alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
§ 54.6696-1 Claims for credit or refund by tax return preparers. ( a ) *In general.* For rules for claims for credit or refund by a tax return preparer who prepared a return or claim for refund for excise tax under chapter 43 of subtitle D of the Internal Revenue Code, the rules under § 1.6696-1 of this chapter will apply.
( b ) *Effective/applicability date.* This section is applicable to returns and claims for refund filed, and advice provided, after December 31, 2008.
[T.D. 9436, 73 FR 78459, Dec. 22, 2008]
```

[Congressional Bills 104th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[H. Con. Res. 56 Introduced in House (IH)]

104th CONGRESS
  1st Session
H. CON. RES. 56

 Expressing the sense of the Congress that rural health care should be 
           addressed in any Federal health care legislation.

_______________________________________________________________________

                    IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

                             April 4, 1995

  Mr. Stupak submitted the following concurrent resolution; which was 
                 referred to the Committee on Commerce

_______________________________________________________________________

                         CONCURRENT RESOLUTION

 
 Expressing the sense of the Congress that rural health care should be 
           addressed in any Federal health care legislation.

Whereas 27 percent of Americans live in rural areas;
Whereas many rural residents have poorer general health because they lack access 
        to basic care;
Whereas rural areas lack sufficient resources to provide adequate long-term 
        care;
Whereas rural areas lack an adequate number of medical personnel and have 
        difficulty recruiting and retaining health care professionals;
Whereas rural hospitals and health centers are experiencing financial shortfalls 
        and cannot fulfill all of the medical needs of rural Americans;
Whereas rural areas have a disproportionate share of transportation-dependent 
        individuals (including the elderly, the poor, and the disabled) but do 
        not receive a similar share of Federal transit revenues;
Whereas rural emergency medical services are hampered by long distances, poor 
        road conditions, and limited financial resources; and
Whereas significant numbers of rural persons with mental illnesses find it 
        difficult, if not impossible, to secure needed health care: Now, 
        therefore, be it
    Resolved by the House of Representatives (the Senate concurring), 
That it is the sense of the Congress that any legislation enacted to 
reform the health care delivery system of the United States should--
            (1) ensure that the unique needs of rural residents are 
        addressed and solved;
            (2) ensure that people who live in rural areas receive the 
        same quality health care as others;
            (3) increase funding for programs that train health care 
        professionals for rural practice and provide incentives for 
        them to practice in rural areas;
            (4) encourage telecommunications consortia and other 
        measures to ensure rural access to emerging medical 
        technologies;
            (5) increase coordination among transportation programs, 
        and increase funding to rural transit programs and to emergency 
        medical services; and
            (6) ensure that rural health care services are coordinated 
        effectively with existing systems and programs of medical, 
        income, residential, and social support at the Federal, State, 
        and local levels.
                                 <all>
```
Exhibit 99.2


                            CERTIFICATION PURSUANT TO
                             18 U.S.C. SECTION 1350,
                             AS ADOPTED PURSUANT TO
                  SECTION 906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002

In connection with the Quarterly Report of American Tax Credit Properties III
L.P. (the "Partnership") on Form 10-Q for the period ending June 29, 2002 as
filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the
"Report"), I, Neal Ludeke, Chief Financial Officer of Richman Housing Credits
Inc., general partner of Richman Tax Credit Properties III L.P., general partner
of the Company, certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. (S) 1350, as adopted pursuant to
(S) 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that:

     (1)  The Report fully complies with the requirements of section 13(a) or
          15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934; and

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



/s/ Neal Ludeke
----------------------------------------
Neal Ludeke
Chief Financial Officer of Richman
Housing Credits Inc., general partner of
Richman Tax Credit Properties III L.P.,
general partner of the Company
August 13, 2002
#### In the Matter of Margarita T. Walter, Petitioner, v Denis W. Donovan et al., Respondents.

[803 NYS2d 442]

Proceeding pursuant to CPLR article 78 in the nature of prohibition, inter alia, to prohibit the respondents from enforcing a judgment entered May 6, 2005, in an action entitled *Walter v Walter,*commenced in the Supreme Court, Westchester County, under index No. 17328/01.

Motion by the petitioner, in effect, to stay all proceedings to enforce the judgment pending hearing and determination of the proceeding and for leave to prosecute the proceeding as a poor *392person. Cross motion by the respondents to dismiss the proceeding.

Ordered that the branch of the motion which is for leave to prosecute the proceeding as a poor person is granted to the extent that the filing fee is waived; and it is further,

Ordered that the motion is otherwise denied as academic; and it is further,

Ordered that the cross motion is granted; and it is further,

Adjudged that the petition is denied and the proceeding is dismissed, without costs or disbursements.

“Because of its extraordinary nature, prohibition is available only where there is a clear legal right, and then only when a court—in cases where judicial authority is challenged—acts or threatens to act either without jurisdiction or in excess of its authorized powers” *(Matter of Holtzman v Goldman,*71 NY2d 564, 569 [1988]; see, *Matter of Rush v Mordue,*68 NY2d 348, 352 [1986]). The petitioner has failed to demonstrate a clear legal right to the relief sought. H. Miller, J.P., Krausman, Rivera and Dillon, JJ., concur.
```

[Congressional Bills 104th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[H. Con. Res. 58 Enrolled Bill (ENR)]

        H.Con.Res.58
                                                 Agreed to April 6, 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

                          Concurrent Resolution

    Resolved by the House of Representatives (the Senate concurring), 
That when the House adjourns on the legislative day of Friday, April 7, 
1995, it stand adjourned until 12:30 p.m. on Monday, May 1, 1995, or 
until noon on the second day after Members are notified to reassemble 
pursuant to section 3 of this concurrent resolution, whichever occurs 
first; and that when the Senate adjourns or recesses at the close of 
business on Thursday, April 6, 1995, Friday, April 7, 1995, Saturday, 
April 8, 1995, Sunday, April 9, 1995, or Monday, April 10, 1995, 
pursuant to a motion made by the majority leader, or his designee, in 
accordance with this concurrent resolution, it stand recessed or 
adjourned until noon on Monday, April 24, 1995, or such time on that 
day as may be specified by the majority leader or his designee in the 
motion to recess or adjourn, or until noon on the second day after 
Members are notified to reassemble pursuant to section 3 of this 
concurrent resolution, whichever occurs first.
    Sec. 2. When the House adjourns on the legislative day of 
Wednesday, May 3, 1995, it stand adjourned until 12:30 p.m. on Tuesday, 
May 9, 1995, or until noon on the second day after Members are notified 
to reassemble pursuant to section 3 of this concurrent resolution, 
whichever occurs first.
    Sec. 3. The Speaker of the House and the Majority Leader of the 
Senate, acting jointly after consultation with the Minority Leader of 
the House and the Minority Leader of the Senate, shall notify the 
Members of the House and the Senate, respectively, to reassemble 
whenever, in their opinion, the public interest shall warrant it.
Attest:

                                 Clerk of the House of Representatives.

Attest:

                                               Secretary of the Senate.
```
UNPUBLISHED

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

No. 23-7129

JULIUS ANDREW REASON, III,

Petitioner - Appellant,

v.

WARDEN JANSON,

Respondent - Appellee.

Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of South Carolina, at Florence. 

Bruce H. Hendricks, District Judge. (4:23-cv-01894-BHH)

Submitted: April 18, 2024 Decided: April 19, 2024

Before WILKINSON, NIEMEYER, and THACKER, Circuit Judges.

Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion.

Julius Andrew Reason, III, Appellant Pro Se. 

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.

USCA4 Appeal: 23-7129 Doc: 7 Filed: 04/19/2024 Pg: 1 of 2
2

PER CURIAM: 

Julius Andrew Reason, III, a federal prisoner, appeals the district court’s order 

accepting the magistrate judge’s recommendation and dismissing without prejudice 

Reason’s 28 U.S.C. § 2241 petition in which he sought to challenge his convictions by way 

of the savings clause in 28 U.S.C. § 2255(e). In light of the Supreme Court’s decision in 

Jones v. Hendrix, 599 U.S. 465, 477-80 (2023) (holding that petitioner cannot use § 2241 

petition to mount successive collateral challenges to federal convictions or sentence), we 

conclude that Reason cannot pursue his challenges in a § 2241 petition. Accordingly, we 

affirm the district court’s order. Reason v. Janson, No. 4:23-cv-01894-BHH (D.S.C. Oct. 

20, 2023). We dispense with oral argument because the facts and legal contentions are 

adequately presented in the materials before this court and argument would not aid the 

decisional process. 

AFFIRMED

USCA4 Appeal: 23-7129 Doc: 7 Filed: 04/19/2024 Pg: 2 of 2
SOUTHWEST AIRLINES CO.

Robert W. Kneisley

Associate General Counsel

1901 L Street, NW – Suite 640

Washington, DC 20036

(202) 263-6284

(202) 263-6291 - Fax

bob.kneisley@wnco.com

January 9, 2012

The Honorable Susan Kurland

Assistant Secretary for Aviation and International Affairs

U.S. Department of Transportation

1200 New Jersey Avenue, SE

Washington, DC 20590

Re: Application of US Airways, Inc. for Pendente Lite Authority to Operate 

Within-Perimeter Slot Exemptions (DCA-JAN); Docket OST-2000-7182

Dear Ms. Kurland:

On December 28, 2011 Delta Airlines announced that it would terminate

DCA-JAN service on March 2, 2012 and return its two corresponding AIR-21 slot 

exemptions for reallocation. On January 4, 2012 US Airways requested pendente 

lite authority to operate the two exemptions until they are permanently reallocated. I 

am writing to inform the Department that Southwest Airlines has no objection to US 

Airways’ application for interim service in that market, subject, of course, to the 

Department’s oft-stated admonition that the grant of pendent lite exemption authority 

has no bearing on the award of permanent authority. 

In fact, the Department’s overriding goal should be to reallocate the two slot 

exemptions as promptly as reasonably possible on a permanent basis, in a manner 

that best vindicates the public interest. To that end, Southwest will submit an 

application in the reallocation proceeding that will generate far greater public 

benefits than US Airways’ small aircraft service in the DCA-JAN market.

More importantly, to allow US Airways to obtain slot exemptions on a 

permanent basis - and thereby increase its already dominant share of DCA slot 

holdings - would fly in the face of the Department’s recent decision on the Delta/US 

Airways “slot-swap” requiring those carriers to give up DCA slots in order to preserve 

competition. If US Airways wishes to provide DCA-JAN service on a long-term 

basis, it can do so simply by using just two of the 460 slots in its massive DCA 

portfolio rather than trying to acquire the precious few slot exemptions that are 

available for the benefit of the public. 

Sincerely, 

cc: Polling list; Docket OST-2000-7182
<PAGE>   1
                                                                    Exhibit 11.1

                      PETE'S BREWING COMPANY AND SUBSIDIARY

                       COMPUTATION OF NET INCOME PER SHARE
               IN ACCORDANCE WITH INTERPRETIVE RELEASE NO. 34-9083
                    (in thousands, except per-share amounts)
<TABLE>
<CAPTION>
                                                 For the three
                                                  months ended
                                                   March 31,
                                             -------------------
                                                1997        1996
                                             -------------------
<S>                                            <C>        <C>   
Weighted average common shares
    outstanding for the period.............    10,742     10,627

Common equivalent shares assuming
    conversion of stock options and
    warrants under the treasury stock
    method.................................      -0-         398
                                             -------------------

Shares used in per share calculation.......    10,742     11,025
                                             ===================

Net income (loss)..........................  $ (2,820)     $ 466
                                             ===================

Net income (loss) per share..............    $  (0.26)     $0.04
                                             ===================
</TABLE>
[Federal Register Volume 74, Number 155 (Thursday, August 13, 2009)]
[Notices]
[Page 40818]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: E9-19492]


=======================================================================
-----------------------------------------------------------------------

FEDERAL DEPOSIT INSURANCE CORPORATION


Notice of Agency Meeting

    Pursuant to the provisions of the ``Government in the Sunshine 
Act'' (5 U.S.C. 552b), notice is hereby given that at 9:03 a.m. on 
Tuesday, August 11, 2009, the Board of Directors of the Federal Deposit 
Insurance Corporation met in closed session to consider matters related 
to the Corporation's resolution activities.
    In calling the meeting, the Board determined, on motion of Director 
Thomas J. Curry (Appointive), seconded by Vice Chairman Martin J. 
Gruenberg, concurred in by Ms. Julie L. Williams, acting in the place 
and stead of Director John C. Dugan (Comptroller of the Currency), 
Director John E. Bowman (Acting Director, Office of Thrift 
Supervision), and Chairman Sheila C. Bair, that Corporation business 
required its consideration of the matters which were to be the subject 
of this meeting on less than seven days' notice to the public; that no 
earlier notice of the meeting was practicable; that the public interest 
did not require consideration of the matters in a meeting open to 
public observation; and that the matters could be considered in a 
closed meeting by authority of subsections (c)(4), (c)(6), (c)(8), 
(c)(9)(A)(ii), and (c)(9)(B) of the ``Government in the Sunshine Act'' 
(5 U.S.C. 552b(c)(4), (c)(6), (c)(8), (c)(9)(A)(ii), and (c)(9)(B)).
    The meeting was held in the Board Room of the FDIC Building located 
at 550-17th Street, NW., Washington, DC.

    Dated: August 11, 2009.

Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation.
Robert E. Feldman,
Executive Secretary.
[FR Doc. E9-19492 Filed 8-12-09; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE P
§ 3.11 Definitions. ( a ) As used in the regulations in this part and as defined in section 607(k) of the Act— ( 1 ) The term *eligible vessel* means any vessel— ( i ) Constructed in the United States, and if reconstructed, reconstructed in the United States,
( ii ) Documented under the laws of the United States, and
( iii ) Operated in the foreign or domestic commerce of the United States or in the fisheries of the United States. Any vessel which was constructed outside of the United States but documented under the laws of the United States on April 15, 1970, or constructed outside the United States for use in the U.S. foreign trade pursuant to a contract entered into before April 15, 1970, shall be treated as satisfying the requirements of subdivision (i) of this subparagraph and the requirements of subparagraph (2)(i) of this section.
( 2 ) The term *qualified vessel* means any vessel— ( i ) Constructed in the United States and, if reconstructed, reconstructed in the United States,
( ii ) Documented under the laws of the United States, and
( iii ) Which the person maintaining the fund agrees with the Secretary of Commerce will be operated in the U.S. foreign, Great Lakes, or noncontiguous domestic trade or in the fisheries of the United States.
( 3 ) The term *agreement vessel* means any eligible vessel or qualified vessel which is subject to an agreement entered into under section 607 of the Act.
( 4 ) The term *vessel* includes cargo handling equipment which the Secretary of Commerce determines is intended for use primarily on the vessel. The term “vessel” also includes an ocean-going towing vessel or an ocean-going barge or comparable towing vessel or barge operated in the Great Lakes.
( b ) Insofar as the computation and collection of taxes are concerned, other terms used in the regulations in this part, except as otherwise provided in the Act or this part, have the same meaning as in the Code and the regulations thereunder.
###### Editorial Note on Part 301

#### Editorial Note:

In the text of this part, integral section references are to sections of the Internal Revenue Code of 1954; decimal section references are to the Code of Federal Regulations.

References in the text to the “Code” are references to sections of the Internal Revenue Code of 1954.

#### § 301.6162-1 Extension of time for payment of tax on gain attributable to liquidation of personal holding companies.

For provisions relating to the extension of time for payment of tax on gain attributable to liquidation of personal holding companies, see § 1.6162-1 of this chapter (Income Tax Regulations).
<TABLE> <S> <C>
 
<ARTICLE> 5 
<LEGEND> 
 
27.01 Financial Data Sheet 
 
This schedule contains summary financial information extracted 
from the consolidated financial statements and is qualified in 
its entirety by reference to such financial statements. 
<MULTIPLIER>	  			1,000 
        
<C>						<S>	 
<PERIOD-TYPE>	  			3-Mos 
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>			Dec-31-1997 
<PERIOD-START>				Apr-01-1997 
<PERIOD-END>				Jun-30-1996 
<CASH>					319 
<SECURITIES>				0 
<RECEIVABLES>				986 
<ALLOWANCES>				0 
<INVENTORY>				1,717 
<CURRENT-ASSETS>			4,236 
<PP&E>					2,543 
<DEPRECIATION>				(63) 
<TOTAL-ASSETS>				8,645 
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>		2,142 
<BONDS>					0 
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>		0 
<PREFERRED>	         		0 
<COMMON>					114 
<OTHER-SE>				0
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>	8,645 
<SALES>					3,424 
<TOTAL-REVENUES>			3,424 
<CGS>					1,832 
<TOTAL-COSTS>				4,161 
<OTHER-EXPENSES>			18 
<LOSS-PROVISION>	         	0 
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>			28 
<INCOME-PRETAX>			(995) 
<INCOME-TAX>				0 
<INCOME-CONTINUING>			(995) 
<DISCONTINUED>	 			0 
<EXTRAORDINARY>	         	0 
<CHANGES>	 				0 
<NET-INCOME>	 			(995) 
<EPS-PRIMARY>				(.087) 
<EPS-DILUTED>	 			(.087) 
         

</TABLE>
#### § 1.981-0 Repeal of section 981; effective dates.

The provisions of section 981 are not effective for taxable years beginning after December 31, 1976. For the treatment of the community income of aliens and their spouses for taxable years beginning after December 31, 1976, see section 879 and the regulations thereunder.

[T.D. 7670, 45 FR 6929, Jan. 31, 1980]
| (logo)usbank  | All  of **us** serving you |
|--------------------|----------------------------|

 

**Annual Statement ofCompliance**

**Morgan Stanley Bankof America Merrill Lynch Trust 2015-C25**

 

*VIA: EMAIL*

 

Banc of AmericaMerrill Lynch Commercial Mortgage Inc.

One Bryant Park

New York, New York10036

Attention: LelandF. Bunch, III

*leland.f.bunch@baml.com*

 

EightfoldReal Estate Capital, L.P.

1111Lincoln Road, Suite 802

MiamiBeach, Florida 33139

Attention:Brian Tageson

*btageson@eightfoldcapital.com*

 

*17g5informationprovider@usbank.com*

 

Re:         Pooling and ServicingAgreement dated as of October 1, 2015 (the “Agreement”) between Banc ofAmerica Merrill Lynch Commercial Mortgage Inc., as Depositor, Wells Fargo Bank,National Association, as Master Servicer, Midland Loan Services, a Division ofPNC Bank, National Association, as Special Servicer, Pentalpha SurveillanceLLC, as Trust Advisor and U.S. Bank National Association, as Trustee,Certificate Administrator, Certifcate Registrar, Authenticating Agent andCustodian.

 

I, Kimberly O. Jacobs, a Senior VicePresident of U.S. Bank National Association, as Certificate Administrator, as acertifying servicer hereby certify that:

 

(1) A review of the activities of theCertificate Administrator during the preceding calendar year (the “ReportingPeriod”) and of the performance of the Certificate Administrator under theAgreement has been made under my supervision; and

 

(2) To the best of my knowledge, based onsuch review, the Certificate Administrator has fulfilled all its obligationsunder the Agreement in all material respects throughout such Reporting Period. 

  

Capitalized terms used but not definedherein have the meanings set forth in the Agreement.

 

 

Date:March 1, 2018

 

 

U.S.Bank National Association, as Certificate Administrator

 

 

By:/s/ Kimberly O. Jacobs

KimberlyO. Jacobs

SeniorVice President
(November 10, 2005)

#### The People of the State of New York ex rel. Charles D. Abercrombie, on Behalf of Vlad Meisher, Petitioner, v Anthony Amicucci, Warden of the Westchester County Jail, Respondent.

[803 NYS2d 446]

Writ of habeas corpus in the nature of an application to reduce bail upon Westchester County indictment No. 381-05.

Adjudged that the writ is sustained, without costs or disbursements, to the extent of reducing bail for Vlad Meisher on Westchester County indictment No. 381-05 to the sum of $750,000, which may be posted in the form of an insurance company bail bond in that sum or by depositing the same sum as a cash bail alternative, with a bail sufficiency hearing to be held pursuant to CPL 520.30; all conditions imposed by the County Court, Westchester County, in conjunction with the original bail set on October 24, 2005, are to remain as conditions of the reduced bail. Crane, J.E, Mastro, Fisher and Lunn, JJ., concur.