alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
| (logo) WELLS       FARGO | Corporate Trust Services

MAC R1204-010 9062 Old Annapolis Road

Columbia, MD 21045

 

Tel: 410 884 2000

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

 

 

 

 

 

Wells Fargo Commercial Mortgage Securities, Inc. 

c/o Wells Fargo Securities, LLC

375 Park Avenue 2nd floor

J0127-023

New York, New York 10152-023

 

 

 

 

RE: Annual Statement of Compliance for WFRBS Commercial Mortgage Trust 2014- C24 Commercial Mortgage Pass-Through Certificates, Series 2014-C24

 

 

Per the Pooling and Servicing Agreement dated as of November 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 26, 2015

 

/s/ Brian Smith

BRIAN SMITH

Vice President

 

 

 

 

Wells Fargo Bank, N.A.
No. 11-9864.

#### Huynh *v.*Executive Committee of the United States District Court for the Northern District of Illinois.

C. A. 7th Cir. Certiorari denied.
IV

105TH CONGRESS

2D SESSION H. CON. RES. 231

Recognizing the National Black Law Students Association for its role in

the professional development of law students, and for other purposes.

IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

MARCH 3, 1998

Mr. HILLIARD submitted the following concurrent resolution; which was

referred to the Committee on the Judiciary

CONCURRENT RESOLUTION

Recognizing the National Black Law Students Association

for its role in the professional development of law students, and for other purposes.

Whereas, in 1968, A.J. Cooper, LeSeur Stewart, Joseph Porter III, Ronald Mitchell, Robert Holmes, and Barry Robinson recognized the need for an organization that would

be responsive to the needs of black law students;

Whereas, determined to rock the foundation upon which the

traditional legal system rested while focusing specifically

on issues relevant to black law students and the black

community at large, these visionaries founded the Black

American Law Students Association;

Whereas, in the spring of 1969, 30 chapters of the Black

American Law Students Association met in Chicago, Illinois, for the Association’s inaugural convention;
2

•HCON 231 IH

Whereas the holding of a Black Law Students Association

convention became an annual tradition and an important

forum in which black law students nationwide could discuss a variety of legal and social issues concerning the

black community;

Whereas, in 1983, the word ‘‘American’’ was removed from

the Association’s name in order to include all blacks, not

just black American citizens;

Whereas the Association is now known as the National Black

Law Students Association;

Whereas there are more than 200 chapters of the National

Black Law Students Association, representing nearly

7,000 law students throughout the United States, including Puerto Rico;

Whereas, as the primary organization dedicated to black law

students across America, the National Black Law Students Association continues to encourage excellence and

success among black law students by providing scholarships and job opportunities for current and future law

students;

Whereas the National Black Law Students Association sponsors a national moot court competition and numerous

community service projects which benefit the Black community and the Nation as a whole;

Whereas, on March 25, 1998, in Boston Massachusetts, the

National Black Law Students Association will hold its

29th Annual Convention; and

Whereas 1998 represents the 30th anniversary of the founding of the association that became the National Black

Law Students Association: Now, therefore, be it
3

•HCON 231 IH

1 Resolved by the House of Representatives (the Senate

2 concurring), That the Congress—

3 (1) recognizes the valuable role played by the

4 National Black Law Students Association in the

5 professional development of thousands of law stu6 dents; and

7 (2) shares the sentiment expressed in the Na8 tional Black Law Students Association’s 30th anni9 versary theme, ‘‘Three decades of excellence: con10 tinuing into the next millennium’’.

Æ
`[Congressional Bills 105th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[H. Con. Res. 67 Reported in House (RH)]






                                                  House Calendar No. 32
105th CONGRESS
  1st Session
H. CON. RES. 67

                          [Report No. 105-92]

Authorizing the 1997 Special Olympics Torch Relay to be run through the 
                            Capitol Grounds.


_______________________________________________________________________


                    IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

                             April 24, 1997

   Mr. Kim submitted the following concurrent resolution; which was 
     referred to the Committee on Transportation and Infrastructure

                              May 7, 1997

        Referred to the House Calendar and ordered to be printed

_______________________________________________________________________

                         CONCURRENT RESOLUTION


 
Authorizing the 1997 Special Olympics Torch Relay to be run through the 
                            Capitol Grounds.

    Resolved by the House of Representatives (the Senate concurring),

SECTION 1. AUTHORIZATION OF RUNNING OF SPECIAL OLYMPICS TORCH RELAY 
              THROUGH CAPITOL GROUNDS.

    On June 13, 1997, or on such other date as the Speaker of the House 
of Representatives and the President pro tempore of the Senate may 
jointly designate, the 1997 Special Olympics Torch Relay may be run 
through the Capitol Grounds, as part of the journey of the Special 
Olympics torch to the District of Columbia Special Olympics summer 
games at Gallaudet University in the District of Columbia.

SEC. 2. RESPONSIBILITY OF CAPITOL POLICE BOARD.

    The Capitol Police Board shall take such actions as may be 
necessary to carry out section 1.

SEC. 3. CONDITIONS RELATING TO PHYSICAL PREPARATIONS.

    The Architect of the Capitol may prescribe conditions for physical 
preparations for the event authorized by section 1.
                                     





                                                  House Calendar No. 32

105th CONGRESS

  1st Session

                            H. CON. RES. 67

                          [Report No. 105-92]

_______________________________________________________________________

                         CONCURRENT RESOLUTION

Authorizing the 1997 Special Olympics Torch Relay to be run through the 
                            Capitol Grounds.

_______________________________________________________________________

                              May 7, 1997

        Referred to the House Calendar and ordered to be printed`
#### UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. Jose Luis MANZO, a.k.a. Jose Manzo, Defendant-Appellant.

No. 16-30151

United States Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit.

Submitted April 11, 2017 *

Filed April 24, 2017

Russell E. Smoot, Assistant U.S. Attorney, Joseph Hilary Harrington, Assistant U.S. Attorney, Jared Courtland Kimball, Assistant U.S. Attorney, USSP — Office of the U.S. Attorney, Spokane, WA, for Plaintiff-Appellee

Jose Luis Manzo, Pro Se

Before: GOULD, CLIFTON, 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).

MEMORANDUM **

Jose Luis Manzo appeals pro se from the district court’s order denying his motion for a sentence reduction under Í8 U.S.C. § 3582(c)(2). We have jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. § 1291, and we affirm.

Manzo contends that the district court erred by denying his motion for a sentence reduction under Amendment 782 to the Sentencing Guidelines. We review de novo whether a district court had authority to modify a sentence under section 3682(c)(2). *See United States v. Leniear,*574 F.3d 668, 672 (9th Cir. 2009). Contrary to Man-zo’s contention, the district court did not conclude that he was ineligible for a sentence reduction because his sentence was based on the parties’ Federal Rule of Criminal Procedure 11(c)(1)(C) plea agreement. Rather, the district court correctly held that it lacked the authority to reduce Manzo’s sentence because Amendment 782 did not lower his applicable Guidelines range. *See*18 U.S.C. § 3582(c)(2); *Leniear,*574 F.3d at 673-74.

AFFIRMED.

**

**This disposition is not appropriate for publication and is not precedent except as provided by Ninth Circuit Rule 36-3.
```

[Congressional Bills 105th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[H. Con. Res. 217 Introduced in House (IH)]

105th CONGRESS
  2d Session
H. CON. RES. 217

 Expressing the sense of Congress with respect to the authority of the 
                   Federal Communications Commission.

_______________________________________________________________________

                    IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

                           February 11, 1998

Mr. Tauzin (for himself, Mr. Boucher, Mr. Livingston, Mr. Stearns, Mr. 
  Klug, Mr. Shimkus, Mr. Deal of Georgia, Mr. Paxon, Mrs. Cubin, Mr. 
    Hastert, Mr. Oxley, Mr. Burr of North Carolina, and Mr. Rogan) 
 submitted the following concurrent resolution; which was referred to 
                       the Committee on Commerce

_______________________________________________________________________

                         CONCURRENT RESOLUTION

 
 Expressing the sense of Congress with respect to the authority of the 
                   Federal Communications Commission.

    Resolved by the House of Representatives (the Senate concurring), 
That it is the sense of Congress that--
            (1) the Congress has never granted the Federal 
        Communications Commission the authority to compel broadcast 
        station licensees to provide free broadcast time for the airing 
        of political advertising, other than the specific equal time 
        obligations of section 315 of the Communications Act of 1934;
            (2) section 315 of that Act contains specific and 
        reasonable limits on the compensation that may be required of 
        political candidates for the airing of political advertising 
        that the Congress enacted as the exclusive authority of the 
        Commission with respect to compensation for political 
        advertising;
            (3) the Commission may not further expand the public 
        interest obligations of broadcast station licensees to accept 
        political advertising without express statutory authority from 
        the Congress, and the responsible weighing of the legal and 
        economic problems that congressional consideration entails; and
            (4) the Federal Communications Commission should not engage 
        in actions that would congest the Federal courts with needless 
        litigation concerning the limits on the Commission's authority, 
        wasting the congressionally appropriated resources of the 
        Commission, the Department of Justice, and the judicial branch.
                                 <all>
```
DISTRICT COURT OF APPEAL OF THE STATE OF FLORIDA

FOURTH DISTRICT

NERMINE HANNA,

Appellant,

v.

NATIONSTAR MORTGAGE, LLC, UNKNOWN SPOUSE OF NERMINE 

HANNA n/k/a MOURAD HANNA, BRIDGET RUEBOTTOM, 

TIMOTHY AGRILLO, FREDERICK AGRILLO, BRIAN MADIO, 

BRIAN MADIO, AS TRUSTEE OF THE TESTAMENTARY TRUST OF 

DOLORES HOWARD, DATED DECEMBER 15, 2006, 

DANIELLE AGRILLO, MARIA SEBASTIAN, VILLAGE OF PALM 

SPRINGS, FLORIDA, CITY OF LAKE WORTH, FLORIDA, and

COVERED BRIDGE CONDOMINIUM ASSOCIATION, INC., 

Appellees.

No. 4D18-2660

[July 11, 2019]

Appeal from the Circuit Court for the Fifteenth Judicial Circuit, Palm 

Beach County; Susan R. Lubitz, Senior Judge; L.T. Case No. 

502012CA004064XXXXMB.

James R. Ackley of the Law Offices of James R. Ackley, P.A., West Palm 

Beach, for appellant.

Nancy M. Wallace of Akerman LLP, Tallahassee, William P. Heller of 

Akerman LLP, Fort Lauderdale, and Eric M. Levine of Akerman LLP, West 

Palm Beach, for appellee Nationstar Mortgage LLC.

PER CURIAM.

Affirmed.

LEVINE, C.J., KUNTZ, J., and BOATWRIGHT, JOE, Associate Judge, concur. 

* * *

Not final until disposition of timely filed motion for rehearing.
UNPUBLISHED

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

No. 18-2065

HAROLD BLICK,

Plaintiff - Appellant,

v.

SHAPIRO & BROWN, LLP; PROFESSIONAL FORECLOSURE 

CORPORATION OF VIRGINIA; SELECT PORTFOLIO SERVICING, INC.; 

DEUTSCHE BANK NATIONAL TRUST COMPANY,

Defendants - Appellees.

Appeal from the United States District Court for the Western District of Virginia, at 

Charlottesville. Norman K. Moon, Senior District Judge. (3:16-cv-00070-NKM-JCH)

Submitted: January 22, 2019 Decided: January 24, 2019

Before MOTZ, KEENAN, and FLOYD, Circuit Judges.

Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion.

Harold Blick, Appellant Pro Se. Jessica Ashley Glajch, William Dean Ledoux, Jr., 

ECKERT SEAMANS CHERIN & MELLOTT, LLC, Richmond, Virginia, for Appellees.

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.
2

PER CURIAM:

Harold Blick appeals the district court’s order entering judgment in favor of 

Deutsche Bank National Trust Company on Blick’s breach of contract claim and in favor 

of Blick on his claim against Shapiro & Brown, LLP, under the Fair Debt Collection 

Practices Act, 15 U.S.C. §§ 1692-1692p (2012), and ordering Shapiro & Brown to pay 

Blick $1 in nominal damages and $1000 in statutory damages. We have reviewed the 

record and find no reversible error. Accordingly, we affirm for the reasons stated by the 

district court. Blick v. Shapiro & Brown, LLP, No. 3:16-cv-00070-NKM-JCH (W.D. Va. 

July 12, 2018). 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.

AFFIRMED
III

105TH CONGRESS

2D SESSION H. CON. RES. 326

IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES

SEPTEMBER 22, 1998

Received

CONCURRENT RESOLUTION

Permitting the use of the rotunda of the Capitol on September 23, 1998, for the presentation of the Congressional

Medal to Nelson Rolihlahla Mandela.

1 Resolved by the House of Representatives (the Senate

2 concurring), That the rotunda of the Capitol is authorized

3 to be used on September 23, 1998, for the presentation

4 of the Congressional Gold Medal to Nelson Rolihlahla

5 Mandela. Physical preparation for the ceremony shall be
2

HCON 326 RDS

1 carried out in accordance with such conditions as the

2 Architect of the Capitol may prescribe.

Passed the House of Representatives September 18,

1998.

Attest: ROBIN H. CARLE,

Clerk.
## THE STATE OF TEXAS

MANDATE

TO THE COUNTY COURT AT LAW OF RUSK COUNT Y, GREETINGS:

Before the Court of Appeals for the Sixth Court of Appeals District of Texas, on the 23rd

day of January, A.D. 2015, the cause upon appeal to revise or reverse your Judgment was

determined; and therein our said Court made its order in these words:

In re Estate of June Elaine Gibson,

Deceased No. 06

- 14

- 00098

- CV

Trial Court No. 2013

- 148P

As stated in the Court’s opinion of this date, we find that the motion of the appellant to

dismiss the appeal should be granted. Therefore, we dismiss the appeal.

We further order that the appellant, Karen Anderson, pay all costs of this appeal.

WHEREFORE, WE COMMAND YOU to observe the order of our said Court in this

behalf, and in all things to have it duly recognized, obeyed, and executed.

WITNESS, the Hon. Josh R. Morriss, III, Chief Justice of our said Court of Appeals, with

the seal thereof annexed, at the City of Tex arkana, this the 9th day of April , A.D. 2015

.

DEBRA K. AUTREY , Clerk
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





In
connection with the Annual Report of SEA 2 SKY CORPORATION on Form 10-K for the
period ended August 31, 2009, as filed with the Securities and Exchange
Commission on the date hereof (the "Report"), I, David Siebenga, Chief Executive
Officer of the Company, certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. 1350, as adopted pursuant
to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that:





(a) The
Report fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) or 15(d) of the
Securities Exchange Act of 1934; and





(b) The
information contained in the Report fairly presents, in all material respects,
the financial condition and results of operations of the
Company.







Date:
December 8, 2009





By: 
/s/ David Siebenga


David
Siebenga


Chief
Executive Officer


Principal
Executive Officer
No. 11-1369.

#### Ellis et ux. *v.*Hanson et al.

Ct. App. Minn. Certiorari denied.
**EXHIBIT 31.1****CERTIFICATION**I, James B. McCurry, certify that:     1. I have reviewed this Form 10-Q of PRG-Schultz International, Inc.;     2. Based on my knowledge, this report does not contain any untrue statement of a material factor omit to state a material fact necessary to make the statements made, in light of thecircumstances under which such statements were made, not misleading with respect to the periodcovered by this report;     3. Based on my knowledge, the financial statements, and other financial information includedin this report, fairly present in all material respects the financial condition, results ofoperations and cash flows of the registrant as of, and for, the periods presented in this report;     4. The registrant’s other certifying officer and I are responsible for establishing andmaintaining disclosure controls and procedures (as defined in Exchange Act Rules 13a-15(e) and15d-15(e)) and have:     (a) Designed such disclosure controls and procedures, or caused such disclosure controlsand procedures to be designed under our supervision, to ensure that material informationrelating to the registrant, including its consolidated subsidiaries, is made known to us byothers within those entities, particularly during the period in which this report is beingprepared;     (b) Evaluated the effectiveness of the registrant’s disclosure controls and procedures andpresented in this report our conclusions about the effectiveness of the disclosure controls andprocedures, as of the end of the period covered by this report based on such evaluation; and     (c) Disclosed in this report any change in the registrant’s internal control over financialreporting that occurred during the registrant’s most recent fiscal quarter (the registrant’sfourth fiscal quarter in the case of an annual report) that has materially affected, or isreasonably likely to materially affect, the registrant’s internal control over financialreporting; and     5. The registrant’s other certifying officer and I have disclosed, based on our most recentevaluation of internal control over financial reporting, to the registrant’s auditors and the auditcommittee of the registrant’s board of directors:     (a) All significant deficiencies and material weaknesses in the design or operation ofinternal control over financial reporting which are reasonably likely to adversely affect theregistrant’s ability to record, process, summarize and report financial information; and     (b) Any fraud, whether or not material, that involves management or other employees whohave a significant role in the registrant’s internal control over financial reporting.         August 13, 2007 By: /s/ James B. McCurry             James B. McCurry      *President, Chairman of the Board and*      *Chief Executive Officer*      *(Principal Executive Officer)*
31
Exhibit 11
                               THERMO SENTRON INC.


                        Computation of Earnings per Share


                                                     Three Months Ended
                                                  -------------------------
                                                   March 29,     March 30,
                                                        1997          1996
    -----------------------------------------------------------------------

    Computation of Primary Earnings per Share:

    Net Income (a)                                $1,348,000    $  742,000
                                                  ----------    ----------

    Shares:
      Weighted average shares outstanding          9,875,000     7,000,000

      Add: Shares issuable from assumed
           exercise of options (as 
           determined by the application
           of the treasury stock method)                   -        27,000
                                                  ----------    ----------

      Weighted average shares outstanding,
        as adjusted (b)                            9,875,000     7,027,000
                                                  ----------    ----------

    Primary Earnings per Share (a) / (b)          $      .14    $      .11
                                                  ==========    ==========