alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
**
Exhibit 34.2 

Report of Independent Registered Public Accounting Firm (Ernst & Young LLP) 

Report of Independent Registered Public Accounting Firm 

The Board of Directors 

U.S. Bank National Association 

We have examined management’s****assertion, included in the accompanying Report on Assessment ofCompliance with Applicable Servicing Criteria, that U.S. Bank National Association (the “Company”) complied with the servicing criteria set forth in Item 1122 (d) of the Securities and Exchange Commission’s Regulation AB for the U.S.Bank Corporate Trust Asset-Backed Securities****Platform (the “Platform”), for which the Company provides trustee, securities administration, registrar and paying agent services, as of and for the year ended March 31, 2019, exceptfor****servicing criteria Items 1122 (d)(1)(i)-(v), 1122 (d)(2)(i), 1122 (d)(2)(iii), 1122 (d)(2)(v)-(vii), 1122 (d)(3)(i), and 1122 (d)(4)(i)-(xv), which the Company has determined are not applicable to the activities it performs withrespect to the servicing platform covered by this report. Management is responsible for the Company’s compliance with those servicing criteria. Our responsibility is to express an opinion on management’s assertion about the Company’scompliance with the servicing criteria based on our examination. 

Our examination was conducted in accordance with attestation standards established bythe American Institute of Certified Public Accountants, as adopted by the Public Company Accounting Oversight Board (United States) and, accordingly, included examining, on a test basis, evidence about the Company’s compliance with theapplicable servicing criteria 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 thePlatform, 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 not designed to determine whether errors may have occurred eitherprior 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 the evidencewe obtained is sufficient and appropriate to provide a reasonable basis for our opinion. 

Our examination does not provide a legal determination on theCompany’s compliance with the servicing criteria. 

In our opinion, management’s assertion that the Company complied with the aforementionedservicing criteria as of and for the year ended March 31, 2019, for the U.S. Bank Corporate Trust Asset-Backed Securities Platform is fairly stated, in all material respects. 

/s/ Ernst & Young LLP 

Minneapolis,Minnesota 

May 22, 2019 
**
#### UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. Luis ALCALDE-AGUILERA, Defendant-Appellant.

No. 01-50701.

D.C. No. CR-01-02367-LDG.

United States Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit.

Submitted March 10, 2003.*

Decided March 17, 2003.

Before CANBY, O’SCANNLAIN and T.G. NELSON, Circuit Judges.

*

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

MEMORANDUM**

Luis Alcalde-Aguilera appeals his conviction and 37-month prison sentence imposed following his guilty plea to importation of cocaine, in violation of 21 U.S.C. §§ 952 and 960. We have jurisdiction pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1291 and 18 U.S.C. § 3742, and we affirm.

Alcalde-Aguilera contends that the district court erred by denying his motion to *738dismiss the indictment because 21 U.S.C. §§ 952 and 960 are unconstitutional pursuant to *Apprendi v. New Jersey,*530 U.S. 466, 120 S.Ct. 2348, 147 L.Ed.2d 435 (2000). Our holdings in *United States v. Mendoza-Paz,*286 F.3d 1104, 1110 (9th Cir.) (§ 960), *cert. denied,*— U.S. -, 123 S.Ct. 573, 154 L.Ed.2d 459 (2002) and *United States v. Varela-Rivera,*279 F.3d 1174, 1175 n. 1 (9th Cir.2002) (§ 952) foreclose this argument. *See also United States v. Hernandez,*2003 WL 730663, at *8 (9th Cir.2003) (holding that *Harris v. United States,*536 U.S. 545, 122 S.Ct. 2406, 153 L.Ed.2d 524 (2002) does not overrule *Mendoza-Paz).*

In the alternative, Alcalde-Aguilera contends that the government was required to allege in the indictment, present to the grand jury, and prove beyond a reasonable doubt that Alcalde-Aguilera knew the type and quantity of controlled substance he was alleged to have imported. We rejected this contention in *United States v. Carranza,*289 F.3d 634, 644 (9th Cir.), *cert. denied,*— U.S.-, 123 S.Ct. 572, 154 L.Ed.2d 458 (2002), and do so here.

AFFIRMED.

**

 This disposition is not appropriate for publication and may not be cited to or by the courts of this circuit except as may be provided by Ninth Circuit Rule 36-3.
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE

DISTRICT OF NEW HAMPSHIRE

United States of America

 v. Case No. 07-cr-109-01-SM

Gary Powers

O R D E R

Defendant's assented-to motion to continue the trial (document no. 18) is granted.

Trial has been rescheduled for the April 2008 trial period. Defendant shall file a Waiver

of Speedy Trial Rights not later than February 29, 2008. 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 the

defendant the reasonable time necessary for effective preparation taking into account

Case 1:07-cr-00109-SM Document 20 Filed 02/22/08 Page 1 of 2
2

the exercise of due diligence under the circumstances.

Final Pretrial Conference: March 21, 2008 at 2:00 PM 

Jury Selection: April 1, 2008 at 9:30 AM

SO ORDERED.

February 22, 2008 _________________________

Steven J. McAuliffe

Chief Judge

cc: Arnold Huftalen, Esq.

 Michael Shklar, Esq.

 U. S. Probation

 U. S. Marshal

Case 1:07-cr-00109-SM Document 20 Filed 02/22/08 Page 2 of 2
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE

DISTRICT OF NEW HAMPSHIRE

United States of America

v. Case No. 06-cr-166-01-SM

Antron Hughes

O R D E R

Defendant Hughes’ motion to continue the final pretrial conference and

trial is granted (document 15). Trial has been rescheduled for the August 2007

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

than May 2, 2007. 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: July 24, 2007 at 2:30 p.m.

Jury Selection: August 7, 2007 at 9:30 a.m.

Case 1:06-cr-00166-SM Document 16 Filed 04/25/07 Page 1 of 2
2

SO ORDERED.

____________________________

Steven J. McAuliffe

 Chief Judge

April 25, 2007

cc: Bjorn Lange, Esq.

Helen Fitzgibbon, AUSA

US Probation

US Marshal

Case 1:06-cr-00166-SM Document 16 Filed 04/25/07 Page 2 of 2
1

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 

DISTRICT OF NEW HAMPSHIRE

H & F Aviation, Inc., and

Joseph L. Frisolone,

v.

Keyson Enterprises, Inc.,

Keyson Airways Corporation,

William Krivsky, Individually,

and Holly Frenzel, Individually,

Civil No. 06-cv-135-SM

Keyson Enterprises, Inc.,

Keyson Airways Corporation,

William Krivsky, Individually,

and Holly Frenzel, Individually,

v.

H & F Aviation, Inc., and

Joseph L. Frisolone,

O R D E R

Re: (Document No. 53) Motion to Allow Depositions After

 the Discovery Deadline; and

(Document No. 55) Defendants' Motion to Extend

 Settlement and Trial Deadlines

Ruling: Denied (document no. 53). Plaintiffs suggest that

the case has been settled via execution of an enforceable

settlement agreement. That issue ought to be resolved before the

parties are put to additional expense aimed at preparation for a

trial that may not occur. Counsel can, no doubt, agree upon

discovery that might be necessary to resolving issues related to

enforcement of the preliminary settlement agreement. Defendants'

Motion to Extend Settlement and Trial Deadlines (document no. 55)

is denied in part and granted in part. The court cannot modify

the terms of the settlement agreement sua sponte. But, the trial

and pretrial schedule deadlines are hereby suspended in light of

plaintiffs representations that the case is settled by agreement

and the agreement is enforceable.

Case 1:06-cv-00135-SM Document 62 Filed 02/02/07 Page 1 of 2
2

____________________________

Steven J. McAuliffe

Chief Judge

February 2, 2007

cc: Donald C. Mark, Jr., Esq.

Edward E. Beckmann, Esq.

R. Matthew Cairns, Esq.

Marie M. McPartlin, Esq.

Paul R. Kfoury, Sr., Esq.

Stephanie A. Bray, Esq.

Case 1:06-cv-00135-SM Document 62 Filed 02/02/07 Page 2 of 2
3.12 U.S. RESERVE ASSETS

Millions of dollars, end of period

Asset 1998 1999 2000

2001 2002

Sept. Oct. Nov. Dec. Jan. Feb. Mar. Apr.p

1 Total ................................. 81,761 71,516 67,647 70,963 69,707 69,158 68,654 67,532 67,357 67,574 67,844

2 Gold stock1 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 11,046 11,048 11,046 11,045 11,045 11,045 11,045 11,044 11,044 11,044 11,044

3 Special drawing rights2,3 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 10,603 10,336 10,539 10,919 10,827 10,864 10,774 10,657 10,763 10,809 10,988

4 Reserve position in International Monetary

Fund2 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 24,111 17,950 14,824 18,404 17,787 17,293 17,854 17,602 17,169 17,078 16,184

5 Foreign currencies4 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 36,001 32,182 31,238 30,595 30,048 29,956 28,981 28,229 28,381 28,643 29,628

1. Gold held ‘‘under earmark’’ at Federal Reserve Banks for foreign and international

accounts is not included in the gold stock of the United States; see table 3.13, line 3. Gold

stock is valued at $42.22 per fine troy ounce.

2. Special drawing rights (SDRs) are valued according to a technique adopted by the

International Monetary Fund (IMF) in July 1974. Values are based on a weighted average of

exchange rates for the currencies of member countries. From July 1974 through December

1980, sixteen currencies were used; since January 1981, five currencies have been used. U.S.

SDR holdings and reserve positions in the IMF also have been valued on this basis since July

1974.

3. Includes allocations of SDRs by the International Monetary Fund on Jan. 1 of the year

indicated, as follows: 1970—$867 million; 1971—$717 million; 1972—$710 million; 1979—

$1,139 million; 1980—$1,152 million; 1981—$1,093 million; plus net transactions in SDRs.

4. Valued at current market exchange rates.

3.13 FOREIGN OFFICIAL ASSETS HELD AT FEDERAL RESERVE BANKS1

Millions of dollars, end of period

Asset 1998 1999 2000

2001 2002

Sept. Oct. Nov. Dec. Jan. Feb. Mar. Apr.p

1 Deposits .............................. 167 71 215 608 75 528 61 162 89 256r 111

Held in custody

2 U.S. Treasury securities2 ................. 607,574 632,482 594,094 587,566 599,043 600,129 592,630 592,031 591,202 593,865 589,531

3 Earmarked gold3 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 10,343 9,933 9,451 9,100 9,099 9,099 9,099 9,098 9,098 9,098 9,091

1. Excludes deposits and U.S. Treasury securities held for international and regional

organizations

2. Marketable U.S. Treasury bills, notes, and bonds and nonmarketable U.S. Treasury

securities, in each case measured at face (not market) value.

3. Held in foreign and international accounts and valued at $42.22 per fine troy ounce; not

included in the gold stock of the United States.
N OTE : This disposition is nonprecedential. 

# United States **Court of Appeals**  **for the Federal Circuit**

______________________ VETERANS ELECTRIC, L LC, Plaintiff

- Appellant

v.

UNITED STATES, Defendant

- Appellee

______________________

2017

- 1655

______________________ Appeal from the United States Court of Federal Claims in No. 1:16

- cv

- 01113

- LAS, Senior Judge Loren A. Smith.

______________________
JUDGMENT

______________________

B RANDON M ICHAEL S ELINSKY , Rocky Mountain Dis ability Law Group, Denver, CO, argued for plaintiff

appellant.

A LBERT S. I AROSSI , Commercial Litigation Branch, Civil Division, United States Department of Justice, Washington, DC, argued for defendant

- appellee . Also represented by C HAD A. R EADLER , R OBERT E. K IRSCHMAN , J R ., D EBORAH A. B YNUM

.

______________________T HIS C AUSE having been heard and considered, it is

O RDERED and A DJUDGED :

P ER C URIAM (P ROST , Chief Judge, N EWMAN and L OURIE , Circuit Judges ).

AFFIRMED

. See Fed. Cir. R. 36.

E NTERED BY O RDER OF THE C OURT

January 16, 2018 /s/ Peter R. Marksteiner Date Peter R. Marksteiner Clerk of Court
[Federal Register Volume 73, Number 185 (Tuesday, September 23, 2008)]
[Notices]
[Page 54841]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: E8-22057]


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

DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES

National Institutes of Health


National Institute on Aging; Notice of Closed Meeting

    Pursuant to section 10(d) of the Federal Advisory Committee Act, as 
amended (5 U.S.C. Appendix 2), notice is hereby given of the following 
meeting.
    The meeting will be closed to the public in accordance with the 
provisions set forth in sections 552b(c)(4) and 552b(c)(6), Title 5 
U.S.C., as amended. The grant applications and the discussions could 
disclose confidential trade secrets or commercial property such as 
patentable material, and personal information concerning individuals 
associated with the grant applications, the disclosure of which would 
constitute a clearly unwarranted invasion of personal privacy.

    Name of Committee: National Institute on Aging Initial Review 
Group; Neuroscience of Aging Review Committee.
    Date: October 14-15, 2008.
    Time: 4 p.m. to 4 p.m.
    Agenda: To review and evaluate grant applications.
    Place: Doubletree Hotel Bethesda, 8120 Wisconsin Avenue, 
Bethesda, MD 20814.
    Contact Person: William Cruce, PhD, Scientific Review 
Administrator, National Institute on Aging, Scientific Review 
Office, Gateway Building 2C-212, 7201 Wisconsin Ave., Bethesda, MD 
20814, 301-402-7704, <a href="/cdn-cgi/l/email-protection#43203136202634032d2a226d2d2a2b6d242c35"><span class="__cf_email__" data-cfemail="5635242335332116383f3778383f3e78313920">[email protected]</span></a>.

(Catalogue of Federal Domestic Assistance Program No. 93.866, Aging 
Research, National Institutes of Health, HHS)

    Dated: September 15, 2008.
Jennifer Spaeth,
Director, Office of Federal Advisory Committee Policy.
[FR Doc. E8-22057 Filed 9-22-08; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4140-01-M


</pre><script data-cfasync="false" src="/cdn-cgi/scripts/5c5dd728/cloudflare-static/email-decode.min.js"></script></body>
</html>
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 Health and Human Services

###### National Institutes of Health

Pursuant to section 10(d) of the Federal Advisory Committee Act, as amended (5 U.S.C. Appendix 2), notice is hereby given of the following meeting.

The meeting will be closed to the public in accordance with the provisions set forth in sections 552b(c)(4) and 552b(c)(6), Title 5 U.S.C., as amended. The grant applications and the discussions could disclose confidential trade secrets or commercial property such as patentable material, and personal information concerning individuals associated with the grant applications, the disclosure of which would constitute a clearly unwarranted invasion of personal privacy.

*Name of Committee:*                         National Institute on Deafness and Other Communication Disorders Special Emphasis Panel, CDRC Conflicts.                    

*Date:*                         October 20, 2008.                    

*Time:*                         8 a.m. to 5 p.m.                    

*Agenda:*                         To review and evaluate grant applications.                    

*Place:*                         Melrose Hotel, 2430 Pennsylvania Ave., NW., Washington, DC 20037.                    

*Contact Person:*                         Christine A. Livingston, PhD, Scientific Review Officer, Division of Extramural Activities, National Institutes of Health/NIDCD, 6120 Executive Blvd.—MSC 7180, Bethesda, MD 20892, (301) 496-8683,                         *livingsc@mail.nih.gov.*

(Catalogue of Federal Domestic Assistance Program Nos. 93.173, Biological Research Related to Deafness and Communicative Disorders, National Institutes of Health, HHS)

Dated: September 11, 2008.

Jennifer Spaeth,

Director, Office of Federal Advisory Committee Policy.

[FR Doc. E8-21879 Filed 9-18-08; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 4140-01-P
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE

DISTRICT OF NEW HAMPSHIRE

Pornchai Moontri

v. Civil No. 06-cv-122-SM

Warden, Maine State Prison, et al

O R D E R

After due consideration of the objection filed, I herewith approve the Report

and Recommendation of Magistrate Judge Muirhead dated June 19, 2006, for the

reasons set forth therein. The petition for a writ of habeas corpus is hereby

dismissed.

SO ORDERED.

July 14, 2006 _________________________________

Steven J. McAuliffe

Chief Judge

cc: Pornchai Moontri, pro se

Case 1:06-cv-00122-SM Document 5 Filed 07/14/06 Page 1 of 1
| Period  | Minneapolis - Other operating loans | Minneapolis - Intermediate non-real-estate loans | Minneapolis - Long-term real estate loans | Kansas City - Other operating loans | Kansas City - Intermediate non-real-estate loans | Kansas City - Long-term real estate loans |
|---------|-------------------------------------|--------------------------------------------------|-------------------------------------------|-------------------------------------|--------------------------------------------------|-------------------------------------------|
| 2001:Q1 | 9.7                                 | 9.59                                             | 9.13                                      | .                                   | .                                                | .                                         |
| 2001:Q2 | 9.25                                | 9.13                                             | 8.49                                      | .                                   | .                                                | .                                         |
| 2001:Q3 | 8.75                                | 8.69                                             | 8.08                                      | .                                   | .                                                | .                                         |
| 2001:Q4 | 7.9                                 | 7.71                                             | 7.22                                      | .                                   | .                                                | .                                         |
| 2002:Q1 | 7.43                                | 7.45                                             | 7.01                                      | .                                   | .                                                | .                                         |
| 2002:Q2 | 7.2                                 | 7.19                                             | 6.81                                      | 7.65                                | 7.57                                             | 7.06                                      |
| 2002:Q3 | 6.81                                | 6.74                                             | 6.36                                      | 7.51                                | 7.43                                             | 6.85                                      |
| 2002:Q4 | 6.68                                | 6.64                                             | 6.25                                      | 7.15                                | 7.04                                             | 6.61                                      |
LETTER
AGREEMENT


 


September
5, 2019


 


Shai
Lustgarten


 


Re:
Employment Agreement Extension


 


Dear
Mr. Lustgarten,


 


Reference
is made to the Employment Agreement entered into by and between Quest Solution, Inc. (the “Company”) and Shai Lustgarten,
as modified by the Modification Agreement entered into between the Company and Shai Lustgarten, dated February 17, 2017 (the “Lustgarten
Employment Agreement”).


 


The
Company and Shai Lustgarten hereby
agree pursuant to this Letter Agreement, that the term of the Lustgarten Employment Agreement shall be extended for two (2) years
until September 5, 2021, on the same terms as the Lustgarten Employment Agreement. At that time, the term of the Lustgarten Employment
Agreement shall automatically extend for an additional two (2) year term unless the Lustgarten Employment Agreement is terminated
at the option of either party. As consideration for entering into this Letter Agreement and in light of Mr. Lustgarten’s
significant contributions to the Company, the Company shall, pursuant to the Company’s 2018 Equity Incentive Plan, grant
Mr. Lustgarten a signing bonus in the form of 1,000,000 shares of the Company’s common stock.


 


Additionally,
the Company agrees, for the duration of the Lustgarten Employment Agreement, to assume and pay the compensation owed by HTS Image
Processing, Inc., its wholly-owned subsidiary, to Mr. Lustgarten in the amount of $15,000 per month.


 


This
Letter Agreement shall be governed by the laws of the state of New York, without giving effect to any conflict of laws provision,
and may not be amended other than through a written agreement executed by Quest Solution, Inc and Shai Lustgarten.


 


	 	Very
    truly yours,
	 	 
	 	QUEST
    SOLUTION, INC.
	 	 	 
	 	By:	/s/ Shai
    Lustgarten
	 	Name:	Shai
    Lustgarten
	 	Title:	Chief
    Executive Officer


 


AGREED
AND ACCEPTED:


 


	/s/ Shai
    Lustgarten	 
	Shai
    Lustgarten