alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
Exhibit 33.2




Management’s Assertion on Compliance with Regulation AB


(Citibank, N.A.)









Management's Assertion of Compliance






Management of the Agency and Trust division of Citibank, N.A. (or “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.









Management has determined that the servicing criteria in Item 1122(d) of Regulation AB are applicable in regard to the servicing platform as of and for the period as follows:









Platform:  Publicly-issued (i.e., transaction-level reporting initially required under the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended) automobile loan or lease-backed securities serviced by Nissan Motor Acceptance Corporation issued on or after January 1, 2006 for which the Company provides trustee and paying agent services (the “Platform”).









Applicable Servicing Criteria:  All servicing criteria set forth in Item 1122(d), to the extent required by Item 1122(d) servicing criteria in regards to the activities performed by the Company with respect to the Platform as to any transaction, except for the following criteria: 1122(d)(1)(i)-1122(d)(1)(iv), 1122(d)(2)(i), 1122(d)(2)(iii), 1122(d)(2)(v)-1122(d)(2)(vii), 1122(d)(3)(i) and 1122(d)(4)(i)-1122(d)(4)(xv), which management has determined are not applicable to the activities the Company performs with respect to the Platform (the “Applicable Servicing Criteria”).  With respect to the Platform, servicing criterion 1122(d)(3)(ii) is applicable only as it relates to remittances.




Period:  Twelve months ended March 31, 2014 (the “Period”).









With respect to the Platform as of and for the Period, the Company’s management provides the following assertion of compliance with respect to the Applicable Servicing Criteria:




·
The Company’s management is responsible for assessing the Company’s compliance with the Applicable Servicing Criteria.




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




·
Based on such assessment, the Company has complied, in all material respects, with the Applicable Servicing Criteria.




KPMG LLP, an independent registered public accounting firm, has issued an attestation report with respect to management’s assertion of compliance with the Applicable Servicing Criteria as of and for the Period.




CITIBANK, N.A.









By: /s/ Karen Montbach


Its: Managing Director




Dated: May 30, 2014
# C_2014424EN.01007301.xml

| 26.11.2014 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 424/73 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

26.11.2014

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 424/73

---

Opinion of the European Economic and Social Committee on the ‘Proposal for a Regulation of the European Parliament and of the Council on fixing an adjustment rate for direct payments provided for in Council Regulation (EC) No 73/2009 in respect of calendar year 2014’

COM(2014) 175 final — 2014/0097 COD

2014/C 424/12

On 2 April 2014, the European Parliament and on 22 April 2014 the Council respectively decided to consult the European Economic and Social Committee, under Article 43(2) of the TFEU, on the:

Proposal for a Regulation of the European Parliament and of the Council on fixing an adjustment rate for direct payments provided for in Council Regulation (EC) No 73/2009 in respect of calendar year 2014

Proposal for a Regulation of the European Parliament and of the Council on fixing an adjustment rate for direct payments provided for in Council Regulation (EC) No 73/2009 in respect of calendar year 2014

COM(2014) 175 final — 2014/0097 COD.

Since the Committee has already set out its views on the content of the proposal in question in its opinion CES2942-2013_00_00_TRA_AC, adopted on 22 May 2013 (1), it decided, at its 499th plenary session of 4 and 5 June 2014 (meeting of 4 June), by 132 votes to 2 with 6 abstentions, not to draw up a new opinion on the subject, but to refer to the position it had taken in the above-mentioned document.

1

Brussels, 4 June 2014.

The President of the European Economic and Social Committee

Henri MALOSSE

---

(1)  EESC opinion NAT/602 on the Proposal for a Regulation of the European Parliament and of the Council on fixing an adjustment rate to direct payments provided for in Regulation (EC) No 73/2009 in respect of calendar year 2013, 2013/C 271/27, page 143 of 19 September 2013.

1

---
EXHIBIT 31.4





CERTIFICATION OF PRINCIPAL FINANCIAL
OFFICER

PURSUANT TO EXCHANGE ACT RULES 13a-14(a)
AND 15d-14(a),

AS ADOPTED PURSUANT TO

SECTION 302 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT
OF 2002



I, James Parslow, certify that:



| | 1. | I have reviewed this Amendment No. 1 to the annual report on Form 10-K of Xenetic Biosciences, Inc.; and
| | -- | --------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------



| | 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 the statements made, in light of the circumstances under which such statements were made, not misleading with
respect to the period covered by this report.
| | -- | ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------



Dated: April 29, 2020



By:           /s/
James Parslow

James Parslow

Chief Financial Officer

(Principal Financial
Officer and Principal Accounting Officer)
§ 2.504 What information will the reviewing official consider? ( a ) The reviewing official will consider: ( 1 ) The administrative record for the decision, prepared by the decision-maker under § 2.213;
( 2 ) All relevant documents submitted by the decision-maker and participants that were filed in accordance with applicable deadlines; and
( 3 ) Laws, regulations, Secretarial Orders, Solicitor's Opinions, policies, implementing guidance, and prior judicial and administrative decisions that are relevant to the appeal.
( b ) If the reviewing official considers documentation that was not included in the administrative record, the reviewing official will: ( 1 ) Provide a copy of that documentation to the decision-maker and interested parties; and
( 2 ) Establish a schedule for the decision-maker and interested parties to review and comment on the documentation.
EXHIBIT 99.1








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 Quarterly Report of Superior Financial Corp. (the Company) on Form 10-Q
for the period ending June 30, 2002 as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the Report), I, C. Stanley Bailey, Chief Executive Officer of the Company, certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. § 1350, as
adopted pursuant to § 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; and
| | -- |  | ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------




| | 2. |  | Information contained in the Report fairly presents, in all material respects, the financial condition and result of operations of the Company.
| | -- |  | -----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------




/S/    C. STANLEY BAILEYC. Stanley Bailey Chief Executive Officer





August 7, 2002
Exhibit 35.4










ANNUAL STATEMENT AS TO COMPLIANCE

UBS-Citigroup Commercial Mortgage Trust 2011-C1



The undersigned, David Co, a Director of Deutsche Bank Trust Company
Americas, as the Certificate Administrator (a “Certifying Servicer”) under the Pooling and Servicing Agreement, dated
as of December 1, 2011, as amended (the “Agreement”), by and among, Citigroup Commercial Mortgage Securities Inc., as Depositor,
Wells Fargo Bank, National Association, as Master Servicer, Midland Loan Services, a Division of PNC Bank, National Association,
as Special Servicer, Deutsche Bank Trust Company Americas, as Trustee, Certificate Administrator, Paying Agent and Custodian, and
Trimont Real Estate Advisors, Inc., as Operating Advisor, here by certifies in accordance with Section 10.11 of the Agreement:



| | A) | A review of such Certifying Servicer's activities from January 1, 2015 to December 31, 2015 (the “reporting period”) and of such
Certifying Servicer's performance under the Agreement has been made under such officer's supervision and
| | -- | -----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

| | B) | That, to the best of such officer's knowledge, based on such review, such Certifying Servicer has fulfilled all its obligations
under the Agreement, in all material respects during the reporting period.
| | -- | ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------



DEUTSCHE BANK TRUST COMPANY AMERICAS

as Certificate Administrator



/s/ David Co

BY: David Co

Title: Director

Date: March 1, 2016
(logo) BERKADIA

 

 

Annual Statement as to Compliance

For the Year Ended December 31, 2015

 

Morgan Stanley Capital I Inc. Commercial Mortgage Pass-Through Certificates Series 2012-C4

 

Pursuant to Section 13.9 of the Subservicing Agreement governing the referenced transaction (the “Servicing Agreement”), I hereby attest that:

 

i. A review of the activities and performance of Berkadia as Subservicer during the period has been made under my supervision.

 

ii. To the best of my knowledge, based on such review, Berkadia as Subservicer has fulfilled, in all material respects, its obligations under this Subservicing Agreement throughout the period and no default by the Subservicer under the Subservicing Agreement has occurred and is continuing.

 

Berkadia,

 

/s/ Mark E. McCool

Mark E. McCool

President

February 10, 2016
#### § 1000.180 What is a successor AFA?

A successor AFA is a funding agreement negotiated after a Tribe's/Consortium's initial agreement with a bureau for continuing to perform a particular program. The parties to the AFA should generally use the terms of the existing AFA to expedite and simplify the exchange of information and the negotiation process.
#### § 170.450 What archeological and environmental requirements must the TTP meet?

All BIA, FHWA, and Tribal work for the TTP must comply with cultural resource and environmental requirements under applicable Federal laws and regulations. A list of applicable laws and regulations is shown in appendix A to this subpart and is also available in the official Tribal Transportation Program Guide.
<PAGE>
                                                                    EXHIBIT 32.2

      STATEMENT OF CHIEF FINANCIAL OFFICER UNDER 18 U.S.C. SECTION 1350

I, James Clark, the chief financial officer of Critical Path, Inc. (the
"Company"), certify for the purposes of section 1350 of chapter 63 of title 18
of the United States Code that, to my knowledge,:

(i) the Quarterly Report of the Company on Form 10-Q/A for the quarterly period
ended September 30, 2003 (the "Report") fully complies with the requirements of
section 13(a) 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: March 4, 2004                  /s/ James Clark
                           ----------------------------------------
                                         James Clark
                                   Chief Financial Officer

A signed original of this written statement required by 18 U.S.C. Section 1350
has been provided to Critical Path, Inc. and will be retained by Critical Path,
Inc. and furnished to the Securities and Exchange Commission or its staff upon
request.

------------------
(1) The material contained in this Exhibit 32.2 is not deemed "filed" with the
SEC and is not to be incorporated by reference into any filing of the Company
under the Securities Act of 1933 or the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, whether
made before or after the date hereof and irrespective of any general
incorporation language contained in such filing.
#### Josephine Lecent, Respondent, v. John Bourcier, as Administrator, etc., of Charles Bourcier, Deceased, Appellant.

Judgment of the Municipal Court affirmed by default, with costs. Jenks, Hooker, Gaynor, Rich and Miller, jJ., concurred.
#### Augustin VALDEZ, Jr., Appellant, v. Herbert BROWNELL, Jr., as Attorney General of the United States,* Appellee.

No. 13860.

United States Court of Appeals Ninth Circuit.

Nov. 12, 1954.

Philip Newman, Newman & Newman, Los Angeles, Cal., for appellant.

Laughlin E. Waters, U. S. Atty., Cecil Hicks, Clyde C. Downing, Robert K. Grean, Asst. U. S. Attys., Los Angeles, Cal., for appellee.

Before MATHEWS and ORR, Circuit Judges, and WIIG, District Judge.

*

 Attorney General Brownell was substituted for Attorney General McGranery on March 3, 1953.

PER CURIAM.

On the grounds and for the reasons stated in its opinion, Valdez v. McGranery, D.C.S.D.Cal., 114 F.Supp. 173, the judgment of the District Court is affirmed.
### §3151. Joint policy requirement

The Secretary of Defense, in consultation with the Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, shall develop joint policies for requirements definition, contingency program management, and contingency contracting during combat operations and post-conflict operations.

(Added and amended Pub. L. 116–283, div. A, title XVIII, §1810(a), (b)(1), Jan. 1, 2021, 134 Stat. 4162, 4163.)

#### **Editorial Notes**

#### Codification

The text of subsec. (a) of section 2333 of this title, which was transferred to this section and amended by Pub. L. 116–283, §1810(b)(1), was based on Pub. L. 109–364, div. A, title VIII, §854(a)(1), Oct. 17, 2006, 120 Stat. 2343.

#### Amendments

2021—Pub. L. 116–283, §1810(b)(1), transferred subsec. (a) of section 2333 of this title to this section and struck out subsec. (a) designation and heading "Joint Policy Requirement" at beginning.

#### **Statutory Notes and Related Subsidiaries**

#### Effective Date

Section and amendment by Pub. L. 116–283 effective Jan. 1, 2022, with additional provisions for delayed implementation and applicability of existing law, see section 1801(d) of Pub. L. 116–283, set out as an Effective Date of 2021 Amendment note preceding section 3001 of this title.
### §2275a. Requirements for protection of satellites

(a) Establishment of Requirements.—Before a major satellite acquisition program achieves Milestone A approval, or equivalent, the Chief of Staff of the Space Force, in consultation with the Commander of the United States Space Command, shall establish requirements for the defense and resilience of the satellites under that program against the capabilities of adversaries to target, degrade, or destroy the satellites.

(b) Definitions.—In this section:

(1) The term "major satellite acquisition program" has the meaning given that term in section 2275 of this title.

(2) The term "Milestone A approval" has the meaning given that term in section 4251 of this title 10.

(Added Pub. L. 117–263, div. A, title XVI, §1601, Dec. 23, 2022, 136 Stat. 2929.)
[if !vml]>[endif]>

[if !vml]>[endif]>

You have reached the FederalDepository Library Program Electronic Collection (FDLP/EC) Archive. Thisarchive assures ongoing access to publications in the FDLP/EC. Access topublications in the archive is available through GPO's suite of cataloging andlocator services, including the Catalog of U.S. Government Publications(CGP).  Archived copies of publications are retrieved in the event thatpublications are no longer available from the original publishing agency site. 
**Title: Motorvehicle use map. Descanso Ranger District & Palomar South. ClevelandNational Forest, California**
 
2017
 
SuDoc Number:A 13.28:C 59/5/
Item Number:0080-G (online)
CGP systemNumber:001037242
 
June 27, 2018
### §621. Competitive categories for promotion

Under regulations prescribed by the Secretary of Defense, the Secretary of each military department shall establish competitive categories for promotion. Each officer whose name appears on an active-duty list shall be carried in a competitive category of officers. Officers in the same competitive category shall compete among themselves for promotion.

(Added Pub. L. 96–513, title I, §105, Dec. 12, 1980, 94 Stat. 2856.)

#### **Statutory Notes and Related Subsidiaries**

#### Effective Date

Section effective Sept. 15, 1981, but the authority to prescribe regulations under this section effective on Dec. 12, 1980, see section 701 of Pub. L. 96–513, set out as an Effective Date of 1980 Amendment note under section 101 of this title.
No. 9894.

#### Ernst & Co. vs. New Orleans Waterworks Company.

An injunction can lawfully issue to prevent a water-works company from cutting off its water supply where the consumer has offered to pay in advance the proper amount tor the use of such water during the year, and the company claims a higher rate than is truly due and exigible.

Under the terms of its charter, the company is hound to supply water at the rate charged by the city of New Orleans previous to the date of said-charter, which was fifteen cents for a thousand gallons to large consumers.

APPEAL from the Civil District Court for the Parish of Orleans. *Tissok,*J.

*J. O. Nixon, Jr.,*for Plaintiffs and Appellees.

*J. B. Beckwith*for Defendant and Appellant.

The opinion of the Court was delivered b.y

.Bermudez, C. J.

This is an action to prevent the defendant company from turning off its water supply from plaintiffs’ vice mills as long as the rates therefor ar.e paid in advance and to compel the company to continue such supply with that reserve of right.

The defendant company charges that the case presented is not one, in which an injunction can issue and that it is entitled to more than the amount which plaintiffs offer to pay.

From a judgment in favor of plaintiffs with certain qualifications of rights in favor of each party, the defendants appeal.

This case cannot be distinguished on the questions of law jireseiited, from those of Isaac Levy against the same company. 38 Ann. 25 and 29, in which this Court held that:

1. The codal provisions of our practice touching injunctions, are broader and more comprehensive than the rules of the chancery courts and include causes for injunction that would not be sanctioned in a court of equity, and that an injunction could issue to prevent the water-works company from cutting off its water supply on a proper showing.

2. The act of incorporation of the defendant company forbids it to1 charge more for water than was paid to the city at the date of its incorporation, March 31, 1877, and the charge then made by the city was fifteen cents for a thousand gallons to large consumers, and that a rice miller in New Orleans is entitled to the nso of the water conveyed through the pipes and conduits of the water-works company on paying-in advance for his supply at that rate.

*551in computing tlie quantity of water to be used, the district judge considered that the number of gallons equal the quantity of coal consumed arid allowed fifteen cents for each thousand gallons, adding a reasonable amount for watei employed for the cleaning of the boilers, et.c., and decreed accordingly, reserving to tlie company the right to claim more than the amounts to be paid in advance, should more water be used than had been computed, and to tlie plaintiffs the right to claim the difference-between that amount and the quantity of water used, were it eventually less than that computed.

The district court perpetuated the injunction.

We have no reason to disturb our previous views and the finding of the district court.

J udgment affirmed.
#### § 152.23 Applications for sale, exchange or gift.

Applications for the sale, exchange or gift of trust or restricted land shall be filed in the form approved by the Secretary with the agency having immediate jurisdiction over the land. Applications may be approved if, after careful examination of the circumstances in each case, the transaction appears to be clearly justified in the light of the long-range best interest of the owner or owners or as under conditions set out in § 152.25(d).
§ 20.309 What does unearned income include? Unearned income includes, but is not limited to: ( a ) Income from interest; oil and gas and other mineral royalties; gaming income per capita distributions; rental property; cash contributions, such as child support and alimony, gaming winnings; retirement benefits;
( b ) Annuities, veteran's disability, unemployment benefits, and federal and state tax refunds;
( c ) Per capita payments not excluded by federal statute;
( d ) Income from sale of trust land and real or personal property that is set aside for reinvestment in trust land or a primary residence, but has not been reinvested in trust land or a primary residence at the end of one year from the date the income was received;
( e ) In-kind contributions providing shelter at no cost to the individual or household, this must equal the amount for shelter included in the state standard, or 25 percent of the state standard, whichever is less; and
( f ) Financial assistance provided by a state, tribal, county, local, or other federal agency.
----

----

----

----

----

----

----

----

|        |
|--------|
|        |  |  |
|   |   |   |
| By:    | /S/   John P. Whittington |
|   | Name: | John P. Whittington |
|   | Title: | Executive Vice President, General Counseland Corporate Secretary |

----

----

----

----

----

----

----

----

----
### §405. Use of Department of Defense funds for United States share of costs of United Nations peacekeeping activities: limitation

(a) Prohibition on Use of Funds.—Funds available to the Department of Defense may not be used to make a financial contribution (directly or through another department or agency of the United States) to the United Nations—

(1) for the costs of a United Nations peacekeeping activity; or

(2) for any United States arrearage to the United Nations.

(b) Application of Prohibition.—The prohibition in subsection (a) applies to voluntary contributions, as well as to contributions pursuant to assessment by the United Nations for the United States share of the costs of a peacekeeping activity.

(Added Pub. L. 104–106, div. A, title XIII, §1301(a), Feb. 10, 1996, 110 Stat. 473.)

#### **Editorial Notes**

#### Prior Provisions

A prior section 405 was renumbered section 401(e) of this title.

#### **Statutory Notes and Related Subsidiaries**

#### Use of Department of Defense Funds for United Nations Forces

Pub. L. 105–261, div. A, title XII, §1231(b), Oct. 17, 1998, 112 Stat. 2155, provided that: "No funds available to the Department of Defense may be used—

"(1) for a monetary contribution to the United Nations for the establishment of a standing international force under the United Nations; or

"(2) to assign or detail any member of the Armed Forces to duty with a United Nations Stand By Force."
#### § 18.102 When must a tribe submit its tribal probate code to the Department for approval?

The tribe must submit its probate code to the Department for approval if the tribal probate code contains provisions regarding the descent and distribution of trust and restricted lands.
#### § 1200.10 Who is eligible to withdraw their tribal funds from trust?

Any tribe for whom we manage funds in trust.