alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<ARTICLE> 5
<LEGEND>
THIS SCHEDULE CONTAINS SUMMARY FINANCIAL INFORMATION EXTRACTED FROM BALANCE
SHEETS AND INCOME STATEMENTS AND IS QUALIFIED IN ITS ENTIRETY BY REFERENCE TO
SUCH FINANCIAL STATEMENTS.
</LEGEND>
<MULTIPLIER> 1,000

<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   6-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          MAR-31-2001
<PERIOD-START>                             APR-01-2000
<PERIOD-END>                               SEP-30-2000
<CASH>                                          44,715
<SECURITIES>                                     3,410
<RECEIVABLES>                                    4,272
<ALLOWANCES>                                         0
<INVENTORY>                                          0
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                                52,397
<PP&E>                                           4,244
<DEPRECIATION>                                   3,346
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                  66,267
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                            5,224
<BONDS>                                              0
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                           187
<OTHER-SE>                                      58,979
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                    66,267
<SALES>                                              0
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                                29,844
<CGS>                                                0
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                   24,569
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                     0
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                     0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                                   0
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                  5,275
<INCOME-TAX>                                     2,179
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                              3,096
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                     3,096
<EPS-BASIC>                                       0.17
<EPS-DILUTED>                                     0.17


</TABLE>
United States Court of Appeals

FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA CIRCUIT

____________

No. 22-1292 September Term, 2022

RRRB-08/08/2022 Decision

Filed On: June 16, 2023

Laura A. Gutteridge Anos,

Petitioner

v.

U.S. Railroad Retirement Board,

Respondent

ON PETITION FOR REVIEW FROM AN ORDER

OF THE RAILROAD RETIREMENT BOARD

BEFORE: Millett, Pillard, and Rao, Circuit Judges

J U D G M E N T

This petition for review of an order of the United States Railroad Retirement

Board was considered on the briefs and appendix filed by the parties. See Fed. R.

App. P. 34(a)(2); D.C. Cir. Rule 34(j). It is

ORDERED AND ADJUDGED that the petition for review be denied. The

Railroad Retirement Board’s decision was supported by substantial evidence and not

based on any error of law. See Reed v. R.R. Ret. Bd., 145 F.3d 373, 375 (D.C. Cir.

1998) (per curiam). Under the “highly deferential” substantial-evidence standard, we

must abide by the Board’s “reasonable findings and conclusions,” even if the evidence

could have supported a contrary view. Marshall Cnty. Coal Co. v. Fed. Mine Safety &

Health Rev. Comm'n, 923 F.3d 192, 201 (D.C. Cir. 2019) (quoting Cumberland Coal

Res., LP v. Fed. Mine Safety & Health Review Comm'n, 717 F.3d 1020, 1028 (D.C. Cir.

2013)). Here, the Board reasonably found petitioner’s request untimely with respect to

the period through December 2010, reasonably concluding that neither the fraud nor

the equity exceptions to the four-year time bar applied. See 45 U.S.C. § 231h; 20

C.F.R. § 211.16(a), (b)(1), (2)(iv). As to petitioner’s timely request with respect to the

month of January 2011, the Board likewise reasonably found that petitioner did not

serve as an employee of CSX Transportation during that month.
United States Court of Appeals

FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA CIRCUIT

____________

No. 22-1292 September Term, 2022

Pursuant to D.C. Circuit Rule 36, this disposition will not be published. The Clerk

is directed to withhold issuance of the mandate herein until seven days after resolution

of any timely petition for rehearing or petition for rehearing en banc. See Fed. R. App.

P. 41(b); D.C. Cir. Rule 41.

Per Curiam

Page 2
**u.s.~**

of Tl'artJpor1a11o Q

! f .ce Of tne Secretory Ol•tonSDO"

I O

l l¢n Chief. QQcumentary Ser-Vices DIY. Depanment of Transponation Washington. D.C. 20590 DESIGNATION OF AGENT FOR SERVICE OF NOTICE. PROCESS. ORDERS DECISIONS AND REQUIREMENTS ATTENTION

: DOCKET SECTION, C-55 Air Susan Co., Ltd.

.having its principal (Name of Company, please print) office at6F #853-1 Seomcheon-Dong, susanjin-Gu, susan, 614-721, Republic of Korea (Address) hereby designates. pursuant to section 1005(b) of the Federal Aviation Act of 1958. the person named below as its Agent upon whom service of all notices and process. and all orders, decisions, and requirements
of the Depanment of Transportation may be made for and on behalf of said carrier: hereby canceling all previous designations of agents made by it to the DOT: Name of Agent George u. Carneal Hogan Lovells US LLP (Please Print) 555 Thirteenth Street, NW Washington,
DC 20004 **Addr~**Tel

.+ 1 202 637 6546: Fax +1 202 637 59101 E -mail george

.ca rn eal@ h og anlovella

.co m The Agent so designated has written his name and also his initials in the following space: Name IN WITNESS WHEREOF,

Air Busan Co., Ltd.

h
th --------------------------------------------------

**asca~ e~**  (Name of Company)

CEO **pre~nts**to be signed in its nam e by________________T_a_e_K_e_un __H _ an ____________________________

, **~** (Please Print) of said company, and to be attested under its corporate seal by on this __4 _,___day ofDe **c.emb~**

ri2 2014 ATTEST

: (Seer tary, or other officer) OST F 1010. 5 (7- 85 )

By:

A i r B u aan Co

.,L td
. (Name of Company) ( Jbx::l idc:zlr) (CEO)
QuickLinks
 -- Click here to rapidly navigate through this document

Exhibit 10.41  


 
 

SECOND AMENDMENT TO
  HUGHES ELECTRONICS CORPORATION
  EXECUTIVE DEFERRED COMPENSATION PLAN    
    


        THIS SECOND AMENDMENT TO THE AMENDED AND RESTATED HUGHES ELECTRONICS CORPORATION EXECUTIVE DEFERRED COMPENSATION PLAN dated as of December 22, 2003, is
made and adopted by The DIRECTV Group ("DIRECTV"). Capitalized terms used but not otherwise defined herein shall have the respective meanings ascribed to them in the Hughes Electronics Corporation
Executive Deferred Compensation Plan (the "Plan"). 


        WHEREAS,
The DIRECTV Group, the renamed Hughes Electronics Corporation, a Delaware corporation, maintains the Plan; 


        WHEREAS,
pursuant to Article 11 of the Plan, DIRECTV may amend the Plan from time to time; 


        WHEREAS,
DIRECTV desires to amend the Plan to eliminate future deferrals as set forth herein; and 


        WHEREAS,
this Second Amendment was adopted by the Compensation Committee of the DIRECTV Board of Directors on November 9, 2006, effective as of December 31, 2006. 



        NOW,
THEREFORE, in consideration of the foregoing, the Plan is hereby amended as follows: 



	1.
	Section 3.3(f)
of the Plan is hereby established as follows: 





"Cancellation of Future Deferral Elections. As of the effective date of this amendment, no new deferral elections shall be honored. Plan participation
as to amounts of elective and/or non elective deferred compensation shall be limited to deferrals of base annual salary for the 2006 Plan year. No existing deferral elections of monies or stock
otherwise payable in 2007 and/or later will be allowed, or honored including, but not limited to, deferral elections for Bonus, Restricted Stock Units, Long-Term Achievement Plan Awards
deferrals and any other previously made deferrals of compensation. 



	2.
	Plan
Section 3.6 is hereby deleted.



	3.
	Plan
Section 3.7 is hereby deleted effective subsequent to the deferral of any Annual Deferral Amount for the 2006 Plan Year. 




        I
hereby certify that the foregoing Second Amendment to the Hughes Electronics Corporation Executive Deferred Compensation Plan was duly adopted by The DIRECTV Group on
December 31, 2006. 


        Executed
on this    day of November, 2006. 



	 	 	/s/ Larry D. Hunter
 Larry D. Hunter, Corporate Secretary













QuickLinks


SECOND AMENDMENT TO HUGHES ELECTRONICS CORPORATION EXECUTIVE DEFERRED COMPENSATION PLAN
104TH CONGRESS

2D SESSION H. CON. RES. 191

CONCURRENT RESOLUTION

To recognize and honor the Filipino World War II

of World War II.and their important contribution to the outcomeveterans for their defense of democratic ideals
104TH CONGRESS

2D SESSION H. CON. RES. 191

CONCURRENT RESOLUTION

Whereas the Commonwealth of the Philippines was strategically located and thus vital to the defense of the United

States during World War II;

Whereas the military forces of the Commonwealth of the

Philippines were called into the United States Armed

Forces during World War II by Executive order and were

put under the command of General Douglas MacArthur;
2

•HCON 191 EH

Whereas the participation of the military forces of the Commonwealth of the Philippines in the battles of Bataan

and Corregidor and in other smaller skirmishes delayed

and disrupted the initial Japanese effort to conquer the

Western Pacific;

Whereas that delay and disruption allowed the United States

the vital time to prepare the forces which were needed to

drive the Japanese from the Western Pacific and to defeat Japan;

Whereas after the recovery of the Philippine Islands from

Japan, the United States was able to use the strategically

located Commonwealth of the Philippines as a base from

which to launch the final efforts to defeat Japan;

Whereas every American deserves to know the important contribution that the military forces of the Commonwealth of

the Philippines made to the outcome of World War II;

and

Whereas the Filipino World War II veterans deserve recognition and honor for their important contribution to the

outcome of World War II: Now, therefore, be it

1 Resolved by the House of Representatives (the Senate

2 concurring), That the Congress recognizes and honors the

3 Filipino World War II veterans for their defense of demo-
3

•HCON 191 EH

1 cratic ideals and their important contribution to the out2 come of World War II.

Passed the House of Representatives July 29, 1996.

Attest:

Clerk.
39502.

#### HENDERSON et al. v. LIBERTY LOAN CORPORATION OF COLLEGE PARK.

Felton, Chief Judge.

1. Where an action in trover purported to be brought in the “Jack Jones” form but which showed by reference to an exhibit attached to the petition that the title to the property sued for was in the plaintiff by reason of a bill of sale to secure debt, the first monthly payment becoming due on April 20, 1961, and the last on September 15, 1962, and where it is nowhere alleged in the petition that there had been a breach of the bill of sale to secure debt, the petition was subject to general demurrer. *General Motors Acceptance Corp. v. Jones,*98 Ga. App. 391 (1) (106 SE2d 67); *American Nat. Bank &c. Co. v. Davis,*104 Ga. App. 586 (122 SE2d 477).

2. The allegation added by amendment to the petition “that *123defendants are now in default under the provisions of ‘Exhibit A’ as attached to plaintiff’s original petition and demand having been made defendants refuse to comply with the terms of said exhibit” was subject to the special demurrer, the ground of which is that the amendment did not show that the defendants were in default on December 2, 1961, the date on which the trover action was filed, the amendment having-been filed on January 9, 1962. The amendment, even though it dated back to the date of the filing of the action, was ambiguous in that it did not clearly allege that the contract was in default on or before the date of the filing of the action.

Decided June 7, 1962.

*James E. Hardy,*for plaintiffs in error.

*A. A. Roberts,*contra.

The court erred in overruling the special demurrers directed at the petition as amended and is directed to sustain special demurrers and the general demurrer in the event the petition is. not amended to allege that the contract was in default on the date the action was filed.

*Judgment reversed with direction.*

*Bell and*Hall, *JJ., concur.*
§ 1.807-3 Reporting of reserves. ( a ) *Reserve reporting.* A life insurance company subject to tax under section 801 is required to make a return on Form 1120-L, *U.S. Life Insurance Company Income Tax Return.* The Internal Revenue Service may require reporting with respect to the opening balance and closing balance of items described in section 807(c) and with respect to the method of computing such items for purposes of determining income. Such reporting may provide for the manner in which separate account items are reported. (See section 6011 and § 301.6011-1 of this chapter.)
( b ) *Applicability date.* The rules of this section apply to taxable years beginning after *October 13, 2020.*
[T.D. 9911, 85 FR 64392, Oct. 13, 2020]
Amendment No. 1 to Purchase Agreement



 Exhibit 10.35 
 AMENDMENT NO. 1 TO PURCHASE AGREEMENT 
 AMENDMENT NO. 1, dated as of January 2, 2007, to PURCHASE
AGREEMENT, dated as of August 7, 2006 (the “Agreement”), by and between ONEOK, Inc. (the “Issuer”), and UBS AG, London Branch (“UBS”) acting through UBS Securities LLC (“Agent”) as agent. 
 W I T N E S S E T H 
 WHEREAS, the Issuer and UBS wish to amend the definition of “Last Averaging Date” set forth in Schedule I to the Agreement; 
 NOW, THEREFORE, in consideration of the premises, the covenants and agreements contained herein and other good and valuable consideration, the receipt and
sufficiency of which are hereby acknowledged, the parties hereby agree as follows: 
 1. Last Averaging Date. The definition of
“Last Averaging Date” in Schedule I to the Agreement is hereby revised to read as follows: 
  

	    	“Last Averaging Date” means a trading day between and including October 16, 2006 and February 8, 2007. If no notice is provided, then the Last Averaging Date
shall be February 8, 2007. 

 2. Counterparts. This Amendment may be executed by the parties hereto in
counterparts, and each such executed counterpart shall be, and shall be deemed to be, an original instrument and all such counterparts, taken together, shall constitute one and the same instrument. 
 3. Governing Law. This Amendment shall be governed by and construed and enforced in accordance with the laws of the state of New York without
reference to conflict of law principles. 
 IN WITNESS WHEREOF, UBS and the Issuer have caused this Agreement to be duly authorized, executed
and delivered as of the date first written above. 
  

					
	UBS AG, LONDON BRANCH
		
	By:	 	/s/ Michael Harris
		 	Name:	 	Michael Harris
		 	Title:	 	 Executive Director
 Equity Risk
Management










  

			
	
		
	By:	 	/s/ E. Kayaliogia
		 	Name: Emir Kayaliogia
		 	Title: Associate Director


  

					
	UBS SECURITIES LLC, as Agent
		
	By:	 	/s/ Michael Harris
		 	 Name:
 Title:
	 	 Michael Harris
 Executive Director
 Equity Risk Management



  

			
		
	By:	 	/s/ E. Kayaliogia
		 	Name: Emir Kayaliogia
		 	Title: Associate Director


  

			
	ONEOK, INC.
		
	By:	 	/s/ Jim Kneale
		 	Name: Jim Kneale
		 	Title:
* Pursuant to 5TH CIR. R. 47.5, the court has determined

that this opinion should not be published and is not precedent

except under the limited circumstances set forth in 5TH CIR.

R. 47.5.4.

IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT

 

No. 01-40968

Summary Calendar

 

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,

Plaintiff-Appellee,

versus

DAVID SANCHEZ CONSUEGRA,

Defendant-Appellant.

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

Appeal from the United States District Court

for the Southern District of Texas

USDC No. B-01-CR-137-7

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

May 9, 2002

Before JONES, SMITH, and EMILIO M. GARZA, Circuit Judges.

PER CURIAM:*

Having pleaded guilty to possession of more than 100

kilograms of marijuana with the intent to distribute and aiding

and abetting the use of a firearm during a drug-trafficking

crime, David Sanchez Consuegra argues on appeal that his plea to

the firearms offense should be vacated because the record

evidence does not establish his guilt. He further argues that
No. 01-40968

-2-

counsel was ineffective for advising him to plead guilty to the

firearms charge. 

In connection with his plea, Consuegra acknowledged that he

and eight codefendants robbed a drug dealer of a large quantity

of marijuana and that he was aware that three codefendants

carried firearms during the robbery. During the course of the

robbery, members of the victim’s family were held at gunpoint and

the drug dealer was shot. This evidence amply supports

Consuegra’s plea of guilty to the firearms violation. See United

States v. Harris, 25 F.3d 1275, 1278-79 (5th Cir. 1994). As a

clerical matter, we AMEND THE JUDGMENT to reflect that Consuegra

pleaded guilty to aiding and abetting the use and carrying of a

firearm during and in relation to a drug-trafficking crime in

violation of 18 U.S.C. §§ 2 and 924(c)(a)(A)(i).

Although as a general rule we do not address claims of

ineffective counsel on direct appeal, the record is adequate for

us to do so in this case. As the record establishes that

Consuegra is guilty of aiding and abetting the use of a firearm

during a drug-trafficking offense, counsel was not ineffective

for advising him to enter a plea to that charge. See Strickland

v. Washington, 466 U.S. 668, 687 (1984).

AFFIRMED AS AMENDED.
AAM-11-371-E July 8, 2011 Exemption No. 10305 Regulatory Docket No. FAA-2011-0701

Mr. Daniel J. Lipko Pine Bottom Aviation Services, LLC Pine Bottom Heliport 1702 Pulpit Road Martinsburg, PA 16662

Dear Mr. Lipko:

This letter is to inform you that we have granted your request for exemption. It transmits our decision, explains its basis, and gives you the conditions and limitations of the exemption, including the date it ends.

The Basis for Our Decision

By letter dated June 25, 2011, you petitioned the Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) on behalf of Pine Bottom Aviation Services, LLC (Pine Bottom) for an exemption from part 120 of Title 14, Code of Federal Regulations (14 CF R), to allow Pine Bottom, which is operating under separate parts of 14 CFR, to cover its safety-sensitive employee under one testing

program.

The FAA has determined that good cause exists for not publishing a summary of the petition

in the Federal Register because the requested exemption would not set a precedent, and any delay in acting on this petition would be detrimental to Pine Bottom.

The FAA has issued a grant of exemption in circumstances similar in all material respects to those presented in your petition. In Grant of Exemption No. 9703 (copy enclosed), the FAA found that Solid Edge’s § 91.147 air tour operations were closely connected to its part 135 operations. The FAA also found that combining the petitioner’s two testing programs into one would be in the public interest and would maintain an equivalent level of safety to that provided by the current regulations. Thus, the FAA concluded it was unnecessary to burden the petitioner by requiring it to conduct two separate testing programs.

Having reviewed your reasons for requesting an exemption, I find that—2

 they are similar in all material respects to relief previously requested in the enclosed Grant of Exemption No. 9703;

 the reasons stated by the FAA for granting the enclosed Grant of Exemption No. 9703 also apply to the situation you present; and

 a grant of exemption is in the public interest.

Our Decision

Under the authority contained in 49 U.S.C. 40113 and 44701, which the FAA Administrator has delegated to me, I hereby grant Pine Bottom Aviation Services, LLC an exemption from part 120 to the extent necessary to allow Pine Bottom, which is operating under separate parts of the regulations, to cover its safety-sensitive employees under one testing program, subject

to the conditions and limitations described below.

Conditions and Limitations

1. Employees of Pine Bottom are subject to the drug and alcohol regulations at all times while conducting operations under part 135 or part 91.

2. The drug and alcohol testing program must be implemented under the auspices of the Pine Bottom part 135 operation, not under part 91.

This exemption terminates on July 31, 2013 unless sooner superseded or rescinded.

Sincerely,

/s/
James R. Fraser, M.D. Deputy Federal Air Surgeon

Enclosure
| (logo)  WELLS FARGO | **Commercial  Mortgage Servicing**D1050-084,  8th Floor  401 South Tryon St.  Charlotte, NC 28202  1-800-326-1334 |
|---------------------|-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|

 

 

**ANNUAL STATEMENT OFCOMPLIANCE**

 

ReferenceisherebymadetothatcertainPooling and Servicing Agreementdatedas of December 1, 2015, by and among WELLS FARGO COMMERCIAL MORTGAGESECURITIES, INC., as Depositor, WELLS FARGO BANK, NATIONAL ASSOCIATION, asMaster Servicer, RIALTO CAPITAL ADVISORS, LLC, as Special Servicer, PENTALPHASURVEILLANCE LLC, as Trust Advisor, WELLSFARGO BANK, NATIONAL ASSOCIATION, as Certificate Administrator, as TaxAdministrator and as Custodian and WILMINGTON TRUST, NATIONAL ASSOCIATION, asTrustee, with respect to Commercial Mortgage Pass-Through Certificates Series 2015-NXS4(the "Agreement"). Capitalized terms used herein not otherwisedefined shall have the meanings assigned in theAgreement.

 

Pursuant to Section 11.12 of thisAgreement, I, Daniel Bober, Executive Vice President of Commercial MortgageServices do hereby certify that:

 

1.A review of the activities of the Master Servicer during the period fromJanuary 1, 2017 through December 31, 2017 (the “Reporting Period”), and of itsperformance per the Agreement during such period has been made under mysupervision,and

 

2.To the best of my knowledge, based on such review, the Master Servicer, hasfulfilled all of its obligations under this Agreement in all material respectsthroughout the ReportingPeriod.

 

 

IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the undersigned hasexecuted this Certificate as of the 28th day ofFebruary2018.

 

/s/Daniel Bober

DanielBober

Executive Vice President

Wells Fargo Bank

 

 

| Wells  Fargo Bank, N.A. | (logo) Together we’ll go far |
|-------------------------|------------------------------------|
H. Con. Res. 89 Agreed to August 1, 1995

One Hundred Fourth Congress

of the

United States of America

AT THE FIRST SESSION

Begun and held at the City of Washington on Wednesday,

the fourth day of January, one thousand nine hundred and ninety-five

Concurent Resolution

Resolved by the House of Representatives (the Senate concurring), That, nothwithstanding the provisions of section 132(a) of

the Legislative Reorganization Act of 1946 (2 U.S.C. 198(a)), the

House of Representatives and the Senate shall not adjourn for

a period in excess of three days, or adjourn sine die, until both

Houses of Congress have adopted a concurrent resolution providing

either for an adjournment (in excess of three days) to a day certain

or for adjournment sine die.

Attest:

Clerk of the House of Representatives.

Attest:

Secretary of the Senate.