alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
#### Ada Newkirk, *et vir.,*v. Highway Engineering & Construction Co., Inc.

152 So. 710.

Opinion Filed February 19, 1934.

*S. S. Sandford,*for Appellants;

*Knight, Thompson & Turner,*for Appellee.

Per Curiam.

— In this case motion is made to dismiss the appeal as frivolous because it was taken from an order entered by the chancellor denying defendant’s motion to set aside and vacate a decree *pro confesso*and final decree consequent thereon long after the entry of the final decree. The transcript shows the final decree to have been entered February 15, 1933. The motion to set aside the decree *pro confesso*was filed May 29, 1933. The order denying the motion to vacate, which is the order appealed from, was not entered until September 14, 1933.

Whatever remedy appellants may now have, if any, to cure the situation attempted to be rectified, it is certain that the final decree cannot be opened up or affected by the appeal taken from an order entered after such final decree became conclusive as against appeal; therefore, on the authority of Gasque v. Ball, 71 Fla. 257, 71 Sou. Rep. 329, *32and the reasoning therein set forth, the appeal herein should be dismissed, and it is so ordered.

Appeal dismissed.

Davis, C. J., and Whitfield, Terrell and Buford, J. J., concur.
|  (logo) WELLS

           FARGO | Commercial Mortgage Servicing

D1086-120, 12th Floor 

550 South Tryon Street 

Charlotte, NC 28202

1-800-326-1334 |
|----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|

 

 

ANNUAL STATEMENT OF COMPLIANCE

 

Reference is hereby made to that certain Pooling and Servicing Agreement dated as of July 1, 2015, by and among WELLS FARGO COMMERCIAL MORTGAGE SECURITIES, INC., as Depositor, WELLS FARGO BANK, NATIONAL ASSOCIATION, as Master Servicer, RIALTO CAPITAL ADVISORS, LLC, as Special Servicer, PENTALPHA SURVEILLANCE LLC, as Trust Advisor, WELLS FARGO BANK, NATIONAL ASSOCIATION, as Certificate  Administrator, as Tax Administrator and as Custodian and WILMINGTON TRUST, NATIONAL ASSOCIATION, as Trustee, with respect to Commercial Mortgage Pass-Through Certificates Series 2015-NXS2 (the "Agreement"). Capitalized terms used herein not otherwise defined shall have the meanings assigned in the Agreement.

 

Pursuant to Section 11.12 of this Agreement, I, Daniel Bober, Executive Vice President of Commercial Mortgage Services do hereby certify that:

 

1.A review of the activities of the Master Servicer during the period from July 1, 2015 through December 31, 2015 (the “Reporting Period”), and of its performance per the Agreement during such period has been made under my supervision, and

 

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

 

 

IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the undersigned has executed this Certificate as of the 4th day of March 2016.

 

 

 

 

/s/ Daniel Bober

Daniel Bober

Executive Vice President 

Wells Fargo Bank

 

|  Wells Fargo Bank, N.A |  (logo) Together we’ll go far

  |
|-----------------------------|--------------------------------------------------|
**REGULATORY EVALUATION**

**Directorate Identifier:**

__ 2010

________ - NM -

____ 212

______ - AD **Executive Order 12866:** Could the AD be considered a “significant regulatory action”? YES ( ) explain NO (X) **DOT Regulatory Policies and Procedures:** Is the AD significan t? YES ( ) explain NO (X) **Regulatory Flexibility Act:** Will the AD have a significant economic impact on a substantial number of small entities? YES ( ) explain NO (X) **Intrastate Aviation in Alaska:** This AD could affect intrastate aviation in Alaska. Is it appropriate to include specific requirements for aircraft operated in Alaska, where aviation might be the only mode of transportation? YES ( ) explain NO (X)
#### PHILLIPS, C. v. STONE, G.

1481 WDA 2016

Superior Court of Pennsylvania.

9/25/2017

168 of 2014

(Westmoreland)

Affirmed/Vacated/Remanded
Exhibit 35.3

OFFICERS CERTIFICATE

I, Karen Montbach, a
Managing Director of Citibank, N.A. (the Company), hereby certify, with respect to the Pooling and Servicing Agreement, dated as of February 1, 2015 (the Agreement), by and among Citigroup Commercial Mortgage Securities
Inc., as depositor, Wells Fargo Bank, National Association, as master servicer, Midland Loan Services, a division of PNC Bank, National Association, as special servicer, Park Bridge Lender Services LLC, as operating advisor, Citibank, N.A., as
certificate administrator (the Certificate Administrator), and Deutsche Bank Trust Company Americas, as trustee, the following:

1. A review of the Companys activities as Certificate Administrator during the reporting period ending December 31, 2016 and its
performance under the Agreement has been made under my supervision.

2. To the best of my knowledge, based on such review, as of and for
the reporting period ending December 31, 2016, the Company has fulfilled all of its obligations under the Agreement in all material respects throughout the reporting period.

This statement is given by the undersigned as an authorized officer of the Company and not in the undersigneds individual capacity.

Date: February 27, 2017



Citibank, N.A.By:

/s/ Karen MontbachName:

Karen MontbachTitle:

Managing Director


CGCMT 2015-GC27
# C_2021278EN.01006002.xml

| 12.7.2021 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 278/60 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

12.7.2021

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 278/60

---

Action brought on 20 May 2021 — Daimler v EUIPO (Representation of three-pronged elements on a black background IV)

(Case T-279/21)

(2021/C 278/82)

Language of the case: German

Parties

Applicant: Daimler AG (Stuttgart, Germany) (represented by: N. Siebertz, lawyer)

Defendant: European Union Intellectual Property Office (EUIPO)

Details of the proceedings before EUIPO

Trade mark at issue: Application for EU figurative mark (Representation of three-pronged elements on a black background IV) — Application for registration No 18 206 087

Contested decision: Decision of the Fifth Board of Appeal of EUIPO of 18 March 2021 in Case R 1898/2020-5

Form of order sought

The applicant claims that the Court should:

| — | annul the contested decision; |
| --- | --- |

—

annul the contested decision;

| — | order EUIPO to pay the costs of the proceedings and those incurred in the appeal proceedings. |
| --- | --- |

—

order EUIPO to pay the costs of the proceedings and those incurred in the appeal proceedings.

Plea in law

| — | Infringement of Article 7(1)(b) of Regulation (EU) 2017/1001 of the European Parliament and of the Council. |
| --- | --- |

—

Infringement of Article 7(1)(b) of Regulation (EU) 2017/1001 of the European Parliament and of the Council.

---
No. 11-1340.

#### Bey et al. *v.*City of New York, New York, et al.

C. A. 2d Cir. Certiorari denied.
# office of Lnvironmenta Fl{). f5ox,71,7

, . ,hL.,,1,.

rr,n, r'r{-h. \cu \ lcrrcc

, .q -i.'.. i'hone (ioir c95l-+rlZ. I'ar (iO5.,r Ei2-l+52

January 5, 2011 Phillip Jernings USEPA Region 6 1445 Ross Ave, Suite 1200 Dallas,Texas7 5202-27

33 Subject:Ohkay Owingeh certification regarding PGP NPDES. Dear Mr. Jennings: It is Ohkay Owingeh's desire to makea written determination in the abovereferenced subject. Ohkay Owingeh is requesting the following conditions: Based on CWA section401 Certification under the applicableprovisions of CWA section

208 (e), 301, 302,303,306, and 307. That Ohkay Owingeh's Water Quality Standards not be exceeded,

and that the Ohkay Owingeh Office of Environmental Affain be provided with a copy of the Notice Of Intent (NOI), and Notice of Termination (NOT) at the same time it is submittedto the Environmental ProtectionAgency, and that a copy of the proposedaction (project plan) will be provided to the tribe upon their request. If you haveany questions please feel free to contactme at (505) 8524212. Sincerely, ^ ^ 

# Na*-t ,$ kd"-ttf=- Mr. Charles

Lujan, Dir:6ctor Ohkay OwingehOOEA 

# Affairs

I XC:
3,152

0

897

4,049

BallotsCounted

34

134

0

168

BallotsRejected

MAINE

Mail,Fax,Email

Election/Registrar's

Office

Internet

DM

V

Public

Assistance

Office

DisabilitiesAgency

Military

RecruitmentOffice

OtherState

Agency

RegistrationDrives

Registration:Other

206,113

18,082 27,643

15,234 19,197

0 0 0 0 0

RegistrationFormSource

TotalRegisteredVoters

1,065,100

SectionA-VoterRegistration

RegistrationFormsReceived

286,269

ConfirmationNotificationsSent

110

Polling

Place

UOCAVA Absentee Provisional

Ballot

EarlyVote

Center

Voteby

Mail

Turnout:

Other

516,142

251,701

4,049 0 0 0 0

SectionF-TurnoutbyMethod

CountedFull Counted

Part

Rejected Provisional:

Other

193

0 0 0

SectionE-ProvisionalBallots

UniformedService

Non-militaryOverseas

Other

SectionB-UOCAVA

1,194

3,627

0

4,821

BallotsTransmitted

TOTAL TOTAL

ProvisionalBallotTotal:193 TurnoutTotal:771,892

Select: MAINE

TOTAL

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

                          

  

2016EAVSDataBrief 

U i
# The Often Subtle Distinction Between Anti-U.S. and Pro-Putin Rhetoric

/ Published March 15, 2022

By Philip Bump, National correspondent | March 15, 2022 at 12:18 p.m. EDT | Washington Post

The Washington Post provides brief timeline of events that took a little noticed post about covert weapons research from an anti-vaccine activist to the country’s most watched cable news network.

**Read More...**
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT

____________________

No. 95-50864

_____________________

GERALD HALL,

Plaintiff

versus

ROY BENTON, ET AL.,

Defendants,

JESS THOMPSON; PEGGY THOMPSON;

FRATERNAL ORDER OF POLICE, LODGE 11,

Defendants-Appellees,

RON BENTON; CHARLIE BLANKENSHIP;

BOBBY WELBORN; RON SARTOR,

Defendants-Third Party

Plaintiffs-Appellees,

versus

ED KREVIT; RUSTY HILL; GARY PAINTER,

Sheriff of Midland County, Texas,

Third Party DefendantsAppellants.

_________________________________________________________________

On Appeal from the United States District Court

for the Western District of Texas

(M0-94-CV-129)

_________________________________________________________________

October 7, 1996

Before POLITZ, Chief Judge, SMITH and DUHÈ, Circuit Judges.
*Pursuant to Local Rule 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 Local Rule 47.5.4.

2

PER CURIAM:*

Ed Krevit, Rusty Hill, and Gary Painter, Third Party DefendantsAppellants, appeal the district court’s rejection, at this stage of

the proceedings, of their assertion of qualified immunity from the

claims of Third Party Plaintiffs. Having considered the briefs and

oral arguments of counsel, and pertinent parts of the record, and

finding that genuine issues of material fact currently exist, we

conclude that we lack jurisdiction and the appeal is, accordingly,

DISMISSED.
ex10-39.htm


Exhibit 10.34




SECOND AMENDMENT


TO CONSULTING AGREEMENT












This SECOND AMENDMENT TO CONSULTING AGREEMENT is entered into as of December 26, 2013 (the “Amendment”) by and between Echo Therapeutics, Inc., a Delaware corporation (the “Company”), and Robert F. Doman, an individual (“Consultant”).


 







 


RECITALS


 


WHEREAS, reference is hereby made to the Consulting Agreement entered into as of August 26, 2013 (as amended, restated, supplemented or otherwise modified, the “Agreement”) by and between Consultant and the Company; and


 


WHEREAS, Consultant and the Company have mutually agreed that the term of the Agreement be amended as set forth herein.


 


NOW, THEREFORE, the parties hereto agree as follows:


 


1. Defined Terms.  Unless otherwise defined herein, terms used herein are used as defined in the Agreement, as amended hereby.


 


2. Amendment of the Agreement.  Section 2 of the Agreement is hereby amended by deleting the phrase “for a period of four months” and replacing it with “until March 26, 2014”.   Except as expressly modified herein, all other provisions of the Agreement shall remain unchanged and in full force and effect.


 


3. Effective Date.  This Amendment shall be effective as of December 26, 2013.


 


4. Governing Law.  This Amendment shall be governed by and construed in accordance with the laws of the Commonwealth of Pennsylvania.


 




  





-1-











  








IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the parties hereto have caused this Second Amendment to Consulting Agreement to be duly executed as of the date first above written.


 


 



	
  

	
ECHO THERAPEUTICS, INC.







 



	
  

	
By: /s/ William Grieco







William Grieco


Chairman, Nominating and Corporate 


Governance Committee of the Board


of Directors








 



	
  

	
Dated: December 26, 2013









 


 



	
  

	
ROBERT F. DOMAN







 



	
  

	
/s/ Robert F. Doman







 



	
  

	
Dated: December 23, 2013
#### COM. v. MACE, L.

1528 MDA 2016

Superior Court of Pennsylvania.

09/08/2017

CP-67-CR-0001376-2015 (York)

Vacated/Remanded
#### Richard MCCLOSKEY, Petitioner-Appellant, v. WYOMING ATTORNEY GENERAL, Respondent-Appellee.

No. 17-8056

United States Court of Appeals, Tenth Circuit.

Filed February 5, 2018

(D.C. No. 1:17-CV-00045-SWS) (D. Wyoming)

Richard McCloskey, Pro Se

Before PHILLIPS, McKAY, and McHUGH, Circuit Judges.

ORDER DENYING CERTIFICATE OF APPEALABILITY *

Monroe G. McKay, Circuit Judge

Petitioner Richard McCloskey seeks a certificate of appealability to appeal the district court’s dismissal of his § 2254 ha-beas corpus petition.

In his habeas petition, Petitioner sought review of various state criminal proceedings against him. These proceedings were either recently decided cases that Petitioner had not appealed in the Wyoming state courts, or ongoing criminal cases in which a final judgment had not yet been entered. The district court thus concluded that the federal habeas petition must be dismissed without prejudice based on (1) Petitioner’s failure to exhaust his state court remedies, *see*28 U.S.C. § 2254(b)(1)(A); *see also Allen v. Zavaras,*568 F.3d 1197, 1202 (10th *789Cir. 2009) (dismissal of a habeas petition is proper if the failure to exhaust is clear from the face of the petition), and (2) the *Younger*abstention doctrine, *see Younger v. Harris,*401 U.S. 37, 91 S.Ct. 746, 27 L.Ed.2d 669 (1971).

After thoroughly reviewing Petitioner’s brief and the record on appeal, we conclude that reasonable jurists would not debate the correctness of the district court’s procedural ruling. *See Slack v. McDaniel,*529 U.S. 473, 478, 120 S.Ct. 1595, 146 L.Ed.2d 542 (2000). We therefore DENY Petitioner’s request for a certificate of appealability and DISMISS the appeal. Petitioner’s motion to proceed *in forma pauperis*on appeal is GRANTED.

*

 This order is not binding precedent except under the doctrines of law of the case, res judicata, and collateral estoppel. It may be cited, however, for its persuasive value consistent with Fed. R. App. P. 32.1 and 10th Cir. R. 32.1.
# C_2021138EN.01004801.xml

| 19.4.2021 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 138/48 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

19.4.2021

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 138/48

---

Action brought on 17 February 2021 — Construcciones Electromecanicas Sabero v EUIPO — Magdalenas de las Heras (Heras Bareche)

(Case T-99/21)

(2021/C 138/64)

Language of the case: Spanish

Parties

Applicant: Construcciones Electromecanicas Sabero, SL (Madrid, Spain) (represented by: I. Valdelomar Serrano, P. Román Maestre and D. Liern Cendrero, lawyers)

Defendant: European Union Intellectual Property Office (EUIPO)

Other party to the proceedings before the Board of Appeal: Magdalenas de las Heras, SA (Aranda de Duero, Spain)

Details of the proceedings before EUIPO

Applicant for the trade mark at issue: Applicant before the General Court

Trade mark at issue: European Union figurative mark Heras Bareche — Application for registration No 17 979 710

Procedure before EUIPO: Opposition proceedings

Contested decision: Decision of the Fifth Board of Appeal of EUIPO of 2 December 2020 in Case R 1019/2020-5

Form of order sought

The applicant claims that the Court should:

| — | Declare that Article 8(1)(b) of Regulation (EU) 2017/1001 of the European Parliament and of the Council was erroneously applied in the contested decision; |
| --- | --- |

—

Declare that Article 8(1)(b) of Regulation (EU) 2017/1001 of the European Parliament and of the Council was erroneously applied in the contested decision;

| — | Grant protection in respect of all the goods and services sought in the application for registration of EU trade mark No 17 979 710 Heras Bareche (figurative) in Classes 30 and 35. |
| --- | --- |

—

Grant protection in respect of all the goods and services sought in the application for registration of EU trade mark No 17 979 710 Heras Bareche (figurative) in Classes 30 and 35.

| — | Order the defendant to pay the costs associated with these proceedings, including the representation costs incurred by the applicant |
| --- | --- |

—

Order the defendant to pay the costs associated with these proceedings, including the representation costs incurred by the applicant

Plea in law

Infringement of Article 8(1)(b) of Regulation No 2017/1001 of the European Parliament and of the Council.

---
2018 EAVS Data Brief: Louisiana EAVS Jurisdictions

64 

 Voter Registration 

Total Registered Voters, 

Nov. 20181

2,992,170

1 A1a of EAVS

Registration Forms Received, 

E-Day 2016 – E-Day 20182

713,451 

2 A3a of EAVS

New Voters Registered, 

E-Day 2016 – E-Day 20183

213,751 

3 A3b of EAVS

Sources of Registration Forms4 

4 A4a-l of EAVS

Mail/Fax/Email 126,163

In-Person 129,264

Online 168,784

Motor Vehicle Office 233,935

Public Assistance 

Office 39,888

Disability Office 4,208

Military Recruitment 

Office 1,694

Other Non-NVRA 

Office 0

Registration Drives 9,515

Other Sources or Not 

Categorized 0

 Voter Turnout  

Voters Participating by Mode5

In-Person E-Day

1,203,694

79%

By Mail

43,096

3%

In-Person Early

271,191

18%

Other Mode

1,571

0%

5 In-person Election Day 

voters is F1b. By-mail voters 

is F1d+F1g. In-person early 

voters is F1f. Other mode is 

F1c+F1e+F1h.

Total Turnout:6 1,519,552

6 F1a of EAVS

Provisional Voters:7 88

7 F1e of EAVS

UOCAVA Voters:8 1,483

8 F1c of EAVS

Election Technology 



Technology Used by Jurisdictions9

64

0 0

64

0 0

DRE w/o

VVPAT

DRE with

VVPAT

Ballot

Marking

Device

Scanner Hand

Count

Electronic

Poll Book

9 F3a-d, F5a-F8a, and 

F11a of EAVS

 Election Policies 

✔ Has online voter registration10

10 Q6 of Policy Survey

Has a form of same-day voter registration (SDR)11

11 Q7 of Policy Survey

Has all-mail elections statewide12

Has all-mail elections in certain jurisdictions12

12 Q9a of Policy Survey

✔ Allows voters to register as permanent absentee 

voters13

✔ 13 Q10 of Policy Survey Requires excuse for by-mail voting14

Requires excuse for in-person early or in-person 14 Q8 of Policy Survey

absentee voting15 15 Q12a of Policy Survey

Uses vote centers16 16 Q13 of Policy Survey

Notes

EAVS data and reports may be downloaded at 

www.eac.gov.

Responses of “Does not apply” and “Data not available” 

are shown as zeroes.
**
**Exhibit 32**

**Certifications of Chief Executive Officer and Chief Financial Officer 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 Annual Report on Form 10-K of Crescent Capital BDC, Inc. (the “Company”)for the year ended December 31, 2018, as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the “Report”), each of the undersigned officers of the Company, does hereby certify, to the best of such officer’sknowledge and belief, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. § 1350, as adopted pursuant to § 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that: 

(1) The Reportfully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934; and 

(2) The informationcontained in the Report fairly presents, in all material respects, the financial condition and results of operations of the Company. 

 

/s/ Jason A. Breaux
Name: Jason A. BreauxTitle: Chief Executive OfficerDate: March 22, 2019
/s/ Mike L. Wilhelms
Name: Mike L. WilhelmsTitle: Chief Financial OfficerDate: March 22, 2019**
Total Polling Locations:

Election Day:7 1,549 

Early Voting:8 -- 

Mail Ballots Transmitted10 Mail Ballots Returned11

6,053,283 4,228,687 (69.9% of 

transmitted) 

Mail Ballots Counted12 Mail Ballots Rejected13

4,178,875 (98.8% of 

returned)

49,812 (1.2% of 

returned) 

Mail Voting Policies 

No excuse is required for mail voting14

Conducts all-mail elections statewide15

Any voter can register as permanent absentee16

EAVS Jurisdictions

21 

Total Registered Voters as of 

Nov. 3, 20201

6,310,564 

Registration Forms Received2*

2,959,834 

Total Confirmation Notices Sent3*

311,385 

2020 EAVS Data Brief: New Jersey

 Voter Registration

0.0%

0.2%

9.6%

31.6%

58.5%

In-Person

Mail, Email, Fax

Online

Other

Motor Vehicle Dept.

Source of Registration Applications4

 Voter Turnout  Election Technology

In-Person 

Election 

Day Voters 

987

0.0%

Mail Voters 

4,178,875

93.0%

In-Person 

Early Voters 

0

0.0%

Other Mode 

314,797

7.0%

Voters Participating By Mode5

21

16

5

0 0 0

Scanner DRE w/o

VVPAT

DRE with

VVPAT

Ballot

Marking

Device

Hand

Count

Electronic

Poll

Books

Technology Used by Jurisdictions9

 Mail Balloting

Notes 

EAVS data and reports may be downloaded at www.eac.gov. 

The data shown are certified as final by state election authorities. 

Responses of “Does not apply,” “Data not available, ” and “Valid 

skip” are shown as zeroes or dashes. Percentages may not sum 

to 100% because of missing data or rounding. 

* Close of registration for 2018 

general election to close of 

registration for 2020 general 

election. 

1 A1a of EAVS. 

2 A3a of EAVS. 

3 A8a of EAVS. 

4 Mail, Email, Fax is A4a. InPerson is A4b. Online is A4c. 

Motor Vehicle Dept. is A4d. 

Other is the sum of A4e–A4l. 

Denominator is A3a. 

5 In-Person Election Day Voters 

is F1b. Mail Voters is F1d+F1g. 

In-Person Early Voters is F1f. 

Other Mode is F1c+F1e+F1h. 

Denominator is sum of F1b–

F1h. 

6 F1a of EAVS. Denominator 

is citizen voting age 

population (CVAP). 

7 D3a of EAVS. 

8 D4a of EAVS. 

9 F3a–d, F5a, F6a, F7a, F8a, 

and F11a of EAVS. 

10 C1a of EAVS. 

11 C1b of EAVS. 

12 C3a of EAVS. 

13 C4a of EAVS. 

14 Q17 of Policy Survey. 

15 Q18 and Q18a of Policy 

Survey. 

16 Q19 of Policy Survey. 

Turnout 

72.8%

6