alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
(logo) pwc

 

 

**Report of IndependentRegistered Public Accounting Firm**

 

 

To the Board of Directors andshareholders of CoreLogic, Inc.:

 

We have examinedmanagement’s assertion, included in the accompanying Report on Assessmentof Compliance, that CoreLogic Commercial Real Estate Services, Inc. (the "Company"),a subsidiary of CoreLogic, Inc. complied with the servicing criteria set forthin Item 1122(d) of the Securities and Exchange Commission's Regulation AB forall loans for commercial mortgage loan outsourcing customers for which theCompany served as the commercial tax service provider (the"Platform"), as of December 31, 2016 and for the year then ended,only including 1122(d)(1)(iv), 1122(d)(2)(ii), 1122(d)(2)(v), 1122(d)(2)(vi),1122(d)(2)(vii), 1122(d)(4)(xi), 1122(d)(4)(xii) and 1122(d)(4)(xiii), whichthe Company has determined are applicable to the servicing activities performedby it with respect to the Platform. Management is responsible for the Company'scompliance with the servicing criteria. Our responsibility is to express anopinion on management's assertion based on our examination.

 

Our examination was conductedin accordance with attestation standards of the Public Company AccountingOversight Board (United States) and, accordingly, included examining, on a testbasis, evidence about the Company’s compliance with the applicableservicing criteria and performing such other procedures as we considerednecessary in the circumstances. Our examination included testing of selectedservicing activities related to the Platform, and determining whether theCompany performed those selected activities in compliance with the applicableservicing criteria. Our procedures were limited to the selected servicingactivities performed by the Company during the period covered by this report.Our procedures were not designed to detect noncompliance arising from errorsthat may have occurred prior to or subsequent to our tests that may haveaffected the balances or amounts calculated or reported by the Company duringthe period covered by this report. We believe that our examination provides areasonable basis for our opinion. Our examination does not provide a legaldetermination on the Company’s compliance with the servicing criteria.

 

In our opinion,management’s assertion that the Company complied with the aforementionedapplicable servicing criteria as of and for the year ended December 31, 2016for all loans for commercial mortgage loan outsourcing customers for which theCompany served as the commercial tax service provider is fairly stated, in all materialrespects.

 

/s/ PricewaterhouseCoopers

 

February 6, 2017

 

 

*PricewaterhouseCoopers LLP,2001 Ross Avenue, Suite 1800, Dallas TX 75201-2997*

*T: 214-746-6500, F:214-712-6660,*www.pwc.com
EX-31 Rule13a-14(d)/15d-14(d) Certifications.

 

 

I, Anthony Sfarra,certify that:

 

1. I have reviewedthis report on Form 10-K and all reports on Form 10-D required to be filed in respectof the period covered by this report on Form 10-K of the Wells Fargo CommercialMortgage Trust 2016-C32 (the "Exchange Act periodic reports");

 

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 my knowledge,all of the distribution, servicing and other information required to beprovided under Form 10-D for the period covered by this report is included inthe 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, except asotherwise 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:

 

National CooperativeBank, N.A., as NCB Master Servicer, Rialto Capital Advisors, LLC, as Special Servicer,National Cooperative Bank, N.A., as NCB Special Servicer, Wilmington Trust,National Association, as Trustee, Pentalpha Surveillance LLC, as OperatingAdvisor, CoreLogic Commercial Real Estate Services, Inc., as Servicing FunctionParticipant, and National Tax Search, LLC, as Servicing Function Participant.

 

 

 

Dated: March 18, 2020

 

 

/s/ Anthony Sfarra

 

 

President

(seniorofficer in charge of securitization of the depositor)
* Pursuant to 5TH CIR. R. 47.5, the court has determined

that this opinion should not be published and is not precedent

except under the limited circumstances set forth in 5TH CIR.

R. 47.5.4.

 

** Lovelace v. Bowen, 813 F.2d 55 (5th Cir. 1987).

IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT

 

No. 98-60168

Summary Calendar

 

LAVELL POWE, JR.,

Plaintiff-Appellant,

versus

KENNETH S. APFEL, Commissioner

of Social Security,

Defendant-Appellee.

- - - - - - - - - -

Appeal from the United States District Court

for the Southern District of Mississippi

USDC No. 4:97-CV-4-LS

- - - - - - - - - -

January 27, 1999

Before GARWOOD, JOLLY, and BARKSDALE, Circuit Judges.

PER CURIAM:*

Lavell Powe, Jr. appeals the district court’s affirmance of

the Commissioner’s denial of his application for disability

insurance benefits and supplemental security income disability

benefits. He argues that the administrative law judge (ALJ): (1)

violated the rule announced in Lovelace**; (2) failed to advise

him of his right to counsel and failed to provide him with a fair
No. 98-60168 

-2-

hearing; (3) erroneously found that Powe was able to perform past

relevant work and failed to allow the testimony of a vocational

expert; (4) erroneously found that Powe was not a credible

witness; (5) applied the wrong legal standard and issued a

decision that was against the overwhelming weight of the

evidence.

To the extent that we have jurisdiction over the claims

raised on appeal, see Paul v. Shalala, 29 F.3d 208, 210-211 (5th

Cir. 1994)(failure to raise an issue before the Appeals Council

deprives this court of jurisdiction over it on appeal absent a

showing of a miscarriage of justice), we AFFIRM for the same

reasons adopted by the district court. See Powe v. Callahan,

4:97-CV-4, (S.D. Miss. Feb 23, 1998).

AFFIRMED.
# C_2017104EN.01001602.xml

| 3.4.2017 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 104/16 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

3.4.2017

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 104/16

---

Judgment of the Court (First Chamber) of 1 February 2017 — European Commission v Hungary

(Case C-392/15) (1)

1

((Failure of a Member State to fulfil obligations - Article 49 TFEU - Freedom of establishment - Notaries - Nationality requirement - Article 51 TFEU - Connection with the exercise of official authority))

(2017/C 104/24)

Language of the case: Hungarian

Parties

Parties

Applicant: European Commission (represented by: H. Støvlbæk and K. Talabér-Ritz, acting as Agents)

Applicant:

Defendant: Hungary (represented by: M.Z. Fehér, G. Koós and M. Tátrai, acting as Agents)

Defendant:

Intervener in support of the defendant: Czech Republic (represented by: M. Smolek, J. Vláčil and D. Hadroušek, acting as Agents)

Intervener in support of the defendant:

Operative part of the judgment

Operative part of the judgment

The Court:

| 1. | Declares that, by imposing a nationality requirement for access to the notarial profession, Hungary failed to fulfil its obligations under Article 49 TFEU; |
| --- | --- |

1.

Declares that, by imposing a nationality requirement for access to the notarial profession, Hungary failed to fulfil its obligations under Article 49 TFEU;

| 2. | Orders Hungary to pay the costs; |
| --- | --- |

2.

Orders Hungary to pay the costs;

| 3. | Orders the Czech Republic to bear its own costs |
| --- | --- |

3.

Orders the Czech Republic to bear its own costs

---

(1)  OJ C 302, 14.9.2015.

1

---
III 

109TH CONGRESS 

2D SESSION S. RES. 415 

Expressing the continuing support of the Senate to the Junior Reserve Officers’ Training Corps (JROTC), and commending the efforts of that 

vital program as it carries out its mission of instilling the values of 

citizenship and service in the hearts and minds of the youth of the 

United States. 

IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES 

MARCH 30, 2006 

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

Committee on Armed Services 

MAY 1, 2006 

Committee discharged; considered and agreed to 

RESOLUTION 

Expressing the continuing support of the Senate to the Junior Reserve Officers’ Training Corps (JROTC), and commending the efforts of that vital program as it carries 

out its mission of instilling the values of citizenship and 

service in the hearts and minds of the youth of the 

United States. 

Whereas, since its inception in 1913, the Junior Reserve Officers’ Training Corps has successfully functioned for over 

90 years; 

Whereas the Junior Reserve Officers’ Training Corps has 

provided citizenship training, discipline, stability, and paVerDate Aug 31 2005 06:14 May 03, 2006 Jkt 049200 PO 00000 Frm 00001 Fmt 6652 Sfmt 6300 E:\BILLS\SR415.ATS SR415

hmoore on PROD1PC68 with HMBILLS
2 

SRES 415 ATS 

triotic values to the youth of the United States throughout the Nation; 

Whereas millions of students have benefitted from the Junior 

Reserve Officers’ Training Corps; 

Whereas, in 2005, there were over 500,000 students enrolled 

in Junior Reserve Officers’ Training Corps programs in 

approximately 3,400 secondary schools; and 

Whereas the Junior Reserve Officers’ Training Corps is 

taught by a dedicated cadre of retired officers and staff 

non-commissioned officers of the Armed Forces who love 

the United States and who are working to secure its future: Now, therefore, be it 

1 Resolved, That the Senate— 

2 (1) expresses appreciation to the Junior Re3 serve Officers’ Training Corps for— 

4 (A) the leadership training that the pro5 gram provides to the youth of the United 

6 States; and 

7 (B) the outstanding results that the pro8 gram has achieved; 

9 (2) commends the professionalism and dedica10 tion displayed daily by the retired members of the 

11 United States Armed Forces who serve as instruc12 tors in the Junior Reserve Officers’ Training Corps; 

13 and 

14 (3) proudly honors the modern-day members of 

15 the Junior Reserve Officers’ Training Corps, who 


hmoore on PROD1PC68 with HMBILLS
3 

SRES 415 ATS 

1 represent a promising group of young men and 

2 women who continue to strive to achieve their full 

3 potential. 

Æ 


hmoore on PROD1PC68 with HMBILLS
## Draft Proposal CB-7

This concept has been developed by the DOE Building Energy Codes Program (BECP) as a possible code

change proposal to the Commercial provisions of the 2012 International Energy Conservation Code

(IECC). Interested parties are asked to submit any and all comments on DOE's initial concepts and draft

code change proposals. For instructions on submitting comments, visit:

www.energycodes.gov/development/ commercial/codes/iecc/concepts/



## Define Rooftop Monitor (CB-7)

Objective: Provide a definition of the term “Rooftop Monitor” as used in Section C402.3.2.1 (4).

Suggested Code Change Proposal

Add a new definition to Section C202 as follows:

C202 ROOFTOP MONITOR. A raised section of a roof containing vertical fenestration along one or

more sides.

Reason: There is currently no definition of rooftop monitor, yet the term is used in Section C402.3.2.1

(4). A definition of rooftop monitor is needed to clarify the intent and ensure uniform application of the

exception.

Cost Impact: There is no cost impact associated with this proposed change.
```

[Congressional Bills 109th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[S. Res. 448 Agreed to Senate (ATS)]

109th CONGRESS
  2d Session
S. RES. 448

Supporting the goals and ideals of ``National Life Insurance Awareness 
                                Month''.

_______________________________________________________________________

                   IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES

                             April 27, 2006

Mr. Nelson of Nebraska (for himself, Mr. Chambliss, Mr. Craig, and Mr. 
 Allen) submitted the following resolution; which was referred to the 
                       Committee on the Judiciary

                           September 6, 2006

             Committee discharged; considered and agreed to

_______________________________________________________________________

                               RESOLUTION

 
Supporting the goals and ideals of ``National Life Insurance Awareness 
                                Month''.

Whereas life insurance is an essential part of a sound financial plan;
Whereas life insurance provides financial security for families by helping 
        surviving members meet immediate and long-term financial obligations and 
        objectives in the event of a premature death in their family;
Whereas approximately 68,000,000 United States citizens lack the adequate level 
        of life insurance coverage needed to ensure a secure financial future 
        for their loved ones;
Whereas life insurance products protect against the uncertainties of life by 
        enabling individuals and families to manage the financial risks of 
        premature death, disability, and long-term care;
Whereas individuals, families, and businesses can benefit from professional 
        insurance and financial planning advice, including an assessment of 
        their life insurance needs; and
Whereas numerous groups supporting life insurance have designated September 2006 
        as ``National Life Insurance Awareness Month'' as a means to encourage 
        consumers to--

    (1) become more aware of their life insurance needs;

    (2) seek professional advice regarding life insurance; and

    (3) take the actions necessary to achieve financial security for their 
loved ones: Now therefore, be it

    Resolved, That the Senate--
            (1) supports the goals and ideals of ``National Life 
        Insurance Awareness Month''; and
            (2) calls on the Federal Government, States, localities, 
        schools, nonprofit organizations, businesses, and the citizens 
        of the United States to observe the month with appropriate 
        programs and activities.
                                 <all>
```
SCWC-19-0000612

IN THE SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF HAWAII

STATE OF HAWAII,

Respondent/Plaintiff-Appellee,

vs.

JOHN ALESANA,

Petitioner/Defendant-Appellant.

CERTIORARI TO THE INTERMEDIATE COURT OF APPEALS

(CAAP-19-0000612; CASE NO. 1DTC-19-027882)

ORDER REJECTING APPLICATION FOR WRIT OF CERTIORARI

(By: Recktenwald, C.J., Nakayama, McKenna, Wilson, and Eddins, JJ.)

Petitioner/Defendant-Appellant’s Application for Writ 

of Certiorari, filed on July 22, 2021, is hereby rejected.

DATED: Honolulu, Hawaiʻi, August 23, 2021.

/s/ Mark E. Recktenwald

/s/ Paula A. Nakayama

/s/ Sabrina S. McKenna

/s/ Michael D. Wilson

/s/ Todd W. Eddins

Electronically Filed

Supreme Court

SCWC-19-0000612

23-AUG-2021

11:20 AM

Dkt. 8 ODAC
April 29, 1952

No. 56618.

Suit 4700.

#### Bamboo & Rattan Works, Inc. *v.*United States.

Abstract 55719 affirmed February 18, 1952. C. A. D. 480.
No. 51188.

#### Protests 47434—K, etc., of Samuel Shapiro & Co., Inc. (Baltimore).

Opinion by

Ekwall, J.

In accordance with stipulation of counsel the court found that the facts herein agreed upon were such as to bring the case within the holding in *John Barr*v. *United States*(11 Cust. Ct. 88, C. D. 801), which record was incorporated herein. (See *John Barr*v. *United States,*324 U. S. 83.) In accordance therewith it was held that the currency of the invoices should be converted at the buying rate in the New York market at noon on the day of exportation (the “free” rate of exchange for pounds sterling), as certified by the Federal Reserve bank and set forth by the collector on each of the entries. The protests were sustained to this extent.
No. 49846.

#### Protests 110177-K, etc., of Emil Buschhoff & Co. et al. (New York).

Opinion by

Walker, J.

It was stipulated that the hides are of cattle of the bovine species.and are similar in all material respects to those involved in *Rice*v. *United States*(11 Cust. Ct. 118, C. D. 807). It was further stipulated that they were entered for consumption or withdrawn from warehouse for consumption on or after the effective date of the Argentine Trade Agreement (T. D. 50504). In accordance therewith the claim at 5 percent under paragraph 1530 (a) as modified was sustaine*d.*
<PAGE>
                                                                    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 Tower Properties Company (the
"Company") on Form 10-Q for the period ended September 30, 2005 as filed with
the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the "Report"), I,
Stanley J. Weber, Chief Financial Officer of the Company, certify, pursuant to
18 U.S.C. Section 1350, as adopted pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley
Act of 2002, that:

     (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/ Stanley J. Weber
-----------------------------------
Stanley J. Weber
Chief Financial Officer

November 14, 2005


                                       29
#### Meyercord Company *v.*Gwilliam Manufacturing Company, Appellant

(No. 2).

February 27, 1925:

Argued November 13,1924.

Before Orlady, P. J., Porter, Henderson, Trexler,

Keller, Linn and Gawthrop, JJ.

Affirmed.

Assumpsit on written contract. Before Brown, J.

Rule for judgment for want of a sufficient affidavit of defense.

The court made absolute the rule. Defendant appealed.

*Error assigned*was the decree of the court.

*Harry M. Miller,*for appellant.

*James Yearsley,*and with him *Illoway & Felix,*for appellee.

Opinion by

Gawthrop, J.,

This case was argued with the appeal of the plaintiff in The Meyercord Co. v. The Gwilliam Manufacturing Co;, to No. 200, October Term, 1924. In that case the question involved was whether it was error to refuse to enter judgment for want of a sufficient affidavit of defense. In this, in which the controlling facts do not differ from the facts in the former case, the court below entered judgment for the plaintiff for want of a sufficient affidavit of defense. For the reasons stated in an opinion this day filed in the former case, the judgment is affirmed.
Before the Second Division,

April 11, 1950

No. 54228.

#### S. S. Kresge Company et al. *v.*United States,

protests 683225-G, etc. (New York).

Opinion by

Lawrence, J.

The protests were dismissed.
Danielle Lewis

- Fwd: Clarification about Duke Energy CBI Claim

Please log this email in as justification for lifting duke's CBI claim.

Sent from my smartphone

Begin forwarded message:

From: Ronald Jordan < Jordan.Ronald@epamail.epa.gov > Date: May 9, 2012 8:12:54 AM EDT To: Thomas.Finseth@erg.com Cc: Jezebele Alicea < Alicea.Jezebele@epamail.epa.gov >, Eric Strassler

< Strassler.Eric@epamail.epa.gov > Subject: Fw: RE: Clarification about Duke Energy CBI Claim

-----Forwarded by Ronald Jordan/DC/USEPA/US on 05/09/2012 08:12AM -----

======================= To: Ronald Jordan/DC/USEPA/US@EPA From: "Craig, Nathan D" < Nathan.Craig@duke

- energy.com > Date: 05/09/2012 07:13AM Cc: "Velte, John S" < John.Velte@duke

- energy.com > Subject: RE: Clarification about Duke Energy CBI Claim

======================= Ron,

After reviewing the information with our contractor, we do not consider the chemical usage information associated with the Allen Steam Station and the Bele ws Creek Steam Station as CBI.

Thank you for following up,

Nathan Craig Environmental Specialist III Water Management Group Office Phone: 704-382-9622 Cell Phone: 704-315-8187 Fax: 704-382-1681

----- Original Message

----- From: TJ Finseth <thomas.finseth@erg.com> To: Danielle Lewis <Danielle.Lewis@erg.com> Date: 5/9/2012 9:53 AM Subject: Fwd: Clarification about Duke Energy CBI Claim Page 1 of 2

5/9/2012 file://C:\Documents and Settings\DLewis\Local Settings\Temp\XP grpwise\4FAA3EB2DO

...From: Ronald Jordan [mailto:Jordan.Ronald@epamail.epa.gov]

Sent: Tuesday, May 08, 2012 2:07 PM To: Craig, Nathan D Cc: Thomas Finseth; Jezebele Alicea; Eric Strassler Subject: Clarification about Duke Energy CBI Claim

Good afternoon, Nathan --

On April 30, 2012, you submitted confidential business information (CBI) cla ims and substantiation related to the engineering data associated with the Mi ami Fort Station as part of EPA's CWA 308 monitoring program. At that time, EPA did not recei ve any CBI claims associated with the Allen Steam Station or the Belews Creek S team Station. However, on February 7, 2011, when you submitted the engineering data associated with the CWA 308 monitoring program, you identified the chemical usage information for all three plants (i.e., Allen Steam Station, Belews Creek Steam Station, and Miami Fort Station) as CBI.

Please confirm that you do not consider the chemical usage information a ssociated with the Allen Steam Station and the Belews Creek Steam Station as CB I.

Regards, Ron Page 2 of 2

5/9/2012 file://C:\Documents and Settings\DLewis\Local Settings\Temp\XP grpwise\4FAA3EB2DO

...
**Exhibit 32****CERTIFICATION OF PERIODIC REPORT**The undersigned officers of **United Components, Inc.**hereby certify pursuant to Section 906 of theSarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, that: 1. the Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q of United Components, Inc. for the quarter endedMarch 31, 2007 (the “Report”) fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) of theSecurities Exchange Act of 1934; and  2. the information contained in the Report fairly presents, in all material respects, thefinancial condition and results of operations of United Components, Inc.       Date: May 15, 2007        By: