alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
[Federal Register Volume 75, Number 193 (Wednesday, October 6, 2010)]
[Notices]
[Page 61744]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2010-25080]


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

DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY

Federal Energy Regulatory Commission

[Docket No. ER10-2750-000]


The Order of St. Benedict of New Hampshire; Supplemental Notice 
That Initial Market-Based Rate Filing Includes Request for Blanket 
Section 204 Authorization

September 22, 2010.
    This is a supplemental notice in the above-referenced proceeding of 
The Order of St. Benedict of New Hampshire's application for market-
based rate authority, with an accompanying rate tariff, noting that 
such application includes a request for blanket authorization, under 18 
CFR part 34, of future issuances of securities and assumptions of 
liability.
    Any person desiring to intervene or to protest should file with the 
Federal Energy Regulatory Commission, 888 First Street, NE., 
Washington, DC 20426, in accordance with Rules 211 and 214 of the 
Commission's Rules of Practice and Procedure (18 CFR 385.211 and 
385.214). Anyone filing a motion to intervene or protest must serve a 
copy of that document on the Applicant.
    Notice is hereby given that the deadline for filing protests with 
regard to the applicant's request for blanket authorization, under 18 
CFR part 34, of future issuances of securities and assumptions of 
liability, is October 12, 2010.
    The Commission encourages electronic submission of protests and 
interventions in lieu of paper, using the FERC Online links at http://www.ferc.gov. To facilitate electronic service, persons with Internet 
access who will eFile a document and/or be listed as a contact for an 
intervenor must create and validate an eRegistration account using the 
eRegistration link. Select the eFiling link to log on and submit the 
intervention or protests.
    Persons unable to file electronically should submit an original and 
14 copies of the intervention or protest to the Federal Energy 
Regulatory Commission, 888 First Street, NE., Washington, DC 20426.
    The filings in the above-referenced proceeding are accessible in 
the Commission's eLibrary system by clicking on the appropriate link in 
the above list. They are also available for review in the Commission's 
Public Reference Room in Washington, DC. There is an eSubscription link 
on the Web site that enables subscribers to receive e-mail notification 
when a document is added to a subscribed docket(s). For assistance with 
any FERC Online service, please e-mail <a href="/cdn-cgi/l/email-protection#5c1a190e1f1332303532390f292c2c332e281c3a392e3f723b332a"><span class="__cf_email__" data-cfemail="4f090a1d0c00212326212a1c3a3f3f203d3b0f292a3d2c61282039">[email protected]</span></a> or 
call (866) 208-3676 (toll free). For TTY, call (202) 502-8659.

Nathaniel J. Davis, Sr.,
Deputy Secretary.
[FR Doc. 2010-25080 Filed 10-5-10; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6717-01-P


</pre><script data-cfasync="false" src="/cdn-cgi/scripts/5c5dd728/cloudflare-static/email-decode.min.js"></script></body>
</html>
(logo)**usbank**

All of**us**serving you** **

** **

** **

**Annual Statement ofCompliance**

**CitigroupCommercial Mortgage Securities Inc.,**

**CommercialMortgage Pass-Through Certificates, Series 2014-GC21**

 

*VIA: EMAIL*

 

CitigroupCommercial Mortgage Securities Inc.

390Greenwich Street, 5th Floor

NewYork, New York 10013

Attention:Paul Vanderslice

Email:paul.t.vanderslice@citi.com

 

GS Mortgage Securities Corporation II, as Depositor for

GS Mortgage Securities Corporation II, 

Commercial Mortgage Pass-Through Certificates, Series2014-GC20

& GS Mortgage Securities Corporation II, 

Commercial Mortgage Pass-Through Certificates, Series2014-GC22

200 West Street

New York, New York 10282

Attention: Leah Nivison

Email: leah.nivison@gs.com

 

Wells Fargo Bank, National Association, as CertificateAdministrator for

GS Mortgage Securities Corporation II, 

Commercial Mortgage Pass-Through Certificates, Series2014-GC20

& GS Mortgage Securities Corporation II, 

Commercial Mortgage Pass-Through Certificates, Series2014-GC22

9062 Old Annapolis Road

Columbia, Maryland 21045

Email: trustadministrationgroup@wellsfargo.com

Email: cts.sec.notifications@wellsfargo.com

Attention: SEC Notifications

 

 

Re: Pooling and ServicingAgreement dated as of May 1, 2014 (the “Agreement”) between CitigroupCommercial Mortgage Securities Inc., as Depositor, Wells Fargo Bank, NationalAssociation, as the Master Servicer, LNR Partners, LLC, as the SpecialServicer, Park Bridge Lender Services LLC, as the Operating Advisor, and U.S.Bank National Association, as the Certificate Administrator and Trustee.

 

I, Kimberly O. Jacobs, aSenior Vice President of U.S. Bank National Association, as CertificateAdministrator, as a certifying servicer hereby certify that:

 

(1) A review of the activitiesof the Certificate Administrator during the preceding calendar year (the “ReportingPeriod”) and of the performance of the Certificate Administrator under theAgreement has been made under my supervision; and

 

(2) To the best of myknowledge, based on such review, the Certificate Administrator has fulfilledall its obligations under the Agreement in all material respects throughoutsuch Reporting Period. 

 

 

Capitalized terms used but notdefined herein have the meanings set forth in the Agreement.

 

 

Date: March 1, 2018

 

 

U.S. Bank National Association,as Certificate Administrator

 

 

By: /s/ Kimberly O. Jacobs

Kimberly O. Jacobs

Senior Vice President
#### Twyla Luquette WELLS v. Robert J. WELLS, Jr.

No. 2011-CC-2359.

Supreme Court of Louisiana.

Dec. 2, 2011.

In re Wells Jr., Robert J.; — Defendant; Applying For Supervisory and/or Remedi*1181al Writs, Parish of Vermilion, 15th Judicial District Court Div. M, No. 90368 M; to the Court of Appeal, Third Circuit, No. CW 11-01068.

Denied.
Exhibit 32.1

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 NSTAR (the Company) on Form 10-K for the year ending December 31, 2009 as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the Report), I, Thomas J. May, Chairman, President
and 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 to the best of my knowledge:



|(i) | the Report fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) or 15(d) of the 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.
|---- | ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------



|                       |  |     |  |                        
|---------------------- |  | --- |  | -----------------------
|Date: February 5, 2010 |  | By: |  | /S/    THOMAS J.
MAY   
|                       |  |     |  | Thomas J. May          
|                       |  |     |  | Chairman, President and
|                       |  |     |  | Chief Executive Officer
#### Hamm *v.*Review Board of the Indiana Employment Security Division et al.

[No. 19,638.

Filed October 11, 1961.]

*319
      *Thomas A. Hoadley,*of Blomington, for appellant.

*Edtvin K. Steers,*Attorney General, and *Keith Campbell,*Deputy Attorney General, for appellee, Review Board of Indiana Employment Security Division.

Cooper, J.

This is a matter of judicial review from a decision of the Review Board of the Indiana Employment Security Division based upon the denial of a claim brought by an employee to recover unemployment benefits by reason of termination of the appellant’s employment on or about the 4th day of August, 1960.

The Attorney General of Indiana, by one of his duly-appointed deputies, has filed a Confession of Error and admits that the judgment rendered in this cause should, in all things, be reversed. It is, nevertheless, the duty and responsibility of an ap*320pellate court in such matters to examine the record and determine whether the law, as applied to the facts- in the cause being reviewed, requires a reversal. See *Myers*v. *State*(1954), 233 Ind. 66, 67, 116 N. E. 2d 839; *Green*v. *State*(1953), 232 Ind. 596, 115 N. E. 2d 211.

The record reveals that the appellant herein filed his “Application for Benefits” at the Bloomington, Indiana office of the Indiana Employment Security Division; said office denied his application. Thereafter, the appellant requested an appeal from the decision of the Claims Office to an appeals referee.

The record further reveals that oh November 23, 1960, the cause was held by an appeals referee, and, at the time' of said hearing, the appellant advised said referee, in substance, that he had employed an attorney, naming him, to represent him in the matter and that the appellant had attempted to reach' his attorney the day before but found out he was in court. The referee ignored the statements made by the appellant, and proceeded to interrogate him, and at thé conclusion of said interrogation,' entered a finding against the appellant herein.

We do not deem it necessary to cite authority that the due process of law provisions of both constitutions ■apply equally to administrative boards, the same as to courts of law, and that the appellant herein had the right to be represented by counsel in this matter before the appeals referee, and at every other stage of the proceedings. When the referee proceeded in the matter as revealed by the record herein, without giving the appellant the benefit of his counsel, such act was arbitrary and illegal and calls for us to reverse the judgment and remand the cause with instructions to grant the appellant herein a full and complete hearing *321and the right to appear before the appeals referee with his counsel in the manner provided for by law.

Ax, J., Myers, J., Ryan, P. J., concur.

Note. — Reported in 177 N. E. 2d 337.
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<ARTICLE> 5
<LEGEND>
This schedule contains summary financial information extracted from the
Balance Sheet at June 30, 2000 (unaudited) and Statements of Income for the
three months ended June 30, 2000 (unaudited) and is qualified in its entirety
by reference to such financial statements.
</LEGEND>


<S>                                     <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                                    3-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          MAR-31-2001
<PERIOD-END>                               JUN-30-2000
<CASH>                                         714,000
<SECURITIES>                                         0
<RECEIVABLES>                               14,526,000
<ALLOWANCES>                                (1,258,000)
<INVENTORY>                                  6,967,000
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                            23,314,000
<PP&E>                                       9,862,000
<DEPRECIATION>                              (3,082,000)
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                              35,247,000
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                        6,868,000
<BONDS>                                              0
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                        51,000
<OTHER-SE>                                  28,328,000
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                35,247,000
<SALES>                                     16,561,000
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                            16,561,000
<CGS>                                       11,347,000
<TOTAL-COSTS>                               11,347,000
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                             3,812,000
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                     0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                              21,000
<INCOME-PRETAX>                              1,413,000
<INCOME-TAX>                                   543,000
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                            870,000
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                   870,000
<EPS-BASIC>                                      .17
<EPS-DILUTED>                                      .16



</TABLE>
#### In re Byrlyne June Van DYKE.

No. 2010-OB-1188.

Supreme Court of Louisiana.

June 16, 2010.

ORDER

Considering the Petition for Transfer from Disability Inactive Status and the Petition for Interim Suspension Pursuant to Supreme Court Rule XIX, § 19 filed by the Office of Disciplinary Counsel,

IT IS ORDERED that Byrlyne June Van Dyke, Louisiana Bar Roll number 23581, be and she hereby is reinstated to active status pursuant to Supreme Court Rule XIX, § 22(G). Pursuant to Supreme Court Rule XIX, § 26(E), this order is effective immediately.

IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that respondent be and she hereby is suspended from the practice of law on an interim basis pursuant to Supreme Court Rule XIX, § 19, pending further orders of this court.

IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that necessary disciplinary proceedings be instituted in accordance with Supreme Court Rule XIX, §§ 11 and 19.

FOR THE COURT:

/s/ Jeannette T. Knoll Justice, Supreme Court of Louisiana
EXHIBIT 13.2





CERTIFICATION OF CHIEF FINANCIAL 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 Annual Report on Form 20-F of Cresud S.A.C.I.F. y A. (the “Company”) for the fiscal year ended June 30, 2014 as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the “Report”), Matias Gaivironsky, as Chief Financial Officer of the company, hereby certifies, 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 and Exchange Act of 1934; and





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





Cresud S.A.C.I.F y A.October 31, 2014
By:
/s/ Matias GaivironskyMatias GaivironskyChief Financial Officer


This certification accompanies the Report pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002 and shall not, except as to the extent required by the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, be deemed filed by the company for purposes of Section 18 of the Securities and Exchange Act of 1934, as amended.
645 A.2d 786

#### IN THE MATTER OF ANTHONY J. CAVUTO, AN ATTORNEY AT LAW.

August 17, 1994.

ORDER TO SHOW CAUSE

The Office of Attorney Ethics having filed a petition with the Court seeking an order directing ANTHONY J. CAVUTO of MOUNT HOLLY to show cause why he should not be temporarily suspended from the practice of law pending the conclusion of ethics proceedings against him, and good cause appearing;

It is ORDERED that ANTHONY J. CAVUTO show cause before this Court on September 12, 1994, at 2:00 p.m., Supreme Court courtroom, Hughes Justice Complex, Trenton, why he should not be temporarily suspended from practice and why the Office of Attorney Ethics should not take protective action, pursuant to *Rule*l:20-'ll(c), as may be appropriate to gain possession and control of respondent’s legal files, records, practice and trust assets; and it is further

ORDERED that a co-signatory for respondent’s attorney trust account be named forthwith, that co-signatory to be approved by the Office of Attorney Ethics; and it is further

ORDERED that David E. Johnson, Jr., Esquire, or his designee, present this matter to the Court.
UNPUBLISHED

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

No. 18-6689

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,

 Plaintiff - Appellee,

v.

TERRY LEE SHIFFLETT,

 Defendant - Appellant.

Appeal from the United States District Court for the Northern District of West Virginia, 

at Martinsburg. Gina M. Groh, Chief District Judge. (3:99-cr-00042-GMG-RWT-3)

Submitted: October 18, 2018 Decided: October 29, 2018

Before DUNCAN, DIAZ, and THACKER, Circuit Judges.

Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion.

Terry Lee Shifflett, Appellant Pro Se. Paul Thomas Camilletti, Assistant United States 

Attorney, OFFICE OF THE UNITED STATES ATTORNEY, Martinsburg, West 

Virginia, for Appellee.

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.
2

PER CURIAM:

Terry Lee Shifflett appeals the district court’s order denying his motion for 

reduction of sentence. We have reviewed the record and find no reversible error. 

Accordingly, we affirm for the reasons stated by the district court. United States v. 

Shifflett, No. 3:99-cr-00042-GMG-RWT-3 (N.D.W. Va. June 5, 2018). We dispense 

with oral argument because the facts and legal contentions are adequately presented in 

the materials before this court and argument would not aid the decisional process.

AFFIRMED