alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
#### METROPOLITAN DADE COUNTY, a political subdivision of the State of Florida, et al., Appellants, v. ADLER BUILT INDUSTRIES, INC., a Florida corporation, Appellee.

No. 68-186.

District Court of Appeal of Florida, Third District.

March 9, 1970.

Thomas C. Britton, County Atty., and John G. Fletcher, Asst. County Atty., for appellants.

Harris & Sirkin, Miami, and Herbert Buchwald, Miami Beach, for appellee.

Before PEARSON, C. J., and BARK-DULL and HENDRY, JJ.

ORDER ON MANDATE

PER CURIAM.

Whereas, the judgment of this court was entered on April 29, 1969 (222 So.2d 264) *438affirming in part and reversing in part the final decree of the Circuit Court for Dade County, Florida, in the above styled cause; and

Whereas, on review of this court’s judgment, by certiorari, the Supreme Court of Florida by its opinion and judgment filed January 28, 1970 (231 So.2d 197) and mandate dated March 2, 1970, quashed this court’s judgment with directions to remand the cause to the trial court for further proceedings in accordance with the opinion and judgment of the Supreme Court of Florida;

Now, therefore, It is Ordered that the mandate of this court heretofore issued in this cause on June 11, 1969 is withdrawn, the opinion and judgment of this court filed April 29, 1969 is vacated, the said opinion and judgment of the Supreme Court of Florida is herewith made the opinion and judgment of this court and the cause is remanded to the trial court for further proceedings in accordance with the said opinion and judgment of the Supreme Court of Florida. Costs allowed shall be taxed in the circuit (Rule 3.16(b) Florida Appellate Rules, 32 F.S.A.).
[Federal Register Volume 62, Number 229 (Friday, November 28, 1997)]
[Notices]
[Page 63363]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 97-31236]


-----------------------------------------------------------------------

DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES

National Institutes of Health


Warren Grant Magnuson Clinical Center; Notice of Meeting of the 
Executive Committee of the Board of Governors of the Warren Grant 
Magnuson Clinical Center

    Pursuant to Pub. L. 92-463, notice is hereby given of the meeting 
of the Executive Committee of the Board of Governors of the Warren 
Grant Magnuson Clinical Center, December 1, 1997. The Executive 
Committee will meet on December 1 from 9:00 a.m. to approximately 12:30 
p.m. in the Medical Board Room (2C116) of the Clinical Center (Building 
10), 9000 Rockville Pike, Bethesda, Maryland.
    The meeting will be open to the public from 9:00 a.m. to 
approximately 11:30 a.m. and will include the Director's update and a 
discussion with Arthur Anderson representatives regarding an evaluation 
of the Clinical Center financial management system.
    In accordance with the provisions set forth in sec. 552b(c)(6) of 
Title 5, U.S.C. and sec. 10(d) of Pub. L. 92-463, the meeting will be 
closed to the public from approximately 11:30 a.m. to adjournment for 
discussion of personnel matters, the disclosure of which would 
constitute a clearly unwarranted invasion of personal privacy.
    Attendance by the public will be limited to space available.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION, CONTACT: Ms. Maggi Stakem, Office of the 
Director, Warren Grant Magnuson Clinical Center, Building 10, Room 
2C146, Bethesda, Maryland 20892, (301) 496-4114.
    Individuals who plan to attend and need special assistance, such as 
sign language interpretation or other reasonable accommodations, should 
contact Ms. Stakem in advance of the meeting.
    This notice is being published less than fifteen days prior to this 
meeting due to scheduling conflicts.

    Dated: November 20, 1997.
LaVerne Y. Stringfield,
Committee Management Officer, NIH.
[FR Doc. 97-31236 Filed 11-26-97; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4140-01-M
MANAGEMENT’S ASSERTION OF COMPLIANCE





Management of the Agency and Trust division of Citibank, N.A. (or “Company”) is responsible for assessing compliance with the servicing criteria set forth in Item 1122(d) of Regulation AB promulgated by the Securities and Exchange Commission.





Management has determined that the servicing criteria in Item 1122(d) of Regulation AB are applicable in regard to the servicing platform for the period as follows:





Platform:  Publicly-issued (i.e., transaction-level reporting initially required under the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended) automobile loan or lease-backed securities and student loan-backed securities issued on or after January 1, 2006, for which the Company provides trustee and paying agent services (the “Platform”)





Applicable Servicing Criteria:  All servicing criteria set forth in Item 1122(d), to the extent required by Item 1122(d) servicing criteria in regards to the activities performed by the Company with respect to the Platform as to any transaction, except for the following criteria: 1122(d)(1)(i)-1122(d)(1)(iv), 1122(d)(2)(i), 1122(d)(2)(iii), 1122(d)(2)(vi)-1122(d)(2)(vii), 1122(d)(3)(i) and 1122(d)(4)(i)-1122(d)(4)(xv), which management has determined are not applicable to the activities the Company performs with respect to the Platform (the “Applicable Servicing Criteria”).





Period:  Twelve months ended December 31, 2009 (the “Period”).





With respect to the Platform as of and for the Period, the Company’s management provides the following assertion of compliance with respect to the Applicable Servicing Criteria:




·
The Company’s management is responsible for assessing the Company’s compliance with the Applicable Servicing Criteria.




·
The Company’s management has assessed compliance with the Applicable Servicing Criteria.  In making this assessment, management used the criteria set forth by the Securities and Exchange Commission in paragraph (d) of Item 1122 of Regulation AB.




·
Based on such assessment, the Company has complied, in all material respects, with the Applicable Servicing Criteria.




KPMG LLP, an independent registered public accounting firm, has issued an attestation report with respect to management’s assertion of compliance with the Applicable Servicing Criteria as of and for the Period.





CITIBANK, N.A.
  By: /s/ Karen Montback
 Its:  Managing Director





Dated: February 26, 2010
**President**

**Section 906 Certification under Sarbanes Oxley Act**

 

 

 

I, Michael G. Clark, certify that: 

 

| 1. | I have reviewed this report, filed on behalf of DWS Capital Growth Fund, a series of DWS Investment Trust, on Form N-CSRS; |
|----|----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|

 

| 2. | Based on my knowledge and pursuant to 18 U.S.C. § 1350, the periodic report on Form N-CSRS (the “Report”) fully complies with the requirements of § 13 (a) or §15 (d), as applicable, of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 and that the information contained in the Report fairly presents, in all material respects, the financial condition and results of operations of the Company. |
|----|---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|

 

 

 

| May 29, 2009 | /s/Michael G. Clark                                       |
|--------------|-----------------------------------------------------------|
|         | Michael G. Clark                                          |
|         | President                                                 |
|         | DWS Capital Growth Fund, a series of DWS Investment Trust |

 

 

 

 

 

**Chief Financial Officer and Treasurer**

**Section 906 Certification under Sarbanes Oxley Act**

 

 

 

I, Paul Schubert, certify that: 

 

| 1. | I have reviewed this report, filed on behalf of DWS Capital Growth Fund, a series of DWS Investment Trust, on Form N-CSRS; |
|----|----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|

 

| 2. | Based on my knowledge and pursuant to 18 U.S.C. § 1350, the periodic report on Form N-CSRS (the “Report”) fully complies with the requirements of § 13 (a) or § 15 (d), as applicable, of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 and that the information contained in the Report fairly presents, in all material respects, the financial condition and results of operations of the Company. |
|----|---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|

 

 

| May 29, 2009 | /s/Paul Schubert                                          |
|--------------|-----------------------------------------------------------|
|         | Paul Schubert                                             |
|         | Chief Financial Officer and Treasurer                     |
|         | DWS Capital Growth Fund, a series of DWS Investment Trust |
**EXHIBIT 35.1**

**World Omni Financial Corp.**

**Servicer Compliance Statement**

**Pursuant to Item 1123**

**of Regulation AB**

I, Victor A. De Jesus, do hereby certify that I am the Vice President and Chief Financial Officer of World Omni Financial Corp., a Florida corporation, and further certify on behalf of World Omni Financial Corp. inits capacity as servicer (the “Servicer”) under the Sale and Servicing Agreement, dated as of January 28, 2010 (the “Agreement”), among World Omni Auto Receivables Trust 2010-A, as Issuing Entity, World Omni Auto ReceivablesLLC, as Depositor, and the Servicer, as follows: 

(i)        A review of theactivities of the Servicer during the period covered by the issuing entity’s Annual Report on Form 10-K for the fiscal year ended December 31, 2010 (the “Reporting Period”), and of its performance under the Agreement, has beenmade under my supervision. 

(ii)       To the best of my knowledge, based on thereview described above, the Servicer has fulfilled all of its obligations under the Agreement in all material respects throughout the Reporting Period. 

IN WITNESS WHEREOF, I have hereunto set my hand as of March 15, 2011.
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<PAGE>
<ARTICLE> 5
<MULTIPLIER> 1,000
       
<S>                             <C>                     <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   3-MOS                   9-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          DEC-31-1996             DEC-31-1996
<PERIOD-START>                             JAN-01-1996             JAN-01-1996
<PERIOD-END>                               SEP-30-1996             SEP-30-1996
<CASH>                                          53,718                  53,718
<SECURITIES>                                         0                       0
<RECEIVABLES>                                  109,743                 109,743
<ALLOWANCES>                                   (6,988)                 (6,988)
<INVENTORY>                                     54,285                  54,285
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                               228,074                 228,074
<PP&E>                                       2,260,404               2,260,404
<DEPRECIATION>                               (836,225)               (836,225)
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                               5,724,102               5,724,102
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                        (275,968)               (275,968)
<BONDS>                                              0                       0
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0                       0
<PREFERRED>                                          0                       0
<COMMON>                                     (270,255)               (270,255)
<OTHER-SE>                                           0                       0
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>               (5,724,102)             (5,724,102)
<SALES>                                              0                       0
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                             (363,816)             (1,078,649)
<CGS>                                                0                       0
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                  154,111                 453,725
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                               150,102                 448,515
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                 5,546                  15,245
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                              37,037                 105,843
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                 26,561                (37,992)
<INCOME-TAX>                                     1,513                  31,745
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                                  0                       0
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0                       0
<CHANGES>                                            0                       0
<NET-INCOME>                                    28,074                 (6,247)
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                      .10                   (.02)
<EPS-DILUTED>                                      .10                   (.02)
        

</TABLE>
Exhibit 32.3.1



Certification Required Under Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002



I, John D. McMahon, the Chief Executive Officer of Orange and Rockland Utilities, Inc. (the Company) certify that the
Companys Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q for the quarterly period ended September 30, 2004, which this statement accompanies, (the Form 10-Q) fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange
Act of 1934 (15 U.S.C. 78m or 78o(d)) and that the information contained in the Form 10-Q fairly presents, in all material respects, the financial condition and results of operations of the Company.



/s/    John D. McMahonJohn D. McMahon




Dated: November 5, 2004
#### ALLIED HELICOPTERS INTERNATIONAL, INC., et al. v. Robert John REED, Jr.

No. 46083.

Supreme Court of Mississippi.

Feb. 15, 1971.

Seth Wheatley, Jr., Greenwood, for appellants.

Bell & McBee, Greenwood, for appellee.

PER CURIAM.

Affirmed.
notes: conversation with Herb

Dante Rodriguez to: Dante Rodriguez 02/09/2012 11:45 AM

Tuesday, 2/9/12

Spoke with Herb, he had reviewed my draft letter. 

l Mann-Kendall Analysis, a simple trend analysis to show strength of trend. Although barely needed. 

Could have contractor do it with data starting at point where dipped below MCL. 

l Add vertical line to graph indicating time at which "attainment monitoring" began, which is when MCL 

was first attained. Add horizontal line indicating length of time during which "attainment monitoring" 

occurred (2 years). Will help explain things to HQ. 

l Guidance from 1994, Ch4, last page mentions timeframe of 2-5 years for performance achievement 

monitoring.

l Actually Herb thinks one confirmation sample would be sufficient since the time frame between 

samples is so long (would be 2 years soon, March 2010 to now). Assuming it shows concentration 

remains below MCL; if not, return to semi-annual sampling. 

Dante Rodriguez, P.E.

Remedial Project Manager

U.S. EPA Region 9

(415) 972-3166

rodriguez.dante@epa.gov

SDMS DOCID# 1138659
255 La. 827

#### STATE of Louisiana v. BROWN’S THRIFT CITY ETHICAL PHARMACY, INC.

No. 50011.

Supreme Court of Louisiana.

March 30, 1970.

*532Fredric G. Hayes, Lefayette, for appellant.

Jack P. F. Gremillion, Atty. Gen., William P. Schuler, Asst. Atty. Gen., Bertrand DeBlanc, Dist. Atty., Charles R. Sonnier, Frances M. Gilfoil, Michael F. Thompson, Asst. Dist. Attys., for appellee.

BARHAM, Justice.

The defendant, Brown’s Thrift City Ethical Pharmacy, Inc., was charged by bill of information with selling one gallon of paint on Sunday, in violation of R.S. 51:194 which forbids the sale on Sunday of certain merchandise including “building supply materials”. After the judge overruled a motion to quash which alleged the unconstitutionality of R.S. 51:194, the defendant was tried, convicted, and sentenced to pay a fine of $100.00 and costs, the maximum penalty for a first violation of this statute. It has appealed to this court.

Since the defendant was tried for a misdemeanor and sentenced to pay a fine which does not exceed $300.00, and since the statute was not held unconstitutional by the trial court, this court is without appellate jurisdiction, and we take notice of this ex proprio motu. La.Const. of 1921, Art. 7, Sec. 10(2), (5); State v. Ginalva, 165 La. 304, 115 So. 571; State v. Boothe, 227 La. 847, 80 So.2d 437; State v. Smith, 254 La. 78, 222 So.2d 864; State v. Murphy, 254 La. 873, 227 So.2d 915.

The appeal is accordingly dismissed.
|   |
|---|
|   |  |
| 1 | I have reviewed this report on Form 10-K and all reports on Form 10-D required to be filed in respect of the period covered by this report on Form 10-K of Ally Auto Receivables Trust 2017-5 (the “Exchange Act periodic reports”); |

|   |
|---|
|   |  |
| 2 | Based on my knowledge, the Exchange Act periodic reports, taken as a whole, do not contain any untrue statement of a material fact or omit to state a material fact necessary to make the statements made, in light of the circumstances under which such statements were made, not misleading with respect to the period covered by this report; |

|   |
|---|
|   |  |
| 3 | Based on my knowledge, all of the distribution, servicing and other information required to be provided under Form 10-D for the period covered by this report is included in the Exchange Act periodic reports; |

|   |
|---|
|   |  |
| 4 | Based on my knowledge and 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; and |

|   |
|---|
|   |  |
| 5 | 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/ Ryan C. Farris                                            |   |
|                                                          |
| Ryan C. Farris                                                |
| President, Ally Auto Assets LLC, as Depositor                 |
| (Senior Officer in charge of securitization of the depositor) |
UNPUBLISHED

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

No. 97-6577

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,

Plaintiff - Appellee,

versus

JOSEPH WILLIE KENNEDY, a/k/a Snake,

Defendant - Appellant.

Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of

Maryland, at Baltimore. J. Frederick Motz, Chief District Judge.

(CR-92-116-JFM)

Submitted: August 28, 1997 Decided: September 17, 1997

Before WILKINS, WILLIAMS, and MICHAEL, Circuit Judges.

Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion.

Joseph Willie Kennedy, Appellant Pro Se. Andrea L. Smith, OFFICE

OF THE UNITED STATES ATTORNEY, Baltimore, Maryland, for Appellee.

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.

See Local Rule 36(c).
2

PER CURIAM:

Appellant appeals the district court's order denying his motions for enlargement of time and for "unsealing of the record." We

have reviewed the record and the district court's opinion and find

no reversible error. Accordingly, we affirm on the reasoning of the

district court. United States v. Kennedy, No. CR-92-116-JFM (D. Md.

Mar. 25, 1997). We dispense with oral argument because the facts

and legal contentions are adequately presented in the materials

before the court and argument would not aid the decisional process.

AFFIRMED
#### ABNER’S INTERNATIONAL, INC., a Florida corporation, Appellant, v. ABNER’S BEEF HOUSE CORPORATION, a Florida corporation; Abner’s Roast Beef, Inc., a Florida corporation; Abner’s Restaurant Corporation, a Florida corporation; and Lum’s, Inc., a Florida corporation, Appellees.

No. 68-827.

District Court of Appeal of Florida. Third District.

Dec. 9, 1969.

Shutts & Bowen and Thomas Tew, Miami, for appellant.

Smith & Mandler and Joe N. Unger, Miami Beach, for appellees.

Before CHARLES, CARROLL, BARK-DULL and HENDRY, JJ.

ORDER ON MANDATE

PER CURIAM.

Whereas, the judgment of this court was entered on March 11, 1969 (220 So.2d 683) reversing the final order of dismissal of the Circuit Court for Dade County, in the above styled cause; and

Whereas, on review of this court’s judgment by certiorari, the Supreme Court of Florida, by its opinion (227 So.2d 865) and judgment filed October 29, 1969 and mandate dated December 1, 1969, now lodged in this court, quashed this court’s judgment and remanded the cause with directions that a final decree be entered in conformity with the said opinion and judgment of that court;

Now, therefore, It is Ordered that the mandate of this court issued in this cause on April 15, 1969 is withdrawn, the opinion and judgment of this court filed March 11, 1969 is vacated, the said opinion and judgment of the Supreme Court of Florida is herewith made the opinion and judgment of this court and the order of dismissal of the trial court appealed from herein is reversed with directions to enter a final decree in conformity with the said opinion and judgment of the Supreme Court of Florida. Costs allowed shall he taxed in the circuit court (Rule 3.16(b) Florida Appellate Rules, 32 F.S.A.).
Exhibit 13
 
 Certification of CEO and CFO Pursuant to
  18 U.S.C. Section 1350, as Adopted Pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002
  and Pursuant to Rule 13a-14(b)
  under the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended (the "Exchange Act")
  In connection with the Annual Report on Form 20-F of IFM Investments Limited (the "Company") for the year ended December 31, 2009 as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the "Report"), Donald Zhang, as Chairman of the Board of Directors and Chief Executive Officer of the Company and Kevin Cheng Wei, as Chief Financial Officer of the Company, each hereby certifies, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. § 1350, as adopted pursuant to § 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, and Rule 13a-14(b) under the Exchange Act, that, to the best of his knowledge:
  (1)           The Report fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) or 15(d), as applicable, of the Exchange Act; 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/Donald ZhangName:
Donald ZhangTitle:
Chairman of the Board of Directors and Chief Executive OfficerDate:
June 30, 2010By: /s/Kevin Cheng WeiName:
Kevin Cheng WeiTitle:
Chief Financial OfficerDate:
June 30, 2010
 
 This certification accompanies the Report pursuant to Rule 13a-14(b) under the Exchange Act and 18 U.S.C. Section 1350 and shall not be deemed "filed" by the Company for purposes of §18 of the Exchange Act, or otherwise subject to the liability of that section.