alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
**EXHIBIT 35.1**

 

**SERVICER COMPLIANCE STATEMENT**

**New Holland Credit Company, LLC**

 

The undersigned, a duly authorized officer of New Holland Credit Company, LLC (“NHCC”), as Servicer pursuant to the Sale and Servicing Agreement dated as of April 1, 2015 (as amended from time to time, the “Sale and Servicing Agreement”) by and among NHCC, CNH Capital Receivables LLC and CNH Equipment Trust 2015-B, does hereby certify that:

 

1.             NHCC is Servicer under the Sale and Servicing Agreement.

 

2.             The undersigned is duly authorized as required pursuant to the Sale and Servicing Agreement to execute and deliver this Certificate to the Indenture Trustee.

 

3.             This Certificate is delivered pursuant to Section 4.9(a) of the Sale and Servicing Agreement and Item 1123 of Regulation AB.

 

4.             A review of the Servicer’s activities during the 12 month period ending (and including) December 31, 2017 and of its performance under the Sale and Servicing Agreement has been made under my supervision.

 

5.             To the best of my knowledge, based on such review, the Servicer has fulfilled all of its obligations under the Sale and Servicing Agreement in all material respects throughout the 12 month period ending (and including) December 31, 2017.

 

6.             IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the undersigned has duly executed this Certificate this 27th day of March, 2018.

 

----

 
| March 27, 2018 |   |               |
|---------------------|--------|--------------------|
|                |   |               |
|                | By:    | /s/ Brett D. Davis |
|                | Name:  | Brett D. Davis     |
|                | Title: | President          |

 

----
Document Headings

                    Document headings vary by document type but may contain                    the following:                  
                -                       the agency or agencies that issued and signed a document                    
                -                       the number of the CFR title and the number of each part                      the document amends, proposes to amend, or is directly                      related to                    
                -                       the agency docket number / agency internal file number                    
                -                       the RIN which identifies each regulatory action listed in                      the Unified Agenda of Federal Regulatory and Deregulatory                      Actions                    

                    See the                                          Document Drafting Handbook                                        for more details.                  

###### Department of Commerce

###### International Trade Administration 

          - [A-570-836] 

# AGENCY:

Import Administration, International Trade Administration, Department of Commerce. 

# ACTION:

Notice of postponement of final results of antidumping duty new shipper review.

# EFFECTIVE DATE:

November 24, 2000. 

# FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

Robert Bolling or Rick Johnson, Office IX, DAS Group III, Import Administration, International Trade Administration, U.S. Department of Commerce, 14th Street and Constitution Avenue NW, Washington, DC 20230; telephone (202) 482-3434 and (202) 482-3818, respectively. 

# POSTPONEMENT OF FINAL RESULTS:

The Department of Commerce (“the Department”) is postponing the final results in the antidumping duty new shipper review of glycine from the People's Republic of China. The deadline for issuing the final results in this new shipper review is now January 24, 2001. 

                        On November 15, 1999, the Department initiated this new shipper administrative review. See                         *Initiation of New Shipper Administrative Review,*64 FR 61834 (November 15, 1999). The date for issuing the final results of the review was November 25, 2000. In order to provide interested parties an opportunity to comment on the issue of whether glycine and phenylglycine are comparable products, which arose late in the proceeding, we are extending the time limit for the final results of the new shipper administrative review of glycine from the People's Republic of China by 60 days, in accordance with section 751(a)(3) of the Tariff Act of 1930, as amended. See November 16, 2000 memorandum from Edward Yang to Joseph Spetrini:                         *Extension of Time Limit for the New Shipper Administrative Review of Glycine from the People's Republic of China.*                        The date for issuing the final results is now January 24, 2001.                     

Dated: November 16, 2000.

Joseph A. Spetrini, 

Deputy Assistant Secretary, AD/CVD Enforcement Group III.

[FR Doc. 00-30039 Filed 11-22-00; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 3510-DS-P
pbms_ex101.htm


Exhibit 10.1


 


CONSULTING AGREEMENT AMENDMENT


 


CONSULTING AGREEMENT AMENDMENT (this "Amendment"), effective as of July 1, 2015, by and among Pharma-Bio Serv, Inc., a Delaware corporation (the “Company”), Strategic Consultants International, LLC, a Puerto Rico registered Limited Liability Corporation (the “Consultant”), and Elizabeth Plaza, residing in Dorado, Puerto Rico (“Plaza”).


 


W I T N E S S E T H:


 


WHEREAS, the Company, Consultant and Plaza have entered into that certain Consulting Agreement, effective as of January 1, 2014, as such Consulting Agreement has been and may be amended, restated or otherwise modified from time to time, including, without limitation, that certain Consulting Agreement Amendment effective January 1, 2015 (the "Consulting Agreement").  Capitalized terms used but not defined herein shall have the meaning ascribed to such terms in the Consulting Agreement; and


 


WHEREAS, the Company, Consultant and Plaza desire to modify the Consulting Agreement.


 


NOW THEREFORE, for good and valuable consideration, the receipt and adequacy of which is hereby acknowledged, the parties hereto agree as follows:


 



	
1.  

	
Section 2 of the Consulting Agreement is amended and restated in its entirety as follows:







 


Services to Be Performed. Consultant will consult with the Board regarding the Company’s strategic initiatives, company services, management, operations and other matters as may be requested from time to time by the Board and will consult with senior management regarding the daily operations of the Company (the "Services"). Consultant shall report directly to the Board. The Consultant agrees to use its best efforts in the performance of the Services under this Agreement. The Consultant shall cooperate with the Company’s personnel and shall observe all Company rules, including specifically those relating to discrimination and harassment, security and confidentiality.


 



	
2.  

	
Except as expressly amended by the terms of this Amendment and all prior amendments to the Consulting Agreement, the terms of the Consulting Agreement shall remain in effect and are unchanged by this Amendment.







 


IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the parties have executed this Amendment in Dorado, Puerto Rico, this 7th day of July, 2015.


 




	
PHARMA-BIO SERV, INC.

	  	  	
STRATEGIC CONSULTANTS INTERNATIONAL LLC:

	  
	  	  	  	  	  
	
/s/ Pedro J. Lasanta

	  	  	
/s/ Elizabeth Plaza

	  
	
Name: Pedro J. Lasanta

	  	  	
Name: Elizabeth Plaza

	  
	
Title:  Chief Financial Officer and Vice President – Finance and Administration and Secretary

	  	  	
Title:  Elizabeth Plaza

	  
	 	 	 	 	 
	 	 	 	 	 
	 	 	 	 
/s/ Elizabeth Plaza

	 
	 	 	 	 
Elizabeth Plaza, individually
#### FORD v. STATE.

No. 26061.

Court of Criminal Appeals of Texas.

Nov. 26, 1952.

Ray Martin, Wichita Falls, for appellant.

George P. Blackburn, State’s Atty.,' of Austin, for the State.

DAVIDSON, Commissioner.

This is a conviction for aggravated assault upon an officer while in the discharge of his official duties, Sec. 1 of Art. 1147, Vernon’s Ann.P.C., with punishment assessed at a fine of $100.

Said Sec. 1 of Art. 1147, Vernon’s Ann. P.C., reads as follows:

> “An assault or battery becomes aggravated * * *

> “When committed upon an officer in the lawful discharge of the duties of his office, if it was known or declared to the offender that the. person assaulted was an officer' discharging an official duty.”

Knowledge or notice to the offender that the person assaulted is an officer discharging an official duty is -an essential element of the offense of aggravated assault, without which the. assault would not be more than a simple' assault.

*949The instant complaint and information contain no such allegation, and are therefore insufficient not only to charge aggravated assault but also to support the judgment entered, which carried a punishment' in excess of the maximum fixed to the offense of simple assault. The case of Slaughter v. State, 138 Tex.Cr.R. 85, 134 S.W.2d 285, and authorities there cited are direct authority for holding the information defective.

Inasmuch as the complaint and information are deemed sufficient to charge the offense of simple assault, the prosecution thereunder will not be ordered dismissed.

Accordingly, the judgment is reversed and the cause remanded.

Opinion approved by the court.
#### DILWORTH v. HUSKY.

No. 10925.

Court of Civil Appeals of Texas. San Antonio.

March 19, 1941.

*270L. B. Cooper, of Cotulla, for appellant.

H. H. Schuenemann, of Kenedy, for ap-pellee.

SMITH, Chief Justice.

This action was brought by Dallas Husky against J. C. Dilworth, Jr., to recover the amount of a promissory note for $500, with interest and attorney’s fees. Husky recovered as prayed for, in a trial without 'a jury, and Dilworth has appealed upon two assignments of error.

In his first assignment of error appellant asserts that the overwhelming preponderance of the evidence showed that the note sued on was given in payment of a gambling debt, which rendered it null and void as being against public policy. Appel-lee testified quite positively that the note was given for money appellant borrowed from him, and not in consideration of a gambling debt. Other witnesses testified to facts tending to show, and to authorize a finding, that the note grew out of- a gambling transaction, to wit, a game of dice. Appellant himself testified the note “was a settlement for what I owed in this dice game partly.” The result was a conflict in evidence upon that issue. The trial judge resolved the conflict in favor of ap-pellee. That finding is binding on this Court. We overrule appellant’s first assignment of error.

Appellant contends in his second assignment of error that the court erred in receiving the note in evidence, and rendering judgment for appellee thereon, “because such instrument is not a lawful note and creates no liability upon the part of appellant to pay appellee a sum certain in money.”

Copy of the note follows:

> “Note

> “$500.00 No. - Kenedy, Texas,

> Mar 9, 1938

> “On or before Mar 9, 1939, for value received, I promise to pay to the order of Dallas Husky at First Nichols Nat Bank Kenedy, Tex - Dollars, as follows, to-wit: $- cash, to be credited hereon and $- on. or before the - day of - 193— $- on or before the -day of-193-and-:until paid m full, with interest at 8% per annum after - until paid, together .with reasonable attorney’s fees if placed in the hands of an attorney for collection. It is further agreed that failure to pay any installment of this note when due shall at the option of the holder mature all installments. ' Each signer, endorser or surety hereby waives protest, notice of non-payment and diligence. This note is given as purchase money for - this day sold and delivered to —-chattel mortgage of even date on the above described property.

> “/s/ J. C. Dilworth, Jr.”

It seems to be conceded that the note was given in settlement of an obligation (whatever its origin or nature) for the sum of $500, and it appears to be so from undisputed and conclusive evidence, and this testimony, together with the figures, $500, and the other recitals in the instrument certainly suffice to establish the amount of the obligation to be $500. Garrett v. Interstate Bank, *79*Tex. 133, 15 S.W. 224.

No question is raised as to the sufficiency of the pleadings to support the judgment,, which must be affirmed.
DEPARTMENT OF THE TREASURY

 WASHINGTON, D.C.

Federal Insurance Office

Federal Advisory Committee on Insurance

Agenda

May 11, 2017

1:00 – 1:15 Welcome & Introductions 

 Steven Seitz, Deputy Director, Federal Insurance Office

U. S. Department of the Treasury

 Daniel Glaser, President & Chief Executive Officer

Marsh & McLennan Companies, Inc.

1:15 – 2:00 Discussion of the Cyber Insurance Market

 Presentation by Matthew McCabe, Senior Vice President, Assistant General Counsel 

for Cyber Policy

Marsh LLC

2:00 – 2:45 Discussion of the Effect of Technological Advances on Insurers’ Corporate Strategy

 Presentation by Marie Carr, Principal

PwCStrategy&

2:45 – 3:00 Break

3:00 – 4:30 Discussion of Insurer Infrastructure Investment Practices

 Presentations by:

 Milum Livesay, Vice President of Accounting Policy, TIAA

Chairman of the Infrastructure Investments Working Group, American Council of 

Life Insurers

 John A. Tanyeri, Managing Director, Head of Infrastructure & Project Finance

MetLife

 Dale Thatcher, former CFO of Selective Insurance Company of America, and 

special consultant to American Insurance Association

 Joshua Zwick, Partner, Oliver Wyman

4:30 – 4:45 New Business

4:45 Adjourn
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<ARTICLE>             9
<MULTIPLIER>          1,000
<CURRENCY>            U.S. DOLLARS

<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   3-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          DEC-31-2000
<PERIOD-START>                             JAN-01-2000
<PERIOD-END>                               MAR-31-2000
<EXCHANGE-RATE>                                      1
<CASH>                                           1,393
<INT-BEARING-DEPOSITS>                          19,602
<FED-FUNDS-SOLD>                                     0
<TRADING-ASSETS>                                     0
<INVESTMENTS-HELD-FOR-SALE>                     14,925
<INVESTMENTS-CARRYING>                             183
<INVESTMENTS-MARKET>                               192
<LOANS>                                        350,390
<ALLOWANCE>                                      2,043
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                 396,519
<DEPOSITS>                                     293,988
<SHORT-TERM>                                         0
<LIABILITIES-OTHER>                              3,381
<LONG-TERM>                                     44,000
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                        34,669
<OTHER-SE>                                      20,481
<TOTAL-LIABILITIES-AND-EQUITY>                 396,519
<INTEREST-LOAN>                                  7,139
<INTEREST-INVEST>                                  265
<INTEREST-OTHER>                                   159
<INTEREST-TOTAL>                                 7,563
<INTEREST-DEPOSIT>                               3,322
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                               3,931
<INTEREST-INCOME-NET>                            3,632
<LOAN-LOSSES>                                       23
<SECURITIES-GAINS>                                   0
<EXPENSE-OTHER>                                  1,711
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                  2,128
<INCOME-PRE-EXTRAORDINARY>                       1,393
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                     1,393
<EPS-BASIC>                                       0.34
<EPS-DILUTED>                                     0.33
<YIELD-ACTUAL>                                    3.82
<LOANS-NON>                                      1,316
<LOANS-PAST>                                       239
<LOANS-TROUBLED>                                     0
<LOANS-PROBLEM>                                      0
<ALLOWANCE-OPEN>                                 2,017
<CHARGE-OFFS>                                        7
<RECOVERIES>                                         0
<ALLOWANCE-CLOSE>                                2,043
<ALLOWANCE-DOMESTIC>                             2,043
<ALLOWANCE-FOREIGN>                                  0
<ALLOWANCE-UNALLOCATED>                              0


</TABLE>
```

[Congressional Bills 103th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[H. Con. Res. 91 Introduced in House (IH)]

103d CONGRESS
  1st Session
H. CON. RES. 91

Expressing the sense of the Congress that a commemorative postage stamp 
should be issued to honor Americans held as prisoners of war or listed 
                         as missing in action.

_______________________________________________________________________

                    IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

                             April 29, 1993

  Mr. Talent submitted the following concurrent resolution; which was 
       referred to the Committee on Post Office and Civil Service

_______________________________________________________________________

                         CONCURRENT RESOLUTION

 
Expressing the sense of the Congress that a commemorative postage stamp 
should be issued to honor Americans held as prisoners of war or listed 
                         as missing in action.

Whereas millions of Americans have proudly served their country in times of war 
        this century;
Whereas thousands of these Americans were captured by the enemy or listed as 
        missing in action;
Whereas many American prisoners of war were subjected to brutal and inhumane 
        treatment by their captors in violation of international codes and 
        customs for the treatment of prisoners of war, and many prisoners of war 
        died from this treatment;
Whereas there are over eighty-eight thousand missing American service personnel 
        from World War II, the Korean war, and the Vietnam era, and the 
        uncertainty surrounding their fates has caused their families to suffer 
        acute hardships; and
Whereas public awareness of the sacrifices that have been and may continue to be 
        made by Americans held as prisoners of war or listed as missing in 
        action and by their families is critical to advancing efforts to obtain 
        the return of missing American service personnel: Now, therefore, be it
    Resolved by the House of Representatives (the Senate concurring), 
That it is the sense of the Congress that the Citizens' Stamp Advisory 
Committee of the United States Postal Service should recommend to the 
Postmaster General that a postage stamp be issued honoring Americans 
held as prisoners of war or listed as missing in action.

                                 <all>
```
[Federal Register Volume 65, Number 227 (Friday, November 24, 2000)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 70508-70509]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 00-30012]


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

FEDERAL COMMUNICATIONS COMMISSION

47 CFR Part 73

[DA 00-2594, MM Docket No. 00-115; RM-9884]


Digital Television Broadcast Services; Redding, CA

AGENCY: Federal Communications Commission.

ACTION: Final rule.

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

SUMMARY: The Commission, at the request of California Broadcasting, 
Inc., licensee of station KRCR-TV, substitutes DTV channel 34 for 
station KRCR-TV's assigned DTV channel 14 at Redding, California. See 
65 FR 41036, July 3, 2000. DTV channel 34 can be allotted to Redding at 
coordinates (40-36-10 N. and 122-39-00 W.) with a power 166, HAAT of 
1106 meters, and with a DTV service population of 318 thousand. With 
this action, this proceeding is terminated.

DATES: Effective January 9, 2001.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Pam Blumenthal, Mass Media Bureau, 
(202) 418-1600.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: This is a synopsis of the Commission's 
Report and Order, MM Docket No. 00-115, adopted November 22, 2000, and 
released November 24, 2000. The full

[[Page 70509]]

text of this Commission decision is available for inspection and 
copying during normal business hours in the FCC Reference Center, 445 
12th Street, SW., Washington, DC. The complete text of this decision 
may also be purchased from the Commission's copy contractor, 
International Transcription Services, Inc., (202) 857-3800, 1231 20th 
Street, NW., Washington, DC 20036.

List of Subjects in 47 CFR Part 73

    Television, Digital television broadcasting.


    Part 73 of Title 47 of the Code of Federal Regulations is amended 
as follows:

PART 73--[AMENDED]

    1. The authority citation for Part 73 continues to read as follows:

    Authority: 47 U.S.C. 154, 303, 334, 336.


Sec. 73.622  [Amended]

    2. Section 73.622(b), the Table of Digital Television Allotments 
under California, is amended by removing DTV Channel 14 and adding DTV 
Channel 34 at Redding.

Federal Communications Commission.
Barbara A. Kreisman,
Chief, Video Services Division, Mass Media Bureau.
[FR Doc. 00-30012 Filed 11-22-00; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6712-01-P
* Pursuant to 5TH CIR. R. 47.5, the court has determined that

this opinion should not be published and is not precedent except

under the limited circumstances set forth in 5TH CIR. R. 47.5.4.

United States Court of Appeals

Fifth Circuit

FILED

October 24, 2006

Charles R. Fulbruge III

Clerk

United States Court of Appeals

Fifth Circuit

FILED

IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT

No. 05-51317

Conference Calendar

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,

Plaintiff-Appellee,

versus

REBECCA JEAN STEWART, also known as Rebecca Jean Stewart, also

known as Cynthia Stewart,

Defendant-Appellant.

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

Appeal from the United States District Court

for the Western District of Texas

USDC No. 1:94-CR-67-1

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

Before JOLLY, DeMOSS, and STEWART, Circuit Judges.

PER CURIAM:*

Rebecca Jean Stewart, federal prisoner # 34290-080, appeals

the district court’s denial of her motion for reduction of

sentence pursuant to 18 U.S.C. § 3582(c)(2). Section 3582(c)(2)

allows the court to modify a term of imprisonment “in the case of

a defendant who has been sentenced to a term of imprisonment

based on a sentencing range that has subsequently been lowered by

the sentencing commission.” § 3582(c)(2). 
No. 05-51317

-2-

Amendment 505, effective November 1, 1994, amended U.S.S.G.

§ 2D1.1 to establish level 38 as the highest category of the drug

quantity table. U.S.S.G., App. C, Amend. 505. Stewart was

sentenced after amendment 505 took effect. Her argument is thus

not one cognizable under § 3582. See United States v. Shaw, 30

F.3d 26, 29 (5th Cir. 1994).

The district court did not err in denying Stewart’s

§ 3582(c) motion. Because this issue had already been decided

adversely to Stewart in the denial of her prior § 3582(c) motion,

this appeal is dismissed as frivolous. See 5TH CIR. R. 42.2;

Howard v. King, 707 F.2d 215, 219-20 (5th Cir. 1983). Stewart is

warned that future challenges to her sentence under amendment 505

will invite the imposition of sanctions against her. Those

sanctions could include a monetary penalty and/or limitations on

her ability to challenge her sentence.

APPEAL DISMISSED; SANCTION WARNING ISSUED.