alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
Legal Division

Dodd-Frank Act Title II

Legal Framework Overview

January 25, 2012
Overview:  Title I – Prudential Oversight and Resolutio

Plans

 Title II – Orderly Resolution Authority 

5 Key Elements Applicability & Appointment Authority for Immediate and Decisive Action  Continuity – Bridge Financial Companies & Rela

Authorities

 Access to Liquidity Prohibition on Taxpayer Bailouts
Orderly Resolution Authority:Applicability & Appointment Bankruptcy is Primary Resolution Process

 Dodd-Frank is only a fall-back option to mitigate systemic consequ Key Issue: Whether Title II will mitigate systemic risk of a Bankrupt

 Limited to Potentially Systemic Financial Comp

 Certain BHCs, Designated Financial Companies, or Other Financia

(with 85% or more of total consolidated revenues from financial ac

 Advance Planning is critical Special Process to Trigger

 Treasury Secretary, in consultation with President, after Recomme

Board of Governors and Designated Regulator (principally FDIC or 

 Judicial Review
Orderly Resolution Authority:Immediate and Decisive Action Immediate authority to operate business, resolv

pay creditors, transfer assets & liabilities

 One day stay on derivatives netting – to allow tr

for value

 Statutory priority of distribution provides certain Creditor protections include statutory minimum 

& judicial determination of disputed claims

 Parallels authority under Bankruptcy Code to pr

consistency – differences focused on speed of execution, value retention, & mitigation of syste
Orderly Resolution Authority:Continuity – Bridge Financial Company Bridge provides authority to maximize value & m

systemic risks by maintaining critical operations

 Temporary FDIC-chartered financial company Broad authority to operate business and transfe

& liabilities

 Broad funding options: cashflow, guarantees & 

assurances of performance, Orderly Liquidation and Debtor in Possession Financing

 Flexible resolution options: merger, charter con

stock sale, or P&A
Orderly Resolution Authority:Access to Liquidity As demonstrated in 2008, immediate liquidity to 

preserve valuable operations is critical to preseand stem systemic consequences

 Title II creates Orderly Liquidation Fund to carry 

II resolutions

 All funding must be repaid by receivership, clawback 

assessments

 Cannot be used to preserve insolvent financial 

companies or avoid closure and resolution
Orderly Resolution Authority:Prohibition on Taxpayer Bail-Outs Statutory bar on taxpayer loss – 12 U.S.C. § 53 Dodd-Frank expressly:

 Prohibits taxpayer losses from the exercise of Title II  Requires unsecured creditors to bear losses under pr

system

 Requires full repayment of OLF from creditors or indu Requires that shareholders receive no payments unti

valid claims are paid

 Requires FDIC to ensure that senior management an

members responsible for the failure are not retained.
USDC IN/ND case 2:13-cv-00002-JD-PRC   document 1   filed 11/19/12   page 1 of 5

USDC IN/ND case 2:13-cv-00002-JD-PRC   document 1   filed 11/19/12   page 2 of 5

USDC IN/ND case 2:13-cv-00002-JD-PRC   document 1   filed 11/19/12   page 3 of 5

USDC IN/ND case 2:13-cv-00002-JD-PRC   document 1   filed 11/19/12   page 4 of 5

USDC IN/ND case 2:13-cv-00002-JD-PRC   document 1   filed 11/19/12   page 5 of 5
John D. RUFF, petitioner, v. A.C. GILLESS, et al.

No. 12-1375.

Supreme Court of the United States

Dec. 2, 2013.

Petition for rehearing denied.
UNPUBLISHED

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

No. 96-7200

RICHARD ROY YOST,

Petitioner - Appellant,

versus

P. L. HUFFMAN, Warden; JOHN B. METZGER, III,

Chairman, Virginia Parole Board; VIRGINIA

PAROLE BOARD,

Respondents - Appellees.

Appeal from the United States District Court for the Western District of Virginia, at Roanoke. James C. Turk, District Judge.

(CA-95-869-R)

Submitted: May 1, 1997 Decided: May 7, 1997

Before WIDENER and MURNAGHAN, Circuit Judges, and PHILLIPS, Senior

Circuit Judge.

Dismissed by unpublished per curiam opinion.

Richard Roy Yost, Appellant Pro Se. Mary Elizabeth Shea, OFFICE

OF THE ATTORNEY GENERAL OF VIRGINIA, Richmond, Virginia, for

Appellees.

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.

See Local Rule 36(c).
2

PER CURIAM:

Appellant appeals the district court's order denying his

motion for reconsideration of the denial of his 28 U.S.C.A. § 2254

(West 1994 & Supp. 1997) petition. We have reviewed the record and

the district court's opinion and find no reversible error. Accordingly, we dismiss the appeal on the reasoning of the district

court. Yost v. Huffman, No. CA-95-869-R (W.D. Va. July 2, 1996). We

deny Yost's motions for stay of the district court order pending

appeal and for a certificate of probable cause to 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
1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

26

27

28

United States District Court

For the Northern District of California

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

MONTEVILLE SLOAN, et al.,

Plaintiffs,

v.

GENERAL MOTORS LLC,

Defendant.

Case No. 16-cv-07244-EMC 

ORDER GRANTING PLAINTIFFS' 

UNOPPOSED MOTION FOR LEAVE 

TO FILE MOTION FOR PARTIAL 

RECONSIDERATION

Docket No. 101

Plaintiffs request leave to file a motion for reconsideration because of an apparent 

scrivener’s error in the Court’s order regarding Defendant General Motors’ motion to dismiss. See

Docket No. 99. In particular, the Court’s order stated that it had dismissed Count 92, Ohio 

Plaintiffs Gulling and Jones’ claim for “implied warranty in tort” under Ohio law. Id. at 45. In 

fact, the Court intended to dismiss Plaintiffs Gulling and Jones’ claims under the Magnuson-Moss 

Warranty Act, Count 1, to the extent they were premised on a claim for “implied warranty in tort,”

raised separately as Count 92. For that reason, Count 92 remains in the case. Plaintiffs’ request 

for clarification, unopposed by GM, is GRANTED; Plaintiffs need not file a motion for 

reconsideration. 

This order disposes of Docket No. 101.

IT IS SO ORDERED.

Dated: March 5, 2018

______________________________________

EDWARD M. CHEN

United States District Judge
<PAGE>

                                                                      EXHIBIT 99

           WINTHROP RESIDENTIAL ASSOCIATES III, A LIMITED PARTNERSHIP
           ----------------------------------------------------------
                         FORM 10-QSB SEPTEMBER 30, 2000
                         ------------------------------

Supplementary information required pursuant to section 9.4 of the partnership
agreement:

1. Statement of Cash Available for Distribution for the three months ended
   September 30, 2000:

   Net Income                                          $    35,000
   Add:   Depreciation                                      47,000
   Less:  Cash to reserves                                 (55,000)
                                                       -----------
   Cash Available for Distribution                     $    27,000
                                                       ===========
   Distributions allocated to General Partners               2,000
                                                       ===========
   Distributions allocated to Limited Partners         $    25,000
                                                       ===========


2. Fees and other compensation paid or accrued by the Partnership to the
   General Partners, or their affiliates, during the three months ended
   September 30, 2000:

<TABLE>
<CAPTION>

      Entity Receiving                       Form of
        Compensation                       Compensation                              Amount
   -------------------------   -------------------------------------------       ----------------
   <S>                         <C>                                               <C>
   General Partners            Interest in Cash Available for Distribution         $   2,000

   WFC Realty Co., Inc.
   (Initial Limited Partner)   Interest in Cash Available for Distribution         $       5
</TABLE>









                                    12 of 12
EXHIBIT 12




Boeing Capital Corporation and Subsidiaries
Computation of Ratio of Income to Fixed Charges


<TABLE>

                                                                                   Three months ended
                                                                                        March 31,
(Dollars in millions)                                                            1999              1998
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Income:
<S>                                                                        <C>               <C>            
    Income before provision for income taxes                               $          28.8   $          20.7
    Fixed charges                                                                     33.9              33.7
                                                                           ------------------------------------
    Income before provision for income taxes and fixed charges             $          62.7   $          54.4
                                                                           ====================================

Fixed charges:
    Interest expense                                                       $          33.0   $          32.5
    Preferred stock dividends                                                          0.9               1.2
                                                                           ------------------------------------
                                                                           $          33.9   $          33.7
                                                                           ====================================

Ratio of income before provision for income taxes and fixed
    charges to fixed charges                                                           1.85              1.61
                                                                           ====================================
</TABLE>
### T E X A S C O U R T O F A P P E A L S , T H I R D D I S T R I C T , A T A U S T I N

NO. 03-14-00626- CV

Gle nn H egar, C om ptroller of P ubl ic Acc ounts of the State of T exas, and Ken P axton, Attor ney Ge neral of the State of Texas, App ellants

v. Bud get P reP ay, Inc. , Appellee

F ROM TH E DISTRI CT COURT O F TRAVIS CO UNTY, 126 TH JUDICI AL DISTRICT NO. D-1 -GN-1 1-0 0118 9, H ONO RAB LE GISELA D. TRI ANA, JUDGE P RESIDING

M E M O R A N D U M O P I N I O N Per Curiam Appellants Glenn Heg ar, Comptroller of Public Acc ounts of the State of Texas, and
Ken Pax ton, Attorney Gene ral of the State of Texas have filed an agree d motion to abate this appea l pending consummation of settlement. Acc ording ly , we g rant the motion and abat e t h e ap peal 1
until May 6, 2015, or until further order of this Court. All appellate deadlines will be tolled during t h e period of abate ment. Absent further order of this Court, this appea l will be automatically

reinstated a fter Ma

y 6, 2015.

We substitut e Glen Heg ar, in his officia l capa city , as succe ssor to Susan Combs as 1 Comptroller of Public Acc ounts and Ken Pax ton, in his officia l capa city , as succe ssor to Gre g Abbott as Attorney

Gene ral. SeeTex. R. App. P . 7.2(a)

.Be fore Chief J ustice Rose, Jus tices Goodwin a nd Field Abated Filed: Apr il 7, 2015

2
Kelly A. GREEN, petitioner, v. AMERICAN FEDERATION OF LABOR AND CONGRESS OF INDUSTRIAL ORGANIZATIONS, et al.

No. 13-5855.

Supreme Court of the United States

Nov. 18, 2013.

Petition for writ of certiorari to the United States Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit denied.
USDC IN/ND case 3:14-cv-00315-RL   document 36-12   filed 07/14/15   page 1 of 5

USDC IN/ND case 3:14-cv-00315-RL   document 36-12   filed 07/14/15   page 2 of 5

USDC IN/ND case 3:14-cv-00315-RL   document 36-12   filed 07/14/15   page 3 of 5

USDC IN/ND case 3:14-cv-00315-RL   document 36-12   filed 07/14/15   page 4 of 5

USDC IN/ND case 3:14-cv-00315-RL   document 36-12   filed 07/14/15   page 5 of 5
#### Lester Levy, Appellant, v Town of Kent et al., Respondents.

In a negligence action to recover damages for personal injuries resulting from water contamination, plaintiff appeals from an order of the Supreme Court, Putnam County (Beisheim, J.), dated August 19, 1983, which, upon the motion of the *314defendants Putnam County and Putnam County Board of Health to dismiss the complaint as against them for nonjoinder of the State of New York as a necessary party, dismissed the complaint as against all defendants “without prejudice to the right of the plaintiffs [sic] to pursue their [sic] claim against the defendants in the Court of Claims”.

Order reversed, without costs or disbursements, and motion denied. (See, *Baisley v Town of Kent,*111 AD2d 299.) Thompson, J. P., Brown, Niehoff and Lawrence, JJ., concur.
-2-

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT 

COURT FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT 

OF INDIANA SOUTH BEND DIVISION

FOUR MILE BAY LLC,

Plaintiff,

v.

ZIMMER BIOMET HOLDINGS, INC.

Defendant.

CASE NO. 3:15-cv-00063-PPS-MGG

HON. PHILIP P. SIMON

M.J. HON. MICHAEL G. GOTSCH, SR.

JOINT MOTION TO STAY

Plaintiff Four Mile Bay LLC (“FMB”) and Defendant Zimmer Biomet Holdings, Inc. 

(“Zimmer”) jointly move the Court to enter an order staying all proceedings in this case and, in 

support, state as follows.

On March 10, 2017, the Patent Trial and Appeal Board (“PTAB”) issued a final written 

decision pursuant to 35 U.S.C. § 318(a) and 37 C.F.R. § 42.1(d) finding all of the challenged 

claims of U.S. Patent No. 8,821,582 (“the ’582 Patent”) to be unpatentable, including all of the 

claims of the ’582 patent asserted in this action (the “PTAB Decision”). The parties’ March 22, 

2017 Joint Status Report provides additional details regarding the PTAB Decision. FMB has 

represented that it will timely appeal the PTAB Decision to the U.S. Court of Appeals for the 

Federal Circuit (“the Federal Circuit”).

Accordingly, the parties jointly request that the Court stay all proceedings in this action 

until the Federal Circuit issues its decision on FMB’s appeal of the PTAB Decision and order that:

1. All proceedings in this action shall be stayed until the Federal Circuit issues its 

decision on the PTAB Decision; and

USDC IN/ND case 3:15-cv-00063-PPS-MGG document 94 filed 03/27/17 page 1 of 3
-2-

2. Within seven days of the Federal Circuit’s decision, the parties shall file a joint 

status report informing the Court of the nature of the Federal Circuit’s decision and the status of 

the litigation of the patents-in-suit.

Dated: March 27, 2017 Respectfully submitted,

/s/ Jeffrey A. Andrews 

Jeffrey A. Andrews (pro hac vice) 

Robert J. McAughan, Jr. (pro hac vice) 

Albert B. Deaver, Jr. (pro hac vice)

David L. Terrell (pro hac vice)

SUTTON McAUGHAN DEAVER PLLC

Three Riverway, Suite 900 

Houston, TX 77056

Clint A. Zalas

LEE GROVE & ZALAS

205 West Jefferson Blvd., Suite 502 

South Bend, IN 46601

Counsel for Plaintiff

FOUR MILE BAY LLC

USDC IN/ND case 3:15-cv-00063-PPS-MGG document 94 filed 03/27/17 page 2 of 3
-2-

/s/ Stephen M. Judge

John D. LaDue (19039-71)

Stephen M. Judge (31831-71)

LaDue Curran & Kuehn LLC

200 First Bank Building

205 West Jefferson Boulevard

South Bend, IN 46601

Tel: (574) 968-0760

Fax: (574) 968-0761

jladue@lck-law.com

sjudge@lck-law.com

Joseph M O'Malley, Jr (pro hac vice)

Young J. Park (pro hac vice)

Paul Hastings LLP

200 Park Ave 

New York, NY 10166 

Tel: (212) 318-6090 

josephomalley@paulhastings.com

youngpark@paulhastings.com

Anand B Patel PHV (pro hac vice)

Naveen Modi (pro hac vice)

Paromita Chatterjee (pro hac vice)

Paul Hastings LLP 

875 15th St NW 

Washington, DC 20005-2221 

Tel: (202) 551-1989 

Fax: (202) 551-0489 

anandpatel@paulhastings.com

naveenmodi@paulhastings.com

mitachatterjee@paulhastings.com

Counsel for Defendant

ZIMMER BIOMET HOLDINGS, INC.

USDC IN/ND case 3:15-cv-00063-PPS-MGG document 94 filed 03/27/17 page 3 of 3
**Exhibit 31.1**CERTIFICATIONI, Terrance J. Lillis, certify that: 1. I have reviewed this report on Form 10-K and all reports on Form 10-D requiredto be filed in respect of the period covered by this report on Form 10-K of PrincipalLife Income Fundings Trust 2007-76 (the “Exchange Act periodic reports”);  2. Based on my knowledge, the Exchange Act periodic reports, taken as whole, donot contain any untrue statement of a material fact or omit to state a material factnecessary to make the statements made, in light of the circumstances under which suchstatements were made, not misleading with respect to the period covered by this report;  3. Based on my knowledge, all of the distribution, servicing and other informationrequired to be provided under Form 10-D for the period covered by this report isincluded in the Exchange Act periodic reports;  4. Based on my knowledge and the servicer compliance statement(s) required in thisreport under Item 1123 of Regulation AB, and except as disclosed in the Exchange Actperiodic reports, the servicer has fulfilled its obligations under the servicingagreement(s) in all material respects; and  5. All of the reports on assessment of compliance with servicing criteria forasset-backed securities and their related attestation reports on assessment ofcompliance with servicing criteria for asset-backed securities required to be includedin this report in accordance with Item 1122 of Regulation AB and Exchange Act Rules13a-18 and 15d-18 have been included as an exhibit to this report, except as otherwisedisclosed in this report. Any material instances of noncompliance described in suchreports have been disclosed in this report on Form 10-K.In giving the certifications above, I have reasonably relied on information provided to me by thefollowing unaffiliated parties: Citibank, N.A. and Bankers Trust Company, N.A.Date: March 27, 2008   /s/ Terrance J. Lillis   Terrance J. Lillis  Chief Financial Officer- Retirement and Investor Services
<PAGE>

                                                                   Exhibit 10.10



                                                              March 11, 2004



EarlyBirdCapital, Inc.
600 Third Avenue
33rd Floor
New York, New York 10016

                  Re:  Tremisis Energy Acquisition Corporation
                       ---------------------------------------

Gentlemen:

                  This letter will confirm the agreement of the undersigned to
purchase warrants ("Warrants") of Tremisis Energy Acquisition Corporation
("Company") included in the units ("Units") being sold in the Company's initial
public offering ("IPO") upon the terms and conditions set forth herein. Each
Unit is comprised of one share of Common Stock and two Warrants. The shares of
Common Stock and Warrants will not be separately tradeable until 90 days after
the effective date of the Company's IPO unless EarlyBirdCapital, Inc. ("EBC")
informs the Company of its decision to allow earlier separate trading.

                  The undersigned agrees that this letter agreement constitutes
an irrevocable order for EBC to purchase for the undersigned's account within
the forty-trading day period commencing on the date separate trading of the
Warrants commences ("Separation Date") up to 1,000,000 Warrants at market prices
not to exceed $0.65 per Warrant ("Maximum Warrant Purchase"). EBC (or such other
broker dealer(s) as EBC may assign the order to) agrees to fill such order in
such amounts and at such times as it may determine, in its sole discretion,
during the forty-trading day period commencing on the Separation Date. EBC
further agrees that it will not charge the undersigned any fees and/or
commissions with respect to such purchase obligation.

                  The undersigned may notify EBC that all or part of his
respective Maximum Warrant Purchase will be made by an affiliate of the
undersigned (or another person or entity introduced to EBC by the undersigned (a
"Designee")) who (or which) has an account at EBC and, in such event, EBC will
make such purchase on behalf of said affiliate or Designee; provided, however,
that the undersigned hereby agrees to make payment of the purchase price of such
purchase in the event that the affiliate or Designee fails to make such payment.

                  The undersigned agrees that neither he nor any affiliate or
Designee shall sell or transfer the Warrants until after the consummation of a
merger, capital stock exchange, asset acquisition or other similar business
combination with an operating business and acknowledges that, at the option of
EBC, the certificates for such Warrants shall contain a legend indicating such
restriction on transferability.

                                                     Very truly yours,

                                                     /s/ Lawrence S. Coben
                                                     -----------------------
                                                     Lawrence S. Coben
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

NORTHERN DISTRICT OF INDIANA

SOUTH BEND DIVISION

DR. G. DAVID MOSS, PH.D, )

)

Plaintiff, )

) Case No.:

v. ) 3:13-cv-01239-JTM-MGG

)

THE UNIVERSITY OF NOTRE DAME DU LAC, )

and ERIN HOFFMANN HARDING, Individually )

and in her Official Capacity, )

)

Defendants. )

STIPULATION OF DISMISSAL WITH PREJUDICE

Pursuant to Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 41(a)(1), Plaintiff, by counsel, and 

Defendants, by counsel, stipulate to Plaintiff’s voluntary dismissal of this cause of action with 

prejudice and with each side bearing its own costs and attorneys’ fees.

Respectfully submitted,

DIXON, WRIGHT & ASSOCIATES, P.C.

/s/ with the consent of Thomas Dixon

Thomas M. Dixon

55255 Birchwood Court

Osceola, IN 46561-9111

Telephone: (574) 315-6455

tdixon3902@comcast.net

Attorney for Plaintiff

BARNES & THORNBURG LLP

/s/ Michael P. Palmer

Michael P. Palmer

Alice J. Springer

700 1st Source Bank Center

100 N. Michigan St.

South Bend, IN 46601-1632

Telephone: (574) 237-1139

Michael.Palmer@btlaw.com

Alice.Springer@btlaw.com

Lindsey D. G. Dates, pro hac vice

One North Wacker Drive, Suite 4400

Chicago, IL 60606-2833

Telephone: (312) 357-1313

Lindsey.Dates@btlaw.com

Attorneys for Defendants

USDC IN/ND case 3:13-cv-01239-PPS-MGG document 35 filed 07/31/17 page 1 of 2
2

CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE

I hereby certify that on July 31, 2017, I electronically filed the foregoing with the Clerk 

of the Court using the CM/ECF system which sent notification of such filing to the following: 

Thomas M. Dixon, 55255 Birchwood Court, Osceola, IN 46561-9111, 

tdixon3902@comcast.net.

BARNES & THORNBURG LLP

By: /s/ Michael P. Palmer

DMS MPALMER 10698238v1

USDC IN/ND case 3:13-cv-01239-PPS-MGG document 35 filed 07/31/17 page 2 of 2