alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
**EXHIBIT32.1**

 

SECTION 906 CERTIFICATION

 

 

Thecertification set forth below is being submitted to the Securities and ExchangeCommission solely for the purpose of complying with Section 1350 of Chapter 63of Title 18 of the United States Code.

 

November10, 2004

 

CharlesT. Chrietzberg, Jr., the Chief Executive Officer of Northern CaliforniaBancorp, Inc. certifies:

 

b.              that thisperiodic report fully complies with the requirements of section 13(a) or 15(d)of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934; and

c.               thatinformation contained in this periodic report fairly presents, in all materialrespects, the financial condition and results of operations of NorthernCalifornia Bancorp, Inc..

 

 
|   | /s/ Charles T.  Chrietzberg, Jr. |   |
|--------|----------------------------------|--------|
|   | Charles T. Chrietzberg,  Jr.     |
|   | Chief Executive Officer          |
|   | and President                    |

 

----
```

[Congressional Bills 105th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[H. Con. Res. 211 Introduced in House (IH)]

105th CONGRESS
  2d Session
H. CON. RES. 211

Opposing increased Federal income taxes on variable annuities and other 
                          variable contracts.

_______________________________________________________________________

                    IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

                           February 11, 1998

   Mr. Paul submitted the following concurrent resolution; which was 
              referred to the Committee on Ways and Means

_______________________________________________________________________

                         CONCURRENT RESOLUTION

 
Opposing increased Federal income taxes on variable annuities and other 
                          variable contracts.

Whereas variable annuities and variable life insurance contracts provide an 
        important means for individuals to save for retirement;
Whereas most variable contracts are held by moderate income individuals to 
        provide retirement income;
Whereas Congress should not negatively interfere with an individual's private 
        savings plans nor discourage savings; and
Whereas the President's proposed Federal budget would increase taxes on those 
        using variable contracts and thereby would discourage retirement savings 
        and financial planning: Now, therefore, be it
    Resolved by the House of Representatives (the Senate concurring), 
That it is the sense of the Congress that no increased taxes should be 
imposed on the use of variable annuities and other variable contracts.
                                 <all>
```
#### James E. HALL, Plaintiff-Appellant, v. REGAL ENTERTAINMENT GROUP, Defendant-Appellee.

No. 16-17122

United States Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit.

Submitted December 7, 2017 * San Francisco, California

Filed December 11, 2017

Boyd Jensen, Garrett & Jensen, Riverside, CA, for Plaintiff-Appellant

Nicholas Schieffelin, Ernest Weiss, Kli-nedinst PC, Santa Ana, CA, for Defendant-Appellee’

*665Before: SCHROEDER and KOZINSKI, Circuit Judges, and ELLIS,** District Judge.

*

 The panel unanimously concludes this case is suitable for decision without oral argument. See Fed. R. App. P. 34(a)(2).

**

 The Honorable Sara Lee Ellis, United States District Judge for the Northern District of Illinois, sitting by designation.

MEMORANDUM ***

“Where [a] dangerous condition is brought about by ... third persons ... or by other causes which are not due to the negligence of the owner, or his employees, then to impose liability the owner must have either actual or constructive knowledge of the dangerous condition[.]” Hatfield v. Levy Bros., 18 Cal.2d 798, 117 P.2d 841, 845 (1941).

Hall alleges that Regal had constructive knowledge of the spill because: (1) Regal’s ushers aren’t provided “carpet cleaner, cleaning solutions, or scrapers” to clean spills; (2) no one addressed the spill for at least 30 minutes after Hall reported it; and (3) Hall’s expert inspected the theater three years later and observed “[s]lippery and sticky spots” on the carpet. These allegations may indicate that Regal didn’t properly clean up spills after Hall slipped, but they have no bearing on Regal’s constructive knowledge of the dangerous condition beforehand. “In the absence of actual or constructive knowledge of the dangerous condition, the own-' er is not liable.” Moore v. Wal-Mart Stores, Inc., 111 Cal.App.4th 472, 3 Cal.Rptr.3d 813, 816 (2003).

AFFIRMED.

***

 This disposition is not appropriate for publication and is not precedent except as provided by Ninth Circuit Rule 36-3.
#### UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff-Appellee v. Harold Archie LINDSAY, III, Defendant-Appellant

No. 17-50005 Summary Calendar

United States Court of Appeals, Fifth Circuit.

Filed January 18, 2018

Joseph H. Gay, Jr., Assistant U.S. Attorney, U.S. Attorney’s Office, Western District of Texas, San Antonio, TX, Jennifer Sheffield Freel, Ewell, Brown, Blanke *&*Knight, L.L.P., Austin, TX, for Plaintiff-Appellee

John Richard Donahue, Waco, TX, for Defendant-Appellant

Before DAVIS, CLEMENT, and COSTA, Circuit Judges.

PER CURIAM: *

Harold Archie Lindsay, III, entered a conditional guilty plea to being a felon in possession of a firearm.' He was sentenced at the bottom of the advisory guidelines range to 30 months of imprisonment and three years of supervised release. Pursuant to his plea agreement, Lindsay reserved the right to appeal the district court’s denial of. his motion to suppress evidence. As he did before the district court, Lindsay contends that the search warrant obtained in his case was legally insufficient as it was based on a “bare bones” affidavit.

This court engages in a two-step inquiry when reviewing a district court’s denial of a defendant’s motion to suppress when a search warrant is involved. *United States v. Cherna,*184 F.3d 403, 407 (5th Cir. 1999). First, the court determines whether the good faith exception to the exclusionary rule announced in *United States v. Leon,*468 U.S. 897, 104 S.Ct. 3405, 82 L.Ed.2d 677 (1984), applies. *Cherna,*184 F.3d at 407. If so, no further analysis is conducted and the district court’s denial of the motion to suppress will be affirmed. *Id.*If the good faith exception does not apply, the court proceeds to the second step, “ensur[ing] that the magistrate had a substantial basis for ... concluding that probable cause existed.” *Id.*(internal quotation marks and citation omitted).

Although the affidavit in the instant case could have provided more information regarding details of the controlled buy, the affidavit did not contain “wholly conclusory statements” that were “so lacking in indi-cia of probable cause as to render official *300belief in [their] existence entirely unreasonable.” *United States v. Satterwhite,*980 F.2d 317, 320-21 (5th Cir. 1992) (internal quotation marks and citations omitted). Given that affidavits must be construed in a commonsense manner, *see United States v. Ventresca,*380 U.S. 102, 108, 85 S.Ct. 741, 13 L.Ed.2d 684 (1965), with great deference given to a magistrate judge’s determination of probable cause, the district court did not err in finding that the affidavit in the instant case was not bare bones. *See United States v. McKnight,*953 F.2d 898, 905 (5th Cir. 1992). As such, it is unnecessary to determine if probable cause in fact existed, because the good-faith exception applies. *See Cherna,*184 F.3d at 407.

AFFIRMED.

*

 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.
IN THE DISTRICT COURT OF APPEAL OF THE STATE O F FLORIDA FIFTH DISTRICT NOT FINAL UNTIL TIME E XPIRES TO FILE MOTION FOR REHEARING AND DISPOSITION THEREOF IF FILED J AMARIAN MORELAND , A ppellant ,
v. Case No. 5D 21

- 2245 LT Case No. 05

- 20 17

- CF

- 0 29876

- D STATE OF FLORIDA ,

Appellee

. ________________________________/ Decision filed July 5, 2022 Appeal from t he C ircuit C ourt for Brevard County , David C

. K oenig , Judge. Matthew J. Me tz , P ublic D efender, a nd Glendo n G. G ordon, J r., A ssistant P ublic Defender, Daytona Beach, for Appellant. Ashley M oody, A ttorney G eneral, Tallahassee, an d Rober ts J. Bradford, Jr., As sistant A ttorney G eneral, D aytona Beach, for Appellee. PER CURIAM. AFFIRMED.

EVANDER, NARDELLA and WOZNIAK , JJ. , c oncur.
Exhibit 32.2

                                  Certification

                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 Long Island Physician Holdings
Corporation (the "Company") on Form 10-Q for the period ended June 30, 2006 as
filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the
"Report"), I, Concetta Pryor, Chief Financial 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 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 result of operations of the
Company.

/s/ Concetta Pryor
------------------

Concetta Pryor
Chief Financial Officer

Date: __________________________

      This certification accompanies the above-described Report on Form 10-Q
pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002 and shall not, except
to the extent required by such Act, be deemed filed by the Company for purposes
of Section 18 of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended.


                                       20
III

104TH CONGRESS

2D SESSION S. RES. 256

To authorize the production of records by the Select Committee on

Intelligence

IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES

MAY 23, 1996

Mr. DOLE (for himself and Mr. DASCHLE) submitted the following resolution;

which was considered and agreed to

RESOLUTION

To authorize the production of records by the Select

Committee on Intelligence

Whereas the Office of the Inspector General of the Central

Intelligence Agency has requested that the Select Committee on Intelligence provide it with copies of committee

records relevant to the Office’s pending review of matters

related to the Zona Rosa massacre of six American citizens in El Salvador in 1985;

Whereas, by the privileges of the Senate of the United States

and rule XI of the Standing Rules of the Senate, no evidence under the control or in the possession of the Senate can, by administrative or judicial process, be taken

from such control or possession but by permission of the

Senate;
2

SRES 256 ATS

Whereas, when it appears that documents, papers, and

records under the control or in the possession of the Senate may promote the administration of justice, the Senate

will take such action as will promote the ends of justice

consistently with the privileges of the Senate: Now, therefore, be it

1 Resolved, That the Chairman and Vice Chairman of

2 the Select Committee on Intelligence, acting jointly, are

3 authorized to provide to the Office of Inspector General

4 of the Central Intelligence Agency, under appropriate se5 curity procedures, copies of records that the Office has

6 requested for use in connection with its pending review

7 into matters related to the Zona Rosa massacre.

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

Columbia, MD 21045

 

Tel:  410 884 2000

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

 

 

 

 

J.P. Morgan Chase Commercial Mortgage Securities Corp. 

383 Madison Avenue 31st Floor,

New York, NY 10179

 

 

 

RE:  Annual Statement of Compliance

 

The undersigned, a duly authorized officer of Wells Fargo Bank, N.A., as Certificate Administrator for the 17 State Street Whole Loan (in such capacities, “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 applicable servicing agreement(s) listed on Schedule A hereto (the “Servicing Agreement(s)”) has been made under my supervision; and

 

(b)     To the best of my knowledge, based on such review, Wells Fargo has fulfilled all of its obligations under the Servicing Agreement(s) in all material respects throughout the reporting period, except as noted on Schedule B.

 

 

 

March 20, 2015

 

 

/s/ Brian Smith

Brian Smith 

Vice President

 

 

To:  J.P. Morgan Chase Commercial Mortgage Securities Corp.

Schedule A

 

 

List of Servicing Agreement(s) and Series

 

 

Pooling and Servicing Agreement dated as of September 1, 2014, by and among  J.P. MORGAN CHASE COMMERCIAL MORTGAGE SECURITIES CORP., as Depositor , WELLS FARGO BANK, NATIONAL ASSOCIATION, as Master Servicer, CWCAPITAL ASSET MANAGEMENT LLC, as Special Servicer,  WELLS FARGO BANK, NATIONAL ASSOCIATION, as Certificate Administrator, WILMINGTON TRUST, NATIONAL ASSOCIATION, as Trustee and PENTALPHA SURVEILLANCE LLC, as Senior Trust Advisor, relating to the series JPM 2014-C23 Commercial Mortgage Pass-Through Certificates  relating to the 17 State Street Whole Loan, a  pari passu portion of which is included in the series JPM 2014-C24 Commercial Mortgage Pass-Through Certificates transaction.

 

 

 

To:  J.P. Morgan Chase Commercial Mortgage Securities Corp.

Schedule B

 

 

Material Non-Compliance with Servicing Obligations

 

Not Applicable
#### Ruben VALDEZ, Plaintiff-Appellant, v. Matthew CATE, Secretary of Corrections, California Department of Corrections; et al., Defendants-Appellees.

No. 16-16948

United States Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit.

Submitted January 16, 2018 *

Filed January 19, 2018

Ruben Valdez, Pro Se

Erin R. Doering, Deputy Attorney General, AGCA-Office of the California Attorney General, Sacramento, CA, for Defendants-Appellees

Before: REINHARDT, TROTT, and HURWITZ, Circuit Judges.

*

 The panel unanimously concludes this case is suitable for decision without oral argument. *See*Fed, R. App. P. 34(a)(2).

*300MEMORANDUM **

California state prisoner Ruben Valdez appeals pro se from the magistrate judge’s orders dismissing his 42 U.S.C. § 1983 action alleging due process violations in connection with his validation as a gang member. We have jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. § 1291. We review de novo whether the magistrate judge validly entered judgment on behalf of the district court. *Allen v.*Meyer, 755 F.3d 866, 867-68 (9th Cir. 2014). We vacate and remand.

Valdez consented to proceed before the magistrate judge. *See*28.U.S.C. § 636(c). The magistrate judge then screened and dismissed Valdez’s claims against three of the originally named defendants before they, had been served. *See*28 U.S.C. § 1915A. The magistrate judge also granted judgment on the pleadings for the remaining defendants, including seven defendants named in Valdez’s second amended complaint who had hot consented to proceed before the magistrate judge. Because all parties, including unserved defendants, must consent to proceed before .the magistrate judge for jurisdiction to vest, *Williams v. King,*875 F.3d 500, 503-04 (9th Cir. 2017), we vacate the magistrate judge’s orders and remand for further proceedings.

Valdez’s motions for appointment of counsel and to take judicial notice (Docket Entry Nos. 29 and 30) are denied.

VACATED and REMANDED.

**

 This disposition is not appropriate for publication and is not precedent except as provided by Ninth Circuit Rule 36-3.
Exhibit 31(ii)
                                --------------


                                CERTIFICATIONS
                                --------------

I, Steve Bailey, certify that:


      1.    I have reviewed this report on Form 10-K and all reports on Form
            10-D required to be filed in respect of the period covered by this
            report on Form 10-K of Alternative Loan Trust 2006-46 (the
            "Exchange Act periodic reports");

      2.    Based on my knowledge, the Exchange Act periodic reports, taken as
            a whole, do 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, all of the distribution, servicing and
            other information required to be provided under Form 10-D for the
            period covered by this report is included in the Exchange Act
            periodic reports;

      4.    I am responsible for reviewing the activities performed by the
            servicer(s) and based on my knowledge and the compliance review(s)
            conducted in preparing the servicer compliance statement(s)
            required in this report under Item 1123 of Regulation AB, and
            except as disclosed in the Exchange Act periodic reports, the
            servicer(s) have fulfilled their obligations under the servicing
            agreement(s) in all material respects; and

      5.    All of the reports on assessment of compliance with servicing
            criteria for asset-backed securities and their related attestation
            reports on assessment of compliance with servicing criteria for
            asset-backed securities required to be included in this report in
            accordance with Item 1122 of Regulation AB and Exchange Act Rules
            13a-18 and 15d-18 have been included as an exhibit to this report,
            except as otherwise disclosed in this report. Any material
            instances of noncompliance described in such reports have been
            disclosed in this report on Form 10-K.

      In giving the certifications above, I have reasonably relied on
      information provided to me by the following unaffiliated parties: The
      Bank of New York, as Trustee.

Date: March 27, 2007


      /s/ Steve Bailey
      -----------------------
      Steve Bailey
      Senior Managing Director, Loan Administration
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<PAGE>
<ARTICLE> 5
<MULTIPLIER> 1,000

<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   9-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          DEC-31-2000
<PERIOD-START>                             JAN-01-2000
<PERIOD-END>                               SEP-30-2000
<CASH>                                          30,297
<SECURITIES>                                    17,583
<RECEIVABLES>                                   11,776
<ALLOWANCES>                                   (1,380)
<INVENTORY>                                          0
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                                63,501
<PP&E>                                          35,895
<DEPRECIATION>                                (12,107)
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                 724,757
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                           27,257
<BONDS>                                              0
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                           886
<OTHER-SE>                                     695,467
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                   724,757
<SALES>                                              0
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                               164,983
<CGS>                                                0
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                  305,304
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                               (1,717)
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                     0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                                   0
<INCOME-PRETAX>                              (142,038)
<INCOME-TAX>                                     1,033
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                          (143,071)
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                 (143,071)
<EPS-BASIC>                                     (1.65)
<EPS-DILUTED>                                   (1.65)


</TABLE>
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<PAGE>
<ARTICLE> 5
<LEGEND>
THIS SCHEDULE CONTAINS SUMMARY FINANCIAL INFORMATION EXTRACTED FROM THE
CONSOLIDATED BALANCE SHEET AS OF MARCH 31, 1999 AND THE CONSOLIDATED STATEMENT
OF OPERATIONS FOR THE THREE MONTHS ENDED MARCH 31, 1999 AND IS QUALIFIED IN ITS
ENTIRETY BY REFERENCE TO SUCH FINANCIAL STATEMENTS.
</LEGEND>
<MULTIPLIER> 1,000
       
<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   3-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          DEC-31-1999
<PERIOD-END>                               MAR-31-1999
<CASH>                                             575
<SECURITIES>                                         0
<RECEIVABLES>                                    3,881
<ALLOWANCES>                                       164
<INVENTORY>                                      1,690
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                                 7,145
<PP&E>                                           2,903
<DEPRECIATION>                                   1,536
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                   8,769
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                            2,947
<BONDS>                                              0
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                         6,517
<OTHER-SE>                                           0
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                     8,769
<SALES>                                          2,981
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                                 2,981
<CGS>                                            1,803
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                    1,405
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                     0
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                     0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                                  29
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                  (256)
<INCOME-TAX>                                     (105)
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                              (151)
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                     (151)
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                    (.04)
<EPS-DILUTED>                                    (.04)
        

</TABLE>