alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
Exhibit 31.1

CERTIFICATION

I, Somsak Chivavibul,
certify that:

1. I have reviewed this report on Form 10-K and all reports on Form 10-D required to be filed in respect of the period
covered by this report on Form 10-K of SLM Student Loan Trust 2010-2 (the Exchange Act periodic reports);

2. Based on my
knowledge, the Exchange Act periodic reports, taken as a whole, do not contain any untrue statement of a material fact or omit to state a material fact necessary to make the statements made, in light of the circumstances under which such statements
were made, not misleading with respect to the period covered by this report;

3. Based on my knowledge, all of the distribution, servicing
and other information required to be provided under Form 10-D for the period covered by this report is included in the Exchange Act periodic reports;

4. Based on my knowledge and the servicer compliance statements required in this report under Item 1123 of Regulation AB, and except as
disclosed in the Exchange Act periodic reports, the servicer and administrator have fulfilled their obligations under the servicing agreement and administration agreement, as applicable, in all material respects; and

5. All of the reports on assessment of compliance with servicing criteria for asset-backed securities and their related attestation reports on
assessment of compliance with servicing criteria for asset-backed securities required to be included in this report in accordance with Item 1122 of Regulation AB and Exchange Act Rules 13a-18 and 15d-18 have been included as an exhibit to this
report, except as otherwise disclosed in this report. Any material instances of noncompliance described in such reports have been disclosed in this report on Form 10-K. In giving the certifications above, I have reasonably relied on information
provided to me by the following unaffiliated parties: Great Lakes Educational Loan Services, Inc., as subservicer, Nelnet Servicing, LLC, as subservicer, and Deutsche Bank National Trust Company, as indenture trustee.

[Signature Page Follows]



---

Date: March 30, 2016



|                     
|---------------------
|/s/ SOMSAK CHIVAVIBUL
|Somsak Chivavibul    

President and Chief Financial Officer

(Senior Securitization Officer)

Navient Funding, LLC
#### Lucille DIGASERO, Appellant, v. FOOD FAIR PROPERTIES AGENCY, INC., et al., Appellees.

No. 73-970.

District Court of Appeal of Florida, Third District.

Feb. 19, 1974.

Neil Chonin, Miami, for appellant.

Hawkesworth, Kay & Schmick, Wicker, Smith, Pyszka, Blomquist & Davant, Carey, Dwyer, Austin, Cole & Selwood, Knight, Peters, Hoeveler, Pickle, Niemoeller & Flynn, Miami, for appellees.

Before BARKDULL, C. J., and CARROLL and HENDRY, JJ. '

PER CURIAM.

Affirmed, on the authority of Peairs v. Florida Publishing Company, Fla.App.1961, 132 So.2d 561.

CARROLL, J., dissents.
#### Edward TRIPP, Appellant, v. STATE of Florida, Appellee.

No. S-160.

District Court of Appeal of Florida, First District.

July 3, 1973.

PER CURIAM.

Affirmed.
FILED

U.S. COURT OF APPEALS

ELEVENTH CIRCUIT

 NOVEMBER 16, 2011

JOHN LEY

CLERK

[DO NOT PUBLISH]

IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

 FOR THE ELEVENTH CIRCUIT

 ________________________

 No. 11-10504 

Non-Argument Calendar

 ________________________

 D.C. Docket No. 4:10-cr-00108-BAE-GRS-1

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, 

 llllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllPlaintiff-Appellee,

versus

SHEDRICK SPAULDING, JR., 

a.k.a. Al, 

 lllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllDefendant-Appellant.

________________________

 Appeal from the United States District Court

 for the Southern District of Georgia

 ________________________

(November 16, 2011)

Before DUBINA, Chief Judge, MARTIN and FAY, Circuit Judges.

PER CURIAM:

Amy Lee Copeland, appointed counsel for Shedrick Spaulding, Jr., has filed
a motion to withdraw on appeal supported by a brief prepared pursuant to Anders

v. California, 386 U.S. 738, 87 S. Ct. 1396, 18 L. Ed. 2d 493 (1967). Our

independent review of the entire record reveals that counsel’s assessment of the

relative merits of the appeal is correct. Because independent examination of the

entire record reveals no arguable issues of merit, counsel’s motion to withdraw is

GRANTED, and Spaulding’s conviction and sentence are AFFIRMED. 

2
#### Roy Alfred HUNT and John A. Hunt, Appellants, v. Terry P. NOWICKI d/b/a Terry’s Texaco Service Station et al., Appellees.

No. 75-831.

District Court of Appeal of Florida, Fourth District.

Aug. 6, 1976.

Rehearing Denied Aug. 31, 1976.

*1031Joseph H. Williams, of Troutman & Parrish, P. A., Winter Park, for appellants.

Monroe E. McDonald, of Sanders, Mc-Ewan, Mims & McDonald, Orlando, for ap-pellee, Ford Motor Co.

PER CURIAM.

AFFIRMED.

DOWNEY, J., and ULMER, RAY E., Jr., Associate Judge, concur.

WALDEN, C. J., dissents, with opinion.

WALDEN, Chief Judge

(dissenting):

Plaintiffs appeal from a judgment dismissing their complaint with prejudice. I would reverse.

The guidelines for determining whether a complaint states a cause of action are certainly well known and will not be repeated. *Poulos v. Vordemeier,*327 So.2d 245 (4th DCA Fla.1976).

The complaint was in eight counts, containing forty-one numbered paragraphs, covering twelve pages.

The minor plaintiff was working upon a twenty year old tractor manufactured and sold by Defendant, Ford. The basic facts were correctly distilled in plaintiffs’ brief:

> “The tractor was designed with its gasoline tank in the cowl of the tractor, which cowl was customarily removed when extended repairs or other work was performed on the tractor’s engine. Plaintiff, Roy Alfred Hunt, was making adjustments to the engine when it was running; which, with the cowl and gasoline tank removed, required that he use an alternate gasoline supply. This supply was in a gallon can resting on the air breather of the engine with a flexible rubber tube running from the can to the tractor’s carburetor. In the process of this work, Plaintiff, Roy Alfred Hunt’s, employer overturned the can of gasoline which ignited and severely burned Plaintiff, Roy Alfred Hunt.

> “Plaintiffs alleged that Ford was generally negligent in the design of the tractor, negligent in failing to warn members of the public of the potential danger in using an alternate gasoline supply such as the one employed here, in failing to market a ‘kit’ to provide a safe alternate gasoline supply for repairs of the type being performed at the time of the accident, and in creating and marketing an inherently dangerous design where alternate safe designs were readily available.” (Record references omitted.)

In my opinion a cause of action can be gleaned at least upon the issues of negligence and breach of warranty. I would reverse with instructions to reinstate the complaint. *Favors v. Firestone Tire & Rubber Company,*309 So.2d 69 (4th DCA Fla.1975); *Marrillia v. Lyn Craft Boat Company,*271 So.2d 204 (2d DCA Fla.1973); *Keller v. Eagle Army-Navy Department Stores, Inc.,*256 So.2d 248 (4th DCA Fla.1971); *Noonan v. Buick Company,*211 So.2d 54 (3rd DCA Fla.1968).

I do, therefore, dissent.
**President**

**Section 906 Certification under Sarbanes Oxley Act**

 

 

 

I, Michael G. Clark, certify that: 

 

| 1. | I have reviewed this report, filed on behalf of DWS Health Care Fund, a series of DWS Securities Trust, on Form N-CSR; |
|----|------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|

 

| 2. | Based on my knowledge and pursuant to 18 U.S.C. § 1350, the periodic report on Form N-CSR (the “Report”) fully complies with the requirements of § 13 (a) or §15 (d), as applicable, of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 and that the information contained in the Report fairly presents, in all material respects, the financial condition and results of operations of the Company. |
|----|--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|

 

 

 

| July 30, 2009 | /s/Michael G. Clark                                    |
|---------------|--------------------------------------------------------|
|          | Michael G. Clark                                       |
|          | President                                              |
|          | DWS Health Care Fund, a series of DWS Securities Trust |

 

 

 

 

 

**Chief Financial Officer and Treasurer**

**Section 906 Certification under Sarbanes Oxley Act**

 

 

 

I, Paul Schubert, certify that: 

 

| 1. | I have reviewed this report, filed on behalf of DWS Health Care Fund, a series of DWS Securities Trust, on Form N-CSR; |
|----|------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|

 

| 2. | Based on my knowledge and pursuant to 18 U.S.C. § 1350, the periodic report on Form N-CSR (the “Report”) fully complies with the requirements of § 13 (a) or § 15 (d), as applicable, of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 and that the information contained in the Report fairly presents, in all material respects, the financial condition and results of operations of the Company. |
|----|--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|

 

 

| July 30, 2009 | /s/Paul Schubert                                       |
|---------------|--------------------------------------------------------|
|          | Paul Schubert                                          |
|          | Chief Financial Officer and Treasurer                  |
|          | DWS Health Care Fund, a series of DWS Securities Trust |
#### LA GRAN FAMILIA, INC., a Florida Corporation, Appellant, v. CUBA PHARMACY, INC., a Florida Corporation, Appellee.

No. 77-875.

District Court of Appeal of Florida, Third District.

Aug. 30, 1977.

Taylor, Brion, Buker & Greene, Arnaldo Velez, Miami, for appellant.

Underwood, Gillis, Karcher & Reinert and Carles E. Casuso, Miami, for appellee.

Before PEARSON, BARKDULL and HUBBART, JJ.

PER CURIAM.

This appeal considers the propriety of a temporary injunction issued, without requiring the plaintiff to post an injunction bond. We reverse.

*770The matter did not arise out of a domestic relation action,1 but was an attempt to enjoin alleged malicious activities by the defendant. The injunction should not have been issued without requiring the plaintiff to post a bond. *Belk’s Department Store, Miami, Inc. v. Scherman,*117 So.2d 845 (Fla. 3d DCA 1960); *Metropolitan Dade County v. Polk Pools, Inc.,*124 So.2d 737 (Fla. 3d DCA 1960); *Tampa Port Authority v. Deen,*179 So.2d 416 (Fla. 2d DCA 1965); *Byrne v. Rec Centers, Inc.,*309 So.2d 177 (Fla. 4th D.C.A. 1975); Fla.R.Civ.P. 1.610.

Reversed and remanded.

1

. Even in case of a divorce action it may be necessary to show inability to make bond to obtain a temporary injunction, without necessity of posting bond. See: *Voss v. Voss,*169 So.2d 351 (Fla. 3rd DCA 1964).
<TABLE> <S> <C>


<ARTICLE> UT
<LEGEND>
THIS SCHEDULE CONTAINS SUMMARY FINANCIAL INFORMATION EXTRACTED FROM THE
CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL STATEMENTS INCLUDED IN ITEM 1 OF CONSOLIDATED NATURAL
GAS COMPANY'S QUARTERLY REPORT ON FORM 10-Q FOR THE QUARTER ENDED SEPTEMBER 30,
1996 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
<BOOK-VALUE>                                  PER-BOOK
<TOTAL-NET-UTILITY-PLANT>                    2,956,251
<OTHER-PROPERTY-AND-INVEST>                  1,054,746
<TOTAL-CURRENT-ASSETS>                         913,643
<TOTAL-DEFERRED-CHARGES>                       356,960
<OTHER-ASSETS>                                 117,124
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                               5,398,724
<COMMON>                                       260,703
<CAPITAL-SURPLUS-PAID-IN>                      490,300
<RETAINED-EARNINGS>                          1,382,547
<TOTAL-COMMON-STOCKHOLDERS-EQ>               2,155,708
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<LONG-TERM-DEBT-NET>                         1,288,723
<SHORT-TERM-NOTES>                                   0
<LONG-TERM-NOTES-PAYABLE>                            0
<COMMERCIAL-PAPER-OBLIGATIONS>                 409,000
<LONG-TERM-DEBT-CURRENT-PORT>                   10,250
<PREFERRED-STOCK-CURRENT>                            0
<CAPITAL-LEASE-OBLIGATIONS>                          0
<LEASES-CURRENT>                                     0
<OTHER-ITEMS-CAPITAL-AND-LIAB>               1,557,201
<TOT-CAPITALIZATION-AND-LIAB>                5,398,724
<GROSS-OPERATING-REVENUE>                    2,565,091
<INCOME-TAX-EXPENSE>                           109,658
<OTHER-OPERATING-EXPENSES>                   2,179,921
<TOTAL-OPERATING-EXPENSES>                   2,289,579
<OPERATING-INCOME-LOSS>                        275,512
<OTHER-INCOME-NET>                              10,555
<INCOME-BEFORE-INTEREST-EXPEN>                 286,067
<TOTAL-INTEREST-EXPENSE>                        75,768
<NET-INCOME>                                   210,299
<PREFERRED-STOCK-DIVIDENDS>                          0
<EARNINGS-AVAILABLE-FOR-COMM>                  210,299
<COMMON-STOCK-DIVIDENDS>                       137,658
<TOTAL-INTEREST-ON-BONDS>                       97,107
<CASH-FLOW-OPERATIONS>                         357,743
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                     2.22
<EPS-DILUTED>                                     2.20
        

</TABLE>
#### Charles CHURCH, Appellant, v. STATE of Florida, Appellee.

No. 77-2027.

District Court of Appeal of Florida, Second District.

July 12, 1978.

Jack O. Johnson, Public Defender, and Paul C. Helm, Asst. Public Defender, Bar-tow, for appellant.

Robert L. Shevin, Atty. Gen., Tallahassee, and Charles Corees, Jr., Asst. Atty. Gen., Tampa, for appellee.

PER CURIAM.

We affirm the judgment of the trial court. However, the present sentence does not specify the amount of credit for time *802served as Section 921.161(1), Florida Statutes (1975) requires. *Knight v. State,*349 So.2d 232 (Fla.2d DCA 1977). Therefore, we remand the case for correction of sentence, and appellant need not be present at that time.

HOBSON, Acting C. J., and BOARD-MAN and DANAHY, JJ., concur.
#### FLORIDA LAND AND TIMBER COMPANY, an Iowa corporation, Appellant, v. CENTRAL AND SOUTHERN FLORIDA FLOOD CONTROL DISTRICT, a public corporation, Appellee.

No. 70-913.

District Court of Appeal of Florida, Second District.

Aug. 9, 1971.

Appeal dismissed.
Electronically Filed

Intermediate Court of Appeals

CAAP-19-0000018

11-APR-2019

10:33 AM
US TREASURY FINANCING SCHEDULE FOR 4th QUARTER 2008

BILLIONS OF DOLLARS

ANNOUNCEMENT AUCTION SETTLEMENT OFFERED MATURING NEW

ISSUE DATE DATE DATE AMOUNT AMOUNT MONEY

4-WK 3-MO 6-MO 12-MO

4-WEEK AND 9/25 9/29 10/2 17.00 23.00 23.00 74.00 -11.00

3&6 MONTH BILLS 10/2 10/6 10/9 17.00 23.00 23.00 70.00 -7.00

10/9 10/14 10/16 15.00 23.00 23.00 64.00 -3.00

10/16 10/20 10/23 17.00 23.00 23.00 19.00 64.00 18.00

10/23 10/27 10/30 20.00 23.00 23.00 61.00 5.00

10/30 11/3 11/6 20.00 23.00 23.00 64.00 2.00

11/6 11/10 11/13 25.00 23.00 23.00 64.00 7.00

11/13 11/17 11/20 30.00 23.00 23.00 19.00 66.00 29.00

11/20 11/24 11/26 30.00 23.00 23.00 69.00 7.00

11/26 12/1 12/4 30.00 23.00 23.00 70.00 6.00

12/4 12/8 12/11 20.00 23.00 23.00 75.00 -9.00

12/11 12/15 12/18 10.00 23.00 23.00 19.00 77.00 -2.00

12/18 12/22 12/25 10.00 23.00 23.00 76.00 -20.00

859.00 894.00 22.00

CASH MANAGEMENT BILLS

32-DAY BILL 11/12 11/13 18.00 18.00 0.00

Matures 12/15

19-DAY BILL 11/25 11/26 32.00 32.00 0.00

Matures 12/15

5-DAY BILL 12/9 12/10 9.00 9.00 0.00

Matures 12/15

0.00

COUPONS

CHANGE

IN SIZE

10-Year TIPS 10/6 10/8 10/15 7.00 1.00 7.00

20-Year TIPS ® 10/23 10/27 10/31 7.00 1.00

2-Year Note 10/27 10/28 10/31 31.00

5-Year Note 10/27 10/30 10/31 21.00 20.00 39.00

10-Year Note 11/5 11/12 11/17 17.00

30-Year Bond 11/5 11/13 11/17 7.00 1.00 43.50 -19.50

2-Year Note 11/24 11/25 12/1 31.00

5-year Note 11/24 11/26 12/1 21.00 22.00 30.00

10-Year Note® 12/8 12/11 12/15 12.00 14.50 -2.50

2-Year Note 12/22 12/29 12/31 31.00

5-year Note 12/22 12/30 12/31 21.00 19.10 32.90

206.00 119.10 86.90

Estimates are italicized

NET CASH RAISED THIS QUARTER: 108.90

R = Reopening
#### Roger G. HEIM, Trustee, Appellant, v. Thomas R. KIRKLAND, Trustee, Thomas R. Kirkland, Individually, and Gloria J. Kirkland, his wife, and Umatilla State Bank, a Florida Corporation, Appellees.

No. 77-1285.

District Court of Appeal of Florida, Fourth District.

March 14, 1978.

Rehearing Denied April 13, 1978.

*851Calvin J. Faucett, Orlando, for appellant. Gerald S. Livingston, Orlando, for appel-lee-Thomas R. Kirkland.

Zebulon L. Osborne, Eustis, for appellee-Umatilla State Bank.

DOWNEY, Judge.

Appellant Roger C. Heim, trustee, takes this interlocutory appeal in an action to foreclose a mortgage from an order of the trial court striking appellant’s prayer for a deficiency decree.

The mortgage and note in question contained a provision that the land described in the mortgage was to stand as the sole security with no further recourse against the maker-mortgagor. However, in his complaint appellant prayed for an accounting of the principal, interest, late charges, abstracting, taxes, expenses and costs due from the mortgagor, and for a deficiency decree should a deficiency result. Appel-lees moved to strike the portions of the prayer relative to the claim for taxes, costs, attorney’s fees and any claim for a deficiency, based upon the provision of the note and mortgage designating the land as the sole security and precluding any further recourse against appellees. The trial court entered an order thereon, holding in pertinent part:

> “The Court finds, by virtue of the provisions of the note attached to the mortgage, Exhibit ‘A’ to the Complaint, that the Mortgagor, THOMAS R. KIRKLAND, Trustee, has no personal liability for payment of principal or interest on the mortgage note or for late charges, or for abstracting charges, taxes, expenses, costs or attorney’s fees incurred by reason of this suit, and that the foregoing constitute a lien upon the property only. Accordingly, the Defendants’ Motion to Strike Plaintiff’s prayer for deficiency judgment against the Defendants be, and is hereby, granted and the claim for deficiency judgment against the Defendants be, and is hereby struck from the Complaint filed herein,”

We fail to find any error in the order being reviewed. The mortgagor-maker covenanted that he would pay the taxes and other charges so that, as against the land, in the event of a default and foreclosure of the mortgage the mortgagee would be entitled to a judgment for the principal, interest, taxes, attorney’s fees and any other appropriate charges. However, because of the no recourse provisions of the contract the mortgagee was not entitled to a deficiency judgment against the mortgagor-maker for any sums over and above the amount which a sale of the property might bring.

Accordingly, the order appealed from is affirmed.

AFFIRMED.

CROSS and DAUKSCH, JJ., concur.
No. 00-7458.

#### Jackson *v.*United States.

Ct. App. D. C. Certiorari denied.
DEPARTMENT OF THE TREASURY

OFFICE OF PUBLIC AFFAIRS 

May 15, 2006 Contact: Brookly McLaughlin 

EMBARGOED UNTIL 9:00 AM 202-622-1996 

TREASURY INTERNATIONAL CAPITAL DATA FOR MARCH

Treasury International Capital (TIC) data for March are released today and posted on the U.S. 

Treasury web site (www.treas.gov/tic). The next release date, which will report on data for April, is 

scheduled for June 15, 2006. 

Net foreign purchases of long-term securities were $69.8 billion. 

• Net foreign purchases of long-term domestic securities were $89.2 billion, $1.6 billion of 

which were net purchases by foreign official institutions and $87.6 billion of which were net 

purchases by private foreign investors. 

• U.S. residents purchased a net $19.4 billion in foreign issued securities. 

Foreigners’ Transactions in Long-Term Securities with U.S. Residents 

(Billions of dollars, not seasonally adjusted)

12 Months Through

2004 2005 Mar-05 Mar-06 Dec-05 Jan-06 Feb-06 Mar-06 

1 Gross Purchases of Domestic Securities 15178.9 16910.8 15645.1 17287.0 1198.8 1439.8 1453.6 1638.0

2 Gross Sales of Domestic Securities 14262.4 15867.8 14709.8 16221.2 1124.3 1360.0 1351.0 1548.8

3 Domestic Securities Purchased, net (line 1 less line 2) /1 916.5 1042.9 935.2 1065.8 74.5 79.8 102.5 89.2

4 Private, net /2 680.9 931.6 771.4 936.5 63.6 60.6 86.5 87.6

5 Treasury Bonds & Notes, net 150.9 304.6 214.2 213.2 12.4 -3.2 10.8 9.3

6 Gov't Agency Bonds, net 205.7 191.9 206.9 218.9 8.9 19.4 28.7 15.2

7 Corporate Bonds, net 298.0 356.8 312.2 386.7 32.8 24.1 29.9 45.5

8 Equities, net 26.2 78.3 38.2 117.7 9.6 20.3 17.1 17.5

9 Official, net 235.6 111.3 163.8 129.3 10.9 19.3 16.0 1.6

10 Treasury Bonds & Notes, net 201.1 59.3 126.8 68.3 5.6 8.1 11.1 -6.3

11 Gov't Agency Bonds, net 20.8 32.8 22.5 34.4 2.9 8.0 2.3 3.8

12 Corporate Bonds, net 11.5 18.4 12.5 23.6 2.4 2.3 3.3 2.6

13 Equities, net 2.2 0.8 2.0 3.0 0.0 0.9 -0.7 1.5

14 Gross Purchases of Foreign Securities 3123.1 3640.7 3088.1 4029.6 338.9 374.4 402.9 448.3

15 Gross Sales of Foreign Securities 3276.0 3796.0 3259.2 4185.9 361.2 387.0 414.9 467.7

16 Foreign Securities Purchased, net (line 14 less line 15) /3 -152.8 -155.3 -171.2 -156.3 -22.3 -12.6 -12.0 -19.4

17 Foreign Bonds Purchased, net -67.9 -28.6 -65.1 -30.4 -5.6 -2.3 -0.1 -7.5

18 Foreign Equities Purchased, net -85.0 -126.7 -106.1 -125.9 -16.7 -10.4 -11.9 -11.9

19 Net Long-Term Flows (line 3 plus line 16) 763.6 887.6 764.1 909.6 52.2 67.2 90.5 69.8

/1 Net foreign purchases of U.S. securities (+)

/2 Includes International and Regional Organizations

/3 Net U.S. acquisitions of foreign securities (-)
Southwest Ohio Regional Council of Carpenters Pension Plan 

Checklist Item #28 

Does the plan include deterministic projections for each year in the extended period of: 

• the value of plan assets; 

• the plan's accrued liability; and 

• the plan's funded percentage? 

See Section 6.05. 

The deterministic projections for each year in the extended period of: 

• the value of plan assets; 

• the plan's accrued liability; and 

• the plan's funded percentage 

are set forth in Exhibit X of the Supplemental Actuarial Information document attached as Document 7.1. 

Document #28 - 1 - 

SWORCCPP-000170