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

[Congressional Bills 103th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[H.R. 1209 Introduced in House (IH)]

103d CONGRESS
  1st Session
                                H. R. 1209

 To limit purchases of district office equipment and furnishings by a 
departing Member to items not needed for official use by the successor 
                        to the departing Member.

_______________________________________________________________________

                    IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

                             March 3, 1993

Ms. Shepherd (for herself, Mr. Fingerhut, Mr. Barrett of Wisconsin, Mr. 
  Frank of Massachusetts, Mr. Kreidler, Mrs. Maloney, Mr. Minge, Mr. 
  Wyden, Mr. Bonilla, Ms. Harman, and Mr. Coppersmith) introduced the 
     following bill; which was referred to the Committee on House 
                             Administration

_______________________________________________________________________

                                 A BILL

 
 To limit purchases of district office equipment and furnishings by a 
departing Member to items not needed for official use by the successor 
                        to the departing Member.

    Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representatives of the 
United States of America in Congress assembled, That subsection (b) of 
the first section of the Act entitled ``An Act to authorize the 
disposition of certain office equipment and furnishings, and for other 
purposes'' (2 U.S.C. 59a(b)) is amended--
            (1) by striking out ``and'' at the end of paragraph (1);
            (2) by striking out the period at the end of paragraph (2) 
        and inserting in lieu thereof ``; and''; and
            (3) by adding at the end the following new paragraph:
            ``(3) subject to the right of the successor to the Member 
        who is leaving office or otherwise ceasing to be a Member to 
        retain the equipment or furnishings for official use.''.

                                 <all>
```
EXHIBIT 31.2

CERTIFICATION

I, Vivid Sehgal, certify
that:

1. I have reviewed this Amendment No. 1 to the Transition Report on Form 10-K/T for the transitional period
April 25, 2015 to December 31, 2015 of LivaNova PLC; and

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

Date: April 29, 2016



/s/ Vivid SehgalVivid SehgalChief Financial Officer(Principal Financial Officer)
I

103D CONGRESS

1ST SESSION H. R. 1150

To amend the Controlled Substances Act and the Controlled Substances

Import and Export Act with respect to the drug fentanyl.

IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

FEBRUARY 25, 1993

Mr. RANGEL (for himself and Mr. SHAYS) introduced the following bill; which

was referred jointly to the Committees on Energy and Commerce and the

Judiciary

A BILL

To amend the Controlled Substances Act and the Controlled

Substances Import and Export Act with respect to the

drug fentanyl.

1 Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representa2 tives of the United States of America in Congress assembled,

3 That—

4 (1) section 401(b) of the Controlled Substances

5 Act (21 U.S.C. 841(b)) is amended—

6 (A) in paragraph (1)(A)(vi)—

7 (i) by striking ‘‘400 grams’’ and in8 serting ‘‘40 grams’’; and
2

•HR 1150 IH

1 (ii) by striking ‘‘or 100 grams’’ and

2 all that follows through the end of clause

3 (vi) and inserting ‘‘(fentanyl) or any of its

4 analogues;’’; and

5 (B) in paragraph (1)(B)(vi)—

6 (i) by striking ‘‘40 grams’’ and insert7 ing ‘‘4 grams’’; and

8 (ii) by striking ‘‘or 10 grams’’ and all

9 that follows through the end of clause (vi)

10 and inserting ‘‘(fentanyl) or any of its ana11 logues;’’; and

12 (2) section 1010(b) of the Controlled Sub13 stances Import and Export Act (21 U.S.C. 960(b))

14 is amended—

15 (A) in paragraph (1)(F)—

16 (i) by striking ‘‘400 grams’’ and in17 serting ‘‘40 grams’’; and

18 (ii) by striking ‘‘or 100 grams’’ and

19 all that follows through the end of clause

20 (vi) and inserting ‘‘(fentanyl) or any of its

21 analogues;’’; and

22 (B) in paragraph (2)(F)—

23 (i) by striking ‘‘40 grams’’ and insert24 ing ‘‘4 grams’’; and
3

•HR 1150 IH

1 (ii) by striking ‘‘or 10 grams’’ and all

2 that follows through the end of clause (vi)

3 and inserting ‘‘(fentanyl) or any of its ana4 logues;’’.

Æ
## Court of Appeals Sixth Appellate District of Texas

JUDGMENT

Johnathan Lee Wood, Appellant

No. 06

- 14

- 00009

- CR v.

The State of Texas, Appellee Appeal from the 8th District Court of Hopkins County, Texas (Tr. Ct. No.

1323123 ). Memorandum Opinion delivered by J ustice Moseley, Chief Justice

Morriss and Justice Carter participating.

As stated in the Court’s opinion of this date, we find that the appeal should be dismissed

for want of jurisdiction . Therefore, we dismiss the appeal.

We note that the appellant, J ohnathan Lee Wood, has adequately indicated his inability to

pay costs of appeal. Therefore, we waive payment of costs.

RENDERED MARCH 21, 2014

BY ORDER OF THE COURT JOSH R. MORRISS, III

CHIEF JUSTICE

ATTEST: Debra K. Autrey, Clerk
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF TEXAS

DALLAS DIVISION

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA §

§

v. § CASE NO.: 3:22-CR-00326-L

§

CORRY ROBERSON (25) §

REPORT AND RECOMMENDATION

CONCERNING PLEA OF GUILTY

CORRY ROBERSON, by consent, under authority of United States v. Dees, 125 F.3d 261 (5th Cir. 1997), has 

appeared before me pursuant to Fed. R. Crim.P. 11, and has entered a plea of guilty to Count(s) 40 of the 

Superseding Indictment After cautioning and examining CORRY ROBERSON under oath concerning each of the 

subjects mentioned in Rule 11, I determined that the guilty plea(s) was knowledgeable and voluntary and that the 

offense(s) charged is supported by an independent basis in fact containing each of the essential elements of such offense. 

I therefore recommend that the plea(s) of guilty be accepted, and that CORRY ROBERSON be adjudged guilty of 21 

U.S.C. § 841(a)(1), (b)(1)(C), and 18 U.S.C. § 2, namely, Possession With Intent to Distribute a Controlled Substance, 

Aiding and Abetting and have sentence imposed accordingly. After being found guilty of the offense by the district judge,

☐ The defendant is currently in custody and should be ordered to remain in custody.

☐ The defendant must be ordered detained pursuant to 18 U.S.C. § 3143(a)(1) unless the Court finds by clear and

convincing evidence that the defendant is not likely to flee or pose a danger to any other person or the community

if released.

☐ The Government does not oppose release.

☐ The defendant has been compliant with the current conditions of release.

☐ I find by clear and convincing evidence that the defendant is not likely to flee or pose a danger to any other

person or the community if released and should therefore be released under § 3142(b) or (c).

☐ The Government opposes release.

☐ The defendant has not been compliant with the conditions of release.

☐ If the Court accepts this recommendation, this matter should be set for hearing upon motion of the

Government.

☐ The defendant must be ordered detained pursuant to 18 U.S.C. § 3143(a)(2) unless (1)(a) the Court finds there is a

substantial likelihood that a motion for acquittal or new trial will be granted, or (b) the Government has

recommended that no sentence of imprisonment be imposed, or (c) exceptional circumstances are clearly shown

under § 3145(c) why the defendant should not be detained, and (2) the Court finds by clear and convincing evidence

that the defendant is not likely to flee or pose a danger to any other person or the community if released.

Date: 27th day of August, 2024 

______________________________________ 

UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE

Failure to file written objections to this Report and Recommendation within fourteen (14) days from the date of its service 

shall bar an aggrieved party from attacking such Report and Recommendation before the assigned United States District 

Judge. 28 U.S.C. §636(b)(1)(B). 

FILED

KAREN MITCHELL

CLERK, U.S. DISTRICT 

COURT August 27, 2024

Case 3:22-cr-00326-L Document 487 Filed 08/27/24 Page 1 of 1 PageID 1576
IA

103D CONGRESS

1ST SESSION H. J. RES. 223

Proposing an amendment to the Constitution of the United States relative

to expenditures to affect Congressional, Presidential, State, and local elections.

IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

JUNE 30, 1993

Mr. VOLKMER introduced the following joint resolution; which was referred to

the Committee on the Judiciary

JOINT RESOLUTION

Proposing an amendment to the Constitution of the United

States relative to expenditures to affect Congressional,

Presidential, State, and local elections.

1 Resolved by the Senate and House of Representatives

2 of the United States of America in Congress assembled,

3 (two-thirds of each House concurring therein), That the fol4 lowing article is proposed as an amendment to the Con5 stitution of the United States, which shall be valid to all

6 intents and purposes as part of the Constitution when

7 ratified by the legislatures of three-fourths of the several
2

•HJ 223 IH

1 States within seven years after the date of its submission

2 for ratification:

3 ‘‘ARTICLE—

4 ‘‘SECTION 1. The Congress shall have the power to

5 set limits on expenditures by, in support of, or in opposi6 tion to, all candidates in any primary, general, or other

7 election for Federal office.

8 ‘‘SECTION 2. The States shall have the power to set

9 limits on expenditures by, in support of, or in opposition

10 to, all candidates in any primary, general, or other election

11 for State or local office.’’.

Æ
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<ARTICLE> 5
<MULTIPLIER> 1,000
       
<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   3-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          NOV-01-1997
<PERIOD-END>                               JAN-25-1997
<CASH>                                          21,191
<SECURITIES>                                         0
<RECEIVABLES>                                   20,694
<ALLOWANCES>                                         0
<INVENTORY>                                    203,947
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                               268,891
<PP&E>                                         440,819
<DEPRECIATION>                                  57,170
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                               1,109,682
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                          291,672
<BONDS>                                              0
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                        22,118
<OTHER-SE>                                     184,281
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                 1,109,682
<SALES>                                        602,923
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                               602,923
<CGS>                                          460,616
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                  460,616
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                     0
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                     0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                              12,911
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                 10,384
<INCOME-TAX>                                     5,199
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                              5,185
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                     5,185
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                      .23
<EPS-DILUTED>                                      .23
        

</TABLE>
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

NORTHERN DISTRICT OF TEXAS

FORT WORTH DIVISION

JENNIFER VANDERSTOK et al.,

 Plaintiffs, Case No. 4:22-cv-00691-O

 v.

MERRICK GARLAND, in his official 

capacity as Attorney General of the United 

States et al., 

 Defendants.

NOTICE OF APPEARANCE

The Clerk of Court is respectfully requested to enter the appearance of Taisa M. Goodnature

in the above-captioned action as counsel for Defendants.

DATED: September 29, 2022 Respectfully submitted,

BRIAN M. BOYNTON

Principal Deputy Assistant Attorney General

ALEXANDER K. HAAS

Director, Federal Programs Branch

LESLEY FARBY

Assistant Director, Federal Programs Branch

/s/ Taisa M. Goodnature

TAISA M. GOODNATURE

Trial Attorney

Civil Division, Federal Programs Branch

U.S. Department of Justice

1100 L Street, NW

Washington, DC 20005

Phone: (202) 514-3786

Email: Taisa.M.Goodnature@usdoj.gov

Counsel for Defendants

Case 4:22-cv-00691-O Document 85 Filed 09/29/22 Page 1 of 2 PageID 1136
2

CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE

On September 29, 2022, I electronically submitted the foregoing document with the clerk of 

court for the U.S. District Court, Northern District of Texas, using the electronic case filing system 

of the court. I hereby certify that I have served all parties electronically or by another manner 

authorized by Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 5(b)(2).

/s/ Taisa M. Goodnature

Case 4:22-cv-00691-O Document 85 Filed 09/29/22 Page 2 of 2 PageID 1137
UNITED STATE DISTRICT COURT

NORTHERN DISTRICT OF TEXAS

AMARILLO DIVISION

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA §

§

VS. § Case No. 2:22-MJ-0186-BR 

 §

TIMETHY MARRUGO §

MOTION FOR CONTINUANCE OF PRELIMINARY EXAMINATION

AND DETENTION HEARINGS

Defendant Timethy Marrugo (“Marrugo”) by and through counsel, files this Motion to 

Continue the Preliminary Examination and Detention Hearings in the above-entitled and numbered 

cause and in support thereof, respectfully shows the Court as follows:

I.

A complaint was filed in this case on October 4, 2022, charging Marrugo with Distribution 

and Possession with Intent to Distribute Methamphetamine. Marrugo had his Initial Appearance 

on October 6, 2022. The Office of the Federal Public Defender was appointed to represent

Marrugo on October 6, 2022. Marrugo’s Preliminary Examination and Detention Hearings are 

currently set for October 19, 2022 at 9:30 a.m.

II.

Counsel will be in trial the week of October 17, 2022 and will need additional time to 

meet with Marrugo to adequately prepare for said hearings. This request is made for good 

cause. Failure to grant a continuance in this case would unduly prejudice Marrugo by depriving 

him of his right to be effectively represented by counsel. Additionally, counsel has conferred 

with AUSA Anna Marie Bell, and she does not oppose Marrugo’s Motion for Continuance.

For these reasons, Marrugo respectfully requests that the Court continue the Preliminary 

Examination and Detention Hearings in this case until Thursday, October 27, 2022, or a date 

Case 2:22-mj-00186-BR Document 12 Filed 10/13/22 Page 1 of 2 PageID 15
convenient for the Court. 

Respectfully Submitted,

JASON D. HAWKINS

Federal Public Defender

Northern District of Texas

/s/ Eric Coats 

ERIC COATS 

Texas Bar No. 00783845

Assistant Federal Public Defender

500 S. Taylor St., Suite 110

Amarillo, Texas 79101

Phone (806) 324-2370

Fax (806) 324-2372

ATTORNEY FOR DEFENDANT

ALEX HALISSI BELL

CERTIFICATE OF CONFERENCE

I certify that I conferred with AUSA Anna Marie Bell and confirmed that the government 

is not opposed to this request.

/s/ Eric Coats 

ERIC COATS 

CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE

I hereby certify that on October 13, 2022, I electronically filed the foregoing document 

using the Court’s CM/ECF system, thereby providing service on attorneys of record.

/s/ Eric Coats 

ERIC COATS 

Case 2:22-mj-00186-BR Document 12 Filed 10/13/22 Page 2 of 2 PageID 16
UNPUBLISHED

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

No. 98-1800

In Re: ANDREW CLIFFORD MOORE,

Debtor.

_________________________

GEORGE E. MCDERMOTT,

Plaintiff - Appellant,

versus

ANDREW CLIFFORD MOORE,

Defendant - Appellee,

and

UNITED STATES TRUSTEE,

Party in Interest.

Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of

Maryland, at Greenbelt. Peter J. Messitte, District Judge. (CA97-1822-PJM, BK-88-42746, AP-95-1249)

Submitted: December 17, 1998 Decided: December 29, 1998

Before WILKINS, NIEMEYER, and TRAXLER, Circuit Judges.
2

Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion.

George E. McDermott, Appellant Pro Se.

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.

See Local Rule 36(c).
3

PER CURIAM:

George E. McDermott appeals from the district court’s order

dismissing his appeal from the bankruptcy court’s order denying his

motion to reopen his adversary proceeding against Andrew Moore

alleging that confirmation of Moore’s Chapter 11 plan was obtained

by fraud. We have reviewed the record and the district court’s

opinion and find no reversible error. Accordingly, we affirm on

the reasoning of the district court. See McDermott v. Moore, No.

CA-97-1822-PJM; BK-88-42746; AP-95-1249 (D. Md. May 18, 1998). We

deny McDermott’s motion for injunctive relief in which he sought to

enjoin the enforcement of this court’s prior opinion, and we deny

his motion for suggestion of removal from this court. See In re

Beard, 811 F.2d 818, 827 (4th Cir. 1987). We dispense with 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.

AFFIRMED
OCC 3.1 Table

$000,000s

Agency External Agency External Total Agency External Agency External Total Agency Externa

Capital Investments Total ‐ ‐ 151.900  ‐ 151.900 ‐ ‐ 192.000  ‐ 192.000 ‐ 

Major IT sub‐total ‐ ‐ 94.400  ‐ 94.400 ‐ ‐ 119.600  ‐ 119.600 ‐ 

non‐Major IT sub‐total ‐ ‐ 57.500  ‐ 57.500 ‐ ‐ 72.400  ‐ 72.400 ‐ 

IT Total ‐ ‐ 151.900  ‐ 151.900 ‐ ‐ 192.000  ‐ 192.000 ‐ 

OCC Major IT Investments

Cyber Security ‐ ‐ 15.400  ‐ 15.400 ‐ ‐ 25.200  ‐ 25.200 ‐ 

015‐57‐8413‐0 OCC Assessment Funds ‐ ‐ 15.400  ‐ 15.400 ‐ ‐ 25.200  ‐ 25.200 ‐ 

OCC IT Infrastructure End User Services and Support

(EUSS)

‐ ‐ 50.300  ‐ 50.300 ‐ ‐ 51.400  ‐ 51.400 ‐ 

015‐57‐8413‐0 OCC Assessment Funds ‐ ‐ 50.300  ‐ 50.300 ‐ ‐ 51.400  ‐ 51.400 ‐ 

OCC IT Infrastructure Server Support Services (SSS) ‐ ‐ 8.900  ‐ 8.900 ‐ ‐ 22.200  ‐ 22.200 ‐ 

015‐57‐8413‐0 OCC Assessment Funds ‐ ‐ 8.900  ‐ 8.900 ‐ ‐ 22.200  ‐ 22.200 ‐ 

OCC IT Infrastructure Telecommunications Servicesand Support (TSS)

‐ ‐ 19.800  ‐ 19.800 ‐ ‐ 20.800  ‐ 20.800 ‐ 

015‐57‐8413‐0 OCC Assessment Funds ‐ ‐ 19.800  ‐ 19.800 ‐ ‐ 20.800  ‐ 20.800 ‐ 

OCC non‐Major IT Investments

Core Examination Systems Application ‐ ‐ 8.400  ‐ 8.400 ‐ ‐ 8.500  ‐ 8.500 ‐ 

015‐57‐8413‐0 OCC Assessment Funds ‐ ‐ 8.400  ‐ 8.400 ‐ ‐ 8.500  ‐ 8.500 ‐ 

Database Administration ‐ ‐ 4.600  ‐ 4.600 ‐ ‐ 4.600  ‐ 4.600 ‐ 

015‐57‐8413‐0 OCC Assessment Funds ‐ ‐ 4.600  ‐ 4.600 ‐ ‐ 4.600  ‐ 4.600 ‐ 

ECON, CCO, ITS, OM Application ‐ ‐ 8.700  ‐ 8.700 ‐ ‐ 9.200  ‐ 9.200 ‐ 

015‐57‐8413‐0 OCC Assessment Funds ‐ ‐ 8.700  ‐ 8.700 ‐ ‐ 9.200  ‐ 9.200 ‐ 

Enterprise Architecture ‐ ‐ 4.100  ‐ 4.100 ‐‐‐‐ ‐ ‐

015‐57‐8413‐0 OCC Assessment Funds ‐ ‐ 4.100  ‐ 4.100 ‐‐‐‐ ‐ ‐

Enterprise Data Management ‐ ‐ 6.100  ‐ 6.100 ‐ ‐ 7.200  ‐ 7.200 ‐ 

015‐57‐8413‐0 OCC Assessment Funds ‐ ‐ 6.100  ‐ 6.100 ‐ ‐ 7.200  ‐ 7.200 ‐ 

Exam Planning and Strategy Application ‐ ‐ 3.300  ‐ 3.300 ‐ ‐ 3.500  ‐ 3.500 ‐ 

015‐57‐8413‐0 OCC Assessment Funds ‐ ‐ 3.300  ‐ 3.300 ‐ ‐ 3.500  ‐ 3.500 ‐ 

IT Management ‐‐‐‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ 13.700  ‐ 13.700 ‐ 

015‐57‐8413‐0 OCC Assessment Funds ‐‐‐‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ 13.700  ‐ 13.700 ‐ 

PY 2016 Funding (Actual) CY 2017 Funding (Enacted) BY 2

DME O&M Total DME O&M Total DME 

Page 1 of 2
OCC 3.1 Table

$000,000s

Agency External Agency External Total Agency External Agency External Total Agency Externa

PY 2016 Funding (Actual) CY 2017 Funding (Enacted) BY 2

DME O&M Total DME O&M Total DME 

Non‐Application Services Contract Application ‐ ‐ 6.500  ‐ 6.500 ‐ ‐ 8.000  ‐ 8.000 ‐ 

015‐57‐8413‐0 OCC Assessment Funds ‐ ‐ 6.500  ‐ 6.500 ‐ ‐ 8.000  ‐ 8.000 ‐ 

OMBUD, COS/PA, BankNet Application ‐ ‐ 8.000  ‐ 8.000 ‐ ‐ 8.500  ‐ 8.500 ‐ 

015‐57‐8413‐0 OCC Assessment Funds ‐ ‐ 8.000  ‐ 8.000 ‐ ‐ 8.500  ‐ 8.500 ‐ 

Reporting & Analytics Application ‐ ‐ 7.800  ‐ 7.800 ‐ ‐ 9.200  ‐ 9.200 ‐ 

015‐57‐8413‐0 OCC Assessment Funds ‐ ‐ 7.800  ‐ 7.800 ‐ ‐ 9.200  ‐ 9.200 ‐ 

Page 2 of 2
V

103D CONGRESS

1ST SESSION H. R. 1162

For the relief of the Persis Corporation.

IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

MARCH 1, 1993

Mr. ABERCROMBIE introduced the following bill; which was referred to the

Committee on the Judiciary

A BILL

For the relief of the Persis Corporation.

1 Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representa2 tives of the United States of America in Congress assembled,

3 SECTION 1. AUTHORITY TO PROVIDE RELIEF.

4 Upon transfer to the Smithsonian Institution, within

5 60 days following the date of the enactment of this Act,

6 of all right, title, and interests held by the Persis Corpora7 tion, of Honolulu, Hawaii, in the collection known as the

8 Honolulu Advertiser Collection of ‘‘The Stamps and Post9 al History of Hawaii’’ that consists of approximately

10 3,500 items, the Secretary of the Treasury is authorized

11 and directed to pay, out of any money in the Treasury
2

•HR 1162 IH

1 not otherwise appropriated, to the Persis Corporation a

2 sum equal to the lesser of—

3 (1) the fair market value of the collection; or

4 (2) $8,250,000.

5 SEC. 2. ATTORNEY FEES.

6 It shall be unlawful for more than 10 percent of the

7 amount appropriated in section 1 to be paid to, delivered

8 to, or received by any agent or attorney on account of serv9 ices rendered in connection with this claim. Violation of

10 the provisions of this section is a misdemeanor punishable

11 by a fine not to exceed $1,000.

Æ
Exhibit 35.8



LOGO

Annual Statement of Compliance

GS Mortgage Securities Trust 2015-GC30

VIA EMAIL

To Addresses on Exhibit A:



| | Re: | GS Mortgage Securities Trust 2015-GC30, Commercial Mortgage Pass-Through Certificates, Series 2015-GC30 (the Trust), issued pursuant to the Pooling and Servicing Agreement, dated as of May 1, 2015
(the Agreement), by and among GS Mortgage Securities Corporation II, as Depositor, U.S. Bank National Association, as Certificate Administrator and Trustee, Trimont Real Estate Advisors, Inc., as Operating Advisor, and Midland Loan
Services, A Division of PNC Bank, National Association, as Master Servicer and Special Servicer
| | --- | ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

I, Michael Farrell, a
Senior Vice President of U.S. Bank National Association, as Custodian, hereby certify that:

(1) A review of the activities of the
Custodian during the preceding calendar year (the Reporting Period) and of the performance of the Custodian under the Agreement has been made under my supervision; and

(2) To the best of my knowledge, based on such review, the Custodian has fulfilled all its obligations under the Agreement in all material
respects throughout such Reporting Period.

Capitalized terms used but not defined herein have the meanings set forth in the Agreement.

Date: March 15, 2016

U.S. Bank National Association,
as Custodian

|    |  |                                      
|--- |  | -------------------------------------
|    | 
|By: |  | /s/ Michael
Farrell                  
|    |  | Michael Farrell Senior Vice
President



---

LOGO

Exhibit A

GS Mortgage Securities Corporation II

200 West Street

New York, New York 10282-2198

Attention: GSMS 2015-GC30

leah.nivison@gs.com

Citibank, N.A.

388 Greenwich Street, 14th Floor

New York, New York 10013

Attention: Citibank
Agency & Trust  CGCMT 2015-GC31

john.hannon@citi.com