alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
Exhibit 35.3





COMPLIANCE STATEMENT


OF


THE TOLEDO EDISON COMPANY, AS SERVICER


The undersigned hereby certifies that he is the duly elected and acting Vice President and Treasurer of The Toledo Edison Company, as servicer (the “ Servicer ”) under the Phase-In-Recovery Property Servicing Agreement, dated as of June 20, 2013 (the “ Servicing Agreement ”), between the Servicer and TE Funding LLC, as Bond Issuer, and further certifies on behalf of the Servicer that:


|   |                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                             
|-- | --------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
|1. | A review of the activities of the Servicer and of its performance under the Servicing Agreement during the period that commenced January 1, 2018 and ended December 31, 2018 has been made under the supervision of the undersigned pursuant to Section 3.03 of the Servicing Agreement; and

|   |                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                             
|-- | ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
|2. | To the best of the undersigned’s knowledge, based on such review, the Servicer has fulfilled all of its obligations in all material respects under the Servicing Agreement throughout the period that commenced January 1, 2018 and ended December 31, 2018.

Executed as of this 29th day of March 2019.





THE TOLEDO EDISON COMPANYBy:/s/ Steven R. StaubName:Steven R. StaubTitle:Vice President and Treasurer
EBSA-2010-0050-DRAFT-1313.html[7/22/2015 10:22:13 PM]

PUBLIC SUBMISSION

As of: July 16, 2015

Received: July 08, 2015

Status: Pending_Post

Tracking No. 1jz-8jvf-peoe

Comments Due: July 21, 2015

Submission Type: Web

Docket: EBSA-2010-0050

Definition of the Term ‘‘Fiduciary’’; Conflict of Interest Rule—Retirement Investment Advice; Notice of

 proposed rulemaking and withdrawal of previous proposed rule.

Comment On: EBSA-2010-0050-0205

Definition of Fiduciary; Conflict of Interest Rule-Retirement Investment Advice and Related Proposed

 Prohibited Transaction Exemptions; Hearing and Comment Period Extension

Document: EBSA-2010-0050-DRAFT-1313

Comment on FR Doc # 2015-14921

Submitter Information

Name: Anonymous Anonymous

General Comment

The government needs to stay out of my retirement planning. I am able to plan for my own retirement without

 additional interference from bureaucrats in Washington who think Americans are too dumb to figure it out. Stay

 out of my retirement!
* Local Rule 47.5 provides: "The publication of opinions

that have no precedential value and merely decide particular cases on the basis of well-settled principles of law imposes needless expense on the public and burdens on the legal profession." Pursuant to that Rule, the court has determined that this opinion should not be published.

IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT

__________________ No. 95-40119 Summary Calendar

__________________ UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Plaintiff-Appellee,

versus JUAN MANUEL FLORES, TEODORA GARCIA-CANTU, Defendant-Appellant.

- - - - - - - - - - Appeal from the United States District Court for the Southern District of Texas USDC No. CR-B-94-129-01 & 2

- - - - - - - - - - November 30, 1995 Before WIENER, PARKER and DENNIS, Circuit Judges. PER CURIAM: * Codefendants Juan Manuel Flores and Teodoro Garcia-Cantu, Jr., appeal their judgments of conviction for conspiracy to possess with intent to distribute in excess of five kilograms of cocaine (count one) and possession with intent to distribute approximately 5,066 grams of cocaine (count two). Flores argues that the district court abused its discretion in denying his motion for severance and that counsel was ineffective in urgingNo. 95-40119 -2- the motion for severance. Garcia-Cantu argues that the evidence was insufficient to prove beyond a reasonable doubt that he was predisposed to engage in drug trafficking and that the prosecutor made improper remarks during closing argument concerning the law of entrapment that deprived him of substantial rights. We have reviewed the record, including the transcripts of the trial, and find no reversible error. The judgments of the district court are AFFIRMED.
I

107TH CONGRESS

1ST SESSION H. R. 88

To amend the Internal Revenue Code of 1986 to increase the unified credit

against estate and gift taxes to the equivalent of a $5,000,000 exclusion

and to increase the annual gift exclusion to $30,000.

IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

JANUARY 3, 2001

Mr. FOLEY introduced the following bill; which was referred to the Committee

on Ways and Means

A BILL

To amend the Internal Revenue Code of 1986 to increase

the unified credit against estate and gift taxes to the

equivalent of a $5,000,000 exclusion and to increase

the annual gift exclusion to $30,000.

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 ‘‘Family Equity Preser5 vation Act of 2001’’.
2

•HR 88 IH

1 SEC. 2. UNIFIED CREDIT INCREASED TO EQUIVALENT OF

2 $5,000,000 EXCLUSION.

3 (a) IN GENERAL.—Subsection (c) of section 2010 of

4 the Internal Revenue Code of 1986 (relating to applicable

5 credit amount) is amended by striking all that follows

6 ‘‘were the applicable exclusion amount’’ and inserting ‘‘.

7 For purposes of the preceding sentence, the applicable ex8 clusion amount is $5,000,000.’’

9 (b) CONFORMING AMENDMENT.—Subparagraph (A)

10 of section 2057(a)(3) of such Code is amended by striking

11 ‘‘$625,000’’ and inserting ‘‘the excess of the applicable ex12 clusion amount (determined without regard to this para13 graph) over $675,000’’.

14 (c) EFFECTIVE DATE.—The amendments made by

15 this section shall apply to estates of decedents dying, and

16 gifts made, after the date of the enactment of this Act.

17 SEC. 3. ANNUAL EXCLUSION FROM GIFT TAX INCREASED

18 TO $30,000.

19 (a) IN GENERAL.—Subsection (b) of section 2503 of

20 the Internal Revenue Code of 1986 (relating to exclusion

21 from gifts) is amended—

22 (1) by striking ‘‘$10,000’’ each place it appears

23 and inserting ‘‘$30,000’’,

24 (2) by striking ‘‘1998’’ and inserting ‘‘2001’’,

25 and

26 (3) by striking ‘‘1997’’ and inserting ‘‘2000’’.
3

•HR 88 IH

1 (b) EFFECTIVE DATE.—The amendment made by

2 this section shall apply to gifts made after December 31,

3 2000.

Æ
EBSA-2010-0050-DRAFT-0933.html[7/21/2015 6:34:32 PM]

PUBLIC SUBMISSION

As of: July 16, 2015

Received: July 08, 2015

Status: Pending_Post

Tracking No. 1jz-8jvb-wu37

Comments Due: July 21, 2015

Submission Type: Web

Docket: EBSA-2010-0050

Definition of the Term ‘‘Fiduciary’’; Conflict of Interest Rule—Retirement Investment Advice; Notice of

 proposed rulemaking and withdrawal of previous proposed rule.

Comment On: EBSA-2010-0050-0205

Definition of Fiduciary; Conflict of Interest Rule-Retirement Investment Advice and Related Proposed

 Prohibited Transaction Exemptions; Hearing and Comment Period Extension

Document: EBSA-2010-0050-DRAFT-0933

Comment on FR Doc # 2015-14921

Submitter Information

Name: anonymous Anonymous

General Comment

Thank you but I do not need someone else to tell me how to prepare for retirement.
PUBLIC SUBMISSION

As of: 5/27/15 8:24 AM

Received: May 19, 2015

Status: Pending_Post

Tracking No. 1jz-8iy1-37oc

Comments Due: July 06, 2015

Submission Type: Web

Docket: EBSA-2010-0050

Definition of the Term ‘‘Fiduciary’’; Conflict of Interest Rule—Retirement Investment Advice; 

Notice of proposed rulemaking and withdrawal of previous proposed rule.

Comment On: EBSA-2010-0050-0204

Definition of the Term Fiduciary; Conflict of Interest Rule-Retirement Investment Advice

Document: EBSA-2010-0050-DRAFT-0287

Comment on FR Doc # 2015-08831

Submitter Information

Name: Jason Anonymous

General Comment

I support the full adoption of the Fiduciary Rule. As an individual investor I should have the full 

assurance that any professional providing me financial advice should be doing so in my best 

interest. 

Page 1 of 1

https://www.fdms.gov/fdms/getcontent?objectId=0900006481aea328&format=xml&show... 5/27/2015
IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT

No. 13-40725

Summary Calendar

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,

Plaintiff-Appellee

v.

EDWIN IDONIS MARTINEZ-LOPEZ, also known as Edwin Idonis ManuelesValledares,

Defendant-Appellant

Appeal from the United States District Court

for the Southern District of Texas

USDC No. 1:13-CR-12-1

Before DeMOSS, OWEN, and GRAVES, Circuit Judges.

PER CURIAM:*

Edwin Idonis Martinez-Lopez appeals his guilty plea conviction for being 

an alien unlawfully found in the United States after deportation. He argues 

for the first time on appeal that counsel was ineffective at sentencing. 

Although Martinez-Lopez’s plea agreement contained an appeal waiver 

provision, we are unable to determine whether he knowingly and voluntarily 

* 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.

United States Court of Appeals

Fifth Circuit

FILED

July 3, 2014

Lyle W. Cayce

Clerk

 

 Case: 13-40725 Document: 00512686702 Page: 1 Date Filed: 07/03/2014
No. 13-40725

waived his appellate rights because the record on appeal does not contain the 

rearraignment transcript. We pretermit consideration of the effect of the 

appeal waiver in this case because we would not reach the merits of the 

ineffective assistance claim in any event as the record is not sufficiently 

developed to allow us to evaluate counsel’s actions. See United States v. Story, 

439 F.3d 226, 230-31 (5th Cir. 2006); see also United States v. Cantwell, 470 

F.3d 1087, 1091 (5th Cir. 2006). 

Martinez-Lopez also argues that there is a clerical error in the judgment 

because it references both 8 U.S.C. § 1326(a) and (b)(1). See FED. R. CRIM.

P. 36. There is no error as Martinez-Lopez was indicted for and in fact pleaded 

guilty to violating § 1326(a) and (b)(1). 

AFFIRMED.

2

 Case: 13-40725 Document: 00512686702 Page: 2 Date Filed: 07/03/2014
Presidential Documents

53409 

Federal Register 

Vol. 72, No. 180 

Tuesday, September 18, 2007 

Title 3— 

The President 

Presidential Determination No. 2007–32 of September 13, 2007 

Continuation of the Exercise of Certain Authorities Under the 

Trading With the Enemy Act 

Memorandum for the Secretary of State [and] the Secretary of the Treasury 

Under section 101(b) of Public Law 95–223 (91 Stat. 1625; 50 U.S.C. App. 

5(b) note), and a previous determination on September 13, 2006 (71 Fed. 

Reg. 54399), the exercise of certain authorities under the Trading With 

the Enemy Act is scheduled to terminate on September 14, 2007. 

I hereby determine that the continuation for 1 year of the exercise of those 

authorities with respect to the applicable countries is in the national interest 

of the United States. 

Therefore, consistent with the authority vested in me by section 101(b) 

of Public Law 95–223, I continue for 1 year, until September 14, 2008, 

the exercise of those authorities with respect to countries affected by: 

(1) the Foreign Assets Control Regulations, 31 C.F.R. part 500; 

(2) the Transaction Control Regulations, 31 C.F.R. part 505; and 

(3) the Cuban Assets Control Regulations, 31 C.F.R. part 515. 

The Secretary of the Treasury is authorized and directed to publish this 

determination in the Federal Register. 

THE WHITE HOUSE, 

Washington, September 13, 2007. 

[FR Doc. 07–4653 

Filed 9–17–07; 10:43 am] 

Billing code 4811–33–M 


pwalker on PROD1PC71 with PROPOSALS3GWBOLD.EPS</GPH>
EX 21.1

                   SUBSIDIARY CORPORATIONS OF
                     CHESAPEAKE CORPORATION
                                
                        December 31, 1998
                                
                                             State of
             Name                         Incorporation
             ----                         -------------
                                
Cary St. Company                             Delaware

Capitol Packaging Company                    Colorado

The Chesapeake Corporation of Virginia       Virginia

Chesapeake Display and Packaging Company     Iowa

Chesapeake Forest Products Company           Virginia

Chesapeake Packaging Co.                     Virginia

Chesapeake Recycling Co.                     Virginia

Chesapeake Resources Company                 Virginia

Chesapeake Trading Company                   Virginia

Chesapeake Trading Company, Inc.             U.S. Virgin Islands

Chesapeake Building Products Company         Virginia

Delmarva Properties, Inc.                    Virginia

Stonehouse Inc.                              Virginia

Wisconsin Tissue Mills Inc.                  Delaware

Chesapeake International Holding Company     Virginia

Wisconsin Tissue de Mexico SA                Mexico

Chesapeake Display and Packaging (Canada)
  Limited                                    Ontario, Canada

Chesapeake Europe SA                         France

Chesapeake Display and Packaging Europe      France


                               -1-
107TH CONGRESS

1ST SESSION H. R. 861

AN ACT

To make technical amendments to section 10 of

title 9, United States Code.

107TH CONGRESS

1ST SESSION H. R. 861

AN ACT

To make technical amendments to section 10 of title 9,

United States Code.

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

•HR 861 EH

1 SECTION 1. VACATION OF AWARDS.

2 Section 10 of title 9, United States Code, is

3 amended—

4 (1) by indenting the margin of paragraphs (1)

5 through (4) of subsection (a) 2 ems;

6 (2) by striking ‘‘Where’’ in such paragraphs

7 and inserting ‘‘where’’;

8 (3) by striking the period at the end of para9 graphs (1), (2), and (3) of subsection (a) and insert10 ing a semicolon and by adding ‘‘or’’ at the end of

11 paragraph (3);

12 (4) by redesignating subsection (b) as sub13 section (c); and

14 (5) in paragraph (5), by striking ‘‘Where an

15 award’’ and inserting ‘‘If an award’’, by inserting a

16 comma after ‘‘expired’’, and by redesignating the

17 paragraph as subsection (b).

Passed the House of Representatives March 14,

2001.

Attest:

Clerk.
TECHNICAL SUPPORT DOCUMENT:

ENERGY EFFICIENCY PROGRAM

FOR CONSUMER PRODUCTS AND 

COMMERCIAL AND INDUSTRIAL EQUIPMENT

DISTRIBUTION TRANSFORMERS 

April 2013

U.S. Department of Energy

Assistant Secretary

Office of Energy Efficiency and Renewable Energy

Building Technologies Program

Appliances and Commercial Equipment Standards

Washington, DC 20585
This Document was prepared for the Department of Energy

by staff members of

Ernest Orlando Lawrence Berkeley National Laboratory

and

Navigant Consulting, Inc.
UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 04-1987

ABIY AEMIRO, Petitioner, versus ALBERTO R. GONZALES, Attorney General, Respondent. On Petition for Review of an Order of the Board of Immigration Appeals. (A79-509-117) Submitted: March 25, 2005 Decided: April 13, 2005 Before LUTTIG, WILLIAMS, and MICHAEL, Circuit Judges. Petition denied by unpublished per curiam opinion. Oti W. Nwosu, Arthur D. Wright, III, THE WRIGHT LAW NETWORK, Riverdale, Maryland, for Petitioner. Peter D. Keisler, Assistant Attorney General, Richard M. Evans, Assistant Director, Jeffrey J. Bernstein, Office of Immigration Litigation, UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE, Washington, D.C., for Respondent. Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. See Local Rule 36(c).- 2 - PER CURIAM: Abiy Aemiro, a native and citizen of Ethiopia, petitions for review of an order of the Board of Immigration Appeals (Board) denying his motion to reopen its previous order dismissing his appeal from the immigration judge’s denial of asylum, withholding of removal, and protection under the Convention Against Torture. We review the denial of a motion to reopen for abuse of discretion. 8 C.F.R. § 1003.2(a) (2004); INS v. Doherty , 502 U.S. 314, 323-24 (1992); Stewart v. INS , 181 F.3d 587, 595 (4th Cir. 1999). The denial of a motion to reopen must be reviewed with extreme deference, since immigration statutes do not contemplate reopening and the applicable regulations disfavor motions to reopen. M.A. v. INS , 899 F.2d 304, 308 (4th Cir. 1990) (en banc). A motion to reopen “shall state the new facts that will be proven at a hearing to be held if the motion is granted and shall be supported by affidavits or other evidentiary material.” 8 C.F.R. § 1003.2(c)(1) (2004). “A motion to reopen proceedings shall not be granted unless it appears to the Board that evidence sought to be offered is material and was not available and could not have been discovered or presented at the former hearing.” Id. We have reviewed the administrative record, the immigration judge’s decision, and the Board’s orders and find no abuse of discretion. Accordingly, we deny the petition for review.- 3 - We dispense with oral argument because the facts and legal contentions are adequately presented in the materials before the court and argument would not aid the decisional process. PETITION DENIED
#### § 260.49 Avoiding defaults.

Borrowers are encouraged to contact the Administrator prior to the occurrence of an event of default to explore possible avenues for avoiding such an occurrence.
EBSA-2010-0050-DRAFT-1040.html[7/22/2015 6:56:07 AM]

PUBLIC SUBMISSION

As of: July 16, 2015

Received: July 08, 2015

Status: Pending_Post

Tracking No. 1jz-8jvc-gqh1

Comments Due: July 21, 2015

Submission Type: Web

Docket: EBSA-2010-0050

Definition of the Term ‘‘Fiduciary’’; Conflict of Interest Rule—Retirement Investment Advice; Notice of

 proposed rulemaking and withdrawal of previous proposed rule.

Comment On: EBSA-2010-0050-0205

Definition of Fiduciary; Conflict of Interest Rule-Retirement Investment Advice and Related Proposed

 Prohibited Transaction Exemptions; Hearing and Comment Period Extension

Document: EBSA-2010-0050-DRAFT-1040

Comment on FR Doc # 2015-14921

Submitter Information

Name: Freddie Eaves

General Comment

Leave my 401K and Retirement planning to myself. I earned it and want to keep every cent.
**Exhibit 32.1**

 

CERTIFICATION PURSUANT TO18 U.S.C. SECTION 1350AS ADOPTED PURSUANT TOSECTION 906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002

 

In connection with the quarterly report of Paulson Capital Corporation(the “Company”) on Form 10-QSB for the period ending March 31, 2004 asfiled with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the“Report”), I, Chester L.F. Paulson, President, certify pursuant to 18 U.S.C.Section 1350, as adopted pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-OxleyAct of 2002, that:

 

(1)           TheReport fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) or 15(d) ofthe Securities Exchange Act of 1934; and

 

(2)           Theinformation contained in the Report fairly presents, in all material respects,the financial condition and results of operations of the Company.

 
| /s/ Chester L.F. Paulson |   |
|--------------------------|--------|
| Chester L.F. Paulson     |   |
| President                |
| May 12, 2004             |

 

----
Andrew W. Bonney

Senior Vice President of Planning

660 Barnstable Rd., Hyannis, MA 02601

Direct: 508 862-9719 Fax: 508 862-9791

Email: andrew.bonney@capeair.com

Honorable Jose Guillermo Rodriguez Rodriguez

Mayor, Mayaguez, Puerto Rico

Peral Street #8

Mayaguez, PR 00681

February 7, 2014

Dear Mayor Rodriguez,

As you know Cape Air proudly serves the city of Mayaguez at the Eugenio Maria de

Hostos Airport. This service is operated under the auspices of the US DOT's Essential

Air Service program. I am pleased to write you with the news that ridership at the

Mayaguez Airport is strong. Advance bookings are up 32% due to an advantageous

scheduling change, newly discounted advance purchase fares and increased marketing.

I write to you today also to let you know that effective March 1,2014 Mayaguez flights

connecting with American Airlines will sell via interline not codeshare. In 2013 Cape

Air added the American Airlines code on the Mayaguez - San Juan route as part of an

expansion of Cape Air's relationship with American. Unfortunately, for business reasons

this codeshare agreement will not continue in the Caribbean. However Cape Air and I

American retain an interline agreement, providing full ticket and baggage connectivity.

World-class connectivity for Mayaguez

Mayaguez itineraries to the world remain available onjetblue.com, Expedia.com,

Travelocity.com, Orbitz.com, capeair.com, united.com and aa.com 1. Also, passengers

can book interline itineraries by calling 800-Cape-Air or visiting our Mayaguez City

Ticket Office at Mayaguez's Plaza Colon. The Mayaguez route continues to be a United

Airlines codeshare route.

If you have any questions about this change please do not hesitate to contact me.

Yours in air service,

1 Customer must select "All Carriers" to see interline itineraries
§ 39.27 Can a PVO take action to deny transportation or restrict services to a passenger with a disability based on safety concerns? ( a ) As a PVO, you may take action to deny transportation or restrict services to a passenger with a disability if necessitated by legitimate safety requirements. Safety requirements must be based on actual risks and not on mere speculation, stereotypes, or generalizations about individuals with disabilities. Example 1 to paragraph 39.27(a): You may take such action in order to comply with Coast Guard safety regulations.
Example 2 to paragraph 39.27(a): You may take such action if accommodating a large or heavy wheelchair would, together with its occupant, create weight and balance problem that could affect adversely the seaworthiness of the vessel or impede emergency egress from the vessel.
Example 3 to paragraph 39.27(a): You could restrict access to a lifeboat for a mobility device that would limit access to the lifeboat for other passengers.
( b ) In taking action pursuant to legitimate safety requirements, you must take the action that imposes the minimum feasible burdens or limitations from the point of view of the passenger. For example, if you can meet legitimate safety requirements by a means short of refusing transportation to a passenger, you must do so.
( c ) You may take action to deny transportation or restrict services to a passenger if the passenger poses a direct threat to others. In determining whether an individual poses a direct threat to the health or safety of others, the PVO must make an individualized assessment, based on reasonable judgment that relies on current medical knowledge or on the best available objective evidence, to ascertain: The nature, duration, and severity of the risk; the probability that the potential injury will actually occur; and whether reasonable modifications of policies, practices, or procedures will mitigate the risk.