alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
EX-34.3
(logo) pwc


Report of Independent Registered Public Accounting Firm


To the Board of Directors and shareholders of CoreLogic, Inc.:


We have examined management's assertion, included in the accompanying Report on
Assessment of Compliance, that CoreLogic Commercial Real Estate Services, Inc.
(the "Company"), an indirect subsidiary of CoreLogic, Inc. complied with the
servicing criteria set forth in Item 1122(d) of the Securities and Exchange
Commission's Regulation AB for all loans for commercial mortgage loan
outsourcing customers for which the Company served as the commercial tax service
provider (the "Platform"), as of December 31, 2013 and for the year then ended,
only including 1122(d)(1)(iv), 1122(d)(2)(v), 1122(d)(2)(vi), 1122(d)(2)(vii),
1122(d)(4)(xi), 1122(d)(4)(xii) and 1122(d)(4)(xiii), which the Company has
determined are applicable to the servicing activities performed by it with
respect to the Platform. Management is responsible for the Company's compliance
with the servicing criteria. Our responsibility is to express an opinion on
management's assertion based on our examination.

Our examination was conducted in accordance with attestation standards of the
Public Company Accounting Oversight Board (United States) and, accordingly,
included examining, on a test basis, evidence about the Company's compliance
with the applicable servicing criteria and performing such other procedures as
we considered necessary in the circumstances. Our examination included testing
of selected servicing activities related to the Platform, and determining
whether the Company performed those selected activities in compliance with the
applicable servicing criteria. Our procedures were limited to the selected
servicing activities performed by the Company during the period covered by this
report. Our procedures were not designed to detect noncompliance arising from
errors that may have occurred prior to or subsequent to our tests that may have
affected the balances or amounts calculated or reported by the Company during
the period covered by this report. We believe that our examination provides a
reasonable basis for our opinion. Our examination does not provide a legal
determination on the Company's compliance with the servicing criteria.

In our opinion, management's assertion that the Company complied with the
aforementioned applicable servicing criteria as of and for the year ended
December 31, 2013 for all loans for commercial mortgage loan outsourcing
customers for which the Company served as the commercial tax service provider is
fairly stated, in all material respects.


/s/ PricewaterhouseCoopers LLP


February 14, 2014


PricewaterhouseCoopers LLP, 2001 Ross Avenue, Suite 1800, Dallas, Texas 75201
T: (214) 999-1400, F: (214) 754-7991, www.pwc.com/us
#### State of Connecticut *v.*Benjamin Carr, Jr.

*John B. Williams,*in support of the motion.

Submitted February 25

decided March 5, 1974.

The motions of the defendant, by Attorney John R. Williams, to set aside an order of the Superior Court in New Haven County denying the defendant’s motion for the appointment of John R. Williams as publie defender are denied since the record discloses that Attorney John R. Williams has appeared and remains as counsel for the defendant.
COURT OF APPEALS

	SECOND DISTRICT OF TEXAS

	FORT WORTH 

	NO. 2-03-202-CV

IN RE RONALD PAUL MCNEEL	RELATOR

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

	ORIGINAL PROCEEDING

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

	MEMORANDUM OPINION1

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

	The court has considered relator's petition for writ of mandamus and is of the opinion that relief should be denied.  Accordingly, relator's petition for writ of mandamus is denied.

							PER CURIAM

PANEL A:	HOLMAN, J.; CAYCE, C.J.; and GARDNER, J.

DELIVERED: July 28, 2003
Exhibit 33.2



MANAGEMENT’S ASSERTION
OF COMPLIANCE



Management of the Trust & Securities Services department of
Deutsche Bank National Trust Company and Deutsche Bank Trust Company Americas (collectively the “Company”) is responsible
for assessing the servicing criteria set forth in Item 1122(d) of Regulation AB promulgated by the Securities and Exchange Commission
to determine which criteria are applicable to the Company in respect of the servicing platform described below. Management has
determined that the servicing criteria are applicable in regard to the servicing platform for the period as follows:



Platform:  The Honda Auto Receivables 2009-2 Owner Trust asset-backed
securities transaction, the Honda Auto Receivables 2010-3 Owner Trust asset-backed securities transaction and the Honda Auto Receivables
2012-2 Owner Trust asset-backed securities transaction (the “Platform”).



Applicable Servicing Criteria:  All servicing criteria set
forth in Item 1122(d), except for the following criteria: 1122(d)(1)(i)-1122(d)(1)(iv), 1122(d)(2)(i), 1122(d)(2)(iii)-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:  Year ended March 31, 2013 (the “Period”).



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



1.  The Company’s management is responsible for assessing the
Company’s compliance with the Applicable Servicing Criteria as of and for the Period.



2.  The Company’s management has assessed the Company’s
compliance with the Applicable Servicing Criteria as of and for the Period. In performing this assessment, management 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, 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.











| | DEUTSCHE BANK NATIONAL TRUST COMPANY
| | ------------------------------------
| |                                     
| | By:                                 
| |                                     
| |                                     
| |                                     
| | DEUTSCHE BANK TRUST COMPANY AMERICAS
| |                                     
| | By:                                 
| |                                     
| |                                     
| |                                     
| | By:                                 
| |                                     
| |                                     



Dated: May 24, 2013
###### Editorial Note on Part 900

#### Editorial Note:

Nomenclature changes to part 900 appear at 67 FR 34602, May 15, 2002.

#### § 900.169 Will the decisions on appeals be available for the public to review?

Yes. The Secretary shall publish all final decisions from the ALJs, the IBIA, and the Secretary of Health and Human Services.
<PAGE>
                                                                      EXHIBIT 21

                                  SUBSIDIARIES

NAP of the Americas of West India, FRA Consortium, Inc., a Florida corporation
Park West Telecommunications Investors, Inc., a Florida corporation (1)
TECOTA Services Corp., a Delaware corporation (2)(3)
Terremark Trademark Holdings, Inc., a Nevada corporation
TerreNAP Data Centers, Inc., a Florida corporation (4)
TerreNAP Services, Inc., a Florida corporation (5)


(1)   Park West Telecommunications Investors, Inc. is a significant shareholder
      or owns a significant interest in:
            Technology Center of the Americas, Inc., a Florida corporation (7)
            Technology Center of the Americas, Ltd., a Florida limited
              partnership

(3)   TECOTA Services Corp. is a minority shareholder of:
            Technology Center of the Americas, LLC, a Delaware limited
              liability corporation

(4)   TerreNAP Data Centers, Inc., is the sole shareholder of:
            NAP of the Americas, Inc.
            Spectrum Telecommunications Corp., a Delaware corporation (6)
            Terremark Asia Company, Ltd., a Bermuda corporation (8)
            Terremark Latin America, Inc., a Florida corporation (9)(10)

(5)   Terremark NAP Services, Inc. is the sole shareholder of:
            Terremark Financial Services, Inc., a Florida corporation
            Terremark Fortune House #1, Inc., a Florida corporation
            Terremark Management Services, Inc., a Florida corporation
            Terremark Realty, Inc., a Florida corporation
            Terremark Technology Contractors, Inc., a Florida corporation

(6)   Spectrum Telecommunications Corp. is the sole shareholder of:
            Terremark Americas Group, a Delaware corporation

(7)   Technology Center of the Americas, Inc. owns a minority interest in:
            Technology Center of the Americas, Ltd., a Florida limited
              partnership
<PAGE>
(8)   Terremark Asia Company, Ltd., a Bermuda corporation, is the sole
      shareholder of:
            Asia Connect, Ltd., a Bermuda corporation
            TerreNAP Data Centers (China), Ltd., a Bermuda corporation

(9)   Terremark Latin America, Inc. is a majority shareholder of:
            Terremark Latin America de Argentina, SA, an Argentine corporation
            Terremark Latin America (Brasil) Ltda, a Brazil corporation
            Terremark Latin America de Mexico, SA de CV, a Mexican corporation

(10)  Terremark Latin America, Inc. is a minority shareholder of:
            Terremark do Brasil Ltda, a Brazil corporation (11)

(11)  Terremark Latin America (Brasil) Ltda, a Brazil corporation, is a majority
      shareholder of:
            Terremark do Brasil Ltda, a Brazil corporation

*     Terremark Worldwide, Inc. owns a minority shareholder interest in:
            Terremark Latin America de Argentina, SA, an Argentine corporation
            Terremark Latin America (Brasil) Ltda, a Brazil corporation
            Terremark Latin America de Mexico, SA de CV, a Mexican corporation
<PAGE>

                                                                    EXHIBIT 32.1

                        CERTIFICATION OF CHIEF EXECUTIVE
                  OFFICER REGARDING PERIODIC REPORT CONTAINING
                              FINANCIAL STATEMENTS

         I, Carl E. Vogel, the Chief Executive Officer of Renaissance Media
Group LLC, Renaissance Media (Louisiana) LLC, Renaissance Media (Tennessee) LLC
and Renaissance Media Capital Corporation (collectively, the "Company") in
compliance with 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, as adopted pursuant to Section 906 of
the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, hereby certify that, the Company's Quarterly
Report on Form 10-Q for the period ended June 30, 2003 (the "Report") filed with
the Securities and Exchange Commission:

         -    fully complies with the requirements of Section 15(d) of the
              Securities Exchange Act of 1934; and

         -    the information contained in the Report fairly presents, in all
              material respects, the financial condition and results of
              operations of the Company.

                                                     /s/  Carl E. Vogel
                                                     ---------------------------
                                                     Carl E. Vogel
                                                     Chief Executive Officer
                                                     August 12, 2003
### §5362. Enforcement

#### (a) In general

Except as provided in subsection (b), a nonbank financial company supervised by the Board of Governors and any subsidiaries of such company (other than any depository institution subsidiary) shall be subject to the provisions of subsections (b) through (n) of section 1818 of this title, in the same manner and to the same extent as if the company were a bank holding company, as provided in section 1818(b)(3) of this title.

#### (b) Enforcement authority for functionally regulated subsidiaries

#### (1) Referral

If the Board of Governors determines that a condition, practice, or activity of a depository institution subsidiary or functionally regulated subsidiary of a nonbank financial company supervised by the Board of Governors does not comply with the regulations or orders prescribed by the Board of Governors under this Act, or otherwise poses a threat to the financial stability of the United States, the Board of Governors may recommend, in writing, to the primary financial regulatory agency for the subsidiary that such agency initiate a supervisory action or enforcement proceeding. The recommendation shall be accompanied by a written explanation of the concerns giving rise to the recommendation.

#### (2) Back-up authority of the Board of Governors

If, during the 60-day period beginning on the date on which the primary financial regulatory agency receives a recommendation under paragraph (1), the primary financial regulatory agency does not take supervisory or enforcement action against a subsidiary that is acceptable to the Board of Governors, the Board of Governors (upon a vote of its members) may take the recommended supervisory or enforcement action, as if the subsidiary were a bank holding company subject to supervision by the Board of Governors.

(Pub. L. 111–203, title I, §162, July 21, 2010, 124 Stat. 1421.)

#### **Editorial Notes**

#### References in Text

This Act, referred to in subsec. (b)(1), is Pub. L. 111–203, July 21, 2010, 124 Stat. 1376, known as the Dodd-Frank Wall Street Reform and Consumer Protection Act, which enacted this chapter and chapters 108 (§8201 et seq.) and 109 (§8301 et seq.) of Title 15, Commerce and Trade, and enacted, amended, and repealed numerous other sections and notes in the Code. For complete classification of this Act to the Code, see Short Title note set out under section 5301 of this title and Tables.
#### John H. Love, Jr., Appellant, v. Walter R. Lusher, Respondent, Impleaded with Others.

Order affirmed, with ten dollars costs and disbursements. No opinion. Woodward, Jenks, Gaynor, Rich and Miller, JJ., concurred.
### §2016. Interest rates and other charges

#### (a) In general

Loans and discounts made by a Farm Credit Bank shall bear such rate or rates of interest or discount, and be on such terms and conditions, as may be determined by the board of directors of the bank from time to time.

#### (b) Setting rates and charges

In setting rates and charges, it shall be the objective to provide the types of credit needed by eligible borrowers at the lowest reasonable costs on a sound business basis taking into consideration the cost of money to the bank, necessary reserve and expenses of the bank and associations, and providing services to members. The loan documents or discounting and financing agreements, may provide for the interest rate or rates to vary from time to time during the repayment period of the loan or agreement.

(Pub. L. 92–181, title I, §1.8, as added Pub. L. 100–233, title IV, §401, Jan. 6, 1988, 101 Stat. 1626; amended Pub. L. 100–399, title IV, §401(g), Aug. 17, 1988, 102 Stat. 996.)

#### **Editorial Notes**

#### Prior Provisions

A prior section 2016, Pub. L. 92–181, title I, §1.8, Dec. 10, 1971, 85 Stat. 586; Pub. L. 96–592, title I, §105, Dec. 24, 1980, 94 Stat. 3438, related to eligibility, prior to the general amendment of this subchapter by Pub. L. 100–233, §401.

#### Amendments

1988—Subsec. (a). Pub. L. 100–399 substituted "such rate or rates of interest or discount, and be" for "interest at a rate or rates, and".

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

#### Effective Date of 1988 Amendment

Amendment by Pub. L. 100–399 effective immediately after amendment made by section 401 of Pub. L. 100–233, which was effective 6 months after Jan. 6, 1988, see section 1001(b) of Pub. L. 100–399, set out as a note under section 2002 of this title.

#### Effective Date

Pub. L. 100–233, title IV, §401, Jan. 6, 1988, 101 Stat. 1622, provided that this section is effective 6 months after Jan. 6, 1988.
# C_2007096EN.01004202.xml

| 28.4.2007 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 96/42 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

28.4.2007

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 96/42

---

Order of the Civil Service Tribunal (First Chamber) of 27 March 2007 — Manté v Council

(Case F-87/06) (1)

1

(Staff cases - Pay - Installation allowance - National expert on secondment who has been appointed an official - Recovery of sum not due - Manifest inadmissibility)

(2007/C 96/88)

Language of the case: French

Parties

Applicant: Thierry Manté (Woluw-Saint-Pierre, Belgium) (represented by: S. Rodrigues and C. Bernard-Glanz, lawyers)

Applicant:

Defendant: Council of the European Union (represented by: M. Simm and I. Sulce, acting as Agents)

Defendant:

Re:

First, annulment of the decision of the Council's Appointing Authority of 22 August 2005 refusing to grant the applicant, a former national expert on secondment who became an official of the European Communities, the installation allowance and ordering its recovery, and secondly, an application for damages.

Operative part of the order

| 1. | The application is dismissed as manifestly inadmissible; |
| --- | --- |

1.

The application is dismissed as manifestly inadmissible;

| 2. | the Council of the European Union, in addition to bearing its own costs, is ordered to pay half those of Mr Manté. |
| --- | --- |

2.

the Council of the European Union, in addition to bearing its own costs, is ordered to pay half those of Mr Manté.

---

(1)  OJ C 237 of 30.9.2006, p. 19.

1

---
# C_2007095EN.01002903.xml

| 28.4.2007 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 95/29 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

28.4.2007

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 95/29

---

Action brought on 27 February 2007 — Commission of the European Communities v Czech Republic

(Case C-116/07)

(2007/C 95/55)

Language of the case: Czech

Parties

Applicant: Commission of the European Communities (represented by B. Stromsky and M. Šimerdová, Agents)

Applicant:

Defendant: Czech Republic

Defendant:

Form of order sought

The Court is asked to:

| — | declare that, by failing to adopt the laws, regulations and administrative provisions necessary to comply with Directive 2004/28/EC (1) of the European Parliament and of the Council of 31 March 2004 amending Directive 2001/82/EC on the Community code relating to veterinary medicinal products, or in any event by not communicating such measures to the Commission, the Czech Republic has failed to fulfil its obligations under Article 3 of that directive; |
| --- | --- |

—

declare that, by failing to adopt the laws, regulations and administrative provisions necessary to comply with Directive 2004/28/EC (1) of the European Parliament and of the Council of 31 March 2004 amending Directive 2001/82/EC on the Community code relating to veterinary medicinal products, or in any event by not communicating such measures to the Commission, the Czech Republic has failed to fulfil its obligations under Article 3 of that directive;

1

| — | order the Czech Republic to pay the costs. |
| --- | --- |

—

order the Czech Republic to pay the costs.

Pleas in law and main arguments

The period prescribed for transposing the directive into national law expired on 30 October 2005.

---

(1)  OJ 2004 L 136, p. 58.

1

---
#### § 169.109 Whose consent do I need for a right-of-way when there is a life estate on the tract?

If there is a life estate on the tract that would be subject to the right-of-way, the applicant must get the consent of both the life tenant and the owners of the majority of the remainder interest known at the time of the application.
EX-10.4






Exhibit 10.4




	 	 	 	 	 
	

	 	Salary Continuation Plan

	 	Plan Year Reporting






Hypothetical Termination Benefits Schedule




William Loving




	 	 	 
	Birth Date: 3/28/1955

	 	Early Voluntary Termination
	Plan Anniversary Date: 1/1/2009
	 	 
	Normal Retirement: 3/28/2020, Age 65

	 	Annual Benefit 2
	

Normal Retirement Payment: Monthly for 15 years	 	Amount Payable at
	

	 	Normal Retirement Age






	 	 	 	 	 	 	 	 	 	 	 	 	 	 	 	 	 
	 	 	 	 	 	 	Benefit	 	 	 	 	 	Based On
	Values	 	Age	 	Level	 	Vesting	 	Benefit
	as of	 	(1)	 	(2)	 	(3)	 	(4)
	 
	Dec 2008 1
	 	 	53	 	 	 	54,663	 	 	 	8.33	%	 	 	4,555	 
	Dec 2009
	 	 	54	 	 	 	54,663	 	 	 	16.67	%	 	 	9,111	 
	Dec 2010
	 	 	55	 	 	 	54,663	 	 	 	25.00	%	 	 	13,666	 
	Dec 2011
	 	 	56	 	 	 	54,663	 	 	 	33.33	%	 	 	18,221	 
	Dec 2012
	 	 	57	 	 	 	54,663	 	 	 	41.67	%	 	 	22,776	 
	 
	Dec 2013
	 	 	58	 	 	 	54,663	 	 	 	50.00	%	 	 	27,332	 
	Dec 2014
	 	 	59	 	 	 	54,663	 	 	 	58.33	%	 	 	31,887	 
	Dec 2015
	 	 	60	 	 	 	54,663	 	 	 	66.67	%	 	 	36,442	 
	Dec 2016
	 	 	61	 	 	 	54,663	 	 	 	75.00	%	 	 	40,997	 
	Dec 2017
	 	 	62	 	 	 	54,663	 	 	 	83.33	%	 	 	45,552	 
	 
	Dec 2018
	 	 	63	 	 	 	54,663	 	 	 	91.67	%	 	 	50,108	 
	Dec 2019
	 	 	64	 	 	 	54,663	 	 	 	100.00	%	 	 	54,663	 
	Mar 2020
	 	 	65	 	 	 	54,663	 	 	 	100.00	%	 	 	54,663	 








 




			
	1	 	The first line reflects 12 months of data, January 2008 to December 2008.
	 
	2	 	The annual benefit amount will be paid for 15 years.
	 
	*	 	The purpose of this hypothetical illustration is to show the participant’s annual
benefit based on various termination assumptions. Actual benefits are based on the terms and
provisions of the plan agreement. Consequently, actual benefits may differ from those shown on
this Hypothetical Termination Benefits Schedule.





			
	 	 	 
	Salary Continuation Plan for Pendleton Community Bank,
 Inc — Franklin, WV
	 	Securities offered through Clark Securities, Inc.,
 DBA CCFS, Inc. in Texas
	1002388 46672 364449 v7.09.14.07 02/22/2008:11 SCP—E,F NB
	 	Member FINRA & SIPC, Dallas, TX 75201, (800) 999-3125.
### §2908. Small bank regulatory relief

#### (a) In general

Except as provided in subsections (b) and (c), any regulated financial institution with aggregate assets of not more than $250,000,000 shall be subject to routine examination under this chapter—

(1) not more than once every 60 months for an institution that has achieved a rating of "outstanding record of meeting community credit needs" at its most recent examination under section 2903 of this title;

(2) not more than once every 48 months for an institution that has received a rating of "satisfactory record of meeting community credit needs" at its most recent examination under section 2903 of this title; and

(3) as deemed necessary by the appropriate Federal financial supervisory agency, for an institution that has received a rating of less than "satisfactory record of meeting community credit needs" at its most recent examination under section 2903 of this title.

#### (b) No exception from CRA examinations in connection with applications for deposit facilities

A regulated financial institution described in subsection (a) shall remain subject to examination under this chapter in connection with an application for a deposit facility.

#### (c) Discretion

A regulated financial institution described in subsection (a) may be subject to more frequent or less frequent examinations for reasonable cause under such circumstances as may be determined by the appropriate Federal financial supervisory agency.

(Pub. L. 95–128, title VIII, §809, as added Pub. L. 106–102, title VII, §712, Nov. 12, 1999, 113 Stat. 1469.)