alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
Page 1 of 3

Disposition Comments

Docket No: FAA-2011-0388 SNPRM

Directorate ID: 2010-NM-004-AD

Originating Office Tracking No.: 

 No Comments/Only Supportive Comments Received – If this box is checked, no signatures are 

required.

No Has the referenced service information been revised since the NPRM was issued? If yes, 

list latest revision and attach a copy. Note that changes beyond the scope of the previously 

published NPRM will require a new notice. Contact the Directorate focal point for guidance.

Instructions: Summarize all comments by issue (not by commenter) and provide your recommended resolution of 

each issue. All comments relating to the same issue should be discussed together. Do not list all of the issues 

from one commenter together. If changes to the AD are required based on the comments received, explain why and 

describe in detail what change(s) you recommend. Reference FAA-IR-M-8040.1C Chapter 9.

ISSUE 1: Select one of the following: 

If other, explain: 

Commenter(s): 

What change to the AD action is requested? 

Why is the change requested or how is it justified? 

Do we agree? 

If YES, we agree because Make the following changes to the AD: 

If PARTIALLY AGREE, we agree with because We disagree with because 

Make the following changes to the AD: 

If NO, we don’t agree because 

ISSUE 2: Select one of the following: 

If other, explain: 

Commenter(s): 

What change to the AD action is requested? 

Why is the change requested or how is it justified? 

Do we agree? 

If YES, we agree because Make the following changes to the AD: 

If PARTIALLY AGREE, we agree with because We disagree with because 

Make the following changes to the AD:

If NO, we don’t agree because 
Page 2 of 3

For additional issues, double-click here
Page 3 of 3

Signature Section

Signature indicates concurrence with this action.

Originating Office Tracking No.: 

ASE Date

Branch Manager Date
Exhibit 106 Confirmation of Advance


		
			CONFIRMATION OF ADVANCE
		

		
			 
		

		
			 
		

		
			Institution:Institution NameAdvance Number:Example
		

		
			AddressSettlement Date: MM/DD/YYYY
		

		
			City, State  ZipMaturity Date:MM/DD/YYYY
		

		
			Customer ID:Account Number
		

		
			 
		

		
			 
		

		
			The Federal Home Loan Bank of Topeka (FHLBank) hereby issues an advance on behalf of the above institution.  Terms of the advance shall be:
		

		
			 
		

		
			Advance Type:  XXXXXX
		

		
			Amount:  $XXX,XXX.00
		

		
			Rate:  X.XXX% - Interest payable monthly and at maturity
		

		
			  (Interest accrued on an Actual/Actual day basis.)
		

		
			 
		

		
			 
		

		
			Prepayment Fee: [Insert Prepayment Language from Member Products Policy]
		

		
			 
		

		
			Other:  Past due principal and interest will be charged interest at a rate equal to 315 basis points above the previous business day’s daily effective federal funds rate as provided in Federal Reserve Statistical Release H.15.
		

		
			 
		

		
			 
		

		
			 
		

		
			 
		

		
			 
		

		
			Lending Officer
		

		
			Date
		

		
			 
		

		
			 
		

		
			CONFIRMATORY APPLICATION AND ACKNOWLEDGMENT
		

		
			
		

		
			The undersigned hereby confirms that it has applied for the Advance referred to above, and that it has accepted and unconditionally agrees to repay such Advance upon the terms and conditions stated above and in the Advance, Pledge and Security Agreement between the parties and FHLBank’s Member Products Policy as amended from time to time.
		

		
			 
		

		
			 
		

		
			Date: ____________________ By: _________________________________ ______________________________
		

		
			(Signature)(Title)
		

		
			 
		

		
			(Please return one signed copy of FHLBank within (5) business days)
IN THE SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF MONTANA

No. DA 20-0496

STATE OF MONTANA,

Plaintiff and Appellee,

v.

JONATHAN WILLIAM PRESLEY,

Defendant and Appellant.

ORDER

Upon consideration of Appellant’s motion for extension of time, 

and good cause appearing,

IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that Appellant is granted an extension 

of time to and including February 25, 2022, within which to prepare, 

file, and serve Appellant’s opening brief on appeal.

Electronically signed by:

Mike McGrath

Chief Justice, Montana Supreme Court

January 19 2022

01/19/2022

Case Number: DA 20-0496
**Exhibit
      32.1**





**Certification** **Pursuant
      to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002**




Securities
      and Exchange Commission


450
      Fifth
      Street, N.W


Washington,
      D.C. 20549




Ladies
      and Gentlemen:




The
        certification set forth below is being furnished to the Securities and Exchange
        Commission solely for the purpose of complying with Rule 13a-14(b) or Rule
        15d-14(b) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 and with Section 1350 of
        Chapter 63 of Title 18 of the United States Code.
 
 Martin
        Wade III, the Chief Executive Officer of International Microcomputer Software,
        Inc, and Robert O’Callahan, the Chief Financial Officer of International
        Microcomputer Software, Inc, each certifies 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
                  International Microcomputer Software,
                  Inc.
  
 By: **/s/
        MARTIN WADE III**
 Martin
        Wade III
 Chief
        Executive Officer
 
 By: **/s/ ROBERT O’CALLAHAN**
 Robert
        O’Callahan
 Chief
        Financial Officer (Principal Accounting Officer)
    41
Exhibit 32.1   CERTIFICATION OF CHIEF EXECUTIVE OFFICER PURSUANT TO 18 U.S.C. SECTION 1350, AS ADOPTED PURSUANT TO SECTION 906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002  Pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002 (subsections (a) and (b) of section 1350, chapter 63 of title 18, United States Code), I, Stan Larson, President and Chief Executive Officer of Trudy Corporation do hereby certify, to the best of my knowledge that:  1) The Company's Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q for the period ended September 30, 2010, being filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission (the "Report") fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended; and  2) The information contained in the Report fairly presents, in all material respects, the financial condition and results of operations of the Company.  This Certification accompanies this Form 10-Q as an exhibit, but shall not be deemed as having been filed for purposes of Section 18 of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 or as a separate disclosure document of the Company or the certifying officer.     Date: December 16, 2010 By: /s/ Stan Larson Stan Larson,  Chief Executive Officer
```

[Congressional Bills 105th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[H. Con. Res. 73 Introduced in House (IH)]

105th CONGRESS
  1st Session
H. CON. RES. 73

                 Concerning the death of Chaim Herzog.

_______________________________________________________________________

                    IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

                              May 6, 1997

 Mr. Burton of Indiana (for himself, Mr. Gilman, Mr. Bunning, Ms. Ros-
Lehtinen, Mr. Ackerman, Mr. Engel, Mr. Hastings of Florida, Mr. Borski, 
 Mrs. Maloney of New York, Mr. Foley, Mr. Wolf, Mr. Ehrlich, Mr. King, 
 and Mr. Manton) submitted the following concurrent resolution; which 
        was referred to the Committee on International Relations

_______________________________________________________________________

                         CONCURRENT RESOLUTION

 
                 Concerning the death of Chaim Herzog.

Whereas Chaim Herzog, the sixth President of the State of Israel, passed away on 
        Thursday, April 17, 1997;
Whereas Chaim Herzog, in his very life exemplified the struggles and triumphs of 
        the State of Israel;
Whereas Chaim Herzog had a brilliant military, business, legal, political, and 
        diplomatic career;
Whereas Chaim Herzog represented Israel at the United Nations from 1975-1978 and 
        with great eloquence defended Israel and its values against the forces 
        of darkness and dictatorship;
Whereas Chaim Herzog, as President of Israel from 1983-1993, set a standard for 
        honor and rectitude; and
Whereas Chaim Herzog was a great friend of the United States of America and as 
        President of Israel had the honor of addressing a joint meeting of the 
        United States Congress on November 10, 1987: Now, therefore, be it
    Resolved by the House of Representatives (the Senate concurring), 
That--
            (1) the Congress of the United States notes with great 
        sadness the passing of Chaim Herzog, a great leader of Israel 
        and a great friend of America and the Congress sends its 
        deepest condolences to the entire Herzog family and to the 
        Government and people of Israel; and
            (2) a copy of this resolution shall be transmitted to the 
        Speaker of the Knesset in Jerusalem, to President Ezer Weizman 
        of Israel, and to Mrs. Aura Herzog of Herzlia, Israel.
                                 <all>
```
No. 11-1228.

#### Burnett *v.*Campbell (two judgments).

Ct. App. Kan. Certiorari denied.
I 

116TH CONGRESS 

2D SESSION H. R. 8223 

To amend the Homeland Security Act of 2002 promote evidence-based controls for defending against common cybersecurity threats and cybersecurity risks, and for other purposes. 

IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES 

SEPTEMBER 11, 2020 

Mr. KATKO (for himself, Mr. LANGEVIN, Ms. ESHOO, Miss RICE of New York, 

and Mr. GALLAGHER) introduced the following bill; which was referred 

to the Committee on Homeland Security 

A BILL 

To amend the Homeland Security Act of 2002 promote evidence-based controls for defending against common cybersecurity threats and cybersecurity risks, and for other 

purposes. 

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

3 SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE. 

4 This Act may be cited as the ‘‘Cyber Essentials Act’’. 


kjohnson on DSK79L0C42PROD with BILLS
2 

•HR 8223 IH

1 SEC. 2. EVIDENCE-BASED CONTROLS FOR DEFENDING 

2 AGAINST COMMON CYBERSECURITY 

3 THREATS AND CYBERSECURITY RISKS. 

4 (a) IN GENERAL.—Subsection (b) of section 2203 of 

5 the Homeland Security Act of 2002 (6 U.S.C. 653) is 

6 amended— 

7 (1) in paragraph (3), by striking ‘‘and’’ after 

8 the semicolon at the end; 

9 (2) by redesignating paragraph (4) as para10 graph (5); and 

11 (3) by inserting after paragraph (3) the fol12 lowing new paragraph: 

13 ‘‘(4) in consultation with the National Institute 

14 of Standards and Technology, develop, publish, and 

15 update as necessary guidelines and processes for a 

16 national audience regarding usable evidence-based 

17 controls that have the most impact in defending 

18 against common cybersecurity threats and cyberse19 curity risks; and’’. 

20 (b) RESTRICTION.—Chapter 35 of title 44, United 

21 States Code (commonly known as the ‘‘Paperwork Reduc22 tion Act’’) shall not apply to any action to implement the 

23 amendments made by this Act. 

Æ 


kjohnson on DSK79L0C42PROD with BILLS
No. 11-1336.

#### Hurtgam *v.*Lyndonville Central School District et al.

C. A. 2d Cir. Certiorari denied.
Exhibit 35.1

Servicer Compliance Statement of AmeriCredit Financial Services, Inc.

This Annual Statement as to Compliance is delivered to you pursuant to Section 4.10 (a) of the Sale and Servicing Agreement dated as of November 3,
2014 (the Agreement) and Item 1123 of Regulation AB, executed in connection with the formation of AmeriCredit Automobile Receivables Trust 2014-4 (the Trust), the issuance of the Notes
by the Trust and the closing of the transactions and the execution and delivery of the various documents by AmeriCredit Financial Services, Inc. (the Servicer) and AFS SenSub Corp. in connection therewith. The capitalized terms used
herein shall have the same meanings as in the Agreement.

The undersigned certifies that I am the Executive Vice President, Corporate
Controller and Chief Accounting Officer of the Servicer. I further certify as follows:



| | 1. | I have conducted, or caused to be conducted under my supervision, a review of the Servicer during the preceding period from January 1, 2017 through December 31, 2017, and its performance under the Agreement.
| | -- | ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------



| | 2. | To the best of my knowledge, following such review, the Servicer has fulfilled all its obligations under the Agreement throughout such period, and, to the best of my knowledge, there has been no default in the
fulfillment of any such obligation.
| | -- | -----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------



|                                     |  |                                         |  |  |  |                      
|------------------------------------ |  | --------------------------------------- |  |  |  | ---------------------
|AmeriCredit Financial Services, Inc. |  |                                         |  | 
|                                     |  |                                         | 
|By:                                  |  | /s/ Connie Coffey                       |  |  |  | Dated: March 15, 2018
|                                     |  | Connie Coffey                           |  |  |  |                      
|                                     |  | Executive Vice President, Corporate     |  |  |  |                      
|                                     |  | Controller and Chief Accounting Officer |  |  |  |
#### COM. v. BLENMAN, K.

1430 EDA 2016

Superior Court of Pennsylvania.

09/05/2017

CP-51-CR-0013908-2012 (Philadelphia)

Affirmed
UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT
No. 04-2425

WEN CAI MU, Petitioner,
versus ALBERTO R. GONZALES, Attorney General, Respondent. On Petition for Review of an Order of the Board of Immigration Appeals. (A-77-354-658) Submitted: April 27, 2005 Decided: May 18, 2005 Before MICHAEL, TRAXLER, and DUNCAN, Circuit Judges. Petition denied by unpublished per curiam opinion. Thomas V. Massucci, New York, New York, for Petitioner. Peter D. Keisler, Assistant Attorney General, Michelle E. Gorden, OFFICE OF IMMIGRATION LITIGATION, Washington, D.C.; David W. Harder, UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE, Denver, Colorado, for Respondent. Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. See Local Rule 36(c).- 2 - PER CURIAM: Wen Cai Mu, a native and citizen of the People’s Republic of China, petitions for review of an order of the Board of Immigration Appeals (Board) denying his motion to reconsider its denial of his application for asylum, withholding of removal and protection under the Convention Against Torture. Mu contends that his motion to reconsider provided the Board with new legal arguments. See Matter of Cerna , 20 I. & N. Dec. 399, 405 n.2 (BIA 1991) (“A motion to reconsider ‘is a request that the Board reexamine its decision in light of additional legal arguments, a change of law, or perhaps an argument or aspect of the case which was overlooked, while [a] motion to reopen is usually based upon new evidence or a change in factual circumstances.’"). We review the Board’s denial of a motion to reconsider for an abuse of discretion. See8 C.F.R. § 1003.2(a) (2004); Yanez-Popp v. INS , 998 F.2d 231, 234 (4th Cir. 1993). A motion to reconsider asserts that the Board made an error in its earlier decision. The motion must “state the reasons for the motion by specifying the errors of fact or law in the prior Board decision and shall be s upported by pertinent authority.” 8 C.F.R. § 1003.2(b)(1). Such motions are especially disfavored “in a deportation proceeding, where, as a general matter, every delay works to the advantage of the deportable alien who wishes merely to- 3 - remain in the United States.” INS v. Doherty , 502 U.S. 314, 323 (1992). We have reviewed the administrative record and the Board’s decision and conclude the Board did not abuse its discretion when it denied Mu’s motion to reconsider. Accordingly, we deny the petition for review. We dispense wi th oral argument because the facts and legal contentions are adequately presented in the materials before the court and argument would not aid the decisional process.

PETITION DENIED
IV

105TH CONGRESS

2D SESSION H. CON. RES. 348

Urging the President and Chile to engage in negotiations to conclude a

free trade agreement between the United States and Chile, in the absence

of fast track authority.

IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

OCTOBER 10, 1998

Mr. SMITH of Michigan (for himself and Mr. PETERSON of Minnesota) submitted the following concurrent resolution; which was referred to the

Committee on Ways and Means

CONCURRENT RESOLUTION

Urging the President and Chile to engage in negotiations

to conclude a free trade agreement between the United

States and Chile, in the absence of fast track authority.

1 Resolved by the House of Representatives (the Senate

2 concurring),

3 SECTION 1. SENSE OF CONGRESS RELATING TO CONCLU4 SION OF FREE TRADE AGREEMENT BETWEEN

5 THE UNITED STATES AND CHILE.

6 (a) SENSE OF CONGRESS.—The Congress urges the

7 President and appropriate representatives of the Govern8 ment of Chile to engage in negotiations to conclude a free

9 trade agreement between the United States and Chile in
2

•HCON 348 IH

1 the absence of legislative provisions to consider legislation

2 implementing the agreement under expedited procedures

3 (‘‘fast track authority’’).

4 (b) NEGOTIATIONS REGARDING AGRICULTURE.—

5 (1) IN GENERAL.—In conducting the negotia6 tions described in subsection (a), the President

7 should assess whether United States tariffs on agri8 culture products that were bound under the Uru9 guay Round Agreements are lower than the tariffs

10 bound by Chile.

11 (2) CONSULTATION.—The President should

12 consult with the Committee on Ways and Means and

13 the Committee on Agriculture of the House of Rep14 resentatives and the Committee on Finance and the

15 Committee on Agriculture, Nutrition, and Forestry

16 of the Senate concerning the results of the assess17 ment under paragraph (1), whether it is appropriate

18 for the United States to agree to further tariff re19 ductions based on the conclusions reached in the as20 sessment, and how all applicable negotiating objec21 tives will be met.

22 (c) CONSULTATION WITH CONGRESS BEFORE

23 AGREEMENT ENTERED INTO.—Before entering into any

24 trade agreement described in subsection (a), the President

25 should consult with—
3

•HCON 348 IH

1 (1) the Committee on Ways and Means of the

2 House of Representatives and the Committee on Fi3 nance of the Senate; and

4 (2) each other committee of the House and the

5 Senate, and each joint committee of the Congress,

6 which has jurisdiction over legislation involving sub7 ject matters which would be affected by the trade

8 agreement.

Æ
```

[Congressional Bills 105th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[H. Con. Res. 327 Introduced in House (IH)]

105th CONGRESS
  2d Session
H. CON. RES. 327

 To redesignate the United States Capitol Police headquarters building 
 located at 119 D Street, Northeast, Washington, D.C., as the ``Eney, 
                 Chestnut, Gibson Memorial Building''.

_______________________________________________________________________

                    IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

                           September 18, 1998

  Mr. Hoyer submitted the following concurrent resolution; which was 
     referred to the Committee on Transportation and Infrastructure

_______________________________________________________________________

                         CONCURRENT RESOLUTION

 
 To redesignate the United States Capitol Police headquarters building 
 located at 119 D Street, Northeast, Washington, D.C., as the ``Eney, 
                 Chestnut, Gibson Memorial Building''.

Whereas the United States Capitol Police force has protected the Capitol and 
        upheld the beacon of democracy in America;
Whereas 3 officers of the United States Capitol Police force have lost their 
        lives in the line of duty;
Whereas Sgt. Christopher Eney was killed on August 24, 1984, during a training 
        exercise;
Whereas officer Jacob ``J.J.'' Chestnut was killed on July 24, 1998, while 
        guarding his post at the Capitol; and
Whereas Detective John Gibson was killed on July 24, 1998, while protecting the 
        lives of visitors, staff, and the Office of the Majority Whip: Now, 
        therefore, be it
    Resolved by the House of Representatives (the Senate concurring), 
That the United States Capitol Police headquarters building located at 
119 D Street, Northeast, Washington, D.C., shall be known and 
designated as the ``Eney, Chestnut, Gibson Memorial Building''.
                                 <all>
```