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

###### Presidio Trust

# AGENCY:

The Presidio Trust.

# ACTION:

Notice of public meeting.

# SUMMARY:

In accordance with § 103(c)(6) of the Presidio Trust Act, 16 U.S.C. 460bb appendix, and in accordance with the Presidio Trust's bylaws, notice is hereby given that a public meeting of the Presidio Trust Board of Directors will be held commencing 6:00 p.m. on Thursday, September 28, 2017, at the Officers' Club, 50 Moraga Avenue, Presidio of San Francisco, California.

The purposes of this meeting are: To approve the minutes of a previous Board meeting; to provide the Chief Executive Officer's report; to receive reports from Board members and committees; to receive public input on the rehabilitation of Fort Scott buildings as a place where the environmental and social challenges of our day are addressed; and to receive public comment on other matters pertaining to Trust business.

Individuals requiring special accommodation at this meeting, such as needing a sign language interpreter, should contact Mollie Matull at 415.561.5300 prior to September 21, 2017.

*Time:*                         The meeting will begin at 6:00 p.m. on Thursday, September 28, 2017.                    

# ADDRESSES:

The meeting will be held at the Officers' Club, 50 Moraga Avenue, Presidio of San Francisco.

# FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

Nancy J. Koch, General Counsel, the Presidio Trust, 103 Montgomery Street, P.O. Box 29052, San Francisco, California 94129-0052, Telephone: 415.561.5300.

Dated: August 17, 2017.

Jean S. Fraser,

Chief Executive Officer.

[FR Doc. 2017-17835 Filed 8-22-17; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 4310-4R-P
Exhibit 21.1



WISCONSIN ELECTRIC POWER COMPANY
SUBSIDIARIES AS OF DECEMBER 31, 2001

The following table includes the subsidiaries of Wisconsin Electric Power Company, an electric, gas and steam utility incorporated in the state of Wisconsin, as well as the percent of ownership, as of December 31, 2001.  Wisconsin Electric is a wholly-owned subsidiary of Wisconsin Energy Corporation.



|                                  | State of        |          
|--------------------------------- | --------------- | ---------
|                                  | Incorporation   | Percent  
|Subsidiary (a)                    | or Organization | Ownership
|                                  |                 |          
|ATC Management Inc.               | Wisconsin       | 42.482%  
|American Transmission Company LLC | Wisconsin       | 37.295%  



|(a) | Omits the names of certain subsidiaries, which if considered in the aggregate as a single
|--- | -----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
|    | subsidiary, would not constitute a "significant subsidiary" as of December 31, 2001.
Exhibit 32.1
 GENERAL CABLE CORPORATION
CERTIFICATION OF CHIEF EXECUTIVE OFFICER AND CHIEF FINANCIAL OFFICER
Pursuant To 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, As Adopted Under
Section 906 Of The Sarbanes-Oxley Act Of 2002
  1)
    
    The Report fully complies with the requirements of section
13(a) or 15(d)
of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934; and2)
    
    The information contained in the Report fairly presents, in
all material
respects, the financial condition and results of operations of the Company.
 Date:  August 6, 2008
    /s/ GREGORY B. KENNYGregory B. KennyChief Executive OfficerDate:  August 6, 2008
    /s/ BRIAN J. ROBINSONBrian J. RobinsonChief Financial Officer
##### 



Exhibit 32.1
 WRITTEN STATEMENT OF CHIEF EXECUTIVE OFFICER
AND CHIEF FINANCIAL OFFICER
PURSUANT TO SECTION 906 OF THE
SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002
  (a)
    
    the Annual Report on Form 10-K of the Company for the year ended December 31, 2007 filed on
the date hereof with the Securities and Exchange Commission (the Annual Report) fully
complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of
1934, as amended; and(b)
    
    the information contained in the Annual Report fairly presents, in all material respects, the
financial condition and results of operations of the Company.
 /s/ Stephen B. MorrisStephen B. MorrisChief Executive OfficerDate: February 28, 2008/s/ Sean R. CreamerSean R. CreamerChief Financial OfficerDate: February 28, 2008
Order filed, November 28, 2012

.

In The 

## Fourteenth Court of Appeals

____________ NO. 14

- 12

- 00965

- CV

____________ SATYA, INC., GOPAL P . BATHIJA, AMEEN M. ALI AND SATYA GROUP II, LTD , Appellant

V.

VIKRAM MEHTA , Appellee

On Appeal from the 1 33rd District Court

Harris County, Texas Trial Court Cause No. 2012

- 27585



### ORDER
The reporter’s record in this case was due October 29, 2012

. See Tex. R. App. P. 35.1. The court has not received a request to extend time for filing the record. The

rec ord has not been filed with the court. Because the reporter’s record has not been filed timely, we issue the following order.

We order Darlene Stein , the official court reporter, to file the record in this appeal within 10 days of the date of this order

. PER CURIAM
#### W. J. DILLNER TRANSFER CO. v. INTERNATIONAL BROTHERHOOD OF TEAMSTERS, CHAUFFEURS, WAREHOUSEMEN AND HELPERS OF AMERICA et al. (two cases).

Civil Nos. 3103, 3115.

District Court, W. D. Pennsylvania.

Oct. 6, 1944.

Reed, Smith, Shaw & McClay, Nicholas Unkovic, and W. D. Armour, all of Pittsburgh, Pa., for plaintiff.

Ban Paul Jubelirer, of Pittsburgh, Pa., and Joseph A. Padway, of Washington, D. C., for defendants.

GIBSON, District Judge.

The defendants above named, excepting International Brotherhood of Teamsters, Chauffeurs, Warehousemen and Helpers of America against which the writ of summons has been quashed, have moved the court to dismiss the complaint because of its alleged failure to state facts which *106establish the jurisdiction of the court and its failure to set forth facts which bring it within the scope of the War Labor Disputes Act, 50 U.S.C.A.Appendix § 1501 et seq. Also the motion alleges that the complaint fails to set forth how damage resulted to complainant by reason of the failure of defendants to obey the Act.

In the opinion of the court the motions to dismiss are without merit and will be denied.

As an alternative to the motions to dismiss the defendants have moved for a. bill of particulars. The motion does not set forth matters required by defendants in order to answer the complaint, but calls for matters which naturally should form parts of the proof of the complaint upon trial. The motion for the bill of particulars will be denied. If necessary for the protection of defendants the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure, 28 U.S.C.A. following section 723c, have provided other means by which the information desired can be obtained.
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
  1.
    
    The Report fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934; and2.
    
    The information contained in the Report fairly presents, in all material respects, the financial condition and results of
operations of the Company.
 Dated: May 10, 2011
    /s/ Edward K. ChristianEdward K. ChristianChief Executive OfficerDated: May 10, 2011
    /s/ Samuel D. BushSamuel D. BushChief Financial Officer
Presidential Documents

39953 

Federal Register 

Vol. 82, No. 162 

Wednesday, August 23, 2017 

Title 3— 

The President 

Memorandum of August 15, 2017 

Elevation of U.S. Cyber Command to a Unified Combatant 

Command 

Memorandum for the Secretary of Defense 

Pursuant to my authority as the Commander in Chief and under sections 

161 and 167b of title 10, United States Code, and in consultation with 

the Secretary of Defense and the Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, 

I direct that U.S. Cyber Command be established as a Unified Combatant 

Command. I also direct the Secretary of Defense to recommend an officer 

for my nomination and Senate confirmation as commander in order to 

establish U.S. Cyber Command as a Unified Combatant Command. 

I assign to U.S. Cyber Command: (1) all the general responsibilities of 

a Unified Combatant Command; (2) the cyberspace-related responsibilities 

previously assigned to the Commander, U.S. Strategic Command; (3) the 

responsibilities of Joint Force Provider and Joint Force Trainer; and (4) 

all other responsibilities identified in section 167b of title 10, United States 

Code. The comprehensive list of authorities and responsibilities for U.S. 

Cyber Command will be included in the next update to the Unified Command 

Plan. 

I further direct that the Secretary of Defense, in coordination with the 

Director of National Intelligence, provide a recommendation and, as appropriate, a plan to me regarding the future command relationship between 

the U.S. Cyber Command and the National Security Agency. 


pmangrum on DSK3GDR082PROD with PRES DOCS
39954 Federal Register / Vol. 82, No. 162 / Wednesday, August 23, 2017 / Presidential Documents 

Consistent with section 161(b)(2) of title 10, United States Code, and section 

301 of title 3, United States Code, you are directed to notify the Congress 

on my behalf. 

You are authorized and directed to publish this memorandum in the Federal 

Register. 

THE WHITE HOUSE, 

Washington, August 15, 2017 

[FR Doc. 2017–17947 

Filed 8–22–17; 8:45 am] 

Billing code 5001–06–P 


pmangrum on DSK3GDR082PROD with PRES DOCSTrump.EPS</GPH>
<PAGE>
 
                                                                      EXHIBIT 21
                                ZERO CORPORATION

                          Subsidiaries of Registrant*
                              As of March 31, 1998


1.  Air Cargo Equipment Corporation, a Delaware corporation
2.  Air Cargo Equipment (UK) Limited, a U.K. corporation
3.  Air Cooling Technology, Inc., a California corporation
4.  Cambridge Aeroflo, Inc., a Massachusetts corporation
5.  Electronic Solutions, a Nevada corporation
6.  McLean Midwest Corporation, a Minnesota corporation
7.  Nielsen Hardware Corporation, a Connecticut corporation
8.  Precision Fabrication Technologies, Inc., an Indiana corporation
9.  Productos Aereos, S.A., a Mexican corporation
10. Samuel Groves & Co. Limited, a U.K. corporation                          
11. ZERO FSC Corporation, a Virgin Islands corporation                       
12. ZERO - East Division, ZERO Corporation, a Massachusetts corporation      
13. ZERO Enclosures, Inc., a California corporation                          
14. ZERO Integrated Systems, a California corporation                        
15. ZERO International, Inc., a California corporation                       
16. ZERO Manufacturing Corporation, a California corporation                 
17. ZERO McLean Europe LTD., a U.K. corporation                              


* All are 100% owned
```

[Congressional Bills 114th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[S. 510 Introduced in Senate (IS)]

114th CONGRESS
  1st Session
                                 S. 510

 To require Senate confirmation of Inspector General of the Bureau of 
         Consumer Financial Protection, and for other purposes.

_______________________________________________________________________

                   IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES

                           February 12, 2015

 Mr. Portman (for himself, Mr. Cochran, Mr. Barrasso, Mrs. Capito, Ms. 
 Ayotte, Mr. Crapo, Mr. Heller, Mr. Hoeven, Mr. Isakson, Mr. Boozman, 
Mr. Blunt, Mr. Corker, and Ms. Collins) introduced the following bill; 
which was read twice and referred to the Committee on Banking, Housing, 
                           and Urban Affairs

_______________________________________________________________________

                                 A BILL

 
 To require Senate confirmation of Inspector General of the Bureau of 
         Consumer Financial Protection, and for other purposes.

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

SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE.

    This Act may be cited as the ``Bureau of Consumer Financial 
Protection-Inspector General Reform Act of 2015'', or the ``CFPB-IG Act 
of 2015''.

SEC. 2. APPOINTMENT OF INSPECTOR GENERAL.

    The Inspector General Act of 1978 (5 U.S.C. App.) is amended--
            (1) in section 8G--
                    (A) in subsection (a)(2), by striking ``and the 
                Bureau of Consumer Financial Protection'';
                    (B) in subsection (c), by striking ``For the 
                purposes of implementing this section'' and all that 
                follows through the end of the subsection; and
                    (C) in subsection (g)(3), by striking ``and the 
                Bureau of Consumer Financial Protection''; and
            (2) in section 12--
                    (A) in paragraph (1), by inserting ``the Director 
                of the Bureau of Consumer Financial Protection;'' after 
                ``the President of the Export-Import Bank;''; and
                    (B) in paragraph (2), by inserting ``the Bureau of 
                Consumer Financial Protection,'' after ``the Export-
                Import Bank,''.
                                 <all>
```
#### Joel DRUM, Plaintiff-Appellant, v. The SUPREME COURT OF the State of CALIFORNIA; et al., Defendants-Appellees.

No. 06-56472.

United States Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit.

Submitted Dec. 20, 2007 *.

Filed Dec. 28, 2007.

Joel Drum, Sherman Oaks, CA pvo se.

Jack C. Woodside, Esq., AGCA-Office of the California Attorney General, Sacramento, CA, Colin P. Wong, DAG, The State Bar of California, Office of the General Counsel, San Francisco, CA, for Defendants-Appellees.

*784Before: GOODWIN, WALLACE, and HAWKINS, Circuit Judges.

*

 The panel unanimously finds this case suitable for decision without oral argument. *See*Fed. R.App. P. 34(a)(2).

MEMORANDUM **

Joel Drum, a California attorney who was suspended from the practice of law for misconduct, appeals pro se from the district court’s judgment dismissing for lack of subject matter jurisdiction his action under 42 U.S.C. § 1983 alleging due process violations arising out of his State Bar disciplinary proceedings. We have jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. § 1291. We review de novo a district court’s jurisdictional dismissal based on the *Rooker-Feldman*doctrine. *Noel v. Hall,*341 F.3d 1148, 1154 (9th Cir.2003). We affirm.

The district court properly concluded that the *Rooker-Feldman*doctrine barred Drum’s action because it is a “forbidden de facto appeal” of suspension proceedings, and raises constitutional claims that are “inextricably intertwined” with prior state court decisions. *Id.*at 1158; *see also Mothershed v. Justices of the Supreme Court,*410 F.3d 602, 607-08 (9th Cir.2005) (holding that district court lacked subject matter jurisdiction pursuant to *Rooker-Feldman*doctrine to adjudicate attorney’s challenge to his State Bar disciplinary proceedings).

Drum’s remaining contentions are unpersuasive.

AFFIRMED.

**

 This disposition is not appropriate for publication and is not precedent except as provided by 9th Cir. R. 36-3.
#### STATE OF WISCONSIN et al. v. CLARK, Attorney General.

No. 2042.

United States District Court W. D. Wisconsin.

Nov. *7,*1950.

*103Thomas E. Fairchild, Atty. Gen. of State of Wisconsin, Stewart G. Honeck, Deputy Atty. Gen., for plaintiffs.

Charles H. Cashin, U. S. Atty. for Western Dist. of Wisconsin, Madison, Wis., James D. Hill, Daniel G. McGrath and Paul F. Myers, all of Washington, D. C., for defendant.

STONE, District Judge.

The motion of the defendant to dismiss this action on the ground that it has abated for the reason that the defendant, Tom C. Clark, Attorney General of the United States as successor to the .Alien Property Custodian, resigned from office on August 24, 1949, and on the same day was sue-, ceeded in office by J. Howard McGrath; that plaintiffs have not substituted the said J. Howard McGrath as defendant herein in the place and stead of defendant Tom •C. Clark within six months after the said J. Howard McGrath took office as required by Rule 25(d), Federal Rules of Civil Procedure, 28 U.S.C.A.

No motion was made by either party hereto within the six months’ period, as provided by Rule 25(d) of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure, to substitute J. Howard McGrath for Tom C. Clark, as a defendant in these proceedings. It is undisputed that on August -24, 1949, Tom C. Clark resigned as Attorney General of the United States and was succeeded in office on the same date by J. Howard Mc-Grath.

Rule 25(d) of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure provides as follows: “When an officer of the United States, * * * is a party to an action and during its pen-dency dies, resigns, or otherwise ceases to hold office, the action may be continued and maintained by or against his successor, *if within 6 months after the successor takes office it is satisfactorily shown to the court that there is a substantial need for so continuing and maintaining it.”*

There is an abundance of authority to support the ruling that an action should be abated where there has been a failure to comply with the provisions of said Rule 25(d).

In a case involving issues analogous to those in the above-entitled action, the United States Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit, on ■ May 16, 1949, in Bowles v. Wilke, 175 F.2d 35, held that that action abated because of the failure of the parties to comply with the provisions of Rule 25(d) of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure.

Defendant’s motion to dismiss the complaint is granted, without costs.
Exhibit
10.76

    


    SUMMARY OF 2009 BONUS PLAN

     

    On
February 12, 2009, the Compensation Committee of the Board of Directors of
AboveNet, Inc., a Delaware corporation (the “Company”), approved the Company’s
2009 Bonus Plan (the “2009 Bonus Plan”).  The 2009 Bonus Plan
provides for the creation of an employee bonus pool based on the achievement in
2009 of certain adjusted U.S. EBITDA (domestic net earnings before interest,
taxes, depreciation and amortization, adjusted for certain non-recurring,
non-operational and non-cash items) targets established by the Compensation
Committee.  Bonus payments to employees from the bonus pool are generally
discretionary except that in accordance with their employment
agreements, each of the President and Chief Executive Officer William
LaPerch, the Senior Vice President and Chief Financial Officer Joseph
Ciavarella, the Senior Vice President and Chief Technology Officer Rajiv Datta,
the Senior Vice President for Operations Douglas Jendras and the Senior Vice
President and General Counsel Robert Sokota is entitled to a bonus equal to
thirty five percent (35%) of his respective base salary upon the achievement of
the adjusted U.S. EBITDA target set by the Compensation Committee.  In
addition, the Senior Vice President of Sales John Jacquay is entitled to a bonus
of $250,000 upon the achievement of such adjusted U.S. EBITDA target.  If
the target threshold established for the bonus payments to these six officers is
not achieved, no bonus payments are required to be made to these
officers.

    


    Additionally,
no bonus payment is payable to any domestic employee without the
authorization and final approval by the Compensation Committee.
EX-35.4
(logo) ncb

2011 Crystal Drive
Suite 800
Arlington, Virginia 22202

TEL  (703) 302-8000
TOLL (800) 955-9622
FAX  (703) 647-3460


February 26, 2014


RBS Commercial Funding, Inc. as Depositor
Attn:  Jim Barnard
600 Washington Blvd.
Stamford, CT 06901


RE:      Annual Statement as to Compliance
         WFRBS 2013 C13

Dear Sir/Madam:


In accordance with the Pooling and Servicing Agreement entered into in
connection with the issuance of the Commercial Mortgage Pass-Through
Certificates Series 2013-C13, as an authorized officer of NCB, FSB (NCB) (the
"Co-op Special Servicer"), I hereby certify that:


a.  A review of the activities of the Co-op Special Servicer during the
    preceding calendar year and of its performance under the Pooling and
    Servicing Agreement has been made under my supervision.


b.  To the best of my knowledge, based on these reviews, the Co-op Special
    Servicer has fulfilled all obligations under this agreement in all material
    respects throughout the year.

`
Please note that the annual financial statement will be sent under separate
cover on or before March 31, 2014.


Best regards,

/s/ Karyn Mann

Karyn Mann
Senior Vice President, Investor Compliance
NCB, FSB



www.ncb.coop

Banking & Financial Services
Cooperative Expansion
Economic Development


NCB refers to National Consumer Cooperative Bank and its subsidiaries
(primarily NCB Financial Corporation and its subsidiary, NCB, FSB) its
affiliated non-profit corporation, NCB Capital Impact, and also NCB
Community Works, LLC which is jointly owned by NCB and NCB Capital Impact.
Each is a separate corporation within the NCB Financial Group.