alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
EXHIBIT 35.1
 VW Credit, Inc. Servicer Compliance Statement Under Item 1123 of Regulation AB
 
   1.
    
    A review of the activities of the Servicer during the period from January 1, 2008
through December 31, 2008, and of its performance under the Sale and Servicing Agreement
was conducted under my supervision.2.
    
    To the best of my knowledge, based on such review, the Servicer has, fulfilled all of
its obligations under the Sale and Servicing Agreement in all material respects throughout
such period, except that with respect to the Applicable Servicing Criterion in Paragraphs
(d)(2)(i) and (d)(3)(i) of Item 1122:
 a.
    
    On February 27, 2008 a process control deficiency was identified (and
corrected February 27, 2008) for the period from January 1, 2008 through February
27, 2008 in the calculation of the daily amount required to transfer to the
collection account, however, sufficient funds were transferred and there was no
impact to the Noteholders.b.
    
    On April 26, 2008 a process control deficiency was identified when a
payment failed to transfer to the collection account within the two day
requirement, however, sufficient funds were transferred and there was no impact to
the Noteholders. A monthly reconciliation process is in place to identify these
types of deposits and the above mentioned deficiency was detected during our
monthly reconciliation process.
 3.
    
    IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the undersigned has duly executed this Certificate on behalf of the
Servicer this thirtieth day of March, 2009.
 /s/Andrew StuartAndrew StuartExecutive Vice President & CFO
**Exhibit 31.2**
 
 **CERTIFICATION**
 
 I, Brian Lenz, certify that:
 
 1.
I have reviewed this Quarterly Report on Form 10-QSB of VioQuest Pharmaceuticals, Inc. (the Registrant);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(s) 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 Registrant and 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, including its consolidated subsidiaries, 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; and5.
The Registrants other certifying officer(s) 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 small business issuers internal control over financial reporting.
 
 Date: November 12, 2004
/s/ Brian LenzBrian Lenz
Interim Chief Financial Officer
#### Union Trust Company of New York, Appellant, v. The Rochester and Pittsburg Railroad Company, Respondent.

Order reversed and motion to amend judgment granted.
#### The Kelly Lumber Company, Plaintiff, v. The Otselic Valley Railroad Company, Defendant. Benjamin F. Gladding, Appellant; Eugene Clinton, Receiver, Respondent. Application by the receiver for an order appointing a referee in the matter of the application to compel an officer of said company, and other persons, to turn over to the receiver property concealed and withheld by them, any or either of them.

Order affirmed, with ten dollars costs and disbursements.

All concurred, except Kellogg, J., not voting.
#### ROBERT HICKS (Employee) v. NORTH CAROLINA GRANITE CORPORATION, Self-Insurer (Employer).

(Filed 12 December, 1956.)

Master and Servant § 40f—

Where the evidence supports the findings of the Industrial Commission that claimant had not been injuriously exposed to the inhalation of silica dust for as much as two years in the ten years prior to the last exposure, the denial of his claim for compensation must be affirmed. G.S. 97-63.

Johnson, J., not sitting.

*234Appeal by plaintiff from *Olive, J.,*June Civil Term, 1956, of Surry.

Claim for compensation for disability due to the occupational disease of silicosis.

The Industrial Commission found the facts as follows: “That the plaintiff was employed by the defendant and exposed to the hazards of silicosis for many years prior to 31 July 1939; that he was not so exposed from August 1939 to 5 May 1950; and that he was again so exposed for thirty-seven days, or parts thereof, during the period 5 May 1950 to 26 June 1950. The plaintiff was, thus, last injuriously exposed to the inhalation of dust of silica in 1950. See G.S. 97-57. And the plaintiff was, therefore, not exposed to the inhalation of dust of silica for a period of at least two years in the ten years prior to the last exposure. His claim for compensation must, therefore, be denied because of the provisions of G.S. 97-63.”

On appeal to the Superior Court, the findings and conclusions of the Industrial Commission were affirmed, and plaintiff appealed to this Court.

*J. II. Blalock for plaintiff, appellant.*

*Folger & Folger for defendant, appellee.*

Pee Cueiam.

The findings of the Industrial Commission were supported by the evidence. In accord with the provisions of the statute, G.S. 97-63, and the decision of this Court in *Midkiff v. Granite Corp.,*235 N.C. 149, 69 S.E. 2d 166, the judgment of the Superior Court is

Affirmed.

JOHNSON, J., not sitting.
EXHIBIT 11.1

COMPUTATION  OF EARNINGS PER SHARE

|                                             | Three Months EndedApril 30, |  | Six Months EndedApril 30, |           
|-------------------------------------------- | --------------------------- |  | ------------------------- | ----------
|                                             |                             |  |                          
|                                             |                             |  |                           |           
|Numerator:                                   |                             |  |                           |           
|Net (loss) income                            |                             |  | $                         | (315,929  
|                                            
|Denominator:                                 |                             | 
|Denominator for basic earnings per share-    |                             |  |                           | 13,431,893
|weighted-average shares                      |                             | 
|Effect of dilutive securities:               |                             | 
|Employee stock options                       |                             |  |                           |          
|                                             |                             |  |                           |           
|Denominator for diluted earnings per share   |                             | 
|adjusted weighted-average shares and         |                             | 
|assumed conversions                          |                             |  |                           | 13,431,893
|                                            
|Basic and diluted (loss) earnings per share: |                             | 
|Net basic (loss) earnings per share          |                             |  | $                         | (0.02     
|                                            
|Net diluted (loss)earnings per share         |                             |  | $                         | (0.02
SOCIALIST REPUBLIC OF VIETNAM


Independence – Freedom – Happiness


 





	
            No .....HDTD-CN/CVC  
 





Hanoi, January 28, 2009


 


LOAN AGREEMENT


 


BORROWER:


Name of Company: CAVICO VIETNAM LTD, CO.


Investment certificate No. 011043000070 issued on 07 January, 2007


Address: 06th Floor – Songda Building – Pham Hung Street – Tu Liem – Ha Noi





	
             
 	
            Phone:
 	
            04.37684.020
 	
            Fax :  
 	
            04.37684.000
 









	
             
 	
            Representative by:
 









	
             
 	
            Mr. Pham Minh Phuc
 	
            Position: CEO
 





LENDER:


Name of invidual, organization: Mr. Bui Quang Ha


ID No: 012489907 issued on 18 March, 2002 by Hanoi Police.


Address : Group 10, Ward 2, Tu Lien Quarter, Tay Ho District, Ha Noi city


 


I: Content:  


Oustanding loans balance by 1,565,325,786 VND at January 28, 2009 of Loan Agreement number 26/HDTD-CN/CVC, date January 28, 2008 between Cavico Vietnam and Mr Bui Quang Ha transfered  to this Loan agreement with following terms :   


1. Amount of borrow with interest : 1.565.325.786 VND


(In words: One billion, five hundred sixty five million, three hundred twenty five thousand and seven hundred eighty six Vietnam Dong)


2. Duration : 12 months


3. Interest rate : 12% per year


4. Form to pay the interest  : Pay interest in advance


5. Date of borrowing: 28 January, 2009


6. Payment: Within 12 months


II . Common commitment





	
             
 	
            -
 	
            Borrower have responsibility for paying principle and interest on time. 
 









	
             
 	
            -
 	
            Lender have responsibility for delivering exact amount as this contract to Borrower. 
 






                





	
            BORROWER
 	
            LENDER
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**
I, Robert C. Salipante, Principal Executive Officer of Sun Life Assurance Company of Canada (U.S.) (the "Company"), hereby certify, to the best of my knowledge, that the Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q of the Company for the period ended September 30, 2003, filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the "Report"), fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 (15 U.S.C. 78m or 78o(d)) and that the information contained in the Report fairly presents, in all material respects, the financial condition and results of operations of the Company.
*/s/ Robert C. Salipante            ____________

Robert C. Salipante

President

November 14, 2003

 

 

The foregoing certification is being furnished solely pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, 18 U.S.C. Section 1350 ("Section 906"), and shall not be deemed filed by the Company for purposes of Section 18 of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 (the "Exchange Act") or otherwise subject to liability under that section.  This certification shall not be deemed to be incorporated by reference into any filing under the Securities Act of 1933 or the Exchange Act except to the extent that this certification is expressly incorporated by reference into any such filing.
A signed original of this written statement required by Section 906 has been provided to the Company and will be retained by the Company and furnished to the Securities and Exchange Commission or its staff upon request.*
In the United States Court of Federal Claims 

OFFICE OF SPECIAL MASTERS

No. 13-18V

Filed: November 26, 2013

Not for Publication

*************************************

STEVEN ENGEN and KELLIE ENGEN, *

Legal Representatives of a Minor Child, *

KELLEN ENGEN, *

*

 Petitioners, * Attorneys’ fees and costs decision based on

 * stipulation of fact

v. *

 *

SECRETARY OF HEALTH *

AND HUMAN SERVICES, *

 *

 Respondent. *

*

*************************************

Randall G. Knutson, Mankato, MN, for petitioners.

Tara J. Kilfoyle, Washington, DC, for respondent.

MILLMAN, Special Master

DECISION AWARDING ATTORNEYS’ FEES AND COSTS1

On November 26, 2013, the parties filed a stipulation of fact in which they agreed on an 

appropriate amount for attorneys’ fees and costs in this case. 

In accordance with the General Order #9 requirement, petitioners assert that they did not 

incur any costs in pursuit of their petition.

 

1 Because this unpublished decision contains a reasoned explanation for the special master’s action in this 

case, the special master intends to post this unpublished decision on the United States Court of Federal 

Claims’s website, in accordance with the E-Government Act of 2002, Pub. L. No. 107-347, 116 Stat. 2899, 

2913 (Dec. 17, 2002). Vaccine Rule 18(b) states that all decisions of the special masters will be made 

available to the public unless they contain trade secrets or commercial or financial information that is 

privileged and confidential, or medical or similar information whose disclosure would constitute a clearly 

unwarranted invasion of privacy. When such a decision is filed, petitioner has 14 days to identify and 

move to redact such information prior to the document=s disclosure. If the special master, upon review, 

agrees that the identified material fits within the banned categories listed above, the special master shall 

redact such material from public access.
2

Petitioners submitted their request for attorneys’ fees and costs to respondent. During 

informal discussions, respondent raised objections to certain items in petitioners’ application. 

Based on these objections, petitioners amend their application for attorneys’ fees and costs to 

$13,555.21. Respondent does not object to this amount. The undersigned finds this amount to 

be reasonable. Accordingly, the court awards $13,555.21, representing reimbursement for 

attorneys’ fees and costs. The award shall be in the form of a check payable jointly to petitioners

and Farrish Johnson Law Office in the amount of $13,555.21.

In the absence of a motion for review filed pursuant to RCFC Appendix B, the clerk of the 

court is directed to enter judgment herewith.2

IT IS SO ORDERED.

Dated: November 26, 2013 s/ Laura D. Millman

 Laura D. Millman

 Special Master

 

2

Pursuant to Vaccine Rule 11(a), entry of judgment can be expedited by each party, either separately or 

jointly, filing a notice renouncing the right to seek review.
I 

113TH CONGRESS 

2D SESSION H. R. 5453 

To authorize health insurance issuers to continue to offer for sale current 

group health insurance coverage in satisfaction of the minimum essential 

health insurance coverage requirement, and for other purposes. 

IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES 

SEPTEMBER 11, 2014 

Mr. BRALEY of Iowa introduced the following bill; which was referred to the 

Committee on Energy and Commerce, and in addition to the Committee 

on Ways and Means, 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 authorize health insurance issuers to continue to offer 

for sale current group health insurance coverage in satisfaction of the minimum essential health insurance coverage requirement, 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. TRANSITION PERIOD FOR GROUP HEALTH IN4 SURANCE PLANS. 

5 (a) IN GENERAL.—Notwithstanding any provision of 

6 the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act (including 

7 any amendment made by such Act or by the Health Care 


asabaliauskas on DSK5VPTVN1PROD with BILLS
2 

•HR 5453 IH

1 and Education Reconciliation Act of 2010), a health insur2 ance issuer that has in effect health insurance coverage 

3 in the group market on any date during 2013 may con4 tinue after such date to offer such coverage for sale 

5 through 2016 in such market outside of an Exchange es6 tablished under section 1311 or 1321 of such Act (42 

7 U.S.C. 18031, 18041). 

8 (b) TREATMENT AS GRANDFATHERED HEALTH

9 PLAN IN SATISFACTION OF MINIMUM ESSENTIAL COV10 ERAGE.—Health insurance coverage described in sub11 section (a) shall be treated as a grandfathered health plan 

12 for purposes of the amendment made by section 1501(b) 

13 of the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act. 

Æ 


asabaliauskas on DSK5VPTVN1PROD with BILLS
Collaboration Agreement



 Exhibit 10.53 
 COLLABORATION AGREEMENT 
 Party A: Shanghai Pudong Development Bank Suzhou Branch 
 Party B: Multi-Fineline Electronix (Suzhou) Co.,Ltd 
 In view to further
strengthen the close relationship between Party A (hereinafter called A) and Party B (hereinafter called B) and on the base of the principles of equality and mutual benefit, both parties, through friendly negotiation, have agreed to enter into the
following agreement under the terms specified as followed: 
 I With the total amount of RMB seventy five million credit line, A facilitate with B with
varied corporate financing types, including short-time loan, issuing of L/C, banking acceptance bills, etc. 
 II With the minimum deposit amount of USD
3 million, the interest will be calculated with the interest rate of LIBOR minus 15 base points. 
 III L/C issuance will be charged on the basis of
0.72% per L/C. 
 IV T/T remittance will be charged as follows: maximum, RMB 500 yuan; minimum, RMB 50 yuan, below RMB 50 or above RMB 500 the fee will
be charged on the basis of 0.45%. 







 V Currencies exchange rate is as follows: if exchange amount is above 0.2 million US dollars, foreign currency
exchanging into RMB can be adjusted upward 100 base points on the basis of purchase price; if below 0.2 million, upward 85 base points. 
 VI L/C
negotiation will be charged on the basis of 0.9%. 
 VII B will open RMB and USD settlement account in A, and B should look upon A as the main collaboration
bank. 
 VIII After the contract takes into effect, both parties will negotiate and replenish the contract as soon as the contract has any conflict with the
Laws regulations and rules of China. 
 IX The duration for this contract is from 31 July, 2009 to 31 July, 2010. 
 X With two originals to A and B respectively, this agreement will be taken into effect with the stamps of both parties. 
  

									
	Party A:	  	 [seal]
	  		  	Party B:	  	 [seal]

					
		  		  		  		  	
				
		  		  		  	Date: 31 July, 2009
I 

113TH CONGRESS 

2D SESSION H. R. 5462 

To amend title 49, United States Code, to provide for limitations on the 

fees charged to passengers of air carriers. 

IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES 

SEPTEMBER 15, 2014 

Mr. HUDSON (for himself, Mr. MCCAUL, Mr. THOMPSON of Mississippi, and 

Mr. RICHMOND) introduced the following bill; which was referred to the 

Committee on Homeland Security 

A BILL 

To amend title 49, United States Code, to provide for 

limitations on the fees charged to passengers of air carriers. 

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

3 SECTION 1. LIMITATION ON FEES CHARGED TO PAS4 SENGERS OF AIR CARRIERS. 

5 (a) IN GENERAL.—Subsection (c) of section 44940 

6 of title 49, United States Code, is amended to read as 

7 follows: 

8 ‘‘(c) LIMITATION ON FEE.— 

9 ‘‘(1) AMOUNT.—Fees imposed under subsection 

10 (a)(1) shall be $5.60 per one-way trip in air transVerDate Sep 11 2014 22:38 Sep 16, 2014 Jkt 039200 PO 00000 Frm 00001 Fmt 6652 Sfmt 6201 E:\BILLS\H5462.IH H5462

tkelley on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with BILLS
2 

•HR 5462 IH

1 portation or intrastate air transportation that origi2 nates at an airport in the United States, except that 

3 the fee imposed per round trip shall not exceed 

4 $11.20. 

5 ‘‘(2) DEFINITION OF ROUND TRIP.—In this 

6 subsection, the term ‘round trip’ means a trip on an 

7 air travel itinerary that terminates or has a stopover 

8 at the origin point (or co-terminal).’’. 

9 (b) APPLICABILITY.—The amendment made by sub10 section (a) shall apply with respect to a trip in air trans11 portation or intrastate air transportation that is pur12 chased on or after the date of the enactment of this Act. 

Æ 


tkelley on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with BILLS
NO.

LEROY FLORES ALANIZ § IN THE COURT OF § vs. § CRIMINAL APPEALS, § THE STATE OF TEXAS § AUSTIN, TEXAS
MOTION FOR SUSPENSION OF RULE 68.11, TEX. R. AP.P. P.

TO THE HONORABLE COURT OF CRIMINAL APPEALS AND JUDGES THEREOF: COMES NOW, Leroy Flores Alaniz, Appellant pro se, and re spectfully moves the Court to exercise its authority granted by Rule 2, Tex. R. App. P., to suspecd operation of Rule 68.11, Tex. R. App. P., in this case. In support thereofiCfAp.peM'an-bNn 

# FjleiMhowthefollowing: COURTOFCMAUPPEALS 

# COURTOFCRIMiNALAPPEALS ^ ^^ SE?252Si5 i. 

### Abe?Acosfa,Ctsrfc • 

### AbelAcosta,Clerk 1. Appellant is petitioning the Court for discretionary review of the Eleventh Court of Appeals' decision affirming 

### the judgement of conviction and sentence entered against Appel lant in Trial No. D-37,921, State v. Alaniz, 358th District 

### Court of Ector County, Texas (COA No. 11-12-00352-CR). 2. Rule 68.11, Tex. R. App. P., requires that, in addition to the service required by Rule 9.5, Tex. R. App. P., Appellant must also serve an additional copy of the petition to the State Prosecuting Attorney. 

### 3. As a prisoner confined in the Texas Department of Crim inal Justice-Correctional Institutions Division, does not have 

### access to photocopying equipment and thus does not have the means by which to make multiple copies in order to make therequired service upon the State Prosecuting Attorney.

PRAYER 

### WHEREFORE, PREMISES CONSIDERED, Appellant prays the Honorable 

### Court grants this motion and suspends operation of Rule 38.11, supra, in this case. Respectfully submitted, 

## Leroy^loresAlaniz \—j TDCJ No. 1826767 French M. Robertson Unit 12071 FM 3522 Abilene, TX 79601 Appellant, pro se

UNSWORN DECLARATION 

### I, Leroy Flores Alaniz, TDCJ No. 1826 767, being presently incarcerated at the French M. Robertson Unit of the Texas Depart ment of Criminal Justice-Correctional Institutions Division, 

### Located in Jones County, Texas, hereby declare under penalty 

### of perjury that the foregoing is true and correct, and placed 

## in the outgoingprisonmailboxonthis the *\\% dayof Septem ber, 2015, to be mailed U.S. Mail, first-class postage prepaid, addressed to: Court of Criminal Appeals of Texas P.O. Box 12308, Capitol Station 

### Austin, Texas 78711-2308 

## EXECUTEDonthis the fjQ dayofSeptember, 2015.

Leroy Flores AlanizCERTIFICATE OF SERVICE 

### I hereby certify that a true and correct copy of the fore 

### going motion has been duly served upon counsel for the opposing 

# party tothiscaseonthe oL~>dayofSeptember, 2015, byplac ing same in the outgoing prison mailbox to be mailed U.S. Mail, first-class postage prepaid, addressed,to: Michael Bloch Assistant District Attorney Ector County Courthouse 300 N. Grant, Room 305 Odessa, Texas, 79761 

## LeroyFloresAlaniz t^~ZS