alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
**Exhibit 32.1**

 

**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 Reportof TEPPCO Partners, L.P. (the “Company”) on Form 10-Q for the quarter ended March31, 2006 (the “Report”), as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commissionon the date hereof, I, Jerry E. Thompson, President and Chief Executive Officerof Texas Eastern Products Pipeline Company, LLC, the general partner of theCompany, certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. §1350, as adopted pursuant to §906 ofthe Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that:

 

1. The Report fully complies with therequirements of section 13(a) or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934,as amended; and

 

2. The information contained in theReport fairly presents, in all material respects, the financial condition andresults of operations of the Company.

 

 
| /s/  JERRY E.  THOMPSON                                   |   |
|----------------------------------------------------------------|--------|
| Jerry E. Thompson                                              |
| President and Chief Executive Officer                          |
| Texas Eastern Products Pipeline Company, LLC, General  Partner |

 

May 3, 2006

 

 

A signed original of this written statement required bySection 906 has been provided to TEPPCO Partners, L.P. and will be retained byTEPPCO Partners, L.P. and furnished to the Securities and Exchange Commissionor its staff upon request.

 

----
(logo) TORCHLIGHT

 

 

**ANNUAL COMPLIANCE STATEMENT**

 

**CERTIFICATION**

 

 

CSMC 2016-NXSR Commercial MortgageTrust, Commercial Mortgage Pass Through Certificates, Series 2016-NXSR (the“Trust”)

 

I, Jacob Baron, on behalf ofTorchlight Loan Services, LLC, as Special Servicer (the “CertifyingServicer”), certify to Credit Suisse Commercial Mortgage SecuritiesCorp., each Other Depositor and their officers, directors and affiliates, andwith the knowledge and intent that they will rely upon this certification,that:

 

1. I (or Servicing Officersunder my supervision) have reviewed the Certifying Servicer’s activitiesduring the preceding calendar year (the “Reporting Period”) and theCertifying Servicer’s performance under the Pooling and ServicingAgreement; and

 

2. To the best of myknowledge, based on such review, the Certifying Servicer has fulfilled all ofits obligations under the Pooling and Servicing Agreement in all materialrespects during the Reporting Period. 

 

Capitalized terms used but notdefined herein have the meanings set forth in the Pooling and ServicingAgreement.

 

Date:       March 7, 2017

 

Torchlight Loan Services, LLC,as special servicer

 

By: /s/ Jacob Baron 

Name: Jacob Baron

Title: AuthorizedSignatory
#### Reindl v. Miller et al.

*Wilson & Salmon,*for plaintiff.

*George W. Lucas,*for defendants.

July 18, 1952.

Sohn, J.,

Judgment was entered by confession on April 9, 1951, in favor of Ben Reindl, plaintiff, against Harry Miller and Mrs. Helen Miller, defendants. On petition of defendants, a rule issued May 1, 1951, to show cause why the judgment should not be opened. On May 14, 1951, plaintiff filed an answer to the petition to open judgment.

On May 15, 1952, at the instance of plaintiff, a rule issued, returnable in 15 days, to show cause why depositions should not be taken. On June 23, 1952, at the suggestion of counsel for plaintiff, the rule was made absolute and the cause ordered for argument on petition and rule. Subsequently this matter appeared on the regular argument list.

Pennsylvania Rule of Civil Procedure 209 reads as follows:

> “Rule 209. Duty of Petitioner To Proceed After Answer Filed:

> “If, after the filing and service of the answer, the moving party does not within fifteen days:

> *547“(a) Proceed by rule or by agreement of counsel to take depositions on disputed issues of fact; or

> “(b) Order the cause for argument on petition and answer (in which event all averments of fact responsive to the petition and properly pleaded in the answer shall be deemed admitted for the purpose of the rule); the respondent may take a rule as of course on the moving party to show cause why he should not proceed as above. If after hearing the rule shall be made absolute by the court, and the petitioner shall not proceed, as above provided, within fifteen days thereafter, the respondent may order the cause for argument on petition and answer, in which event all the averments of fact responsive to the petition and properly pleaded in the answer shall be deemed admitted for the purpose of the rule.”

It is apparent from a recital of the action taken by the respective parties, that defendants did not, within 15 days, proceed by rule or agreement to take depositions, nor did they order the cause for argument on petition and answer, as permitted by the rule. Defendants, who are petitioners, did not proceed as required by the rule within 15 days.

The cause was ordered for argument on petition and answer. Under the provisions of the rule, all the averments of fact responsive to the petition and properly pleaded in the answer shall be deemed admitted for the purpose of the rule. Accepting as true for the purpose of the rule, the averments contained in the answer, we conclude that the judgment should not be opened to permit defendants to defend against the same.

*Order*

And now, to wit, July 18, 1952, for the reasons set forth in the foregoing petition, the rule issued May 1, 1951, to show cause why the judgment should not be *548opened to permit defendants to defend against the judgment, be, and it is hereby discharged, and it is ordered, adjudged and decreed that plaintiff may proceed with the writ of execution.
**ODP Information Bulletin**
```

[Congressional Bills 104th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[H.J. Res. 198 Engrossed in House (EH)]

  2d Session

                             H. J. RES. 198

_______________________________________________________________________

                            JOINT RESOLUTION

  Appointing the day for the convening of the first session of the One 
Hundred Fifth Congress and the day for the counting in Congress of the 
electoral votes for President and Vice President cast in December 1996.
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
104th CONGRESS
  2d Session
H. J. RES. 198

_______________________________________________________________________

                            JOINT RESOLUTION

 
  Appointing the day for the convening of the first session of the One 
Hundred Fifth Congress and the day for the counting in Congress of the 
electoral votes for President and Vice President cast in December 1996.

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

SECTION 1. DATE FOR CONVENING OF THE ONE HUNDRED FIFTH CONGRESS.

    The first regular session of the One Hundred Fifth Congress shall 
begin at noon on Tuesday, January 7, 1997.

SEC. 2. DATE FOR COUNTING 1996 ELECTORAL VOTES IN CONGRESS.

    The meeting of the Senate and House of Representatives to be held 
in January 1997 pursuant to section 15 of title 3, United States Code, 
to count the electoral votes for President and Vice President cast by 
the electors in December 1996 shall be held on January 9, 1997 (rather 
than on the date specified in the first sentence of that section).

            Passed the House of Representatives September 28, 1996.

            Attest:

                                                                 Clerk.
```
###### Editorial Note on Subchapter A of Chapter II

#### Editorial Note:

Nomenclature changes to subchapter A appear at 78 FR 60697, Oct. 2, 2013.

#### § 351.68 Are taxpayer identification numbers (TINs) required for registration of book-entry Series EE savings bonds?

The TIN of each person named in the registration is required to purchase a book-entry bond.
#### UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. Ernest PORRAS-CARDOZA, Defendant-Appellant.

No. 00-50693.

D.C. No. CR-00-02482-H.

United States Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit.

Submitted June 10, 2002.*

Decided June 13, 2002.

Before RYMER, T.G. NELSON and THOMAS, Circuit Judges.

*

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

MEMORANDUM**

Ernest Porras-Cardoza appeals his guilty-plea conviction for importing marijuana, in violation of 21 U.S.C. §§ 952 and 960. We have jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. § 1291 and we affirm.

Porras-Cardoza contends that his conviction should be vacated because, in light of *Apprendi v. New Jersey,*530 U.S. 466, 120 S.Ct. 2348, 147 L.Ed.2d 435 (2000), § 960 is unconstitutional on its face. This contention is foreclosed by our recent decision in *United States v. Mendoza-Paz,*286 F.3d 1104, 1109-10 (9th Cir.2002).

Porras-Cardoza also contends that even if the statute is constitutional, § 960 requires proof of the defendant’s knowledge of the type and amount of drugs involved in order to sustain a conviction. The contention is foreclosed by our recent decision in *United States v. Carranza,*289 F.3d 634, 644 (9th Cir.2002).

AFFIRMED.

**

 This disposition is not appropriate for publication and may not be cited to or by the courts of this circuit except as may be provided by Ninth Circuit Rule 36-3.
#### Donald W. BOX, Plaintiff-Appellant, v. Jo Anne BARNHART,* Commissioner of Social Security Administration, Defendant-Appellee.

No. 00-57001.

D.C. No. CV-99-02332-NAJ.

United States Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit.

Submitted June 4, 2002.**

Decided June 6, 2002.

Before O’SCANNLAIN, RYMER, and THOMAS, Circuit Judges.

*

 Jo Anne Barnhart is substituted for her predecessor as Commissioner of the Social Security Administration. Fed. R.App. P. 43(c)(2).

**

 This panel unanimously finds this case suitable for decision without oral argument. See Fed. R.App. P. 34(a)(2).

MEMORANDUM ***

Donald Box appeals the district court’s grant of summary judgment affirming the Commissioner of the Social Security Administration’s (“Commissioner”) denial of his application for Social Security disability insurance benefits. We have jurisdiction pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1291, and we affirm. Because the parties are familiar with the factual and procedural history of this case, we will not recount it here.

Box argues that the Commissioner erred by rejecting his claim of disabling pain. We must affirm the decision of the Commissioner if it is supported by substantial *860evidence and the Commissioner applied the correct legal standards. *Sandgathe v. Chater,*108 F.3d 978, 980 (9th Cir.1997). Here, the Commissioner provided clear and convincing reasons for rejecting Box’s allegation of disabling pain that are supported by substantial evidence. See *Rollins v. Massanari,*261 F.3d 853, 857 (9th Cir.2001); *Orteza v. Shalala,*50 F.3d 748, 750 (9th Cir.1995)

The ALJ did not err by failing to further develop the record. *See Mayes v. Massanari,*276 F.3d 453, 459-60 (9th Cir.2001).

AFFIRMED.

***

 This disposition is not appropriate for publication and may not be cited to or by the courts of this circuit except as may be provided by Ninth Circuit Rule 36-3.
Order entered September 30, 2014

In The 

## Court of Appeals **Fifth District of Texas at Dallas**

No. 05
- 13
- 01613
- CV MIKOB PROPERTIES, IN C., ALLAN KLEIN, AND MITCHELL KOBERNICK, Appellant s V.
DAVID JOACHIM AND INTERNATIONAL REALTY CONCEPTS, INC., Appellee s On Appeal from the 101st Judicial District Court Dallas County, Texas Trial Court Cause No. DC
- 12
- 01602


### O RDER
We GRANT appell ee s’ counsel’s September 17, 2014 motion f o r withdraw al of counsel

. We DIRECT the Clerk to remove Friedman & Feiger, L.L.P. a nd Ryan K. Lurich as counsel of record for appell ee s.
Because a c orporat e entity may only appear in this Court through an attorney, we
ORDER appell ee Inter n a t ional Realty Concepts, Inc. to notify the Court, within THIRTY
DAYS of the date of this order, of the name, State Bar number, mailing and e

- mail address es , and telephone number of new counsel. See Kunstoplast of Am., Inc. v. Formosa Plastics Corp. , 937 S.W.2d 455, 456 (Tex. 1996) (per curiam).We DIRECT the Clerk to send appellees a copy of this orde r and all future

co rrespondence to:
David Joachim International Realty Concepts, Inc. 7575 San Felipe Street, Suite 300 Houston, Texas 77063 (713) 972

- 1220.

/s/ CRAIG STODDART JUSTICE
Motion Granted; Appeal Dismissed and Memorandum Opinion filed

October 6 , 2020

.

In The



## Fourteenth Court of Appeals

NO. 14

- 20

- 00417

- CV

SIGNATURE CONCRETE OF HOUSTON, LLC AND CLAY HUDSON , Appellant s
V.
SUNCOAST POST

- TENSION LTD. , Appellee
On Appeal from t he 164th District Court

Harris County, Texas Trial Court Cause No. 2019

- 12429

MEMORANDUM OPINION This is an appeal from a judgment signed April 30, 2020 . On September 18, 2020 , appellant s filed a motion to dismiss the appeal. See Tex. R. App. P. 42.1 (a ) (1) . T he motion is granted.
We dismi ss the appeal

. PER CURIAM
Panel c onsists of Justices Spain, Hassan, and Poissant.
www.gpo.gov

### §64. Services of agents dispensed with

It shall be the duty of the President to dispense with the services of such Indian agents and superintendents as may be practicable; and where it is practicable he shall require the same person to perform the duties of two agencies or superintendencies for one salary.

(R.S. §2053; June 22, 1874, ch. 389, §1, 18 Stat. 147; Mar. 3, 1875, ch. 132, §1, 18 Stat. 421.)

#### Codification

R.S. §2053 derived from act Feb. 14, 1873, ch. 138, §1, 17 Stat. 437.

#### Indian Agents

In a communication, dated November 29, 1940, from the Office of Indian Affairs of the Department of the Interior, it was stated that there have been no Indian agents since 1908, all of the agencies and schools having been placed under the supervision of superintendents.
HomeOffice of the SpokespersonPress Releases...Appointment of Eileen C. Donahoe as Special Envoy and Coordinator for Digital Freedom

# 									Appointment of Eileen C. Donahoe as Special Envoy and Coordinator for Digital Freedom							

Press Statement

Antony J. Blinken, Secretary of State

September 11, 2023

I welcome the appointment of Dr. Eileen C. Donahoe as the State Department’s Special Envoy and Coordinator for Digital Freedom in the Bureau of Cyberspace and Digital Policy.

The President’s appointment of Dr. Donahoe reinforces the importance of digital freedom and values-based technology governance work as Administration and Department priorities. As Special Envoy and Coordinator, Dr. Donahoe will leverage her deep technical knowledge and foreign policy experience to advance U.S. priorities around online freedoms, digital inclusion, and information integrity.

Dr. Donahoe has built a distinguished career promoting human rights and digital freedom both within and outside of government and is uniquely qualified to lead in this role. She joins us from the Global Digital Policy Incubator (GDPi) at Stanford University’s Freeman Spogli Institute for International Studies, where she served as the Executive Director. Dr. Donahoe previously served as the first U.S. Ambassador to the United Nations Human Rights Council in Geneva. She was also Director of Global Affairs at Human Rights Watch where she represented the organization worldwide on human rights foreign policy, with a special focus on Internet governance and digital security.

We are excited to welcome Dr. Donahoe back to the State Department in this important leadership role.

Tags

Bureau of Cyberspace and Digital PolicyCyber IssuesInternet FreedomOffice of the SpokespersonThe Secretary of State

Back to Top
I

104TH CONGRESS

1ST SESSION H. R. 1257

To amend the Solid Waste Disposal Act, and for other purposes.

IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

MARCH 16, 1995

Mr. DICKS introduced the following bill; which was referred to the Committee

on Commerce

A BILL

To amend the Solid Waste Disposal Act, and for other

purposes.

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

3 SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE.

4 This Act may be cited as the ‘‘Landfill Technological

5 Improvement Act of 1995’’.

6 SEC. 2. USE OF ORGANIC SORBENTS.

7 Section 3004(c)(2) of the Solid Waste Disposal Act

8 (42 U.S.C. 6924(c)(2)) is amended—

9 (1) in the first sentence following subparagraph

10 (B) by striking ‘‘during’’ and inserting in lieu there11 of ‘‘in the anaerobic environment of’’; and
2

•HR 1257 IH

1 (2) by adding at the end the following: ‘‘Not2 withstanding any regulations implementing subpara3 graph (B) of this paragraph to the contrary, nothing

4 in this section shall prohibit usage in hazardous

5 waste landfills of sorbents manufactured from proc6 essed organic materials that would not be expected

7 to degrade in an anaerobic environment, until such

8 time as the Administrator issues final regulations

9 concerning anaerobic landfill conditions and the

10 usage of organic sorbents in landfills.’’.

Æ
#### § 12.4 Distribution of free samples of tobacco products prohibited.

The distribution of free samples of tobacco products in or around any Federal building under the jurisdiction of the Secretary of the Treasury is prohibited, except in areas designated pursuant to § 12.5 of this part.
# L_2020236DE.01001301.xml

| 22.7.2020 | DE | Amtsblatt der Europäischen Union | L 236/13 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

22.7.2020

DE

Amtsblatt der Europäischen Union

L 236/13

---

Berichtigung der Verordnung (EU) 2020/461 des Europäischen Parlaments und des Rates vom 30. März 2020 zur Änderung der Verordnung (EG) Nr. 2012/2002 des Rates zur finanziellen Unterstützung von Mitgliedstaaten und von Ländern, die ihren Beitritt zur Union verhandeln und die von einer Notlage größeren Ausmaßes im Bereich der öffentlichen Gesundheit schwer betroffen sind

(
  Amtsblatt der Europäischen Union L 99 vom 31. März 2020
  )

Seite „Inhalt“ und Seite 9, Titel:

Anstatt:

„Verordnung (EU) 2020/461 des Europäischen Parlaments und des Rates vom 30. März 2020 zur Änderung der Verordnung (EG) Nr. 2012/2002 des Rates zur finanziellen Unterstützung von Mitgliedstaaten und von Ländern, die ihren Beitritt zur Union verhandeln und die von einer Notlage größeren Ausmaßes im Bereich der öffentlichen Gesundheit schwer betroffen sind“

muss es heißen:

„Verordnung (EU) 2020/461 des Europäischen Parlaments und des Rates vom 30. März 2020 zur Änderung der Verordnung (EG) Nr. 2012/2002 des Rates zur finanziellen Unterstützung der von einer Notlage größeren Ausmaßes im Bereich der öffentlichen Gesundheit schwer betroffenen Mitgliedstaaten und Länder, die ihren Beitritt zur Union verhandeln“.

---
[Federal Register Volume 74, Number 161 (Friday, August 21, 2009)]
[Notices]
[Page 42311]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: E9-20101]


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

DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES

Food and Drug Administration

[Docket No. FDA-2009-D-0348]


Draft Guidance for Industry: Guide to Minimize Microbial Food 
Safety Hazards of Leafy Greens; Availability; Correction

AGENCY:  Food and Drug Administration, HHS.

ACTION:  Notice; correction.

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

SUMMARY:  The Food and Drug Administration is correcting a notice that 
appeared in the Federal Register of August 3, 2009 (74 FR 38439). The 
document announced the availability of a draft guidance entitled 
``Guidance for Industry: Guide to Minimize Microbial Food Safety 
Hazards of Leafy Greens.'' The document was published with an incorrect 
date for submitting written or electronic comments on the draft 
guidance. This document corrects that error.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Amy Green, Center for Food Safety and 
Applied Nutrition (HFS-317), Food and Drug Administration, 5100 Paint 
Branch Pkwy., College Park, MD 20740, 301-436-2025.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: In FR Doc. E9-18451, appearing on page 38439 
in the Federal Register of August 3, 2009, the following correction is 
made:
    1. On page 38439, in the third column, in the ``DATES'' section, in 
the eighth line, ``October 2, 2009'' is corrected to read ``November 2, 
2009''.

    Dated: August 17, 2009.
David Horowitz,
Assistant Commissioner for Policy.
[FR Doc. E9-20101 Filed 8-20-09; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4160-01-S
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<ARTICLE> 5
<MULTIPLIER> 1,000
       
<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   3-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          JUN-30-1998
<PERIOD-START>                             JUL-02-1997
<PERIOD-END>                               SEP-30-1997
<CASH>                                          10,273
<SECURITIES>                                         0
<RECEIVABLES>                                    7,833
<ALLOWANCES>                                     (141)
<INVENTORY>                                      3,561
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                                21,993
<PP&E>                                           8,414
<DEPRECIATION>                                   (413)
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                 104,191
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                           22,663
<BONDS>                                         69,277
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                             0
<OTHER-SE>                                      11,840
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                   104,191
<SALES>                                         16,362
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                                16,362
<CGS>                                            8,539
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                    8,539
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                 4,854
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                     0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                               2,414
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                    639
<INCOME-TAX>                                       521
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                                118
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                       118
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                        0
<EPS-DILUTED>                                        0
        

</TABLE>
Order entered July 18, 2013

In The

Court of Appeals 

Fifth District of Texas at Dallas 

No. 05-13-00634-CV

TODD PRUETT, Appellant

V.

MICHAEL PITTMAN, M.D., Appellee

On Appeal from the 193rd Judicial District Court

Dallas County, Texas

Trial Court Cause No. DC-12-07463

ORDER

Before the Court is appellant’s July 15, 2013 motion for an extension of time to file a 

brief. Appellant explains that he needs the extension because he is trying to obtain a reporter’s 

record from a hearing in the 265th Judicial District Court of Dallas County, Texas. By order 

dated June 13, 2013, this Court denied appellant’s request that we order the court reporter of the 

265th Judicial District Court to file the reporter’s record from a hearing held in that Court on 

September 13, 2013. 

Appellant is appealing the trial court’s order granting appellee’s motion to dismiss. The 

trial court conducted a hearing on appellee’s motion on January 22, 2013. By letter dated June 

17, 2013, Stephanie Moses, Official Court Reporter for the 193rd Judicial District Court of 

Dallas County, Texas, informed this Court that no record was made of the January 22, 2013 
hearing. Accordingly, we GRANT appellant’s motion for an extension of time to file a brief. 

Appellant shall file his brief on or before August 16, 2013. We caution appellant that no further 

extension of time will be granted in this accelerated appeal absent extraordinary circumstances.

/s/ CAROLYN WRIGHT

CHIEF JUSTICE