alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
ANNUAL CERTIFICATE OF COMPLIANCE 

 OF

SCP SERVICING, LLC

 

 

**BBCMS Mortgage Trust 2021-C11**

** **

**Commercial Mortgage Pass-Through Certificates, Series2021-C11**

 

 

I, Vartan Derbedrossian, the ChiefServicing Officer of SCP Servicing, LLC, a Delaware limited liability company,as Special Servicer and a Reporting Servicer (hereinafter the “ReportingServicer”), under the Pooling and Servicing Agreement (the “Pooling andServicing Agreement”) dated as of September 1, 2021, certify pursuant toSection 11.09 to the Certificate Administrator, the Trustee, and the Depositor(as those terms are defined in the Pooling and Servicing Agreement) all of thefollowing as of February 27, 2024:

 

(a)        that a review of the activities of theReporting Servicer during the period from 1/1/2023 to 12/31/2023 (the “ReportingPeriod”) and of its performance under this Pooling and Servicing Agreementhas been made under my supervision;

 

(b)       that, to the best of my knowledge, based onsuch review, the Reporting Servicer has fulfilled all of its obligations underthe Pooling and Servicing Agreement in all material respects during theReporting Period;

 

(c)        that the Reporting Servicer has maintainedan effective internal control system over the servicing of mortgage loans; and

 

(d)      that the Reporting Servicer has not received anynotice regarding qualification, or challenge to the status of any Trust REMICas a REMIC, from the IRS or any other governmental agency or body.

 

 

 

IN WITNESS WHEREOF, thisCertificate has been executed and is effective as of Feburary 27, 2024.

 

 

REPORTING SERVICER:

 

**SCP Servicing LLC,**

a Delaware limited liabilitycompany

 

 

 

By: /s/ Vartan Derbedrossian

Name: Vartan Derbedossian

Title: Chief Servicing Officer
```

[Congressional Bills 107th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[H. Con. Res. 30 Introduced in House (IH)]

107th CONGRESS
  1st Session
H. CON. RES. 30

Expressing the sense of Congress with respect to relocating the United 
                 States Embassy in Israel to Jerusalem.

_______________________________________________________________________

                    IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

                           February 13, 2001

  Mr. Tancredo (for himself, Ms. Dunn, Mr. Cantor, Mr. Ackerman, Mr. 
 English, Mr. Ramstad, Mr. McNulty, Mr. Calvert, Ms. Ros-Lehtinen, Mr. 
 Stearns, Mr. LaHood, Mr. Otter, Ms. Berkley, Mr. Ross, Mr. Barton of 
 Texas, and Mr. Berman) submitted the following concurrent resolution; 
     which was referred to the Committee on International Relations

_______________________________________________________________________

                         CONCURRENT RESOLUTION

 
Expressing the sense of Congress with respect to relocating the United 
                 States Embassy in Israel to Jerusalem.

Whereas the Jerusalem Embassy Act of 1995 (Public Law 104-45; 109 Stat. 398) 
        requires that the United States Embassy in Israel be established in 
        Jerusalem;
Whereas section 7 of such Act allows the President to suspend the requirement 
        that the United States Embassy in Israel be established in Jerusalem if 
        the suspension is necessary to protect the national security interests 
        of the United States;
Whereas the Clinton administration suspended such requirement;
Whereas every sovereign nation has the right to designate its own capital;
Whereas Jerusalem has been the capital of Israel since 1950;
Whereas Jerusalem has been a united and undivided city governed by Israel since 
        1967;
Whereas Jerusalem is the seat of the Government of Israel, including the 
        President, Parliament, and Supreme Court of Israel;
Whereas the United States conducts official meetings and other business in the 
        city of Jerusalem;
Whereas, in every country except Israel, the United States maintains its Embassy 
        in the city designated by the host country; and
Whereas relocating the United States Embassy in Israel to Jerusalem will express 
        the continued support of the United States for Israel and for an 
        undivided Jerusalem: Now, therefore, be it
    Resolved by the House of Representatives (the Senate concurring), 
That Congress--
            (1) maintains its commitment to relocating the United 
        States Embassy in Israel to Jerusalem; and
            (2) urges the President, pursuant to the Jerusalem Embassy 
        Act of 1995 (Public Law 104-45; 109 Stat. 398), to immediately 
        begin the process of relocating the United States Embassy in 
        Israel to Jerusalem.
                                 <all>
```
IV

107TH CONGRESS

1ST SESSION H. CON. RES. 272

Expressing the sense of Congress regarding the crash of American Airlines

Flight 587.

IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

NOVEMBER 16, 2001

Mr. WEINER (for himself, Mr. RANGEL, and Mr. MEEKS of New York) submitted the following concurrent resolution; which was referred to the

Committee on Transportation and Infrastructure

NOVEMBER 16, 2001

Committee on Transportation and Infrastructure discharged; considered and

agreed to

CONCURRENT RESOLUTION

Expressing the sense of Congress regarding the crash of

American Airlines Flight 587.

Whereas American Airlines Flight 587 en route from John

F. Kennedy Airport in Queens County, New York, to

Santo Domingo, Dominican Republic, crashed on the

Rockaway Peninsula in Queens County, New York, on

November 12, 2001;

Whereas the crash resulted in a tragic loss of life estimated

at 265 individuals, including passengers, crew members,

and people on the ground;
2

•HCON 272 ATH

Whereas New York City has strong cultural, familial, and

historic ties to the Dominican Republic;

Whereas many of the passengers of American Airlines Flight

587 were of Dominican origin and resided in the Washington Heights community, a vibrant neighborhood which

is an integral part of our national cultural mosaic;

Whereas the Rockaway community has already suffered

greatly as a result of the attacks on the United States

of September 11, 2001, as home to the highest concentration of firefighters in New York City, many of

whom lost their lives at the World Trade Center;

Whereas many Rockaway residents ignored the risks and

rushed to the site of the plane crash in an effort to help;

Whereas the people of the Rockaway community have served

as an inspiration through their resilience in the face of

adversity and their faith in and practice of community;

and

Whereas the professional emergency personnel on the ground

performed valiantly limiting the devastation of this tragedy: Now, therefore, be it

1 Resolved by the House of Representatives (the Senate

2 concurring), That Congress—

3 (1) sends its heartfelt condolences to the fami4 lies, friends, and loved ones of the victims of the

5 crash of American Airlines Flight 587 on the Rock6 away Peninsula in Queens County, New York, on

7 November 12, 2001;
3

•HCON 272 ATH

1 (2) sends its sympathies to the people of the

2 Dominican Republic and to the Dominican commu3 nity in New York City;

4 (3) sends its sympathies to the people of the

5 Rockaway community;

6 (4) commends the heroic actions of the rescue

7 workers, volunteers, and State and local officials

8 who responded to this tragic event with courage, de9 termination, and skill; and

10 (5) directs the Clerk of the House of Represent11 atives to transmit an enrolled copy of this resolution

12 to the President of the Dominican Republic.

Æ
EXHIBIT 32.2

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


         In connection with the Quarterly Report of The Flooring Zone, Inc. on
Form 10-QSB for the quarter ended March 31, 2005, as filed with the Securities
and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the "Report"), the undersigned,
Michael Carroll, Principal Financial Officer of the Company, certify, pursuant
to 18 U.S.C. ss.1350, as adopted pursuant to ss. 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act
of 2002, that:

         (1)      The Report fully complies with the requirements of section 13
                  (a) or 15 (d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934; and

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



Date: May 16, 2005                                    /s/ Michael Carroll
                                                     ---------------------------
                                                     Michael Carroll,
                                                     Principal Financial Officer
<TABLE> <S> <C>


<ARTICLE>                     5
<MULTIPLIER>                                   1,000

<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   3-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                              DEC-31-1997
<PERIOD-START>                                 JAN-01-1997
<PERIOD-END>                                   MAR-31-1997
<CASH>                                         66,806
<SECURITIES>                                   0
<RECEIVABLES>                                  179,340
<ALLOWANCES>                                   7,629
<INVENTORY>                                    8,183
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                               282,589
<PP&E>                                         1,316,604
<DEPRECIATION>                                 266,133
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                 2,342,221
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                          292,883
<BONDS>                                        1,366,380
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                          0
<PREFERRED>                                    1
<COMMON>                                       1,436
<OTHER-SE>                                     413,951
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                   2,342,221
<SALES>                                        292,883
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                               292,883
<CGS>                                          176,766
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                  176,766
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                               74,870
<LOSS-PROVISION>                               0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                             25,876
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                15,998
<INCOME-TAX>                                   4,996
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                            11,002
<DISCONTINUED>                                 0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                0
<CHANGES>                                      0
<NET-INCOME>                                   11,002
<EPS-BASIC>                                  0.07
<EPS-DILUTED>                                  0.07



</TABLE>
* Pursuant to Local Rule 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 Local Rule

47.5.4.

IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT

 

No. 96-50607

Summary Calendar

 

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,

Plaintiff-Appellee,

versus

SANTIAGO NKO-SIAKA, a/k/a Siaka Nko Santiago,

a/k/a Sam Nko Siaka Smith,

Defendant-Appellant.

- - - - - - - - - -

Appeal from the United States District Court

for the Western District of Texas

USDC No. A-96-CR-16-ALL

- - - - - - - - - -

December 19, 1996

Before SMITH, DUHÉ, and BARKSDALE, Circuit Judges.

PER CURIAM:*

Santiago Nko-Siaka challenges his sentence for his

conviction pursuant to 18 U.S.C. § 1546(a). 

He raises the following issues: 1) U.S.S.G. § 2L2.2

contemplates bribery within the heartland of cases covered by the

guideline, and therefore, bribery could not support the district

court’s upward departure; 2) the court’s other reason for the
No. 96-50607

- 2 -

** Nko-Siaka raised for the first time on appeal the

following issues: 1) the evidence did not establish that he

committed bribery under state law; 2) even if he did commit

bribery, such bribery would have been relevant conduct of the

offense of conviction; 3) the Government failed to demonstrate

that Nko-Siaka would have been deported if he had attended the

deportation proceedings; and 4) the deportation proceedings were

not related to the offense of conviction.

upward departure, Nko-Siaka absconding from deportation

proceedings, was unclearly stated so that it could not be grounds

for the departure; 3) the Sentencing Commission considered

deportation in several offense guidelines and in § 2L2.2, and

this consideration precludes the court’s use of absconding as

grounds for a departure; and 4) the extent of the departure was

based on the court’s legal error in its analogy to another

offense guideline without consideration of Nko-Siaka’s acceptance

of responsibility in the analogy. 

From our review of the appellate record, we conclude that

the district court did not abuse its discretion in its upward

departure. See United States v. Ashburn, 38 F.3d 803, 807 (5th

Cir. 1994) (en banc), cert. denied, 115 S. Ct. 1969 (1995). 

Further, Nko-Siaka’s remaining issues** do not rise to the level

of plain error. See United States v. Calverley, 37 F.3d 160,

162-64 (5th Cir. 1994) (en banc), cert. denied, 115 S. Ct. 1266

(1995).

AFFIRMED.
### April 29, 201S 

### Discussion There a r e ma n y i dentified opportun i ti es for bromide t o enter waterways; we believe t hat JS we 

### co nt i nue to Inv es t igate, we will i dentify mo r e water p l ants at risk . 

### Bromldc In troduced to the water treatment proccss**wh ~**  

### ch l orine Is pres ent results in more brom inilted species being formed. more total mass being formed (reeulation is b.ued 

### on mau} 

### and the h ea lt h effects of b t om i na t cd species are potent

# ian.,. more s lgn lficJnt t han c hl orinated species . 

### Th e r e will 

### be significant costs**a~ociated** 

### wit h this change In wa ter qua li ty for**tu ~a** **tm nt**  

### pla nt s . Bro mide 

## can be remo\'cd by anio n excha nge at a po int in t he plant before chlo rin e Is i nll oduced . B ut , anion exchan.ge specifically for b t om i de r e m ova l h as not been resea rc he- d . Work wou l d ne e-d t o b e done to estab l i sh If bromide to ul d 

### be r e mo ...ed se l e · cti•,ely. or if other Jnions (sulfates, ca r bo n ates.**ch ri** **des~** wou l d be prefeue d . fgl u OU!:s cou l d be used on raw water for \ 'Cry l ow tur bid i ty .)yste m s, but fluid i zed beds wou ld be r eq u ired f o r systems with h l Eh turbidity. d u e to clogging Issues w i th turb idi ty or co l umns co u ld be u se d pos t fil t er prlo r to chlorine .lddi tj on. / {o nc e OS P S (ch t orin3ted and bro mi natedj are formed, there Is no good treJtme nt to remove them <'It t he l!!-a nt . Current l y p i Jnts usc ma n y 

### ways to pr ev ent the ir form ation includ i ng ch l o ra mln.ation {limits

e"posu re of 

### f tce chlo rin e t o humics} and NOM r e moval (remo ...es the humi c precu rso r. (ach Is ex pensive. and often .s i t e spec i fic . GAC remo..-es some but not all the NOM and the bromide Is not r emoved so the rema inin g 08Ps c an be h i £h l y bromln ,n ed.
Exhibit 32.2  Section 1350 Certification  In connection with the quarterly report of Lotus Pharmaceuticals, Inc. (the Company) on Form 10-Q for the period ended June 30, 2009 as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission (the Report), I, Yan Zeng, Chief Financial Officer of the Company, certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. SS. 1350, as adopted pursuant to SS. 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that:  1. The Report fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934; and  2. The information contained in the Report fairly presents, in all material respects, the financial condition and result of operations of the Company.  August 10, 2009
        /s/ Yan Zeng
 Yan Zeng, Chief Financial Officer, principal financial and accounting officer  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 has been provided to the company and will be retained by the company and furnished to the Securities and Exchange Commission or its staff upon request.
University of Southern California is hereby submitting this amendment on their behalf in

accordance with Section 333 of the FMRA. This is a request to amend Exemption No. 13505 ( Regulatory Docket No. FAA

- 2015

- 3647) for the applicant under this Docket to add additional aircraft and include the updated conditions and limitations

, as follows:

Approved Unmanned Aerial Systems

The Petitioner requests that their Exemption No. 13505 is updated to include that their operator is authorized to use any aircraft identified on the List of Approved Unmanned Aerial Systems (UAS) under Section 333 at regulatory docket FAA

- 2007

- 3330 at www.regulations.gov , when weighing less than 55 pounds including payload.

Updated Conditions and Limitations That Petitioner request s that their Exemption No. 13505 is updated to include the thirty

- two new conditions and limitations as adopted by the Federal Aviation Administration on or about March 6, 2016, which includes and outlines operations conducted closer than 500 feet to peopl e directly participating in the intended purpose of the operation, not protected by barriers as defined in

those new additional conditions and limitations. The Petitioner further requests that it be allowed to fly under and in compliance with any new versi on of a standard Section 333 Exemption provided to any future Petitioners.

Please note that all other conditions and information are to remain the same with the exception

for the change above.

The primary contact for this application, which a copy to Traverse Legal, PLC at the address below, is:

Mr. Ryan Mcalinden Associate Director for Digital Training and Instruction University of Southern California

12015 Waterfront Drive Playa Vista, CA 90094

Contact Information for Traverse Legal, PLC:

Enrico S chaefer, Esq. Traverse Legal, PLC 810 Cottageview Drive, Unit G

- 20 Traverse City, MI 49684

Telephone: 231

- 932

- 0411 231

- 932

- 0411

Email: enrico@traverselegal.com

For additional information on this Exemption please contact Petitioner’s represented at the information provided above.

Thank you for your consideration.Sincerely,

Enrico Schaefer, Esq. Traverse Legal, PLC Attorney for University of Southern California

Email: enrico@traverselegal.com www.dronelaw.pro www.traverselegal.com
391 A.2d 696

#### Commonwealth v. Rodgers, Appellant.

Argued March 13, 1978.

Laurence T. Himes, Jr., for appellant; Sheryl Ann Dorney, Assistant District Attorney, for Commonwealth, appellee.

Judgment of sentence affirmed.
Exhibit 35.1



Servicer Compliance Statement of AmeriCredit Financial Services,
Inc.





This Annual Statement as to Compliance is delivered
to you pursuant to Section 2.9 (c) of the 2021-3 Servicing Supplement dated as of June 30, 2021 (the “Agreement”) and Item
1123 of Regulation AB, executed in connection with the formation of GM Financial Automobile Leasing Trust 2021-3 (the “Trust”),
the issuance of the Notes by the Trust and the closing of the transactions and the execution and delivery of the various documents by
AmeriCredit Financial Services, Inc. (the “Servicer”) and GMF Leasing LLC in connection therewith. The capitalized terms used
herein shall have the same meanings as in the Agreement.



The undersigned certifies
that I am the Executive Vice President, Corporate Controller and Chief Accounting Officer of the Servicer. I further certify as follows:



| | 1. | I have conducted, or caused to be conducted under my supervision, a review of the Servicer during the
preceding period from August 18, 2021 through December 31, 2021, and its performance under the Agreement.
| | -- | ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------



| | 2. | To the best of my knowledge, following such review, the Servicer has fulfilled all its obligations under
the Agreement throughout such period, and, to the best of my knowledge, there has been no default in the fulfillment of any such obligation.
| | -- | -----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------



AmeriCredit Financial Services, Inc.





|By: | /s/ Connie Coffey                       |  | Dated: March 4, 2022
|--- | --------------------------------------- |  | --------------------
|    | Connie Coffey                           |  |                     
|    | Executive Vice President, Corporate     |  |                     
|    | Controller and Chief Accounting Officer |  |
#### ST. BENEDICT’S HOSPITAL, Plaintiff, v. DEPARTMENT OF EMPLOYMENT SECURITY and Carol Petersen, Defendants.

No. 18120.

Supreme Court of Utah.

Jan. 6, 1983.

Glenn J. Mecham, Ogden, Craig S. Cook, Salt Lake City, for plaintiff.

David L. Wilkinson, Floyd G. Astin, K. Allen Zabel, Salt Lake City, for defendants.

STEWART, Justice:

This case is here to review a decision of the Board of Review of the Industrial Commission granting a claim for unemployment compensation to the defendant Carol Petersen. The sole issue raised on appeal is whether the Board of Review properly construed U.C.A., 1953, § 35-4-5(a) of the Employment Security Act in awarding unemployment compensation. Specifically, the issue is whether the “equity and good conscience” language contained in § 35-4-5(a) is a standard separate from and in addition to the “good cause standard.”

On oral argument, counsel stipulated that if the Court in *Salt Lake City Corp. v. Department of Employment Security and Marian Lynch,*657 P.2d 1312 (1982) held that § 35-4-5(a) established two separate standards upon which compensation may be granted, then the instant case should be affirmed. In *Salt Lake City Corp., supra,*we held that § 35-4-5(a) does provide two separate and distinct standards.

Affirmed.

HALL, C.J., and OAKS, HOWE and DURHAM, JJ., concur.