alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
#### UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff—Appellee, v. Jason William HALLUM, Defendant—Appellant.

No. 03-50371.

D.C. No. CR-02-01120-VAP-1.

United States Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit.

Submitted Sept. 12, 2005.*

Decided Sept. 16, 2005.

Hanley Chew, Office of the U.S. Attorney, Criminal Division, Los Angeles, CA, for Plaintiff-Appellee.

Philip Deitch, Law Office of Philip Deitch, Los Angeles, CA, for Defendant-Appellant.

Before REINHARDT, RYMER, and HAWKINS, Circuit Judges.

*

 This panel unanimously finds this case suitable for decision without oral argument. *See*Fed. R.App. P. 34(a)(2).

MEMORANDUM**

Jason William Hallum appeals his jury-trial conviction and sentence for conspiracy to commit mail theft and possession of stolen mail, in violation of 18 U.S.C. §§ 371 and 1708.

Pursuant to *Anders v. California,*386 U.S. 738, 87 S.Ct. 1396, 18 L.Ed.2d 493 (1967), counsel for Hallum has filed a brief and a motion to withdraw as counsel of record, stating there are no grounds for relief. No pro se supplemental brief has been filed.

We have conducted an independent review of the record pursuant to *Penson v. Ohio,*488 U.S. 75, 83, 109 S.Ct. 346, 102 L.Ed.2d 300 (1988). We affirm the conviction. We remand the sentence for further proceedings consistent with *United States v. Ameline,*409 F.3d 1073, 1084-85 (9th Cir.2005) (en banc). *See United States v. Moreno-Hernandez,*419 F.3d 906, 915-16 (9th Cir.2005).

Counsel’s motion to withdraw as counsel on appeal is denied.

The conviction is AFFIRMED, and the sentence is REMANDED.

**

 This disposition is not appropriate for publication and may not be cited to or by the courts of this circuit except as provided by 9th Cir. R. 36-3.
IN THE SUPREME COURT OF PENNSYLVANIA

WESTERN DISTRICT

COMMONWEALTH OF PENNSYLVANIA,

 Respondent

 v.

MICHAEL ROY LIPINSKI,

 Petitioner

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

No. 212 WAL 2014

Petition for Allowance of Appeal from the

Order of the Superior Court

ORDER

PER CURIAM

AND NOW, this 1st day of October, 2014, the Petition for Allowance of Appeal is

DENIED.
Cáse Wo. 8,038.

#### LANCASTER v. COUNTY AUDITOR.

[2 Dill. 478.] 1

Circuit Court, D. Iowa.

1873.

Tax Sale — Redemption'.

The county auditor can not lawfully refuse to receive from the owner of the patent or regular title to lands, the amount of money, when tendered in time, necessary to redeem the same from a sale for taxes, on the ground that there is an outstanding tax title to the same lands in some one else.

The plaintiff claimed to be the ‘owner of certain lands in Page county which had been sold for taxes in 1864, and for which a deed was given to the purchaser. In 1867 the land was again sold for taxes, to one Cal-lanan. In 1870, the plaintiff went to the county auditor’s office, and offered to redeem the lands from the last sale, but the auditor refused to accept the money, on the ground that he was no longer the owner of the land, and the only person who could redeem was the holder of the tax deed under the former sale. This suit was brought to redeem the land, and to enjoin the treasurer from making a deed under the last sale.

Brown, Campbell & Sully, for complainant.

Barcroft, Gatch, & Hammond, for defendant

1

 [Reported by Hon. John P. Dillon. Circuit Judge, and here reprinted by permission.]

DILLON, Circuit Judge.

We hold that the plaintiff had the right to redeem; that the auditor had no right to refuse to issue the redemption certificate, and that it was his duty to receive the money tendered by the owner of the regular title. The existence of an outstanding deed could not prevent the owner from protecting his interest from the inception of a new estate under the last sale. Decree accordingly.
[if !vml]>[endif]>

[if !vml]>[endif]>

You have reached the FederalDepository Library Program Electronic Collection (FDLP/EC) Archive. Thisarchive assures ongoing access to publications in the FDLP/EC. Access to publicationsin the archive is available through GPO's suite of cataloging and locatorservices, including the Catalog of U.S. Government Publications (CGP). Archived copies of publications are retrieved in the event that publicationsare no longer available from the original publishing agency site. 
**Title:****Evaluation of the 2015 DoDcyber strategy : mild progress in a complex and dynamic military domain**
 
PDF | Mobi | ePub
 
SuDoc Number:I 19.42/4-4:2018-5089
Item Number:0624-B-02 (online)
CGP systemNumber:001081644
 
October 4, 2018
# C_2015213EN.01004501.xml

| 29.6.2015 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 213/45 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

29.6.2015

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 213/45

---

Action brought on 16 April 2015 — ZZ v Commission

(Case F-55/15)

(2015/C 213/73)

Language of the case: French

Parties

Parties

Applicant: ZZ (represented by: L. Levi and A. Tymen, lawyers)

Applicant:

Defendant: Commission

Defendant:

Subject-matter and description of the proceedings

Subject-matter and description of the proceedings

The annulment of the Commission’s decision, principally, in so far as it withdraws from the applicant the benefit of foreign residence allowance in favour of expatriation allowance and, in the alternative, in so far as it orders the recovery of amounts allegedly unlawfully paid and the compensation for pecuniary and non-pecuniary losses allegedly incurred.

Form of order sought

Form of order sought

| — | Principally, annul the decision of 18 July 2014 in so far as it withdraws from the applicant the benefit of foreign residence allowance in favour of expatriation allowance, retroactively from 1 July 2009; |
| --- | --- |

—

Principally, annul the decision of 18 July 2014 in so far as it withdraws from the applicant the benefit of foreign residence allowance in favour of expatriation allowance, retroactively from 1 July 2009;

| — | In the alternative, annul the decision of 18 July 2014 in so far as it orders the recovery of amounts allegedly unlawfully paid; |
| --- | --- |

—

In the alternative, annul the decision of 18 July 2014 in so far as it orders the recovery of amounts allegedly unlawfully paid;

| — | Annul the decision of 7 January 2015 rejecting the applicant’s complaint of 12 September 2014, if necessary, and in any event, in the still further alternative, in so far as it refuses to reduce the monthly amounts deducted pursuant to Article 85 of the Statute; |
| --- | --- |

—

Annul the decision of 7 January 2015 rejecting the applicant’s complaint of 12 September 2014, if necessary, and in any event, in the still further alternative, in so far as it refuses to reduce the monthly amounts deducted pursuant to Article 85 of the Statute;

| — | Order compensation for the applicant’s pecuniary loss; |
| --- | --- |

—

Order compensation for the applicant’s pecuniary loss;

| — | Order compensation for the applicant’s non-pecuniary loss, calculated as EUR 10  000; |
| --- | --- |

—

Order compensation for the applicant’s non-pecuniary loss, calculated as EUR 10  000;

| — | Order the defendant to pay all the costs. |
| --- | --- |

—

Order the defendant to pay all the costs.

---
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 Labor

###### Employment and Training Administration 

          - [TA-W-61,236] 

Pursuant to Section 221 of the Trade Act of 1974, as amended, an investigation was initiated on April 3, 2007 in response to a petition filed by a company official on behalf of workers at Precision Technologies Incorporated, Reno, Pennsylvania. 

The petitioner has requested that the petition be withdrawn. Consequently, the investigation has been terminated. 

Signed in Washington, DC, this 23rd day of April 2007. 

Linda G. Poole, 

Certifying Officer, Division of Trade Adjustment Assistance. 

 [FR Doc. E7-8468 Filed 5-2-07; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 4510-FN-P
| (logo) WELLS

           FARGO | **Commercial  Mortgage Servicing**D1050-084,  8th Fl  401 South Tryon Street  Charlotte, NC 28202  1-800-326-1334 |
|----------------------------------------------------------------------------------|-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|

 

 

**ANNUAL STATEMENT OFCOMPLIANCE**

** **

ReferenceisherebymadetothatcertainPoolingandServicingAgreementdated as of March 1, 2016, by and amongDEUTSCHE MORTGAGE & ASSET RECEIVING CORPORATION, as Depositor, WELLS FARGOBANK, NATIONAL ASSOCIATION, as Master Servicer, CWCAPITAL ASSET MANAGEMENT LLC,as Special Servicer, WILMINGTON TRUST, NATIONAL ASSOCIATION, as Trustee,DEUTSCHE BANK TRUST COMPANY AMERICAS, as Certificate Administrator, PayingAgent and Custodian and PARK BRIDGE LENDER SERVICES LLC, as Operating Advisorand Asset Representations Reviewer with respect to Commercial MortgagePass-Through Certificates, COMM 2016-DC2 (the "Agreement").Capitalized terms used herein not otherwise defined shall have the meaningsassigned in theAgreement.

 

Pursuant to Section10.11 of this Agreement, I, Leslie Hayton, Managing Director of CommercialMortgage Services do hereby certify that:

 

1.A review of the activities of the Master Servicer during the period fromJanuary 1, 2018 through December 31, 2018 (the “Reporting Period”), and of itsperformance per the Agreement during such period has been made under mysupervision,and

 

2.To the best of my knowledge, based on such review, the Master Servicer hasfulfilled all of its obligations under the Agreement in all material respectsthroughout the ReportingPeriod.

 

IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the undersigned hasexecuted this Certificate as of the 28th day of February2019.

 

/s/ Leslie Hayton

Leslie Hayton 

Managing Director 

Wells Fargo Bank

 

 

| Wells Fargo Bank,  N.A. | (logo)  Together we’ll go far |
|-------------------------|-------------------------------------|
# C_2015221EN.01002101.xml

| 6.7.2015 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 221/21 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

6.7.2015

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 221/21

---

Order of the President of the General Court of 20 May 2015 — Jaber v Council

(Case T-154/15 R)

((Application for interim measures - Restrictive measures taken against Syria - Freezing of funds and restriction on entry into and transit through the territory of the European Union - Application for suspension of operation of a measure - Failure to comply with the procedural requirements - Inadmissibility))

(2015/C 221/29)

Language of the case: French

Parties

Parties

Applicant: Aiman Jaber (Lattakia, Syria) (represented by: A. Boesch, D. Amaudruz and M. Ponsard, lawyers)

Applicant:

Defendant: Council of the European Union

Defendant:

Re:

Re:

Application for suspension of operation of the measures imposed on the applicant under Council Implementing Regulation (EU) 2015/108 of 26 January 2015 implementing Regulation (EU) No 36/2012 concerning restrictive measures in view of the situation in Syria (OJ 2015 L 20, p. 2), and of Council Implementing Decision (CFSP) 2015/117 of 26 January 2015 implementing Decision 2013/255/CFSP concerning restrictive measures against Syria (OJ 2015 L 20, p. 85).

Operative part of the order

Operative part of the order

| 1. | The application for interim measures is dismissed. |
| --- | --- |

1.

The application for interim measures is dismissed.

| 2. | Costs are reserved. |
| --- | --- |

2.

Costs are reserved.

---
```

[Congressional Bills 110th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[H. Con. Res. 198 Referred in Senate (RFS)]

  2d Session
H. CON. RES. 198

_______________________________________________________________________

                   IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES

                            January 23, 2008

Received and referred to the Committee on Health, Education, Labor, and 
                                Pensions

_______________________________________________________________________

                         CONCURRENT RESOLUTION

 
  Expressing the sense of Congress that the United States has a moral 
     responsibility to meet the needs of those persons, groups and 
   communities that are impoverished, disadvantaged or otherwise in 
                                poverty.

Whereas poverty can be seen as a deep, structural problem that implicates our 
        value system and our educational and economic institutions;
Whereas poverty may be defined as the lack of basic necessities of life such as 
        food, shelter, clothing, health care, education, security, and 
        opportunity;
Whereas policy initiatives addressing poverty have not kept pace with the needs 
        of millions of Americans;
Whereas many experts believe that the lack of an equitable distribution of 
        housing choices across the country leads to isolation and concentrated 
        poverty;
Whereas the number of Americans living in poverty has risen by over 5,000,000 
        since 2000;
Whereas there were 37 million Americans living in poverty in 2005;
Whereas the official poverty rate in 2005 was 12.6 percent;
Whereas 24.9 percent of African Americans, 21.8 percent of Hispanics, 25.3 
        percent of Native Americans, 10.9 percent of Asian Americans, and 8.3 
        percent of Whites lived in poverty in the United States in 2005;
Whereas in 2005 a family of 4 was considered poor under the U.S. Census Bureau's 
        official measure if the family's income was below $19,971;
Whereas the poverty rate for children 18 years and younger (17.6 percent) 
        remained higher than that of 18-24 year-olds (11.1 percent) and that of 
        people 65 and older (10.1 percent) in 2005; and
Whereas the number in poverty increased for people 65 and older by almost 
        400,000 since 2000: Now, therefore, be it
    Resolved by the House of Representatives (the Senate concurring), 
That it is the sense of Congress that the United States should set a 
national goal of cutting poverty in half over the next 10 years.

            Passed the House of Representatives January 22, 2008.

            Attest:

                                            LORRAINE C. MILLER,

                                                                 Clerk.
```
February 11, 1942

No. 46956.

#### Protests 984372-G, etc., of Simon, Healey & Goldstein, Inc.

Government’s application for rehearing denied.
<PAGE>   1
                                                                    EXHIBIT 10.7


                     AMENDMENT TO THE ASSIGNMENT AGREEMENT
                              Dated April 19, 1999


BETWEEN:  CYBEROAD GAMING CORPORATION, a St. Kitts corporation ("CGC"); and

BETWEEN:  CYBEROAD.COM (ISLE OF MAN) LIMITED, an Isle of Man corporation,
("Cyberoad IOM");


WHEREAS this Amendment acknowledges that:

     c)   the Assignment Agreement amending the Operating and Revenue Sharing
          Agreement for Asanol Management Corporation, executed by the parties
          hereto, is to be made effective as of May 1, 1999; and
     d)   the total consideration, as paid in full, is U.S.$10,000.00, and
          other good and valuable consideration, the receipt of which is hereby
          acknowledged.

EXECUTION IN COUNTERPART

This instrument may be signed in counterpart, in as many counterparts as may be
necessary, each of which shall be deemed to be an original, and each of which
shall constitute one and the same instrument, and shall bear the date first
written above.



ACKNOWLEDGED AND AGREED TO ON THE 18TH DAY OF OCTOBER, 1999

CYBEROAD GAMING CORPORATION             CYBEROAD.COM (ISLE OF MAN)


/s/  LAWRENCE COFIELD                   /s/  JOHN COFFEY
---------------------------             --------------------------
Lawrence Cofield,                       John Coffey,
Director                                Director
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<ARTICLE> 5
<MULTIPLIER> 1,000
       
<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   3-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          DEC-31-1997
<PERIOD-END>                               MAR-31-1997
<CASH>                                         108,900
<SECURITIES>                                         0
<RECEIVABLES>                                  305,400
<ALLOWANCES>                                    11,300
<INVENTORY>                                    192,700
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                               691,500
<PP&E>                                         712,500
<DEPRECIATION>                                 277,700
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                               1,522,100
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                          264,200
<BONDS>                                              0
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                        800
<COMMON>                                         7,300
<OTHER-SE>                                   1,080,600
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                 1,522,100
<SALES>                                        284,600
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                               284,600
<CGS>                                          113,900
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                  113,900
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                               129,300
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                     0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                                 100
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                 41,300
<INCOME-TAX>                                    11,600
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                             29,700
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                    29,700
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                      .39
<EPS-DILUTED>                                      .39
        

</TABLE>
```

[Congressional Bills 110th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[H. Con. Res. 201 Introduced in House (IH)]

110th CONGRESS
  1st Session
H. CON. RES. 201

  Expressing the sense of Congress that the Government of Iraq should 
 schedule a referendum to determine whether or not the people of Iraq 
want the Armed Forces of the United States to be withdrawn from Iraq or 
       to remain in Iraq until order is restored to the country.

_______________________________________________________________________

                    IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

                             August 2, 2007

 Mr. Rohrabacher submitted the following concurrent resolution; which 
            was referred to the Committee on Foreign Affairs

_______________________________________________________________________

                         CONCURRENT RESOLUTION

 
  Expressing the sense of Congress that the Government of Iraq should 
 schedule a referendum to determine whether or not the people of Iraq 
want the Armed Forces of the United States to be withdrawn from Iraq or 
       to remain in Iraq until order is restored to the country.

    Resolved by the House of Representatives (the Senate concurring), 
That it is the sense of Congress that as soon as practicable after the 
submission to Congress of the second report required by section 
1314(b)(2) of the U.S. Troop Readiness, Veterans' Care, Katrina 
Recovery, and Iraq Accountability Appropriations Act, 2007 (Public Law 
110-28; relating to the Iraqi Government's record of performance on its 
benchmarks), the Government of Iraq should schedule a referendum to 
determine whether or not the people of Iraq want the Armed Forces of 
the United States to be withdrawn from Iraq or to remain in Iraq until 
order is restored to the country.
                                 <all>
```
No. 59187.

protest 173158-K (Seattle).

#### Close and Stewart *v.*United States,

Opinion by

Johnson, J.

In accordance with stipulation of counsel that the merchandise consists of beef similar in all material respects to that the subject of *Swift & Company et al.*v. *United States*(33 Cust. Ct. 212, C. D. 1655), the claim of the plaintiff was sustained.
# C_2016305EN.01003502.xml

| 22.8.2016 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 305/35 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

22.8.2016

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 305/35

---

Order of the General Court of 13 June 2016 — GABO:mi v Commission

(Case T-588/15) (1)

1

((Seventh framework programme for research, technological development and demonstration activities (2007-2013) - Grant agreements - Suspension of payments - Lifting of the suspension - No need to adjudicate))

(2016/C 305/49)

Language of the case: English

Parties

Parties

Applicant: GABO:mi Gesellschaft für Ablauforganisation:milliarium mbH & Co. KG (Munich (Germany)) (represented by: M. Ahlhaus and C. Mayer, lawyers)

Applicant:

Defendant: European Commission (represented by: R. Lyal and M. Siekierzyńska, acting as Agents)

Defendant:

Re:

Re:

Action on the basis of Article 263 TFEU for annulment, first, of Commission Decisions of 29 July and 19 August 2015 to suspend all payments that might be made to the applicant by Directorates E ‘Health’ and F ‘Bio-economy’ of its Directorate-General (DG) for Research and Innovation, secondly, Commission Decision of 25 August 2015 instructing the coordinator of project Biofector not to transfer any amount to the applicant in the context of that project, thirdly, Commission Decision of 28 August 2015 maintaining the suspension of payments by Directorate E of its DG for Research and Innovation, fourthly, Commission Decision of 15 September 2015 instructing the coordinators of projects ‘The hip trial’ and EU-CERT-ICD not to transfer any amount to the applicant in the context of those projects, fifthly, Commission Decision of 5 October 2015, addressed to the coordinator of project NEMO, to consider the applicant’s costs ineligible and to adjust as a result the payments due to the applicant, sixthly, Commission Decision of 14 October 2015, addressed to the coordinator of project Procardio, to suspend payments to the applicant by Directorate G ‘Energy’ of its DG for Research and Innovation, seventhly, Commission Decisions of 23 October and 6 November 2015 taken in execution of that decision of 28 August 2015 and addressed to the coordinators of projects LENA and Re-liver and, eighthly, Commission Decision of 11 November 2015, addressed to the coordinator of project ENS@T-Cancer, to consider the applicant’s costs ineligible and to adjust as a result the payments due to it.

Operative part of the order

Operative part of the order

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

1.

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

| 2. | GABO:mi Gesellschaft für Ablauforganisation:milliarium mbH & Co. KG and the European Commission shall bear their own costs. |
| --- | --- |

2.

GABO:mi Gesellschaft für Ablauforganisation:milliarium mbH & Co. KG and the European Commission shall bear their own costs.

---

(1)  OJ C 27, 25.1.2016.

1

---