alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
EXHIBIT 35.1

                    SERVICER COMPLIANCE STATEMENT (ITEM 1123)

                        RESIDENTIAL FUNDING COMPANY, LLC

                RALI SERIES 2007-QH1 TRUST (THE "ISSUING ENTITY")

The undersigned,  a duly authorized officer of Residential Funding Company, LLC,
as servicer  (the  "Servicer")  pursuant to the Series  Supplement,  dated as of
January 1, 2007,  and the  Standard  Terms of Pooling and  Servicing  Agreement,
dated as of December 1, 2006 (as amended  from time to time,  the  "Agreement"),
among Residential Accredit Loans, Inc., as company, Residential Funding Company,
LLC, as master servicer,  and Deutsche Bank Trust Company Americas,  as trustee,
does hereby certify that:

1. A review of the  Servicer's  activities  during  the  period  covered  by the
Issuing Entity's report on Form 10-K and of the Servicer's performance under the
Agreement has been made under my supervision.

2. To the best of my knowledge, based on such review, the Servicer has fulfilled
all of its obligations under the Agreement in all material  respects  throughout
such period.

IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the undersigned has duly executed this Certificate this 24th
day of March 2008.


By:   /s/ Anthony N. Renzi
      Name:   Anthony N. Renzi
      Title:  Managing Director
<partyblock><br><br><div align="center"><b><font size="+1">The People of the State of New York, Respondent,<br><br>against<br><br>Jeriel Pena, Defendant-Appellant.</font></b></div><br><br><p>Defendant appeals from a judgment of the Criminal Court of the City of New York, New York County (Ann E. Scherzer, J. on motion to dismiss; Robert M. Mandelbaum, J. at trial and sentencing), rendered May 13, 2014, after a nonjury trial, convicting him of criminal trespass in the third degree, and imposing sentence.</p><p>Per Curiam.</p><p>Judgment of conviction (Ann E. Scherzer, J. on motion to dismiss; Robert M. Mandelbaum, J. at trial and sentencing), rendered May 13, 2014, affirmed.</p><p>The verdict convicting defendant of criminal trespass in the third degree (<i>see</i> Penal Law ยง 140.10[a]) was supported by legally sufficient evidence and was not against the weight of the evidence (<a href="../2007/2007_09814.htm" target="_blank"><i>see People v Danielson</i>, 9 NY3d 342</a>, 348-349 [2007]). There is no basis upon which to disturb the trial court's determinations concerning credibility. The credited police testimony established that defendant entered a New York City subway platform unlawfully by pulling back the wheel of one of the turnstiles and stepping over it without paying the required fare and without permission (<a href="../2018/2018_04831.htm" target="_blank"><i>see People v Alvarez, </i>162 AD3d 596</a> [2018];<a href="../2007/2007_51665.htm" target="_blank"><i> People v Thiam</i>, 16 Misc 3d 136</a>[A], 2007 NY Slip Op 51665[U] [App Term, 1st Dept 2007],<i> lv denied</i> 9 NY3d 993 [2007]). Contrary to defendant's unpreserved claim, the facts and circumstances did not provide him with a reasonable basis to believe that he was licensed to pass through the turnstiles without paying the fare (<i>see People v Bowser</i>, 287 AD2d 647 [2001], <i>lv denied </i>97 NY2d 751 [2002]).</p><p>The court providently exercised its discretion in denying defendant's CPL 170.40 motion to dismiss the charges in furtherance of justice. There is no 'compelling factor' (CPL 170.40[1]) that would warrant that 'extraordinary remedy' (<a href="../2017/2017_05167.htm" target="_blank"><i>People v Hall</i>, 151 AD3d 621</a>, 622 [2017], <i>lv denied</i> 30 NY3d 950 [2017], <i>quoting People v Moye</i>, 302 AD2d 610, 611 [2003], "which we have cautioned should be exercised sparingly" (<a href="../2012/2012_02277.htm" target="_blank"><i>see People v Keith R.</i>, 95 AD3d 65</a>, 67 [2012], <i>lv denied</i> 19 NY3d 963 [2012][internal quotation marks omitted]; <a href="../2013/2013_02032.htm" target="_blank"><i>see also People v Marshall</i>, 106 AD3d 1</a>, 11 [2013], <i>lv denied</i> 21 NY3d 1007 [2013]).</p><p>THIS CONSTITUTES THE DECISION AND ORDER OF THE COURT.</p><br>I concur I concur I concur <br>Decision Date: October 19, 2018<br><br><div align="center"><form method="LINK" action="../../slipidx/at_1_idxtable.shtml"><input type="submit" value="Return to Decision List"></form></div></partyblock>
IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT

No. 15-10821

Conference Calendar

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,

Plaintiff-Appellee

v.

MARK ANTHONY PAPE,

Defendant-Appellant

Appeal from the United States District Court

for the Northern District of Texas

USDC No. 4:14-CR-111-1

Before JONES, CLEMENT, and OWEN, Circuit Judges.

PER CURIAM:*

The attorney appointed to represent Mark Anthony Pape has moved for 

leave to withdraw and has filed a brief in accordance with Anders v. California, 

386 U.S. 738 (1967), and United States v. Flores, 632 F.3d 229 (5th Cir. 2011).

Pape has filed a response. The record is not sufficiently developed to allow us 

to make a fair evaluation of Pape’s claim of ineffective assistance of counsel; 

 

* Pursuant to 5TH CIR. R. 47.5, the court has determined that this opinion should not 

be published and is not precedent except under the limited circumstances set forth in 5TH 

CIR. R. 47.5.4.

United States Court of Appeals

Fifth Circuit

FILED

June 21, 2016

Lyle W. Cayce

Clerk

 Case: 15-10821 Document: 00513556178 Page: 1 Date Filed: 06/21/2016
No. 15-10821

2

we therefore decline to consider the claim without prejudice to collateral 

review. See United States v. Isgar, 739 F.3d 829, 841 (5th Cir. 2014).

We have reviewed counsel’s brief and the relevant portions of the record 

reflected therein, as well as Pape’s response. We concur with counsel’s 

assessment that the appeal presents no nonfrivolous issue for appellate review. 

Accordingly, the motion for leave to withdraw is GRANTED, counsel is excused 

from further responsibilities herein, and the APPEAL IS DISMISSED. See

5TH CIR. R. 42.2.

 Case: 15-10821 Document: 00513556178 Page: 2 Date Filed: 06/21/2016
(b) The definition of “IPO Conversion” in Section 4.5(a) is hereby amended by deleting thewords “a registered public offering pursuant to the Securities Act that is”.***Section 2. Governing Law***     THIS AMENDMENT SHALL BE GOVERNED BY, AND CONSTRUED IN ACCORDANCE WITH, CAYMAN ISLANDS LAW.***Section 3. Headings***     Section headings herein are included herein for convenience of reference only and shall notconstitute a part hereof for any other purpose or be given any substantive effect.***Section 4. Notices***     All communications and notices hereunder shall be given as provided in the Limited PartnershipAgreement.***Section 5. Severability***     The illegality or unenforceability of any provision of this Amendment or any instrument oragreement required hereunder shall not in any way affect or impair the legality or enforceabilityof the remaining provisions of this Amendment or any instrument or agreement required hereunder.***Section 6. Successors***     The terms of this Amendment shall be binding upon, and shall inure to the benefit of, theparties hereto and their respective successors and assigns.
2

 
     IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the parties have executed this Amendment as a Deed effective the day andyear first above written.      **TDS Investor (Cayman) GP Ltd.**
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 on Form 10-K of Lightlake Therapeutics Inc. (the"Company") for the year ended July 31, 2010, as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the "Report"), Dr. Roger Crystal, as Chief Executive Officer of the Company, hereby certifies, 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.





Date: November 10, 2010


By: /s/ Dr. Roger Crystal


Dr. Roger Crystal


Chief Executive Officer








This certification accompanies each Report pursuant to ss. 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002 and shall not, except to the extent required by the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, be deemed filed by the Company for purposes of ss.18 of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended.
 
 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.
Document Headings

                    Document headings vary by document type but may contain                    the following:                  
                -                       the agency or agencies that issued and signed a document                    
                -                       the number of the CFR title and the number of each part                      the document amends, proposes to amend, or is directly                      related to                    
                -                       the agency docket number / agency internal file number                    
                -                       the RIN which identifies each regulatory action listed in                      the Unified Agenda of Federal Regulatory and Deregulatory                      Actions                    

                    See the                                          Document Drafting Handbook                                        for more details.                  

###### Small Business Administration

          - [Disaster Declaration #12194 and #12195]

# AGENCY:

U.S. Small Business Administration.

# ACTION:

 Amendment 1.

# SUMMARY:

This is an amendment of the Presidential declaration of a major disaster for the State of Oklahoma (FEMA—1917—DR), dated 05/24/2010.

*Incident:*                         Severe Storms, Tornadoes, and Straight-Line Winds.                    

*Incident Period:*                         05/10/2010 through 05/13/2010.                    

*Effective Date:*                         05/28/2010.                    

*Physical Loan Application Deadline Date:*                         07/23/2010.                    

*EIDL Loan Application Deadline Date:*                         02/24/2011.                    

# ADDRESSES:

Submit completed loan applications to: U.S. Small Business Administration, Processing and Disbursement Center, 14925 Kingsport Road, Fort Worth, TX 76155.

# FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

A. Escobar, Office of Disaster Assistance, U.S. Small Business Administration, 409 3rd Street, SW., Suite 6050, Washington, DC 20416.

# SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

The notice of the Presidential disaster declaration for the State of Oklahoma, dated 05/24/2010 is hereby amended to include the following areas as adversely affected by the disaster:

*Primary Counties: (Physical Damage and Economic Injury Loans):*

Creek, Garvin.

*Contiguous Counties: (Economic Injury Loans Only):*

Oklahoma: Grady, Pawnee, Payne, Tulsa.

All other information in the original declaration remains unchanged.

(Catalog of Federal Domestic Assistance Numbers 59002 and 59008)

James E. Rivera,

Associate Administrator for Disaster Assistance.

[FR Doc. 2010-13755 Filed 6-8-10; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 8025-01-P
<PAGE>



Exhibit 11.1


COMPUTATION OF EARNINGS PER SHARE

<TABLE>
<CAPTION>

                                                                   Three Months Ended
                                                                       January 31,
                                                                  2001            2002
                                                               (restated)      (unaudited)
                                                             ------------    -------------
<S>                                                          <C>             <C>
Numerator:
Net income                                                   $    107,223    $    486,506
Preferred stock dividends                                         (37,500)
Cumulative effect of change in accounting principle              (576,001)              -
                                                             ------------    ------------

Net income (loss) available to common shareholders
                                                                 (506,278)        486,506

Denominator:
Denominator for basic earnings per share- weighted-average
  shares                                                        9,906,406      10,214,545
Effect of dilutive securities:
Employee stock options                                                  -         489,841
Warrants                                                                -               -

Dilutive potential common shares                                        -               -
                                                             ------------    ------------

Denominator for diluted earnings per share adjusted
  weighted-average shares and assumed conversions
                                                                9,906,406      10,704,386


Basic and diluted (loss) earnings per share
                                                             $       (.05)   $        .05


</TABLE>
#### Thomas Nelson as Administrator, etc., Respondent, v. James L. Armstrong, Appellant, Impleaded, etc.

Judgment affirmed, with costs. Opinion by

Dykman, J.;

Barnard, P. J., not sitting.
#### Joseph Brophy, Appellant, v. Edward B. Bartlett, Respondent.

Judgment affirmed, with costs. Opinion by

Barnard, P. J.

dissenting.
Case: 19-30088 Doc# 5166 Filed: 12/18/19 Entered: 12/18/19 15:00:50 Page 1 of

1
Ronor(lbze Burl Rrittain Comty Auditor San Pstricio

county Sinton, Texas Dear Sir: opinion Bo. o-U36 ore: Doss OpinionO-880 apply to counties where constables

are workingon a fee b&bsis and not under the salfry law? If the sheriff

and one or more of his deputies are in attendance

upon the court at the same time, are each entitled to the $4.00 per diem? Your requestfor an opinionon the above statedquestions has been received by this depsrtment. As we understand

your first question you desire to know whetheror not a constable

who is compensated on a fee basis can serve es bailifffor the grand jury and receive: pay for such services. This department

has repeatedly

held that a constsble cannot serve as bailiff for the grand jury and receivepay therefor. The same rule applies in all counties

prohibiting

constables

from serving

as bailifffor the grand jury and receiving

pey for such service. It is immaterial whetherthe constables are compenliated

on a fee or salerybasis. For your convenience we enclose copiesof our opinions No. O-880 and O-130. Regarding

your second question, we call your attention to Article 3933, Vernon'sCivil Statutes, which reads in part as follows: 11

. For every day the sheriffor his deputy shall attend the &hict or county court,he shall receive Four Dollers ($4.00) a &Y to be paid by the county for each day that the sheriff by himselfor a deputy shall attend said court." In the case of L&better vs. Dallas County, lllS.W. 193, in which a writ of errorwas deniedby the Suprune Court, the court pssed upon the sams question

as here presented

with the exception that bt that tims the statute providedfor Two Dollars ($2.00) per day for such servicesinstead of Four Dollers ($4.00)

aa is now provided

by Article 3933, supra,and holds that the county is only liable for the $2.00 per day for the attendance of the sheriffor his deputy,and that even the district judge does not have authority

to bind the counties beyond that.Hon. Rurl Rrittain, Page 2 (04646)

In view of the foregoing authorities

you are rl)spectfully advisedthat it4 is the opinionof this department that the county is ~@y liablafor the SUJII of Four Dollars ($4.00) per day for the serv$ces of the sheriff

or his deputy in att&ding the couutyor districtcourt,and in no event could the sheriff

and. his deputyor deputies be paid $4.00 per diem each for attendance upon the court at the same time. Trustingthat the foregoing fully axwrersyour inquiry, we remain. Yours very truly ATTORNEYGE%ERALOF TEXAS s/ Ardell Will+amR
By ArdellWilliams

Assistant AWrjm
EllCl.

- NOV. 6, 1930 s/W. F. Moore FIRSTASSISTBNT A'l%XNEYGBV'ERALOF-
* This disposition is not appropriate for publication and may not be cited to or by the courts of this circuit except as provided by Ninth Circuit Rule 36-3.
** The Honorable Ronald B. Leighton, United States District Judge for the Western District of Washington, sitting by designation. NOT FOR PUBLICATION UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT
DEBRA NOVAK-SCOTT, Plaintiff - Appellant,
v. CITY OF PHOENIX, Defendant - Appellee. No. 08-16253 D.C. No. CV-05-3147-PHX-JAT
MEMORANDUM *

Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of Arizona James A. Teilborg, District Judge, Presiding Argued and Submitted October 8, 2009 San Francisco, California Before: RYMER and TASHIMA, Circuit Judges, and LEIGHTON,** District Judge. Debra Novak-Scott, a City of Phoenix employee, appeals the district court’s summary judgment dismissing her Title VII retaliation claim against the City of 

# FILED
NOV 12 2009 MOLLY C. DWYER, CLERK

U.S. COURT OF APPEALS2 Phoenix. We have jurisdiction pursuan t to 28 U.S.C. § 1291, and we affirm. We review a district court’s grant of summary judgment de novo
. Head v. Glacier , 413 F.3d 1053, 1058 (9th Cir. 2005). The district court properly concl uded that Ms. Novak-Scott failed to establish a prima facie case of retaliation. She did not suffer the type of significant harm that would dissuade a reasonable worker from making or supporting a charge of discrimination. Burlington N. & Santa Fe Ry. Co. v. White , 548 U.S. 53, 60 (2006). Accordingly, for the reasons stated by the district court, summary judgment was properly granted for the City of Phoenix. AFFIRMED.
[Federal Register Volume 60, Number 235 (Thursday, December 7, 1995)]
[Notices]
[Pages 62870-62871]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 95-29761]



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

DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES
National Institutes of Health


Government-Owned Inventions; Availability for Licensing

AGENCY: National Institutes of Health, HHS.

ACTION: Notice.

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

SUMMARY: The inventions listed below are owned by an agency of the U.S. 
Government and are available for licensing in the U.S. in accordance 
with 36 U.S.C. 207 or pursuant to 42 U.S.C. 241 to achieve expeditious 
commercialization of results of federally-funded research and 
development.

ADDRESSES: Licensing information for the technologies referenced below 
may be obtained by contacting Stephen Finley, Ph.D., at the Office of 
Technology Transfer, National Institutes of Health, 6011 Executive 
Boulevard, Suite 325, Rockville, Maryland 20852-3804 (telephone 301/
496-7056 ext 215; fax 301/402-0220).

cDNA Sequence of a Clone Encoding Arylalkylamine N-
acetyltransferase

Klein et al. (NICHD)

[DHHS Reference No. E-161-95/0]

    and

Human Gene Encoding Serotonin N-acetyltransferase

Klein et al. (NICHD)

[DHHS Reference No. E-222-95/0]

    The identification of an arylalkylamine N-acetyltransferase (AA-
NAT) mRNA in the brain and the cloning of ovine and human cDNAs 
encoding for the pineal enzyme serotonin N-acetyltransferase. These 
findings open a new area of research--the importance of AA-NAT in the 
regulation of brain serotonin and the development of drugs which raise 
serotonin levels by inhibiting this enzyme. This enzyme is the rate-
controlling step in the conversion of serotonin to melatonin. The 
hormone melatonin has been linked to controlling circadian rhythms. 
Development of regulators of the synthesis of the hormone melatonin may 
be the preferred route to controlling seasonal reproduction cycles or 
sleep cycles of vertebrates. Activators of the serotonin N-
acetyltransferase may be beneficial to induce or enhance the quality of 
sleep at night. Inhibitors of serotonin N-acetyltransferase may lead to 
drugs that stimulate the levels of alertness and physical activity or 
delay the onset of fatigue. Licenses for the cDNAs encoding for this 
enzyme or the production of the enzyme are available.


[[Page 62871]]

    Dated: November 20, 1995.
Barbara M. McGarey,
Deputy Director, Office of Technology Transfer.
[FR Doc. 95-29761 Filed 12-6-95; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4140-01-M
[Federal Register Volume 75, Number 109 (Tuesday, June 8, 2010)]
[Notices]
[Page 32469]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2010-13670]



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



FEDERAL RESERVE SYSTEM




Consumer Advisory Council; Notice of Meeting of the Consumer 

Advisory Council



    The Consumer Advisory Council will meet on Thursday, June 17, 2010. 

The meeting, which will be open to public observation, will take place 

at the Federal Reserve Board's offices in Washington, DC, in Dining 

Room E on the Terrace Level of the Martin Building. For security 

purposes, anyone planning to attend the meeting should register no 

later than Tuesday, June 15, by completing the form found online at: 

https://www.federalreserve.gov/secure/forms/cacregistration.cfm.

    Attendees must present photo identification to enter the building 

and should allow sufficient time for security processing.

    The meeting will begin at 9 a.m. and is expected to conclude at 

12:30 p.m. The Martin Building is located on C Street, NW., between 

20th and 21st Streets.

    The Council's function is to advise the Board on the exercise of 

the Board's responsibilities under various consumer financial services 

laws and on other matters on which the Board seeks its advice. Time 

permitting, the Council will discuss the following topics:

    <bullet> Home Mortgage Disclosure Act (HMDA)

    In the context of the Board's review of Regulation C, which 

implements HMDA, members will discuss whether the 2002 revisions to 

Regulation C, which required lenders to report mortgage pricing data, 

helped provide useful and accurate information about the mortgage 

market; the need for additional data and other improvements; and what 

emerging issues in the mortgage market may warrant additional research.

    <bullet> Community Reinvestment Act (CRA)

    Members will discuss the future of the Community Reinvestment Act, 

including possible changes in light of developments in the financial 

services industry and issues associated with the foreclosure crisis.

    <bullet> Foreclosure issues

    Members will discuss loss-mitigation efforts, including the 

Administration's Making Home Affordable program, neighborhood 

stabilization initiatives and challenges, and other issues related to 

foreclosures.

    Reports by committees and other matters initiated by Council 

members also may be discussed.

    Persons wishing to submit views to the Council on any of the above 

topics may do so by sending written statements to Jennifer Kerslake, 

Secretary of the Consumer Advisory Council, Division of Consumer and 

Community Affairs, Board of Governors of the Federal Reserve System, 

Washington, DC 20551. Information about this meeting may be obtained 

from Ms. Kerslake at 202-452-6470.



    Board of Governors of the Federal Reserve System, June 3, 2010.

Jennifer J. Johnson,

Secretary of the Board.

[FR Doc. 2010-13670 Filed 6-7-10; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 6210-01-P