alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
<Page>

                                                                      EXHIBIT 15

To the Board of Directors and Shareholder of
Allstate Life Insurance Company:


We have reviewed, in accordance with standards established by the American
Institute of Certified Public Accountants, the unaudited interim financial
information of Allstate Life Insurance Company and subsidiaries for the
three-month periods ended March 31, 2004 and 2003, as indicated in our report
dated May 7, 2004; because we did not perform an audit, we expressed no opinion
on such financial information.

We are aware that our report referred to above, which is included in your
Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q for the quarterly period ended March 31, 2004, is
incorporated by reference in the following Registration Statements:

<Table>
<Caption>
         FORMS S-3 REGISTRATION NOS.        FORMS N-4 REGISTRATION NOS.
         ---------------------------        ---------------------------
                 <S>                                <C>
                 333-100068                         333-114560
                 333-102319                         333-114561
                 333-102325                         333-114562
                 333-104789                         333-102934
                 333-105331
                 333-112233
                 333-112249
</Table>

We also are aware that the aforementioned report, pursuant to Rule 436(c) under
the Securities Act of 1933, is not considered a part of the Registration
Statement prepared or certified by an accountant or a report prepared or
certified by an accountant within the meaning of Sections 7 and 11 of that Act.


/s/ Deloitte & Touche LLP

Chicago, Illinois
May 7, 2004

                                       E-2
• REF ID:A71108 

•"'""' ..... I _..-::.,\..-::--" ... ~ .. _, '-- • 

Ltr Bq F1:rth 4.rmy, A.G 311. 5 ~U'SV-EA, 2S Oct 48, Subj: Cryptog1'19.ph1c 

Rquip 

4G 311.5 AI.FSV-E.\ 2nd Ind 

BQ J'IftB J!\Rrt..'Y, 1660 E l:Iyde Park Bl'Vd, Chicago 15, n1 

TO: Chief, Arrq Security Agency, The Pentagon, Waah1.n6ton 25, D. c. 

l. The request contained in basic comunieation es based upon 

excessi-ve bandling 1Jime rather than volume ot t'l'l!tfic. EJ3mples of this 

handling time are speciticall.y cited in pal".lgraph S of basic cOD1111DD1cation. 

In at least two (2) instances during the past month operational priority 

messages ba.ve been placed 1n the h.'lnds of addre1sees too hte to be acted 

upon. This situation "38 due entirely to the prohibit1Ye length ot time 

required to encode and decode the message. 

2. 'fllia situation waa '1acuased inf'ol'lll!UJ with General Spencer B. 

JI.kin. the Chief S18Dal Officer, 11ho indicated th9t SIGTOT equipment could 

be made ava.11Able to key installations in this .Al'll'l1 .ftre."l. 

3. In view of the foregoing 1t 1e requested that fUrther consideration be given to pmviding the equipment .requested 1n basic colllrlUDication. 

/•I w~ n. wooa.wii~ t:. Jl. f'OOD'f l\RD 

Jfajor, A. G. D • 

.Asst. f.dJutant General 

a-e- , .......... ~ ...... -=-f"' 1 ~ 1

1

1

, °"/' .... "'::::·,1~1.\. .... ~V..~ 

·. ~~.~~, ' ~il- ....... ~ 

" Declassified and approved for release by NSA on 05-28-2014 pursuantto E.O. 1352a (
Court of Appeals, State of Michigan 

ORDER 

David H. Sawyer 

Todd Peck v Rachel Patricia Ann Peck 

Presiding Judge 

Docket No. 332814 

Jane E. Markey 

LC No. 14-052965-DM 

Colleen A. O'Brien 

Judges 

The Court orders that the October 10, 2016 opinion is hereby AMENDED to correct a 

clerical error. The opinion is corrected to read November 10, 2016 as the date of the opinion. 

In all other respects, the opinion remains unchanged. 

A true copy entered and certified by Jerome W. Zimmer Jr., Chief Clerk, on 

NUV 1 8 2016 

Date
UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION 

FEDERAL AVIATION ADMINISTRATION 

WASHINGTON, D.C. 

TROPICAL AVIATION GROUND 

SERVICES, INC. and AIR SUNSHINE, 

INC. 

Complainant, 

v. 

BROWARD COUNTY, FLORIDA 

Respondent. 

Docket No. 16-12-15 

NOTICE OF EXTENSION OF TIME 

This matter is before the Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) based on the above-referenced 

complaint, filed in accordance with FAA Rules of Practice for Federally-Assisted Airport 

Enforcement Proceedings, 14 CFR, Part 16 (Rules of Practice). Pursuant to the Rules of 

Practice, §16.ll(a), the date by which the Director, FAA Office of Airport Compliance and 

Management Analysis will issue a Director's Determination in this matter is hereby extended to 

on or before March 13, 2015. 

An extension of time is necessary and appropriate for a fair and complete determination in this 

case. 

Randall S. Fiertz 

Director, Airport Compliance 

and Management Analysis 
CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE 

11-

1 HEREBY CERTIFY that on January K . 2015, I placed in the United States mail (first 

class, postage paid), a true copy of the Notice of Extension of Time addressed to: 

Ronnie Adili, Esq., P.A. 

5645 Coral Ridge Drive, #292 

Coral Springs, FL 33076 

Robert A. Sweetapple 

Sweetapple, Broeker & Varkas, P.L. 

165 East Boca Raton Road 

Boca Raton, FL 33432 

Counsel for Complainants 

Joni Armstrong Coffey 

Broward County Attorney 

Governinent Center, Suite 423 

1 1 5 South Andrews A venue 

Fort Lauderdale, FL 33301 

Counsel for Respondent 

Copy to: 

FAA Part 16 Airport Proceedings Docket 

FAA Airport Compliance and Management Analysis, A CO-l 00 

Southern Region Airports Division, AS0-600 

Orlando Airports District Office 

~4~ Claudia Roberts 

Office of Airport Compliance 

and Management Analysis
SPSIS-3 

REF ID:A488683 

0COP SEGRE) 

12 Maret\ 1945. 

MEMORANDUM tor OP-20-G, Navy Department, 'Washington 25, D.C. 

Subject: Original intercept and work sheets for 

SSA Message 27065. 

Recently an un.aucceasful search vaa made in Signal Security Agency'• files tor the original intercept and work 

aheet of the attached message (SIS No. 27065; lie.VJ" No. JD 

8007). There is a poaa1b111ty that it is in the tiles of 

OP-20-G and it is requested that a search be ma.de there for 

the documents desired. 

l Incloaure: 

Incl. 1: Coll): of Meeaage 27065. 

w. Preston Corderman, 

Colonel, Stgnal Corpe, Commanding. 

c;;-· ... ,-. --., :·---., ~ --'""' ----l. . 

I 

Declassified and approved for release by NSA on 11-07-2013 pursuant to E .0. 1352\3 
From: Tokyo (Togo) 

To: Honolulu 

December 2, 1941 

J-19 

REF ID:A488683 

Do~ :5ECRE1 

#123 (Secret outside the department.) 

In view of the present situation, the presence in 

port of warahips 1 airplane carriers, and cruieere is of utmost 

importance. Hereafter, to the utmost of .your ability, let 

me know day by day. Wire me in each ease whether or not 

there are any observation balloons above Pearl Harbor or 

if there are any indications that they will •e sent up. Also 

advise me whether or not the warships are provided with antimine nets. 

ARMY 27065 

JD 8007 (Japanese) Trana. 12/30/41 (5) 
-

REF ID:A488683 

I ONF IDEJ.'rr IAL RES TRIC tED~ I 

TO \ - Dtt~ ' :2.. L,. if> FROM , 

-~-ding Officer · ·. asta!lt Commandant 

4.t- of Comm Rese~rch 

Mitrol 0 ... ----- ---.l'iscal 0 

A dxn in is tr -~~---------- at 1 v e 0 ---- Post Adju~nt ----·-------- intelligence ... o-------

frov9st Marsha. ~nd Sig Serv Bn _____ _ 

Ohief, Pers & Tng Div ----- Chief, P49rs Br ------ · Chief, Tng Br -------

--- o/c· Oi'f~cer Pers Se_o ___ _ 

Chief, Oper Se~v Div --- Chief, Congmica ti_o_n_s_B""'r __ _ 

Qllief, Laboratory Br 

Chi~f, Machine Br ---- Chier, Supply Br------- o/C, SSA Mail tln_,.i..,..t ____ _ 

~Chief. Security Div 

Chief, Protee'tive-~-e-c-'B_r __ _ 

Chief', Cryptographic Br __ _ 

Chief, Development Br 

Chief, Intelligence Div ---- ---- Chief,· La.nguag-e Br ---- • Ohief, Mil Cryptan-a~l-Yt.,..i ... c_B_r_ 

--- C3hief, Gen Cryptanalytic 'fl:lChief, T/A and Control Br -· 

Chief, I & L Br ~ 

.· .... 

As diaousse~ · As requested,,_ ____ __.,_4 .., ..... 

Oomme?Its and ':retii?i'i. . ... Informa:tion and fil-.o ___ _ 

Informe.tion and forwarding . 

.,.. Information and return·· - --- Reco'mner..da tion 

See not& on re~erse ------- Si~nature if approv~d ----- Your action ----- --------------

~ . . . .
**Exhibit 23**
**INDEPENDENT AUDITOR’S CONSENT**
The Board of Directors
Brantley Capital Corporation:
     We consent to the incorporation by reference in the registration statement(No. 333-17215) on Form S-8 of Brantley Capital Corporation (Company) of ourreport dated March 29, 2004 with respect to the balance sheets of BrantleyCapital Corporation as of December 31, 2003 and 2002, and the related statements ofinvestments, operations, changes in net assets, and cash flows for the yearended December 31, 2003 and 2002, which report appears in the 2003 Form 10-K of theCompany.
/s/ KPMG LLP
Cleveland, Ohio
March 29, 2004
PAPD No.16 _,J!Cl/Ao 

"'.. iila--.Y 

'llmCDMMl-NSROl'PA,,_ 

• • REF ID:A6763Be 

DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE'°' 

UNITED STATES-PATENT OFFICE ·--N .. D.C. WASHINGTON 

Pleae ,/ind belmu a eommunicatfon/rom the EXAMINER 

In charge of this application. J..o..•o, ••••• _.,,,.....~.._·.a.c;~~ ...... Q.. 

MAY 11 1~49 

Henl'J' D. Ste.utter 

Arrlll Secur1tJ Agonc7 The Pentaeon Waebin~ton 25, D. c. 

•PO ~1H 

ConUnullOfMF oJ P.-..L 

l'lL/08 

lf.,23 !'OOD ,616 ""'"' · -.../. ~= Wllliari r. Friedman 

Ser No. 551172 

Filed Augu.at 25, 191.al+ 

F• Authent1cat1nB Device 

Reapona1ve to amendtlant or September 2, 

1940: 

(1) 

hereb7 noted. 

(2) 

1uent1fied b7 

(3) 

2 la considered 

a1dered inventiv 

oorrectli' 

claim 

It la not con• 

fol" changing the s1gnts 1n ro reterenceo. 

term "a predetermined number0 

If 1t 1a desired to limit 

~""'ll'l!nector 90 .. 97 which cloaea input c1rcu1 te 

which a11e neither ono noi- all then the cla1ci should be 

amended aocordln(;l7. Cllliaa 3 and 5 aa at presont worded. 

@'pp roved for Release by NSA on 09-06-2013 pursuantto E .0. 1352a 
I 

1 • • 

• • if. J-· 

. 

' . 

REF ID:A67638 

• >. 

• . . • 

ue rejected tbr the saT.1e l'easona aa olaim 2. 

(5) Cla1m 6 appeara allowable aa at 

present advised • 

.. ' . .,
## IN THE COURT O F CRIMINA L A PPEA LS OF TEXAS NO. WR-82,322-01
EX P ARTE RICHARD TIDWELL, App licant
ON AP P LICATION FOR A WRIT OF HABEAS CORP US CAUSE NO. 21993-A IN THE 88TH DIS TRICT COURT

F ROM HARDINCOUNTY
Per curiam . O R D E R Pursuant to the provisions of Ar t i cl e 1 1
. 07 of the Texas Code of Criminal Procedur e, the cler k of the trial court transmitted to this Court this application for a writ of habea s corpus. Ex parte Y oung , 418 S.W .2d 824, 826 (Tex. Crim
. Ap p . 1 9 6 7). Applicant was convicted of ag gravated robber y and sente nced to twe nty

year s’ imprisonment. He did not appea l his conviction. Applicant contends that hi s trial counsel rende red ineffe ctive assistance
. Applicant has alleg ed fac ts that, if true, might entitle him to relief
. Strickland v. W

ashington , 466 U.S. 668 (1984); Ex parte Patterson , 993 S.W .2d 114, 115 (Tex. Crim. App. 1999). In these circ umstances, additional fac ts are ne eded. A s we held in Ex parte Rodriguez , 334 S.W .2d 294, 294 (Tex. Crim.2

App. 1960), the tria l court is the appr opriate f orum for f

indings of f

act. The trial court sha ll order trial counsel to respond to Appl i cant’s claims of i neff ective assistance of counsel. The trial court may use any means set out in T E X . C O D E C R I M . P R O C . art. 11.07, § 3(d)
. I f the trial court elects t o hold a h ea ring , it shall deter mine whether Applicant is indige nt. I f Appl i ca n t is indige nt and wishes to be repr esente d by counsel, the trial court shall appoint an attorney to repre sent him at the hea ring . T E X . C O D E C R I M . P R O C . art. 26.04. The trial court shall make finding s of fac t and co n cl u s i ons of law as to whether counsel’s conduct was defic ient and, if so, whether Applicant was prejudice d. The trial court shall also make any other finding s of fac t and conclusions of law that it deems rele vant and ap p ro p ri at e to the dispositi on of Applica

nt’s claim for ha

beas c orpus re lief. This application will be held in abeyance until the trial court has resolved the fac t issues. The issues shall be resolved within 90 day s of this order
. A supplemental transcr i p t co n t ai n ing all aff idavits and int err og atories or the t ransc ription of the court repor ter’s notes from any hearing or deposition, alongwith the trial court’ s supplemental finding s of fa ct and c onclusions of law, shall be for war ded to this Court withi n 120 day s of the date of this order
. Any extensions of t ime shall be obtained f

rom this Court.

Filed: Nove mber 19, 2014 Do not publish
IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT

No. 15-51044

Summary Calendar

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,

Plaintiff-Appellee

v.

TIMOTHY D. JACKSON, also known as Timothy Jackson,

Defendant-Appellant

Appeal from the United States District Court

for the Western District of Texas

USDC No. 1:08-CR-475-5

Before DAVIS, SOUTHWICK, and HIGGINSON, Circuit Judges.

PER CURIAM:*

Timothy D. Jackson, federal prisoner # 18342-280, appeals the district 

court’s denial of his 18 U.S.C. § 3582(c)(2) motion for a sentencing reduction 

based on retroactive Amendment 782 to U.S.S.G. § 2D1.1. The Supreme Court 

has prescribed a two-step inquiry for a district court that is considering a 

§ 3582(c)(2) motion. Dillon v. United States, 560 U.S. 817, 826 (2010). The 

court must first determine whether a prisoner is eligible for a reduction as set 

 

* Pursuant to 5TH CIR. R. 47.5, the court has determined that this opinion should not 

be published and is not precedent except under the limited circumstances set forth in 5TH 

CIR. R. 47.5.4.

United States Court of Appeals

Fifth Circuit

FILED

November 10, 2016

Lyle W. Cayce

Clerk

 Case: 15-51044 Document: 00513755127 Page: 1 Date Filed: 11/10/2016
No. 15-51044

2

forth in U.S.S.G. § 1B1.10(a). Id. If he is eligible, then the district court must 

“consider any applicable [18 U.S.C.] § 3553(a) factors and determine whether, 

in its discretion,” any reduction is warranted under the particular facts of the 

case. Id. at 827. We review the decision whether to reduce a sentence under 

§ 3582(c)(2) for an abuse of discretion. United States v. Henderson, 636 F.3d 

713, 717 (5th Cir. 2011). 

The district court implicitly found Jackson eligible for the reduction but 

determined that a reduction was unwarranted due to his inadequately 

represented criminal history, the need to protect the public, and the need to 

provide adequate deterrence. Jackson contends that this was an abuse of 

discretion, urging that the court gave excessive weight to factors that did not 

justify denial and inadequate weight to factors supporting a reduction, 

including his post-sentencing rehabilitative efforts.

The record reflects that the district court considered Jackson’s motion as 

a whole, gave specific reasons for its denial, and referenced the relevant 

§ 3553(a) factors. Jackson thus cannot show an abuse of discretion on the 

district court’s part. See Henderson, 636 F.3d at 717; United States v. Evans, 

587 F.3d 667, 673 (5th Cir. 2009); United States v. Whitebird, 55 F.3d 1007, 

1010 (5th Cir. 1995). 

AFFIRMED.

 Case: 15-51044 Document: 00513755127 Page: 2 Date Filed: 11/10/2016
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<ARTICLE> 5
<CIK> 0000352715
<NAME> BIOSONICS, INC.
<MULTIPLIER> 1
<CURRENCY> US DOLLARS
       
<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   6-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          DEC-31-1998
<PERIOD-START>                             APR-01-1998
<PERIOD-END>                               JUN-30-1998
<EXCHANGE-RATE>                                      1
<CASH>                                             100
<SECURITIES>                                         0
<RECEIVABLES>                                   11,146
<ALLOWANCES>                                     2,000
<INVENTORY>                                    177,791
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                               213,822
<PP&E>                                         229,824
<DEPRECIATION>                               (216,725)
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                 235,352
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                        2,657,389
<BONDS>                                        564,000
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                        31,354
<OTHER-SE>                                           0
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                   235,352
<SALES>                                          6,975
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                                10,821
<CGS>                                              826
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                      826
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                               424,092
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                     0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                              24,886
<INCOME-PRETAX>                              (413,271)
<INCOME-TAX>                                         0
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                       (15,198,103)
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                 (413,271)
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                        0
<EPS-DILUTED>                                        0
        

</TABLE>
SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF NEW YORK

Appellate Division, Fourth Judicial Department

965 

CA 15-01053 

PRESENT: SMITH, J.P., CARNI, LINDLEY, DEJOSEPH, AND SCUDDER, JJ. 

 

EARTHA C. SOUTHERN, INDIVIDUALLY AND AS PARENT 

AND NATURAL GUARDIAN AND ADMINISTRATOR OF THE 

ESTATE OF MALACHI SOUTHERN, INFANT, DECEASED, 

PLAINTIFF-APPELLANT, 

 

V ORDER

SENZAN HSU, M.D., CHILDREN’S HOSPITAL OF BUFFALO 

OF KALEIDA HEALTH, DEFENDANTS-RESPONDENTS, 

ET AL., DEFENDANT. 

 

EARTHA C. SOUTHERN, PLAINTIFF-APPELLANT PRO SE.

GIBSON, MCASKILL & CROSBY, LLP, BUFFALO (MICHAEL J. WILLETT OF

COUNSEL), FOR DEFENDANT-RESPONDENT SENZAN HSU, M.D.

ROACH, BROWN, MCCARTHY & GRUBER, P.C., BUFFALO (ELIZABETH G. ADYMY OF

COUNSEL), FOR DEFENDANT-RESPONDENT CHILDREN’S HOSPITAL OF BUFFALO OF

KALEIDA HEALTH. 

 

Appeal from an order of the Supreme Court, Erie County (John M.

Curran, J.), entered April 9, 2015. The order granted the motions of

defendants Senzan Hsu, M.D., and Children’s Hospital of Buffalo of

Kaleida Health, for summary judgment dismissing all claims and cross

claims against them.

It is hereby ORDERED that the order so appealed from is

unanimously affirmed without costs for reasons stated in the decision

at Supreme Court.

Entered: November 10, 2016 Frances E. Cafarell

Clerk of the Court
REF ID:A68385 

~14 c. lkT•• 

Colonel, lipal Corpa 

Chtet • ll'mJI" Securiv A1llD07 

Waehlngt.an 25, D. C. 

Dear Colonel lqe11 

l:bl&tll' reter to our letter Dr April 28th, 

1Phie1! na Sil 1"9p]T to 7oar httor ~April 16th a&SClre~aed 

to The Weetem lJnion Twan.ph Coapa11.1, ma thtl 1Nb3ect of 

Tf'ltCTSph Sigml lnaqa•r. 

I• WDl1ld apprec:fate hear.Ina trcie 1'0\\ Hp.rd.• hie J'DU' current aee4• tor thi• tc1.uipaen't, .,.rt1cular]7 

u to the 1;,rpe of motor whioh would be au:lta'ble tor TOQr 

nqu1191entll. 

.lC'll111h 

tour• Te17 trv.q, 

l. I. IUDILL A CCllPil!' 

/•/ A. C. F.apJda A. c. bplda, lqbleerbJa a Sal• 

Mlf2HH11C!J..O~ li"2' D' C' 

v~~A 2ECnl:5f.lA VCEVICA. 

HEVDc:Jnv~.LEl:S2 

@'pp roved for Release by NSA on O 1-16-2014 pursuantto E .0. 1352a 

------,--- --- -- . ..,. - - ":.._•-- - --- /
NOT FOR PUBLICATION IN WEST'S HAWAI I REPORTS AND PACIFIC REPORTER

NO. CAAP-23-0000464

IN THE INTERMEDIATE COURT OF APPEALS
OF THE STATE OF HAWAI I

STATE OF HAWAI I, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. AMBER NAKAMURA, Defendant-Appellant

APPEAL FROM THE CIRCUIT COURT OF THE FIRST CIRCUIT

(CR. NO. 1PC151000507)

ORDER APPROVING STIPULATION TO DISMISS APPEAL (By: Hiraoka, Presiding Judge, Wadsworth and Guidry, JJ.) Upon consideration of the December 15, 2023 Stipulation for Dismissal of Appeal ( Stipulation ) filed by Defendant-Appellant Amber Nakamura, the papers in support, and the record, it appears that: (1) the appeal has been docketed; (2) the parties stipulate to dismiss the appeal, and indicate that no fees or costs are outstanding; (3) the Stipulation is dated and signed by counsel for all parties appearing in the appeal; (4) the Stipulation is supported by a declaration that reflects a knowing and intelligent understanding of the consequences of the dismissal of the appeal and that the withdrawal is made voluntarily; and (5) dismissal is authorized by Hawai i Rules of Appellate Procedure Rule 42(b) and (c).

Therefore, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that the Stipulation is approved and the appeal is dismissed.

DATED: Honolulu, Hawai i, January 4, 2024. /s/ Keith K. Hiraoka Presiding Judge /s/ Clyde J. Wadsworth Associate Judge /s/ Kimberly T. Guidry Associate Judge

Electronically Filed Intermediate Court of Appeals CAAP-23-0000464 04-JAN-2024 12:10 PM Dkt. 45 OAWST
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<ARTICLE> 5
<LEGEND>
This schedule contains summary financial information extracted from Shelter
Properties III Ltd. 1997 First Quarter 10-QSB and is qualified in its entirety
by reference to such 10-QSB filing.
</LEGEND>
<CIK> 0000353282
<NAME> SHELTER REALTY III CORPORATION
<MULTIPLIER> 1,000
       
<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   3-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          DEC-31-1997
<PERIOD-END>                               MAR-31-1997
<CASH>                                           1,751
<SECURITIES>                                         0
<RECEIVABLES>                                       20
<ALLOWANCES>                                         0
<INVENTORY>                                          0
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                                     0<F1>
<PP&E>                                          25,485
<DEPRECIATION>                                  13,516
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                  15,165
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                                0<F1>
<BONDS>                                          8,401
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                             0
<OTHER-SE>                                       6,126
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                    15,165
<SALES>                                              0
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                                 1,345
<CGS>                                                0
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                        0
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                 1,191
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                     0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                                 193
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                      0
<INCOME-TAX>                                         0
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                                  0
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                       154
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                     2.76<F2>
<EPS-DILUTED>                                        0
<FN>
<F1>The Partnership has an unclassified balance sheet.
<F2>Multiplier is 1.
</FN>
        

</TABLE>
IN THE DISTRICT COURT OF APPEAL OF THE STATE OF FLORIDA

FIFTH DISTRICT

NOT FINAL UNTIL TIME EXPIRES TO

FILE MOTION FOR REHEARING AND

DISPOSITION THEREOF IF FILED

ROBERT FENN, 

Appellant, 

v. Case No. 5D16-1779

U.S. BANK, N.A., BANK OF AMERICA,

LASALLE BANK NATIONAL ASSOCIATION

AND ANDRITA KING-FENN, 

Appellees. 

________________________________/

Opinion filed November 22, 2016

Appeal from the Circuit Court

for Orange County, 

John Marshall Kest, Judge.

Robert Fenn, Winter Garden, pro se.

Joseph M. Reichert, and Manuel S. 

Hiraldo, of Blank Rome LLP, Ft. 

Lauderdale, for Appellee, U.S. Bank, 

N.A., Etc. 

No appearance for other appellees.

PER CURIAM.

AFFIRMED. See Fla. R. App. P. 9.315(a). 

LAWSON, C.J., ORFINGER, and EVANDER, J.J., concur.