alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
CERTIFICATION PURSUANT TO18 U.S.C. SECTION 1350,AS ADOPTED PURSUANT TOSECTION 906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002

In connection with this Quarterly Report of Goldtech Mining Corporation (the "Company") on Form 10-QSB for the period ending March 31, 2005, as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the "Report"), I, Tracy Kroeker, Chief Executive Officer and Chief Financial Officer of the Company, certifies to the best of her knowledge, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Sec. 1350, as adopted pursuant to Sec. 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. | The information contained in the Report fairly presents, in all material respects, the financial condition and result of operations of the Company.

|By: | /s/   Tracy KroekerTRACY KROEKERChief Executive OfficerChief Financial Officer
|--- | ------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Dated: May 23, 2005
Grant Thornton(logo)



Report of Independent Registered Public Accounting Firm



| | Audit • Tax • AdvisoryGrant Thornton LLP1201 Walnut St, Suite 2200Kansas City, Missouri 64106T 8 16.412.2400F 8 16.412.2404
| | ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------





Board of Directors

Situs Holdings, LLC



We have examined management’s assertion, included in
the accompanying Certification Regarding Compliance with Applicable Servicing Criteria (“Management’s Assertion”),
that Situs Holdings, LLC (the “Company”) complied with servicing criteria set forth in Items 1117, 1119, 1122(d)(3)(i)
and 1122(d)(4)(vii) of the U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission’s Regulation AB for the Operating or Trust Advisor Services
Platform (the “Platform) as of and for the year ended December 31, 2016. The platform consists of asset-backed transactions
and securities defined by management in Appendix B of Management’s report. Management is responsible for the Company’s
compliance with the applicable servicing criteria. Our responsibility is to express an opinion on management’s assertion
about the Company’s compliance with the applicable servicing criteria for the Platform based on our examination.



Our examination was conducted in accordance with the 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 for the Platform and performing such other procedures
as we considered necessary in the circumstances. Our examination included testing selected asset-backed transactions and securities
constituting the Platform and evaluating whether the Company performed servicing activities related to those transactions and securities
in compliance with the applicable servicing criteria for the period covered by this report. Accordingly, our testing may not have
included servicing activities related to each asset-backed transaction or security constituting the Platform. Further, our examination
was not designed to detect material noncompliance that may have occurred prior to the period covered by this report and that may
have affected the Company’s servicing activities 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 applicable servicing criteria.



In our opinion, management’s assertion that Situs Holdings,
LLC complied with the aforementioned applicable servicing criteria as of and for the year ended December 31, 2016, for the Platform
is fairly stated, in all material respects.



|/s/ Grant Thornton LLP | 
|---------------------- | 
|Kansas City, Missouri 
|February 28, 2017
3036.570 Special precautions for work at operating airports.       Where any acquisition will require work at an operating airport, insert the clause at (HSAR) 48 CFR 3052.236–70, Special Precautions for Work at Operating Airports, in solicitations and contracts.    **Parent topic:** Subpart 3036.5—Contract Clauses
§ 987.57 Approved manufacturers or feeders. ( a ) Diversion of dates, pursuant to § 987.55 or § 987.56, shall be accomplished only by such persons (which may include handlers) as are approved manufacturers or feeders. Any person may become an approved manufacturer or feeder if he ( 1 ) submits an application to the Committee in which he agrees, as a condition to approval of his application, to furnish to the Committee such information as it may require and to comply with the requirements and restrictions relative to the use and disposition of such dates, as set forth in this part, and
( 2 ) receives from the Committee written approval of his application. The application and approval shall be in accordance with such rules, regulations and safeguards as may be prescribed pursuant to § 987.59.
( b ) [Reserved]
[27 FR 6818, July 9, 1962, as amended at 43 FR 4251, 4253, Feb. 1, 1978]
IN THE DISTRICT COURT OF THE UNITED STATES

FOR THE MIDDLE DISTRICT OF ALABAMA

EASTERN DIVISION

SANDI PHILLIPS and )

RONALD J. PHILLIPS, )

)

Plaintiff, )

)

v. ) CIVIL ACTION NO. 3:06cv744-SRW

)

ST. PAUL TRAVELERS )

INSURANCE COMPANY, )

)

Defendant. )

ORDER

In the scheduling order entered on this date, the parties have been given a deadline for

filing dispositive motions. Any motion for summary judgment is due on or before that

deadline. The schedule for submissions in support of and opposition to the motion will

proceed as set out in this Order. Absent a showing of good cause, the dispositive motion

deadline and the briefing deadlines will not be extended. The Uniform Scheduling Order

provides ample time for discovery, and the court generally does not consider failure to

conduct needed discovery or the schedules of counsel to be good cause for extending the

dispositive motion deadline or briefing schedule. Counsel are advised to plan accordingly.

It is ORDERED that:

1. The moving party shall file its brief and evidentiary submission simultaneously

with the motion for summary judgment.

2. The opponent's brief and responsive submission shall be filed not later than 21

Case 3:06-cv-00744-SRW Document 9 Filed 12/01/2006 Page 1 of 2
days thereafter.

3. The movant's reply brief shall be filed not later than 11 calendar days after the date

on which the opponent's responsive submission was due. The movant may not include any

new evidentiary material with the reply brief without prior leave of court.

4. Briefs must contain a statement of facts including specific references to the record.

The court will not consider documents or parts of documents that have not been specifically

cited by page number. 

Upon conclusion of the submission schedule, the court will take the motion under

submission without oral argument. If the court determines that oral argument is necessary,

it will set a hearing date. 

DONE, this 1st day of December, 2006.

/s/ Susan Russ Walker 

SUSAN RUSS WALKER

UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE

Case 3:06-cv-00744-SRW Document 9 Filed 12/01/2006 Page 2 of 2
| (logo) NTS NATIONAL

TAX SEARCH, LLC | 130 S. Jefferson, Suite 300

Chicago, IL 60661

312-233-6440 |
|--------------------------------------|--------------------------------------------------------------|

 

 

REPORT ON ASSESSMENT OFCOMPLIANCE WITH APPLICABLE SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION’SREGULATION AB SERVICING CRITERIA

 

 

For the calendar year ending December31, 2016, National Tax Search, LLC has been a Tax Service Vendor for **WellsFargo Bank** (the “Servicer”).

 

National Tax Search, LLC(“NTS”) is responsible for assessing compliance as of December 31, 2016and for the period from January 1, 2016 through December 31, 2016 (the“Reporting Period”) with the servicing criteria set forth in Title17, Section 229.1122(d) of the Code of Federal Regulations (the“CFR”). NTS has used the servicing criteria communicated to NTS bythe Servicer to assess compliance with the applicable servicing criteria. Onlyservicing criteria 1122 (d) (l)(ii), 1122 (d)1(iv), 1122 (d)2(ii), 1122(d)2(v), 1122(d)2(vi), 1122(d)(4)(xi), and 1122(d)(4)(xii) (the“Applicable Servicing Criteria”) are applicable to the activitiesNTS performs with respect to the transactions covered by this report. NTS hasdetermined that the remaining servicing criteria set forth in Item 1122 (d) ofthe SEC Regulation AB are not applicable to the activities it performs withrespect to the transactions covered by this report. The transactions covered bythis report include all tax payments made on behalf of the Servicer usingNTS’s TaxQ system (the “Platform Transactions”).

 

NTS, as a vendor, has assessedits compliance with the Applicable Servicing Criteria for the Reporting Periodand has concluded that NTS has complied, in all material respects, with theApplicable Servicing Criteria as of December 31, 2016 and for the ReportingPeriod with respect to the Platform Transactions taken as a whole.

 

Plante& Moran, PLLC, anindependent registered public accounting firm, has issued an attestation reporton the assessment of compliance with the Applicable Servicing Criteria as ofDecember 31, 2016 and for the Reporting Period as set forth in this assertion.

 

National Tax Search, LLC, asVendor to Servicer

 

 

/s/ Lori D. Eshoo

Lori D. Eshoo, President/CEO 

January 23, 2017
Case 2:06-cv-00717-ID-SRW Document 87 Filed 09/24/2007 Page 1 of 1
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE MIDDLE DISTRICT OF ALABAMA

NORTHERN DIVISION

J.B., a minor child, by and through *

his next friend, ADDIE WARD, on *

behalf of himself and all others *

similarly situated; *

*

Plaintiff, *

vs. * CASE NO:02:06cv755-MHT

*

*

WALTER WOOD, in his individual *

capacity, *

*

Defendant. *

J.B., a minor child, by and through *

his next friend, ADDIE WARD, on *

behalf of himself and all others *

similarly situated; *

*

Plaintiff, *

vs. * CASE NO:02:06cv908-MEF

*

*

WALTER WOOD, in his individual *

capacity, *

*

Defendant. *

JOINT MOTION FOR EXTENSION OF TIME TO FILE PLAINTIFF’S

BRIEF IN RESPONSE TO THE MOTION FOR SUMMARY JUDGMENT

COMES NOW the parties, by and through respective counsel, and hereby request the

court extent the time for filing plaintiff’s response to the Motion for Summary Judgment and in

support thereof state as follows:

Case 2:06-cv-00755-MHT-CSC Document 33 Filed 06/18/2007 Page 1 of 3
1. That the Court has directed the plaintiff to file his response to the defendant’s motion

for summary judgment on or before June 21, 2007.

2. That efforts since early May to schedule the deposition of defendant Walter Wood have

been hampered by deponent’s schedule. Mr. Wood’s deposition is currently scheduled for June

27, 2007.

3. That an extension to July 9, 2007 is requested for the filing of plaintiff’s brief in

response to summary judgment.

WHEREFORE THE PREMISES CONSIDERED, the aforementioned relief is requested.

Submitted on this the 18th day of June, 2007.

s//Robert D. Drummond, Jr.

Robert D. Drummond, Jr. (DRU004)

Attorney for the Plaintiff

ASB-4619-O78R

323 De La Mare Ave.

Fairhope, AL 36532

251-990-6249

fax:251-650-1264

robertdrummond@bellsouth.net

s//Michael J. Crow

Michael J. Crow (CRO039)

Attorney for the Plaintiff

BEASLEY. ALLEN, CROW,

METHVIN, PORTIS &MILES

P.O. 4160

Montgomery, AL 36103-4160

334-269-2343

Case 2:06-cv-00755-MHT-CSC Document 33 Filed 06/18/2007 Page 2 of 3
s//T. Dudley Perry, Jr.

T. Dudley Perry, Jr.

Bar Number:3985-R67T

Counsel For the Defendant

P.O. Box 66

Mt. Meigs, Alabama 36057

334-215-3803

CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE

I hereby certify that on this 18nd day of June, 2007, the foregoing was electronically filed

with the Clerk of this Court thereby providing notice to counsel to all counsel.

s//Robert D. Drummond, Jr.

Case 2:06-cv-00755-MHT-CSC Document 33 Filed 06/18/2007 Page 3 of 3
1909.406-3 Procedures.

(a) Investigation and referral. Any officer of the Board who becomes aware of circumstances which

may serve as a basis for a debarment, suspension, or ineligibility shall report the circumstances by

memorandum to the Board Procurement Executive for consideration of debarment, suspension or

ineligibility action.

(b) Decision-making process.

(1) Contractors shall be given the opportunity to submit, in person, in writing, or through a

representative, information and arguments in opposition to a proposed debarment or suspension. All

rebuttals shall be addressed to the Board Procurement Executive. However, if a response to the

proposed debarment or suspension is not received by the Board Procurement Executive within 30

calendar days of receipt of the notice, the debarment or suspension shall become final.

(2) If a contractor, or a representative, desires to present information and arguments in person to

the Board Procurement Executive, an oral presentation will be held within 20 calendar days of

receipt of the request, unless a longer period of time is requested by the contractor. Hearings will be

held before a three-person fact-finding board composed of one member each from the Office of

General Counsel and Congressional Liaison, the Bureau of Management, and the Office of Contracts,

other than the initiating officer. The fact-finding board shall deliver written findings to the Board

Procurement Executive (together with a transcription of the proceedings, if made) within 10

calendar days after the hearing. The findings shall resolve any facts in dispute based on a

preponderance of the evidence presented and determine whether a cause for debarment or

suspension exists.

(c) Debarring/suspending official's decision. The debarring/suspending official's final decision shall

be made in writing in accordance with FAR 9.406-3 and notice of the decision will be given in

accordance with FAR 9.406-3. A copy of the notice shall be given to the affected agency component.

Parent topic: Subpart 1909.4 - Debarment, Suspension, and Ineligibility
#### § 20.2204 Reports of planned special exposures.

The licensee shall submit a written report to the Administrator of the appropriate NRC Regional Office listed in appendix D to part 20 within 30 days following any planned special exposure conducted in accordance with § 20.1206, informing the Commission that a planned special exposure was conducted and indicating the date the planned special exposure occurred and the information required by § 20.2105.

[56 FR 23406, May 21, 1991, as amended at 60 FR 20186, Apr. 25, 1995]
#### Orville Beckford, Respondent, v Corning Glass Works, Appellant.

In an action, *inter alia,*to recover damages for the alleged wrongful termination of plaintiff’s employment, defendant appeals from so much of the order of the Supreme Court, Nassau County, dated April 3, 1979, as denied its motion to dismiss the second and fifth causes of action and granted plaintiff’s cross motion to dismiss defendant’s fourth afiirmative defense of the Statute of Limitations. Order modified, on the law, by (1) deleting therefrom the provisions (a) granting the cross motion to dismiss the fourth afiirmative defense and (b) denying the motion to dismiss the second and fifth causes of action and (2) substituting therefor provisions (a) denying the cross motion to dismiss the fourth afiirmative defense, (b) reinstating that defense and (c) granting defendant’s motion to the extent of dismissing the second cause of action and so much of the fifth cause of action as is based on allegations that plaintiff was discharged from employment because of racial discrimination, without prejudice to defendant’s right to renew its motion to dismiss those aspects of the fifth cause of action that are not based on racial discrimination. As so modified, order affirmed insofar as appealed from, without costs or disbursements. The one-year period of limitation in which a party may file a complaint as to an unlawful discriminatory practice (Executive Law, § 297, subd 5) applies to actions at law as well as to the inception of administrative proceedings before the State Division of Human Rights (see *Lanzer v Fairchild Pub.,*46 AD2d 644; *Avery v Dunn,*NYLJ, May 5, 1978, p 6, col 5). As stated in *Avery (supra,*p 6, col 6), "it is unlikely that it was * * * the intent of the legislature to make available * * * two periods of limitation” as to a newly created right (cf. *Grant v Guidotti,*66 AD2d 545, affd 49 NY2d 622). Here, the action was instituted almost three years after the alleged wrongful discharge. Since the second cause of action is entirely based on alleged racial discrimination, it must be dismissed. The inartfully expressed fifth cause of action is apparently based only in part on racial discrimination, and to that extent it is also dismissed, without prejudice to defendant’s right to renew the motion to dismiss as to the other aspects of that cause of action. Hopkins, J. P., Damiani, Titone and Mangano, JJ., concur.
Subpart 1807.72—Acquisition Forecasting

Parent topic: PART 1807—ACQUISITION PLANNING

1807.7200 Policy.

(a) As required by the Business Opportunity Development Reform Act of 1988, it is NASA policy to—

(1) Prepare an annual forecast and semiannual update of expected contract opportunities or classes

of contract opportunities for each fiscal year;

(2) Include in the forecast contract opportunities that small business concerns, including those

owned and controlled by socially and economically disadvantaged individuals, may be capable of

performing; and

(3) Make available such forecasts to the public.

(b) The annual forecast and semiannual update are available on the NASA Acquisition Internet

Service (http://www.hq.nasa.gov/office/procurement/forecast/index.html).

1807.7201 Definitions.

Class of contracts means a grouping of acquisitions, either by dollar value or by the nature of

supplies and services to be acquired.

Contract opportunity means planned new contract awards exceeding the simplified acquisition

threshold (SAT).
Michigan Supreme Court

Lansing, Michigan

Stephen J. Markman, Chief Justice

Brian K. Zahra

Bridget M. McCormack

David F. Viviano 

Richard H. Bernstein

Joan L. Larsen

Kurtis T. Wilder, Justices

I, Larry S. Royster, Clerk of the Michigan Supreme Court, certify that the

foregoing is a true and complete copy of the order entered at the direction of the Court.

 July 12, 2017

Order 

Clerk

July 12, 2017

155588(84)

PEOPLE OF THE STATE OF MICHIGAN, Plaintiff-Appellee, SC: 155588

v COA: 329038, 329101, 329109

Wayne CC: 15-001414-FC

15-001416-FC

15-001415-FC

ANDRE HAYNES,

Defendant-Appellant.

_____________________________________/

On order of the Chief Justice, the motion of defendant-appellant to extend the time 

for filing his reply is GRANTED. The reply submitted on May 24, 2017, is accepted for 

filing.
Case 2:06-cv-00750-MEF-CSC Document 5 Filed 09/28/2006 Page 1 of 1
0900006481129673.xlsx

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

A B C D E

Name Title Affiliation Phone Number Email

Ballo, Timothy Associate Attorney Earthjustice (202) 667-4500 tballo@earthjustice.org

Beck, Scott Product Engineering Manager Lakeview Metals (847) 838-9800 ScottB@LVMetals.com

Petersen, Eric

Director of Customer Services & 

Research AK Steel (513) 425-5000 Eric.Petersen@aksteel.com

Fernstrom, Gary Senior Project Manager PG&E (510) 530-1789 gbf1@pge.com

DeLaski, Andrew Executive Director ASAP (617) 363-9470 adelaski@standardsASAP.org

Roy, Robin Director NRDC (212) 727-2700 rroy@nrdc.org

Nadel, Steve Executive Director ACEEE (202) 507-4011 snadel@aceee.org

Robles, Eduardo Eaton (915) 238-9846 eduardorobles@eaton.com

Greeson, Robert Sr. Electrical Design Engineer Federal Pacific (276) 645-8210 rgreeson@federalpacific.com

Tendulkar, Vijay ONYX Power vijay.tendulkar@onyxpower.com

Kennedy, Chad

Manager, Industry Standards

Schneider (803) 695-7813 

chad.kennedy@us.schneiderelectric.com

Caskey, John

Assistant Vice President of 

Industry Operations NEMA (703) 841-3233 john.caskey@nema.org

Millure, David

Sr. Vice President

Metglas (843) 349-7380 dave.millure@metglas.com

Cymbalsky, John

Supervisory Operations Research 

Analyst DOE (202) 287-1692 john.cymbalsky@ee.doe.gov

Stoering, Mark VP of Business Development Xcel Energy; ERAC (612) 215-4570 mark.e.stoering@xcelenergy.com

Page 1 of 2
0900006481129673.xlsx

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

A

Name

Ballo, Timothy

Beck, Scott

Petersen, Eric

Fernstrom, Gary

DeLaski, Andrew

Roy, Robin

Nadel, Steve

Robles, Eduardo

Greeson, Robert

Tendulkar, Vijay

Kennedy, Chad

Caskey, John

Millure, David

Cymbalsky, John

Stoering, Mark

F G H I J K

Alternates Alternates (2)

Looby, Kevin

Lakeview 

Metals

Waltner, Meg NRDC mwaltner@nrdc.org

Siquieros, 

Carlos Eaton carlosgsiqueiros@eaton.com

Patzner, 

Thomas

Square D / 

Schneider 

Electric

thomas.patzner@us.schneiderelectric.com

Ryan, Paul

Hitachi 

Metals 

America paul.ryan@hitmet.com

Berman, 

Robert

Berman 

Economics

BermanEconomics

@gmail.com

Cohen, Dan

Asst Gen 

Counsel Daniel.Cohen@hq.doe.gov

Page 2 of 2
Case 3:06-cv-00744-SRW Document 1 Filed 08/17/2006 Page 1 of 4
Case 3:06-cv-00744-SRW Document 1 Filed 08/17/2006 Page 2 of 4
Case 3:06-cv-00744-SRW Document 1 Filed 08/17/2006 Page 3 of 4
Case 3:06-cv-00744-SRW Document 1 Filed 08/17/2006 Page 4 of 4
Case 3:06-cv-00744-SRW Document 1-2 Filed 08/17/2006 Page 1 of 9
Case 3:06-cv-00744-SRW Document 1-2 Filed 08/17/2006 Page 2 of 9
Case 3:06-cv-00744-SRW Document 1-2 Filed 08/17/2006 Page 3 of 9
Case 3:06-cv-00744-SRW Document 1-2 Filed 08/17/2006 Page 4 of 9
Case 3:06-cv-00744-SRW Document 1-2 Filed 08/17/2006 Page 5 of 9
Case 3:06-cv-00744-SRW Document 1-2 Filed 08/17/2006 Page 6 of 9
Case 3:06-cv-00744-SRW Document 1-2 Filed 08/17/2006 Page 7 of 9
Case 3:06-cv-00744-SRW Document 1-2 Filed 08/17/2006 Page 8 of 9
Case 3:06-cv-00744-SRW Document 1-2 Filed 08/17/2006 Page 9 of 9
Case 3:06-cv-00744-SRW Document 1-3 Filed 08/17/2006 Page 1 of 4
Case 3:06-cv-00744-SRW Document 1-3 Filed 08/17/2006 Page 2 of 4
Case 3:06-cv-00744-SRW Document 1-3 Filed 08/17/2006 Page 3 of 4
Case 3:06-cv-00744-SRW Document 1-3 Filed 08/17/2006 Page 4 of 4