alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
CERTIFICATIONS
  1.
    
    I have reviewed this report on Form 10-K and all reports on Form 10-D to be
filed in respect of the period covered by this report on Form 10-K of Ford Credit Auto
Owner Trust 2008-C (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 as of the last day of 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 period reports;4.
    
    I am responsible for reviewing the activities performed by the servicer and
based on my knowledge and the compliance review conducted in preparing the servicer
compliance statement required in this report under Item 1123 of Regulation AB, and
except as disclosed in the Exchange Act periodic reports, the servicer has fulfilled
its obligations under the servicing agreement in all material respects; and5.
    
    All of the reports on assessment of compliance with servicing criteria for
asset-backed securities and their related attestation reports on assessment of
compliance with servicing criteria for asset-backed securities required to be included
in this report in accordance with Item 1122 of Regulation AB and Exchange Act Rules
13a-18 and 15d-18 have been included as an exhibit to this report, except as otherwise
disclosed in this report. Any material instances of noncompliance described in such
reports have been disclosed in this report on Form 10-K.
   /s/ David M. BrandiDavid M. BrandiVice President and Assistant Treasurer
Ford Motor Credit Company LLC, as Servicer
(senior officer in charge of servicing function)
Exhibit 32.1

Written Statement of the Chief Executive Officer

Pursuant to 18 U.S.C. §1350

Solely for the purposes of complying with 18 U.S.C. §1350, I, the undersigned Chief Executive Officer of Smart & Final Inc. (the
Company), hereby certify, based on my knowledge, that the quarterly report on Form 10-Q of the Company for the quarter ended March 26, 2006 (the Report) fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) of the
Securities Exchange Act of 1934 and that information contained in the Report fairly presents, in all material respects, the financial condition and results of operations of the Company.



|                      
|----------------------
|/s/ Etienne Snollaerts
|Etienne Snollaerts    
|May 1, 2006
No. P66/262. —

#### Ashear Bros., Inc. *v.*United States, protests 65/19990 and 65/20139 (New York).

Ford, J.

In accordance with stipulation of counsel that the merchandise covered by the foregoing protests consists of handkerchiefs, not block-printed by hand, similar in all material respects to those the subject of *Ashear Bros., Inc.*v. *United States*(55 Cust. Ct. 238, C.D. 2582), the claim of the plaintiff was sustained.
UNPUBLISHED

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

No. 99-1090

In Re: MICHAEL KENNEDY,

Petitioner.

On Petition for Writ of Mandamus. (CA-98-947-BR)

Submitted: April 29, 1999 Decided: May 5, 1999

Before WILLIAMS, TRAXLER, and KING, Circuit Judges.

Petition dismissed by unpublished per curiam opinion.

Michael Kennedy, Petitioner Pro Se.

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.

See Local Rule 36(c).
2

PER CURIAM:

Michael Kennedy petitions this court for a writ of mandamus

directing the district court to rule on his Motion to Expedite

Proceedings or in the Alternative for Bond Pending Adjudication of

Habeas Petition. The district court denied this motion on February

5, 1999. We accordingly deny the motion for leave to proceed in

forma pauperis and dismiss the mandamus petition as moot. We deny

the motion to consolidate and dispense with oral argument because

the facts and legal contentions are adequately presented in the

materials before the court and argument would not significantly aid

the decisional process.

DISMISSED
----

|   | (i) | the      accompanying Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q of the Company for the period      ended March 31, 2008 (the “Report”) fully complies with the requirements      of Section 13(a) or Section 15(d), as applicable, of the Securities      Exchange Act of 1934, as amended;and |
|--------|-----|------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|

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

| Date: | May      19, 2008 |
|-------|-------------------|

|   | LAPOLLA      INDUSTRIES, INC. |                                  |
|--------|-------------------------------|---------------------------------------|
|   |                          |                                  |   |
|   |                          |                                  |   |
|   | By:                           |  /s/ Douglas J. Kramer,      CEO |   |
|   |                          | Douglas      J. Kramer                |   |
|   |                          | Principal      Executive Officer      |   |

|   | (i) | the      accompanying Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q of the Company for the period      ended March 31, 2008 (the “Report”) fully complies with the requirements      of Section 13(a) or Section 15(d), as applicable, of the Securities      Exchange Act of 1934, as amended;and |
|--------|-----|------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|

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

| Date: | May      19, 2008 |
|-------|-------------------|

|   | LAPOLLA      INDUSTRIES, INC. |                             |
|--------|-------------------------------|----------------------------------|
|   |                          |                             |   |
|   |                          |                             |   |
|   | By:                           |  /s/ Paul Smiertka          |   |
|   |                          | Paul      Smiertka               |   |
|   |                          | Principal      Financial Officer |   |

----
| Skip to Content*Release Date: December 6, 2012*Release dates |  Announcements |   Coded tables |  Historical dataCurrent release |  Screen reader |  PDF (450 KB) |  Data Download Program (DDP)**L.216 Other Loans and Advances** |
|------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|
(Reap. Dec. 10799)

#### Koeller Struss Co. *v.*United States

Entry No. 3916.

(Decided August 19, 1964)

*Allerton ded. Tomplcins*for the plaintiff.

*John W. Douglas,*Assistant Attorney General *(Earold*L. *Grossman,*trial attorney), for the defendant.

*384Richardson, Judge:

This reappraisement appeal has been submitted for decision upon a stipulation reading as follows:

> Me. Tompkins : I offer to stipulate, subject to the approval of the Court, that the merchandise under appeal consists of bags and baskets exported from Japan; that at the time of exportation such and similar bags and baskets were freely sold in the principal markets of Japan in the usual wholesale quantities and in the ordinary course of trade for exportation to the United States at the appraised values less, pro-rated, the item specified on the invoice as “Our Buying Commission (9% on Ex-Factory Price US$1,677.60)” at $150.98.

> Me. Gbossman : Upon information received from Mr. Joseph J. Garrity, who is the Appraiser at the Port of St. Louis where this merchandise was appraised and entered, the Government will agree to the request for stipulation, and so stipulate.

On the agreed facts, I find:

1. That export value, as that value is defined in 19 U.S.C.A., section 3401a(b) (section 402(b), Tariff Act of 1930, as amended by the Customs Simplification Act of 1956), is the proper basis for determination of the values of the involved merchandise;

2. That such values are the appraised values, less, prorated, the item specified on the invoice as “Our Buying Commission (9% on Ex-Factory Price US$1,677.60)” at $150.98.

Judgment will be entered accordingly.
| 1.     | Such Annual Report on Form 10-K for the year ending December 31, 2010, fully complies with the requirements of section 13(a) or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934; and                                               |
|--------|-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|
|   |                                                                                                                                                                                                                                      |
| 2.     | The information contained in such Annual Report on Form 10-K for the year ending December 31, 2010, fairly presents, in all material respects, the financial condition and results of operations of Metha Energy Solutions Inc. |

|                 | Metha Energy Solutions Inc. |
|----------------------|-----------------------------|
|                 |                        |
| Date: April 15, 2011 | By:               | /s/ Jesper Toft |
|                 |                        | Jesper Toft |
|                 |                        | Chief Financial Officer, |
syte-ex1013_46.htm



EXHIBIT 10.13

 

FIRST AMENDMENT TO SIDE LETTER AGREEMENT

Willow Oak Asset Management, LLC (“Investor”) and Alluvial Capital Management, LLC (“General Partner”) have entered into a Side Letter Agreement, dated December 28, 2016 (the “Agreement”) under which Investor agreed to provide General Partner with a seed investment to facilitate General Partner launching an investment limited partnership, Alluvial Fund, LP (the “Fund”).

 

The parties desire to amend the Agreement pursuant to this First Amendment, dated December 15, 2017 (“First Amendment) to permit the Investor to redeem a portion of its investment in the Fund prior to the permitted redemption date under the Agreement, and to amend the Agreement as set forth in this Amendment. Any defined terms not defined in this First Amendment shall have the definitions set forth in the Agreement. 

 

THEREFORE, IT IS AGREED AS FOLLOWS:

 


	
1.
	
Paragraph One, No Incentive Fee, is amended to add the following language:




 

To the extent that Arquitos Capital Partners, LP (“Arquitos”) replaces any portion of the Investors seed investment in the Fund with its own investment in the Fund (“Replacement Investment”), the Arquitos investment shall not be subject to any incentive fee. 

 


	
2.
	
Paragraph Two, Most Favored Nation, is amended to add the following language:




 

Notwithstanding the foregoing, this Paragraph 2 shall not apply to a Replacement Investment.

 


	
3.
	
Paragraph 6 (c), Fee Share, is amended to add the following language:




 

For the avoidance of doubt, any Replacement Investment shall count toward the Seed Investment amount in this Paragraph 6(c). All fee share payments derived from the Seed Investment, including Replacement Investments, shall continue to be paid by the General Partner to the Investor.

 


	
4.
	
Paragraph 7, Lockup, is amended to add the following language:




 

Notwithstanding the foregoing, withdrawals by the Investor that are matched by equivalent and coincident Replacement Investments, shall not be subject to the restrictions of this Paragraph 7. 

 

 

 



 

This First Amendment becomes part of the Agreement as of its execution, and all references to the “Agreement” will include this First Amendment unless otherwise specified. In the event of a conflict between this First Amendment and the Agreement, the terms of this First Amendment shall prevail. Unless otherwise modified by this First Amendment, the terms of the Agreement shall apply to this First Amendment. Termination of the Agreement automatically terminates this First Amendment.  The parties have executed and delivered this First Amendment and it becomes effective as of the date it is signed by the last of the parties to do so.

 


	
Willow Oak Asset Management, LLC
	
 
	
Alluvial Capital Management, LLC

	
 
	
 
	
 
	
 
	
 
	
 
	
 

	
 
	
 
	
 
	
 
	
 
	
 
	
 

	
By:
	
 
	
/s/ Steven L. Kiel
	
 
	
By:
	
 
	
/s/ David Waters, Jr.

	
 
	
 
	
 
	
 
	
 
	
 
	
 

	
Name:
	
 
	
Steven L. Kiel
	
 
	
Name:
	
 
	
David Waters, Jr.

	
 
	
 
	
 
	
 
	
 
	
 
	
 

	
Its:
	
 
	
Chief Executive Officer
	
 
	
Its:
	
 
	
President
No. 68495.

protest 63/676 (New York).

#### Reliance Merchandise Co., Inc. *v.*United States,

Opinion by

Ford, J.

In accordance with stipulation of counsel that the merchandise consists of Hibachis similar in all material respects to those the subject of Abstract 67238, the claim of the plaintiff was sustained.
H. Res. 722 

In the House of Representatives, U. S., 

October 10, 2007. 

Resolved, That the following named Members be, and are 

hereby, elected to the following standing committees of the 

House of Representatives: 

COMMITTEE ON ARMED SERVICES: Mr. Lamborn. 

COMMITTEE ON FOREIGN AFFAIRS: Mr. Blunt, to rank 

after Mr. Chabot. 

Attest: 

Clerk.
| Skip to Content*Release Date: March 6, 2014*Release dates |  Announcements |   Coded tables |  Historical data | Technical Q&AsCurrent release |  Screen reader |  PDF (450 KB) |  Data Download Program (DDP)**F.226 Pension Entitlements** |
|----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|
```

[Congressional Bills 110th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[H. Res. 815 Introduced in House (IH)]

110th CONGRESS
  1st Session
H. RES. 815

  Expressing the sense of the House of Representatives that staff-led 
        tours of the United States Capitol should be preserved.

_______________________________________________________________________

                    IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

                            November 9, 2007

Mr. Moran of Virginia (for himself, Mr. Duncan, Ms. Wasserman Schultz, 
  Mr. Capuano, and Mr. Matheson) submitted the following resolution; 
      which was referred to the Committee on House Administration

_______________________________________________________________________

                               RESOLUTION

 
  Expressing the sense of the House of Representatives that staff-led 
        tours of the United States Capitol should be preserved.

Whereas the Capitol Visitor's Center is scheduled to open in the fall of 2008 
        and it has been proposed that professional staff will exclusively begin 
        to give tours;
Whereas Members of Congress should retain the ability to provide their 
        constituents staff-led tours;
Whereas staff-led tours have become a longstanding tradition in the United 
        States Capitol;
Whereas Capitol tours provide constituents an opportunity to meet their Member 
        of Congress and personal staff and receive unique local perspectives and 
        insights regarding the history of the United States Capitol;
Whereas staff-led tours allow for smaller more personalized tours;
Whereas staff-led tours provide constituents a closer look at the work of the 
        Member's office; and
Whereas explicitly limiting Capitol tours to just 1 provider, United States 
        Capitol Guide Service, will severely limit a constituent's experience of 
        their Representative's congressional office: Now, therefore, be it
    Resolved, That the House of Representatives supports the 
continuation of staff-led tours of the United States Capitol.
                                 <all>
```
EX-10.5(a)



 Exhibit 10.5(a) 

522 Fifth Avenue                     

New York, NY 10036              

 
 



 
 June 1, 2017 

Aspect Capital Ltd. 
 10 Portman
Square 
 London W1H 6AZ, 
 U.K.

 Attention: Mr. Anthony Todd, CEO 

Re:   Management Agreement Renewals 

Dear Mr. Todd: 
 We are writing with respect
to your management agreements concerning the commodity pools to which reference is made below (the “Management Agreements”). We are extending the term of the Management Agreements through June 30, 2018 and all other provisions of the
Management Agreements will remain unchanged. 
  

	 	•	 	 Global Diversified Futures Fund L.P. 



 

	 	•	 	 Diversified 2000 Futures Fund L.P. 



 

	 	•	 	 Tactical Diversified Futures Fund L.P. 



 

	 	•	 	 CMF Aspect Master Fund L.P. 



 

	 	•	 	 Institutional Futures Portfolio L.P 



 

	 	•	 	 Global Futures Fund Ltd 



 

	 	•	 	 MSMF Custom Solutions Fund L.P. 



Please acknowledge receipt of this modification by signing one copy of this letter and returning it to the attention of Mr. Patrick T. Egan at 522
Fifth Avenue – 7th Floor, New York, NY 10036. If you have any questions, I can be reached at 212-296-6808. 

Very truly yours, 
 CERES
MANAGED FUTURES LLC 
  

			
	 By:
	 	 /s/ Patrick T. Egan

		 	 Patrick T. Egan

		 	 President and Director


  

			
	ASPECT CAPITAL LTD.
		
	 By:
	 	 /s/ Jonathan Greenworld



			
	 Print Name: Jonathan Greenworld

	
PE/tr            Company Secretary and Authorised 
Signatory
Exhibit 32.1









CERTIFICATION
OF CHIEF EXECUTIVE OFFICER AND CHIEF FINANCIAL OFFICER PURSUANT TO 18 U.S.C.
SECTION 1350, AS ADOPTED PURSUANT TO SECTION 906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF
2002





I, Tao
Chen, certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, as adopted pursuant to 906 of
the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of
2002 that:





(1)           The
Annual Report on Form 10-K of Legend Mining Inc. (the
“Company”) for the fiscal year ended March 31, 2009 ( the “Report”) fully
complies with the requirements of 13(a) or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934;and





(2)           The
information contained in the Report fairly represents, in all material respects,
the financial condition and results of operations of the Company as of and for
the periods covered in the Report.








Date:  June
25, 2009








/s/ Tao
Chen


Tao
Chen


Chief
Executive Officer (Principal Executive Officer) and Chief Financial Officer
(Principal Accounting Officer)
1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

26 ORDER - 1

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

WESTERN DISTRICT OF WASHINGTON

AT TACOMA

DAVID CARROLL, STEPHENSON, an

individual, and all others similarly situated,

Plaintiff,

v.

JOHN McKAY, et al. ,

Defendants.

Case No. C06-5054FDB

ORDER OF DISMISSAL

By order of June 20, 2002, the Honorable Robert S. Lasnik entered an order that, among

other things, provided that “any pro se complaint/petition submitted for filing in this district in which

David Carroll, Stephenson is a named plaintiff or purports to act as party representative shall be

subject to review by the Court prior to issuance of summons or service of process by the Court.” 

The Order further provides: “As to any non-habeas action, the Court will review the

complaint/petition to determine whether good cause exists to permit the action to proceed in light of

the claims raised therein and David Carroll, Stephenson’s past litigation abuses.” 

Plaintiff Stephenson has filed a cause of action against 22 individuals, including judges and

court officers, in which he alleges racketeering claims relating to “a series of off-shore scams” where

parties are lured to investing their time and good names and then claim the parties are indebted to

them for business expenses relative to the fictitious business enterprise.” 

Case 3:06-cv-05054-FDB Document 3 Filed 02/07/2006 Page 1 of 2

Stephenson v. McKay et al Doc. 3

Dockets.Justia.com
1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

26 ORDER - 2

Plaintiff’s Complaint was mistakenly processed by being opened and given a cause number by

the Clerk’s office when the above-referenced order was in place. Plaintiff’s Complaint is

preposterous and good cause does not exist to permit this cause of action to proceed. 

ACCORDINGLY, IT IS ORDERED: Plaintiff’s cause of action is DISMISSED. 

DATED this _____ day of February, 2006.

AFRANKLIN D. BURGESS

UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE

Case 3:06-cv-05054-FDB Document 3 Filed 02/07/2006 Page 2 of 2
* Pursuant to 5 TH C IR. R. 47.5, the court has determined that this opinion

should not be published except under the limited circumstances set forth in 5 TH C IR . R. 47.5.4.

IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT

_______________ No. 96-60500

_______________

ESTATE OF RAYMOND E. JONES, Deceased; DOROTHY J. JONES, Independent Executrix; and DOROTHY J. JONES,

Petitioners-Appellants,

VERSUS
COMMISSIONER OF INTERNAL REVENUE, Respondents-Appellees.

_________________________ Appeal from the United States Tax Court

(23835-88)

_________________________ May 1, 1997 Before SMITH, BARKSDALE, and BENAVIDES, Circuit Judges.

PER CURIAM: *

We have reviewed the briefs and pertinent portions of the record and have heard the arguments of counsel. We conclude that
the Tax Court was correct in determining that the statute of
limitations did not run before the notice of deficiency was issued. The determination of the Tax Court, accordingly, is AFFIRMED.
| Skip to Content*Release Date: June 6, 2013*Release dates |  Announcements |   Coded tables |  Historical data | Technical Q&AsCurrent release |  Screen reader |  PDF (450 KB) |  Data Download Program (DDP)**F.201 Special Drawing Rights SDRs Certificates and Treasury Currency** |
|---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|