alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
Texas-New Mexico Power Company

577 N. Garden Ridge Blvd.

Lewisville, Texas 75067

LOGO

EXHIBIT 32.5

CERTIFICATION PURSUANT TO 18 U.S.C. § 1350, AS ADOPTED PURSUANT TO § 906 OF THE

SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002

In connection with the Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q for the period ended June 30, 2010, for Texas-New Mexico Power Company
(Company), as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on August 9, 2010 (Report), I, Patricia K. Collawn, President and Chief Executive Officer of the Company, certify pursuant to 18 U.S.C. §1350, as
adopted pursuant to § 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that:



| | (1) | the Report fully complies with the requirements of § 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: August 9, 2010 |  | By: |  | /s/ Patricia K.
Collawn              
|                     |  |     |  | Patricia K. Collawn                  
|                     |  |     |  | President and Chief Executive Officer
|                     |  |     |  | Texas-New Mexico Power Company
HHF New Jersey Date: October 1, 2018

A-1

SCHEDULE A

BASIC INFORMATION

Eligible Entity Information:

Name of the Eligible Entity: New Jersey Housing and Mortgage Finance 

Agency1

Corporate or other organizational form: body, politic and corporate of the State of

New Jersey established and existing under 

the New Jersey Statutes Annotated (N.J.S.A.) 

§ 55:14K et. seq.

Jurisdiction of organization: New Jersey 

Notice Information:

HFA Information:

Name of HFA: New Jersey Housing and Mortgage Finance 

Agency

Organizational form: body, politic and corporate of the State of 

New Jersey established and existing under 

the New Jersey Statutes Annotated (N.J.S.A.) 

§ 55:14 et. seq.

Date of Application: September 1, 2010

Date of Action Plan: September 1, 2010 

Notice Information:

Program Participation Cap: $415,512,054.00

Portion of Program Participation Cap

Representing Original HHF Funds: N/A

Portion of Program Participation Cap

Representing Unemployment HHF Funds: $112,200,637.00

1 References in the Agreement to the term "HFA" shall mean the New Jersey Housing and Mortgage Finance 

Agency ("NJHMFA") in its capacity as an HFA as such term is used in the Agreement; references in the Agreement

to the term "Eligible Entity" shall mean NJHMFA, in its capacity as Eligible Entity as such term is used in the 

Agreement.
HHF New Jersey Date: October 1, 2018

A-2

Rounds 1-4 Funding Allocation: $300,548,144.00

Round 5 Funding Allocation: $114,963,910.00

Program Funds: $370,482,064.00

Permitted Expenses: $45,029,990.00

Closing Date: September 23, 2010

First Amendment Date: September 29, 2010

Second Amendment Date: December 16, 2010

Third Amendment Date: August 31, 2011

Fourth Amendment Date: January 25, 2012

Fifth Amendment Date: August 24, 2012

Sixth Amendment Date: October 30, 2013

Seventh Amendment Date: April 11, 2014

Eighth Amendment Date: May 21, 2015

Ninth Amendment Date: June 28, 2016

Eligible Entity Depository Account Information: See account information set forth in the

Depository Account Control Agreement 

between Treasury and Eligible Entity 

regarding the HHF Program.
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<ARTICLE> 5
<LEGEND>
This schedule contains summary financial information extracted from the
consolidated statement of income and consolidated balance sheet and is
qualified in its entirety by reference to such financial statements.
</LEGEND>
<CIK> 0000021212
<NAME> COACHMEN INDUSTRIES, INC.
<MULTIPLIER> 1000
       
<S>                      <C>               <C>  
<PERIOD-TYPE>            6-MOS             6-MOS     
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>        DEC-31-1998       DEC-31-1997<F1> 
<PERIOD-END>             JUN-30-1998       JUN-30-1997
<CASH>                        60,225            81,335
<SECURITIES>                  21,061                 0
<RECEIVABLES>                 30,524            28,198
<ALLOWANCES>                   1,247             1,069
<INVENTORY>                   81,021            64,580        
<CURRENT-ASSETS>             196,540           178,085        
<PP&E>                        98,523            76,208        
<DEPRECIATION>                38,328            32,102        
<TOTAL-ASSETS>               276,702           245,886        
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>         53,816            49,425        
<BONDS>                       10,800            13,261                
<COMMON>                      72,348            70,477 
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>              0                 0 
<PREFERRED>                        0                 0 
<OTHER-SE>                   132,905           103,796 
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY> 276,702           245,886 
<SALES>                      376,707           327,474 
<TOTAL-REVENUES>             376,707           327,474 
<CGS>                        323,136           283,899 
<TOTAL-COSTS>                355,835           312,441 
<OTHER-EXPENSES>              (2,521)           (1,670)
<LOSS-PROVISION>                 181               175  
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>               803               795  
<INCOME-PRETAX>               23,392            16,703  
<INCOME-TAX>                   7,770             5,854  
<INCOME-CONTINUING>           15,622            10,849  
<DISCONTINUED>                     0                 0  
<EXTRAORDINARY>                    0                 0  
<CHANGES>                          0                 0             
<NET-INCOME>                  15,622            10,849  
<EPS-PRIMARY>                    .90               .63  
<EPS-DILUTED>                    .89               .62  
<FN>
<F1>RESTATED
</FN>
        

</TABLE>
<TABLE> <S> <C>



<ARTICLE>                               5
<LEGEND>                                This  schedule   contains   summary
                                        financial   information   extracted
                                        from   the   Balance    Sheet   and
                                        Statement   of    Operations    and
                                        Comprehensive Loss and is qualified
                                        in its  entirety  by  reference  to
                                        such financial statements.

</LEGEND>
<CIK>                         0000021610
<NAME>                        RANGER INDUSTRIES, INC.
       
<S>                                            <C>
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                              Dec-31-1998
<PERIOD-START>                                 Jan-01-1998
<PERIOD-END>                                   Jun-30-1998
<PERIOD-TYPE>                                  6-mos
<CASH>                                         752,973
<SECURITIES>                                         0
<RECEIVABLES>                                    2,838
<ALLOWANCES>                                         0
<INVENTORY>                                          0
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                               763,555
<PP&E>                                               0
<DEPRECIATION>                                       0
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                 763,555
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                           26,248
<BONDS>                                              0
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                        47,886
<OTHER-SE>                                     689,421
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                   763,555
<SALES>                                              0
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                                     0
<CGS>                                                0
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                   44,809
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                     0
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                     0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                             (12,890)
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                (31,919)
<INCOME-TAX>                                     4,600
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                            (36,519)
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                   (36,519)
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                     (.01)
<EPS-DILUTED>                                     (.01)
        


</TABLE>
EXHIBIT 34.1





ATTESTATION REPORT ON ASSESSMENT OF COMPLIANCE WITH


SERVICING CRITERIA FOR ASSET-BACKED SECURITIES





REPORT OF INDEPENDENT REGISTERED PUBLIC ACCOUNTING FIRM





To the Board of Directors and Shareholders


Entergy Texas, Inc.


The Woodlands, Texas





We have examined management's assertion, included in the accompanying Report on Assessment of Compliance with Servicing Criteria For Asset-Backed Securities, that Entergy Texas, Inc. (the "Company") complied with the servicing criteria set forth in Item 1122(d) of the Securities and Exchange Commission's Regulation AB applicable for Entergy Texas Restoration Funding, LLC’s Senior Secured Transition Bonds (the “Securities”) as of and for the year ended December 31, 2017, excluding criteria in Items 1122(d)(1)(ii), 1122(d)(1)(iii), 1122(d)(1)(iv), 1122(d)(2)(iii), 1122(d)(2)(vi), 1122(d)(4)(iii), 1122(d)(4)(v), 1122(d)(4)(ix), 1122(d)(4)(x), 1122(d)(4)(xi), 1122(d)(4)(xii), 1122(d)(4)(xiii), and 1122(d)(4)(xv), which management has determined are not applicable to the activities performed by the Company with respect to the Securities. Management is responsible for the Company's compliance with the servicing criteria. Our responsibility is to express an opinion on management's assertion about the Company's compliance with the servicing criteria based on our examination.





Our examination was conducted in accordance with the standards of the Public Company Accounting Oversight Board (United States), and, accordingly, included examining, on a test basis, evidence about the Company's compliance with the applicable servicing criteria, including tests on a sample basis of the servicing activities related to the Securities, determining whether the Company performed those selected activities in compliance with the servicing criteria during the specified period, and performing such other procedures as we considered necessary in the circumstances. Our procedures were limited to selected servicing activities performed by the Company during the period covered by this report . Further, an examination is not designed to detect noncompliance arising from errors that may have occurred prior to the period specified above that may have affected the balances or amounts calculated or reported by the Company during the period covered by this report. We believe that our examination provides a reasonable basis for our opinion. Our examination does not provide a legal determination on the Company's compliance with the servicing criteria.





In our opinion, management's assertion that the Company complied with the aforementioned applicable servicing criteria as of and for the year ended December 31, 2017 for Entergy Texas Restoration Funding, LLC’s Senior Secured Transition Bonds is fairly stated, in all material respects.





/s/ Deloitte & Touche LLP





New Orleans, Louisiana


March 22, 2018
I

FRANKGRt:i,,\t;x

AUSSA BERRY

Fil"St \Vard CTUnli-UiOn('rS

DIANA m:WITT

l'ArrY TUII~

Second "lard Commissioners

CITY OF LEWISTOWN JIM DANIELS

Park and Rccrea: ion Director

Kt;VIN MYI Rl':

City ~l.".grl

MONTE BO :rrGER

Cit), Attorney

NIKKIIlRl'~IMOND

FiuiintiillOfficer

cony IlIlWWEU,

Chief of Police

JASON M,\NLEY

Fire Chid

GA YU; DON,EY

1l~;Tl! PliTNA~1

Third Ward Commtsstenera

!lick Po" I

At-Large CommiuiQl\(,I'

ROGt:H KRUC'KENIlEHG

Director of Puhllc \Vorks

KELLYANNE TERRY

Library Director

DUANE FERDINAND

Ptann~t1g Director

305 W, Watson St. Lewistown, Montana 59457

(406) 535· 1760 Fax (406) 535·3323

July 2,2013

Dennis DeVany

Department of Transportation

Office of the Secretary

Washington, D.C.

Sent via email to: dennis.devanY01dot.gov; eaS@dot.gov; cc to:

Mark Hybner@baucus.senate.gov; dzrice@gmail.com

Dear Mr. DeVany,

Please consider this our Petition for Reconsideration regarding Order 2013-6-

13.

Whereas, Public Law 112-27, signed into law on August 5,2011, amended the

definition of an "eligible place" for the purpose of receiving Essential Air Service

(EAS).Among other things, the amendment states that to be eligible, a

community must have had an average subsidy per passenger of less than

$1,000 during the most recent fiscal year.

Whereas, Public Law 112-95, signed into law on February 14, 2012, further

amended the EAS statutes. Among other things, Section 424 amends 49 D.S.C.

41733 by adding the following.

"(2) PROCEDURES TO AVOIDTERMINATION.--The

Secretary shall establish, by order, procedures by

which each community notified of an impending loss

of subsidy under paragraph (1) may work directly

with an air carrier to ensure that the air carrier is

able to submit a proposal to the Secretary to provide

essential air service to such community for an

amount of compensation that would not exceed the

subsidy cap.
"(3)ASSISTANCEPROVIDED.--TheSecretary shall

provide, by order, information to each community

notified under paragraph (1)regarding--

"(A)the procedures established pursuant to

paragraph (2);and

"(B)the maximum amount of compensation

that could be provided under this subchapter

to an air carrier serving such community that

would comply with basic essential air service

and the subsidy cap.".

Whereas, to the best of our knowledge, the Secretary has not established

procedures by which a community may work with an air carrier to ensure that

the air carrier is able to submit a proposal to provide EAS.

Therefore, we request that the DOTset aside Order 2013-6-13 and allow

subsidized service to continue at all seven communities until such time that the

DOTissues an order establishing the above referenced procedures. Once the

order is issued we request an appropriate amount of time (60 days) to review

the procedures established within the order and seek carriers to work with

directly. After such time has elapsed we request that the DOTissue a new RFP

for all seven Montana communities. It is our opinion that this is the most

appropriate way to move forward.

Yours Truly,

Lewistown City Manager
Administrative Offices Civil and Family Division Criminal Division Jury Office (512) 854

- 9457 (512) 854

- 9457 (512) 854

- 9420 (512) 854

- 9669 fax: 854

- 4744 fax: 854

- 9549 fax: 854

- 4566 fax: 854

- 4457 

## Velva L. Price Travis County District Clerk Travis County Courthouse Complex P.O. Box 679003 Austin, Texas 78767 - 9003

November 23 , 201 5

Mr. Jeffrey D. Kyle Third Court of Appeals P.O. Box 12547 Austin, Texas 78711
- 2547 **RE: APPELAS COURT CAUSE**  **03 -**  **1 5**  **- 006**  **49 -**  **CV AND 03**  **- 15**  **- 00650**  **- CV**  **DISTRICT COURT CAUSE D**  **- 1**  **- GN**  **- 15**  **- 001711**  Dear Mr. Kyle , A clerk’s record in cause number, D
- 1
- GN
- 15
- 001711 and Court of Appeals number 03
- 15
- 006 49
- CV AND 03
- 15
- 00650
- CV , styled, JERMAINE HOPKINS V MARC OTT ET AL , is du e in your office November 23 , 2015

. This office has not received payment or a designation of clerk’s record as of today, November 23 , 2015. Thank you for your consideration. If you have any questions , please contact me at (512) 854
- 5835

. Sincerely, Trish Winkler Deputy Court Clerk I I (512) 854
- 4309
* This disposition is not appropriate for publication and is not precedent except as provided by 9th Cir. R. 36-3.

** The Honorable Betty Binns Fletcher, Senior Circuit Judge for the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals, fully particip ated in the case and concurred in the judgment prior to her death. NOT FOR PUBLICATION UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Plaintiff - Appellee,
v. THOMAS M. KLASSY, Defendant - Appellant. No. 11-10372 D.C. No. 2:05-cr-00503-MCE-1
MEMORANDUM *

Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern District of California Morrison C. England, District Judge, Presiding Argued and Submitted October 16, 2012 San Francisco, California Before: B. FLETCHER, ** D.W. NELSON, and MURGUIA, Circuit Judges. Thomas Klassy devised a criminal sche me to bilk his creditors by declaring bankruptcy while simultaneously hiding assets that could be used to satisfy his 

# FILED
NOV 05 2012 MOLLY C. DWYER, CLERK

U.S. COURT OF APPEALS2 debts. His scheme discovered, Kla ssy was tried and convicted of money laundering and various types of fraud. Kl assy appeals his sentence, but not his conviction, for the second time. A panel of this Court previously vacated Klassy’s sentence and remanded for resentencing afte r concluding that the district court calculated Klassy’s total offense level, 33, starting with a base offense level one too high (seven, rather than six). See United States v. Klassy (“ Klassy I ”), 409 F. App’x 169, 171 (9th Cir. 2011). This time, we do not find the district court clearly erred in making the factual findings supporting its Guideline calculation—a total offense level of 32—nor do we find that th e district court abused its discretion in applying the Guidelines to the facts th at it found when sentencing Klassy to 121 months’ imprisonment. United States v. Dann , 652 F.3d 1160, 1175 (9th Cir. 2011).The question underlying this appeal is whether the district court concluded properly that Klassy intended to cause more than $400,000 in losses to his creditors, thereby justifying its applicati on of a 14-level enhancement to Klassy’s offense level. See U.S. Sentencing Guidelines Ma nual § 2B1.1(b)(1) (prescribing offense level enhancements keyed to th e amount of loss a defendant caused, or sought to cause, by his fraudulent conduct). The district court was entitled to calculate the losses Klassy intended to cause his creditors in either of two ways: as3 the value of the assets Klassy attempte d to conceal from them, or as the total amount of unsecured debt Klassy sought to discharge in bankruptcy. Klassy I , 409 F. App’x at 171–72 (citing United States v. Bussell , 504 F.3d 956, 962–63 (9th Cir. 2007)). Consequently, even if Klassy coul d, as he argues, prove at resentencing that he concealed under $400,000 in assets , he nevertheless sought to discharge more than $400,000 in unsecured debt, see In re Klassy , No. 03-26999 (Bankr. E.D. Cal. July 16, 2003) (Doc. No. 10), and—as the district court noted—could therefore be subject to the same 14-level enhancement. The district court did not err in applying it. AFFIRMED.
Exhibit 18




May 8, 1998


Comsat Corporation
6560 Rock Spring Drive
Bethesda, MD  20817


Dear Sirs:

At your request,  we have read the  description  included in your Quarterly
Report on Form  10-Q to the  Securities  and  Exchange  Commission  for the
quarter  ended March 31, 1998, of the facts  relating to the  corporation's
changes  in its  accounting  policies  for the cost of  satellites  lost at
launch or in orbit and for satellite  performance  incentive  payments.  We
believe,  on the basis of the  facts so set  forth  and  other  information
furnished  to us by  appropriate  officials  of the  corporation,  that the
accounting  changes  described  in  note 3 of  Form  10-Q  are  alternative
accounting principles that are preferable under the circumstances.

We have  not  audited  any  consolidated  financial  statements  of  Comsat
Corporation  and its  consolidated  subsidiaries  as of any date or for any
period  subsequent  to  December  31,  1997.  Therefore,  we are  unable to
express,  and we do not  express,  an opinion on the facts set forth in the
above-mentioned  Form 10-Q, on the related  information  furnished to us by
officials of the  corporation,  or on the  financial  position,  results of
operations,  or cash  flows  of  Comsat  Corporation  and its  consolidated
subsidiaries  as of any date or for any period  subsequent  to December 31,
1997.

Yours truly,



/S/  DELOITTE & TOUCHE LLP
--------------------------
     DELOITTE & TOUCHE LLP
     Washington, D.C.
Exhibit 32.1


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 Annual Report of PB Capital International Inc. (the “Registrant”) on Form 10-K for the year ended July 31, 2010 as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the “Report”), I, Henry Fong, Principal Executive Officer and the Principal Financial Officer of the Registrant, certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, as adopted pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that, to 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 Registrant.





Dated:  November 10, 2010
PB Capital International, Inc.By: /s/ Henry FongHenry Fong

President

(Principal Executive Officer)

(Principal Financial Officer)
#### Grady Alonzo GRAHAM, Appellant, v. STATE of Florida, Appellee.

No. 69-73.

District Court of Appeal of Florida. Second District.

Jan. 9, 1970.

PER CURIAM.

Affirmed.