alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
**Exhibit 35.2**

** **

**WASHINGTON MUTUAL MORTGAGE SECURITIES CORP.**

** **

**OFFICER’S CERTIFICATEANNUAL STATEMENT OF COMPLIANCE**

 

            I, Barbara Campbell, an authorized officer of Washington Mutual Mortgage Securities Corp. (the “AdministrativeAgent”), do hereby certify to Long Beach Securities Corp. (the “Depositor”) and Washington Mutual Bank (the “Servicer”), pursuant to the Administrative Agent Agreement dated as of April 1, 2006 (the “ServicingAgreement”) by and between Long Beach Mortgage Company, as servicer and predecessor in interest to the Servicer, and the Administrative Agent the following with respect to Long Beach Mortgage Loan Trust 2006-10 for the 2006 fiscal year  (the“Relevant Year”):

 

1.        A review of the activities of the Servicer during the Relevant Year and of performance under the ServicingAgreement has been made under my supervision.

2.        To the best of my knowledge, based on such review, the Servicer has fulfilled all of its obligations under theServicing Agreement in all material respects throughout the Relevant Year.

 

Dated as of February 22, 2007.

 
|  

__/s/ Barbara Campbell________________

Name:  Barbara Campbell

Title:    First Vice President |
|-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|
NOT FOR PUBLICATION

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

 FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT

WILLIAM M. BRYSON, Jr.,

 Petitioner - Appellant,

 v.

UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF

JUSTICE; et al.,

 Respondents - Appellees.

No. 12-17106

D.C. No. 1:12-cv-00322-AWI

MEMORANDUM*

Appeal from the United States District Court

for the Eastern District of California

Anthony W. Ishii, District Judge, Presiding

Submitted May 13, 2014** 

Before: CLIFTON, BEA, and WATFORD, Circuit Judges.

Federal prisoner William M. Bryson appeals pro se from the dismissal of his

petition for a writ of audita querela requesting a refund of a $100 special

FILED

MAY 22 2014

MOLLY C. DWYER, CLERK

U.S. COURT OF APPEALS

 * This disposition is not appropriate for publication and is not precedent

except as provided by 9th Cir. R. 36-3.

 ** The panel unanimously concludes this case is suitable for decision

without oral argument. See Fed. R. App. P. 34(a)(2).
assessment imposed as part of his sentence for money laundering.1

 We have

jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. § 1291. We review de novo whether a federal

prisoner may file a petition for a writ of audita querela, see United States v. ValdezPacheco, 237 F.3d 1077, 1079 (9th Cir. 2001) (per curiam), and may affirm on any

ground supported by the record, see Holley v. Yarborough, 568 F.3d 1091, 1098

(9th Cir. 2009).

Bryson contends that he is entitled to a refund because there is insufficient

evidence to support his money laundering conviction. Dismissal of the petition

was proper because these arguments are cognizable in a 28 U.S.C. § 2255 motion. 

See Valdez-Pacheco, 237 F.3d at 1079-80 (a writ of audita querela is only available

to fill in “gaps” in postconviction remedies). That Bryson has already sought

habeas relief and is now precluded from filing a section 2255 motion absent

authorization from the Court of Appeals does not make a writ of audita querela

available to him. See id. at 1080.

We do not consider Bryson’s additional arguments. See Padgett v. Wright,

587 F.3d 983, 985 n.2 (9th Cir. 2009) (per curiam) (this court does not consider

1

 The district court’s order erroneously states that Bryson filed a habeas

petition under 28 U.S.C. § 2241. However, the magistrate judge’s findings and

recommendation, which were adopted in full, accurately describe and analyze

Bryson’s filing as a petition for a writ of audita querela. 

2 12-17106
arguments raised for the first time on appeal or in the reply brief).

Bryson’s motion to strike the answering brief is denied.

AFFIRMED.

3 12-17106
INNOVATIVE MEDICAL SERVICES                                           EXHIBIT 11
COMPUTATION OF EARNINGS PER COMMON SHARE
FOR THE SIX MONTHS ENDED JANUARY 31, 1999 AND 2000



                                                     For the Six Months Ended
                                                           January 31
                                                     2000              1999
                                                ------------------------------

   Shares outstanding                              4,552,242        4,149,476
                                                ------------       -----------

   Weighted average shares outstanding             4,451,372        3,949,293
   Stock Options                                   1,452,500        1,306,250
   Warrants                                        1,798,125        1,798,125
                                                ------------       -----------
     Total weighted average shares outstanding     7,701,997        7,053,668
                                                ============       ===========

   Net Income (Loss)                            $   187,341        $  294,143
                                                ============       ===========
   Basic Net Earnings (Loss) per share          $      0.04        $     0.07
                                                ============       ===========
   Diluted Net Earnings (Loss) per share        $      0.02        $     0.04
                                                ============       ===========
EXHIBIT 11

                                                       For the Six Months Ended
                                                              January 31
                                                              ----------
                                                         2001           2000
                                                      ----------    -----------


Shares outstanding                                     6,504,351      4,552,242
                                                                    -----------

Weighted average shares outstanding                    6,145,403      4,451,372
Stock Options                                          1,412,675      1,452,500
Warrants                                               1,797,500      1,798,125
                                                                    -----------
   Total weighted average shares outstanding           9,355,578      7,701,997
                                                                    ===========

Net income (loss) before cumulative
   change in accounting principle                    $  (934,449)   $  (264,966)

Cumulative effect of change
   in accounting principle                                    --         79,896


Net income (loss)                                    $  (934,449)   $  (185,070)
                                                     ===========    ===========

Basic Net Earnings (Loss) per share
  Net income (loss) per common share before
     change in accounting principle                  $     (0.15)    $    (0.06)
  Cumulative effect of change
     in accounting principle                                   -           0.02
                                                     -----------     ----------
   Net income (loss) per common share                $     (0.15)    $    (0.04)
                                                     ===========     ==========

Diluted Net Earnings (Loss) per share
   Net income (loss) per common share before change  $     (0.15)    $     0.01
       in accounting principal
   Cumulative effect of change
       in accounting principle                                 -           0.01
                                                     -----------     ----------
   Net income (loss) per common share                $     (0.15)    $     0.02
                                                     ===========     ==========
|       (i)  | the accompanying report on Form 10-Q of the Company for the fiscal quarter ended October 31, 2011 (the “Report”) fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) or Section 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934; and |
|-----------------------------------------------|--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|

|       (ii)      | the information contained in the Report fairly presents, in all material respects, the financial condition and results of operations of the Company. |
|------------------------------------------------------------------------|------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|

|                               |   |                                                                                |
|------------------------------------|--------|-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|
| Date:  December 15, 2011 | By:    | /s/ Craig A. Johnson                                                                |   |
|                               |   | Craig A. JohnsonChief Financial Officer(Principal Financial and Accounting Officer) |

----
Summary of Meetings 

With Escanaba Paper Company

Following the publication on August 6, 2012 of the notice of proposed rulemaking regarding 

Michigan’s regional haze plan, EPA held two meetings with the Escanaba Paper Company:

August 27, 2012 call 

Escanaba Paper attendees: Todd Schmidt, Dave Holland (consultant to Escanaba Paper)

EPA attendees: Douglas Aburano, John Summerhays, 

Michigan attendees: Bob Irvine, Asad Khan

Synopsis: The primary topic of discussion was the form and magnitude of the limit for 

Boiler 8. EPA had proposed a limit reflecting a weighted average (weighted according to 

fuel use) of a 0.26 pounds per million British Thermal Units (lb/MMBTU) for gas and 0.50 

lb/MMBTU for oil. Escanaba Paper requested a fixed limit irrespective of fuel used. and 

urged that this limit be between 0.35 and .040 lb/MMBTU, preferably 0.375 lb/MMBTU.

August 30, 2012 call

Escanaba Paper attendees: Todd Schmidt, Dave Holland (consultant to Escanaba Paper)

EPA attendees: Douglas Aburano, John Summerhays, 

Michigan attendees: Bob Irvine, Asad Khan

Synopsis: Again, the primary topic of discussion was the form and magnitude of the 

limit for Boiler 8. EPA proposed to promulgate a fixed limit of 0.35 lb/MMBTU, and 

Escanaba Paper agreed.

November 2, 2012 call

Escanaba Paper attendees: Todd Schmidt, Dave Holland (consultant to Escanaba Paper)

EPA attendees: Douglas Aburano, John Summerhays, 

Michigan attendees: Bob Irvine, Asad Khan
Synopsis: EPA and Escanaba Paper discussed details of the codification of requirements 

for Escanaba Paper, discussing comments that Escanaba provided by email on November 1, 

2012. EPA committed to use the company’s formal identity as Escanaba Paper Company 

where appropriate. EPA committed to clarify that the statement in the notice of proposed 

rulemaking that it viewed the Boiler 9 limit as requiring overfire air did not mean that this 

particular compliance approach was mandated. Escanaba Paper asked that the codification 

expressly allow alternative test methods for the Boiler 9 limit; EPA stated that the intent was 

for Escanaba Paper, in the context of demonstrating compliance, to have flexibility to use 

alternate test methods that could be shown to the regulatory agency to provide equivalent, 

adequate demonstration of compliance. EPA indicated that this might be done by stating that 

Method 7 is the reference method. Escanaba Paper sought a delayed compliance date, but 

EPA stated that it found no justification for delaying the compliance date for a limit that is 

already being met.
Comment Info: ================= General Comment:John Thomas (L.E.K.)
```

[Congressional Bills 104th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[S. Con. Res. 63 Enrolled Bill (ENR)]

        S.Con.Res.63
                                         Agreed to June 12, 1996        

                       One Hundred Fourth Congress

                                 of the

                        United States of America

                          AT THE SECOND SESSION

         Begun and held at the City of Washington on Wednesday,
   the third day of January, one thousand nine hundred and ninety-six

                          Concurrent Resolution

    Resolved by the Senate (the House of Representatives concurring),

SECTION 1. USE OF DISASTER RESERVE FOR ASSISTANCE TO LIVESTOCK 
              PRODUCERS.

    In light of the prolonged drought and other adverse weather 
conditions existing in certain areas of the United States, the 
Secretary of Agriculture should promptly dispose of all commodities in 
the disaster reserve maintained under section 813 of the Agricultural 
Act of 1970 (7 U.S.C. 1427a) to relieve the distress of livestock 
producers whose ability to maintain livestock is adversely affected by 
disaster conditions, such as prolonged drought or flooding.
  Attest:

                                               Secretary of the Senate.

  Attest:

                                 Clerk of the House of Representatives.
```
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.                  

###### Federal Election Commission

# TIME AND DATE:

Tuesday, March 8, 2022 at 10:00 a.m. and its continuation at the conclusion of the open meeting on March 10, 2022.

# PLACE:

 1050 First Street NE, Washington, DC and virtual (this meeting will be a hybrid meeting).

# STATUS:

 This meeting will be closed to the public.

# MATTERS TO BE CONSIDERED:

 Compliance matters pursuant to 52 U.S.C. 30109.

Matters concerning participation in civil actions or proceedings or arbitration.

* * * * *

# CONTACT PERSON FOR MORE INFORMATION: 

Judith Ingram, Press Officer, Telephone: (202) 694-1220.

*Authority:*                         Government in the Sunshine Act, 5 U.S.C. 552b.                    

Vicktoria J. Allen,

Acting Deputy Secretary of the Commission.

[FR Doc. 2022-04558 Filed 3-1-22; 11:15 am]

BILLING CODE 6715-01-P
#### Carnell D. MCELROY, Sr., Plaintiff-Appellant, v. Harold CLARKE, Director of Virginia Department of Corrections; Earl Barksdale, Warden of Red Onion State Prison; Miss Baker, Institutional Programs Manager of Red Onion State Prison; Jeffrey C. Artrip, Chief Housing Unit Manager of Red Onion State Prison; Lieutenant Roy A. Sykes, Correctional Officer of Red Onion State Prison, Defendants-Appellees.

No. 17-6806

United States Court of Appeals, Fourth Circuit.

Submitted: November 21, 2017

Decided: November 27, 2017

Carnell Dion McElroy, Appellant Pro Se. Laura Haeberle Cahill, OFFICE OF THE ATTORNEY GENERAL OF VIRGINIA, John Michael Parsons, Assistant Attorney General, Richmond, Virginia, for Appellees.

Before WYNN and THACKER, Circuit Judges, and HAMILTON, Senior Circuit Judge.

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.

PER CURIAM:

Carnell D. McElroy, Sr., appeals the district court’s order dismissing his 42 U.S.C. § 1983 (2012) complaint. We have reviewed the record and find no reversible error. Accordingly, we affirm for the reasons stated by the district court. *McElroy v. Clarke,*No. 7:16-cv-00245-JPJ-RSB, 2017 WL 2570668 (W.D. Va., June 14, 2017). The motion for appointment of counsel is denied. We dispense with oral argument because the facts and legal contentions are adequately presented in the materials before this court and argument would not aid the decisional process.

*AFFIRMED*
II

104TH CONGRESS

1ST SESSION S. J. RES. 24

Proposing an amendment to the Constitution of the United States relative

to the free exercise of religion.

IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES

JANUARY 25 (legislative day, JANUARY 10), 1995

Mr. COCHRAN introduced the following joint resolution; which was read twice

and referred to the Committee on the Judiciary

JOINT RESOLUTION

Proposing an amendment to the Constitution of the United

States relative to the free exercise of religion.

1 Resolved by the Senate and House of Representatives

2 of the United States of America in Congress assembled

3 (two-thirds of each House concurring therein), That the fol4 lowing article is proposed as an amendment to the Con5 stitution of the United States, which shall be valid to all

6 intents and purposes as part of the Constitution when

7 ratified by the legislatures of three-fourths of the several

8 States:
2

SJ 24 IS

1 ‘‘ARTICLE—

2 ‘‘The right of citizens of the United States to the free

3 exercise of religion shall not be denied or abridged by the

4 United States or by any State.’’.

Æ
EXHIBIT 32.2
 
 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 IDT Corporation (the “Company”) on Form 10-Q for the quarter ended January 31, 2011 as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission (the “Report”), I, Bill Pereira, Chief Financial 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 my knowledge:
  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 results of operations of the Company.
  Date: March 17, 2011
 
 /s/    BILL PEREIRABill Pereira

Chief Financial Officer
 
 A signed original of this written statement required by Section 906, or other document authenticating, acknowledging, or otherwise adopting the signature that appears in typed form within the electronic version of this written statement required by Section 906, has been provided to IDT Corporation and will be retained by IDT Corporation and furnished to the Securities and Exchange Commission or its staff upon request.
[Federal Register Volume 87, Number 39 (Monday, February 28, 2022)]
[Notices]
[Page 11082]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2022-04162]


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

DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES

National Institutes of Health


Office of the Director, National Institutes of Health; Notice of 
Closed Meeting

    Pursuant to section 10(d) of the Federal Advisory Committee Act, as 
amended, notice is hereby given of the following meeting.
    The meeting will be closed to the public in accordance with the 
provisions set forth in sections 552b(c)(4) and 552b(c)(6), Title 5 
U.S.C., as amended. The grant applications and the discussions could 
disclose confidential trade secrets or commercial property such as 
patentable material, and personal information concerning individuals 
associated with the grant applications, the disclosure of which would 
constitute a clearly unwarranted invasion of personal privacy.

    Name of Committee: Scientific and Technical Review Board on 
Biomedical and Behavioral Research Facilities.
    Date: March 28, 2022.
    Time: 1:00 p.m. to 5:00 p.m.
    Agenda: To review and evaluate grant applications.
    Place: National Institutes of Health, Rockledge II, 6701 
Rockledge Drive, Bethesda, MD 20892 (Virtual Meeting).
    Contact Person: Santanu Banerjee, Ph.D., Scientific Review 
Officer, Center for Scientific Review, National Institutes of 
Health, 6701 Rockledge Drive, Room 2106, Bethesda, MD 20892, (301) 
496-0000, <a href="/cdn-cgi/l/email-protection#7210131c17001817170147321f131b1e5c1c1b1a5c151d04"><span class="__cf_email__" data-cfemail="95f7f4fbf0e7fff0f0e6a0d5f8f4fcf9bbfbfcfdbbf2fae3">[email protected]</span></a>.

(Catalogue of Federal Domestic Assistance Program Nos. 93.14, 
Intramural Research Training Award; 93.22, Clinical Research Loan 
Repayment Program for Individuals from Disadvantaged Backgrounds; 
93.232, Loan Repayment Program for Research Generally; 93.39, 
Academic Research Enhancement Award; 93.936, NIH Acquired 
Immunodeficiency Syndrome Research Loan Repayment Program; 93.187, 
Undergraduate Scholarship Program for Individuals from Disadvantaged 
Backgrounds, National Institutes of Health, HHS)

    Dated: February 23, 2022.
Melanie Pantoja,
Program Analyst, Office of Federal Advisory Committee Policy.
[FR Doc. 2022-04162 Filed 2-25-22; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4140-01-P


</pre><script data-cfasync="false" src="/cdn-cgi/scripts/5c5dd728/cloudflare-static/email-decode.min.js"></script></body>
</html>