alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
# Official Journal L 279/2015

| | ISSN 1977-0677 |
| --- | --- |
| Official Journal
  of the European Union | L 279 |
| | |
| English edition | Legislation | Volume 5823 October 2015 |

ISSN 1977-0677

Official Journal

of the European Union

L 279

English edition

Legislation

Volume 5823 October 2015

---

| Contents | | II   Non-legislative acts | page |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |
| | | INTERNATIONAL AGREEMENTS |
| | * | Council Decision (EU) 2015/1891 of 1 October 2015 on the conclusion, on behalf of the European Union and its Member States, of the Protocol to the Stabilisation and Association Agreement between the European Communities and their Member States, of the one part, and the former Yugoslav Republic of Macedonia, of the other part, to take account of the accession of the Republic of Croatia to the European Union | 1 |
| | * | Council Decision (EU) 2015/1892 of 18 February 2014 approving the conclusion, by the European Commission, on behalf of the European Atomic Energy Community, of the Protocol to the Stabilisation and Association Agreement between the European Communities and their Member States, of the one part, and the former Yugoslav Republic of Macedonia, of the other part, to take account of the accession of the Republic of Croatia to the European Union | 3 |

Contents

II   Non-legislative acts

page

INTERNATIONAL AGREEMENTS

*

Council Decision (EU) 2015/1891 of 1 October 2015 on the conclusion, on behalf of the European Union and its Member States, of the Protocol to the Stabilisation and Association Agreement between the European Communities and their Member States, of the one part, and the former Yugoslav Republic of Macedonia, of the other part, to take account of the accession of the Republic of Croatia to the European Union

1

*

Council Decision (EU) 2015/1892 of 18 February 2014 approving the conclusion, by the European Commission, on behalf of the European Atomic Energy Community, of the Protocol to the Stabilisation and Association Agreement between the European Communities and their Member States, of the one part, and the former Yugoslav Republic of Macedonia, of the other part, to take account of the accession of the Republic of Croatia to the European Union

3

| 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.
The State of

Fourth Court of Appeals

San Antonio, Texas

October 1, 2014

No. 04-14-00565-CR

Rodolfo Martinez SALINAS,

Appellant

v.

The STATE of Texas,

Appellee

From the 49th Judicial District Court, Webb County, Texas

Trial Court No. 2009-CRP-000403-D1

Honorable Elma T. Salinas-Ender, Judge Presiding

ORDER

The reporter’s record was originally due on August 18, 2014. On August 26, 2014, 

Jessica Ramirez, a court reporter responsible for filing a portion of the reporter’s record in this 

appeal, filed a notification of late record. On the same day, we granted Ms. Ramirez’s request for 

an extension of time to file the reporter’s record to September 17, 2014. However, as of the date 

of this order, Ms. Ramirez has not filed a second notification of late record, nor has she filed the 

reporter’s record. 

We, therefore, ORDER Jessica Ramirez to file the reporter’s record no later than

October 29, 2014. If the reporter’s record is not received by such date, an order may be issued 

directing Ms. Ramirez to appear and show cause why she should not be held in contempt for 

failing to file the reporter’s record. 

_________________________________

Karen Angelini, Justice

IN WITNESS WHEREOF, I have hereunto set my hand and affixed the seal of the said 

court on this 1st day of October, 2014.

___________________________________

Keith E. Hottle

Clerk of Court
No. D-2724.

#### In re Discipline of Mahoney.

Anthony M. Mahoney, of Woodbridge, N. J., is suspended from the practice of law in this Court, and a rule will issue, returnable within 40 days, requiring him to show cause why he should not be disbarred from the practice of law in this Court.
#### John J. MOORE, Jr., Plaintiff-Appellant, v. Warden BUSH, Defendant-appellee.

No. 17-7273

United States Court of Appeals, Fourth Circuit.

Submitted: February 22, 2018

Decided: February 26, 2018

John J. Moore, Jr„ Appellant Pro Se. Donald John Zelenka, Deputy Attorney General, Susannah Rawl Cole, OFFICE OF THE ATTORNEY GENERAL OF SOUTH CAROLINA, Columbia, South Carolina, for Appellee.

Before TRAXLER and DUNCAN, Circuit Judges, and HAMILTON, Senior Circuit Judge.

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.

*301PER CURIAM:

John J. Moore, Jr., seeks to appeal the district court’s order accepting the recommendation of the magistrate judge and denying relief on Moore’s 28 U.S.C. § 2254 (2012) petition. The order is not appealable unless a circuit justice or judge issues a certificate of appealability. 28 U.S.C. § 2253(c)(1)(A) (2012). A certifícate of ap-pealability 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 Moore 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 materials before this court and argument would not aid the decisional process.

*DISMISSED*
[Federal Register Volume 87, Number 60 (Tuesday, March 29, 2022)]
[Notices]
[Page 17991]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2022-06590]


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

DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE

National Institute of Standards and Technology


Information Collection Activities; Submission to the Office of 
Management and Budget (OMB) for Review and Approval; Comment Request; 
Generic Clearance for Usability Data Collections

    The Department of Commerce will submit the following information 
collection request to the Office of Management and Budget (OMB) for 
review and clearance in accordance with the Paperwork Reduction Act of 
1995, on or after the date of publication of this notice. We invite the 
general public and other Federal agencies to comment on proposed, and 
continuing information collections, which helps us assess the impact of 
our information collection requirements and minimize the public's 
reporting burden. Public comments were previously requested via the 
Federal Register on December 7, 2021, during a 60-day comment period. 
This notice allows for an additional 30 days for public comments.
    Agency: National Institute of Standards and Technology (NIST), 
Commerce.
    Title: NIST Generic Clearance for Usability Data Collections.
    OMB Control Number 0693-0043.
    Form Number(s): None.
    Type of Request: Regular submission, extension of a current 
information collection.
    Number of Respondents: 150,000.
    Average Hours per Response: Varied, dependent upon the data 
collection method used. The possible response time to complete a 
questionnaire may be 15 minutes or 2 hours to participate in an 
empirical study.
    Burden Hours: 100,000.
    Needs and Uses: NIST will conduct information collections to 
evaluate the usability and utility of NIST research for measurement and 
standardization work. These data collections efforts may include, but 
may not be limited to electronic methodologies, empirical studies, 
video and audio collections, interview, and questionnaires.
    Affected Public: Individual or households; State, Local or Tribal 
Government; Federal Government.
    Frequency: On occasion.
    Respondent's Obligation: Voluntary.
    This information collection request may be viewed at 
www.reginfo.gov. Follow the instructions to view the Department of 
Commerce collections currently under review by OMB.
    Written comments and recommendations for the proposed information 
collection should be submitted within 30 days of the publication of 
this notice on the following website www.reginfo.gov/public/do/PRAMain. 
Find this particular information collection by selecting ``Currently 
under 30-day Review--Open for Public Comments'' or by using the search 
function and entering either the title of the collection or the OMB 
Control Number 0693-0043.

Sheleen Dumas,
Department PRA Clearance Officer, Office of the Chief Information 
Officer, Commerce Department.
[FR Doc. 2022-06590 Filed 3-28-22; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 3510-13-P
**EXHIBIT 32.1**

 

SECTION 906 CERTIFICATION

 

The certification set forth below is being submitted to the Securitiesand Exchange Commission solely for the purpose of complying with Section 1350of Chapter 63 of Title 18 of the United States Code.

 

May 12, 2004

 

Charles T. Chrietzberg, Jr., the Chief ExecutiveOfficer of Northern California Bancorp, Inc. certifies:

 

1.     that this periodic reportfully complies with the requirements of section 13(a) or 15(d) of theSecurities Exchange Act of 1934; and

2.     that information contained inthis periodic report fairly presents, in all material respects, the financialcondition and results of operations of Northern California Bancorp, Inc..

 
|   | /s/ Charles  T. Chrietzberg, Jr. |   |
|--------|----------------------------------|--------|
|   | Charles T.  Chrietzberg, Jr.     |
|   | Chief  Executive Officer         |
|   | and  President                   |

 

1

----
Exhibit



Exhibit 10.15.1 













SCHEDULE OF SIGNATORIES TO DIRECTOR 
INDEMNIFICATION AGREEMENTS




1. Philip W. Knisely


2. John P. Williamson


3. James G. Berges


4. Jeri L. Isbell


5. Wilbur W. James, Jr.


6. Justin A. Kershaw


7. Scott H. Muse


8. Nathan K. Sleeper


9. William R. VanArsdale


10. A. Mark Zeffiro


11. J.L. Zrebiec
```

[Congressional Bills 104th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[S. Res. 296 Introduced in Senate (IS)]

104th CONGRESS
  2d Session
S. RES. 296

 To permit disabled Senate employees with the privilege of the Senate 
             floor to use supporting services on the floor.

_______________________________________________________________________

                   IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES

           September 24 (legislative day, September 20), 1996

Mr. Ford submitted the following resolution; which was referred to the 
                 Committee on Rules and Administration

_______________________________________________________________________

                               RESOLUTION

 
 To permit disabled Senate employees with the privilege of the Senate 
             floor to use supporting services on the floor.

    Resolved, That (a) a Senate employee with a disability (as defined 
in section 3 of the Americans with Disabilities Act of 1990 (42 U.S.C. 
12102)) who has the privilege of the Senate floor under rule XXII of 
the Standing Rules of the Senate may bring such supporting services 
(including dog guides and interpreters) on the Senate floor as the 
employing office determines are necessary to assist the disabled 
employee in discharging the official duties of his or her employment 
position.
    (b) The employing office of a disabled employee shall administer 
the provisions of this resolution.
                                 <all>
```
No. 11-11003.

#### Figura Torrefranca *v.*Ryan, Director, Arizona Department of Corrections, et al.

C. A. 9th Cir. Motion of petitioner for leave to proceed *in forma pauperis*denied, and certiorari dismissed. See this Court’s Rule 39.8.
| (logo) WELLS           FARGO | Corporate Trust Services

 

MAC R1204-010 9062 Old Annapolis Road

Columbia, MD 21045

 

Tel:  410 884 2000

Fax: 410 715 2380 |
|---------------------------------------------------------------------------|-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

J.P. Morgan Chase Commercial Mortgage Securities Corp.

383 Madison Avenue

31st Floor

New York, New York 10179

 

 

 

 

RE: Annual Statement of Compliance for JPMBB Commercial Mortgage Securities Trust 2014-C24, Commercial Mortgage Pass-Through Certificates Series 2014- C24

 

 

Per the Pooling and Servicing Agreement dated as of October 1, 2014 ( the "Agreement"), the undersigned, a duly authorized officer of Wells Fargo Bank, N.A., as Certificate Administrator ("Wells Fargo"), hereby certifies as follows as of and for the year ending December 31, 2014 (the "Reporting Period" ) :

 

(a) A review of Wells Fargo's activities during the Reporting Period and of its performance under the Agreement has been made under such officer's supervision; and

 

(b) To the best of such officer's knowledge, based on such review, Wells Fargo has fulfilled all of its obligations under the Agreement in all material respects throughout the Reporting Period.

 

 

 

 

February 25, 2015

 

 

 

/s/ Brian Smith 

BRIAN SMITH 

Vice President

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Wells Fargo Bank, N.A.
IN THE SUPREME COURT OF PENNSYLVANIA MIDDLE DISTRICT
MOTLEY CREW, LLC, A LAW FIRM, JOSEPH R. REISINGER ESQUIRE, LLC, AND JOSEPH R. REISINGER, Petitioners

v.
BONNER CHEVROLET CO., INC., PAUL R. MANCIA, D.D.S., RICHARD F. CROSSIN, GENERAL MOTORS COMPANY, THOMAS N. CROSSIN AND JAMES MILLER, Respondents : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : No. 591 MAL 2014
Petition for Allowance of Appeal from the Order of the Superior Court

ORDER

PER CURIAM AND NOW , this 10th day of December, 2014, the Petition for Allowance of Appeal is DENIED

.
IN THE SUPREME COURT OF PENNSYLVANIA

MIDDLE DISTRICT

MOTLEY CREW, LLC, A LAW FIRM,

JOSEPH R. REISINGER ESQUIRE, LLC,

AND JOSEPH R. REISINGER,

 Petitioners

 v.

BONNER CHEVROLET CO., INC., PAUL

R. MANCIA, D.D.S., RICHARD F.

CROSSIN, GENERAL MOTORS

COMPANY, THOMAS N. CROSSIN AND

JAMES MILLER,

 Respondents

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

No. 591 MAL 2014

Petition for Allowance of Appeal from the

Order of the Superior Court

ORDER

PER CURIAM

AND NOW, this 10th day of December, 2014, the Petition for Allowance of

Appeal is DENIED.
#### UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. Rondall Clyde MIXSON, Defendant-Appellant.

No. 17-6872

United States Court of Appeals, Fourth Circuit.

Submitted: November 14, 2017

Decided: December 4, 2017

Rondall Clyde Mixson, Appellant Pro Se. Jennifer R. Bockhorst, Assistant United States Attorney, OFFICE OF THE UNITED STATES ATTORNEY, Abing-don, Virginia; Donald Ray Wolthuis, Assistant United States Attorney, OFFICE OF *183THE UNITED STATES ATTORNEY, Roanoke, Virginia, for Appellee.

Before NIEMEYER, AGEE, and KEENAN, Circuit Judges.

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.

PER CURIAM:

Rondall Clyde Mixson seeks to appeal the district court’s order denying relief on his 28 U.S.C. § 2255 (2012) motion. The order is not appealable unless a circuit justice or judge issues a certificate of ap-pealability. 28 U.S.C. § 2258(c)(1)(B) (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 motion 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 Mixson has not made the requisite showing. Accordingly, we deny his motions to appoint counsel and place this case in abeyance, deny a certificate of appealability, and dismiss the appeal. 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.

*DISMISSED*
**Exhibit 34.5**

 

(logo) pwc

** **

**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 accompanyingReport on Assessment of Compliance, that CoreLogic Commercial Real Estate Services, Inc. (the “Company”), an indirectsubsidiary of CoreLogic, Inc. complied with the servicing criteria set forth in Item 1122(d) of the Securities and Exchange Commission’sRegulation AB for all loans for commercial mortgage loan outsourcing customers for which the Company served as the commercial taxservice 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 theCompany has determined are applicable to the servicing activities performed by it with respect to the Platform. Management is responsiblefor the Company’s compliance with the servicing criteria. Our responsibility is to express an opinion on management’s assertionbased on our examination.

 

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

 

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

 

February 4, 2016

 

/s/ PricewaterhouseCoopers

 

PricewaterhouseCoopers LLP, 2001 Ross Avenue, Suite 1800, Dallas,Texas 75201

T: (214) 999-1400, F: (214) 754-7991, www.pwc.com/us
# Official Journal L 307/2016

| | ISSN 1977-0677 |
| --- | --- |
| Official Journal
  of the European Union | L 307 |
| | |
| English edition | Legislation | Volume 5915 November 2016 |

ISSN 1977-0677

Official Journal

of the European Union

L 307

English edition

Legislation

Volume 5915 November 2016

---

| Contents | | II   Non-legislative acts | page |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |
| | | REGULATIONS |
| | * | Commission Delegated Regulation (EU) 2016/1969 of 12 September 2016 amending Council Regulation (EC) No 428/2009 setting up a Community regime for the control of exports, transfer, brokering and transit of dual-use items | 1 |

Contents

II   Non-legislative acts

page

REGULATIONS

*

Commission Delegated Regulation (EU) 2016/1969 of 12 September 2016 amending Council Regulation (EC) No 428/2009 setting up a Community regime for the control of exports, transfer, brokering and transit of dual-use items

1

| 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.
UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT
No. 97-1326
KENNETH WAYNE DODSON, Plaintiff - Appellant, versus UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF DEFENSE; DEFENSE MAPPING AGENCY; DEIDRA HUNGERFORD, in her official capacity at the Defense MappingAgency; KAREN GRUMBINE, in her official capacity at the Defense Mapping Agency; SANDRAL J.DANIELL, in her official capacity at the Defense Mapping Agency; STEPHANIE BLACKSHEAR, in her official capacity at the Defense Mapping Agency; GRANDVILLE PETERSON, in his official capacity at the Defense Mapping Agency; RUBY THOMAS, in her official capacity at the Defense Mapping Agency; JAMES BRUNGER, in his official capacity at the Defense Mapping Agency; MR. SMITH, Security Officer, Defendants - Appellees, Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Virginia, at Alexandria. James C. Cacheris, Chief District Judge. (CA-96-918-A) Submitted: October 23, 1997 Decided: November 13, 1997 Before HAMILTON and WILLIAMS, Circuit Judges, and PHILLIPS, Senior Circuit Judge.2 Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion. Kenneth Wayne Dodson, Appellant Pro Se. Rachel Celia Ballow, OFFICE OF THE UNITED STATES ATTORNEY, Alexandria, Virginia, for Appellees. Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. See Local Rule 36(c).

PER CURIAM: Appellant appeals from the district court's order dismissing without prejudice his employment discrimination action. We have reviewed the record and the district court's o rder and find no reve rsible error. Dodson failed to plead or prove that he hadexhausted administrative remedies or that those remedies were constitutionally deficient. We dispense with oral argument because thefacts and legal contentions are adequately presented in the materials before the court and argument would not aid the decisional process.

AFFIRMED