alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
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 Secured Digital  Applications,  Inc.
(the  "Company")  on Form 10-QSB for the quarterly  period ending  September 30,
2005 as filed with the  Securities  and Exchange  Commission  on the date hereof
(the "Report"),  I, Voon Fui Yong, Chief Accounting Officer (principal 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:

     (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.


/s/ Voon Fui Yong
-------------------
Voon Fui Yong
Chief Accounting Officer
June 15, 2006
Case 3:22-cr-00209-X Document 39 Filed 09/19/23 Page 1 of 1 PageID 95
EXHIBIT 33.1





REPORT ON ASSESSMENT OF COMPLIANCE WITH SERVICING CRITERIA


FOR ASSET-BACKED SECURITIES





Entergy New Orleans, Inc. (the “Servicer”), as a party participating in the servicing function under Item 1122 of Regulation AB, hereby reports on its assessment of compliance with the servicing criteria specified in paragraph (d) of Item 1122 of Regulation AB, as follows:





(1) The Servicer is responsible for assessing compliance with the servicing criteria applicable to it. The servicing criteria specified in the following paragraphs of paragraph (d) of Item 1122 of Regulation AB are not applicable to the Servicer based on the activities it performs with respect to asset-backed securities transactions taken as a whole involving the Servicer and that are backed by the same asset type backing the Senior Secured Storm Recovery Bonds: (1)(ii) (outsourcing), (1)(iii) (back-up servicing), (1)(iv) (fidelity bond), 2(iii) (advances or guarantees), (2)(vi) (unissued checks), (4)(iii) (additions, removals or substitutions), 4(v) (records regarding pool assets), (4)(ix) (adjustments to interest rates), (4)(x) (funds held in trust for an obligor), (4)(xi) (payments on behalf of obligors), (4)(xii) (late payment penalties), (4)(xiii) (obligor disbursements), and (4)(xv) (external credit enhancement);





(2) The Servicer used the criteria in paragraph (d) of Item 1122 of Regulation AB to assess compliance with the applicable servicing criteria;





(3) The Servicer has determined that it is in compliance with the applicable servicing criteria as of and for the year ending December 31, 2016,  which is the period covered by this report on Form 10-K; and





(4) Deloitte & Touche LLP, an independent registered public accounting firm, has issued an attestation report on the Servicer's assessment of compliance with the applicable servicing criteria as of and for the year ended December 31, 2016, which is the period covered by this report on Form 10-K.








Dated: March 29, 2017





Entergy New Orleans, Inc., as servicer





By:  /s/ Alyson M. Mount





Name:  Alyson M. Mount


Title:   Senior Vice President and Chief Accounting Officer
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF TEXAS

FORT WORTH DIVISION

VICTORIA HARRIS,

Plaintiff,

v. No. 4:22-cv-00487-P

COMMISSIONER, SOCIAL SECURITY 

ADMINISTRATION,

Defendant.

ORDER ACCEPTING FINDINGS, CONCLUSIONS, AND 

RECOMMENDATION OF THE UNITED STATES 

MAGISTRATE JUDGE

The United States Magistrate Judge made Findings, Conclusions, 

and a Recommendation in this case. ECF No. 28. No objections were 

filed, and the Magistrate Judge’s Recommendation is ripe for review. 

The District Judge reviewed the proposed Findings, Conclusions, and 

Recommendation for plain error. Finding none, the undersigned District 

Judge believes that the Findings and Conclusions of the Magistrate 

Judge are correct, and they are accepted as the Findings and 

Conclusions of the Court.

The Court therefore ORDERS that the commissioner’s decision be 

REVERSED AND REMANDED.

SO ORDERED on this 8th day of September 2023.

Mark T. Pittman 

UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE 

Case 4:22-cv-00487-P Document 30 Filed 09/08/23 Page 1 of 1 PageID 3276
House Calendar No. 163

103D CONGRESS

2D SESSION H. CON. RES. 238

[Report No. 103–515]

CONCURRENT RESOLUTION

Authorizing the use of the Capitol grounds for the

Greater Washington Soap Box Derby.

MAY 19, 1994

Referred to the House Calendar and ordered to be

printed
IV

House Calendar No. 163

103D CONGRESS

2D SESSION H. CON. RES. 238

[Report No. 103–515]

Authorizing the use of the Capitol grounds for the Greater Washington

Soap Box Derby.

IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

APRIL 13, 1994

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

to the Committee on Public Works and Transportation

MAY 19, 1994

Referred to the House Calendar and ordered to be printed

CONCURRENT RESOLUTION

Authorizing the use of the Capitol grounds for the Greater

Washington Soap Box Derby.

1 Resolved by the House of Representatives (the Senate

2 concurring),

3 SECTION 1. AUTHORIZATION OF SOAP BOX DERBY RACES

4 ON CAPITOL GROUNDS.

5 The Greater Washington Soap Box Derby Associa6 tion (hereinafter in this resolution referred to as the ‘‘As-
2

•HCON 238 RH

1 sociation’’) shall be permitted to sponsor a public event,

2 soap box derby races, on the Capitol grounds on July 16,

3 1994, or on such other date as the Speaker of the House

4 of Representatives and the President pro tempore of the

5 Senate may jointly designate.

6 SEC. 2. CONDITIONS.

7 The event to be carried out under this resolution shall

8 be free of admission charge to the public and arranged

9 not to interfere with the needs of Congress, under condi10 tions to be prescribed by the Architect of the Capitol and

11 the Capitol Police Board; except that the Association shall

12 assume full responsibility for all expenses and liabilities

13 incident to all activities associated with the event.

14 SEC. 3. STRUCTURES AND EQUIPMENT.

15 For the purposes of this resolution, the Association

16 is authorized to erect upon the Capitol grounds, subject

17 to the approval of the Architect of the Capitol, such stage,

18 sound amplification devices, and other related structures

19 and equipment as may be required for the event to be car20 ried out under this resolution.

21 SEC. 4. ADDITIONAL ARRANGEMENTS.

22 The Architect of the Capitol and the Capitol Police

23 Board are authorized to make any such additional ar24 rangements that may be required to carry out the event

25 under this resolution.
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 Energy

###### Federal Energy Regulatory Commission

          - [Docket No. RP01-67-000]

Take notice that on October 31, 2000, ANR Pipeline Company (ANR) tendered for filing, as part of its FERC Gas Tariff, Second Revised Volume No. 1, the Fifth Revised Sheet No. 45E.01 to be effective December 1, 2000.

ANR states that the purpose of this filing is to designate in its tariff a new point eligible for service under its existing Rate Schedule IPLS.

ANR states that copies of the filing have been mailed to all affected customers and state regulatory commissions.

Any person desiring to be heard or to protest said filing should file a motion to intervene or a protest with the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission, 888 First Street, NE., Washington, DC 20426, in accordance with Sections 385.214 of 385.211 of the Commission's Rules and Regulations. All such motions or protests must be filed in accordance with Section 154.210 of the Commission's Regulations. Protests will be considered by the Commission in determining the appropriate action to be taken, but will not serve to make protestants parties to the proceedings. Any person wishing to become a party must file a motion to intervene. Copies of this filing are on file with the Commission and are available for public inspection in the Public Reference Room. This filing may be viewed on the web at http://www.ferc.fed.us/​online/​rims.htm (call 202-208-2222 for assistance). Comments and protests may be filed electronically via the internet in lieu of paper. See, 18 CFR 385.2001(a)(1)(iii) and the instructions on the Commission's web site at http://www.ferc.fed.us/​efi/​doorbell.htm.

David P. Boergers,

Secretary.

[FR Doc. 00-28753 Filed 11-8-00; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 6717-01-M
IN THE

TENTH COURT OF APPEALS

No. 10-23-00061-CR

IN RE ALLAN LATOI STORY

Original Proceeding

From the 19th District Court

McLennan County, Texas

Trial Court No. 2011-2499-C1

MEMORANDUM OPINION

Relator Allan Latoi Story, acting pro se, has filed a petition for a writ of mandamus 

seeking to compel the trial court to rule on his “Petition for Depositions Before Suit or to 

Investigate Claims.” Story’s petition for writ of mandamus is denied.

MATT JOHNSON

Justice
In re Story Page 2

Before Chief Justice Gray,*

Justice Johnson,1 and 

Justice Smith

*(Chief Justice Gray dissenting)

Petition denied

Opinion delivered and filed May 17, 2023

Do not publish

[OT06]

1 This memorandum opinion was circulated by the authoring justice for review by the panel members on 

March 29, 2023.
IA

103D CONGRESS

1ST SESSION H. J. RES. 106

To designate the months of October 1993 and October 1994 as ‘‘Country

Music Month’’.

IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

FEBRUARY 16, 1993

Mr. CLEMENT (for himself, Mr. COOPER, Mr. DUNCAN, Mr. FORD of Tennessee, Mr. GORDON, Mrs. LLOYD, Mr. QUILLEN, Mr. SUNDQUIST, and

Mr. TANNER) introduced the following joint resolution; which was referred to the Committee on Post Office and Civil Service

JOINT RESOLUTION

To designate the months of October 1993 and October 1994

as ‘‘Country Music Month’’.

Whereas country music derives its roots from the folk songs

of our Nation’s workers, captures the spirit of our religious hymns, reflects the sorrow and joy of our traditional ballads, and echoes the drive and soulfulness of

rhythm and blues;

Whereas country music has played an integral part in our

Nation’s history, accompanying the growth of our Nation

and reflecting the ethnic and cultural diversity of our

people;
2

HJ 106 IH

Whereas country music embodies a spirit of the American

people and the deep and genuine feelings individuals experience throughout life;

Whereas the distinctively American refrains of country music

have been performed for audiences throughout the world,

striking a chord deep within the hearts and souls of fans

everywhere; and

Whereas October 1993 and October 1994 mark, respectively,

the twenty-ninth and thirtieth annual observances of

Country Music Month: Now, therefore, be it

1 Resolved by the Senate and House of Representatives

2 of the United States of America in Congress assembled,

3 That the months of October 1993 and October 1994 are

4 designated as ‘‘Country Music Month’’, and that the

5 President is authorized and requested to issue a proclama6 tion calling upon the people of the United States to

7 observe such months with appropriate ceremonies and

8 activities.

Æ
|                                                                                            
|--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
|                                                                                            
|View History: Annual Download Data (XLS File)                                              
|View History: Annual                                                                        
|View History: Annual                                                                        
|View History:                                                                               
|                                                                                            
|U.S. Refinery Asphalt and Road Oil Shell Storage Capacity as of January 1 (Thousand Barrels)
|                                                                                            
|                                                                                            
|U.S. Refinery Asphalt and Road Oil Shell Storage Capacity as of January 1 (Thousand Barrels)
|                                                                                            

|Decade                                                                                                                            | Year-0 | Year-1 | Year-2 | Year-3 | Year-4 | Year-5 | Year-6 | Year-7 | Year-8 | Year-9
|--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- | ------ | ------ | ------ | ------ | ------ | ------ | ------ | ------ | ------ | ------
|1980's                                                                                                                            |        |        | 32,304 | 31,156 | 32,754 | 33,121 | 34,564 | 34,027 | 34,425 | 33,556
|1990's                                                                                                                            | 33,595 | 34,567 | 33,825 | 33,269 | 32,144 | 31,136 | NA     | 32,342 | NA     | 30,972
|2000's                                                                                                                            | 32,040 | 31,910 | 30,902 | 30,413 | 30,382 | 29,020 | 27,823 | 28,323 | 28,334 | 28,542
|2010's                                                                                                                            | 26,932 | --     | --     | --     | --     | --     | --     | --     | --     | --    
|2020's                                                                                                                            | --     | --     | --     | --     | --     |        |        |        |        |       
|- = No Data Reported;  -- = Not Applicable;  NA = Not Available;  W = Withheld to avoid disclosure of individual company data.
|                                                                                                                                 
|Release Date: 6/14/2024                                                                                                          
|Next Release Date: June 2025
(logo) Rialto

           CAPITAL

 

2015 Annual Statement of Servicer Compliance (Item 1123)

 

Pooling and Servicing Agreement (the "Pooling and Servicing Agreement") dated as of February 1, 2015 by and among Citigroup Commercial Mortgage Securities Inc. as Depositor, Wells Fargo Bank, National Association as Master Servicer, Midland Loan Services, a Division of PNC Bank, National Association as Special Servicer, Park Bridge Lender Services LLC as Operating Advisor, Citibank, N.A. as Certificate Administrator, and Deutsche Bank Trust Company Americas as Trustee, relating to the Citigroup Commercial Mortgage Securities Inc., Commercial Mo1tgage Pass-Through Certificates, Series 2015-GC27 (CGCMT 2015-GC27), pursuant to which Rialto Capital Advisors, LLC was appointed special servicer solely for the Boca Hamptons Plaza Portfolio Loan Combination

The undersigned, a duly authorized officer of Rialto Capital Advisors, LLC, as special servicer (the "Boca Hamptons Plaza Portfolio Special Servicer") for the Boca Hamptons Plaza Portfolio Loan Combination herein certifies to the following:

1. All servicing activities and performance of such servicing activities for the Boca Hamptons Plaza Portfolio Loan Combination are performed on behalf of the Boca Hamptons Plaza Portfolio Special Servicer.

2. A review of the servicing activities and performance by the Boca Hamptons Portfolio Special Servicer for the period of July 1, 2015 through December 31, 2015 (the "Reporting Period"), under the Pooling and Servicing Agreement has been conducted under my supervision.

3. To the best of my knowledge, based on such review, the Boca Hamptons Portfolio Special Servicer has fulfilled all of its obligations under the terms of the Pooling and Servicing Agreement, in all material respects throughout the Reporting Period and if there has been a failure to fulfill any such obligations in any material respect, each failure and the nature and status thereof has been specifically identified herein.

 

Certified by: /s/ Adam Singer

Adam Singer, Managing Director

Date: March 15, 2016
IINITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

NORTMRN DISTRICT OF TEXAS

SAN ANGELO DIVISION

FIRST SONORA BANCSHARES, INC.,

Plaintiff,

No. 6:22-CV-018-H

THE CHARTER OAKFIRE

INSURANCE CO.,

Defendant.

ORDER

The Court relerred this case to the Honorable Magistrate Judge John R. Parker for

pretrial management pursuant to 28 U.S.C. $ 636(b)(1XA). Dkt. No. 3. Shortly thereafter,

the parties fiIed a joint motion to remand the case to state court on the basis of the plaintiffs

stipulation that the amount-in-controversy fell below jurisdictional thresholds. Dkt. No. 5.

Judge Parker has made findings, conclusions, and a recommendation that the Court

$ant the parties' motion. Dkt. No. 6. In his FCR, Judge Parker ordered the parties, given

the motion's joint nature, to advise him whether the parties agreed to waive the standard 14-

day objections period. Id. at2. The parties filed a joint notice stating that they would waive

the 14-day period and consent to the Court's adopting Judge Parker's FCR immediately.

Dkt. No. 7. Accordingly, the Court adopts Judge Parker's FCR in full. The case is

remanded back to state court, and the Clerk is directed to close the case.

So ordered onAprfl, Zt ,2022.

.IAMES SL YHENDRIX

D STATES DISTRICT JUDGE

Case 6:22-cv-00018-H-BU Document 8 Filed 04/20/22 Page 1 of 1 PageID 56
(logo) PACIFIC LIFE

 

 

**MANAGEMENT'S REPORT ONASSESSMENT OF COMPLIANCE WITH SEC REGULATION AB SERVICING CRITERIA**

 

 

Pacific Life Insurance Company(the "Asserting Party") is responsible for assessing compliance, asof and for the year ended December 31, 2016, with the Relevant ServicingCriteria set forth in Item 1122 (d) of the SEC's Regulation AB, excluding thecriteria set forth in Item 1122 (d)(1)(iii), (d)(2)(ii), (d)(3)(i), (d)(3)(ii),(d)(3)(iii), (d)(3)(iv), (d)(4)(ii), and (d)(4)(xv), which the Asserting Partyhas concluded are not applicable to the activities it performs, with respect tothe asset-backed securities transactions covered by this report (such criteria,after giving effect to the exclusions identified above, the "ApplicableServicing Criteria"). The transactions covered by this report include allasset-backed transactions under the Securitized Commercial Mortgage LoansPlatform (the "Platform"), as listed in Appendix A.

 

The Asserting Party has usedthe criteria set forth in paragraph (d) of Item 1122 of Regulation AB in orderto assess the effectiveness of Pacific Life Insurance Company's compliance withthe Applicable Servicing Criteria as of and for the year ended December 31,2016. The Asserting Party has concluded that it has complied, in all materialrespects, with the Applicable Servicing Criteria as of and for the year endedDecember 31, 2016, with respect to the Platform taken as a whole.

 

Deloitte & Touche LLP, an independentregistered public accounting firm, has issued an attestation report for thePlatform on the assessment of compliance with the Applicable Servicing Criteriaas of and for the year ended December 31, 2016, as set forth in this assertion.

 

 

Pacific Life Insurance Company

 

 

/s/ Michelle Stickles

Michelle Stickles

Vice President, AssetManagement 

February 8, 2017

 

 

**PACIFIC LIFE INSURANCECOMPANY**

700 Newport Center Drive,Newport Beach, California 92660-6397 Tel (949) 219-3011

 

 

**APPENDIX A**

** **

**SECURITIZED COMMERCIALMORTGAGE LOANS PLATFORM**

 

| **Trust Name**                    | **Loan Name**                   |
|-----------------------------------|---------------------------------|
|                              |                            |
| COMM 2014-277P                    | 277 Park Avenue                 |
| 2015 HGLR                         | Houston Galleria Mall           |
| DBJPM 2016-SFC                    | Westfield San Francisco  Center |
| JPM 2015-WPG                      | Scottsdale Quarter              |
| Morgan Stanley Series  2006-HQ 10 | Waterside Mall                  |
UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT
No. 96-6356
STEPHEN C. SINNETT, Plaintiff - Appellant, versus RONALD J. ANGELONE, Director, Respondent - Appellee.
Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Virginia, at Richmond. Robert R. Merhige, Jr., Senior District Judge. (CA-95-348-3) Submitted: May 16, 1996 Decided: June 6, 1996 Before RUSSELL, LUTTIG, and WILLIAMS, Circuit Judges. Dismissed by unpublished per curiam opinion. Stephen C. Sinnett, Appellant Pro Se. Alexander Leonard Taylor, Jr., OFFICE OF THE ATTORNEY GENERAL OF VIRGINIA, Richmond, Virginia, for Appellee. Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. See Local Rule 36(c).2 PER CURIAM: Appellant seeks to appeal the district court's order denying relief on his 28 U.S.C. § 2254 (1988) petition. We have reviewed the record and the district court's opinion and find no reversibleerror. Accordingly, we deny a certificate of appealability and dismiss the appeal on the reasoning of the district court. Sinnett v. Angelone , No. CA-95-348-3 (E.D. Va. Dec. 26, 1995). We dispensewith oral argument because the facts and legal contentions are adequately presented in the materials before the court and argument would not aid the decisional process.

DISMISSED