alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
Management's Assertion of Compliance

Management of the Agency and Trust division of Citibank, N.A. (the "Company")
is responsible for providing this platform-level assessment of compliance with
the servicing criteria specified in Item 1122(d) of Regulation AB promulgated
by the Securities and Exchange Commission.

Management has determined that the following servicing criteria are applicable
in regards to the platform for the following period:

Platform: publicly-issued (i.e., transaction-level reporting initially
required under the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended) residential
mortgage-backed securities, automobile loan or lease-backed securities and
student loan-backed securities issued on or after January 1, 2006, for which
the Company provides the following servicing functions (the "Platform"):

      - paying agent, securities administration and trustee; or
      - securities administration and paying agent; or
      - paying agent and trustee; or
      - paying agent.

Applicable Servicing Criteria: All servicing criteria set forth in Item
1122(d), to the extent required by the Item 1122(d) servicing criteria in
regards to the activities performed by the Company with respect to the
Platform as to any transaction, excluding the following servicing criteria:
1122(d)(1)(i), 1122(d)(1)(iii), 1122(d)(I)(iv), 1122(d)(2)(iii). 1122(d)(4)
(i), 1122(d)(4)(ii) and 1122(d)(4)(iv) through 1122(d)(4)(xiv), (the
"Applicable Servicing Criteria").

Period: Twelve months ended December 31, 2006 (the "Period").

With respect to the Platform, the Company's management provides the following
assessment 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 as of and for the
      Period.

    - The Company's management has assessed compliance with the Applicable
      Servicing Criteria as of and for the Period. 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, as of and for the Period, the Company has
      complied, in all material respects, with the Applicable Servicing
      Criteria.

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

                              Citibank,N.A.
                              By:/s/Jeffrey Volk
                              -----------------------------
                              Jeffrey Volk

                              Its: Managing Director
                              -----------------------------

                              Dated: February 28, 2007
                                    -----------------------
<PAGE>




                                                                    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 SurgiCare, Inc. (the "Company") on
Form 10-QSB for the period ended September 30, 2002 as filed with the Securities
and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the "Report"), I, Keith G. LeBlanc,
Chief Executive Officer of the Company, certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. section
1350, as adopted pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that
to the best of my knowledge:

1. The Report fully complies with the requirements of section 13(a) or 15(d) of
the Securities Exchange Act of 1934; and

2. The information contained in the Report fairly presents, in all material
respects, the financial condition and result of operations of the Company.


--------------------------------
Keith G. LeBlanc, CEO
November 19, 2002

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
32.002 Applicability of subparts.       (a) The following sections and subparts of this part are applicable to all purchases subject to part  32:                                                         (1) Sections 32.000 through 32.009.                                                            (2)                         subpart  32.3, Loan Guarantees for Defense Production.                                                            (3)                         subpart  32.6, Contract Debts.                                                            (4)                         subpart  32.7, Contract Funding.                                                            (5)                         subpart  32.8, Assignment of Claims.                                                            (6)                         subpart  32.9, Prompt Payment.                                                            (7)                         subpart  32.11, Electronic Funds Transfer.                                                                             (b)                   subpart  32.2, Commercial Product and Commercial Service Purchase Financing, is applicable only to purchases of commercial products and commercial services under authority of part  12.                                          (c) The following subparts of this part are applicable to all purchases made under any authority other than part  12:                                                         (1)                         subpart  32.1, Financing for Other Than a Commercial Purchase.                                                            (2)                         subpart  32.4, Advance Payments for Other Than Commercial Acquisitions.                                                            (3)                         subpart  32.5, Progress Payments Based on Costs.                                                            (4)                         subpart  32.10, Performance-Based Payments.    **Parent topic:** Part 32 - Contract Financing
Document Headings

                    Document headings vary by document type but may contain                    the following:                  
                -                       the agency or agencies that issued and signed a document                    
                -                       the number of the CFR title and the number of each part                      the document amends, proposes to amend, or is directly                      related to                    
                -                       the agency docket number / agency internal file number                    
                -                       the RIN which identifies each regulatory action listed in                      the Unified Agenda of Federal Regulatory and Deregulatory                      Actions                    

                    See the                                          Document Drafting Handbook                                        for more details.                  

###### Department of Transportation

###### Federal Highway Administration

# AGENCY:

Federal Highway Administration (FHWA), DOT.

# ACTION:

Rescind Notice of Intent to prepare an EIS.

# SUMMARY:

                        This notice rescinds the Notice of Intent for preparing an Environmental Impact Statement (EIS) for proposed highway to provide a connection between U.S. Highway 82 Bypass and Interstate 69 in Washington and Bolivar Counties, Mississippi, is terminated. The original Notice of Intent for this EIS process was published in the                         **Federal Register**                         on November 29, 2005.                    

# FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

Claiborne Barnwell, Project Development Team Leader, Federal Highway Administration, Mississippi Division, 100 West Capitol Street, Suite 1026, Jackson, Mississippi 39269, Telephone: (601) 965-4217.

# SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

## Background

The Federal Highway Administration (FHWA) in cooperation with the Mississippi Department of Transportation (MDOT) initiated an Environmental Impact Statement (EIS) with a Notice of Intent November 29, 2005, to provide a connector road, to be built to interstate standards, between the U.S. Highway 82 Bypass in Greenville and Interstate 69 near Benoit.

Due to funding constraints this Notice of Intent is rescinded.

Andrew H. Hughes,

Division Administrator, Mississippi, Federal Highway Administration, Jackson, Mississippi.

[FR Doc. 2010-30024 Filed 11-30-10; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE M
Exhibit 32.2 CERTIFICATION PURSUANT TO SECTION 1350, CHAPTER 63 OF TITLE 18, UNITED STATES CODE, AS ADOPTED PURSUANT TO SECTION 906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002 In connection with the accompanying Quarterly Report of Kohlberg Capital Corporation (the Company) on Form 10-K for the year ended December 31, 2011 (the Report), I, Michael I. Wirth, Chief Financial 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 Section 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended; and (2)  The information contained in the Report fairly presents, in all material respects, the financial condition and results of operations of the Company.  Date: March 15, 2012

          

          By:/s/ Michael I. WirthMichael I. Wirth Chief Financial Officer (Principal Financial Officer)
31.106 [Reserved]

Parent topic: Subpart 31.1 - Applicability
156 So.2d 604

#### A. E. SULLIVAN et al. v. HARTFORD ACCIDENT & INDEMNITY COMPANY.

No. 46920.

Oct. 9, 1963.

In re: A. E. Sullivan et al. applying for certiorari or writ of review to the Court of Appeal, Second Circuit, Parish of Caddo. 155 So.2d 432.

*66Writ refused. On the facts found by the Court of Appeal, there is no error of law in its judgment
### Quality assurance and analysis of water levels in wells on Pahute Mesa and vicinity, Nevada Test Site, Nye County, Nevada

By: Joseph M. Fenelon**

                            https://doi.org/10.3133/wri004014

#### Links

- More information:  **Publisher Index Page**                            (html)
- Download citation as:  RIS                         |                         Dublin                            Core

#### Abstract
9.308-2 Testing performed by the

Government.

(a)

(1) The contracting officer shall insert the clause at 52.209-4, First Article Approval-Government

Testing, in solicitations and contracts when a fixed-price contract is contemplated and it is intended

that the contract require first article approval and that the Government will be responsible for

conducting the first article test.

(2) If it is intended that the contractor be required to produce the first article and the production

quantity at the same facility, the contracting officer shall use the basic clause with its Alternate I.

(3) If it is necessary to authorize the contractor to purchase material or to commence production

before first article approval, the contracting officer shall use the basic clause with its Alternate II.

(b)

(1) The contracting officer shall insert a clause substantially the same as the clause at 52.209-4,

First Article Approval-Government Testing, in solicitations and contracts when a cost-reimbursement

contract is contemplated and it is intended that the contract require first article approval and that

the Government be responsible for conducting the first article test.

(2) If it is intended that the contractor be required to produce the first article and the production

quantity at the same facility, the contracting officer shall use a clause substantially the same as the

clause at 52.209-4, First Article Approval-Government Testing, with its Alternate I.

(3) If it is necessary to authorize the contractor to purchase material or to commence production

before first article approval, the contracting officer shall use a clause substantially the same as the

clause at 52.209-4, First Article Approval-Government Testing, with its Alternate II.

Parent topic: 9.308 Contract clauses.
United States Court of Appeals

FOR THE EIGHTH CIRCUIT

___________

No. 07-1599

___________

Cynthia Herron, *

*

Appellant, *

* Appeal from the United States

v. * District Court for the Western

* District of Missouri.

Principal Management Corporation, *

* [UNPUBLISHED]

Defendant, *

*

and *

*

Princor Financial Services; *

Principal Life Insurance Company, *

*

Appellees. *

___________

Submitted: February 26, 2008

 Filed: March 21, 2008

___________

Before MURPHY, COLLOTON, and SHEPHERD, Circuit Judges.

___________

PER CURIAM.
1

The Honorable Scott O. Wright, United States District Judge for the Western

District of Missouri.

2

Claims against other defendants were dismissed and are not at issue on appeal.

-2-

Cynthia Herron appeals the district court’s1 Federal Rule of Civil Procedure

12(b)(6) dismissal of her diversity action against Principal Life Insurance Company

(Principal Life), seeking damages under Missouri law for breach of contract, tortious

interference with a business expectancy, and breach of the duty of good faith and fair

dealing, arising out of her role as a broker for Principal Life.2

 Having carefully

reviewed the record and considered Herron’s arguments, we find no basis for reversal.

See Levy v. Ohl, 477 F.3d 988, 991 (8th Cir. 2007) (de novo standard of review of

Rule 12(b)(6) dismissal); Bockelman v. MCI Worldcom, Inc., 403 F.3d 528, 531 (8th

Cir. 2005) (de novo standard of review of district court’s interpretation of state law).

We also conclude that the district court did not abuse its discretion in denying

Herron’s motion to amend. See Wisdom v. First Midwest Bank of Poplar Bluff, 167

F.3d 402, 409 (8th Cir. 1999) (parties should not be allowed to amend complaint

without showing how it could be amended to save meritless claim).

Accordingly, we affirm. See 8th Cir. R. 47B.

______________________________
15.204 Contract format.

The use of a uniform contract format facilitates preparation of the solicitation and contract as well

as reference to, and use of, those documents by offerors, contractors, and contract administrators.

The uniform contract format need not be used for the following:

(a) Construction and architect-engineer contracts (see part 36).

(b) Subsistence contracts.

(c) Supplies or services contracts requiring special contract formats prescribed elsewhere in this

regulation that are inconsistent with the uniform format.

(d) Letter requests for proposals (see 15.203(e)).

(e) Contracts exempted by the agency head or designee.

15.204-1 Uniform contract format.

15.204-2 Part I-The Schedule.

15.204-3 Part II-Contract Clauses.

15.204-4 Part III-List of Documents, Exhibits, and Other Attachments.

15.204-5 Part IV-Representations and Instructions.

Parent topic: Subpart 15.2 - Solicitation and Receipt of Proposals and Information
8.1104 Contract clauses.

Insert the following clauses in solicitations and contracts for leasing of motor vehicles, unless the

motor vehicles are leased in foreign countries:

(a) The clause at 52.208-4, Vehicle Lease Payments.

(b) The clause at 52.208-5, Condition of Leased Vehicles.

(c) The clause at 52.208-6, Marking of Leased Vehicles.

(d) A clause substantially the same as the clause at 52.208-7, Tagging of Leased Vehicles, for

vehicles leased over 60 days (see subpart B of 41 CFR part 102-34).

(e) The provisions and clauses prescribed elsewhere in the FAR for solicitations and contracts for

supplies when a fixed-price contract is contemplated, but excluding-

(1) The clause at 52.211-16, Variation in Quantity;

(2) The clause at 52.232-1, Payments;

(3) The clause at 52.222-20, Contracts for Materials, Supplies, Articles, and Equipment; and

(4) The clause at 52.246-16, Responsibility for Supplies.

Parent topic: Subpart 8.11 - Leasing of Motor Vehicles
Page 1 of 3

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE

NORTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA

TALLAHASSEE DIVISION

NYDEED B.K. NASHAD'DAI,

Plaintiff,

vs. Case No. 4:03cv297-WS/WCS

LIEUTENANT J.A. PICKLES,

SERGEANT R.W. LONG,

SERGEANT PADGET,

SERGEANT PHILMAN,

SERGEANT BRYAN,

OFFICER D.H. BEVIS,

UNKNOWN MAJOR OF SECURITY,

UNKNOWN OFFICER #2

UNKNOWN OFFICER #3,

Defendants.

 /

O R D E R

After two items of mail were returned to the Court as "undeliverable," docs. 62,

63, 65, 66, an order was entered on December 27, 2005, directing the re-mailing of

those documents to Plaintiff. Doc. 67. Just three days later, Plaintiff submitted a notice

of change of address, doc. 68, and, thus, it is assumed that Plaintiff did not receive that

court order. The Clerk of Court shall mail the latest court order to Plaintiff at the

address most recently provided by Plaintiff. 

Case 4:03-cv-00297-WS-CAS Document 70 Filed 01/17/06 Page 1 of 3
Page 2 of 3

Case No. 4:03cv297-WS/WCS

In accordance with the December 5, 2005, court order, Defendants filed a motion

for leave to take Plaintiff's deposition. Doc. 69. Such a deposition would be taken in

this district requiring Plaintiff's travel from St. Petersburg. Id. 

Pursuant to N.D. Fla. Loc. R. 26.2(C)(2), it is policy "that the deposition of a nonresident plaintiff may be taken at least once in this district." This policy is permissive

and Defendant's motion is granted. Plaintiff's deposition shall be taken on or before

March 1, 2006. 

Due to the difficulty in Plaintiff's receipt of court orders, a brief period of time will

be extended to Plaintiff to submit any additional discovery requests. Any such request

must be received by Plaintiff no later than February 1, 2006. 

Accordingly, it is 

ORDERED:

1. The Clerk of Court shall mail this Order to Plaintiff at his most recent change

of address, see doc. 68. 

2. The Clerk of Court shall mail a copy of the prior court order, doc. 67, and the

discovery order, doc. 63, to Plaintiff. 

3. Plaintiff shall have until February 1, 2006, in which to show cause for

permitting Plaintiff to engage in any additional discovery prior to setting this case for

trial. Plaintiff's response shall be in compliance with the prior order, doc. 63, and must

detail the scope and nature of any further discovery. 

4. Defendants' motion to depose Plaintiff, doc. 69, is GRANTED. Plaintiff's

deposition shall be taken on or before March 1, 2006.

Case 4:03-cv-00297-WS-CAS Document 70 Filed 01/17/06 Page 2 of 3
Page 3 of 3

Case No. 4:03cv297-WS/WCS

5. The Clerk of Court shall return this file to the undersigned by February 1,

2006.

DONE AND ORDERED on January 17, 2006.

s/ William C. Sherrill, Jr. 

WILLIAM C. SHERRILL, JR. 

UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE

Case 4:03-cv-00297-WS-CAS Document 70 Filed 01/17/06 Page 3 of 3
#### Medical Arts Office Services, Inc., Respondent, v St. Paul’s Realty Corp., Appellant.

by defendant from an order of the Supreme Court, Nassau County, dated May 8,1978, which denied its motion, *inter alia,*to direct the plaintiff or the Sheriff of Nassau County to pay the defendant $2,797.17 for poundage advanced. Order reversed, without costs or disbursements, and matter remanded to Special Term for retaxation of costs and disbursements in the action in accordance herewith, by a Justice other than the one from whose order the appeal emanates. The delay in making this motion for reimbursement of costs expended by the defendant corpora*665tion, which ultimately prevailed at trial, does not give rise to a defense of waiver or laches. The record indicates that defendant changed its attorney during this period of eight months and the new attorney first sought reimbursement from the Sheriff. Moreover, plaintiff was on notice from a prior order of Special Term that defendant would be entitled to reimbursement of costs if it secured a verdict in its favor. Lazer, J. P., Gulotta, Cohalan and Gibbons, JJ., concur.
Exhibit 21.1

List of Subsidiaries



|                                   |  |             
|---------------------------------- |  | ------------
|                                   |  | Jurisdiction
|Katonah Debt Advisors, L.L.C.(1)   |  | Delaware    
|Kohlberg Capital Funding LLC I     |  | Delaware    
|Katonah Management Holdings LLC(1) |  | Delaware    
|Katonah X Management LLC(1)(2)     |  | Delaware    

---

|(1) | Represents a wholly-owned portfolio company that is not consolidated for financial reporting purposes.
|--- | ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

|(2) | Katonah X Management LLC is a wholly-owned subsidiary of Katonah Management Holdings LLC.
|--- | -----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
07/23/2010 15:12 814B77520G OIL REGION ALLIANCE PAGE 02 

Oil Region Alliance 

217 Elm Street / Oil City, PA. I«i301-1'll2 / phi flM-C)77-J1,'i2 <ir Wt-itli-AiM / fit: 8t4-«77-52 

..m 

July 9, 2010 

Mr. Dennis J. DeVany 

Chief, Essential Service District X-53 

Office of Aviation Analytics 

US Dept. of Transportation 

1200 New Jersey Avenue, SE 

Washington, DC 20590 

Dear Mr. DeVany: 

We arc contacting you regarding continued Essential Air Service at Venango Regional Airport. 

The Oil Region Alliance of Business, Industry & Tourism supports 'Option 1' of Gulfstream 

International's proposal to continue offering essential air service to the Oil City/Franklin 

community. This option will enable the Oil Region to work toward economic recovery by 

providing air access to the nation's air transportation system. 

The current EAS agreement and the air service provided have been hampered by several 

economic and performance factors resulting in the cost per passenger exceeding the .S200 cap. 

Some of these factors include: 

• The contract in 2008 was bid based upon oil costs at $140/bbl resulting In $4.50 per gallon 

Jet Fuel. The actual price was half that by the time the service began in September 2008. 

• Wc quickly entered one of the worst recessions in 50 years, 

• Passengers were fearful of national and international health scares such as the SARs and 

."5wine flu. 

• The Oil Region had a terrible winter of 2009-2010 that saw the air carrier cancel 21% of its 

Franklin flights in December, January and Febmary, primarily due to airborne icing, 

In our contacts with many of our local businesses we have learned that they are just beginning to 

recover from the recent recession, and are hoping to increase their air travel this year. 

Wc recently participated in a fomm coordinated by the Venango Area Chamber of Commerce 

which included community and business leaders to discus.s this issue. At that forum we 

determined that we will work collaboratively with the Venango Area Chamber, Venango 

Regional Airport, and elected officials to encourage local businesses to commit a percentage of 

their air travel to being provided by the connection from the Venango Regional Airport, 

Additionally we will work with Mickey Bowman of Gulfstream International on uSave Our 

Service (SOS) campaign to recruit air travelers and encourage our almost 600 busincs.s 

«;-WJSi;v%:;VM«.V!tV*M«BHtitMW(li»!^ 
07/23/2010 15:12 6146775206 OIL REGION ALLIANCE PAGE 03 

Page 2 of2 

members to use (he air service. We will collaborate our campaign efforts with other local 

business and community groups to increase passenger intake to reduce our cost per passenger. 

Our agency represents Venango County and portions of Crawford County, as the County's 

lead economic development agency we advocate on behalf of the community's essential air 

transportation service. 

Regards. 

. VP Economic Development 

JP:dm
#### § 4284.909 Forms, regulations, and instructions.

Copies of all forms, regulations, instructions, and other materials related to the program referenced in this subpart may be obtained through the Agency's Web site and at any Rural Development office.