alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
(logo)KPMG Peat Marwick LLP



           725 South Figueroa Street
           Los Angeles, CA 90017



                        INDEPENDENT ACCOUNTANTS' REPORT



The Audit Commitment of the Board of Directors
American Savings, Bank, F.A.:


We have examined management's assertion about American Savings Bank's compliance
with  the  minimum  servicing  standards  identified  in  the  Mortgage  Bankers
Association of America's UNIFORM SINGLE ATTESTATION PROGRAM FOR MORTGAGE BANKERS
(USAP)  as of  and  for  the  year  ended  December  31,  1995  included  in the
accompanying  management  assertion.  Management  is  responsible  for  American
Savings  Bank's   compliance  with  those  minimum  servicing   standards.   Our
responsibility  is to express an opinion  on  management's  assertion  about the
entity's compliance based on our examination.

Our  examination  was made in   accordance  with  standards  established  by the
American  Institute of Certified Public Accountants and,  accordingly,  included
examining,  on  a test basis,  evidence about American Savings Bank's compliance
with the minimum servicing  standards and performing such other procedures as we
considered  necessary  in the  circumstances.  We believe  that our  examination
provides a reasonable  basis for our opinion. Our examination does not provide a
legal  determination  on American  Savings  Bank's  compliance  with the minimum
servicing standards.

In our opinion, management's  assertion that American Savings Bank complied with
the  aforementioned  minimum  servicing  standards  as of and for the year ended
December 31, 1995 is fairly stated, in all material respects. 


                                                        /s/KPMG Peat Marwick LLP


January 26,1996



(logo)Member Firm of 
      Klynveld Peat Marwick Goerdeler
2004 GlobalSantaFe Management Annual Incentive Plan


 EXHIBIT 10.1 
  
 2004 GLOBALSANTAFE MANAGEMENT ANNUAL INCENTIVE PLAN 
  
 The 2004 GlobalSantaFe Management Annual Incentive Plan (the “2004 MAIP”) became effective on January 1, 2004, and the payment of
bonuses thereunder, if any, will be based on performance for the period January 1 through December 31, 2004, at the discretion of the Compensation Committee (the “Committee”) of the Board of Directors of GlobalSantaFe Corporation (the
“Company”). The Committee is presently expected to determine bonus amounts, if any, on or about February 28, 2005. 
  
 The purpose of the 2004 MAIP was to promote the interests of the Company and its shareholders by providing eligible management employees with financial rewards based upon
the achievement of targeted performance. The 2004 MAIP was also intended to help the Company attract and retain management employees. 
  
 Executive officers as well as other officers and managers were eligible to participate in the 2004 MAIP. The target bonus as a percent of each individual
participant’s annual base salary ranged from 5% to 100%. The 2004 MAIP bonus was capped at 200% of an individual’s annual base salary. 
  
 The 2004 MAIP performance measures for participants in the parent company and the Company’s contract drilling services subsidiaries consisted of both financial and
operational targets. The weighting was 33.3% for the financial measures, which were net income relative to peer companies and cost. The weighting was 66.6% for the operational performance measures, which were safety, downtime, environmental, and
specified corporate objectives. 
  
 The 2004 MAIP performance measures for
participants in the Company’s drilling management services and oil and gas subsidiaries consisted of both financial and operational targets. The weighting was 50% for the financial measures, which was based on operating income, and 50% for the
operational performance measures, which were lost time incident rate and specified corporate objectives. 
  
 Bonuses payable under the 2004 MAIP are determined by the Committee, subject to ratification by the independent members of the Board of Directors, with respect to the Company’s Chief Executive Officer’s
bonus. 






 The following are the bonus targets for the Company’s executive officers for the 2004 MAIP. The percentages are
expressed as a percentage of annual base salary. 
  

				
	 Executive Officer

	  	 2004 Management Annual
 Incentive Plan Target Percentage

	 
	 Jon A. Marshall
President and
Chief Executive Officer
	  	100	%
	 W. Matt Ralls
Senior Vice President
and Chief Financial
Officer
	  	65	%
	 James L. McCulloch
Senior Vice President
and General Counsel
	  	60	%
	 Marion M. Woolie
Senior Vice President,
Operations
	  	65	%
	 Roger B. Hunt
Senior Vice President,
Marketing
	  	60	%
	 Cheryl D. Richard
Senior Vice President,
Human Resources
	  	60	%
	 Michael R. Dawson
Vice President and
Controller
	  	40	%
		
	 Executive Officer

	  	 2004 ADTI (Drilling
Management Services)
 Annual Incentive Plan
 Target Percentage

	 
	 R. Blake Simmons
President,
Applied Drilling Technology Inc.
	  	60	%
# C_2014184EN.01002702.xml

| 16.6.2014 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 184/27 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

16.6.2014

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 184/27

---

Order of the General Court of 2 April 2014 — France v Commission

(Case T-511/11) (1)

1

((State aid - Measures taken by Interbev - Financing by voluntary contributions made mandatory - Decision declaring the aid scheme compatible with the internal market - Withdrawal of the decision - No need to adjudicate))

2014/C 184/47

Language of the case: French

Parties

Parties

Applicant: French Republic (represented by: initially E. Belliard, G. de Bergues, J. Rossi and J. Gstalter, then E. Belliard, G. de Bergues, D. Colas and J. Bousin, Agents)

Applicant:

Defendant: European Commission (represented by: B. Stromsky, C. Urraca Caviedes and S. Thomas, then B. Stromsky and C. Urraca Caviedes, Agents)

Defendant:

Re:

Re:

Application for annulment of Commission Decision 2012/131/EU of 13 July 2011 on levies for Interbev (OJ 2012 L 59, p. 14).

Operative part of the order

Operative part of the order

| 1. | There is no longer any need to adjudicate on the present action. |
| --- | --- |

1.

There is no longer any need to adjudicate on the present action.

| 2. | The European Commission is ordered to pay the costs. |
| --- | --- |

2.

The European Commission is ordered to pay the costs.

---

(1)  OJ C 340, 19.11.2011.

1

---
<PAGE>   1
                                                                   EXHIBIT 23.02


            CONSENT OF PRICE WATERHOUSE LLP, INDEPENDENT ACCOUNTANTS

We hereby consent to the incorporation by reference in the Registration
Statements on Form S-8, file Nos. 333-07625, 333-30831, 333-41523 and 333-46591,
of Excite, Inc. of our report dated August 6, 1996, with respect to the
financial statements of The McKinley Group, Inc. which do not appear in this
Annual Report on Form 10-K for the year ended December 31, 1997.


/s/ Price Waterhouse LLP

PRICE WATERHOUSE LLP

San Jose, California
March 27, 1998
# C_2013071EN.01001801.xml

| 9.3.2013 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 71/18 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

9.3.2013

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 71/18

---

Judgment of the General Court of 29 January 2013 — Müller v OHIM — Loncar (Sunless)

(Case T-662/11) (1)

1

(Community trade mark - Opposition proceedings - Application for the Community figurative mark Sunless - Earlier Community word marks SUNLESS and LONCAR-SUNLESS - Relative ground for refusal - Likelihood of confusion - Similarity of the signs - Article 8(1)(b) of Regulation (EC) No 207/2009)

2013/C 71/27

Language of the case: German

Parties

Parties

Applicant: Thomas Müller (Gütersloh, Germany) (represented by: J. Schmidt, lawyer)

Applicant:

Defendant: Office for Harmonisation in the Internal Market (Trade Marks and Designs) (represented by: G. Schneider, acting as Agent)

Defendant:

Other party to the proceedings before the Board of Appeal of OHIM: Loncar, SL (Sabadell, Spain)

Other party to the proceedings before the Board of Appeal of OHIM:

Re:

Re:

Action brought against the decision of the Second Board of Appeal of OHIM of 27 September 2011 (Case R 2508/2010-2), relating to opposition proceedings between Loncar, SL and Mr Thomas Müller

Operative part of the judgment

Operative part of the judgment

The Court:

| 1. | Dismisses the action; |
| --- | --- |

1.

Dismisses the action;

| 2. | Orders Thomas Müller to pay the costs. |
| --- | --- |

2.

Orders Thomas Müller to pay the costs.

---

(1)  OJ C 49, 18.2.2012.

1

---
#### § 189.27-10 Certificate of Inspection: Conditions of validity.

To maintain a valid Certificate of Inspection, you must complete your annual and periodic inspections within the periods specified in §§ 189.27-1 and 189.27-5 respectively, and your Certificate of Inspection must be endorsed.

[USCG-1999-4976, 65 FR 6509, Feb. 9, 2000]
---

---

# EXHIBIT 8.1

# Subsidiaries

|ENTITY                                     | PLACE OF INCORPORATION
|------------------------------------------ | ----------------------
|
|
|
|
|Cimatron Technologies, Inc.                | United States         
|Cimatron Technologies Inc.                 | Canada                
|Cimatron GmbH                              | Germany               
|Cimatron Sarl                              | France                
|Cimatron UK Ltd.                           | United Kingdom        
|Microsystem Srl *                          | Italy                 
|Cimatron Japan K.K                         | Japan                 
|Cimatron Technologies (P) Ltd              | India                 
|Cimatron (Beijing) Technology Co. Ltd.     | China                 
|Cimatron (Guangzhou) Technology Co. Ltd.** | China                 
|Korea Cimatron Technologies Co. Ltd.       | Korea                 

|* | As
of July 1st, 2005 we hold 27.5% of the outstanding share capital of
Microsystem, pursuant to the agreements we signed with Microsystem and its shareholders.
In May 2007 our board of directors  approved  the
exercise of our option to increase our holdings in our Italian distributor to 51%, which
increase is scheduled to take effect during the first week of July 2007.
|- | -----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

|** | We
hold only 60% of the shares of this joint venture.
|-- | -----------------------------------------------------



---

---
<PAGE>   1
                                                                   EXHIBIT 21.01



                       LIST OF REGISTRANT'S SUBSIDIARIES


<TABLE>
<CAPTION>
                                                                      Percentage Owned
Name                                   Jurisdiction of Organization     by Registrant
----                                   ----------------------------   ----------------

<S>                                    <C>                             <C>
Prism Data Warehouse Solutions Limited             England                  100%

Prism Solutions Iberica S.L.                       Spain                    100

Prism Solutions, GmbH                              Germany                  100

Prism Solutions SARL                               France                   100

Prism Solutions de Mexico, S.A. de C.V             Mexico                   100

Prism Solutions, Inc.                              Canada                   100
</TABLE>
Release dates | Full version (300 KB PDF)  Board Actions | Actions   under delegated authority  Applications and reports received:Boston | New York | Philadelphia   | Cleveland | Richmond   | AtlantaChicago | St. Louis | Minneapolis   | Kansas City | Dallas   | San Francisco

#   Board Actions 

## Actions taken during the week ending November 4, 2006

----

 None 
Release dates | Full version (300 KB PDF)  Board Actions | Actions   under delegated authority  Applications and reports received:Boston | New York | Philadelphia   | Cleveland | Richmond   | AtlantaChicago | St. Louis | Minneapolis   | Kansas City | Dallas   | San Francisco
Home | Banking information and regulationAccessibility | Contact   usLast update: November 9, 2006
EXHIBIT 21

                           SUBSIDIARIES OF REGISTRANT

                       NAME                               STATE OF INCORPORATION
                       ----                               ----------------------
Vincam Human Resources, Inc.                                       Florida
Vincam Human Resources, Inc. I                                     Florida
Vincam Human Resources, Inc. II                                    Florida
Vincam Human Resources, Inc. III                                   Florida
Vincam Human Resources, Inc. IV                                    Florida
Vincam Human Resources, Inc. V                                     Florida
Vincam Human Resources, Inc. VI                                    Florida
Vincam Human Resources, Inc. XII                                   Florida
Vincam Human Resources of Michigan, Inc.                           Florida
Personnel Resources, Inc.                                          Florida
Vincam Staffing, Inc.                                              Florida
Vincam Government Solutions, Inc.                                  Florida
Psych/Care, Inc.                                                   Florida
Vincam Occupational Health Systems, Inc.                           Florida
Vincam Insurance Services, Inc.                                    Florida
American Pediatric System, Inc.                                    Florida
Vincam Practice Management, Inc.                                   Florida
Vincam/Staff Administrators, Inc.                                 Colorado
Vincam/Staff Administrators of CO, Inc.                           Colorado
Vincam/Staff Administrators of California, Inc.                   Colorado
Vincam/Staff Administrators of Western Colorado, Inc.             Colorado
American Staffing, Inc.                                           Michigan
Vincam/Amstaff, Inc.                                              Michigan
Amstaff HR Services, Inc.                                         Michigan
R.D.M., Inc.                                                      Michigan
Amstaff PEO, Inc.                                                 Michigan
Amstaff H.R.M., Inc.                                              Michigan
Amstaff Management Services, Inc.                                 Michigan
Amstaff Professional Services, Inc.                               Michigan
Amstaff Employer Resources, Inc.                                  Michigan
Amstaff P.C.S., Inc.                                              Michigan
A.E. Service Group, Inc.                                          Michigan
Staff Resource Services, Inc.                                     Michigan
Staffing Group Enterprises, Inc.                                  Michigan
AM Risk Management Company                                        Michigan
Addison, Inc.                                                     Michigan
ATCO PEO, Inc.                                                    Michigan
Vincam/Staffing Network Inc.                                    New Hampshire
Vincam/Corporate Staff Services, Inc.                            Connecticut
*Pursuant to 5TH CIR. R. 47.5, the court has determined that

this opinion should not be published and is not precedent except

under the limited circumstances set forth in 5TH CIR. R. 47.5.4.

IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT

_____________________

No. 98-10300

Summary Calendar

_____________________

GLENN G. LATHAM,

Plaintiff,

STEVE L. HURT,

Movant-Appellant,

versus

KENNETH S. APFEL, Commissioner of

Social Security,

Defendant-Appellee.

_________________________________________________________________

Appeal from the United States District Court for the

Northern District of Texas

USDC No. 5:93-CV-112

_________________________________________________________________

October 23, 1998

Before JOLLY, SMITH, and WIENER, Circuit Judges.

PER CURIAM:*

Steve L. Hurt, counsel for Glenn G. Latham, argues that the

district court erred in determining that it did not have

jurisdiction to determine and allow him reasonable attorney’s fees

under the Social Security Act for his representation of Latham

before the courts. The Commissioner agrees that the district court

had jurisdiction to determine the attorney’s fees due and does not
2

object to the amount of fees requested by Hurt. Latham does not

deny that Hurt is entitled to the fees requested.

We have reviewed the record and the briefs of the parties and

find that the district court erred in refusing to determine and

allow Hurt attorney’s fees in accordance with 42 U.S.C.

§ 406(b)(1). The determination of the amount of the fees must be

made prior to Hurt taking any action to collect the sums due to

him. See § 406(b)(2).

The district court’s denial without prejudice of Hurt’s motion

for a determination and allowance of attorney’s fees under the

Social Security Act is VACATED and the case is REMANDED to the

district court for a determination of the attorney’s fees due to

Hurt under § 406(b)(1).

VACATED and REMANDED.
#### § 202.10 Petitions for reconsideration.

Petitions for reconsideration of decisions by the Secretary in any case taken under review will be considered, upon a showing of good cause, if filed within ten (10) days of service of the Secretary's decision.
Exhibit 32.2

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

In connection with the annual report on Form 10-K of Information Services Group, Inc. (the "Company") for the year ended
December 31, 2009 as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the "Report"), I, David E. Berger, Executive Vice President, Chief Financial Officer of the Company,
hereby certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. § 1350, as adopted pursuant to § 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that:



March 8, 2010

/s/ DAVID E. BERGERDavid E. Berger Executive Vice President, Chief Financial Officer
(Principal Financial Officer and
Principal Accounting Officer)


---



QuickLinks
§ 188.01-5 Incorporation by reference. ( a ) Certain material is incorporated by reference into this subchapter with the approval of the Director of the Federal Register under 5 U.S.C. 552(a) and 1 CFR part 51. All approved material is available for inspection at the U.S. Coast Guard, Office of Design and Engineering Standards (CG-ENG), 2703 Martin Luther King Jr. Avenue SE., Stop 7509, Washington, DC 20593-7509, and is available from the sources listed below. It is also available for inspection at the National Archives and Records Administration (NARA). For information on the availability of this material at NARA, call 202-741-6030 or go to *http://www.archives.gov/federal_register/code_of_federal_regulations/ibr_locations.html .*
( b ) National Fire Protection Association (NFPA), 1 Batterymarch Park, Quincy, MA 02169, 617-770-3000, *http://www.nfpa.org .* ( 1 ) NFPA 10, Standard for Portable Fire Extinguishers, 2010 Edition, effective December 5, 2009, IBR approved for § 189.25-20(a).
( 2 ) [Reserved]
[USCG-2012-0196, 81 FR 48301, July 22, 2016]
# C_2012379EN.01002002.xml

| 8.12.2012 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 379/20 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

8.12.2012

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 379/20

---

Order of the President of the Court of 14 September 2012 — (reference for a preliminary ruling from the Rechtbank Roermond — Netherlands) — Criminal proceedings against Jibril Jaoo

(Case C-88/12) (1)

1

2012/C 379/34

Language of the case: Dutch

The President of the Court has ordered that the case be removed from the register.

---

(1)  OJ C 126, 28.4.2012.

1

---
Docket Files EPA-R09-OAR-2016-0543

A. Notices

1. Proposed Rule - Determination of Attainment of the 2008 Ozone National Ambient Air Quality

Standards; Eastern San Luis Obispo, California, 81 FR 70382 (October 12, 2016)

B. FR Notices

1. 73 FR 16436 (March 27, 2008)

2. 77 FR 30088 (May 21, 2012)

3. 80 FR 65292 (October 26, 2015)

4. 81 FR 26697 (May 4, 2016)

C. Other Documents

1. Letter from Meredith Kurpius, Manager, Air Quality Analysis Office, EPA Region IX, to Larry Allen,

Air Pollution Control Officer, SLOCAPCD, dated December 11, 2013.

2. Letter from Meredith Kurpius, Manager, Air Quality Analysis Office, EPA Region IX, to Larry Allen,

Air Pollution Control Officer, SLOCAPCD, dated October 27, 2014.

3. Letters from Meredith Kurpius, Manager, Air Quality Analysis Office, EPA Region IX, to Larry

Allen, Air Pollution Control Officer, SLOCAPCD, dated October 26, 2015.

4. Letter from Elizabeth J. Adams, Acting Director, Air Division, EPA Region IX, to Richard Corey,

Executive Officer, CARB, dated August 31, 2016, transmitting findings of the EPA’s 2015 TSA of

the CARB's ambient air monitoring program.

5. Letter from Larry Allen, Air Pollution Control Officer, SLOCAPCD, to Alexis Strauss, Acting

Regional Administrator, EPA Region IX, regarding 2015 Annual SLAMS Data Certification,

certifying calendar year 2015 ambient air quality data and quality assurance data, April 19, 2016.

a. CY2015-AMP430

b. CY2005-signed-AMP600

6. San Luis Obispo County APCD’s Annual Network Plan Report (July 2015).

7. Cover letter for San Luis Obispo County APCD’s Annual Network Plan Report (July 2015).

8. EPA, Air Quality System, Design Value Report, July 25, 2016.

9. EPA AQS Quick Look Report (AMP450), August 10, 2016.

10. CARB Annual Monitoring Network Report for Twenty-five Districts in California, Volume 1, June

2015.