alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
EX-35 (d)
(logo) OCWEN


ANNUAL SERVICER COMPLIANCE STATEMENT
PURSUANT TO ITEM 1123 OF REGULATION AB

March 8, 2007

RE: Renaissance 2006-4

For the fiscal year ended December 31, 2006 (the "Reporting Period"), Ocwen Loan
Servicing, LLC ("OLS") furnishes this annual servicer compliance statement
pursuant to Item 1123 of Regulation AB, indicating its compliance with the
servicing standards of the Securities & Exchange Commission as set forth in
Regulation AB, 17 CFR Section 229.1100, et seq., ("Regulation AB"). In this
regard, I make the following representations, which are true to the best of my
knowledge and belief in all material respects.

1.   A review of the servicing activities of OLS during the Reporting Period,
     and of its performance under the Servicing Agreement dated as of December
     28, 2006 (the "Agreement"), has been performed under my supervision.

2.   To the best of my knowledge, based on this review, OLS has fulfilled all of
     its obligations under the Agreement in all material respects throughout the
     Reporting Period.

By: /s/ Ronald M. Faris
Name:  Ronald M. Faris
Title: President


Ocwen Loan Servicing LLC
1661 Worthington Road Suite 100
Centrepark West
West Palm Beach, FL 33409
### C OURT OF 

### A PPEALS FOR THE



### F IRST 

### D ISTRICT OF 

### T EXAS AT 

### H OUSTON



### O RDER ON 

### M OTION

Cause Number: 01

- 13

- 00102

- CV

Trial Court Cause

Number: 907501

Style: Svetlana B. Poplin

v Amerisure Insurance Company

Date motion filed * : November 11, 2014

Type of motion: Motion for Rehearing

Party filing motion: Appellant

Document to be filed: no

Is appeal accelerated? YES NO

Ordered that motion is:

Granted

If document is to be filed, d ocument due:

Absent extraordinary circumstances, the Court will not grant additional motions to extend time

Denied

Dismissed ( e.g. , want of jurisdiction, moot)

Other:

Judge's signature: /s/ Sherry Radack

Acting individually Acting for the Court

Panel consi sts of Chief Justice Radack, and Justices Bland and Huddle

Date: January 1 4 , 2014
Briefs Stricken and Order filed November 1 9 , 2020

In The 

## Fourteenth Court of Appeals

____________ NO. 14

- 18

- 01082

- CR

____________ TAMMI BLEIMEYER , Appellant

V.
THE STATE OF TEXAS , Appellee

On Appeal from the 178th District Court

Harris County, Texas Trial Court Cause No. 1458861



### ORDER
Appellant’s brief and the State’s brief each contain s sensitive data in that each
disclose s the name s of multiple people (the complainant and witnesses) who were minor s at the time the offense was committed. Tex. R. App. P. 9.10(a)(3). Sensitive data must be redacted from any filing. Tex. R. App. P. 9.10(b). Because the sensitive data is not redacted, the brief s are STRICKEN

. Appellant and the State are ordered
to file brief

s that compl y with Tex. R. App. P. 9.10 by November 30, 2020

.

PER CURIAM Panel consists of Justices Christopher, Wise , and Zimmerer.
Ron Curry, Administrator 

US EPA, Region 6 {6-RA) 

1445 Ross Avenue, Suite 1200 

Dallas, Texas 75202 

RE: State of Louisiana 

Recommendations for Sulfur Dioxide Area Designations 

March 20, 2015 Updated Guidance 

Dear Mr. Curry: 

On March 20, 2015, the United States Environmental Protection Agency (US EPA) issued "Updated 

Guidance for Area Designations for the 2010 Primary Sulfur Dioxide National Ambient Air Quality 

Standard." This guidance was based upon a consent decree entered into on March 2, 2015, in the 

US District Court of the Northern District of California by the US EPA and plaintiffs Sierra Club and 

Natural Resources Defense Council (Case No. 13-cv-03953). States with indicated areas were given until 

September 18, 2015, to submit a recommendation to US EPA. 

The first phase of designations, which will be promulgated by July 2, 2016, address stationary sources 

that according to the US EPA's Air Markets Database either emitted more than 16,000 tons of S02 or 

emitted more than 2,600 tons of S02 and had an average emission rate of 0.45 lbs. of S02/mmbtu or 

higher in 2012. Three facilities in Louisiana were identified as fitting these categories: 

1.) Nelson Industrial Steam Company- Calcasieu Parish; 

2.) R S Nelson Generation Plant- Calcasieu Parish; and 

3.) Dolet Hills Power Station- DeSoto Parish. 

Therefore, in accordance with Section 107(d) of the Clean Air Act Amendments of 1990 the state of 

Louisiana, through the Louisiana Department of Environmental Quality (LDEQ), is pleased to propose 

recommendations for the areas indicated as follows: 

• Based on technical reviews of available monitoring data and supportive modeling results 

that demonstrate the ambient air in the area surrounding the two facilities located in 

Calcasieu Parish are in compliance with 2010 S02 NAAQS, the Department recommends a 

designation of attainment. 

• Based on the lack of a qualified monitor in the area surrounding the facility in DeSoto 

Parish, LDEQ recommends a designation of unclassifiable. At this time, LDEQ is working with 

facility representatives to properly site, install, and operate a S02 monitor prior to the end 

of 2015. In accordance with the Data Requirements Rule for the 

2010 1-Hour S02 Primary NAAQS, air quality in DeSoto Parish would be addressed in future 

area designations (80 FR 51052). 

Post Office Box 4301 • Baton Rouge, Louisiana 70821-4301 • Phone 225-219-3953 • Fax 225-219-3971 

www.deq.louisiana.gov 
C: Mark Hansen, Acting Associate Director of Air Programs 

Guy Donaldson, Chief Air Planning Section 

PMH/VHA/apdp 

Enclosures: 

Calcasieu Parish Supporting Document 

DeSoto Parish Supporting Document
#### COM. v. CHERRINGTON, O.

2035 MDA 2016

Superior Court of Pennsylvania.

9/1/2017

CP-40-CR-0002889-2011

(Luzerne)

Affirmed
#### UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff-Appellee v. Charles Robert TILGHMAN, Defendant-Appellant

No. 17-10476 Conference Calendar

United States Court of Appeals, Fifth Circuit.

Filed February 20, 2018

James Wesley Hendrix, Assistant U.S. Attorney, U.S. Attorney’s Office, Northern District of Texas, Dallas, TX, for Plaintiff-Appellee

Charles Robert Tilghman, Pro Se

Before REAVLEY, CLEMENT, and HO, Circuit Judges.

PER CURIAM: *

The attorney appointed to represent Charles Robert Tilghman has moved for leave to withdraw and has filed a brief in accordance with *Anders v. California,*386 U.S. 738, 87 S.Ct. 1396, 18 L.Ed.2d 493 (1967), and *United States v. Flores,*632 F.3d 229 (5th Cir. 2011). Tilghman has not filed a response. We have reviewed counsel’s brief and the relevant portions of the record reflected therein. We concur with counsel’s assessment that the appeal presents no nonfrivolous issue for appellate review. Accordingly, counsel’s motion for leave to withdraw is GRANTED, counsel is excused from further responsibilities herein, and the APPEAL IS DISMISSED. *See*5th Cir. R. 42.2.

*

 Pursuant to 5th Cir. R. 47.5, the court has determined that this opinion should not be published and is not precedent except under *459the limited circumstances set forth in 5th Cir. R. 47.5.4.
In the United States Court of Federal Claims

OFFICE OF SPECIAL MASTERS 

No. 16-0052V 

Filed: April 27, 2016 

UNPUBLISHED 

* * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * 

DIANA HAGERMAN, * 

* 

Petitioner, * Ruling on Entitlement; Concession;

* Influenza (“Flu”) Vaccine; Shoulder

* Injury Related to Vaccine Administration

SECRETARY OF HEALTH * (“SIRVA”); Special Processing Unit

AND HUMAN SERVICES, * (“SPU”)

 * 

Respondent. * 

 * 

* * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * 

Maximillian J. Muller, Muller Brazil, LLP, Dresher, PA, for petitioner. 

Ann Donohue Martin, U.S. Department of Justice, Washington, DC, for respondent. 

RULING ON ENTITLEMENT1

Dorsey, Chief Special Master: 

On January 12, 2016, Diana Hagerman (“petitioner”) filed a petition for 

compensation under the National Vaccine Injury Compensation Program, 42 U.S.C. 

§300aa-10, et seq.,

2 (the “Vaccine Act”). Petitioner alleges that she suffered injuries to

her right shoulder, which were caused by an influenza (“flu”) vaccine she received on 

November 4, 2014. Petition at 1. The case was assigned to the Special Processing 

Unit of the Office of Special Masters. 

On April 27, 2016, respondent filed her Rule 4(c) report in which she concedes 

that petitioner is entitled to compensation in this case. Respondent’s Rule 4(c) Report 

at 1. Specifically, respondent states that “petitioner’s right shoulder injury is consistent 

with SIRVA, and that it was caused in fact by the flu vaccine she received on November 

4, 2014.” Id. at 3-4. Respondent further agrees that petitioner has met the statutory 

requirements for entitlement to compensation. Id.

1 Because this unpublished ruling contains a reasoned explanation for the action in this case, the 

undersigned intends to post it on the United States Court of Federal Claims' website, in accordance with 

the E-Government Act of 2002. 44 U.S.C. § 3501 note (2012) (Federal Management and Promotion of 

Electronic Government Services). In accordance with Vaccine Rule 18(b), petitioner has 14 days to 

identify and move to redact medical or other information, the disclosure of which would constitute an 

unwarranted invasion of privacy. If, upon review, the undersigned agrees that the identified material fits 

within this definition, the undersigned will redact such material from public access. 

2 National Childhood Vaccine Injury Act of 1986, Pub. L. No. 99-660, 100 Stat. 3755. Hereinafter, for 

ease of citation, all “§” references to the Vaccine Act will be to the pertinent subparagraph of 42 U.S.C. § 

300aa (2012). 

v.
2 

 In view of respondent’s concession and the evidence before me, the 

undersigned finds that petitioner is entitled to compensation. 

IT IS SO ORDERED.

 s/Nora Beth Dorsey 

 Nora Beth Dorsey 

 Chief Special Master
<PAGE>

EXHIBIT 31.1

CERTIFICATION

I, Tony Tong, certify that:

1. I have reviewed this quarterly report on Form 10-Q / A#1 of PacificNet Inc.;

2. Based on my knowledge, this report does not contain any untrue statement of a
material fact or omit to state a material fact necessary to make the statements
made, in light of the circumstances under which such statements were made, not
misleading with respect to the period covered by this report;

3. Based on my knowledge, the financial statements, and other financial
information included in this report, fairly present in all material respects the
financial condition, results of operations and cash flows of the registrant as
of, and for, the periods presented in this report;

4. The registrant's other certifying officers and I are responsible for
establishing and maintaining disclosure controls and procedures (as defined in
Exchange Act Rules 13a-15(e) and 15d-15(e)) for the registrant and have:

(a) designed such disclosure controls and procedures, or caused such disclosure
controls and procedures to be designed under our supervision, to ensure that
material information relating to the registrant, including its consolidated
subsidiaries, is made known to us by others within those entities, particularly
during the period in which this report is being prepared;

(b) evaluated the effectiveness of the registrant's disclosure controls and
procedures and presented in this report our conclusions about the effectiveness
of the disclosure controls and procedures, as of the end of the period covered
by this report based on such evaluation; and

(c) disclosed in this report any change in the registrant's internal control
over financial reporting that occurred during the registrant's most recent
fiscal quarter that has materially affected, or is reasonably likely to
materially affect, the registrant's internal control over financial reporting;
and;

5. The registrant's other certifying officers and I have disclosed, based on our
most recent evaluation of internal control over financial reporting, to the
registrant's auditors and the audit committee of the registrant`s board of
directors (or persons performing the equivalent functions):

(a) all significant deficiencies and material weaknesses in the design or
operation of internal control over financial reporting which are reasonably
likely to adversely affect the registrant`s ability to record, process,
summarize and report financial information; and

(b) any fraud, whether or not material, that involves management or other
employees who have a significant role in the registrant's internal controls over
financial reporting.


Date: November 3, 2006                      /s/ TONY TONG
                                            --------------------
                                            Tony Tong
                                            Chairman and Chief Executive Officer
                                            (Principal Executive Officer)
EXHIBIT 11

                               TALK VISUAL CORPORATION

COMPUTATION OF WEIGHTED AVERAGE
COMMON STOCK SHARES OUTSTANDING
<TABLE>
<CAPTION>

                                                 Total Number    Three Months Ended
                                                   Of Shares       March 31, 2001
                                                 ------------    ------------------

<S>                                               <C>               <C>
Outstanding shares as of January 1, 2001          77,235,840        77,235,840

Sale of common shares on 1/03/01                   1,163,273         1,124,497

Sale of common shares on 1/17/01                   3,853,740         3,125,811

Preferred stock exchange on  1/23/01                 848,190           631,430

Exercise of options on  1/31/01                    2,000,000         1,311,111

Exercise of options on  2/14/01                    1,200,000           600,000

Sale of common shares on 3/02/01                   1,986,352           640,047

Sale of common shares on 3/19/01                   2,493,898           332,520

Exercise of options on  3/19/01                      324,750            43,300
                                                  ----------        ----------

Total Weighted Average Shares Outstanding         91,106,043        85,044,557
                                                  ==========        ==========


Net Loss                                                           $(  988,133)
                                                                    ==========
Net Loss per common share (1)                                      $     (0.01)

</TABLE>


(1) The effect of common stock options and warrants are excluded from diluted
earnings per share as their inclusion would be anti-dilutive for the
three month period ending March  31, 2001
No. 11-1301.

#### Cantrell, Individually and as Administrator of the Estate of Cantrell, et al. *v.*City of Murphy, Texas, et al.

C. A. 5th Cir. Certiorari denied.
* 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 UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT

 

No. 02-50088

Summary Calendar

 

JAMES SULLIVAN, A Minor, 

by James Sorrells, Next Friend (father),

Plaintiff-Appellant,

versus

JO ANNE B. BARNHART, COMMISSIONER OF SOCIAL SECURITY,

Defendant-Appellee.

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

Appeal from the United States District Court

for the Western District of Texas

USDC No. A-01-CV-338-SS

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

December 30, 2002

Before GARWOOD, WIENER, and DENNIS, Circuit Judges.

PER CURIAM:*

James Sorrells (“Sorrells”), on behalf of his minor son

James Sullivan, appeals the district court’s judgment affirming

the Social Security Commissioner’s denial of his application for

supplemental security income (SSI). Sorrells contends that the

Administrative Law Judge’s (ALJ) findings were not supported by

substantial evidence. 
No. 02-50088

-2-

“Appellate review of the [Commissioner’s] denial of

disability benefits is limited to determining whether the

decision is supported by substantial evidence in the record and

whether the proper legal standards were used in evaluating the

evidence.” Villa v. Sullivan, 895 F.2d 1019, 1021 (5th Cir.

1990)(citation omitted); Ripley v. Chater, 67 F.3d 552, 555 (5th

Cir. 1995). “Substantial evidence is more than a scintilla, less

than a preponderance, and is such relevant evidence as a

reasonable mind might accept as adequate to support a

conclusion.” Villa, 895 F.2d at 1021-22 (citation omitted). 

The record contains substantial evidence supporting the

Commissioner’s conclusion that Sullivan’s condition did not

result in marked and severe functional limitations which

warranted SSI benefits. See 42 U.S.C. § 1382c(a)(3)(C)(i). 

Because the Commissioner’s decision was supported by substantial

evidence, the decision of the district court is affirmed.

AFFIRMED.
No. 11-1155.

#### Blue Cross & Blue Shield of Montana, Inc. *v.*Fossen et al.

C. A. 9th Cir.; and
FO R PUB L ICAT IO N UNIT E D ST AT E S CO URT O F APPE AL S FO R T H E NINT HCIRCUIT
JO H N T E IX E IRA; ST E V E NO B RIGA; GARY GA M AZ A; CAL G U N S FO UNDAT IO N , INC., (CG F); SE CO ND AM E NDM E NT FO UNDAT IO N , INC., (SAF); CAL IFO RNIA ASSO CIAT IO N O F FE DE RAL FIRE ARM S L ICE NSE E S, (Cal-FFL ) , Pla i ntiffs-Appe lla nts,
v. CO U NT Y O F AL AM E DA; AL A M E DA CO U NT Y B O ARD O F SUPE RV ISO RS, as a policy m a k

ing body ; W IL M A CH A N, in he roffic i a l c apac ity ; NAT E M IL E Y, in his offic ial c apac ity ; KE IT H CARSO N, in his offic i al c apac ity ,

De fe nda nts-Appe lle e s. No. 13-17132 D.C . No. 3:12-c v-03288-WHO Northe rn Distric t of C a lifornia , San Franc isc o
O R DE R

T H O M A S , C hie f Judge : Upon thevote of a

m a jority of nonre c use d

a c tive judge s, it is ordere d tha t this c a s e be re he ard e n ba n c pursua nt to Fe de ra l R

ule of Appe lla

te Proc e dure 35(a ) 

# F IL ED
DEC 27 2016 M OLLY C. DW Y E R, CLERK U. S. CO URT O F APPEALSand C irc u it R ule 35-3. Thethre e -judge pa ne l opinion sha

ll not be c ite d a s pre c e de nt by

or to a ny c ourt of theNinth C irc uit.

2
#### John M. DUTTON, Plaintiff-Appellant, v. MUELLER & DRURY PC; et al., Defendants-Appellees.

No. 17-16202

United States Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit.

Submitted December 18, 2017 *

Filed January 23, 2018

John M. Dutton, Pro Se

Douglas V. Drury, Esquire, Attorney, Mueller *&*Drury, P.C., Mesa, AZ, for Defendants-Appellees

Before: WALLACE, SILVERMAN, and BYBEE, Circuit Judges.

*

 The panel unanimously concludes this case is suitable for decision without oral argument. *See*Fed. R. App. P. 34(a)(2).

MEMORANDUM **

John M. Dutton appeals pro se from the district court’s judgment dismissing his action alleging violations of the Fair Debt Collection Practices Act (“FDCPA”). We have jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. § 1291. We review de novo a district court’s dismissal under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 12(b)(6). *Cervantes v. Countrywide Home Loans, Inc.,*656 F.3d 1034, 1040 (9th Cir. 2011). We affirm.

The district court properly dismissed Dutton’s action because Dutton failed to allege facts sufficient to show a qualifying “debt” and that Dutton is a “consumer” under the FDCPA. *See*15 U.S.C. § 1692a(3), (5) (defining “consumer” and “debt” under the FDCPA).

The district court did not abuse its discretion by dismissing the complaint without leave to amend because amendment would be futile. *See Cervantes,*656 F.3d at 1041 (setting forth standard of review and explaining that dismissal without leave to amend is proper when amendment would be futile); *see also Walls v. Wells Fargo Bank, N.A.,*276 F.3d 502, 510-11 (9th Cir. 2002) (holding that an FDCPA claim based on an alleged violation of the Bankruptcy *316Code is precluded because the sole remedy “lies in the Bankruptcy Code”).

We reject as unsupported by the record Dutton’s contention that the district judge was biased.

AFFIRMED.

**

**This disposition is not appropriate for publication and is not precedent except as provided by Ninth Circuit Rule 36-3.
<PAGE>


                                                                    Exhibit 23.1

                         CONSENT OF INDEPENDENT AUDITORS

We consent to the reference to our firm under the caption "Experts" in the
Registration Statement (Form S-3) and related Prospectus of Harken Energy
Corporation for the registration of 32,267,385 Nontransferable Common Stock
Subscription Rights, 95,238,096 Preferred Stock Purchase Rights, and 95,238,096
shares of its common stock and to the incorporation by reference therein of our
report dated March 25, 2002, with respect to the consolidated financial
statements of Harken Energy Corporation included in its Annual Report (Form
10-K) for the year ended December 31, 2001, filed with the Securities and
Exchange Commission.

                                                           /s/ ERNST & YOUNG LLP

Houston, Texas
September 12, 2002
105TH CONGRESS

2D SESSION H. CON. RES. 27

CONCURRENT RESOLUTION

Recognizing the importance of African-American

ebrate African-American music.of the United States to study, reflect on, and celmusic to global culture and calling on the people
105TH CONGRESS

2D SESSION H. CON. RES. 27

CONCURRENT RESOLUTION

Whereas artists, songwriters, producers, engineers, educators,

executives, and other professionals in the music industry

provide inspiration and leadership through their creation

of music, dissemination of educational information, and

financial contributions to charitable and communitybased organizations;
2

•HCON 27 EH

Whereas African-American music is indigenous to the United

States and originates from African genres of music;

Whereas African-American genres of music such as gospel,

blues, jazz, rhythm and blues, rap, and hip-hop have

their roots in the African-American experience;

Whereas African-American music has a pervasive influence

on dance, fashion, language, art, literature, cinema,

media, advertisements, and other aspects of culture;

Whereas the prominence of African-American music in the

20th century has reawakened interest in the legacy and

heritage of the art form of African-American music;

Whereas African-American music embodies the strong presence of, and significant contributions made by, AfricanAmericans in the music industry and society as a whole;

Whereas the multibillion dollar African-American music industry contributes greatly to the domestic and worldwide

economy; and

Whereas African-American music has a positive impact on

and broad appeal to diverse groups, both nationally and

internationally: Now, therefore, be it

1 Resolved by the House of Representatives (the Senate

2 concurring), That the Congress—

3 (1) recognizes the importance of the contribu4 tions of African-American music to global culture

5 and the positive impact of African-American music

6 on global commerce; and

7 (2) calls on the people of the United States to

8 take the opportunity to study, reflect on, and cele-
3

•HCON 27 EH

1 brate the majesty, vitality, and importance of Afri2 can-American music.

Passed the House of Representatives October 13,

1998.

Attest:

Clerk.