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

Office of 

Personnel Management 

The Federal Government’s Human Resources Agency

Benefits Administration Letter 

Number: 09-204 Date: May 5, 2009 

Subject: Federal Employees’ Group Life Insurance Program: New Address for the 

Office of Federal Employees’ Group Life Insurance (OFEGLI)

The Office of Federal Employees’ Group Life Insurance, the unit of MetLife that pays FEGLI 

claims, is moving its current Jersey City, New Jersey office effective June 15, 2009. Some 

contact information is new, while other information remains unchanged. 

What’s Changing:

New OFEGLI addresses: 

For FEGLI claims and regular mail: 

OFEGLI 

P.O. BOX 6512 

UTICA, NY 13504-6512 

For overnight deliveries only (such as express mail): 

OFEGLI 

5950 AIRPORT RD. 

ORISKANY, NY 13424-3926 

Claim forms submitted to OFEGLI after June 15, 2009, should be sent to OFEGLI’s Oriskany 

office for processing, using the above addresses as applicable. However, OFEGLI has arranged 

to ensure that any claim forms sent to Jersey City by mistake after June 15th will automatically 

be forwarded to their Oriskany office. 

New OFEGLI fax numbers: 

1-315-792-6603 

1-315-792-6802 
What’s Not Changing:

OFEGLI’s Toll-Free Phone Number: 

1-800-633-4542 

OFEGLI’s Overseas Beneficiaries Phone Number:

1-212-578-2975 

Address to use for Requests for FEGLI Conversion (only): 

OFEGLI 

P.O. BOX 2627 

JERSEY CITY, NJ 07303-2627 

Conversion requests will continue to be accepted and processed for the time being at the Jersey 

City address. We will announce later in the year the new address for all conversion requests. 

Until then, please continue to use the Jersey City address for conversion requests only. 

Updated Information on the Web

This information will be posted on the FEGLI website at www.opm.gov/insure/life. We also are 

updating the FEGLI Handbook and FEGLI forms to reflect the new information. 

If you have any other questions or comments regarding this BAL, you may contact us at 

fegli@opm.gov. 

 Kathleen M. McGettigan 

 Deputy Associate Director 

 Center for Retirement and Insurance Services 

2
Report of Independent Registered Public Accounting Firm
 
 To the Board of Directors, PNC Financial Services Group, Inc.:
 
 
 
 We have examined management's assertion, included in the accompanying Report on Assessment of Compliance with Regulation AB Servicing Criteria, that Midland Loan Services, a division of PNC Bank,
 
 National Association ("Midland" or the "Company") complied with the servicing criteria set forth in
 
 
 
 Item 1122(d) of the Securities and Exchange Commission's Regulation AB for the commercial
 
 mortgage-backed securities transactions (the "Platform"), as of December 31, 2012 and for the year
 
 
 
 
 then
 ended, excluding criteria 1122(d)(1)(iii),1122(d)(3)(i)(B), 1122(d)(3)(i)(C), 1122(d)(3)(i)(D),
 
 1122(d)(3)(ii), 1122(d)(3)(iii), 1122(d)(3)(iv), and 1122(d)(4)(xv), which the Company has determined are not applicable to the servicing activities performed by it with respect to the Platform.  Management is
 
 responsible for the Company's compliance with the servicing criteria. Our responsibility is to express an opinion on management's assertion based on our examination.
 Our examination was conducted in accordance with attestation standards of the Public Company Accounting Oversight Board (United States) and, accordingly, included examining, on a test basis, evidence about the Company's compliance with the applicable servicing criteria and performing such
 ot
 her procedures as we considered necessary in the circumstances. Our examination included testing of
 
 selected asset- backed transactions and securities that comprise the Platform, testing of selected
 
 servicing activities related to the Platform, and determining whether the Company processed those selected transactions and performed those selected activities in compliance with the applicable servicing criteria. Our procedures were limited to the selected transactions and servicing activities performed by
 
 the
 Company during the period covered by this report. Our procedures were not designed to detect
 noncompliance arising from errors that may have occurred prior to or subsequent to our tests that may have affected the balances or amounts calculated or reported by the Company during the period covered by this report. We believe that our examination provides a reasonable basis for our opinion.                    Our examination does not provide a legal determination on the Company's compliance with the servicing criteria.
 
 
 
 In our
 opinion, management's assertion that Midland Loan Services complied with the aforementioned
 
 
 applicable servicing criteria as of and for the year ended December 31, 2012 for the Platform is fairly stated,
 
 
 
 
 in all material respects.
 
 /s/ PricewaterhouseCoopers  LLP
 
 March 1, 2013
#### Neely’s Case.

Argued March 15, 1940.

Be*413fore Keller, P. J., Cunningham, Baldrige, Stadteeld, Parker, Rhodes and Hirt, JJ.

*Paul H. Rhoads,*with him *John Fox Weiss,*of *Weiss é Rhoads*and *Carl F. Chronister,*for appellant.

*Mark T. Milnor,*for appellee.

March 18, 1940:

Per Curiam,

This appeal from the decree of the Court of Common Pleas of Dauphin County raises the question whether the decree appealed from complies with the judgment and order of the Supreme Court in *Commonwealth Trust Company Case,*331 Pa. 569, 1 A. 2d 662. Appellant contends that he is entitled to recover interest on the bonds of the Union Real Estate Investment Company up to the date of the actual payment of the money following the entry of the order by the lower court made pursuant to the judgment or decree of the Supreme Court, and to an allowance of additional compensation beyond that included in the $35,444.54 stipulated by the parties and referred to in the Supreme Court’s opinion. The matter is complicated by the fact that the Commonwealth Trust Company is in liquidation and the preferred rights of its depositors may be affected by a reversal of the lower court’s decree.

*414In view of the admonition of the Supreme Court in *Ladner v. Siegel,*296 Pa. 579, 587, 146 A. 710, we are of opinion that the circumstances require us to certify the appeal to the Supreme Court for its determination, in the light of its fuller knowledge of the issues involved in the original case and of its intentions as expressed in its judgment and order. See also, *In re Estate of Crawford,*108 Pa. Superior Ct. 475, 165 A. 540; *Crawford’s Est.,*313 Pa. 127, 129, 169 A. 438.

Appeal certified to the Supreme Court.
Exhibit 32

 

CERTIFICATION PURSUANT TO

18 U.S.C. SECTION 1350,

AS ADOPTED PURSUANT TO

SECTION 906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACTOF 2002

 

In connection with the Interim Report of Event Cardio Group Inc. (the"Registrant") on Form 10-Q for the interim period ended February 28, 2015 as filed with the Securities and ExchangeCommission on the date hereof (the "Report"), I, John Bentivoglio, Chief Executive Officer acting ChiefFinancial Officer (Principal Executive Officer and Principal Accounting Officer) of the Registrant, certify, in accordancewith 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, as adopted pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that to the best of myknowledge:

 

	(1)	The Report, to which this certification is attachedas Exhibit 32, 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 fairlypresents, in all material respects, the financial condition and results of operations of the Registrant

 

Dated: April 15, 2015

John Bentivoglio

Chief Executive Officer

acting Chief Financial Officer

(Principal Executive Officer and PrincipalAccounting Officer)