alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
104TH CONGRESS

1ST SESSION H. R. 1026

AN ACT

To designate the United States Post Office building

Stratton Post Office’’.rado Springs, Colorado, as the ‘‘Winfield Scottlocated at 201 East Pikes Peak Avenue in Colo-
104TH CONGRESS

1ST SESSION H. R. 1026

AN ACT

To designate the United States Post Office building located

at 201 East Pikes Peak Avenue in Colorado Springs,

Colorado, as the ‘‘Winfield Scott Stratton Post Office’’.

1 Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representa2 tives of the United States of America in Congress assembled,
2

•HR 1026 EH

1 SECTION 1. DESIGNATION.

2 The United States Post Office building located at 201

3 East Pikes Peak Avenue, Colorado Springs, Colorado,

4 shall be known and designated as the ‘‘Winfield Scott

5 Stratton Post Office’’.

6 SEC. 2. REFERENCES.

7 Any reference in a law, map, regulation, document,

8 paper, or other record of the United States to the building

9 referred to in section 1 shall be deemed to be a reference

10 to the ‘‘Winfield Scott Stratton Post Office’’.

Passed the House of Representatives October 17,

1995.

Attest:

Clerk.
```

[Congressional Bills 104th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[H.J. Res. 50 Referred in Senate (RFS)]

104th CONGRESS
  1st Session
H. J. RES. 50

_______________________________________________________________________

                   IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES

             February 2 (legislative day, January 30), 1995

   Received; read twice and referred to the Committee on Energy and 
                           Natural Resources

_______________________________________________________________________

                            JOINT RESOLUTION

 
 To designate the visitor center at the Channel Islands National Park, 
      California, as the ``Robert J. Lagomarsino Visitor Center''.

    Resolved by the Senate and House of Representatives of the United 
States of America in Congress assembled,

SECTION 1. DESIGNATION.

    The visitor center at the Channel Islands National Park, 
California, is designated as the ``Robert J. Lagomarsino Visitor 
Center''.

SEC. 2. LEGAL REFERENCES.

    Any reference in any law, regulation, document, record, map, or 
other paper of the United States to the visitor center referred to in 
section 1 is deemed to be a reference to the ``Robert J. Lagomarsino 
Visitor Center''.

            Passed the House of Representatives February 1, 1995.

            Attest:

                                                ROBIN H. CARLE,

                                                                 Clerk.
```
Court of Appeals

of the State of Georgia

ATLANTA,____________________

The Court of Appeals hereby passes the following order:

A20A0361. OBATALA BLOUNT v. BRIDGETT BEECHER.

Obtala Blount has filed an original mandamus action in this Court against

Bridgett Bleecher, Deputy Clerk of the Superior Court of Tattnall County. Blount

asks this Court to compel Bleecher to file and process the notice of appeal he filed in

a proceeding before the superior court. This case is not, however, subject to original

mandamus relief by our Court.

Appellate courts have mandamus authority in aid of their jurisdiction, see Ga.

Const. of 1983, Art. VI, Sec. I, Par. IV, but the need to resort to the appellate courts

for such relief is “extremely rare” because “the superior courts of this state have the

power, in proper cases, to issue process in the nature of mandamus, prohibition,

specific performance, quo warranto, and injunction[.]” Brown v. Johnson, 251 Ga.

436, 436 (306 SE2d 655) (1983). Moreover, mandamus will issue “only if (1) no

other adequate legal remedy is available to effectuate the relief sought; and (2) the

applicant has a clear legal right to such relief.” Bibb County v. Monroe County, 294

Ga. 730, 734 (2) (755 SE2d 760) (2014).

Thisis not one of the extremely rare instancesin which this Court will exercise

original mandamus jurisdiction. See Gay v. Owens, 292 Ga. 480, 482-483 (2) (738

SE2d 614) (2013). Until Blount has pursued mandamus relief in superior court and

obtained a ruling thereon, there is no basis for this Court to exercise jurisdiction. See

Brown, 251 Ga. at 436. Accordingly, this petition for writ of mandamus is hereby

DISMISSED.

November 22, 2019
Court of Appeals of the State of Georgia

Clerk’s Office, Atlanta,____________________

I certify that the above is a true extract from

the minutes of the Court of Appeals of Georgia.

Witness my signature and the seal of said court

hereto affixed the day and year last above written.

, Clerk.

11/22/2019
(logo) pwc

 

 

**Report of IndependentRegistered Public Accounting Firm**

 

 

To the Board of Directors andshareholders of CoreLogic, Inc.:

 

We have examined management’sassertion, included in the accompanying Report on Assessment of Compliance,that CoreLogic Commercial Real Estate Services, Inc. (the "Company"),a subsidiary of CoreLogic, Inc. complied with the servicing criteria set forthin Item 1122(d) of the Securities and Exchange Commission's Regulation AB forall loans for commercial mortgage loan outsourcing customers for which theCompany served as the commercial tax service provider (the"Platform"), as of December 31, 2016 and for the year then ended, onlyincluding 1122(d)(1)(iv), 1122(d)(2)(ii), 1122(d)(2)(v), 1122(d)(2)(vi),1122(d)(2)(vii), 1122(d)(4)(xi), 1122(d)(4)(xii) and 1122(d)(4)(xiii), whichthe Company has determined are applicable to the servicing activities performedby it with respect to the Platform. Management is responsible for the Company'scompliance with the servicing criteria. Our responsibility is to express anopinion on management's assertion based on our examination.

 

Our examination was conductedin accordance with attestation standards of the Public Company AccountingOversight Board (United States) and, accordingly, included examining, on a testbasis, evidence about the Company’s compliance with the applicableservicing criteria and performing such other procedures as we considerednecessary in the circumstances. Our examination included testing of selectedservicing activities related to the Platform, and determining whether theCompany performed those selected activities in compliance with the applicableservicing criteria. Our procedures were limited to the selected servicingactivities performed by the Company during the period covered by this report.Our procedures were not designed to detect noncompliance arising from errorsthat may have occurred prior to or subsequent to our tests that may haveaffected the balances or amounts calculated or reported by the Company duringthe period covered by this report. We believe that our examination provides areasonable basis for our opinion. Our examination does not provide a legaldetermination on the Company’s compliance with the servicing criteria.

 

In our opinion,management’s assertion that the Company complied with the aforementionedapplicable servicing criteria as of and for the year ended December 31, 2016 forall loans for commercial mortgage loan outsourcing customers for which theCompany served as the commercial tax service provider is fairly stated, in allmaterial respects.

 

/s/ PricewaterhouseCoopers

 

February 6, 2017

 

 

*PricewaterhouseCoopers LLP,2001 Ross Avenue, Suite 1800, Dallas TX 75201-2997*

*T: 214-746-6500, F:214-712-6660,*www.pwc.com
1 

## Missouri Court of Appeals

**Southern District**

**Division Two**

JOSEPH A. SMILEY, )

)

Appellant, )

)

vs. ) No. SD37012

)

STATE OF MISSOURI, ) FILED: January 5, 2022

)

Respondent. )

APPEAL FROM THE CIRCUIT COURT OF GREENE COUNTY

Honorable Calvin R. Holden, Judge

REVERSED AND REMANDED WITH DIRECTIONS

Joseph A. Smiley (“Movant”) appeals the motion court’s judgment denying his Rule

29.15 amended motion for pos t

- conviction relief (“PCR”)

. 1 Because Movant’s amended motion

was not timely filed and the motion court did not conduct an independent abandonment inquiry,

we reverse the motion court’s judgment and remand the case to the motion court to conduct such

an i nquiry and then to proceed accordingly.

Movant’s convictions in the underlying criminal case were affirmed by this Court on

direct appeal and mandate issued on July 14, 2016. Movant timely filed a pro se PCR motion on

August 15, 2016

.

1 All rule references are to Misso uri Court Rules (2016).2 Two days later, on August 17, 2016, the motion court appointed the State Public

Defender to represent Movant , which triggered the commencement of the Rule 29.15(g) sixty

day period for filing an amended motion. Stanley v. State , 420 S.W.3d 532, 540 (Mo. banc

2014). Thus, any amended motion was initially due to be filed by October 17, 2016. 2

Also, on August 17, 2016 , o n its own motion

, the motion court granted “an additional 60

days for filing of an Amended Motion

. ” At that time, however, the motion court was only

authorized to extend the time for filing an amended motion “for one additional period not to

exceed thirty days. ” Rule 29.15(g). The motion court ha d no authority to extend the time limit

for filing an amended motion beyond the initial 30

- day extension. Stanley , 420 S.W.3d at 541.

As so limited, t he motion court’s order extend ed the filing deadline for an amended motion for

only an additional thirty days . Thus, any amended motion was due to be filed no later than

November 16, 2016.

Appointed counsel untimely filed Movant’s amended PCR motion on January 23, 2017.

When an untimely amended motion is filed, the motion court has a duty to undertake an

independent inquiry to determine if abandonment occurred. Moore v. State , 45 8 S.W.3d 822,

825 (Mo. banc 2015). That was not done here, which requires us to “remand the case because

the motion court is the appropriate forum to conduct such an inquiry.” Id. at 826. “ The result of

the inquiry into abandonment determines which motion

— the initial motion or the amended

motion

— the court should adjudicate. ” Id.

The motion court’s judgment is reversed and the case is remanded to the motion court to

conduct an independent abandonment inquiry and for further proceedings consistent wit h the

outcome of that inquiry.

2 The 60 th day fell on Sunday, October 16, 2016 , which by Rule 44.01(a) extended the period until October 17, 2016.3 GARY W. LYNCH, C.J.

– OPINION AUTHOR

DON E. BURRELL, J.

– CONCURS

JENNIFER R. GROWCOCK, J.

– CONCURS
V

104TH CONGRESS

1ST SESSION H. R. 1030

For the relief of John M. Ragsdale.

IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

FEBRUARY 23, 1995

Mr. CALVERT introduced the following bill; which was referred to the

Committee on the Judiciary

A BILL

For the relief of John M. Ragsdale.

1 Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representa2 tives of the United States of America in Congress assembled,

3 SECTION 1. COMPENSATION FOR WORK-RELATED INJURY.

4 (a) AUTHORIZATION OF PAYMENT.—The Secretary

5 of the Treasury shall pay, out of money in the Treasury

6 not otherwise appropriated, the sum of $48,128.09 to

7 John M. Ragsdale as compensation for injuries sustained

8 by John M. Ragsdale in June and July of 1952 while John

9 M. Ragsdale was employed by the National Bureau of

10 Standards.

11 (b) SETTLEMENT OF CLAIMS.—The payment made

12 under subsection (a) shall be a full settlement of all claims
2

•HR 1030 IH

1 by John M. Ragsdale against the United States for the

2 injuries referred to in subsection (a).

3 SEC. 2. LIMITATION ON AGENTS AND ATTORNEYS’ FEES.

4 It shall be unlawful for an amount that exceeds 10

5 percent of the amount authorized by section 1 to be paid

6 to or received by any agent or attorney in consideration

7 of services rendered in connection with this Act. Any per8 son who violates this section shall be guilty of an infrac9 tion and shall be subject to a fine in the amount provided

10 in title 18, United States Code.

Æ
EXHIBIT 10.6(b)


2007 AMENDMENT TO
 THE 1995 NON-QUALIFIED
 STOCK OPTION PLAN


          The Board amends the Plan, effective February 12, 2007, as follows:


          Section 8(a) is hereby amended by replacing the current text with the following text:


          In the event of a stock dividend, stock split, recapitalization, merger in which the Company is the surviving corporation or other capital adjustment affecting the Common Stock, an appropriate adjustment shall be made to the number of shares subject to the Plan and the number of shares and the exercise price per share with respect to any option outstanding under the Plan.  All such adjustments will be effected in a manner that precludes the enlargement of rights and benefits under outstanding option awards.
[Federal Register Volume 74, Number 158 (Tuesday, August 18, 2009)]
[Notices]
[Page 41711]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: E9-19624]


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

DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES

National Institutes of Health


National Institute of General Medical Sciences; Notice of Closed 
Meeting

    Pursuant to section 10(d) of the Federal Advisory Committee Act, as 
amended (5 U.S.C. App.), 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 contract proposals and the discussions could 
disclose confidential trade secrets or commercial property such as 
patentable material, and personal information concerning individuals 
associated with the contract proposals, the disclosure of which would 
constitute a clearly unwarranted invasion of personal privacy.

    Name of Committee: National Institute of General Medical 
Sciences Special Emphasis Panel ZGM1-GDB-X-C1.
    Date: September 8, 2009.
    Time: 2 p.m. to 4 p.m.
    Agenda: To review and evaluate contract proposals.
    Place: National Institutes of Health, Natcher Building, Room 
3AN18, 45 Center Drive, Bethesda, MD 20892 (Telephone Conference 
Call).
    Contact Person: John J. Laffan, PhD, Scientific Review Officer, 
Office of Scientific Review, National Institute of General Medical 
Sciences, National Institutes of Health, Natcher Building, Room 
3AN18J, Bethesda, MD 20892, 301-594-2773.
(Catalogue of Federal Domestic Assistance Program Nos. 93.375, 
Minority Biomedical Research Support; 93.821, Cell Biology and 
Biophysics Research; 93.859, Pharmacology, Physiology, and 
Biological Chemistry Research; 93.862, Genetics and Developmental 
Biology Research; 93.88, Minority Access to Research Careers; 93.96, 
Special Minority Initiatives, National Institutes of Health, HHS)

    Dated: August 10, 2009.
Jennifer Spaeth,
Director, Office of Federal Advisory Committee Policy.
[FR Doc. E9-19624 Filed 8-17-09; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4140-01-M
<PAGE>

                                                                    Exhibit 32.1

                           GTECH HOLDINGS CORPORATION

                            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 GTECH Holdings Corporation (the
"Company") on Form 10-Q for the period ending August 23, 2003 as filed with the
Securities and Exchange Commission on the Date hereof (the "Report"), I, W.
Bruce Turner, President and Chief Executive Officer of the Company, certify,
pursuant to 18 U.S.C section 1350, as adopted pursuant to sections 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 result of operations of
         the Company.

                                 GTECH HOLDINGS CORPORATION

Date:    October 1, 2003         By /s/ W. Bruce Turner
                                 -----------------------------------------------
                                 W. Bruce Turner
                                 President and Chief Executive Officer
#### § 0.216 Influencing legislation or petitioning Congress.

Except for the official handling, through the proper channels, of matters relating to legislation in which the Department has an interest, employees shall not use government time, money, or property to petition a Member of Congress to favor or oppose any legislation or proposed legislation, or to encourage others to do so. This section does not prohibit the use of government time by union representatives to petition a Member of Congress to favor or oppose any legislation or proposed legislation, where permitted by the terms of a collective bargaining agreement.

[82 FR 47106, Oct. 11, 2017]
SUPERIOR COURT OF NEW JERSEY

APPELLATE DIVISION

DOCKET NO . A

- 5678

- 16T1

CAVALRY SPV I, LLC A S

ASSIGNEE OF FIA CARD

SERVICES, N.A./BANK OF

AMERICA, N.A.,

Plaintiff

- Appellant,

v.

ESTIM É DIEUVEILLE,

Defendant

- Respondent.

_______________________ _______

Submitted September 18, 2018

- Decided

Before Judges Yannotti, Rothstadt and Gilson.

On appeal from Superior Court of New Jersey, Law

Division, Hudson County, Docket No. L

- 1447

- 16.

Maurice Wutscher LLP, attorneys for appellant

(Donald S. Maurice, Jr., and Thomas R. Dominczyk, on

the brief).

Stern Thomasson LLP, attorneys for respondent (Philip

D. Stern and Andrew T. Thomasson, on the brief).

PER CURIAM NOT FOR PUBLICATION WITHOUT THE

APPROVAL OF THE APPELLATE DIVISION

This opinion shall not "constitute precedent or be binding upon any court." Although it is posted on the

internet, this opinion is binding only on the parties in the case and its use in other cases is limited. R. 1:36

- 3.

September 21, 20182 A

- 5678

- 16T1

Appellant Cavalry SPV I, LLC has advised t he court that it wishes to

withdraw its appeal. Accordingly, the appeal is dismissed with prejudice and

without costs.
October 19, 2011

VIA ELECTRONIC SUBMISSION

The Rules Docket (AGC 200)

Federal Aviation Administration

800 Independence Avenue, SW

Washington, DC. 20591

Re: Exemption No. 9996, Regulatory Docket No. FAA-2009-1034

This letter serves as a request for a two-year extension of Exemption No. 9996, 

Regulatory Docket No. FAA-2009-1034, which expires.January,31,2012.

The North Bay Air Museum has operated its North American F-51-D (registration No. 

N51GP serial No.(44-74483 ) and a Curtiss P-40-N5 (registration No. N540TP serial 

No. (42-105306) for the purpose of carrying passengers for compensation or hire on local 

flights for educational and historical purposes under the terms and conditions of 

Exemption 9996. 

The North Bay Air Museum continues to hold a determination from the IRS as a 501(c) 

(3) charitable organization and all of the conditions associated with our program and the 

reasons presented with our original petition remain unchanged. 

Please feel free to contact me at 707 227-2111 with any questions. Thank you for your 

attention to this matter.

Sincerely,

Sheryl Carlucci

Executive Director

North Bay Air Museum
| (logo) WELLS

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

 

  |
|-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------|-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|

 

**ANNUAL STATEMENT OFCOMPLIANCE**

** **

** **

Reference is herebymade to that certain Pooling and Servicing Agreement dated as of December 1,2016, by and among J.P. Morgan Chase Commercial Mortgage Securities Corp., asDepositor, Wells Fargo Bank, National Association, as Master Servicer, LNRPartners, LLC, as Special Servicer, Wells Fargo Bank, National Association, asCertificate Administrator, Wilmington Trust, National Association, as Trustee,and Pentalpha Surveillance LLC, as Operating Advisor and as AssetRepresentations Reviewer, with respect to Commercial Mortgage Pass-ThroughCertificates Series 2016-JP4 (the "Agreement"). Capitalized termsused herein not otherwise defined shall have the meanings assigned in theAgreement.

 

Pursuant to Section11.09 of this Agreement, I, Leslie Hayton, Managing Director of CommercialMortgage Services do hereby certify that:

 

1.           A review of the activities of the Master Servicer during the period fromJanuary 1, 2018 through December 31, 2018 (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 the Agreement in all material respectsthroughout the Reporting Period.

 

 

IN WITNESS WHEREOF,the undersigned has executed this Certificate as of the 28th day ofFebruary 2019.

 

 

/s/Leslie Hayton

Leslie Hayton 

Managing Director 

Wells Fargo Bank

 

 

| Wells  Fargo Bank, N.A. | (logo)  Together we’ll go far |
|-------------------------|-------------------------------------|
NO. 07-10-00077-CR 

IN THE COURT OF APPEALS 

FOR THE SEVENTH DISTRICT OF TEXAS 

AT AMARILLO 

PANEL D 

JULY 20, 2010 

STEFAN KLIMAJ, APPELLANT 

v. 

THE STATE OF TEXAS, APPELLEE 

 FROM THE COUNTY COURT AT LAW NO. 1 OF LUBBOCK COUNTY; 

NO. 2008-449,836; HONORABLE LARRY B. "RUSTY" LADD, JUDGE 

Before QUINN, C.J., and CAMPBELL and PIRTLE, JJ. 

ON MOTION TO DISMISS 

Appellant Stefan Klimaj has filed a motion to dismiss his appeal and a document 

entitled “Withdrawal of Notice of Appeal.” By the latter document, appellant prays for 

dismissal of his appeal. Both documents are signed by appellant and his attorney. Tex. 

R. App. P. 42.2(a). 

No decision of this court having been delivered to date, we grant the motion to 

dismiss. Accordingly, the appeal is dismissed. No motion for rehearing will be 

entertained and our mandate will issue forthwith. 

 James T. Campbell 

 Justice 

Do not publish.
#### Richard J. Lawson, Appellant, v Howard Systems International et al., Respondents.

[802 NYS2d 620]

Order, Supreme Court, New York County (Alice Schlesinger, J.), entered August 2, 2004, which, in an action for employment discrimination on the basis of race, insofar as appealed from as limited by plaintiffs brief, denied plaintiffs motion pursuant to Judiciary Law § 519 to hold defendants in criminal contempt for having terminated plaintiffs employment on account of his absence from work by reason of jury service, unanimously affirmed, with costs.

Even assuming the claim was properly entertained as an unpleaded cause of action, the motion was properly denied. No private cause of action exists under Judiciary Law § 519 *(Gomariz v Foote, Cone & Belding Communications,*228 AD2d 316 [1996] ). Concur—Sullivan, J.P., Ellerin, Williams, Gonzalez and McGuire, JJ.