alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
<PAGE>   1

                                                                      EXHIBIT 12

                       LORAL SPACE & COMMUNICATIONS LTD.

          COMPUTATION OF DEFICIENCY OF EARNINGS TO COVER FIXED CHARGES
                                 (IN THOUSANDS)
                                  (UNAUDITED)

<TABLE>
<CAPTION>
                                                               THREE MONTHS ENDED
                                                                   MARCH 31,
                                                              --------------------
                                                                2001        2000
                                                              --------    --------
<S>                                                           <C>         <C>
Loss before income taxes, equity in net loss of affiliates,
  minority interest and cumulative effect of change in
  accounting principle......................................  $(38,100)   $ (4,899)
Plus fixed charges:
  Interest expense..........................................    55,110      45,735
  Interest component of rent expense(1).....................     4,106       2,352
Less: capitalized interest..................................     5,417       2,419
                                                              --------    --------
Earnings available to cover fixed charges...................  $ 15,699    $ 40,769
                                                              ========    ========
Fixed charges(2)............................................  $(76,154)   $(75,380)
                                                              ========    ========
Deficiency of earnings to cover fixed charges...............  $(60,455)   $(34,611)
                                                              ========    ========
</TABLE>

---------------

(1) The interest component of rent expense is deemed to be approximately 25% of
    total rent expense.

(2) Fixed charges include preferred dividends as adjusted for the Company's
    effective tax rate.
Exhibit 99.2 

 

 

CERTIFICATION PURSUANT TO 18 U.S.C.SECTION 1350, AS ADOPTED PURSUANT TO SECTION 906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF2002 

Gregory J. Wilson, as Treasurer andController (Principal Financial Officer and Principal Accounting Officer) ofNetLojix Communications, Inc. (the "Company"), certifies, pursuant to 18 U.S.C.Section 1350, as adopted pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002,that: 

(1) the Company's Quarterly Reporton Form 10-QSB for the quarterly period ended March 31, 2003 as filed with theSecurities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the "Report") fullycomplies with the requirements of Section 13(a) or 15(d) of the SecuritiesExchange Act of 1934; and 

(2) the information contained in theReport fairly presents, in all material respects, the financial condition andresults of operations of the Company. 

 

/s/  GREGORY J. WILSON---------------------------------Gregory J. WilsonTreasurer and Controller (Principal Financial Officer and PrincipalAccounting Officer)

 

May 14, 2003
II

104TH CONGRESS

1ST SESSION S. 914

To delineate acceptable drug testing methods, and for other purposes.

IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES

JUNE 12 (legislative day, JUNE 5), 1995

Mr. HEFLIN (for himself and Mr. KYL) introduced the following bill; which

was read twice and referred to the Committee on the Judiciary

A BILL

To delineate acceptable drug testing methods, and for other

purposes.

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

3 SECTION 1. DRUG TESTING OF FEDERAL OFFENDERS.

4 (a) CONDITIONS OF PROBATION.—Section 3563(a) of

5 title 18, United States Code, is amended—

6 (1) by redesignating paragraph (4), as added by

7 section 20414(b)(3) of the Violent Crime Control

8 and Law Enforcement Act of 1994, as paragraph

9 (5);
2

•S 914 IS

1 (2) in the undesignated matter following para2 graph (5), as so redesignated, by striking (4) each

3 place it appears and inserting (5); and

4 (3) by inserting ‘‘, hair, or blood’’ after

5 ‘‘urine’’.

6 (b) CONDITIONS OF SUPERVISED RELEASE.—Section

7 3583(d) of title 18, United States Code, is amended by

8 inserting ‘‘, hair, or blood’’ after ‘‘urine’’.

9 (c) CONDITIONS OF PAROLE.—Section 1902(a) of

10 title 42, United States Code, is amended by inserting ‘‘,

11 hair, or blood’’ after ‘‘urine’’.

12 (d) RESIDENTIAL SUBSTANCE ABUSE TREATMENT

13 FOR PRISONERS.—Section 1902(b) of the Omnibus Crime

14 Control and Safe Streets Act of 1968 (42 U.S.C. 3796ff–

15 1) is amended by striking ‘‘urinalysis or other proven reli16 able forms of testing of individuals’’ and inserting ‘‘speci17 men testing for drugs, including but not limited to urine,

18 hair, and blood testing of individuals’’.

Æ
| (logo) WELLS            FARGO | Corporate Trust ServicesMAC R1204-010 9062 Old Annapolis Road

Columbia, MD 21045

 

Tel:  410 884 2000

Fax: 410 715 2380 |
|---------------------------------------------------------------------------------|---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|

 

 

Deutsche Mortgage & Asset Receiving Cor p oration 

60 Wall Street 

New York, New York 10005 

 

 

 

RE: Annual Statement of Compliance for COMM 2014-CCRE20 Mortgage Trust 

Commercial Mortgage Pass-Through Certificates 

 

 

Per the Pooling and Servicing Agreement dated as of October 1, 2014 (the "Agreement"), the undersigned, a duly authorized officer of Wells Fargo Bank, N.A., as Certificate Administrator ("Wells Fargo"), hereby certifies as follows as of and for the year ending December 31, 2014 (the "Reporting Period"): 

 

 

(a) A review of Wells Fargo's activities during the Reporting Period and of its performance under the Agreement has been made under such officer's supervision; and 

 

(b) To the best of such officer's knowledge, based on such review, Wells Fargo has fulfilled all of its obligations under the Agreement in all material respects throughout the Reporting Period. 

 

 

 

February 24, 2015 

 

 

 
| /s/ Brian Smith

BRIAN SMITH

Vice President | /s/ Dave Ward

Dave Ward

Senior Vice President |
|----------------------------------------------|-------------------------------------------------|

 

 

Wells Fargo Bank, N.A.
OFFICE OF **THE** ATTORNEY GENERAL OF TEXAS



### Hoeorrhle Herry ILeO%‘ uhelrnen S*t8 

### Basrd of Control henin, T8ufa Door sir1

9, 19&l, askfda lowleg pueatiaer h Lo&nlatura, Roaua 0h0rirr or Ony ooene\f1e th8 arr1eor reorillng mm0 aall o ountoby**the** porroe named theredesi$netod tW ‘endplaoo shal.2 hnto urn of 6aib

### onrruit betom t&o 

### Cbuetr,
EXHIBIT 31.1
 CERTIFICATION OF CHIEF EXECUTIVE OFFICER
PURSUANT TO SECTION 13(a) or 15(d) OF THE SECURITIES EXCHANGE ACT OF 1934
AS ADOPTED PURSUANT TO
SECTION 302 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002
  1.
    
    I have reviewed this report on Form 10-Q of IRIDEX Corporation;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;3.
    
    Based on my knowledge, the financial statements, and other financial information
included in this report, fairly present in all material respects the financial condition,
results of operations and cash flows of the registrant as of, and for, the periods
presented in this report;4.
    
    The registrants other certifying officers and I are responsible for establishing and
maintaining disclosure controls and procedures (as defined in Exchange Act Rules 13a-15(e)
and 15d-15(e) for the registrant and have:
 a)
    
    Designed such disclosure controls and procedures, or caused such disclosure
controls and procedures to be designed under our supervision, to ensure that material
information relating to the registrant, including its consolidated subsidiaries, is
made known to us by others within those entities, particularly during the period in
which this quarterly report is being prepared;b)
    
    Evaluated the effectiveness of the registrants disclosure control and
procedures and presented in this report our conclusions about the effectiveness of the
disclosure controls and procedures, as of the end of the period covered by this report
based on such evaluation; andc)
    
    Disclosed in this report any changes in the registrants internal control over
financial reporting that occurred during the registrants most recent fiscal quarter
(the registrants fourth fiscal quarter in the case of the annual report) that has
materially affected, or is reasonably likely to materially affect the registrants
internal control over financial reporting;
 5.
    
    The registrants other certifying officers and I have disclosed, based on our most
recent evaluation of internal control over financial reporting, to the registrants
auditors and the audit committee of the registrants board of directors (or persons
performing the equivalent functions):
 a)
    
    All significant deficiencies and material weaknesses in the design or operation
of internal control over financial reporting which are reasonably likely to adversely
affect the registrants ability to record, process, summarize and report financial
information; andb)
    
    Any fraud, whether or not material, that involves management or other employees
who have a significant role in the registrants internal control over financial
reporting.
  By:
    /s/ THEODORE A. BOUTACOFFName:
    Theodore A. BoutacoffTitle:
    President, Chief Executive Officer and Chairman(Principal Executive Officer)
**EXHIBIT 8.1**List of Subsidiaries 1. Melco PBL Holdings Limited, incorporated in Cayman Islands 2. Melco PBL International Limited, incorporated in Cayman Islands 3. Melco PBL Nominee One Limited, incorporated in Cayman Islands 4. Melco PBL Investments Limited, incorporated in Cayman Islands 5. Melco PBL Nominee Three Limited, incorporated in Cayman Islands 6. Melco PBL Nominee Two Limited, incorporated in Cayman Islands 7. Melco PBL Gaming (Macau) Limited, incorporated in Macau Special Administrative Region of thePeople’s Republic of China 8. Melco Crown (COD) Hotels Limited, incorporated in Macau Special Administrative Region of thePeople’s Republic of China 9. Melco Crown (COD) Developments Limited, incorporated in Macau Special Administrative Region ofthe People’s Republic of China 10. Melco Crown (CM) Hotel Limited, incorporated in Macau Special Administrative Region ofthe People’s Republic of China 11. Melco Crown (CM) Developments Limited, incorporated in Macau Special AdministrativeRegion of the People’s Republic of China 12. Melco Crown (Macau Peninsula) Hotel Limited, incorporated in Macau Special AdministrativeRegion of the People’s Republic of China 13. Melco Crown (Macau Peninsula) Developments Limited, incorporated in Macau SpecialAdministrative Region of the People’s Republic of China 14. Melco PBL (Macau Peninsula) Limited, incorporated in British Virgin Islands
TEXAS COURT OF APPEALS, THIRD DISTRICT, AT AUSTIN

NO. 03-18-00160-CV

In re Farmers Texas County Mutual Insurance Company, 

Dana Guess, and Scott Sheffield

ORIGINAL PROCEEDING FROM TRAVIS COUNTY

M E M O R A N D U M O P I N I O N 

The petition for writ of mandamus is denied. See Tex. R. App. P. 52.8(a). We lift 

the temporary stay of all proceedings and discovery in the underlying case. 

__________________________________________________

Jeff Rose, Chief Justice

Before Chief Justice Rose, Justices Goodwin and Field

Filed: July 18, 2018
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<ARTICLE>5
<MULTIPLIER>1,000


<S>                                                            <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                                                            6-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                                                   DEC-31-1998
<PERIOD-START>                                                      JAN-01-1998
<PERIOD-END>                                                        JUN-30-1998
<CASH>                                                                   17,158
<SECURITIES>                                                             17,280
<RECEIVABLES>                                                            24,926
<ALLOWANCES>                                                                  0
<INVENTORY>                                                                   0
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                                                         61,256
<PP&E>                                                                   11,949
<DEPRECIATION>                                                                0
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                                          105,329
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                                                    18,461
<BONDS>                                                                       0
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                                         0
<PREFERRED>                                                                   0
<COMMON>                                                                      0
<OTHER-SE>                                                               85,236
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                                            105,329
<SALES>                                                                  38,187
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                                                         38,187
<CGS>                                                                    10,864
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                                            10,864
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                                         28,173
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                                              0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                                                       (1,031)
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                                             181
<INCOME-TAX>                                                              1,025
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                                                        (844)
<DISCONTINUED>                                                              774
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                                               0
<CHANGES>                                                                     0
<NET-INCOME>                                                                (70)
<EPS-BASIC>                                                             (0.01)
<EPS-DILUTED>                                                             (0.01)


</TABLE>
1 Opinion issued July 5, 2013

In The 

## Court of Appeals For The 

## First District of Texas

———————————— NO. 01
- 11
- 00769
- CV

——————————— IN RE MOODY NATIONAL KI RBY HOUSTON S, LLC, Relator

Original Proceeding on Petition for Writ of Mandamus

MEMORANDUM OPINION On September 13, 2011, R elator, Moody National Kirby Houston S, LLC (“Moody”), filed a petition for writ of mandamus seek ing to c ompel the trial court to grant it s motion to expunge the lis pendens filed by Real Party in Interest, Capcor at KirbyMain, LLC (“Capcor”) , on a parcel of real property owned by2 Moody. 1 The motion was based on Capcor’s alleged failure to comply with the notice requirements of Texas Property Code section 12.0071(d). See T EX
. P ROP
. C ODE A NN
. § 12.0071(d) (West 2012). On March 11, 2013, Moody filed a second petition for writ of mandamus, asserting a new ground for expunction under section 12.0071(c)(2). See id. § 12.0071(c)(2). Because Moody abandoned t he ground asserted in its first petition , we dismiss Moody’s first petition for writ of mandamus as moot.

PER CURIAM Panel consists of Chief Justice Radack and Justices Sharp and Massengale.

1 The underlying case is Capcor at KirbyMain, LLC v. Moody National Kirby Houston S, LLC and Moody National Title Company, LP , Cause No. 2011

- 32904 , pending in the 215th Judicial District Court of Harris County, Texas, the Honorable Elaine Palmer, p residing.
IN THE SUPREME COURT OF PENNSYLVANIA

MIDDLE DISTRICT

COMMONWEALTH OF PENNSYLVANIA,

Respondent

v.

ANTHONY H. PAGE,

Petitioner

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

No. 321 MAL 2017

Petition for Allowance of Appeal from 

the Order of the Superior Court

ORDER

PER CURIAM

AND NOW, this 29th day of August, 2017, the Petition for Allowance of Appeal is 

DENIED.
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<ARTICLE> 5
<LEGEND>
THIS SCHEDULE CONTAINS SUMMARY FINANCIAL INFORMATION EXTRACTED FROM THE
CONSOLIDATED BALANCE SHEET AND CONSOLIDATED STATEMENT OF OPERATIONS OF
ORTHODONTIX, INC. FOR THE THREE MONTHS ENDED MARCH 31, 1999 AND IS QUALIFIED IN
ITS ENTIRETY BY REFERENCE TO SUCH FINANCIAL STATEMENTS.
</LEGEND>
       
<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   3-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          DEC-31-1999
<PERIOD-START>                             JAN-01-1999
<PERIOD-END>                               MAR-31-1999
<CASH>                                         754,788
<SECURITIES>                                         0
<RECEIVABLES>                                1,225,050
<ALLOWANCES>                                   230,000
<INVENTORY>                                          0
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                             2,239,625
<PP&E>                                         803,110
<DEPRECIATION>                                 262,881
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                               4,226,258
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                        1,159,187
<BONDS>                                              0
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                           588
<OTHER-SE>                                   3,025,651
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                 4,226,258
<SALES>                                      2,162,728
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                             2,162,728
<CGS>                                                0
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                        0
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                             2,560,136
<LOSS-PROVISION>                              (397,408)
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                                (473)
<INCOME-PRETAX>                               (372,059)
<INCOME-TAX>                                         0
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                           (372,059)
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                  (372,059)
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                    (0.06)
<EPS-DILUTED>                                    (0.06)
        

</TABLE>
```

[Congressional Bills 114th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[H.R. 668 Introduced in House (IH)]

114th CONGRESS
  1st Session
                                H. R. 668

 To make clear that an agency outside of the Department of Health and 
     Human Services may not designate, appoint, or employ special 
consultants, fellows, or other employees under subsection (f) or (g) of 
             section 207 of the Public Health Service Act.

_______________________________________________________________________

                    IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

                            February 3, 2015

 Mr. Burgess introduced the following bill; which was referred to the 
                    Committee on Energy and Commerce

_______________________________________________________________________

                                 A BILL

 
 To make clear that an agency outside of the Department of Health and 
     Human Services may not designate, appoint, or employ special 
consultants, fellows, or other employees under subsection (f) or (g) of 
             section 207 of the Public Health Service Act.

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

SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE.

    This Act may be cited as the ``Health and Human Services Hiree 
Clarification Act''.

SEC. 2. EMPLOYMENT OF SPECIAL CONSULTANTS AND FELLOWS FOR THE PUBLIC 
              HEALTH SERVICE.

    (a) In General.--Section 207(f) of the Public Health Service Act 
(42 U.S.C. 209(f)) is amended by adding at the end the following: 
``This subsection and subsection (g) do not authorize the designation, 
appointment, or employment of any special consultant, fellow, or other 
employee by an agency outside of the Department of Health and Human 
Services.''.
    (b) Technical Corrections.--Section 207(h) of the Public Health 
Service Act (42 U.S.C. 209(h)) is amended--
            (1) by striking ``subsection (f)'' and inserting 
        ``subsection (g)''; and
            (2) by striking ``subsection (e)'' and inserting 
        ``subsection (f)''.
    (c) Applicability.--The amendments made by this section apply with 
respect to special consultants, fellows, and other employees appointed 
on or after the date of the enactment of this Act.
                                 <all>
```
#### NATIONSTAR MORTGAGE, LLC, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. Annette I. Riley CLARKE, a/k/a Annette I. Riley, Defendant-Appellant, and Marlon Clarke; Cach, LLC; Bank of America, N.A.; Wells Fargo, N.A., Defendants.

No. 17-2095

United States Court of Appeals, Fourth Circuit.

Submitted: December 21, 2017

Decided: December 27, 2017

Annette I. Riley Clarke, Appellant Pro Se. Brian Allen Calub, MCGUIRE-WOODS, LLP, Charlotte, North Carolina; Christina Rampey Hunoval, HUNOVAL LAW FIRM PLLC, Charlotte, North Carolina, for Appellee.

*163Before WILKINSON and DUNCAN, Circuit Judges, and HAMILTON, Senior Circuit Judge.

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.

PER CURIAM:

Annette Riley Clarke seeks to appeal the district court’s order remanding a removed foreclosure action to South Carolina state court. “[A] district court may remand a case *sua spcrnte*for lack of subject matter jurisdiction at any time, 28 U.S.C. § 1447(c), and such an order is not reviewable, *id.*§ 1447(d).” *Doe v. Blair,*819 F.3d 64, 66-67 (4th Cir. 2016). The district court remanded Clarke’s removed action for lack of subject matter jurisdiction, explaining that the complaint did not present a federal question and that diversity of citizenship was lacking. Because the district court remanded the action for lack of subject matter jurisdiction, we lack jurisdiction to review its order. *Id.*Accordingly, we dismiss the appeal. We dispense with oral argument because the facts and legal contentions are adequately presented in the materials before this court and argument would not aid the decisional process.

*DISMISSED*