alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
|WELLS FARGO(logo) | Commercial Mortgage ServicingD1050-084, 8th Floor401 South Tryon StreetCharlotte, NC 282021-800-326-1334
|----------------- | --------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------





ANNUAL STATEMENT OF COMPLIANCE



Reference is hereby made
to that certain Pooling and Servicing Agreement dated as of October 1, 2015, by and among Banc of America Merrill Lynch Commercial
Mortgage Inc., as Depositor, Wells Fargo Bank, National Association, as Master Servicer, Midland Loan Services, A Division of PNC
Bank, National Association, as Special Servicer, Pentalpha Surveillance LLC, as Trust Advisor, U.S. Bank National Association,
as Trustee, Certificate Administrator, Certificate Registrar, Authenticating Agent and Custodian with respect to Commercial Mortgage
Pass-Through Certificates Series 2015-C25 (the “Agreement”). Capitalized terms used herein not otherwise defined shall
have the meanings assigned in the Agreement.



Pursuant to Section 13.9 of the Agreement,
I, Leslie Hayton, Managing Director of Commercial Mortgage Services do hereby certify that:



| | 1. | A review of the activities of the
Master Servicer during the period from January 1, 2018 through December 31, 2018 (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 2019.



|/s/ Leslie Hayton | 
|----------------- | 



Leslie Hayton

Managing Director

Wells
Fargo Bank



|Wells Fargo Bank, N.A. | Together we’ll go far
|---------------------- | ---------------------
United States Court of Appeals

for the Fifth Circuit

No. 21-60765

Foyagem Atehnkeng Brain, 

Petitioner,

versus

Merrick Garland, U.S. Attorney General, 

Respondent.

Petition for Review of an Order of the

Board of Immigration Appeals

A203 600 816

Before Jones, Smith, and Graves, Circuit Judges.

Per Curiam:*

Foyagem Atehnkeng Brain (“Foyagem”), a native and citizen of 

Cameroon, timely petitions us for review of the Board of Immigration 

Appeals’ denial of his motion for reconsideration. Foyagem argues that the 

Board and the Immigration Judge assigned to his case abused their discretion 

by applying the wrong standard when considering his eligibility for asylum. 

* This opinion is not designated for publication. See 5th Cir. R. 47.5.

United States Court of Appeals

Fifth Circuit

FILED

December 20, 2022

Lyle W. Cayce

Clerk

Case: 21-60765 Document: 00516584350 Page: 1 Date Filed: 12/20/2022
No. 21-60765

2

Further, he argues that this improper application violated his right to due 

process. 

This court reviews the denial of a motion to reconsider under an 

abuse-of-discretion standard. Gonzales-Veliz v. Barr, 938 F.3d 219, 226 (5th 

Cir. 2019). A motion to reconsider must “‘specify the errors of law or fact in 

the previous order and . . . be supported by pertinent authority.’” Gonzalez 

Hernandez v. Garland, 9 F.4th 278, 283 (5th Cir. 2021) (quoting 8 U.S.C. § 

1229a(c)(6)(C)), cert. denied, 143 S. Ct. 86 (2022). The Board’s decision will 

stand unless it was “capricious, racially invidious [or] utterly without 

foundation in the evidence.” Zhao v. Gonzales, 404 F.3d 295, 304 (5th Cir. 

2005) (quoting Pritchett v. INS, 993 F.2d 80, 83 (5th Cir. 1993)).

Upon review, we find no abuse of discretion. The Board does not 

abuse its discretion in denying a motion to reconsider when the petitioner 

repeats arguments the Board has already rejected. Clavel-Avelar v. Garland, 

858 F. App’x 795, 796 (5th Cir. 2021). Further, we do not find that Foyagem 

has identified a misapplication in law. The Board correctly held that 

arguments regarding the Immigration Judge’s opinion are not properly 

presented in a motion to reconsider. See Chambers v. Mukasey, 520 F.3d 445, 

448 (5th Cir. 2008); Matter of O-S-G-, 24 I. & N. Dec. 56, 58 (BIA 2006). 

Finally, we lack jurisdiction to consider the due process argument 

because it was not raised before the Board during the initial appeal or the 

motion for reconsideration and is accordingly unexhausted. See Roy v. 

Ashcroft, 389 F.3d 132, 137 (5th Cir. 2004).

For the foregoing reasons, the petition for review is DENIED IN 

PART, DISMISSED IN PART.

Case: 21-60765 Document: 00516584350 Page: 2 Date Filed: 12/20/2022
```

[Federal Register Volume 74, Number 19 (Friday, January 30, 2009)]
[Notices]
[Page 5664]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: E9-1841]

[[Page 5664]]

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

DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES

National Institutes of Health

National Institute on Alcohol Abuse and Alcoholism; Notice of 
Closed Meeting

    Pursuant to section 10(d) of the Federal Advisory Committee Act, as 
amended (5 U.S.C. Appendix 2), notice is hereby given of the following 
meeting.
    The meeting will be closed to the public in accordance with the 
provisions set forth in sections 552b(c)(4) and 552b(c)(6), Title 5 
U.S.C., as amended. The grant applications and the discussions could 
disclose confidential trade secrets or commercial property such as 
patentable material, and personal information concerning individuals 
associated with the grant applications, the disclosure of which would 
constitute a clearly unwarranted invasion of personal privacy.

    Name of Committee: National Institute on Alcohol Abuse and 
Alcoholism, Special Emphasis Panel AA-3 Member Conflict Review.
    Date: March 9, 2009.
    Time: 3 p.m. to 5 p.m.
    Agenda: To review and evaluate grant applications.
    Place: National Institute on Alcohol Abuse and Alcoholism, 5635 
Fishers Lane, 2085, Rockville, MD 20852, (Telephone Conference 
Call).
    Contact Person: Abraham P. Bautista, PhD, Chief, Extramural 
Project Review Branch, National Institute on Alcohol Abuse & 
Alcoholism, National Institutes of Health, 5635 Fishers Lane, Rm 
2085, Rockville, MD 20852, 301-443-9737, [email protected].

(Catalogue of Federal Domestic Assistance Program Nos. 93.271, 
Alcohol Research Career Development Awards for Scientists and 
Clinicians; 93.272, Alcohol National Research Service Awards for 
Research Training; 93.273, Alcohol Research Programs; 93.891, 
Alcohol Research Center Grants, National Institutes of Health, HHS)

    Dated: January 22, 2009.
Jennifer Spaeth,
Director, Office of Federal Advisory Committee Policy.
[FR Doc. E9-1841 Filed 1-29-09; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4140-01-M
```
```

[Federal Register Volume 74, Number 146 (Friday, July 31, 2009)]
[Notices]
[Page 38182]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: E9-18303]

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

DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY

Federal Energy Regulatory Commission

[Docket No. ER09-1482-000]

Sagebrush Power Partners, LLC; Supplemental Notice That Initial 
Market-Based Rate Filing Includes Request for Blanket Section 204 
Authorization

July 27, 2009.
    This is a supplemental notice in the above-referenced proceeding of 
Sagebrush Power Partners, LLC's application for market-based rate 
authority, with an accompanying rate tariff, noting that such 
application includes a request for blanket authorization, under 18 CFR 
part 34, of future issuances of securities and assumptions of 
liability.
    Any person desiring to intervene or to protest should file with the 
Federal Energy Regulatory Commission, 888 First Street, NE., 
Washington, DC, 20426, in accordance with Rules 211 and 214 of the 
Commission's Rules of Practice and Procedure (18 CFR 385.211 and 
385.214). Anyone filing a motion to intervene or protest must serve a 
copy of that document on the Applicant.
    Notice is hereby given that the deadline for filing protests with 
regard to the applicant's request for blanket authorization, under 18 
CFR part 34, of future issuances of securities and assumptions of 
liability, is August 17, 2009.
    The Commission encourages electronic submission of protests and 
interventions in lieu of paper, using the FERC Online links at http://www.ferc.gov. To facilitate electronic service, persons with Internet 
access who will eFile a document and/or be listed as a contact for an 
intervenor must create and validate an eRegistration account using the 
eRegistration link. Select the eFiling link to log on and submit the 
intervention or protests.
    Persons unable to file electronically should submit an original and 
14 copies of the intervention or protest to the Federal Energy 
Regulatory Commission, 888 First St., NE., Washington, DC 20426.
    The filings in the above-referenced proceeding are accessible in 
the Commission's eLibrary system by clicking on the appropriate link in 
the above list.
    They are also available for review in the Commission's Public 
Reference Room in Washington, DC. There is an eSubscription link on the 
Web site that enables subscribers to receive e-mail notification when a 
document is added to a subscribed docket(s). For assistance with any 
FERC Online service, please e-mail [email protected]. or call 
(866) 208-3676 (toll free). For TTY, call (202) 502-8659.

Nathaniel J. Davis, Sr.,
Deputy Secretary.
[FR Doc. E9-18303 Filed 7-30-09; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6717-01-P
```
```

[Congressional Bills 103th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[S. Res. 182 Introduced in Senate (IS)]

103d CONGRESS
  2d Session
S. RES. 182

 Entitled ``A Call for Humanitarian Assistance to the Pontian Greeks''.

_______________________________________________________________________

                   IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES

            February 23 (legislative day, February 22), 1994

 Mr. D'Amato submitted the following resolution; which was referred to 
                   the Committee on Foreign Relations

_______________________________________________________________________

                               RESOLUTION

 
 Entitled ``A Call for Humanitarian Assistance to the Pontian Greeks''.

Whereas the Pontian Greeks originally settled in northern Turkey in the late 
        19th and early 20th centuries to escape the ravages of war and since 
        then have found themselves alternately both discriminated against as 
        well as innocent victims of brutal wars;
Whereas the Pontian Greeks have been subject to severe discrimination and 
        torture since the early 1900's due to their ethnic and cultural 
        identity;
Whereas the Pontian Greeks have historically been denied their right to develop 
        their own culture and study their history, first under the Ottoman 
        Empire and later while under the Soviet Empire;
Whereas the Pontian Greeks are, in part, descendants of Greeks who were uprooted 
        and forcibly resettled in Georgia in the 1930's by Stalin during 
        collectivization drives out of fear of divided loyalties;
Whereas this population of 15,000 is now cut off from supply lines and 
        distribution networks by both winter storms and a brutal civil war of a 
        year-and-a-half;
Whereas both the battle-scarred Greek settlements and their refugee camps are 
        located in the center of this savage war;
Whereas existing supplies are rapidly eroding, leaving Greeks on the brink of 
        starvation and forced to endure a long winter without clothing, 
        medicine, water, or electricity;
Whereas the remaining supplies of this small minority are subject to widespread 
        looting;
Whereas many Greeks are forced to undertake a dangerous sealift in order to 
        emigrate to Greece out of a desperate attempt to escape this dire 
        situation; and
Whereas the Pontian Greeks face certain death without outside assistance: Now, 
        therefore, be it
    Resolved, That the United States should take the lead in organizing 
international humanitarian efforts to aid this destitute population.

                                 <all>
```
# United States Court **of Appeals**  **f or the Fifth Circuit** 

**____________** No. 23 - 11217 Summary Calendar

**____________ United States of America,**  Plaintiff
— Appellee **,** versus **Raunel Garcia -**  **Suarez,** Defendant
— Appellant **.**

**______________________________** Appeal from the United States District Court for the Northern District of Texas USDC No. 3:22 - CR - 476 - 1

**________________ ______________**  Before **Barksdale, Graves,** and **Oldham,** Circuit Judges **. Per Curiam**  **:** ***** Raunel Garcia - Suarez challenges on two bases his guilty - plea conviction and within - Guidelines 70 - months’ sentence for illegal reentry after removal from the United States, in violation of 8 U.S.C . § 1326(a) (prohibiting reentry of removed aliens) , (b)(1) (setting applicable maximum penalty ) .

**_____________________** * This opinion is not designated for publication. See **5th Cir .**  **R .**  47.5. United States Court of Appeals Fifth Circuit 

### FILED July 2, 2024 Lyle W. Cayce Clerk Case: 23-11217 Document: 58-1 Page: 1 Date Filed: 07/02/2024No. 23 - 11217

2 Garcia correctly concedes his contention that § 1326(b) violates due process is foreclosed by Almendarez - Torres v. United States , 523 U.S. 224 (1998) , but raises the issu e to preserve it for possible further review. See United States v. Pervis , 937 F.3d 546, 553 – 54 (5th Cir. 2019) (discussing Almendarez - Torres ). He has abandoned, by failing to adequately brief, his challenge to the substantive reasonableness of his sentence. See, e.g. , United States v. Stalnaker , 571 F.3d 428, 439 – 40 (5th Cir. 2009) (explainin g challenges were waived when appellant did “not cite the record or relevant law”); **Fed. R. App. P.**  28(a)(8) (outlining requirements for appellant’s brief) . **AFFIRMED** . Case: 23-11217 Document: 58-1 Page: 2 Date Filed: 07/02/2024
- 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

### Some Middle Ordovician brachiopods and trilobites from the 
Basin Ranges, western United States

#### Professional Paper 523-D

Tweet


#### Links

- 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/pp523D 
                   				    				   Page Contact Information: Pubs 
Warehouse Contact Page				    				   Page Last Modified: February 02, 
2012 00:09:18
```

[Congressional Bills 103th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[S. Res. 18 Agreed to Senate (ATS)]

103d CONGRESS
  1st Session
S. RES. 18

                   To amend paragraph 3 of rule XXV.

_______________________________________________________________________

                   IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES

             January 21 (legislative day, January 5), 1993

 Mr. Mitchell submitted the following resolution; which was considered 
                             and agreed to

_______________________________________________________________________

                               RESOLUTION

 
                   To amend paragraph 3 of rule XXV.

    Resolved, That paragraph 3 of rule XXV of the Standing Rules of the 
Senate is amended for the One Hundred Third Congress as follows:
            (1) In subparagraph (a) strike ``19'' after ``Small 
        Business'' and insert in lieu thereof ``21''.
            (2) In subparagraph (c) strike ``10'' after ``Indian 
        Affairs'' and insert in lieu thereof ``18''.
    Sec. 2. Notwithstanding the provisions S. Res. 400, the Committee 
on Intelligence shall have seventeen members solely for the duration of 
the One Hundred Third Congress.

                                 <all>
```
NOT FOR PUBLICATION

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT

VILASID PHICHITH, 

Petitioner, 

 v. 

JEFFERSON B. SESSIONS III, Attorney 

General, 

Respondent.

No. 16-71925 

Agency No. A098-177-766 

MEMORANDUM*

On Petition for Review of an Order of the

Board of Immigration Appeals

Submitted December 18, 2017**

Before: WALLACE, SILVERMAN, and BYBEE, Circuit Judges.

Vilasid Phichith, a native and citizen of Laos, petitions for review of the 

Board of Immigration Appeals’ (“BIA”) order dismissing his appeal from an 

immigration judge’s (“IJ”) decision denying his request for a continuance. We 

have jurisdiction under 8 U.S.C. § 1252. We review for abuse of discretion the 

 

* This disposition is not appropriate for publication and is not precedent 

except as provided by Ninth Circuit Rule 36-3.

** The panel unanimously concludes this case is suitable for decision 

without oral argument. See Fed. R. App. P. 34(a)(2).

FILED

DEC 21 2017

MOLLY C. DWYER, CLERK

U.S. COURT OF APPEALS
2 16-71925 

denial of a continuance and review de novo questions of law. Ahmed v. Holder, 

569 F.3d 1009, 1012 (9th Cir. 2009). We deny the petition for review.

The agency did not abuse its discretion in denying Phichith’s request for an 

additional continuance where he did not demonstrate good cause. See 8 C.F.R. 

§ 1003.29; Ahmed v. Holder, 569 F.3d 1009, 1012 (9th Cir. 2009) (factors 

considered in determining whether the denial of a continuance constitutes an abuse 

of discretion include the nature of the evidence excluded and the number of 

continuances previously granted). 

Phichith cites no authority to support his contention that the BIA erred in 

dismissing his appeal from an IJ’s denial of a continuance prior to resolving his 

motion to reconsider the denial of his visa petition. Cf. Matter of Aurelio, 19 I. & 

N. Dec. 458, 460 (BIA 1987) (“The proceedings in which visa petitions are 

adjudicated are separate and apart from exclusion and deportation proceedings.”).

PETITION FOR REVIEW DENIED.
Exhibit 35.1

 

ANNUAL SERVICER’S COMPLIANCE CERTIFICATE

 

This Compliance Certificateis furnished pursuant to Section 4.10 of the Sale and Servicing Agreement (the “Agreement”), dated as of September16, 2015, by and among Hyundai Auto Receivables Trust 2015-C, Hyundai Capital America, as seller and servicer (the “Servicer”),Hyundai ABS Funding, LLC (formerly known as Hyundai ABS Funding Corporation), as depositor, and Citibank, N.A., as indenture trusteeand Item 1123 of Regulation AB. The undersigned hereby certifies that:

 

1)       Iam a duly authorized officer of the Servicer.

 

2)       Areview of the activities of the Servicer from January 1, 2016 through December 31, 2016 (the “Relevant Period”) andof the Servicer’s performance under the Agreement during the Relevant Period has been made under my supervision.

 

3)       Basedon such review, the Servicer has, to the best of my knowledge, fulfilled all of its obligations under the Agreement in all materialrespects throughout the Relevant Period.

 

IN WITNESS WHEREOF, I have duly executed thisCompliance Certificate this 16th day of March, 2017.
#### § 1.60 [Reserved]
III

103D CONGRESS

1ST SESSION S. RES. 140

To authorize the testimony of Senate employees.

IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES

AUGUST 6 (legislative day, JUNE 30), 1993

Mr. MITCHELL (for himself and Mr. DOLE) submitted the following resolution;

which was considered and agreed to

RESOLUTION

To authorize the testimony of Senate employees.

Whereas, in the case of United States v. Dean, Cr. No. 92–

0181, Independent Counsel Arlin M. Adams has requested the trial testimony of Kenneth A. McLean, a

former Senate employee on the staff of the Committee on

Banking, Housing, and Urban Affairs;

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 may, by the judicial process, be taken from such control or possession but by permission of the Senate;

Whereas, when it appears that evidence under the control or

in the possession of the Senate may promote the administration of justice, the Senate will take such action as will
2

SRES 140 ATS

promote the ends of justice consistently with the privileges of the Senate; and

Whereas, pursuant to sections 703(a) and 704(a)(2) of the

Ethics in Government Act of 1978, 2 U.S.C. § 288b(a)

and 288c(a)(2) (1988), the Senate may direct its counsel

to represent committees, Members, officers and employees of the Senate with respect to subpoenas or orders issued to them in their official capacity: Now, therefore,

be it

1 Resolved, That Kenneth A. McLean, and any other

2 present or former Senate employee whose testimony may

3 be required, is authorized to testify in the trial of United

4 States v. Deborah Dean, Cr. No. 92–0181 (D.D.C.), ex5 cept as to matters for which a privilege should be asserted.

6 SEC. 2. That the Senate Legal Counsel is directed

7 to represent Kenneth A. McLean, and any other present

8 or former Senate employee, in connection with the testi9 mony authorized under section 1.

Æ