alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
###### Editorial Note on Part 301

#### Editorial Note:

In the text of this part, integral section references are to sections of the Internal Revenue Code of 1954; decimal section references are to the Code of Federal Regulations.

References in the text to the “Code” are references to sections of the Internal Revenue Code of 1954.

#### § 301.6503(g)-1 Suspension pending correction.

The running of the periods of limitations provided in sections 6501 and 6502 on the making of assessments, the collection by levy, or a proceeding in court in respect of any tax imposed by chapter 42 or section 507, 4971, or 4975 shall be suspended for any period described in section 507(g)(2) or during which the Commissioner has extended the time for making correction under section 4963(e)(1)(B).

[T.D. 7838, 47 FR 44252, Oct. 7, 1982, as amended by T.D. 8084, 51 FR 16305, May 2, 1986]
#### § 19.985 Person.

*Person* means any individual, corporation, partnership, association, unit of government, or legal entity, however organized.
| (logo) WELLS FARGO | **Corporate Trust Services**

  MAC R1204-010  9062 Old Annapolis Road  Columbia, MD 21045  Tel: 410 884 2000  Fax: 410 715 2380 |
|--------------------|----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|

 

 

CCRE Commercial MortgageSecurities, L.P. 

110 E 59TH ST

NEW YORK, New York 10022-1304

 

Re: Annual Statement ofCompliance for CFCRE 2016-C7 Mortgage Trust Commercial Mortgage Pass-ThroughCertificates, Series 2016-C7

 

Per the Pooling and ServicingAgreement dated as of December 1, 2016 (the "Agreement"), theundersigned, a duly authorized officer of Wells Fargo Bank, N.A., asCertificate Administrator ("Wells Fargo"), hereby certifies asfollows as of and for the year ending December 31, 2016 (the "ReportingPeriod"):

 

(a) A review of Wells Fargo'sactivities during the Reporting Period and of its performance under theAgreement has been made under such officer's supervision; and

 

(b) To the best of suchofficer's knowledge, based on such review, Wells Fargo has fulfilled all of itsobligations under the Agreement in all material respects throughout theReporting Period.

 

 

February 27, 2017

 

 

/s/ Brian Smith

BRIAN SMITH

Vice President

 

 

| Wells Fargo Bank, N.A. | (logo) Together we’ll go  far |
|------------------------|-------------------------------------|
www.gpo.gov

### §393a. Lands of Five Civilized Tribes

From and after thirty days from February 11, 1936 the restricted lands belonging to Indians of the Five Civilized Tribes in Oklahoma of one-half or more Indian blood, enrolled or unenrolled, may be leased for periods of not to exceed five years for farming and grazing purposes, under such rules and regulations as the Secretary of the Interior may prescribe and not otherwise. Such leases shall be made by the owner or owners of such lands, if adults, subject to approval by the superintendent or other official in charge of the Five Civilized Tribes Agency, and by such superintendent or other official in charge of said agency in cases of minors and of Indians who are non compos mentis.

(Feb. 11, 1936, ch. 50, 49 Stat. 1135.)

#### Transfer of Functions

For transfer of functions of other officers, employees, and agencies of Department of the Interior, with certain exceptions, to Secretary of the Interior, with power to delegate, see Reorg. Plan No. 3 of 1950, §§1, 2, eff. May 24, 1950, 15 F.R. 3174, 64 Stat. 1262, set out in the Appendix to Title 5, Government Organization and Employees.
#### Jeffrey J. Howell et al., Respondents, v Sheryl A. Huss et al., Appellants, et al., Defendant.

[803 NYS2d 478]

Appeal from an order of the Supreme Court, Monroe County (Harold L. Galloway, J.), dated January 7, 2005 in a personal injury action. The order, insofar as appealed from, denied the motion of defendants Sheryl A. Huss and Córtese Dodge, Inc. to dismiss the action on the ground of forum non conveniens.

It is hereby ordered that the order so appealed from be and the same hereby is unanimously affirmed without costs for reasons stated in decision at Supreme Court. Present—Kehoe, J.P., Martoche, Pine, Lawton and Hayes, JJ.
www.gpo.gov

### §582. Shoshone-Bannock Tribes of the Fort Hall Reservation; credit of funds

The sum of $500,000, and the interest thereon, less attorneys’ fees and other appropriate deductions all in the proportion that the $500,000 bears to the $15,700,000, shall be credited to the Shoshone-Bannock Tribes of the Fort Hall Reservation for claims of the tribes enumerated in dockets numbered 326–D, 326–E, 326–F, 326–G, and 366.

(Pub. L. 92–206, §2, Dec. 18, 1971, 85 Stat. 737.)
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<ARTICLE>             9
       
<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   9-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          DEC-31-1997
<PERIOD-END>                               SEP-30-1997
<CASH>                                      11,951,115
<INT-BEARING-DEPOSITS>                         106,688
<FED-FUNDS-SOLD>                             1,000,000
<TRADING-ASSETS>                                     0
<INVESTMENTS-HELD-FOR-SALE>                 39,461,881
<INVESTMENTS-CARRYING>                      20,816,211
<INVESTMENTS-MARKET>                        20,941,657
<LOANS>                                    213,121,867
<ALLOWANCE>                                  3,609,073
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                             296,816,402
<DEPOSITS>                                 267,565,028
<SHORT-TERM>                                 1,319,690
<LIABILITIES-OTHER>                          1,284,184
<LONG-TERM>                                    975,000
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                        32,226
<OTHER-SE>                                  25,640,274
<TOTAL-LIABILITIES-AND-EQUITY>             296,816,402
<INTEREST-LOAN>                             14,105,859
<INTEREST-INVEST>                            2,655,885
<INTEREST-OTHER>                               497,129
<INTEREST-TOTAL>                            17,258,873
<INTEREST-DEPOSIT>                           7,661,261
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                           7,770,223
<INTEREST-INCOME-NET>                        9,488,650
<LOAN-LOSSES>                                  450,000
<SECURITIES-GAINS>                             312,865
<EXPENSE-OTHER>                              6,843,404
<INCOME-PRETAX>                              3,443,459
<INCOME-PRE-EXTRAORDINARY>                   3,443,459
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                 2,062,956
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                      .70
<EPS-DILUTED>                                      .70
<YIELD-ACTUAL>                                    4.62
<LOANS-NON>                                  4,719,252
<LOANS-PAST>                                   706,929
<LOANS-TROUBLED>                                     0
<LOANS-PROBLEM>                                200,000
<ALLOWANCE-OPEN>                             3,354,311
<CHARGE-OFFS>                                  242,850
<RECOVERIES>                                    47,612
<ALLOWANCE-CLOSE>                            3,609,073
<ALLOWANCE-DOMESTIC>                         3,609,073
<ALLOWANCE-FOREIGN>                                  0
<ALLOWANCE-UNALLOCATED>                              0
        

</TABLE>
EXHIBIT 31.1

      CERTIFICATION OF CHIEF EXECUTIVE OFFICER AND CHIEF FINANCIAL OFFICER
            PURSUANT TO SECTION 302 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002


I, Michael Schumacher, certify that:

1. I have reviewed this quarterly report on Form 10-QSB of Birch Branch, Inc.

2. Based on my knowledge, this quarterly 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 quarterly
report;

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

4. The registrant's other certifying officers and I are responsible for
establishing and maintaining disclosure controls and procedures (as defined in
Exchange Act Rules 13a-14 and 15d-14) for the registrant and have:

a) designed such disclosure controls and procedures to ensure that material
information relating to the registrant, including its consolidated subsidiaries,
is made known to us by others within those entities, particularly during the
period in which this quarterly report is being prepared;

b) evaluated the effectiveness of the registrant's disclosure controls and
procedures as of a date within 90 days prior to the filing date of this
quarterly report (the "Evaluation Date"); and

c) presented in this quarterly report our conclusions about the effectiveness of
the disclosure controls and procedures based on our evaluation as of the
Evaluation Date.

5. The registrant's other certifying officers and I have disclosed, based on our
most recent evaluation, to the registrant's auditors and the audit committee of
registrant's board of directors (or persons performing the equivalent
functions):

a) all significant deficiencies in the design or operation of internal controls
which could adversely affect the registrant's ability to record, process,
summarize and report financial data and have identified for the registrant's
auditors any material weaknesses in internal controls; and

b) any fraud, whether or not material, that involves management or other
employees who have a significant role in the registrant's internal controls; and

6. The registrant's other certifying officers and I have indicated in this
quarterly report whether there were significant changes in internal controls or
in other factors that could significantly affect internal controls subsequent to
the date of our most recent evaluation, including any corrective actions with
regard to significant deficiencies and material weaknesses.

Date:  November 13, 2006


/s/ Michael Schumacher
----------------------------------------------
Michael Schumacher
President, Treasurer, Chief Executive Officer,
 Chief Financial Officer and Director



                                       10
#### David H. Hymes, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. Marion Johnson, a/k/a Thomas Johnson, and Gertrude Johnson, a/k/a Loles Johnson, Defendants-Appellants. People of the State of Illinois, Appellee, v. Marion Johnson, a/k/a Thomas Johnson, and Gertrude Johnson, a/k/a Loles Johnson, Contemnor-Appellants.

Gen. No. 52,813.

First District, Second Division.

December 30, 1968.

*218Pedersen & Houpt, of Chicago (Peter O’Connell Kelly, of counsel), for appellants;

no appearance for appellee.

Opinion by

PRESIDING JUSTICE BURKE.

Not to be published in full.
March 23, 1998


Mr. Thomas J Bruner
3200 Danville Blvd.
Alamo, California

Dear Mr. Bruner:

In keeping with the terms of the asset purchase agreement between Worldport
Communications Inc. and Intercontinental Exchange Inc. we are pleased to provide
you the following offer of employment at WorldPort Communications, Inc:

EFFECTIVE DATE:          Closing of the asset purchase agreement.

TERM OF OFFER:      Two (2) years

TITLE:              Your exact title will be determined as we progress toward
                    closing.

REPORTING RELATIONSHIP:       Initially you will report to the COO of Worldport.
                    Subsequent to closing and final job determination you may
                    report to another senior executive.

COMPENSATION:       Base Salary:  $84,000 per year paid periodically according
                    to WorldPort Communications payroll practices.

                    Performance Incentive:  The employee will receive stock
                    purchase options as follows:

                    30,000 options vesting after one year of employment, with an
                       exercise price of $7.00 per share;

                    30,000 options vesting after two years of employment, with
                       an exercise price of $10.00 per share;

                    Benefits:  Standard Worldport Communications Benefits

                    Review:  Your compensation will be reviewed at the end of
                    the first six months following closing of the asset purchase
                    agreement.


TERMINATION:        During the term of your employment as defined above you will
                    be terminated by the company only for cause, disability or
                    death.

                    If you are terminated by the company for any reason other
                    than those stated above you will be paid a severance equal
                    to four (4) months base salary.
NON-COMPETE/
NON-SOLICITATION/
CONFIDENTIALITY     As a condition of WorldPort entering into an employment
                    arrangement with you, and as a condition of continued
                    employment with WorldPort, you agree to execute a separate
                    agreement covering these aspects of your employment, and to
                    abide by its terms and conditions.


                    If these terms and conditions of employment are acceptable
to you, please indicate your acceptance of this offer by signing below.

I look forward to working with you.


Sincerely,

/s/ Phillip Magiera_             _ 
Mr. Phillip Magiera
 Its: Chief Financial Officer




I hereby accept the above offer of employment and the associated terms:



/s/ Thomas J. Bruner     _                                
Thomas J. Bruner
§ 19.840 How is fact-finding conducted? ( a ) If fact-finding is conducted— ( 1 ) You may present witnesses and other evidence, and confront any witness presented; and
( 2 ) The fact-finder must prepare written findings of fact for the record.
( b ) A transcribed record of fact-finding proceedings must be made, unless you as a respondent and the Department of the Treasury agree to waive it in advance. If you want a copy of the transcribed record, you may purchase it.
##### 



EXHIBIT 31.2
 CERTIFICATION OF THE CHIEF FINANCIAL OFFICER
PURSUANT TO RULES 13a-14 AND 15d-14 OF THE SECURITIES EXCHANGE ACT
OF 1934 AND SECTION 302 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002
 I, Rose M. DiMarco, certify that:1.
    
    I have reviewed this quarterly report on Form 10-Q of First Keystone Financial, Inc. (the
Registrant);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 Registrant as of, and for, the periods presented in this
report;4.
    
    The Registrants other certifying officer(s) 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 Registrant 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 Registrant, 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)
    
    Evaluated the effectiveness of the Registrant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(c)
    
    Disclosed in this report any change in the Registrants internal control over
financial reporting that occurred during the Registrants most recent fiscal quarter (the
Registrants fourth fiscal quarter in the case of an annual report) that has materially
affected, or is reasonably likely to materially affect, the Registrants internal control
over financial reporting; and
 5.
    
    The Registrants other certifying officer(s) and I have disclosed, based on our most recent
evaluation of internal control over financial reporting, to the Registrants auditors and the
audit committee of Registrant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 Registrant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 Registrants internal control over financial reporting.
 Date: August 14, 2007
    /s/Rose M. DiMarcoRose M. DiMarcoChief Financial Officer
#### In the Matter of Karen E. Meinzer, a Suspended Attorney, Respondent. Grievance Committee of the Eighth Judicial District, Petitioner.

[803 NYS2d 475]

Order entered granting motion for default. Same memorandum as in *Matter of Meinzer*(23 AD3d 1158 [2005]). Present—Green, J.P., Scudder, Gorski, Pine and Hayes, JJ.
#### § 19.100 What does this part do?

This part adopts a governmentwide system of debarment and suspension for Department of the Treasury nonprocurement activities. It also provides for reciprocal exclusion of persons who have been excluded under the Federal Acquisition Regulation, and provides for the consolidated listing of all persons who are excluded, or disqualified by statute, executive order, or other legal authority. This part satisfies the requirements in section 3 of Executive Order 12549, “Debarment and Suspension” (3 CFR 1986 Comp., p. 189), Executive Order 12689, “Debarment and Suspension” (3 CFR 1989 Comp., p. 235) and 31 U.S.C. 6101 note (Section 2455, Public Law 103-355, 108 Stat. 3327).
* This order and judgment is not binding precedent, e xcept under the

doctrines of law of the case, res judicata, and col lateral estoppel. The court generally disfavors the citation of orders and judg ments; nevertheless, an order and judgment may be cited under the terms and condi tions of 10th Cir. R. 36.3. 

## F I L E D United States Court of Appeals Tenth Circuit 

### AUG 14 2001 

### PATRICK FISHER Clerk UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE TENTH CIRCUIT

MAREK JAKUBOWSKI and JANINA T. JAKUBOWSKI,

Plaintiffs-Appellants,

v. UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,

Defendant-Appellee. No. 00-1270 (D.C. No. 99-S-735) (D. Colo.)

ORDER AND JUDGMENT *

Before SEYMOUR and McKAY , Circuit Judges, and BRORBY , Senior Circuit Judge.

After examining the briefs and appellate record, th is panel has determined unanimously that oral argument would not materiallyassist the determination of this appeal. See Fed. R. App. P. 34(a)(2); 10th Cir. R. 34.1(G). Th e case is therefore ordered submitted without oral argument.1 Although Ms. Jakubowski’s name did not appear on th e notice of appeal,

her name was included on the docketing statement fi led within sixty days of the date of the district court judgment. As such, the docketing statement will be construed as a timely notice of appeal for Ms. Jakubowski, see Ayala v. United States , 980 F.2d 1342, 1344 (10th Cir. 1992), making her a proper appellant in this proceeding. -2- Marek Jakubowski and Janina T. Jakubowski (taxpayer s) appeal the judgment of the United States District Court for th e District of Colorado granting summary judgment to the Internal Revenue Service (IRS) on their tax refund suit. 1 Taxpayers sought the refund of allegedly overpaid i ncome taxes based on an alleged capital loss from the sale of real property . In response, the IRS submitted evidence showing that taxpayers had claimed too muc h in settlement expenses on the sale of the property and had improperly calculated the cost basis of the property resulting in a capital gain to taxpayers o f $21,970.

We review the district court’s grant of summary jud gment de novo, applying the same legal standard used by the district court. Summary judgment is appropriate if the pleadings, d epositions, answers to interrogatories, and admissions on file, together with the affidavits, if any, show that there is no genuine i ssue as to any material fact and that the moving party is entitledto a judgment as a matter of law. When applying this standard, we vie w the evidence and draw reasonable inferences therefrom in the lig ht most favorable to the nonmoving party. Simms v. Oklahoma ex rel. Dep’t of Mental Health & Substance Abuse Servs. , 165 F.3d 1321, 1326 (10th Cir. 1999) (quotation and cit ation omitted).-3-

After reviewing the record on appeal, the submissio ns of the parties, and the relevant law, we affirm the judgment of the dis trict court for substantially the reasons stated by that court in its memorandum opin ion and order dated June 28,
2000. The judgment of the United States District Court fo r the District of Colorado is AFFIRMED. The mandate shall issue forthwith.

Entered for the Court

Monroe G. McKay Circuit Judge
#### In the Matter of Donnie McKoy, Petitioner, v Glenn S. Goord, as Commissioner of Correctional Services, Respondent.

[804 NYS2d 118]

Froceeding pursuant to CFLR article 78 (transferred to this Court by order of the Supreme Court, entered in Albany County) to review a determination of respondent which found petitioner guilty of violating certain prison disciplinary rules.

Eetitioner was charged in a misbehavior report with possession of contraband and drugs after a correction officer recovered from his cell a lighter, as well as an empty flex pen and a fork, both which had burn marks and contained residue, which later tested positive for marihuana. Following a tier III disciplinary hearing, petitioner was found guilty of both charges. After the determination was affirmed on administrative appeal, petitioner commenced this CFLR article 78 proceeding.

We confirm. The detailed misbehavior report, together with the testimony of the officer who tested the residue and the pos*808itive results, provide substantial evidence supporting the determination of guilt *(see Matter of Borges v McGinnis,*307 AD2d 489, 489 [2003], *lv denied*100 NY2d 514 [2003]; *Matter of Infante v Selsky,*299 AD2d 612, 613 [2002]; *Matter of Spulka v Murphy,*276 AD2d 986 [2000], *lv denied*96 NY2d 703 [2001]). Petitioner’s reliance upon a previous disciplinary determination finding him not guilty of drug possession is misplaced as it involved a totally unrelated incident. His remaining contentions have not been preserved for our review as they were not raised at the hearing and/or in his administrative appeal *(see Matter of Cummings v Goord,*10 AD3d 748, 749 [2004]).

Crew III, J.P., Carpinello, Mugglin, Rose and Kane, JJ., concur. Adjudged that the determination is confirmed, without costs, and petition dismissed.