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

I, Richard Simpson, certify that:


1.	I have reviewed this report on Form 10-K and all reports on Form 10-D required to be filed in respect of the period covered by this report on Form 10-K of Citigroup Commercial Mortgage Trust 2015-P1 (the “Exchange Act periodic reports”);


2.	Based on my knowledge, the Exchange Act periodic reports, taken as a whole, do not contain any untrue statement of a material fact or omit to state a material fact necessary to make the statements made, in light of the circumstances under which such statements were made, not misleading with respect to the period covered by this report;


3.	Based on my knowledge, all of the distribution, servicing and other information required to be provided under Form 10-D for the period covered by this report is included in the Exchange Act periodic reports;


4.	Based on my knowledge and the servicer compliance statement(s) required in this report under Item 1123 of Regulation AB, and except as disclosed in the Exchange Act periodic reports, the servicers have fulfilled their obligations under the servicing agreements in all material respects; and


5.	All of the reports on assessment of compliance with servicing criteria for asset-backed securities and their related attestation reports on assessment of compliance with servicing criteria for asset-backed securities required to be included in this report in accordance with Item 1122 of Regulation AB and Exchange Act Rules 13a-18 and 15d-18 have been included as an exhibit to this report, except as otherwise disclosed in this report.  Any material instances of noncompliance described in such reports have been disclosed in this report on Form 10-K.


In giving the certifications above, I have reasonably relied on information provided to me by the following unaffiliated parties: Wells Fargo Bank, National Association; LNR Partners, LLC; Park Bridge Lender Services LLC; Computershare Trust Company, National Association; CoreLogic Solutions, LLC; Berkadia Commercial Mortgage LLC; Principal Real Estate Investors, LLC; Berkeley Point Capital LLC; Deutsche Bank Trust Company Americas;and Wilmington Trust, National Association.

Date:	March 29, 2024

/s/ Richard Simpson ___________________Richard SimpsonPresident, Citigroup Commercial Mortgage Securities Inc.(senior officer in charge of securitization of the depositor)

CGCMT 2015-P1 Certifications


---
EXHIBIT 31.1

CERTIFICATION

	I, Theron G. Reed, certify that: 

l.	I have reviewed this quarterly report on Form 10-QSB of Community National Bancorporation;

2.	Based on my knowledge, this report does not contain any untrue statement of a material fact or omit to state a material fact necessary to make the statements made, in light of the circumstances under which such statements were made, not misleading with respect to the period covered by this report;

3.	Based on my knowledge, the financial statements, and other financial information included in this report, fairly present in all material respects the financial condition, results of operations and cash flows of the small business issuer as of, and for, the periods presented in this report;

4.	The small business issuer's other certifying officers and I are responsible for establishing and maintaining disclosure controls and procedures (as defined in Exchange Act Rules 13a-15(e) and 15d-15(e)) for the small business issuer and have:

	(a)	Designed such disclosure controls and procedures, or caused such disclosure controls and procedures to be designed under our supervision, to ensure that material information relating to the small business issuer, including its consolidated subsidiaries, is made known to us by others within those entities, particularly during the period in which this report is being prepared;

	(b)	[Intentionally omitted]

	(c)	Evaluated the effectiveness of the small business issuer's disclosure controls and procedures and presented in this report our conclusions about the effectiveness of the disclosure controls and procedures, as of the end of the period covered by this report based on such evaluation; and

	(d)	Disclosed in this report any change in the small business issuer's internal control over financial reporting that occurred during the small business issuer's most recent fiscal quarter (the small business issuer's fourth fiscal quarter in the case of an annual report) that has materially affected, or is reasonably likely to materially affect, the small business issuer's internal control over financial reporting; and

5.	The small business issuer's other certifying officer(s) and I have disclosed, based on our most recent evaluation of the internal control over financial reporting, to the small business issuer's auditors and the audit committee of small business issuer's board of directors (or persons performing the equivalent functions):

	(a)	All significant deficiencies and material weaknesses in the design or operation of internal control over financial reporting which are reasonably likely to adversely affect the small business issuer's ability to record, process, summarize and report financial information; and

	(b)	Any fraud, whether or not material, that involves management or other employees who have a significant role in the small business issuer's internal control over financial reporting.

Date: August 14, 2003.

/S/ Theron G. Reed
###### Editorial Note on Part 1

#### Editorial Note:

IRS redesignated the following sections to appear below the undesignated center heading “Regulations Applicable to Certain Bonds Sold Prior to July 8, 1997” and preceding the undesignated center heading “Deductions for Personal Exemptions.” See 62 FR 25507 and 25513, May 9, 1997 for the specific sections involved in the redesignation.

#### § 1.408A-9 Effective date.

This section contains the following question and answer providing the effective date of §§ 1.408A-1 through 1.408A-8:

Q-1. To what taxable years do §§ 1.408A-1 through 1.408A-8 apply?

A-1 Sections 1.408A-1 through 1.408A-8 apply to taxable years beginning on or after January 1, 1998.

[T.D. 8816, 64 FR 5611, Feb. 4, 1999]
No. L-391.

February 6, 1939

#### *Forest Lumber Company.*

Contract for purchase of timber on Indian Reservation; ■tribal contract; liability of the Government. Opinion 86 C. Cls. 188.

Dismissed on mandate of the Supreme Court reversing the decision of the Court of Claims. 87 C. Cls. 758; 305 U. S. 415.
UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 98-4652

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Plaintiff - Appellee, versus ALBERT M. MCDOWELL, JR., Defendant - Appellant.Appeal from the United States District Court for the Western District of Virginia, at Abingdon. Glen M. Williams, Senior District Judge. (CR-97-45-A) Submitted: June 29, 1999 Decided: July 15, 1999 Before HAMILTON, LUTTIG, and KING, Circuit Judges. Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion.Joseph Franklin Dene, DENE & DENE, Abingdon, Virginia, for Appellant. Robert P. Crouch, Jr., United States Attorney, Rick A. Mountcastle, Assistant United States Attorney, Abingdon, Virginia, for Appellee. Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. See Local Rule 36(c).2 PER CURIAM: Albert M. McDowell, Jr., appeals his conviction and sentence for being a felon in possession of a firearm, in violation of 18U.S.C.A. § 922(g)(1) (West Supp. 1999). The district court properly included McDowell’s 1974 and 1976 state convictions as predicate offenses under 18 U.S.C.A. § 924(e) (West Supp. 1999), and thus properly sentenced McDowell as a career offender. See 18 U.S.C.A. § 921(a)(20) (West Supp. 1999); United States v. O’Neal , ___ F.3d ___, No. 96-4188, 1999 WL 351147 (4th Cir. June 2, 1999); United States v. Hairston, 71 F.3d 115, 117-18 (4th Cir. 1995). The district court likewise did not abuse its discretion in admitting evidence of McDowell’s Mississippi arrest involving possession of a handgun. See United States v. Queen, 132 F.3d 991, 995-97 (4th Cir. 1997), cert. denied , 118 S. Ct. 1572 (1998); Fed. R. Evid. 404(b). We affirm McDowell’s conviction and sentence. We dispense with oral argument because the facts and legal contentions are adequately set forth in the materials before the court and argument would not aid the decisional process.

AFFIRMED
*

 This order and judgment is not binding precedent, except under the doctrines of

law of the case, res judicata, and collateral estoppel. The court generally disfavors the

citation of orders and judgments; nevertheless, an order and judgment may be cited under

the terms and conditions of 10th Cir. R. 36.3.

** After examining the briefs and appellate record, this panel has determined

unanimously to honor the parties’ request for a decision on the briefs without oral

argument. See Fed. R. App. P. 34(f); 10th Cir. R. 34.1(G). The case is therefore ordered

submitted without oral argument.

F I L E D

United States Court of Appeals

Tenth Circuit

FEB 1 1999

PATRICK FISHER

Clerk

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

TENTH CIRCUIT

 

MARK WESLEY KELLEY,

Petitioner-Appellant,

v. No. 98-5176

RON WARD,

Respondent-Appellee.

(D.C. No. 97-CV-1007-B)

(N.D. Okla.)

 

ORDER AND JUDGMENT*

 

Before SEYMOUR, Chief Judge, BALDOCK, and HENRY, Circuit Judges.**

 

Petitioner Mark Wesley Kelly seeks a certificate of appealability to appeal the

district court’s order dismissing his § 2254 petition for a writ of habeas corpus as

untimely under 28 U.S.C. § 2244(d)(1). Petitioner contends that application of the oneyear statute of limitations in § 2244 constitutes an unconstitutional suspension of the writ

under U.S. Const. Art. I, § 9, cl. 2. He also contends that we should reconsider our recent
2

decision in Hoggro v. Boone, 150 F.3d 1223 (10th Cir. 1998), wherein we set forth the

proper method of calculating the limitations period under § 2244.

Both arguments are foreclosed. The rule is well established in this circuit that one

panel of the court cannot overrule another panel of the court. We are bound by the

precedent established by a prior panel. E.g., In re Miller, 55 F.3d 1487, 1489 (10th Cir.

1995). Thus, we have no occasion absent en banc review to reconsider our decision in

Hoggro. Furthermore, we have previously held that, absent special circumstances not

present in this case, the one-year limitation on filing a first habeas petition does not

violate the Constitution’s Suspension Clause. Miller v. Marr, 141 F.3d 976, 977-78 (10th

Cir.), cert. denied, 119 S. Ct. 210 (1998).

Accordingly, we agree with the district court substantially for the reasons stated in

its order of dismissal that the instant petition is time-barred.

APPLICATION FOR A CERTIFICATE OF APPEALABILITY DENIED;

APPEAL DISMISSED.

Entered for the Court,

Bobby R. Baldock

Circuit Judge
II

103D CONGRESS

2D SESSION S. RES. 219

Expressing the sense of the Senate regarding the issuance under title VII

of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 of administrative guidelines applicable

to religious harassment in employment.

IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES

JUNE 7, 1994

Mr. BROWN submitted the following resolution; which was referred to the

Committee on Labor and Human Resources

RESOLUTION

Expressing the sense of the Senate regarding the issuance

under title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 of administrative guidelines applicable to religious harassment in

employment.

Whereas the liberties protected by our Constitution include

religious liberty protected by the first amendment;

Whereas citizens of the United States profess the beliefs of

almost every conceivable religion;

Whereas Congress has historically protected religious expression even from governmental action not intended to be

hostile to religion;

Whereas the Supreme Court has written that ‘‘the free exercise of religion means, first and foremost, the right to believe and profess whatever religious doctrine one desires’’;
2

•SRES 219 IS

Whereas the Supreme Court has firmly settled that under our

Constitution the public expression of ideas may not be

prohibited merely because the content of the ideas is offensive to some;

Whereas Congress enacted the Religious Freedom Restoration Act of 1993 to restate and make clear again our intent and position that religious liberty is and should forever be granted protection from unwarranted and unjustified government intrusions and burdens;

Whereas the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission

has written proposed guidelines to title VII of the Civil

Rights Act of 1964, published in the Federal Register on

October 1, 1993, that expand the definition of religious

harassment beyond established legal standards set forth

by the Supreme Court, and that may result in the infringement of religious liberty; and

Whereas such guidelines do not appropriately resolve issues

related to religious liberty and religious expression in the

workplace: Now, therefore, be it

1 Resolved, That it is the sense of the Senate that, for

2 purposes of issuing final regulations under title VII of the

3 Civil Rights Act of 1964 in connection with the proposed

4 guidelines published by the Equal Employment Oppor5 tunity Commission on October 1, 1993 (58 Fed. Reg.

6 51266), the Commission should withdraw religion as a

7 category covered by the proposed guidelines, hold public

8 hearings, and receive additional public comment before is9 suing similar new regulations.

Æ
This disposition is not appropriate for publication and is not precedent *

except as provided by 9th Cir. R. 36-3.

The panel unanimously concludes this case is suitable for decision **

without oral argument. See Fed. R. App. P. 34(a)(2).

EH/Research

NOT FOR PUBLICATION

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

 FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT

RAMONA HOLDERMAN,

 Petitioner - Appellant,

 v.

DORA B. SCHRIRO; et al.,

 Respondents - Appellees.

No. 07-17292

D.C. No. CV-06-03016-SMM

MEMORANDUM *

Appeal from the United States District Court

for the District of Arizona

Stephen M. McNamee, District Judge, Presiding

Submitted February 16, 2010** 

Before: FERNANDEZ, GOULD, and M. SMITH, Circuit Judges.

Arizona state prisoner Ramona Holderman appeals from the district court’s

judgment dismissing her 28 U.S.C. § 2254 habeas petition. We have jurisdiction

pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 2253, and we affirm. 

FILED

MAR 05 2010

MOLLY C. DWYER, CLERK

U.S. COURT OF APPEALS
EH/Research 2 07-17292

Holderman contends that her aggravated sentence violates the Sixth

Amendment because the trial court relied on judge-found aggravating factors to

sentence her above the presumptive sentencing range. Because the state trial judge

relied on at least one permissible factor in enhancing Holderman’s sentence, the

Arizona Supreme Court’s decision rejecting this claim was neither contrary to, nor

an unreasonable application of, clearly established federal law. See 28 U.S.C. 

§ 2254(d)(1); see also Butler v. Curry, 528 F.3d 624, 643 (9th Cir. 2008).

Holderman also contends that her due process rights were violated when the

trial judge failed to give her notice that he would consider certain aggravating

factors. The district court did not err in dismissing this claim as unexhausted and

procedurally defaulted. See Beaty v. Stewart, 303 F.3d 975, 987 (9th Cir. 2002).

AFFIRMED.
[Federal Register Volume 74, Number 18 (Thursday, January 29, 2009)]
[Notices]
[Page 5206]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: E9-1826]


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

DEPARTMENT OF STATE

[Delegation of Authority No. 319]


Re-Delegation from the Deputy Secretary of State of Certain 
Authorities Vested in the Under Secretary for Democracy and Global 
Affairs and Coordinator

    By virtue of the authority vested in the Secretary of State by the 
laws of the United States, and delegated to me by Delegation of 
Authority 245, dated April 23, 2001, I hereby delegate to the following 
officials to the extent authorized by law all authorities vested in the 
Under Secretary of State for Democracy and Global Affairs and 
Coordinator, including all authorities vested in the Secretary of State 
that have been or may be delegated or redelegated to that Under 
Secretary:
    (1) To the Principal Deputy Assistant Secretary of State for Oceans 
and International Environmental Scientific Affairs, insofar as these 
authorities relate to the responsibilities of the Bureau of Oceans and 
International Environmental Scientific Affairs;
    (2) To the Principal Deputy Assistant Secretary of State for 
Democracy, Human Rights and Labor, insofar as these authorities relate 
to the responsibilities of the Bureau of Democracy, Human Rights and 
Labor; and
    (3) To the Principal Deputy Assistant Secretary of State for 
Population, Refugees and Migration, insofar as these authorities relate 
to the responsibilities of the Bureau of Population, Refugees and 
Migration.
    Any authorities covered by this delegation are also hereby 
delegated to the Deputy Secretary for Management and Resources, the 
Under Secretary for Political Affairs and the Under Secretary for 
Management, and may also be exercised by the Secretary and the Deputy 
Secretary. Nothing in this delegation of authority shall be deemed to 
supersede any existing delegation of authority, which shall remain in 
full force and effect during and after this delegation.
    This delegation shall become effective at noon on January 20, 2009, 
and shall expire upon the appointment and entry upon duty of a 
subsequently appointed individual to serve as Under Secretary for 
Democracy and Global Affairs and Coordinator.
    This memorandum shall be published in the Federal Register.

    Dated: January 16, 2009.
John D. Negroponte,
Deputy Secretary of State.
[FR Doc. E9-1826 Filed 1-28-09; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4710-10-P
427 A.2d 1224

#### Commonwealth v. Cugini, Appellant.

Submitted September 13, *6301979.

Norman M. Abrams, for appellant;

Eric B. Henson, Assistant District Attorney, for Commonwealth, appellee.

Before PRICE, WIEAND and VAN der VOORT, JJ.*

*

 Judge Donald E. Wieand is sitting by special designation.

Order affirmed.
Washington/

Oregon

Northern

California

Central

California

Southern

California

North

Atlantic

MidAtlantic

South

Atlantic

Straits

of Florida

Eastern Gulf

of Mexico

Central Gulf

of Mexico

Western Gulf

of Mexico

 7.76 Tcf

5.32 Bbo

2.28 Tcf

0.40 Bbo

3.58 Tcf

2.08 Bbo

2.04 Tcf

0.53 Bbo

69.45 Tcf

12.38 Bbo 16.08 Tcf

 5.07 Bbo

133.90 Tcf

 30.93 Bbo

2.49 Tcf

2.40 Bbo

 9.87 Tcf

 1.35 Bbo

0.02 Tcf

0.02 Bbo

19.36 Tcf

 1.42 Bbo

Assessment of Undiscovered Technically Recoverable Oil and Gas Resources 

of the Nation’s Outer Continental Shelf, 2011

Bowers

Basin*

Aleutian

Basin*

Navarin

Basin

Chukchi Sea

Aleutian Arc*

St. George

Basin

Shumagin

North

Aleutian

Basin

Kodiak

Gulf of 

Alaska

Cook Inlet

Beaufort Sea

ALASKA

Hope 

Basin

Norton

Basin

St. Matthew-Hall

3.77 Tcf

0.15 Bbo

76.77 Tcf

15.38 Bbo

27.64 Tcf

8.22 Bbo

3.06 Tcf

0.06 Bbo

1.22 Tcf

0.13 Bbo

2.80 Tcf

0.21 Bbo

1.20 Tcf

1.01 Bbo

4.04 Tcf

0.63 Bbo

1.84 Tcf

0.05 Bbo

0.49 Tcf

0.01 Bbo

8.62 Tcf

0.75 Bbo

*

* Not evaluated in this study - petroleum potential is negligible.

Natural Gas in Trillions of Cubic Feet (Tcf)

Oil in Billions of Barrels (Bbo)

Undiscovered Technically Recoverable 

Oil and Gas Resources (UTRR) 

Mean* Estimates for Planning Areas

* Arithmetic average or expected value

Regional Totals:

 Alaska OCS 26.61 Bbo 131.45 Tcf 

 Atlantic OCS 3.30 Bbo 31.28 Tcf 

 Gulf of Mexico OCS 48.40 Bbo 219.46 Tcf

 Pacific OCS 10.20 Bbo 16.10 Tcf

Total U.S. OCS 88.59 Bbo 398.37 Tcf

0.01 - 1

1 - 5

5 - 10

10 - 25

25 - 50

50 - 100

> 100

Oil and Gas BTU Equivalent

in Quadrillions (1*1015)

BOEM Map 2011-01b

November 2011
```

[Congressional Bills 103th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[S. Res. 161 Placed on Calendar Senate (PCS)]

                                                       Calendar No. 267

103d CONGRESS

  1st Session

                              S. RES. 161

_______________________________________________________________________

                               RESOLUTION

 To authorize the printing of a revised edition of the Senate Election 
                             Law Guidebook.

_______________________________________________________________________

             November 4 (legislative day, November 2), 1993

                         Placed on the calendar

                                                       Calendar No. 267
103d CONGRESS
  1st Session
S. RES. 161

 To authorize the printing of a revised edition of the Senate Election 
                             Law Guidebook.

_______________________________________________________________________

                   IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES

             November 4 (legislative day, November 2), 1993

Mr. Ford, from the Committee on Rules and Administration, reported the 
    following original resolution; which was placed on the calendar

_______________________________________________________________________

                               RESOLUTION

 
 To authorize the printing of a revised edition of the Senate Election 
                             Law Guidebook.

    Resolved, That the Committee on Rules and Administration hereby is 
directed to prepare a revised edition of the Senate Election Law 
Guidebook, Senate Document 102-15, and that such document shall be 
printed as a Senate document.
    Sec. 2. There shall be printed 600 additional copies of the 
document specified in section 1 of this resolution for the use of the 
Committee on Rules and Administration.
```
EXHIBIT 32.2

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 CEC Entertainment, Inc. (the Company) on Form 10-Q for the quarter ended October 1, 2006 as
filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the Report), the undersigned certifies, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, as adopted pursuant to Section 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 results of operations of the Company.
| | --- | ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------



/s/ Christopher D. MorrisChristopher D. MorrisChief Financial OfficerApril 23, 2007


A signed original of this written statement required by Section 906 has been provided to CEC
Entertainment, Inc. and will be retained by CEC Entertainment, Inc. and furnished to the Securities and Exchange Commission or its staff upon request.



29