alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
Exhibit 99.2

Annual
Servicers Report

March 20, 2006
Fitch, Inc.
One State Street Plaza
New York, New York 10004
Moodys Investors Service Inc.
99 Church Street
New York, New York 10007
Standard & Poors Rating Services,
a division of the McGraw-Hill Companies, Inc.
55 Water Street
New York, New York 10041
Deutsche Bank Trust Company Americas
60 Wall Street
New York, New York 10005
College Loan Corporation Trust I (the Trust)
c/o Wilmington Trust Company
Rodney Square North
1100 North Market Street
Wilmington, Delaware 19890

As an officer of College Loan Corporation, the issuer
administrator of the Trust, I hereby certify that:

|1. |  | a review of the activities of the servicers during the preceding calendar year
          and of their performance under the servicing agreements has been made under my
          supervision; and
|-- |  | --------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

|2. |  | to the best of my knowledge, based on such review, the servicers have fulfilled
          all of their obligations under the servicing agreements throughout the period
          ended December 31, 2005, and there have been no known defaults in the
          fulfillment of such obligations.
|-- |  | --------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

| | /s/ Cary Katz
Cary Katz
Chief Executive Officer
| | -----------------------------------------------
#### OVERLOOK HOSPITAL v. J. RICHARD GOLDSTEIN. MORRISTOWN MEMORIAL HOSPITAL v. J. RICHARD GOLDSTEIN.

July 11, 1985.

Motions for leave to appeal are granted; and it is further

ORDERED that partial relief is granted, limited solely to the extent that

1) in the pending administrative hearing on the Commissioner’s recommended denials of movants’ applications for a certificate of need, movants’ will be permitted to address the Commissioner’s decision granting a certificate of need to Newark Beth Israel Medical Center, and

2) movants’ appeals to the Appellate Division from the Commissioner’s decision granting a certification of need to Newark *323Beth israel Medical Center are stayed, pending the completion of the administrative proceedings.

Jurisdiction is not retained.
O pinion filed November 17 , 20 22



### In The 

# Eleventh Court of Appeals

__________

No. 11

- 1 5

- 00 24 8

- CV

__________ TNC ENERGY, LLC , Appellant

V.

CRESCENT SUPPLY COMPANY , Appellee

On Appeal from the 350 t h District Court Taylor County, Texas
T rial Court Cause No. 10328

- D

M E M O R A N D U M O P I N I O N Appellant, TNC Energy, LLC

, timely filed a restricted appeal from a final

default judgment signed by the trial judge on April 10 , 2015. Soon thereafter,
Appellant filed in this court a notice indicating that it was the subject of an involuntary bankruptcy proceeding, and we immediately abated the appeal

. See

T EX

. R. A PP

. P. 8.1 , 8.2

. Over the past several years, we have requested that t h e parties inform this c ourt of the status of the bankruptcy proceeding s or any other2 event that would allow this appeal to be reinstated. See T EX

. R. A PP

. P. 8.3. On October 26, 2022, Appellant advised this court that “the Bankruptcy was fully administered and closed, which included a discharge of the remaining claim by
Crescent Supply Company” against Appellant

. Appellant therefore suggested that
this appeal could be reinstated and dismissed. After receiving the notification from Appellant regarding the discharge in bankruptcy, we informed the parties by letter that the appeal appeared to be moot
and subject to dismissal. We requested that the parties respond a nd show grounds
to continue the appeal. See T EX

. R. A PP

. P. 42.3. N either of the parties did so. Accordingly, we dismiss t his appeal.

PER CURIAM

November 17, 2022

Panel consists of: Bailey , C.J., Trotter , J., and Williams , J.
Exhibit 32

          CERTIFICATION OF CHIEF EXECUTIVE OFFICER AND CHIEF FINANCIAL
                                     OFFICER
                                   PURSUANT TO
                             18 U.S.C. SECTION 1350,
                             AS ADOPTED PURSUANT TO
                  SECTION 906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002

      The undersigned hereby certifies, pursuant to, and as required by, 18
U.S.C. Section 1350, as adopted pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley
Act of 2002, that the Quarterly Report of National Investment Managers Inc. (the
"Company") on Form 10-QSB for the period ended March 31, 2006 fully complies
with the requirements of Section 13(a) or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act
of 1934, as amended, and that information contained in such Quarterly Report on
Form 10-QSB fairly presents, in all material respects, the financial condition
and results of operations of the Company.



Dated: May 12, 2006                       /s/ Steven Ross
                                          -----------------------------
                                          Steven Ross
                                          President and Chief Executive Officer


                                          /s/ Leonard Neuhaus
Dated: May 12, 2006                       ----------------------------
                                          Leonard Neuhaus
                                          Chief Operating and Financial Officer


                                       29
BLD
- 178 NOT PRECEDENTIAL UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE THIRD CIRCUIT

___________ No. 24

- 2404

___________ IN RE: TODD ANTHONY ROBINSON, Petitioner

____________________________________ On a Petition for Writ of Mandamus from the United States District Court for the Western District of Pennsylvania

(Related to W.D. Pa. Civ. No. 2

- 22

- cv - 01223 )

____________________________________ Submitted Pursuant to Rule 21, Fed. R. App. P.

September 5, 2024 Before: BIBAS, MATEY, and CHUNG, Circuit Judges (Opinion filed : September 17, 2024 )

_________ OPINION *

_________ PER CURIAM In July 2024, Todd Robinson filed a pro se petition for a writ of mandamus, asking us to direct the District Court to rule on his petition for writ of habeas corpus pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 2241, or in the alternative, to issue our own ruling on his habeas petition. After Robinson filed the mandamus petition, the District Court entered a memorandum and order denying his habeas petition. In light of the District Court’s action, this

* This disposition is not an opinion of the full Court and pursuant to I.O.P. 5.7 does not constitute binding precedent.2

mandamus petition no longer presents a live controversy. Therefore, we will dismiss it as
moot. See Blanciak v. Allegheny Ludlum Corp. , 77 F.3d 690, 698

- 99 (3d Cir. 1996) (“ If developments occur during the course of adjudication that eliminate a plaintiff's personal stake in the outcome of a suit or prevent a court from being able to grant the requested relief, the case must be dismissed as moot.”). 1

1 Robinson has appealed from the District Court’s dismissal of his habeas petition. That appeal is pending at C.A. No. 24

- 2579 and will be considered separately.
#### STATE OF NEW JERSEY v. MARK MUGRAGE.

May 7, 1985.

Petition for certification denied.
# United States Court **of Appeals**  **f or the Fifth Circuit** 

**____________** No. 22

- 51014 Summary Calendar

**____________ United States of America,**  Plaintiff

— Appellee **,**

versus **John Paul Lopez,** Defendant

— Appellant

**.**

**______________________________** Appeal from the United States District Court for the Western District of Texas USDC No. 6:21

- CR

- 107

- 1

**______________________ ________**  Before **King, Haynes,** and **Graves,** C ircuit Judges

**. Per Curiam**  **:** ***** John Paul Lopez pleaded guilty to one count of possession with intent to distribute 50 grams or more of a mixture or substance containing a detectable amount of methamphetamine (count one) and one count of possession of a firearm in furtherance of a drug trafficking crim e (count two)

. See 21 U.S.C. § 841(a)(1), (b)(1)(B)(viii) ; 18 U.S.C. § 924(c)(1)(A)(i)

. He was sentenced to consecutive sentences of 188 months of imprisonment on

**_____________________**

* This opinion is not designated for publication. See **5th Cir**

**. R** 

**.** 4 7.5. United States Court of Appeals Fifth Circuit 

### FILED August 2, 2023 Lyle W. Cayce Clerk Case: 22-51014 Document: 00516843770 Page: 1 Date Filed: 08/02/2023No. 22

- 51014

2 count one and 60 months of imprisonment on count two . The district court imposed a four

- ye ar term of supervised release on count one, to run
concurrent ly with a three

- year term of supervised release on count two. Lopez challenges the condition of his supervised release that provides that, if the probation officer determines that Lopez presents a risk to another person, the probation officer may require Lopez to notify the person of that risk and may contact the person to confirm that notification occurred. While Lopez chall enged this condition of supervised release at sentencing, he challenged it as unconstitutionally vague. He now argues that this condition constitutes an improper delegation of judicial authority to the probation officer. He concedes that his argument is foreclosed by our decision in United States v. Mejia

- Banegas , 32 F.4th 450, 452 (5th Cir. 2022), but he raises the issue to preserve it for further review. The Government has filed an unopposed motion for summary affirmance, asserting that Lopez ’s claim i s foreclosed by Mejia

- Banegas . In the alternative, the Government requests an extension of time to file its brief.
We held in Mejia

- Banegas that such a risk

- notification condition did not impermissibly delegate judicial authority, plainly or otherwise. 3 2 F.4th at 451

- 52. The parties are thus correct that the issue is foreclosed, and the Government is correct that summary affirmance is appropriate. See Groendyke Transp., Inc. v. Davis , 406 F.2d 1158, 1162 (5th Cir. 1969). The Government’s motion for su mmary affirmance is **GRANTED** , the district court’s judgment is **AFFIRMED** , and the Government’s alternative motion for an extension of time to file a brief is **DENIED.** Case: 22-51014 Document: 00516843770 Page: 2 Date Filed: 08/02/2023
**Exhibit
      32.2**




**CERTIFICATION
      PURSUANT TO 18 U.S.C. SECTION 1350, AS ADOPTED PURSUANT TO**


**SECTION
      906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002**





In
      connection with the Annual Report of CenterStaging Corp. on Form 10-KSB for
      the
      fiscal year ended June 30, 2007 as filed with the Securities and Exchange
      Commission on the date hereof (the “Report”), the undersigned, Howard
      Livingston, the Chief Financial Officer of CenterStaging, Inc., does hereby
      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 the results of operations of the Company as of
      and
      for the periods covered by the Report.







Dated:
      October 17, 2007





/s/
      Howard Livingston


Chief
      Financial Officer
#### STATE v. GROVER

No. 198A01

Case below: 142 N.C. App. 411

Petition by the Attorney General for writ of supersedeas allowed 18 April 2001.
##### 



EXHIBIT 8 CERTIFICATION PURSUANT TO 18 U.S.C. SECTION 1350,
AS ENACTED PURSUANT TO
SECTION 906 OF THE U.S. SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002 CAE Inc. (the Company) is filing with the U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission on the
date hereof, its annual report on Form 40-F for the fiscal year ended March 31, 2005 (the
Report). I, Alain Raquepas, Vice-President Finance and Chief Financial Officer of the Company, certify,
pursuant to 18 U.S.C. section 1350, as enacted pursuant to section 906 of the U.S. Sarbanes-Oxley
Act of 2002, that:  (i)
    
    the Report fully complies with the requirements of section
13(a) or 15(d) of the U.S. Securities Exchange Act of 1934; and(ii)
    
    the information contained in the Report fairly presents, in all
material respects, the financial condition and results of operations of the
Company. /s/ Alain Raquepas
Alain Raquepas
Vice-President Finance and
Chief Financial Officer Date: June 28, 2005 4
[Federal Register Volume 75, Number 171 (Friday, September 3, 2010)]
[Notices]
[Pages 54093-54094]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2010-22075]


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

DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE

National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration

RIN 0648-XT21


Marine Mammals; File No. 555-1870

AGENCY:  National Marine Fisheries Service (NMFS), National Oceanic and 
Atmospheric Administration (NOAA), Commerce.

ACTION:  Notice; issuance of permit amendment.

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

SUMMARY:  Notice is hereby given that James T. Harvey, Ph.D., Moss 
Landing Marine Laboratories, 8272 Moss Landing Road, Moss Landing, CA

[[Page 54094]]

95039, has been issued a major amendment to Permit No. 555-1870-01.

ADDRESSES:  The permit amendment and related documents are available 
for review upon written request or by appointment in the following 
offices:
    Permits, Conservation and Education Division, Office of Protected 
Resources, NMFS, 1315 East-West Highway, Room 13705, Silver Spring, MD 
20910; phone (301)713-2289; fax (301)713-0376; and
    Southwest Region, NMFS, 501 West Ocean Blvd., Suite 4200, Long 
Beach, CA 90802-4213; phone (562)980-4001; fax (562)980-4018.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:  Amy Sloan or Tammy Adams, (301)713-
2289.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: On July 8, 2010, notice was published in the 
Federal Register (75 FR 39206) that a request for an amendment to 
Permit No. 555-1870-01 to conduct research on harbor seals (Phoca 
vitulina) had been submitted by the above-named applicant. The 
amendment has been issued under the authority of the Marine Mammal 
Protection Act of 1972, as amended (16 U.S.C. 1361 et seq.), and the 
regulations governing the taking and importing of marine mammals (50 
CFR part 216).
    The permit amendment (Permit No. 555-1870-02) authorizes an 
increase in the number of subadult harbor seals taken annually in 
California by capture, sedation, tagging, and sampling from 40 seals 
(20 males and 20 females) to 70 seals (35 males and 35 females). Also, 
a pilot study is authorized to bring up to six seals into temporary 
captivity to assess the efficacy of a modified sedation and suture 
protocol for implantation of subcutaneous radio tags. If effective, the 
modified protocols will be implemented in the field. The permit expires 
April 15, 2012.
    In compliance with the National Environmental Policy Act of 1969 
(42 U.S.C. 4321 et seq.), a final determination has been made that the 
activity proposed is categorically excluded from the requirement to 
prepare an environmental assessment or environmental impact statement.

    Dated: August 25, 2010.
P. Michael Payne,
Chief, Permits, Conservation and Education Division, Office of 
Protected Resources, National Marine Fisheries Service.
[FR Doc. 2010-22075 Filed 9-3-10; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 3510-22-S
Exhibit
23.1


CONSENT
OF INDEPENDENT REGISTERED PUBLIC ACCOUNTING FIRM





We hereby
consent to the incorporation by reference in the Registration Statements of
Access Integrated Technologies, Inc. and subsidiaries on Form S-3 (Registration
No. 333-123279), Form S-3 (Registration No. 333-127673), Form S-3 (Registration
No. 333-129747), Form S-3 (Registration No. 333-136998), Form S-3 (Registration
No. 333-140231), Form S-3 (Registration No. 333-142411), Form S-3 (Registration
No. 333-144927), Form S-3 (Registration No. 333-146335), Form S-3 (Registration
No. 333-150661), Form S-8 (Registration No. 333-124290), and Form S-8
(Registration No. 333-139091) of our report dated June 13, 2008 on our audit of
the consolidated balance sheets of Access Integrated Technologies, Inc. and
subsidiaries as of March 31, 2007 and 2008 and the related consolidated
statements of operations, cash flows and stockholders' equity for the years then
ended, and our audit of internal control over financial reporting as of March
31, 2008, which reports appear in this Form 10-K.  We also consent to
the reference to our firm under the heading "Experts" in the Registration
Statements on Form S-3 (Registration No. 333-123279), Form S-3 (Registration No.
333-127673), Form S-3 (Registration No. 333-129747), Form S-3 (Registration No.
333-136998), Form S-3 (Registration No. 333-140231), Form S-3 (Registration No.
333-142411), Form S-3 (Registration No. 333-144927), Form S-3 (Registration No.
333-146335), and Form S-3 (Registration No. 333-150661).
















Florham
Park, New Jersey


June 13,
2008
#### STATE OF NEW JERSEY v. NEFTALI MARTINEZ.

October 21, 1985.

Petition for certification denied.
#### STATE OF NEW JERSEY v. CAROL MAXEY.

March 29, 1985.

Petition for certification denied.
[Federal Register Volume 75, Number 170 (Thursday, September 2, 2010)]
[Notices]
[Page 53985]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2010-21940]



[[Page 53985]]

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

NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION

[Docket Nos. 52-025-COL and 52-026-COL; ASLBP No.10-903-01-COL-BD02]


Southern Nuclear Operating Company Establishment of Atomic Safety 
And Licensing Board

    Pursuant to delegation by the Commission dated December 29, 1972, 
published in the Federal Register, 37 FR 28,710 (1972), and the 
Commission's regulations, see 10 CFR 2.104, 2.300, 2.303, 2.309, 2.311, 
2.318, and 2.321, notice is hereby given that an Atomic Safety and 
Licensing Board (Board) is being established to preside over the 
following proceeding:

Southern Nuclear Operating Company; (Vogtle Electric Generating Plant, 
Units 3 and 4)

    This proceeding arises from the August 12, 2010 submission of a 
request for admission of a new contention to challenge the application 
of Southern Nuclear Operating Company's application for a combined 
license for Vogtle Electric Generating Plant, Units 3 and 4, to be 
located in Burke County, Georgia. The request was submitted by the Blue 
Ridge Environmental Defense League, the Center for a Sustainable Coast, 
and Georgia Women's Action for New Directions for Clean Energy.\1\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \1\ On May 19, 2010, a Board that previously was established to 
adjudicate the contested portion of this proceeding granted summary 
disposition in favor of applicant, Southern Nuclear Operating 
Company, on the only admitted contention. Because that decision was 
not appealed to the Commission, and because the Commission did not 
take sua sponte review, the contested proceeding was terminated and 
the prior Board was divested of jurisdiction, thus necessitating the 
establishment of the instant Board to consider the August 12, 2010 
submission. See Commission Order (Aug. 25, 2010) at 1 (unpublished); 
Licensing Board Memorandum (Referring Request to Admit New 
Contention to the Commission) (Aug. 17, 2010) at 2-3 (unpublished).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The Board is comprised of the following administrative judges: G. 
Paul Bollwerk, III, Chairman, Atomic Safety and Licensing Board Panel, 
U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission, Washington, DC 20555-0001.
    Nicholas G. Trikouros, Atomic Safety and Licensing Board Panel, 
U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission, Washington, DC 20555-0001.
    James F. Jackson, Atomic Safety and Licensing Board Panel, U.S. 
Nuclear Regulatory Commission, Washington, DC 20555-0001.
    All correspondence, documents, and other materials shall be filed 
in accordance with the NRC E-Filing rule, which the NRC promulgated in 
August 2007 (72 FR 49,139).

     Issued at Rockville, Maryland, this 27th day of August 2010.
E. Roy Hawkens,
Chief Administrative Judge, Atomic Safety and Licensing Board Panel.
[FR Doc. 2010-21940 Filed 9-1-10; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 7590-01-P
News United States Air Force
 AF announces NAS JRB Fort Worth as the preferred location for next F-35A basePublished Jan. 12, 2017
                        
                        By Secretary of the Air Force Public Affairs
                **WASHINGTON (AFNS)  --**
                Air Force officials announced Naval Air Station Joint Reserve Base Fort Worth, Texas, as the preferred location for the first Air Force Reserve-led F-35 base, which is expected to begin receiving its first F-35As in the mid-2020s.  Davis-Monthan Air Force Base, Arizona; Homestead Air Reserve Base, Florida; and Whiteman AFB, Missouri, will be considered as reasonable alternatives during the environmental analysis process which must be completed before the Air Force makes a final basing decision.  "We selected the Air Force Reserve unit in Fort Worth because it is the location that meets all of the necessary training requirements at the lowest cost,” said Air Force Secretary Deborah Lee James. “Additionally, the location will provide mission synergy and access to an experienced workforce for recruiting as a result of its proximity to the F-35 manufacturing plant.”  According to the Air Force Chief of Staff Gen. David L. Goldfein, the F-35 is even better than advertised. “In the hands of our Airmen, the F-35 will be the most lethal, survivable and adaptable aircraft in our inventory for decades to come," Goldfein said. “No matter how you slice it, the F-35's stealth characteristics, maneuverability, interoperability and its ability to make other aircraft better through sensor fusion make it unmatched by any adversary."   In December 2016, the Air Force released the candidate bases for the next two Air National Guard-led F-35 bases. The candidate bases included Dannelly Field Air Guard Station,  Alabama; Gowen Field AGS, Idaho; Jacksonville AGS, Florida; Selfridge Air National Guard Base, Michigan; and Truax AGS, Wisconsin. The Air Force will be conducting on-the-ground site surveys at each candidate location assessing each location against operational requirements, potential impacts to existing missions, infrastructure and manpower, and then develop cost estimates to bed down the F-35A. The preferred and reasonable alternatives for the ANG bases are expected to be selected in the summer of 2017.   The F-35As are expected to begin arriving at the second and third ANG locations in the early to mid-2020s.   Currently, three active-duty operational locations—Hill AFB, Utah; Royal Air Force Lakenheath, United Kingdom; and Eielson AFB, Alaska— and one ANG location – Burlington AGS, Vermont – have been identified for F-35A basing.F-35 



Reserve 



NAS JRB Forth Worth