alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
Exhibit 35
                                  ----------


                      COUNTRYWIDE HOME LOANS SERVICING LP


                             OFFICERS' CERTIFICATE
                    ANNUAL STATEMENT OF THE MASTER SERVICER


                                  CWALT, INC.
                       ALTERNATIVE LOAN TRUST 2006-HY13
             MORTGAGE PASS-THROUGH CERTIFICATES, SERIES 2006-HY13


      The undersigned does hereby certify that the undersigned is an officer
of Countrywide GP, Inc., general partner of Countrywide Home Loans Servicing
LP (the "Master Servicer"), and does hereby further certify pursuant to
Section 3.16 of the Pooling and Servicing Agreement for the above-captioned
Series (the "Agreement") that:

(i) A review of the activities of the Master Servicer during the preceding
calendar year and of the performance of the Master Servicer under the
Agreement has been made under my supervision; and

(ii) To the best of my knowledge, based on such review, the Master Servicer
has fulfilled all of its obligations under the Agreement in all material
respects throughout such calendar year.




/s/ Craig Baingo                                      Dated: March 14, 2007
-----------------

Craig Baingo
Executive Vice President, Finance
Opinion issued March 26, 2024

In The

Court of Appeals 

For The 

First District of Texas 

————————————

NO. 01-23-00347-CV

———————————

IN RE S.R.A. AND D.K.A., Relator

Original Proceeding on Petition for Writ of Mandamus

MEMORANDUM OPINION

Former foster parents for two children, S.R.A. and D.K.A., filed a petition 

for writ of mandamus, seeking an order for the immediate return of the children to 

their care from their current placement with real parties in interest, the current 

foster parents who seek to adopt the children.1 

1 The underlying case is In the Interest of S.R.A and D.K.A., cause number 20-CP0130, pending in the 306th District Court of Galveston County, Texas, the 

Honorable Anne B. Darring presiding.
2

The Court denies the petition. See TEX. R. APP. P. 52.8. Any pending 

motions are dismissed as moot.

PER CURIAM

Panel consists of Justices Kelly, Countiss, and Rivas-Molloy.
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

KELLY ELIZABETH LOUDERMILK

,

Appellant

,

v. Case No. 5D 16

- 728

STATE OF FLORIDA

,

Appellee

.

________________________________/

Opinion filed February 24, 2 017

Appeal from the Circuit Court

for Os ceola County

, A. James Craner , Judge.

James S. Purdy, Public Defender, and Kathryn Rollison Radtke, Assistant Public Defender, Daytona Beach, for Appellant.

Pamela Jo Bondi, Attorney General,
Tallahassee, and Pamela J. Koller, Assistant Attorney General, Daytona Beach, for Appellee.

PER CURIAM.

Kelly Elizabeth Loudermilk appeals her judgment and sentence for trafficking in

oxycodone and conspiracy to traffic in oxycodone. Loudermilk contends that the trial

court erred in: 1) denying her motion for continuance to secure the testimony of two

codefendants that she alleged would support an entrapment defense; and 2) applying the2 incorrect legal standard to her motion for new trial. We affirm as to the first issue without

further discussion but reverse and remand as to the second.

The proper standard to address a defendant’ s motion for new trial is the weight of

the evidence. See Lee v. State , 117 So. 3d 848, 849 (Fla. 5th DCA 2013) ; Santiago v.

State , 874 So. 2d 617, 625 (Fla. 5th DCA 2004). In this case, the trial court incorporated

its order denying Loudermilk’s motion for judgment of acquittal, in which it applied a

sufficiency of the evidence standard, into its order denying her motion for new trial.

Accordingly, the se orders su ggest that the trial court also utilized a sufficiency of the

evidence standard when considering Loudermilk’ s motion for new trial. W e therefore

reverse and remand on this issue for the trial court to consider Loudermilk’s motion for

new trial pursuant to the weight of the evidence standard. See King v. State , 183 So. 3d

1071, 1072 (Fla. 5th DCA 2015).

AFFIRMED in part; REVERSED in part; REMANDED.

SAWAYA, TORPY and BERGER , JJ., concur.
### IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT

No. 19

- 50383 Summary Calendar

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA , Plaintiff

− Appellee ,

v ersus
JESUS OSORIO

- ABUNDIO, A lso K nown as Jeremias Bonilla, A lso K nown as Jesus Osonrio

- Abundis , Defendant

− Appellant

.

Appeal from the United States District Court for the Western District of Texas No. 1:17

- CR

- 80

- 1

Before DAVIS, SMITH, and HIGGINSON, Circuit Judges. PER CURIAM: *

Jesus Osorio

- Abundio appeals his conviction of illegal reentry into the

* Pursuant to 5 TH C IR

. 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 5 TH C IR

. R. 47.5.4. United States Court of Appeals Fifth Circuit 

### FILED December 11, 2019 Lyle W. Cayce Clerk Case: 19-50383 Document: 00515231598 Page: 1 Date Filed: 12/11/2019No. 19

- 50383

2 United States. He challenges the denial of his motion to dismiss the indict

ment as invalid , contending that his initial removal order was void for the failure of the notice to appear in the initial removal proceedings to specify a time and date for his removal hearing. He concedes that the issue is fore closed by United States v. Pedroza

- Rocha , 933 F.3d 490 (5th Cir. 2019), petition for cert. filed (U.S. Nov. 6, 2019) (No. 19

- 6588), but he wishes to preserve it for further revie w. The g overnment moves, unopposed, for sum mary affirmance, agreeing that the issue is foreclosed by Pedroza

- Rocha and Pierre

- Paul v. Barr , 930 F.3d 684 (5th Cir. 2019)

. In Pedroza

- Rocha , 933 F.3d at 496−98 we concluded that the notice to

appear was not deficient for failure to specify a date and time for the hearing, that any such deficiency had not deprived the immigration court of jurisdiction, and that the petitioner could not collaterally attack his notice to appear with

out first exhausting admi nistrative remedies. Osorio

- Abundio ’s arguments are, as he concedes, therefore foreclosed

. See id. Because the g overnment’s position “is clearly right as a matter of law so that there can be no substantial question as to the outcome of the case,” Groend yke Transp., Inc. v. Davis , 406 F.2d 1158, 1162 (5th Cir. 1969), the motion for summary affirmance is GRANTED, the g overnment’s alternative motion for an extension of time to file a brief is DENIED, and the judgment is AFFIRMED. Case: 19-50383 Document: 00515231598 Page: 2 Date Filed: 12/11/2019
<PAGE>
                                                                    Exhibit 99.1


                            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 Citizens First Financial Corp. (the
"Company") on Form 10-Q for the period ended June 30, 2002 as filed with the
Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the "Report"), I, C.
William Landefeld, Chief Executive 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 to the best of my knowledge:

      (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 results of operations
            of the Company.

/s/   C. William Landefeld
--------------------------
      C. William Landefeld
      Chief Executive Officer
      November 14, 2002


                                       25
Exhibit 10.13


The Board of Directors
Valesul Aluminio S.A.


Consent of Independent Accountants

We consent to the use of our audit report dated January 17, 2002, included
herein in this Statement on Form 20 - F of Companhia Vale do Rio Doce, relating
to the financial statements of Valesul Aluminio S.A. as of December 31, 2000
and 2001 and for the three years period ended December 31, 2001.


/s/ KPMG Auditors Independentes

KPMG Auditores Independentes

Rio de Janeiro, Brazil

June 27, 2002
<PAGE>   1
                                                                   EXHIBIT 15.1 


Penske Motorsports, Inc. Form 10-Q (continued)



Penske Motorsports, Inc.
Detroit, Michigan

We have made a review, in accordance with standards established by the American
Institute of Certified Public Accountants, of the unaudited interim financial
information of Penske Motorsports, Inc. for the periods ended June 30, 1997 and
1996, as indicated in our report dated August 1, 1997; because we did not
perform an audit, we expressed no opinion on that information.

We are aware that our report referred to above, which is included in your
Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q for the quarter ended June 30, 1997, is
incorporated by reference in Registration Statement No. 333-692 on Form S-8.

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
Detroit, Michigan
August 1, 1997
**EXHIBIT 32.1**

 

**CERTIFICATION PURSUANT TO**

**18 U.S.C. SECTION 1350,**

**AS ADOPTED PURSUANT TO**

**SECTION 906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002**

 

The undersigned, Robert S. Herlin, President and Chief Executive Officer of Evolution Petroleum Corporation (the “Company”), certifies in connection with the filing with the Securities and Exchange Commission of the Company’s Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q for the quarter ended December 31, 2010 (the “Report”) pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, as adopted pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, to his knowledge, 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 results of operations of the Company.

 

IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the undersigned has executed this certification as of the 11th day of February, 2011.

 
|   | /s/   ROBERT S. HERLIN                  |
|--------|-----------------------------------------|
|   | Robert   S. Herlin                      |
|   | President   and Chief Executive Officer |

 

A signed original of this written statement required by Section 906 has been provided to Evolution Petroleum Corporation and will be retained by Evolution Petroleum Corporation and furnished to the Securities and Exchange Commission or its staff upon request.  The foregoing certificate is being furnished to the Securities and Exchange Commission as an exhibit to this Form 10-Q and shall not be considered filed as part of the Form 10-Q.

 

1

----
Michigan Supreme Court

Lansing, Michigan

Bridget M. McCormack, Chief Justice

David F. Viviano,

Chief Justice Pro Tem

Stephen J. Markman

Brian K. Zahra

Richard H. Bernstein

Elizabeth T. Clement

Megan K. Cavanagh,

Justices

I, Larry S. Royster, Clerk of the Michigan Supreme Court, certify that the

foregoing is a true and complete copy of the order entered at the direction of the Court.

 M 

ay 22, 2019

Order 

Clerk

May 22, 2019

157930(20)

IN THE MATTER OF 

THERESA M. BRENNAN, JUDGE

53rd DISTRICT COURT SC: 157930

JTC Formal Complaint No. 99

BEFORE THE JUDICIAL TENURE COMMISSION

____________________________________________/

On order of the Chief Justice, the motion of respondent judge to file a corrected

brief in support of the petition is GRANTED. The corrected brief submitted on May 21, 

2019, is accepted for filing.
I 

114TH CONGRESS 

1ST SESSION H. R. 664 

To allow travel between the United States and Cuba. 

IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES 

FEBRUARY 2, 2015 

Mr. SANFORD (for himself, Mr. MCGOVERN, Mr. CHAFFETZ, Ms. LEE, Mr. 

CRAMER, and Mr. RANGEL) introduced the following bill; which was referred to the Committee on Foreign Affairs 

A BILL 

To allow travel between the United States and Cuba. 

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

3 SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE. 

4 This Act may be cited as the ‘‘Freedom to Travel 

5 to Cuba Act of 2015’’. 

6 SEC. 2. TRAVEL TO CUBA. 

7 On or after the date of the enactment of this Act, 

8 and subject to section 3— 

9 (1) the President may not prohibit or otherwise 

10 regulate, directly or indirectly, travel to or from 

11 Cuba by United States citizens or legal residents, or 


SSpencer on DSK4SPTVN1PROD with BILLS
2 

•HR 664 IH

1 any of the transactions incident to such travel, in2 cluding banking transactions; and 

3 (2) any regulation in effect on such date of en4 actment that prohibits or otherwise regulates travel 

5 to or from Cuba by United States citizens or legal 

6 residents, or any of the transactions incident to such 

7 travel, including banking transactions, shall cease to 

8 have any force or effect. 

9 SEC. 3. EXCEPTIONS. 

10 Section 2 shall not apply in a case in which the 

11 United States is at war with Cuba, armed hostilities be12 tween the two countries are in progress, or there is immi13 nent danger to the public health or the physical safety of 

14 United States travelers. 

15 SEC. 4. APPLICABILITY. 

16 This Act applies to actions taken by the President 

17 before the date of the enactment of this Act that are in 

18 effect on such date of enactment, and to actions taken 

19 on or after such date. 

20 SEC. 5. INAPPLICABILITY. 

21 The provisions of this Act apply notwithstanding sec22 tion 102(h) of the Cuban Liberty and Democratic Soli23 darity (LIBERTAD) Act of 1996 (22 U.S.C. 6032(h)) 


SSpencer on DSK4SPTVN1PROD with BILLS
3 

•HR 664 IH

1 and section 910(b) of the Trade Sanctions Reform and 

2 Export Enhancement Act of 2000 (22 U.S.C. 7209(b)). 

Æ 


SSpencer on DSK4SPTVN1PROD with BILLS
EXHIBIT
      14





CODE
      OF
      ETHICS





City
      Language Exchange, Inc.





City
      Language Exchange, Inc.’s (the “Company”) mission includes significant efforts
      to promote ethical conduct in the practice of financial management throughout
      the company. Senior officers hold an important and elevated role in corporate
      governance. While members of the management team, they are uniquely capable
      and
      empowered to ensure that all shareholders’ interests are appropriately balanced,
      protected and preserved. This Code provides principles to which senior officers
      are expected to adhere and advocate. They embody rules regarding individual
      and
      peer responsibilities, as well as responsibilities to employers, the public
      and
      other stakeholders. Violations of the Company’s Code of Ethics may subject the
      officer to censure, suspension or expulsion under procedural rules adopted
      by
      the Company’s Board of Directors.





All
      senior officers of the Company will:




·Act
      with honesty and integrity,
      avoiding actual or apparent conflicts of interest in personal and professional
      relationships.





·Provide
      constituents with information
      that is accurate, complete, objective, relevant, timely and understandable.





·Comply
      with rules and regulations of
      federal, state, provincial and local governments, and other appropriate private
      and public regulatory agencies.





·Act
      in good faith, responsibly, with
      due care, competence and diligence, without misrepresenting material facts
      or
      allowing one’s independent judgment to be subordinated.





·Respect
      the confidentiality of
      information acquired in the course of one’s work except when authorized or
      otherwise legally obligated to disclose. Confidential information acquired
      in
      the course of one’s work will not be used for personal advantage.





·Share
      knowledge and maintain skills
      important and relevant to constituents’ needs.





·Proactively
      promote ethical behavior
      as a responsible partner among peers, in the work environment and the community.





·Achieve
      responsible use of and control
      over all assets and resources employed or entrusted.





In
      my
      role as a senior executive officer of the Company, I certify to you that I
      adhere to and advocate the aforementioned principles and responsibilities
      governing my professional and ethical conduct.




Date:[Signature]


[Title]
```

[Congressional Bills 104th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[S. Res. 245 Agreed to Senate (ATS)]

104th CONGRESS
  2d Session
S. RES. 245

  Making majority party appointments to the Labor and Human Resources 
                               Committee.

_______________________________________________________________________

                   IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES

                             April 16, 1996

 Mr. Lott (for Mr. Dole) submitted the following resolution; which was 
                        considered and agreed to

_______________________________________________________________________

                               RESOLUTION

 
  Making majority party appointments to the Labor and Human Resources 
                               Committee.

    Resolved, That notwithstanding any provision in Rule 25 or 26, the 
following be the majority party membership on the Committee on Labor 
and Human Resources for the 104th Congress, or until their successors 
are appointed:
    Labor and Human Resources: Mrs. Kassebaum (Chairman), Mr. Jeffords, 
Mr. Coats, Mr. Gregg, Mr. Frist, Mr. DeWine, Mr. Ashcroft, Mr. Gorton, 
and Mr. Faircloth.
                                 <all>
```
## SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF NEW YORK 

## Appellate Division, Fourth Judicial Department

**86 CA 15-00084**  PRESENT: CENTRA, J.P., PERADOTTO, LINDLEY, DEJOSEPH, AND SCUDDER, JJ.

DONTIE S. MITCHELL, PLAINTIFF-APPELLANT,

V ORDER
WOODS OVIATT GILMAN, LLP, AND WILLIAM G. BAUER, DEFENDANTS-RESPONDENTS. (APPEAL NO. 1.)

DONTIE S. MITCHELL, PLAINTIFF-APPELLANT PRO SE. WOODS OVIATT GILMAN LLP, ROCHESTER (WILLIAM G. BAUER OF COUNSEL), FOR DEFENDANTS-RESPONDENTS.

Appeal from an order of the Supreme Court, Cayuga County (Thomas G. Leone, A.J.), entered June 5, 2014. The order, among other things, denied that part of plaintiff’s motion seeking to strike defendants’ answer. Now, upon reading and filing the stipulation of discontinuance signed by the plaintiff on November 27, 2015 and by the attorney for the defendants on December 3, 2015, It is hereby ORDERED that said appeal is unanimously dismissed without costs upon stipulation.

Entered: February 5, 2016 Frances E. Cafarell Clerk of the Court
# C_2008274EN.01S00301.xml

| 29.10.2008 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 274/s3 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

29.10.2008

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 274/s3

---

NOTE TO THE READER

NOTE TO THE READER

The institutions have decided no longer to quote in their texts the last amendment to cited acts.

Unless otherwise indicated, references to acts in the texts published here are to the version of those acts currently in force.

---
(logo) pwc

 

 

 

 

 

 

Report of Independent Registered Public Accounting Firm

 

 

To the Board of Directors and shareholders of CoreLogic, Inc.:

 

We have examined management's assertion, included in the accompanying Report on Assessment of Compliance, that CoreLogic Commercial Real Estate Services, Inc. (the "Company"), an indirect subsidiary of CoreLogic, Inc. complied with the servicing criteria set forth in Item 1122(d) of the Securities and Exchange Commission's Regulation AB for all loans for commercial mortgage loan outsourcing customers for which the Company served as the commercial tax service provider (the "Platform"), as of December 31, 2014 and for the year then ended, only including 1122(d)(1)(iv), 1122(d)(2)(ii), 1122(d)(2)(v), 1122(d)(2)(vi), 1122(d)(2)(vii), 1122(d)(4)(xi), 1122(d)(4)(xii) and 1122(d)(4)(xiii), which the Company has determined are 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 other procedures as we considered necessary in the circumstances. Our examination included testing of selected servicing activities related to the Platform, and determining whether the Company performed those selected activities in compliance with the applicable servicing criteria. Our procedures were limited to the selected 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 the Company complied with the aforementioned applicable servicing criteria as of and for the year ended December 31, 2014 for all loans for commercial mortgage loan outsourcing customers for which the Company served as the commercial tax service provider is fairly stated, in all material respects. 

 

 

/s/ PricewaterhouseCoopers LLP

February 11, 2015

 

 

 

 

 

PricewaterhouseCoopers LLP, 2001 Ross Avenue, Suite 1800, Dallas, TX 75201-2997

T: (214) 999 1400, F: (214)754 7991, www.pwc.com/us
III

104TH CONGRESS

1ST SESSION S. RES. 105

Condemning Iran for the violent suppression of a protest in Teheran.

IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES

APRIL 5, 1995

Mr. D’AMATO submitted the following resolution; which was referred to the

Committee on Foreign Relations

RESOLUTION

Condemning Iran for the violent suppression of a protest

in Teheran.

Whereas an estimated crowd of 100,000 Iranian people assembled in southern Teheran on April 4, 1995, to protest

sharp price increases and a shortage of water, and other

important staples of daily life;

Whereas the Iranian Revolutionary Guard and the Bassidj, a

political militia, have been granted the right to ‘‘shootto-kill’’ in order to quell disturbances; and

Whereas these forces, supplemented by armed helicopter

gunships, on April 4, 1995, opened fire on the demonstrators killing as many as 150 people, thereby ending

the protest: Now, therefore, be it

1 Resolved, That it is the sense of the Senate that the

2 President should immediately condemn this brutal sup-
2

SRES 105 IS

1 pression of a crowd of protesters resulting in the death

2 of as many as 150 people by the Government of Iran and

3 instruct the United States Ambassador to the United Na4 tions to bring this matter before the United Nations Secu5 rity Council with the intent of pursuing a Security Council

6 condemnation of Iran.

Æ