alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
(logo) pwc

 

 

**Report of IndependentRegistered Public Accounting Firm**

 

 

To the Board of Directors andshareholders of CoreLogic, Inc.:

 

We have examinedmanagement’s assertion, included in the accompanying Report on Assessmentof Compliance, that CoreLogic Commercial Real Estate Services, Inc. (the "Company"),a subsidiary of CoreLogic, Inc. complied with the servicing criteria set forthin Item 1122(d) of the Securities and Exchange Commission's Regulation AB forall loans for commercial mortgage loan outsourcing customers for which the Companyserved as the commercial tax service provider (the "Platform"), as ofDecember 31, 2016 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 areapplicable to the servicing activities performed by it with respect to thePlatform. Management is responsible for the Company's compliance with theservicing criteria. Our responsibility is to express an opinion on management'sassertion based on our examination.

 

Our examination was conductedin accordance with attestation standards of the Public Company AccountingOversight Board (United States) and, accordingly, included examining, on a testbasis, evidence about the Company’s compliance with the applicableservicing criteria and performing such other procedures as we considerednecessary in the circumstances. Our examination included testing of selectedservicing activities related to the Platform, and determining whether theCompany performed those selected activities in compliance with the applicableservicing criteria. Our procedures were limited to the selected servicingactivities performed by the Company during the period covered by this report.Our procedures were not designed to detect noncompliance arising from errorsthat may have occurred prior to or subsequent to our tests that may haveaffected the balances or amounts calculated or reported by the Company duringthe period covered by this report. We believe that our examination provides areasonable basis for our opinion. Our examination does not provide a legaldetermination on the Company’s compliance with the servicing criteria.

 

In our opinion,management’s assertion that the Company complied with the aforementionedapplicable servicing criteria as of and for the year ended December 31, 2016for all loans for commercial mortgage loan outsourcing customers for which theCompany served as the commercial tax service provider is fairly stated, in allmaterial respects.

 

/s/ PricewaterhouseCoopers

 

February 6, 2017

 

 

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

*T: 214-746-6500, F:214-712-6660,*www.pwc.com
EXHIBIT  32


                            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 Air Methods Corporation (the
"Company")  on  Form  10-Q for the period ended June 30, 2004, as filed with the
Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the "Report"), I certify,
pursuant  to  18  U.S.C.  Sec.  1350,  as  adopted  pursuant  to Sec. 906 of the
Sarbanes-Oxley  Act  of  2002,  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  result of operations of the
Company.


/s/Aaron  D.  Todd
---------------------------------
Aaron  D.  Todd
Chief  Executive  Officer
August  13,  2004

/s/Trent  J.  Carman
---------------------------------
Trent  J.  Carman
Chief  Financial  Officer
August  13,  2004


A  signed  original  of  this written statement required by Section 906 has been
provided  to  Air  Methods  Corporation  and will be retained by Air Methods and
furnished  to  the Securities and Exchange Commission or its staff upon request.


<PAGE>
EXHIBIT 32




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 Air Methods Corporation (the “Company”) on Form 10-Q for the period ended March 31, 2011, as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the “Report”), I certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. § 1350, as adopted pursuant to § 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, 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 result of operations of the Company.
  /s/ Aaron D. Todd
  Aaron D. Todd
 Chief Executive Officer
 May 6, 2011
  /s/ Trent J. Carman
  Trent J. Carman
 Chief Financial Officer
 May 6, 2011
<PAGE>



                                                                    Exhibit 23.1


                       CONSENT OF INDEPENDENT ACCOUNTANTS

We hereby consent to the incorporation by reference in this Registration
Statement on Form S-8 of our report dated February 27, 2002, relating to the
financial statements of US Oncology, Inc., which appears in US Oncology, Inc.'s
Annual Report on Form 10-K for the year ended December 31, 2001.

PricewaterhouseCoopers LLP
August 29, 2002
Houston, Texas
# HAVA BUDGET WORKSHEET

# Year 4 Budget

# Year 5 Budget
IIB 

116TH CONGRESS 

1ST SESSION H. R. 831 

IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES 

FEBRUARY 7, 2019 

Received; read twice and referred to the Committee on Environment and 

Public Works 

AN ACT 

To direct the Secretary of Transportation to request nominations for and make determinations regarding roads to 

be designated under the national scenic byways program, 

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, 


pamtmann on DSKBFK8HB2PROD with BILLS
2 

HR 831 RFS

1 SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE. 

2 This Act may be cited as the ‘‘Reviving America’s 

3 Scenic Byways Act of 2019’’. 

4 SEC. 2. NATIONAL SCENIC BYWAYS PROGRAM. 

5 (a) REQUEST FOR NOMINATIONS.—Not later than 90 

6 days after the date of enactment of this Act, the Secretary 

7 of Transportation shall issue a request for nominations 

8 with respect to roads to be designated under the national 

9 scenic byways program, as described in section 162(a) of 

10 title 23, United States Code. The Secretary shall make 

11 the request for nominations available on the appropriate 

12 website of the Department of Transportation. 

13 (b) DESIGNATION DETERMINATIONS.—Not later 

14 than 1 year after the date on which the request for nomi15 nations required under subsection (a) is issued, the Sec16 retary shall make publicly available on the appropriate 

17 website of the Department of Transportation a list speci18 fying the roads, nominated pursuant to such request, to 

19 be designated under the national scenic byways program. 

Passed the House of Representatives February 6, 

2019. 

Attest: KAREN L. HAAS, 

Clerk. 


pamtmann on DSKBFK8HB2PROD with BILLS
Exhibit 32

                            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 CBQ, Inc. on Form 10-QSB for
the period  ending March 31,  2004,  as filed with the  Securities  and Exchange
Commission  on  the  date  hereof  (the  "Report"),   I,  Howard  Ullman,  Chief
Executive/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 the best of my knowledge and belief:

         (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/    Howard Ullman
Howard Ullman
CEO, President and Chairman
(Principal Executive and Financial Officer)


May 14, 2004


A signed  original of this written  statement  required by Section 906, or other
document authenticating, acknowledging, or otherwise adopting the signature that
appears in typed form within the  electronic  version of this written  statement
has been  provided  to the  Company  and will be  retained  by the  Company  and
furnished to the Securities and Exchange Commission or its staff upon request.
NOTE: This disposition is nonprecedential.

United States Court of Appeals 

for the Federal Circuit 

__________________________ 

THE BOEING COMPANY (SUCCESSOR TO 

MCDONNELL DOUGLAS CORPORATION), 

Plaintiff-Appellant, 

and 

GENERAL DYNAMICS CORPORATION, 

Plaintiff-Appellant, 

v. 

UNITED STATES, 

Defendant-Appellee. 

__________________________ 

2007-5111, -5131 

__________________________ 

Appeals from the United States Court of Federal 

Claims in case No. 91-CV-1204, Senior Judge Robert H. 

Hodges, Jr. 

__________________________ 

Before RADER, Chief Judge, PROST and MOORE, Circuit 

Judges. 

PER CURIAM. 

O R D E R 

The Supreme Court vacated and remanded this case 

to the Federal Circuit in its recent decision in General 
BOEING v. US 2

Dynamics Corp. v. United States, 131 S. Ct. 1900 (2011), 

for consideration of the Government’s argument that it 

does not have an obligation to share its superior knowledge “with respect to ‘highly classified information,’” or 

“when (as was the case here) the agreement specifically 

identifies information that must be shared.” Id. at 1909-

10. In addition, on remand, we must determine whether 

those issues “can safely be litigated without endangering 

state secrets.” Id. at 1910. 

On June 30, 2011, the parties submitted a joint motion for entry of a scheduling order in this case for briefing of the remanded issues. The Government’s 

arguments, however, were never squarely addressed by 

the Court of Federal Claims in the first instance. In 

addition, the Supreme Court’s remand requires factual 

determinations most appropriately undertaken by the 

trial court. 

Upon consideration thereof, 

IT IS ORDERED THAT: 

(1) The parties’ joint motion for entry of a scheduling 

order is denied. 

(2) We remand to the Court of Federal Claims for further proceedings consistent with the Court’s opinion in 

General Dynamics Corp. v. United States. 

FOR THE COURT

July 7, 2011 

—————————— 

Date 

/s/ Jan Horbaly 

—————————— 

Jan Horbaly 

Clerk 
3 BOEING v. US

cc: Paul M. Smith, Esq. 

Charles J. Cooper, Esq. 

Bryant G. Snee, Esq. 

Marcia G. Madsen, Esq.
1The Honorable Jean C. Hamilton, Chief Judge, United States District Court for

the Eastern District of Missouri. 

United States Court of Appeals

FOR THE EIGHTH CIRCUIT

___________

No. 98-3339

___________

United States of America, *

 *

Appellee, *

 *

v. * Appeal from the United States

 * District Court for the

Charles C. Gibson, Jr., also know as * Eastern District of Missouri. 

Chuck Gibson, *

 * [UNPUBLISHED]

Appellant. *

___________

 Submitted: March 3, 2000

 Filed: March 10, 2000

___________

Before BEAM, LOKEN, and MORRIS SHEPPARD ARNOLD, Circuit Judges. 

___________

PER CURIAM.

Charles C. Gibson, Jr. appeals from the final judgment of the district court1 after

he pleaded guilty to one count of conspiring to distribute and possess with intent to

distribute methamphetamine, in violation of 21 U.S.C. §§ 841(a)(1) and 846; two

counts of possession with intent to distribute methamphetamine, in violation of 21

U.S.C. § 841(a)(1); one count of conspiring to commit money laundering, in violation

of 18 U.S.C. §§ 1956(a)(1)(B)(i) and (h); and four counts of money laundering, in
-2-

violation of 18 U.S.C. §§ 1956(a)(1)(B)(i) and 2. Gibson also consented to two counts

of property forfeiture. The district court sentenced him to concurrent terms of 360

months imprisonment on his conspiracy and possession-with-intent-to-distribute counts,

and 240 months on his money laundering counts, to be followed by five years

supervised release. Counsel has filed a brief pursuant to Anders v. California, 386 U.S.

738 (1967), arguing for reversal that the district court violated Gibson’s due process

rights by “failing to conduct an adequate factual finding” on whether Gibson’s

extraordinary physical impairment warranted a downward departure under U.S.

Sentencing Guidelines Manual § 5H1.4 (1997). 

We reject counsel’s argument that the district court violated Gibson’s due

process rights. See United States v. Granados, No. 98-2488, 2000 WL 98630 at *2

(8th Cir. Jan. 31, 2000) (district court has discretion to determine appropriate procedure

in conducting sentencing hearing, including whether to receive additional evidence);

United States v. Carr, 66 F.3d 981, 983 (8th Cir. 1995) (per curiam) (due process

violation is established only if defendant shows district court relied on materially false

information as basis for challenged sentence). To the extent the due process argument

is actually an attack on the district court’s discretionary refusal to depart, such a

challenge is unreviewable. See United States v. Eagle, 133 F.3d 608, 611 (8th Cir.

1998) (district court’s discretionary refusal to depart downward under § 5H1.4 is not

reviewable).

After review of counsel’s Anders brief, along with our independent review of the

record in accordance with Penson v. Ohio, 488 U.S. 75, 80 (1988), we find no

nonfrivolous issues. Accordingly, we affirm the judgment of the district court. 
-3-

A true copy.

Attest:

CLERK, U.S. COURT OF APPEALS, EIGHTH CIRCUIT.
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<PAGE>
 
<ARTICLE> 5
<MULTIPLIER> 1,000
       
<S>                             <C>                     <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   12-MOS                   12-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          DEC-31-1995             DEC-31-1996
<PERIOD-START>                             JAN-01-1995             JAN-01-1996
<PERIOD-END>                               DEC-31-1995             DEC-31-1996
<CASH>                                             102                     382
<SECURITIES>                                         0                       0
<RECEIVABLES>                                     1417                     520
<ALLOWANCES>                                        53                     813
<INVENTORY>                                       2666                    2633
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                                    58                     426
<PP&E>                                            1028                     967
<DEPRECIATION>                                    1337                    1449
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                    5898                    5517
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                             4604                    6107
<BONDS>                                              0                       0
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0                       0
<PREFERRED>                                          0                    2430
<COMMON>                                            36                      43
<OTHER-SE>                                        1179                  (3131)
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                      5898                    5517
<SALES>                                           3310                     650
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                                  5327                    3575
<CGS>                                             2549                     316
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                     3468                    2098
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                  6831                    7490
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                     0                       0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                                  56                     362
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                 (5028)                  (6375)
<INCOME-TAX>                                         0                       0
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                             (5028)                  (6375)
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0                       0
<CHANGES>                                            0                       0
<NET-INCOME>                                    (5028)                  (6375)
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                   (1.38)                  (1.67)
<EPS-DILUTED>                                   (1.38)                  (1.67)
        

</TABLE>
• “Following rules inflexibly produces fools.”

• “The heaviest penalty for declining to rule is to be ruled by someone inferior to yourself.”• When we attain full compliance with minimal standards, we will remind ourselves we

have just met the lowest standards permissible.

• We base our activities on certain assumptions:

1. Our staff is competent.

2. The survey/investigative process is valid.

3. The standards we apply are current, meaningful, dynamic, least intrusive, fiscally

responsible, and outcome oriented.

4. Past conduct is a valid predictor of future compliance.

5. We have and use all available remedies/approaches.

• 6. The more agencies, organizations, interest groups and people we involve the more

they can support us.

7. The public is entitled to more infonnatipn and access.

8. What we do is important and relevant. It has directed and collateral effect on the

regulated, staff, consumers of service and families.

9. Those we regulate are knowledgeable, familiar with requirements; are acting in

good faith; legitimate businesses.

10. No one is attempting to deliberately circumvent or pervert our function.11. Objects and questions/appeals are legitimate, sincere disagreements or

misunderstandings.

12. We are dedicated to not taking away any remaining choice, autonomy,

decision-making, prile from resident/patients/consumers of services.

Paternalism and projectitin are not acceptable. Paternalistic wrapping or self

annointing ourselves devalues their dignity and tarnishes ours.•

• Our reputation and ability to influence change is not cumulative; but only as effective as

each individual.

• No one benefits from delay or confusion, especially the consumer.• We shall require standards for ourselves equal to those we set for others.

• The quality/value of our work is not measured by:

The number of verified complaints, the number of violations identified, other

government agencies, our satisfaction with the survey results, the love/adoration of

advocates.

• We are responsible to all the public.

• We are involved in a system of law — o Of principles. Of reason. Of equity. Of values.
<PAGE>

                      Securities and Exchange Commission
                            Washington, D.C. 20549

                                 ___________


                                   FORM 8-K


                                CURRENT REPORT
                    PURSUANT TO SECTION 13 OR 15(d) OF THE
                        SECURITIES EXCHANGE ACT OF 1934

                                  May 1, 2002
               Date of Report (Date of earliest event reported)

                       SIZELER PROPERTY INVESTORS, INC.
            (Exact Name of Registrant as Specified in its Charter)



        MARYLAND                   1-9349                    72-1082589
(State of Incorporation)  (Commission File Number)  (IRS Employer Identification
                                                               Number)


                            2542 WILLIAMS BOULEVARD
                            KENNER, LOUISIANA 70062
   (Address, including zip code, of Registrant's Principal Executive Office)

                                (504) 471-6200
             (Registrant's telephone number, including area code)

                                Not Applicable
         (Former name or former address if changed since last report)

                                       1
<PAGE>

Item 5.  Other Events.

     On May 1, 2002, Sizeler Property Investors, Inc. (the "Company") announced
that it completed the exchange offer for its outstanding 8% convertible
subordinated debentures due July 15, 2003 (the "Old Debentures"). The Company
accepted tenders from holders of a total of $28,067,000 in aggregate principal
amount of Old Debentures and issued $27,299,000 in aggregate principal amount of
9.0% convertible subordinated debentures due July 15, 2009 and 30,720 share of
9.75% Series B cumulative redeemable preferred stock.

Item 7. Financial Statements and Exhibits.

        The following documents are filed as exhibits to this Current Report:

4.1     Indenture dated as of May 2, 2002 for the Company's of 9.0% convertible
        subordinated debentures due July 15, 2009 between the Company and J.P.
        Morgan Trust Company, National Association, as Trustee (filed herewith).

4.2     Articles Supplementary of the Company relating to the 9.75% Series B
        cumulative redeemable preferred stock of the Company as filed with the
        Maryland Department of Assessments and Taxation (filed herewith).

                                  SIGNATURES

        Pursuant to the requirements of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, the
Registrant has duly caused this Report to be signed on its behalf by the
undersigned hereunto duly authorized.


                                             SIZELER PROPERTY INVESTORS, INC.


                                             By: /s/ Robert A. Whelan
                                                ---------------------
                                                 Robert A. Whelan
                                                 Chief Financial Officer

Dated: May 7, 2002

                                       2
Exhibit 99.1





Certification of Chief Executive Officer and Chief Financial Officer


Pursuant to 18 U.S.C.
Section 1350


As Adopted Pursuant to


Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act
of 2002





I, Carl Hull, certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350 as adopted pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002,
that Amendment No. 1 to the Quarterly Report of Applied Imaging Corp. on Form 10-Q for the quarter ended March 31, 2002 fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 and that information
contained in such amended Quarterly Report fairly presents in all material respects the financial condition and results of operations of Applied Imaging Corp.





Date: September 20, 2002



By:

/S/    CARL HULLCarl Hull President and Chief Executive Officer





I, Barry Hotchkies, certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350 as adopted pursuant to
Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that Amendment No. 1 to the Quarterly Report of Applied Imaging Corp. on Form 10-Q for the quarter ended March 31, 2002 fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) or 15(d) of the Securities
Exchange Act of 1934 and that information contained in such amended Quarterly Report fairly presents in all material respects the financial condition and results of operations of Applied Imaging Corp.





Date September 20, 2002



By:

/s/    BARRY HOTCHKIESBarry Hotchkies Vice President, Chief Financial Officer