alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
**Exhibit35.1**

**ANNUALCOMPLIANCE CERTIFICATE**

GE Money Bank (the “Servicer”) hereby certifies as ofDecember 31, 2006 as follows:

1.                                       Theundersigned has reviewed, for the period beginning January 1, 2006 and endingDecember 31, 2006: (a) the activities of the Servicer as they related to theServicing Agreement dated as of June 27, 2003 (as amended and supplemented fromtime to time, the “Servicing *Agreement*”),among GE Money Bank and GE Capital Credit Card Master Note Trust and (b) theServicer’s performance under the Servicing Agreement.  The performance by the Servicer of itsobligations under the Servicing Agreement has been made by persons under thedirect supervision of the undersigned.

2.                                       Exceptas described below, to the best knowledge of the undersigned, based on myreview of the Servicer’s performance under the Servicing Agreement, theServicer has fulfilled all of its obligations under the Servicing Agreement inall material respects for the period beginning January 1, 2006 and endingDecember 31, 2006.  With respect to a limited number of accountsin certain retailer portfolios that were initially classified as delinquent andsubsequently corrected to current status, the APR was not accurately calculateddue to a system error.  Due to the systemerror, after the correction to current status, these accounts continued toreflect an increased APR charged to delinquent accounts rather than the correctlower APR.  The Servicer is currentlyworking to complete its analysis of the issue.

This report is deliveredpursuant to Item 1123 of Regulation AB.
|        | GE MONEY BANK |
|--------|---------------|
|   |          |
|   | By:           | /s/ LISA GIEGEL |
|   | Name:         | Lisa Giegel |
|   | Title:        | Senior Vice President and Controller |
|   |          |
|   |          |
|   |          |
|        |               |  |  |

 

 

----
Daniel CAMMARATA, Appellant, v. Kelly A. CAMMARATA n/k/a Kelly Ahmeti, Appellee.

Nos. 4D17-2553 4D18-477

District Court of Appeal of Florida, Fourth District.

[November 28, 2018]

Mary Michele Hudson of Maverick Law, LLC, Palm Beach Gardens, for appellant.

Matthew David Martin of Martin Family Law, Boca Raton, for appellee.

Per Curiam.

In this consolidated appeal, the former husband appeals from two orders: (1) the Final Judgment Denying Former Husband's Supplemental Petition for Modification, Denying Former Husband's Motion for Contempt and Enforcement, and Granting Former Wife's Supplemental Petition for Modification of Child Support; and (2) the Final Judgment Awarding Former Wife Attorney's Fees and Costs. We affirm without discussion the portions of the first order which are final, and the second order in its entirety.

We dismiss the appeal as to the portion of the first order which directs that the former wife's supplemental petition for modification of child support is referred to the magistrate for further consideration.1 The body of the judgment states in part that the trial court "refers all issues related to modification of child support to the general magistrate," and that "[t]he parties shall attend mediation to address the modification of child support prior to scheduling a child support modification hearing before the magistrate." In addition, the trial court specifically "ORDERED" that "[t]he Former Wife's Supplemental Petition for Modification of Child Support and for Other Relief is referred to the magistrate for further consideration. The parties shall attend mediation prior to setting a hearing on the Supplemental *1094Petition for Modification ...." Accordingly, this portion of the order is nonfinal and nonappealable.

*Affirmed in part, dismissed in part, and remanded to correct scrivener's error* .

Gerber, C.J., Warner and Forst, JJ., concur.

1

There is a scrivener's error in this order that must be corrected. The heading of the final judgment incorrectly reflects that the former wife's supplemental petition for modification of child support was *granted* . The appellee concedes that the heading of the final judgment is inconsistent with the court's directives within the judgment.
|   |                                                                                          |                             |                                    |
|--------|-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|----------------------------------|-----------------------------------------|
|   | KPMG LLPChartered AccountantsBay Adelaide Centre 333 Bay Street Suite 4600 Toronto ON M5H 2S5 | Telephone  FaxInternet | (416) 777-8500(416) 777-8818www.kpmg.ca |

| ─   | our Independent Auditors’ Report of Registered Public Accounting Firm dated March 29, 2012, on the consolidated financial statements of Seabridge Gold Inc. (the "Company") comprising the consolidated statements of financial position of the Company as at December 31, 2011, December 31, 2010 and January 1, 2010, the consolidated statements of operations and comprehensive (loss) income, changes in shareholders’ equity and cash flows for the years ended December 31, 2011 and December 31, 2010, and notes, comprising a summary of significant accounting policies and other explanatory information |
|---------------------|---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|

| ─   | our Report of Independent Registered Public Accounting Firm dated March 29, 2012 on the consolidated statements of financial position of the Company as at December 31, 2011, December 31, 2010 and January 1, 2010 and the related consolidated statements of operations and comprehensive (loss) income, changes in shareholders’ equity and cash flows for the years ended December 31, 2011 and December 31, 2010 |
|---------------------|-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|

| ─   | our Report of Independent Registered Public Accounting Firm dated March 29, 2012  on the Company’s internal control over financial reporting as of December 31, 2011 |
|---------------------|--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|
Loretta Lois BICKERSTAFF, et al. v. Richard J. BICKERSTAFF

NO. 2018-CC-1896

Supreme Court of Louisiana.

November 23, 2018

Stay denied. Writ denied.
EXHIBIT 32.2

                            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 Quarterly Report of IBX Group, Inc. (the
"Company") on Form 10-QSB for the quarter ended June 30, 2003 as filed with the
Securities and Exchange Commission (the "Report"), I, David Blechman, Treasurer
of the Company, certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. ss. 1350, as adopted pursuant to
ss. 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.


         Dated:  August 19, 2003        /s/ David Blechman
                                        --------------------------
                                        David Blechman
                                        Treasurer
STATE of Louisiana v. Ahmad Rashad JOHNSON, Sr.

NO. 2018-K-0436

Supreme Court of Louisiana.

December 3, 2018

Denied.
Jesula PETIT-FRERE, Appellant, v. James FARLEY and Mary Farley, Appellees.

No. 4D17-1547

District Court of Appeal of Florida, Fourth District.

[October 11, 2018]

Brett C. Powell of The Powell Law Firm, P.A., Palmetto Bay, for appellant.

Warren B. Kwavnick of Cooney Trybus Kwavnick Peets, Fort Lauderdale, for appellees.

Per Curiam.

*Affirmed.*

Damoorgian, Ciklin and Conner, JJ., concur.
George WALKER, Appellant, v. STATE of Florida, Appellee.

No. 1D18-3625

District Court of Appeal of Florida, First District.

October 16, 2018 Rehearing Denied November 29, 2018

George Walker, pro se, Appellant.

Pamela Jo Bondi, Attorney General, Tallahassee, for Appellee.

Per Curiam.

Upon consideration of Appellant's response to the Court's order of August 30, 2018, the Court has determined that the appeal is untimely. Accordingly, the appeal is dismissed. Any request for belated appeal must be filed pursuant to Florida Rule of Appellate Procedure 9.141(c).

Lewis, Wetherell, and Winokur, JJ., concur.
# Third District Court of Appeal

State of Florida

Opinion filed May 27, 2015.

Not final until disposition of timely filed motion for rehearing.

________________

No. 3D10-27

Lower Tribunal No. 06-44071

________________



### Anthony Figueroa

, Appellant,

vs.



### The State of Florida

, Appellee.

An Appeal from the Circuit Court for Miami-Dade County, Daryl E.

Trawick

, Judge.

Carlos J. Martinez, Public Defender, and Robert Kalter, Assistant Public

Defender, for appellant.

Pamela Jo Bondi, Attorney General, and Douglas J. Glaid

, Senior Assistant

Attorney General, for appellee.

Before WELLS, LAGOA, and FERNANDEZ, JJ.

ON REMAND FROM THE SUPREME COURT OF FLORIDA

PER CURIAM.Upon remand by the Florida Supreme Court, we reverse Anthony

Figueroa’s (“Figueroa”) conviction and sentence for second degree murder and

remand for a new trial.

The sole issue on appeal arises from the jury instructions given by the trial

court for manslaughter, which was the 2008 interim manslaughter by act

instruction approved by the Florida Supreme Court. See In re Standard Jury

Instructions in Criminal Cases

— Report No. 2007-10

, 997 So. 2d 403 (Fla. 2008).

The question before us is whether that instruction erroneously stated the elements

of manslaughter by act, and whether the instruction constitutes fundamental error

in the instant case. See Daniels v. State

, 121 So. 3d 409 (Fla. 2013); State v.

Montgomery

, 39 So. 3d 252 (Fla. 2010).

Pursuant to Figueroa’s Motion for Rehearing, we withdrew our opinion

issued June 25, 2014, and stayed our decision pending disposition of Griffin v.

State

, 160 So. 3d 63 (Fla. 2015). Subsequently, in Griffin

, the Florida Supreme

Court clarified that the giving of an erroneous manslaughter by act jury instruction

does establish fundamental error when the defendant’s sole defense is

misidentification. Because the defendant in Griffin was convicted of second

degree murder, an offense only one step removed from manslaughter, and because

the defendant did not concede the intent by which the homicide was committed,

the Court concluded that proof of that issue remained on the State, and remained in

dispute notwithstanding the defendant’s defense of misidentification. Id. at 70.

2Thus, it was fundamental error to erroneously instruct the jury on manslaughter by

act, requiring a new trial. Id.

In accordance with Griffin

, 160 So. 3d 63, we hold that the error here was

fundamental, as Figueroa did not concede the element of intent and he had no

affirmative obligation to dispute intent or any element of the crime. Id. ; Page v.

State

, 40 Fla. L. Weekly D1077 (Fla. 3d DCA May 6, 2015); Moore v. State

, 40

Fla. L. Weekly D1075 (Fla. 3d DCA May 6, 2015). Because we find that

fundamental error occurred, we reverse and remand for a new trial.

REVERSED AND REMANDED

3
I 

113TH CONGRESS 

2D SESSION H. R. 5814 

To adapt to changing crude oil market conditions. 

IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES 

DECEMBER 9, 2014 

Mr. BARTON (for himself and Mr. BRIDENSTINE) introduced the following bill; 

which was referred to the Committee on Energy and Commerce, and in 

addition to the Committee on Foreign Affairs, for a period to be subsequently determined by the Speaker, in each case for consideration of such 

provisions as fall within the jurisdiction of the committee concerned 

A BILL 

To adapt to changing crude oil market conditions. 

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

3 SECTION 1. FINDINGS. 

4 The Congress finds that— 

5 (1) the United States has enjoyed a renaissance 

6 in energy production, establishing the United States 

7 as the world’s leading oil producer; 

8 (2) the United States upholds a commitment to 

9 free trade and open markets and has consistently 


smartinez on DSK4TPTVN1PROD with BILLS
2 

•HR 5814 IH

1 opposed attempts by other nations to restrict the 

2 free flow of energy; and 

3 (3) the United States should remove all restric4 tions on the export of crude oil, which will provide 

5 domestic economic benefits, enhanced energy secu6 rity, and flexibility in foreign diplomacy. 

7 SEC. 2. REPEAL. 

8 Section 103 of the Energy Policy and Conservation 

9 Act (42 U.S.C. 6212) and the item relating thereto in the 

10 table of contents of that Act are repealed. 

11 SEC. 3. NATIONAL POLICY ON OIL EXPORT RESTRICTION. 

12 Notwithstanding any other provision of law, to pro13 mote the efficient exploration, production, storage, supply, 

14 marketing, pricing, and regulation of energy resources, in15 cluding fossil fuels, no official of the Federal Government 

16 shall impose or enforce any restriction on the export of 

17 crude oil. 

18 SEC. 4. STUDY AND RECOMMENDATIONS. 

19 Not later than 120 days after the date of enactment 

20 of this Act, the Secretary of Energy shall conduct a study 

21 and transmit to the Committee on Energy and Commerce 

22 of the House of Representatives and the Committee on 

23 Energy and Natural Resources of the Senate recVerDate Sep 11 2014 00:33 Dec 11, 2014 Jkt 049200 PO 00000 Frm 00002 Fmt 6652 Sfmt 6201 E:\BILLS\H5814.IH H5814

smartinez on DSK4TPTVN1PROD with BILLS
3 

•HR 5814 IH

1 ommendations on the appropriate size, composition, and 

2 purpose of the Strategic Petroleum Reserve. 

Æ 


smartinez on DSK4TPTVN1PROD with BILLS
```

[Congressional Bills 113th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[H.R. 957 Introduced in House (IH)]

113th CONGRESS
  1st Session
                                H. R. 957

   To reduce temporarily the royalty required to be paid for sodium 
           produced on Federal lands, and for other purposes.

_______________________________________________________________________

                    IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

                             March 5, 2013

  Mrs. Lummis (for herself, Mr. Himes, Ms. Bonamici, Mr. McCarthy of 
  California, and Mr. Cook) introduced the following bill; which was 
             referred to the Committee on Natural Resources

_______________________________________________________________________

                                 A BILL

 
   To reduce temporarily the royalty required to be paid for sodium 
           produced on Federal lands, and for other purposes.

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

SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE.

    This Act may be cited as the ``American Soda Ash Competitiveness 
Act''.

SEC. 2. REDUCTION IN ROYALTY RATE ON SODA ASH.

    Notwithstanding section 102(a)(9) of the Federal Land Policy and 
Management Act of 1976 (43 U.S.C. 1701(a)(9)), section 24 of the 
Mineral Leasing Act (30 U.S.C. 262), and the terms of any lease under 
that Act, the royalty rate on the quantity or gross value of the output 
of sodium compounds and related products at the point of shipment to 
market from Federal land in the 5-year period beginning on the date of 
enactment of this Act shall be 2 percent.
                                 <all>
```
Exhibit32.2

CERTIFICATION PURSUANT TO 18 U.S.C. SECTION1350, AS ADOPTED PURSUANT TO SECTION 906 OF THESARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002

In connection with the Annual Reportof Salomon Smith Barney Orion Futures Fund L.P. (the"Partnership") on Form 10-K for the yearending December 31, 2005 as filed with the Securities and ExchangeCommission on the date hereof (the "Report"),I, Daniel R. McAuliffe, Jr., Chief Financial Officer and Director ofCitigroup Managed Futures LLC, certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. §1350, as adopted pursuant to § 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of2002, that:

(1) The Report fully complies withthe requirements of section 13(a) or 15(d) of the Securities ExchangeAct of 1934; and

(2) The information containedin the Report fairly presents, in all material respects, the financialcondition and results of operations of the Partnership.

/s/ Daniel R. McAuliffe,Jr.                Daniel R. McAuliffe, Jr.Citigroup Managed Futures LLC Chief Financial Officer andDirector

March 28,2006                                    Date

----
Exhibit 32.1



INTERVIDEO, INC.



CERTIFICATION OF CHIEF EXECUTIVE OFFICER

PURSUANT TO

18 U.S.C. SECTION 1350,

AS ADOPTED PURSUANT TO

SECTION 906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002



I, Steve Ro, certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, as adopted pursuant to Section 906
of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that, the Quarterly Report of InterVideo, Inc. on Form 10-Q for the three-month period ended June 30, 2005, fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 and
that information contained in such Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q fairly presents in all material respects the financial condition and results of operations of InterVideo, Inc.



Dated: August 15, 2005



|                                     
|-------------------------------------
|/s/ Steve Ro                         
|Steve Ro                             
|Chief Executive Officer and President
Gustave J. LABARRE, Jr., et al. v. OCCIDENTAL CHEMICAL COMPANY and Texas Brine Company, LLC, et al.

NO. 2018-C-1380

Supreme Court of Louisiana.

December 3, 2018

Denied.
##### Table of Contents



UNITED STATES SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION
 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20549
 FORM 8-K
 CURRENT REPORT
Pursuant to Section 13 or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934
 December 20, 2005
 (Date of earliest event reported)
 CAPTEC FRANCHISE CAPITAL PARTNERS L.P. IV
  Delaware
(State or Other Jurisdiction
of Incorporation)
    
    333-9371
(Commission File Number)
    
    38-3304096
(IRS Employer Identification No.)
 24 Frank Lloyd Wright Drive
Lobby L, 4th Floor
Ann Arbor, Michigan
(Address of Principal Executive Offices)
    
    48106
(Zip Code)
 (734) 994-5505
    o
 o
 o
 o




---



TABLE OF CONTENTS  Item 1.01. Entry into a Material Definitive AgreementItem 9.01. Financial Statements and ExhibitsSIGNATURESExhibit IndexPurchase and Sale Agreement    Table of Contents  Section 1  Registrants Business and Operations
 
 Item 1.01. Entry into a Material Definitive Agreement .
    
 Item 9.01. Financial Statements and Exhibits .
 (a)
    
    No financial statements are required to be filed as part of
this Form 8-K.(b)
    
    No pro forma financial information is required to be filed as
part of this Form 8-K.(c)
    
    The following exhibit is filed as part of this Form 8-K:
 99
    
    Purchase and Sale Agreement between The
Ben-nissan Trust dated September 21, 2000, and Captec Franchise Capital
Partners L.P. IV, dated December 20, 2005.
 ForwardLooking Statements




---



##### Table of Contents



SIGNATURES
  CAPTEC FRANCHISE CAPITAL PARTNERS L.P. IV
 By:
    
    GP4 Asset Acquisition, LLCGeneral Partner of Captec Franchise Capital Partners L.P. IVBy:
    
    /s/ Patrick L. BeachPatrick L. BeachPresidentDate:
    
    December 22, 2005




---



##### Table of Contents



Exhibit Index
 Exhibit No.
    
    Exhibit Description99
    
    Purchase and Sale Agreement between The Ben-nissan Trust dated September 21, 2000, and Capted Franchise
Capital Partners L.P. IV, dated December 20, 2005.
<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 Washington Banking Company (the
"Company") on Form 10-K for the period ended December 31, 2005, as filed with
the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the "Report"), I,
Michal D. Cann, Chief Executive Officer of the Company, certify, pursuant to 18
U.S.C. Section 1350, as adopted pursuant to 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 result of operations of the Company
      as of, and for, the periods presented in the Report.

This certification is being furnished solely to comply with the requirements of
18 U.S.C. Section 1350, and shall not be incorporated by reference into any of
the Company's filings under the Securities Act of 1933 or the Securities
Exchange Act of 1934, or otherwise be deemed to be filed as part of the Report
or under such Acts.

/s/ Michal D. Cann
------------------------
Michal D. Cann
Chief Executive Officer


March 13, 2006
```

[Federal Register Volume 89, Number 243 (Wednesday, December 18, 2024)]
[Notices]
[Pages 102972-102973]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2024-29889]

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

POSTAL SERVICE

Product Change--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 Robinson, 202-268-8405.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The United States Postal Service[supreg] 
hereby

[[Page 102973]]

gives notice that, pursuant to 39 U.S.C. 3642 and 3632(b)(3), on 
December 6, 2024, it filed with the Postal Regulatory Commission a USPS 
Request to Add Priority Mail & USPS Ground Advantage[supreg] Contract 
518 to Competitive Product List. Documents are available at 
www.prc.gov, Docket Nos. MC2025-679, K2025-678.

Sean Robinson,
Attorney, Corporate and Postal Business Law.
[FR Doc. 2024-29889 Filed 12-17-24; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 7710-12-P
```