alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
by this report. Our procedures were not designed to determine whether errors may have occurredeither prior to or subsequent to our tests that may have affected the balances or amountscalculated or reported by the Company during the period covered by this report for the selectedtransactions or any other transactions. We believe that our examination provides a reasonable basisfor our opinion. Our examination does not provide a legal determination on the Company’s compliancewith the servicing criteria.As described in the accompanying Management’s Assertion of Compliance for servicing criteria1122(d)(2)(i), 1122(d)(4)(i) and 1122(d)(4)(ii), the Company has engaged various vendors to performthe activities required by these servicing criteria. The Company has determined that none of thesevendors is considered a “servicer” as defined in Item 1101(j) of Regulation AB, and the Company haselected to take responsibility for assessing compliance with the servicing criteria applicable toeach vendor as permitted by Interpretation 17.06 of the SEC Division of Corporation Finance Manualof Publicly Available Telephone Interpretations (Interpretation 17.06). As permitted byInterpretation 17.06, the Company has asserted that it has policies and procedures in placedesigned to provide reasonable assurance that the vendors’ activities comply in all materialrespects with the servicing criteria applicable to each vendor. The Company is solely responsiblefor determining that it meets the SEC requirements to apply Interpretation 17.06 for the vendorsand related criteria as described in its assertion, and we performed no procedures with respect tothe Company’s eligibility to apply Interpretation 17.06.In our opinion, management’s assertion that the Company complied with the aforementioned servicingcriteria, including servicing criteria 1122(d)(2)(i), 1122(d)(4)(i) and 1122(d)(4)(ii) for whichcompliance is determined based on Interpretation 17.06 as described above, as of and for the yearendedDecember 31, 2009, is fairly stated, in all material respects.(Signed) KPMG, LLPChicago, Illinois
Brandy Marie SANDERS, Appellant, v. STATE of Florida, Appellee.

CASE NO. 1D17-1880

District Court of Appeal of Florida, First District.

Opinion filed December 4, 2017

**DECISION WITHOUT PUBLISHED OPINION**

AFFIRMED.
August 8, 2016

Mr. David Agranovich

Leading Edge Aviation Resources, LLC

1201 N. Fillmore Street #207

Arlington, VA 22201

Re: FAA–2016–1033

Dear Mr. Agranovich:

This letter is to provide notification that we have reviewed your petition for exemption, and 

have determined that we will continue to process your petition. 

As referenced in the June 22, 2016, letter posted to your docket at www.regulations.gov, we 

are reviewing pending Section 333 petitions to determine if the recently-issued regulation, 

Operation and Certification of Small Unmanned Aircraft Systems, Title 14, Code of Federal 

Regulations, Part 107 (www.faa.gov/uas) will satisfy your request. We have determined that 

your request requires further regulatory relief (Tier 3), and we will continue working on your 

petition for exemption. 

We have found that your petition, if granted, would set a precedent. Therefore, we will 

publish a summary of your petition in the Federal Register for public comments, if we have 

not done so already.

We will advise you of the agency’s final decision on your petition as soon as possible. If you 

have any questions regarding your petition, please contact me at 333exemptions@faa.gov. 

Sincerely,

/s/

Brenda Robeson

Program Analyst
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<ARTICLE>                     5
<MULTIPLIER>                                   1,000
       
<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   9-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                              APR-25-1998
<PERIOD-START>                                 APR-26-1997
<PERIOD-END>                                   JAN-24-1998
<CASH>                                         287,000
<SECURITIES>                                   0
<RECEIVABLES>                                  1,231,000
<ALLOWANCES>                                   (76,000)
<INVENTORY>                                    1,084,000
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                               2,526,000
<PP&E>                                         1,519,000
<DEPRECIATION>                                 (856,000)
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                 3,562,000
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                          2,130,000
<BONDS>                                        0
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                          0
<PREFERRED>                                    3,850,000
<COMMON>                                       174,000     
<OTHER-SE>                                     (2,811,000) 
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                   3,562,000   
<SALES>                                        4,511,000   
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                               4,511,000
<CGS>                                          3,129,000
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                  3,165,000
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                               2,325,000
<LOSS-PROVISION>                               0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                             (99,000)
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                (1,033,000)
<INCOME-TAX>                                   0
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                            (1,033,000)
<DISCONTINUED>                                 0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                0
<CHANGES>                                      0
<NET-INCOME>                                   (1,033,000)
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                  (.07)
<EPS-DILUTED>                                  (.07)
        

</TABLE>
Exhibit 32.2  CERTIFICATION 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), the undersigned officer of Environmental Energy Services, Inc., a Delaware corporation (the "Company"), does hereby certify, to the best of his knowledge, that:  1.     The Quarterly Report on Form 10-QSB for the period ending June 30, 2007 (the "Report") of the Company complies in all material respects 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.  /s/ Greg Holsted Greg Holsted, Chief Financial Officer  Date: October 4, 2007    {A0040433.DOC}
EX PARTE Leonardo A. WYNN

CR-15-1200

Court of Criminal Appeals of Alabama.

December 7, 2016

**DECISION WITHOUT PUBLISHED OPINION**

Mand. pet. dismissed.
Document Headings

                    Document headings vary by document type but may contain                    the following:                  
                -                       the agency or agencies that issued and signed a document                    
                -                       the number of the CFR title and the number of each part                      the document amends, proposes to amend, or is directly                      related to                    
                -                       the agency docket number / agency internal file number                    
                -                       the RIN which identifies each regulatory action listed in                      the Unified Agenda of Federal Regulatory and Deregulatory                      Actions                    

                    See the                                          Document Drafting Handbook                                        for more details.                  

###### Department of Labor

###### Employment and Training Administration

          - [TA-W-64,841]

Pursuant to Section 221 of the Trade Act of 1974, as amended, an investigation was initiated on January 9, 2009 in response to a petition filed by a company official on behalf of workers of Mar/Tron, Flippin, Arkansas.

The petitioner has requested that the petition be withdrawn. Therefore, the investigation under this petition has been terminated.

Signed at Washington, DC, this 16th day of March 2009.

Linda G. Poole,

Certifying Officer, Division of Trade Adjustment Assistance.

[FR Doc. E9-7127 Filed 3-30-09; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 4510-FN-P
Exhibit 32.1
 CERTIFICATION
 PURSUANT TO 18 U.S.C. SECTION 1350,
AS ADOPTED PURSUANT TO
SECTION 906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002
  a)
    
    The Report fully complies with the requirements of section 13(a) or 15(d) of the
Securities Exchange Act of 1934; and
 b)
    
    The information contained in the Report fairly presents, in all material respects,
the financial condition and results of operations of the Company.
 Date:      August 4, 2010
    By:
    /s/ Ramón M. Ruiz-ComasRamón M. Ruiz-ComasPresident and
Chief Executive Officer  49
v.

CHRIS ARTHUR CHRISTENSEN,

Defendant and Appellant.

Cleric of Supreme Cou

t

State of Montana

ORDER

Pursuant to our Order of March 7, 2020, this cause was classified for oral

argurnent on Friday, April 3, 2020, at 9:30 a.m. Due to unforeseen circumstances and the

Governor's declaration of a state of emergency and subsequent declaration for all

Montanans to shelter in place,

IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that oral argument in this rnatter has been

CANCELED.

IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that this matter has been deemed subrnitted on the

briefs to the Court sitting en banc.

The Clerk is directed to provide a copy of this Order to all counsel of record; to

Dean Paul Kirgis, Alexander Blewett III School of Law, University of Montana; to

Christina Tin, Director of Communication and Events, Alexander Blewett III School of

Law, University of Montana; to John Mudd, Executive Director, State Bar of Montana;

and to the Honorable Ho71-Recht, District Judge.

DATED this ).-. day of April, 2020.

For the Court,

Chief Justice
IV 

118TH CONGRESS 

1ST SESSION H. RES. 759 

Expressing support for the designation of October as ‘‘Manufacturing Month’’. 

IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES 

OCTOBER 3, 2023 

Mr. FLOOD submitted the following resolution; which was referred to the 

Committee on Oversight and Accountability 

RESOLUTION 

Expressing support for the designation of October as 

‘‘Manufacturing Month’’. 

Whereas, in 2021, manufacturers contributed $2,496,000,000 

to the economy, accounting for 10.70 percent of gross domestic product; 

Whereas this figure is an all-time high; 

Whereas more than 13,200,000 people in the United States 

(or 10.3 percent of the workforce) are employed directly 

in manufacturing in 2022, while many millions more jobs 

are supported through the supply chain and related industries; 

Whereas, in August 2023, the average hourly earnings for 

the manufacturing worker was $32.61 an hour; 


kjohnson on DSK7ZCZBW3PROD with $$_JOB
2 

•HRES 759 IH 

Whereas, in 2022, every dollar spent in manufacturing adds 

an additional $2.79 to the economy, making it the highest multiplier of any economic sector; 

Whereas, in 2022, manufacturing represented 60 percent of 

American exports; and 

Whereas the month of October would be an appropriate time 

to designate as ‘‘Manufacturing Month’’: Now, therefore, 

be it 

1 Resolved, That the House of Representatives supports 

2 the designation of ‘‘Manufacturing Month’’. 

Æ 


kjohnson on DSK7ZCZBW3PROD with $$_JOB
UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 06-6251

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Plaintiff - Appellee, versus JEFFREY PRESTON MCCLUNG, Defendant - Appellant. Appeal from the United States District Court for the Western District of Virginia, at Roanoke. James C. Turk, Senior District Judge. (5:97-cr-30031-jhm-1; 7:06-cv-00031-jct) Submitted: September 26, 2006 Decided: September 29, 2006 Before WIDENER and WILKINSON, Circuit Judges, and HAMILTON, Senior Circuit Judge. Dismissed by unpublished per curiam opinion. Jeffrey Preston McClung, Appellant Pro Se. Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. See Local Rule 36(c).- 2 - PER CURIAM: Jeffrey Preston McClung seeks to appeal the district court’s order denying relief on his successive 28 U.S.C. § 2255 (2000) motion. The order is not appealable unless a circuit justice or judge issues a certificate of appealability. 28 U.S.C. § 2253(c)(1) (2000). 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) (2000). A prisoner satisfies this standard by demonstrating that reasonable jurists would find that any assessment of the constitutional claims by the district court is debatable or wrong and that any dispositive procedural ruling by the district court is likewise debatable. Miller-El v. Cockrell , 537 U.S. 322, 336-38 (2003); Slack v. McDaniel , 529 U.S. 473, 484 (2000); Rose v. Lee , 252 F.3d 676, 683-84 (4th Cir. 2001). We have independently reviewed the record and conclude that McClung has not made the requisite showing. Accordingly, we deny McClung’s motion for production of records and transcripts, construed as a petition for writ of mandamus, 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 the court and argument would not aid the decisional process.

DISMISSED
Exhibit
32.1




CERTIFICATION
PURSUANT TO 18 U.S.C. SECTION 1350, AS ADOPTED PURSUANT TO


SECTION
906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002




The
undersigned, Kaien Liang, the Chief Executive Officer of CHINA EXECUTIVE
EDUCATION CORP. (the "Company"), do hereby certify that:




1. The
Company’s Transition Report on Form 10-K for the for the transition period from
April 30, 2009 to January 1, 2010 (the “Report”) fully complies with the
requirements of Section 13(a) 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 operation of the Company.




IN
WITNESS WHEREOF, each of the undersigned has executed this statement this 14th
day of April, 2010.







/s/ Kaien
      LiangKaien
      LiangChief
      Executive Officer(Principal
      Executive Officer)







A signed
original of this written statement required by Section 906 has been provided to
China Executive Education Corp. and will be retained by China Executive
Education Corp. and furnished to the Securities and Exchange Commission or its
staff upon request.




The
forgoing certification is being furnished to the Securities and Exchange
Commission pursuant to § 18 U.S.C. Section 1350. It is not being filed for
purposes of Section 18 of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended, and
is not to be incorporated by reference into any filing of the Company, whether
made before or after the date hereof, regardless of any general incorporation
language in such filing.
Peter J. PATRICOLA v. IMPERIAL PALACE OF MISSISSIPPI, LLC

2016-CT-01043-COA

Supreme Court of Mississippi.

Filed: November 20, 2017 Closed: February 1, 2018

Motion Desc: Petition for Writ of Certiorari.

Certiorari - Denied.
Executive Order 12866 

and 

Congressional Review Requirements 

Rulemaking Document Title: l^(^-i^^ M t^CU.w^ f^J^^y V {(^.^^^ Jwyr,^/ ^ 

RIN: ^(0X'A\)1 S 

With respect to the attached rulemaking document(s): 

1. E.0.12866: The requirements of section 6(a)(3)(E) of E.O. 12866 have been met in accordance with the 

following [initial appropriate hne]: 

The rulemaking document(s) was not reviewed by the Office of hiformation and 

Regulatory Affairs (OIRA). 

No substantive changes were made to the documenl(s) after it was submitted to OIRA. 

The required information is attached. 

2. Congressional Review: The requirements of the Small Business Regulatory Enforcement Fairness Act 

for the submission of final rules to Congress and GAO (§801) have been met in accordance with the 

following [initial appropriate line]: 

This document is not a final rule. 

This document is not a rule under (§ 804). 

The document has been submitted to C-50 for transmission to Congress and GAO. 

^\^c AX 

Signature 

Name 

VA,^ 

^-J O 

TitleyOffice 

C 

^ u 

Date
EX PARTE Clyde H. FRIEND

CR-16-0005

Court of Criminal Appeals of Alabama.

November 9, 2016

**DECISION WITHOUT PUBLISHED OPINION**

Mand. pet. dismissed.
Latonya Calvinia HARRIS, Appellant, v. STATE of Florida, Appellee.

CASE NO. 1D17-1960

District Court of Appeal of Florida, First District.

Opinion filed November 16, 2017

**DECISION WITHOUT PUBLISHED OPINION**

AFFIRMED.
David Jerome RUSSELL v. STATE

CR-16-0064

Court of Criminal Appeals of Alabama.

November 17, 2016

**DECISION WITHOUT PUBLISHED OPINION**

Dismissed.
SERVED: JUNE 4, 2014**.~ ~** - -.-

-- U.S. DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION OFFICE OF HEARINGS

WASHINGTON, DC

__..,· ' ·, -**~** . --: I**~**•., IN THE MATTER OF MULTI-AERO, INC. Respondent

DOCKET NO. FAA-2014-0317 (Civil Penalty Action)
NOTICE OF ASSIGNMENT AND DISMISSAL OF PROCEEDING This proceeding (heretofore designated as Case No. 2013CE030082) was forwarded to the Office ofHearings on May 29,2014, and has been assigned to the undersigned. OnJune 2, 2014, Respondent's Counsel submitted a letter stating that the parties hadreached a settlement. Respondent withdrew its request for hearing, and moved to terminate the proceeding with prejudice. Accordingly, pursuantto 14 C.P.R.§ 13.215, this proceeding is dismissed with prejudice. The FAA shall sendthe Judge and the Docket a copy ofany compromise order or 

### fmal order assessing civil penalty. SO ORDERED.

ChiefAdministrative L " Attachment

- Service List

### DocketNo. FAA-2014-0317 (Civil Penalty Action) 

### SERVICE LIST-BY U.S. 

### MAIL ORIGINAL & ONE COPY 

### Federal Aviation Administration 800 Independence Avenue, S.W. Washington, DC 20591 Attention: Hearing Docket Clerk, AGC-430 Wilbur Wright Building- Suite 2W10001 ONE COPY 

### Gregory S. Winton, Respondent's Counsel 

### · The Aviation Law Firm

One Research Court, Suite 450 Rockville, MD 20850 TEL: 301-294-8550 FAX: 301-294-2525 David B. Kessler, Complainant's Counsel 

### Office ofRegional Counsel Federal Aviation Administration 901 Locust Street, Room 506 Kansas City, Missouri 64106-2641 FAX: 816-329-3771 The Honorable Ronnie A. Yoder, Chief Administrative LawJudge 

### U.S. Department ofTransportation Office ofHearings, M-20 1200 NewJersey Avenue, S.E. (E11-320) Washington, DC 20590 TEL: 202-366-2142 FAX: 202-366-7536

1 Service was by U.S. Mail. For service in person orby expedited courier, use the following address: FederalAviation Administration, 600 Independence Avenue, S.W., Wilbur WrightBuilding- Suite 2Wl000, Washington, DC 20591, Attention: Hearing Docket Clerk, AGC-430. 

### -2-
Exhibit 32.1  CERTIFICATION PURSUANT TO SECTION 906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002  In connection with the annual report of American Business Change Agents, Inc. (the "Company") on Form 10-K for the fiscal year ended January 31, 2012 as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the "Report"), I, Edward A. Sundberg, Chief Executive Officer of the Company, certify 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.   Date:  May 28, 2013 By: /s/ Edward A. Sundberg Edward A. Sundberg Chief Executive Officer and Chief Financial Officer
----

Removal from the register of Case C-370/04 (1)

(2005/C 217/69)

(Language of the case: German)

By order of 6 June 2005 the President of the Court of Justice of the European Communities has ordered the removal from the register of Case C-370/04: Commission of the European Communities v Federal Republic of Germany.

----

(1)OJ C 262 of 23.10.2004.

----
TESORO PROPERTY OWNER'S ASSOCIATION, INC., a Florida not-for-profit corporation, Appellant, v. TESORO COMMONS, LLC, a Florida Limited Liability Company, Appellee.

No. 4D17-3006

District Court of Appeal of Florida, Fourth District.

[February 14, 2018]

Albert B. Moore, Fort Pierce, for appellant.

Owen Schultz of McCarthy, Summers, Bobko, Wood, Norman, Bass & Melby, P.A., Stuart, for appellee.

Per Curiam.

Tesoro Property Owner's Association, Inc. appeals an order granting a temporary injunction in favor of Tesoro Commons, LLC ("the property owner"). Because the trial court failed to make sufficient factual findings to support the injunction, we reverse.

*404Florida Rule of Civil Procedure 1.610(c) mandates that "[e]very injunction shall specify the reasons for entry." This Court has held that strict compliance with rule 1.610(c) is required. *Eldon v. Perrin* , 78 So.3d 737, 738 (Fla. 4th DCA 2012). Before granting a temporary injunction, the trial court must make clear, definite, and unequivocally sufficient factual findings showing that (1) the movant will suffer irreparable harm unless the injunction is entered; (2) there is no adequate remedy at law; (3) there is a substantial likelihood that the movant will succeed on the merits; and (4) entry of a temporary injunction will serve the public interest. *Am. Learning Sys., Inc. v. Gomes* , 199 So.3d 1076, 1082 (Fla. 4th DCA 2016) ; *Concerned Citizens for Judicial Fairness, Inc. v. Yacucci* , 162 So.3d 68, 72 (Fla. 4th DCA 2014) ; *Eldon* , 78 So.3d at 738. Failure to make specific findings as to each of these four elements is reversible error. *Wade v. Brown* , 928 So.2d 1260, 1262 (Fla. 4th DCA 2006).

Here, the property owner concedes that neither the oral ruling nor the written order contains sufficient findings to support entry of a temporary injunction. The trial court failed to make any findings that the property owner will suffer irreparable harm unless an injunction is entered, that the property owner does not have an adequate remedy at law, or that the entry of an injunction will serve the public interest.

Accordingly, we reverse the temporary injunction and remand for further proceedings.

*Reversed and remanded.*

Gerber, C.J., Ciklin and Levine, JJ., concur.
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<ARTICLE> 5
<MULTIPLIER> 1000
       
<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   3-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          DEC-31-1998
<PERIOD-END>                               MAR-31-1998
<CASH>                                            4362
<SECURITIES>                                         0
<RECEIVABLES>                                      155
<ALLOWANCES>                                         0
<INVENTORY>                                          0
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                                  4520
<PP&E>                                               0
<DEPRECIATION>                                       0
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                    4520
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                              110
<BONDS>                                              0
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                             0
<OTHER-SE>                                        4410
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                      4520
<SALES>                                              0
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                                   177
<CGS>                                                0
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                        0
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                   148
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                     0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                                   0
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                     29
<INCOME-TAX>                                         0
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                                 29
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                        29
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                      .03
<EPS-DILUTED>                                      .03
        

</TABLE>