alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
EX-31 Rule 13a-14(d)/15d-14(d) Certification.


  I, Kristen Ann Cronin, 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 ACE Securities Corp. Home Equity Loan Trust, Series
     2007-HE1 (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
     servicers and based on my knowledge and the compliance reviews
     conducted in preparing the servicer compliance statements required in
     this report under Item 1123 of Regulation AB, and except as disclosed
     in the Exchange Act periodic reports, the servicer has fulfilled its
     obligations under the servicing agreements 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 party: Ocwen
    Loan Servicing, LLC as Servicer.

    Dated:   March 27, 2008


    /s/ Kristen Ann Cronin
    Signature

    Vice President
    (senior officer in charge of the servicing function of the master
    servicer)
## Summary Measures and Graphs

- Individual Provisions
- Trust Fund Investment in Equities

### **Description of Proposed Provision:						G2: Invest 40 percent of the OASI and DI Trust Fund reserves in equities (phased in 2024-2038), assuming an ultimate 4.8 percent annual real rate of return on equities.**

|  |  |
|--|--|
| *  A change in the investment of trust fund reserves to include some           equities affects the size of all summarized measures because increased           "present-value" discounting reduces the weight on values for more distant           future years.  As a result, the magnitude of the current-law actuarial           balance and the summarized effects of most proposals is reduced.  Therefore,           the size of the change in the long-range actuarial balance indicated here           cannot be interpreted directly as a reduction in the shortfall.  The actual           reduction in the shortfall from equity investment depends on the amount of           reserves that are available for investment throughout the period.  For example,           if provisions to change revenue or scheduled benefits resulted in a purely           pay-as-you-go system (reserves just above zero throughout the period), then           investment in equities would have no effect on the actuarial balance. |
|--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|
##### 



Exhibit 32.1 CERTIFICATION PURSUANT TO
SECTION 906 OF THE SARBANES -OXLEY ACT OF 2002 In connection with the Annual Report of Belden & Blake Corporation (the Company) on Form
10-K for the period ended December 31, 2005, as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission
on the date hereof (the Report), the undersigned, in the capacities and on the dates indicated
below, hereby certifies pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, as adopted pursuant to Section 906 of
the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that to the knowledge of the undersigned:  1.
    The Report fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) or 15(d) of
the Securities Exchange Act of 1934; and2.
    The information contained in the Report fairly presents, in all material respects,
the financial condition and results of operations of the Company. Date: April 5, 2006

/s/
Mark A. HouserMark A. Houser, Chief Executive Officer andChairman of the Board of Directors This certification
accompanies the Form 10-K and shall not be treated as having been filed as part
of the Form 10-K.
[Federal Register Volume 60, Number 242 (Monday, December 18, 1995)]
[Notices]
[Pages 65071-65072]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 95-30652]



=======================================================================
-----------------------------------------------------------------------

[[Page 65072]]


DEPARTMENT OF LABOR

Employment and Training Administration
[NAFTA--00303; Lucas, Iowa, NAFTA--00303A; Mt. Ayr, Iowa, NAFTA--
00303B; Osceola, Iowa, and NAFTA--00303C]


Iowa Assemblies, Inc., Murray, Iowa; Amended Certification 
Regarding Eligibility To Apply for NAFTA Transitional Adjustment 
Assistance

    In accordance with Section 250(a), Subchapter D, Chapter 2, Title 
II, of the Trade Act of 1974, as amended (19 USC 2273), the Department 
of Labor issued a Notice of Certification of Eligibility to Apply for 
NAFTA Transitional Adjustment Assistance on January 12, 1995, 
applicable to all workers at Iowa Assemblies, Inc. in Lucas, Mt. Ayr 
and Osceola, Iowa.
    At the request of the State Agency on behalf of the company, the 
Department reviewed the subject certification. The company reports 
worker separations will occur at the subject firm's manufacturing 
facilities in Mt. Ayr, Osceola, and Murray, Iowa. The workers produce 
among other products, automotive wiring harnesses and wiring assembly. 
The Department's review of the certification for workers of the subject 
firm found that workers in Mt. Ayr and Osceola, Iowa are currently 
covered under the certification. When the certification was issued, the 
Mt. Ayr and Osceola locations of the subject firm were not separately 
assigned a suffix number. The intent of the Department's certification 
is to include all workers of Iowa Assemblies, Inc. adversely affected 
by increased imports of wiring harnesses and assembly from Mexico or 
Canada. Therefore, the Department is amending the certification for 
workers of the subject firm to separately identify the Mt. Ayr and 
Osceola, Iowa locations, and provide for the worker separations in 
Murray, Iowa.
    The amended notice applicable to NAFTA-00303 is hereby issued as 
follows:

    ``All workers of Iowa Assemblies, Inc., Lucas (NAFTA-303), Mt. 
Ayr (NAFTA-303A), Osceola (NAFTA-303B), and Murray (NAFTA-0303C) 
Iowa engaged in employment related to the production of wiring 
harnesses and assembly who became totally or partially separated 
from employment on or after December 8, 1993 are eligible to apply 
for NAFTA-TAA under Section 250 of the Trade Act of 1974.''

    Signed at Washington, DC., this 5th day of December 1995.
Russell T. Kile,
Acting Program Manager, Policy and Reemployment Services, Office of 
Trade Adjustment Assistance.
[FR Doc. 95-30652 Filed 12-15-95; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4510-30-M
[Federal Register Volume 60, Number 250 (Friday, December 29, 1995)]
[Notices]
[Page 67389]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 95-31487]



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

DEPARTMENT OF THE TREASURY
[Dept. Circ. 570, 1995--Rev., Supp. No. 5]


Surety Companies Acceptable on Federal Bonds, Termination of 
Authority; The American Road Insurance Company

    Notice is hereby given that the Certificate of Authority issued by 
the Treasury to the American Road Insurance Company, of Dearborn, 
Michigan, under the United States Code, Title 31, Sections 9304-9308, 
to qualify as an acceptable surety on Federal bonds is terminated 
effective November 17, 1995.
    The Company was last listed as an acceptable surety on Federal 
bonds at 60 FR 34437, June 30, 1995.
    With respect to any bonds currently in force with the American Road 
Insurance Company, bond-approving officer may let such bonds run to 
expiration and need not secure new bonds. However, no new bonds should 
be accepted from the Company. In addition, bonds that are continuous in 
nature should not be renewed.
    Questions concerning this notice may be directed to the U.S. 
Department of the Treasury, Financial Management Service, Funds 
Management Division, Surety Bond Branch, 3700 East-West Highway, Room 
6F04, Hyattsville, MD 20872, telephone (202/FTS) 874-6765.

    Dated: December 18, 1995.
Charles F. Schwan III,
Director, Funds Management Division, Financial Management Service.
[FR Doc. 95-31487 Filed 12-28-95; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4810-35-M
/s



# Fourth Court of Appeals

**San Antonio, Texas**

July 22, 2014

N o. 04

- 13

- 00593

- CV

Venus MINSAL

, Appellant

v.

Abel H. GARCIA

, Appellee

From the 166th Judicial District Court, Bexar County, Texas

Trial Court No. 2012

- CI

- 184 66

Honorable Antonia Arteaga, Judge Presiding



### ORDER

Appellant’s motion to amend appellant’s brief is GRANTED. Appellee’s motion for an

extension of time to file his brief is GRANTED. Appellee’s brief is due on July 26, 2014

.

_________________________________ Karen Angelini, Justice

IN WITNESS WHEREOF, I have here unto set my hand and affixed the seal of the said

court on this 22nd day of July, 2014

.

___________________________________ Keith E. Hottle

Clerk of Court
```

[Congressional Bills 113th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[H.R. 5462 Engrossed in House (EH)]

113th CONGRESS
  2d Session
                                H. R. 5462

_______________________________________________________________________

                                 AN ACT

 
 To amend title 49, United States Code, to provide for limitations on 
            the fees charged to passengers of air carriers.

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

SECTION 1. LIMITATION ON FEES CHARGED TO PASSENGERS OF AIR CARRIERS.

    (a) In General.--Subsection (c) of section 44940 of title 49, 
United States Code, is amended to read as follows:
    ``(c) Limitation on Fee.--
            ``(1) Amount.--Fees imposed under subsection (a)(1) shall 
        be $5.60 per one-way trip in air transportation or intrastate 
        air transportation that originates at an airport in the United 
        States, except that the fee imposed per round trip shall not 
        exceed $11.20.
            ``(2) Definition of round trip.--In this subsection, the 
        term `round trip' means a trip on an air travel itinerary that 
        terminates or has a stopover at the origin point (or co-
        terminal).''.
    (b) Applicability.--The amendment made by subsection (a) shall 
apply with respect to a trip in air transportation or intrastate air 
transportation that is purchased on or after the date of the enactment 
of this Act.

            Passed the House of Representatives September 17, 2014.

            Attest:

                                                                 Clerk.
113th CONGRESS

  2d Session

                               H. R. 5462

_______________________________________________________________________

                                 AN ACT

 To amend title 49, United States Code, to provide for limitations on 
            the fees charged to passengers of air carriers.
```
#### GURNEY P. HOOD, Commissioner of Banks, ex rel. BANK OF ROSE HILL, v. H. J. BONEY and Wife, INEZ C. BONEY, A. McL. GRAHAM, Administrator of J. A. BANNERMAN, Deceased, and GURNEY P. HOOD, Commissioner of Banks, ex rel. BANK OF ROSE HILL, and S. D. PITTMAN, Trustee, v. HARVEY J. BONEY and INEZ C. BONEY, His Wife.

(Filed 15 March, 1933.)

Limitation oí Actions E c—

In an action on a note under seal a mere allegation that defendant was a surety on her husband’s note, without supporting evidence, will not support her plea of three-year statute of limitations.

Appeal by H. J. Boney and Inez C. Boney, his wife, from *Harris, J-,*at January Term, 1933, of Duplin.

No error.

*Oscar B. Turner for appellants.*

*George R. Ward for plaintiff.*

Adams, J.

This is an action to recover judgment on two notes executed by the defendants to the Bank of Rose Hill. The execution of the notes *365and the amounts due are admitted, but the defendant Inez C. Boney alleges that she is a surety and pleads the three-year statute of limitations in bar. The notes are under seal. Action was brought within ten years. The defendants offered no evidence and excepted to an instruction that upon the evidence the issues should be answered in favor of the plaintiff. We find no error entitling the defendants to a new trial.

No error.
#### ERNEST H. COOKE v. THE GREAT ATLANTIC AND PACIFIC TEA COMPANY and A. T. SHEPARD.

(Filed 5 April, 1933.)

Negligence A c — Plaintiff must show negligence on part of store in order to recover for injuries sustained in fall therein.

Neither the owner nor the manager of a store is an insurer of the safety of its customers, and in order for a customer to recover for injuries resulting from slipping and falling on a banana peeling on the floor of the store he must establish negligence.

Appeal by plaintiff from *Barnhill, J.,*at October Term, 1932, of GeaNville.

Affirmed.

This is an action to recover damages for personal injuries caused by tbe negligence of tbe defendants.

On Saturday nigbt, 24 October, 1931, tbe plaintiff while leaving tbe store of tbe defendant, tbe Great Atlantic and Pacific Tea Company, in Oxford, N. 0., where be bad purchased of tbe said defendant groceries and other merchandise, stepped on a banana peeling which was lying on tbe floor just outside tbe door, slipped and fell. Tbe banana peeling was on tbe floor of tbe entrance to tbe store from tbe sidewalk, about 18 inches from tbe door. Tbe door was 5 or 6 feet from tbe sidewalk. There were many customers in tbe store at tbe time of tbe accident. Defendant’s clerks and salesmen were busy waiting on these customers. Tbe defendant bad bananas in its store as a part of its stock of merchandise. Tbe defendant, A. T. Shepard, was tbe manager of tbe store, and in charge of tbe business of bis codefendant.

There was no evidence tending to show who threw tbe banana peeling on tbe floor of tbe entrance to tbe store, just outside tbe door, or bow long tbe banana peeling bad been there before tbe plaintiff stepped on it, slipped and fell. There was evidence tending to show that plaintiff was injured by bis fall, and that be sustained damages resulting from bis injuries.

At tbe close of tbe evidence for tbe plaintiff, tbe action was dismissed by judgment as of nonsuit, and plaintiff appealed to tbe Supreme Court.

*T. Lanier for plaintiff.*

*Guthrie & Guthrie for defendants.*

Per Curiam.

There was no evidence at tbe trial of this action tending to show that tbe plaintiff was injured by tbe negligence of tbe defendants, or of either of them.

*496Neither defendant was an insurer of tbe plaintiff, while he was in the store as a customer, or while he was leaving with the groceries and merchandise which he had purchased in the store. *Bowden v. Kress,*198 N. C., 559, 152 S. E., 625. In the absence of any evidence tending to show that the defendants were negligent, there was no error in the judgment dismissing the action as of nonsuit. The judgment is

Affirmed.
Skip to main content

# Social Security

Search
Menu
Español
Sign in

## Fiscal Year Trust Fund Operations

Office of the Chief Actuary 

Financial data for a selected time period

The table below begins with fiscal year 1977,    the first fiscal year to begin on October 1.     Prior fiscal years began July 1.
```

[Congressional Bills 113th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[H.R. 5658 Introduced in House (IH)]

113th CONGRESS
  2d Session
                                H. R. 5658

      To revise the definition of ``manufactured home'' under the 
 Manufactured Housing Construction and Safety Standards Act of 1974 to 
 clarify the exclusion of certain recreational vehicles, and for other 
                               purposes.

_______________________________________________________________________

                    IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

                           September 18, 2014

Mr. Stutzman (for himself, Mrs. Walorski, and Mr. Duffy) introduced the 
   following bill; which was referred to the Committee on Financial 
                                Services

_______________________________________________________________________

                                 A BILL

 
      To revise the definition of ``manufactured home'' under the 
 Manufactured Housing Construction and Safety Standards Act of 1974 to 
 clarify the exclusion of certain recreational vehicles, and for other 
                               purposes.

    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 ``Recreational Vehicle Certainty Act 
of 2014''.

SEC. 2. DEFINITION OF ``MANUFACTURED HOME''.

    Paragraph (6) of section 603 of the Manufactured Housing 
Construction and Safety Standards Act of 1974 (42 U.S.C. 5402(6)) is 
amended by striking ``self-propelled recreational vehicle'' and 
inserting the following: ``recreational vehicle that is designed as 
temporary living quarters for recreational, camping, travel, or 
seasonal use and built in compliance with consensus standards for such 
products, including (A) a self-propelled motorhome or recreational 
vehicle trailer that is towed by another vehicle without a special 
highway use permit and is regulated by the National Highway Traffic 
Safety Administration as a vehicle, and (B) a park model recreational 
vehicle that has a gross area of not greater than 400 square feet based 
on the exterior dimensions of the unit measured at the largest 
horizontal projections in the setup mode, excluding any loft area 
having less than 5 feet in ceiling height, roof overhangs, and exterior 
porch or deck area''.

SEC. 3. REGULATIONS.

    Not later than the expiration of the 90-day period beginning on the 
date of the enactment of this Act, the Secretary of Housing and Urban 
Development shall issue such regulations as may be necessary to carry 
out the amendments made by section 2.
                                 <all>
```
IN THE SUPREME COURT OF PENNSYLVANIA

EASTERN DISTRICT

MICHAEL HOLLEY (PRO SE),

Petitioner

v.

COURT OF COMMON PLEAS OF

PHILADELPHIA,

Respondent :

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

: No. 142 EM 2017

ORDER

PER CURIAM

AND NOW , this 14th day of February

, 2018, the Application for Leave to F i le

Original Process is GRANTED, and the Motion for Writ of Mandamus is DENIED.
<PAGE>   1
                                                                      EXHIBIT 11


                         SCIENTIFIC GAMES HOLDINGS CORP.
                        COMPUTATION OF PER SHARE EARNINGS

                      (IN THOUSANDS EXCEPT PER SHARE DATA)


<TABLE>
<CAPTION>
                                                    Three-month period                      Year
                                                    ended December 31                ended December 31
                                                    -----------------                -----------------
                                                1997       1996       1995       1997       1996       1995
                                                ----       ----       ----       ----       ----       ----
<S>                                           <C>        <C>        <C>        <C>        <C>        <C>
Net earnings                                  $ 5,108    $ 5,513    $ 5,923    $ 8,972    $18,726    $22,428
                                              =======    =======    =======    =======    =======    =======
Weighted Average Common stock outstanding      11,876     12,127     13,006     12,020     12,682     12,929

Effect of common stock equivalents (stock)        399        461        720        407        584        724
                                              -------    -------    -------    -------    -------    -------
Total                                          12,275     12,588     13,726     12,427     13,266     13,653
                                              =======    =======    =======    =======    =======    =======
Net earnings per common share - diluted       $   .42    $   .44    $   .43    $   .72    $  1.41    $  1.64
                                              =======    =======    =======    =======    =======    =======
</TABLE>








                                       26
### Proposed Provision: C2.6. Increase the normal retirement age (NRA) and the earliest eligibility age (EEA) for those age 62 in 2024-2025 to 68 and 63, respectively, and then by 3 months per year in 2026-2029 to 69 and 64, respectively.