alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
AMENDMENT NUMBER TWO


to the


POOLING AND SERVICING AGREEMENT


Series 2005-HE6, Dated as of June 1, 2005


 


among


BEAR STEARNS ASSET BACKED SECURITIES I LLC, as Depositor


EMC MORTGAGE CORPORATION, as a Seller and as Master Servicer


and


LASALLE BANK NATIONAL ASSOCIATION, as Trustee


This AMENDMENT NUMBER TWO is made and entered into this 9th day of August 2005, by and among BEAR STEARNS ASSET BACKED SECURITIES I LLC, a Delaware limited liability company, as depositor (the “Depositor”), EMC MORTGAGE CORPORATION, a Delaware corporation, as seller (in such capacity, the “Seller”) and as master servicer (in such capacity, the “Master Servicer”) and LASALLE BANK NATIONAL ASSOCIATION, a national banking association, not in its individual capacity but solely as trustee (the “Trustee”), in connection with the Pooling and Servicing Agreement, dated as of June 1, 2005, among the above mentioned parties, as amended by AMENDMENT NUMBER ONE dated as of July 25, 2005, (as amended by Amendment Number One, the “Agreement”). This amendment is made pursuant to Section 11.01 of the Agreement.


1.         Capitalized terms used herein and not defined herein shall have the meanings assigned to such terms in the Agreement.


2.         The definition of Special Servicer Trigger in Section 1.01 of the Agreement shall be amended by deleting the definition in its entirety and replacing it with the following:


 


Special Servicer Trigger:  With respect to any Distribution Date, a Special Servicer Trigger shall have occurred and be continuing if at any time, (x) the percent equivalent of a fraction, the numerator of which is the aggregate Stated Principal Balance of the Mortgage Loans that are 60 days or more Delinquent and the denominator of which is the aggregate Stated Principal Balance of all of the Mortgage Loans as of the last day of the related Due Period exceeds (y) the percentage set forth in Exhibit N for such Distribution Date.


 



 









 


3.         Except as amended above, the Agreement shall continue to be in full force and effect in accordance with their terms.






 









 


IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the Depositor, the Master Servicer, the Seller and the Trustee have caused their names to be signed hereto by their respective officers thereunto duly authorized as of the day and year first above written.


BEAR STEARNS ASSET BACKED SECURITIES I LLC


as Depositor



	
            By: /s/ Baron Silverstein
 
	
            Name:
 	
            Baron Silverstein
 
	
            Title:
 	
            Vice President
 	
             




EMC MORTGAGE CORPORATION


as Seller and Master Servicer



	
            By: /s/ Sue Stepanek
 	
             

	
            Name:
 	
            Sue Stepanek
 	
             

	
            Title:
 	
            Executive Vice President
 
				



LASALLE BANK NATIONAL ASSOCIATION


as Trustee



	
            By: /s/ Christopher Lewis
 	
             

	
            Name:
 	
            Christopher Lewis
 	
             

	
            Title:
 	
            Assistant Vice President
**Exhibit 31.1**

**Certification**

I, Michael Gooch,certify that:

1.     I havereviewed this Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q of GFI Group Inc.;

2.     Based onmy knowledge, this report does not contain any untrue statement of a materialfact or omit to state a material fact necessary to make the statements made, inlight of the circumstances under which such statements were made, notmisleading with respect to the period covered by this report;

3.     Based onmy knowledge, the financial statements, and other financial informationincluded in this report, fairly present in all material respects the financialcondition, results of operations and cash flows of the registrant as of, andfor, the periods presented in this report;

4.     Theregistrant’s other certifying officer and I are responsible for establishingand maintaining disclosure controls and procedures (as defined in Exchange Act Rules 13a-15(e) and15d-15(e)) for the registrant and have:

a)               designed suchdisclosure controls and procedures, or caused such disclosure controls andprocedures to be designed under our supervision, to ensure that materialinformation relating to the registrant, including its consolidatedsubsidiaries, is made known to us by others within those entities, particularlyduring the period in which this report is being prepared;

b)              evaluated theeffectiveness of the registrant’s disclosure controls and procedures andpresented in this report our conclusions about the effectiveness of thedisclosure controls and procedures, as of the end of the period covered by thisreport based on such evaluation; and

c)               disclosed in thisreport any change in the registrant’s internal control over financial reportingthat occurred during the registrant’s first fiscal quarter that has materiallyaffected, or is reasonably likely to materially affect, the registrant’sinternal control over financial reporting; and

5.     Theregistrant’s other certifying officer and I have disclosed, based on our mostrecent evaluation of internal control over financial reporting, to the registrant’sauditors and the audit committee of the registrant’s board of directors (orpersons performing the equivalent functions):

a)               all significantdeficiencies and material weaknesses in the design or operation of internalcontrol over financial reporting which are reasonably likely to adverselyaffect the registrant’s ability to record, process, summarize and reportfinancial information; and

b)              any fraud, whetheror not material, that involves management or other employees who have asignificant role in the registrant’s internal control over financial reporting.

Date:August 14, 2006
| /s/ MICHAEL GOOCH        |   |
|--------------------------|--------|
| Michael Gooch            |   |
| Chairman of the  Board,  |   |
| Chief Executive  Officer |   |

 

----
**Exhibit 32.2**

 

GMH COMMUNITIESTRUST

 

CERTIFICATIONSREQUIRED BY

RULE 13a-14(a) OFTHE SECURITIES EXCHANGE ACT OF 1934

 

 

I, Bradley W. Harris,Senior Vice President and Chief Financial Officer of GMH Communities Trust, aMaryland real estate investment trust (the “Company”), hereby certify that, tomy knowledge:

 

(1)                                  TheCompany’s periodic report on Form 10-Q for the period ended March 31,2005 (the “Form 10-Q”) fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) ofthe Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended; and

 

(2)                                  Theinformation contained in the Form 10-Q fairly presents, in all materialrespects, the financial condition and results of operations of the Company.

 

*             *             *

 

 
| /s/ Bradley W. Harris                              |   |
|----------------------------------------------------|--------|
| Bradley W. Harris                                  |
| Senior Vice President  and Chief Financial Officer |

 

 

Date: May 10, 2005

 

----
[No. 35869-3-I.

Division One.

August 5, 1996.]

#### D.E. Goodrich, *Appellant,*v. The City of Anacortes, *Respondent.*

Appeal from a judgment of the Superior Court for Skag-it County, No. 91-2-00222-6, Larry E. McKeeman, J., entered December 9, 1994. *Affirmed*by unpublished opinion per Agid, J., concurred in by Webster and Becker, JJ.
Fourth Court of Appeals

San Antonio, Texas

JUDGMENT

No. 04-13-00273-CV

IBS ASSET LIQUIDATIONS LLC f/k/a Icon Building Systems, LLC,

Appellant

v.

SERVICIOS MULTIPLES DEL NORTE SA DE CV,

Appellee

From the 150th Judicial District Court, Bexar County, Texas

Trial Court No. 2012-CI-06095

Honorable Richard Price, Judge Presiding

BEFORE JUSTICE MARION, JUSTICE BARNARD, AND JUSTICE ALVAREZ

In accordance with this court’s opinion of this date, the trial court’s order denying 

appellant’s motion to compel arbitration is REVERSED and the cause is REMANDED to the trial 

court for further proceedings. It is ORDERED that appellant recover its costs of appeal from 

appellee.

SIGNED November 20, 2013.

_____________________________

Sandee Bryan Marion, Justice
#### FLORIDA POWER & LIGHT COMPANY, Appellant, v. AMERICAN LIMITED CORPORATION, Appellee.

No. 86-1464.

District Court of Appeal of Florida, Fifth District.

Sept. 3, 1987.

Barry R. Davidson and John W. Little, III, of Steel, Hector & Davis, Miami, for appellant.

William L. Coalson of Greene, Greene & Coalson, P.A., Jacksonville, for appellee.

COBB, Judge.

Florida Power and Light Company (FPL) filed a condemnation proceeding seeking a 300-foot wide easement across land in Putnam County owned by American Limited Corp. American counterclaimed for specific performance, asserting that FPL had orally contracted to buy the land in question for $150,000. FPL answered the counterclaim and raised the statute of frauds1 as an affirmative defense. The specific performance claim was severed for separate trial from the condemnation action.

At the conclusion of a nonjury trial, the trial judge granted specific performance requiring conveyance of the property to FPL for $150,000. This holding was based on a finding that promissory estoppel negated the statute of frauds defense. We reverse. Promissory estoppel is not a valid bar to the statute of frauds defense under Florida law. *Tanenbaum v. Biscayne Osteopathic Hospital, Inc.,*190 So.2d 777 (Fla.1966). Equitable relief is not available to one who relies upon the validity of an unenforceable express contract rather than seeking *quantum meruit*relief. 27 Fla.Jur.2d, *Statute of Frauds,*§ 12 (1981).

REVERSED.

ORFINGER, J., concurs.

DAUKSCH, J., dissents with opinion.

1

. *See*§ 725.01, Fla.Stat. (1985).

DAUKSCH, Judge,

dissenting.

I respectfully dissent, but not too strongly because perhaps the pleadings must be stretched a bit to reach my conclusion. In my view, when the parties agreed upon the $150,000 figure the actual consideration for that sum was the forbearance from a defense of the condemnation action — not the conveyance of the land. FPL had the legal right and authority to condemn the land and take it away from the appellee so there was not really a price-for-conveyance agreed upon. If no land conveyance was involved in the $150,000 agreement then the statute of frauds is not involved, but merely an oral contract for payment to facilitate the taking. I would sustain the trial judge’s result.
## Martin, Michael (OST) From: 

### Sent: To:
Cc: 

### Subject: Attachments:
Everyone: Martin, Michael (OST) Tuesday, February 19, 2013 1:06 PM 'Kenny Patterson Qoleary@showlowaz.gov)'; lona@cityofpage.org; Jeffrey Tripp Qeffrey.tripp@prescott-az.gov); John Salem Qsalem@cityofkingman.gov); Dave French (kaadave@frontier.com); 'dimbatt@cableone.net' jcook@amanresorts.com'; mmatthews@flygreatlakes.com; chowell@flygreatlakes.com; Bob Karns (bob@sovereignairinc.com); Tim Sieber (tim@seaportair.com); 'Rob McKinney (rob@seaportair.com)'; Devany, Dennis (OST); 'eas@seaportair.com' Essential Air Service Proposals at Kingman, Page, Prescott, and Show Low SEAPORT- proposal to serve AZ 4.pdf; SOVEREIGN AIR- Proposal to serve AZ 4.xlsx; GREAT LAKES- proposal to serve AZ 4.pdf

I would like to update you on the Essential Air Service (EAS) situation at Kingman, Page, Prescott, and Show Low, and giveyou an opportunityto offerany comments on the record before we submita recommendation tothe Assistant Secretary forAviation and InternationalAffairs. We issued Order2013-1-8, January 11,2013, requesting proposals from airlines interested in providing EAS for a newterm atthe above-mentioned communities. In response to our request, Great Lakes Aviation, SeaPort Airlines, and Sovereign Air submitted proposals. I have attached each airline's proposal foryour review. I expectthe proposals to be uploaded on www.regulations.gov by late this afternoon. I requestthatyou review the proposals and submit any commentsyou may have as soon as possible, but no laterthan Tuesday, March 19. Please send yourcomments directlyto me via e-mail at michael.f.martin@dot.gov. Also, please forward this e-mail to all relevant partiesthat I have not included on this email. Ifyou have any questions, feel free to contact me. Regards, Michael Martin United States Department ofTransportation Essential AirService (EAS) and Small CommunityAir Service Development Program (SCASDP) (202} 366-6494

1
```

[Congressional Bills 107th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[H. Con. Res. 285 Introduced in House (IH)]

107th CONGRESS
  1st Session
H. CON. RES. 285

   Condemning the more than 500 anthrax threats sent to reproductive 
     health centers and abortion providers since October 14, 2001.

_______________________________________________________________________

                    IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

                            December 6, 2001

   Ms. Slaughter (for herself, Ms. DeGette, Mr. Greenwood, and Mrs. 
   Morella) submitted the following concurrent resolution; which was 
               referred to the Committee on the Judiciary

_______________________________________________________________________

                         CONCURRENT RESOLUTION

 
   Condemning the more than 500 anthrax threats sent to reproductive 
     health centers and abortion providers since October 14, 2001.

Whereas since October 14, 2001, reproductive health centers and abortion 
        providers located throughout the United States have received more than 
        500 letters that purported to contain anthrax;
Whereas the Federal Bureau of Investigation considers these anthrax threats to 
        be acts of domestic terrorism;
Whereas antichoice, extremist, clandestine organizations in the United States 
        have claimed responsibility for these acts;
Whereas the response of law enforcement and fire departments to these acts of 
        terrorism has consumed precious resources that could have been devoted 
        to other emergency services;
Whereas 7 murders, 17 attempted murders, 41 bombings, 165 arsons, 82 attempted 
        arsons and bombings, 122 assaults, 343 death threats, 3 kidnappings, 315 
        trespasses, 948 acts of vandalism, 100 butyric acid attacks, and more 
        than 600 anthrax threats have been perpetrated against abortion 
        providers in North America; and
Whereas for more than 25 years abortion providers have had to go to work each 
        day fearing intimidation, property damage, personal injury, and even 
        death: Now, therefore, be it
    Resolved by the House of Representatives (the Senate concurring), 
That Congress--
            (1) condemns the more than 500 anthrax threats sent to 
        reproductive health centers and abortion providers since 
        October 14, 2001;
            (2) supports reproductive health centers and abortion 
        providers as they continue to provide constitutionally 
        protected services to women and men in the United States; and
            (3) urges the administration, local law enforcement, and 
        related government agencies to continue to make their best 
        efforts to bring all those who commit acts of terrorism to 
        justice.
                                 <all>
```
### ^SPORTAilQjl ^ OPERATION S 2?l i i1. U U.S . Dep to fTransportatio n 120 0 Ne wJerse yAve . S E Washington , D C 2059 0 Februarys , 201 2 Dea rSirs , Thi s lette rreference s Su n Countr yslo texemptio n Docke tNo . FAA-2012-0089 , an d th e possibl e endin g o fa direc tfligh tfro m Lansing , Michiga n t o Washington , DC . I a m requestin g tha tyo u gran ta n exemptio n t o Su n Countr yt o continu e thi s flight . 3- - i M

Lansin g i s continuall ylookin g fo rway s t o improv e ou rcity' s econom yan d worthiness . I wa s s o happ ytha tw e ha d thi s fligh tt o th e nation' s capital . Lansin g shoul d hav e a direc tlin k

t o Washington , DC . i hav e take n thi s fligh tan d kno wtha tth e airpor t official s wer e please d a s t o th e 48,00 0 peopl e tha thav e flow n fro m Lansing . I hav e rea d tha tth e exemptio n wil l no tadversel yaffec tsafet ya s th e airlin e ha s provide d saf e servic e sinc e Apri l 2011 . Ou rairpor tservice s ou rstat e government , Michiga n Stat e University , an d stat e association s wit h tie s t o Washington , DC . Ou rnationa l capita l i s als o a wonderfu l vacatio n destinatio n tha ti s mad e eve n mor e assessabl e t o u s tha tliv e i n mid Michiga n b yusin g ou rairpor ther e i n Lansing . I than k yo u fo ryou rconsideratio n i n thi s importan tmatter . Sincerely , Caro l L . Blacke r 82 5 E . Cavanaug h Lansing , M l 4891 0
Exhibit 32.2


                                             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 Aearo Company I (the 'Company'),
on Form 10-Q for the period  ended June 30, 2004,  as filed with the  Securities
and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the 'Report'),  I, Jeffrey S. Kulka,
Chief Financial 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 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 financialcondition and results of operations of the
      Company.


/s/ Jeffrey S. Kulka
    Jeffrey S. Kulka
    Senior Vice President,
    Chief Financial Officer,
    Treasurer, and Secretary

August 16, 2004

A signed written statement required by Section 906 has been provided to
Aearo Company I and will be retained by Aearo Company I and furnished to the
Securities and Exchange Commission and its staff upon request.
```

[Congressional Bills 107th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[H. Con. Res. 131 Introduced in House (IH)]

107th CONGRESS
  1st Session
H. CON. RES. 131

Congratulating the Baltic nations of Estonia, Latvia, and Lithuania on 
      the tenth anniversary of the reestablishment of their full 
                             independence.

_______________________________________________________________________

                    IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

                              May 10, 2001

Mr. Smith of New Jersey (for himself, Mr. Hoyer, Mr. Pitts, Mr. Cardin, 
    Mr. Wamp, and Mr. Hastings of Florida) submitted the following 
     concurrent resolution; which was referred to the Committee on 
                        International Relations

_______________________________________________________________________

                         CONCURRENT RESOLUTION

 
Congratulating the Baltic nations of Estonia, Latvia, and Lithuania on 
      the tenth anniversary of the reestablishment of their full 
                             independence.

Whereas the Baltic nations of Estonia, Latvia, and Lithuania were forcibly and 
        illegally incorporated into the Soviet Union from 1940 until 1991;
Whereas from 1940 to 1991, thousands of Estonians, Latvians, and Lithuanians 
        were executed, imprisoned, or exiled by Soviet authorities through a 
        regime of brutal repression, Sovietization, and Russification in their 
        respective nations;
Whereas despite the efforts of the Soviet Union to eradicate the memory of 
        independence, the Baltic people never lost their hope for freedom and 
        their long-held dream of full independence;
Whereas during the period of ``glasnost'' and ``perestroika'' in the Soviet 
        Union, the Baltic people led the struggle for democratic reform and 
        national independence; and
Whereas, in the years following the restoration of full independence, Estonia, 
        Latvia, and Lithuania have demonstrated their commitment to democracy, 
        human rights, and the rule of law, and have actively participated in a 
        wide range of international structures, pursuing further integration 
        with European political, economic, and security organizations: Now, 
        therefore, be it
    Resolved by the Senate (the House of Representatives concurring), 
That Congress--
            (1) congratulates Estonia, Latvia, and Lithuania on the 
        tenth anniversary of the restoration of their full 
        independence; and
            (2) calls on the President to continue to build the close 
        and mutually beneficial relations the United States has enjoyed 
        with Estonia, Latvia, and Lithuania since the restoration of 
        the full independence of those nations.
                                 <all>
```
Estructura Senasa

Presidencia

Vicepresidencia

DNFA DNSA DNPV Dnctlya URO

Dilab Dapfyv

UAI Consejo

Administración

Regiones
UNIDAD REGIONAL OPERATIVA
Unidad Regional 

Operativa

Coordinación de 

Desarrollo Regional y 

Apoyo Operativo

14 coordinadores 

generales regionales

Estructura URO

Coordinación de 

Seguimiento y Evaluación 

Regional
Antecedentes
Antecedentes 

Resolución Senasa No 225/06 

Redefine las zonas que comprenden las distintas regiones en

las que esta dividido el territorio nacional.

Decreto N° 1585/96 

Crea las direcciones regionales.

Resolución Senasa N° 222/06 

Crea la Comisión de regionalización.
 Resolución Senasa No 323/06 

Determina las responsabilidades del coordinador general

regional, coordinador regional temático y jefe laboratorio

regional.

 Resolución Senasa N° 335/07 

Creación de la Unidad regional operativa y funciones.

 Resolución Senasa N° 362/07

Designa autoridades de la Unidad regional operativa.

Antecedentes 
OBJETIVOS DE LA REGIONALIZACION Y 

LA DESCENTRALIZACION OPERATIVA
Organizar a la institución regionalmente 

y en ese marco descentralizar 

operativamente sus funciones
 Mejorar la atención a la cadena agroalimentaria.

 Articular con los sectores público-privados en cuestiones

de sanidad e inocuidad alimentaria.

 Fortalecer los vínculos entre el gobierno nacional y los

gobiernos provinciales y municipales.

Objetivos de la regionalización
Nivel Regional
Estructura y Funciones
Coordinación General

Regional

Coordinación Temática 

Administrativa, Legal Y 

Técnica

Coordinación Temática 

de Sanidad Animal

Coordinación Temática 

de Protección Vegetal

Estructura Regional

Coordinación Temática 

de Fiscalización 

Agroalimentaria

Jefe Laboratorio

Regional
 Representar al Senasa a nivel regional.

 Proporcionar operatividad al sistema.

 Coordinar acciones por área temática de los

programas nacionales y regionales.

 Elaborar, proponer y ejecutar el presupuesto

asignado.

Funciones
Centros Regionales
Centros 

Regionales
Centro Regional Buenos Aires Sur
 Texto 1

 Texto 2  165.023 km2 de territorio. 

 452 unidades elaboradoras/comercializadoras bajo control 

bajo control Senasa. 

 305 buques fresqueros bajo control bajo control Senasa

 4 puertos. 

 43 oficinas Senasa. 

 382 agentes.

Centro Regional Buenos Aires Sur

Mar del Plata
Centro Regional Patagonia Norte
 297.091 km2 de territorio. 

 450 unidades elaboradoras/comercializadoras bajo control 

Senasa . 

 2 puertos y 2 pasos fronterizos. 

 19 oficinas Senasa. 

 148 agentes.

Centro Regional Patagonia Norte

Gral. Roca
Centro Regional Patagonia Sur
 489.892 km2 de territorio. 

 271 unidades elaboradoras/comercializadoras bajo 

control Senasa. 

 11 puertos.

 7 pasos fronterizos.

 14 Oficinas Senasa.

 131 agentes.

Centro Regional Patagonia Sur

Comodoro

Rivadavia
 Presupuesto 2008: u$s 161.000.000

 Personal total: 4.356 agentes.

 Personal nivel central y laboratorio: 685 agentes.

 Personal regiones: 3.671 agentes.

Recursos Senasa
#### STATE ex rel. Jerome PERCY v. Hon. C. Paul PHELPS, Louisiana State Department of Corrections.

No. 86-KH-0946.

Supreme Court of Louisiana.

Feb. 6, 1987.

In re Percy, Jerome; applying for remedial writ; Parish of Orleans, Criminal District Court, Div. “D”, No. 278-277.

Denied.