alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
Exhibit 33.3

 

MANAGEMENT’S REPORT ON ASSESSMENT OF COMPLIANCE WITH SEC REGULATION AB SERVICING CRITERIA

Pacific Life Insurance Company (the “Asserting Party”) is responsible for assessing compliance, as of and for the year ended December 31, 2019, with the Relevant Servicing Criteria set forth in Item 1122 (d) of the SEC’s Regulation AB, excluding the criteria set forth in Item 1122 (d)(1)(iii), (d)(2)(ii), (d)(3)(i), (d)(3)(ii), (d)(3)(iii), (d)(3)(iv), (d)(4)(ii), (d)(4)(v), (d)(4)(ix), (d)(4)(iv), (d)(4)(x), (d)(4)(xi), (d)(4)(xii), (d)(4)(xiii), (d)(4)(xiv), and (d)(4)(xv), which the Asserting Party has concluded are not applicable to the activities it performs, with respect to the asset-backed securities transactions covered by this report (such criteria, after giving effect to the exclusions identified above, the “Applicable Servicing Criteria”). The transactions covered by this report include all asset-backed transactions under the Securitized Commercial Mortgage Loans Platform (the “Platform”), as listed in Appendix A.

The Asserting Party has used the criteria set forth in paragraph (d) of Item 1122 of Regulation AB in order to assess the effectiveness of Pacific Life Insurance Company’s compliance with the Applicable Servicing Criteria as of and for the year ended December 31, 2019. The Asserting Party has concluded that it has complied, in all material respects, with the Applicable Servicing Criteria as of and for the year ended December 31, 2019, with respect to the Platform taken as a whole.

Deloitte & Touche LLP, an independent registered public accounting firm, has issued an attestation report for the Platform on the assessment of compliance with the Applicable Servicing Criteria as of and for the year ended December 31, 2019, as set forth in this assertion.

Pacific Life Insurance Company

 

|                                            |
|--------------------------------------------|
|                                       |
| /s/ John Waldeck                           |
| John Waldeck                               |
| VP Underwriting & Portfolio Management |
| February 18, 2020                          |

 

 

 

 

PACIFIC LIFE INSURANCE COMPANY

700 Newport Center Drive, Newport Beach, California 92660-6397 Tel (949)219-3011

 

----

 

SECURITIZED COMMERCIAL MORTGAGE LOANS PLATFORM

 

 

|                        |                                |
|------------------------|--------------------------------|
| Trust Name             | Loan Name                      |
|                   |                           |
| COMM 2014-277P         | 277 Park Avenue                |
| HGMT 2015-HGLR         | Houston Galleria Mall          |
| DBJPM 2016 –SFC  | Westfield San Francisco Center |
| JPM 2015 – WPG   | Scottsdale Quarter             |
| BMARK 2019 – B12 | Woodlands Mall                 |
|                   |                           |
§ 242.902 Public dissemination of transaction reports. ( a ) *General.* Except as provided in paragraph (c) of this section, a registered security-based swap data repository shall publicly disseminate a transaction report of a security-based swap, or a life cycle event or adjustment due to a life cycle event, immediately upon receipt of information about the security-based swap, or upon re-opening following a period when the registered security-based swap data repository was closed. The transaction report shall consist of all the information reported pursuant to § 242.901(c), plus any condition flags contemplated by the registered security-based swap data repository's policies and procedures that are required by § 242.907.
( b ) [Reserved].
( c ) *Non-disseminated information.* A registered security-based swap data repository shall not disseminate: ( 1 ) The identity of any counterparty to a security-based swap;
( 2 ) With respect to a security-based swap that is not cleared at a registered clearing agency and that is reported to the registered security-based swap data repository, any information disclosing the business transactions and market positions of any person;
( 3 ) Any information regarding a security-based swap reported pursuant to § 242.901(i);
( 4 ) Any non-mandatory report;
( 5 ) Any information regarding a security-based swap that is required to be reported pursuant to §§ 242.901 and 242.908(a)(1) but is not required to be publicly disseminated pursuant to § 242.908(a)(2);
( 6 ) Any information regarding a clearing transaction that arises from the acceptance of a security-based swap for clearing by a registered clearing agency or that results from netting other clearing transactions;
( 7 ) Any information regarding the allocation of a security-based swap; or
( 8 ) Any information regarding a security-based swap that has been rejected from clearing or rejected by a prime broker if the original transaction report has not yet been publicly disseminated.
( d ) *Temporary restriction on other market data sources.* No person shall make available to one or more persons (other than a counterparty or a post-trade processor) transaction information relating to a security-based swap before the primary trade information about the security-based swap is sent to a registered security-based swap data repository.
[80 FR 14728, Mar. 19, 2015, as amended at 81 FR 53654, Aug. 12, 2016]
N OTE : This o rder is nonprecedential.



# United States **Court of Appeals** 

**for the Federal Circuit**

______________________

MORTIMER PHILBERT,

Petitioner,

v.

MERIT SYSTEMS PROTEC TION BOARD,

Respondent.

______________________

2014

- 3029

______________________

Petition for review of the Merit Systems Protection

Board in No. DC0752130165 -I- 1.

______________________

ON MOTION

______________________

O R D E R

Mortimer Philbert moves for leave to proceed in forma

pauperis.

Upon consideration thereof,

I T I S O RDERED T HAT :

The motion is granted. Case: 14-3029 Document: 7 Page: 1 Filed: 11/27/2013PHILBERT v. MSPB 2

F OR THE C OURT

/s/ Daniel E. O’Toole

Daniel E. O’Toole

Clerk of Court

s 24 Case: 14-3029 Document: 7 Page: 2 Filed: 11/27/2013
###### Editorial Note on Part 260

#### Editorial Note:

Nomenclature changes to part 260 appear at 57 FR 36501, Aug. 13, 1992, and 57 FR 47409, Oct. 16, 1992.

#### § 260.3(4)-2 Definition of “distribution” in section 303(4) for certain transactions.

A person, the chief part of the business of which consists in the purchase of the securities of any one issuer and/or its affiliate and in the sale of its own securities to furnish the proceeds with which to acquire the securities of such issuer and/or affiliate, is to be regarded as engaged in the distribution of the securities of such issuer and/or affiliate within the meaning of section 303(4).
#### § 143.10 Garnishment hearings.

Any oral or written hearing required to establish the Commission's right to collect a delinquent debt through administrative wage garnishment shall be presided over by a hearing official designated by the Executive Director, with the concurrence of the General Counsel or the General Counsel's designee. Any qualified and impartial employee of the Commission designated by the Executive Director may serve as a hearing official. Except as otherwise provided in this section, the hearing shall be conducted in accordance with the requirements of, and the procedures set forth in, 31 CFR 285.11(f). All documents presented to the hearing official for his or her consideration shall be marked as exhibits and retained in the record. All testimony given at an oral hearing, either in person or by telephone, shall be under oath or affirmation; a transcript of the hearing shall be prepared and made part of the record. When a debtor requests a hearing, the designated hearing official shall hold the hearing and issue his or her written decision within 60 days of the Commission's receipt of the request, unless otherwise approved, in writing, by the Executive Director.
#### The People of the State of New York, Respondent, v Michael Hurley, Appellant.

[821 NYS2d 545]

Motion for writ of error coram nobis denied. Present — Pigott, Jr., P.J., Kehoe, Smith and Pine, JJ.
Subpart 5315.3 — SOURCE SELECTION

Parent topic: Part 5315 - Contracting by Negotiation

5315.300 Scope of Subpart

See MP5315.3 for required Department of the Air Force Source Selection responsibilities and

procedures.

5315.371-4 Exceptions

(a)(2) See MP5301.601(a)(i).

5315.371-5 Waiver

(a) When a waiver to the requirement at DFARS 215.371-2 is sought, the contracting officer should

provide the following documentation to support the waiver request:

(1) Summary of market research that documents that competition was anticipated, process used to

maximize competition pre-solicitation, and description of solicitation method;

(2) Rationale why re-advertising for an additional 30 days will likely not obtain two or more offers.

(3) Rationale for how the price/cost will be determined fair and reasonable with only one offeror.

See MP5301.601(a)(i).
§ 242.814 Entity operating both a national securities exchange and security-based swap execution facility. ( a ) An entity that intends to operate both a national securities exchange and a security-based swap execution facility shall separately register the two facilities pursuant to section 6 of the Act and § 242.803, respectively.
( b ) A national securities exchange shall, to the extent that the exchange also operates a security-based swap execution facility and uses the same electronic trade execution system for listing and executing trades of security-based swaps on or through the exchange and the facility, identify whether electronic trading of such security-based swaps is taking place on or through the national securities exchange or the security-based swap execution facility.
### §19069. Astronomy and satellite constellations

The Director shall support research into and the design, development, and testing of mitigation measures to address the potential impact of satellite constellations on Foundation scientific programs by—

(1) making awards on a competitive basis to support study of the potential impacts of satellite constellations on ground-based optical, infrared, and radio astronomy, including through existing programs such Spectrum and Wireless Innovation enabled by Future Technologies (SWIFT) and the Spectrum Innovation Initiative;

(2) supporting research on potential satellite impacts and benefits and mitigation strategies to be carried out at one or more Foundation supported Federally Funded Research and Development Centers or major multiuser research facilities as defined in section 1862s–2(g) of this title, as appropriate; and

(3) supporting workshops related to the potential impact of satellite constellations on scientific research and how those constellations could be used to improve scientific research.

(Pub. L. 117–167, div. B, title III, §10362, Aug. 9, 2022, 136 Stat. 1568.)
###### Editorial Note on Part 1

#### Editorial Note:

Nomenclature changes to part 1 appear at 89 FR 71805, Sept. 4, 2024.

#### § 1.42 Delivery accounts.

In connection with the making or taking of delivery of a commodity under a commodity contract whose terms require settlement via physical delivery, if a futures commission merchant facilitates or effects the transfer of the physical delivery property and payment therefor on behalf of the customer, and does so outside the futures account, foreign futures account or cleared swaps account in which the commodity contract was held, the futures commission merchant must do so in a delivery account, *provided, however,* that when the commodity subject to delivery is a security, a futures commission merchant may, consistent with any applicable regulatory requirements, do so in a securities account.

[86 FR 19419, Apr. 13, 2021]
================================================================================


                                 LOAN AGREEMENT
                                 --------------


                  THIS AGREEMENT made the 12th day of January, 2006.


BETWEEN:

                  LORI BOLTON, of 2640 Tempe Knoll Drive, North Vancouver,
                  British Columbia, V7N 4K6;

                  ("Bolton")

                                                              OF THE FIRST PART

AND:
                  MATRIX VENTURES,  INC., a company incorporated pursuant to the
                  laws of Nevada with an address for service at 1802 N Carson
                  Street, Suite 212, Carson City, Nevada, 89701


                  ("Matrix")

                                                             OF THE SECOND PART

WHEREAS:

A.       Matrix requires funding in connection with its business operations in
         the mineral property exploration sector;

B.       Bolton is prepared to loan up to $150,000 (the "Loan") to Matrix, on
         certain terms and conditions contained herein;

                  NOW  THEREFORE  THIS  AGREEMENT  WITNESSETH  that  for  and in
consideration  of the sum of TEN DOLLARS  ($10.00),  and other good and valuable
consideration,  the receipt and sufficiency of which is hereby acknowledged, the
parties hereto agree as follows:

1.       Bolton hereby agrees to advance Loan from time to time upon the request
         of Matrix up to the maximum amount of the Loan.

2.       The Loan shall be unsecured  and bear simple  interest at a rate of 10%
         per annum, calculated in arrears on a monthly basis and continuing
         until the entire Loan amount is paid in full.

3.       The Loan, as well as all accrued interest shall be due and payable from
         Matrix to Bolton on demand.

<page>

4.       All funds and dollar amounts referred to in this Agreement are in the
         lawful currency of United  States, unless otherwise stated.

5.       This  Agreement  shall be  interpreted in  accordance  with the laws in
         effect  from time to time in the  Province of British Columbia.

                  IN WITNESS  WHEREOF the parties  hereto have hereunto  affixed
their respective hands, both as of the day and year first above written.


                                             MATRIX VENTURES, INC.

/s/ Lori Bolton                              PER:  /s/ Lori Bolton
--------------------------                   ------------------------
LORI BOLTON                                  Authorized Signatory
#### (A) Chain Building Corp. v. Nancy E. Appel. (B) Sherry Gale Casuals, Inc., v. Favorite Trucking Corp.

[In each action] Application denied, with $10 costs. Concur — Rabin, J. P., Valente, McNally, Stevens and Eager, JJ.
#### § 275.222-2 Definition of “client” for purposes of the national de minimis standard.

For purposes of section 222(d)(2) of the Act (15 U.S.C. 80b-18a(d)(2)), an investment adviser may rely upon the definition of “client” provided by § 275.202(a)(30)-1, without giving regard to paragraph (b)(4) of that section.

[76 FR 43014, July 19, 2011]
Pursuant to 5TH CIR. R. 47.5, the court has determined that this opinion should not *

be published and is not precedent except under the limited circumstances set forth in 5TH CIR.

R. 47.5.4.

IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT

No. 09-30560

VIKTOR KHALIMSKY; FAINA LUSHTAK,

Plaintiffs - Appellants

v.

LIBERTY MUTUAL FIRE INSURANCE COMPANY,

Defendant - Appellee

Appeal from the United States District Court

for the Eastern District of Louisiana

USDC No. 2:07-CV-8959 

Before KING, JOLLY, and STEWART, Circuit Judges.

PER CURIAM:*

Plaintiffs–Appellants appeal the district court’s order entered April 13,

2009, granting summary judgment in favor of Defendant–Appellee on the

Appellants’ medical expenses and loss of income claims. The parties brought a

joint motion for leave to file an interlocutory appeal and a joint motion to stay

trial pending appeal. On June 18, 2009, the district court stayed proceedings

and granted the motion to certify the summary judgment order as interlocutory.

Appellants filed their notice of appeal on June 26, 2009.

United States Court of Appeals

Fifth Circuit

F I L E D

February 10, 2010

Charles R. Fulbruge III

Clerk

Case: 09-30560 Document: 00511024540 Page: 1 Date Filed: 02/10/2010
No. 09-30560

2

However, Appellants did not file the requisite petition for permission to

appeal within ten days after the § 1292(b) order was filed in the district court,

and Appellants still have not filed such a petition. 28 U.S.C. § 1292(b) (“The

Court of Appeals which would have jurisdiction of an appeal of such action may

thereupon, in its discretion, permit an appeal to be taken from such order, if

application is made to it within ten days after the entry of the order[.]”); FED. R.

APP. P. 5(a)(1) (“To request permission to appeal when an appeal is within the

court of appeals’ discretion, a party must file a petition for permission to

appeal.”). “As a court of limited jurisdiction, we must note an absence of

jurisdiction, even if not urged by the parties.” Aucoin v. Matador Servs., Inc.,

749 F.2d 1180, 1181 (5th Cir. 1985). “Specifically, in the absence of a timely

request for permissive appeal under FED. R. APP. P. 5(a), we lack jurisdiction to

consider granting a discretionary appeal.” Id. “ The petition [for appeal under

Rule 5(a)] is an important complement to a procedure designed to answer the

question of whether an immediate appeal will materially advance the ultimate

termination of the litigation.” Id. 

Here, the notice of appeal filed in the district court is not an adequate

request under Rule 5(a) because it does not contain a statement of reasons why

the court should allow the appeal, and it “does not timely inform the appellate

court in a manner which allows it promptly to respond.” Id. Therefore, we

DISMISS this appeal for lack of appellate jurisdiction. Id. 

 DISMISSED.

Case: 09-30560 Document: 00511024540 Page: 2 Date Filed: 02/10/2010
§ 300.600 Rules relating to supplemental report on SIPC membership. ( a ) ( 1 ) *Who must file the supplemental report.* Except as provided in paragraph (a)(2) of this section, a broker or dealer must file with SIPC, within 60 days after the end of its fiscal year, a supplemental report on the status of its membership in SIPC (commonly referred to as the “Independent Accountants' Report on Applying Agreed-Upon Procedures”) if a rule of the Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC) requires the broker or dealer to file audited financial statements annually.
( 2 ) If the broker or dealer is a member of SIPC, the broker or dealer is not required to file the supplemental report for any year in which it reports $500,000 or less in total revenues in its annual audited statement of income filed with the SEC.
( b ) *Requirements of the supplemental report.* The supplemental report must cover the SIPC Annual General Assessment Reconciliation Form (Form SIPC-7) or the Certification of Exclusion From Membership Form (Form SIPC-3) for each year for which an SEC Rule requires audited financial statements to be filed. The supplemental report must include the following: ( 1 ) A copy of the form filed or a schedule of assessment payments showing any overpayments applied and overpayments carried forward, including payment dates, amounts, and name of SIPC collection agent to whom mailed; or
( 2 ) If exclusion from membership was claimed, a statement that the broker or dealer qualified for exclusion from membership under the Securities Investor Protection Act of 1970, as amended, and the date the Form SIPC-3 was filed with SIPC; and
( 3 ) An independent public accountant's report. The independent public accountant, who must be independent in accordance with the provisions of 17 CFR 210.2-01, must be engaged to perform the following agreed-upon procedures in accordance with standards of the Public Company Accounting Oversight Board (PCAOB): ( i ) Compare assessment payments made in accordance with the General Assessment Payment Form (Form SIPC-6) and applied to the General Assessment calculation on the Form SIPC-7 with respective cash disbursements record entries;
( ii ) For all or any portion of a fiscal year, compare amounts reflected in the audited financial statements required by an SEC rule with amounts reported in the Form SIPC-7;
( iii ) Compare adjustments reported in the Form SIPC-7 with supporting schedules and working papers supporting the adjustments;
( iv ) Verify the arithmetical accuracy of the calculations reflected in the Form SIPC-7 and in the schedules and working papers supporting any adjustments; and
( v ) Compare the amount of any overpayment applied with the Form SIPC-7 on which it was computed; or
( vi ) If exclusion from membership is claimed, compare the income or loss reported in the audited financial statements required by an SEC rule with the Form SIPC-3.
[81 FR 14374, Mar. 17, 2016]
### §1778. Nonprofit programs

The food and milk service programs in schools and nonprofit institutions receiving assistance under this chapter shall be conducted on a nonprofit basis.

(Pub. L. 89–642, §9, Oct. 11, 1966, 80 Stat. 888.)
No: 16-046 August 3, 2016

Contact: Scott Burnell, 301-415-8200

NRC Completes Safety Review of Proposed New Reactors

at William States Lee Site In South Carolina

The Nuclear Regulatory Commission staff has completed its Final Safety Evaluation Report for 

Combined Licenses for two proposed reactors at the William States Lee site. The report concludes there 

are no safety aspects that would preclude issuing the licenses for construction and operation of the 

proposed reactors at the site, near Gaffney in Cherokee County, S.C.

The staff will provide the report and Final Environmental Impact Statement on the application 

to the Commission for the mandatory hearing phase of the licensing process. In the mandatory hearing, 

expected to take place later this year, the Commission will examine whether the staff’s review supports 

the findings necessary to issue the licenses. Following the mandatory hearing, the Commission will 

vote on whether to authorize the staff to issue the licenses.

Duke Energy submitted its application for the William States Lee site on Dec. 12, 2007, for 

permission to build and operate two AP1000 nuclear reactors at the site. The NRC certified the 

amended 1,100-megawatt AP1000 design in 2012. More information on the certification process is 

available on the NRC website. 

The NRC’s Advisory Committee on Reactor Safeguards independently reviewed those aspects 

of the application that concern safety. The committee provided the results of its review to the 

Commission on Dec. 14, 2015. The NRC completed its environmental review and issued the final 

impact statement for the proposed William States Lee reactors in December 2013.
Subpart 3428.3—Insurance

Parent topic: PART 3428—BONDS AND INSURANCE

3428.311 Solicitation provision and contract clause on

liability insurance under cost-reimbursement contracts.

3428.311-2 Agency solicitation and contract clauses.

The contracting officer must insert the clause at 3452.228–70 (Required insurance) in all

solicitations and contracts when a cost-reimbursement contract is contemplated.
§ 37.1300 Core Principle 13—Financial resources. ( a ) *In general.* The swap execution facility shall have adequate financial, operational, and managerial resources to discharge each responsibility of the swap execution facility.
( b ) *Determination of resource adequacy.* The financial resources of a swap execution facility shall be considered to be adequate if the value of the financial resources exceeds the total amount that would enable the swap execution facility to cover the operating costs of the swap execution facility for a one-year period, as calculated on a rolling basis.