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UNPUBLISHED

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

No. 02-6797

STEPHAN D. BROOKS,

Plaintiff - Appellant,

versus

JOHN DOE, Law Enforcement Officer; R. G.

BUENING,

Defendants - Appellees.

Appeal from the United States District Court for the Western

District of North Carolina, at Charlotte. Graham C. Mullen, Chief

District Judge. (CA-98-460-3-2MU)

Submitted: July 18, 2002 Decided: July 25, 2002

Before WIDENER, LUTTIG, and GREGORY, Circuit Judges.

Dismissed by unpublished per curiam opinion.

Stephan D. Brooks, Appellant Pro Se. Richard Harcourt Fulton,

OFFICE OF THE CITY ATTORNEY, Charlotte, North Carolina; Frank

Bayard Aycock, III, Charlotte, North Carolina, for Appellees.

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.

See Local Rule 36(c).
2

PER CURIAM:

Stephan D. Brooks appeals the district court’s order denying

relief on his 42 U.S.C.A. § 1983 (West Supp. 2002) complaint under

28 U.S.C.A. § 1915(e)(2) (West Supp. 2002). We have reviewed the

record and the district court’s opinion and find that this appeal

is frivolous. Accordingly, we dismiss the appeal on the reasoning

of the district court. See Brooks v. Doe, No. CA-98-460-3-2MU

(W.D.N.C. filed Apr. 30, 2002 & entered May 2, 2002). We dispense

with oral argument because the facts and legal contentions are

adequately presented in the materials before the court and argument

would not aid the decisional process.

DISMISSED
Exhibit 33.2

**REPORT ON ASSESSMENT OF COMPLIANCE WITH REGULATION AB SERVICING CRITERIA**

Securitisation Advisory Services Pty Limited (the "**Asserting Party**") is responsible for assessing compliance as of June 30, 2007 and for the period from February 27, 2007 (date of issuance of the Medallion Trust Series 2007-1G) through June 30, 2007 (the "**Reporting Period**") with the servicing criteria set forth in Section 229.1122(d) of the Code of Federal Regulations (the "**CFR**"), except for criteria 229.1122(d)(1)(ii)-(iv), 229.1122(d)(2)(iv)-(vi), 229.1122(d)(4)(i)-(ii), 229.1122(d)(4)(iv)-(xiii) in the CFR, which the Asserting Party has concluded are not applicable to the servicing of the Medallion Trust Series 2007-1G asset-backed securitization transaction backed by housing loan receivables and serviced by the Asserting Party (the "**ApplicableServicing Criteria**"). The sole asset-backed securitization transaction covered by this report was the Medallion Trust Series 2007-1G.

 

The Asserting Party has assessed its compliance with the Applicable Servicing Criteria for the Reporting Period and has concluded that the Asserting Party has complied, in all material respects, with the Applicable Servicing Criteria for the Medallion Trust Series 2007-1G asset-backed securitization transaction backed by housing loan receivables serviced by the Asserting Party.

 

Securitisation Advisory Services Pty Limited is a wholly-owned subsidiary of Commonwealth Bank of Australia.  Pursuant to board resolutions that authorize employees of Commonwealth Bank of Australia to act on behalf of Securitisation Advisory Services Pty Limited in performing the servicing functions of Securitisation Advisory Services Pty Limited in relation to the Medallion Trust Series 2007-1G, the servicing duties of Securitisation Advisory Services Pty Limited in relation to the servicing of the Medallion Trust Series 2007-1G have been effected by employees of Commonwealth Bank of Australia.

 

Ernst & Young, an independent registered public accounting firm, has issued an attestation report on the assessment of compliance with the Applicable Servicing Criteria for the Reporting Period as set forth in this assertion.

Securitisation Advisory Services Pty Limited

__/s/ Craig Carland________

Date:  19 September 2007

By: Company Director

 

Name: Craig Carland
EXHIBIT 32




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 Quarterly Report of NT Media Corp. of California, Inc. (the "Registrant") on Form 10-Q for the period ending September 30, 2010, as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the "Report"), I, Ali Moussavi, Principal Executive Officer and Acting Principal Financial Officer of the Registrant, certify to the best of my knowledge, 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 result of operations of the registrant.


Dated:  November 19, 2010

/s/ Ali MoussaviAli MoussaviPrincipal Executive Officer and Acting Principal Financial Officer
#### Timothy Anderson et al., Appellants, v New York City Housing Authority, Respondent.

Submitted April 6, 2009;

decided June 4, 2009

Motion for leave to appeal dismissed upon the ground that the order sought to be appealed from does not finally determine the action within the meaning of the Constitution.
#### In the Matter of Abdullah Y. Salahuddin, Appellant, v Donald Selsky, as Director of Special Housing/Inmate Disciplinary Programs, Respondent.

Submitted March 9, 2009;

decided April 30, 2009

Motion for leave to appeal dismissed upon the ground that the order sought to be appealed from does not finally determine the proceeding within the meaning of the Constitution. Motion for poor person relief dismissed as academic.
[Federal Register Volume 80, Number 9 (Wednesday, January 14, 2015)]
[Notices]
[Page 1941]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2015-00415]


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

DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR

Bureau of Land Management

[15X.LLID9570000.L14400000.BJ0000.241A.4500075726]


Filing of Plats of Survey; Idaho

AGENCY: Bureau of Land Management, Interior.

ACTION: Notice of filing of plats of surveys.

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

SUMMARY: The Bureau of Land Management (BLM) has officially filed the 
plats of survey of the lands described below in the BLM Idaho State 
Office, Boise, Idaho, effective 9:00 a.m., on the dates specified.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Bureau of Land Management, 1387 South 
Vinnell Way, Boise, Idaho, 83709-1657.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: This survey were executed at the request of 
the Bureau of Land Management to meet their administrative needs. The 
lands surveyed are:
    The supplemental plat was prepared to show new tracts 38-46, in 
unsurveyed section 11, T. 48 N., R. 2 E., Boise Meridian, Idaho, Group 
Number 1411, was accepted December 29, 2014.
    This survey was executed at the request of the USDA Natural 
Resources Conservation Service to meet their administrative needs. The 
lands surveyed are:
    The plat represents the dependent resurvey of a portion of the 
subdivisional lines, and the subdivision of sections 9, 15, 16, 22, 23, 
and 26, and metes-and-bounds surveys in sections 9, 16, and 26, 
Township 4 North, Range 25 East, Boise Meridian, Idaho, Group Number 
1395, was accepted November 25, 2014.
    These surveys were executed at the request of the Bureau of Indian 
Affairs to meet certain administrative and management purposes. The 
lands surveyed are:
    The plat representing the dependent resurvey of portions of the 
north boundary, subdivisional lines, and the subdivision of sections 2 
and 3, and a survey of the 2012-2013 meanders of the full-pool line of 
the Portneuf Reservoir in section 2 and 3, Township 6 South, Range 38 
East, of the Boise Meridian, Idaho, Group Number 1383, was accepted 
November 19, 2014.
    The plat representing the dependent resurvey of portions of the 
north boundary, subdivisional lines, and subdivision of section 4, 
Township 32 North, Range 1 East, of the Boise Meridian, Idaho, Group 
Number 1401, was accepted December 10, 2014.

Stanley G. French,
Chief Cadastral Surveyor for Idaho.
[FR Doc. 2015-00415 Filed 1-13-15; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4310-GG-P
#### Philip Morris USA, Inc. v. Tolson

Case below: 176 N.C. App. 509

No. 191P06

1. Pit’s NOA Based Upon a Constitutional Question (COA05-340)

2. AG’s Motion to Dismiss Appeal

3. Pit’s PDR Under N.C.G.S. § 7A-31

1. _

2. Allowed 03/08/07

3. Denied 03/08/07
1 

Certification of Vaccination for Visitors to Non-public Spaces 

The purpose of this form is to take steps to prevent the spread of COVID-19, to protect the health and safety of 

all National Gallery employees, onsite contractors, visitors to National Gallery buildings or National Gallery

controlled indoor workspaces, and other individuals interacting with the National Gallery workforce. If you fail to

submit this signed attestation or any required negative COVID-19 test, you may be denied entry to a National 

Gallery facility.

My Vaccination Status

By checking the box below, I declare that the following statement is true:

 I am fully vaccinated.1

 I am not yet fully vaccinated.2

 I have not been vaccinated.3

 I decline to respond.

I understand that if I decline to respond or am not fully vaccinated, I must complywith the following 

additional safety protocols while at the National Gallery, in addition to the ones already in place (such 

as wearing a mask at all times): 

• Physically distance; and

• Provide proof of having received a negative COVID-19 test from within the previous 3 days.

I sign this document under penalty of perjury that the above is true and correct, and that I am the person 

named below. I understand that a knowing and willful false statement on this form can be punished by fine or 

imprisonment or both (18 U.S.C. 1001). Checking “I decline to respond” does not constitute a false statement. 

I understand that, if I am a Federal employee or contractor, making a false statement on this form could result

in additional administrative action, including an adverse personnel action up to and including removal from my 

position or removalfrom a contract.

1 The Centers for Disease Control and Prevention considers an individual fully vaccinated if they are:

• 2 weeks after their second dose in a 2-dose series, such as the Pfizer or Moderna vaccines, or

• 2 weeks after a single-dose vaccine, such as Johnson & Johnson’s Janssen vaccine . 

• If you don’t meet these requirements, regardless of your age, you are not fully vaccinated.

2 Either I have received my first dose of Moderna or Pfizer, and my second appointment is scheduled, or I received my final dose less

than two weeks ago.

3 If you are not vaccinated due to medical or religious reasons, please check either “I have not been vaccinated” or “I decline to 

respond.”
2

Your printed name here:

Your signature here:

Date:

Consequence of Failure to Provide Information: Providing this information is voluntary.However, if you 

fail to provide this information, you will be treated as not fully vaccinated forpurposes of implementing safety 

measures, including with respect to mask wearing, physicaldistancing, and testing.

Directions and notice to visitors to non-public spaces at the National Gallery

You may be asked to show this form and/or a recent negative Covid test result upon entry to non-public spaces 

at the National Gallery. Please retain this form during your visit.
Exhibit 33.7

[logo]                                                     Wells Fargo Bank, NA
                                                           Document Custody
                                                           1015-10th Avenue SE
                                                           Minneapolis, MN 55014


          ASSESSMENT OF COMPLIANCE WITH APPLICABLE SERVICING CRITERIA

Corporate Trust Services division of Wells Fargo Bank, National Association (the
"Company") is responsible for assessing compliance with the servicing criteria
set forth in Item 1122(d) of Regulation AB promulgated by the Securities and
Exchange Commission. The Company has determined that the servicing criteria are
applicable in regards to the servicing platform as of and for the period as
follows:

Platform: Publicly-issued (i.e., transaction-level reporting required under the
Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended) residential mortgage-backed
securities and commercial mortgage-backed securities issued on or after January
1, 2006 for which the Company provides document custody services, excluding
any publicly issued transactions issued by any government sponsored entity (the
"Platform").

Applicable Servicing Criteria: The servicing criteria set forth in Item
1122(d)(1)(iv), 1122(d)(4)(i) and 1122(d)(4)(ii), in regard to the activities
performed by the Company with respect to the Platform (the "Applicable Servicing
Criteria"). Management of the Company has determined that all other servicing
criteria set forth in Item 1122(d) are not applicable to the Platform.

Period: As of and for the twelve months ended December 31, 2007 (the "Period").

With respect to the Platform and the Period, the Company provides the following
assessment of compliance with respect to the Applicable Servicing Criteria:

1. The Company is responsible for assessing its compliance with the Applicable
Servicing Criteria.

2. The Company has assessed compliance with the Applicable Servicing Criteria.
In performing this assessment, the Company used the criteria set forth by the
Securities and Exchange Commission in paragraph (d) of Item 1122 of Regulation
AB.

3. Based on such assessment, as of and for the Period, the Company has complied,
in all material respects with the Applicable Servicing Criteria.

KPMG LLP, a registered public accounting firm, has issued an attestation report
with respect to the Company's assessment of compliance as of and for the Period.



                                         WELLS FARGO BANK, NATIONAL ASSOCIATION

                                         By: /s/ Shari Gillund

                                         Its: Senior Vice President

                                         Dated: February 28, 2008
F OR P UB L I CAT I ON U N I TED STA TES C O U R T O F A PPEA LS FO R TH E N I N TH C I R C U I T Y EW H A LA SH ET A BEBE, P et i t i on er , v. M IC H A E L B . M U K A S E Y , A tt orn ey G e n e r a l, R e s p o n d e n t. N o. 05- 76201 A ge nc yN o. A 026- 810- 941 O R D ER

K O Z I N S K I , C hi ef

Judg e: T h e p e rc u r iam o p in io n th at w a s f ile dN o v e m b e r2 0 , 2 0 0 8 , w a s f ile din e rr or . T he opi ni on a c c om pany i ng thi s or de ri s s ubs t i tut e d a s the opi ni on of the court . T he previ ou sly f i l ed concurrence and d i ss entar e unaffe ct ed by thi s order . T he pe t i t i on f

orr e he ar i ng r e m a i ns pe ndi ng. W i thi n 14 day s , r e s ponde nt s ha l lf i l e ar e s pons e t o the pe t i t i on. P e t i t i one rm ayr e pl yw i thi n 14 day s of the r e s p o n s e ; th e r e p lys h a ll n o t e x c e e dth e le n g th p e rm itte df o rth e r e s p o n s e . S e e 9 th C i r . R . 40- 1. 

# FI LED JAN 05 2 009 M OLLY C. DW Y ER, CLERK U . S. C O U R T OF APPE ALS
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<PAGE>
<ARTICLE> 9
<MULTIPLIER> 1,000
<CURRENCY> US DOLLARS
       
<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   9-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          DEC-31-1996
<PERIOD-START>                             JAN-01-1996
<PERIOD-END>                               SEP-30-1996
<EXCHANGE-RATE>                                      1
<CASH>                                          28,795
<INT-BEARING-DEPOSITS>                         267,682
<FED-FUNDS-SOLD>                                12,620
<TRADING-ASSETS>                                     0
<INVESTMENTS-HELD-FOR-SALE>                     90,240
<INVESTMENTS-CARRYING>                          39,303
<INVESTMENTS-MARKET>                            39,362
<LOANS>                                        203,083
<ALLOWANCE>                                      3,395
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                 389,624
<DEPOSITS>                                     314,516
<SHORT-TERM>                                    23,846
<LIABILITIES-OTHER>                              3,820
<LONG-TERM>                                          0
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                            29
<OTHER-SE>                                      47,413
<TOTAL-LIABILITIES-AND-EQUITY>                 389,624
<INTEREST-LOAN>                                 12,246
<INTEREST-INVEST>                                6,124
<INTEREST-OTHER>                                   353
<INTEREST-TOTAL>                                18,723
<INTEREST-DEPOSIT>                               8,317
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                               8,629
<INTEREST-INCOME-NET>                           10,094
<LOAN-LOSSES>                                      229
<SECURITIES-GAINS>                                   6
<EXPENSE-OTHER>                                 12,582
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                  4,862
<INCOME-PRE-EXTRAORDINARY>                       4,862
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                     3,263
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                     1.12
<EPS-DILUTED>                                     1.12
<YIELD-ACTUAL>                                    .055
<LOANS-NON>                                         89
<LOANS-PAST>                                       249
<LOANS-TROUBLED>                                     0
<LOANS-PROBLEM>                                  1,856
<ALLOWANCE-OPEN>                                 3,356
<CHARGE-OFFS>                                      346
<RECOVERIES>                                       156
<ALLOWANCE-CLOSE>                                3,395
<ALLOWANCE-DOMESTIC>                             3,395
<ALLOWANCE-FOREIGN>                                  0
<ALLOWANCE-UNALLOCATED>                              0
        

</TABLE>
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 Housing and Urban Development

          - [Docket No. FR-5311-N-01]

# AGENCY:

Office of the Assistant Secretary for Public and Indian Housing, HUD.

# ACTION:

Notice.

# SUMMARY:

                        Through this notice, HUD announces the availability on its Web site of the application information, eligibility requirements, review and selection procedures, and other program requirements governing the availability of $995 million in Capital Fund Recovery Competition Grants under the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act of 2009. The assistance is intended to preserve and create jobs, promote economic recovery, assist those impacted by the recession, and invest in transportation, environment, and infrastructure that will provide long-term economic benefits. The notice establishing the program requirements is available on the HUD Web site at:                         *http://www.hud.gov/​recovery.*

# FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

                        If you have a question or need a clarification, you may contact the Office of Capital Improvements by sending an email message to                         *PIHOCI@hud.gov.*                         Please see                         *http://www.hud.gov/​offices/​pih/​programs/​ph/​capfund/​ocir.cfm*, which can be accessed from                         *http://www.hud.gov/​recovery/​,*                         for additional information.                    

Dated: May 5, 2009.

Paula O. Blunt,

General Deputy Assistant Secretary for Public and Indian Housing.

[FR Doc. E9-11162 Filed 5-8-09; 4:15 pm]

BILLING CODE 4210-67-P
Michigan Supreme Court

Lansing, Michigan

Robert P. Young, Jr., Chief Justice

Michael F. Cavanagh

Stephen J. Markman

Mary Beth Kelly

Brian K. Zahra

Bridget M. McCormack

David F. Viviano, Justices

I, Larry S. Royster, Clerk of the Michigan Supreme Court, certify that the

foregoing is a true and complete copy of the order entered at the direction of the Court.

October 1, 2014

Order 

October 1, 2014

148971(54)

PEOPLE OF THE STATE OF MICHIGAN,

Plaintiff-Appellee,

v

ROBERT TUTTLE,

Defendant-Appellant.

SC: 148971

COA: 312364

Oakland CC: 2012-241272-FH

__________________________________________/

On order of the Chief Justice, the motion of the Cannabis Attorneys of Michigan 

for leave to file an amicus curiae brief is GRANTED. The amicus brief submitted on

September 19, 2014, is accepted for filing.
#### The People of the State of New York, Respondent, v Yotuhel Montane, Appellant.

[974 NYS2d 257]

Appeal by the defendant from a judgment of the Supreme Court, Kings County (Dwyer, J.), rendered August 23, 2011, convicting him of conspiracy in the second degree, upon his plea of guilty, and imposing sentence.

Ordered that the judgment is affirmed.

The defendant knowingly, voluntarily, and intelligently waived his right to appeal *(see People v Bradshaw,*18 NY3d 257 [2011]; *People v Lopez,*6 NY3d 248, 256 [2006]). As a result of the defendant’s valid waiver of his right to appeal, appellate review of his challenge to the Supreme Court’s suppression determination is precluded *(see People v Oseni,*107 AD3d 829 [2013], *lv denied*21 NY3d 1044 [2013]; *People v Hackett,*93 AD3d 807 [2012]).

Contrary to the People’s contention, the defendant’s plea did *1102not constitute a waiver of his challenge to the territorial jurisdiction of the Supreme Court *(see People v McLaughlin,*80 NY2d 466, 471 [1992]; *People v Casias,*303 AD2d 294 [2003]). Nor is appellate review of this issue precluded by the defendant’s valid waiver of his right to appeal *(see People v Seaberg,*74 NY2d 1, 9 [1989]). Nevertheless, the defendant’s contention is without merit *(see*CPL 20.20; *People v Artis,*63 AD3d 1173 [2009]; *Matter of Machado v Donalty,*107 AD2d 1079 [1985]).

The defendant’s valid waiver of his right to appeal also does not preclude appellate review of his claim that counsel’s representation was ineffective, which is directed toward the voluntariness of the plea *(see People v Gedin,*46 AD3d 701 [2007]). Nevertheless, since the colloquy during the plea demonstrates that counsel discharged his obligation to inform the defendant of the immigration consequences of pleading guilty consistent with *Padilla v Kentucky*(559 US 356, 369 [2010]), his contention is without merit.

The defendant’s remaining contention is without merit. Rivera, J.P., Balkin, Chambers and Sgroi, JJ., concur.