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

Reference is hereby made to that
certain Trust and Servicing Agreement dated as of March 1, 2015, by and among DEUTSCHE MORTGAGE & ASSET RECEIVING CORPORATION,
as Depositor, WELLS FARGO BANK, NATIONAL ASSOCIATION, as Master Servicer, LNR PARTNERS, LLC, as Special Servicer, MIDLAND LOAN
SERVICES, A DIVISION OF PNC BANK, NATIONAL ASSOCIATION, as Special Servicer, WILMINGTON TRUST, NATIONAL ASSOCIATION, as Trustee,
and DEUTSCHE BANK TRUST COMPANY AMERICAS, as Certificate Administrator, Paying Agent and Custodian, and PARK BRIDGE LENDER SERVICES
LLC, as Operating Advisor with respect to Commercial Mortgage Pass-Through Certificates, COMM 2015-CCRE22 (the "Agreement").
Capitalized terms used herein not otherwise defined shall have the meanings assigned in the Agreement.

Pursuant to Section 10.11 of
this Agreement, I, Daniel Bober, Executive Vice President of Commercial Mortgage Services do hereby certify that:

| |    |                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                 
| | -- | ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
| | 1. | A review of the activities of the Master Servicer during the period from January 1, 2017 through December 31, 2017 (the “Reporting Period”), and of its performance per the Agreement during such period has been made under my supervision, and
| |    |                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                 
| | 2. | To the best of my knowledge, based on such review, the Master Servicer has fulfilled all of its obligations under the Agreement in all material respects throughout the Reporting Period.                                                       

IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the
undersigned has executed this Certificate as of the 28th day of February 2018.



Daniel Bober

Executive Vice President 
Wells Fargo Bank
Exhibit 23.1

Consent of KPMG LLP

The General Partner
Essex Portfolio, L.P.:

We consent to the incorporation by reference in the
registration statements on Form S-3 (Nos. 333-108336 and 333-44467)
of Essex Portfolio, L.P. of our report dated February 4, 2004, except note 18,
as to which the date is February 27, 2004, with respect to the
consolidated balance sheets of Essex Portfolio, L.P. and subsidiaries as of
December 31, 2003 and 2002
and the related consolidated statements of operations,
partners' capital, and cash flows for each
of the years in the three-year period ended December 31, 2003 and the related
financial statement schedule, which report appears in the annual report on Form 10-K
of Essex Portfolio, L.P.

/s/ KPMG LLP          
      
KPMG LLP

San Francisco, California
March 12, 2004

---
Exhibit
32.1
 
 CERTIFICATION
 
 The
undersigned, Bami Bastani, President and Chief Executive Officer of ANADIGICS,
Inc. (the "Company"), hereby certifies that the Quarterly Report of the Company
on Form 10-Q for the period ended March 29, 2008 fully complies with the
requirements of Section 13(a) or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934
and that the information contained in such report fairly presents, in all
material respects, the financial condition and results of operations of the
Company.
 
 
 Dated:
April 28, 2008
  By:
                /s/
      Bami BastaniBami
      BastaniPresident
      and Chief
      Executive Officer
 
 This
certification shall not be deemed to be “filed” for the purpose of Section 18 of
the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended, and will not be incorporated by
reference into any registration statement filed under the Securities Act of
1933, as amended, unless specifically identified therein as being incorporated
by reference.
 
 A signed
original of this written statement required by Section 906, or other document
authenticating, acknowledging, or otherwise adopting the signature that appears
in typed form within the electronic version of this written statement required
by Section 906, has been provided to ANADIGICS, Inc. and will be retained by
ANADIGICS, Inc. and furnished to the Securities and Exchange Commission or its
staff upon request.
<TABLE> <S> <C>


        <S> <C>

<ARTICLE> 5
<LEGEND>

THIS SCHEDULE CONTAINS SUMMARY FINANCIAL INFORMATION EXTRACTED FROM THE
ACCOMPANYING FINANCIAL STATEMENTS AND IS QUALIFIED IN ITS ENTIRETY BY REFERENCE
TO SUCH FINANCIAL STATEMETENTS.
</LEGEND>

<S>                                    <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                           6-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                       DEC-31-1998
<PERIOD-END>                            JUN-30-1998
<CASH>                                   $  697,319
<SECURITIES>                                      0
<RECEIVABLES>                               295,349	
<ALLOWANCES>                                160,000	
<INVENTORY>                                  31,188
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                            946,395
<PP&E>                                    1,251,062
<DEPRECIATION>                              596,261
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                            1,604,677
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                       550,046
<BONDS>                                     235,734
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                             0
<PREFERRED>                                       0
<COMMON>                                  6,708,948 	
<OTHER-SE>                               (5,890,051)
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>              1,604,677
<SALES>                                     802,638
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                            802,638	
<CGS>                                        99,848
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                99,848 	
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                          1,459,193	
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                  0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                           15,941	
<INCOME-PRETAX>                          (  746,237)
<INCOME-TAX>                             (  747,037)	
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                      (  747,037)
<DISCONTINUED>                                    0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                   0
<CHANGES>                                         0	
<NET-INCOME>                             (  747,037)	
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                  (.22)
<EPS-DILUTED>                                  (.22)	
        


</TABLE>
IV

103D CONGRESS

1ST SESSION H. CON. RES. 3

Expressing the sense of the Congress with respect to the right of all Americans to keep and bear arms in defense of life or liberty and in the

pursuit of all other legitimate endeavors.

IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

JANUARY 5, 1993

Mr. CRANE submitted the following concurrent resolution; which was referred

to the Committee on the Judiciary

CONCURRENT RESOLUTION

Expressing the sense of the Congress with respect to the

right of all Americans to keep and bear arms in defense

of life or liberty and in the pursuit of all other legitimate

endeavors.

Whereas the second amendment to the Constitution of the

United States conveys an inalienable right to all American citizens, such right occupying the same preferred position as all other constitutional rights, and

Whereas unconscionable abridgements of the second amendment have been undertaken over the years by State and

local governmental bodies, and have been allowed by the

courts to stand uncorrected, and

Whereas the Framers of the second amendment to the Constitution and those who ratified the second amendment
2

HCON 3 IH

intended that the individual retain the right to keep and

bear arms in order to protect life, liberty, and property

and to protect our Nation from those who would attempt

to destroy our freedom: Now, therefore, be it

1 Resolved by the House of Representatives (the Senate

2 concurring), That it is the sense of the Congress that the

3 Constitution provides that all individual citizens have the

4 right to keep and bear arms, which right supersedes the

5 power and authority of any government.

Æ
Document Headings

                    Document headings vary by document type but may contain                    the following:                  
                -                       the agency or agencies that issued and signed a document                    
                -                       the number of the CFR title and the number of each part                      the document amends, proposes to amend, or is directly                      related to                    
                -                       the agency docket number / agency internal file number                    
                -                       the RIN which identifies each regulatory action listed in                      the Unified Agenda of Federal Regulatory and Deregulatory                      Actions                    

                    See the                                          Document Drafting Handbook                                        for more details.                  

###### Department of Defense

###### Department of the Navy 

# AGENCY:

Department of the Navy, DOD. 

# ACTION:

Notice. 

# SUMMARY:

The Department of the Navy hereby gives notice of its intent to grant to American Pipe Lining, Inc., a revocable, nonassignable, exclusive license in the United States to practice the Government-owned invention described in U.S. Patent No. 5,707,702, entitled “Epoxy Pipelining Composition and Method of Manufacture,” issued January 13, 1998. 

# DATES:

Anyone wishing to object to the grant of this license must file written objections along with supporting evidence, if any, not later than January 8, 2001. 

# ADDRESSES:

Written objections are to be filed with the Naval Research Laboratory, Code 1004, 4555 Overlook Avenue, SW, Washington, DC 20375-5320. 

# FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

Catherine M. Cotell, Ph.D., Head, Technology Transfer Office, NRL Code 1004, 4555 Overlook Avenue, SW, Washington, DC 20375-5320, telephone (202) 767-7230. 

(Authority: 35 U.S.C. 207, 37 CFR Part 404.) 

Dated: October 31, 2000. 

J.L. Roth, 

Lieutenant Commander, Judge Advocate General's Corps, U.S. Navy, Federal Register Liaison Officer. 

[FR Doc. 00-28813 Filed 11-8-00; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 3810-FF-P
IN THE SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF MONTANA No. DA 23
- 0583 STATE OF MONTANA,

Plaintiff and Appellee, v. TAYLOR JAY DAMM,

Defendant and Appellant
.

**ORDER** Upon consideration of Appellant’s motion for extension of time, and good cause appearing, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that Appellant is granted an extension of time to and including September 11 , 202 4, within which to prepare, file, and serve Appellant’s opening brief on appeal.

Electronically signed by: Mike McGrath Chief Justice, Montana Supreme Court

August 6 2024

08/06/2024

Case Number: DA 23-0583
# United States Court of Appeals For the Eighth Circuit

___________________________

No. 23-1696

___________________________

Chad Bennett lllllllllllllllllllll Plaintiff - Appellant

v. Joseph Mrstik, Police Chief, City Manager; City of Pleasantville, Iowa; Brian Bigaouette, Deputy Sheriff; Marion County Sheriff's Department

lllllllllllllllllllll Defendants - Appellees

____________ Appeal from United States District Court for the Southern District of Iowa - Central

____________ Submitted: April 23, 2024 Filed: April 29, 2024 [Unpublished]

____________ Before GRUENDER, ERICKSON, and KOBES, Circuit Judges.

____________ PER CURIAM.Chad Bennett appeals following the district court’s 1 dismissal of his civil rights

complaint related to the investigation and prosecution of Bennett on state criminal charges. We grant appellees’ motion requesting that we take judicial notice of certain filings in the criminal case. Having carefully reviewed the record and the parties’ arguments on appeal, we find no basis for reversal. Accordingly, we affirm. See 8th Cir. R. 47B.

______________________________

1 The Honorable Stephanie M. Rose, Chief Judge, United States District Court for the Southern District of Iowa. -2-
**UN PUBLISHED** 

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

**No. 10** 
**- 6326** 

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA ,
Plaintiff

– Appellee ,

v.

CARLOS WOODS ,
Defendant

– Appellant

.

Appeal from the United States District Court for the Distr ict of Maryland , at Baltimore

. William D. Quarles, Jr. , District Judge. ( 1:07

- cr
- 00127

- WDQ

- 1 )

Submitted : June 25, 2010 Decided: July 2, 2010

Before GREGORY, AGEE, and DAVIS , Circuit Judges.

Affirmed by un published per curiam opinion

.

Carlos Woods, Appellant Pro Se. Michael Joseph Leotta, Assistant United States Attorney, Baltimore, Maryland, for Appellee.

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.2 PER CURIAM:

Carlos Woods appeals the district court’s orde r
denying his Fed. R. Crim. P. 33 motion for a new trial . We have
reviewed the record and find no reversible error. Accordingly,
we affirm for the reasons stated by the district court. United

States v. Woods , No. 1:07

- cr
- 00127

- WDQ

- 1 (D. Md. Feb. 19, 201 0)

. We dispense with oral argument because t he facts and legal
contentions are adequately presented in the materials before the
court and argument would not aid the decisional process.

AFFIRMED
CORPORATE DISCLOSURE STATEMENT AND CERTIFICATE OF INTERESTED PARTIES PAGE 1

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICTCOURT

FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF TEXAS

LUBBOCK DIVISION

LAND GORILLA, INC §

§

§

Plaintiff, §

§

v. § Civil Action No. 5:22-cv-000333-C

§

COMMUNITY TRUST BANK, INC. §

§ Ex Parte Filing

§

Garnishee. §

CORPORATE DISCLOSURE STATEMENT AND

CERTIFICATE OF INTERESTED PARTIES

Pursuant to Fed. R. Civ. P. 7.1, and Local Rules 3.1(c), 3.2(e), 7.4, 81.1(a)(4)(D) and 81.2, 

Defendant Land Gorilla, Inc. (“Land Gorilla”) discloses the following: 

1. Land Gorilla has no parent corporation and there is no publicly held corporation owning 

10% of more of Land Gorilla’s membership interests.

2. The persons or other legal entities that are financially interested in the outcome of this 

case:

Judgment Creditor Land Gorilla, Inc.,

Judgment Debtor Siwell, Inc. d/b/a Capital Mortgage Services of Texas

Garnishee Community Trust Bank, Inc.

Case 5:22-cv-00033-C Document 4 Filed 03/03/22 Page 1 of 2 PageID 20
CORPORATE DISCLOSURE STATEMENT AND CERTIFICATE OF INTERESTED PARTIES PAGE 2

Dated: March 3, 2022.

Respectfully submitted,

By: /s/ Michael L. Hood

Jonathan M. Herman (TX Bar No. 24052690)

Michael L. Hood (TX Bar No. 09943435)

THE HERMAN LAW FIRM

1601 Elm Street, Suite 2002

Santander Tower

Dallas, Texas 75201

Telephone: (214) 624-9805

Facsimile: (469) 383-3469

jherman@herman-lawfirm.com

mhood@herman-lawfirm.com

Counsel for Defendant

Land Gorilla, Inc.

Case 5:22-cv-00033-C Document 4 Filed 03/03/22 Page 2 of 2 PageID 21
NO. 94-580 IN THE SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF MONTANA 1995

JACK D. THOMAS,

Petitioner and Appellant,
v. RICK DAY, Acting Administrator, Department of Corrections and Human Services, and MONTANA TWENTIETH JUDICIAL DISTRICT, Sanders County, Montana,

Respondents and Respondents.

APPEAL FROM: District Court of the Twentieth Judicial District,

In and for the County of Sanders, The Honorable C.B. McNeil, Judge presiding.

COUNSEL OF RECORD:

For Appellant: Jack D. Thomas, Billings, Montana, Pro Se For Respondents: Hon. Joseph P. Mazurek, Attorney General; Barbara C. Harris, Ass't Attorney General, Helena. Montana


## 4 1” &;& Submitted on Briefs: June 20, 1995 

### Filed: JUL17 Decided: July 17, 1995The sole issue on appeal is whether the District Court abused

its discretion when it failed to give Thomas credit for time spent on probation? Section 46-18-201(3), MCA, provides that: If any restrictions or conditions imposed under subsection (1)(a) or (1) (b)are violated, the court shall consider any elapsed time and either expressly allow part or all of it as a credit against the sentence or reject all or part as a credit and state its reasons in the order. In the instant case, the District Court expressly rejected Thomas' probation time because of "Defendant's repeated and serious violations of the terms and conditions of his probation." Section 46-18-201(3), MCA, gives the district court discretion to credit or refuse time spent. The District Court properly exercised that discretion. There is nothing in the record to suggest that the District Court abused that discretion. Thomas' arguments focus on the reasons he violated his parole. His arguments are not convincing nor do they suggest any abuse of discretion by the District Court. Affirmed. Pursuant to Section I , Paragraph 3(c), Montana Supreme Court 1988 Internal Operating Rules, this decision shall not be cited as precedent and shall be published by its filing as a public document with the Clerk of the Supreme Court and by a report of its result to Montana Law Week, State Reporter, and West Publishing Company.We concur:

/ J ti'ces

4July 17, 1995 CERTIFICATE OF SERI hereby certify that the following certified order was sent by United States mail, following named:
Jack D. Thomas 104 N. 31st St. Billings, MT 59101 Hon. Joseph P. Mazurek, Attorney GeneraI Barbara Harris, Assistant Justice Bldg. Helena, MT 59620 Robert Slomski Sanders County Attorney P.O. Box 519 Thompson Falls, MT 59873-0519 ED SMITH CLERK OF THE SUPREME STATE OF MONTANA prepaid, to the

COURT

-
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

NORTHERN DISTRICT OF TEXAS

FORT WORTH DIVISION

JOHN DOE,

Plaintiff,

v.

TEXAS CHRISTIAN UNIVERSITY, 

Defendant.

§

§ 

§ 

§ 

§ 

§ 

§ 

§ 

§ 

Civil Action No. 4:22-cv-00297-O 

ORDER

Before the Court is Defendant’s Unopposed Motion to Set Settlement Conference Pursuant 

to Scheduling Order and Local Rule 16.3 (ECF No. 183), filed December 15, 2022. The Court 

finds that the motion should be GRANTED. Accordingly, the Court ORDERS the parties to 

appear for an in-person settlement conference on Wednesday, December 21, 2022 at 1:00 PM in 

the Second Floor Courtroom of the Federal Courthouse in Fort Worth, Texas (501 West 10th 

Street). It is further ORDERED that Plaintiff Doe shall be accompanied in-person by lead counsel 

and Defendant TCU shall be accompanied in-person by TCU Chancellor, Victor J. Boschini, Jr. 

SO ORDERED this 16th day of December, 2022. 

Case 4:22-cv-00297-O Document 185 Filed 12/16/22 Page 1 of 1 PageID 10486
#### BELL v. STATE.

No. 22636.

Court of Criminal Appeals of Texas.

Dec. 1, 1943.

L. P. DeLee, of Dallas, for appellant.

Spurgeon E. Bell, State’s Atty., of Austin, for the State.

DAVIDSON, Judge:

Upon his plea of guilty to the offense of theft by bailee by conversion, appellant was assessed two years in the state penitentiary.

The record is before us without statement of facts or bills of exception. Nothing is presented for review.

The judgment of the trial court is affirmed.

PER CURIAM.

The foregoing opinion of the Commission of Appeals has been examined by the Judges of the Court of Criminal Appeals and approved by the Court
```

[Congressional Bills 103th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[H. Con. Res. 242 Introduced in House (IH)]

103d CONGRESS
  2d Session
H. CON. RES. 242

To express the sense of the Congress that if nominated by the Governor 
 of New York as an estuary of national significance, the Administrator 
  of the Environmental Protection Agency should select and convene a 
management conference under the Federal Water Pollution Control Act for 
the lands and waters comprising the South Shore Estuary Reserve on Long 
                           Island, New York.

_______________________________________________________________________

                    IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

                             April 21, 1994

   Mr. King (for himself, Mr. Levy, Mr. Ackerman, Mr. Lazio, and Mr. 
Hochbrueckner) submitted the following concurrent resolution; which was 
 referred jointly to the Committees on Public Works and Transportation 
                   and Merchant Marine and Fisheries

_______________________________________________________________________

                         CONCURRENT RESOLUTION

 
To express the sense of the Congress that if nominated by the Governor 
 of New York as an estuary of national significance, the Administrator 
  of the Environmental Protection Agency should select and convene a 
management conference under the Federal Water Pollution Control Act for 
the lands and waters comprising the South Shore Estuary Reserve on Long 
                           Island, New York.

    Resolved by the House of Representatives (the Senate concurring),

SECTION 1. SENSE OF CONGRESS REGARDING SOUTH SHORE ESTUARY RESERVE ON 
              LONG ISLAND, NEW YORK.

    (a) Sense of Congress.--It is the sense of the Congress that if the 
Governor of the State of New York, in accordance with requirements 
applicable under section 320 of the Federal Water Pollution Control Act 
(33 U.S.C. 1330), nominates the area described in subsection (b) as an 
estuary of national significance, then the Administrator of the 
Environmental Protection Agency should select and convene a management 
conference for the area under that section.
    (b) Area Described.--The area referred to in subsection (a) is the 
lands and waters comprising the South Shore Estuary Reserve established 
by the State of New York, located on Long Island, New York.

                                 <all>
```
UNPUBLISHED

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

No. 97-2293

TOM SNYDER, d/b/a SCM, Incorporated,

Plaintiff - Appellant,

versus

ALPHA PRO TECH, INCORPORATED,

Defendant - Appellee.

Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of

Maryland, at Greenbelt. Peter J. Messitte, District Judge. (CA96-1932-PJM)

Argued: June 5, 1998 Decided: August 4, 1998

Before HAMILTON and MOTZ, Circuit Judges, and WILLIAMS, Senior

United States District Judge for the Eastern District of Virginia,

sitting by designation.

Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion.

ARGUED: John Michael Shoreman, MCFADDEN, SHOREMAN & TSIMPEDES,

P.C., Washington, D.C., for Appellant. David B. Anderson, WALSTON,

WELLS, ANDERSON & BAINS, L.L.P., Birmingham, Alabama, for Appellee.

ON BRIEF: Douglas B. McFadden, MCFADDEN, SHOREMAN & TSIMPEDES,

P.C., Washington, D.C., for Appellant. J. David Moore, WALSTON,

WELLS, ANDERSON & BAINS, L.L.P., Birmingham, Alabama, for Appellee.

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.

See Local Rule 36(c).
2

PER CURIAM

This case represents an appeal by the appellant of the

district court’s order granting summary judgment in favor of Alpha

Pro Tech, Inc. The two basic findings were that no enforceable

contract existed between appellant and appellee, and no service was

rendered to justify a quantum meruit award. We review a summary

judgment motion de novo. After reviewing the record and the district court’s bench ruling we find no reversible error. Accordingly, we affirm on the reasoning of the district court. Snyder v.

Alpha Pro Tech, Inc., PJM 96-1932 (D. Md. August 12, 1997).

AFFIRMED