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

LABATON SUCHAROW LLP

Thomas A. Dubbs

Louis Gottlieb

Carol C. Villegas

Jeffrey A. Dubbin (SBN 287199)

140 Broadway

New York, New York 10005

LOWENSTEIN SANDLER LLP

Michael S. Etkin (pro hac vice)

Andrew Behlmann (pro hac vice)

One Lowenstein Drive

Roseland, New Jersey 07068

Lead Counsel to Lead Plaintiff and the Class Bankruptcy Counsel to Lead Plaintiff

and the Class

MICHELSON LAW GROUP

Randy Michelson (SBN 114095)

220 Montgomery Street, Suite 2100

San Francisco, California 94104

Bankruptcy Counsel to Lead Plaintiff

and the Class

UNITED STATES BANKRUPTCY COURT

NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

SAN FRANCISCO DIVISION

In re:

PG&E CORPORATION

- and –

PACIFIC GAS AND ELECTRIC COMPANY,

Debtors.

☒ Affects Both Debtors

☐ Affects PG&E Corporation

☐ Affects Pacific Gas and Electric Company

Case No. 19-30088 (DM) (Lead Case)

Chapter 11

(Jointly Administered)

ORDER APPROVING STIPULATION 

REGARDING SCHEDULING WITH 

RESPECT TO SECURITIES LEAD 

PLAINTIFF’S MOTION TO APPLY 

BANKRUPTCY RULE 7023 TO CLASS 

PROOF OF CLAIM [ECF NO. 5042]

Objection Deadline: January 14, 2020 at 

4:00 PM (Pacific Time)

Reply Deadline: January 22, 2020 at 4:00 

PM (Pacific Time) 

Hearing Date: January 29, 2019 at 10:00 

AM (Pacific Time)

Signed and Filed: December 27, 2019

________________________________________

DENNIS MONTALI

U.S. Bankruptcy Judge

Entered on Docket 

December 27, 2019

EDWARD J. EMMONS, CLERK 

U.S. BANKRUPTCY COURT 

NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

Case: 19-30088 Doc# 5211 Filed: 12/27/19 Entered: 12/27/19 12:14:57 Page 1 of

2
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

The Court, having considered the Stipulation Regarding Scheduling With Respect to 

Securities Lead Plaintiff’s Motion to Apply Bankruptcy Rule 7023 to Class Proof of Claim [ECF 

No. 5042] (the “Stipulation”) [ECF No. ___],1 and for good cause shown therefor,

IT IS HEREBY ORDERED AS FOLLOWS:

1. The Stipulation is hereby approved.

2. The hearing on the Rule 7023 Motion is rescheduled to the January 29, 2020 omnibus 

hearing.

3. The Debtors shall have until January 14, 2020 at 4:00 p.m. (Pacific) to file their 

objection, if any, to the Rule 7023 Motion.

4. If the Debtors file an objection to the Rule 7023 Motion, PERA shall have until 

January 22, 2020 at 4:00 p.m. (Pacific) to file its reply, if any, in further support of the Rule 7023 

Motion.

APPROVED AS TO FORM AND CONTENT:

Dated: December 24, 2019

WEIL, GOTSHAL & MANGES LLP

KELLER & BENVENUTTI LLP

By: __/s/ Peter J. Benvenutti____

Counsel to the Debtors in Possession

Dated: December 24, 2019

LOWENSTEIN SANDLER LLP 

MICHELSON LAW GROUP

By: __/s/ Randy Michelson_____

Bankruptcy Counsel to Lead Plaintiff and the Class

*** END OF ORDER ***

1 Capitalized terms used but not defined in this Order have the meanings given thereto in the 

Stipulation.

Case: 19-30088 Doc# 5211 Filed: 12/27/19 Entered: 12/27/19 12:14:57 Page 2 of

2
Exhibit 31(ii)
                                 --------------


                                 CERTIFICATIONS
                                 --------------

I, Steve Bailey, certify that:

      1.   I have reviewed this report on Form 10-K and all reports on Form
           10-D required to be filed in respect of the period covered by this
           report on Form 10-K of CHL Mortgage Pass-Through Trust 2007-2 (the
           "Exchange Act periodic reports");

      2.   Based on my knowledge, the Exchange Act periodic reports, taken as a
           whole, do 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, all of the distribution, servicing and other
           information required to be provided under Form 10-D for the period
           covered by this report is included in the Exchange Act periodic
           reports;

      4.   I am responsible for reviewing the activities performed by the
           servicer(s) and based on my knowledge and the compliance review(s)
           conducted in preparing the servicer compliance statement(s) required
           in this report under Item 1123 of Regulation AB, and except as
           disclosed in the Exchange Act periodic reports, the servicer(s) have
           fulfilled their obligations under the servicing agreement(s) in all
           material respects; and

      5.   All of the reports on assessment of compliance with servicing
           criteria for asset-backed securities and their related attestation
           reports on assessment of compliance with servicing criteria for
           asset-backed securities required to be included in this report in
           accordance with Item 1122 of Regulation AB and Exchange Act Rules
           13a-18 and 15d-18 have been included as an exhibit to this report,
           except as otherwise disclosed in this report. Any material instances
           of noncompliance described in such reports 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 the following unaffiliated parties: The Bank
      of New York, as Trustee.

Date: March 25, 2008

       /s/ Steve Bailey
       -----------------------------
       Steve Bailey
       Senior Managing Director, Chief Executive Officer Loan Administration
       (Senior officer in charge of the servicing function of
       Countrywide Home Loans Servicing LP)
```

[Congressional Bills 113th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[H.R. 572 Introduced in House (IH)]

113th CONGRESS
  1st Session
                                H. R. 572

To suspend the issuance of visas to nationals of Brazil until such time 
 as Brazil amends its laws to remove the prohibition on extradition of 
                nationals of Brazil to other countries.

_______________________________________________________________________

                    IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

                            February 6, 2013

 Mr. Ryan of Ohio (for himself and Mr. Johnson of Ohio) introduced the 
  following bill; which was referred to the Committee on the Judiciary

_______________________________________________________________________

                                 A BILL

 
To suspend the issuance of visas to nationals of Brazil until such time 
 as Brazil amends its laws to remove the prohibition on extradition of 
                nationals of Brazil to other countries.

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

SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE.

    This Act may be cited as the ``End Immuity for Brazilian Criminals 
Act''.

SEC. 2. SUSPENSION OF VISAS FOR BRAZILIANS UNTIL BRAZIL AMENDS ITS LAWS 
              TO REMOVE THE PROHIBITION ON EXTRADITION OF NATIONALS OF 
              BRAZIL TO OTHER COUNTRIES.

    (a) Suspension of Visa Issuance.--Notwithstanding any other 
provision of law, no immigrant or nonimmigrant visa may be issued to a 
citizen, subject, national, or resident of Brazil until the President 
of the United States determines and certifies to the Congress that the 
Government of Brazil has amended its laws to remove the prohibition on 
extradition of nationals of Brazil to other countries.
    (b) Waiver.--The President may waive the application of subsection 
(a) on a case-by-case basis if the President determines and certifies 
to the Congress that it is in the national interests of the United 
States to do so.
    (c) Effect of Unauthorized Issuance.--Any visa issued in violation 
of this subsection shall be null and void.
                                 <all>
```
Case: 19-30088 Doc# 4679 Filed: 11/12/19 Entered: 11/12/19 14:27:13 Page 1 of

2
Case: 19-30088 Doc# 4679 Filed: 11/12/19 Entered: 11/12/19 14:27:13 Page 2 of

2
[Federal Register Volume 81, Number 22 (Wednesday, February 3, 2016)]
[Notices]
[Page 5821]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2016-02042]


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

DEPARTMENT OF THE TREASURY

United States Mint


Citizens Coinage Advisory Committee Meeting

ACTION: Notification of Citizens Coinage Advisory Committee February 
16, 2016, public meeting

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

SUMMARY: Pursuant to United States Code, Title 31, section 
5135(b)(8)(C), the United States Mint announces the Citizens Coinage 
Advisory Committee (CCAC) public meeting scheduled for February 16, 
2016.
    Date: February 16, 2016.
    Time: 1:00 p.m. to 2:00 p.m. EDT.
    Location: This meeting will occur via teleconference. Interested 
members of the public may dial in to listen to the meeting at (866) 
564-9287/Access Code: 62956028.
    Subject: Review and consideration of additional candidate designs 
for the 2017 America the Beautiful Quarters[supreg] Program honoring 
Ellis Island (Statue of Liberty National Monument) in New Jersey and 
Effigy Mounds National Monument in Iowa.
    Interested persons should call the CCAC HOTLINE at (202) 354-7502 
for the latest update on meeting time and room location.
    In accordance with 31 U.S.C. 5135, the CCAC:
    [ssquf] Advises the Secretary of the Treasury on any theme or 
design proposals relating to circulating coinage, bullion coinage, 
Congressional Gold Medals, and national and other medals.
    [ssquf] Advises the Secretary of the Treasury with regard to the 
events, persons, or places to be commemorated by the issuance of 
commemorative coins in each of the five calendar years succeeding the 
year in which a commemorative coin designation is made.
    [ssquf] Makes recommendations with respect to the mintage level for 
any commemorative coin recommended.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: William Norton, United States Mint 
Liaison to the CCAC; 801 9th Street NW; Washington, DC 20220; or call 
202-354-7200.
    Any member of the public interested in submitting matters for the 
CCAC's consideration is invited to submit them by fax to the following 
number: 202-756-6525.

    Authority: 31 U.S.C. 5135(b)(8)(C).

    Dated: January 28, 2016.
Richard A. Peterson,
Deputy Director for Manufacturing and Quality, United States Mint.
[FR Doc. 2016-02042 Filed 2-2-16; 8:45 am]
 BILLING CODE 4810-37-P
NOT FOR PUBLICATION

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT

MATTHEW J. KING,

Plaintiff

- Appellant,

v.

JAMES G. COX, et al

.,

Defendants

- Appellees. No. 16

- 16725

D.C. No. 2:13

- cv

- 02080

- GMN

PAL

MEMORANDUM *

Appeal from the United States District Court

for the District of Nevada Gloria M. Navarro, Chief Judge, Presiding

Submitted May 24, 2017 **

Before: THOMAS, Chief Judge, and SILVERMAN, and RAWLINSON, Circuit Judges.

Matthew J. King , a Nevada state pri soner, appeals pro se from the district

court’s summary judgment in his 42 U.S.C. § 1983 action alleging deliberate

indifference to a serious medical need . We have jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C.

§ 1291. We review de novo

. Toguchi v. Chung , 391 F.3d 1051, 10 56 (9th Cir.

* This disposition is not appropriate for publication and is not precedent except as provided by Ninth Circuit Rule 36

- 3.

** The panel unanimously concludes this case is suitable for decision without oral argument. See Fed. R. App. P. 34(a)(2). 

# FILED

JUN 2 2017

MOLLY C. DWYER, CLER K

U.S. COURT OF APPEAL S2 16

- 16725

2004). W e affirm.

The district court properly granted summary judgment for defendants Cox

and Byrne because King failed to raise a genuine dispute of material fact as to

whether the course of treatment chosen to treat his h epatitis C was “medically

unacceptable under the circumstances, and was chosen in conscious disregard o f an

excessive risk to [King’s ] health.” I d. at 1058 (citation and internal quotation

marks omitted) (a difference in medical opinion does not rise to the level of

deliberate indifference).

King’s appeal of the denial of his motion for preliminary injunction is moot.

See Mt. Graham Red Squirrel v. Madigan , 954 F.2d 1441, 1450 (9th Cir. 1992)

(when underlying claims have been decided, the reversal of a denial of preliminary

relief would have no practical consequences, and the issue is therefore moot)

.

The district court did not abuse its discretion by denying King’s motion s for

appointment of a medical expert and an investigator because Kin g failed to show

that these appointment s were necessary. See Walker v. Am. Home Shield Long

Term Disability Plan

, 180 F.3d 1065, 1071 (9th Cir. 1999) (setting forth standard

of review).

The district court did not abuse its discretion in denying King’s mot ion for

appointment of counsel because King did not show exceptional circumstances

warranting such an appointment

. See Palmer v. Valdez , 560 F.3d 965, 970 (9th3 16

- 16725

Cir. 2009) (setting forth standard of review and explaining the “exceptional

circumstances” requirement ).

We do not consider arguments and allegations raised for the first time on

appeal. See Padgett v. Wright , 587 F.3d 983, 985 n.2 (9th Cir. 2009).

AFFIRMED.
An official website of the United States government         Here's how you know         
**Official websites use .mil**
A **.mil** website belongs to an official U.S. Department of Defense organization in the United States.
**Secure .mil websites use HTTPS**
 A **lock (lock )** or **https://** means you’ve safely connected to the .mil website. Share sensitive information only on official, secure websites.

Skip to main content (Press Enter).

United States Space Command

USSPACECOM

                - 
                - 
                - 
                - 
                - 

Search

Search
Search

-  Home		 
-  About    -  Mission         
  -  Warfighting Units         
  -  Frequently Asked Questions         
  -  Strategic Vision         
  -  Emblem 
-  Leaders    -  Commander         
  -  Deputy Commander         
  -  Command Senior Enlisted Leader         
  -  Chief of Staff 
-  Support    -  Inspector General         
  -  FOIA      -  Making a FOIA Request         
    -  Reading Room 
  -  Equal Opportunity Coordinator         
  -  Sexual Assault Prevention and Response Victim Advocate         
  -  Command Chaplain         
  -  Commandant         
  -  Resilience Program 
-  Newsroom    -  News      -  FY2025 Testimony 
  -  Photos and Videos         
  -  Speeches         
  -  Publications 
-  Contact		 
-  Partnerships and Outreach    -  Academic Engagement Enterprise      -  AEE Articles of Interest         
    -  AEE Members 
  -  Careers      -  Civilians         
    -  Internships 
  -  Industry Engagement Portal 
-  Newcomers    -  Newcomer Information         
  -  Checking In 

# WELCOME LETTER

Command Team

## **Welcome Letter**

Command Links

#### **Never A Day Without Space Video**

## **U.S. Space Command Mission**

####  

#### **QUICK LINKS**

#### Accessibility  |  Section 508    Web PolicySite Map  |  Defense.gov  |  Intel.govQuestions  |  Privacy and SecurityContact Us  |  Inspector General  |  FOIAOPM.gov  |  Plain Writing Act | MISONo Fear Act  |  Links DisclaimerUSA.gov  |  DoD Open Government

                  - Facebook
                  - X
                  - YouTube
                  - LinkedIn
                  - Civilian Careers

Hosted by Defense Media Activity - WEB.mil
#### The Springfield Fire and Marine Insurance Company v. Sarah Newman, for use, etc.

*Practice—Bill of Exceptions.*

The motion for a new trial and the documentary evidence and instructions complained of must be preserved in the bill of exceptions, or error can not be assigned thereon.

[Opinion filed June 15, 1889.]

Appeal from the Circuit Court of Pulaski County; the Hon. Robert W. McCartney, Judge, presiding.

Messrs. Robarts *&*Bradley and Thomas Bates, for appellant.

Messrs. Angus Leek and Crandall, Linegar & Boyd, for appellee.

Green, P. J.

This suit was brought on a policy of insurance to recover the amount of loss by fire of the property alleged to. have been insured. The cause was tried by a jury who returned a verdict for plaintiff, assessing the damages at $900, and the court entered judgment for the plaintiff for that sum and costs of suit. Defendant thereupon took this appeal.

*394The appellant presents a bill of exceptions so radically defective by reason of the omission of material matters as to preclude this court from taking cognizance of and passing upon the errors assigned.

The bill of exceptions does not contain the policy or any of the documentary evidence complained of, and does not contain any instructions given or refused, or motion for a new trial on behalf of defendant, and as- these are matters which can be preserved and brought up for review, in this court only by being embodied in a bill of exceptions, we can not consider the rulings of the court thereon which are assigned for error. The judgment must be affirmed. Nason v. Letz, 73 Ill. 371; James v. Dexter et al., 113 Ill. 654 ; Martin et al. v. Foulke et al., 114 Ill. 206.

*Judgment affirmed.*
#### TIDEWATER BANK & TRUST COMPANY and METROPOLITAN BANK & TRUST COMPANY v. CATHERINE W. BROWN, W. H. HOLLAND, F. M. W. BUTLER and J. R. FLEMING.

(Filed 16 September, 1925.)

Appeal by plaintiffs from *Cranmer, J.,*at December Term, 1924, of PASQUOTANK.

Plaintiffs brought suit to recover judgment on a promissory note for $1,739.00 executed by Catherine W. Brown and endorsed by her co-defendants. Pleadings were duly filed, and at the trial the following verdict was returned:

1. Is the plaintiff the owner and holder of the note in due course? Answer: Yes, owner, but not holder in due course.

2. Was the execution and delivery of the note by maker and endorsers obtained by fraudulent misrepresentations of the agent of the. payee as alleged in the answer? Answer: Yes.

3.'In what sum, if any, are the defendants indebted to the plaintiff? Answer: .

*848*Aydlett & Simpson for plaintiff.*

*W. L. Small and JShringhaus & Mall for defendant.*

Pee CubiaM.

This case has been tried in substantial compliance with the law which is applicable, and the record presents no satisfactory reason for disturbing the verdict.

No error.
An official website of the United States government         Here's how you know         
**Official websites use .mil**
A **.mil** website belongs to an official U.S. Department of Defense organization in the United States.
**Secure .mil websites use HTTPS**
 A **lock (lock )** or **https://** means you’ve safely connected to the .mil website. Share sensitive information only on official, secure websites.

Skip to main content (Press Enter).

United States Space Command

USSPACECOM

                - 
                - 
                - 
                - 
                - 

Search

Search
Search

-  Home		 
-  About    -  Mission         
  -  Warfighting Units         
  -  Frequently Asked Questions         
  -  Strategic Vision         
  -  Emblem 
-  Leaders    -  Commander         
  -  Deputy Commander         
  -  Command Senior Enlisted Leader         
  -  Chief of Staff 
-  Support    -  Inspector General         
  -  FOIA      -  Making a FOIA Request         
    -  Reading Room 
  -  Equal Opportunity Coordinator         
  -  Sexual Assault Prevention and Response Victim Advocate         
  -  Command Chaplain         
  -  Commandant         
  -  Resilience Program 
-  Newsroom    -  News      -  FY2025 Testimony 
  -  Photos and Videos         
  -  Speeches         
  -  Publications 
-  Contact		 
-  Partnerships and Outreach    -  Academic Engagement Enterprise      -  AEE Articles of Interest         
    -  AEE Members         
    -  AEE Multimedia 
  -  Careers      -  Civilians         
    -  Internships 
  -  Industry Engagement Portal 
-  Newcomers    -  Newcomer Information         
  -  Checking In 

PHOTO INFORMATION

** Download

** Details

** Share

PHOTO INFORMATION

** Download

** Details

** Share

PHOTO INFORMATION

** Download

** Details

** Share

PHOTO INFORMATION

** Download

** Details

** Share

PHOTO INFORMATION

** Download

** Details

** Share

PHOTO INFORMATION

** Download

** Details

** Share

# USSPACECOM Releases Specific Behaviors

By Staff ReportU.S. Space Command

                PETERSON SPACE FORCE BASE, Colo.  –              https://www.spacecom.mil/Newsroom/Publications/Pub-Display/Article/3318236/tenets-of-responsible-behavior-in-space/*https://www.spacecom.mil/Newsroom/Publications/Pub-Display/Article/3318615/tenet-derived-responsible-behaviors-in-space/*

**                    SHARE                

**                    PRINT
EX-35.3
(logo)WELLS FARGO


Corporate Trust Services
MAC N2702-011
9062 Old Annapolis Road
Columbia, MD 21045
410 884-2000
410 715-2380 Fax


Wells Fargo Bank, N.A.


Nomura Home Equity Loan, Inc.
2 World Financial Center
Building B
New York, NY 10281


RE: Annual Statement as to Compliance for Nomura Home Equity Loan, Inc.
Asset-Backed Certificates, Series 2007-1


The undersigned, a duly authorized officer of Wells Fargo Bank, National
Association ("Wells Fargo"), hereby certifies as follows for the calendar year
2007 or applicable portion thereof (the "Reporting Period"):

(a) a review of Wells Fargo's activities as Master Servicer and Securities
Administrator during the Reporting Period under the Pooling and Servicing
Agreement has been made under my supervision; and

(b) to the best of my knowledge, based on such review, except as otherwise
provided on Schedule A hereto, Wells Fargo has fulfilled all of its obligations
under the Servicing Agreement(s) in all material respects throughout the
Reporting Period.


February 25, 2008


/s/ Jacquelyn E. Kimball
Jacquelyn E. Kimball
Vice President


(page)

(logo)WELLS FARGO


Corporate Trust Services
MAC N2702-011
9062 Old Annapolis Road
Columbia, MD 21045
410 884-2000
410 715-2380 Fax

Wells Fargo Bank, N.A.


Schedule A


List of Exceptions for Nomura Home Equity Loan, Inc. Asset-Backed Certificates,
Series 2007-1

Payment/Distribution Calculation Errors:


This deal experienced non-systemic administrative issues during the reporting
year that resulted in incorrect calculations of distributions to certificate
holders for one or more payment cycles. The instances were subsequently
corrected and remittance reports and payments to holders were revised to reflect
the correct distributions.