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

[Congressional Bills 117th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[H.R. 7082 Received in Senate (RDS)]

<DOC>
117th CONGRESS
  2d Session
                                H. R. 7082

_______________________________________________________________________

                   IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES

                           December 13, 2022

                                Received

_______________________________________________________________________

                                 AN ACT

 
 To designate the facility of the United States Postal Service located 
at 2200 North George Mason Drive in Arlington, Virginia, as the ``Jesus 
                Antonio Collazos Post Office Building''.

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

SECTION 1. JESUS ANTONIO COLLAZOS POST OFFICE BUILDING.

    (a) Designation.--The facility of the United States Postal Service 
located at 2200 North George Mason Drive in Arlington, Virginia, shall 
be known and designated as the ``Jesus Antonio Collazos Post Office 
Building''.
    (b) References.--Any reference in a law, map, regulation, document, 
paper, or other record of the United States to the facility referred to 
in subsection (a) shall be deemed to be a reference to the ``Jesus 
Antonio Collazos Post Office Building''.

            Passed the House of Representatives December 12, 2022.

            Attest:

                                             CHERYL L. JOHNSON,

                                                                 Clerk.

                               By Kevin F. McCumber,

                                                          Deputy Clerk.
```
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<PAGE>
 
<ARTICLE> 5
<MULTIPLIER> 1,000
       
<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   6-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                         JUN-30-1997
<PERIOD-START>                            JUL-01-1996
<PERIOD-END>                              DEC-31-1996
<CASH>                                          1,061
<SECURITIES>                                        0 
<RECEIVABLES>                                  38,446 
<ALLOWANCES>                                    3,490 
<INVENTORY>                                    22,476 
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                              115,774       
<PP&E>                                         37,826      
<DEPRECIATION>                                 26,639    
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                162,215      
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                          96,424    
<BONDS>                                             0  
<COMMON>                                          216 
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                               0 
<PREFERRED>                                         0 
<OTHER-SE>                                     57,189       
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                  162,215         
<SALES>                                       146,003          
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                              146,003          
<CGS>                                         122,062          
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                 138,309          
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                    0       
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                    0      
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                                299       
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                 7,332       
<INCOME-TAX>                                    3,470      
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                             3,862      
<DISCONTINUED>                                      0  
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                     0      
<CHANGES>                                           0  
<NET-INCOME>                                    3,862 
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                     .19 
<EPS-DILUTED>                                     .19 
        

</TABLE>
### IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT

No. 14

- 41336 Summary Calendar

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA , Plaintiff

- Appellee

v.
JOE GONZALEZ , Defendant

- Appellant

Appeal from the United States District Court for the Southern District of Texas USDC No. 7:13

- CR

- 1641

- 1

Before REAVLEY, SMITH, and HAYNES, Circuit Judges. PER CURIAM: * Joe Gonzalez appeals his jury trial conviction s and concurrent 72

- month
sentences for conspiracy to possess with intent to deliver 100 kilograms or more of marijuana , see 21 U.S.C. §§ 841(a)(1) and (b)(1)(B) , 846 , and for possession with intent to deliver 100 kilograms or more of marijuana , see § § 8 41(a)(1) and (b)(1)(B) , 846 ; 18 U.S.C. § 2. We affirm.

* Pursuant to 5 TH C IR

. R. 47.5 , the court has determined that this opinion should not be published and is not precedent except under the limited circumstances set forth in 5 TH C IR

. R. 47.5.4. United States Court of Appeals Fifth Circuit 

### FILED August 13, 2015

Lyle W. Cayce Clerk Case: 14-41336 Document: 00513152685 Page: 1 Date Filed: 08/13/2015No. 14

- 41336

2 We reject Gonzalez’s claim that the district court plainly erred by failing to instruct the jury that a n agreement with a government agent cannot form the basis for a conspir a cy conviction

. See Sears v. United States , 343 F.2d 139, 142 (5th Cir. 1975). Even if a Sears instruction may have been appropriate, we pretermit the question whether the failure to give it was error

. See United States v. Delgado
, 672 F.3d 320, 342 & n.28 (5th Cir. 2012) (en banc) ; United States v. Rodriguez , 523 F.3d 519, 525 (5th Cir. 2008)

. I f there was error, Gonzalez has not show n that it was “reversible plain error.” Delgado , 672 F.3d
at 343. Gonzalez “never advanced the argument that [he] conspired only wi th a government agent.” Delgado , 672 F.3d at 343. Instead, his argument focused on discrediting the Government’s confidential informant , someone the defense painted as an untrustworthy felon eager to be remunerated by the Government for producing a drug trafficking conviction. Gonzalez’s theory of defense was that there was no conspiracy at all

— that there was only the informant placing and planting ideas in law enforcement a gents ’ heads . “Thus, the lack of a Sears instruction did not impede [Gonzalez’s] defense” and provides no “grounds for reversal.” Delgado , 672 F.3d at 343 (internal quotation marks and citation omitted). We reject also Gonzalez ’s contention that the district court abused its discretion by propounding a deliberate ignorance instruct ion. See United States v. Nguyen , 493 F.3d 613, 619 (5th Cir. 2007). Any error in giving such an instruction is harmless if substantial evidence showing actual knowledge was adduced at trial, as happened in Gonzalez’s case. See United States v

. McElwee , 646 F.3d 328, 341 (5th Cir. 2011). AFFIRMED. Case: 14-41336 Document: 00513152685 Page: 2 Date Filed: 08/13/2015
Fourth Court of Appeals

San Antonio, Texas

JUDGMENT

No. 04-15-00043-CV

Carlos M. REYES and Molly Reyes,

Appellants

v.

Bill W. BELL Sr. and Bill Bell Jr.,

Appellees

From the 79th Judicial District Court, Jim Wells County, Texas

Trial Court No. 10-09-49378-CV

Honorable Richard C. Terrell, Judge Presiding

BEFORE JUSTICE MARTINEZ, JUSTICE ALVAREZ, AND JUSTICE CHAPA

In accordance with this court’s opinion of this date, this appeal is DISMISSED. Costs of 

the appeal are taxed against appellants.

SIGNED June 24, 2015.

_________________________________

Rebeca C. Martinez, Justice
Exhibit 35.1

  [LOGO]
HOME LOAN
 SERVICES

GS Mortgage Securities Corp.
Attn: Principal Finance Group/Christopher M. Gething
85 Broad Street
New York, NY 10004

GS Mortgage Securities Corp.
Attn: Asset Management Group/Senior Asset Manager
85 Broad Street
New York, NY 10004

Deutsche Bank National Trust Company as Trustee
Attention: Corporate Trust
1761 East St. Andrews Place
Santa Ana, CA 92705-4934

Re: FFMLT Trust 2006-FF6 (the "Trust") Mortgage Pass-Through Certificates,
Series 2006-FF6, issued pursuant to section 3.22 of the Pooling and Servicing
Agreement, dated as of May 1, 2006 (the "Pooling and Servicing Agreement"),
among GS Mortgage Securities Corp., as depositor (the "Depositor"), Home Loan
Services, Inc. f/k/a National City Home Loan Services, Inc., as servicer
("HLS"), and Deutsche Bank National Trust Company, as trustee (the "Trustee")

The undersigned Officer certifies the following for the year 2006 ending on
December 31, 2006:

      (i)   a review of the activities of the Servicer during the preceding
            calendar year and of performance under this Agreement has been made
            under such officer's supervision, and

      (ii)  to the best of such officers' knowledge, based on such review, the
            Servicer has fulfilled all of its obligations under this Agreement
            throughout such year.

Certified by:

Home Loan Services, Inc., f/k/a National City Home Loan Services, Inc.

/s/ Steven A. Baranet
---------------------
Steven A. Baranet
Vice President
March 1, 2007

Loan Services
P.O. Box 1838
Pittsburgh, PA 15230-1838

[LOGO] Merrill Lynch
Home Loan Services is a subsidiary
of Merrill Lynch Bank and Trust Co., FSB

                                                                      [LOGO]
                                                                   EQUAL HOUSING
                                                                      LENDER

                                                                      LENDER
(logo)Rialto

CAPITAL

 

 

**2018 Annual Statement of ServicerCompliance (Item 1123)**

 

 

Poolingand Servicing Agreement (the "Pooling and Servicing Agreement") datedas of July 1, 2018 by and among GS Mortgage Securities Corporation II, asDepositor, Wells Fargo Bank, National Association as Master Servicer, RialtoCapital Advisors, LLC as General Special Servicer, TriMont Real EstateAdvisors, LLC, as 1000 Wilshire Special Servicer, Park Bridge Lender ServicesLLC as Operating Advisor and Asset Representations Reviewer, Wells Fargo Bank,National Association as Certificate Administrator, Wilmington Trust, NationalAssociation as Trustee relating to the GS Mortgage Securities Trust 20 18-GS10,Commercial Mortgage Pass-Through Certificates, Series 2018-GS10 **(GSMS2018-GS10)**

 

Theundersigned, a duly authorized officer of Rialto Capital Advisors, LLC, asspecial servicer (the “Special Servicer”) herein certifies to the following:

 

1.       All servicing activities and performanceof such servicing activities under the Pooling and Servicing Agreement areperformed on behalf of the Special Servicer.

 

2.       A review of the servicing activities andperformance by the Special Servicer for the period of July 30, 2018 to December31, 2018 (the “Reporting Period”) in accordance with the Pooling and ServicingAgreement has been conducted under my supervision.

 

3.       To the best of my knowledge, based on suchreview, the Special Servicer has fulfilled all of its obligations under theterms of the Pooling and Servicing Agreement, in all material respects for theReporting Period and if there has been a failure to fulfill any suchobligations in any material respect, each failure and the nature and statusthereof has been specifically identified herein.

 

 

Certifiedby: /s/ Adam Singer

AdamSinger, Managing Director 

 

Date:March 1, 2019
#### The State, ex rel. Belt, *v.*Mason, Aud.

(No. 24399

Decided November 22, 1933.)

*Mr. D. F. Trew*and *Mr. T. M. Potter,*for plaintiff in error.

*Mr. Dwight CusicJc*and *Mr. U. S. McGonagle,*for defendant in error.

It is ordered and adjudged that the judgment of the said Court of Appeals be, and the same is hereby, affirmed on authority of *Miller, Pros. Atty.,*v. *Lakewood Housing Co.,*125 Ohio St., 152, third proposition of syllabus.

*Judgment affirmed.*

Weygandt, C. J., Allen, Stephenson, Jones, Matthias, Bevis and Zimmerman, JJ., concur.
#### SMITH v. KENNEDY et al.

No. 5617.

Court of Appeal of Louisiana. Second Circuit.

April 1, 1938.

Rehearing Denied April 29, 1938.

Writ of Certiorari and Review Denied May 30, 1938.

Theus, Grisham, Davis & Leigh, of Mon.roe, for appellant.

Madison, Madison & Fuller, of Bastrop, for appellees.

TALIAFERRO, Judge.

This suit and that of Trippe Motors, Incorporated, v. J. P. Kennedy and Sun Indemnity Company, 181 So. 676, No. 5602, on the docket of this court, decided this day, were consolidated below and here for trial. Plaintiff herein sues to recover damages resulting from personal injuries alleged to have been sustained by him in the same accident around which liability vel non revolved in said suit No. 5602. To recover, it was necessary that he establish negligence on the part of defendant or his truck driver as the proximate cause of the accident. In our opinion, he failed to do this. and, as a consequence, his action, for this if for no other reason, must fall.

The lower court rejected plaintiff’s demands on the ground that he had not proven to that degree legally required of him that the disability and suffering of which he now complains have any causal con*679nection with or were to any extent super-induced by the collision between the car he was driving and defendant’s truck.

For the reasons assigned by us in said suit No. 5602, the judgment appealed from is affirmed with costs.
#### Ensign Bank, F.S.B., Respondent, v Gerald Modell, Inc., Appellant.

Order, Supreme Court, New York County (William Davis, J.), entered December 26, 1989, which, *inter alia,*denied defendant’s motion for a protective order, unanimously affirmed, with costs and disbursements.

On appeal, defendant attempts to argue, for the first time, that plaintiff’s notice to produce "all items and collateral held by defendant under pawn tickets numbered 11039, 10183, 11040, 0186 and 10180”, is overbroad, burdensome and fails to specify the items sought to be inspected pursuant to CPLR 3120. While the court generally will not reach issues raised for the first time on appeal, review is not precluded in this case, where the notice for discovery and inspection at issue can be adequately evaluated from the record on appeal. *(See, Blue Grass Partners v Bruns, Nordeman, Rea & Co.,*75 AD2d 791, 792-793.) On review, we find defendant’s arguments to be without merit.

The discovery request at issue here is specific enough to apprise defendant of the categories of items sought, which are narrowly defined. Thus, the use of the term "all”, in this context, does not suggest the type of overbreadth and burden that would warrant judicial intervention. *(See, Stevens v Met*
      *150
      *ropolitan Suburban Bus Auth.,*117 AD2d 733, 734.) To hold otherwise would be to exalt form over substance. Concur— Kupferman, J. P., Sullivan, Asch, Wallach and Smith, JJ.
[Federal Register Volume 73, Number 177 (Thursday, September 11, 2008)]
[Notices]
[Page 52836]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: E8-21099]


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

DEPARTMENT OF DEFENSE

Office of the Secretary

[Docket ID: DoD-2008-OS-0102]


Privacy Act of 1974; Systems of Records

AGENCY: Defense Logistics Agency, DoD.

ACTION: Notice to delete a system of records.

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

SUMMARY: The Defense Logistics Agency is deleting a system of records 
notice in its existing inventory of record systems subject to the 
Privacy Act of 1974 (5 U.S.C. 552a), as amended.

DATES: This action will be effective without further notice on October 
14, 2008 unless comments are received that would result in a contrary 
determination.

ADDRESSES: Send comments to the Privacy Act Officer, Headquarters, 
Defense Logistics Agency, ATTN: DP, 8725 John J. Kingman Road, Stop 
2533, Fort Belvoir, VA 22060-6221.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Ms. Jody Sinkler at (703) 767-5045.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The Defense Logistics Agency notices for 
systems of records subject to the Privacy Act of 1974 (5 U.S.C. 552a), 
as amended, have been published in the Federal Register and are 
available from the address above.
    The Defense Logistics Agency proposes to delete a system of records 
notice from its inventory of record systems subject to the Privacy Act 
of 1974 (5 U.S.C. 552a), as amended. The proposed deletion is not 
within the purview of subsection (r) of the Privacy Act of 1974, (5 
U.S.C. 552a), as amended, which requires the submission of a new or 
altered system report.

    Dated: September 3, 2008.
Patricia Toppings,
OSD Federal Register Liaison Officer, Department of Defense.
S400-50-CA

System name:
    Family Support Program Volunteer Files (November 16, 2004, 69 FR 
67112).

Reason:
    Records were incorporated into S400.20, Day Care Facility 
Registrant and Applicant Records, published August 29, 2008 (73 FR 
50949).

[FR Doc. E8-21099 Filed 9-10-08; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 5001-06-P
IN THE SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF DELAWARE

KENNETH SWANSON , §

§ No. 304, 2014

Defendant Below, §

Appellant, § Court Below:

§

§ Superior Court of the

v. § State of Delaware, in and for

§ New Castle County

STATE OF DELAWARE, §

§ Cr. I.D. Nos. 1304003117A

Plaintiff Below, § and 1304003117B

Appellee. §

Submitted: August 19, 2015

Decided: August 20, 2015

Before STRINE, Chief Justice, HOLLAND and VALIHURA, Justices.

O R D E R

This 20th day of August 2015, the Court, having considered this matter on 

the briefs of the parties, and having concluded that the same should be affirmed on 

the basis of and for the reasons assigned by the Superior Court in its ruling on 

November 22, 2013;

NOW, THEREFORE, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that the judgment of 

the Superior Court be, and the same hereby is, AFFIRMED.

BY THE COURT:

/s/ Karen L. Valihura

 Justice
Exhibit
35.1







Servicer
Compliance Statement of AmeriCredit Financial Services, Inc.



This
Annual Statement as to Compliance is delivered to you pursuant to Section 2.9 (c) of the 2018-3 Servicing Supplement dated as
of July 31, 2018 (the “Agreement”) and Item 1123 of Regulation AB, executed in connection with the formation of GM
Financial Automobile Leasing Trust 2018-3 (the “Trust”), the issuance of the Notes by the Trust and the closing of
the transactions and the execution and delivery of the various documents by AmeriCredit Financial Services, Inc. (the “Servicer”)
and GMF Leasing LLC in connection therewith. The capitalized terms used herein shall have the same meanings as in the Agreement.



The
undersigned certifies that I am the Executive Vice President, Corporate Controller and Chief Accounting Officer of the Servicer.
I further certify as follows:



| | 1. | I
                                         have conducted, or caused to be conducted under my supervision, a review of the Servicer
                                         during the preceding period from July 31, 2018 through December 31, 2018, and its performance
                                         under the Agreement.
| | -- | ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------



| | 2. | To
                                         the best of my knowledge, following such review, the Servicer has fulfilled all its obligations
                                         under the Agreement throughout such period, and, to the best of my knowledge, there has
                                         been no default in the fulfillment of any such obligation.
| | -- | --------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------





|                                         |                                             |  |                     
|---------------------------------------- | ------------------------------------------- |  | --------------------
|AmeriCredit Financial
    Services, Inc. |                                             | 
|                                         |                                             |  |                     
|By:                                      | /s/
    Connie Coffey                       |  | Dated: March 8, 2019
|                                         | Connie Coffey                               |  |                     
|                                         | Executive Vice President, Corporate         |  |                     
|                                         | Controller and Chief Accounting
    Officer |  |
IB

Union Calendar No. 84

107TH CONGRESS

1ST SESSION H. J. RES. 50

[Report No. 107–145]

Disapproving the extension of the waiver authority contained in section 402(c)

of the Trade Act of 1974 with respect to the People’s Republic of China.

IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

JUNE 5, 2001

Mr. ROHRABACHER (for himself and Mr. BROWN of Ohio) introduced the following joint resolution; which was referred to the Committee on Ways

and Means

JULY 18, 2001

Reported adversely; committed to the Committee of the Whole House on the

State of the Union and ordered to be printed

JOINT RESOLUTION

Disapproving the extension of the waiver authority contained

in section 402(c) of the Trade Act of 1974 with respect

to the People’s Republic of China.

1 Resolved by the Senate and House of Representatives

2 of the United States of America in Congress assembled,

3 That the Congress does not approve the extension of the

4 authority contained in section 402(c) of the Trade Act of

5 1974 recommended by the President to the Congress on
2

•HJ 50 RH

1 June 1, 2001, with respect to the People’s Republic of

2 China.

Union Calendar No. 84

107TH CONGRESS

1ST SESSION H. J. RES. 50

[Report No. 107–145]

JOINT RESOLUTION

Disapproving the extension of the waiver authority

contained in section 402(c) of the Trade Act of1974 with respect to the People’s Republic ofChina.

JULY 18, 2001

Committed to the Committee of the Whole House on the

State of the Union and ordered to be printed
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE

DISTRICT OF NEW HAMPSHIRE

United States of America

v. Criminal No. 05-cr-066-01-PB

Shelly Maynard

O R D E R

Defendant appeared for a bail revocation hearing pursuant to

18 U.S.C. § 3148. She admitted to having used crack cocaine

after being clean for three months. She also admitted to missing

a cell-in. Probation maintains that she missed a urine drop, a

number of cell-ins and refused proffered drug treatment programs.

She left Serenity House twice. Her desire for treatment at this

point appears to be a last minute effort to avoid bail

revocation. Given the number of failed opportunities to comply

with conditions I find that the defendant is unlikely to abide by

any condition or combination of conditions. The conditions of

release are revoked.

Accordingly, it is ORDERED that the defendant be detained

pending trial. 

The defendant is committed to the custody of the Attorney

General or his designated representative for confinement in a

corrections facility separate, to the extent practicable, from

Case 1:05-cr-00066-PB Document 14 Filed 08/16/05 Page 1 of 2
2

persons awaiting or serving sentences or being held in custody

pending appeal. The defendant shall be afforded a reasonable

opportunity for private consultation with defense counsel. On

order of a court of the United States or on request of an

attorney for the government, the person in charge of the

corrections facility shall deliver the defendant to the United

States Marshal for the purpose of an appearance in connection

with a court proceeding. 

SO ORDERED.

___________________________________

James R. Muirhead

United States Magistrate Judge

Date: August 16, 2005 

cc: Helen Fitzgibbon, AUSA

 Jeffrey S. Levin, Esq.

 U.S. Marshal

 U.S. Probation

Case 1:05-cr-00066-PB Document 14 Filed 08/16/05 Page 2 of 2