alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
Exhibit 34.2




Report of Independent Registered Public Accounting Firm (Ernst & Young LLP)









Report of Independent Registered Public Accounting Firm




The Board of Directors

U.S. Bank National Association









We have examined management’sassertion, including the accompanying Report on Assessment of Compliance with Applicable Servicing Criteria, that U.S. Bank National Association (the Company) complied with the servicing criteria set forth in Item 1122(d) of the Securities and Exchange Commission’s Regulation AB for the Corporate Trust Asset-Backed Securities platform (the Platform), as of March 31, 2013, and for the period fromApril 1, 2012 through March 31, 2013, except for servicing criteria 1122(d)(1)(i)–(iv), 1122(d)(2)(i), 1122(d)(2)(iii), 1122(d)(2)(v)–(vii), 1122(d)(3)(i), and 1122(d)(4)(i)–(xv), which the Company has determined are not applicable to the activities performed by them with respect to the servicing platform covered by this report.  Management is responsible for the Company’s compliance with those servicing criteria.  Our responsibility is to express an opinion on management’s assertion about the Company’s compliance with the servicing criteria based on our examination.






Our examination was conducted in accordance with attestation standards established by the American Institute of Certified Public Accountants, as adopted by the Public Company Accounting Oversight Board (United States) and, accordingly, included examining, on a test basis, evidence about the Company’s compliance with the applicable servicing criteria and performing such other procedures as we considered necessary in the circumstances.  Our examination included testing of less than all of the individual asset-backed transactions and securities that comprise the Platform, testing of less than all of the servicing activities related to the Platform, and determining whether the Company processed those selected transactions and performed those selected activities in compliance with the servicing criteria.  Furthermore, our procedures were limited to the selected transactions and servicing activities performed by the Company during the period covered by this report.  Our procedures were not designed to determine whether errors may have occurred either prior to or subsequent to our tests that may have affected the balances or amounts calculated or reported by the Company during the period covered by this report for the selected transactions or any other transactions.  We believe that our examination provides a reasonable basis for our opinion.  Our examination does not provide a legal determination on the Company’s compliance with the servicing criteria.






In our opinion, management’s assertion that the Company complied with the aforementioned servicing criteria as of March 31, 2013, and for the periodfrom April 1, 2012 through March 31, 2013, for the Corporate Trust Asset-Backed Securities Platform is fairly stated, in all material respects.






/s/ Ernst & Young LLP




May 28, 2013
```

[Congressional Bills 114th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[H.R. 5604 Introduced in House (IH)]

<DOC>

114th CONGRESS
  2d Session
                                H. R. 5604

 To amend title 38, United States Code, to authorize the use of Post-9/
   11 Educational Assistance to pursue independent study programs at 
 certain educational institutions that are not institutions of higher 
                               learning.

_______________________________________________________________________

                    IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

                             June 28, 2016

  Mr. Mullin introduced the following bill; which was referred to the 
                     Committee on Veterans' Affairs

_______________________________________________________________________

                                 A BILL

 
 To amend title 38, United States Code, to authorize the use of Post-9/
   11 Educational Assistance to pursue independent study programs at 
 certain educational institutions that are not institutions of higher 
                               learning.

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

SECTION 1. AUTHORIZATION FOR USE OF POST-9/11 EDUCATIONAL ASSISTANCE TO 
              PURSUE INDEPENDENT STUDY PROGRAMS AT CERTAIN EDUCATIONAL 
              INSTITUTIONS THAT ARE NOT INSTITUTIONS OF HIGHER 
              LEARNING.

    Paragraph (4) of section 3680A(a) of title 38, United States Code, 
is amended to read as follows:
            ``(4) any independent study program except an accredited 
        independent study program (including open circuit television) 
        leading--
                    ``(A) to a standard college degree;
                    ``(B) to a certificate that reflects educational 
                attainment offered by an institution of higher 
                learning; or
                    ``(C) to a certificate that reflects completion of 
                a course of study offered by--
                            ``(i) an area career and technical 
                        education school (as defined in section 3 of 
                        the Carl D. Perkins Career and Technical 
                        Education Act of 2006 (20 U.S.C. 2302)) that 
                        provides education at the postsecondary level; 
                        or
                            ``(ii) a postsecondary vocational 
                        institution (as defined in section 102(c) of 
                        the Higher Education Act of 1965 (20 U.S.C. 
                        1002(c))) that provides education at the 
                        postsecondary level.''.
                                 <all>
```
**EXHIBIT 31.2** **Certification    of Chief Financial Officer**     I, Michael Luetkemeyer, certify that:     1. I have reviewed this annual report on    Form 10-K    of TranS1 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 officer 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 we 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, 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    (the registrant’s fourth fiscal quarter in the case of an    annual report) 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 officer 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 control over financial reporting. /s/  Michael    Luetkemeyer    Michael Luetkemeyer    Chief Financial Officer     Date: March 25, 2008
STATE of Louisiana v. Evangelisto RAMOS

NO. 2017-KO-2133

Supreme Court of Louisiana.

June 15, 2018

Denied.
Emanuel POTTS, Appellant, v. STATE of Florida, Appellee.

No. 4D18-2710

District Court of Appeal of Florida, Fourth District.

[November 1, 2018]

Emanuel Potts, Miami, pro se.

No appearance required for appellee.

Per Curiam.

*Affirmed.*

Gerber, C.J., Taylor and Ciklin, JJ., concur.
```

[Federal Register Volume 89, Number 243 (Wednesday, December 18, 2024)]
[Notices]
[Page 102966]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2024-29853]

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

POSTAL SERVICE

Product Change--Priority Mail Express, Priority Mail, and USPS 
Ground Advantage[supreg] Negotiated Service Agreement

AGENCY: Postal ServiceTM.

ACTION: Notice.

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

SUMMARY: The Postal Service gives notice of filing a request with the 
Postal Regulatory Commission to add a domestic shipping services 
contract to the list of Negotiated Service Agreements in the Mail 
Classification Schedule's Competitive Products List.

DATES: Date of required notice: December 18, 2024.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Sean C. Robinson, 202-268-8405.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The United States Postal Service[supreg] 
hereby gives notice that, pursuant to 39 U.S.C. 3642 and 3632(b)(3), on 
December 5, 2024, it filed with the Postal Regulatory Commission a USPS 
Request to Add Priority Mail Express, Priority Mail & USPS Ground 
Advantage[supreg] Contract 916 to Competitive Product List. Documents 
are available at www.prc.gov, Docket Nos. MC2025-648, K2025-647.

Sean C. Robinson,
Attorney, Corporate and Postal Business Law.
[FR Doc. 2024-29853 Filed 12-17-24; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 7710-12-P
```
<Page>

                                                                    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

     In connection with the Annual Report of Vaso Active Pharmaceuticals, Inc.
(the "Company") on Form 10-KSB for the year ended December 31, 2003, as filed
with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the "Report"),
I, John J. Masiz, Chief Executive Officer of the Company, certify, pursuant to
18 U.S.C. Section 1350, as adopted by Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of
2002, 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.

By: /s/ John J. Masiz
    -----------------
Chief Executive Officer (principal executive officer)
March 26, 2004


This certification is made solely for purpose of 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, subject
to the knowledge standard contained therein, and not for any other purpose.
UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT
No. 96-7169
JOSEPH MARIO TURNER, Petitioner - Appellant, versus WILLIAM D. SMITH, Warden; ATTORNEY GENERAL OF THE STATE OF MARYLAND, Respondents - Appellees.
Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of Maryland, at Baltimore. J. Frederick Motz, Chief District Judge. (CA-96-416-JFM) Submitted: March 27, 1997 Decided: April 2, 1997 Before RUSSELL, LUTTIG, and MICHAEL, Circuit Judges. Dismissed by unpublished per curiam opinion. Joseph Mario Turner, Appellant Pro Se. John Joseph Curran, Jr., Attorney General, Gwynn X. Kinsey, Jr., Assistant Attorney General, Baltimore, Maryland, for Appellees. Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. See Local Rule 36(c).2 PER CURIAM: Appellant seeks to appeal the district court's order denying relief on his petition filed under 28 U.S.C. § 2254 (1994), amended by Antiterrorism and Effective Death Penalty Act of 1996, Pub. L. No. 104-132, 110 Stat. 1214. We have reviewed the record and the district court's opinion and find no reversible error. Accordingly, we deny a certificate of appealability, deny Appellant's motion for a certificate of probable cause to appeal, and dismiss the appeal on the reasoning of the district court. Turner v. Smith , No. CA-96- 416-JFM (D. Md. July 17, 1996). We deny Appellant's motion for 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
I 

113TH CONGRESS 

1ST SESSION H. R. 921 

To amend the Department of Veterans Affairs Health Care Programs Enhancement Act of 2001 and title 38, United States Code, to require 

the provision of chiropractic care and services to veterans at all Department of Veterans Affairs medical centers and to expand access to such 

care and services. 

IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES 

FEBRUARY 28, 2013 

Mr. MICHAUD introduced the following bill; which was referred to the 

Committee on Veterans’ Affairs 

A BILL 

To amend the Department of Veterans Affairs Health Care 

Programs Enhancement Act of 2001 and title 38, United 

States Code, to require the provision of chiropractic care 

and services to veterans at all Department of Veterans 

Affairs medical centers and to expand access to such 

care and services. 

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 ‘‘Chiropractic Care 

5 Available to All Veterans Act’’. 


pmangrum on DSK3VPTVN1PROD with BILLS
2 

•HR 921 IH

1 SEC. 2. PROGRAM FOR PROVISION OF CHIROPRACTIC 

2 CARE AND SERVICES TO VETERANS. 

3 Section 204(c) of the Department of Veterans Affairs 

4 Health Care Programs Enhancement Act of 2001 (38 

5 U.S.C. 1710 note) is amended— 

6 (1) by inserting ‘‘(1)’’ before ‘‘The program’’; 

7 and 

8 (2) by adding at the end the following new 

9 paragraph: 

10 ‘‘(2) The program shall be carried out at not fewer 

11 than 75 medical centers by not later than December 31, 

12 2014, and at all medical centers by not later than Decem13 ber 31, 2016.’’. 

14 SEC. 3. EXPANDED CHIROPRACTOR SERVICES AVAILABLE 

15 TO VETERANS. 

16 (a) MEDICAL SERVICES.—Paragraph (6) of section 

17 1701 of title 38, United States Code, is amended by add18 ing at the end the following new subparagraph: 

19 ‘‘(H) Chiropractic services.’’. 

20 (b) REHABILITATIVE SERVICES.—Paragraph (8) of 

21 such section is amended by inserting ‘‘chiropractic,’’ after 

22 ‘‘counseling,’’. 

23 (c) PREVENTIVE HEALTH SERVICES.—Paragraph 

24 (9) of such section is amended— 


pmangrum on DSK3VPTVN1PROD with BILLS
3 

•HR 921 IH

1 (1) by redesignating subparagraphs (F) 

2 through (K) as subparagraphs (G) through (L), re3 spectively; and 

4 (2) by inserting after subparagraph (E) the fol5 lowing new subparagraph (F): 

6 ‘‘(F) periodic and preventative chiropractic ex7 aminations and services;’’. 

Æ 


pmangrum on DSK3VPTVN1PROD with BILLS
Alvin PETE v. State of Louisiana, DEPARTMENT OF CORRECTIONS, et al.

No. 2018-C-1252

Supreme Court of Louisiana.

November 20, 2018

**ON WRIT OF CERTIORARI TO THE COURT OF APPEAL, THIRD CIRCUIT, PARISH OF ST. MARTIN**

Writ denied.

CLARK, J., would grant and assigns reasons:

I agree fully with the reasons stated by Justice Crichton. Although penal authorities have a duty to use reasonable care in preventing harm after they have reasonable cause to anticipate it, a penal institution is not an insurer of an inmate against attacks by other inmates. *State ex rel. Jackson v. Phelps* , 95-2294 (La. 4/8/96), 672 So.2d 665, 667. Therefore, I would grant and docket the matter in order to perform a duty-risk analysis.

Although I do not necessarily find error in the court of appeal's amendment of plaintiff's increased judgment for the serious injury of loss of an eye, I question the initial threshold finding of liability in this case. In my view, in light of the number of inmates in our correctional system and the possibility of similar circumstances arising again, I would grant and docket this matter to conduct a full tort analysis on the issue of liability. *See**State ex rel. Jackson v. Phelps* , 672 So.2d 665, 667 (La. 1996) ; and *Parker v. State* , 282 So.2d 483 (La. 1973).
Exhibit 32



Certification by the Chief Executive Officer and Chief Financial Officer pursuant to 18 U.S.C. 1350

as adopted pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002



Each of the undersigned hereby certifies that, to his knowledge, (i) the Form 10-K filed by Surrey Bancorp (the Issuer)
for the year ended December 31, 2004, fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, and (ii) the information contained in that report fairly presents, in all material respects, the
financial condition and results of operations of the Issuer on the dates and for the periods presented therein.



|                     |  |  |  |                |  |                          |  |                                      
|-------------------- |  |  |  | -------------- |  | ------------------------ |  | -------------------------------------
|                     |  |  |  | SURREY BANCORP
|                     |  |  | 
|Date: March 24, 2005 |  |  |  | By:            |  | /s/ Edward C. Ashby, III
|                     |  |  |  |                |  |                          |  | Edward C. Ashby, III                 
|                     |  |  |  |                |  |                          |  | President and Chief Executive Officer
|                     |  |  | 
|Date: March 24, 2005 |  |  |  | By:            |  | /s/ Mark H. Towe        
|                     |  |  |  |                |  |                          |  | Mark H. Towe                         
|                     |  |  |  |                |  |                          |  | Chief Financial Officer
**Exhibit 34.1**

** **

Reportof Independent Registered Public Accounting Firm

 

TheBoard of Directors

GEMoney Bank:

 

We have examined the accompanyingmanagement’s assertion that GE Money Bank (the “Company”) complied with theservicing criteria set forth in Item 1122(d) of the Securities andExchange Commission’s Regulation AB for asset-backed securities transactionsfor which the Company acted as servicer involving credit card receivables,accounts receivable and asset based lending receivables (the Platform), as of May 22,2008 and for the period from January 1, 2008 through May 22,2008.  Management has determined thatservicing criteria 1122(d)(1)(ii), 1122(d)(1)(iv) and 1122(d)(4)(vi) areapplicable to the activities it performs with respect to the Platform, and thatall other servicing criteria set forth in Item 1122(d) are not applicableto the primary servicing services provided by the Company with respect to thePlatform.  Appendix B to management’sassertion identifies the individual asset-backed transactions and securitiesdefined by management as constituting the Platform.  Management is responsible for the Company’scompliance with those servicing criteria. Our responsibility is to express an opinion on management’s assessmentabout the Company’s compliance based on our examination.

 

Ourexamination was conducted in accordance with the standards of the PublicCompany Accounting Oversight Board (United States) and, accordingly, includedexamining, on a test basis, evidence about the Company*’*scompliance with the servicing criteria specified above and performing suchother procedures as we considered necessary in the circumstances.  Our examination included testing selectedasset-backed transactions and securities that comprise the Platform, testingselected servicing activities related to the Platform, and determining whetherthe Company processed those selected transactions and performed those selectedactivities in compliance with the servicing criteria.  Furthermore, our procedures were limited tothe selected transactions and servicing activities performed by the Companyduring the period covered by this report. Our procedures were not designed to determine whether errors may haveoccurred either prior to or subsequent to our tests that may have affected thebalances or amounts calculated or reported by the Company during the periodcovered by this report for the selected transactions or any other transactions.We believe that our examination provides a reasonable basis for our opinion.  Our examination does not provide a legaldetermination on the Company’s compliance with the servicing criteria.

 

In ouropinion, management’s assessment that the Company complied with theaforementioned servicing criteria as of May 22, 2008 and for the periodfrom January 1, 2008 through May 22, 2008 is fairly stated, in allmaterial respects.

 

/s/  KPMG LLP

 

Chicago, Illinois

March 24, 2009

 

----
```

[Congressional Bills 113th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[H. Res. 167 Introduced in House (IH)]

113th CONGRESS
  1st Session
H. RES. 167

   Recognizing the roles and contributions of America's teachers to 
building and enhancing our Nation's civic, cultural, and economic well-
                                 being.

_______________________________________________________________________

                    IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

                             April 17, 2013

Mr. Graves of Missouri (for himself, Mr. Hanna, Mr. Schiff, Mr. Payne, 
   Mr. Simpson, Ms. Bordallo, Mr. Loebsack, Mr. Neal, Mr. Holt, Mr. 
 Guthrie, Mr. Roe of Tennessee, and Mr. Walz) submitted the following 
 resolution; which was referred to the Committee on Education and the 
                               Workforce

_______________________________________________________________________

                               RESOLUTION

 
   Recognizing the roles and contributions of America's teachers to 
building and enhancing our Nation's civic, cultural, and economic well-
                                 being.

Whereas education and knowledge are the foundation of America's current and 
        future strength;
Whereas teachers and other education staff have earned and deserve the respect 
        of their students and communities for their selfless dedication to 
        community service and the future of our Nation's children;
Whereas the purpose of ``National Teacher Appreciation Week'', held during May 
        6, 2013, through May 10, 2013, is to raise public awareness of the 
        unquantifiable contributions of teachers and to promote greater respect 
        and understanding for the teaching profession; and
Whereas students, schools, communities, and a number of organizations 
        representing educators are hosting teacher appreciation events in 
        recognition of ``National Teacher Appreciation Week'': Now, therefore, 
        be it
    Resolved, That the House of Representatives thanks and promotes the 
profession of teaching by encouraging students, parents, school 
administrators, and public officials to participate in teacher 
appreciation events during ``National Teacher Appreciation Week''.
                                 <all>
```
Chris A. THOMAS, Jr., Appellant/Petitioner(s), v. STATE of Florida, Appellee/Respondent(s).

CASE NO.: 2D18-4118

District Court of Appeal of Florida, Second District.

November 20, 2018

**DECISION WITHOUT PUBLISHED OPINION**

Denied.