alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
Exhibit 34.1.3.1

 

[Letterhead of KPMG LLP]

 

Report of Independent Registered Public Accounting Firm

 

The Board Members

Regulus Group LLC:

 

We have examined management’s assessment for those customers that management has informed us have requested confirmation of compliance, included in the accompanying Report on Assessment of Compliance with Regulation AB Servicing Criteria, that Regulus Group LLC complied with the servicing criteria set forth in Item 1122(d)(2)(i) and 1122 (d)(4)(iv) of the Securities and Exchange Commission’s Regulation AB for remittance processing services to those issuers of asset backed securities and servicers of loan and/or receivable portfolios that include pool assets for asset backed securities transactions (the Platform) as of and for the year ended December 31, 2006. Regulus Group LLC has determined that the remainder of the servicing criteria are not applicable to the activities it performs with respect to the Platform as of and for the year ended December 31, 2006. Management is responsible for theCompany’s compliance with those servicing criteria. Our responsibility is to express an opinion on management’s assessment about the Company’s compliance based on our examination.

 

Our examination was conducted in accordance with the standards of the Public Company Accounting Oversight Board (United States) and, accordingly, included examining, on a test basis, evidence about the Company’s compliance with the servicing criteria specified above and performing such other procedures as we considered necessary in the circumstances. Our examination included testing of less than all of the individual asset-backed transactions and securities that comprise the Platform, testing of less than all of the servicing activities related to the Platform, and determining whether the Company processed those selected transactions and performed those selected activities in compliance with the servicing criteria. Furthermore, our procedures were limited to the selected transactions and servicing activities performed by the Company during the period covered by this report. Our procedures were notdesigned to determine whether errors may have occurred either prior to or subsequent to our tests that may have affected the balances or amounts calculated or reported by the Company during the period covered by this report for the selected transactions or any other transactions. We believe that our examination provides a reasonable basis for our opinion. Our examination does not provide a legal determination on the Company’s compliance with the servicing criteria.

 

In our opinion, management’s assessment that the Company complied with the aforementioned servicing criteria as of and for the year ended December 31, 2006 is fairly stated, in all material respects.

 

/s/_KPMG LLP

 

Philadelphia, PA

February 22, 2007
[Federal Register Volume 73, Number 157 (Wednesday, August 13, 2008)]
[Notices]
[Page 47250]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: E8-18743]


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

DEPARTMENT OF STATE

[Public Notice 6315]


Culturally Significant Objects Imported for Exhibition 
Determinations: ``Alexander Roslin and the Comtesse d'Egmont 
Pignatelli''

SUMMARY: Notice is hereby given of the following determinations: 
Pursuant to the authority vested in me by the Act of October 19, 1965 
(79 Stat. 985; 22 U.S.C. 2459), Executive Order 12047 of March 27, 
1978, the Foreign Affairs Reform and Restructuring Act of 1998 (112 
Stat. 2681, et seq.; 22 U.S.C. 6501 note, et seq.), Delegation of 
Authority No. 234 of October 1, 1999, Delegation of Authority No. 236 
of October 19, 1999, as amended, and Delegation of Authority No. 257 of 
April 15, 2003 [68 FR 19875], I hereby determine that the objects in 
the exhibition: ``Alexander Roslin and the Comtesse d'Egmont 
Pignatelli,'' imported from abroad for temporary exhibition within the 
United States, are of cultural significance. The objects are imported 
pursuant to loan agreements with the foreign owners or custodians. I 
also determine that the exhibition or display of the exhibit objects at 
the Minneapolis Institute of Arts, Minneapolis, MN, from on or about 
August 29, 2008, until on or about November 30, 2008, and at possible 
additional exhibitions or venues yet to be determined, is in the 
national interest. Public Notice of these Determinations is ordered to 
be published in the Federal Register.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: For further information, including a 
list of the exhibit objects, contact Julie Simpson, Attorney-Adviser, 
Office of the Legal Adviser, U.S. Department of State (telephone: (202-
453-8050). The address is U.S. Department of State, SA-44, 301 4th 
Street, SW., Room 700, Washington, DC 20547-0001.

    Dated: August 6, 2008.
C. Miller Crouch,
Principal Deputy Assistant Secretary for Educational and Cultural 
Affairs, Department of State.
[FR Doc. E8-18743 Filed 8-12-08; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4710-05-P
Court of Appeals

of the State of Georgia

ATLANTA,____________________

The Court of Appeals hereby passes the following order:

A20A0805. NKOMA ANTOINE MORGAN v. THE STATE.

In 2013, a jury found Nkoma Antoine Morgan guilty of armed robbery and

other crimes. On July 30, 2019, the trial court entered an order denying his motion

for a new trial. On August 30, 2019, Morgan filed a notice of appeal. We, however, 

lack jurisdiction.

A notice of appeal must be filed within 30 days of the entry of an appealable

judgment. OCGA § 5-6-38 (a). The proper and timely filing of a notice of appeal is

an absolute requirement to confer appellate jurisdiction on this Court. Rowland v.

State, 264 Ga. 872, 872 (1) (452 SE2d 756) (1995). Morgan’s notice of appeal was

untimely filed 31 days after entry of the order sought to be appealed. Consequently,

we lack jurisdiction over Morgan’s appeal, which is hereby DISMISSED.

Because Morgan is represented by counsel, he is informed of the following in

accordance with Rowland, 264 Ga. at 875-876 (2): This appeal has been dismissed

because you failed to file a proper and timely notice of appeal. If you still wish to

appeal, you may petition the trial court for leave to file an out-of-time appeal. If the

trial court grants your request, you will have 30 days from the entry of that order to

file a notice of appeal referencing your conviction. If the trial court denies your

request, you will have 30 days from the entry of that order to file a notice of appeal

referencing the denial of your request for an out-of-time appeal.

December 23, 2019
The Clerk of Court is DIRECTED to send a copy of this order to Morgan and

to his attorney, and the latter also is DIRECTED to send a copy to Morgan.

Court of Appeals of the State of Georgia

Clerk’s Office, Atlanta,____________________

I certify that the above is a true extract from

the minutes of the Court of Appeals of Georgia.

Witness my signature and the seal of said court

hereto affixed the day and year last above written.

, Clerk.

12/23/2019
| (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. |
|-----------------|---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|

|         |                                                                      |                                    |
|--------------|---------------------------------------------------------------------------|-----------------------------------------|
|    |                                                            | /s/ Steven                Anderson |
|         | Steven                Anderson                                            |
|         | President                and                Chief Executive Officer  |

----
```

[Congressional Bills 104th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[H.R. 742 Introduced in House (IH)]

104th CONGRESS
  1st Session
                                H. R. 742

To amend the Federal Advisory Committee Act to limit the application of 
    that Act to meetings between Federal officers or employees and 
  representatives of State, county, and local governments and Indian 
 tribes, and to limit the application of that Act to activities of the 
 Department of the Interior related to consultations of the Department 
  with Indian tribal organizations with respect to the management of 
      funds held in trust by the United States for Indian tribes.

_______________________________________________________________________

                    IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

                            January 30, 1995

  Mr. Dicks introduced the following bill; which was referred to the 
              Committee on Government Reform and Oversight

_______________________________________________________________________

                                 A BILL

 
To amend the Federal Advisory Committee Act to limit the application of 
    that Act to meetings between Federal officers or employees and 
  representatives of State, county, and local governments and Indian 
 tribes, and to limit the application of that Act to activities of the 
 Department of the Interior related to consultations of the Department 
  with Indian tribal organizations with respect to the management of 
      funds held in trust by the United States for Indian tribes.

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

SECTION 1. LIMITATION ON APPLICATION OF FEDERAL ADVISORY COMMITTEE ACT 
              TO CERTAIN MEETINGS AND CONSULTATIONS.

    Section 4 of the Federal Advisory Committee Act (5 U.S.C. App.) is 
amended--
            (1) in subsection (c) by inserting before the period the 
        following: ``, or to any meeting between a full-time officer or 
        employee of the Federal Government and one or more 
        representatives of any combination of one or more State, 
        county, or local governments or Indian tribes''; and
            (2) by adding at the end the following:
    ``(d) This Act does not apply to any activity of the Department of 
the Interior related to consultation of the Department with an Indian 
tribal organization with respect to the management of funds held in 
trust by the United States for an Indian tribe.''.
                                 <all>
```
I 

117TH CONGRESS 

1ST SESSION H. R. 6228 

To limit cost-sharing for prescription drugs, and for other purposes. 

IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES 

DECEMBER 9, 2021 

Ms. MANNING (for herself, Ms. BOURDEAUX, Ms. LOIS FRANKEL of Florida, 

Mrs. MCBATH, Ms. NEWMAN, and Mr. WELCH) introduced the following 

bill; which was referred to the Committee on Energy and Commerce 

A BILL 

To limit cost-sharing for prescription drugs, and for other 

purposes. 

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

3 SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE. 

4 This Act may be cited as the ‘‘Capping Prescription 

5 Costs Act of 2021’’. 

6 SEC. 2. CAP ON PRESCRIPTION DRUG COST-SHARING. 

7 (a) QUALIFIED HEALTH PLANS.—Section 1302(c) of 

8 the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act (42 

9 U.S.C. 18022(c)) is amended— 


pamtmann on DSKBC07HB2PROD with BILLS
2 

•HR 6228 IH

1 (1) in paragraph (3)(A)(i), by inserting ‘‘, in2 cluding cost-sharing with respect to prescription 

3 drugs covered by the plan’’ after ‘‘charges’’; and 

4 (2) by adding at the end the following: 

5 ‘‘(5) PRESCRIPTION DRUG COST-SHARING.— 

6 ‘‘(A) 2023.—For plan years beginning in 

7 2023, the cost-sharing incurred under a health 

8 plan with respect to prescription drugs covered 

9 by the plan shall not exceed $250 per month for 

10 each enrolled individual, or $500 for each fam11 ily. 

12 ‘‘(B) 2024 AND LATER.— 

13 ‘‘(i) IN GENERAL.—In the case of any 

14 plan year beginning in a calendar year 

15 after 2023, the limitation under this para16 graph shall be equal to the applicable dol17 lar amount under subparagraph (A) for 

18 plan years beginning in 2023, increased by 

19 an amount equal to the product of that 

20 amount and the medical care component of 

21 the consumer price index for all urban con22 sumers (as published by the Bureau of 

23 Labor Statistics) for that year. 

24 ‘‘(ii) ADJUSTMENT TO AMOUNT.—If 

25 the amount of any increase under clause 


pamtmann on DSKBC07HB2PROD with BILLS
3 

•HR 6228 IH

1 (i) is not a multiple of $5, such increase 

2 shall be rounded to the next lowest mul3 tiple of $5.’’. 

4 (b) GROUP HEALTH PLANS.—Section 2707(b) of the 

5 Public Health Service Act (42 U.S.C. 300gg–6(b)) is 

6 amended— 

7 (1) by striking ‘‘annual’’; and 

8 (2) by striking ‘‘paragraph (1) of section 

9 1302(c)’’ and inserting ‘‘paragraphs (1) and (5) of 

10 section 1302(c) of the Patient Protection and Af11 fordable Care Act’’. 

12 (c) EFFECTIVE DATE.—The amendments made by 

13 subsections (a) and (b) shall take effect with respect to 

14 plans beginning after December 31, 2022. 

Æ 


pamtmann on DSKBC07HB2PROD with BILLS
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.                  

###### Department of Defense

###### Office of the Secretary 

# AGENCY:

DoD, Office of the Under Secretary (Personnel and Readiness). 

# ACTION:

Notice. 

# SUMMARY:

                        The Servicemembers Civil Relief Act, as codified at 50 U.S.C. App. Section 531, prohibits a landlord from evicting a Service member (or the Service member's family) from a residence during a period of military service except by court order. The law as originally passed by Congress applied to dwellings with monthly rents of $2400 or less. The law requires the Department of Defense to adjust this amount annually to reflect inflation, and to publish the new amount in the                         **Federal Register**                        . We have applied the inflation index required by the statute. The maximum monthly rental amount for 50 U.S.C. App. Section 531 (a)(1)(A)(ii) as of January 1, 2008, will be $2,831.13.                     

# DATES:

*Effective Dates:*                         January 1, 2008.                     

# FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

Colonel S. Shumake, Office of the Under Secretary of Defense for Personnel and Readiness, (703) 697-3387. 

Dated: January 30, 2008. 

L.M. Bynum, 

Alternate OSD Federal Register Liaison Officer, Department of Defense.

[FR Doc. E8-1941 Filed 2-1-08; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 5001-06-P
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.                  

###### Department of Labor

###### Employment and Training Administration 

          - [TA-W-62,679] 

                    In accordance with Section 223 of the Trade Act of 1974 (19 U.S.C. 2273), and Section 246 of the Trade Act of 1974 (26 U.S.C. 2813), as amended, the Department of Labor issued a Certification Regarding Eligibility to Apply for Worker Adjustment Assistance and Alternative Trade Adjustment Assistance on February 22, 2008, applicable to workers of Hydraulic Technologies, Inc., Galion, Ohio. The notice was published in the                     **Federal Register**                     on March 7, 2008 (73 FR 12466).                 

At the request of the State agency, the Department reviewed the certification for workers of the subject firm. The workers are engaged in the production of hydraulic cylinders. 

New information shows that in September 2007 Ligon Industries purchased the assets of Hydraulic Technologies, Inc. and is currently known as HTI Hydraulic Technologies, LLC. 

Accordingly, the Department is amending this certification to show that Hydraulic Technologies, Inc. is currently known as HTI Hydraulic Technologies, LLC.

The intent of the Department's certification is to include all workers of Hydraulic Technologies, Inc., currently known as HTI Hydraulic Technologies, LLC who were adversely affected by increased imports hydraulic cylinders. 

The amended notice applicable to TA-W-62,679 is hereby issued as follows:

All workers of Hydraulic Technologies, Inc., currently known as HTI Hydraulic Technologies, LLC, Galion, Ohio, who became totally or partially separated from employment on or after December 27, 2006, through February 22, 2010, are eligible to apply for adjustment assistance under Section 223 of the Trade Act of 1974, and are also eligible to apply for alternative trade adjustment assistance under Section 246 of the Trade Act of 1974.

Signed at Washington, DC this 13th day of August, 2008. 

Elliott S. Kushner, 

Certifying Officer, Division of Trade Adjustment Assistance.

[FR Doc. E8-19407 Filed 8-20-08; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 4510-FN-P
##### 



Exhibit 32.1

CERTIFICATION PURSUANT TO
SECTION 906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002

In connection with the Quarterly Report of Otter Tail Corporation (the
Company) on Form 10-Q for the period ended June 30, 2003 as filed with the
Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the Report), I, John
D. Erickson, President and Chief Executive Officer of the Company, certify,
pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, as adopted pursuant to Section 906 of the
Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, 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.

| |  |                                                                                           
| |  | ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
| |  | /s/ John D. EricksonJohn D. Erickson
President and Chief Executive Officer
August 14, 2003
#### PAULEET CHAVERS v. ANDREW ENTRAVIA.

No. 2105.

Court of Appeal of Louisiana. First Circuit.

April 10, 1940.

Reid & Reid, of Hammond, for appellant.

Rownd & Tycer, of Hammond, and H. W. & H. M. Robinson, of New Orleans, for appellee.

LeBLANC, Judge,

For the reasons assigned in the opinion this day handed down in the case of Elmer Pier v. Andrew Entravia, La.App., 195 So. 124, it is ordered that the judgment appealed from in this case be affirmed. Defendant to pay all costs.
#### Pa. Co. for Ins. on Lives & Granting Annuities *v.*Com.

A motion for re-argument of this case was granted, which was asked on the ground that a question of double taxation was not involved, as the Act of 1885 must be regarded as taking effect in 1886, and not in 1885, as assumed by the court, the Act having been passed June 30, and it would not be practicable to make an election as to taxes of that year when the election is required to be made on or before March 1st, of the current taxing year; but the case was settled before argument.

Jan. 7, 1889.

Motion for re-argument of writ of error No. 29, May T., 1887, from C. P. Dauphin Co., to review the action of the court below in entering a judgment in favor of the Commonwealth on an appeal from a settlement made by the auditor general and state treasurer, of taxes claimed by the Commonwealth. Reported above, page 694.

The petition for re-argument averred that the court had fallen into an error in supposing that the tax upon the capital stock settled under the Act, of 1879, and the tax upon the shareholders under the Act of 1885 were claimed for the same year, to-wit, the taxing year ending the first Monday of November, 1885, whereas the tax claimed against the shareholders was for the year ending the first Monday of November, 1886. The Act of 1885 must be regarded as taking effect for the tax year of 1886, as the Act was passed June 30, and it would not be practicable to make an election as to the taxes of that year when the election is required to be made on or before March 1st of the current taxing year.

*W. S. Kirkpatrick,*Attorney General, and *John F. Sanderson,*Deputy Attorney General, for motion,

relied upon the language of Clark, J., in Com. *v.*LehighValley R. R., 104 Pa. 89, and Com. *v.*Dunbar Furnace Co., 4 Pa. C. C. R., 349, as establishing the principle that a taxing statute which forms part of a system, and is a supplemental provision, should be given effect for the taxing year following the one current at the date of its enactment.

*Frank P. Prichard*and *John G. Johnson,*contra,

relied upon Mackellar *v.*Com., 10 Cent. 45, s. c. 10 Atl. 780, as deciding that the provision of the Act of 1885 “that the Act shall go into effect immediately, reserving and excepting unto the commonwealth the right to collect any taxes accrued under the laws repealed by this Act,” had the effect to compel an opportionment of the taxes due under the Act of 1879, from November 1884, to June 30, 1885, the date when the latter Act went into operation.

Per Curiam,

Re-argument ordered.

The above case was settled before reargument. See Report of Attorney General for 1889-90, page 20, and 137 Pa. 411.