alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
January 5, 2011

MEMORANDUM

TO: EPA Docket #EPA-HQ-OAR-2009-0211

FROM: Robert Anderson, Environmental Protection Specialist, EPA/OAR/OTAQ/CISD

RE: Data from pre-Tier 2 DOE Catalyst Durability Program (V4/CRC E-87-2)

Attached is an Excel spreadsheet that contains data from the DOE Catalyst Durability Test Program also 

referred to as the DOE V4 program or the CRC E-87-2 program. These data are results for the pre-Tier 2 

vehicle portion of the test program.

The enclosed spreadsheet contains all data for non-Tier 2 vehicles submitted to EPA from DOE as of 

January 5, 2010. These data include all DOE pre-Tier 2 test data that were a part of the preliminary data 

set EPA submitted to the docket on November 17, 2010 (see Docket ID EPA-HQ-OAR-2009-0211-14045)

as well as additional data collected since that time. As was the case in the original waiver decision (see 

Docket ID EPA-HQ-OAR-0211-14019), some (i.e. for the 2000 Honda Accord aged on E0) non-methane 

organic gases values may need to be recalculated and will be posted shortly. 

It should be noted that these data could be subject to change based on ongoing QA/QC. 

For more information, please contact Robert Anderson at either anderson.robert@epa.gov or (202) 343-

9718.
### IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT

No. 14

- 20683 Conference Calendar

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA , Plaintiff

- Appellee

v.
JULIO ALEMAN TRIANA, also known as Julio Aleman, al so known as Julio Aleman

- Triana , Defendant

- Appellant

Appeal from the United States District Court for the Southern District of Texas USDC No. 4:14

- CR

- 198

- 1

Before DAVIS, JONES, and HIGGINSON, Circuit Judges. PER CURIAM: * Appealing the judgment in a criminal case, Julio Aleman Triana raises an argument that he concedes is foreclosed by United States v. Rodriguez , 711 F.3d 541, 562

- 63 & n.28 (5th Cir. 2013) (en banc ) , in whi ch we held that the generic, contemporary definition of “sexual abuse of a minor” does not require
the age of consent to be below 17 years old and does not include the asserted

* Pursuant t o 5 TH C IR

. R. 47.5 , the court has determined that this opinion should not be published and is not precedent except under the limited circumstances set forth in 5 TH C IR

. R. 47.5.4. United States Court of Appeals Fifth Circuit 

### FILED June 1 6 , 2015 Lyle W. Cayce Clerk Case: 14-20683 Document: 00513079100 Page: 1 Date Filed: 06/16/2015No. 14

- 20683

2 age
- differential requirement

. Accordingly, the unopposed motion for summary
di sposition is GRANTED, and the judgment of the district court is AFFIRMED. Case: 14-20683 Document: 00513079100 Page: 2 Date Filed: 06/16/2015
Exhibit 35.1

                              ANNUAL CERTIFICATION

Re:   Securitized Asset Backed Receivables LLC Trust 2006-FR4 (the "Trust"),
      Mortgage Pass-Through Certificates, Series 2006-FR4, issued pursuant to
      the Pooling and Servicing Agreement, dated as November 1, 2006 (the
      Servicing Agreement"), by and among Securitized Asset Backed Receivables
      LLC, as depositor (the "Depositor"), Deutsche Bank National Trust Company,
      as trustee (the "Trustee"), Barclays Capital Real Estate Inc. d/b/a HomEq
      Servicing, as servicer (the "Servicer"), and Fremont Investment and Loan,
      as responsible party

On November 1, 2006, substantially all of the servicing assets of Servicer were
acquired by Barclays Capital Real Estate Inc. d/b/a HomEq Servicing. I, Arthur
Q. Lyon, Vice President and Chief Executive Officer of the HomEq Servicing
Division of Barclays Capital Real Estate Inc. d/b/a HomEq Servicing, hereby
certify to the Depositor and the Trustee and their officers, directors, and
affiliates, pursuant to Section 3.22 of the Pooling and Servicing Agreement,
that:

      A review of the activities of the Servicer during the period of November
      1, 2006 to December 31, 2006, or the applicable portion thereof, and, to
      the best of my knowledge, based on such review, the Servicer has fulfilled
      all of its obligations under the Pooling and Servicing Agreement in all
      material respects for the period of November 1, 2006 to December 31, 2006.

Date: March 7, 2007


/s/ Arthur Q. Lyon
-----------------------------
Arthur Q. Lyon
Vice President and CEO
HomEq Servicing Division

Barclays Officer's Certificate
SABR 2006-FR4
```

[Congressional Bills 114th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[H.R. 714 Introduced in House (IH)]

114th CONGRESS
  1st Session
                                H. R. 714

  To amend the Federal Election Campaign Act of 1971 to prohibit the 
          conversion of leadership PAC funds to personal use.

_______________________________________________________________________

                    IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

                            February 4, 2015

  Mr. Capuano (for himself, Mr. Jones, and Mr. Peters) introduced the 
     following bill; which was referred to the Committee on House 
                             Administration

_______________________________________________________________________

                                 A BILL

 
  To amend the Federal Election Campaign Act of 1971 to prohibit the 
          conversion of leadership PAC funds to personal use.

    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 ``Leadership PAC Limitation Act''.

SEC. 2. PROHIBITING CONVERSION OF LEADERSHIP PAC FUNDS TO PERSONAL USE.

    (a) Prohibition.--Section 313(b)(1) of the Federal Election 
Campaign Act of 1971 (52 U.S.C. 30114(b)(1)) is amended by inserting 
after ``subsection (a)'' the following: ``or funds of a leadership PAC 
(as defined in section 304(i)(8)(B))''.
    (b) Effective Date.--The amendment made by subsection (a) shall 
apply with respect to elections occurring on or after the date of the 
enactment of this Act.
                                 <all>
```
Exhibit 34.6



LOGO

Report of Independent Registered Public Accounting Firm

To the Board of Directors and shareholders of CoreLogic, Inc.:

We have examined managements assertion, included in the accompanying Report on Assessment of Compliance, that CoreLogic Commercial Real Estate Services,
Inc. (the Company), an indirect subsidiary of CoreLogic, Inc. complied with the servicing criteria set forth in Item 1122(d) of the Securities and Exchange Commissions Regulation AB for all loans for commercial mortgage loan
outsourcing customers for which the Company served as the commercial tax service provider (the Platform), as of December 31, 2015 and for the year then ended, only including 1122(d)(1)(iv), 1122(d)(2)(ii), 1122(d)(2)(v),
1122(d)(2)(vi), 1122(d)(2)(vii), 1122(d)(4)(xi), 1122(d)(4)(xii) and 1122(d)(4)(xiii), which the Company has determined are applicable to the servicing activities performed by it with respect to the Platform. Management is responsible for the
Companys compliance with the servicing criteria. Our responsibility is to express an opinion on managements assertion based on our examination.

Our examination was conducted in accordance with attestation standards of the Public Company Accounting Oversight Board (United States) and, accordingly,
included examining, on a test basis, evidence about the Companys compliance with the applicable servicing criteria and performing such other procedures as we considered necessary in the circumstances. Our examination included testing of
selected servicing activities related to the Platform, and determining whether the Company performed those selected activities in compliance with the applicable servicing criteria. Our procedures were limited to the selected servicing activities
performed by the Company during the period covered by this report. Our procedures were not designed to detect noncompliance arising from errors that may have occurred prior to or subsequent to our tests that may have affected the balances or amounts
calculated or reported by the Company during the period covered by this report. We believe that our examination provides a reasonable basis for our opinion. Our examination does not provide a legal determination on the Companys compliance with
the servicing criteria.

In our opinion, managements assertion that the Company complied with the aforementioned applicable servicing criteria as of
and for the year ended December 31, 2015 for all loans for commercial mortgage loan outsourcing customers for which the Company served as the commercial tax service provider is fairly stated, in all material respects.

February 4, 2016



LOGO



LOGO
```

[Federal Register Volume 76, Number 68 (Friday, April 8, 2011)]
[Notices]
[Page 19752]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Printing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2011-8480]

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

CONSUMER PRODUCT SAFETY COMMISSION

Sunshine Act Meeting Notice

TIME AND DATE: Wednesday, April 13, 2011, 10 a.m.-11.a.m.

PLACE: Room 410, Bethesda Towers, 4330 East West Highway, Bethesda, 
Maryland.

STATUS: Commission Meeting--Open to the Public

Matter To Be Considered

    Decisional Matter: Toddler Beds--Final Rule.
    A live Webcast of the Meeting can be viewed at http://www.cpsc.gov/webcast.
    For a recorded message containing the latest agenda information, 
call (301) 504-7948.

CONTACT PERSON FOR MORE INFORMATION: Todd A. Stevenson, Office of the 
Secretary, U.S. Consumer Product Safety Commission, 4330 East West 
Highway, Bethesda, MD 20814, (301) 504-7923.

    Dated: April 5, 2011.
Todd A. Stevenson,
Secretary.
[FR Doc. 2011-8480 Filed 4-6-11; 11:15 am]
BILLING CODE 6355-01-P
```
III

104TH CONGRESS

1ST SESSION S. RES. 7

Electing Howard O. Greene, Jr., as the Sergeant at Arms and Doorkeeper

of the Senate.

IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES

JANUARY 4, 1995

Mr. DOLE submitted the following resolution; which was considered and

agreed to

RESOLUTION

Electing Howard O. Greene, Jr., as the Sergeant at Arms

and Doorkeeper of the Senate.

1 Resolved, That Howard O. Greene, Jr., of Delaware,

2 be and he is hereby elected Sergeant at Arms and Door3 keeper of the Senate beginning January 4, 1995.

Æ
#### IN RE: Tony Alforenzo WALKER, Petitioner.

No. 17-2001

United States Court of Appeals, Fourth Circuit.

Submitted: October 19, 2017

Decided: December 7, 2017

Tony Alforenzo Walker, Petitioner Pro Se.

Before FLOYD and HARRIS, Circuit Judges, and HAMILTON, Senior Circuit Judge.

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.

PER CURIAM:

Tony Alforenzo Walker petitions for a writ of mandamus, alleging that the district court has unduly' delayed in ruling on his Fed. R. Civ. P. 60(b) motion for relief from the court’s judgment dismissing Walker’s 28 U.S.C. § 2255 (2012) motion as untimely. He seeks an order from this court directing the district court to act. Our review of the district court’s, docket reveals that the district court denied Walker’s Rule 60(b) motion on October 16, 2017. *United States v. Walker,*No. 2:93-cr-00084-AWA-1 (E.D. Va. Oct. 16, 2017). Because the district court has recently decided Walker’s motion, we deny the mandamus petition as moot. We dispense with oral argument because the facts and legal contentions are adequately presented in *110the materials before this court and argument would not aid the decisional process.

*PETITION DENIED*
# L_2007099EN.01001801.xml

| 14.4.2007 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | L 99/18 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

14.4.2007

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

L 99/18

---

Corrigendum to Council Regulation (EC, Euratom) No 1605/2002 of 25 June 2002 on the Financial Regulation applicable to the general budget of the European Communities

(
  Official Journal of the European Communities L 248 of 16 September 2002
  )

On page 8, point (a) of Article 4(2), on page 16, first subparagraph of Article 49(1), second sentence and on page 36, in Article 158:

for:

‘... operating expenditure ...’,

read:

‘... operational expenditure ...’.

On page 9, in Article 9(2):

for:

‘2.   Appropriations for commitment of differentiated appropriations ...’,

read:

‘2.   Differentiated commitment appropriations ...’.

On page 14, third subparagraph of Article 41(2):

for:

‘... operating appropriations ...’,

read:

‘... operational appropriations ...’.

On page 15, first subparagraph of Article 44, second sentence:

for:

‘... entered in a separate chapter, ...’,

read:

‘... entered in a separate title, ...’.

On page 40, in Article 179(2):

for:

‘2.   Administrative expenditure ...’,

read:

‘2.   Operating expenditure ...’.

---
##### 



EXHIBIT 99.2



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 Onyx Acceptance Corporation
(the Company) on Form 10-Q for the period ended June 30, 2002, as filed with
the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the Report), I,
John W. Hall, President, CEO and Principal 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:

(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.



/s/ JOHN W. HALL

Name: John W. Hall
Title:   President, CEO and Principal Executive Officer
Date:   August 14, 2002





This certification is made solely for the purpose of 18 U.S.C. Section 1350,
and not for any other purpose.
#### Gbolahan Babagbemileke MAJEKODUNMI, Petitioner, v. U.S. ATTORNEY GENERAL, Respondent.

No. 16-17694 Non-Argument Calendar

United States Court of Appeals, Eleventh Circuit.

(November 7, 2017)

Gbolahan Babagbemileke Majekodunmi, Pro Se

Virginia Lum, Kevin James Conway, U.S. Department of Justice, Civil Division, Office of Immigration Litigation, Washington, DC, OIL, Office of Immigration Litigation, Washington, DC, Alfie Owens, *929DHS/ICE Office of Chief Counsel—ATL, Atlanta, GA, for Respondent

Before TJOFLAT, WILLIAM PRYOR and NEWSOM, Circuit Judges.

PER CURIAM:

Gbolahan Majekodunmi, a native and citizen of Nigeria, petitions *pro se*for review of an order affirming the denial of his applications for a waiver of inadmissibility, 8 U.S.C. § 1182(i), and for an adjustment of status, *id.*§ 1255(a). The Board of Immigration Appeals affirmed the findings of the immigration judge that Majekodunmi failed to prove that his removal would cause extreme hardship to himself or to his mother, a United States citizen. We dismiss Majekodunmi’s petition.

We lack jurisdiction to review Majeko-dunmi’s petition. “[N]o court ... ha[s] jurisdiction to review ... any judgment regarding the granting of [discretionary] relief [for a waiver of inadmissibility based on extreme hardship] under section ,.. 1182(i),” *id.*§ 1252(a)(2)(B)(i), unless the petition for review presents “constitutional claims or questions of law,” *id.*§ 1252(a)(2)(D). Majekodunmi argues that the Board failed to “give[ ] sufficient weight to [his] claims of undue hardship,” contests the adverse credibility finding of the immigration judge, argues that his removal will cause undue hardship to his new wife and child, *see id.*§ 1182(i), and argues that the immigration judge erred by denying his application for an adjustment of status, *id.*§ 1255(a), but none of his arguments present a constitutional issue or question of law.

We DISMISS Majekodunmi’s petition.
EX‐34.5

 

(logo)      CURCIO

WIESELTHIER

+COHEN

 

CERTIFIED PUBLIC ACCOUNTANTS PC 7 PENN PLAZA, SUITE 1500 NEW YORK NY 10001

TEL: 212 557-9800 • FAX: 212 557-9819 • website: www.cwccpafirm.com

 

 

Report of Independent Registered Public Accounting Firm

 

Managing Member

Park Bridge Lender Services LLC

New York, NY

 

 

We have examined management’s assertion, included in the accompanying Management’s Report on Assessment of 2014 Compliance by Park Bridge Lender Services LLC with Regulation AB Servicing Criteria (“Management’s Report”), that Park Bridge Lender Services LLC (the “Company”) complied with the servicing criteria set forth in Item 1122(d) of the U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission’s Regulation AB as of and for the year ended December 31, 2014, excluding those criteria noted as not applicable (N/A) within Exhibit B to Management’s Report. The transactions covered by this report are only those transactions processed by the Company in its capacity as trust advisor or operating advisor for the asset backed securities transactions (the “Platform”) identified in Management’s Report. Reference Exhibit A to Management’s Report for the transactions covered by this examination. Management is responsible for the Company’s compliance with the applicable servicing criteria. Our responsibility is to express an opinion on management’s assertion based on our examination.

 

Our examination was conducted in accordance with attestation standards of the Public Company Accounting Oversight Board (United States) and, accordingly, including examining, on a test basis, evidence about the Company’s compliance with the applicable servicing criteria and performing such other procedures as we considered necessary in the circumstances. Our examination included testing of a selected sample of the servicing activities related to the Platform, determining whether the Company performed those selected activities in compliance with the applicable servicing criteria during the specified period. Our procedures were limited to the selected transactions and servicing activities performed by the Company during the period covered by this report. Our examination was not designed to detect material noncompliance arising from errors that may have occurred prior to or subsequent to our tests, that may have affected the Company’s servicing activities during the period covered by this report. We believe that our examination provides a reasonable basis for our opinion. Our examination does not provide a legal determination on the Company’s compliance with the applicable servicing criteria.

 

In our opinion, management’s assertion that the Company complied with the aforementioned applicable servicing criteria identified in Exhibit B to Management’s Report with respect to the transactions identified in Exhibit A to Management’s Report as of and for the year ended December 31, 2014, for the Platform, is fairly stated in all material aspects.

 

 

/s/ Curcio, Wieselthier & Cohen, C.P.A.’S, P.C. 

 

Curcio , Wieselthier & Cohen, C.P.A.’S, P.C.  New York, NY 

February 20, 2015

 

 

MEMBER OF THE AMERICAN INSTITUTE OF CERTIFIED PUBLIC ACCOUNTANTS
#### Jeremiah Lamont LUKE, Petitioner-Appellant, v. Carlton B. JOYNER, Respondent-Appellee.

No. 17-6482

United States Court of Appeals, Fourth Circuit.

Submitted: November 30, 2017

Decided: December 15, 2017

Jeremiah Lamont Luke, Appellant Pro Se. Clarence Joe DelForge, III, NORTH CAROLINA DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE, Raleigh, North Carolina, for Appel-lee.

Before AGEE and FLOYD, Circuit Judges, and HAMILTON, Senior Circuit Judge.

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit,

PER CURIAM:

Jeremiah Lamont Luke seeks to appeal the district court’s order denying relief on his 28 U.S.C. § 2254 (2012) petition. The order is not appealable unless a circuit justice or judge issues a certificate of ap-pealability. 28 U.S.C. § 2253(c)(1)(A) (2012). A certificate of appealability will not issue absent “a substantial showing of the denial of a constitutional right.” 28 U.S.C. § 2253(c)(2) (2012). When the district court denies relief on the merits, a prisoner satisfies this standard by demonstrating that reasonable jurists would find that the district court’s assessment of the constitutional claims is debatable or wrong. *Slack v. McDaniel,*529 U.S. 473, 484, 120 S.Ct. 1595, 146 L.Ed.2d 542 (2000); *see Miller-El v. Cockrell,*537 U.S. 322, 336-38, 123 S.Ct. 1029, 154 L.Ed.2d 931 (2003). When the district court denies relief on procedural grounds, the prisoner must demonstrate both that the dispositive procedural ruling is debatable, and that the petition states a debatable claim of the denial of a constitutional right. *Slack,*529 U.S. at 484-85, 120 S.Ct. 1595.

We have independently reviewed the record and conclude that Luke has not made the requisite showing.* Accordingly, we deny a certificate of appealability, deny leave to proceed in forma pauperis, and dismiss the appeal. We dispense with oral argument because the facts and legal contentions are adequately presented in the *132materials before this court and argument would not aid the decisional process.

*DISMISSED*

*

 We previously remanded this case to the district court for the limited purpose of determining whether Luke's notice of appeal was timely filed under Fed, R. App. P, 4(c)(1) and *Houston v. Lack,*487 U.S. 266, 276, 108 S.Ct. 2379, 101 L.Ed.2d 245 (1988). The district court concluded that Luke timely filed a notice of appeal.
# Official Journal L 231/2010

| | ISSN 1725-2555
  doi:10.3000/17252555.L_2010.231.eng |
| --- | --- |
| Official Journal
  of the European Union | L 231 |
| | |
| English edition | Legislation | Volume 531 September 2010 |

ISSN 1725-2555

doi:10.3000/17252555.L_2010.231.eng

Official Journal

of the European Union

L 231

English edition

Legislation

Volume 531 September 2010

---

| Contents | | II   Non-legislative acts | page |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |
| | | REGULATIONS |
| | | Commission Regulation (EU) No 770/2010 of 31 August 2010 establishing the standard import values for determining the entry price of certain fruit and vegetables | 1 |
| | | Commission Regulation (EU) No 771/2010 of 31 August 2010 fixing the import duties in the cereals sector applicable from 1 September 2010 | 3 |

Contents

II   Non-legislative acts

page

REGULATIONS

Commission Regulation (EU) No 770/2010 of 31 August 2010 establishing the standard import values for determining the entry price of certain fruit and vegetables

1

Commission Regulation (EU) No 771/2010 of 31 August 2010 fixing the import duties in the cereals sector applicable from 1 September 2010

3

| | | Corrigenda |
| --- | --- | --- |
| | * | Corrigendum to Council Regulation (EC) No 1342/2008 of 18 December 2008 establishing a long-term plan for cod stocks and the fisheries exploiting those stocks and repealing Regulation (EC) No 423/2004 (OJ L 348, 24.12.2008) | 6 |
| | * | Corrigendum to Commission Decision 2010/459/EC of 17 September 2008 on State aid C 61/07 (ex NN 71/07) — Greece Olympic Airways Services/Olympic Airlines (OJ L 222, 24.8.2010) | 7 |

Corrigenda

*

Corrigendum to Council Regulation (EC) No 1342/2008 of 18 December 2008 establishing a long-term plan for cod stocks and the fisheries exploiting those stocks and repealing Regulation (EC) No 423/2004 (OJ L 348, 24.12.2008)

(OJ L 348, 24.12.2008)

6

*

Corrigendum to Commission Decision 2010/459/EC of 17 September 2008 on State aid C 61/07 (ex NN 71/07) — Greece Olympic Airways Services/Olympic Airlines (OJ L 222, 24.8.2010)

(OJ L 222, 24.8.2010)

7

| EN | Acts whose titles are printed in light type are those relating to day-to-day management of agricultural matters, and are generally valid for a limited period.
  The titles of all other Acts are printed in bold type and preceded by an asterisk. |
| --- | --- |

EN

Acts whose titles are printed in light type are those relating to day-to-day management of agricultural matters, and are generally valid for a limited period.

The titles of all other Acts are printed in bold type and preceded by an asterisk.