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

I, Richard Simpson, certifythat:

 

1.            I have reviewed this report on Form 10-K and all reports on Form 10-D requiredto be filed in respect of the period covered by this report on Form 10-K ofCitigroup Commercial Mortgage Trust 2016-GC36 (the “Exchange Act periodicreports”);

 

2.            Based on my knowledge, the Exchange Act periodic reports, taken as a whole, donot contain any untrue statement of a material fact or omit to state a materialfact necessary 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 informationrequired to be provided under Form 10-D for the period covered by this reportis included in the Exchange Act periodic reports;

 

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

 

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

 

In giving the certificationsabove, I have reasonably relied on information provided to me by the followingunaffiliated parties: KeyBank National Association; Wells Fargo Bank, NationalAssociation; Computershare Trust Company, National Association; GreystoneServicing Company LLC; Midland Loan Services, a Division of PNC Bank, NationalAssociation; Pentalpha Surveillance LLC; Berkadia Commercial Mortgage LLC;Wilmington Trust, National Association; Situs Holdings, LLC; Park Bridge LenderServices LLC; CoreLogic Solutions, LLC; and Berkeley Point Capital LLC. 

 

Date:       September 15, 2023

 

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

Intermediate Court of Appeals

CAAP-16-0000608

11-MAY-2017

07:46 AM
* 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.

IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT

 

No. 99-10910 

Conference Calendar

 

MORRIS GLENN IVY, JR.,

Petitioner-Appellant,

versus

GARY L. JOHNSON, Director,

Texas Department of Criminal

Justice, Institutional Division,

Respondent-Appellee.

- - - - - - - - - -

Appeal from the United States District Court

for the Northern District of Texas

USDC No. 4:98-CV-861-Y

- - - - - - - - - -

October 18, 2000

Before SMITH, BARKSDALE, and BENAVIDES, Circuit Judges. 

PER CURIAM:*

Morris Glenn Ivy, Texas prisoner # 547727, appeals the

district court’s dismissal of his 28 U.S.C. § 2254 petition as

time-barred by the Antiterrorism and Effective Death Penalty

Act’s one-year limitations period. Ivy argues that the prison

law library did not receive a copy of the AEDPA’s amendments

until April 1, 1997, or three weeks prior to the expiration of

the AEDPA’s grace period for filing a timely § 2254 petition. He

argues that the one-year limitations period should be subject to
No. 99-10910

-2-

equitable tolling as a result of this delay in information. Ivy

also filed a motion requesting this court to consider the

underlying merits of his petition. This motion is DENIED. 

This court has held that alleged inadequacies of a prison’s

law library are not among the “rare and exceptional”

circumstances that warrant deviation from the AEDPA’s limitations

period and its one-year grace period. See Felder v. Johnson, 204

F.3d 168, 171-73 (5th Cir. 2000), petition for cert. filed, (May

8, 2000)(No. 99-10243). Accordingly, the district court’s

dismissal of Ivy’s petition is AFFIRMED.

AFFIRMED; MOTION DENIED.
Exhibit 10.47
                           BEAR RIVER ZEOLITE COMPANY
                                ROYALTY AGREEMENT
                                  MAY 29, 2002

1.     Bear  River  Zeolite Company ("BRZ") agrees to pay George Desborough
and  Nick  Raymond  a  royalty  on  zeolite  sales from the BRZ mine, located in
Franklin  County,  Idaho,  including the zeolite mined from Webster leased lands
and adjacent to BLM claims, according to the following schedule, in an aggregate
amount  FOB  Preston  plant  of  zeolite  sales:

<TABLE>
<CAPTION>

<S>                                       <C>

Sales Price Preston                   Percentage
--------------------            -------------------
0 - $40 per ton . .                1% (one percent)
40 - $75 per ton. .                1% (one and one-half percent)
75 - $100 per ton .                2% (two percent)
100 -  per ton. . .                3% (three percent)
</TABLE>

2.     Royalties  will  be  paid  quarterly.

3.     This  constitutes the entire agreement between the parties; and all prior
agreements  and  understandings  are  merged  herein.

4.     This  Agreement  is not modifiable except by a signed writing and may not
be  amended  or  changed  by  waiver,  estoppel  or  a  course  of  conduct.

5.     There  are no statements, representations or information relied on by the
parties  beyond  the  face  of  this  Agreement.

6.     The  terms  of  this  Agreement  are  accepted  by  the  undersigned  and
supersedes  all  prior  agreements  and  understandings  of  any  kind.


                                    BEAR  RIVER  ZEOLITE  COMPANY



                                    By:/s/ John C. Lawrence
                                       --------------------
                                        John  C.  Lawrence
                                        President

                                            1
<PAGE>

                                        GEORGE  DESBUROUGH

                                    By:/s/ George Desburough
                                      ----------------------
                                        George  Desburough



                                        NICK  RAYMOND


                                    By:/s/ Nick Raymond
                                     -------------------
                                        Nick  Raymond


ATTEST:


/s/ Michael Fleursch
--------------------
Michael  Fleursch

                                              2
NOTICE: Motive Power & Equipment Technical Bulletin MP&E 98-49

SUBJECT: Dimensions Applicable to Handles of Uncoupling Levers 

INFORMATION DATE: 06/15/1998

Memorandum

U.S. Department of Transportation

Federal Railroad Administration

Date: June 15, 1998 

Reply to Att. of: MP&E 98-49

Subject: §231.1(k)

Dimensions Applicable to Handles of Uncoupling Levers

From: E. R. English

Director, Office of Safety Assurance and Compliance

To: All Regional Administrators, Deputy Administrators,

Motive Power & Equipment Specialists and MP&E Inspectors

In the past some of our inspectors have taken exception to the handles of bottom operated uncoupling

levers being more than 6 inches from the side of the car.

Section 231.1(k)(2) states in relevant part: (i) Handles of uncoupling levers, except those shown in Plate

B or of similar designs, shall be not more than 6 inches from sides of car. (ii) Uncoupling levers of design

shown on Plate B and of similar designs shall conform to the following prescribed limits: (iii) Handles

shall be not more than 12, preferably 9, inches from sides of cars. Center lift arms shall be not less than 7

inches long. The top operated uncoupling lever shown in Plate B is similar in design to bottom operated

uncoupling levers and are fundamentally the same, as both are operated in the same manner by an upward

lift of the uncoupling lever handle to disengage the coupler lock block.

The reference in 231.1(k)(2)(i) to uncoupling levers of other than Plate B design requires that the

uncoupling lever handle be not more than 6 inches from side of car. This refers primarily to those

uncoupling levers which are operated by a downward motion of the uncoupling lever either by hand or

foot. This type of uncoupling lever could be operated from the side ladder while the car was in motion. 

Therefore, FRA will not take exception to bottom operated uncoupling levers that are similar in design to

that shown in Plate B, unless the uncoupling lever handle is more than 12 inches from the side of the car.

Also, for your information, the Association of American Railroad's (AAR) Rule 22 for bottom operated

uncoupling levers show the maximum distance of the uncoupling lever handle to be 12 inches from the

side of the car.
|   | (1) | The Report fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended; and |
|--------|-----|-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|

|   | (2) | The information contained in the Report fairly presents, in all material respects, the financial condition and results of operations of the Company. |
|--------|-----|------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|

| Date: November 4, 2011 |   | /s/ RONALD L. SMITH                                                          |   |
|------------------------|--------|-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------|--------|
|                   |   | Ronald L. Smith                                                                   |   |
|                   |   | Vice President and Chief Financial Officer(Principal Financial Officer) |   |
|                   |   |                                                                              |   |
# Fourth Court of Appeals

San Antonio, Texas

May 12, 2014

N o. 04

- 14

- 00120

- CV

IN THE INTEREST OF R.A.G.C., ET AL., CHILDREN,

From the 131st Judicial District Court, Bexar County, Texas

T rial Court No. 2011

- CI

- 00860 Honorable Martha B. Tanner, Judge Presiding



### O R D E R

Appellant's second motion for extension of time to file brief is hereby GRANTED. Appellant's brief is due on or before June 11, 2014. No further extensions of time will be granted.

_________________________________ Rebeca C. Martinez, Justice

IN WITNESS WHEREOF, I have hereunto set my hand and affixed the seal of the said

court on this 12th day of May, 2014

.

___________________________________ Keith E. Hottle

Clerk of Court
**Exhibit 34.2**

 

**Report of Independent Registered PublicAccounting Firm**

 

The Board of Directors

U.S. Bank National Association

 

We have examined management’s assertion,included in the accompanying Report on Assessment of Compliance with Applicable Servicing Criteria, that U.S. Bank National Association(the “Company”) complied with the servicing criteria set forth in Item 1122 (d) of the Securities and ExchangeCommission’s Regulation AB for the U.S. Bank Corporate Trust Asset-Backed Securities Platform (the “Platform”),for which the company provides trustee, securities administration, registrar and paying agent services, as of and for the yearended March 31, 2016, except for servicing criteria 1122 (d)(1)(i)-(v), 1122 (d)(2)(i), 1122 (d)(2)(iii), 1122 (d)(2)(v)-(vii),1122 (d)(3)(i), 1122 (d)(4)(i)-(xv), which the Company has determined are not applicable to the activities performed by them withrespect to the servicing platform covered by this report. Management is responsible for the Company’s compliance with thoseservicing criteria. Our responsibility is to express an opinion on management’s assertion about the Company’s compliancewith the servicing criteria based on our examination.

 

Our examination was conducted in accordancewith attestation standards established by the American Institute of Certified Public Accountants, as adopted by the Public CompanyAccounting Oversight Board (United States) and, accordingly, included examining, on a test basis, evidence about the Company’scompliance with the applicable servicing criteria and performing such other procedures as we considered necessary in the circumstances.Our examination included testing of less than all of the individual asset-backed transactions and securities that comprise thePlatform, testing of less than all of the servicing activities related to the Platform, and determining whether the Company processedthose selected transactions and performed those selected activities in compliance with the servicing criteria. Furthermore, ourprocedures were limited to the selected transactions and servicing activities performed by the Company during the period coveredby this report. Our procedures were not designed to determine whether errors may have occurred either prior to or subsequent toour tests that may have affected the balances or amounts calculated or reported by the Company during the period covered by thisreport for the selected transactions or any other transactions. We believe that our examination provides a reasonable basis forour opinion. Our examination does not provide a legal determination on the Company’s compliance with the servicing criteria.

 

In our opinion, management’s assertionthat the Company complied with the aforementioned servicing criteria as of and for the year ended March 31, 2016, for theU.S. Bank Corporate Trust Asset-Backed Securities Platform is fairly stated, in all material respects.

 

/s/ Ernst & Young LLP

Minneapolis, Minnesota
Before the Third Division,

June 13, 1945

No. 50253.

#### Protest 116240-K of French Line, Inc., as general agent for War Shipping Administration (New York).

Opinion by

Cline, J.

There was nothing in the record to show that a written notice of abandonment was filed with the collector within 30 days after the date of entry. When the case was called for trial there was no appearance on behalf of the plaintiff. An examination of the record failed to disclose sufficient evidence to overcome the presumption of correctness attaching to the collector’s decision. The protest was therefore overruled.
Order issued July 28 , 201 4 

# S

In The 

## Court of Appeals

Fifth District of Texas at Dallas

________________________________________

No. 05

- 1 3

- 0 1591

- CR

No. 05

- 13

- 01592

- CR

________________________________________

JOHN ELLSWORTH BLACK , Appellant



### V.

THE STATE OF TEXAS

, Appellee



### O R D E R

Before Justices Lang, Myers, and Brown

Based on the Court’s opinion of this date, we GRANT the April 9, 201 4 motion of Niles

Illich for leave to withdraw as appointed counsel on appeal. We DIRECT the Clerk of the Court

to remove Niles Illich as counsel of record for appellant. We DIRECT the Clerk of the Court to

send a copy of this order and all future correspondence to John Ellsworth Black , TDCJ No.

1891896

, Byrd U nit

, 21 FM 247, Huntsville, Tex as, 77320.

/Lana Myers/

LANA MYERS

JUSTICE
Exhibit 4.1




MODULAR MEDICAL,
INC.


AND


_______________________,



TRUSTEE


INDENTURE


DATED AS OF


_______, 2022


DEBT SECURITIES



    	 



    	 



    

MODULAR
MEDICAL, INC.


RECONCILIATION
AND TIE BETWEEN TRUST INDENTURE ACT OF 1939


AND INDENTURE,
DATED AS OF _______ ___, 2022


	Section of Trust Indenture Act of 1939	 	Section(s) of Indenture
	 	 	 
	§ 310(a)(1)	 	609
	(a)(2)	 	609
	(a)(3)	 	Not Applicable
	(a)(4)	 	Not Applicable
	(a)(5)	 	609
	(b)	 	608, 610
	§ 311(a)	 	613
	(b)	 	613
	(c)	 	Not Applicable
	§ 312(a)	 	701, 702 (a)
	(b)	 	702 (b)
	(c)	 	702 (b)
	§ 313(a)	 	703 (a)
	(b)	 	703 (a)
	(c)	 	703 (a)
	(d)	 	703 (b)
	§ 314(a)	 	704, 1005
	(b)	 	Not Applicable
	(c)(1)	 	103
	(c)(2)	 	103
	(c)(3)	 	Not Applicable
	(d)	 	Not Applicable
	(e)	 	103
	§ 315(a)	 	601 (a)
	(b)	 	602
	(c)	 	601 (b)
	(d)	 	601 (c)
	(d)(1)	 	601 (c) (1)
	(d)(2)	 	601 (c) (2)
	(d)(3)	 	601 (c) (3)
	(e)	 	511
	§ 316(a)(1)(A)	 	505
	(a)(1)(B)	 	504
	(a)(2)	 	Not Applicable
	(a)(last sentence)	 	101
	(b)	 	507
	(c)	 	105
	§ 317(a)(1)	 	503
	(a)(2)	 	509
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<ARTICLE> 9
<LEGEND>
THIS SCHEDULE CONTAINS SUMMARY FINANCIAL INFORMATION EXTRACTED FROM THE
CONSOLIDATED BALANCE SHEET, CONSOLIDATED STATEMENT OF INCOME AND
CONSOLIDATED STATEMENT OF CASH FLOWS AND IS QUALIFIED IN ITS ENTIRETY
BY REFERENCE TO SUCH FINANCIAL STATEMENTS.
</LEGEND>
<MULTIPLIER> 1,000
       
<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   9-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          DEC-31-1996
<PERIOD-END>                               SEP-30-1996
<CASH>                                         169,932
<INT-BEARING-DEPOSITS>                               0
<FED-FUNDS-SOLD>                                15,879
<TRADING-ASSETS>                                43,669
<INVESTMENTS-HELD-FOR-SALE>                    459,690
<INVESTMENTS-CARRYING>                         225,384
<INVESTMENTS-MARKET>                           222,124
<LOANS>                                      2,143,218
<ALLOWANCE>                                     32,068
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                               3,147,933
<DEPOSITS>                                   2,432,484
<SHORT-TERM>                                   359,192
<LIABILITIES-OTHER>                             64,399
<LONG-TERM>                                      2,425
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                        21,089
<OTHER-SE>                                     268,344
<TOTAL-LIABILITIES-AND-EQUITY>               3,147,933
<INTEREST-LOAN>                                134,902
<INTEREST-INVEST>                               32,547
<INTEREST-OTHER>                                   359
<INTEREST-TOTAL>                               170,209
<INTEREST-DEPOSIT>                              66,012
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                              75,803
<INTEREST-INCOME-NET>                           94,406
<LOAN-LOSSES>                                    2,001
<SECURITIES-GAINS>                                 234
<EXPENSE-OTHER>                                 60,438
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                 61,167
<INCOME-PRE-EXTRAORDINARY>                      38,970
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                    38,970
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                     2.38
<EPS-DILUTED>                                     2.35
<YIELD-ACTUAL>                                    4.62
<LOANS-NON>                                      5,596
<LOANS-PAST>                                       685
<LOANS-TROUBLED>                                 2,275
<LOANS-PROBLEM>                                      0
<ALLOWANCE-OPEN>                                30,508
<CHARGE-OFFS>                                    1,981
<RECOVERIES>                                       954
<ALLOWANCE-CLOSE>                               32,068
<ALLOWANCE-DOMESTIC>                            32,068
<ALLOWANCE-FOREIGN>                                  0
<ALLOWANCE-UNALLOCATED>                              0
        

</TABLE>
```

[Federal Register Volume 78, Number 30 (Wednesday, February 13, 2013)]
[Notices]
[Page 10248]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Printing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2013-03336]

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

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

Federal Aviation Administration

Public Notice for Waiver of Aeronautical Land-Use Assurance

AGENCY: Federal Aviation Administration (FAA), DOT.

ACTION: Notice of intent of waiver with respect to land; Lewis 
University Airport, Romeoville, IL.

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

SUMMARY: The FAA is considering a proposal to change a portion of 
airport land from aeronautical use to non-aeronautical use and to 
authorize the sale of the airport property. The Will County Department 
of Highways has offered fair market value to purchase the land for the 
Weber Road improvement project. The parcel is not needed for 
aeronautical purposes and the proceeds from the sale of the land will 
be used for future airport improvement projects. This notice announces 
that the FAA is considering the release of the subject airport property 
at the Lewis University Airport, Romeoville, IL, from all federal land 
covenants. Approval does not constitute a commitment by the FAA to 
financially assist in disposal of the subject airport property nor a 
determination that all measures covered by the program are eligible for 
grant-in-aid funding from the FAA.

DATES: Comments must be received on or before March 15, 2013.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Gary D. Wilson, Program Manager, 2300 
East Devon Avenue, Des Plaines, IL, 60018. Telephone Number 847-294-
7631/FAX Number 847-294-7046. Documents reflecting this FAA action may 
be reviewed at this same location by appointment or at the Lewis 
University Airport, George Michas Drive, 1 Executive Terminal, 
Romeoville, Illinois 60446-1806.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: In accordance with section 47107(h) of Title 
49, United States Code, this notice is required to be published in the 
Federal Register 30 days before modifying the land-use assurance that 
requires the property to be used for an aeronautical purpose. The 
proposal consists of Parcel 12-1A-1, totaling 0.029 acres located on 
the west side of airport property. The parcel was purchased with 
Federal funds for land use compatibility and approach protection. 
Following is a legal description of the properties being released 
located in Will County, Illinois, and described as follows:

Parcel 12-1A-1

    A part of the West Half of the Northwest Quarter of Section 17, 
Township 36 North, Range 10 East of the Third Principal Meridian, 
described as follows: the east 25.00 feet of the west 75.00 feet of the 
South 50.00 feet of the West Half of the Northwest Quarter of said 
Section 17, in Will County, Illinois.
    Said Parcel containing 0.029 acres, more or less.

    Issued in Des Plaines, Illinois on, February 5, 2013.
James G. Keefer,
Manager, Chicago Airports District Office, FAA, Great Lakes Region.
[FR Doc. 2013-03336 Filed 2-12-13; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4910-13-P
```