alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
Exhibit 99.1


      CERTIFICATION OF CHIEF EXECUTIVE OFFICER AND CHIEF FINANCIAL OFFICER
                                   PURSUANT TO
                             18 U.S.C. SECTION 1350,
                             AS ADOPTED PURSUANT TO
                  SECTION 906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002

I, Gordon R. Arnold,  certify,  pursuant to 18 U.S.C.  Section  1350, as adopted
pursuant to Section 906 of the  Sarbanes-Oxley  Act of 2002,  that the Quarterly
Report of Sierra  Monitor  Corporation  on Form 10-QSB for the quarterly  period
ended June 30, 2002 fully  complies  with the  requirements  of Section 13(a) or
15(d) of the Securities  Exchange Act of 1934 and that information  contained in
such  Form  10-QSB  fairly  presents  in all  material  respects  the  financial
condition and results of operations of Sierra Monitor Corporation.

                                    By:       /s/ Gordon R. Arnold
                                       ----------------------------------------
                                    Name:  Gordon R. Arnold
                                    Title: Chief Executive Officer

I, Gordon R. Arnold,  certify,  pursuant to 18 U.S.C.  Section  1350, as adopted
pursuant to Section 906 of the  Sarbanes-Oxley  Act of 2002,  that the Quarterly
Report of Sierra  Monitor  Corporation  on Form 10-QSB for the quarterly  period
ended June 30, 2002 fully  complies  with the  requirements  of Section 13(a) or
15(d) of the Securities  Exchange Act of 1934 and that information  contained in
such  Form  10-QSB  fairly  presents  in all  material  respects  the  financial
condition and results of operations of Sierra Monitor Corporation.

                                     By:        /s/ Gordon R. Arnold
                                        ----------------------------------------
                                     Name: Gordon R. Arnold
                                     Title:   Chief Financial Officer


                                                                   Page 13 of 13
EXHIBIT
32.2








CERTIFICATION
UNDER SECTION 906


OF
THE


SARBANES-OXLEY
ACT OF 2002








In
connection with the quarterly report on Form 10-Q of Unico American Corporation
(the "Company") for the period ended September 30, 2009, as filed with the
Securities and Exchange Commission (the "Report"), I, Lester A. Aaron, Treasurer
and Chief Financial Officer of the Company, hereby certify, pursuant to 18
U.S.C. Section 1350, as adopted pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley
Act of 2002, that to the best of my knowledge:





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.











/s/  Lester A.
Aaron


Name:                    Lester
A. Aaron


Title:                      Treasurer,
Chief Financial Officer


Date:                      November
10, 2009











A signed
original of this written statement required by Section 906, or other document
authenticating, acknowledging, or otherwise adopting the signature that appears
in typed form within the electronic version of this written statement required
by Section 906, has been provided to Unico American Corporation, and will be
retained by Unico American Corporation, and furnished to the Securities and
Exchange Commission or its staff upon request.
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF OHIO

EASTERN DIVISION

JOSHUA COPENHAVER NELSON,

Plaintiff,

v.

WANZA JACKSON, et al.,

Defendants.

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

Case No. 2:12-cv-1167

Judge Graham

Magistrate Judge King

ORDER

On March 19, 2013, the United States Magistrate Judge issued an 

Order and Report and Recommendation, Doc. No. 34, recommending that 

that plaintiff’s motion for entry of default, Doc. No. 14, be denied. 

The parties were specifically advised of their right to object to the 

Report and Recommendation and of the consequences of their failure to 

do so. There has nevertheless been no objection to the Report and 

Recommendation.

The Report and Recommendation is hereby ADOPTED and AFFIRMED. 

Plaintiff’s motion for entry of default, Doc. No. 14, is DENIED.

 s/ James L Graham 

 James L. Graham

United States District Judge

Case: 2:12-cv-01167-JLG-NMK Doc #: 38 Filed: 04/11/13 Page: 1 of 1 PAGEID #: <pageID>
<PAGE>   1




                                                                  Exhibit 10.137



                                December 1, 1999



Heller Financial, Inc.
Attn: Portfolio Manager, Vacation Ownership
500 West Monroe St., 30th Fl.
Chicago, IL 60661

     Re:  Master Bluegreen Resort Loan Facility, dated as of October 20, 1998,
          Between Bluegreen Corporation and Heller Financial, Inc. (the
          "Existing Master Loan Facility")

Dear Ladies and Gentlemen:

     We refer to the Existing Master Loan Facility. In connection with the
closing of the Resort Loan, as such term is defined in the Existing Master Loan
Facility, in respect of Shore Crest Vacation Villas II Horizontal Property
Regime in North Myrtle Beach, South Carolina, we hereby request that you agree
to the following modifications to the Existing Master Loan Facility:

               1.  The reference in Section 1.1(a) of the Existing Master Loan
          Facility and the reference in the defined term "Resort Loan Limit" in
          the Existing Master Loan Facility to "$25,000,000" shall be increased
          to "$28,000,000."

               2.  The reference in Section 1.5 of the Existing Master Loan
          Facility to "$250,000" shall be increased to "$280,000" and the
          reference in said Section to "$150,000" shall be increased to
          "$180,000."

     It is the intention of the undersigned, with your agreement to the same,
to increase the overall amount of the Existing Master Loan Facility to
$28,000,000, and to, contemporaneously with your agreement to the same, pay to
you the full 1% commitment fee in respect thereof of $30,000.

     Except as explicitly amended by this letter, the Existing Master Loan
Facility remains in full force and effect under its terms as in effect
immediately prior to the effectiveness of this letter agreement.

     If you are in agreement with the above, please execute the copy of the
letter attached hereto, whereupon this letter shall become an agreement between
us and shall modify the Existing Master Loan Facility as set forth above.

                                                BLUEGREEN CORPORATION


                                                By: /s/ ALLAN J. HERZ
                                                   -----------------------------
                                                   Name:  Allan J. Herz
                                                   Title: Vice President



AGREED TO:

HELLER FINANCIAL, INC.


By: /s/ DENNIS K. HOLLAND
   ----------------------------
   Name:  Dennis K. Holland
   Title: Senior Vice President
(Reap. Dec. 9385)

#### Finwood Industries, Inc. *v.*United States

Entry No. 8540, etc.

(Decided April 7, 1959)

*Siegel, Mandell & Davidson*for the plaintiff.

*George Cochran Dowb,*Assistant Attorney General, for the defendant.

Mollison, Judge:

The appeals for reappraisement enumerated in the attached schedule of reappraisements relate to plywood, exported from Finland in the year 1956, and were submitted for decision upon stipulation of counsel for the parties limited to the items marked with the letter “A” and checked C. J. O’C. by Examiner Charles J. O’Connor on the invoices, and as to which the merchandise was advanced in value and appraised on the basis of home market value.

On the agreed facts as to such merchandise, I find foreign value, as defined in section 402(c), Tariff Act of 1930, as amended, to be the proper basis for the determination of the value of the said items of merchandise, and that such value, in each instance, was the appraised value, less 4 per centum, packed.

As to all items of merchandise where appraisement was made on the basis of the entered invoice unit values the said appeals, having been abandoned, are dismissed.

Judgment will issue accordingly.
(Reap. Dec. 8828)

#### Liberty Brush Co., Inc., et al. *v.*United States

Entry No. 881564, etc.

(Decided June 12, 1957)

*Cobb & Weissbrodt*for the plaintiffs.

*George Cochran Doub,*Assistant Attorney General, for the defendant.

Mollison, Judge:

The appeals for reappraisement listed in schedule "A,” hereto attached and made a part hereof, have been submitted for decision upon the following stipulation of counsel for the parties hereto:

> It is hereby stipulated and agreed by counsel for the respective parties, subject to the approval of the Court, that the merchandise involved in the appeals listed in Schedule “A” hereto attached, and made a part of this stipulation, consist of paint brushes exported from England.

> That at the time of exportation thereof, such or similar paint brushes were not being freely offered for sale for home consumption in England, or for export to the United States, or for sale in the principal markets of the United States, in accordance with the provisions of Section 402 (c), (d), and (e), of the Tariff Act of 1930, as amended.

> That at the time of exportation thereof, the “cost of production” of such paint brushes, as defined in Section 402 (f) of the aforesaid Act, is as shown in the respective appeals for the particular paint brushes described in Schedule B, hereto attached and made a part hereof.

> That these appeals for reappraisement are submitted for decision upon this stipulation.

On the agreed facts I find the cost of production, as that value is defined in section 402 (f) of the Tariff Act of 1930, to be the proper basis for the determination of the value of the merchandise identified in schedule “B,” hereto attached and made a part hereof, and that such values are as shown in said schedule “B.”

Insofar as the appeals relate to all other merchandise they are hereby dismissed.

Judgment will be entered accordingly.
EXHIBIT 32.1

                              TWL CORPORATION

             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 TWL Corporation (the
"Company") on Form 10-QSB for the period ended September 30, 2006 as filed
with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the
"Report"), I, Dennis J. Cagan, Chief Executive 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, to the best of my knowledge:

     1.   The Report fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a)
          or 15(d) of the Securities and 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 20, 2006            /S/ DENNIS J. CAGAN
                                   --------------------------------------
                                   Dennis J. Cagan
                                   Chief Executive Officer


     A signed original of this written statement required by Section 906
     has been provided to TWL Corporation and will be retained by it and
     furnished to the Securities and Exchange Commission or its staff upon
     request.
No. 48693.

#### Protest 835632-G of Katz-Konrad Hat Co. (St. Louis).

Opinion by

Tilson, J.

The record showed that certain of the items consist of hats similar to those in *Caradine*v. *United States*(9 Cust. Ct. 69, C. D. 664). In accordance therewith they were held dutiable at *121⁄2*percent under paragraph 1504 (b) (5) and the Netherlands Trade Agreement (T. D. 48075) as claimed.
```

[Congressional Bills 109th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[S. Res. 475 Agreed to Senate (ATS)]

109th CONGRESS
  2d Session
S. RES. 475

  Proclaiming the week of May 21 through May 27, 2006, as ``National 
                          Public Works Week''.

_______________________________________________________________________

                   IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES

                              May 11, 2006

   Mr. Inhofe (for himself and Mr. Jeffords) submitted the following 
             resolution; which was considered and agreed to

_______________________________________________________________________

                               RESOLUTION

 
  Proclaiming the week of May 21 through May 27, 2006, as ``National 
                          Public Works Week''.

Whereas public works infrastructure, facilities, and services are of vital 
        importance to the health, safety, and well-being of the people of the 
        United States;
Whereas those facilities and services could not be provided without the 
        dedicated efforts of public works professionals, engineers, and 
        administrators who represent State and local governments throughout the 
        United States;
Whereas those individuals design, build, operate, and maintain the 
        transportation systems, water supply infrastructure, sewage and refuse 
        disposal systems, public buildings, and other structures and facilities 
        that are vital to the citizens and communities of the United States; and
Whereas it is in the interest of the public for citizens and civic leaders to 
        understand the role that public infrastructure plays in--

    (1) protecting the environment;

    (2) improving public health and safety;

    (3) contributing to economic vitality; and

    (4) enhancing the quality of life of every community of the United 
States: Now, therefore, be it

    Resolved, That the Senate--
            (1) proclaims the week of May 21 through May 27, 2006, as 
        ``National Public Works Week'';
            (2) recognizes and celebrates the important contributions 
        that public works professionals make every day to improve--
                    (A) the public infrastructure of the United States; 
                and
                    (B) the communities that those professionals serve; 
                and
            (3) urges citizens and communities throughout the United 
        States to join with representatives of the Federal Government 
        and the American Public Works Association in activities and 
        ceremonies that are designed--
                    (A) to pay tribute to the public works 
                professionals of the Nation; and
                    (B) to recognize the substantial contributions that 
                public works professionals make to the Nation.
                                 <all>
```
(Reap. Dec. 9578)

#### Frank P. Dow Co., Inc. *v.*Untied States

Entry No. 263, etc.

(Decided January 7, 1960)

*Stein & Shostak*for the plaintiff.

*George Cochran Doub,*Assistant Attorney General, for the defendant.

Wilson, Judge:

These appeals for reappraisement listed in the schedule of cases, hereto attached and made a part hereof, have been submitted for decision upon the following stipulation of counsel for the respective parties:

> IT IS HEREBY STIPULATED AND AGREED by and between counsel for the respective parties hereto, subject to the approval of the Court, as to the merchandise covered by the Appeals for Reappraisement enumerated in the attached Schedule of Cases, that, at the time of exportation to the United States, the prices at which such or similar merchandise was freely offered for sale to all purchasers in the principal market of the country from which exported in the usual wholesale quantity and in the ordinary course of trade for *532exportation to the United States, including *the*cost of containers and coverings of whatever nature and all other costs, charges and expenses incident to placing the merchandise in condition packed ready for shipment to the United States were the appraised values less additions made to meet the advances by the Appraiser in similar cases covering the nondutiable so-called f.o.b. charges for inland freight, insurance premium, storage, hauling and lighterage, petties, etc., added by the importer on entry.

> IT IS FURTHER STIPULATED AND AGREED that there were no higher foreign values for merchandise such or similar to the merchandise covered by the Appeals for Reappraisement enumerated in the attached Schedule of Oases, at the time of exportation thereof.

> IT IS FURTHER STIPULATED AND AGREED that the Appeals for Re-appraisement enumerated in the attached Schedule of Oases may be deemed submitted for decision on the foregoing stipulation.

On the agreed facts, I find and hold the export value, as that value is defined in section 402(d) of the Tariff Act of 1930, to be the proper basis for the determination of the value of the merchandise involved, and that such values are the appraised values, less the additions made under duress to meet the advances by the appraiser in similar cases covering the nondutiable so-called f.o.b. charges for inland freight, insurance premiums, storage, hauling and lighterage, petties, etc., added by the importer on entry.

Judgment will be entered accordingly.
| (logo) WELLS FARGO | **Commercial Mortgage  Servicing**D1050-084, 8th Floor  401 South Tryon St.  Charlotte, NC 28202  1-800-326-1334 |
|--------------------|------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|

 

 

ANNUAL STATEMENT OF COMPLIANCE

 

Reference is hereby made tothat certain Pooling and Servicing Agreement dated as of June 1, 2016, by andamong BANC OF AMERICA MERRILL LYNCH COMMERCIAL MORTGAGE, INC, as Depositor,WELLS FARGO BANK, NATIONAL ASSOCIATION, as Master Servicer, RIALTO CAPITALADVISORS, LLC, as Special Servicer, WELLS FARGO BANK, NATIONAL ASSOCIATION, asCertificate Administrator, WILMINGTON TRUST, NATIONAL ASSOCIATION, asTrustee  and PARK BRIDGE LENDER SERVICES LLC, as Operating Advisor andAsset Representations Reviewer with respect to Commercial Mortgage Pass-ThroughCertificates, Series 2016-UBS10 (the "Agreement"). Capitalized termsused herein not otherwise defined shall have the meanings assigned in theAgreement.

 

Pursuant to Section 11.09 ofthis Agreement, I, Daniel Bober, Executive Vice President of CommercialMortgage Services do hereby certify that:

 

1.       A review of the activities of the  Master Servicer during the period fromJune 1, 2016 through December 31, 2016,  and of its performance per theAgreement during such period has been made under my supervision, and 

 

2.       To the best of my knowledge, based on such review, the Master Servicer, hasfulfilled all of its obligations under this Agreement in all material respectsthroughout the period June 1, 2016 through December 31, 2016.

 

 

IN WITNESS WHEREOF, theundersigned has executed this Certificate as of the 28th day of February 2017.

 

 

/s/ Daniel Bober

Daniel Bober

Executive Vice President

 

 

| Wells Fargo Bank, N.A. | (logo) Together we’ll  go far |
|------------------------|-------------------------------------|
#### J. T. Steeb & Co., Inc. *v.*United States

No. 7592.

Entry No. 728.

Invoice dated Longton, England', July 21, 1945.

Certified September 1945.

Entered at Seattle, Wash., November 5, 1945.

(Decided May 24, 1948)

*Lawrence, Tuttle & Harper (Walter I. Carpeneti*of counsel) for the plaintiff.

*Paul P. Rao,*Assistant Attorney General *(Joseph E. Weil,*special attorney), for the defendant.

Cline, Judge:

This is an appeal for reappraisement of decorated chinaware imported from Great Britain. It was entered at the invoice values less nondutiable charges plus 5 per centum deducted as a trade discount and was appraised at the invoice unit values, plus 65 per centum, less *2%*per centum, plus packing at £1/13/7 per crate.

At the trial counsel for the plaintiff stated:

> Mb. Carpeneti: If your Honor please, in that case the importer made entry of the merchandise without including therein a packing charge.

> At this time I offer to stipulate that the packing charge per crate is 28 shillings; for the 6 crates, 8 pounds and 8 shillings; and that the said packing was inadvertently omitted upon making entry.

> Mr. Weil: The Government-so stipulates.

On the record herein and on the agreed facts I find the export value as that value is defined in section 402 (d) of the Tariff Act of 1930, to be the proper basis for the determination of the value of the merchandise here involved, and that such values are the invoice unit values, plus 65 per centum, less *2%*per centum, plus packing at 28 shillings per crate.

Judgment will bo rendered accordingly.
#### Fletcher v. Gushee.

A negotiable note ill the hands of an. indorsee, “ *to whom it came before the pay-day, for a valuable consideration, without notice that the malcer had any objection to the payment of it,"*is good against the maker, although it was obtained from the payee and put into circulation by fraud.

Assumpsit by the indorsee against the maker of a negotiable note payable at four months. The case states, that *“ it*came to the hands of the plaintiff before the pay-day, for a valuable consideration, without notice, that the maker had any objection to the payment of it.”

The defendant offered to prove, that it was an accommodation note, for which he received no value, and that it was obtained from the payee and put into circulation by fraud.

The trial was before Howard, J., who rejected the evidence. The case was then taken from the jury and submitted to the court, upon an agreement that, if the offered evidence was rightfully rejected, the defendant should be defaulted ; otherwise the action to stand for trial.

*Bachelder,*for the plaintiff.

*Whitmore,*for the defendant.

As the note was obtained from the payee and put into circulation by fraud, the want of consideration is a defence open *588to the defendant, unless the plaintiff, taking the onus upon himself, shows, that it came to him *in the regular course of business,*and that it came to him *without knowledge of the fraud.*

Neither of these facts has he even attempted to show. *Aldrich*v. *Warren,*16 Maine, 465; *Munroe*v. *Cooper,*5 Pick. 412.

Howard, J.,

orally.—The plaintiff was the *bona fide*holder, for value, and before the maturity of the note. The evidence was, therefore, rightfully rejected.

*Defendant defaulted.*