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

107TH CONGRESS

1ST SESSION H. J. RES. 38

Disapproving the rule submitted by the Department of Health and Human

Services on December 28, 2000, relating to standards for privacy of

individually identifiable health information.

IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

MARCH 15, 2001

Mr. PAUL introduced the following joint resolution; which was referred to the

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

on Ways and Means, and Education and the Workforce, for a period to

be subsequently determined by the Speaker, in each case for consideration of such provisions as fall within the jurisdiction of the committee

concerned

JOINT RESOLUTION

Disapproving the rule submitted by the Department of

Health and Human Services on December 28, 2000,

relating to standards for privacy of individually identifiable health information.

1 Resolved by the Senate and House of Representatives

2 of the United States of America in Congress assembled,

3 That Congress disapproves the rule submitted by the De4 partment of Health and Human Services on December 28,

5 2000 (volume 65, number 250, page 82462 of the Federal

6 Register), relating to standards for privacy of individually
2

•HJ 38 IH

1 identifiable health information, and such rule shall have

2 no force or effect.

Æ
NOT FINAL UNTIL TIME EXPIRES TO FILE REHEARING MOTION AND, IF FILED, DETERMINED

IN THE DISTRICT COURT OF APPEAL OF FLORIDA SECOND DISTRICT PEGGY ANN HOWARD, DOC #158812, ) ) Appellant, ) ) v. ) Case No. 2D18-1066 ) STATE OF FLORIDA, ) ) Appellee. ) ) Opinion filed September 4, 2019. Appeal from the Circuit Court for Polk County; Wayne Durden, Judge. Howard L. Dimmig, II, Public Defender, and Tosha Cohen, Assistant Public Defender, Bartow, for Appellant. Ashley Moody, Attorney General,Tallahassee, and Linsey SimsBohnenstiehl, Assistant Attorney General, Tampa, for Appellee.
PER CURIAM.

Affirmed.

NORTHCUTT, LUCAS, and SALARIO, JJ., Concur.
Exhibit 99.1

   MANAGEMENT'S ASSERTION OF COMPLIANCE WITH REGULATION AB SERVICING CRITERIA


Management of National Education Loan Network, Inc. (the Company) is responsible
for assessing compliance with the servicing criteria set forth in Item 1122(d)
of Regulation AB of the Securities and Exchange Commission for publicly-issued
student loan-backed securities issued on or after January 1, 2006, for which the
Company provides services as a master servicer and administrator (the Platform).

The Company's management has assessed the effectiveness of the Company's
compliance with the applicable servicing criteria as of and for the year ended
December 31, 2006. In making this assessment, management used the criteria set
forth by the Securities and Exchange Commission in paragraph (d) of Item 1122 of
Regulation AB.

Based on such assessment, management believes that, as of and for the year ended
December 31, 2006, the Company has complied in all material respects with the
servicing criteria set forth in Item 1122(d) of Regulation AB of the Securities
and Exchange Commission, except for servicing criteria 1122(d)(1)(iii),
1122(d)(1)(iv), 1122(d)(2)(iii), 1122(d)(2)(vi), 1122(d)(4)(ii), 1122(d)(4)(iv),
1122(d)(4)(v), 1122(d)(4)(vi), 1122(d)(4)(vii), 1122(d)(4)(viii),
1122(d)(4)(ix), 1122(d)(4)(x), 1122(d)(4)(xi), 1122(d)(4)(xii),
1122(d)(4)(xiii), and 1122(d)(4)(xiv), which the Company has determined are not
applicable to the activities it performs with respect to the Platform.

KPMG LLP, a registered public accounting firm, has issued an attestation report
with respect to managment's assessment of compliance with the applicable
servicing criteria as of and for the year ended December 31, 2006.



April 2, 2007                     National Education Loan Network, Inc.


                                   /s/ MICHAEL S. DUNLAP
                                   --------------------------------------
                                  Michael S. Dunlap, Chairman, CEO, President
                                  National Education Loan Network, Inc.


                                  /s/ TERRY J. HEIMES
                                  ---------------------------------------
                                  Terry J. Heimes, CFO, Treasurer
                                  National Education Loan Network, Inc.
Order entered September 17 , 2019

In The



## Court of Appeals

Fifth District of Texas at Dallas

No. 05

- 19

- 00063

- CR

TEKLEA GEBREYESUS, Appellant

V.

THE STATE OF TEXAS, Appellee

On Appeal from the 292n d Judicial District Court

Dallas County, Texas

Trial Court Cause No. F

- 1855502

- V



### O RDER

The State’s second motion for extension of time to file its brief is GRANTED . The

State’s brief is deemed FILED September 11, 2019.

/s/ DAVID L. BRIDGES

PRESIDIN G JUSTICE
#### Industrial Commission of Ohio *v.*Johnson.

(No. 23901

Decided December 6, 1933.)

*Mr. John W. Bricker,*attorney general, and *Mr. R, R. Zurmehly,*for plaintiff in error.

*590
      *Messrs. Cowan, Adams & Adams*and *Mr. J. A. Obey,*for defendant in error.

It is ordered and adjudged by this court that the judgment of the said Court of Appeals be, and the same is hereby, affirmed on authority of *Coutellier*v. *Indus. Comm.,*126 Ohio St., 546.

*Judgment affirmed.*

Weygandt, C. J., Allen, Stephenson, Jones and Bevis, JJ.,,concur.

Matthias, J., not participating.
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE 

DISTRICT OF NEW HAMPSHIRE

Federal Trade Commission

v. Civil No. 04-cv-377-JD

Seismic Entertainment 

Productions, Inc., et al.

PROCEDURAL ORDER

The Federal Trade Commission and John Robert Martinson filed

a “Stipulated Final Order for Permanent Injunction and Settlement

of Claims for Monetary Relief Against Defendant John Robert

Martinson” on October 20, 2006. Previously, on July 14, 2006,

the court granted the assented-to motion to enter an order of

judgment for permanent injunction and other equitable relief

against defendants Mailwiper, Inc., and Spy Deleter, Inc. The

Stipulated Final Order filed by the FTC and Martinson on October

20 and the order entered on July 14 against Mailwiper and Spy

Deleter are similar in both form and content. 

The Stipulated Final Order against Martinson, refers to both

“Defendant” in the singular and “Defendants” in the plural,

particularly in the section titled “Monetary Judgment and

Consumer Redress.” That section also provides that judgment is

entered “against the Defendant, jointly and severally with former

Defendants Mailwiper and Spy Deleter.” Stip. at 8. Based on the

definition on the first page of the Stipulated Final Order,

“Defendants,” as used there, means Martinson, Mailwiper, and Spy

Case 1:04-cv-00377-JD Document 136 Filed 10/23/06 Page 1 of 2
2

Deleter. 

Judgment has already been entered against Mailwiper and Spy

Deleter. That judgment was entered “against the Defendants,

jointly and severally,” Order, July 14, at 12, and defined

“Defendants” to mean Spy Deleter and Mailwiper, without reference

to Martinson, id. at 1. By its own terms and because judgment

was previously entered against Mailwiper and Spy Deleter, the

Stipulated Final Order is against Martinson, not Mailwiper or Spy

Deleter.

Therefore, the FTC and Martinson shall file a joint or

stipulated clarification of the Stipulated Final Order with

respect to the use of “Defendants” in the plural. The

clarification shall be filed on or before November 3, 2006. The

court will not act on the Stipulated Final Order unless a

clarification is filed.

SO ORDERED.

____________________________

Joseph A. DiClerico, Jr.

United States District Judge

October 23, 2006

cc: Stacey P. Ferguson, Esquire

David P. Frankel, Esquire

Charulata B. Pagar, Esquire

Rosemary Rosso, Esquire

Laura M. Sullivan, Esquire

Martha Van Oot, Esquire

John McFerrin Clancy

John Robert Martinson

Case 1:04-cv-00377-JD Document 136 Filed 10/23/06 Page 2 of 2
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE

DISTRICT OF NEW HAMPSHIRE

In the Matter of the Search of 

Stepping Out Addictions Treatment, Inc.

and Behavioral Management Associates, Inc.

 Mag Case # 05mj57-PB

 

S E A L E D O R D E R

I hereby recuse myself due to the appearance by Peter Anderson, Esq. from

McLane, Graf, Raulerson & Middleton, who is from my previous law firm. The

case is reassigned to Judge Paul Barbadoro. 

 

SO ORDERED.

June 17, 2005 /s/ James R. Muirhead

 James R. Muirhead

U.S. Magistrate Judge

cc: Mark Irish, Esq.

Peter Anderson, Esq.

Case 1:05-mj-00057-PB Document 9 Filed 06/17/05 Page 1 of 1
#### The STATE of Florida ex rel. The FLORIDA BAR, Complainant, v. Will O. MURRELL, Sr., Respondent.

Supreme Court of Florida. En Banc.

Dec. 7, 1954.

See also 66 So.2d 216.

William D. Barfield, Jacksonville, John T. Wigginton, Tallahassee, and Darrey A. Davis, Miami Beach, for complainant.

L. J. Cushman, Miami, for respondent.

PER CURIAM.

On 30 July 1954 the Court filed an opinion in the above cause followed by a judgment that the respondent be suspended from the practice of law for two years unless he paid within ninety days the cost of the proceedings, in which event the term of suspension would be reduced to one year. State ex rel. Florida Bar v. Murrell, 74 So.2d 221. The Florida Bar filed a statement of the cost to which it had been put in this disciplinary proceeding and now the respondent takes exception to some of the items, citing us some of our decisions on what are and what are not proper costs to be taxed in a case.

This is not the usual adversary proceeding and we think it entirely unnecessary for us to determine whether the respondent should be relieved of some or any of the charges appearing in the statement. The effect of the order was to give him the opportunity of reducing his sentence of suspension to one year if he relieved The Florida Bar of the expense to which it had been put in presenting the charges against the respondent. He had the choice and he now has the choice of either paying the whole bill and being suspended for one year or paying none of it and being suspended for two years.

The objections of the respondent to the itemized statement of costs are overruled.

ROBERTS, C. J., and THOMAS, SE-BRING, HOBSON and MATHEWS, JJ., concur.

TERRELL and DREW, JJ., not participating.
[Federal Register Volume 73, Number 174 (Monday, September 8, 2008)]
[Notices]
[Pages 52071-52072]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: E8-20628]


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

NATIONAL SCIENCE FOUNDATION


Notice of Permits Issued Under the Antarctic Conservation Act of 
1978

AGENCY: National Science Foundation.

ACTION: Notice of permits issued under the Antarctic Conservation Act 
of 1978, Public Law 95-541.

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

SUMMARY: The National Science Foundation (NSF) is required to publish 
notice of permits issued under the Antarctic Conservation Act of 1978. 
This is the required notice.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Nadene G. Kennedy, Permit Office, 
Office of Polar Programs, Rm. 755, National Science Foundation, 4201 
Wilson Boulevard, Arlington, VA 22230.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: On July 30, 2008, the National Science 
Foundation published a notice in the Federal Register of permit 
applications

[[Page 52072]]

received. A permit was issued on August 29, 2008 to: Judit Hersko, 
Permit No. 2009-012.

Nadene G. Kennedy,
Permit Officer.
[FR Doc. E8-20628 Filed 9-5-08; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 7555-01-P
Ex. 10.4 (Perry Resignation Letter)








Exhibit 10.4


May 31, 2019


Chris Claus, Chairman of the Board
Jeff Swart, EVP, General Counsel & Secretary
TrueCar, Inc.
120 Broadway, Suite 300
Santa Monica, CA 90401


Dear Chris and Jeff,


This is to inform you that I hereby resign from all of my positions at TrueCar, Inc. and its affiliates, including my positions as President and CEO of TrueCar, Inc. and my positions as officer and/or director of ALG, Inc., TrueCar Dealer Solutions, Inc. and DealerScience, LLC.


I acknowledge that Section 1(b) of my employment agreement makes my resignation as President and CEO of TrueCar, Inc. trigger an automatic resignation as a member of the Board of Directors of TrueCar, Inc., unless otherwise requested by the Board. Because the Board has asked that I temporarily remain a member of the Board while TrueCar and I negotiate the terms of a 24-month consulting arrangement, TrueCar agrees that my resignation from the Board will be delayed until I enter into a consulting agreement with TrueCar, unless TrueCar earlier notifies me that negotiations over the agreement have reached an impasse.


TrueCar acknowledges and agrees that my resignation will be treated as a “Qualifying Termination” as this term is defined in Section 6(a) of my employment agreement. As noted above, TrueCar intends to negotiate in good faith a consulting agreement with me that would have a 24-month term, which would have the effect of extending the exercise period of all of my stock options during the term of that agreement and for three months after its expiration.


Please acknowledge your acceptance and agreement by signing below.


Sincerely,


/s/ Chip Perry
Chip Perry




ACCEPTED AND AGREED BY:






By:     /s/ Jeff Swart    


Name:     Jeff Swart


Title:       EVP, General Counsel and Secretary
#### Buckeye Stages, Inc., *v.*Public Utilities Commission of Ohio.

(No. 24234

Decided December 6, 1933.)

*Mr. James Huffman*and *Mr. Ralph W. Sanborn,*for plaintiff in error.

Mr. *John W. Bricker,*attorney general, and *Mr. D. H. Armstrong,*for defendant in error.

It is ordered and adjudged by this court that the order of the said Publie Utilities Commission of Ohio be, and the same is hereby, reversed for the reason that the same is unlawful and unreasonable.

. This court having held in cause No. 24108, *ante,*575, this day decided, that the Publie Utilities Commission was not authorized to revoke the certificate issued to the Buckeye Stages, Inc., without notice and hearing, and the court having held in cause No. 24329, *ante,*576, this day decided, that the Public Utilities Commission erred in not permitting the Buckeye Stages, Inc., to present evidence with reference to applications Nos. 5266, 5679 and 4559, the Public Utilities Commission was not, therefore, authorized to make the finding and order which was entered on April 11, 1933.

It is further ordered that this proceeding be remanded to the Public Utilities Commission for further proceedings according to law in cases Nos. 5189, 5698 and 5753 on the docket of the said Public Utilities Commission.

*Order reversed and ccmse remanded.*

Weygandt, C. J., Allen, Stephenson, Matthias, Bevis and Zimmerman, JJ., concur.
Exhibit 99.1

                                                                  news release


                                                                      Contact:
                                                              David Whitehouse
                                                                  203.614.5708
For Immediate Release



      Frontier Communications Corporation Declares Fourth-Quarter Dividend

Stamford,  Conn.  -  November  6,  2008 -  Frontier  Communications  Corporation
(NYSE:FTR)  announced  today that its Board of Directors  has declared a regular
quarterly cash dividend  payment of $0.25 per share of common stock,  payable on
December  31, 2008 to holders of record of common stock at the close of business
on December 9, 2008.

                                      # # #
EXHIBIT 31.1 - SECTION 302 CERTIFICATION

                             CERTIFICATION

I, Kenneth A. McCullum, 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 Hartford Life Global Funding Trust 2006-048
     (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 in order 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.   Based on my knowledge and the servicer compliance statement 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 agreement in all material
     respects;

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 Rule 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 certification above, I have reasonably relied on information
provided to me by the following unaffiliated parties:

            JP Morgan Chase Bank, N.A. and its officers and agents

Date:  August 29, 2006


/s/ Kenneth A. McCullum


Kenneth A. McCullum
Senior Vice President & Actuary
Hartford Life Insurance Company, as depositor
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE DISTRICT OF NEW HAMPSHIRE

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA

vs.

JACQUIE P. VIEIRA

CR. NO. 05-

INDICTMENT

The Grand Jury charges:

COUNT ONE

[18 U.S.C. §§ 2 and 1951 Aiding and Abetting Robbery Affecting Commerce]

On or about August 30, 2005, in the District of New Hampshire, the defendant,

JACQUIE P. VIEIRA,

did knowingly and willfully aide and abet Stephen M. Butler in obstructing, delaying, and

affecting interstate commerce and the movement of any article and commodity in interstate

commerce, by robbery. JACQUIE P. VIEIRA waited in a car in the vicinity of Vista Foods,

a grocery store involved in the business of selling goods in interstate commerce, located at

310 Wilson Street, Manchester, New Hampshire, while Stephen M. Butler robbed the store of

about $17,000 in presence of store employees and against their will, by means of actual and

threatened force and violence against store employees. JACQUIE P. VIEIRA then drove

Stephen M. Butler away from the scene of the robbery. JACQUIE P. VIEIRA’S acts

facilitated the success of the robbery, in violation of Title 18, United States Code, Sections 2

and 1951.

A TRUE BILL

October 12, 2005 /s/ Grand Jury Foreperson 

Foreperson

THOMAS P. COLANTUONO

United States Attorney

By : /s/ Mark S. Zuckerman 

Mark S. Zuckerman

Assistant United States Attorney

Case 1:05-cr-00214-JD Document 1 Filed 10/12/2005 Page 1 of 1
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE

DISTRICT OF NEW HAMPSHIRE

United States of America

v. Case No. 05-cr-153-01-SM

Nicholas Spears

O R D E R

Defendant Spears’ motion to continue the final pretrial conference and trial

is granted (document 11). Trial has been rescheduled for the January 2006 

trial period. Defendant Spears shall file a waiver of speedy trial rights not later

than September 19, 2005. On the filing of such waiver, his continuance shall be

effective.

The Court finds that the ends of justice served by granting a continuance

outweigh the best interest of the public and the defendant in a speedy trial, 18

U.S.C. § 3161(h)(8)(B)(iv), in that failure to grant a continuance would

unreasonably deny defendant the reasonable time necessary for effective

preparation taking into account the exercise of due diligence under the

circumstances. 

Final Pretrial Conference: December 19, 2005 at 11:00 a.m.

Jury Selection: January 4, 2006 at 9:30 a.m.

Case 1:05-cr-00153-PB Document 12 Filed 09/09/05 Page 1 of 2
2

SO ORDERED.

____________________________

Steven J. McAuliffe

 Chief Judge

September 9 , 2005

cc: Jorel Booker, Esq.

Terry Ollila, AUSA

US Probation

US Marshal

Case 1:05-cr-00153-PB Document 12 Filed 09/09/05 Page 2 of 2
IA

107TH CONGRESS

1ST SESSION H. J. RES. 76

Making further continuing appropriations for the fiscal year 2002, and for

other purposes.

IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

DECEMBER 5, 2001

Mr. YOUNG of Florida introduced the following joint resolution; which was

referred to the Committee on Appropriations

DECEMBER 5, 2001

Committee on Appropriations discharged; which was considered and passed

JOINT RESOLUTION

Making further continuing appropriations for the fiscal year

2002, and for other purposes.

1 Resolved by the Senate and House of Representatives

2 of the United States of America in Congress assembled,

3 That Public Law 107–44 is further amended by striking

4 the date specified in section 107(c) and inserting in lieu

5 thereof ‘‘December 15, 2001’’.

Æ
#### Duke to use *v.*North Penn Gas Company, Appellant.

*Practice, C. P.*— Findings *of fact*— Review—Evidence—Appeals.

While the appellate court will give to the findings of fact by the court below in a case tried without a jury the same effect that is given to the verdict of the jury, it will examine the record as in the case of a nonsuit, or the refusal to direct a verdict for the defendant, to determine whether there is any testimony which, if believed, will sustain the findings.

Argued Feb. 4, 1908.

Appeal, No. 337, Jan. T., 1907, by defendant, from judgment of C. P. Montgomery Co., Oct. T., 1906, No. 104, on case tried by the court without a jury in suit of Ií. T. Duke to use of the Norristown Trust Company v. North Penn Gas Company.

Before Pell, Brown, Mestrezat, Potter and Stewart, JJ.

Affirmed.

Assumpsit on a written contract.

The case was tried by the court without a jury under the act of April 22, 1874.

The court in an opinion by Swartz, P. J., found in favor of the plaintiff and against the defendant for $1,789.49.

*349
      *Errors assigned*were in dismissing exceptions to various findings of fact and conclusions of law.

*Louis M. Childs,*with, him *John C. Bell,*for appellant.

*Montgomery Evans,*with him *N. LL. Lcwzelere,*for appellee.

March 2, 1908:

Per Curiam,

This was an action on a written contract to furnish and lay gas pipe for the defendant at a stipulated price, and was tried by the court without a jury. It is conceded that the use plaintiff was entitled to recover the amount of money it advanced the contractor on the faith of statements contained in a letter written by the defendant’s president, which he knew was to be used for the purpose of obtaining advances. The right to recover the contract price was resisted on the ground that the work had not been properly done. We are asked to set aside the finding that there was a substantial compliance with the contract and that tests afterwards made disclosed only such defects as were to be expected in work of this kind, on the ground that there was no testimony sufficient to sustain it. While we give to the findings of fact by the court in such a case the same effect that is given to the verdict of a jury, we will, however, examine the record, as in the case of nonsuit or the refusal to direct a verdict for the defendant, to determine whether there was any testimony which, if believed, will sustain the findings. For this purpose we have examined the testimony and find that the conclusion of the court that there had been a substantial compliance with the terms of the contract is not without support.

The judgment is affirmed.