alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
§ 1.542-1 General rule. A personal holding company is any corporation (other than one specifically excepted under section 542(c)) which, for the taxable year, meets: ( a ) The gross income requirement specified in section 542(a)(1) and § 1.542-2, and
( b ) The stock ownership requirement specified in section 542(a)(2) and § 1.542-3.
Both requirements must be satisfied with respect to each taxable year.
§ 48.4082-2 Diesel fuel and kerosene; notice required for dyed fuel. ( a ) *In general.* A legible and conspicuous notice stating *“DYED DIESEL FUEL, NONTAXABLE USE ONLY, PENALTY FOR TAXABLE USE”* must be posted by a seller on any retail pump or other delivery facility where it sells dyed diesel fuel for use by its buyer. A legible and conspicuous notice stating *“DYED KEROSENE, NONTAXABLE USE ONLY, PENALTY FOR TAXABLE USE”* must be posted by a seller on any retail pump or other delivery facility where it sells dyed kerosene for use by its buyer. Any seller that fails to post the required notice on any retail pump or other delivery facility where it sells dyed fuel is, for purposes of the penalty imposed by section 6715, presumed to know that the fuel will not be used for a nontaxable use.
( b ) *Cross reference; terminal operators.* For the requirement that terminal operators provide a notice with respect to dyed fuel, see § 48.4101-1(h)(3) (relating to terms and conditions of registration for terminal operators).
( c ) *Effective date.* This section is applicable with respect to diesel fuel after December 31, 1993, and with respect to kerosene after June 30, 1998.
[T.D. 8879, 65 FR 17157, Mar. 31, 2000]
#### Gary Czarnecki, Appellant, v Darlene Welch et al., Respondents.

[803 NYS2d 817]

Lahtinen, J.

Appeal from an order of the Supreme Court (Williams, J.), entered February 17, 2005 in Saratoga County, which denied plaintiffs motion to compel discovery.

Plaintiff commenced this action to recover for personal injuries sustained when he was bitten by defendants’ dog in *915December 2001. Subsequently, plaintiff moved for an order directing defendants to comply with his discovery demand that the dog be videotaped during a re-creation of the events surrounding the biting incident for evaluation by an animal behavior expert. Supreme Court denied the motion, noting the passage of “some three years” since the incident as well as the lack of authority permitting such an experiment. Plaintiff appeals.

Supreme Court has broad discretion in managing disclosure, and absent an abuse of discretion or unreasonable interference with the disclosure of relevant and necessary material we will not disturb its determinations with regard thereto *(see American Assn. of Bioanalysts v New York State Dept. of*Health, 12 AD3d 868, 869 [2004]; *McMahon v Aviette Agency,*301 AD2d 820, 821 [2003]; *Jordan v Blue Circle Atl.,*296 AD2d 752, 752-753 [2002]). Based on the facts and circumstances of this case, we cannot conclude that Supreme Court abused its discretion in denying the motion *(see Austin v Bascaran,*185 AD2d 474, 475 [1992]; *compare Hayden v Sieni,*196 AD2d 573, 574 [1993], *appeal dismissed*82 NY2d 835 [1993]).

Cardona, P.J., Mercure, Mugglin and Rose, JJ., concur. Ordered that the order is affirmed, with costs.
[Federal Register Volume 74, Number 151 (Friday, August 7, 2009)]
[Notices]
[Page 39612]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: E9-18617]


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

DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE

Forest Service


Trinity County Resource Advisory Committee

AGENCY: Forest Service, USDA.

ACTION: Notice of meeting.

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

SUMMARY: The Trinity County Resource Advisory Committee (RAC) will meet 
at the Trinity County schools office conference room on August 17, 2009 
from 6:30 p.m. The purpose of this meeting is to discuss proposed 
projects under Title II of the Secure Rural Schools and Community Self-
Determination Act of 2008.

DATES: Monday, August 17, 2009 at 6:30 p.m.

ADDRESSES: The meeting will be held at the Trinity County Office of 
Education, 201 Memorial Drive, Weaverville, CA 96093.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Resource Advisory Committee 
Coordinator John Heibel at 530-226-2524 or <a href="/cdn-cgi/l/email-protection#b7dddfd2ded5d2dbf7d1c499d1d2d399c2c4"><span class="__cf_email__" data-cfemail="1f75777a767d7a735f796c31797a7b316a6c">[email protected]</span></a>.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The meeting is open to the public. Public 
input sessions will be provided and individuals will have the 
opportunity to address the Trinity County Resource Advisory Committee.

    Dated: July 29, 2009.
Scott G. Armentrout,
Deputy Forest Supervisor, Shasta-Trinity National Forest.
[FR Doc. E9-18617 Filed 8-6-09; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE M


</pre><script data-cfasync="false" src="/cdn-cgi/scripts/5c5dd728/cloudflare-static/email-decode.min.js"></script></body>
</html>
<TABLE> <S> <C>


<ARTICLE>                     5
       
<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   3-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                              JUN-30-1996
<PERIOD-START>                                 JUL-01-1996
<PERIOD-END>                                   SEP-30-1996
<CASH>                                         18,953
<SECURITIES>                                   0                                   
<RECEIVABLES>                                  3,311,697
<ALLOWANCES>                                   0
<INVENTORY>                                    0
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                               3,338,264
<PP&E>                                         1,073,204
<DEPRECIATION>                                 722,177
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                 4,123,924
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                          2,243,666
<BONDS>                                        0
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                          0
<PREFERRED>                                    0
<COMMON>                                       5,016
<OTHER-SE>                                     0
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                   4,123,924
<SALES>                                        0
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                               296,291
<CGS>                                          155,711
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                  1,142,069
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                               1,284,043
<LOSS-PROVISION>                               0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                             0
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                0
<INCOME-TAX>                                   0
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                            0
<DISCONTINUED>                                 0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                0
<CHANGES>                                      0
<NET-INCOME>                                   (2,285,532)
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                  (.06)
<EPS-DILUTED>                                  (.06)
                                               


</TABLE>
NOT FOR PUBLICATION

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT

JULIO SMITH PARRA,

Plainti ff

- Appellant,

v.
E. K. Mc DANIEL; et al.,

Defendants

- Appellees. No. 14

- 15720

D.C. No. 3 :11

- cv
- 00913

- LRH

WGC

MEMORANDUM *

Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of Nevada Larry R. Hicks, District Judge, Presiding

Submitted August 25, 2015 **

Before: McKEOWN, CLIFT ON, and HURWITZ, Circuit Judges

. Nevada state prisoner Julio Smith Parra appeals pro se from the district
court’s summary judgment in his 42 U.S.C. § 1 983 action alleging retaliation and
due process violations. We have jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. § 1291. We review
de novo, Brodheim v. Cry , 584 F.3d 1262, 1267 (9th Cir. 2009), and we affirm.

* This disposition is not appropri ate for publication and is not precedent except as provided by 9th Cir. R. 36

- 3.

** The panel unanimously concludes this case is suitable for decision without oral argument. See Fed. R. App. P. 34(a)(2). 

# FILED

SEP 4 2015
MOLLY C. DWYER, CLER K U.S. COURT OF APPEAL S2 14

- 15720

The district court properly granted summary judgment on Parra’s due
process claim because Parra failed to raise a genuine dispute of material fact as to
whether he experienced an “atypical and significant hardship . . . in relation to the
ordinary incident s of prison life” that would give rise to a protected liberty interest

.
See Sandin v. Conner , 515 U.S. 472, 484 (1995) . Contrary to Parra’s contention,
the district court was not required to address whether there was “some evidence” to
support the discip linary finding.
The district court properly granted summary judgment on Parra’s retaliation

claim because Parra failed to raise a genuine dispute of material fact as to whether

defendant Bryant took an adverse action against Parra in response to Parra’s
protected conduct. See id . at 1269

- 71 ( elements of a retaliation claim in the prison

context; “a plaintiff must show that his protected conduct was the substantial or

motivat ing factor behind the defendant’ s conduct” (citation and internal quotation

mark s omitted))

. We do not consider matters not specifically and distinctly raised and argued
in the opening brief

. See Padgett v. Wright , 587 F.3d 983, 985 n. 2 (9th Cir. 2009)
(per curiam).

A FFIRMED.
<PAGE>

                                                                    EXHIBIT 32.1

                    CERTIFICATION OF CHIEF EXECUTIVE OFFICER
   PURSUANT TO SECTION 906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002 (18 U.S.C. 1350)

      The undersigned Chief Executive Officer of First Keystone Financial, Inc.
(the "Registrant") hereby certifies that the Registrant's Form 10-Q for the
quarter ended June 30, 2006 fully complies with the requirements of Section
13(a) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 and that the information contained
therein fairly presents, in all material respects, the financial condition and
results of operations of the Registrant.

                               /s/ Thomas M. Kelly
                               ---------------------------------------------
                               Name: Thomas M. Kelly
                               Title: President and Chief Executive Officer

Date:  August 14, 2006

A signed original of this written statement required by Section 906 of the
Sarbanes-Oxley Act has been provided to First Keystone Financial, Inc. and will
be retained by First Keystone Financial, Inc. and furnished to the Securities
and Exchange Commission or its staff upon request.
#### The People of the State of New York, Respondent, v Trina N. Carollo, Appellant.

[803 NYS2d 480]

Appeal from a judgment of the Orleans County Court (James P. Punch, J.), rendered November 3, 2003. The judgment convicted defendant, upon her plea of guilty, of assault in the second degree.

It is hereby ordered that the judgment so appealed from be and the same hereby is unanimously affirmed.

Memorandum: Defendant appeals from a judgment convicting her, upon her plea of guilty, of assault in the second degree (Penal Law § 120.05 [3]). She failed to preserve for our review her contention that reversal is required because County Court failed to advise her at the time of the plea that she would be subject to a five-year period of postrelease supervision *(see*
      *1130
      *People v DePugh,*16 AD3d 1083 [2005]; *People v Pan Zhi Feng,*15 AD3d 862 [2005]; *People v Hollenbach,*307 AD2d 776 [2003], *lv denied*100 NY2d 642 [2003]). We decline to exercise our power to review that contention as a matter of discretion in the interest of justice *(see*CPL 470.15 [6] [a]). Contrary to defendant’s further contention, the five-year period of postrelease supervision is not illegal. Defendant was sentenced as a second felony offender pursuant to Penal Law § 70.06 (6), and thus a five-year period of postrelease supervision was mandatory *(see*former § 70.45 [2]; *People v Jeter,*15 AD3d 885, 886 [2005], *lv denied*4 NY3d 887 [2005]; *People v Skye,*298 AD2d 889 [2002]). Present—Pigott, Jr., P.J., Hurlbutt, Gorski, Smith and Lawton, JJ.
1. I have reviewed this report on Form 10-K and all reports on Form 10-D required to be filed in respect of the period covered by this report on Form 10-K of BMW Vehicle Lease Trust 2015-2 (the “Exchange Act periodic reports”);
  2. Based on my knowledge, the Exchange Act periodic reports, taken as a whole, do not contain any untrue statement of a material fact or omit to state a material fact necessary to make the statements made, in light of the circumstances under which such statements were made, not misleading with respect to the period covered by this report;
  3. Based on my knowledge, all of the distribution, servicing and other information required to be provided under Form 10-D for the period covered by this report is included in the Exchange Act periodic reports;
  4. I am responsible for reviewing the activities performed by the servicer and based on my knowledge and the compliance review conducted in preparing the servicer compliance statement required in this report under Item 1123 of Regulation AB, and except as disclosed in the Exchange Act periodic reports, the servicer has fulfilled its obligations under the servicing agreement in all material respects; and
 5. All of the reports on assessment of compliance with servicing criteria for asset-backed securities and their related attestation reports on assessment of compliance with servicing criteria for asset-backed securities required to be included in this report in accordance with Item 1122 of Regulation AB and Exchange Act Rules 13a-18 and 15d-18 have been included as an exhibit to this report, except as otherwise disclosed in this report.  Any material instances of noncompliance described in such reports have been disclosed in this report on Form 10-K.
   By: /s/ Ritu Chandy
| (logo) WELLS FARGO | **Commercial Mortgage  Servicing**D1050-084, 8th Fl  401 South Tryon Street  Charlotte, NC 28202  1-800-326-1334 |
|--------------------|------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|

 

 

**ANNUAL STATEMENT OFCOMPLIANCE**

 

 

Reference is hereby made tothat certain Trust and Servicing Agreement dated as of September 26, 2016, byand among J.P. Morgan Chase Commercial Mortgage Securities Corp., as Depositor,Wells Fargo Bank, National Association, as Servicer and Special Servicer, WellsFargo Bank, National Association, as Certificate Administrator and WilmingtonTrust, National Association, as Trustee with respect to Commercial MortgagePass-Through Certificates Series 2016-NINE (the "Agreement").Capitalized terms used herein not otherwise defined shall have the meaningsassigned in the Agreement.

 

Pursuant to Section 13.7 ofthis Agreement, I, Daniel Marthinsen, Managing Director of Special Servicing dohereby certify that:

 

1.            A review of the activities of the Special Servicer during the period fromSeptember 26, 2016 through December 31, 2016 (the “Reporting Period”), and ofits performance per the Agreement during such period has been made under mysupervision, and 

 

2.            To the best of my knowledge, based on such review, the Special Servicer hasfulfilled all of its obligations under the Agreement in all material respectsthroughout the Reporting Period.

 

 

IN WITNESS WHEREOF, theundersigned has executed this Certificate as of the 28th day of February 2017.

                                                                                               

 

/s/ Daniel Marthinsen

Daniel Marthinsen, ManagingDirector                  

Wells Fargo Bank 

 

| Wells Fargo Bank, N.A. | (logo) Together we’ll go far |
|------------------------|------------------------------------|
<PAGE>
                                                                    EXHIBIT 32.1

                    CERTIFICATION OF CHIEF EXECUTIVE OFFICER
   PURSUANT TO SECTION 906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002 (18 U.S.C. 1350)

     The undersigned Chief Executive Officer of First Keystone Financial, Inc.
(the "Registrant") hereby certifies that the Registrant's Form 10-Q for the
quarter ended December 31, 2005 fully complies with the requirements of Section
13(a) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 and that the information contained
therein fairly presents, in all material respects, the financial condition and
results of operations of the Registrant.


                                        /s/ Thomas M. Kelly
                                        ----------------------------------------
                                        Name: Thomas M. Kelly
                                        Title: President and
                                               Chief Executive Officer

Date: February 14, 2006

A signed original of this written statement required by Section 906 of the
Sarbanes-Oxley Act has been provided to First Keystone Financial, Inc. and will
be retained by First Keystone Financial, Inc. and furnished to the Securities
and Exchange Commission or its staff upon request.


                                       -1-
**EXHIBIT 18.1**

 

May 6, 2004

 

 

# Board of Directors

# Western Gas Resources

1099 18th Street,Suite 1200

Denver, CO  80202

 

Dear Directors:

 

We are providing this letter to you for inclusion asan exhibit to your Form 10-Q filing pursuant to Item 601 of Regulation S-K.

 

We have been provided a copy ofthe Company’s Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q for the period ended March 31,2004.  The notes to the financialstatements therein describe a change in accounting principle from depleting oiland gas properties on a well-by-well basis to a field level.  It should be understood that thepreferability of one acceptable method of accounting over another for depletingoil and gas properties has not been addressed in any authoritative accountingliterature, and in expressing our concurrence below we have relied onmanagement’s determination that this change in accounting principle ispreferable.  Based on our reading ofmanagement’s stated reasons and justification for this change in accountingprinciple in the Form 10-Q, and our discussions with management as to theirjudgment about the relevant business planning factors relating to the change,we concur with management that such change represents, in the Company’scircumstances, the adoption of a preferable accounting principle in conformitywith Accounting Principles Board Opinion No. 20.

 

We have not audited anyfinancial statements of the Company as of any date or for any period subsequentto December 31, 2003.  Accordingly, ourcomments are subject to change upon completion of an audit of the financialstatements covering the period of the accounting change.

 

Very truly yours,

 

 

PricewaterhouseCoopers LLP

 

----
#### Daniel Dobbins, Appellant, v Nancy Vartabedian, Respondent.

[805 NYS2d 576]

In an action, inter alia, to recover damages for malicious prosecution and abuse of process, the plaintiff appeals from an order of the Supreme Court, Suffolk County (Cohalan, J.), dated November 9, 2004, which granted the defendant’s motion to vacate a judgment of the same court dated December 19, 2002, entered upon her default in appearing at a pretrial conference, which was in his favor and against the defendant in the principal sum of $62,227.

Ordered that the order is reversed, on the law and as a matter of discretion, the motion is denied, and the judgment dated December 19, 2002, is reinstated.

To vacate her default in appearing at a pretrial conference, the defendant was required to demonstrate both a reasonable excuse for her default and a meritorious defense *(see*CFLR 5015 [a] [1]; *Roussodimou v Zafiriadis,*238 AD2d 568, 568-569 [1997]). The defendant failed to proffer a reasonable excuse for her failure to appear at numerous court-ordered conferences and to promptly move to vacate her default in appearing at the inquest *(see Amato v Fast Repair, Inc.,*15 AD3d 429 [2005]; *Santiago v New York City Health & Hosps. Corp.,*10 AD3d 393, 394 [2004]; *29-31 N. Sta. Plaza v Shmulick Constr. Corp.,*8 AD3d 472, 473 [2004]). Accordingly, the Supreme Court improvidently exercised its discretion in granting the defendant’s motion to vacate the judgment dated December 19, 2002. Adams, J.P., Ritter, Goldstein, Skelos and Dillon, JJ., concur.
t~issouri e;;.a;;;s•"':r&'·M 

601 Historic 66 W Waynesville, Mo 65583 

Phone: 573-774-6171 Fax: 573-774-5()47 

www.waynesvillemo.org 

September 24, 2012 

Mr. Dennis DeVany 

Chief, EAS & Domestic Analysis 

US Department of Transportation 

400 Seventh St, S.W. 

Washington, DC 20590 

Dear Mr. DeVany: 

Thank you for the opportunity to comment on the Essential Air Services proposals submitted for air 

service at the Waynesville/St. Robert Regional Airport at Forney Field on Fort Leonard Wood. Our 

commitment to air service for our communities led to a unique partnership between the Cities of 

Waynesville, St. Robert and Fort Leonard Wood. As the civilian sponsors of the existing joint use 

Agreement on Fort Leonard Wood, the continuance of viable air service from the Fort Leonard Wood 

Region is of prime importance to the Cities of St. Robert and Waynesville and our regional neighbors. 

""''"'~ 

BERT 

111o..~\lfl,\:f>AVi'fl:ll'\ ",ti~t A (Jr~i'tll~>l~l·tr. \I~V,~!{h(~ ~~.J 

'JJ:ll'>li'lllla(l'\ii!O') 

~~~ W• 'oll·l(ld~) 

Wrl\~.l.lir.trtl.HI.Hn 

Although, we were pleased with the submitted proposals, based on our review ofthe EAS proposals and 

Discussions with Fort Leonard Wood official, the Cities of Waynesville and St. Robert recommend accepting 

the proposal submitted by Cape Air. The cities are extremely pleased with the performance of Cape Air which 

has resulted in a growing passenger service in this area. We recommend Cape Air as the best balance between 

value and service for our community. 

On behalf of the Cities of Waynesville and St. Robert, thank you for your continued support of the EAS program. 

Please do not hesitate to contact us if you need further input. 

Sincerely, 

Mayor Luge Hardman 

City of Waynesville 

/.t-~-;t:L-~~~ t~~ · Mayor George Sanders 

City of St. Robert
§ 40.6060-1 Reporting requirements for tax return preparers. ( a ) *In general.* A person that employs one or more tax return preparers to prepare a return or claim for refund of any tax to which this part 40 applies other than for the person, at any time during a return period, shall satisfy the recordkeeping and inspection requirements in the manner stated in § 1.6060-1 of this chapter.
( b ) *Effective/applicability date.* This section is applicable to returns and claims for refund filed after December 31, 2008.
[T.D. 9436, 73 FR 78454, Dec. 22, 2008; 74 FR 5105, Jan. 29, 2009]
#### § 31.3121(a)(6)-1 Payment by an employer of employee tax under section 3101 or employee contributions under a State law.

The term “wages” does not include any payment by an employer (without deduction from the remuneration of, or other reimbursement from, the employee) of either (a) the employee tax imposed by section 3101 or the corresponding section of prior law, or (b) any payment required from an employee under a State unemployment compensation law.
Editorial Note on Part 10
Editorial Note: Nomenclature changes to part 10 appear by T.D. 9359, 72 FR 54544, Sept. 26, 2007.

§ 10.24 Assistance from or to disbarred or suspended persons and former Internal Revenue Service employees. A practitioner may not, knowingly and directly or indirectly: ( a ) Accept assistance from or assist any person who is under disbarment or suspension from practice before the Internal Revenue Service if the assistance relates to a matter or matters constituting practice before the Internal Revenue Service.
( b ) Accept assistance from any former government employee where the provisions of § 10.25 or any Federal law would be violated.