alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
| (logo) WELLS

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

 

  |
|-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------|-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|

 

**ANNUAL STATEMENT OFCOMPLIANCE**

** **

** **

Reference is herebymade to that certain Pooling and Servicing Agreement dated as of April 1, 2015,by and among Morgan Stanley Capital I Inc., as Depositor, Wells Fargo Bank,National Association, as Master Servicer, Midland Loan Services, A Division ofPNC Bank, National Association, as Special Servicer, Park Bridge LenderServices LLC, as Trust Advisor, Wilmington Trust, National Association, asTrustee, and Wells Fargo Bank, National Association, as CertificateAdministrator, Certificate Registrar, Authenticating Agent and Custodian withrespect to Commercial Mortgage Pass-Through Certificates Series 2015-C22 (the"Agreement"). Capitalized terms used herein not otherwise definedshall have the meanings assigned in the Agreement.

 

Pursuant to Section13.9 of the 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 Reporting Period.

 

 

IN WITNESS WHEREOF,the undersigned has executed this Certificate as of the 28th day ofFebruary 2019.

 

 

/s/ Leslie Hayton

Leslie Hayton 

Managing Director

Wells Fargo Bank

 

 

| Wells Fargo Bank,  N.A. | (logo) Together  we’ll go far |
|-------------------------|-------------------------------------|
Case 4:22-cr-00081-P Document 20 Filed 03/30/22 Page 1 of 2 PageID 36
Case 4:22-cr-00081-P Document 20 Filed 03/30/22 Page 2 of 2 PageID 37
### Fw: HCFC Allocation Rule Question /Thoughts
Drusilla Hufford t o : David Donaldson, Luke Hall-Jordan, Diane McConkey 05/26/2011 02:27 PM

FYI - the email I mentioned this morning, to be docketed.
Drusilla

Drusilla Hufford U.S. EPA Mailing address 1200 Pennsylvania Avenue, NW (6205J) Washington, DC 20460 Office location and express mail delivery 1310 L St., NW Washington, DC 20005 tel: 202-343-9101 cell: 202-253-2243 fax: 202-343-2363 e-mail: hufford.drusilla@epa.gov http://www.epa.gov/ozone ----- Forwarded by Drusilla Hufford/DC/USEPA/US on 05/26/2011 02:28 PM -----
From: "Lee, Amanda I." <Amanda

_ I.

_ Lee@omb.eop.gov> To: Drusilla Hufford/DC/USEPA/US@EPA Date: 05/25/2011 04:17 PM Subject: FW: HCFC Allocation Rule Question/Thoughts

From: Zumwalt, Bryan ( V itter) [mailto:Bryan

_ Zumwalt@vitter.senate.gov] Sent: Monday, May 23, 2011 12:10 PM To: Lee, A manda I. Subject: HCFC Allocation Rule Question / Thoughts


### Hello Amanda,
I understand you are handling the Interim Final Rule for the HCFC

‐ 22 Allocation Rule. We are concerned that the court decision is forcing EPA to allocate in a way that harms US companies to the benefit of foreign companies. These are significant impacts

‐ one of the three US producers tells us that the impact to them alone is $70 million dollars in lost sales. It is important that the rule be finalized in a way that minimizes this harm. I was curious if we can prevent the total number of consumption allowances from being increased?
Consumption allowances let the companies produce or import for the US market. While that will mean shifting allowances from the US companies to the foreign companies, adding consumption allowances would disrupt the market transition in the run up to the next phase

‐ own step in 2015. It would also mean more ozone depleting chemicals in the atmosphere and slow market adoption of new generation

### refrigerants. On the other hand, the domestic producers production allowances should NOT be reduced . Production allowances allow US producers to make HCFCs for export. Reducing production allowances would simply serve to reduce the ability of the US companies to make product to serve their existing export markets in developing countries, giving further advantage to the foreign producers and shifting production to China.
It is important that this rule minimize harm to the US companies, and that EPA go through a full rulemaking to try to fix these problems in a timely manner. I am not sure if our thoughts on this are helpful in any way, but I appreciate your attention to our concerns.
Thank you, Bryan Bryan Zumwalt Counsel U.S. Senator David Vitter (202) 224-4623 

##  (202) 228-5061 

##  www

. vitter

. senate

. gov To receive regular e-updates from Senator Vitter, p lease click here

.
Case 2:22-cr-00043-Z-BR Document 87 Filed 01/09/23 Page 1 of 1 PageID 308
**UN PUBLISHED** 
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

**No. 15**  **- 6381** 

JORDACHE W. LEACH , Petitioner

- Appellant ,
v.
FRANK L. PERRY , Respondent

- Appellee
.

Appeal from the United States District Court for the Middle District of North Carolina , at Greensboro
. Catherine C. Eagles , District Judge. ( 1:15

- cv - 00014

- CCE

- JEP )

Submitted : May 19 , 2015 Decided: May 22, 2015

Before NIEMEYER and HARRIS , Circuit Judges , and DAVIS, Senior Circuit Judge
.
Dismissed by un published per curiam opinion
. Jordache W. Leach, Appellant Pro Se. Clarence Joe DelForge, III, NORTH CAROLINA DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE, Raleigh, North Carolina, for Appellee.
Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.2 PER CURIAM: Jordache W. Leach seeks to appeal the district court ’ s order denying relief on his 28 U.S.C. § 2254 (2012) petition. The order is not appealable unless a circuit justice or judge issues a certificate of appealability. See 28 U.S.C.
§ 2253(c)(1) (A) (2012) . A cert ificate of appealability will not issue absent “ a substantial showing of the denial of a constitutional right. ” 28 U.S.C. § 2253(c)(2) (2012)
. When the district court denies relief on the merits, a prisoner satisfies this standard by demonstrating that r easonable jurists would find that the district court’s assessment of the constitutional claims is debatable or wrong. Slack v. McDaniel , 529 U.S. 473, 484 (2000); see Miller

- El v. Cockrell , 537 U.S. 322, 336

- 38 (2003). When the district court denies relief on procedural grounds, the prisoner must demonstrate both that the dispositive procedural ruling is debatable, and that the petition states a debatable claim of the denial of a constitut ional right. Slack , 529 U.S. at 484

- 85. We have independently reviewed the record and conclude that Leach has not made the requisite showing. Accordingly, we deny a certificate of appealability , deny leave to proceed in forma pauperis, and dismiss the appeal. We dispense with oral argument because the facts and legal contentions are adequately3 presented in the materials before th is court and argument would not aid the decisional process.
DISMISSE D
House Calendar No. 32

103D CONGRESS

1ST SESSION H. CON. RES. 82

[Report No. 103–69]

CONCURRENT RESOLUTION

Authorizing the use of the Capitol grounds for the

Greater Washington Soap Box Derby.

APRIL 29, 1993

Referred to the House Calendar and ordered to be

printed
IV

House Calendar No. 32

103D CONGRESS

1ST SESSION H. CON. RES. 82

[Report No. 103–69]

Authorizing the use of the Capitol grounds for the Greater Washington

Soap Box Derby.

IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

APRIL 21, 1993

Mr. HOYER (for himself, Mr. CARDIN, Mrs. BENTLEY, Mr. WYNN, Mr. WOLF,

Mr. MORAN, and Mrs. MORELLA) submitted the following concurrent resolution; which was referred to the Committee on Public Works and

Transportation

APRIL 29, 1993

Referred to the House Calendar and ordered to be printed

CONCURRENT RESOLUTION

Authorizing the use of the Capitol grounds for the Greater

Washington Soap Box Derby.

1 Resolved by the House of Representatives (the Senate

2 concurring),
2

•HCON 82 RH

1 SECTION 1. AUTHORIZATION OF SOAP BOX DERBY RACES

2 ON CAPITOL GROUNDS.

3 The Greater Washington Soap Box Derby Associa4 tion (hereinafter in this resolution referred to as the ‘‘As5 sociation’’) shall be permitted to sponsor a public event,

6 soap box derby races, on the Capitol grounds on July 17,

7 1993, or on such other date as the Speaker of the House

8 of Representatives and the President pro tempore of the

9 Senate may jointly designate.

10 SEC. 2. CONDITIONS.

11 The event to be carried out under this resolution shall

12 be free of admission charge to the public and arranged

13 not to interfere with the needs of Congress, under condi14 tions to be prescribed by the Architect of the Capitol and

15 the Capitol Police Board; except that the Association shall

16 assume full responsibility for all expenses and liabilities

17 incident to all activities associated with the event.

18 SEC. 3. STRUCTURES AND EQUIPMENT.

19 For the purposes of this resolution, the Association

20 is authorized to erect upon the Capitol grounds, subject

21 to the approval of the Architect of the Capitol, such stage,

22 sound amplification devices, and other related structures

23 and equipment as may be required for the event to be car24 ried out under this resolution.
3

•HCON 82 RH

1 SEC. 4. ADDITIONAL ARRANGEMENTS.

2 The Architect of the Capitol and the Capitol Police

3 Board are authorized to make any such additional ar4 rangements that may be required to carry out the event

5 under this resolution.
DEPARTMENT OF THE TREASURY

WASHINGTON, D.C.

 March 18, 2020 

Russell Vought 

Acting Director

Office of Management and Budget 

725 17th Street, NW 

Washington, DC 20503 

Dear Mr. Vought: 

In accordance with section 3(c) of Executive Order 13891, Promoting the Rule of Law Through 

Improved Agency Guidance Documents, dated October 9, 2019, this letter confirms our 

understanding that the Department of the Treasury has been granted an extension to comply with 

the requirements under sections 3(a) and (b) of the Order. 

The Department of the Treasury and its bureaus maintain a large number of guidance documents, 

and the project of reviewing, rescinding (as appropriate), and posting guidance requires 

significant information technology and other resources. An extension will enable the 

Department to complete the process directed by Executive Order 13891. 

As you know, the Department of the Treasury takes seriously the limits on use of subregulatory 

guidance. Prior to Executive Order 13891, in March 2019, the Department issued a Policy 

Statement on the Tax Regulatory Process in order to reaffirm its commitment to a tax guidance 

process that encourages public participation and transparency. That statement underscored that 

the Department’s subregulatory guidance is not intended to affect taxpayer rights or obligations 

independent from underlying statutes or regulations. The statement further recognized that, 

unlike statutes and regulations, subregulatory guidance does not have the force and effect of law.

The Department is committed to the principles set forth in Executive Order 13891. We look 

forward to continuing this work with you and your staff. 

 

 

 David F. Eisner 

Assistant Secretary for Management
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 Health and Human Services Health Resources and Services Administration
 Periodically, the Health Resources and Services Administration (HRSA) publishes abstracts of information collection requests under review by the Office of Management and Budget, in compliance with the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 (44 U.S.C. Chapter 35). To request a copy of the clearance requests submitted to OMB for review, call the HRSA Reports Clearance Office on (301)-443-1129. The following request has been submitted to the Office of Management and Budget for review under the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995: Proposed Project: Social Support for Homeless Mothers: Implications for Best Practices and Program Design—New The Health Care for the Homeless Clinicians' Network (HCHCN) of the National Health Care for the Homeless Council, Inc., through a cooperative agreement with the Bureau of Primary Health Care, Health Resources and Services Administration, proposes to conduct a study on the social support available to homeless mothers, most of whom are parenting children alone. The study will be of adult homeless women and will be conducted by convening focus groups and administering a questionnaire to focus group members. The study is designed to look at clients' life events, histories of violence, medical and physical illness, social support, children's needs, and services use. The results will help to define best practices as they relate to social support processes and enable HCH programs to offer the appropriate mix of supports necessary to help mothers transition into permanent housing. The participants will be recruited from ten sites of the national Health Care for the Homeless program. The estimated response burden is as follows: Type of respondent
Number of
                             respondents
Responses per
                             respondent
Hours per
                             response
Total hour burdenFocus Group (including survey)
100
1
1.5
150
 Written comments and recommendations concerning the proposed information collection should be sent within 30 days of this notice to: John Morrall, Human Resources and Housing Branch, Office of Management and Budget, New Executive Office Building, Room 10235, Washington, DC 20503. Dated: November 7, 2000. Jane M. Harrison, Director, Division of Policy Review and Coordination.


[FR Doc. 00-29107 Filed 11-14-00; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 4160-15-P
[Federal Register Volume 65, Number 221 (Wednesday, November 15, 2000)]
[Notices]
[Page 69044]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 00-29126]


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

DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR

Fish and Wildlife Service


Endangered Species Permit Application

AGENCY: Fish and Wildlife Service, Interior.

ACTION: Notice of Regional Director's Permit Amendment (TE-676811-1).

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

SUMMARY: The Regional Director, Region 2, U.S. Fish and Wildlife 
Service, Albuquerque, New Mexico (Applicant), requests authorization to 
amend U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service Endangered Species Permit TE-
676811, from September 1, 2000 through December 31, 2003. This 
amendment updates the Regional Director's permit to include species 
that have recently been listed. The permit allows ``take'' of species 
listed as threatened or endangered under the Endangered Species Act for 
scientific research and recovery purposes or the enhancement of 
propagation or survival for approved recovery activities. This notice 
is provided pursuant to section 10(a)(1)(A) of the Endangered Species 
Act of 1973, as amended (16 U.S.C. 1531, et seq.).

DATES: Written comments on this permit amendment must be received on or 
before December 15, 2000.

ADDRESSES: Written data or comments should be submitted to the Legal 
Instruments Examiner, Division of Endangered Species/Permits, 
Ecological Services, P.O. Box 1306, Albuquerque, New Mexico 87103. 
Please refer to the permit number for this application when submitting 
comments. All comments received, including names and addresses, will 
become part of the official administrative record and may be made 
available to the public.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (see 
address above). Please refer to the permit number for this amendment 
when requesting copies of documents. Documents and other associated 
information are available for review, subject to the requirements of 
the Privacy Act and Freedom of Information Act, by any party who 
submits a written request for a copy of such documents within 30 days 
of the date of publication of this notice, to the address above.

Bryan Arroyo,
Assistant Regional Director, Ecological Services, Region 2, Fish and 
Wildlife Service.
[FR Doc. 00-29126 Filed 11-14-00; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4510-55-U
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<ARTICLE> 5
<LEGEND>
THIS SCHEDULE CONTAINS SUMMARY FINANCIAL INFORMATION EXTRACTED FROM THE
CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL STATEMENTS OF ISS GROUP, INC. AS OF AND FOR THE TWELVE
MONTHS ENDED DECEMBER 31, 1999 AND IS QUALIFIED IN ITS ENTIRETY BY REFERENCE TO
SUCH FINANCIAL STATEMENTS.
</LEGEND>
<RESTATED>
<MULTIPLIER> 1,000

<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   YEAR
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          DEC-31-1999
<PERIOD-START>                             JAN-01-1999
<PERIOD-END>                               DEC-31-1999
<CASH>                                          70,090
<SECURITIES>                                    56,693
<RECEIVABLES>                                   27,782
<ALLOWANCES>                                       848
<INVENTORY>                                        473
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                               168,812
<PP&E>                                          16,210
<DEPRECIATION>                                   7,277
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                 184,845
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                           29,177
<BONDS>                                              0
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                            41
<OTHER-SE>                                     155,112
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                   184,845
<SALES>                                              0
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                               116,487
<CGS>                                                0
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                  113,787
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                   136
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                     0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                                   0
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                  8,466
<INCOME-TAX>                                       976
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                              7,490
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                     7,490
<EPS-BASIC>                                       0.19
<EPS-DILUTED>                                     0.17


</TABLE>
#### TALIAFERRO v. LAIRD.

No. 5805.

Court of Civil Appeals of Texas. Texarkana.

Feb. 27, 1941.

*132Hill & Bath, of Henderson, for appellant.

Norman M. West, of Henderson, for ap-pellee.

HALL, Justice.

This suit is on a note brought by ap-pellee against appellant and others in the County Court of Rusk County. Appellant, Taliaferro, denied execution of the note, alleging forgery; and, in the alternative, in event of judgment against him, sought judgment over and against his codefend-ants, the makers of said note. Trial was to a jury on special issues. The verdict was favorable to appellee and judgment was rendered accordingly.

The contention here by appellant is that the court improperly placed the burden of proof as to the execution of said note on appellant, when that burden, in law, rested with appellee. There is no merit in this contention. Traders & General Ins. Co. v. Huntsman, Tex.Civ.App., 125 S.W.2d 431; Eichlitz v. Allen, Tex.Civ.App., 131 S.W.2d 43, writ dismissed; Traders & General Ins. Co. v. Burns, Tex.Civ.App., 118 S.W.2d 391; Texas Employers Ins. Ass’n v. Watkins, Tex.Civ.App., 135 S.W.2d 296.

The judgment in all things is affirmed.
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF TEXAS

AMARILLO DIVISION

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA §

§

v. § 2:22-CR-00054-Z-BR

§

DOMINGO DELGADO (1) §

REPORT AND RECOMMENDATION

CONCERNING PLEA OF GUILTY

DOMINGO DELGADO (1), by consent, under authority of United States v. Dees, 125 F.3d 261 (5th Cir. 1997), 

has appeared before me pursuant to FED. R. CRIM. P. 11, and has entered a plea of guilty to Count 1 of the Indictment. After 

cautioning and examining DOMINGO DELGADO (1) under oath concerning each of the subjects mentioned in Rule 11, I 

determined that the guilty plea was knowledgeable and voluntary and that the offense charged is supported by an 

independent basis in fact containing each of the essential elements of such offense. I therefore recommend that the plea of 

guilty be accepted, and that DOMINGO DELGADO (1) be adjudged guilty of 21 U.S.C. §§ 841(a)(1) and 841(b)(1)(C) -

POSSESSION WITH INTENT TO DISTRIBUTE METHAMPHETAMINE and have sentence imposed accordingly. After 

being found guilty of the offense by the District Judge,

☒ The defendant is currently in custody and should be ordered to remain in custody.

☐ The defendant must be ordered detained pursuant to 18 U.S.C. § 3143(a)(1) unless the Court finds by clear and 

convincing evidence that the defendant is not likely to flee or pose a danger to any other person or the community 

if released.

☐ The Government does not oppose release.

☐ The defendant has been compliant with the current conditions of release.

☐ I find by clear and convincing evidence that the defendant is not likely to flee or pose a danger to any other 

person or the community if released and should therefore be released under § 3142(b) or (c).

☐ The Government opposes release.

☐ The defendant has not been compliant with the conditions of release.

☐ If the Court accepts this recommendation, this matter should be set for hearing upon motion of the 

Government.

☐ The defendant must be ordered detained pursuant to 18 U.S.C. § 3143(a)(2) unless (1)(a) the Court finds there is a 

substantial likelihood that a motion for acquittal or new trial will be granted, or (b) the Government has 

recommended that no sentence of imprisonment be imposed, or (c) exceptional circumstances are clearly shown 

under § 3145(c) why the defendant should not be detained, and (2) the Court finds by clear and convincing evidence 

that the defendant is not likely to flee or pose a danger to any other person or the community if released.

Date: October 17, 2022

______________________________________

UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE

NOTICE

Failure to file written objections to this Report and Recommendation within fourteen (14) days from the date of its 

service shall bar an aggrieved party from attacking such Report and Recommendation before the assigned United States 

District Judge. 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1)(B).

Case 2:22-cr-00054-Z-BR Document 38 Filed 10/17/22 Page 1 of 1 PageID 81