alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
[Federal Register Volume 62, Number 244 (Friday, December 19, 1997)]
[Notices]
[Page 66631]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 97-33121]


=======================================================================
-----------------------------------------------------------------------

FEDERAL MARITIME COMMISSION


Ocean Freight Forwarder License Applicants

    Notice is hereby given that the following applicants have filed 
with the Federal Maritime Commission applications for licenses as ocean 
freight forwarders pursuant to section 19 of the Shipping Act of 1984 
(46 U.S.C. app. 1718 and 46 CFR 510).
    Persons knowing of any reason why any of the following applicants 
should not receive a license are requested to contact the Office of 
Freight Forwarders, Federal Maritime Commission, Washington, D.C. 
20573.

Prem International, Inc., 7225 N.W. 25th Street, Suite 203, Miami, FL 
33122, Officers: Hugo Pedro Kelly, President, Sergio Barci, Vice 
President
UT Freight Forwarders Ltd., 161-15 Rockaway Blvd., Jamaica, NY 11434, 
Officers: John Hwang, President, Lisa Cho, Secretary
Triton Forwarding, Inc., 3080 Bristol Street, Suite 610, Costa Mesa, CA 
92626, Officers: Anthony G. Khamis, Director, Leonard Yanovsky, 
Director
Interamericas Consulting Import Export Inc., 22716 SW 65 Way, Boca 
Raton, FL 33428, Officer: Iracema V.S. Heidal, President.

    Dated: December 15, 1997.
Ronald D. Murphy,
Assistant Secretary.
[FR Doc. 97-33121 Filed 12-18-97; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6730-01-M
#### UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff—Appellee, v. Pilar Adrian LECHUGA-ROMERO, Defendant—Appellant.

No. 01-10598.

D.C. No. CR-00-00391-LDG.

United States Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit.

Submitted Aug. 12, 2002 *.

Decided Aug. 15, 2002.

Before SCHROEDER, Chief Judge, TASHIMA and RAWLINSON, Circuit Judges.

*

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

MEMORANDUM **

Püar Adrian Lechuga-Romero appeals his forty-six month sentence imposed following a guüty plea to illegal re-entry into the United States, in violation of 8 U.S.C. § 1326. We dismiss in part, and remand in part.

Lechuga contends that the district court erroneously determined that, by arguing for a downward departure from the Sentencing Guidelines based upon cultural assimüation, Lechuga fañed to invoke a cognizable departure provision. This argument lacks merit.

The district court entertained arguments from the parties regarding the de*248parture motion; its comment that Lechuga failed to provide the court with a citation to any specific departure provision is insufficient to support Lechuga’s contention that the district court failed to recognize cultural assimilation as a valid basis for departure under the Sentencing Guidelines.

To the extent that Lechuga also argues that the district court erroneously determined that it lacked discretion to depart downward from the Sentencing Guidelines based upon cultural assimilation, that argument is also belied by the record.

The government did not challenge the district court’s authority to depart on the basis of cultural assimilation, and the district court did not state a belief that it lacked discretion to do so. Accordingly, we cannot conclude that the district court determined that it lacked authority to depart downward on this basis. *See United States v. Jackson,*986 F.2d 312, 314 (9th Cir.1993) (per curiam) (holding that when authority to depart is not otherwise in dispute, a district court’s silence regarding authority to depart is not sufficient to indicate that the court believed it lacked such authority). Because we lack jurisdiction to review a district court’s discretionary decision not to depart downward from the applicable Sentencing Guideline, *see United States v. Rivera,*996 F.2d 993, 997 (9th Cir.1993), we dismiss the appeal as to this claim.

Finally, Lechuga correctly argues, and the government concedes, that the district court judgement references both 8 U.S.C. §§ 1326(a) and (b) as the crime of conviction. So that the judgement will unambiguously reflect that Lechuga was convicted only of one punishable offense pursuant to section 1326(a), we remand to the district court with directions to correct the judgement of conviction by striking the reference to section 1326(b). *See*28 U.S.C. § 2106; *see also United States v. Rivera-Sanchez,*222 F.3d 1057, 1062 (9th Cir. 2000).

DISMISSED IN PART; REMANDED WITH INSTRUCTIONS.

**

 This disposition is not appropriate for publication and may not be cited to or by the courts of this circuit except as may be provided by Ninth Circuit Rule 36-3.
#### In re Virgil FULLER, a child.

No. 40633.

Supreme Court of Florida.

Feb. 9, 1971.

Certiorari denied. 241 So.2d 881.

CARLTON, Acting C. J., and ADKINS, ' BOYD, McCAIN and DEKLE, JJ., concur.
Order entered January 15, 2020

In The 

## Court of Appeals Fifth District of Texas at Dallas

No. 05
- 19
- 01015
- CR THE STATE OF TEXAS, Appellant

V. TINA TEAGUE, Appellee On Appeal from the County Crimi nal Court of Appeals No. 2

Dallas County, Texas Trial Court Cause No. MA17
- 47049
- M



### O RDER
T his appeal is REINSTATED

. On October 10, 2019, the Court abated this appeal to allow the trial court to make findings of fact and conclusions of law and to order th e reporter’s record supplemented with missing exhibits. The trial court’s written findings and the supplemental reporter’s record have
been filed. The State’s brief shall be due THIRTY DAYS from the date of this order.

/s/ ROBERT D. BURNS, III CHIEF J USTICE
CERTIFICATION PURSUANT TO 18 U.S.C. SECTION 1350,
AS ADOPTED PURSUANT TO SECTION 906 OF THE
SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002
  
    
    the Report fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) or 15(d) of
the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, and
    
    the information contained in the Report fairly presents, in all material
respects, the financial condition and results of operations of the Company.
  /s/ Lawrence SaperLawrence SaperChairman of the Board
and Chief Executive Officer/s/ Hank ScaramelliHank ScaramelliVice President, Finance and Administration,
and Chief Financial Officer
CERTIFICATION
PURSUANT TO




18
U.S.C. §1350,




AS
ADOPTED PURSUANT TO




SECTION
906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002




In
connection with the annual report of World Ventures Inc. (the "Company") on Form
20-F for the year ended October 31, 2008, as filed with the Securities and
Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the "Report"), I, Gary B. Van Norman,
Chief Financial Officer of the Company, certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. §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.




Date: May
20, 2009




/s/
      Gary B. Van NormanName:
      Gary B. Van NormanTitle:
      Vice President and Chief Financial
Officer
**Exhibit31-1**

 

**CERTIFICATIONS**

** **

I, James V. Mahoney, certify that:

 

1.               I have reviewedthis quarterly report on Form 10-Q of The Dayton Power and Light Company;

 

2.               Based on myknowledge, this report does not contain any untrue statement of a material factor omit to state a material fact necessary to make the statements made, inlight of the circumstances under which such statements were made, notmisleading with respect to the period covered by this report;

 

3.               Based on myknowledge, the financial statements, and other financial information includedin this report, fairly present in all material respects the financialcondition, results of operations and cash flows of the registrant as of, andfor, the periods presented in this report;

 

4.               The registrant’s othercertifying officer(s) and I are responsible for establishing and maintainingdisclosure controls and procedures (as defined in Exchange Act Rules 13a-15(e)and 15d-15(e)) for the registrant and have:

 

a) Designed such disclosure controls and procedures, or caused suchdisclosure controls and procedures to be designed under our supervision, toensure that material information relating to the registrant, including itsconsolidated subsidiaries, is made known to us by others within those entities,particularly during the period in which this report is being prepared;

 

b) Evaluated the effectiveness of the registrant’s disclosure controlsand procedures and presented in this report our conclusions about theeffectiveness of the disclosure controls and procedures, as of the end of theperiod covered by this report based on such evaluation;

 

c) Disclosed in this report any change in the registrant’s internalcontrol over financial reporting that occurred during the registrant’s mostrecent fiscal quarter (the registrant’s fourth fiscal quarter in the case of anannual report) that has materially affected, or is reasonably likely tomaterially affect, the registrant’s internal control over financial reporting;and

 

5.               The registrant’sother certifying officer(s) and I have disclosed, based on our most recentevaluation of internal control over financial reporting, to the registrant’sauditors and the audit committee of the registrant’s board of directors (orpersons performing the equivalent function):

 

a) All significant deficiencies and material weaknesses in the designor operation of internal control over financial reporting which are reasonablylikely to adversely affect the registrant’s ability to record, process,summarize and report financial information; and

 

b) Any fraud, whether ornot material, that involves management or other employees who have asignificant role in the registrant’s internal control over financial reporting.

 

 
| Date:       | November 15,  2004                |
|-------------|----------------------------------------|
| Signature:  | /s/ James V.  Mahoney                  |   |
| Print Name: | James V.  Mahoney                      |
| Title:      | President  and Chief Executive Officer |

 

----
September 20, 2016

Exemption No. 11400D

Regulatory Docket No. FAA

– 2015

– 0155

Mr. Mark E. McKinnon

Dentons US, LLP

Counsel for Mosaic Sales Solutions US Operating Co. LLC

1676 International Drive

Penthouse

McLean, VA 22102

- 4832

Dear Mr. McKinnon :

This letter is to inform you that we have granted your petition for an amendment. It explains

the basis for our decision, describes its effect, and lists any changes to the original conditions

and limitations.

By letter dated May 20, 2016 , you petitioned the Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) on

behalf of Mosaic Sales Solutions US Operating Co. LLC (hereinafter petitioner or operator)

for an amendment to your current exemption . T hat exemption from §§ 61.23(a) and ( c ),

61.101(e)(4 ) and (5), 61.113(a), 61.315(a) , 91.7(a), 91.119(c), 91.121, 91.151(a)(1),

91.405(a), 91.407(a)(1), 91.409(a)(1) and (2), and 91.417(a) and (b) of Title 14, Code of

Federal Regulations (14 CFR) allows the petitioner to conduct UAS operations

. You

requested an amendment to change the company name from Contend, LLC to Mosaic Sales

Solutions US Operating Co. LLC

.

In your petition, you indicate that there has been no change in the conditions and rea sons

relative to public interest and safety that were the basis for granting the original exemption.

The FAA has determined that good cause exists for not publishing a summary of the petition

in the Federal Register because the requested amendment to the exemption would not set a

precedent, and any delay in acting on this pe tition would be detrimental to the petitioner

.2

Our Decision

The FAA has determined that the justification for the issuance of Exemption No. 11400 C

remains valid and is in the public interest. Therefore, under the authority contained

in 49 U.S.C

. 106(f), 40113, and 44701, delegated to me by the Administrator, the operator is

granted an amendment to change the operator name

.

The operator shall add th is amendment to its original exemption.

Conditions and Limitations

In this grant of amendment , Mosaic Sales Solutions US Operating Co. LLC is hereafter

referred to as the operator. All conditions and limitations within Grant of Exemption No.

11400C remain in effect

.

Failure to comply with any of the conditions and limitations of this grant of exemption will be

grounds for the immediate suspension or rescission of this exemption.

T his exemption terminates on April 30, 2017 , unless sooner supersed ed or rescinded.

Sincerely,

/ s/

John S. Duncan

Di rector, Flight Standards Service
IN THE SUPREME COURT OF PENNSYLVANIA

MIDDLE DISTRICT

JOSE RIVERA,

Petitioner

v.

ARMSTRONG WORLD INDUSTRIES, INC., 

BRENNTAG NORTHEAST INC., BARLEY 

SNYDER, AND ALAN J. HAY, M.D.,

Respondents

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

No. 672 MAL 2019

Petition for Allowance of Appeal 

from the Order of the Superior Court

ORDER

PER CURIAM

AND NOW, this 4th day of May, 2020, the Petition for Allowance of Appeal is 

DENIED.
Exhibit 32.1

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 Electromed, Inc. (the Company) on Form
10-K for the year ended June 30, 2011, as filed with the Securities and
Exchange Commission (the Report), I, Robert D. Hansen, Chief Executive
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:

(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.

Dated:
September 14, 2011

/s/ Robert D.
Hansen
Robert D. Hansen
Chief Executive Officer

---
US TREASURY FINANCING SCHEDULE FOR 3rd QUARTER 2009

BILLIONS OF DOLLARS

ANNOUNCEMENT AUCTION SETTLEMENT OFFERED MATURING NEW

ISSUE DATE DATE DATE AMOUNT AMOUNT MONEY

4-WK 3-MO 6-MO 12-MO

4-WEEK AND 6/25 6/29 7/2 35.00 32.00 30.00 27.00 110.00 14.00

3&6 MONTH BILLS 7/2 7/6 7/9 34.00 32.00 31.00 88.00 9.00

7/9 7/13 7/16 34.00 32.00 30.00 81.00 15.00

7/16 7/20 7/23 31.00 32.00 31.00 85.00 9.00

7/23 7/27 7/30 30.00 32.00 31.00 27.00 111.00 9.00

7/30 8/3 8/6 35.00 31.00 31.00 93.00 4.00

8/6 8/10 8/13 35.00 31.00 31.00 95.00 2.00

8/13 8/17 8/20 35.00 31.00 31.00 92.00 5.00

8/20 8/24 8/27 31.00 31.00 31.00 28.00 111.00 10.00

8/27 8/31 9/3 25.00 31.00 31.00 95.00 -8.00

9/3 9/8 9/10 19.00 31.00 31.00 96.00 -15.00

9/10 9/14 9/17 15.00 31.00 31.00 95.00 -18.00

9/17 9/21 9/24 15.00 31.00 31.00 28.00 111.00 -6.00

1183.00 1263.00 30.00

CASH MANAGEMENT BILLS

339-DAY BILL 7/2 7/6 30.00 30.00

Matures 6/10/2010

70-DAY BILL 7/15 7/16 35.00 35.00 0.00

Matures 9/24

70-DAY BILL 7/24 7/30 30.00 30.00

Matures 10/8

70-DAY BILL 8/5 8/6 35.00 35.00

Matures 10/15

70-DAY BILL 35.00

Matures 8/6

70-DAY BILL 8/12 8/13 35.00 35.00

Matures 10/22

70-DAY BILL 35.00 -35.00

Matures 8/13 Matures 8/13

34-DAY BILL 8/11 8/12 35.00 35.00 0.00

Matures 9/15

70-DAY BILL 30.00

Matures 8/20

231-DAY BILL 8/25 8/27 30.00 30.00

Matures 4/15/2010

CMB Funds: 125.00

COUPONS

CHANGE

IN SIZE

10-Year TIPS 7/2 7/6 7/15 8.00

3-Year Note 7/6 7/7 7/15 35.00

10-Year Note ® 7/6 7/8 7/15 19.00

30-Year Note ® 7/6 7/9 7/15 11.00 13.80 59.20

20-Year TIPS ® 7/23 7/21 7/31 6.00

2-Year Note 7/23 7/28 7/31 42.00 2.00

5-Year Note 7/23 7/29 7/31 39.00 2.00

7-Year Note 7/23 7/30 7/31 28.00 1.00 19.00 96.00

3-Year Note 8/5 8/11 8/17 37.00 2.00

10-Year Note 8/5 8/12 8/17 24.00 2.00

30-Year Bond 8/5 8/13 8/17 15.00 1.00 60.90 15.10

2-Year Note 8/20 8/25 8/31 44.00 2.00

5-year Note 8/20 8/26 8/31 40.00 1.00

7-year Note 8/20 8/27 8/31 29.00 1.00 19.00 94.00

3-Year Note 9/3 9/8 9/15 37.00

10-Year Note ® 9/3 9/9 9/15 20.00 1.00

30-Year Note ® 9/3 9/10 9/15 12.00 1.00 14.90 54.10

2-Year Note 9/17 9/22 9/30 44.00

5-year Note 9/17 9/23 9/30 41.00 1.00

7-year Note 9/17 9/24 9/30 30.00 1.00 20.00 95.00

531.00 127.60 413.40

Estimates are italicized. R = Reopening

NET CASH RAISED THIS QUARTER: 568.40
NOT FOR PUBLICATION

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT

JAIME DUENAS

- HERNANDEZ,

Petitioner,

v. WILLIAM P. BARR, Attorney General,

Respondent. No. 18

- 70906
Agency No. A087

- 991

- 568

MEMORANDUM *

On Petition for Review of an Order of the Board of Immigration Appeals

Submitted March 3, 2020 * *

Before: MURGUIA, CHRISTEN, and BADE, Circuit Judges.

Jaime Duenas

- Hernandez , a native and citizen of Mexico, petitions for
review of the Board of Immigrati on Appeals’ (“BIA”) order denying his motion to
reopen removal proceedings. Our jurisdiction is governed by 8 U.S.C. § 1252. We
review for abuse of discretion the denial of a motion to reopen. Garcia v. Holder , 621 F.3d 906, 912

- 13 (9th Cir. 2010). We deny in part and dismiss in part the

* This disposition is not appropriate for publication and is not precedent except as provided by Ninth Circuit Rule 36

- 3.

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

# FILED

MAR 10 2020

MOLLY C. DWYER, CLERK U.S. COURT OF APPEALS2 18

- 70906

petition for review.
We lack jurisdiction to review Duenas

- Hernandez’s contentions regarding
hardship to his United States citizen daughter, where the evidence is cumulative of
his previously denied application for cancellation of removal. See Fernandez v.

Gonzalez , 439 F.3d 592, 603 (9th Cir. 2006) (court lacks jurisdiction over a motion
to reopen where new evidence is cumulative of a previously considered
discretionary determination)

. The BIA did not abuse its discretion in denying

Duenas

- Hernandez’s motion on the ground th at the new evidence of his daughter’ s
scoliosis was insufficient to establish prima facie eligibility for cancellation of

removal. See id. (court has jurisdiction to review the agency’s decision where “the
evidence submitted addresses a hardship ground so distinct from that considered
previously as to make the motion to reopen a request for new relief”)

. To the extent Duenas

- Hernandez challe nges the BIA’s hardship
determination on direct appeal, we lack jurisdiction to consider that challenge,
where this petition is untimely as to that decision. See 8 U.S.C. § 1252(b)(1).
Finally, w e lack jurisdiction to consider Duenas

- Hernandez’s unexhaust ed
ineffective assistance of counsel claim, where he failed to raise the claim in the

order under review

. See Tijani v. Holder , 628 F.3d 1071, 1080 (9th Cir. 2010)3 18

- 70906

(“We lack jurisdiction to review legal claims not presented in an alien’s

administrative proceedings before the BIA.”).

PETITION FOR REVIEW DENIED in part; DISMISSED in part.
Exhibit 99.1

                            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 Copper Corporation (the "Company") on
Form 10-QSB for the period ending January 31, 2003, as filed with the Securities
and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the "Report'),  I, Roger W. Sherman,
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:

     (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 result of  operations of the
Company.


/s/ Roger W. Sherman
------------------------
Roger W. Sherman
Chief Executive Officer
March 11, 2003
#### Francis T. YOUNG and Lola Young, his wife, Appellants, v. Eamonn QUINN, Patricia Quinn, and Frank Moore Realty, Inc., a Florida Corporation, Appellees.

No. 77-780.

District Court of Appeal of Florida, Fourth District.

Nov. 1, 1977.

Rehearing Denied Dec. 9, 1977.

Robert L. Gossett of Bunin & Gossett, and Mark A. Jacobs of Paul Glasel, P.A., Hollywood, for appellants.

Alvin Capp of Capp, Reinstein & Kope-lowitz, Fort Lauderdale, for appellees— Quinn.

PER CURIAM.

From our review of the record in this case we determine that the questions presented on appeal have become moot. Under such circumstances an appeal may be dismissed on the court’s own motion. *De-Hoff v. Imeson,*153 Fla. 553, 15 So.2d 258 (1943). No practical result could be attained by reviewing the questions raised by this appeal; therefore the appeal is dismissed.

ALDERMAN, C. J., and LETTS and MOORE, JJ., concur.
256 La. 894

#### Mrs. Ila D. THOMPSON v. Raymond R. BULLOCK.

No. 50820.

Supreme Court of Louisiana.

Sept. 30, 1970.

In re: Raymond R. Bullock applying for certiorari, or writ of review, to the Court of Appeal, Third Circuit, Parish of Calcasieu. 236 So.2d 892; 236 So.2d 899.

Writ refused. There is no error of law in the judgment.
U.S. flag
          Un sitio oficial del Gobierno de los Estados Unidos
            Así es como usted puede verificarlo
          Así es como usted puede verificarloDot gov**El .gov significa que es oficial.**
                
                Los sitios web del gobierno federal siempre usan un dominio .gov o .mil. Antes de compartir información confidencial en línea, asegúrese de estar en un sitio .gov o .mil.
          Https**Este sitio es seguro.**
                
                El **https://** medios todos los datos transmitidos son cifrados - en otras palabras, cualquier información o el historial de navegación que proporcione se transmite de forma segura.

    
          FTC: Translation Menu
  

        
EnglishFTC: Secondary Menu (ES)
  

        
    
    Reporte las estafas
                                
                          
        
                Reciba alertas **
Menú


    close


                  FTC: Main navigation (ES)
  

        
  
  Consejos para consumidores
      
    Guía para negocios
      
    Reembolsos
      
    Noticias
      
    Acerca de la FTC
      
    Buscar
        
        
        FTC: Secondary Menu (ES)
  

        
    
    Reporte las estafas
                                
                          
        
                Reciba alertas

          
  
          Consejos para consumidores
      
    
              Guía para negocios
      
    
              Reembolsos
      
    
              Noticias
      
    
              Acerca de la FTC
      
    
              Buscar Features
  


  Sobrescribir enlaces de ayuda a la navegación
      Inicio
                                                                        Noticias de la FTCView this page in English Our features provide you with timely, helpful information on consumer protection and competition topics.
    
    Feature
  Ciberseguridad para pequeños negocios


Aprenda conceptos básicos para proteger su negocio de ataques cybernéticos. Los recursos de ciberseguridad para negocios en ésta sección fueron desarrollados con el Instituto Nacional de Estándares y...
    Feature
  Pandemia de COVID-19: La FTC en acción


Detecte las últimas estafas relacionadas con COVID, obtenga orientación para el cumplimiento de la le y, y manténgase informado sobre las acciones de cumplimiento de la ley de la FTC durante la...
    Feature
  FTC en Español


Información de la Comisión Federal de Comercio (Federal Trade Commission, FTC), sobre sus derechos de consumidor, cómo evitar las estafas, y recursos para su pequeño negocio.
  
    
    
    

  Return to top **
Menú
FTC: Secondary Menu (ES)
  

        


      Reporte las estafas
                              Reciba alertas
  
  
      FTC: Footer (es)
  

        


      Política de privacidad y noticias