alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
First Union Mortgage Corporation
NC4755
Operational & Regulatory Risk Division
P. O. Box 900001
Raleigh, North Carolina 27675-9001
1100 Corporate Center Drive
Raleigh, North Carolina 27607-5066

(LOGO) FIRST UNION

Norwest Bank Minnesota, N.A.
11000 Broken Land Parkway
Columbia, MD 21044-3562
Attention: Master Servicing

RE: Officer's Certificate

Dear Master Servicer:

The undersigned Officer certifies the following for the 1999 fiscal year:

(A) I have reviewed the  activities and  performance of the Servicer  during the
    preceding  fiscal  year under the terms of the  Servicing  Agreement,  Trust
    Agreement,  Pooling and Servicing Agreement and/or Seller/Servicer Guide and
    to the best of these Officers' knowledge,  the Servicer has fulfilled all of
    its  duties,   responsibilities   or  obligations   under  these  Agreements
    throughout  such  year,  or if there has been a default  or  failure  of the
    servicer to perform any of such duties,  responsibilities or obligations,  a
    description of each default or failure and the nature and status thereof has
    been reported to Norwest Bank Minnesota, N.A.;

(B) I have  confirmed  that the Servicer is currently an approved  FNMA or FHLMC
    servicer in good standing;

(C) I have confirmed that the Fidelity Bond, the Errors and Omissions  Insurance
    Policy  and any  other  bonds  required  under  the  terms of the  Servicing
    Agreement,   Trust  Agreement,   Pooling  and  Servicing   Agreement  and/or
    Seller/Servicer Guide
    are in full force and effect;

(D) All premiums for each Hazard  Insurance  Policy,  Flood Insurance Policy (if
    applicable) and Primary  Mortgage  Insurance  Policy (if  applicable),  with
    respect  to each  Mortgaged  Property,  have  been  paid  and  that all such
    insurance policies are in full force and effect;

(E) All real  estate  taxes,  governmental  assessments  and any other  expenses
    accrued and due, that if not paid could result in a lien or  encumbrance  on
    any  Mortgaged  Property,  have been paid,  or if any such costs or expenses
    have not been paid with respect to any  Mortgaged  Property,  the reason for
    the non-payment has been reported to Norwest Bank Minnesota, N.A.,

(F) All Custodial Accounts have been reconciled and are properly funded; and

(G) All annual  reports of  Foreclosure  and  Abandonment  of Mortgage  Property
    required per section  6050H,  6050J and 6050P of the Internal  Revenue Code,
    respectively, have been prepared and filed.


Certified By:
Joesph F. DeDominios
Officer
Vice President
Title
3/30/2000
Date
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<PAGE>

<ARTICLE> 5
<LEGEND>
THE BALANCE SHEET AND STATEMENT OF OPERATIONS OF UROLOGIX FOR THE THREE MONTH
PERIOD ENDING SEPTEMBER 3, 1999
</LEGEND>

<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   3-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          JUN-30-2000
<PERIOD-START>                             JUL-01-1999
<PERIOD-END>                               SEP-30-1999
<CASH>                                         681,473
<SECURITIES>                                25,414,535
<RECEIVABLES>                                1,027,394
<ALLOWANCES>                                   221,934
<INVENTORY>                                  1,979,096
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                            30,042,258
<PP&E>                                       4,973,143
<DEPRECIATION>                               2,856,740
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                              36,472,286
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                        3,013,338
<BONDS>                                              0
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                       114,856
<OTHER-SE>                                  33,344,092
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                36,472,286
<SALES>                                      1,910,488
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                             1,910,488
<CGS>                                        1,152,806
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                1,152,806
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                             3,162,509
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                     0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                                   0
<INCOME-PRETAX>                            (2,031,158)
<INCOME-TAX>                                         0
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                        (2,031,158)
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                               (2,031,158)
<EPS-BASIC>                                      (.18)
<EPS-DILUTED>                                    (.18)


</TABLE>
I 

118TH CONGRESS 

1ST SESSION H. R. 6134 

To amend the Higher Education Act of 1965 to require certain institutions 

of higher education to provide notice of tuition levels for students. 

IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES 

NOVEMBER 1, 2023 

Mr. CARTWRIGHT (for himself, Mr. BISHOP of Georgia, Mr. PETERS, Ms. 

SCHAKOWSKY, Mr. VARGAS, Mr. FITZPATRICK, Mr. CONNOLLY, Mr. 

SWALWELL, and Mr. TONKO) introduced the following bill; which was referred to the Committee on Education and the Workforce 

A BILL 

To amend the Higher Education Act of 1965 to require 

certain institutions of higher education to provide notice 

of tuition levels for students. 

1 Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representa2 tives of the United States of America in Congress assembled, 

3 SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE. 

4 This Act may be cited as the ‘‘Truth in Tuition Act 

5 of 2023’’. 

6 SEC. 2. NOTICE OF TUITION LEVELS. 

7 (a) AMENDMENT.—Section 487(a) of the Higher 

8 Education Act of 1965 (20 U.S.C. 1094(a)) is amended 

9 by adding at the end the following new paragraph: 


kjohnson on DSK7ZCZBW3PROD with $$_JOB
2 

•HR 6134 IH

1 ‘‘(30)(A) The institution will provide to each 

2 student admitted to an undergraduate or graduate 

3 program— 

4 ‘‘(i) a multi-year tuition and fee schedule; 

5 or 

6 ‘‘(ii) a single-year tuition and fee schedule, 

7 and a nonbinding, multi-year estimate of net 

8 costs after all financial aid is awarded, assum9 ing constant family and student income, assets, 

10 and relevant circumstances. 

11 ‘‘(B) Multi-year schedules and estimates re12 quired by subparagraph (A)— 

13 ‘‘(i) may include a percentage or dollar in14 crease or decrease of any size the institution de15 termines to be appropriate from one year to the 

16 next; and 

17 ‘‘(ii) shall indicate, on a year-by-year basis, 

18 costs for the normal duration of such student’s 

19 undergraduate or graduate program. 

20 ‘‘(C) Institutions that elect a single-year tuition 

21 and fee schedule under subparagraph (A)(ii) shall 

22 include with each multi-year estimate provided under 

23 such subparagraph the average deviation, in percent24 age terms, between previous year estimates and ac25 tual net costs for students at their institution. 


kjohnson on DSK7ZCZBW3PROD with $$_JOB
3 

•HR 6134 IH

1 ‘‘(D) The Secretary shall waive the require2 ments of subparagraph (A) if the institution dem3 onstrates to the Secretary that the requirements of 

4 subparagraph (A) are not practicable because of the 

5 occurrence of one or more events causing the institu6 tion severe economic distress, dramatic reduction of 

7 State or Federal aid, or any other circumstance de8 termined to be appropriate by the Secretary.’’. 

9 (b) EFFECTIVE DATE.—The amendment made by 

10 subsection (a) shall be effective on the date that is 120 

11 days after the date of enactment of this Act. 

Æ 


kjohnson on DSK7ZCZBW3PROD with $$_JOB
EXHIBIT
31.2
 
 RULE
13a-14(a) CERTIFICATION
 
 I, Jane
Morlok, certify that:
 
 1.       
     I have reviewed this annual report on Form
10-KSB/A of Breda Telephone Corp.;
 
 2.           
Based on my knowledge, this report does 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, the financial statements, and other financial
information included in this report, fairly present in all material respects the
financial condition, results of operations and cash flows of the small business
issuer as of, and for, the periods presented in this report;
 
 4.           
 The small business issuer's other certifying officer(s) and I are
responsible for establishing and maintaining disclosure controls and procedures
(as defined in Exchange Act Rules 13a-15(e) and 15d-15(e)) for the small
business issuer and have:
 
 (a)           Designed
such disclosure controls and procedures, or caused such disclosure controls and
procedures to be designed under our supervision, to ensure that material
information relating to the small business issuer, including its consolidated
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 small business issuer's disclosure controls and
procedures and presented in this report our conclusions about the effectiveness
of the disclosure controls and procedures, as of the end of the period covered
by this report based on such evaluation; and
 
 (c)           Disclosed
in this report any change in the small business issuer's internal control over
financial reporting that occurred during the small business issuer's most recent
fiscal quarter (the small business issuer's fourth fiscal quarter in the case of
an annual report) that has materially affected, or is reasonably likely to
materially affect, the small business issuer's internal control over financial
reporting; and
 
 5.           
 The small business issuer's other certifying officer(s) and I have
disclosed, based on our most recent evaluation of internal control over
financial reporting, to the small business issuer's auditors and the audit
committee of the small business issuer's board of directors (or persons
performing the equivalent functions):
 
 (a)           All
significant deficiencies and material weaknesses in the design or operation of
internal control over financial reporting which are reasonably likely to
adversely affect the small business issuer's ability to record, process,
summarize and report financial information; and
 
 (b)           Any
fraud, whether or not material, that involves management or other employees who
have a significant role in the small business issuer's internal control over
financial reporting.
 
 Date:  December
14, 2009.
 
 /s/ Jane MorlokJane
      Morlok, Chief Financial
Officer







E-2
#### Brandy M. BELTZ, Plaintiff-Appellant, v. Nancy A. BERRYHILL, Acting Commissioner Social Security, Defendant-Appellee.

No. 14-35474

United States Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit.

Submitted February 28, 2017 *

Filed March 02, 2017

Eitan Kassel Yanich, Olympia, WA, for Plaintiff-Appellant

Helen J. Brunner, Esquire, Assistant U.S. Attorney, Kerry Keefe, Esquire, DOJ-Office of the U.S. Attorney, Seattle, WA, Lisa Goldoftas, Assistant Regional Counsel, Seattle, WA, for Defendant-Ap-pellee

Before: PREGERSON, LEAVY, and OWENS, Circuit Judges.

*

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

MEMORANDUM **

Brandy Beltz appeals the district court’s judgment affirming the Commissioner of Social Security’s denial of Beltz’s application for supplemental security income under Title XVI of the Social Security Act. We have jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. § 1291, and we review de novo. *Molina v. Astrue,*674 F.3d 1104, 1110 (9th Cir. 2012). *577We reverse the district court’s decision and remand to the administrative law judge (ALJ) for consideration of the new medical evidence submitted to the Appeals Council.

The district court erred in concluding that the new medical evidence was not sufficient to call into question the propriety of the ALJ’s ultimate non-disability determination. The new medical evidence calls into question whether, considering the record as a whole, the Commissioner’s decision is supported by substantial evidence. *See Ghanim v. Colvin,*763 F.3d 1154, 1160 (9th Cir. 2014) (“[I]n conducting our review, we must consider the entire record as a whole and may not affirm simply by isolating a specific quantum of supporting evidence.” (internal quotation marks and citations omitted)).

At each step in the sequential evaluation, the ALJ evaluated and relied on the medical evidence that was in the record in at the time the unfavorable decision was issued in Beltz’s case. A review of the entire administrative record, including the new medical evidence, calls into question the sufficiency of the evidence to support the ALJ’s determinations at steps three through five, and introduces new conflicts in the evidence that require a re-assessment of the credibility of Beltz’s symptom testimony and the statements of lay witnesses. *See Taylor v. Comm’r of Soc. Sec. Admin.,*659 F.3d 1228, 1235 (9th Cir. 2011). Because the new medical evidence sheds additional light on the nature, extent, and persistence of Beltz’s alleged disability, we remand to permit the ALJ to account for the new evidence in conducting each- step in the five-step sequential analysis. *Id.*at 1233.

REVERSED AND REMANDED.

**

 This disposition is not appropriate for publication and is not precedent except as provided by Ninth Circuit Rule 36-3.
<PAGE>

                                                                     Exhibit 23

            CONSENT OF INDEPENDENT REGISTERED PUBLIC ACCOUNTING FIRM

The Board of Directors
NaviSite, Inc.:

      We consent to the incorporation by reference in the registration statement
Nos. 333-136652, 333-123114 and 333-117543 on Forms S-3, 333-132677, 333-117545,
333-111165, 333-89987, 333-67786, 333-67774, 333-56454, 333-56452 and 333-56478
on Forms S-8 of NaviSite, Inc. of our report dated October 11, 2006, with
respect to the consolidated balance sheets of NaviSite, Inc. and subsidiaries as
of July 31, 2006 and 2005, and the related consolidated statements of
operations, changes in stockholders' equity (deficit) and cash flows for each of
the years in the three-year period ended July 31, 2006, and our report dated
October 11, 2006 relating to the consolidated financial statement schedule,
which reports appear in the July 31, 2006 Annual Report on Form 10-K of
NaviSite, Inc.

      As discussed in Note 2 to the consolidated financial statements, effective
August 1, 2005, the Company adopted the provisions of Statement of Financial
Accounting Standards No. 123(R), Share-Based Payment.

/s/ KPMG LLP
Boston, Massachusetts
October 26, 2006
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<ARTICLE> 9
<MULTIPLIER> 1,000
       
<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   9-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          DEC-31-1997
<PERIOD-START>                             JAN-01-1997
<PERIOD-END>                               SEP-30-1997
<CASH>                                           4,309
<INT-BEARING-DEPOSITS>                               0
<FED-FUNDS-SOLD>                                     0
<TRADING-ASSETS>                                     0
<INVESTMENTS-HELD-FOR-SALE>                     19,249
<INVESTMENTS-CARRYING>                               0
<INVESTMENTS-MARKET>                                 0
<LOANS>                                        130,010
<ALLOWANCE>                                      1,764
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                 158,679
<DEPOSITS>                                     129,702
<SHORT-TERM>                                     5,753
<LIABILITIES-OTHER>                              1,458
<LONG-TERM>                                      8,799
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                         6,020
<OTHER-SE>                                       6,947
<TOTAL-LIABILITIES-AND-EQUITY>                 158,679
<INTEREST-LOAN>                                  8,968
<INTEREST-INVEST>                                  878
<INTEREST-OTHER>                                     0
<INTEREST-TOTAL>                                 9,846
<INTEREST-DEPOSIT>                               4,006
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                               4,293
<INTEREST-INCOME-NET>                            5,553
<LOAN-LOSSES>                                      465
<SECURITIES-GAINS>                                  (9)
<EXPENSE-OTHER>                                  5,215
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                  2,592
<INCOME-PRE-EXTRAORDINARY>                       1,646
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                     1,646
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                     2.89
<EPS-DILUTED>                                     2.89
<YIELD-ACTUAL>                                    9.72
<LOANS-NON>                                        136
<LOANS-PAST>                                       479
<LOANS-TROUBLED>                                    81
<LOANS-PROBLEM>                                  1,356
<ALLOWANCE-OPEN>                                 1,544
<CHARGE-OFFS>                                      267
<RECOVERIES>                                        22
<ALLOWANCE-CLOSE>                                1,764
<ALLOWANCE-DOMESTIC>                             1,024
<ALLOWANCE-FOREIGN>                                  0
<ALLOWANCE-UNALLOCATED>                            740
        

</TABLE>
ATTACHMENT HEADER SHEET

Attachment Number 007

Attachment Name

Attachment 7 PbNbTiZrO Structure

Associated PMN Section Number

Pt.I, Sec.B, le. (Chem 5)

Does not contain CBI

Report Number

CONSi 10317786855351
Attachment 7 PbNbTiZrO Structure REPORT# - CONS 110317786855351

Niobium PZT

Trade names: PZT-5A; LM-51

Niobium PZT is processed in 25 kg batches, weighing and batching is 2 brs/batch,

powder break-up and calcine is 4 hrslbatch (exposure time); final mill and spray

dry is 2 hrs/batch. Total process exposure time is 8 hours/batch, maximum 100

batches/year. See process flow chart for detailed process.

Niobium PZT has an infinite repeating crystal structure of the ABO3 Perovskite

structure where A=Pb, B=Nb, Zr and Ti;

Formula is:

Pb (Zr.51 5. 5Ti.4 q_45 )x Nbt-x~03 where the Zr + Ti mole ratio =1.00 and x= .94-.98

0

Constituents:

Lead Oxide 68 wt%

Zirconium dioxide 17-19 wt %

Titanium dioxide 10- 1 2Wt%

Niobium pentoxide 1-3 wt%
#### UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff-Appellee v. Lizette LUNA, Defendant-Appellant

No. 17-40311 Summary Calendar

United States Court of Appeals, Fifth Circuit.

Filed October 20, 2017

Paula Camille Offenhauser, Assistant U.S. Attorney, Carmen Castillo Mitchell, Assistant U.S. Attorney, U.S. Attorney’s Office, Southern District of Texas, Houston, TX, for Plaintiff-Appellee

Marjorie A. Meyers, Federal Public Defender, Michael Lance Herman, Assistant Federal Public Defender, Scott Andrew Martin, Assistant Federal Public Defender, Federal Public Defender’s Office, Southern District of Texas, Houston, TX, for Defendant-Appellant

Before BENAVIDES, CLEMENT, and GRAVES, Circuit Judges.

PER CURIAM: *

Lizette Luna pleaded guilty to possession with intent to distribute approximately 291.5 kilograms of marihuana in violation of 21 U.S.C. § 841(a)(1) and (b)(1)(B). The district court imposed a sentence of 48 months of imprisonment, which was an upward variance from the advisory guideline range of 30 to 37 months.

Luna argues that her sentence is substantively unreasonable and greater than necessary to achieve the goals of 18 U.S.C. § 3553(a). She claims that in varying from the advisory guideline range, the district court placed too much weight on the fact that she was out on bond for another drug offense when she committed this offense and an upward variance was substantively unreasonable because she continued her criminal activity only after drug traffickers threatened to harm her and her family. We review the substantive reasonableness of Luna’s sentence under a deferential abuse-of-discretion standard. *Gall v. United States,*552 U.S. 38, 46, 51, 128 S.Ct. 586, 169 L.Ed.2d 445 (2007).

The district court was aware of Luna’s claim that she agreed to do a “second run” of marihuana only after being threatened by drug traffickers. Although Luna “may disagree with how the district court balanced the § 3553(a) factors, [her] argument that these factors should have been weighed differently is not a sufficient ground for reversal." *United States v. Malone,*828 F.3d 331, 342 (5th Cir.), *cert. denied,*— U.S.-, 137 S.Ct. 526, 196 L.Ed.2d 408 (2016).

The judgment of the district court is AFFIRMED.

*

 Pursuant to 5th Cm. 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 Cm. R. 47.5.4.
#### Karin Negron et al., Plaintiffs, *v.*Mal Cooper, Defendant.

City Court of Long Beach,

June 21, 1973.

*Karin Negron*and *James Negron,*plaintiffs in person.

Vincent A. Pirrone, J.

The above-entitled small claims action having come on for trial before me on June 21, 1973, and the defendant having failed to appear, this matter was marked *“*Inquest Clerk ”, and after such inquest, judgment is awarded in favor of the plaintiffs in the sum of $400, plus disbursements.

The summons in this action was duly forwarded by the court to the defendant at his place of business by registered mail, return receipt requested, and was returned by the post office marked “ unclaimed ”. The returned envelope further reflects notations to the effect that the postal service, prior to its return of the summons, left at least two notices indicating that a registered letter in the name of the defendant was in its possession, and would be made available to the defendant upon request.

Accordingly, this court determines that the defendant is evading service, and pursuant to the authority of *Lewandowski*v. *348
      *Goldberg*(27 Misc 2d 941), and following rule 28 (subd. [f], par. [2]) Nassau County District Court Rules (22 NYCRR 3840.28 [f] [2], this court obtained jurisdiction, and judgment is granted in behalf of the plaintiffs.
#### UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff-Appellee v. Jose Toribio GALVAN-GONZALEZ, Defendant-Appellant

No. 16-40221 Conference Calendar

United States Court of Appeals, Fifth Circuit.

Date Filed: 12/20/2016

Renata Ann Gowie, Assistant U.S. Attorney, U.S. Attorney’s Office, Southern District of Texas, Houston, TX, for Plaintiff-Appellee

Jose Toribio Galvan-Gonzalez, Pro Se

Before DENNIS, PRADO, and OWEN, Circuit Judges.

PER CURIAM: *

The attorney appointed to represent Jose Toribio Galvan-Gonzalez has moved for leave to withdraw and has filed a brief in accordance with *Anders v. California,*386 U.S. 738, 87 S.Ct. 1396, 18 L.Ed.2d 493 (1967), and *United States v. Flores,*632 F.3d 229 (5th Cir. 2011). Galvan-Gonzalez has not filed a response. We have reviewed counsel’s brief and the relevant portions of the record reflected therein. We concur with counsel’s assessment that the appeal presents no nonfrivolous issue for appellate review. Accordingly, counsel’s motion for leave to withdraw is GRANTED, counsel is excused from further responsibilities herein, and the APPEAL IS DISMISSED. *See*5th Cir. R. 42.2.

*

 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.
Marcus Rashad ALLEN, Appellant/Petitioner(s), v. STATE of Florida, Appellee/Respondent(s).

CASE NO.: 2D17-2585

District Court of Appeal of Florida, Second District.

December 06, 2017

**DECISION WITHOUT PUBLISHED OPINION**

Dismissed.