alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
EXHIBIT 34.1




Report of Independent Registered Public Accounting Firm







The Management Committee


BMW Financial Services NA, LLC





We have examined BMW Financial Services NA, LLC’s (the “Company”) compliance with the servicing criteria set forth in Item 1122(d) of the Securities and Exchange  Commission's Regulation AB for Asset-Backed Securities, BMW Vehicle Lease Trust 2010-1 (except for the servicing criteria described in the following paragraph), which the Company has determined as being applicable to the activities it performs with respect to the asset−backed securities transactions being serviced as of December 31, 2011 and for the period from January 1, 2011 to December 31, 2011. Management is responsible for the Company’s compliance with those servicing criteria. Our responsibility is to express an opinion on the Company’s compliance with those servicing criteria based on our examination.





The Company has determined that the servicing criteria in Items 1122(d)(1)(ii), 1122(d)(1)(iii), 1122(d)(1)(iv), 1122(d)(2)(vi), 1122(d)(3)(iii), 1122(d)(4)(ix), 1122(d)(4)(x) (A)-(C), 1122(d)(4)(xi), 1122(d)(4)(xii), 1122(d)(4)(xiii), and 1122(d)(4)(xv) are not applicable to the activities it performs with respect to the asset−backed securities transactions being serviced as of December 31, 2011 and for the period from January 1, 2011 to December 31, 2011.





Our examination was conducted in accordance with the attestation standards of the Public Company Accounting Oversight Board (United States) and, accordingly, included examining, on a test basis, evidence about the Company's compliance with the servicing criteria specified in the first paragraph of this report 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 the Company's compliance with the servicing criteria specified in the first paragraph.





In our opinion, BMW Financial Services NA, LLC complied, in all material respects, with the aforementioned servicing criteria as of December 31, 2011 and for the period from January 1, 2011 to December 31, 2011.














Roseland, New Jersey


March 27, 2012
No. 53698.

protests 141084-K, etc. (New York).

#### Nathan Kaufman Co., Inc., et al. *v.*United States,

Opinion by

Oliver, C. J.

Following the authorities cited in Abstract 15400 the court dismissed the protests.
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 

FOR THE SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF OHIO 

EASTERN DIVISION 

DAWN SNELLING, 

 

 Plaintiff, 

 v. Civil Action 2:11-CV-983 

 Judge Sargus 

 Magistrate Judge King 

 

ATC HEALTHCARE SERVICES, INC., 

et al., 

 Defendants. 

ORDER 

 Defendants have filed a motion to reconsider the grant, in part, 

of plaintiff’s motion to compel. Objection, Doc. No. 63. This matter 

is now before the Court on defendants’ motion to stay the order 

granting, in part, the motion to compel. Motion to Stay, Doc. No. 

64. 

 The Motion to Stay, Doc. No. 64, is GRANTED. The order granting, 

in part, the motion to compel, Opinion and Order, Doc. No. 61, is 

hereby STAYED pending resolution of defendants’ motion to reconsider 

that order. 

February 27, 2013 s/Norah McCann King_______ 

 Norah McCann King 

 United States Magistrate Judge 

Case: 2:11-cv-00983-EAS-NMK Doc #: 68 Filed: 02/27/13 Page: 1 of 1 PAGEID #: <pageID>
#### ELBRIDGE G. PHELPS, Respondent, *v.*HIRAM GEE, Appellant.

*Pendency of a former action for the same cause*— when *the object of the first action, in which the summons only has been served, cannot be proved by panol evidence.*

Appeal from a judgment in favor of the plaintiff, entered upon the verdict of a jury, and from an order denying a motion for a new trial made upon a case and exceptions, and upon the ground of newly discovered evidence.

The defendant pleaded, among other defenses, the pendency of another suit for the same cause of action. Upon the trial he offered to prove by the plaintiff that, prior to the commencement of this action, he had commenced another action against the defendant upon the same cause of action, and that such former action was still pending undetermined.

The court at General Term said : “ The defendant, on the trial, proved that the plaintiff, about August .twelfth, commenced an *203action against the defendant. He offered to show that it was for the same cause with the present. It was objected that he could not prove that in this manner. It was admitted that the summons was served and a notice of retainer, biit that no complaint had ever been served. And the defendant offered to prove for what that action was brought. The court said that all which it would be possible to prove was what the action was designed for, and excluded the evidence.

“We think the court decided correctly. It is very true that parol evidence may be given for the purpose of showing what the actual controversy was in a former action. *(Doty*v. *Brown, é*N. Y., 71.) But the difficulty here is that the subject of controversy in the former action was still uncertain. The plaintiff in that action might serve a complaint upon any cause of action consistent with the summons. Nor was this difficulty obviated by the defendant’s question, whether he had any other cause of action than that now before the court. Because the plaintiff could serve a complaint setting forth a fictitious cause of action. And it could not be averred that the former action was certainly for such a cause until the complaint had been served.”

*'Merritt King,*for the appellant.

*Smith Brothers,*for the respondent.

Opinion by

Learned, P. J.

Present — Learned, P. J., Boardman and Bookes, JJ.

Judgment and order affirmed, with costs.
---

EXHIBIT 32.2

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

I, Hon Ming Tony Wong, hereby certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C.
Section 1350, as adopted pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of
2002, that:

|(1) | the Annual Report on Form 10-K of Golden Global Corp. for
      the year ended June 30, 2011 (the "Report") 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 the Report fairly presents,
      in all material respects, the financial condition and results of
      operations of Golden Global Corp.                                                           

|Dated: October 13, 2011 |                                                                     
|----------------------- | --------------------------------------------------------------------
|                        |                                                                     
|                        |                                                                     
|                        | /s/
      Hon Ming Tony Wong                                        
|                        | Hon Ming Tony Wong                                                  
|                        | Chief Financial Officer, Secretary, Treasurer
      and Director    
|                        | (Principal Financial Officer and Principal
      Accounting Officer)
|                        | Golden Global Corp.                                                 

A signed original of this written statement required by Section
906, or other document authenticating, acknowledging, or otherwise adopting the
signature that appears in typed form within the electronic version of this
written statement required by Section 906, has been provided to Golden Global
Corp. and will be retained by Golden Global Corp. and furnished to the
Securities and Exchange Commission or its staff upon request.

---
Exhibit 8.1

List of Subsidiaries and Affiliated Entities



|                                                            |  |                              
|----------------------------------------------------------- |  | -----------------------------
|Subsidiaries:                                               |  | Jurisdiction of Incorporation
|Bitauto Hong Kong Limited                                   |  | Hong Kong                    
|Beijing Bitauto Internet Information Company Limited        |  | PRC                          
|                                                            | 
|Special Purpose Entities:                                   |  | Jurisdiction of Incorporation
|Beijing Bitauto Information Technology Company Limited      |  | PRC                          
|Beijing C&I Advertising Company Limited                     |  | PRC                          
|Beijing Easy Auto Media Company Limited                     |  | PRC                          
|Beijing Brainstorm Advertising Company Limited              |  | PRC                          
|Beijing New Line Advertising Company Limited                |  | PRC                          
|Beijing Bitauto Interactive Advertising Company Limited     |  | PRC                          
|Beijing You Jie Information Company Limited                 |  | PRC                          
|You Jie Wei Ye (Beijing) Culture Media Company Limited      |  | PRC                          
|Beijing BitOne Technology Company Limited                   |  | PRC                          
|Beijing Bit EP Information Technology Company Limited       |  | PRC                          
|Beijing Bitcar Interactive Information Technology Co., Ltd. |  | PRC
Jump to navigation

            - About
            - Browse Collections
            - Advanced Search
            - Contact

## You are here

- Home  › 
- Browse Collections  › 
- U.S. Government Posters

# BGN: 1890-1990

                - U.S. Government Posters

## Description

                    -           Title        
                    -  BGN: 1890-1990 
                    -           Creator        
                    -  United States Board on Geographic Names 
                    -           Publisher        
                    -  United States Board on Geographic Names 
                    -           Subjects        
                    -  United States Board on Geographic Names 
                    -           Subject: Time        
                    -  1990-2000 
                    -           Physical Description        
                    -  186 × 66 cm 
                    -           Number of Pages        
                    -  1 
                    -           Host institution        
                    -  University of Iowa. Libraries. Government Publications 
                    -           Digitization Specifications        
                    -  Scanned with Ideal Contex Magnum G600 54 Plus at 300 ppi, 24-bit color. Archival tiff image available. 
                    -           Rights Management        
                    -  This is a work of the U.S. Government and is not subject to copyright protection in the United States. 
                    -           Contact Information        
                    -  Please contact the Government Publications Department at The University of Iowa Libraries: lib-govpub@uiowa.edu 
                    -           Item Type (AAT)        
                    -  Posters 
                    -           Item Type (IMT)        
                    -  jpeg 
                    -           Identifier        
                    -  023175313.jpg 
                    -           OCLC Collection Number        
                    -  429489521 

                - Contact the Libraries
                - Library locations & hours
                - News & Events
                - Help using the Libraries
                - Assistance for people with disabilities
                - Our diversity statement
                - Thank a Librarian
                - Web site/page feedback  OR  general suggestions
                -  

                -  
                - 100 Main Library (LIB)
                - 125 West Washington St.
                - Iowa City, IA 52242-1420
                - 319-335-5299 (Service Desk)
                - ©2020  The University of Iowa
                -
IN THE SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF DELAWARE IN THE MATTER OF THE PETITION OF JOHN E. TROTTER FOR A WRIT OF MANDAMUS § § No. 545, 2017 § Submitted: December 20, 2017 Decided: January 16, 2018 Before VAUGHN , SEITZ , and TRAYNOR , Justices. ORDER This 16 th day of January, 2018, upon consid eration of John E. Trotter’s petition for a writ of mandamus and the Stat e’s answer and motion to dismiss, it appears to the Court that: (1) Trotter seeks to invoke the original jurisdiction of this Court, under Supreme Court Rule 43, to issue a writ of mandamus ordering the Superior Court to consider his pro se motion for leave to file an ineffect ive assistance of counsel claim. We conclude that Trotte r’s petition manifestly fails to invoke the original jurisdiction of this Court. The pe tition must therefore be dismissed. (2) On October 3, 2017, Trotter pled gu ilty to Assault in the Second Degree in Criminal ID No. 1607007011 and Drug De aling (Tier 4), Conspiracy in the Second Degree, and Possession of a Dest ructive Weapon in Criminal ID No. 1608012612. The Superior Court ordered a presentence investigation. Trotter has not yet been sentenced.2 (3) The docket in Criminal ID No. 1608012612 reflects that on December 8, 2017 the Superior Court referred, without reviewing, a document filed by Trotter to Trotter’s counsel. On December 18, 2017, Trotter filed a petition for a writ of mandamus in this Court. Trotter seeks an order compelling the Superior Court to consider his pro se motion for leave to file an ineff ective assistance of counsel claim. (4) A writ of mandamus will only issue if the petitioner can show: (i) a clear right to the performance of a duty; (ii) that no other adequate remedy is available; and (iii) the Superi or Court has arbitrarily faile d or refused to perform its duty. 1 “[I]n the absence of a clear showing of an arbitrary refusal or failure to act, this Court will not issue a writ of mandamu s to compel a trial court to perform a particular judicial function, to decide a ma tter in a particular way, or to dictate the control of its docket.” 2 Trotter has failed to demonstrate that the Superior Court arbitrarily failed or refused to perform a duty to which he has a clear right. (5) Under Superior Court Criminal Rule 47, “[t]he court will not consider

pro se applications by defendants who ar e represented by counsel unless the defendant has been granted permission to pa rticipate with counsel in the defense.” Trotter is represented by counsel in the Supe rior Court. He does not contend that he was granted permission to participate with his counsel in the defense. If Trotter

1 In re Bordley , 545 A.2d 619, 620 (Del. 1988). 2 Id.3 wishes to withdraw his guilty plea, he can ask his counsel to file a motion to withdraw the guilty plea. There is no basis fo r issuance of a writ of mandamus here. NOW, THEREFORE, IT IS ORDERED that the State’s motion to dismiss is GRANTED. The petition for the issuance of a writ of mandamus is DISMISSED.
BY THE COURT: /s/ Collins J. Seitz, Jr. Justice
I 

118TH CONGRESS 

2D SESSION H. R. 9061 

To amend section 436 of the Social Security Act to increase funding for 

the retention, recruitment, and training of caseworkers, and for other 

purposes. 

IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES 

JULY 18, 2024 

Ms. CHU (for herself, Mr. DAVIS of Illinois, Ms. DELBENE, and Mr. EVANS) 

introduced the following bill; which was referred to the Committee on 

Ways and Means 

A BILL 

To amend section 436 of the Social Security Act to increase 

funding for the retention, recruitment, and training of 

caseworkers, and for other purposes. 

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 ‘‘Promoting a Strong 

5 Child Welfare Workforce Act of 2024’’. 

6 SEC. 2. INCREASED FUNDING FOR RETENTION, RECRUIT7 MENT, AND TRAINING OF CASEWORKERS. 

8 (a) AUTHORIZATION OF APPROPRIATIONS.—Section 

9 436(a) of the Social Security Act (42 U.S.C. 629f(a)) is 


kjohnson on DSK7ZCZBW3PROD with $$_JOB
2 

•HR 9061 IH

1 amended by striking ‘‘$345,000,000’’ and inserting 

2 ‘‘$385,000,000’’. 

3 (b) RESERVATION FOR RETENTION, RECRUITMENT, 

4 AND TRAINING OF CASEWORKERS.—Section 436(b) of 

5 such Act (42 U.S.C. 629f(b)) is amended— 

6 (1) in the heading, by striking ‘‘SUPPORT FOR

7 MONTHLY CASEWORKER VISITS’’ and inserting 

8 ‘‘SUPPORT FOR CASEWORKER RECRUITMENT AND

9 RETENTION’’; 

10 (2) in paragraph (4)(A), by striking 

11 ‘‘$20,000,000’’ and inserting ‘‘$60,000,000’’; and 

12 (3) in paragraph (4)(B)(i), by inserting ‘‘, in13 cluding with respect to ensuring the safety and well14 being of caseworkers’’ before the period. 

15 SEC. 3. EFFECTIVE DATE. 

16 The amendments made by this Act shall take effect 

17 on the 1st day of the 1st fiscal year that begins after the 

18 date of the enactment of this Act. 

Æ 


kjohnson on DSK7ZCZBW3PROD with $$_JOB
ex10-10.htm


    Exhibit
10.10

     

    COLUMBIA
UNIVERSITY SCIENCE AND TECHNOLOGY VENTURES

     

    SECOND
AMENDMENT TO THE LICENSE AGREEMENT OF

     

    FEBRUARY
1, 2005 BETWEEN COLUMBIA AND OMNIMMUNE CORP.

     

    June 10,
2005

     

    Harris A.
Lichtenstein, Ph.D.

    President
and CEO

    Omnimmune
Corp.

    4600 Post
Oak Place

    Suite
152

    Houston,
Texas 77027

     

    Dear
Harris:

     

    The
Agreement between Omnimmune Corp. and The Trustees of Columbia University in the
City of New York, dated February 1, 2005 (“Agreement”),
as amended by the amendment of March 29, 2005 is hereby further amended
effective May 31, 2005, as follows:

     

    
      	
              1.  

            	
              Section
      17 (a) is amended to read as
follows:

            


    

     

    
      	
              a.  

            	
              This Agreement shall
      be effective as of the date first recited above and shall continue in full
      force and effect until its expiration or termination
      in accordance with this Section 17; provided however that
      if the Stock Purchase Agreement or the Stockholders Agreement involving
      Columbia and Omnimmune is not fully executed within 180 days of the
      effective date of this Agreement, then this Agreement is null
      and
void.

            


    

    
    

     

    
    

    All other
terms and conditions of the Agreement shall remain in full force and
effect, except as expressly amended herein.

     

    Please
indicate your agreement to the Letter Amendment by signing where indicated
below, and returning one original signed Letter to my attention.

     

    Very
truly yours,

     

    /s/
Scot G.
Hamilton                          


    Scot G.
Hamilton

    Senior
Director

    Science
and Technology Ventures

    The
Trustees of Columbia University in the City of New York

     

    AGREED
AND ACKNOWLEDGED:

     

    OMNIMMUNE
CORP.

     

    By:/s/
Harris A.
Lichtenstein                                                                

    President

     

    Date:
7/02/05
_________________________________________ 

 

 

Order Michigan Supreme Court

Lansing, Michigan 

July 31, 2006 Clifford W. Taylor,

 Chief Justice 

Michael F. Cavanagh 

Elizabeth A. Weaver 130217(56) Marilyn Kelly 

Maura D. Corrigan 

Robert P. Young, Jr. 

Stephen J. Markman, OCWEN FEDERAL BANK, FSB, Justices 

Plaintiff-Appellee, 

v SC: 130217 

 COA: 249081 

St Clair CC: 01-003301-CH 

INTERNATIONAL CHRISTIAN MUSIC 

MINISTRY, INC., d/b/a LATE NIGHT PRAISE

AND WORSHIP, and PERCY L. LEWIS, 

Defendants-Appellants. 

_________________________________________/ 

On order of the Court, the motion for reconsideration of this Court’s order of April 

28, 2006 is considered, and it is DENIED, because it does not appear that the order was 

entered erroneously. 

d0724 

I, Corbin R. Davis, Clerk of the Michigan Supreme Court, certify that the 

foregoing is a true and complete copy of the order entered at the direction of the Court. 

July 31, 2006 

 Clerk
Filed by Bowne Pure Compliance





Exhibit 10.1




AMENDMENT NO. 1 TO EMPLOYMENT AGREEMENT




This Amendment No. 1 to Employment Agreement (the “Amendment”) is entered into as of
August 11, 2008 by and between Global Cash Access, Inc., a Delaware corporation (the
“Company”), and Scott Betts (“Executive”).



R E C I T A L S




WHEREAS, the Company and Executive have entered into that certain Employment Agreement, dated
as of October 31, 2007 (the “Agreement”); and



WHEREAS, the Company and Executive desire to amend the Agreement in accordance with the terms
of this Amendment.



NOW, THEREFORE, for good and valuable consideration, receipt of which is hereby acknowledged,
the Company and Executive hereby agree to amend the Agreement as follows:



A M E N D M E N T




1. Definitions; References; Interpretation. Except as otherwise provided herein,
capitalized terms used in this Amendment shall have the definitions set forth in the Agreement.
Each reference to “this Agreement,” “hereof,” “hereunder,” “herein” and “hereby” and each other
similar reference contained in the Agreement shall from and after the date hereof refer to the
Agreement, as amended hereby.



2. Amendment. Section 1.3 of the Agreement shall be and hereby is amended by deletion
of all references to “the first six (6) months of Executive’s employment with the Company” and
insertion in replacement thereof with “the first eighteen (18) months of Executive’s employment
with the Company”.



3. Terms of Agreement. Except as expressly modified hereby, all terms, conditions and
provisions of the Agreement shall continue in full force and effect.



4. Conflicting Terms. In the event of any inconsistency or conflict between the
Agreement and this Amendment, the terms, conditions and provisions of this Amendment shall govern
and control.



5. Entire Agreement. This Amendment and the Agreement constitute the entire and
exclusive agreement between the parties with respect to the subject matter hereof. All previous
discussions and agreements with respect to this subject matter are superseded by the Agreement and
this Amendment. This Amendment may be executed in one or more counterparts, each of which shall be
an original and all of which taken together shall constitute one and the same instrument.


 


 









 





IN WITNESS WHEREOF, each of the undersigned has executed this Amendment No. 1 to Employment Agreement as of the date first set forth above, to be
effective upon the Effective Date.



	 	 	 	 	 	 	 
	GLOBAL CASH ACCESS, INC.	 	 	 	SCOTT BETTS
	 
	 	 	 	 	 	 
	By:

	 	/s/ E. Miles Kilburn	 	 	 	 
	 

	 	 
	 	 	 	 
	 

	 	E. Miles Kilburn
	 	 	 	Scott Betts
	 

	 	Chairman of the Board of Directors
	 	 	 	President, Chief Executive Officer and
	 

	 	 	 	 	 	Member of the Board of Directors
Before the Second Division,

March 29, 1951

No. 55405.

#### Geo. S. Bush & Co., Inc. *v.*United States,

protests 921584-G and 546920-G (Seattle).

Opinion by

Ford, J.

_ In accordance with stipulation of counsel that certain items of the merchandise consist of imitation gut similar in all material respects to that the classification of which was involved in *Bush*v. *United States*(34 C. C. P. A. 17, C. A. D. 338), the claim at 20,percent under paragraph 1558 was sustained.