alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
##### 



SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION
 Washington, D.C. 20549
 FORM 8-K
 CURRENT REPORT
 Pursuant to Section 13 or 15(d)
of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934
 Date of Report (Date of earliest event reported): June 18, 2007
 COPANO ENERGY, L.L.C.
  Delaware
(State or Other Jurisdiction of 
Incorporation or Organization)
    
    001-32329
(Commission File Number)
    
    51-0411678
(I.R.S. Employer
Identification No.)
 2727 Allen Parkway, Suite 1200
Houston, Texas
(Address of Principal Executive Offices)
    
    77019
(Zip Code)
 (713) 621-9547
 Not Applicable.
   o
 o
 o
 o




---



##### 



Item 8.01 Other Events.
  Item 9.01 Financial Statements and Exhibits.
 
 Exhibit No.
    
    Description99.1
    
    Copano Energy, L.L.C. press release dated June 20, 2007
 2




---



##### 



SIGNATURES
  COPANO ENERGY, L.L.C.Date: June 21, 2007
    By:
    /s/ MATTHEW J. ASSIFFName:
    Matthew J. AssiffTitle:
    Senior Vice President and Chief Financial Officer 3




---



##### 



Exhibit Index
 Exhibit No.
    
    Description99.1
    
    Copano Energy, L.L.C. press release dated June 20, 2007
#### PALMER v. STATE.

No. 17898.

Court of Criminal Appeals of Texas.

Feb. 5, 1936.

Hartwell & Ryan and L. D. Hartwell, all of Greenville, for appellant.

Lloyd W. Davidson, State’s Atty., of Austin, for the State.

MORROW,- Presiding Judge.

The conviction is for murder; penalty assessed at confinement in the state penitentiary for not less than two nor more than ninety-nine years.

The indictment and other proceedings appear regular. The evidence heard by the jury and the trial court is not brought up for review. No brief is before this court, and nothing is perceived which would authorize interference with the judgment,

ft js therefore affirmed,
**EXHIBIT 31.1**

 

**CERTIFICATION**

 

I, Brett D. Davis, certify that:

 

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 CNH Equipment Trust 2012-C (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.             I am responsible for reviewing the activities performed by the servicer and based on my knowledge and the compliance review conducted in preparing 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.

 

In giving the certifications above, I have reasonably relied on information provided to me by the following unaffiliated parties: Deutsche Bank Trust Company Americas.

 

----

 
| March 30,   2015 |   |                                                             |
|-----------------------|--------|------------------------------------------------------------------|
|                  |   |                                                             |
|                  | By:    | /s/   Brett D. Davis                                             |
|                  | Name:  | Brett   D. Davis                                                 |
|                  | Title: | President   (senior officer in charge of the servicing function) |

 

----
1 The Honorable Catherine D. Perry, United States District Judge for the Eastern District of Missouri. 

## United States Court of Appeals FOR THE EIGHTH CIRCUIT

___________ No. 01-3402

___________ Nicole Stiles, * * Appellant, * * Appeal from the United States v. * District Court for the Eastern * District of Missouri. J.C. Penney Company, Inc., * * [UNPUBLISHED] Appellee. *

___________ Submitted: January 30, 2002 Filed: February 14, 2002

___________ Before LOKEN, BEAM, and RILEY, Circuit Judges.

___________ PER CURIAM. Nicole Stiles, previously a stylist in a J.C. Penney, Inc. (Penney) salon, appeals the district court’s 1 adverse grant of summary judgment in her employment discrimination and retaliation action against her former employer. Upon de novo review, see Brower v. Runyon , 178 F.3d 1002, 1005 (8th Cir. 1999), we conclude the district court properly granted summary judgment for the reasons explained in the court’s thorough, well-reasoned opinion. No genuine issues of material fact exist, and Penney is entitled to judgment as a matter of law.-2- Stiles’s disqualification from a makeover contest did not constitute an actionable adverse employment action under Title VII. See LaCroix v. Sears, Roebuck & Co. , 240 F.3d 688, 691-92 (8th Cir. 2001). Even assuming that Stiles stated a prima facie case of discrimination and retaliation with regard to her termination, she failed to show that Penney’s reason for firing her (mischarging or failing to charge for salon services) was pretextual. SeeHutson v. McDonnell Douglas Corp. , 63 F.3d 771, 781 (8th Cir. 1995) (stating that the employment discrimination laws do not authorize the review of an employer's business judgments that do not involve intentional discrimination). Accordingly, we affirm. See 8th Cir. R. 47B. A true copy.
Attest: CLERK, U.S. COURT OF APPEALS, EIGHTH CIRCUIT.
(logo)**Prudential**

**PrudentialAsset Resources**

PGIMReal Estate Finance

2100Ross Avenue, Suite 2500, Dallas TX 75201

Tel214-777-4500

 

Abusiness of Prudential Financial, Inc.

 

WellsFargo Bank, National Association

CommercialMortgage Servicing

MACD1086

550South Tryon Street, 14th Floor

Charlotte,North Carolina 28202

Attention:Asset Manager

 

 

RE:         **RBS 2012-C9**

Period: **January 1, 2018 to December 31,2018(the "Reporting Period")**

 

 

**Annual ComplianceStatement**

 

I, Joni Brown-Haas, in my capacity asPresident and Managing Director of Prudential Asset Resources, Inc. (the"Company") hereby certify with regard to the Company's role asSub-Servicer under the Sub-Servicing Agreement, (the "Agreement")dated as of October 1, 2012, pertaining to the above-referenced certificates,that:

 

       (i)         a review of theactivities of the Company under the Agreement  during the period notedabove, and  of the performance of the Company under the Agreement duringthe  relevant  period  has been made under my supervision, and

 

     (ii)        to thebest of my knowledge, based on such review, the Company has fulfilled all itsobligations under the Agreement throughout the relevant period, and

 

   (iii)         to thebest of my knowledge, based on such review, the Company has fulfilled itsobligations under its sub-servicing agreement in all material respects, and

 

    (iv)        theCompany has maintained an effective internal control system over the servicingof mortgage loans including the Loans serviced by the Company, and

 

     (v)         theCompany has not received any notice regarding qualification or challenging thestatus of the Lower Tier REMIC or the Upper Tier REMIC as a REMIC, from the IRSor any other governmental agency or body.

 

Effectiveas of February 22, 2019

 

 

/s/Joni Brown-Haas

JoniBrown-Haas

Presidentand Managing Director

PrudentialAsset Resources, Inc.
```

[Congressional Bills 106th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[S. 2714 Introduced in Senate (IS)]

106th CONGRESS
  2d Session
                                S. 2714

To amend the Internal Revenue Code of 1986 to provide a higher purchase 
 price limitation applicable to mortgage subsidy bonds based on median 
                             family income.

_______________________________________________________________________

                   IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES

                             June 13, 2000

Mrs. Lincoln (for herself, Mr. Hatch, Mr. Hutchinson, Mr. Jeffords, and 
  Mr. Breaux) introduced the following bill; which was read twice and 
                  referred to the Committee on Finance

_______________________________________________________________________

                                 A BILL

 
To amend the Internal Revenue Code of 1986 to provide a higher purchase 
 price limitation applicable to mortgage subsidy bonds based on median 
                             family income.

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

SECTION 1. INCREASE IN PURCHASE PRICE LIMITATION UNDER MORTGAGE SUBSIDY 
              BOND RULES BASED ON MEDIAN FAMILY INCOME.

    (a) In General.--Paragraph (1) of section 143(e) of the Internal 
Revenue Code of 1986 (relating to purchase price requirement) is 
amended to read as follows:
            ``(1) In general.--An issue meets the requirements of this 
        subsection only if the acquisition cost of each residence the 
        owner-financing of which is provided under the issue does not 
        exceed the greater of--
                    ``(A) 90 percent of the average area purchase price 
                applicable to the residence, or
                    ``(B) 3.5 times the applicable median family income 
                (as defined in subsection (f)(4)).''.
    (b) Effective Date.--The amendment made by this section shall apply 
to obligations issued after the date of the enactment of this Act.
                                 <all>
```
#                                                     Jamie J  Molaison                                            

###                         Scientific Associate                    

## Contact

molaisonjj@ornl.gov|865.235.4114

## Bio

I am the Scientific Associate for SNS BL-3, SNAP, which is the high pressure diffractometer. I’ve served in this role for the last 16 years, joining the SNAP team immediately after completing my MS in inorganic chemistry at the Univ. of Tennessee, where I employed neutron and X-ray scattering to study the structure and dynamics of superacids and superacidic solutions. In addition to overseeing daily beamline operations, I’m heavily involved in the development of pressure cells (mainly diamond anvil cells) and associated apparatuses.

## Publications

##   Neutron scattering study of polyamorphic THF·17(H2O) – toward a generalized picture of amorphous states and structures der...

May, 2023

##   Development of Large-Volume-Diamond Anvil Cell for Neutron Diffraction: The Neutron Diamond Anvil Cell Project at ORNL...

February, 2023

##   The mechanism behind SnO metallization under high pressure...

August, 2022

##   High pressure neutron diffraction on WAND2 with a Paris-Edinburgh press...

April, 2022

##   Magnetic structure of antiferromagnetic high-pressure phases of dysprosium...

March, 2022

### Pagination

-                Current page            1 
-                Page            2 
-                Page            3 
- …
-  Next page›› 
-  Last pageLast » 

View All

## Key Links

Curriculum Vitae

ORCID

## Organizations

User Facilities

Spallation Neutron Source

High Flux Isotope Reactor

Neutron Sciences Directorate

Oak Ridge National Laboratory				1 Bethel Valley Road				Oak Ridge, TN 37830

(+1) 865.576.7658

#### Connect With Us

                                          -  Partnerships 
                                          -  Visit 
                                          -  Contact 

#### News

                                          -  Newsroom 
                                          -  Newsletter Signup 
                                          -  Media Contacts 

#### Research

                                          -  Science Areas 
                                          -  User Facilities 
                                          -  Centers & Institutes 

#### Resources

                                          -  Internal Users 
                                          -  Directory 

                                          -  Privacy 
                                          -  Accessibility/508 
                                          -  Nondiscrimination/1557 
                                          -  Vulnerability Disclosure Program
6/26/2015 OFFICIAL NOTICE FROM COURT OF CRIMINAL APPEALS OF TEXAS P.O. BOX 12308, CAPITOL STATION, AUSTIN, TEXAS 78711

%J FILL COPY

OACase No. 12-14-00116-CR 

### Perez, Jose Diaz Tr. Ct. No. 18,373 PD-0728-15 

## On this day, this Courthas granted theAppellant's Pro Se motion foran extension oftime in which to file the Petition for Discretionary Review. The time to file the 

## petition has been extended to Friday, August 28, 2015. NO FURTHER EXTENSIONS WILL BE ENTERTAINED. NOTE: Petition For Discretionary Review mustbefiled withThe CourtofCriminal Appeals. Abel Acosta, Clerk

12TH COURT OF APPEALS CLERK CATHY LUSK 

### 1517W. FRONT, ROOM 354 

### TYLER, TX 75701
* DELIVERED VIA E-MAIL * -n O -* rJ> r* 1" H f 3" O x C O ~ Cor-v*-—-^ O <2-
o o r*5ri ^ c: C_>j > 33 *lwftj <B O o ~""i ^ • J> rm~\ J a not

* -J-
Exhibit
      32.1 - Chief Executive Officer Certification (Section 906)




**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 Adrenalina (the "Company") on Form
      10-Q
      for the period ending June 30, 2008 as filed with the U. S. Securities and
      Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the "Report"). I, Ilia Lekach, Chief
      Executive 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 and belief:




(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/
                Ilia LekachIlia
                LekachChief
                Executive Officer





**Date**  **August
      14, 2008**
1 IN THE COURT OF APPEALS OF THE STATE OF IDAHO

Docket No. 39192

STATE OF IDAHO

,

Plaintiff-Respondent

,

v.

KYLE DANIEL DAY

,

Defendant-Appellant

. ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) 2012 Unpublished Opinion No. 481

Filed: May 17, 2012

Stephen W. Kenyon, Clerk

THIS IS AN U NPUBLISHED

OPINION AND SHALL NOT

BE CITED AS AUTHORITY

Appeal from the District Court of the Fifth Judicial District, State of Idaho, Cassia County. Hon. Michael R. Crabtree , District Judge.

Judgment of conviction and unified sentence of twenty years, with a minimum period of confinement of five years , for rape
, affirmed

.

Sara B. Thomas, State Appellate Public Defender; Brian R. Dickson, Deputy Appellate Public Defender, Boise, for appellant.

Hon. Lawrence G. Wasden, Attorney General; Lori A. Fleming, Deputy Attorney
General, Boise, for respondent.

________________________________________________

Before GRATTON, Chief Judge; LANSING, Judge; and GUTIERREZ, Judge

PER CURIAM

Kyle Daniel Day ple ade d guilty to rape , Idaho Code § 19

- 1601(1) . The district court

sentenced Day to a unified term of twenty years, with a minimum period of confinement of five

years , to run concurrent with two unrelated sentences. Day appeals.

Sentencing is a matter for the trial court’s discretion. Both our standard of review and the

factors to be considered in evaluating the reasonableness of the sentence are well established and

need not be repeated here. See State v. Hernandez , 121 Idaho 114, 117

- 18, 822 P.2d 1011, 1014

-
15 (Ct. App. 1991); State v. Lopez , 106 Idaho 447, 449

- 51, 680 P.2d 869, 871

- 73 (Ct. App.

1984); State v. Toohill , 103 Idaho 565, 568, 650 P.2d 707, 710 (Ct. App. 1982). When reviewing2 th e length of a sentence, we consider the defendant’s entire sentence. State v. Oliver , 144 Idaho

722, 726, 170 P.3d 387, 391 (2007). Applying these standards, and having reviewed the record

in this case, we cannot say that the district court abused its di scretion.

Therefore, Day ’s judgment of conviction and sentence are affirmed.
# L_2011149EN.01000801.xml

| 8.6.2011 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | L 149/8 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

8.6.2011

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

L 149/8

---

COMMISSION IMPLEMENTING REGULATION (EU) No 553/2011

of 7 June 2011

establishing the standard import values for determining the entry price of certain fruit and vegetables

THE EUROPEAN COMMISSION,

Having regard to the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union,

Having regard to Council Regulation (EC) No 1234/2007 of 22 October 2007 establishing a common organisation of agricultural markets and on specific provisions for certain agricultural products (Single CMO Regulation) (1),

Having regard to Commission Regulation (EC) No 1580/2007 of 21 December 2007 laying down implementing rules for Council Regulations (EC) No 2200/96, (EC) No 2201/96 and (EC) No 1182/2007 in the fruit and vegetable sector (2), and in particular Article 138(1) thereof,

Whereas:

Regulation (EC) No 1580/2007 lays down, pursuant to the outcome of the Uruguay Round multilateral trade negotiations, the criteria whereby the Commission fixes the standard values for imports from third countries, in respect of the products and periods stipulated in Annex XV, Part A thereto,

HAS ADOPTED THIS REGULATION:

Article 1

The standard import values referred to in Article 138 of Regulation (EC) No 1580/2007 are fixed in the Annex hereto.

Article 2

This Regulation shall enter into force on 8 June 2011.

This Regulation shall be binding in its entirety and directly applicable in all Member States.

Done at Brussels, 7 June 2011.

For the Commission, On behalf of the President,

José Manuel SILVA RODRÍGUEZ

Director-General for Agriculture and Rural Development

---

(1)  
  OJ L 299, 16.11.2007, p. 1.

1

(2)  
  OJ L 350, 31.12.2007, p. 1.

2

---

ANNEX

Standard import values for determining the entry price of certain fruit and vegetables

| (EUR/100 kg) |
| --- |
| CN code | Third country code (1) | Standard import value |
| 0702 00 00 | TR | 110,0 |
| ZZ | 110,0 |
| 0707 00 05 | TR | 125,5 |
| ZZ | 125,5 |
| 0709 90 70 | TR | 118,7 |
| ZZ | 118,7 |
| 0709 90 80 | EC | 18,6 |
| ZZ | 18,6 |
| 0805 50 10 | AR | 78,9 |
| BR | 36,6 |
| TR | 63,4 |
| ZA | 79,4 |
| ZZ | 64,6 |
| 0808 10 80 | AR | 88,9 |
| BR | 75,9 |
| CA | 142,4 |
| CL | 88,5 |
| CN | 91,2 |
| NZ | 116,0 |
| US | 92,5 |
| UY | 50,2 |
| ZA | 95,4 |
| ZZ | 93,4 |
| 0809 10 00 | TR | 214,0 |
| ZZ | 214,0 |
| 0809 20 95 | TR | 392,6 |
| XS | 175,4 |
| ZZ | 284,0 |

(EUR/100 kg)

CN code

Third country code (1)

Standard import value

0702 00 00

TR

110,0

ZZ

110,0

0707 00 05

TR

125,5

ZZ

125,5

0709 90 70

TR

118,7

ZZ

118,7

0709 90 80

EC

18,6

ZZ

18,6

0805 50 10

AR

78,9

BR

36,6

TR

63,4

ZA

79,4

ZZ

64,6

0808 10 80

AR

88,9

BR

75,9

CA

142,4

CL

88,5

CN

91,2

NZ

116,0

US

92,5

UY

50,2

ZA

95,4

ZZ

93,4

0809 10 00

TR

214,0

ZZ

214,0

0809 20 95

TR

392,6

XS

175,4

ZZ

284,0

---

(1)  Nomenclature of countries laid down by Commission Regulation (EC) No 1833/2006 (OJ L 354, 14.12.2006, p. 19). Code ‘
  ZZ
  ’ stands for ‘of other origin’.

---
* 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.

IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT

 

No. 97-20985

Summary Calendar

 

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,

Plaintiff-Appellee,

versus

WISTING FIERRO RUIZ,

Defendant-Appellant.

- - - - - - - - - -

Appeal from the United States District Court

for the Southern District of Texas

USDC No. H-95-CV-1470

- - - - - - - - - -

September 18, 1998

Before POLITZ, Chief Judge, KING, and BARKSDALE, Circuit Judges.

PER CURIAM:*

Wisting Fierro Ruiz, federal prisoner No. 59534-079, appeals

the district court’s denial of his motion for entry of judgment

on a separate document in case No. CA-H-95-1470. We VACATE the

denial of this motion and REMAND to the district court for entry

of judgment on a separate document. See Hammack v. Baroid Corp.,

142 F.3d 266, 269-70 (5th Cir. 1998); Townsend v. Lucas, 745 F.2d

933, 933-34 (5th Cir. 1984). Ruiz has abandoned his argument

that the district court erred by denying his motion to set aside
No. 97-20985

-2-

the judgment in No. CA-H-95-1470. See Yohey v. Collins, 985 F.2d

222, 223-24 (5th Cir. 1993). Ruiz’ motion for recusal of the

district judge is DENIED. Liteky v. United States, 510 U.S. 540,

554-55 (1994). In light of the order of remand, we find it

unnecessary to address the other appellate arguments raised by

Ruiz. 

VACATED AND REMANDED IN PART; AFFIRMED IN PART; MOTION FOR

RECUSAL DENIED.