alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
National Advisory Committee on Windstorm Impact 

Reduction (NACWIR) Member 

 

Parthiv A. Dangodara, P.E.

Global Windstorm Specialist

AIG

Mr. Dangodara’s expertise is in the wind-loss insurance 

industry. He has a Bachelor of Science (B.S.) degree in 

electrical engineering and an extensive background in 

windstorm risk assessment and loss prevention. Mr. 

Dangodara is a Global Windstorm Specialist with the 

Property Casualty component of the American 

Insurance Group, Inc. (AIG). 

Prior to joining AIG, Mr. Dangodara worked for 15 

years with the Factory Mutual Insurance Company 

(commonly known as FM Global) as a Loss Control 

Specialist and a Wind Specialist. FM Global is a market 

leader among commercial property insurers in the U.S., which 

specializes in loss prevention services primarily to large corporations throughout the world in the 

Highly Protected Risk (HPR) property insurance market sector. Mr. Dangodara has conducted 

numerous HPR facility risk audits covering the following areas:

- critical facilities, including hospitals;

- manufacturing facilities, including semiconductors and computers, pharmaceuticals, 

boats, warehouses, juice and dairy, newspaper printing, machine shops, pulp, paper 

and plywood mills, and cement plants; and

- infrastructure and lifeline facilities, including telecommunications switching 

facilities, power plants, substations, co-generation facilities, waste processing plants, 

and airplane hangars.

He conducted several hundred field surveys and wind loss investigations through his work at 

AIG and FM Global, and as a RICOWI Wind Investigation Team Member.
Conformed Copy
                                                                    Exhibit 3

                             CERTIFICATE OF TRUST
                                      OF
                          PREMIER AUTO TRUST 1997-3


               THIS Certificate of Trust of Premier Auto Trust 1997-3 (the
"Trust"), dated September 5, 1997, is being duly executed and filed by Chase
Manhattan Bank Delaware, a Delaware banking corporation, as trustee, to form
a business trust under the Delaware Business Trust Act (12 Del.C. ss. 3801 et
seq.).


               1. Name: The name of the business trust formed hereby is
Premier Auto Trust 1997-3.


               2. Delaware Trustee: The name and business address of the
trustee of the Trust in the State of Delaware is Chase Manhattan Bank
Delaware, 1201 Market Street, Wilmington, Delaware 19801, Attention:
Corporate Trustee Administration Department.


               3. Effective Date: This Certificate of Trust shall be
effective upon its filing with the Secretary of State of the State of
Delaware.


               IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the undersigned, being the sole trustee of
the Trust, has executed this Certificate of Trust as of the date first-above
written.


                                            CHASE MANHATTAN BANK DELAWARE,
                                            not in its individual capacity
                                            but solely as Owner Trustee under
                                            the Trust Agreement dated as of
                                            September 5, 1997


                                            By:    /s/ Denis Kelly
                                                   --------------------
                                            Name:  DENIS KELLY
                                            Title: TRUST OFFICER
II 

108TH CONGRESS 

2D SESSION H. R. 3858 

IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES 

OCTOBER 6, 2004 

Received 

AN ACT 

To amend the Public Health Service Act to increase the 

supply of pancreatic islet cells for research, and to provide for better coordination of Federal efforts and information on islet cell transplantation. 

1 Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representa2 tives of the United States of America in Congress assembled, 
2 

HR 3858 RDS 

1 SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE. 

2 This Act may be cited as the ‘‘Pancreatic Islet Cell 

3 Transplantation Act of 2004’’. 

4 SEC. 2. ORGAN PROCUREMENT ORGANIZATION CERTIFI5 CATION. 

6 Section 371 of the Public Health Service Act (42 

7 U.S.C. 273) is amended by adding at the end the fol8 lowing: 

9 ‘‘(c) Pancreata procured by an organ procurement or10 ganization and used for islet cell transplantation or re11 search shall be counted for purposes of certification or re12 certification under subsection (b).’’. 

13 SEC. 3. ANNUAL ASSESSMENT ON PANCREATIC ISLET CELL 

14 TRANSPLANTATION. 

15 Section 429 of the Public Health Service Act (42 

16 U.S.C. 285c–3) is amended by adding at the end the fol17 lowing: 

18 ‘‘(d) In each annual report prepared by the Diabetes 

19 Mellitus Interagency Coordinating Committee pursuant to 

20 subsection (c), the Committee shall include an assessment 

21 of the Federal activities and programs related to pan22 creatic islet cell transplantation. Such assessment shall, 

23 at a minimum, address the following: 

24 ‘‘(1) The adequacy of Federal funding for tak25 ing advantage of scientific opportunities relating to 

26 pancreatic islet cell transplantation. 
3 

HR 3858 RDS 

1 ‘‘(2) Current policies and regulations affecting 

2 the supply of pancreata for islet cell transplantation. 

3 ‘‘(3) The effect of xenotransplantation on ad4 vancing pancreatic islet cell transplantation. 

5 ‘‘(4) The effect of United Network for Organ 

6 Sharing policies regarding pancreas retrieval and 

7 islet cell transplantation. 

8 ‘‘(5) The existing mechanisms to collect and co9 ordinate outcomes data from existing islet cell trans10 plantation trials. 

11 ‘‘(6) Implementation of multiagency clinical in12 vestigations of pancreatic islet cell transplantation. 

13 ‘‘(7) Recommendations for such legislation and 

14 administrative actions as the Committee considers 

15 appropriate to increase the supply of pancreata 

16 available for islet cell transplantation.’’. 

Passed the House of Representatives October 5, 

2004. 

Attest: JEFF TRANDAHL, 

Clerk.
<PAGE>



                                                                    EXHIBIT 32.1

                                  CERTIFICATION

            PURSUANT TO SECTION 906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002
                    (SUBSECTION (A) AND (B) OF SECTION 1350,
                  CHAPTER 63 OF TITLE 18, UNITED STATES CODE)

      Pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, the undersigned officer of Vornado
Operating Company (the "Company"), hereby certifies, to such officer's
knowledge, that the Company's Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q for the three months
ended March 31, 2004 (the "Report") fully complies with the requirements of
Section 13(a) or 15(d), as applicable, of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934
and that the information contained in the Report fairly presents, in all
material respects, the financial condition and results of operations of the
Company.

May 5, 2004                               /s/ STEVEN ROTH
                                          ------------------------------
                                          Name:    Steven Roth
                                          Title:   Chief Executive Officer
---

| | Karl T. Swanson, SME, MAusIMM
| | -----------------------------
| | P.O. Box 86                  
| | Larkspur, CO 80118, USA      
| | Fax: (501) 638-9162          

Exhibit 99.12

CONSENT OF TECHNICAL REPORT AUTHOR

Reference is made to the technical report entitled NI 43-101
Technical Report, Yukon-Nevada Gold Corp., Jerritt Canyon Property, Elko County,
Nevada, USA, dated December 31, 2011, which the undersigned has prepared (the
Technical Report). The undersigned hereby consents to the written
disclosure of extracts therefrom or summaries thereof, either directly or as
incorporated by reference, in the annual information form of Veris Gold Corp.
(the Corporation) dated March 28, 2013 and the Annual Report on Form
40-F of the Corporation for the fiscal year ended December 31, 2012. The
undersigned further consents to the incorporation by reference in the
Registration Statement on Form S-8 (No. 333-171775) and the Registration
Statement on Form F-10 (No. 333-184496), as amended or supplemented, of the
Corporation of the extracts from, or summaries of, the Technical Report.





/s/ Karl T.
SwansonKarl T. Swanson, SME, MAusIMM March 28, 2013

---
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF ILLINOIS

EASTERN DIVISION

[REDACTED], 

Plaintiff,

v.

[REDACTED], et al.,

Defendants.

Case No. 20-cv-02617

Judge Edmond E. Chang

Magistrate Judge Jeffrey Cole

MEMORANDUM IN SUPPORT OF PLAINTIFF’S EX PARTE 

MOTION TO EXTEND THE TEMPORARY RESTRAINING ORDER

Pursuant to Rule 65(b)(2) of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure and the Court’s 

inherent power to effectuate its own orders, Plaintiff seeks to extend the Temporary Restraining 

Order granted and entered by the Court on May 15, 2020 (the “TRO”) [30] for a period of 

fourteen (14) days until June 12, 2020. 

On May 15, 2020, this Court entered the TRO against the Defendants identified on 

Schedule A to the Amended Complaint. [30]. As of May 26, 2020, the third parties have not 

completed effectuating the TRO. Declaration of Justin R. Gaudio at ¶ 2. Plaintiff plans to freeze 

financial accounts identified by the third parties. Id. 

Rule 65(b)(2) states that a temporary restraining order entered without notice may be 

extended provided a party can show, prior to expiration of the order, good cause for such an 

extension. Fed. R. Civ. P. 65(b)(2). Plaintiff respectfully submits that there is good cause to 

extend the TRO, since there is a high probability that the Defendants will continue to harm 

Plaintiff without the TRO in place. Specifically, Defendants will likely attempt to move any 

assets from their financial accounts to off-shore bank accounts. As discussed in Plaintiff’s

Memorandum in Support of its Ex Parte Motion for Entry of a Temporary Restraining Order, 

Case: 1:20-cv-02617 Document #: 32 Filed: 05/26/20 Page 1 of 2 PageID #:948
2

and as found by the Court in granting the TRO, this possibility of harm is significant. 

Accordingly, in the interest of justice, Plaintiff submits that extension of the TRO is necessary. 

In light of the above, Plaintiff respectfully requests that the TRO be extended for a period of 

fourteen (14) days until June 12, 2020.

Dated this 26th day of May 2020. Respectfully submitted,

/s/ Justin R. Gaudio

Amy C. Ziegler

Justin R. Gaudio

RiKaleigh C. Johnson 

Jake M. Christensen

Greer, Burns & Crain, Ltd.

300 South Wacker Drive, Suite 2500

Chicago, Illinois 60606

312.360.0080 / 312.360.9315 (facsimile)

aziegler@gbc.law

jgaudio@gbc.law

rjohnson@gbc.law

jchristensen@gbc.law

Counsel for Plaintiff 

Case: 1:20-cv-02617 Document #: 32 Filed: 05/26/20 Page 2 of 2 PageID #:949
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<ARTICLE> 5
<MULTIPLIER> 1,000

<S>                                                         <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                                               6-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                                           DEC-31-1999
<PERIOD-START>                                              JAN-01-1999
<PERIOD-END>                                                JUN-30-1999
<CASH>                                                      111,645
<SECURITIES>                                                31,397
<RECEIVABLES>                                               8,868
<ALLOWANCES>                                                1,534
<INVENTORY>                                                 2,014
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                                            157,331
<PP&E>                                                      8,065
<DEPRECIATION>                                              1,734
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                              166,188
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                                       25,162
<BONDS>                                                     0
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                       0
<PREFERRED>                                                 0
<COMMON>                                                    293,403
<OTHER-SE>                                                  (153,417)
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                                166,188
<SALES>                                                     63,806
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                                            63,806
<CGS>                                                       58,706
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                               114,457
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                            15,579
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                            0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                                          18,144
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                            (66,230)
<INCOME-TAX>                                                0
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                                         (66,230)
<DISCONTINUED>                                              0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                             0
<CHANGES>                                                   0
<NET-INCOME>                                                (66,230)
<EPS-BASIC>                                                 (2.97)
<EPS-DILUTED>                                               (2.97)


</TABLE>
**Exhibit 31.1**

**CERTIFICATION PURSUANT TOSECTION 302 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002**

I, Michael H. Lee, certify that:

1.                 I have reviewedthe Annual Report of Tower Group, Inc. (the “Company”) on Form 10-Kfor the period ending December 31, 2005 as filed with the Securities andExchange Commission on the date hereof (the “Report”);

2.                 Based on myknowledge, the Report does not contain any untrue statement of a material factor omit to state a material fact necessary to make the statements made, inlight of the circumstances under which such statements were made, notmisleading with respect to the period covered by the Report;

3.                 Based on myknowledge, the financial statements, and other financial information includedin the Report, fairly present in all material respects the financial condition,results of operations and cash flows of the Company as of, and for, the periodspresented in the Report;

4.                 The Company’sother certifying officer and I are responsible for establishing and maintainingdisclosure controls and procedures (as defined in Exchange Act Rules 13a-15(e) and15d-15(e)) for the Company and have:

(a)          designed such disclosurecontrols and procedures, or caused such disclosure controls and procedures tobe designed under our supervision, to ensure that material information relatingto the Company, including its consolidated subsidiaries, is made known to us byothers within those entities, particularly during the period in which theReport is being prepared;

(b)         evaluated theeffectiveness of the Company’s disclosure controls and procedures and presentedin the Report our conclusions about the effectiveness of the disclosurecontrols and procedures, as of the end of the period covered by the Reportbased on such evaluation; and

(c)          disclosed in the Reportthat there were no changes in the Company’s internal control over financialreporting that occurred during the Company’s fourth quarter of 2005 that hasmaterially affected, or is reasonably likely to materially affect, the Company’sinternal control over financial reporting; and

5.                 The Company’sother certifying officer and I have disclosed, based on our most recentevaluation of internal control over financial reporting, to the Company’sauditors and to the audit committee of the Board of Directors:

a)               all significantdeficiencies and material weaknesses in the design or operation of internalcontrol over financial reporting which are reasonably likely to adverselyaffect the Company’s ability to record, process, summarize and report financialinformation; and

b)              anyfraud, whether or not material, that involves management or other employees whohave a significant role in the Company’s internal control over financialreporting.
| /s/ MICHAEL H. LEE       |   |
|--------------------------|--------|
| Michael H. Lee           |   |
| Chief Executive  Officer |   |
| March 15,  2006     |   |

 

----
Compensation of Strategic Advisory Committee of Board of Directors



 EXHIBIT 10.35 
  
 Compensation of Strategic Advisory Committee of Board of Directors 
  
 The chairman of the Company’s Strategic Advisory Committee (the “Committee”)
will receive an annual retainer of $25,000, but will not receive any fee for meetings attended; and 
  
 The other members of the Committee will receive a fee of $2,000 for each meeting attended, but will not receive an annual retainer.
August 15, 2007 

From: Clayton H. Lewis <Clayton.Lewis@Colorado.EDU> 

To: TGDC/NIST 

Subject: VVSG Draft (August 7,2007) 

The people at NIST and elsewhere who have developed the usability performance requirements 

in the draft are to be commended for excellent work. Because of the demographic inclusion in 

the testing, the new benchmarks represent a big step forward for accessibility for voters with 

disabilities, as well as for usability for all voters. As a usability researcher with more than 30 

years experience in industry and academe I am very impressed that the proposal, based on solid 

background work detailed on the vote.nist site, presents methods that are simple, clear, and 

sensible, as well as practical and effective. Bravo! 

Clayton Lewis 

Professor of Computer Science 

Scientist in Residence, Coleman Institute for Cognitive Disabilities 

University of Colorado 

http://www.cs.colorado.edu/~clayton
NOT FOR PUBLICATION

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT

ANTHONY RICHARDO TURNER, 

Plaintiff-Appellant, 

 v. 

C.E. DUCART, Warden, Pelican Bay State 

Prison (C.D.C.R. - Agency); et al., 

Defendants-Appellees.

No. 16-16914 

D.C. No. 4:15-cv-04839-JSW 

MEMORANDUM*

Appeal from the United States District Court

for the Northern District of California

Jeffrey S. White, District Judge, Presiding

Submitted October 23, 2017**

Before: McKEOWN, WATFORD, and FRIEDLAND, Circuit Judges. 

California state prisoner, Anthony Richardo Turner, appeals pro se from the 

district court’s judgment dismissing for failure to file an amended complaint his 42 

U.S.C. § 1983 action alleging constitutional violations. We have jurisdiction under 

28 U.S.C. § 1291. We review for an abuse of discretion. Ferdik v. Bonzelet, 963 

 

* This disposition is not appropriate for publication and is not precedent 

except as provided by Ninth Circuit Rule 36-3.

** The panel unanimously concludes this case is suitable for decision 

without oral argument. See Fed. R. App. P. 34(a)(2).

FILED

NOV 1 2017

MOLLY C. DWYER, CLERK

U.S. COURT OF APPEALS
2 16-16914 

F.3d 1258, 1260 (9th Cir. 1992). We vacate and remand.

The district court dismissed Turner’s action with prejudice because Turner 

failed to file a timely amended complaint in compliance with its May 15, 2016 

order. However, Turner submitted evidence showing that he failed to file a timely 

amended complaint because prison officials obstructed his access to the courts. 

See Bateman v. U.S. Postal Serv., 231 F.3d 1220, 1223 (9th Cir. 2000) (setting 

forth elements of excusable neglect under Fed. R. Civ. P. 60(b)(1) and explaining 

that excusable neglect is a basis for reconsideration of a final order). We vacate 

and remand for the district court to consider Turner’s amended complaint in the 

first instance. We note that to the extent the district court’s October 27, 2016 order 

determined that Turner’s amended complaint could be dismissed for failure to 

comply with Fed. R. Civ. P. 20(a)(2), that ruling was in error. See Fed. R. Civ. P. 

21 (“Misjoinder of parties is not a ground for dismissing an action. On motion or 

on its own, the court may at any time, on just terms, add or drop a party. The court 

may also sever any claim against a party.”). 

Turner’s claim that the district court ruled on summary judgment is 

incorrect. 

We reject as without merit Turner’s contention that the district court denied 
3 16-16914 

Turner due process. 

We do not consider documents and facts not presented to the district court.

See United States v. Elias, 921 F.2d 870, 874 (9th Cir. 1990) (“Documents or facts 

not presented to the district court are not part of the record on appeal.”).

Turner’s motion for appointment of counsel, set forth in his opening brief, is 

denied. 

VACATED and REMANDED.
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 

NORTHERN DISTRICT OF ILLINOIS 

EASTERN DIVISION 

CAMELBAK PRODUCTS, LLC,

Plaintiff,

v.

THE PARTNERSHIPS AND UNINCORPORATED 

ASSOCIATIONS IDENTIFIED ON SCHEDULE “A”,

Defendants.

Civil Action No.: 1:20-cv-03952

Judge Rebecca R. Pallmeyer

Magistrate Judge Jeffrey T. Gilbert

SATISFACTION OF JUDGMENT

WHEREAS, a judgment was entered in the above action on September 30, 2020 [41] in 

favor of Plaintiffs and against the Defendants Identified in Amended Schedule A. Plaintiffs

acknowledge payment of an agreed upon damages amount, costs, and interest and desires to release 

this judgment and hereby fully and completely satisfy the same as to the following Defendants:

NO. DEFENDANT

546 sport_good

393 Old Street Store

373 Heracles Store

457 Zuzi Store

236 huasharenmin2013

THEREFORE, full and complete satisfaction of said judgment as to above identified 

Defendants is hereby acknowledged, and the Clerk of the Court is hereby authorized and directed 

to make an entry of the full and complete satisfaction on the docket of said judgment.

Case: 1:20-cv-03952 Document #: 55 Filed: 12/21/20 Page 1 of 2 PageID #:9434
Dated: December 18, 2020 Respectfully submitted, 

Yanling Jiang (Bar No. 6309336) 

JianglP LLC 

3 l 2-675-6297 

l l l West Jackson BLVD STE 1700

Chicago, IL 60604 

Telephone: 312-675-6297 

Email: yanling@jiangip.com 

ATTORNEY FOR PLAINTIFF 

Subscribed and sworn before me by Yanling Jiang, on this 18th day of December, 2020. 

Given under by hand and notarial seal. 

MICHAEL SEVERT 

Official Seal 

1 Notary Public • State of Illinois 

, My Commis sion Expires Sep 11, 2023 

Notary Public 

State of :tl ---------

County of 

Case: 1:20-cv-03952 Document #: 55 Filed: 12/21/20 Page 2 of 2 PageID #:9435
**EXHIBIT 35.2**

** **

ANNUAL SERVICER’S CERTIFICATE

 

WELLS FARGO DEALER FLOORPLAN MASTER NOTETRUST

 

March 29, 2019

 

The undersigned, aduly authorized officer of Wells Fargo Commercial Distribution Finance, LLC (“CDF”), as the sub-servicer (the“Sub-Servicer”), pursuant to the Amended and Restated Sub-Servicing Agreement dated as of August 10, 2006 (asmay be further amended and supplemented from time to time, the “Agreement”), between Wells Fargo Bank, N.A.and CDF, does hereby certify that:

 

1.          Areview of the activities of Sub-Servicer during the fiscal year ended December 31, 2018 (the “reporting period”), andof its performance under the Agreement, has been made under my supervision.

 

2.          Tothe best of my knowledge, based on such review, Sub-Servicer has fulfilled all of its obligations under the Agreement in all materialrespects throughout the reporting period.

 

 

 

 

IN WITNESS WHEREOF,the undersigned has duly executed this certificate the date first above written.