alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
EX-31 Rule 13a-14(d)/15d-14(d) Certification.

  Re: BCAP LLC TRUST 2008-IND2

  I, Kristen Ann Cronin, certify that:

  1.I have reviewed the 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 BCAP LLC TRUST 2008-IND2 (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
    servicers and based on my knowledge and the compliance reviews
    conducted in preparing the servicer compliance statements required in
    this report under Item 1123 of Regulation AB, and except as disclosed
    in the Exchange Act periodic reports, the servicers have fulfilled
    their obligations under the servicing agreements in all material
    respects and

  5.All of the reports on assessment of compliance with servicing criteria
    for ABS 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:
    IndyMac Federal Bank, FSB f/k/a IndyMac Bank, F.S.B. as Servicer.

    Dated:   March 27, 2009


    /s/ Kristen Ann Cronin
    Signature

    Vice President
    (senior officer in charge of the servicing function of the master
    servicer)
Exhibit 31.1

CERTIFICATION

I, Douglas J. Mattscheck, Chief Executive Officer and President of AGY Holding Corp., certify that:

1. I have reviewed this annual report on Form 10-K of AGY Holding Corp. (the Registrant);

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

3. Based on my
knowledge, the financial statements, and other financial information included in this report, fairly present in all material respects the financial condition, results of operations and cash flows of the Registrant as of, and for, the periods
presented in this report;

4. The Registrants other certifying officer and I are responsible for establishing and maintaining disclosure controls and
procedures (as defined in Exchange Act Rules 13a-15(e) and 15d-15(e)) for the Registrant and have:

a. Designed such disclosure controls and
procedures, or caused such disclosure controls and procedures to be designed under our supervision, to ensure that material information relating to the Registrant, including its consolidated subsidiaries, is made known to us by others within those
entities, particularly during the period in which this report is being prepared;

b. Evaluated the effectiveness of the Registrants
disclosure controls and procedures and presented in this report our conclusions about the effectiveness of the disclosure controls and procedures, as of the end of the period covered by this report based on such evaluation; and

c. Disclosed in this report any change in the Registrants internal control over financial reporting that occurred during the Registrants most
recent fiscal quarter that has materially affected, or is reasonably likely to materially affect, the Registrants internal control over financial reporting; and

5. The Registrants other certifying officer and I have disclosed, based on our most recent evaluation of internal control over financial reporting, to the Registrants auditors and the audit committee of
Registrants board of directors (or persons performing the equivalent functions):

a. All significant deficiencies and material
weaknesses in the design or operation of internal control over financial reporting which are reasonably likely to adversely affect the Registrants ability to record, process, summarize and report financial information; and

b. Any fraud, whether or not material, that involves management or other employees who have a significant role in the Registrants internal control
over financial reporting.



|                                     
|-------------------------------------
|Date: March 25, 2009                 
|                                     
|/s/ Douglas J. Mattscheck            
|Douglas J. Mattscheck                
|Chief Executive Officer and President
|(Principal Executive Officer)
From: allhiscreations@centurytel.net

To: E-OHPSCA2713.EBSA

Subject: Comment: RIN 1210-AB44

Date: Wednesday, September 07, 2011 2:32:52 PM

To Whom It May Concern:

I am writing today to ask in the strongest way possible that you rescind the unjust and coercive

mandate that all "contraceptives" and sterilization procedures be covered by private health insurance

with no co-pay to patients. If you do not reverse course I ask you to expand conscience protections for

any organizations that provide individual and group insurance and have moral or religious objections. I

strongly oppose the government forcing free insurance coverage on Americans especially for drugs and

devices that I oppose because some of these can cause an abortion (such as ella and Plan B).

I also ask you to reconsider your definition of religious employer and offer an authentic conscience

protection for any organization and business that has moral or religious objection to providing such

insurance to their employees. This legal mandate clearly violates the spirit of conscience laws which

prohibit government discrimination against those who object to various health services on moral or

religious grounds. The definition of "religious employer" in the regulation is so narrow as to only include

churches, but will still mean that a host of businesses and organizations that have conscience objections

will be required to choose between either violating their conscience or not being able to offer employees

health insurance.

Please protect the conscience rights of insurers, providers and people like me who object to being

forced by the federal government to offer or subsidize contraceptives and sterilization services, especially

when some of these drugs can take the life of early unborn children. No Americans should be forced by

the federal government to essentially subsidize services they object to. I again urge you in the strongest

way possible to reverse course and remove contraceptives and sterilizations from the list of mandatory

preventive services. (I am sure that one way or another I will be paying for this be it tax increase or

health Insurance payments.)

Sincerely,

Cynthia O'Connor

Kalispell, MT 59901
From: ACCSanchez@aol.com

To: E-OHPSCA2713.EBSA

Subject: Comment: RIN 1210-AB44

Date: Wednesday, September 07, 2011 2:20:17 PM

To Whom It May Concern:

I am writing today to ask in the strongest way possible that you rescind the unjust and coercive

mandate that all "contraceptives" and sterilization procedures be covered by private health insurance

with no co-pay to patients. If you do not reverse course I ask you to expand conscience protections for

any organizations that provide individual and group insurance and have moral or religious objections. I

strongly oppose the government forcing free insurance coverage on Americans especially for drugs and

devices that I oppose because some of these can cause an abortion (such as ella and Plan B).

I also ask you to reconsider your definition of religious employer and offer an authentic conscience

protection for any organization and business that has moral or religious objection to providing such

insurance to their employees. This legal mandate clearly violates the spirit of conscience laws which

prohibit government discrimination against those who object to various health services on moral or

religious grounds. The definition of "religious employer" in the regulation is so narrow as to only include

churches, but will still mean that a host of businesses and organizations that have conscience objections

will be required to choose between either violating their conscience or not being able to offer employees

health insurance.

Please protect the conscience rights of insurers, providers and people like me who object to being

forced by the federal government to offer or subsidize contraceptives and sterilization services, especially

when some of these drugs can take the life of early unborn children. No Americans should be forced by

the federal government to essentially subsidize services they object to. I again urge you in the strongest

way possible to reverse course and remove contraceptives and sterilizations from the list of mandatory

preventive services.

Sincerely,

April Sanchez

Longview, TX 75601
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





I, Mark Bradley, Chief Executive Officer and Principal Financial Officer of Players Network, a Nevada corporation (the "Company"), certify, pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that:





(1) the report on Form 10-Q of Players Network. (the "Registrant") for the fiscal quarter ended March 31, 2010 (the "Report") which this statement accompanies fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934; and





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








Date: May 12, 2010


/S/Mark Bradley


Name:  Mark Bradley


Title: Chief Executive Officer and Principal Financial Officer





A signed original of this written statement required by Section 906 has been provided to the Company and will be retained by the Company and furnished to the Securities and Exchange Commission or its staff upon request.
#### Jose David MORALES-GUERRA, Petitioner, v. Alberto R. GONZALES, U.S. Attorney General, Respondent.

No. 04-60584.

Summary Calendar.

United States Court of Appeals, Fifth Circuit.

Decided Aug. 18, 2005.

Gloria Sarahi Echevarria, Houston, TX, for Petitioner.

*389Richard M Evans, Assistant Director, Thomas Ward Hussey, Director, Paul Fiorino, Alberto R Gonzales, U.S. Department of Justice, Washington, DC, Hipólito Acosta, Houston, TX, Caryl G. Thompson, New Orleans, LA, for Respondent.

Before BENAVIDES, DENNIS, and OWEN, Circuit Judges.

PER CURIAM: *

Jose David Morales-Guerra (Morales), a citizen of El Salvador, petitions for review of an order of the Board of Immigration Appeals (BIA) affirming the immigration judge’s (IJ) denial of Morales’s application for withholding of removal under the Immigration and Nationality Act (INA).

This court usually reviews only the BIA’s decision, not that of the IJ, except to the extent that the IJ’s decision influences the BIA. *Mikhael v. INS,*115 F.3d 299, 302 (5th Cir.1997). Because the BIA adopted and affirmed the IJ’s decision, however, the IJ’s decision is the final agency determination for judicial review. *Id.*

To obtain withholding of removal under the INA, an applicant “must show that it is more likely than not that his life or freedom would be threatened by persecution,” based on his political opinion, race, religion, nationality, or membership in a particular social group. *Efe v. Ashcroft,*293 F.3d 899, 906 (5th Cir.2002) (quotation marks omitted). We review for substantial evidence the determination that an alien is not entitled to withholding of removal. *See id.*at 905-06.

Morales contends that the IJ erred by determining that he had not shown it was more likely than not he would be subjected to persecution because of his former employment as a police officer, if he returned to El Salvador. The record does not compel a finding that Morales met his burden to show that he was entitled to withholding of removal under the INA. *See Roy v. Ashcroft,*389 F.3d 132, 138-39 (5th Cir.2004). Thus, Morales has failed to show that the IJ’s decision was not supported by substantial evidence. *See Mikhael,*115 F.3d at 302.

The petition for review is DENIED.

*

 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.
EX-10.9



 Exhibit 10.9 
 ARRANGEMENTS WITH NON-EMPLOYEE DIRECTORS 
 On October 22, 2012, the
Board of Directors of ABM Industries Incorporated (the “Registrant”) approved certain changes to cash and equity compensation of non-employee directors, beginning November 1, 2012. Non-employee directors will receive: an annual cash
retainer of $70,000; an annual equity grant of $90,000 in restricted stock units, to be given at the Company’s annual shareholders meeting, with the value calculated by dividing $90,000 by the closing price of ABM common stock on the date of
the grant; annual cash retainer for Committee service in the amount of $20,000 for members of the Audit Committee; $7,500 for members of the Governance Committee; $12,500 for members of the Compensation Committee; and $5,000 for members of the
Corporate Citizenship and Communications Committee. Fees for attendance at Committee meetings were eliminated. The Board also approved annual retainers for the Chairman of the Board and the Chairs of the respective Committees as follows: Chairman of
the Board, $75,000; Chairman of the Audit Committee, $15,000; Chairman of the Governance Committee, $7,500; Chairman of the Compensation Committee, $10,000; Chairman of the Corporate Citizenship and Communications Committee, $5,000 and Chairman of
the Executive Committee, $5,000. The Board also approved additional payments to non-employee directors who, in instances approved by the Chairman of the Board, invest significant time above and beyond the requirements of Board or Committee service,
by virtue of serving on an ad hoc committee or otherwise, in an amount equal to $2,000 per day for such service. 
 On
October 22, 2012, the Board of Directors approved the participation of then current non-employee directors in the Registrant’s health benefit plans, with the full cost of any such participation to be paid by the individual director
electing to so participate. Non-employee directors who join the Board after October 22, 2012 are not eligible to participate in the Registrant’s health benefit plans.
From: joyukich@davidson.edu

To: E-OHPSCA2713.EBSA

Subject: Comment: RIN 1210-AB44

Date: Wednesday, September 07, 2011 2:20:15 PM

To Whom It May Concern:

I am writing today to ask in the strongest way possible that you rescind the unjust and coercive

mandate that all "contraceptives" and sterilization procedures be covered by private health insurance

with no co-pay to patients. If you do not reverse course I ask you to expand conscience protections for

any organizations that provide individual and group insurance and have moral or religious objections. I

strongly oppose the government forcing free insurance coverage on Americans especially for drugs and

devices that I oppose because some of these can cause an abortion (such as ella and Plan B).

I also ask you to reconsider your definition of religious employer and offer an authentic conscience

protection for any organization and business that has moral or religious objection to providing such

insurance to their employees. This legal mandate clearly violates the spirit of conscience laws which

prohibit government discrimination against those who object to various health services on moral or

religious grounds. The definition of "religious employer" in the regulation is so narrow as to only include

churches, but will still mean that a host of businesses and organizations that have conscience objections

will be required to choose between either violating their conscience or not being able to offer employees

health insurance.

Please protect the conscience rights of insurers, providers and people like me who object to being

forced by the federal government to offer or subsidize contraceptives and sterilization services, especially

when some of these drugs can take the life of early unborn children. No Americans should be forced by

the federal government to essentially subsidize services they object to. I again urge you in the strongest

way possible to reverse course and remove contraceptives and sterilizations from the list of mandatory

preventive services.

Sincerely,

John Yukich

Davidson, NC 28036
Document Headings

                    Document headings vary by document type but may contain                    the following:                  
                -                       the agency or agencies that issued and signed a document                    
                -                       the number of the CFR title and the number of each part                      the document amends, proposes to amend, or is directly                      related to                    
                -                       the agency docket number / agency internal file number                    
                -                       the RIN which identifies each regulatory action listed in                      the Unified Agenda of Federal Regulatory and Deregulatory                      Actions                    

                    See the                                          Document Drafting Handbook                                        for more details.                  

###### Department of Health and Human Services

###### National Institutes of Health

Pursuant to section 1009 of the Federal Advisory Committee Act, as amended, notice is hereby given of the following meeting.

The meeting will be closed to the public in accordance with the provisions set forth in sections 552b(c)(4) and 552b(c)(6), title 5 U.S.C., as amended. The grant applications and the discussions could disclose confidential trade secrets or commercial property such as patentable material, and personal information concerning individuals associated with the grant applications, the disclosure of which would constitute a clearly unwarranted invasion of personal privacy.

*Name of Committee:*                         National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases Special Emphasis Panel; NIAID Investigator Initiated Program Project Applications (P01 Clinical Trial Not Allowed).                    

*Date:*                         October 18, 2023.                    

*Time:*                         10:00 a.m. to 4:00 p.m.                              ( print page 64920)    

*Agenda:*                         To review and evaluate grant applications.                    

*Place:*                         National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases, National Institutes of Health, 5601 Fishers Lane, Room 3G13A, Rockville, MD 20892 (Virtual Meeting).                    

*Contact Person:*                         Mairi Noverr, Ph.D., Scientific Review Officer, Scientific Review Program, Division of Extramural Activities, National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases, National Institutes of Health, 5601 Fishers Lane, Room 3G13A, Rockville, MD 20852, (240) 747-7530,                         *mairi.noverr@nih.gov.*

(Catalogue of Federal Domestic Assistance Program Nos. 93.855, Allergy, Immunology, and Transplantation Research; 93.856, Microbiology and Infectious Diseases Research, National Institutes of Health, HHS)

Dated: September 13, 2023.

Tyeshia M. Roberson-Curtis, 

Program Analyst, Office of Federal Advisory Committee Policy.

[FR Doc. 2023-20321 Filed 9-19-23; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 4140-01-P
#### MOBILE TRANSP. CO. v. CITY OF MOBILE et al.

(Circuit Court of Appeals, Fifth Circuit.

November 23, 1903.)

No. 1,257.

Appeal from the Circuit Court of the United States for the Southern District of Alabama.

Frederick G. Bromberg, for appellant. Harry T. Smith and Gregory L. Smith, for appellees.

Before PARDEE, McCORMICK, and SHELBY, Circuit Judges.

PER CURIAM.

After a careful examination of this case and the very exhaustive briefs filed, we are of opinion that the learned judge of the Circuit Court rendered the proper decision, and his decree is affirmed.
From: ben.d.mortenson@gmail.com

To: E-OHPSCA2713.EBSA

Subject: Comment: RIN 1210-AB44

Date: Wednesday, September 07, 2011 12:54:57 PM

To Whom It May Concern:

I am writing today to ask in the strongest way possible that you rescind the unjust and coercive

mandate that all "contraceptives" and sterilization procedures be covered by private health insurance

with no co-pay to patients. If you do not reverse course I ask you to expand conscience protections for

any organizations that provide individual and group insurance and have moral or religious objections. I

strongly oppose the government forcing free insurance coverage on Americans especially for drugs and

devices that I oppose because some of these can cause an abortion (such as ella and Plan B).

I also ask you to reconsider your definition of religious employer and offer an authentic conscience

protection for any organization and business that has moral or religious objection to providing such

insurance to their employees. This legal mandate clearly violates the spirit of conscience laws which

prohibit government discrimination against those who object to various health services on moral or

religious grounds. The definition of "religious employer" in the regulation is so narrow as to only include

churches, but will still mean that a host of businesses and organizations that have conscience objections

will be required to choose between either violating their conscience or not being able to offer employees

health insurance.

Please protect the conscience rights of insurers, providers and people like me who object to being

forced by the federal government to offer or subsidize contraceptives and sterilization services, especially

when some of these drugs can take the life of early unborn children. No Americans should be forced by

the federal government to essentially subsidize services they object to. I again urge you in the strongest

way possible to reverse course and remove contraceptives and sterilizations from the list of mandatory

preventive services.

Sincerely,

Bennett Mortenson

Provo, UT 84604