alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
EX-33.3



ASSERTION OF COMPLIANCE WITH APPLICABLE SERVICING CRITERIA



The Bank of New York and The Bank of New York Trust Company, N.A. (collectively, the "Company") provides this platform-level assessment of compliance with the servicing criteria specified in Item 1122(d) of Regulation AB promulgated by the Securities and Exchange Commission.



Management has determined that the following servicing criteria are applicable in regards to the following servicing platform for the following period:



Platform: Publicly-issued (i.e., transaction-level reporting initially required under the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended) residential mortgage-backed securities and other mortgage-related asset-backed securities issued on or after January 1, 2006 (and like-kind transactions issued prior to January 1, 2006) for which the Company provides trustee, securities administration, paying agent or custodial services. The platform includes like kind transactions for which the Company provided trustee, securities administrator, paying agent or custodial services as a result of the Company's acquisition as of October 1, 2006 of portions of JPMorgan Chase Bank, N.A.'s corporate trust business, including structured finance agency and trust transactions.



Applicable Servicing Criteria: All servicing criteria set forth in Item 1122(d), to the extent required by the related transaction agreements as to any transaction, except for the following criteria: 1122 (d) (1)(ii), (iii), (iv), (4) (iv), (v), (vi), (vii), (viii), (ix), (x), (xi), (xii) and (xiii).



Period: Twelve months ended December 31, 2006.



With respect to the Platform and the Period, the Company provides the following assessment of compliance in respect of the Applicable Servicing Criteria:



-

The Company is responsible for assessing its compliance with the Applicable Servicing Criteria.



-

The Company has assessed compliance with the Applicable Servicing Criteria.



-

As of December 31, 2006 and for the Period, the Company was in material compliance with the Applicable Servicing Criteria.



Ernst & Young LLP, an independent registered public accounting firm, has issued an attestation report with respect to the Company's foregoing assessment of compliance.





|                           |                           
|-------------------------- | --------------------------
|The Bank of New York       | The Bank of New York      
|The Bank of New York Trust | The Bank of New York Trust
|Company, N.A.              | Company, N.A.             
|                           |                           
|                           |                           
|                           |                           
|By:
/s/ Robert L. Griffin  | By:
/s/ Patrick J. Tadie  
|Robert L. Griffin          | Patrick J. Tadie          
|Authorized Signer          | Authorized Signer         







March 1, 2007
§ 604.205 Professional and technical services. ( a ) The prohibition on the use of appropriated funds, in § 604.100 (a), does not apply in the case of a payment of reasonable compensation made to an officer or employee of a person requesting or receiving a Federal contract, grant, loan, or cooperative agreement or an extension, continuation, renewal, amendment, or modification of a Federal contract, grant, loan, or cooperative agreement if payment is for professional or technical services rendered directly in the preparation, submission, or negotiation of any bid, proposal, or application for that Federal contract, grant, loan, or cooperative agreement or for meeting requirements imposed by or pursuant to law as a condition for receiving that Federal contract, grant, loan, or cooperative agreement.
( b ) For purposes of paragraph (a) of this section, “professional and technical services” shall be limited to advice and analysis directly applying any professional or technical discipline. For example, drafting of a legal document accompanying a bid or proposal by a lawyer is allowable. Similarly, technical advice provided by an engineer on the performance or operational capability of a piece of equipment rendered directly in the negotiation of a contract is allowable. However, communications with the intent to influence made by a professional (such as a licensed lawyer) or a technical person (such as a licensed accountant) are not allowable under this section unless they provide advice and analysis directly applying their professional or technical expertise and unless the advice or analysis is rendered directly and solely in the preparation, submission or negotiation of a covered Federal action. Thus, for example, communications with the intent to influence made by a lawyer that do not provide legal advice or analysis directly and solely related to the legal aspects of his or her client's proposal, but generally advocate one proposal over another are not allowable under this section because the lawyer is not providing professional legal services. Similarly, communications with the intent to influence made by an engineer providing an engineering analysis prior to the preparation or submission of a bid or proposal are not allowable under this section since the engineer is providing technical services but not directly in the preparation, submission or negotiation of a covered Federal action.
( c ) Requirements imposed by or pursuant to law as a condition for receiving a covered Federal award include those required by law or regulation, or reasonably expected to be required by law or regulation, and any other requirements in the actual award documents.
( d ) Only those services expressly authorized by this section are allowable under this section.
Motion for Permission to Electronically File Motion for 

Rehearing 1 Day After Deadline – Arthur Franklin Miller, Jr. Page 1 of 2

CAUSE NO. 05-14-01065-CR 

ARTHUR FRANKLIN MILLER, JR. § IN THE COURT OF APPEALS 

 § 

 § 

vs. § FOR THE FIFITH DISTRICT 

 § 

 § 

THE STATE OF TEXAS § OF TEXAS AT DALLAS 

APPELLANT’S MOTION FOR PERMISSION TO ELECTRONICALLY FILE A 

MOTION FOR REHEARING 1 DAY AFTER THE DEADLINE 

TO THE HONORABLE JUSTICES OF SAID COURT: 

COMES NOW, Counsel for the Appellant, and files this Motion and Certification for 

Court to allow Appellant to electronically file a Motion for Rehearing one (1) day after the filing 

deadline, and would show in support thereof, the following: 

I. 

 Pursuant to the Tex. R. App. P. 4.1 (b), undersigned counsel certifies that the clerk’s 

office was not closed or inaccessible to the public during regular hours but counsel was unable to 

successfully file after several attempts by electronic means because of either an in counsel’s 

office “computer glitch” or possibly internet interruptions because of the recent building power 

outages caused by the recent severe weather. 

II. 

In an attempt to comply with Tex. R. App. P. 49.1, a manual filing “the old fashioned 

way” by regular U.S. Mail was postmarked and completed on June 16, 2015. 

ACCEPTED

05-14-01065-CR

FIFTH COURT OF APPEALS

DALLAS, TEXAS

6/17/2015 2:40:43 PM

LISA MATZ

CLERK

 FILED IN 5th COURT OF APPEALS DALLAS, TEXAS 6/17/2015 2:40:43 PM LISA MATZ Clerk
Motion for Permission to Electronically File Motion for 

Rehearing 1 Day After Deadline – Arthur Franklin Miller, Jr. Page 2 of 2

 WHEREFORE, PREMISES CONSIDERED, for these reasons, the Appellant 

asks this Court to allow Appellant to electronically file the Motion for Rehearing one (1) day 

after the deadline. 

 Respectfully Submitted, 

 /s/ Jay Ethington______________ 

 Jay Ethington 

 SBN: 06692500 

 3131 McKinney Avenue 

 Suite 800 

 Dallas, Texas 75204 

 Tel: (214) 740-9955 

 Fax: (214) 740-9912 

 jay@jayethington.com 

 ATTORNEY FOR APPELLANT 

 

CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE 

 This is to certify that on the 17TH day of June, 2015, a true and correct copy of the above 

and foregoing Motion was served on the attorney for the State of Texas, Amy Sue Melo Murphy, 

Assistant District Attorney, Collin County District Attorney’s Office. 

 /s/ Jay Ethington 

 Jay Ethington
Due to the use of Java scripting used on the website, http://www.foia.cia.gov/collection/berlin-wall-collection, the functionality of the website has not been replicated. All documents linked to on the site have saved in ~\netsite-docs\gpo15
407\pdfs.
§ 1631.10 Use of property in compliance with LSC's statutes and regulations. ( a ) A recipient may use personal property purchased or leased, in whole or in part, with LSC funds primarily to deliver legal services to eligible clients under the requirements of the LSC Act, applicable appropriations acts, and LSC regulations.
( b ) A recipient may use personal property purchased or leased, in whole or in part, with LSC funds for the performance of an LSC grant or contract for other activities, if such other activities do not interfere with the performance of the LSC grant or contract.
( c ) If a recipient uses personal property purchased or leased, in whole or in part, with LSC funds to provide services to an organization that engages in activity restricted by the LSC Act, LSC regulations, or other applicable law, the recipient must charge the organization a fee no less than that which private nonprofit organizations in the same area charge for the same services under similar conditions.
```

[Congressional Bills 118th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[S.J. Res. 32 Introduced in Senate (IS)]

<DOC>

118th CONGRESS
  1st Session
S. J. RES. 32

  Providing for congressional disapproval under chapter 8 of title 5, 
  United States Code, of the rule submitted by the Bureau of Consumer 
  Financial Protection relating to ``Small Business Lending Under the 
             Equal Credit Opportunity Act (Regulation B)''.

_______________________________________________________________________

                   IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES

                             June 13, 2023

  Mr. Kennedy (for himself, Ms. Lummis, Mrs. Fischer, Mr. Cramer, Mr. 
Risch, Mr. Crapo, Mr. Cassidy, Mr. Scott of South Carolina, Mr. Daines, 
 Mr. Vance, Mr. Thune, Mrs. Hyde-Smith, Mr. Barrasso, Mr. Wicker, Mr. 
  Rubio, Mr. Lee, Mr. Moran, Mr. Lankford, Mr. Scott of Florida, Mr. 
 Budd, Mr. Boozman, Mr. Tillis, Mr. Marshall, Mrs. Britt, Mr. Hagerty, 
   Mr. Braun, Mr. Cornyn, Ms. Ernst, and Mrs. Capito) introduced the 
 following joint resolution; which was read twice and referred to the 
            Committee on Banking, Housing, and Urban Affairs

_______________________________________________________________________

                            JOINT RESOLUTION

 
  Providing for congressional disapproval under chapter 8 of title 5, 
  United States Code, of the rule submitted by the Bureau of Consumer 
  Financial Protection relating to ``Small Business Lending Under the 
             Equal Credit Opportunity Act (Regulation B)''.

    Resolved by the Senate and House of Representatives of the United 
States of America in Congress assembled, That Congress disapproves the 
rule submitted by the Bureau of Consumer Financial Protection relating 
to ``Small Business Lending Under the Equal Credit Opportunity Act 
(Regulation B)'' (88 Fed. Reg. 35150 (May 31, 2023)), and such rule 
shall have no force or effect.
                                 <all>
```
#### Richard F. Burke, Appellant, *v.*George B. Mulgrew et al., as Executors of Felix A. Mulgrew, Deceased, Respondents.

*Burke*v. *Mulgrew,*127 App. Div. 733, appeal dismissed.

(Submitted December 9, 1909;

decided December 14, 1909.)

Appeal from an order of the Appellate Division of the Supreme Court in the first judicial department, entered July 11, 1908, which reversed a judgment in favor of plaintiff entered upon a verdict and an order denying a motion for a new trial and granted a new trial in an action to recover for services.

*John E. McIntyre*and *William H. Loughran*for appellant.

*Frederick St. John*for respondents.

Appeal dismissed, with costs ; no opinion.

Concur: Cullen, Ch. J., Gray, Haight, Vann, Werner, Willard Bartlett and Hiscock, JJ.
#### § 410.1300 Purpose of this subpart.

This subpart covers standards and required services that care provider facilities must meet and provide in keeping with the principles of treating unaccompanied children in custody with dignity, respect, and special concern for their particular vulnerability.
#### Philip J. Coffey, Appellant, *v.*Mary C. Burke, as Executrix of Thomas P. Burke, Deceased, et al., Respondents

Reported below, 132 App. Div. 128.

(Argued November 8, 1909;

decided November 16, 1909.)

Motion to dismiss an appeal from a judgment of the Appellate Division of the Supreme Court in the second judicial department, entered May 3,1909, which affirmed a judgment in favor of defendants entered upon a verdict directed by the court and an order denying a motion for a new trial in an action to recover for services alleged to have been rendered.

The motion was made upon the grounds that the notice of appeal was not served within sixty days after notice of entry of judgment; that the action was to recover for services ; that the affirmance by the Appellate Division was unanimous and, therefore, not appealable, without permission, to the Court of Appeals.

*Edward I). O'Brien*for motion.

*James O. Church*opposed.

Motion denied, with ten dollars costs, on the ground that an appellant has sixty days after the first of September within which to appeal, unless the year that he otherwise would have had would expire within that period, in which case his time is limited by the expiration of that year.
From: RobertJ Wayland/RTP/USEPA/US 

 

To: "Higgins, Cortney" <Cortney_Higgins@omb.eop.gov> 

 

Cc: Kevin Culligan/DC/USEPA/US@EPA, Erich Eschmann/DC/USEPA/US@EPA, 

Bill 

Maxwell/RTP/USEPA/US@EPA 

Cortney, 

We're trying to cross-walk the oil data with our small entity analysis to 

make sure we've adequately captured the appropriate units. We're hoping 

to complete that today. Hopefully we can send over the info either later 

today, or over the weekend. 

thanx! 

bob 

Robert J. Wayland, Ph.D. 

Leader, Energy Strategies Group 

U.S. Environmental Protection Agency 

Office of Air Quality Planning & Standards 

Sector Policies and Programs Division 

Mail Code D243-01 

RTP, NC 27711 

 

Phone: (919) 541-1045 

Cell: (919) 306-2290 

Fax: (919) 541-5450 

e-mail: wayland.robertj@epa.gov 

********************************************************* 

DRAFT/Deliberative Document -- FOIA Exempt 

********************************************************* 

From: "Higgins, Cortney" <Cortney_Higgins@omb.eop.gov> 

To: RobertJ Wayland/RTP/USEPA/US@EPA 

Cc: Kevin Culligan/DC/USEPA/US@EPA 

Date: 12/09/2011 01:17 PM 

Subject: EGU MACT -- cost of compliance for oil-fired units 

Hi Bob, 

Do you know when we’ll see the cost of compliance for the oil fired 

units? In particular, we are interested in the costs for the units with 

CF between 5 and 10%. 

 

Regards, 

Cortney
H. R. 1595 

One Hundred Eleventh Congress 

of the 

United States of America 

AT THE FIRST SESSION 

Begun and held at the City of Washington on Tuesday, 

the sixth day of January, two thousand and nine 

An Act 

To designate the facility of the United States Postal Service located at 3245 Latta 

Road in Rochester, New York, as the ‘‘Brian K. Schramm Post Office Building’’. 

Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representatives of 

the United States of America in Congress assembled, 

SECTION 1. BRIAN K. SCHRAMM POST OFFICE BUILDING. 

(a) DESIGNATION.—The facility of the United States Postal 

Service located at 3245 Latta Road in Rochester, New York, shall 

be known and designated as the ‘‘Brian K. Schramm Post Office 

Building’’. 

(b) REFERENCES.—Any reference in a law, map, regulation, 

document, paper, or other record of the United States to the facility 

referred to in subsection (a) shall be deemed to be a reference 

to the ‘‘Brian K. Schramm Post Office Building’’. 

Speaker of the House of Representatives. 

Vice President of the United States and

President of the Senate.
#### Phillip Rosenberg, an Infant, by Morris B. Rosenberg, His Guardian ad Litem, Respondent, *v.*Hugo Schoolherr, as Administrator of the Estate of Louis Schoolherr, Deceased, Appellant.

*Rosenberg*v. *Selioolherr,*116 App. Div. 289, affirmed.

(Argued November 29, 1909;

decided December 17, 1909.)

Appeal from a judgment of the Appellate Division of the Supreme Court in the first judicial department, entered Janu*523ary 3,1907, affirming a judgment in favor of plaintiff entered upon a verdict and an order denying a motion for a new trial in an action to recover for personal injuries alleged to have been sustained through the negligence of defendant’s intestate.

*Charles Melville Weeks*for appellant.

*Charles W. Sinnott*for respondent.

Judgment affirmed, with costs; no opinion.

Concur: Cullen, Oh. J., Cray, Edward T. Bartlett, Haight, Willard Bartlett, Hisoook and Chase, JJ.
#### § 211.9 Examination and reexamination.

Following admission of an eligible person to a hospital for temporary or continuing care and treatment, he shall be examined by qualified members of the medical staff as soon as practicable, but not later than the fifth day after his admission. Each such person shall be reexamined at least once within each six month period beginning with the month following the month in which he was first examined.
EXHIBIT 31.1

CERTIFICATION

I, Richard J. Hendrix,
certify that:



|1. | I have reviewed this Amendment No.1 to the Annual Report on Form 10-K of FBR & Co.;
|-- | -----------------------------------------------------------------------------------



|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; and
|-- | --------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------



|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.
|-- | ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Date: April 21, 2017



/s/ Richard J. HendrixRichard J. HendrixChief Executive Officer
Exhibit
32.1




CERTIFICATION
OF PRINCIPAL EXECUTIVE OFFICER


PURSUANT
TO 18 U.S.C. SECTION 1350,


AS
ADOPTED PURSUANT TO


SECTION
906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002




Solely
for the purposes of complying with 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, as adopted pursuant
to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, I, the undersigned Principal
Executive and Financial Officer of Flexible Solutions International, Inc. (the
“Company”), hereby certify that, to the best of my knowledge, the Quarterly
Report on Form 10-Q of the Company for the quarter ended March 31, 2009 (the
“Report”) fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) or 15(d) of the
Securities Exchange Act of 1934 and that the information contained in the Report
fairly presents, in all material respects, the financial condition and results
of operations of the Company.




May
      14, 2009
                
                /s/ Daniel
      B. O’BrienDaniel
      B. O’BrienPresident,
      Chief Executive and Financial Officer
<PAGE>
                                                                    EXHIBIT 99.1


                 CERTIFICATION OF QUARTERLY REPORT ON FORM 10-Q
                            OF PRIVATE BUSINESS, INC.
                      FOR THE QUARTER ENDED MARCH 31, 2003


The undersigned hereby certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 906 of the
Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that, to the undersigned's best knowledge and
belief, the Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q for Private Business, Inc. ("Issuer")
for the period ending March 31, 2003 as filed with the Securities and Exchange
Commission on the date hereof (the "Report"):

        a).     fully complies with the requirements of section 13(a) or 15(d)
                of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934; and

        b).     the information contained in the Report fairly presents, in all
                material respects, the financial condition and results of
                operations of the Issuer.


        This Certification accompanies the Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q of the
Issuer for the quarterly period ended March 31, 2003.

        This Certification is executed as of May 14, 2003.



                                            /s/ Henry M. Baroco
                                            --------------------------
                                            Henry M. Baroco
                                            Chief Executive Officer
§ 152.14 Eligibility. ( a ) *General rule.* An individual is eligible to enroll in a PCIP if he or she: ( 1 ) Is a citizen or national of the United States or lawfully present in the United States;
( 2 ) Subject to paragraph (b) of this section, has not been covered under creditable coverage for a continuous 6-month period of time prior to the date on which such individual is applying for PCIP;
( 3 ) Has a pre-existing condition as established under paragraph (c) of this section; and
( 4 ) Is a resident of one of the 50 States or the District of Columbia which constitutes or is within the service area of the PCIP. A PCIP may not establish any standards with regard to the duration of residency in the PCIP service area.
( b ) *Satisfaction of 6-month creditable coverage requirement when an enrollee leaves the PCIP service area.* An individual who becomes ineligible for a PCIP on the basis of no longer residing in the PCIP's service area as described in paragraph (a)(4) of this section is deemed to have satisfied the requirement in paragraph (a)(2) of this section for purposes of applying to enroll in a PCIP in the new service area.
( c ) *Pre-existing condition requirement.* For purposes of establishing a process for determining eligibility, and subject to HHS approval, a PCIP may elect to apply any one or more of the following criteria in determining whether an individual has a pre-existing condition for purposes of this section: ( 1 ) *Refusal of coverage.* Documented evidence that an insurer has refused, or a clear indication that the insurer would refuse, to issue coverage to an individual on grounds related to the individual's health.
( 2 ) *Exclusion of coverage.* Documented evidence that such individual has been offered coverage but only with a rider that excludes coverage of benefits associated with an individuals' identified pre-existing condition.
( 3 ) *Medical or health condition.* Documented evidence of the existence or history of certain medical or health condition, as approved or specified by the Secretary.
( 4 ) *Other.* Other criteria, as defined by a PCIP and approved by HHS.