alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
|WELLS FARGO(logo) | Commercial Mortgage ServicingD1050-084, 8th Fl401 South Tryon StreetCharlotte, NC 282021-800-326-1334
|----------------- | -----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------



ANNUAL STATEMENT OF COMPLIANCE



Reference is hereby made
to that certain Pooling and Servicing Agreement dated as of January 1, 2016, by and among CCRE COMMERCIAL MORTGAGE SECURITIES,
L.P., as Depositor, WELLS FARGO BANK, NATIONAL ASSOCIATION, as Master Servicer, CWCAPITAL ASSET MANAGEMENT LLC, as Special Servicer,
WILMINGTON TRUST, NATIONAL ASSOCIATION, as Trustee, and WELLS FARGO BANK, NATIONAL ASSOCIATION, as Certificate Administrator, Paying
Agent, and Custodian, and PARK BRIDGE LENDER SERVICES LLC, as Operating Advisor and Asset Representations Reviewer with respect
to Commercial Mortgage Pass-Through Certificates, CFCRE 2016-C3 (the “Agreement”). Capitalized terms used herein not
otherwise defined shall have the meanings assigned in the Agreement.



Pursuant to Section 10.11 of this
Agreement, I, Leslie Hayton, Managing Director of Commercial Mortgage Services do hereby certify that:



| | 1. | A review of the activities of the Master Servicer
during the period from January 1, 2018 through December 31, 2018 (the “Reporting Period”), and of its performance per
the Agreement during such period has been made under my supervision, and
| | -- | ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------



| | 2. | To the best of my knowledge, based on such review,
the Master Servicer has fulfilled all of its obligations under the Agreement in all material respects throughout the Reporting
Period.
| | -- | -----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------



IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the undersigned has executed
this Certificate as of the 28th day of Februray 2019.



|/s/ Leslie Hayton | 
|----------------- | 



Leslie Hayton

Managing Director

Wells
Fargo Bank



|Wells Fargo Bank, N.A. | Together we’ll go far
|---------------------- | ---------------------
# C_2015221EN.01002102.xml

| 6.7.2015 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 221/21 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

6.7.2015

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 221/21

---

Order of the President of the General Court of 20 May 2015 — Kaddour v Council

(Case T-155/15 R)

((Application for interim measures - Restrictive measures taken against Syria - Freezing of funds and restriction on entry into and transit through the territory of the European Union - Application for suspension of operation of a measure - Failure to comply with the procedural requirements - Inadmissibility))

(2015/C 221/30)

Language of the case: French

Parties

Parties

Applicant: Khaled Kaddour (Damascus, Syria) (represented by: A. Boesch, D. Amaudruz and M. Ponsard, lawyers)

Applicant:

Defendant: Council of the European Union

Defendant:

Re:

Re:

Application for suspension of operation of the measures imposed on the applicant under Council Implementing Regulation (EU) 2015/108 of 26 January 2015 implementing Regulation (EU) No 36/2012 concerning restrictive measures in view of the situation in Syria (OJ 2015 L 20, p. 2), and of Council Implementing Decision (CFSP) 2015/117 of 26 January 2015 implementing Decision 2013/255/CFSP concerning restrictive measures against Syria (OJ 2015 L 20, p. 85).

Operative part of the order

Operative part of the order

| 1. | The application for interim measures is dismissed. |
| --- | --- |

1.

The application for interim measures is dismissed.

| 2. | Costs are reserved. |
| --- | --- |

2.

Costs are reserved.

---
Exhibit
32


Certification
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, to the best of my knowledge, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section
1350, as adopted pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes Oxley Act of 2002,
that:




i.  The Quarterly Report on
Form 10-Q of Sierra Monitor Corporation for the quarterly period ended
September 30, 2010 fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) or
15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 and;




ii. The information contained in such
Form 10-Q fairly presents, in all material respects, the financial condition and
results of operations of Sierra Monitor Corporation.




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 Sierra Monitor Corporation
and will be retained by Sierra Monitor Corporation and furnished to the
Securities and Exchange Commission or its staff upon request.




Date:          
        November 4, 2010
                  By:
                  /s/ Gordon R. ArnoldGordon
      R. ArnoldChief
      Executive OfficerChief
      Financial Officer
# C_2016222EN.01005004.xml

| 20.6.2016 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 222/50 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

20.6.2016

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 222/50

---

Order of the Civil Service Tribunal of 3 May 2016 — Grzebielec v Commission

(Case F-110/15) (1)

(2016/C 222/81)

Language of the case: French

The President of the First Chamber has ordered that the case be removed from the register.

---

(1)  OJ C 328, 5/10/2015, p. 36.

---
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<ARTICLE>                     5
<LEGEND>
     This schedule contains summary financial information extracted from the
     10Q for the quarter ended March 31, 1998 and is qualified in its 
     entirety by reference to such financial statements.
</LEGEND>
       
<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                  9-mos
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                              Jun-30-1998
<PERIOD-END>                                   Mar-31-1998
<CASH>                                           194,000
<SECURITIES>                                           0 
<RECEIVABLES>                                  2,669,000
<ALLOWANCES>                                      83,000
<INVENTORY>                                    7,853,000<F1>
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                              10,890,000
<PP&E>                                        18,193,000
<DEPRECIATION>                                11,528,000
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                17,555,000
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                          3,823,000
<BONDS>                                                0                                     
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                  0                         
<PREFERRED>                                            0
<COMMON>                                       2,826,000
<OTHER-SE>                                     6,045,000
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                  17,555,000
<SALES>                                       19,897,000
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                              20,239,000
<CGS>                                         16,465,000
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                 16,465,000
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                       0
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                       0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                               215,000
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                1,289,000
<INCOME-TAX>                                     438,000
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                              851,000
<DISCONTINUED>                                         0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                        0
<CHANGES>                                              0
<NET-INCOME>                                     851,000
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                        .53
<EPS-DILUTED>                                        .53
<FN>
<F1>Net of LIFO reserve of $1,849,660
</FN>
        

</TABLE>
| (logo) WELLS FARGO | **Commercial Mortgage  Servicing**D1050-084, 8th Floor  401 South Tryon St.  Charlotte, NC 28202  1-800-326-1334 |
|--------------------|------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|

 

 

**ANNUAL STATEMENT OFCOMPLIANCE**

 

 

Reference is hereby made tothat certain Pooling and Servicing Agreement dated as of November 1, 2015, byand among DEUTSCHE MORTGAGE & ASSET RECEIVING CORPORATION, as Depositor,WELLS FARGO BANK, NATIONAL ASSOCIATION, as Master Servicer, LNR PARTNERS, LLC,as Special Servicer, WILMINGTON TRUST, NATIONAL ASSOCIATION, as Trustee, WELLSFARGO BANK, NATIONAL ASSOCIATION, as Certificate Administrator, Paying Agent andCustodian, and PARK BRIDGE LENDER SERVICES LLC, as Operating Advisor withrespect to Commercial Mortgage Pass-Through Certificates, COMM 2015-LC23 (the"Agreement"). Capitalized terms used herein not otherwise definedshall have the meanings assigned in the Agreement.

 

Pursuant to Section 10.11 ofthis Agreement, I, Daniel Bober, Executive Vice President of CommercialMortgage Services do hereby certify that:

 

1. A review of the activities ofthe Master Servicer during the period from January 1, 2016 through December 31,2016 (the “Reporting Period”), and of its performance per theAgreement during such period has been made under my supervision, and

 

2. To the best of myknowledge, based on such review, the Master Servicer has fulfilled all of itsobligations under the Agreement in all material respects throughout theReporting Period.

 

 

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

 

 

| Wells Fargo Bank, N.A. | (logo) Together we’ll  go far |
|------------------------|-------------------------------------|
# C_2017161EN.01002301.xml

| 22.5.2017 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 161/23 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

22.5.2017

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 161/23

---

Judgment of the General Court of 5 April 2017 — France v Commission

(Case T-344/15) (1)

1

((Access to documents - Regulation (EC) No 1049/2001 - Documents sent under the procedure laid down in Directive 98/34/EC - Documents originating from a Member State - Access granted - Exception for the protection of court proceedings - Exception for the protection of the purpose of inspections, investigations or audits - Prior agreement of the Member State))

(2017/C 161/31)

Language of the case: French

Parties

Parties

Applicant: French Republic (represented initially by F. Alabrune, G. de Bergues, D. Colas and F. Fize, and subsequently by D. Colas and B. Fodda, and then by D. Colas, B. Fodda and E. de Moustier, acting as Agents)

Applicant:

Defendant: European Commission (represented by: J. Baquero Cruz and F. Clotuche-Duvieusart, acting as Agents)

Defendant:

Intervener in support of the applicant: Czech Republic (represented by: M. Smolek, T. Müller and J. Vláčil, acting as Agents)

Intervener in support of the applicant:

Re:

Re:

Application based on Article 263 TFEU and seeking the annulment of Commission Decision Ares (2015) 1681819 of 21 April 2015, granting to a citizen access to documents sent by the French Republic in accordance with the procedure laid down in Directive 98/34/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council of 22 June 1998 laying down a procedure for the provision of information in the field of technical standards and regulations (OJ 1998 L 204, p. 37).

Operative part of the judgment

Operative part of the judgment

The Court:

| 1. | Dismisses the action; |
| --- | --- |

1.

Dismisses the action;

| 2. | Orders the French Republic to pay the costs, including those relating to the action for interim measures; |
| --- | --- |

2.

Orders the French Republic to pay the costs, including those relating to the action for interim measures;

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

3.

Orders the Czech Republic to bear its own costs.

---

(1)  OJ C 270, 17.8.2015.

1

---
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<ARTICLE> 5
<LEGEND>
This Schedule Contains Summary Financial Information Extracted From The
Consolidated Condensed Financial Statements As Of September 30, 1996
And For The Nine Months Then Ended And Is Qualified In Its Entirety By
Reference To Such Financial Statments.
</LEGEND>
<MULTIPLIER> 1000
       
<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   9-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          DEC-31-1996
<PERIOD-END>                               SEP-30-1996
<CASH>                                           17806
<SECURITIES>                                         0
<RECEIVABLES>                                    89737
<ALLOWANCES>                                         0
<INVENTORY>                                     714843
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                                     0
<PP&E>                                               0
<DEPRECIATION>                                       0
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                  958683
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                                0
<BONDS>                                         108836
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                       3072
<COMMON>                                           114
<OTHER-SE>                                      357756
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                    958683
<SALES>                                              0
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                                883670
<CGS>                                           729644
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                   832872
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                     0
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                     0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                                1170
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                  49628
<INCOME-TAX>                                     18114
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                              31514
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                    $31514
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                    $2.63
<EPS-DILUTED>                                    $2.64
        

</TABLE>
No. 40345.

#### Protest 844357-G of New York Merchandise Co., Inc. (New York).

Opinion by

Sullivan, J.

In accordance with stipulation of counsel and on the authority of *United States*v. *Woolworth*(24 C. C. P. A. 338, T. D. 48770) and Abstract 27179 the balls in question were held dutiable at 30 percent under paragraph 1502 as claimed.
H. Con. Res. 259 Agreed to November 15, 2007 

One Hundred Tenth Congress 

of the 

United States of America 

AT THE FIRST SESSION 

Begun and held at the City of Washington on Thursday, 

the fourth day of January, two thousand and seven 

Concurrent Resolution 

Resolved by the House of Representatives (the Senate concurring), That when the House adjourns on the legislative day of 

Thursday, November 15, 2007, or Friday, November 16, 2007, on 

a motion offered pursuant to this concurrent resolution by its 

Majority Leader or his designee, it stand adjourned until 2 p.m. 

on Tuesday, December 4, 2007, or until the time of any reassembly 

pursuant to section 2 of this concurrent resolution, whichever occurs 

first; and that when the Senate recesses or adjourns on any day 

from Thursday, November 15, 2007, through Thursday, November 

29, 2007, on a motion offered pursuant to this concurrent resolution 

by its Majority Leader or his designee, it stand recessed or 

adjourned until noon on Monday, December 3, 2007, or such other 

time on that day as may be specified by its Majority Leader or 

his designee in the motion to recess or adjourn, or until the time 

of any reassembly pursuant to section 2 of this concurrent resolution, whichever occurs first. 

SEC. 2. The Speaker of the House and the Majority Leader 

of the Senate, or their respective designees, acting jointly after 

consultation with the Minority Leader of the House and the 

Minority Leader of the Senate, shall notify the Members of the 

House and the Senate, respectively, to reassemble at such place 

and time as they may designate if, in their opinion, the public 

interest shall warrant it. 

Attest: 

Clerk of the House of Representatives. 

Attest: 

Secretary of the Senate.
#### Burama JAITEH, Petitioner, v. Alberto GONZALES,* Attorney General of the United States, the Office of Homeland Security, Respondents.

Docket No. 03-4798.

United States Court of Appeals, Second Circuit.

Sept. 2, 2005.

Mark T. Kenmore, Buffalo, NY., for Petitioner.

Lora M. Taylor, Assistant United States Attorney (Frank D. Whitney, United States Attorney for the Eastern District of North Carolina; Anne M. Hayes, Assistant U.S. Attorney, on the brief), Raleigh, NC., for Respondents.

Present: WALKER, Chief Judge, CALABRESI, and STRAUB, Circuit Judges.

*

 Alberto Gonzales is substituted for his predecessor, John Ashcroft, as Attorney General of the United States. *See*Fed. R.App. P. 43(c)(2).

SUMMARY ORDER

UPON DUE CONSIDERATION, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED, ADJUDGED AND DECREED that the order of the Board of Immigration Appeals is AFFIRMED and the petition for review is DENIED.

Petitioner Burama Jaiteh seeks review of a March 26, 2003, Board of Immigration Appeals (“BIA”) order summarily affirming the December 12, 2000, decision of an immigration judge (“U”) denying Jaiteh’s applications for asylum and withholding of removal. Jaiteh argues that the IJ erred in finding that (1) the treatment he claims *386to have been subjected to in The Gambia did not constitute persecution; (2) he had not demonstrated a well-founded fear of future persecution if returned to The Gambia; and (3) his testimony was generally not credible. Familiarity with the facts and procedural history is assumed. We affirm the BIA order and deny Jaiteh’s petition.

Where the BIA has adopted the reasoning of the IJ or affirmed without opinion, we may review the IJ opinion directly. *See Secaida-Rosales v. INS,*331 F.3d 297, 305 (2d Cir.2003). When reviewing the decision of the IJ, “the administrative findings of fact are conclusive unless any reasonable adjudicator would be compelled to conclude to the contrary.” 8 U.S.C. § 1252(b)(4)(B).

During proceedings before the IJ, Jaiteh claimed that the Muslim religious leader of his home village, or “Imam,” had publicly announced that Jaiteh was no longer a Muslim after it was discovered that he had joined the Ahmadiyyas, an Islamic sect, and that he was thereafter forbidden from worshiping in the village mosque. Jaiteh acknowledged, however, that he was not residing in his home village when he joined the Ahmadiyyas, having previously moved to a nearby city, and that he had been free to practice his faith at the mosque there at the time he left The Gambia. Whatever the situation may be in his home village, there is nothing in the record indicating that Jaiteh, as a member of the Ahmadiyyas, would be persecuted by the Gambian government or anyone else if returned to The Gambia. Therefore, the IJ’s determination that Jaiteh does not have a well-founded fear of persecution is a reasonable one.

We have carefully considered Jaiteh’s remaining arguments and find them to be without merit.

For the reasons set forth above, the decision of the Board of Immigration Appeals is hereby AFFIRMED and the petition for review is DENIED.
No. 46357.

#### Petition 5376-R of Collin & Gissel (Galveston).

Opinion by

Keefe, J.

It was established at the trial that before importation the classification of the filter was discussed with the collector’s office and the entire transaction was fully disclosed to customs officials. An appeal to reap-praisement had been made but due to the fact that it was impossible to obtain evidence from abroad, the appeal was abandoned, although it appears that.at the present time they would be able to establish the facts desired at that time. On the record presented the court was of the opinion that the importers were diligent in endeavoring to ascertain all the facts in the case and that there was no intention to .deceive thé.'.appráis'er'a'á to the value of the merchandise. The petition was therefore granted.
# C_2015354EN.01005702.xml

| 26.10.2015 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 354/57 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

26.10.2015

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 354/57

---

Action brought on 22 August 2015 — ZZ v Commission

(Case F-122/15)

(2015/C 354/70)

Language of the case: French

Parties

Parties

Applicant: ZZ (represented by: S. Orlandi and T. Martin, lawyers)

Applicant:

Defendant: European Commission

Defendant:

Subject-matter and description of the proceedings

Subject-matter and description of the proceedings

The annulment of the decision transferring the applicant’s pension rights to the European Union pension scheme, which applies the new general implementing provisions (GIP) for Article 11(2) of Annex VIII to the Staff Regulations.

Form of order sought

Form of order sought

The applicant claims that the Tribunal should:

| — | Declare illegal Article 9 of the general implementing provisions for Article 11(2) of Annex VIII to the Staff Regulations; |
| --- | --- |

—

Declare illegal Article 9 of the general implementing provisions for Article 11(2) of Annex VIII to the Staff Regulations;

| — | Annul the decision of 6 January 2015 confirming the transfer of the pension rights acquired prior to his entry to the service pursuant to the general implementing provisions adopted on 3 March 2011 for Article 11(2) of Annex VIII to the Staff Regulations; |
| --- | --- |

—

Annul the decision of 6 January 2015 confirming the transfer of the pension rights acquired prior to his entry to the service pursuant to the general implementing provisions adopted on 3 March 2011 for Article 11(2) of Annex VIII to the Staff Regulations;

| — | Order the Commission to pay the costs. |
| --- | --- |

—

Order the Commission to pay the costs.

---
#### Copeland & Thompson, Inc. *v.*United States

No. 6446.

Entry No. 701464, etc.

Invoices dated Stoke on Trent, England, June 1943, etc.

Certified June 1943, etc.

Entered at New York, N. Y., July 16, 1943, etc.

(Decided October 17, 1946)

*Benjamin A. Levett*for the plaintiff.

*Paul P. Bao,*Assistant Attorney General, for the defendant.

Keefe, Judge:

This appeal for reappraisement has been submitted for decision upon the following stipulation of counsel for the parties hereto:

(Stipulation omitted.)

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 appraised *379values, less the additions made by the importer on entry because of advances by the appraiser in similar cases.

Judgment will be rendered accordingly.