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


<ARTICLE> 5
<CIK> 0000857613
<NAME> NORTH OAKS PARTNERSHIP
       
<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   6-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          DEC-31-1997
<PERIOD-END>                               JUN-30-1997
<CASH>                                       2,393,063
<SECURITIES>                                         0
<RECEIVABLES>                                  418,496
<ALLOWANCES>                                         0
<INVENTORY>                                     58,134
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                             3,513,296
<PP&E>                                               0
<DEPRECIATION>                                       0
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                               8,717,960
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                        1,903,494
<BONDS>                                     12,960,000
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                             0
<OTHER-SE>                                           0
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                 8,717,960
<SALES>                                              0
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                             3,512,789
<CGS>                                                0
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                2,884,188
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                     0
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                     0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                           (721,595)
<INCOME-PRETAX>                               (18,071)
<INCOME-TAX>                                         0
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                                  0
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                  (18,071)
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                        0
<EPS-DILUTED>                                        0
        


</TABLE>
**Final Listing of Questionnaire Files for Steam Electric Rulemaking Record**

**Plant ID 01435**  **Removed from Public**  **(Non-CBI) Docket** **1 Copyright** 

**Flag 2**  **File Name Description**  

### x 01435\01435_Checklist.xls EPA Technical Review Checklist Workbook



### 01435\01435_Completeness_Checklist.xls EPA Completeness Review Checklist 

### 01435\01435_HardcopyLog.doc EPA log of hardcopy documents submitted 

### x 01435\01435_Part A.xls Plant submitted survey file 

### x 01435\01435_Part B.xls Plant submitted survey file 

### x 01435\01435_Part C.xls Plant submitted survey file 

### x 01435\01435_Part D.xls Plant submitted survey file 

### x 01435\01435_Part H.xls Plant submitted survey file



### 01435\Certification Statement Plant ID 01435.pdf Plant certification statement 

### x 01435\Revised Part A\01435_Part A_Revised.xls Plant submitted survey file



### x 01435\Revised Part A\Correspondance - Revised Outfall Coordinates.pdf Email communications regarding questions on the survey response 

### x 01435\Revised Part A\Telecon - Revised Outfall Coordinates.doc Technical Review Correspondence 

### x 01435\Supplemental Documents\01435_A5-2 Map-1.pdf Plant submitted supplemental files to the survey 

### x 01435\Supplemental Documents\01435_A5-3 WB-1.pdf Plant submitted supplemental files to the survey 

### x 01435\Supplemental Documents\01435_C2-31 Fly Ash System Diagram.pdf Plant submitted supplemental files to the survey



### 01435\Supplemental Documents\01435_C3-23 Bottom Ash System Diagram.pdf Plant submitted supplemental files to the survey 

### x 01435\Supplemental Documents\01435_D3-1 Pond-1 D-1.pdf Plant submitted supplemental files to the survey 

### x 01435\Supplemental Documents\01435_D3-1 Pond-2.pdf Plant submitted supplemental files to the survey 

### x 01435\Supplemental Documents\01435_Follow Up Questions.doc Plant submitted supplemental files to the survey



### 01435\Supplemental Documents\01435_Submittal Letter.pdf Plant submitted supplemental files to the survey

1Final reviewed survey responses are located in the Steam Electric Technical Questionnaire Database

. 2Copyright documents are available from the docket.
§ 570.504 Payments and transfers to blocked accounts in U.S. financial institutions. Any payment of funds or transfer of credit in which any person whose property and interests in property are blocked pursuant to § 570.201 has any interest that comes within the possession or control of a U.S. financial institution must be blocked in an account on the books of that financial institution. A transfer of funds or credit by a U.S. financial institution between blocked accounts in its branches or offices is authorized, provided that no transfer is made from an account within the United States to an account held outside the United States, and further provided that a transfer from a blocked account may be made only to another blocked account held in the same name. Note 1 to § 570.504 :
*See* § 501.603 of this chapter for mandatory reporting requirements regarding financial transfers. *See also* § 570.203 concerning the obligation to hold blocked funds in interest-bearing accounts.
```

[Congressional Bills 104th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[H.R. 2629 Introduced in House (IH)]

104th CONGRESS
  1st Session
                                H. R. 2629

  To require Members of the House of Representatives to keep a public 
                     record of visits by lobbyists.

_______________________________________________________________________

                    IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

                           November 14, 1995

 Mr. DeFazio introduced the following bill; which was referred to the 
                      Committee on House Oversight

_______________________________________________________________________

                                 A BILL

 
  To require Members of the House of Representatives to keep a public 
                     record of visits by lobbyists.

    Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representatives of the 
United States of America in Congress assembled,
    Section 1. Record of Visits By Lobbyists.--Each Member of the House 
of the House of Representatives and the Senate shall keep a record 
available to any member of the public, in which shall be recorded each 
visit to such Member by an individual who is registered under section 
308 of the Federal Regulation of Lobbying Act (2 U.S.C. 267). Such 
record shall include the date of the visit recorded, the name and 
affiliation of the individual who made the visit, and the subject of 
the visit to such Member. At the end of each calendar quarter, such 
record shall be transmitted to the Clerk of the House of 
Representatives.
    Sec. 2. Effective Date.--Section 1 shall take effect on January 1, 
1996.
                                 <all>
```
No. 00-5803.

#### Moore *v.*United States.

C. A. 11th Cir. Certiorari denied.
§ 553.508 Payments for legal services from funds originating outside the United States. ( a ) *Professional fees and incurred expenses.* ( 1 ) Receipt of payment of professional fees and reimbursement of incurred expenses for the provision of legal services authorized pursuant to § 553.507(a) to or on behalf of any person whose property and interests in property are blocked pursuant to § 553.201, is authorized from funds originating outside the United States, provided that the funds do not originate from: ( i ) A source within the United States;
( ii ) Any source, wherever located, within the possession or control of a U.S. person; or
( iii ) Any individual or entity, other than the person on whose behalf the legal services authorized pursuant to § 553.507(a) are to be provided, whose property and interests in property are blocked pursuant to any part of this chapter or any Executive order or statute.
( 2 ) Nothing in this paragraph (a) authorizes payments for legal services using funds in which any other person whose property and interests in property are blocked pursuant to § 553.201, any other part of this chapter, or any Executive order or statute has an interest.
( b ) *Reports.* ( 1 ) U.S. persons who receive payments pursuant to paragraph (a) of this section must submit annual reports no later than 30 days following the end of the calendar year during which the payments were received providing information on the funds received. Such reports shall specify: ( i ) The individual or entity from whom the funds originated and the amount of funds received; and
( ii ) If applicable: ( A ) The names of any individuals or entities providing related services to the U.S. person receiving payment in connection with authorized legal services, such as private investigators or expert witnesses;
( B ) A general description of the services provided; and
( C ) The amount of funds paid in connection with such services.
( 2 ) The reports, which must reference this section, are to be submitted to OFAC using one of the following methods: ( i ) Email (preferred method): OFACReport@treasury.gov; or
( ii ) *U.S. Mail:* OFAC Regulations Reports, Office of Foreign Assets Control, U.S. Department of the Treasury, 1500 Pennsylvania Avenue NW, Freedman's Bank Building, Washington, DC 20220.
HomeDiplomatic Security Service Memorial...Jesse Nathanael  Aliganga

# 				 Jesse Nathanael  Aliganga			

				U.S. Military–Marine Security Guard			

Deceased				August 7, 1998			

**U.S. Government image**Back to DSS Memorial

Tags

Diplomatic Security Service MemorialKenya

Back to Top
NOTICE: NOT FOR OFFICIAL PUBLICATION.

UNDER ARIZONA RULE OF THE SUPREME COURT 111(c), THIS DECISION IS NOT PRECEDENTIAL

AND MAY BE CITED ONLY AS AUTHORIZED BY RULE.

IN THE

ARIZONA COURT OF APPEALS

DIVISION ONE

STATE OF ARIZONA, Respondent,

v.

JENGHIZ K. STEWART, Petitioner.

No. 1 CA-CR 18-0219 PRPC

Petition for Review from the Superior Court in Maricopa County

No. CR1996-005461

The Honorable Justin Beresky, Judge

REVIEW GRANTED; RELIEF DENIED

COUNSEL

Maricopa County Attorney’s Office, Phoenix

By Diane Meloche

Counsel for Respondent

Jenghiz K. Stewart, Kingman

Petitioner

MEMORANDUM DECISION

Presiding Judge Kenton D. Jones, Judge Michael J. Brown, and Judge Jon 

W. Thompson delivered the decision of the Court.

FILED 7-24-18
STATE v. STEWART

Decision of the Court

2

P E R C U R I A M:

¶1 Petitioner Jenghiz Stewart seeks review of the superior court’s 

order denying his petition for post-conviction relief, filed pursuant to 

Arizona Rule of Criminal Procedure 32.1. This is the petitioner’s third 

successive petition for relief following the revocation of his probation. 

¶2 Absent an abuse of discretion or error of law, this Court will 

not disturb a superior court’s ruling on a petition for post-conviction relief. 

State v. Gutierrez, 229 Ariz. 573, 576-77, ¶ 19 (2012). It is the petitioner’s 

burden to show that the superior court abused its discretion in denying the 

petition. See State v. Poblete, 227 Ariz. 537, 538, ¶ 1 (App. 2011).

¶3 We have reviewed the record in this matter, the superior 

court’s order denying the petition for post-conviction relief, and the petition 

for review. We find that petitioner has not shown any abuse of discretion. 

¶4 Accordingly, we grant review and deny relief.
<PAGE>
                                                                      EXHIBIT 32

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

         Pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002 and in
connection with the Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q of Trover Solutions, Inc.
(the "Corporation") for the period ended September 30, 2003, as filed with the
Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the "Report"), the
undersigned, the Chairman, President and Chief Executive Officer of the
Corporation, certifies 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
Corporation.

/s/  Patrick B. McGinnis
--------------------------------------------
Patrick B. McGinnis
Chairman, President and
Chief Executive Officer
November 14, 2003


A signed original of this written statement required by Section 906 has been
provided to Trover Solutions, Inc. and will be retained by Trover Solutions,
Inc. and furnished to the Securities and Exchange Commission or its staff upon
request.

<PAGE>

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


         Pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002 and in
connection with the Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q of Trover Solutions, Inc.
(the "Corporation") for the period ended September 30, 2003, as filed with the
Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the "Report"), the
undersigned, the Chief Financial Officer of the Corporation, certifies 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
Corporation.

/s/  Douglas R. Sharps
-------------------------------------
Douglas R. Sharps
Executive Vice President and
Chief Financial Officer
November 14, 2003


A signed original of this written statement required by Section 906 has been
provided to Trover Solutions, Inc. and will be retained by Trover Solutions,
Inc. and furnished to the Securities and Exchange Commission or its staff upon
request.
40181.

#### BANKERS FIDELITY LIFE INSURANCE COMPANY v. DURCINKA.

Carlisle, Presiding Judge.

Plaintiff filed suit against the defendant insurance company seeking to recover sums paid to defendant, presenting proof that defendant, through its agents, made representations to her that the defendant had a profit sharing contract which was being offered to teachers and other professional people, plaintiff being a teacher, and that she could buy 50 shares of stock in the company if she bought the profit sharing contract for $400, which sum was to be paid each year. Receipts from agents of the company and checks written by the plaintiff showed, by entries made by agents of the defendant, that they were given for a profit sharing contract. Plaintiff received for said sums paid a policy of life insurance with an investment feature included in the contract. The defendant offered no evidence. At the trial each party made a motion for a directed verdict at the close of the evidence, and the trial judge directed a verdict in favor of the plaintiff for recovery of the sums paid, with interest. *113The defendant made a motion for a judgment notwithstanding the verdict which was overruled by the trial judge, and the case is here upon exceptions thereto. *Held:*

Decided June 26, 1963.

*Smith, Field, Ringel, Martin & Carr, Sam F. Lowe, Jr., Ralph H. Hicks,*for plaintiff in error.

*Hilton & Hilton, L. H. Hilton,*contra.

1. This case is controlled by the decisions of this court in *Bankers Fidelity Life Ins. Co. v. Morgan,*104 Ga. App. 894 (123 SE2d 433), and *Bankers Fidelity Life Ins. Co. v. Oliver,*106 Ga. App, 305 (126 SE2d 887).

2. The demurrers of the defendant to the petition claiming that no cause of action was set forth because *Code*§ 56-519, upon which the action was based, had been repealed before the suit was filed, were overruled by the trial judge and are unexcepted to. Such ruling is, therefore, the law of the case. *Bankers Fidelity Life Ins. Co. v. Oliver,*106 Ga. App. 305, supra.

*Judgment affirmed.*

*Bell and Hall, JJ., concur.*
#### EISENMANN CORPORATION, Plaintiff-Appellant, v. REGENERATIVE ENVIRONMENTAL EQUIPMENT CO., INC., Elam Company, Inc., and Durr Environmental, Inc., Defendants-Appellees.

No. 00-1249.

United States Court of Appeals, Federal Circuit.

Jan. 9, 2001.

Steven C. Kohl, Raymond E. Scott, Howard *&*Howard Attorneys, P.C., Bloomfield Hills, MI, for Defendants-Appellees.

ORDER OF DISMISSAL

The parties, through their counsel of record, having moved to dismiss the above-identified appeal with prejudice, hereby orders that the appeal be dismissed with prejudice.

IT IS SO ORDERED.
#### § 548.207 Exempt transactions.

*International Emergency Economic Powers Act.* The prohibitions contained in this part do not apply to any transactions that are exempt pursuant to section 203(b) of the International Emergency Economic Powers Act, (50 U.S.C. 1702(b)).
40485.

#### ELBERFELD v. EMPLOYERS MUTUAL LIABILITY INSURANCE COMPANY et al.

Eberhardt, Judge.

This is a workmen’s compensation case where the employee suffered a myocardial infarction at about 4 a.m. after he had left work at 5 p.m. the previous day. *40While there was testimony that the decedent had often been under tensions from the stress of making decisions and at times from conflicts with other employees on his job, there was also testimony that on his last day of work and perhaps for some time prior thereto the job routine had been normal, that he had not been subjected to any unusual physical strain, and that he appeared to have been enjoying a normal state of health. There was no evidence that he had suffered from any heart condition at any time prior to the fatal attack. Medical evidence was submitted both by the claimant and the insurance carrier, some of it to the effect that the job tensions “could have been a contributing factor” while some was that they had nothing whatever to do with the fatal attack. The single director and later the full board denied compensation, and the award was affirmed by the superior court. *Held:*

The evidence presented a factual question that was resolved against the claimant, with competent evidence in the record supporting the award. Whether the evidence would have authorized any other finding of fact and award than that reached by the board is immaterial for it is the well settled rule that where there is any competent evidence to support the award of the State Board of Workmen’s Compensation neither the superior court nor this court has authority to reverse.1*Corbett v. McClurd,*107 Ga. App. 113, 115 (129 SE2d 389).

Claimant relies upon the decision of the Supreme Court in *Thomas v. United States Cas. Co.,*218 Ga. 493 (128 SE2d 749), but it requires no different result here because, first, it appeared there that the exertion to which the attack was attributed occurred on the job and while in the course of *41deceased’s employment, and secondly, it was simply held there, as we do here, that there was competent evidence to support the determination made by the board as to whether the exertion caused the employee’s death.

Decided January 17, 1964

Rehearing denied January 29, 1964.

*Grubbs, Prosser & Burke, J. M. Grubbs, Jr., Holcomb & McDuff, Frank D. Holcomb,*for plaintiff in error.

*Smith, Swift, Currie, McGhee & Hancock, James B. Hiers, Jr., Frank M. Swift,*contra.

*Judgment affirmed.*

*Bell, P. J., and Jordan, J., concur.*

1

It is to be noted that the employee’s death occurred March 20, 1959, the award of the single director was made April 10, 1962 and that of the full board August 16, 1962. Consequently the rule requiring that it be shown by a “preponderance of competent and creditable evidence that [the attack causing death] was attributable to the performance of the usual work of employment” as stated in the amendment to *Code*§ 114-102 by the Act of 1963, pp. 141, 142 was not urged and has not been considered here.
OFFICE OF THE Al-i-ORNEY GENERAL OF TEXAS 

AUSTIN 

i 
826 
8%7 
828 

ReUroad Cotieeion of Taxme, pa&e & 

?ubeectlcn 9 of tba eeme ertlclo recde se falbwe; 

%aka enb aatabllsh rsre~nrblo rates for 

the+ traneportetloa of poeeengere ova2 each rellred eubJeot beret$, ~sbhloh rrtas et.al$ not oxeoed 

Article &l6, l up r e, prc~fdee that *t&e peeseam fare 

upon 811 rellroede In %‘exe# ehell be three aeats per mile*, rhloh 

lnolud*e us4 rlloeence not to oxooed on* hundred pounds of bewge. 

The queetioa to ba doteymlnd is uhotbrr It use latutdrd thet 

this saxiaun paeaengsr fera should rpply to era4 passenger trenaported on tkm paea*~o~ trelno, rogardfeee or rhethsr ha ba 

trmwporfed oa rogulrrly ~ohoduld traina or ipeolal oars or 

epooiel tmdne. 

l!bo tlrrrt part of euberotlon 9 of Article 6146, 8 

groli~e the8 8be Reiloaed Ccmmheioa ebrll %akm #rd. wtob). 7 

re, 

sh 

nemmabl~ ntee for the trenegortetlc-8 af pureage~e wer anoh 

rdlrod aubfeot hmato, wbleb rat*8 &all sot exceed the retas 

fixed by law", end the 1rtt.r pmt of es16 l ubeeoticm prorld~ 

t&t “the ~omiwloa #till &eve power to grreorlk roeecneblo 

Yetom, tells of ah0rp8 la+ rfl. other #uploom p@?fomd by 8ny 

rellroad 8ubJeot herot@.* 

A oarefal rttdy of rutmortion 9 OS irtidlb 6&8 rereele that tt Ie mat 01-r and defialtrr, ead tbanfolr we will 

hero to leak to ttm dopammuit81 ooaatruotloa d Oh* eeaa. 

: ?or mar twenty-fira yoerr your dapartllurt ha8 

cOruOrU*d th abOle StStUtO SS @Stl&6 tb0 RSilFS86 CCOdBSlCPvower 

to fix ohr a8 (in ~0~86 af nulwm terms .rorided far in 

Article 6bl 8 I ttmt may bm obrrgad by the ra E lrwde of tble atato 

R&lroed Cmeiiel.oo. of Tezae, page 6 

Stete for the traaepottetion of peeeeqgere on racial pe8eenger 

care aad epaclal passeager trains. We th ink luoh l p wla l 

p a r esingecwa r aae egscul peuees3~er tralae era ulthlrr. the 

meoaiag al tbs term other eervlc~8” a8 the saw 18 uwd in 

l ubwction 9, at &tic16 6418, eupre. 

Poara very truly 

Ae8ietant
§ 561.407 Conducting or facilitating a financial transaction with the Central Bank of Iran or a designated Iranian financial institution. A foreign financial institution conducts or facilitates a financial transaction with the Central Bank of Iran or a designated Iranian financial institution if it maintains an account for such entities or engages in a financial transaction directly or indirectly with such entities. Note to § 561.407 :
See § 561.404 for factors that may be considered in determining whether a financial transaction is significant, as required for the imposition of certain sanctions pursuant to this part.
(logo) C-III | C-III AssetManagement

 

 

**OFFICER’S CERTIFICATE**

**C-III Asset Management LLC**

 

 

The undersigned, Barry Davis,President of C-III Asset Management LLC (*f/k/a Centerline Servicing LLC*),the Special Servicer under that certain Pooling and Servicing Agreement datedas of March 1, 2017, relating to the **Wells Fargo Commercial Mortgage Trust2017-RB1, Commercial Mortgage Pass-Through Certificates, Series 2017-RB1**(the “Pooling and Servicing Agreement”), hereby certifies as follows:

 

1.     a review of the activities of theSpecial Servicer and of its performance under the Pooling and ServicingAgreement during the calendar year 2018 (the “Reporting Period”) has been madeunder the undersigned’s supervision;

 

2.     to the best of the undersigned’sknowledge, based on such review, the Special Servicer maintained an effectiveinternal control system relating to its servicing of the Mortgage Loansserviced by it and has fulfilled in all material respects its obligations underthe Pooling and Servicing Agreement throughout the Reporting Period.

 

Capitalized terms nototherwise defined herein shall have the meanings given them in the Pooling andServicing Agreement.

 

 

**IN WITNESS WHEREOF,** as of the 1st day of March, 2019, I havehereunto signedmy name.

 

 

/s/ Barry Davis

**Barry Davis**, President

C-III Asset Management LLC, a

Delaware limited liabilitycompany

 

 

WFCM 2017-RB1