alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
|                                      |
|--------------------------------------|
|                                      |  |
| Deutsche Bank Trust Company Americas | BNY Mellon Trust of Delaware |
| As Indenture Trustee                 | As Owner Trustee |
| Attn:  Michelle H.Y. Voon  | Attn:  Robert Castle / Kristine Gullo |
| 100 Plaza One 6th Floor         | 100 White Clay Center, Suite 102 |
| Jersey City, NY 07311                | Newark, DE  19711 |

|                                                 |
|-------------------------------------------------|
|                                                 |  |
| The Bank of New York Mellon Trust Company, N.A. | Ally Auto Assets LLC |
| Attn:  Robert Castle                  | Ally Financial Inc. |
| 2 North LaSalle Street, Suite 1020              | 200 Renaissance Center |
| Chicago, IL  60602                    | 12th Floor, MC 482-B12-C24 |
|                                            | Detroit, MI |

|     |
|-----|
|     |  |
| Re: | Ally Auto Receivables Trust 2011-3 (the “Issuer”) |

|    |
|----|
|    |  |
| a. | A review of the activities of the Servicer during the period of January 1, 2012 through December 31, 2012, and of its performance under the  Servicing Agreement has been under his supervision, and |
| b. | To the best of his knowledge, based on such review, the Servicer has fulfilled all of its obligations under the Servicing Agreement throughout such period. |

|        |
|--------|
|        |  |  |
|   | Very truly yours, |
|   |   |
|   | /s/ David J. DeBrunner |   |
|   | David J. DeBrunner |
|   | Vice President, Controller and Chief Accounting Officer |
|   | Ally Financial Inc. |
EXHIBIT 32



CERTIFICATION



The undersigned hereby certify that the Annual Report on Form 10-K for the fiscal year ended December 31, 2005 of PHL Variable Insurance Company (the Company) filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 and that the information contained in such report fairly presents, in all material respects, the financial condition and results of operations of the Company.



|/s/ Philip K. Polkinghorn      |  | /s/ Michael E. Haylon         
|------------------------------ |  | ------------------------------
|Name:
Philip K. Polkinghorn    |  | Name:
Michael E. Haylon       
|Title:
Chief Executive Officer |  | Title:
Chief Financial Officer
|Date:
March 31, 2006           |  | Date:
March 31, 2006          



A signed original of this written statement required by Section 906, or other document authenticating, acknowledging, or otherwise adopting the signature that appears in typed form within the electronic version of this written statement required by Section 906, has been provided to PHL Variable Insurance Company and will be retained by PHL Variable Insurance Company and furnished to the Securities and Exchange Commission or its staff upon request.
I 

110TH CONGRESS 

1ST SESSION H. R. 1003 

To amend the Foreign Affairs Reform and Restructuring Act of 1998 to 

reauthorize the United States Advisory Commission on Public Diplomacy. 

IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES 

FEBRUARY 12, 2007 

Ms. WATSON introduced the following bill; which was referred to the 

Committee on Foreign Affairs 

A BILL 

To amend the Foreign Affairs Reform and Restructuring 

Act of 1998 to reauthorize the United States Advisory 

Commission on Public Diplomacy. 

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

3 SECTION 1. REAUTHORIZATION OF UNITED STATES ADVI4 SORY COMMISSION ON PUBLIC DIPLOMACY. 

5 Section 1334 of the Foreign Affairs Reform and Re6 structuring Act of 1998 (22 U.S.C. 6553) is amended by 

7 striking ‘‘October 1, 2006’’ and inserting ‘‘October 1, 

8 2009’’. 

Æ 


bajohnson on PROD1PC77 with BILLS
```

[Congressional Bills 110th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[H.J. Res. 41 Introduced in House (IH)]

110th CONGRESS
  1st Session
H. J. RES. 41

  Proposing an amendment to the Constitution of the United States to 
 clarify that the Constitution neither prohibits voluntary prayer nor 
                      requires prayer in schools.

_______________________________________________________________________

                    IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

                             March 29, 2007

    Mr. Rahall introduced the following joint resolution; which was 
               referred to the Committee on the Judiciary

_______________________________________________________________________

                            JOINT RESOLUTION

 
  Proposing an amendment to the Constitution of the United States to 
 clarify that the Constitution neither prohibits voluntary prayer nor 
                      requires prayer in schools.

    Resolved by the Senate and House of Representatives of the United 
States of America in Congress assembled   (two-thirds of each House 
concurring therein), That the following article is proposed as an 
amendment to the Constitution of the United States, which shall be 
valid to all intents and purposes as part of the Constitution when 
ratified by the legislatures of three-fourths of the several States 
within seven years after the date of its submission by the Congress:

                              ``Article --

    ``Nothing in this Constitution, including any amendment to this 
Constitution, shall be construed to prohibit voluntary prayer or 
require prayer in a public school, or to prohibit voluntary prayer or 
require prayer at a public school extracurricular activity.''.
                                 <all>
```
#### Harness *v.*Churchmembers Life Insurance Company etc. et al.

[No. 19,180.

Filed December 22, 1959.]

*Lewis C. Bose*and *Charles W. Symmes,*both of Indianapolis, for appellant.

*Roeap, Rocap, Reese & Robb,*of Indianapolis, for appellee, George F. Kopetsky.

*William C. Harrison*and *Johnson & Weaver,*both of Indianapolis, for appellees Churchmembers Life Insurance Company and Glen Ashmore.

*186Per Curiam.

This cause comes to us from a Superior Court of Marion County wherein the trial court sustained a demurrer to the appellant’s complaint.

For a review of the record and the briefs now before us, it appears that the trial court sustained the demurrers upon the authority of the following cases: *Plotzki*v. *Standard Oil Co.*(1950), 228 Ind. 518, 92 N. E. 2d 632, and *Neal, Admr.*v. *Home Builders, Inc.*(1953), 232 Ind. 160, 111 N. E. 2d 280, 111 N. E. 2d 713.

It appearing that two Judges of each division of the Appellate Court are of the opinion that the ruling precedent of the Supreme Court as established by the majority opinions in each of the aforesaid cases are erroneous in that the doctrine announced therein on the question of attractive nuisances, and that the dissenting opinions in each of the foregoing cases correctly state the law as should be applied to the factual situation that appears in this cause.

An equal number of this court are of the opinion that the true doctrine of the law which should apply in this particular case was announced in the first instance prior to transfer in *Neal, Admr.*v. *Home Builders, Inc.*(1952), 104 N. E. 2d 395. Note: The Appellate Court decision was reviewed and approved in 27 N. Y. U. Law Review at 722. For criticism of the doctrine announced in the Plotzki case, *supra,*see 26 Ind. Law Journal, 266.

By reason of the statement which we have heretofore made, we transfer this cause to the Supreme Court pursuant to §4-215, Burns’ 1946 Replacement.

Note. — Reported in 163 N. E. 2d 37.
III 

110TH CONGRESS 

1ST SESSION H. CON. RES. 49 

IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES 

JULY 31, 2007 

Received 

AUGUST 3, 2007 

Referred to the Committee on Armed Services 

CONCURRENT RESOLUTION 

Recognizing the 75th anniversary of the Military Order of 

the Purple Heart and commending recipients of the Purple Heart for their courage and sacrifice on behalf of 

the United States. 

Whereas the Purple Heart is a combat decoration awarded to 

members of the Armed Forces who are wounded by an 

instrument of war wielded by the enemy and posthumously to the next of kin in the name of members who 

are killed in action or die of wounds received in action; 


cnoel on PRODPC75 with BILLS
2 

•HCON 49 RFS 

Whereas the Purple Heart was originally conceived as the 

Badge of Military Merit by General George Washington 

on August 7, 1782; 

Whereas 2007 marks the 225th anniversary of the Badge of 

Military Merit, the predecessor of the Purple Heart 

Medal; 

Whereas the practice of awarding the Purple Heart was revived in 1932, the 200th anniversary of George Washington’s birth, out of respect for his memory and military 

achievements; 

Whereas over 1.5 million Purple Heart Medals have been 

awarded to members of the Armed Forces fighting in defense of freedom and democracy in the Civil War, the 

Spanish-American War, World War I, World War II, the 

Korean War, the Vietnam War, Somalia, Bosnia, Operation Desert Storm, Operation Enduring Freedom, Operation Iraqi Freedom, and other expeditionary conflicts; 

Whereas the organization known as the Military Order of the 

Purple Heart was formed on October 19, 1932, for the 

protection and mutual interest of members of the Armed 

Forces who have received the Purple Heart; and 

Whereas the Military Order of the Purple Heart is composed 

exclusively of recipients of the Purple Heart: Now, therefore, be it 

1 Resolved by the House of Representatives (the Senate 

2 concurring), That Congress— 

3 (1) congratulates the Military Order of the Pur4 ple Heart on its 75th anniversary as a national or5 ganization whose goals are to preserve and sustain 

6 the honor of the Armed Forces; 


cnoel on PRODPC75 with BILLS
3 

•HCON 49 RFS 

1 (2) commends all recipients of the Purple Heart 

2 for their courage and sacrifice on behalf of the 

3 United States; and 

4 (3) encourages all Americans to take time to 

5 learn about the Purple Heart and the honor, cour6 age, and bravery it symbolizes. 

Passed the House of Representatives July 30, 2007. 

Attest: LORRAINE C. MILLER, 

Clerk. 


cnoel on PRODPC75 with BILLS
COURT OF APPEALS

EIGHTH DISTRICT OF TEXAS

EL PASO, TEXAS

BRUCE EZELL,

 Appellant, 

v.

SCOTT R. CRAWLEY,

 Appellee.

§

 

§

 

§

 

§

 

§

 

No. 08-20-00238-CV

Appeal from the

County Court at Law No. 2

of Travis County, Texas

(TC # C-1-CV-20-003262)

O R D E R

The Court GRANTS the Appellant’s third motion for extension of time within which to 

file the brief until February 12, 2021. NO FURTHER MOTIONS FOR EXTENSION OF TIME 

TO FILE THE APPELLANT’S BRIEF WILL BE CONSIDERED BY THIS COURT.

It is further ordered that the Hon. Evan A. Johnston, the Appellant’s attorney, prepare the 

Appellant’s Brief and forward the same to this Court on or before February 12, 2021.

IT IS SO ORDERED this 22nd day of January, 2021.

PER CURIAM

Before Rodriguez, C.J., Palafox and Alley, JJ.
Exhibit 23.2

CONSENT OF INDEPENDENT REGISTERED PUBLIC ACCOUNTING FIRM

We have issued (i) our
report dated August 12, 2011 with respect to the consolidated statements of operations, changes in equity and cash flows of Mid-Con Energy Corporation for the year ended June 30, 2009, and (ii) our report dated March 9, 2012 with
respect to the consolidated financial statements of Mid-Con Energy Partners, LP for the years ended December 31, 2011 and 2010 and for the period from inception (July 1, 2009) to December 31, 2009 included in the Annual Report of Mid-Con
Energy Partners, LP on Form 10-K for the year ended December 31, 2011. We hereby consent to the incorporation by reference of said reports in the Registration Statements of Mid-Con Energy Partners, LP on Form S-8 (File No. 333-179161,
effective January 25, 2012).



|                      
|----------------------
|                      
|/s/ GRANT THORNTON LLP
|Tulsa, Oklahoma       
|March 9, 2012
```

[Congressional Record Volume 141, Number 79 (Friday, May 12, 1995)]
[Extensions of Remarks]
[Page E1025]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]

                        HONORING ROBERT E. MILLS

                                 ______

                              HON. JAY KIM

                             of california

                    in the house of representatives

                          Friday, May 12, 1995
  Mr. KIM. Mr. Speaker, it gives me great pleasure to rise today and 
pay tribute to one of California's outstanding citizens, Robert E. 
Mills on the 40th anniversary of his company, Associated Engineers.
  Robert E. ``Bob'' Mills, a registered engineer, founded the private 
consulting firm of Associated Engineers in 1955. Mr. Mills, using his 
acumen and entrepreneurial skills expanded the company to include all 
aspects of construction management, civil engineering, and survey work. 
This work included general civil infrastructure design and construction 
for industrial, commercial and residential developers, counties and 
municipalities, flood control districts, school districts, public and 
private water agencies, and State and Federal highway departments. In 
his ongoing pursuit of excellence Mr. Mills invented the Cutaline, an 
asphalt cutter which consists of a circular wheel on a special arm 
which is conected to a road grader. The Cutaline does in 1 hour what it 
would take three men, 2 days to do.
  As one who believes in the value of community service, Bob has served 
the community as chairman of the San Bernardino County Flood Control 
District Zone I Advisory Committee, chairman of Economic Development 
for the Upland Chamber of Commerce for 9 years, the board of directors 
for the California Council of Civil Engineers and Land Surveyors, 
chairment of the Grading Committee, which instituted changes in the 
State of California Uniform Building Code, the American Red Cross, the 
Upland Kiwanis Club, the United Fund, YMCA, and on the board of 
trustees of the Congregational Church in Ontario.
  I commend Bob on his outstanding and worthwhile achievements and 
congratulate him on 40 successful years of Associated Engineers.

                          ____________________
```
422 A.2d 1174

#### Commonwealth v. McClinnaham, Appellant.

Submitted March 23, 1979.

Eugene H. Clarke, Jr., for appellant; Eric B. Henson, Assistant District Attorney, for Commonwealth, appellee.

Before PRICE, SPAETH and LIPEZ, JJ.

The judgment of sentence of the lower court is hereby affirmed.
#### STATE OF NEW JERSEY v. RICHARD JOSEPH STARK.

March 27, 1984.

Petition for certification denied.
#### JULIA TRUPIANO v. RUTGERS UNIVERSITY.

January 23, 1984.

Petition for certification denied.
News United States Air Force
 Maintainers counter cyber threats at Red Flag 14-1Published Feb. 18, 2014
                        
                        By Maj. Teresa Sullivan
                        
                        
                        99th Air Base Wing Public Affairs
                **NELLIS AIR FORCE BASE, Nev. (AFNS) --**
                For the first time, maintainers learn how to counter cyber threats on the flightline through innovation and adaptability during Red Flag 14-1 here. 
Maintainers are not only expected to keep their aircraft in the fight, but are also being tested on scenarios they may face while in a combat zone.
"What we've done is created what we call a contested, degraded or operationally limited environment, or CDO, for our maintainers, and it's designed to prepare our Airmen for what they may face in a major combat environment," said Maj. Christopher Vance, the 414th Combat Training Squadron maintenance division chief, and who's in charge of creating maintenance training scenarios. "This is a beta test for maintenance. CDO has never before been applied to maintenance during the exercise."
Red Flag leaders said they wanted to ensure Airmen on the flightline are able to problem-solve and respond to their environment if and when they are faced with a compromise in technology or cyber threats. Scenarios were devised to train maintainers in a similar format to Red Flag pilots. 
"Our maintainers are very innovative and come up with solutions to problems on their own all the time, but this has raised their awareness to a new level," said Lt. Col. Tony Lombardo, the 366th Air Expeditionary Wing maintenance group commander at Red Flag 14-1. "The good thing is our Airmen are aware of technology, and they're adaptable. It's amazing to see them embrace this challenge." 
Red Flag maintainers also receive academics on cyber vulnerabilities, information operations and other CDO-related threats. 
"Our Airmen want the feedback," Lombardo said. "At the end of the day, they want to know how they did against the scenario."
Instructors from the Air Force Advanced Maintenance and Munitions Operations School, the weapons school of maintenance, are also on scene to serve as observers and to document how the Airmen respond to the challenges given to them. Their mission is to take that information and create tactics, techniques and procedures, and recommend official Air Force doctrine on how maintenance will counter cyber vulnerabilities on into the future.
"This training is necessary for our maintainers," said Chief Master Sgt. Gerard Liburd, the 366th AEW senior maintenance superintendent at Red Flag 14-1. "This is a new Air Force, and we need to be prepared for all types of threats." 
"They have higher situational awareness," Liburd said about the maintainers. "If something looks out of place, they're all over it. If the computer doesn't work, they create a workaround. We're hoping our Airmen can take what they're learning here and incorporate it in to their training back home."maintainers 



red flag 



nellis afb 



Aircraft
<PAGE>

                                                                    EXHIBIT 32.1

                  CERTIFICATION BY THE CHIEF EXECUTIVE OFFICER
     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 Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q for the period ended May
17, 2004, of CKE Restaurants, Inc. (the "Company") as filed with the Securities
and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the "Report"), I, Andrew F. Puzder,
Chief Executive Officer of the Company, certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section
1350, as adopted pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002,
that:

      1.    The Report fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) or
            15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 (15 U.S.C. Section
            78m(a) or Section 780(d)); and

      2.    The information contained in the Report fairly presents, in all
            material respects, the financial condition and results of operations
            of the Company.

      In witness whereof, the undersigned has executed and delivered this
certificate as of the date set forth opposite his signature below.

Date: June 22, 2004                          /s/ Andrew F. Puzder
                                             -----------------------------------
                                             Andrew F. Puzder
                                             Chief Executive Officer
**Exhibit 31.2**

**Certification of Chief Financial Officer**

**Pursuant to**

**Rule 13a-14(a)/15d-14(a)**

I, Dennis M. Mulroy, ChiefFinancial Officer of Cardium Therapeutics, Inc., certify that: 

1. I have reviewed this Quarterly Report on Form 10-QSB of Cardium Therapeutics, Inc.;

2. Based on my knowledge, this report does not contain any untrue statement of a material fact or omit to state a material fact necessary to make thestatements 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, the financial statements, and other financial information included in this report, fairly present in all material respects the financial condition, results of operations and cash flows of the small business issuer as of, andfor, the periods presented in this report; 

4. The small business issuer’s other certifying officer(s) and I are responsible for establishing andmaintaining disclosure controls and procedures (as defined in Exchange Act Rules 13a-15(e) and 15d-15(e)) for the small business issuer and have: 

a) designed such disclosure controls and procedures, or caused such disclosure controls and procedures to be designed under our supervision, to ensure that material information relating to the small business issuer, including itsconsolidated subsidiaries, is made known to us by others within those entities, particularly during the period in which this report is being prepared; 

b) evaluated the effectiveness of the small business issuer’s disclosure controls and procedures and presented in this report our conclusions about the effectiveness of the disclosure controls and procedures, asof the end of the period covered by this report based on such evaluation; and 

c) disclosed in this report any change in the small businessissuer’s internal control over financial reporting that occurred during the small business issuer’s most recent fiscal quarter (the small business issuer’s fourth fiscal quarter in the case of an annual report) that has materiallyaffected, or is reasonably likely to materially affect, the small business issuer’s internal control over financial reporting; and 

5. The smallbusiness issuer’s other certifying officer(s) and I have disclosed, based on our most recent evaluation of internal control over financial reporting, to the small business issuer’s auditors and the audit committee of the small businessissuer’s board of directors (or persons performing the equivalent functions): 

a) all significant deficiencies and material weaknessesin the design or operation of internal control over financial reporting which are reasonably likely to adversely affect the small business issuer’s ability to record, process, summarize and report financial information; and 

b) any fraud, whether or not material, that involves management or other employees who have a significant role in the small business issuer’sinternal control over financial reporting. 

Date: May 15, 2006