alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
EX-31 Rule13a-14(d)/15d-14(d) Certifications.

 

 

I, Simcha Herzog,certify that:

 

1. I have reviewedthis report on Form 10-K and all reports on Form 10-D required to be filed inrespect of the period covered by this report on Form 10-K of the WFRBSCommercial Mortgage Trust 2013-C11 (the "Exchange Act periodicreports");

 

2. Based on myknowledge, the Exchange Act periodic reports, taken as a whole, do not containany untrue statement of a material fact or omit to state a material factnecessary to make the statements made, in light of the circumstances underwhich such statements were made, not misleading with respect to the periodcovered by this report;

 

3. Based on myknowledge, all of the distribution, servicing and other information required tobe provided under Form 10-D for the period covered by this report is includedin the Exchange Act periodic reports;

 

4. Based on myknowledge and the servicer compliance statements required in this report underItem 1123 of Regulation AB, and except as disclosed in the Exchange Actperiodic reports, the servicers have fulfilled their obligations under theservicing agreements in all material respects; and

 

5. All of the reportson assessment of compliance with servicing criteria for asset-backed securitiesand their related attestation reports on assessment of compliance withservicing criteria for asset-backed securities required to be included in thisreport in accordance with Item 1122 of Regulation AB and Exchange Act Rules13a-18 and 15d-18 have been included as an exhibit to

this report, exceptas otherwise disclosed in this report. Any material instances of noncompliancedescribed in such reports have been disclosed in this report on Form 10-K.

 

In giving thecertifications above, I have reasonably relied on information provided to me bythe following unaffiliated parties:

 

Wells Fargo Bank,National Association, as Master Servicer, Midland Loan Services, a Division ofPNC Bank, National Association, as Special Servicer, CWCapital Asset ManagementLLC, as Special Servicer, U.S. Bank National Association, as Trustee, WellsFargo Bank, National Association, as Certificate Administrator, Wells FargoBank, National Association, as Custodian, TriMont Real Estate Advisors, Inc.,as Trust Advisor, CoreLogic Commercial Real Estate Services, Inc., as ServicingFunction Participant, National Tax Search, LLC, as Servicing FunctionParticipant, and Prudential Asset Resources, Inc., as Primary Servicer.

 

 

 

Dated: March 20, 2020

 

 

/s/ Simcha Herzog

 

 

President 

(seniorofficer in charge of securitization of the depositor)
# EUR-Lex - 31984D0589 - EN

Avis juridique important

*|*

# 31984D0589

**84/589/EEC: Commission Decision of 28 November 1984 concerning the implementation by Greece of certain measures to adjust capacity in the fisheries sector pursuant to Council Directive 83/515/EEC (Only the Greek text is authentic) **

*
Official Journal L 322 , 11/12/1984 P. 0013 - 0013 *

*****

COMMISSION DECISION

of 28 November 1984

concerning the implementation by Greece of certain measures to adjust capacity in the fisheries sector pursuant to Council Directive 83/515/EEC

(Only the Greek text is authentic)

(84/589/EEC)

THE COMMISSION OF THE EUROPEAN

COMMUNITIES,

Having regard to the Treaty establishing the European Economic Community,

Having regard to Council Directive 83/515/EEC of 4 October 1983 concerning certain measures to adjust capacity in the fisheries sector (1), hereinafter referred to as the Directive, and in particular Article 7 (1) thereof,

Whereas the Government of Greece intends to introduce a system of financial aids for measures involving the temporary and permanent reduction of production capacity in the fisheries sector; whereas on 18 April and 6 June 1984 it communicated the information concerning this scheme required under Article 6 of Directive 83/515/EEC;

Whereas, in accordance with Article 7 of the Directive, the Commission has considered whether, having regard to their compatibility with the Directive and to the other structural measures existing or planned in the fisheries sector, the measures contemplated fulfil the conditions for financial contributions from the Community;

Whereas this Decision does not relate to aid granted under Article 12 of the Directive;

Whereas this Decision is in accordance with the opinion of the Standing Committee on Fisheries Structures,

HAS ADOPTED THIS DECISION:

Article 1

The measures which Greece intends to take to implement a financial aid scheme for measures involving the temporary and definitive reduction of production capacities fulfil the conditions for a financial contribution from the Community.

Article 2

This Decision shall not apply to national aid referred to in Article 12 of Directive 83/515/EEC.

Article 3

This Decision is addressed to the Hellenic Republic.

Done at Brussels, 28 November 1984.

For the Commission

Giorgios CONTOGEORGIS

Member of the Commission

(1) OJ No L 290, 22. 10. 1983, p. 15.
20-F










Exhibit 10.1  



Consent of Independent
Registered Public Accounting Firm 



 We consent to the incorporation by
reference in the Registration Statements (Forms S-8 333-54356 and 333-117849) of Ceragon
Networks Ltd. of our report dated February 6, 2006 with respect to the consolidated
financial statements of Ceragon Networks Ltd. and subsidiaries included in its Annual
Report (Form 20-F/A - Amendment No. 1) for the year ended December 31, 2005, filed with the Securities and
Exchange Commission. 










	

 Tel-Aviv, Israel

July 27, 2006
		/s/ KOST FORER GABBAY and KASIERER
————————————————————

KOST FORER GABBAY and KASIERER
A Member of Ernst & Young Global
AAM-12-278-E 

April 3, 2012 

 Exemption No. 10497 

 Regulatory Docket No. FAA-2012-0309 

Mr. Brian L. Johnson 

Vermilion Ventures, LLC 

11038 Highway 37 #2 

Hibbing, MN 55746 

Dear Mr. Johnson: 

This letter is to inform you that we have granted your request for exemption. It transmits our 

decision, explains its basis, and gives you the conditions and limitations of the exemption, 

including the date it ends. 

The Basis for Our Decision 

By letter dated March 14, 2012, you petitioned the Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) on 

behalf of Vermilion Ventures, LLC (Vermilion Ventures), for an exemption from part 120 of 

Title 14, Code of Federal Regulations (14 CFR). That exemption, if granted, would allow 

Vermilion Ventures, which is operating under separate parts of the regulations, to cover its 

safety-sensitive employees under one drug and alcohol testing program. 

The FAA has determined that good cause exists for not publishing a summary of the petition 

in the Federal Register because the requested exemption would not set a precedent, and any 

delay in acting on this petition would be detrimental to Vermilion Ventures. 

The FAA has issued a grant of exemption in circumstances similar in all material respects to 

those presented in your petition. In Grant of Exemption No. 9703 (copy enclosed), the FAA 

found that Solid Edge’s § 91.147 air tour operations were closely connected to its part 135 

operations. The FAA also found that combining the petitioner’s two testing programs into 

one would be in the public interest and would maintain an equivalent level of safety to that 

provided by the current regulations. Thus, the FAA concluded it was unnecessary to burden 

the petitioner by requiring it to conduct two separate testing programs. 
2 

Having reviewed your reasons for requesting an exemption, I find that— 

 they are similar in all material respects to relief previously requested in the enclosed Grant 

of Exemption No. 9703; 

 the reasons stated by the FAA for granting the enclosed Grant of Exemption No. 9703 

also apply to the situation you present; and 

 a grant of exemption is in the public interest. 

Our Decision 

Under the authority contained in 49 U.S.C. 40113 and 44701, which the FAA Administrator 

has delegated to me, I hereby grant Vermilion Ventures, LLC an exemption from 14 CFR 

part 120 to the extent necessary to allow Vermilion Ventures, which is operating under 

separate parts of the regulations, to cover its safety-sensitive employees under one testing 

program, subject to the conditions and limitations described below. 

Conditions and Limitations 

1. Employees of Vermilion Ventures are subject to the drug and alcohol regulations at all 

times while conducting operations under part 135 or part 91. 

 2. The drug and alcohol testing program must be implemented under the auspices of the 

Vermilion Ventures part 135 operation, not under part 91. 

This exemption terminates on April 30, 2014, unless sooner superseded or rescinded. 

Sincerely, 

/s/ 

James R. Fraser, M.D. 

Deputy Federal Air Surgeon 

Enclosure
Fourth Department,

June, 1969

(June 19, 1969)

#### Earnest Cox et al., Respondents, v. Clifford Rogers et al., Appellants.

Order insofar as appealed from unanimously modified in accordance with the memorandum herein, and as so modified affirmed, without costs. Memorandum: Issues are presented in the moving papers not only as to whether the defendants landlords are responsible for code violations on the premises and for a failure to correct them but also as to plaintiffs’ own direct responsibility as tenants for their creation and maintenance. As stated in *Town of Southeast*v. *Gonnella*(26 A D 2d 550) *“*In the absence of a clear right to the relief demanded, injunctive relief should not be granted until the issues have been fully explored and the entire matter resolved after plenary trial.” In the circumstances presented by the moving papers injunctive relief should not be granted without a resolution of the factual issues on the trial. (Appeal from certain parts of order of Onondaga Special Term granting preliminary injunction and denying motion to dismiss complaint.) Present— Del Vecehio, J. P., Marsh, Gabrielli, Bastow and Henry, JJ.
#### Town of Carmel et al., Respondents, v. Board of Supervisors of Putnam County et al., Appellants. (Action No. 1.) Town of Southeast et al., Respondents, v. Board of Supervisors of Putnam County et al., Appellants. (Action No. 2.) Town of Philipstown et al., Intervenors-Defendants Appellants.

Order of the Supreme Court, Putnam County, dated March 17,

1969, affirmed, without costs. (See *Graham*v. *Board of Supervisors of Erie County,*18 N Y 2d 672; cf. *Iannucci*v. *Board of Supervisors,*20 N Y 2d 244.) Rabin, Acting P. J., Benjamin, Munder, Martuscello and Kleinfeld, JJ., concur.
CASE ANNOUNCEMENTS

*November 26, 2007*

[Cite as *11/26/2007 Case Announcements,*2007-Ohio-6205.]

DISCIPLINARY CASES

2007-1918.

#### Disciplinary Counsel v. McShane.

On November 20, 2007, respondent filed a motion to remand this matter to the Board of Commissioners on Grievances and Discipline. In order to allow time for relator’s response and consideration of the motion by the court,

It is ordered, sua sponte, that the filing of objections is stayed until further order of this court.
#### § 800.306 Noninterference with other laws.

Nothing in this regulation shall be construed to modify requirements imposed on the borrower by Federal, State and local government agencies in connection with permits, licenses, or other authorizations to conduct or finance its business.
| (logo) Prudential | Prudential Asset Resources, Inc.

 

Prudential Mortgage Capital Company

2100 Ross Avenue, Suite 2500 Dallas, TX 75201

Tel 877-937-4500 |
|-------------------|------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|

 

 

Wells Fargo Bank, National Association

Attn: Commercial Mtg Servicing

MAC D1086-120

550 South Tryon Street,14th Floor

Charlotte, NC 28202

 

 

 

RE:        Commercial Mortgage Pass-Through, **WFRBS 2013-C12**

Period:  **January****1.2014 to December 31. 2014 (the "Reporting Period")**

Annual Compliance Statement

I, Hal Collett, in my capacity as President and Managing Director of Prudential Asset Resources, Inc. (the "Company") hereby certify with regard to the Company's role as Primary Servicer under the Pooling and Servicing Agreement,(the "Agreement") dated as of March 1, 2013 pertaining to the above-referenced certificates, that:

 

(i)            a review of the activities of the Company under the Agreement during the Reporting Period, and of the performance of the Company under the Agreement has been made under my supervision, and

 

(ii)           to the best of my knowledge, based on such review, the Company has fulfilled  all its obligations under the Agreement in all material respects throughout the Reporting Period.

 

 

 

 

 

Effective as of February 24, 2015

/s/Hal Collett

Hal Collett

President and Managing Director

Prudential Asset Resources,Inc.
Transmission and Distribution Engineering Committee

| In 1991, NRECA established its Transmission and    Distribution Engineering Committee (T&D Committee) to work with REA (now RUS) in the    development and maintenance of electric transmission and distribution standards and    specifications, and the exchange of engineering information of mutual interest to rural    electric utilities. The T&D Committee is composed of some of the most dedicated and    talented individuals from NRECA and from electric cooperatives all across the United    States. These individuals routinely donate several weekends and considerable amounts of    other personal time each year to fulfill their commitments to the Committee.

We want to use this opportunity to thank these individuals and the    organizations that sponsor their participation. See Appendix B for the T&D Committee    Roster.

If you would like more information or have any questions, please call    Don Heald, Acting Chair, Technical Standards Committee "A" (Electric), at    (202) 720-0980.
 

[Abbreviations] [Returnto Table of Contents] |
|------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|
#### § 780.10 Decision of the Board.

The decision of the Board in any proceeding under this part shall constitute the final action of the Department on the matter.
§ 74.17 Special nuclear material physical inventory summary report. ( a ) Each licensee subject to the requirements of §§ 74.31 or 74.33 of this part shall submit a completed Special Nuclear Material Physical Inventory Summary Report on NRC Form 327 not later than 60 calendar days from the start of each physical inventory required by §§ 74.31(c)(5) or 74.33(c)(4). Using an appropriate method listed in § 74.6, the licensee shall report the inventory results by plant and total facility to the Director of the NRC's Office of Nuclear Material Safety and Safeguards.
( b ) Each licensee subject to the requirements of § 74.41(a) of this part shall submit a completed Special Nuclear Material Physical Inventory Summary Report on NRC form 327 not later than 60 calendar days from the start of each physical inventory required by § 74.43(c)(7). Using an appropriate method listed in § 74.6, the licensee shall report the inventory results by plant and total facility to the Director of the NRC's Office of Nuclear Material Safety and Safeguards.
( c ) Each licensee subject to the requirements of § 74.51 shall submit a completed Special Nuclear Material Physical Inventory Summary Report on NRC form 327 not later than 45 calendar days from the start of each physical inventory required by § 74.59(f). The licensee shall report the physical inventory results by plant and total facility to the Director, Office of Nuclear Material Safety and Safeguards, U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission, Washington, DC 20555-0001.
[67 FR 78145, Dec. 23, 2002, as amended at 68 FR 58821, Oct. 10, 2003]
DISTRICT COURT OF APPEAL OF THE STATE OF FLORIDA

FOURTH DISTRICT

WISLY PRENELUS,

Appellant,

v.

STATE OF FLORIDA,

Appellee.

No. 4D18-1937

[October 4, 2018]

Appeal of order denying rule 3.850 motion from the Circuit Court for 

the Seventeenth Judicial Circuit, Broward County; William W. Haury, Jr., 

Judge; L.T. Case No. 05020589CF10A.

Michael D. Weinstein of Michael D. Weinstein, P.A., Fort Lauderdale, 

for appellant.

No appearance required for appellee.

PER CURIAM.

Affirmed.

GERBER, C.J., GROSS and KUNTZ, JJ., concur.

* * *

Not final until disposition of timely filed motion for rehearing.
UNITED STATES ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY 

WASHINGTON , DC 20460 

JUL - 5 2011 


Mr. Michael OFFiCE .)F P. Halpin, P.E. f,IR A '0 RADIA ~ 

Director, Division of Air Resource Management 

Florida Department of Environmental Protection 

Bob Martinez Center 

2600 Blair Stone Road 

Tallahassee, Florida 32399-2400 

Dear Mr. Halpin: 

Thank you for your letter of June 2,2011 , requesting an extension of the public comment period for the 

proposed "National Emission Standards for Hazardous Air Pollutants from Coal- and Oil-fired Electric 

Utility Steam Generating Units and Standards of Performance for Fossil-Fuel-Fired Electric Utility, 

Industrial-Commercial-Institutional, and Small Industrial-Commercial-Institutional Steam Generating 

Units" (the Mercury and Air Toxics Standards rule), which was published in the Federal Register on 

May 3,2011. The proposal identified a public comment period of 60 days; that period would have ended 

on July 5, 2011. The U.S . Environmental Protection Agency, however, recently announced an extension 

of the comment period by 30 days to August 4. 

While we are extending the comment period, we are not seeking to extend the 

November 16, 2011 , deadline for signature of the final rule, and remain committed to meeting that 

deadline. 

The 30-day extension will provide the public with a 140-day period to review the proposal. As you 

know, interested parties were aware of the posting on March 16, 2011 , of the signed proposal on the 

EPA's website (http://www.epa.gov/ttn/atw/utility/utilitypg.html). along with much of the pertinent 

supporting documentation (including the analyses used in establishing the proposed emission limits and 

the technical support documents). The proposal was published a little over six weeks later, on May 3, 

marking the beginning of the formal public comment period. This will provide the public with 

approximately 140 days to review and provide written comments on the proposed rule and supporting 

documents. It will also provide at least 60 days for other documentation that was not posted on the 

website until after the proposed rule was signed. Due to the substantive issues specific to this 

rulemaking, this comment period is significantly longer than statutorily required. 

Again, thank you for your letter. We look forward to the timely receipt of your comments. 

Gina McCarthy 

Assistant Administrator 

Internet Address (URL) • http IIwwwepa gov 


Recycled/Recyclable· Pnnted with Vegetable Ol18ased In son 100% Pl)slconsumer. Process Chlonne Free Recycled Paper
#### § 708.42 Extension of deadlines.

The Secretary of Energy (or the Secretary's designee) may approve the extension of any deadline established by this part, and the OHA Director may approve the extension of any deadline under §§ 708.22 through 708.34 of this subpart (relating to the investigation, hearing, and OHA appeal process). Failure by the DOE to comply with timing requirements does not create a substantive right for any party to overturn a DOE decision on a complaint.
Exhibit 13.(a).1




CERTIFICATION PURSUANT TO


18 U.S.C. Section 1350





In connection with the filing of the Annual Report on Form 20-F for the period ended December 31, 2015 (the “Report”) by Mazor Robotics Ltd. (the "Company"), the undersigned, as Chief Executive Officer of the Company, hereby certifies pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, as adopted pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that, to my knowledge:





(1) the Report fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) or Section 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 results of operations of the Company.




/s/ Ori Hadomi

Ori Hadomi

Chief Executive Officer





May 2, 2016
<PAGE>   1
                                   Exhibit 11


Statement re:  computation of per share earnings



<TABLE>
<CAPTION>
                                                        Thirteen Weeks Ended
                                                        --------------------
                                                      Dec 31,           Jan 1,
                                                       1995             1995
                                                    -----------      -----------
<S>                                                 <C>              <C>        
Weighted average shares outstanding                  13,225,612       11,345,727
Common Stock equivalents:
  Stock options                                          89,351          275,428
                                                    -----------      -----------
                                                     13,314,963       11,621,155
                                                    ===========      ===========

     Net Income                                     $   545,000      $ 1,520,000
                                                    ===========      ===========



EARNINGS PER COMMON SHARE                           $       .04      $       .13
                                                    ===========      ===========
</TABLE>



                                       12
#### The People of the State of New York, Respondent, v. Charles Cooper, Appellant.

Judgment of Supreme Court, Queens County, rendered December 22, 1967, affirmed. No opinion. Beldock, P. J., Benjamin, Munder and Kleinfeld, JJ., concur; Martuscello, J., dissents and votes to reverse the judgment and to order a new trial as to all four counts, with the following memorandum: I am of the opinion that defendant’s possession of the keys and registration of the Buiek automobile, without any proof of his presence in the car and of any other circumstances tending to connect him with the television set found in the trunk of the car, was insufficient to charge him with possession of said television set *(People*v. *Spillman,*309 N. Y. 295). Accordingly, it was error to admit the television set into evidence. Although the television set only related to the burglary and larceny counts with respect to the Collier home, the conviction for burglary and larceny of the Foster home should also be set aside since it cannot be said whether the jury would have returned a verdict of guilty with respect to Foster charges if the improperly received evidence had been excluded *(People*v. *Donovan,*13 N Y 2d 148, 153).