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

<ARTICLE> 5
<LEGEND>
This schedule contains summary financial information extracted from the
Consolidated Finanical Statements for Merisel, Inc. for the quarterly period
ended September 30, 1995 and is qualified in its entirety by reference to such
financial statement.
</LEGEND>
<MULTIPLIER> 1,000
<CURRENCY> U.S. DOLLARS
       
<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   9-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          DEC-31-1995
<PERIOD-START>                             JAN-01-1995
<PERIOD-END>                               SEP-30-1995
<EXCHANGE-RATE>                                      1
<CASH>                                           1,467
<SECURITIES>                                         0
<RECEIVABLES>                                  574,029
<ALLOWANCES>                                    23,242
<INVENTORY>                                    664,348
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                             1,248,828
<PP&E>                                         148,888
<DEPRECIATION>                                  50,635
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                               1,468,758
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                          974,205
<BONDS>                                        262,600
<COMMON>                                           298
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<OTHER-SE>                                     230,956
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                 1,468,758
<SALES>                                      4,378,776
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                             4,378,776
<CGS>                                        4,110,825
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                4,110,825
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                 9,333
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                12,216
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                              30,962
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                (8,432)
<INCOME-TAX>                                   (1,777)
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                            (6,655)
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                   (6,655)
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                   (0.22)
<EPS-DILUTED>                                   (0.22)
        

</TABLE>
§ 801.406 Rejection, disposition, or withdrawal of declarations. ( a ) The Committee, acting through the Staff Chairperson, may: ( 1 ) Reject any declaration that does not comply with § 801.403 and so inform the parties promptly in writing;
( 2 ) Reject any declaration at any time, and so inform the parties promptly in writing, if, after the declaration has been submitted and before the Committee has taken one of the actions specified in § 801.407(a): ( i ) There is a material change in the pilot program covered transaction as to which a declaration has been submitted; or
( ii ) Information comes to light that contradicts material information provided in the declaration by the party (or parties); or
( 3 ) Reject any declaration at any time after the declaration has been submitted, and so inform the parties promptly in writing, if the party (or parties) that submitted the declaration does not provide follow-up information requested by the Staff Chairperson within two business days of the request, or within a longer time frame if the party (or parties) so request in writing and the Staff Chairperson grants that request in writing.
( b ) The Staff Chairperson shall notify the parties that submitted a declaration when the Committee has found that the transaction that is the subject of a declaration is not a pilot program covered transaction.
( c ) Parties to a transaction that have submitted a declaration pursuant to § 801.401(a) may request in writing, at any time prior to the Committee taking action under § 801.407(a), that such declaration be withdrawn. Such request shall be directed to the Staff Chairperson and shall state the reasons why the request is being made and state whether the transaction that is the subject of the declaration is being fully and permanently abandoned. An official of the Department of the Treasury will promptly advise the parties to the transaction in writing of the Committee's decision.
( d ) The Committee may not request or recommend that a declaration be withdrawn and refiled, except to permit parties to a pilot program covered transaction to correct material errors or omissions in the declaration submitted with respect to that pilot program covered transaction.
( e ) A party (or parties) may not submit more than one declaration for the same or a substantially similar transaction without approval from the Staff Chairperson.
#### § 578.704 Administrative collection; referral to United States Department of Justice.

In the event that the violator does not pay the penalty imposed pursuant to this part or make payment arrangements acceptable to OFAC, the matter may be referred for administrative collection measures by the Department of the Treasury or to the United States Department of Justice for appropriate action to recover the penalty in a civil suit in a Federal district court.
NOT FOR PUBLICATION

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

 FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT

EVA M. FUTCH,

 Plaintiff - Appellant,

 v.

BAC HOME LOANS SERVICING, LP; et

al.,

 Defendants - Appellees.

No. 11-17573

D.C. No. 2:10-cv-02256-KJDGWF

MEMORANDUM*

Appeal from the United States District Court

for the District of Nevada

Kent J. Dawson, District Judge, Presiding

Submitted May 15, 2014** 

San Francisco, California

Before: RIPPLE,*** SILVERMAN, and GOULD, Circuit Judges. 

FILED

MAY 19 2014

MOLLY C. DWYER, CLERK

U.S. COURT OF APPEALS

 * This disposition is not appropriate 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).

 *** The Honorable Kenneth F. Ripple, Senior Circuit Judge for the U.S.

Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit, sitting by designation.
-2-

Eva M. Futch appeals pro se from the district court’s judgment dismissing

her diversity action arising out of foreclosure proceedings. We have jurisdiction

under 28 U.S.C. § 1291. We review de novo. King v. California, 784 F.2d 910,

912 (9th Cir. 1986). We affirm.

The district court properly dismissed Futch’s wrongful foreclosure and quiet

title claims because Futch did not allege facts showing that she was not in default

on her loan when defendants initiated non-judicial foreclosure proceedings. See

Breliant v. Preferred Equities Corp., 918 P.2d 314, 318 (Nev. 1996) (per curiam)

(“In a quiet title action, the burden of proof rests with the plaintiff to prove good

title in himself.”); Collins v. Union Fed. Sav. & Loan Ass’n, 662 P.2d 610, 623

(Nev. 1983) (wrongful foreclosure claim requires allegation that a lender exercised

the power of sale and foreclosed upon property when no failure of performance

existed on the part of the borrower).

The district court properly dismissed Futch’s civil conspiracy and injunctive

and declaratory relief claims after dismissing the underlying causes of action. See,

e.g., Eikelberger v. Tolotti, 611 P.2d 1086, 1088 (Nev. 1980) (conspiracy action

for damages generally must be based on a viable, independent cause of action).

Futch’s contentions that defendants lacked standing to pursue foreclosure,

and that the assignments transferring the interest in the promissory note and deed
-3-

of trust are invalid, in part because of the use of Mortgage Electronic Registration

Systems, Inc. (“MERS”) as the beneficiary of the deed of trust and lender’s

nominee, are foreclosed by Edelstein v. Bank of New York Mellon, 286 P.3d 249,

259-60, 262 (Nev. 2012) (en banc) (separating the instruments does not

permanently bar foreclosure, and an entity has authority to pursue foreclosure

when it is entitled to enforce both the deed of trust and the note); see also

Cervantes v. Countrywide Home Loans, Inc., 656 F.3d 1034, 1044 (9th Cir. 2011)

(MERS may act as a beneficiary of the trust deed). 

AFFIRMED.
HomeBulgaria

# Bulgaria

111 items

        -    Media Note  		Counselor Chollet’s Travel to Bulgaria, Romania, and Belgium	  February 4, 2022 
        -    Readout  		Deputy Secretary Sherman’s Call with Bulgarian Prime Minister Petkov	  January 31, 2022 
        -    Readout  		Secretary Blinken’s Call with Bulgarian Prime Minister Petkov	  December 17, 2021 
        -    Report  		Country Reports on Terrorism 2020: Bulgaria	  December 16, 2021 
        -    Department Press Briefing  		Department Press Briefing – November 23, 2021	  Ned PriceNovember 23, 2021Washington, D.C. 
        -    Report  		2021 Investment Climate Statements: Bulgaria	  July 21, 2021 
        -    Report  		2021 Trafficking in Persons Report: Bulgaria	  July 1, 2021 
        -    Readout  		 Secretary Blinken’s Call with Bulgarian President Radev	  June 11, 2021 
        -    Press Statement  		Public Designation of Five Bulgarian Public Officials Due to Involvement in Significant Corruption	  Ned PriceJune 2, 2021 
        -    Report  		2020 Report on International Religious Freedom: Bulgaria	  May 12, 2021 

previous page1…45678…12next page

Back to Top
<TABLE> <S> <C>




<ARTICLE> 5
<LEGEND>
THE SCHEDULE CONTAINS SUMMARY FINANCIAL INFORMATION EXTRACTED FROM THE
BALANCE SHEET AS OF DECEMBER 31, 1996 AND FROM THE STATEMENT OF OPERATIONS
FOR THE YEAR ENDED DECEMBER 31, 1996 AND IS QUALIFIED IN ITS ENTIRETY
BY REFERENCE TO SUCH FINANCIAL STATEMENTS.
</LEGEND>
       
<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   YEAR
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          DEC-31-1996
<PERIOD-END>                               DEC-31-1996
<CASH>                                         972,773
<SECURITIES>                                         0
<RECEIVABLES>                                  198,970
<ALLOWANCES>                                    81,980
<INVENTORY>                                          0
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                                     0<F1>
<PP&E>                                       8,850,783
<DEPRECIATION>                              15,069,604
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                              10,975,886
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                                0<F1>
<BONDS>                                      6,859,637
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                             0
<OTHER-SE>                                   3,860,128
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                10,975,886
<SALES>                                      3,212,914
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                             3,265,631
<CGS>                                                0
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                2,307,441
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                     0
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                53,043
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                             558,878
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                189,247
<INCOME-TAX>                                         0
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                            189,247
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                   189,247
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                        0
<EPS-DILUTED>                                        0
<FN>
<F1>THE PARTNERSHIP HAS AN UNCLASSIFIED BALANCE SHEET; THEREFORE, THE VALUE
IS $0.
</FN>
        

</TABLE>
Exhibit 31.2
 CERTIFICATION PURSUANT TO SECTION 302 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002
  1.
    
    I have reviewed this quarterly report on Form 10-Q of Avanir Pharmaceuticals, Inc.;2.
    
    Based on my knowledge, this report does 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, the financial statements, and other financial information included
in this report, fairly present in all material respects the financial condition, results of
operations and cash flows of the registrant as of, and for, the periods presented in this
report;4.
    
    The registrants other certifying officer(s) and I are responsible for establishing and
maintaining disclosure controls and procedures (as defined in Exchange Act Rules 13a-15(e)
and 15d-15(e)) and internal control over financial reporting (as defined in Exchange Act
Rules 13a-15(f) and 15d-15(f)) for the registrant and have:
     5.
    
    The registrants other certifying officer(s) and I have disclosed,
based on our most recent evaluation of internal control over financial
reporting, to the registrants auditors and the audit committee of
registrants Board of Directors (or persons performing the equivalent
functions):
   Dated: May 8, 2009
    /s/ Christine G. OcampoChristine G. OcampoVice President, Finance
[Principal Financial and Accounting Officer]
#### § 539.901 Paperwork Reduction Act notice.

For approval by the Office of Management and Budget (“OMB”) under the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 (44 U.S.C. 3507) of information collections relating to recordkeeping and reporting requirements, licensing procedures (including those pursuant to statements of licensing policy), and other procedures, see § 501.901 of this chapter. An agency may not conduct or sponsor, and a person is not required to respond to, a collection of information unless it displays a valid control number assigned by OMB.
#### § 700.11 Weapons and explosives.

No person, while on the property, shall carry firearms, other dangerous or deadly weapons, or explosives, either openly or concealed, except for authorized training or official purposes, in accordance with FLETC regulations.
#### STATE of Louisiana ex rel. Ike GREEN v. C. Murray HENDERSON, Warden, Louisiana State Penitentiary.

No. 55153.

Supreme Court of Louisiana.

Sept. 20, 1974.

In re: Ike Green applying for writs of Certiorari and Habeas Corpus.

Writ denied. The complaints forming the basis of this application have been adjudicated. See La., 273 So.2d 288.
#### § 1010.405 [Reserved]
HomeEthiopia

# Ethiopia

291 items

        -    Special Briefing  		Digital Press Briefing with Bureau of Population, Refugees, and Migration Assistant Secretary of State, Julieta Valls Noyes	  Julieta Valls NoyesMarch 26, 2024 
        -    Media Note  		Assistant Secretary of State for Consular Affairs Bitter Travels to Nigeria and Ethiopia	  March 25, 2024 
        -    Media Note  		Assistant Secretary Noyes Travels to Ethiopia and Chad	  March 15, 2024 
        -    Media Note  		Assistant Secretary Witkowsky’s Travel to Mozambique, Ethiopia, and Kenya	  March 15, 2024 
        -    Department Press Briefing  		Department Press Briefing – March 12, 2024	  Matthew MillerMarch 12, 2024Washington, D.C. 
        -    Media Note  		Special Envoy for Sudan Perriello Travels to Uganda, Ethiopia, Djibouti, Kenya, Egypt, Saudi Arabia, and the United Arab Emirates	  March 9, 2024 
        -    Media Note  		Special Envoy for the Horn of Africa Mike Hammer Travels to Ethiopia, the United Kingdom, and Italy	  March 6, 2024 
        -    Special Needs Profile  		Addis Ababa, Ethiopia: International Community School of Addis Ababa: 2024 Special Needs Profile	  March 1, 2024 
        -    Special Briefing  		Online Briefing with Molly Phee, Assistant Secretary of State for African Affairs; Michael Hammer, Special Envoy for the Horn of Africa; and John Godfrey, U.S. Ambassador to the Republic of Sudan	  February 21, 2024Johannesburg Hub 
        -    Media Note  		Assistant Secretary Phee’s Travel to Ethiopia	  February 9, 2024 

123…30next page

Back to Top
#### Charles J. KERNER, Jr. and Vincent L. Piraro, dba K. P. Builders v. Mr. and Mrs. Emil GILT. Joseph F. BUA v. Emil J. GILT et al. W. J. GEAGAN LUMBER COMPANY, INC. v. Charles J. KERNER, Jr. and Vincent L. Piraro, dba K. P. Builders.

No. 55141.

Supreme Court of Louisiana.

Sept. 20, 1974.

In re: Charles J. Kerner, Jr. and Vincent L. Piraro, dba K. P. Builders applying for certiorari, or writ of review to the Court of Appeal, Fourth Circuit, Parish of Jefferson. 296 So.2d 428.

Writ denied. The result is correct.
- Office Home
- About Us

HomeOffice of Security Negotiations and Agreements...About Us – Office of Security Negotiations and Agreements

# 									About Us – Office of Security Negotiations and Agreements							

Bureau of Political-Military Affairs

The Office of Security Negotiations and Agreements in the U.S. Department of State’s Bureau of Political-Military Affairs (PM/SNA) leads the negotiation and conclusion of security agreements that:
        - Facilitate the deployment and movement of U.S. forces and materiel abroad
        - Provide status protections for U.S. service members operating overseas
        - Reduce financial obligations for the U.S. Government, and
        - Enhance bilateral defense relationships on a global scale.

PM/SNA is engaged in over a dozen negotiations of security agreements at any given time. In this pursuit, PM/SNA draws on expertise from the Department of Defense’s (DoD) Office of the Under Secretary of Defense for Policy, Office of the General Counsel, the Joint Staff, Combatant Commands, the Department’s regional bureaus and Embassies, and the Office of the Legal Adviser.

These security agreements include:
        - Defense Cooperation Agreements (DCA)
        - Status of Forces Agreements (SOFA)
        - Acquisition and Cross-Servicing Agreements (ACSA)
        - Access Agreements
        - Transit and Overflight Arrangements
        - State flights agreements
        - Cost-sharing agreements such as the U.S.-ROK Special Measures Agreements (SMA) or U.S.-Japan Host Nation Support agreements and
        - DoD Public-Private Partnership Arrangements

PM/SNA also coordinates policy reviews and approvals for logistics agreements, such as acquisition and cross-servicing agreements (ACSA), which are normally negotiated by DoD. Since 2019, PM/SNA has concluded:
        - Landmark defense cooperation agreements with Hungary, Jordan, Norway, Poland, and Slovakia
        - SOFAs with the Antigua and Barbuda, Bahamas, Curacao, Guatemala, Panama, and Rwanda
        - A Host Nation Support framework with Japan
        - An agreement to apply provisions of the NATO SOFA to Joint Forces Command Norfolk
        - Access agreements with El Salvador and Oman
        - Pre-positioning agreement with Iceland
        - Renewed an extension of the Mutual Airlift Support Agreement (MASA) with the Republic of Korea
        - The 11th SMA with the Republic of Korea
        - Renewed an extension of a cost-sharing arrangement with Luxembourg
        - A Technical Arrangement to supplement the Visiting Forces Agreement with the Philippines
        - ACSAs with Belgium, Bulgaria, Brunei, Denmark, Ecuador, Egypt, Guatemala, Guyana, Indonesia, and Kenya

Tags

Bureau of Political-Military AffairsPolitical-Military Cooperation

## Related Articles

-  											 									
Read more
 

Back to Top
#### STATE FARM MUTUAL AUTOMOBILE INSURANCE COMPANY, Queensboro Leasing, Inc., and Martin W. Spiegler, Appellants, v. Lillian LEHTO, Appellee.

No. 79-1696.

District Court of Appeal of Florida, Fourth District.

Oct. 8, 1980.

*1096Prank M. Weathers of Weathers & Nark-ier, P. A., West Palm Beach, for appellants-State Farm Mut., Queensboro Leasing and Spiegler.

William E. Pruitt of Pruitt & Pruitt, West Palm Beach, for appellee.

PER CURIAM.

Appellants contend the trial court erred in setting aside the jury verdict for appellants and granting a new trial. Based upon our consideration of the record and briefs of counsel, we hold that appellants have failed to successfully assume the heavy burden which exists when one contends the trial judge abused his discretion in granting a motion for new trial. *Cloud v. Fallis,*110 So.2d 669 (Fla.1959); *Weems v. Dawson,*352 So.2d 1196 (Fla. 4th DCA 1977); *Bullard v. Canale,*260 So.2d 237 (Fla. 4th DCA 1972).

Accordingly, the order appealed from is affirmed.

AFFIRMED.

LETTS, C. J., and DOWNEY and AN-STEAD, JJ., concur.
No. 16,926.

No. 16,927.

No. 16,928.

No. 16,929.

No. 16,930.

No. 16,931.

No. 16,932.

No. 16,933.

No. 16,934.

No. 16,935.

#### Werber *v.*Talbot Paving Company. Hubbard *v.*Talbot Paving Company. Clouser *v.*Talbot Paving Company. Rhodes *v.*Talbot Paving Company. Amsden *v.*Talbot Paving Company. Covault *v.*Talbot Paving Company. Briscoe et al. *v.*Talbot Paving Company. Wheeler *v.*Talbot Paving Company. Clouser *v.*Talbot Paving Company. Carroll *v.*Talbot Paving Company. *699Henley *v.*Talbot Paving Company. Thomas *v.*Talbot Paving Company. Hubbard *v.*Talbot Paving Company.

No. 16,936.

No. 16,937.

No. 16,938.

Filed Oct. 31, 1894.

From the Wells Circuit Court.

*L. Mock, L. B. Simmons, H. Brownlee, B. J. Panins, D. II. Fonts,*and *A. M. Waltz,*for appellant.

*J. Morris, B. C. Bell, J. M. Barrett*and *S. L. Morris,*for appellee.

Hackney, C. J.

In the above entitled cases, the appellee sued the several appellants to enforce liens against the lots of said several appellants for the improvement of a part of Washington street, in the town of Hartford City, upon which improvement said several lots abutted. All of the questions involved in any one of said cases, were presented and determined adversely to the appellants by this court, in the case of *Dowell*v. *Talbot Paving Co.,*138 Ind. 675. Upon the authority of that case the judgments, severally, in the above entitled eases are in all things affirmed.

Dailey, J., did not participate in the consideration of these cases.
IIA

104TH CONGRESS

2D SESSION H. R. 2711

IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES

SEPTEMBER 5, 1996

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

Resources

AN ACT

To provide for the substitution of timber for the canceled

Elkhorn Ridge Timber Sale.

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

HR 2711 RFS

1 SECTION 1. SUBSTITUTION OF TIMBER FOR CANCELED

2 TIMBER SALE.

3 (a) IN GENERAL.—Notwithstanding the provisions of

4 the Act of July 31, 1947 (30 U.S.C. 601 et seq.), and

5 the requirements of section 5402.0–6 of title 43, Code of

6 Federal Regulations, the Secretary of the Interior, acting

7 through the Bureau of Land Management, is authorized

8 to substitute, without competition, a contract for timber

9 identified for harvest located on public lands administered

10 by the Bureau of Land Management in the State of Cali11 fornia of comparable value for the following terminated

12 timber contract: Elkhorn Ridge Timber Sale, Contract No.

13 CA–050–TS–88–01.

14 (b) DISCLAIMER.—Nothing in this section shall be

15 construed as changing any law or policy of the Federal

16 Government beyond the timber sale substitution specified

17 in this section.

Passed the House of Representatives September 4,

1996.

Attest: ROBIN H. CARLE,

Clerk.
#### § 542.415 Transactions by foreign persons for which a U.S. person would not require a specific license.

For the purposes of this part, foreign persons will not be subject to sanctions pursuant to § 587.201(a)(1), (3), (6), (8), or (13) or § 542.212 solely on the basis of transaction for which a U.S. person would not require a specific license.

[89 FR 48319, June 6, 2024]