna /s/ Michael D. Wilson /s/ Todd W. Eddins

2
#### § 1.145-0 Table of contents.

This section lists the captioned paragraphs contained in §§ 1.145-1 and 1.145-2.

## § 1.145-1 Qualified 501(c)(3) bonds.

(a) Overview.

(b) Scope.

(c) Effective dates.

## § 1.145-2 Application of private activity bond regulations.

(a) In general.

(b) Modification of private business tests.

(c) Exceptions.

(1) Certain provisions relating to governmental programs.

(2) Costs of issuance.

(d) Issuance costs financed by prior issue.

[T.D. 8712, 62 FR 2303, Jan. 16, 1997, as amended by T.D. 9234, 70 FR 75035, Dec. 19, 2005]
Exhibit 35.6



|     |  |                                                                                                              |  | 
|---- |  | ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------ |  | 
|LOGO |  | Commercial Mortgage Servicing D1050-084, 8th Floor 401 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 August 1, 2015, by and among CITIGROUP COMMERCIAL
MORTGAGE SECURITIES INC, as Depositor, WELLS FARGO BANK, NATIONAL ASSOCIATION, as Master Servicer, LNR PARTNERS, LLC, as Special Servicer, PARK BRIDGE LENDER SERVICES LLC, as Operating Advisor, CITIBANK, N.A., as Certificate Administrator and
DEUTSCHE BANK TRUST COMPANY AMERICAS, as Trustee , and WELLS FARGO BANK, NATIONAL ASSOCIATION as Custodian with respect to Commercial Mortgage Pass-Through Certificates, Series 2015-P1 (the
Agreement). Capitalized terms used herein not otherwise defined shall have the meanings assigned in the Agreement.

Pursuant
to Section 10.08 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, 2016 through December 31, 2016 (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 28th day of
February 2017.



|                        
|------------------------
|LOGO                    
|Daniel Bober            
|Executive Vice President
|Wells Fargo Bank        



|                       |  |  |  |     
|---------------------- |  |  |  | ----
|Wells Fargo Bank, N.A. |  |  |  | LOGO
Editorial Note on Part 886
Editorial Note: Nomenclature changes to part 886 appear at 73 FR 35341, June 23, 2008.

§ 886.5850 Sunglasses (nonprescription). ( a ) *Identification.* Sunglasses (nonprescription) are devices that consist of spectacle frames or clips with absorbing, reflective, tinted, polarizing, or photosensitized lenses intended to be worn by a person to protect the eyes from bright sunlight but not to provide refractive corrections. This device is usually available over-the-counter.
( 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 § 886.9.
[52 FR 33355, Sept. 2, 1987, as amended at 65 FR 2321, 2000]
**Exhibit 31.2**

 

I, DaleH. Johnson, certify that:

 

1.               I havereviewed this Form 10-QSB of Angeion Corporation;

 

2.               Based on my knowledge, this report does notcontain any untrue statement of a material fact or omit to state a materialfact necessary to make the statements made, in light of the circumstances underwhich such statements were made, not misleading with respect to the periodcovered by this report;

 

3.               Based on my knowledge, the financialstatements, and other financial information included in this report, fairlypresent in all material respects the financial condition, results of operationsand cash flows of the registrant as of, and for, the periods presented in thisreport;

 

4.               The registrant’s other certifying officer(s)and I are responsible for establishing and maintaining disclosure controls andprocedures (as defined in Exchange Act Rules 13a-15(e) and 15d-15(e)) for theregistrant and have:

 

(a)          Designedsuch disclosure controls and procedures, or caused such disclosure controls andprocedures to be designed under our supervision, to ensure that materialinformation relating to the registrant, including its consolidatedsubsidiaries, is made known to us by others within those entities, particularlyduring the period in which this report is being prepared;

 

(b)         Evaluatedthe effectiveness of the registrant’s disclosure controls and procedures andpresented in this report our conclusions about the effectiveness of thedisclosure controls and procedures, as of the end of the period covered by thisreport based on such evaluation; and

 

(c)          Disclosed inthis report any change in the registrant’s internal control over financialreporting that occurred during the registrant’s most recent fiscal quarter (theregistrant’s fourth fiscal quarter in the case of an annual report) that hasmaterially affected, or is reasonably likely to materially affect, theregistrant’s internal control over financial reporting; and

 

5.               The registrant’s other certifying officer(s)and I have disclosed, based on our most recent evaluation of internal controlover financial reporting, to the registrant’s auditors and the audit committeeof the registrant’s board of directors (or persons performing the equivalentfunctions):

 

(a)          Allsignificant deficiencies and material weaknesses in the design or operation ofinternal control over financial reporting which are reasonably likely toadversely affect the registrant’s ability to record, process, summarize andreport financial information; and

 

(b)         Any fraud,whether or not material, that involves management or other employees who have asignificant role in the registrant’s internal control over financial reporting.

 
| Date:  | September  12, 2003 |                     |   | /s/ Dale H.  Johnson |   |
|--------|---------------------|--------------------------|--------|----------------------|--------|
|   |                | Dale H.  Johnson         |
|   |                | Chief  Financial Officer |

 

1

----
§ 876.5310 Nonimplanted, peripheral electrical continence device. ( a ) *Identification.* A nonimplanted, peripheral electrical continence device is a device that consists of an electrode that is connected by an electrical cable to a battery-powered pulse source. The electrode is placed onto or inserted into the body at a peripheral location and used to stimulate the nerves associated with pelvic floor function to maintain urinary continence. When necessary, the electrode may be removed by the user.
( b ) *Classification.* Class II, subject to the following special controls: ( 1 ) That sale, distribution, and use of this device are restricted to prescription use in accordance with § 801.109 of this chapter.
( 2 ) That the labeling must bear all information required for the safe and effective use of the device as outlined in § 801.109(c) of this chapter, including a detailed summary of the clinical information upon which the instructions are based.
[65 FR 18237, Apr. 7, 2000]
427 A.2d 1223

#### Commonwealth v. Brandon, Appellant.

Submitted June 29, 1979.

Joseph W. Mullin, Public Defender, for appellant;

Stewart L. Kurtz, District Attorney, for Commonwealth, appellee.

*629Before CERCONE, P. J., and WIEAND and LOUIK, JJ.*

*

 Judge Donald E. Wieand is sitting by special designation. Judge Maurice Louik, of the Court of Common Pleas of Allegheny County, Pennsylvania, is sitting by designation.

Judgments of sentence affirmed.
# C_2015398EN.01004501.xml

| 30.11.2015 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 398/45 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

30.11.2015

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 398/45

---

Judgment of the General Court of 13 October 2015 — Teughels v Commission

(Case T-131/14 P) (1)

1

((Appeal - Cross-appeal - Civil service - Officials - Pensions - Transfer of national pension rights - Proposal to add years of pensionable service - Act not having an adverse effect - Inadmissibility of the action at first instance - Article 11(2) of Annex VIII to the Staff Regulations))

(2015/C 398/56)

Language of the case: French

Parties

Parties

Appellant: Catherine Teughels (Eppegem, Belgium) (represented by: L. Vogel and B. Braun, lawyers)

Appellant:

Other party to the proceedings: European Commission (represented by: J. Currall and G. Gattinara, Agents)

Other party to the proceedings:

Re:

Re:

Appeal brought against the judgment of the Civil Service Tribunal of the European Union (Full Court) in Teughels v Commission (F-117/11, ECR-SC, EU:F:2013:196), seeking to have that judgment set aside.

Teughels

Commission

Operative part of the judgment

Operative part of the judgment

The Court:

| 1. | Sets aside the judgment of the Civil Service Tribunal of the European Union (First Chamber) of 11 December 2013 in Teughels v Commission (F-117/11). |
| --- | --- |

1.

Sets aside the judgment of the Civil Service Tribunal of the European Union (First Chamber) of 11 December 2013 in Teughels v Commission (F-117/11).

| 2. | Dismisses the action brought by Catherine Teughels before the Civil Service Tribunal in Case F-117/11. |
| --- | --- |

2.

Dismisses the action brought by Catherine Teughels before the Civil Service Tribunal in Case F-117/11.

| 3. | Orders Ms Teughels to bear her own costs on appeal and to pay those incurred by the European Commission on appeal, and orders the Commission to bear its own costs associated with the cross-appeal. |
| --- | --- |

3.

Orders Ms Teughels to bear her own costs on appeal and to pay those incurred by the European Commission on appeal, and orders the Commission to bear its own costs associated with the cross-appeal.

| 4. | Orders Ms Teughels and the Commission each to bear their own costs at first instance. |
| --- | --- |

4.

Orders Ms Teughels and the Commission each to bear their own costs at first instance.

---

(1)  OJ C 159, 26.5.2014.

1

---
Document Headings

                    Document headings vary by document type but may contain                    the following:                  
                -                       the agency or agencies that issued and signed a document                    
                -                       the number of the CFR title and the number of each part                      the document amends, proposes to amend, or is directly                      related to                    
                -                       the agency docket number / agency internal file number                    
                -                       the RIN which identifies each regulatory action listed in                      the Unified Agenda of Federal Regulatory and Deregulatory                      Actions                    

                    See the                                          Document Drafting Handbook                                        for more details.                  

###### Department of Labor

###### Employment and Training Administration

          - [TA-W-71,620]

Pursuant to Section 223 of the Trade Act of 1974, as amended, an investigation was initiated on July 9, 2009 in response to a worker petition filed by the Minnesota State Workforce Office on behalf of workers of Circuit City, Coon Rapids, Minnesota.

The petitioner requested that this petition be withdrawn. Consequently, further investigation in this case would serve no purpose, and the investigation under this petition has been terminated.

Signed at Washington, DC, this 14th day of July 2009.

Richard Church,

Certifying Officer, Division of Trade Adjustment Assistance.

[FR Doc. E9-18062 Filed 7-28-09; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 4510-FN-P
**Exhibit
      32.01**








**CERTIFICATION
      OF CHIEF EXECUTIVE OFFICER**


**REQUIRED
      BY RULE 13a-14(b) or RULE 15d-14(b)**


**AND
      SECTION 906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT**


**OF
      2002, 18 U.S.C. SECTION 1350**








In
      connection with the Quarterly Report of Williams Controls, Inc (the "Company")
      on Form 10-Q for the period ended December
      31, 2006 as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof
      (the "Report"), I, Patrick W. Cavanagh, Chief Executive Officer of the Company,
      certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. ss. 1350, as adopted pursuant to ss. 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 result of operations of the Company.

















/s/
      PATRICK W. CAVANAGH


Patrick
      W. Cavanagh


Chief
      Executive Officer


Williams
      Controls, Inc.


February
      9 ,
      2007
[Federal Register Volume 74, Number 144 (Wednesday, July 29, 2009)]
[Notices]
[Page 37717]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: E9-18023]


-----------------------------------------------------------------------

DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES

National Institutes of Health


Center for Scientific Review; Amended Notice of Meeting

    Notice is hereby given of a change in the meeting of the Center for 
Scientific Review Special Emphasis Panel, July 27, 2009, 9 a.m. to July 
28, 2009, 6 p.m., National Institutes of Health, 6701 Rockledge Drive, 
Bethesda, MD 20892 which was published in the Federal Register on July 
1, 2009, 74 FR 31453-31454.
    The meeting will be held August 3, 2009 to August 4, 2009. The 
meeting time and location remain the same. The meeting is closed to the 
public.

    Dated: July 23, 2009.
Jennifer Spaeth,
Director, Office of Federal Advisory Committee Policy.
[FR Doc. E9-18023 Filed 7-28-09; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4140-01-P
Webinar Attendees: Energy Conservation Standards Rulemaking Framework Document for Residential Dehumidifiers Meeting

Meeting Date: Monday, September 24, 2012

Name Title Organization Street City State Zip Phone Fax 

Comstock, Owen Residential Analyst U.S. Energy Information Administration 1000 Independence Ave 

SW

Washington DC 20585 N/A N/A 

Dougherty, Brian P Mechanical Engineer

Building and Fire Research Laboratory

United States Department of CommerceNational Institute of Standards and Technology(NIST)

100 Bureau Drive, Stop 8632Bldg. 226, Room B-309

Gaithersburg MD 20899-8632 301-975-6396 301-975-5433 

Kar, Raul Consultant Navigant Consulting, Inc. 77 S Bedford Street Burlington MA 02476 N/A N/A Kim, David Energy Program 

Specialist

LG Electronics USA 1000 Sylvan Avenue Englewood 

Cliffs

NJ 07632 201-408-9105 N/A 

Kwatra, Sameer Senior Analyst ACEEE 529 14th St NW Washington DC 20045 N/A N/A Mortazavi, Renata Senior Standards 

Engineer

Natural Resources Canada 580 Booth Street Ottawa ON K1A 0E4 N/A N/A 

Stephens, Charlie Senior Energy Codes & 

Standards Engineer

Northwest Energy Efficiency Alliance (NEEA) 421 SW Sixth Avenue, 

Suite 600

Portland OR 97204 503-688-5457 503-688-5447 

Strait, Peter Associate Energy 

Specialist

California Energy Commission (CEC) 1516 9th Street Sacramento CA 95814 916-651-9375 916-654-4304 

Sutherland, Timothy

Managing Consultant Navigant Consulting Inc. 77 South Bedford St, Suite 

400

Burlington MA 01803 781-270-0101 781-270-0418 

Tremel, Curt Director of Performance 

Lab

UL - Springboard Engineering 3020 1st Avenue E. Newton IA 50208 641-787-8812 N/A 

Williams, Yoolanda Program Manager - 

Regulatory and Compliance

General Electric AP2-126, Appliance Park Louisville KY 40225 N/A N/A 

Wilson, Linda Environmental Scientist New York State Office of the Attorney General 120 Broadway New York NY 10271 212-416-8948 212-416-6007 Woodford, Michael Vice President, 

Standards

Air-Conditioning, Heating & Refrigeration Institute (AHRI)

2111 Wilson Boulevard,Suite 500

Arlington VA 22201 703-600-0328 703-528-3816 

Young, Daniel Project Manager Energy Solutions 1610 Harrison Street Oakland CA 94612 510-482-4420 

x 246

510-482-4421
#### J. F. MORENO v. THE UNITED STATES

[No. 43977.

Decided January 9, 1939]

*Mr. J. F. Moreno per se.*

*Mr. Carl*Eardley, with whom was *Mr. Assistant Attorney General Sam E. Whitaker,*for the defendant.

*271MEMORANDUM

The defense interposed to the allowance of the claim herein, as stated in defendant’s brief, is “Did the act of 1928, amending 28 U. S. C. 598, impliedly repeal the clause in 28 U. S. C. 597, requiring a Court Commissioner to secure Court approval of additional per diems?” The court is of the opinion that it did, and that the decision of this court in *Moreno*v. *United*States, 70 C. Cls. 758, so decided.

The regulations of the Attorney General appearing in Finding 5, so far as they exact the approval of the court of per diem fees here involved, contravene the amendatory act of May 29, 1928 (45 Stat. 998), and an exaction of this nature is void and of no effect.
#### State of Connecticut *v.*Anthony Komninos

Argued May 7

decided May 7, 1968

*Donald A. Browne,*assistant state’s attorney, for the appellee (state).

The motion by the state to dismiss the appeal from the Superior Court in Fairfield County is granted.
|   |  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 operation of the Company. |
|--------|----------|--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|

| Date:  |  August 16, 2010 |   | By:    |  /s/ Julie Smolyansky                                               |   |
|--------|-----------------------|--------|--------|--------------------------------------------------------------------------|--------|
|   |                  |   |   | Julie SmolyankyChief Executive Officer, President and Director |   |
#### § 1.1293-0 Table of contents.

This section contains a listing of the headings for § 1.1293-1.

## § 1.1293-1 Current inclusion of income of qualified electing funds.

(a) In general. [Reserved]

(1) Other rules. [Reserved]

(2) Net capital gain defined.

(i) In general.

(ii) Effective date.

(b) Other rules. [Reserved]

(c) Application of rules of inclusion with respect to stock held by a pass through entity.

(1) In general.

(2) QEF stock transferred to a pass through entity.

(i) Pass through entity makes a section 1295 election.

(ii) Pass through entity does not make a section 1295 election.

(3) Effective date.

[T.D. 8750, 63 FR 13, Jan. 2, 1998, as amended by T.D. 8870, 65 FR 16319, Mar. 28, 2000]
#### Lillian Van DeVere *v.*The Hartford Courant Company

Argued June 4

decided June 4, 1968

*Philip 8. Walker,*for the appellee (defendant).

*Nicholas P. Cardwell,*for the appellant (plaintiff).

The motion by the defendant to dismiss the appeal from the Superior Court in Hartford County is granted.
Editorial Note on Part 868
Editorial Note: Nomenclature changes to part 868 appear at 73 FR 35341, June 23, 2008.

§ 868.2610 Gas pressure gauge. ( a ) *Identification.* A gas pressure gauge (e.g., bourdon tube pressure gauge) is a device intended for medical purposes that is used to measure gas pressure in a medical gas delivery system.
( 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 1119, Jan. 16, 1996; 66 FR 38794, July 25, 2001]