alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
# C_2016291EN.01000201.xml

| 11.8.2016 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 291/2 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

11.8.2016

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 291/2

---

Non-opposition to a notified concentration

(Case M.8081 — Triton/Voith Industrial Services)

(Text with EEA relevance)

(2016/C 291/03)

On 3 August 2016, the Commission decided not to oppose the above notified concentration and to declare it compatible with the internal market. This decision is based on Article 6(1)(b) of Council Regulation (EC) No 139/2004 (1). The full text of the decision is available only in the English language and will be made public after it is cleared of any business secrets it may contain. It will be available:

1

| — | in the merger section of the Competition website of the Commission (http://ec.europa.eu/competition/mergers/cases/). This website provides various facilities to help locate individual merger decisions, including company, case number, date and sectoral indexes, |
| --- | --- |

—

in the merger section of the Competition website of the Commission (http://ec.europa.eu/competition/mergers/cases/). This website provides various facilities to help locate individual merger decisions, including company, case number, date and sectoral indexes,

| — | in electronic form on the EUR-Lex website (http://eur-lex.europa.eu/homepage.html?locale=en) under document number 32016M8081. EUR-Lex is the online access to European law. |
| --- | --- |

—

in electronic form on the EUR-Lex website (http://eur-lex.europa.eu/homepage.html?locale=en) under document number 32016M8081. EUR-Lex is the online access to European law.

---

(1)  OJ L 24, 29.1.2004, p. 1.

1

---
<PAGE>

                                  EXHIBIT 32.2

                  CERTIFICATION OF THE CHIEF FINANCIAL OFFICER
                       PURSUANT TO 18 U.S.C. SECTION 1350,
      AS ADOPTED PURSUANT TO SECTION 906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002

In connection with the Quarterly Report of K-Fed Bancorp (the "Company") on Form
10-Q for the period ending March 31, 2005 as filed with the Securities and
Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the "Report"), I, Daniel A. Cano, Chief
Financial 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 and in
connection with this quarterly report on Form 10-Q that:

     3.   The Report fully complies with the requirements of sections 13(a) or
          15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended, and

     4.   The information contained in the report fairly presents, in all
          material respects, the company's financial condition and results of
          operations.



Date: May 11, 2005                                 /s/ Daniel A. Cano
      ------------                                 -------------------------
                                                   Daniel A. Cano
                                                   Chief Financial Officer
| (logo)  **ncb**  National Cooperative Bank    | 2011  Crystal  Drive  Suite, 8oo  Arlington, VA 22202 |
|----------------------------------------------------|------------------------------------------------------------|

 

 

**FORM OF ANNUAL COMPLIANCE STATEMENT**

 

CERTIFICATION

 

BANK 2018-BNK12, Commercial Mortgage Pass-ThroughCertificates, Series 2018-BNK12 (the “Trust”)

 

I, Karyn Mann, on behalf ofNational Cooperative Bank, N.A., as NCB Special Servicer (the “CertifyingServicer”), certify to Wells Fargo Commercial Mortgage Securities, Inc. andits officers, directors and affiliates, and with the knowledge and intent thatthey will rely upon this certification, that:

 

1.       I (or Servicing Officers under mysupervision) have reviewed the Certifying Servicer’s activities during thepreceding calendar year between January 1, 2018 and December 31, 2018 (the “ReportingPeriod”) and the Certifying Servicer’s performance under the Pooling andServicing Agreement; and

 

2.       Tothe best of my knowledge, based on such review, the Certifying Servicer hasfulfilled all of its obligations under the Pooling and Servicing Agreement inall material respects during the Reporting Period.

 

 

Date:February 4, 2019

 

 

NATIONALCOOPERATIVE BANK, N.A.,

asNCB Special Servicer

By:/s/ Karyn Mann

Name:Karyn Mann

Title:Senior Vice President
T hi s or derand j udgm enti s notbi ndi ng pr ece dent , exce ptundert he * doctr i nes of l aw of the ca s e, r es j udi cat a, and col l at er al es t oppel . I tm aybe ci t ed, h o w e v e r, fo r its p e rsu a siv e v a lu e c o n sis ten t w ith F e d . R . A p p . P . 3 2 .1 a n d 1 0 th C i r . R . 32. 1. A ft erexami ni ng the br i efs and the appe l l at e r ecor d, t hi s t hr ee-j udge ** panel has det erm i ned unani m ous l yt hator al ar gum entw oul d notbe of mat er i al a ss ista n c e in th e d e ter m in a tio n o f th is a p p e a l. S e e F e d . R . A p p . P . 3 4 (a ); 1 0 th C ir. R . 3 4 .1 (G ). T h e c a u se is th e re fo re o rd e re d su b m itt e d w ith o u t o ra l ar g u m e n t. 

## F I LED United States C ourt of Appeals Tenth Circuit 

### A u gu s t7,2007 Elisab eth A. Shumaker C l erk of C ourt UNI TED S TATES CO URT O F AP PEALS

T E N T H C IR C U IT UNI T E D S T AT E S OF AM E RI CA , Pl ai nt i ff - A ppel l ee, v. E DGAR DAVI D OL I VAF R E D E R IC H , al so kn ow n as Jose S anti ago G on zal es, D e fe n d a n t - A p p e llan t. N o. 06- 2330 ( D . C. N o. CR - 06 - 18 85 J P)

(D .N .M .)

ORDE R AND J UDGM EN T * B efor e KELLY , M UR P HY , and O’ BRI EN , C i rcui tJudg es. ** D efe ndant - A ppel l antE dgarD avi d O l i va- Fr eder i ch fi l ed the i ns t antappea l aft erhe w as s ent ence d t o t w o m onths ’ i m pr i s onm entforvi ol at i on of a c ondi t i on o f h is s u p e rv ise d re lea se , w h ich w a s p re v io u slyim p o se d b yth e d istric t co u rt in th e W e ste rn D istric t o f T e x a s. S p e c ifica lly , M r. O liv a -F re d e ric h v io late d h is- 2 -

s upervi s ed r el eas e w hen he e nt er ed the U ni t ed St at es w i thoutobt ai ni ng the expr es s cons entof the Secr et aryof H om el and Secur i tyt o do s o. T he di s tr i ct courtor der ed the tw o- m onth s ent ence forvi ol at i on of s upervi s ed r el eas e t o run cons ecut i vel yw i th the thi r ty - s even mont h s ent ence i m pos ed forthe under l y i ng o ffe n se o f

ill e g a l re e n try . F in d in g n o p o ten tiallym e rito rio u s is su e s fo r a p p e a l, c o u n se l fo r M r. O liv a -F re d e ric h h a s filed a n A n d e rs b rie f a n d re q u e sts to w i thdr aw . See A nder s v. C al i forni a, 386 U . S. 738 ( 1967) . M r . O l i va- Fr eder i ch h a s b e e n s e rv e d w ith c o p ie s o f th e A n d e rs b ri e f

a n d h a s fa ile d to re s p o n d . B eca us e M r . O l i va- Fr eder i ch know i ngl yand vol unt ar i l yadmi t t ed t o bei ng i n the U ni t ed St at es w i thoutperm i s s i on, s ee Bra dyv. U ni t ed St at es , 397 U . S. 742, 755- 56 ( 1970) , and the s ent ence i m pos ed w as r eas oned and r eas onabl e, s ee U ni t ed St at es v. T edfor d, 405 F. 3d 1159, 1161 ( 10th C i r . 2005) , w e D I SM I SS t hi s appea l a n d GR ANT c o u n s e l ’ s mo t i o n t o wi th d r a w.

E n tered fo r th e C o u rt P au l J. K ell y , Jr. C i r cui tJ udge
#### HANN, Warden, v. HAWK.

No. 14564.

United States Court of Appeals Eighth Circuit.

July 20, 1953.

Robert A. Nelson, Asst. Atty. Gen. of Nebraska (Clarence S. Beck, Ally. Gen. of Nebraska, was with him on the brief), for appellant.

Richard W. Smith, Miami, Okl., for ap-pellee.

Before SANBORN, JOHNS EN. and RIDDICK, Circuit Judges.

PER CURIAM.

This is an appeal from a judgment of the United States District Court for the District of Nebraska, granting the application of the appellee, Henry Hawk, for a writ of habeas corpus and releasing him from imprisonment in the Nebraska State Penitentiary, where he had been held under a sentence of life imprisonment based upon a State court conviction for murder.

The appeal was argued at the November 1952 session of this Court, but, before it was *840decided, Henry Hawk died, at Council Bluffs, Iowa, on April 21, 1953. We are urged by counsel to decide the case, notwithstanding the death, of Hawk.

This case obviously became moot upon Hawk’s death, and this Court would not be justified in deciding questions which have become academic, no matter how interesting they may be. Following the established practice in dealing with a case such as this which became moot pending a decision of this Court on the merits, the judgment appealed from is vacated and the case is remanded with directions to dismiss it. See United States v. Munsingwear, Inc., 340 U.S. 36, 39, 71 S.Ct. 104,95 L.Ed. 36.
# Official Journal C 240/2006

| | ISSN 1725-2423 |
| --- | --- |
| Official Journal
  of the European Union | C 240 |
| | |
| English edition | Information and Notices | Volume 495 October 2006 |

ISSN 1725-2423

Official Journal

of the European Union

C 240

English edition

Information and Notices

Volume 495 October 2006

---

| Notice No | Contents | page |
| --- | --- | --- |
| | I   Information |
| | Council |
| 2006/C 240/1 | Council Decision of 18 September 2006 renewing the Governing Board of the European Centre for the Development of Vocational Training | 1 |
| | Commission |
| 2006/C 240/2 | Interest rate applied by the European Central Bank to its main refinancing operations: 3 % on 1 October 2006 — Euro exchange rates | 5 |
| 2006/C 240/3 | Authorisation for State aid pursuant to Articles 87 and 88 of the EC Treaty — Cases where the Commission raises no objections (1) | 6 |
| 2006/C 240/4 | Commission communication pursuant to Article 4(1)(a) of Council Regulation (EEC) 2408/92 — Imposition of a public service obligation in respect of a scheduled air service within the United Kingdom (1) | 7 |
| 2006/C 240/5 | Prior notification of a concentration (Case COMP/M.4321 — Siemens/Bayer Diagnostics) (1) | 8 |
| 2006/C 240/6 | Authorisation for State aid pursuant to Articles 87 and 88 of the EC Treaty — Cases where the Commission raises no objections (1) | 9 |
| 2006/C 240/7 | Prior notification of a concentration (Case COMP/M.4239 — Plastic Omnium/Inopart) — Candidate case for simplified procedure (1) | 11 |

Notice No

Contents

page

I   Information

Council

2006/C 240/1

Council Decision of 18 September 2006 renewing the Governing Board of the European Centre for the Development of Vocational Training

1

Commission

2006/C 240/2

Interest rate applied by the European Central Bank to its main refinancing operations: 3 % on 1 October 2006 — Euro exchange rates

5

2006/C 240/3

Authorisation for State aid pursuant to Articles 87 and 88 of the EC Treaty — Cases where the Commission raises no objections (1)

6

2006/C 240/4

Commission communication pursuant to Article 4(1)(a) of Council Regulation (EEC) 2408/92 — Imposition of a public service obligation in respect of a scheduled air service within the United Kingdom (1)

7

2006/C 240/5

Prior notification of a concentration (Case COMP/M.4321 — Siemens/Bayer Diagnostics) (1)

8

2006/C 240/6

Authorisation for State aid pursuant to Articles 87 and 88 of the EC Treaty — Cases where the Commission raises no objections (1)

9

2006/C 240/7

Prior notification of a concentration (Case COMP/M.4239 — Plastic Omnium/Inopart) — Candidate case for simplified procedure (1)

11

---

| | |
| --- | --- |
| | (1)   Text with EEA relevance |

---

(1)   Text with EEA relevance

1

| EN | |
| --- | --- |

EN
Exhibit 31.2**CERTIFICATIONS**I, Donald Gayhardt, certify that: 1. I have reviewed this Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q of Dollar Financial Corp.;  2. Based on my knowledge, this report does not contain any untrue statement of a materialfact or omit to state a material fact necessary to make the statements made, in light ofthe circumstances under which such statements were made, not misleading with respect to theperiod covered by this report;  3. Based on my knowledge, the financial statements, and other financial informationincluded 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 periodspresented in this report;  4. The registrant’s other certifying officers and I are responsible for establishing andmaintaining disclosure controls and procedures (as defined in Exchange Act Rules 13a-15(e)and 15d-15(e)) for the registrant and have: a) Designed such disclosure controls and procedures, or caused such disclosurecontrols and procedures to be designed under our supervision, to ensure that materialinformation relating to the registrant, including its consolidated subsidiaries, ismade known to us by others within those entities, particularly during the period inwhich this report is being prepared;  b) Evaluated the effectiveness of the registrant’s disclosure controls andprocedures and presented in this report our conclusions about the effectiveness ofthe disclosure controls and procedures, as of the end of the period covered by thisreport based on such evaluation; and  c) Disclosed in this report any change in the registrant’s internal controlover financial reporting that occurred during the registrant’s most recent fiscalquarter (the registrant’s fourth fiscal quarter in the case of an annual report) thathas materially affected, or is reasonably likely to materially affect, theregistrant’s internal control over financial reporting; and 5. The registrant’s other certifying officers and I have disclosed, based on our mostrecent evaluation of internal control over financial reporting, to the registrant’sauditors and the audit committee of the registrant’s board of directors (or personsperforming the equivalent functions): a) All significant deficiencies and material weaknesses in the design oroperation of internal control over financial reporting which are reasonably likely toadversely affect the registrant’s ability to record, process, summarize and reportfinancial information; and  b) Any fraud, whether or not material, that involves management or otheremployees who have a significant role in the registrant’s internal control overfinancial reporting.Date:November 9, 2005  /s/ Donald Gayhardt         Donald Gayhardt    President  
41
(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, including its consolidated subsidiaries, was made known to us by others
within those entities, particularly during the period in which this report was being prepared;
 (b)
    
    Designed such internal control over financial reporting, or caused such internal control over
financial reporting to be designed under our supervision, to provide reasonable assurance
regarding the reliability of financial reporting and the preparation of financial statements
for external purposes in accordance with generally accepted accounting principles;
 (c)
    
    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
 (d)
    
    Disclosed in this report any change in the registrants internal control over financial
reporting that occurred during the registrants most recent fiscal year that has materially
affected, or is reasonably likely to materially affect, the registrants internal control over
financial reporting; and
  (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.
I 

113TH CONGRESS 

1ST SESSION H. R. 1420 

To authorize appropriations to the Secretary of Commerce to establish publicprivate partnerships under the Market Development Cooperator Program 

of the International Trade Administration, and for other purposes. 

IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES 

APRIL 9, 2013 

Mr. GALLEGO (for himself and Mr. CA ́RDENAS) introduced the following bill; 

which was referred to the Committee on Foreign Affairs 

A BILL 

To authorize appropriations to the Secretary of Commerce 

to establish public-private partnerships under the Market 

Development Cooperator Program of the International 

Trade Administration, and for other purposes. 

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 ‘‘American Export Pro5 motion Act of 2013’’. 


sroberts on DSK5SPTVN1PROD with BILLS
2 

•HR 1420 IH

1 SEC. 2. ADDITIONAL FUNDING FOR THE MARKET DEVELOP2 MENT COOPERATOR PROGRAM OF THE DE3 PARTMENT OF COMMERCE. 

4 (a) IN GENERAL.—There is authorized to be appro5 priated to the Secretary of Commerce, for the period be6 ginning on the date of the enactment of this Act and end7 ing on the last day of the 18th month thereafter, 

8 $4,000,000 for the Manufacturing and Services unit of the 

9 International Trade Administration— 

10 (1) to establish public-private partnerships 

11 under the Market Development Cooperator Program 

12 of the International Trade Administration; and 

13 (2) to underwrite a portion of the start-up costs 

14 for new projects carried out under that Program to 

15 strengthen the competitiveness and market share of 

16 United States industry, not to exceed, for each such 

17 project, the lesser of— 

(A) 1 18 ⁄3 of the total start-up costs for the 

19 project; or 

20 (B) $500,000. 

21 (b) REQUIREMENTS.—In obligating and expending 

22 the funds appropriated pursuant to subsection (a), the 

23 Secretary of Commerce shall give preference— 

24 (1) to activities that assist small- and medium25 sized businesses in the United States; and 


sroberts on DSK5SPTVN1PROD with BILLS
3 

•HR 1420 IH

1 (2) to activities that the Secretary determines 

2 will create or sustain the greatest number of jobs in 

3 the United States or obtain the maximum return on 

4 investment. 

Æ 


sroberts on DSK5SPTVN1PROD with BILLS
H. R. 1376 

One Hundred Thirteenth Congress 

of the 

United States of America 

AT THE SECOND SESSION 

Begun and held at the City of Washington on Friday, 

the third day of January, two thousand and fourteen 

An Act 

To designate the facility of the United States Postal Service located at 369 Martin 

Luther King Jr. Drive in Jersey City, New Jersey, as the ‘‘Judge Shirley A. 

Tolentino Post Office Building’’. 

Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representatives of 

the United States of America in Congress assembled, 

SECTION 1. JUDGE SHIRLEY A. TOLENTINO POST OFFICE BUILDING. 

(a) DESIGNATION.—The facility of the United States Postal 

Service located at 369 Martin Luther King Jr. Drive in Jersey 

City, New Jersey, shall be known and designated as the ‘‘Judge 

Shirley A. Tolentino Post Office Building’’. 

(b) REFERENCES.—Any reference in a law, map, regulation, 

document, paper, or other record of the United States to the facility 

referred to in subsection (a) shall be deemed to be a reference 

to the ‘‘Judge Shirley A. Tolentino Post Office Building’’. 

Speaker of the House of Representatives. 

Vice President of the United States and

President of the Senate.
#### DULUTH, MISSABE & IRON RANGE RAILWAY COMPANY, Appellant, v. Donald T. ANDERSON.

No. 14834.

United States Court of Appeals Eighth Circuit.

June 22, 1953.

W. O. Bissonett, Duluth, Minn., for appellant.

Spellacy & Spellacy, Marble, Minn., for appellee.

PER CURIAM.

Appeal from District Court dismissed with prejudice, but without taxation of costs in favor of either of the parties in this Court, on stipulation of parties.
James F. JOHNSON, Petitioner, v. Richard S. TISCHNER, Director, Court Services and Offender Supervision Agency, et al.

No. 19-5633.

Supreme Court of the United States.

January 13, 2020

Petition for writ of certiorari to the United States Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit denied.
I 

110TH CONGRESS 

1ST SESSION H. R. 4767 

To extend the temporary suspension of duty on electric juice extractors. 

IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES 

DECEMBER 17, 2007 

Mr. SCOTT of Virginia introduced the following bill; which was referred to the 

Committee on Ways and Means 

A BILL 

To extend the temporary suspension of duty on electric juice 

extractors. 

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

3 SECTION 1. ELECTRIC JUICE EXTRACTORS. 

4 (a) IN GENERAL.—Heading 9902.23.43 of the Har5 monized Tariff Schedule of the United States is amended 

6 by striking ‘‘12/31/2009’’ and inserting ‘‘12/31/2011’’. 

7 (b) EFFECTIVE DATE.—The amendment made by 

8 subsection (a) applies with respect to goods entered, or 

9 withdrawn from warehouse for consumption, on or after 

10 the 15th day after the date of the enactment of this Act. 

Æ 

mstockstill on PROD1PC66 with BILLS
Christopher Anthony JONES, Petitioner, v. NEVADA.

No. 18-9521

Supreme Court of the United States.

October 7, 2019

Petition for writ of certiorari to the Supreme Court of Nevada denied.
Joseph R. MULLINS, Petitioner v. Joseph E. CORCORAN, et al.

No. 19-548

Supreme Court of the United States.

January 13, 2020

Petition for writ of certiorari to the Appeals Court of Massachusetts denied.
# C_2018174EN.01000101.xml

| 23.5.2018 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 174/1 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

23.5.2018

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 174/1

---

Non-opposition to a notified concentration

(Case M.8886 — Avenue Capital/Pemberton/Permira/Delsey)

(Text with EEA relevance)

(2018/C 174/01)

On 15 May 2018, the Commission decided not to oppose the above notified concentration and to declare it compatible with the internal market. This decision is based on Article 6(1)(b) of Council Regulation (EC) No 139/2004 (1). The full text of the decision is available only in English and will be made public after it is cleared of any business secrets it may contain. It will be available:

1

| — | in the merger section of the Competition website of the Commission (http://ec.europa.eu/competition/mergers/cases/). This website provides various facilities to help locate individual merger decisions, including company, case number, date and sectoral indexes, |
| --- | --- |

—

in the merger section of the Competition website of the Commission (http://ec.europa.eu/competition/mergers/cases/). This website provides various facilities to help locate individual merger decisions, including company, case number, date and sectoral indexes,

| — | in electronic form on the EUR-Lex website (http://eur-lex.europa.eu/homepage.html?locale=en) under document number 32018M8886. EUR-Lex is the online access to European law. |
| --- | --- |

—

in electronic form on the EUR-Lex website (http://eur-lex.europa.eu/homepage.html?locale=en) under document number 32018M8886. EUR-Lex is the online access to European law.

---

(1)  OJ L 24, 29.1.2004, p. 1.

1

---