alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
Exhibit 31(ii)
                                --------------


                                CERTIFICATIONS

I, Steve Bailey, certify that:


      1.    I have reviewed this report on Form 10-K and all reports on Form
            10-D required to be filed in respect of the period covered by this
            report on Form 10-K of CHL Mortgage Pass-Through Trust 2006-14
            (the "Exchange Act periodic reports");

      2.    Based on my knowledge, the Exchange Act periodic reports, taken as
            a whole, do not contain any untrue statement of a material fact or
            omit to state a material fact necessary to make the statements
            made, in light of the circumstances under which such statements
            were made, not misleading with respect to the period covered by
            this report;

      3.    Based on my knowledge, all of the distribution, servicing and
            other information required to be provided under Form 10-D for the
            period covered by this report is included in the Exchange Act
            periodic reports;

      4.    I am responsible for reviewing the activities performed by the
            servicer(s) and based on my knowledge and the compliance review(s)
            conducted in preparing the servicer compliance statement(s)
            required in this report under Item 1123 of Regulation AB, and
            except as disclosed in the Exchange Act periodic reports, the
            servicer(s) have fulfilled their obligations under the servicing
            agreement(s) in all material respects; and

      5.    All of the reports on assessment of compliance with servicing
            criteria for asset-backed securities and their related attestation
            reports on assessment of compliance with servicing criteria for
            asset-backed securities required to be included in this report in
            accordance with Item 1122 of Regulation AB and Exchange Act Rules
            13a-18 and 15d-18 have been included as an exhibit to this report,
            except as otherwise disclosed in this report. Any material
            instances of noncompliance described in such reports have been
            disclosed in this report on Form 10-K.

      In giving the certifications above, I have reasonably relied on
      information provided to me by the following unaffiliated parties: The
      Bank of New York, as Trustee.

  Date: March 26, 2007


      /s/ Steve Bailey
      -----------------------------
      Steve Bailey
      Senior Managing Director, Loan Administration
FEDERAL ELECTION COMMISSION 

WASHINGTON, D.C. 20463 

April 25,2018 

MEMORANDUM 

TO: Patricia C. Orrock 

Chjef Compliance Officer 

Thomas E. Hintermister 

Assistant Staff Director 

Audit Division 

FROM: Erin Chlopak 

Acting Associate General Counsel 

Policy Division 

Lorenzo Holloway 

Assistant General Counsel 

Compliance Advice 

Margaret J. Forman M JT 

Attorney 

SUBJECT: Proposed Draft Final Audit Report on Mike Bishop for Congress (LRA 1068) 

The Office of the. General Counsel has reviewed the proposed Draft Final Audit Report 

("proposed DFAR") on Mike Bishop for Congress. The proposed DFAR contains one finding: 

Reporting of Debts and Obligations. We concur with the finding. If you have any questions, 

please contact Margaret J. Forman, the attorney assigned to this audit.
Editorial Note on Part 46
Editorial Note: The Department of Health and Human Services issued a notice of waiver regarding the requirements set forth in part 46, relating to protection of human subjects, as they pertain to demonstration projects, approved under section 1115 of the Social Security Act, which test the use of cost—sharing, such as deductibles, copayment and coinsurance, in the Medicaid program. For further information see 47 FR 9208, Mar. 4, 1982.

§ 46.201 To what do these regulations apply? ( a ) Except as provided in paragraph (b) of this section, this subpart applies to all research involving pregnant women, human fetuses, neonates of uncertain viability, or nonviable neonates conducted or supported by the Department of Health and Human Services (DHHS). This includes all research conducted in DHHS facilities by any person and all research conducted in any facility by DHHS employees.
( b ) The exemptions at § 46.101(b)(1) through (6) are applicable to this subpart.
( c ) The provisions of § 46.101(c) through (i) are applicable to this subpart. Reference to State or local laws in this subpart and in § 46.101(f) is intended to include the laws of federally recognized American Indian and Alaska Native Tribal Governments.
( d ) The requirements of this subpart are in addition to those imposed under the other subparts of this part.
I 

111TH CONGRESS 

1ST SESSION H. R. 1591 

To amend title 38, United States Code, to clarify that the United States 

may not recover or collect any charges from a third party for hospital 

care or medical services provided by the Secretary of Veterans Affairs 

to a veteran for a service-connected disability. 

IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES 

MARCH 18, 2009 

Mr. ADLER of New Jersey (for himself, Mr. LOBIONDO, Mr. YOUNG of Alaska, Mr. KLEIN of Florida, Mr. ELLISON, Mr. NYE, Mr. MITCHELL, and 

Mr. MICHAUD) introduced the following bill; which was referred to the 

Committee on Veterans’ Affairs 

A BILL 

To amend title 38, United States Code, to clarify that the 

United States may not recover or collect any charges 

from a third party for hospital care or medical services 

provided by the Secretary of Veterans Affairs to a veteran for a service-connected disability. 

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 ‘‘Fulfilling America’s 

5 Promise to Our Veterans Act’’. 


wwoods2 on PRODPC68 with BILLS
2 

•HR 1591 IH

1 SEC. 2. CLARIFICATION THAT THE UNITED STATES MAY 

2 NOT RECOVER CHARGES FROM A THIRD 

3 PARTY FOR TREATMENT OF VETERANS’ 

4 SERVICE-CONNECTED DISABILITIES. 

5 Section 1729 of title 38, United States Code, is 

6 amended—— 

7 (1) by redesignating subsection (i) as subsection 

8 (k); and 

9 (2) by inserting after subsection (h) the fol10 lowing new subsection (i): 

11 ‘‘(i) In any case in which a veteran is furnished care 

12 or services under this chapter for a service-connected dis13 ability, the United States has no right to recover or collect 

14 any charges for such care or services from any third 

15 party.’’. 

Æ 


wwoods2 on PRODPC68 with BILLS
NotesFAQContact Us

Collection

Thesaurus
AdvancedSearch Tips

Collection

Thesaurus
BrowseThesaurus

 Download full text

**ERIC Number:**

**Record Type:**

**Publication Date:**

**Pages:**

**Abstractor:**

**ISBN:**

**ISSN:**

**EISSN:**

AcculturationAdult EducationCultural DifferencesCulturally Relevant EducationEnglish (Second Language)ImmigrantsLand SettlementLanguage TeachersLimited English SpeakingMental HealthRefugeesSecond Language InstructionSecond Language LearningTeacher Role

**Publication Type:**

**Education Level:**

**Audience:**

**Language:**

**Sponsor:**

**Authoring Institution:**

**Grant or Contract Numbers:**

PrivacyCopyrightContact UsSelection PolicyAPI
JournalsNon-JournalsDownloadSubmitMultimediaWidget
#### Dalrymple v. Hillenbrand.

*Promissory note—indorsement—holder for value without notice of defect.*

In an action by the holder in good faith for value, etc., against the indorser of a promissory note purporting to be made by a firm, *held,*that the defenses that the makers were not partners and that the note was without consideration and in fraud of the bankrupt act, were not available, as (1) the indorsement was a guaranty that the prior acts were valid and signatures genuine, and as (3) plaintiff was a holder before maturity for value without notice of such defects.

Appeal by defendant from a judgment in favor of plaintiff entered upon the report of a referee.

The action was brought in Seneca county by James F. Dalrymple against Joseph Hillenbrand, upon a promissory note purporting to *58be inade by the firm of Altenbrand Brothers, payable to the order of themselves, and which was indorsed by the makers and defendant. Sufficient facts appear in the opinion.

*Daniel Pratt*and *Rowan & Helm,*for appellant.

*Weed & Hammond,*for respondent.

Mullin, P. J.

On the 26th of April, 1872, Altenbrand Brothers made their promissory note payable to their own order for 11,000 one year from date. It was indorsed in the name of the firm, and by the defendant and Chamberlain Brothers, and before maturity transferred to the plaintiff for a valuable consideration, and without any proof of notice to him of defect or illegality in said note in its inception or transfer. The note was duly presented for payment and protested for non-payment and notice given to the indorsers.

The action is on the note, and the defense is that the makers were not partners when the note was made, having been adjudged bankrupts some months prior to its date, and that it was without consideration, and was given in fraud of the provisions of the bankrupt law.

The defendant as indorser of this note cannot assail its validity on any of the grounds insisted on by him. Story in his work on promissory notes, at page 157, says the indorsement of a promissory note is a guaranty on the part of the indorser that the signatures of the makers and the prior indorsers thereon are genuine, and that the prior parties to the note had power to do all that they have done, and to bind themselves by their contract. Byles on Bills, 148; Edwards on Bills, 289; *Erwin*v. *Downs,*15 N. Y. 575.

Again, the defenses set up are not available to the defendant against the plaintiff, who is a *Iona -fide*holder of the note for a valuable consideration without notice, and who had acquired title to it before maturity. *McKnight*v. *Wheeler,*6 Hill, 492; *Morford*v. *Davis,*28 N. Y. *481; Devlin*v. *Brady,*36 id. 531; *Delaware Bank*v. *Jarvis,*20 id. 226.

This disposes of the case, and it is unnecessary to examine any other of the appellant’s points. It is quite probable that illegal evidence was received, but it had no bearing on the questions on which the case is decided.

The judgment must be affirmed.

*Judgment affirmed.*
§ 2554.11 What is contained in a complaint? ( a ) A complaint is a written statement giving notice to the person alleged to be liable under 31 U.S.C. 3802 of the specific allegations being referred for adjudication and of the person's right to request a hearing with respect to those allegations. The person alleged to have made false statements or to have submitted false claims to the Corporation is referred to as the “defendant.”
( b ) The reviewing official may join in a single complaint, false claims or statements that are unrelated, or that were not submitted simultaneously, regardless of the amount of money or the value of property or services demanded or requested.
( c ) The complaint will state that the Corporation seeks to impose civil penalties, assessments, or both, against each defendant and will include: ( 1 ) The allegations of liability against each defendant, including the statutory basis for liability, identification of the claims or statements involved, and the reasons liability allegedly arises from such claims or statements;
( 2 ) The maximum amount of penalties and assessments for which each defendant may be held liable;
( 3 ) A statement that each defendant may request a hearing by filing an answer and may be represented by a representative;
( 4 ) Instructions for filing such an answer;
( 5 ) A warning that failure to file an answer within 30 days of service of the complaint will result in imposition of the maximum amount of penalties and assessments.
( d ) The reviewing official must serve any complaint on the defendant and, if a hearing is requested by the defendant, provide a copy to the Administrative Law Judge (ALJ) assigned to the case.
---

---

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 Report of Defense Industries International, Inc. (the
Company) on Form 10-Q for the period ending March 31, 2009 as filed with the
SEC on the date hereof (the Report), I, Joseph Postbinder, Chief Executive
Officer of the Company, certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. § 1350, as adopted pursuant to
§ 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.

|By: /s/ Joseph Postbinder

Joseph PostbinderChief Executive Officer |  | 
|--------------------------------------------------------------------------------- |  | 

June 11, 2009



---

---
§ 309.45 When and how may a Tribe or Tribal organization request reconsideration of a disapproval action? ( a ) Except as specified under paragraphs (g) and (h) of this section, a Tribe or Tribal organization may request reconsideration of the disapproval of a Tribal IV-D application, plan or plan amendment by filing a written Request for Reconsideration to the Secretary within 60 days of the date of the Notice of Disapproval.
( b ) The Request for Reconsideration must include: ( 1 ) All documentation that the Tribe or Tribal organization believes is relevant and supportive of its application, plan or plan amendment; and
( 2 ) A written response to each ground for disapproval identified in the Notice of Disapproval, indicating why the Tribe or Tribal organization believes its application, plan or plan amendment conforms to the requirements for approval specified in applicable Federal statutes, regulations and office issuances; and
( 3 ) Whether or not the Tribe or Tribal organization requests a meeting or conference call with the Secretary.
( c ) After receiving a Request for Reconsideration that includes a request for a conference call or meeting, OCSE will determine whether to hold a conference call or a meeting with the Tribe or Tribal organization to discuss the reasons for disapproval of the application, plan, or plan amendment as well as the Tribe or Tribal organization's response. The Secretary will notify the Tribe or Tribal organization of the date and time of the conference call or meeting.
( d ) A conference call or meeting under § 309.45(c) shall be held not less than 30 days nor more than 60 days after the date the notice of such call or meeting is furnished to the Tribe or Tribal organization, unless both parties agree in writing to another time.
( e ) The Secretary will make a written determination affirming, modifying, or reversing disapproval of a Tribal IV-D program application, plan, or plan amendment within 60 days after the conference call or meeting is held, or within 60 days after the request for reconsideration that does not include a request for a meeting. This determination shall be the final decision of the Secretary.
( f ) The Secretary's determination that a Tribal IV-D application, new plan or plan amendment is not approvable remains in effect pending the reconsideration under this part.
( g ) Disapproval of start-up funding and a request for waiver of the 100-child rule is not subject to administrative appeal.
( h ) Where the Secretary believes an approved Tribal IV-D plan should be disapproved, he will notify the Tribe of his intent to disapprove the plan. If the Tribe waives its right to reconsideration under this section, the Tribe may request a pre-decision hearing with 60 days of the date of the Notice of Intent to Disapprove the plan. The hearing will utilize the procedures at 45 CFR part 213.
[69 FR 16672, Mar. 30, 2004, as amended at 89 FR 9793, Feb. 12, 2024]
III 

118TH CONGRESS 

1ST SESSION S. RES. 116 

Supporting the goals and ideals of ‘‘Deep Vein Thrombosis and Pulmonary 

Embolism Awareness Month’’. 

IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES 

MARCH 21, 2023 

Mr. GRASSLEY (for himself and Mr. LUJA ́N) submitted the following 

resolution; which was considered and agreed to 

RESOLUTION 

Supporting the goals and ideals of ‘‘Deep Vein Thrombosis 

and Pulmonary Embolism Awareness Month’’. 

Whereas deep vein thrombosis (referred to in this preamble 

as ‘‘DVT’’) is a condition that occurs when a blood clot 

forms in the deep veins of the body, such as in the arm, 

abdomen, around the brain, and most commonly in the 

leg; 

Whereas a potentially life-threatening complication of DVT is 

pulmonary embolism (referred to in this preamble as 

‘‘PE’’), where a blood clot breaks off, travels through the 

blood stream, and lodges in the lung; 

Whereas DVT and PE are serious but often preventable medical conditions; 


pbinns on DSKJLVW7X2PROD with $$_JOB
2 

•SRES 116 ATS 

Whereas DVT and PE affect as many as 900,000 individuals 

in the United States each year; 

Whereas DVT and PE kill an estimated 60,000 to 100,000 

individuals in the United States each year, and 1 out of 

4 individuals who have a PE die without warning; 

Whereas DVT and PE deaths are often preventable; 

Whereas DVT and PE are leading causes of preventable hospital death in the United States; 

Whereas DVT and PE are a common complication faced by 

cancer patients, and survival rates are lower for individuals with cancer who also have blood clots; 

Whereas pregnancy increases the risk of DVT and PE, and 

that risk remains elevated for up to 3 months after giving birth; 

Whereas immobility, surgery, older age, and a family history 

of clotting and thrombophilia increase the risk of DVT 

and PE; 

Whereas DVT and PE contributes to up to $10,000,000,000 

in incremental medical costs each year in the United 

States; and 

Whereas the establishment of March as ‘‘Deep Vein Thrombosis and Pulmonary Embolism Awareness Month’’ would 

raise awareness about this life-threatening but preventable condition: Now, therefore, be it 

1 Resolved, That the Senate— 

2 (1) supports the goals and ideals of ‘‘Deep Vein 

3 Thrombosis and Pulmonary Embolism Awareness 

4 Month’’; and 


pbinns on DSKJLVW7X2PROD with $$_JOB
3 

•SRES 116 ATS 

1 (2) recognizes the importance of raising aware2 ness of deep vein thrombosis and pulmonary embo3 lism. 

Æ 


pbinns on DSKJLVW7X2PROD with $$_JOB
### SERVED JULY 22, 2010 OF U.S. DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION OFFICE OF HEARINGS

WASHINGTON, D.C.
IN THE MATTER OF CLARE ELAINE SPEARING Respondent FAADOCKETNO. CPI0EA0003 DMS No. FAA-2010-0313
ADMINISTRATIVE LAW 

### JUDGE'S ORDERGRANTING MOTION FOR CONTINUANCE OF HEARING On July 9, 2010, I scheduled a hearing for July 27,2010. OnJuly 15,2010, counsel for the Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) filed a motion requesting both ajudgmenton the pleadings and a continuance for the hearing in this matter. As Respondenfs response to FAA's motion forjudgment on the pleadings will be due on July 30, 2010, and as the ruling onthis motion may determine the need for a hearing, FAA's motion for a continuance is GRANTED, and the hearing will be postponed.
. As I will not be available to preside over this case after August 31, 2010, a new administrative lawjudge will be assigned tothis case and will schedule a new date for the hearing ifa hearing proves to be necessary.


# J

# ~tL**~.·~enkin** Administrative LawJudgeFAA DOCKETNO. CP10EA0003 (Civil Penalty Action)

SERVICE LIST ORIGINAL & ONE COpy Federal Aviation Administration 800 Independence Avenue, S.W. Washington, DC 20591 Attention: Hearing Docket Clerk, AGC-430
. Wilbur Wright Building-Suite 2WlO00 1 ONE COpy Clare Elaine Spearing, Respondent 703 Atlantis 5 Parliament Street Hamilton HM 12 Bermuda Christian L. Lewerenz, Complainant's Counsel Office ofthe Regional Counsel Federal Aviation Administration 1Aviation Plaza Jamaica, NY 11434 TEL: 718-553-3273 FAX: 718-995-5699 The Honorable Isaac D. Benkin,Administrative Law Judge Office ofHearings, M
..20 U.S. Department ofTransportation
. 1200 New Jersey Avenue, S.E. EastBuilding Ground Floor, Room E12-320 Washington, DC 20590 TEL: Attorney-Advisor 202-366-2139 Legal Assistant 202-366-2132 FAX: 202,.366-7536

'. Service was by U.S. Mail. For service in person orby expedited courier, use the following address: Federal Aviation Administration, 600 Independence Avenue, S.W., Wilbur Wright**Building~uite** 2WlOOO, Washington, DC 20591; Attention: Hearing DocketClerk, AGC-430.
§ 1177.28 Scope and application. ( a ) The standards set forth in this subpart apply to the suspension or termination of collection activity, pursuant to 31 U.S.C. 3711, on debts that do not exceed $100,000, or such other amount as the Attorney General may direct, exclusive of interest, penalties, and administrative costs, after deducting the amount of partial payments or collections, if any. Prior to referring a debt to DOJ for litigation, NEH may suspend or terminate collection under this subpart with respect to debts that arise out of its activities, or that are referred or transferred to it for collection services.
( b ) If, after deducting the amount of any partial payments or collections, the principal amount of a debt exceeds $100,000, or such other amount as the Attorney General may direct, exclusive of interest, penalties, and administrative costs, the authority to suspend or terminate rests solely with DOJ. If NEH believes that suspension or termination of any debt in excess of $100,000 may be appropriate, it will refer the debt to the Civil Division or other appropriate litigating division in DOJ, using the CCLR. The referral will specify the reasons for NEH's recommendation. If, prior to referral to the DOJ, NEH determines that a debt is plainly erroneous or clearly without legal merit, NEH may terminate collection activity without obtaining DOJ concurrence, regardless of the amount involved.