alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
DEPARTMENT OF THE TREASURY
WASHINGTON, D.C. 20220

November 30, 2012

Mr. James J. Duffy

Chief Human Resources Officer
Ally Financial Inc.

1177 Avenue of the Americas
New York, NY 10036

Re: Compensation Payments and Structure for Ally Top 25 Employee
Dear Mr. Duffy:

Pursuant to the Department of the Treasury’s Interim Final Rule on TARP Standards for
Compensation and Corporate Governance (the “Rule” ,' the Office of the Special Master issued
a determination letter regarding 2012 compensation payments and structures for the senior
executive officers and next 20 most highly compensated employees (the “top 25 employees”) of
Ally Financial Inc. (“‘Ally” or the “Company”) on April 6, 2012 (the “top 25 letter”). 31 C.F.R.
§ 30.16(a)(3)(i).

Subsequent to the issuance of the top 25 letter, Ally’s compensation committee requested
a change in the compensation structure that it had originally proposed for the Company’s chief
executive officer for 2012 services, particularly in light of the executive’s seniority. In response
to Ally’s new proposal, and as previously communicated to you, the Office of the Special Master
has approved replacing the amount of the executive’s long-term restricted stock (as indicated for
employee 280677 in Exhibit I to the top 25 letter) with an equal amount of additional stock
salary awarded pro rata on each payroll date in 2012. The revised compensation structure does
not include any increase in cash salary or any increase in total direct compensation.”

The approvals in this letter apply only to the executive referenced above and shall not be
relied upon by anyone with respect to any other facts or circumstances. Such conclusion is
limited to the authority vested in the Office of the Special Master by Section 30.16(a)(3) of the
Rule, and shall not constitute, or be construed to constitute, the judgment of the Office of the
Special Master or the Department of the Treasury with respect to the compliance of the proposed
compensation payments or structure or any other compensation payments or structure for the
subject executive with any other provision of the Rule. Moreover, my evaluation and conclusion
with respect to this executive have relied upon, and are qualified in their entirety by, the accuracy

' The Interim Final Rule and all determination letters issued by the Office of the Special Master are available at
www.financialstability.gov (click on “Executive Compensation”).

? For the avoidance of doubt, we reconfirm the language in the June 8, 2012, supplemental determination letter to
Ally stating that the modifications described therein do not apply to Ally’s chief executive officer.


of the materials submitted by Ally to the Office of the Special Master, and the absence of any
material misstatement or omission in such materials.

Very truly yours,

fea.

Patricia Geoghegan
Office of the Special Master
for TARP Executive Compensation

ce: Richard Strahota
Drema M. Kalajian, Esq.
#### Rick Consulting Corp., Appellant, v Associated Food Stores, LLC, et al., Respondents.

[737 NYS2d 274]

Order, Supreme Court, New York County (Robert Lippmann, J.), entered August 21, 2000, which granted defendants’ motion to dismiss the complaint pursuant to CPLR 3211 (a) (1) and (7), unanimously affirmed, with costs.

Inasmuch as the parties’ agreement specifically provided that defendants would have the absolute right to decline to enter a contract to sell defendant corporation’s assets and would incur no liability to plaintiff broker for so doing, the imposition of liability upon defendants for refusing to negotiate an agreement to sell the assets of defendant corporation to a putative buyer procured by plaintiff would be inconsistent with the terms of the parties’ contractual relationship and negate their established intentions *(see, Sheth v New York Life Ins. Co.,*273 AD2d 72, 73; *see also, Graff v Billet,*101 AD2d 355, 356, *affd*64 NY2d 899). Concur — Tom, J.P., Sullivan, Rosenberger, Wallach and Buckley, JJ.
UNITED STATES

SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION

WASHINGTON, D. C. 20549

 

FORM N-CSR

 

| Investment Company Act file number | 811-07507 |
|------------------------------------|-----------|

 

DWS Investments VIT Funds

 (Exact Name of Registrant as Specified in Charter)

 

345 Park Avenue

New York, NY 10154-0004

 (Address of principal executive offices)             (Zip code)

 

Registrant’s Telephone Number, including Area Code: (212) 454-7190

 

Paul Schubert

345 Park Avenue

New York, NY 10154-0004

(Name and Address of Agent for Service)

 

| Date of fiscal year end: | 12/31 |
|--------------------------|-------|

 

| Date of reporting period: | 12/31/08 |
|---------------------------|----------|

 

 

**ITEM 1.**           **REPORT TO STOCKHOLDERS**

 

----
IW17PF_530
IW17PF_531
IW17PF_532
IW17PF_533
IW17PF_534
IW17PF_535
IW17PF_536
IW17PF_537
IW17PF_538
IW17PF_539
IW17PF_540
IW17PF_541
IW17PF_542
IW17PF_543
IW17PF_544
IW17PF_545
IW17PF_546
IW17PF_547
IW17PF_548
IW17PF_549
IW17PF_550
IW17PF_551
IW17PF_552
IW17PF_553
Table of Contents

 

**Exhibit 8.1.  - List of significant subsidiaries of Pampa Energía S.A.**

 

1.      Central Hidroeléctrica Lago Escondido S.A.

2.      Central Térmica Güemes S.A.

3.      Central Térmica Loma de la Lata S.A.

4.      Central Térmica Piedra Buena S.A.

5.      Compañía de Transporte de Energía Eléctrica en Alta Tensión S.A. (Transener)

6.      Compañía Inversora en Transmisión Eléctrica Citelec S.A. (Citelec)

7.      Corporación Independiente de Energía S.A.

8.      Dolphin Energía S.A.

9.      Electricidad Argentina S.A.

10.  Empresa Distribuidora y Comercializadora Norte S.A. (Edenor)

11.  Energía Distribuida S.A.

12.  Empresa Transportadora de Energía Eléctrica por Distribución Troncal de la Provincia de Buenos Aires S.A. (Transba)

13.  Hidroeléctrica Diamante S.A.

14.  Hidroeléctrica Los Nihuiles S.A.

15.  IEASA S.A.

16.  Ingentis S.A.

17.  Inversora Diamante S.A.

18.  Inversora Ingentis S.A.

19.  Pampa Inversiones S.A.

20.  Inversora Nihuiles S.A.

21.  Pampa Generación S.A.

22.  Pampa Participaciones S.A.

23.  Pampa Participaciones II S.A.

24.  Pampa Real Estate S.A.

25.  Pampa Renovables S.A.

26.  Petrolera Pampa S.A.

27.  Powerco S.A.

28.  Transelec Argentina S.A.

 

 

----
Exhibit 99.3

 

**Certification Pursuant To 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, As Adopted Pursuant To Section 906 of the Sarbanes Oxley Act Of 2002**

 

In connection with the Annual Report of Cenovus Energy Inc. (the “Company”) on Form 40-F for the year ended December 31, 2010, as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the “Report”), I, Brian C. Ferguson, President & Chief Executive Officer of the Company, certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. section 1350, as adopted pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that to the best of my knowledge:

 

1.                                       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 the Company.

 
|   |                                           |
|--------|------------------------------------------------|
| By:    | /s/   Brian C. Ferguson                        |   |
|   | Brian   C. Ferguson                            |
|   | President &   Chief Executive Officer |

 

 

February 25, 2011

 

----
EXHIBIT
34.1




ATTESTATION
REPORT ON ASSESSMENT OF COMPLIANCE WITH




SERVICING
CRITERIA FOR ASSET-BACKED SECURITIES







REPORT OF
INDEPENDENT REGISTERED PUBLIC ACCOUNTING FIRM





To the
Board of Directors and Shareholder


Entergy
Texas, Inc.


Beaumont,
Texas





We have
examined management's assertion, included in the accompanying Management’s
Report On Assessment of Compliance With Servicing Criteria For Asset-Backed
Securities, that Entergy Texas, Inc. (the "Company") complied with the servicing
criteria set forth in Item 1122(d) of the Securities and Exchange Commission's
Regulation AB applicable for Entergy Texas Restoration Funding, LLC’s Senior
Secured Transition Bonds (the “Securities”) as of December 31, 2009 and for the
period November 6, 2009 through December 31, 2009, excluding criteria
1122(d)(1)(ii), (1)(iii), (1)(iv), (2)(iii), (2)(vi), (4)(iii), (4)(v), (4)(ix),
(4)(x), (4)(xi), (4)(xii), (4)(xiii), and (4)(xv), which management has
determined are not applicable to the activities performed by the Company with
respect to the Securities.  Management is responsible for the
Company's compliance with the servicing criteria.  Our responsibility
is to express an opinion on management's assertion about the Company's
compliance with the servicing criteria based on our examination.





Our
examination was conducted in accordance with attestation standards established
by the American Institute of Certified Public Accountants, as adopted by the
Public Company Accounting Oversight Board (United States), and, accordingly,
included examining, on a test basis, evidence about the Company's compliance
with the applicable servicing criteria, including tests on a sample basis of the
servicing activities related to the Securities, determining whether the Company
performed those selected activities in compliance with the servicing criteria
during the specified period, and performing such other procedures as we
considered necessary in the circumstances.  Further, an examination is
not designed to detect noncompliance arising from errors that may have occurred
prior to the period specified above that may have affected the balances or
amounts calculated or reported by the Company during the period covered by this
report.  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.





In our
opinion, management's assertion that the Company complied with the
aforementioned applicable servicing criteria as of December 31, 2009 and for the
period November 6, 2009 through December 31, 2009 for Entergy Texas Restoration
Funding, LLC’s Senior Secured Transition Bonds is fairly stated, in all material
respects.





/s/
Deloitte & Touche LLP





New
Orleans, Louisiana


March 29,
2010
```

[Congressional Bills 117th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[H.R. 2014 Introduced in House (IH)]

<DOC>

117th CONGRESS
  1st Session
                                H. R. 2014

   To repeal certain outdated authorizations for the use of military 
                     force, and for other purposes.

_______________________________________________________________________

                    IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

                             March 18, 2021

Mr. Gallagher (for himself, Mr. Golden, Mr. Meijer, and Ms. Spanberger) 
 introduced the following bill; which was referred to the Committee on 
                            Foreign Affairs

_______________________________________________________________________

                                 A BILL

 
   To repeal certain outdated authorizations for the use of military 
                     force, and for other purposes.

    Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representatives of the 
United States of America in Congress assembled,

SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE.

    This Act may be cited as the ``Outdated AUMF Repeal Act''.

SEC. 2. REPEAL OF AUTHORIZATION FOR USE OF MILITARY FORCE AGAINST IRAQ 
              RESOLUTION OF 2002.

    The Authorization for Use of Military Force Against Iraq Resolution 
of 2002 (Public Law 107-243; 50 U.S.C. 1541 note) is hereby repealed.

SEC. 3. REPEAL OF AUTHORIZATION FOR USE OF MILITARY FORCE AGAINST IRAQ 
              RESOLUTION.

    The Authorization for Use of Military Force Against Iraq Resolution 
(Public Law 102-1; 50 U.S.C. 1541 note) is hereby repealed.

SEC. 4. REPEAL OF RESOLUTION TO PROMOTE PEACE AND STABILITY IN THE 
              MIDDLE EAST.

    The joint resolution entitled ``A joint resolution to promote peace 
and stability in the Middle East'' (Public Law 85-7; 22 U.S.C. 1961 et 
seq.) is hereby repealed.
                                 <all>
```
#### The SOUTHEAST FIRST NATIONAL BANK OF MIAMI, Appellant, v. Michael A. BUTTER, Appellee.

No. 76-1789.

District Court of Appeal of Florida, Third District.

Oct. 11, 1977.

Friedman & Britton and John L. Britton, Miami, for appellant.

Merlin & Horowitz and Gary Kalos, Cira-volo & Feldman, Miami, for appellee.

Before PEARSON, HUBBART and KE-HOE, JJ.

PER CURIAM.

The plaintiff appeals from an order dissolving a writ of garnishment entered prior to judgment pursuant to Sections 77.031, 77.04, 77.06 and 77.07, Florida Statutes (1975). The reason as urged by the appellant as to why the order dissolving the garnishment may have been erroneous at the time of the entry of the order in this cause are moot because the Supreme Court of Florida has declared unconstitutional all of the above enumerated sections of the Florida Statutes insofar as they pertain to pre-judgment garnishment. See *Ray Lein Const., Inc. v. Wainwright,*346 So.2d 1029 (Fla.1977). Therefore, the order dissolving the writ of garnishment is affirmed without further discussion.

Affirmed.
** **

**Consent of Independent Auditor’s**

 	

We hereby consent to the inclusion in this AnnualReport on Form 40-F for the year ended December 31, 2011 of Advantage Oil & Gas Ltd. of our report dated March 23, 2012, relatingto the consolidated financial statements as at December 31, 2011, December 31, 2010 and January 1, 2010 and for each of the yearsin the two year period ended December 31, 2011 and 2010, and the effectiveness of internal control over financial reporting ofAdvantage Oil & Gas Ltd. as at December 31, 2011.

 

 

**Chartered Accountants**

Calgary, Alberta

 

March 26, 2012

 

  

PricewaterhouseCoopers LLP, Chartered Accountants

111 5 Avenue SW, Suite 3100, Calgary, Alberta,Canada T2P 5L3

T: +1 403 509 7500, F: +1 403 781 1825, www.pwc.com/ca

 

“PwC” refers to PricewaterhouseCoopersLLP, an Ontario limited liability partnership.
Redacted by the U.S. Department of the Treasury

Redacted by the U.S. Department of the Treasury

Redacted by the U.S. Department of the Treasury

Redacted by the U.S. Department of the Treasury

Redacted by the U.S. Department of the Treasury

Redacted by the U.S. Department of the Treasury

Redacted by the U.S. Department of the Treasury

Redacted by the U.S. Department of the Treasury

Redacted by the U.S. Department of the Treasury

Redacted by the U.S. Department of the Treasury

Redacted by the U.S. Department of the Treasury

Redacted by the U.S. Department of the Treasury

Redacted by the U.S. Department of the Treasury

Redacted by the U.S. Department of the Treasury

Redacted by the U.S. Department of the Treasury

Redacted by the U.S. Department of the Treasury

Redacted by the U.S. Department of the Treasury

Redacted by the U.S. Department of the Treasury

Redacted by the U.S. Department of the Treasury

Redacted by the U.S. Department of the Treasury

Redacted by the U.S. Department of the Treasury

Redacted by the U.S. Department of the Treasury

Redacted by the U.S. Department of the Treasury
**EXHIBIT
        32.02**
  CERTIFICATION
        PURSUANT TO
 
 SECTION
        906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002
 
 In
        connection with the quarterly report on Form 10-Q of Colonial Commercial
        Corp.
        (the “Company”) for the quarter ended September 30, 2006 as filed with the
        Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the “Report”), I, William
        Salek, Chief Financial Officer of the Company, certify, pursuant to section
        18
        U.S.C. 1350 as adopted pursuant to section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act
        of
        2002, that:
 
 1.
              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
                  the
                  Company.
 
  By:
              /s/
                  William SalekName:
              William
                  SalekChief
                  Financial OfficerDate:
              November
                  13, 2006
Exhibit 32.2



CERTIFICATION PURSUANT TO

18 U.S.C. SECTION 1350,

AS ADOPTED PURSUANT TO

SECTION 906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002



In connection with the Quarterly Report of Texas-New Mexico Power Company (the Company) on Form 10-Q for the period ended June 30, 2004 as filed with the
Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the Report), I, Scott Forbes, Chief Financial Officer of the Company, certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. § 1350, as adopted pursuant to § 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002,
that to the best of my knowledge:



(1) 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 the Company



|                       
|-----------------------
|/s/ Scott Forbes       
|Scott Forbes           
|Chief Financial Officer
|August 5, 2004
EXHIBIT 32.2



CERTIFICATION PRINCIPAL FINANCIAL OFFICER

PURSUANT TO 18 U.S.C. SECTION 1350, AS ADOPTED PURSUANT TO

SECTION 906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002



Pursuant to 18 U.S.C. § 1350, as created by Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, the undersigned officer of Soupman, Inc. (the Registrant) hereby certifies, to such officers knowledge, that:



| |     |                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                               
| | --- | --------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
| | (1) | the accompanying Annual Report on Form 10-K of the Registrant for the year ended August 31, 2015 (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



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



|                     |     |                               
|-------------------- | --- | ------------------------------
|Date: March 25, 2016 |    
|                     |     |                               
|                     | By: | /s/ Robert N. Bertrand        
|                     |     | Name: Robert N. Bertrand      
|                     |     | Title: Chief Financial Officer
|                     |     | (Principal Financial Officer) 





|
|
|
### Memorandum

**Subject:** Telephone conversation between Nathan Topham and Bernie Hawkins
**Date:** March 15, 2013 **Participants:** Nathan Topham, U.S. EPA

Bernie Hawkins, Nelson Mullins Riley & Scarborough LLP On March 15, 2013, a telephone conversation took place between Nathan Topham and Bernie Hawkins. Mr. Topham and Mr. Hawkins discussed one issue included in the petition for reconsideration of the January 5, 2012 Secondary L ead Smelting rule filed by Mr. H awkins’ client, Johnson Controls. Mr. Topham asked Mr. Hawkins if allowing facilities discretion to choose which wall of a total enclosure to define as the “windward wall” would provide sufficient flexibility to resolve the issue described in paragraph ( iv) on page 21 of JCI’s reconsideration petition. Mr. Topham explained that the choice of windward wall would be added to the mandatory recordkeeping requirements and that this discretion only applies when a totall y enclosed area is inside a larger structu re shielding the enclosed area from the effects of ambient wind.
| 1.      | The annual 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 annual report fairly presents, in all material respects, the financial condition and results of operations of the Company. |
|----------------------------------|-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|

| /s/ Robert Trinka             |   |
|-------------------------------|--------|
| Robert Trinka                 |   |
| Chief Executive Officer       |   |
| (Principal Executive Officer) |   |

| 1.      | The annual 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 annual report fairly presents, in all material respects, the financial condition and results of operations of the Company. |
|----------------------------------|-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|

| /s/ Robert Trinka              |   |
|--------------------------------|--------|
| Robert Trinka                  |   |
| Chief Executive Officer        |   |
| (Principal Accounting Officer) |   |
#### MADISON DRUG COMPANY, a Florida corporation, Appellant, v. HILLSBOROUGH COUNTY AVIATION AUTHORITY, a public body corporate created under the Laws of Florida, Appellee.

No. 69-598.

District Court of Appeal of Florida, Second District.

June 25, 1970.

Appeal dismissed.