alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
1

Filed 10/23/20 P. v. Bennett CA3

NOT TO BE PUBLISHED

California Rules of Court, rule 8.1115(a), prohibits courts and parties from citing or relying on opinions not certified for publication or ordered published, except as specified by rule 8.1115(b). This opinion has not been certified for publication or ordered published for purposes of rule 8.1115.

IN THE COURT OF APPEAL OF THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA

THIRD APPELLATE DISTRICT

(Butte)

----

THE PEOPLE,

Plaintiff and Respondent,

v.

CHRISTIAN DAVID BENNETT,

Defendant and Appellant. C091136

(Super. Ct. No. 19CF03446)

Appointed counsel for defendant Christian David Bennett asked this court to

review the record and determine whether there are any arguable issues on appeal.

( People v. Wende (1979) 25 Ca l. 3d 436 ( Wende ).) Finding no arguable error that would

result in a disposition more favorable to defendant, w e will affirm the judgment.

I

Defendant was identified in a video showing him break into a car parked on the

victim’s driveway and attempt to use a garage door opener in the car to open the victim’s

garage. Defendant pleaded no contest to attempted residential burglary (Pen. Code,

§ § 664/459 ) 1 in exchange for dismissal of a prior prison term enhancement allegation

1 Undesignated statutory references are to the Penal Code.2

(§ 667 .5 , subd. (b)) , and the trial court denied d efendant ’s subsequent motion to withdraw

the plea

.

At a consolidated sentencing hearing, the trial court sentenced defendant to the

u pper term of three years for a second degree burglary conviction in a companion case

(case No. 18CF00660 ) , and eight months ( one

- third the middle term ) for the attempted

burglary offense in this case. The trial court applied all presentence credits to cas e

No. 18CF00660 and ordered defendant to pay various fines and fees. Defendant

requested, but did not obtain

, a certificate of probable cause.

II

Appointed counsel filed an opening brief setting forth the facts of the case and

asking this court to review the record and determine whether there are any arguable

issues on appeal. ( Wende, supra, 25 Cal.3d 436.) Defendant was advised by counsel of

the right to file a supplemental brief within 30 days of the date of filing the opening brief.

More than 30 day s elapsed and we received no communication from defendant.

Having undertaken an examination of the entire record, we find no arguable error

that would result in a disposition more favorable to defendant.

DISPOSITION

The judgment is affirmed.

/S/

MAURO, J.

We concur:

/S/

ROBIE, Acting P. J.

/S/

KRAUSE, J.
## MARYLAND DEPARTMENT OF THE ENVIRONMENT 1800 Washington Boulevard • Baltimore MD 

### 21230 

# MDE 410-537-3000 • 1-800-633-6101. www.mde.state.md.us

Mart:.in O'Malley Governor Robert M. Summers, Ph.D. Secretary Ant:.hony G. Brmvn Lieutenant Governor



### D 

### 2 

## ;ofl Linda C. Janey, J.D., Assistant Secretary Clearinghouse and Communications Maryland State Clearinghouse for Intergovenunental Assistance Maryland Office ofPlanning 301 West Preston Street Baltimore MD 21201
Dear Ms. Janey:
I am enclosing a copy ofthe introductory sections ofthe State ofMaryland Lead (Pb) Infrastructure State Implementation Plan (SIP). Section 11 O(a) ofthe federal Clean Air Act requires that each SIP provide for the implementation, maintenance, and enforcementofthe NAAQS. This section also requires that within three years ofthe promulgation ofa NAAQS, a state must adopt and submit such a plan to EPA. These "infrastructure SIPs"provide assurances ofstate resources and authorities, and where necessary establish the basic state programs, to implement, maintain, and enforce new orrevised standards. This document summarizes where the 

### § 11O(a) (2) requirements for the 2008 revised lead NAAQS are addressed in Maryland's current SIP orpending SIP revisions. This document may also be viewed at the website link below: http://www.mde.state.!TId.us/ProlZrams/AirPrograms/air planning/index.asp A public hearing on the redesignation request will be held on December 5, 2012. The official close ofthe commentperiod occurs at the end ofbusiness hours on December 5, 2012. The hearing will be held as required by federal law (Clean Air Act at 42 U.S.c.. 7410 (a) and 40 CFR 51.102). Ifyou have any comments on this redesignation request, please call me at (410) 537-3240.

# Sjn~h:Jlll/li<---- (; Jim Wilkinson ' Natural Resources Planner Air andRadiation Management Administration

www. mde.state.md.us TTY Users 1-800-735-2258 Via Maryland Relay Service
```

[Congressional Bills 103th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[S. Res. 100 Agreed to Senate (ATS)]

103d CONGRESS
  1st Session
S. RES. 100

              To authorize testimony of Senate employees.

_______________________________________________________________________

                   IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES

               April 22 (legislative day, April 19), 1993

    Mr. Mitchell (for himself and Mr. Dole) submitted the following 
             resolution; which was considered and agreed to

_______________________________________________________________________

                               RESOLUTION

 
              To authorize testimony of Senate employees.

Whereas the respondent in Pefaur v. Pefaur, Nos. 92-42571, 92-53491, pending in 
        the Florida Circuit Court for Dade County, seeks the deposition 
        testimony of Lula Rodriguez, a Senate employee on the staff of Senator 
        Graham;
Whereas, by the privileges of the Senate of the United States and Rule XI of the 
        Standing Rules of the Senate, no evidence under the control or in the 
        possession of the Senate can, by administrative or judicial process, be 
        taken from such control or possession but by permission of the Senate; 
        and
Whereas, when it appears that evidence under the control or in the possession of 
        the Senate is needed for the promotion of justice, the Senate will take 
        such action as will promote the ends of justice consistent with the 
        privileges of the Senate: Now, therefore, be it
    Resolved, That Lula Rodriguez, and any other employee whose 
testimony is required, are authorized to testify in Pefaur v. Pefaur, 
Nos. 92-42571, 92-53491 (Fla. Cir. Ct.), except concerning matters for 
which a privilege should be asserted.

                                 <all>
```
Exhibit 35.2



LOGO



ANNUAL STATEMENT OF COMPLIANCE OF

LNR PARTNERS, LLC

The undersigned, Job Warshaw,
being the President of LNR Partners, LLC (the Special Servicer), as special servicer under the applicable Pooling and Servicing Agreement for the transactions listed on Schedule Ihereto, hereby certifies, subject to any
limitations listed on Schedule Ihereto, as of the date hereof, on behalf of the Special Servicer, solely in his capacity as an authorized officer of the Special Servicer and not in his individual capacity, as follows:



| | 1. | A review of the activities performed by the Special Servicer during the period commencing on January 1, 2017 and ending on December 31, 2017 (or any other shorter period set forth on Schedule Ihereto)
(the Reporting Period), and of the Special Servicers performance under the Pooling and Servicing Agreement has been made under my supervision; and
| | -- | --------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------



| | 2. | To the best of my knowledge, based on such review and using the applicable servicing criteria under Item 1122 of Regulation AB, the Special Servicer has fulfilled all of its obligations under the applicable Pooling
and Servicing Agreement in all material respects throughout the Reporting Period.
| | -- | --------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------



LNR PARTNERS, LLC,a Florida limited liability companyBy

/s/ Job WarshawJob WarshawPresident






1601 Washington Avenue  Suite 700  Miami Beach, Florida 33139-3164

Telephone: (305) 695-5600  Fax: (305) 695-5601



---

Schedule I

CGCMT 2015-GC33

Citigroup Commercial Mortgage Securities Inc.,
Commercial Mortgage Pass-Through Certificates, Series 2015-GC33

Citibank,N.A.,

Global Transaction Services

388 Greenwich Street, 14th Floor

New York NY 10013

Anthony Bausa

Citibank,N.A.,

Global Transaction Services

388 Greenwich Street, 14th Floor

New York NY 10013

John Hannon

Citigroup Commercial Mortgage Securities Inc.

390 Greenwich Street, 5th Floor

New York NY 10013

Paul Vanderslice

Citigroup Commercial Mortgage Securities Inc.

388 Greenwich Street, 19th Floor

New York NY 10013

Richard Simpson

Citigroup Commercial Mortgage Securities Inc.

388 Greenwich Street, 17th Floor

New York NY 10013

Ryan M. OConnor

Situs Holdings, LLC

5065 Westheimer, Suite 700E

Attn: Legal Department

Houston TX 77052

Situs Holdings, LLC

2 Embarcadero, Suite 1300

San Francisco CA 94111

Stacey Ciarlanti
exv10w25



 





Exhibit 10.25




AMENDMENT NO. 6

TO

CNF INC.

DEFERRED COMPENSATION PLAN

1998 RESTATEMENT




     CNF Inc. (the ACompany@) maintains the Deferred Compensation Plan for Executives
(as heretofore amended, the APlan@) to allow executives of the Company and its
affiliates to defer payment of short-term and long-term executive compensation. The Company hereby
amends the Plan as follows (capitalized terms used herein without definition have the meanings
given to those terms in the Plan).



     1. Amendment to Section 3.9. Section 3.9 of the Plan is amended in its entirety so as to read
as follows:



3.9 Phantom Stock Account Distributions. Unless the Committee, in its sole
discretion, elects to make all or part of a distribution in cash, distributions from a
Participant=s Phantom Stock Account shall be made in the form of (i) one share of
Common Stock for each whole Phantom Stock Unit, plus (ii) cash in lieu of any fractional
Phantom Stock Unit, determined based on the Fair Market Value of a share of Common Stock as
of the date of the distribution. If a Participant=s Phantom Stock Account balance
is to be distributed in installments, (a) the number of shares of Common Stock to be
delivered in a particular installment shall be determined by dividing the number of Phantom
Stock Units credited to the Participant=s Phantom Stock Account immediately prior to
such installment by the remaining number of installments (with any fractional Phantom Stock
Units paid in cash, in accordance with clause (i) above) and (b) Dividend Equivalents shall
continue to accrue and be credited to such Participant=s Phantom Stock Account in
accordance with Section 3.6(b)(ii) during the installment period with respect to Phantom
Stock Units that remain credited to such Phantom Stock Account.



     2. Effective Date; No Other Amendments. The effective date of this Amendment shall be January
28, 2002. Except as expressly amended hereby, the Plan remains in full force and effect.



	 	 	 	 	 	 	 
	 	 	CNF INC.	 	 
	 
	 	 	 	 	 	 
	 

	 	By:
	 	/s/ Eberhard G.H. Schmoller
 

	 	 
	 

	 	Name:
	 	Eberhard G.H. Schmoller	 	 
	 

	 	Title:
	 	Senior Vice President, 	 	 
	 

	 	 	 	General Counsel and Secretary	 	 
	 
	 	 	 	 	 	 
	 	 	Executed: June 3, 2004
EX-31 Rule 13a-14(d)/15d-14(d) Certifications.

 

 

I, Anthony Sfarra, certify that:

 

1. I have reviewed this report on Form 10-K and all reports onForm 10-D required to be filed in respect of the period covered by this report onForm 10-K of the Wells Fargo Commercial Mortgage Trust 2015-SG1 (the"Exchange Act periodic reports");

 

2. Based on my knowledge, the Exchange Act periodic reports, takenas a whole, do not contain any untrue statement of a material fact or omit tostate a material fact necessary to make the statements made, in light of thecircumstances under which such statements were made, not misleading withrespect to the period covered by this report;

 

3. Based on my knowledge, all of the distribution, servicing andother information required to be provided under Form 10-D for the periodcovered by this report is included in the Exchange Act periodic reports;

 

4. Based on my knowledge and the servicer compliance statementsrequired in this report under Item 1123 of Regulation AB, and except asdisclosed in the Exchange Act periodic reports, the servicers have fulfilledtheir obligations under the servicing agreements in all material respects; and

 

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

 

In giving the certifications above, I have reasonably relied oninformation provided to me by the following unaffiliated parties:

 

Rialto Capital Advisors, LLC, as Special Servicer, WilmingtonTrust, National Association, as Trustee, Trimont Real Estate Advisors, LLC(f/k/a TriMont Real Estate Advisors, Inc.), as Trust Advisor, CoreLogicSolutions, LLC, as Servicing Function Participant,PGIM Real Estate Loan Services, Inc. (formerly known as Prudential AssetResources, Inc.), as Primary Servicer, Computershare Trust Company,National Association, as Servicing Function Participant for the CertificateAdministrator on and after November 1, 2021, and Computershare TrustCompany, National Association, as Servicing Function Participant for theCustodian on and after November 1, 2021.

 

 

 

Dated:March11, 2022

 

 

/s/ Anthony Sfarra

Anthony Sfarra 

President

(seniorofficer in charge of securitization of the depositor)
#### § 1.279-7 Effect on other provisions.

Under section 279(j), no inference is to be drawn from any provision in section 279 and the regulations thereunder that any instrument designated as a bond, debenture, note, or certificate or other evidence of indebtedness by its issuer represents an obligation or indebtedness of such issuer in applying any other provision of this title. Thus, for example, an instrument, the interest on which is not subject to disallowance under section 279 could, under section 385 and the regulations thereunder, be found to constitute a stock interest, so that any amounts paid or payable thereon would not be deductible.

[T.D. 7262, 38 FR 5851, Mar. 5, 1973]
Ko United States Forest Pacific 333 SW First Avenue (97204)
&) Department of Service Northwest PO Box 3623
‘ee’ Agriculture Region Portland, OR 97208-3623
503-808-2468

a

ais

File Code: 2080/1950
Date: May 11, 2005

Final Environmental Impact Statement (FEIS)
For the Pacific Northwest Region Invasive Plant Program
Preventing and Managing Invasive Plants

Dear Citizens:

Iam pleased to announce the availability of the Final Environmental Impact Statement (FEIS) for the
Pacific Northwest Region Invasive Plant Program - Preventing and Managing Invasive Plants, The FEIS
discloses the potential environmental effects of adding management direction related to invasive plants to
National Forest Land and Resource Management Plans in the Pacific Northwest Region (Region Six).
Invasive plant prevention and treatment standards would be added, a new and expanded set of invasive
plant treatment tools would be available to the National Forests.

On August 22, 2004, the Forest Service released a Draft Environmental Impact Statement (DEIS) that
considered four alternatives: No Action, the Proposed Action, plus two additional action alternatives
(Alternatives B and D). All three of the action alternatives were designed to reduce the rate of spread of
invasive plants within Region Six, increase the effectiveness of invasive plant management, and protect
human health and the environment.

During the 90-day DEIS review period we received approximately 300 pieces of correspondence. Most
of the correspondence originated in Oregon and Washington. The comments have been reviewed and
considered individually and collectively. We responded to the comments by:

1) Modifying alternatives — The wording of standards was changed in response to comments and
one new standard was added to all alternatives.

2) Supplementing analysis — Several sections of the FEIS include supplemental analysis or
clarifying discussions in response to comments.

3) Corrections — Some comments resulted in corrections to the existing analysis. Appendix A of the
FEIS provides a summary of all public comments.

The Proposed Action remains the Forest Service preferred alternative. I expect to release a Record of
Decision later this summer, once all interagency consultations are completed.

For more information on this FEIS, contact Eugene Skrine at 503 808-2685 or electronically at
r6_IPEIS@fs.fed.us. Additional information will also be posted on our website:
www.fs.fed.us/r6/invasiveplant-eis.

Sincerely,

(Wh —

€gional Forester

& Caring for the Land and Serving People Printed on Recycled Paper @
- USGS Home
- Contact						   USGS
- Search 
USGS

- mobile menu barsUSGS Publications Warehouse
    Contact
    Explore recent 
    publications by USGS Authors
    Browse all of Pubs 
    Warehouse by Publication type and year
    FAQS
    Web 
    Service Documentation
    Other 
    Resources
    Descriptions of US Geological Survey Report Series
- USGS Publications Warehouse
- Contact
- Explore recent 
    publications by USGS Authors
- Browse all of Pubs 
    Warehouse by Publication type and year
- FAQS
- Web 
    Service Documentation
- Other 
    Resources
- Descriptions of US Geological Survey Report Series

- USGS Publications 
  Warehouse
- Explore					    
  Explore recent 
    publications by USGS Authors
    Browse all of Pubs 
    Warehouse by Publication type and year
- Explore recent 
    publications by USGS Authors
- Browse all of Pubs 
    Warehouse by Publication type and year
- Documentation					    
  FAQS
    Web 
    Service Documentation
    Other 
    Resources
    Descriptions of US Geological Survey Report Series
- FAQS
- Web 
    Service Documentation
- Other 
    Resources
- Descriptions of US Geological Survey Report Series
- Contact

### The October 1963 eruption of Kilauea Volcano, Hawaii

#### Professional Paper 614-C

Tweet


#### Links

- More information: **National Geologic Map Database Index Page**     
                             (html)
- Document: **Document**                                
  (pdf)
- Plate: **Plate 1**                                
  (pdf)
- Download citation as:  RIS

#### Abstract

#### Additional publication details

Part or all of this report is presented in Portable 
Document Format (PDF). For best results viewing and printing PDF documents, it 
is recommended that you download the documents to your computer and open them 
with Adobe Reader. PDF documents opened from your browser may not display or 
print as intended. Download the latest version of Adobe 
Reader, free of charge. More information about viewing, downloading, and 
printing report files can be found here.

Accessibility
				    FOIA				    Privacy				    Policies and 
Notices

U.S. Department of the Interior				    | 				    
U.S. Geological 
Survey				    				   URL: http://pubs.er.usgs.gov/publication/pp614C 
                   				    				   Page Contact Information: Pubs 
Warehouse Contact Page				    				   Page Last Modified: February 02, 
2012 00:09:56
# C_2017392EN.01000302.xml

| 20.11.2017 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 392/3 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

20.11.2017

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 392/3

---

Judgment of the Court (Ninth Chamber) of 21 September 2017 — Ferriere Nord SpA v European Commission

(Case C-88/15 P P) (1)

1

((Appeal - Agreements, decisions and concerted practices - Italian producers of reinforcing bars - Fixing of prices and limiting and controlling output and sales - Infringement of Article 65 CS - Annulment of the initial decision by the General Court of the European Union - Decision re-adopted on the basis of Regulation (EC) No 1/2003 - Failure to issue a new statement of objections - Lack of a hearing following the annulment of the initial decision))

(2017/C 392/04)

Language of the case: Italian

Parties

Parties

Appellant: Ferriere Nord SpA (represented by: W. Viscardini and G. Donà, avvocati)

Appellant:

Other party to the proceedings: European Commission (represented by: L. Malferrari and P. Rossi, acting as Agents, assisted by M. Moretto, avvocato)

Other party to the proceedings:

Operative part of the judgment

Operative part of the judgment

The Court:

| 1. | Sets aside the judgment of the General Court of the European Union of 9 December 2014, Ferriere Nord v Commission (T-90/10, not published, EU:T:2014:1035); |
| --- | --- |

1.

Sets aside the judgment of the General Court of the European Union of 9 December 2014, Ferriere Nord v Commission (T-90/10, not published, EU:T:2014:1035);

| 2. | Annuls Commission Decision C(2009) 7492 final of 30 September 2009 relating to a proceeding under Article 65 CS (Case COMP/37.956 — Reinforcing bars, re-adoption), as amended by Commission Decision C(2009) 9912 final of 8 December 2009, in so far as it concerns Ferriere Nord SpA; |
| --- | --- |

2.

Annuls Commission Decision C(2009) 7492 final of 30 September 2009 relating to a proceeding under Article 65 CS (Case COMP/37.956 — Reinforcing bars, re-adoption), as amended by Commission Decision C(2009) 9912 final of 8 December 2009, in so far as it concerns Ferriere Nord SpA;

| 3. | Orders the European Commission to bear its own costs and to pay those incurred by Ferriere Nord SpA both at first instance and in the present appeal. |
| --- | --- |

3.

Orders the European Commission to bear its own costs and to pay those incurred by Ferriere Nord SpA both at first instance and in the present appeal.

---

(1)  OJ C 146, 4.5.2015.

1

---