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

Officer

V.P.
Title

3/30/00
Date
July 6, 2011 

Mr. Paul Gretch 

Director 

Office 

des transports 

du Canada 

Office of International Aviation 

U.S. Department of Transportation 

X40, suite 6402 

400 7th Street S.W. 

Washington, D.C. 20590 

Dear Mr. Gretch 

Reference: OST 2006-24269 

Canadian 

Transportation 

Agency 

File: M48201U5-19 

This letter confirms that the Canadian Transportation Agency considers applications by US air 

carriers for approval to operate charters to and from Canada in accordance with the provisions of 

the Air Transport Agreement Between Canada and the United States of America, signed March 

12, 2007 and, for those charters not specified in the Annex to that Agreement, on the basis of 

comity and reciprocity. 

~llince ~~ 

MacDonald Manager International Agreements 

cc Robert Ready, ANA 

Marc Rioux, ACEA.. 

Ottawa (Ontario) K1A ON9 

www.otc.gc.ca 

Ottawa Ontario K1A ON9 

www.cta.gc.ca 

Canada
COURT OF APPEALS

EIGHTH DISTRICT OF TEXAS

EL PASO, TEXAS

EDUARDO BELLAS JR

,

Appellant

,

v

.

VAQUERO PERMIAN GATHERING

LLC

,

Appellee. **§**

**§**

**§**

**§**

**§**

**§**

**§** No. 08

- 2 1

- 00 2 13

- CV

Appeal from the

143 rd District Court

of Ward C ounty, Texas

(TC# 19

- 05

- 25029

- CVW )

O R D E R

On January 7, 2022 , this Court issued an order for mediation referral. The order required

the parties to confer and attempt to agree upon a qualified mediator within twenty days of the date

of the order and notify the Court of the mediator’s name and contact information. On January 27,

2022, the appellee informed this Court the parties failed to agree on a qualified mediator. On that

same day, the appellant filed a motion to extend time to choose a mediator. The Court DENIES

the motion to extend time to choose a mediator

.

Therefore, the Court ORDERS the appeal to continue. The suspension of the appellate

timetable is lifted and the Reporter’s Record shall be filed in this Court on or before April 7, 2022.

IT IS SO ORDERED this 8 th d ay of March , 20 2 2

.

PER CURIAM

Before Rodriguez , C.J., Palafox and Alley , JJ.
Exhibit 10.2





 Exhibit 10.2 

WHEREAS, in compliance with the Bipartisan Budget Act of 2018, each of the 401(k) Plans has been amended, or is in the process of being
amended, to eliminate the 6-Month Suspension Requirement, effective January 1, 2019; and 

AMENDMENT TO THE 
 NEWELL
RUBBERMAID INC. 
 2008 DEFERRED COMPENSATION PLAN 

WHEREAS, NBI sponsors and maintains the Newell Rubbermaid Inc. 2008 Deferred Compensation Plan (the “2008 DCP”),
which, in part, allows eligible employees of NBI and certain of its affiliates to defer a portion of their base salary and incentive compensation; and 

WHEREAS, under Section 8.1 of the 2008 DCP, the BAC may amend the 2008 DCP at any time to ensure that the 2008 DCP complies with
the requirements of Section 409A of the Code, provided that such amendment does not materially increase the benefit costs of the 2008 DCP to NBI; and 

WHEREAS, under Section 3.5(b)(ii) of the 2008 DCP, to comply with the 6-Month Suspension
Requirement, the BAC may, in its sole discretion, cancel a participant’s deferral election under the 2008 DCP due to a hardship distribution to the participant from any one or more 401(k) Plans; and 

WHEREAS, to ensure that the 2008 DCP complies with Section 409A of the Code, in connection with the elimination of the 6-Month Suspension Requirement under the 401(k) Plans, the BAC now desires to amend the 2008 DCP so that a participant’s deferral election under the 2008 DCP cannot be cancelled for any period on or after
January 1, 2019, on account of a hardship distribution. 
 NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, that the BAC hereby amends the
2008 DCP as follows, effective January 1, 2019: 
 Section 3.5(b)(ii) of the 2008 DCP is amended to read, in its entirety, as
follows: 
 (ii) The Committee may, in its sole discretion, cancel a Participant’s Deferral Election due to an
Unforeseeable Emergency. 
 [Signature lines follow on the next page] 












 This document may be executed in any number of counterparts, each of which shall be deemed to be an
original, and all such counterparts together, shall constitute one and the same instrument. 
 Dated this
19th day of December, 2018 
  

					
	/s/ Michael Rickheim	 		 	/s/ Elizabeth Moore
	Michael Rickheim	 		 	Elizabeth Moore


					
			
	/s/ Randy Michel	 		 	  

	Randy Michel
#### UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff-Appellee v. Jorge BACIO-GONZALES, also known as Jorge Bacio-Gonzalez, Defendant-Appellant

No. 16-40663 Summary Calendar

United States Court of Appeals, Fifth Circuit.

Filed June 1, 2017

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, Philip G. Gallagher, Michael Lance Herman, Assistant Federal Public Defenders, Federal Public Defender’s. Office, Southern District of Texas, Houston, TX, for Defendant-Appellant

Before JOLLY, SMITH, and GRAVES, Circuit Judges.

PER CURIAM: *

Jorge Bacio-Gonzales appeals the sentence imposed following his guilty plea conviction for reentry of a deported alien. He contends that the district court erred in increasing his offense level pursuant to U.S.S.G. § 2L1.2(b)(l)(A)(ii) (2015) based on his prior Texas felony convictions for burglary of a habitation under Texas Penal Code § 30.02(a). Bacio-Gonzales argues, under *Mathis v. United States,*— U.S. —, 136 S.Ct. 2243, 195 L.Ed.2d 604 (2016); that the Texas burglary statute is not divisible and that not every violation of § 30.02(a) qualifies as a crime of violence under § 2L1.2(b)(l)(A)(ii) (2015).

The Government has filed an opposed motion for summary affirmance asserting that Bacio-Gonzales’s arguments are foreclosed by our recent decision in *United States v. Uribe,*838 F.3d 667 (5th Cir. 2016), *cert. denied,*— U.S. —, 137 S.Ct. 1359, 197 L.Ed.2d 542 (2017). In the alternative, the Government requests an extension of time in which to file a brief on the merits.

The Government is correct that *Uribe*forecloses Bacio-Gonzales’s *Mathis*argument. *See Uribe,*838 F.3d at 669-71. Accordingly, the motion for summary affir-mance is GRANTED, the alternative motion for an extension of time to file a brief is DENIED, and the judgment of the district court is AFFIRMED.

*

 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

Court of Appeals

Second Appellate District of Texas

at Fort Worth

No. 02-21-00075-CR

JEFFERY LEE MANNS, Appellant

V.

THE STATE OF TEXAS

§

§

§

§

§

On Appeal from the 396th District 

Court

of Tarrant County (1213452D)

July 8, 2021

Per Curiam Memorandum Opinion

(nfp)

JUDGMENT

This court has considered the record on appeal in this case and holds that the 

appeal should be dismissed. It is ordered that the appeal is dismissed for want of 

jurisdiction.

SECOND DISTRICT COURT OF APPEALS 

PER CURIAM
Exhibit 23  Consent of Ernst & Young LLP

Consent Of Independent Auditors

We consent to the  incorporation  by  reference in the  Registration  Statements
listed below of our report  dated July 21, 1999,  except for Note 3, as to which
the date is May 12, 2000, with respect to the consolidated  financial statements
of  America  Online,  Inc.  for the  year  ended  June  30,  1999,  as  amended,
incorporated by reference as Exhibit 99 to this Form 10-Q/A.

1)  No. 33-46607  15)  No. 333-07603  29)  No. 333-74523     43)  No. 333-79489
2)  No. 33-48447  16)  No. 333-22027  30)  No. 333-74525     44)  No. 333-79797
3)  No. 33-78066  17)  No. 333-46633  31)  No. 333-74527     45)  No. 333-82123
4)  No. 33-86392  18)  No. 333-46635  32)  No. 333-74529     46)  No. 333-83409
5)  No. 33-86394  19)  No. 333-46637  33)  No. 333-74531     47)  No. 333-85337
6)  No. 33-86396  20)  No. 333-57143  34)  No. 333-74533     48)  No. 333-85343
7)  No. 33-90174  21)  No. 333-57153  35)  No. 333-74535     49)  No. 333-85345
8)  No. 33-91050  22)  No. 333-60623  36)  No. 333-74537     50)  No. 333-94253
9)  No. 33-94000  23)  No. 333-60625  37)  No. 333-74539     51)  No. 333-94255
10) No. 33-94004  24)  No. 333-68605  38)  No. 333-74541     52)  No. 333-94259
11) No. 333-00416 25)  No. 333-68631  39)  No. 333-74543     53)  No. 333-95013
12) No. 333-02460 26)  No. 333-68599  40)  No. 333-76725
13) No. 333-07163 27)  No. 333-72499  41)  No. 333-76733
14) No. 333-07559 28)  No. 333-74521  42)  No. 333-76743


                                                       /s/ Ernst & Young LLP


McLean, Virginia
May 12, 2000

<PAGE>
Shermykael Juanius JENKINS, Appellant, v. Deandra Leeann GOODMAN, Appellee.

Case No. 2D17-877

District Court of Appeal of Florida, Second District.

Opinion filed May 25, 2018

Shermykael Juanius Jenkins, pro se.

No appearance by Deandra LeeAnn Goodman.

SILBERMAN, Judge.

*1199After a final judgment of injunction for protection against domestic violence was entered against him, Shermykael Juanius Jenkins filed a pro se "Motion for Rehearing or Appeal" which the trial court treated as Jenkins' notice of appeal. In his motion for rehearing or appeal and in this court, Jenkins alleged grounds that do not establish reversible error but may provide for relief from judgment under Florida Family Law Rule of Procedure 12.540(b). Rather than relinquish jurisdiction for the trial court to consider those grounds, we affirm without prejudice to Jenkins filing a motion for relief from judgment under rule 12.540(b) within thirty days of mandate. *See**Armbruster v. Amber Int'l Corp.*, 416 So.2d 1220, 1221 (Fla. 3d DCA 1982) ; *Glatstein v. City of Miami*, 391 So.2d 297, 299 (Fla. 3d DCA 1980).

CASANUEVA and SLEET, JJ., Concur.
STATE of Louisiana v. Glynn HAWKINS and Alex Lewis

NO. 2017-KO-1280

Supreme Court of Louisiana.

May 18, 2018

Denied.
J.L.F. v. MADISON COUNTY DEPARTMENT OF HUMAN RESOURCES

2160317

Court of Civil Appeals of Alabama.

June 13, 2017

**DECISION WITHOUT PUBLISHED OPINION**

Transferred to Madison Cir. Ct. for trial de novo pursuant to Rule 28(D), Ala. R.Juv.P.
STATE of Louisiana v. Devin HOLMES

NO. 2017-K-1755

Supreme Court of Louisiana.

May 18, 2018

Denied.
David F. DAMERAU, Appellant, v. Steven H. FRIEDMAN, Appellee.

No. 4D18-0396

District Court of Appeal of Florida, Fourth District.

[May 24, 2018]

Cole M. Gale, Fort Lauderdale, for appellant.

Douglas A. Kahle and Lloyd R. Schwed of Schwed Kahle & Kress, PA, Palm Beach Gardens, for appellee.

Per Curiam.

*Affirmed.*

Damoorgian, Forst and Kuntz, JJ., concur.
EX PARTE John David YOUNG

CR-16-0552

Court of Criminal Appeals of Alabama.

May 15, 2017

**DECISION WITHOUT PUBLISHED OPINION**

Mand. pet. denied.
Frank E. POLO, Appellant(s)/Petitioner(s), v. Merlin HERNANDEZ, Appellee(s)/Respondent(s),

CASE NO.: 3D17-2526

District Court of Appeal of Florida, Third District.

NOVEMBER 28, 2017

Following review of the petition for writ of certiorari, it is ordered that said petition is hereby denied.

SALTER, EMAS and LOGUE, JJ., concur.
Joseph E. WOODS v. Rita H. WOODS

2160034

Court of Civil Appeals of Alabama.

April 14, 2017

**DECISION WITHOUT PUBLISHED OPINION**

Affirmed.
# Fourth Co **urt of Appeals San Antonio, Texas** 

December 1, 2021

No. 04

- 21

- 00460

- CR

Andon Joseph SAMBRANO

, Appellant

v.

The STATE of Texas, Appellee

From the 452nd District Court

, Kimble County, Texas Trial Court No. 2020

- DCR

- 1025 Honorable Robert Rey Hofmann , Jud ge Presiding



### ORDER

Sandra Jackson's Second Notification of Late Reporter's Record is this date NOTED. The record is due December 31, 2021 , with no further extensions absent extenuating circumstances.

_________________________________ Rebeca C. Martinez, Chief Justice

IN WITNESS WHEREOF, I have hereunto set my hand and a ffixed the seal of the said court on this 1st day of December, 2021

.

___________________________________ MICHAEL A. CRUZ

, Clerk of Court
* Pursuant to 5TH CIR. R. 47.5, the court has determined that this

opinion should not be published and is not precedent except for the limited

circumstances set forth in 5TH CIR. R. 47.5.4.

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT

No. 99-60348

Summary Calendar

QUINTIN L. MILTON

Plaintiff-Appellant,

versus

JACKSON PUBLIC SCHOOL DISTRICT

Defendant-Appellee.

Appeal from the United States District Court

for the Southern District of Mississippi, Jackson Division

District Court No. 3:98-CV-467

June 8, 2000

Before JOLLY, JONES, and BENAVIDES, Circuit Judges.

PER CURIAM:*

Quintin Milton sued his former employer, the Jackson Public

School District, alleging he was discharged based on his national origin

in violation of Title VII, 42 U.S.C.A. §2000e et seq., and 42 U.S.C.A.

§1981. Milton also asserted state law claims of negligent and

intentional infliction of emotional distress. The district court

granted summary judgment in favor of Jackson Public Schools with regard
2

to Milton’s federal discrimination claims and declined to exercise

pendent jurisdiction over the remaining state law claims.

Having reviewed the parties’ briefs, the district court’s

comprehensive opinion, and pertinent sections of the record, this Court

agrees that Milton was neither able to establish a prima facie case of

discrimination nor adduce sufficient evidence to support a reasonable

inference that national origin was a determinative factor in his

termination. This Court therefore affirms for essentially the same

reasons stated by the district court.

AFFIRMED.
[Federal Register Volume 87, Number 23 (Thursday, February 3, 2022)]
[Notices]
[Page 6140]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2022-02274]


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

DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE

International Trade Administration

[A-580-874]


Certain Steel Nails From the Republic of Korea: Final Results of 
Antidumping Duty Administrative Review; 2019-2020; Correction

AGENCY: Enforcement and Compliance, International Trade Administration, 
Department of Commerce.

ACTION: Notice; correction.

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

SUMMARY: The Department of Commerce (Commerce) published notice in the 
Federal Register of January 20, 2022, in which Commerce announced the 
final results of the 2019-2020 administrative review of the antidumping 
duty (AD) order on certain steel nails from the Republic of Korea 
(Korea). This notice was a duplicate for a notice published on January 
19, 2022, in which Commerce announced the final results of the 2019-
2020 administrative review of the AD order on certain steel nails from 
Korea.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Eva Kim, AD/CVD Operations, Office IV, 
Enforcement and Compliance, International Trade Administration, U.S. 
Department of Commerce, 1401 Constitution Avenue NW, Washington, DC 
20230; telephone: (202) 482-8283.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

Correction

    In the Federal Register of January 20, 2022, the FR Doc 2022-01038 
is a duplicate to the notice published on January 19, 2022, FR Doc 
2022-00957.

Background

    On January 20, 2022, Commerce published in the Federal Register the 
final results of the 2019-2020 administrative reviews of the AD order 
on certain steel nails from Korea.\1\ This was a duplicate notice from 
the January 19, 2022, notice published in the Federal Register 
announcing the final results of the 2019-2020 administrative reviews of 
the AD order on certain steel nails from Korea.\2\ The controlling 
notice is the original January 19, 2022, notice. The inadvertent 
duplicate publication of this notice does not constitute 
redetermination of this proceeding. This notice serves as a 
notification of, and correction to, this inadvertent duplicate 
publication.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \1\ See Certain Steel Nails From the Republic of Korea: Final 
Results of Antidumping Duty Administrative Review; 2019-2020, 87 FR 
3079 (January 20, 2022).
    \2\ See Certain Steel Nails From the Republic of Korea: Final 
Results of Antidumping Duty Administrative Review: 2019-2020, 87 FR 
2763 (January 19, 2022).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

Notification to Interested Parties

    This notice is issued and published in accordance with section 
751(a) of the Tariff Act of 1930, as amended.

    Dated: January 28, 2022.
Lisa W. Wang,
Assistant Secretary for Enforcement and Compliance.
[FR Doc. 2022-02274 Filed 2-2-22; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 3510-DS-P
```

[Congressional Bills 117th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[H.R. 1523 Introduced in House (IH)]

<DOC>

117th CONGRESS
  1st Session
                                H. R. 1523

    To amend the Fair Labor Standards Act of 1938 to harmonize the 
              definition of employee with the common law.

_______________________________________________________________________

                    IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

                             March 2, 2021

Ms. Stefanik (for herself, Mrs. Steel, Mr. Norman, Mr. Gaetz, Mr. Cole, 
Mrs. Miller of West Virginia, Mrs. Rodgers of Washington, and Mr. Hern) 
 introduced the following bill; which was referred to the Committee on 
                          Education and Labor

_______________________________________________________________________

                                 A BILL

 
    To amend the Fair Labor Standards Act of 1938 to harmonize the 
              definition of employee with the common law.

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

SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE.

    This Act may be cited as the ``Modern Worker Empowerment Act''.

SEC. 2. AMENDMENTS TO THE FAIR LABOR STANDARDS ACT OF 1938 TO HARMONIZE 
              THE DEFINITION OF EMPLOYEE.

    (a) Definition of Employee.--Section 3(e)(1) of the Fair Labor 
Standards Act of 1938 (29 U.S.C. 203(e)(1)) is amended by inserting 
before the period the following: ``, as determined under the usual 
common law rules''.
    (b) Definition of Employ.--Section 3(g) of the Fair Labor Standards 
Act of 1938 (29 U.S.C. 203(g)) is amended by inserting ``an employee'' 
after ``permit''.
                                 <all>
```
Nicholas CAMPBELL, Appellant, v. STATE of Florida, Appellee.

Case No. 5D17-1429

District Court of Appeal of Florida, Fifth District.

Decision filed April 24, 2018

James S. Purdy, Public Defender, and Glendon G. Gordon, Jr, Assistant Public Defender, Daytona Beach, for Appellant.

Pamela Jo Bondi, Attorney General, Tallahassee, and Kaylee D. Tatman, Assistant Attorney General, Daytona Beach, for Appellee.

PER CURIAM.

AFFIRMED.

TORPY, EVANDER and EDWARDS, JJ., concur.
METRO TREATMENT OF ALABAMA, LP, d/b/a Sumter County Treatment Center v. STATE HEALTH PLANNING AND DEVELOPMENT AGENCY (SHPDA)

2160342

Court of Civil Appeals of Alabama.

April 13, 2017

**DECISION WITHOUT PUBLISHED OPINION**

Dismissed.
#### Ivory L. SIMON, Plaintiff-Appellant v. James LEBLANC; Terry L. Terrell, Defendants-Appellees

No. 16-30858 Summary Calendar

United States Court of Appeals, Fifth Circuit.

Filed July 21, 2017

*261Ivory L. Simon, Pro Se

Samuel Bryan Gabb, Plauche, Smith <& Nieset, L.L.C., Lake Charles, LA, for Defendants-Appellees

Before DAVIS, CLEMENT, and COSTA, Circuit Judges.

PER CURIAM: *

Ivory L. Simon, Louisiana prisoner # 505008, appeals the district court’s grant of the appellees’ motion for summary judgment in this 42 U.S.C. § 1983 suit, which raised claims concerning deliberate indifference to serious medical needs. Simon argues that these defendants are liable to him under the theory of respondeat superi- or and because they denied his grievances.

We review the grant of a motion for summary judgment de novo. *Xtreme Lashes, LLC v. Xtended Beauty, Inc.,*576 F.3d 221, 226 (5th Cir. 2009). Summary judgment “shall” be entered “if the movant shows that there is no genuine dispute as to any material fact and the movant is entitled to judgment as a matter of law.” Fed. R. Civ. P. 56(a).

“Under section 1983, supervisory officials are not liable for the actions of subordinates on any theory of vicarious liability.” *Thompkins v. Belt,*828 F.2d 298, 303 (5th Cir. 1987). Accordingly, Simon’s argument that the appellees are responsible for the wrongs perpetrated upon him because they had supervisory authority is unavailing. *See id.*Because a prisoner does not have a constitutional right to have his grievances resolved to his liking, Simon’s argument that the appellees are liable to him because they denied his grievances likewise fails. *See Geiger v. Jowers,*404 F.3d 371, 373-74 (5th Cir. 2005).

AFFIRMED.

*

 Pursuant to 5th Cíe. 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.