alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
Exhibit 31


      Re:   GSAA Home Equity Trust 2006-S1 (the "Trust") Mortgage Pass-Through
            Certificates, Series 2006-S1, issued pursuant to the Pooling and
            Servicing Agreement, dated as of December 1, 2006 (the "Pooling and
            Servicing Agreement"), among GS Mortgage Securities Corp., as
            depositor (the "Depositor"), Ocwen Loan Servicing, LLC, as a
            servicer ("Ocwen"), Avelo Mortgage, L.L.C., as a servicer ("Avelo"
            and together with Ocwen, the "Group I Servicers"), National City
            Home Loan Services, Inc., as a servicer, Wells Fargo Bank, National
            Association, as master servicer (the "Group I Master Servicer"),
            U.S. Bank National Association, as a custodian and Deutsche Bank
            National Trust Company, as trustee (the "Trustee")

I, Michelle Gill, 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 the Trust;

      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. Based on my knowledge and the servicer compliance statements required
in this report under Item 1123 of Regulation AB, and except as disclosed in the
Exchange Act periodic reports, the Group I Servicers and the Group I Master
Servicer have fulfilled their obligations under the Pooling and Servicing
Agreement 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 Trustee,
the Group I Servicers and the Group I Master Servicer.

                                                Date: March 29, 2007



                                                /s/ Michelle Gill
                                                ----------------------------
                                                Michelle Gill
                                                Vice President
                                                GS Mortgage Securities Corp.
1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

26

27

28

BAKER 

&

HOSTE TL E R L LP ATTOR NE YS AT LAW

SAN FRANCISCO

 

EXHIBIT D 

VISUAL COMPARISION TCC’S AND DEBTORS’ 

SUPPLEMENTAL NOTICE PROGRAMS 

Case: 19-30088 Doc# 2299-4 Filed: 05/31/19 Entered: 05/31/19 12:56:45 Page 1

of 2
ANGEION

MEDIA PLAN

PG&E'S 

PROPOSED 

MEDIA PLAN

- Strategic

recommendation

based on indepth

audience and

market research

- 7 month campaign

- 95% Reach

- 52 Frequency

- 318 Million

impressions (Local)

- Expanded

geographic

approach (i.e.

California, Western

US States, National)

- Comprehensive

media mix to reach

fragmented target

audience

TRADITIONAL 

BROADCAST

- 900 TRPs

- 75% Reach

- 10.62 Frequency

- 77.7 Million

impressions

- :30 ads

- English & Spanish

language

OTT/STREAMING

- 6.6 Million

impressions

-6% Reach

-10 Frequency

- :15 ads

- English & Spanish

language

-All video is in key

DMAs

TERRESTRIAL

- 2100 TRPs

- 66% Reach

- 30.95 Frequency

- 201 Million

impressions

- :60 ads for

terrestrial

- English & Spanish

language

- 6 key MSAs

STREAMING

- 6.7 Million

impressions

-:30 ads for

streaming

- English & Spanish

language

- Streaming is state

wide

- 4x insertions in

People

- 4x insertions in

Sports Illustrated

- Full page

- 8 Million

impressions

- 36% Reach

- 2.26 Frequency

- Regionally targeted

to Western states

- 7x in Wall Street

Journal, USA Today,

LA Times

-14x in 14 local

papers

- Full page ads

- 22% Reach

-7 Frequency

- 15 Million

impressions

LOCAL

- 54 Digital

Billboards

- 18 Static Billboards

- Flyer Distribution

- 55% Reach

- 17 Frequency

-199 Million

IMPRESSIONS

STATEWIDE

- 10 Digital

Billboards in Los

Angeles

- 29 Digital Transit

Shelters in San

Diego

-10 Static Billboards

in San Diego

-62 Million

additional

impressions

PROGRAMMATIC 

DISPLAY AND VIDEO 

LOCAL: 

- Multipronged 

targeting approach

- 41% Reach

- 15 Frequency

- 60 Million impressions

CALIFORNIA:

- Video only

- Multipronged 

targeting approach

- 6.25 Million 

impressions

WESTERN STATES: 

- Multipronged 

targeting approach

- 30 Million impressions

NATIONAL:

- Multipronged 

targeting approach& 

Site Retargeting

- 25 Million impressions

SOCIAL MEDIA

LOCAL: 

- Multipronged

targeting approach

- 23% Reach

- 1.5 Frequency

- 33 Million

impressions

CALIFORNIA:

- Multipronged

targeting approach

- 28 Million

impressions

NATIONAL:

- Email matching

- 5 Million

impressions

- Lack of target

definition

- Unclear what the

total reach and

frequency of the

campaign would be

- Subpar media

weight over a 90 day

period

- N/A - 3x in Wall Street - N/A

Journal, USA Today,

LA Times

-3x in 11 local

papers

- Estimated to be

fractional page ads

-150 TRPs total across TV and Radio

-1.5x frequency

-English and Spanish language ads

Silent as to most metrics. Purported to 

Reach 750,000 individuals in 6 affected 

counties with Facebook, GDN, and News 

sites

Case: 19-30088 Doc# 2299-4 Filed: 05/31/19 Entered: 05/31/19 12:56:45 Page 2

of 2
```

[Congressional Bills 113th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[H.R. 5094 Introduced in House (IH)]

113th CONGRESS
  2d Session
                                H. R. 5094

 To amend title 38, United States Code, to authorize the Secretary of 
Veterans Affairs to recoup certain bonuses or awards paid to employees 
                 of the Department of Veterans Affairs.

_______________________________________________________________________

                    IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

                             July 14, 2014

Mr. Miller of Florida introduced the following bill; which was referred 
to the Committee on Veterans' Affairs, and in addition to the Committee 
  on Oversight and Government Reform, for a period to be subsequently 
   determined by the Speaker, in each case for consideration of such 
 provisions as fall within the jurisdiction of the committee concerned

_______________________________________________________________________

                                 A BILL

 
 To amend title 38, United States Code, to authorize the Secretary of 
Veterans Affairs to recoup certain bonuses or awards paid to employees 
                 of the Department of Veterans Affairs.

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

SECTION 1. AUTHORITY TO RECOUP BONUSES OR AWARDS PAID TO EMPLOYEES OF 
              DEPARTMENT OF VETERANS AFFAIRS.

    (a) In General.--Chapter 7 of title 38, United States Code, is 
amended by adding at the end the following new section:
``Sec. 712. Recoupment of bonuses or awards paid to employees of 
              Department.
    ``Notwithstanding any other provision of law, the Secretary may 
issue an order directing an employee of the Department to repay the 
amount of any award or bonus paid to the employee under title 5, 
including under chapters 45 or 53 of such title, or this title if--
            ``(1) the Secretary determines such repayment appropriate 
        pursuant to regulations prescribed by the Secretary to carry 
        out this section; and
            ``(2) the employee is afforded notice and an opportunity 
        for a hearing.''.
    (b) Clerical Amendment.--The table of sections at the beginning of 
such chapter is amended by adding at the end the following new item:

``712. Recoupment of bonuses or awards paid to employees of 
                            Department.''.
                                 <all>
```
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<ARTICLE>                          5
<LEGEND>
     This schedule  contains summary  financial  information  extracted from the
Partnership's  audited financial statements for the quarter ended March 31, 1997
and is qualified in its entirety by reference to such financial statements.
</LEGEND>
<MULTIPLIER>                            1,000
       
<S>                                  <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                           6-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                  SEP-30-1996
<PERIOD-END>                       MAR-31-1997
<CASH>                                  1,805
<SECURITIES>                                0
<RECEIVABLES>                               0
<ALLOWANCES>                                0
<INVENTORY>                                 0
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                        1,805
<PP&E>                                  4,624
<DEPRECIATION>                              0
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                          6,429
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                      37
<BONDS>                                     0
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                       0
<PREFERRED>                                 0
<COMMON>                                    0
<OTHER-SE>                              6,392
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>            6,429
<SALES>                                     0
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                          582
<CGS>                                       0
<TOTAL-COSTS>                             168
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                            0
<LOSS-PROVISION>                            0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                          0
<INCOME-PRETAX>                           414
<INCOME-TAX>                                0
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                       414
<DISCONTINUED>                              0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                             0
<CHANGES>                                   0
<NET-INCOME>                              414
<EPS-PRIMARY>                            6.83
<EPS-DILUTED>                            6.83
        

</TABLE>
#### GEORGE A. STARKWEATHER, Jr., Appellant, *v.*ISAAC H. BRONNER, Respondent.

*Allegations as to fraud in contracting a debt*— *when they cannot be stricken out as irrelevant.*

Appeal from an order striking out a portion of the plaintiff’s complaint.

The complaint set forth a cause of action for goods sold, upon which the sum of $200 was claimed to be due at the time when the suit was commenced, and in addition to that seven promissory notes amounting to the sum of $658.95 which were not due at the time when the summons was served. For the purpose of recovering upon these demands, allegations were made in the complaint, showing that the debt had been fraudulently contracted, and the credit fraudulently induced, and it was these allegations which were stricken out by the order from which this appeal was taken.

The court at General Term said: *“la*order to recover in the case, ou the demands by their terms not due, it will be essential upon the trial, that the plaintiff shall establish as a matter of fact, that he was induced to give the credit which was given in form upon those debts, in consequence of fraudulent representations made by the defendant. Without them it is clear that no right of action existed upon those notes at the time when the suit was commenced. Striking out these allegations, therefore, has placed the complaint in such a condition as to show that the plaintiff has no right whatever to recover upon those demands, and even though the credit may have been fraudulently induced, he will not be allowed to establish that fact by evidence upon the trial in the absence of these allegations in the complaint. The case, in this respect, differs from that of *The National Bowery Bank*v. *JDuryea*(55 How., 88), and since affirmed by the Court of Appeals, where the allegations of fraud were made simply for the purpose of enabling the plaintiff to hold the defendant to bail. Here no such object was desired to be attained by means of these allegations, but their purpose was to show that the defendant was *347not entitled to the credit, which hi form had been procured by him, in consequence of the fact that it wa3 induced by false and fraudulent representations. To entitle him to recover upon those demands upon the trial of the cause, evidence must be given showing that such fraud had been perpetrated. Without allegations setting forth this fact in the complaint, no such proof can 'be given upon the trial of the case. Consequently, the order striking out these allegations from the complaint was erroneously made.”

*J. J. Perry,*for the appellant. *F. 8. Hahn,*for the respondent.

Opinion by

Daniels, J.

Brady, P. J., and Ingalls, J., concurred.

Order reversed and an order entered denying the motion, with ten dollars costs and disbursements.
Exhibit 32.2    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 TransAct Energy Corp. a Nevada corporation (the Company), on Form 10-K for the annual period ending December 31, 2011 as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission (the Report), I, Simon G. Thomas, Chief Financial Officer of the Company, certify, pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, 18 U.S.C. Section 1350), 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 (15 U.S.C. 78m or 78o(d)); 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/ Simon G. Thomas Simon G. Thomas Chief Financial Officer Date: April 13, 2012
##### 



EXHIBIT 11
 MIDSOUTH BANCORP, INC. AND SUBSIDIARIES
Computation of Earnings Per Share (Unaudited)
For the Three and Six Months Ended June 30, 2006 and 2005
 Second Quarter
    
    
    Second Quarter
    
    
    Year-to-Date
    
    
    Year-to-DateJune 30,
    
    
    June 30,
    
    
    June 30,
    
    
    June 30,2006
    
    
    2005
    
    
    2006
    
    
    2005BASICEarnings:Income applicable to common stock
    
    $
    2,235,754
    
    
    $
    2,040,253
    
    
    $
    4,054,274
    
    
    $
    3,963,676Shares:Weighted average number of
common shares outstanding
    
    
    4,958,809
    
    
    
    4,897,241
    
    
    
    4,945,456
    
    
    
    4,891,197Earnings per common share:Income applicable to common stock
    
    $
    0.45
    
    
    $
    0.42
    
    
    $
    0.82
    
    
    $
    0.81DILUTEDEarnings:Net income
    
    $
    2,235,754
    
    
    $
    2,040,253
    
    
    $
    4,054,274
    
    
    $
    3,963,676Weighted average number of
common shares outstanding
    
    
    4,958,809
    
    
    
    4,897,241
    
    
    
    4,945,456
    
    
    
    4,891,197Assuming exercise of options, reduced by
the number of shares which could have
been purchased with the proceeds from
exercise of such options at the
average issue price
    
    
    96,730
    
    
    
    171,680
    
    
    
    94,972
    
    
    
    175,701Weighted average number of common
shares outstanding, as adjusted
    
    
    5,055,539
    
    
    
    5,068,921
    
    
    
    5,040,428
    
    
    
    5,066,898Fully diluted earnings per common share
    
    $
    0.44
    
    
    $
    0.40
    
    
    $
    0.80
    
    
    $
    0.78
I 

113TH CONGRESS 

2D SESSION H. R. 4927 

To designate the facility of the United States Postal Service located at 

14 3rd Avenue, NW., in Chisholm, Minnesota, as the ‘‘James L. Oberstar 

Memorial Post Office Building’’. 

IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES 

JUNE 20, 2014 

Mr. NOLAN (for himself, Mr. WALZ, Mr. ELLISON, Mrs. BACHMANN, and Ms. 

MCCOLLUM) introduced the following bill; which was referred to the Committee on Oversight and Government Reform 

A BILL 

To designate the facility of the United States Postal Service 

located at 14 3rd Avenue, NW., in Chisholm, Minnesota, 

as the ‘‘James L. Oberstar Memorial Post Office Building’’. 

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

3 SECTION 1. JAMES L. OBERSTAR MEMORIAL POST OFFICE 

4 BUILDING. 

5 (a) DESIGNATION.—The facility of the United States 

6 Postal Service located at 14 3rd Avenue, NW., in Chis7 holm, Minnesota, shall be known and designated as the 

8 ‘‘James L. Oberstar Memorial Post Office Building’’. 

mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with BILLS

2 

•HR 4927 IH

1 (b) REFERENCES.—Any references in a law, map, 

2 regulation, document, paper, or other record of the United 

3 States to the facility referred to in subsection (a) shall 

4 be deemed to be a reference to the ‘‘James L. Oberstar 

5 Memorial Post Office Building’’. 

Æ 

mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with BILLS
<TABLE> <S> <C>



<ARTICLE> 5
       
<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   9-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          APR-30-1997
<PERIOD-END>                               JAN-31-1997
<CASH>                                               0
<SECURITIES>                                         0
<RECEIVABLES>                                1,063,560
<ALLOWANCES>                                  (66,527)
<INVENTORY>                                    164,884
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                             1,235,647
<PP&E>                                       4,536,614
<DEPRECIATION>                             (3,832,599)
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                               3,005,362
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                        1,604,219
<BONDS>                                              0
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                     4,102,947
<OTHER-SE>                                 (2,821,200)
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                 3,005,362
<SALES>                                      4,217,525
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                             4,286,014
<CGS>                                        2,548,281
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                2,548,281
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                     0
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                     0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                              85,762
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                137,140
<INCOME-TAX>                                         0
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                            137,140
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                   137,140
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                      .05
<EPS-DILUTED>                                      .05
        


</TABLE>
Case: 19-30088    Doc# 1714    Filed: 04/26/19    Entered: 04/26/19 15:15:07    Page 1 of11

Case: 19-30088    Doc# 1714    Filed: 04/26/19    Entered: 04/26/19 15:15:07    Page 2 of11

Case: 19-30088    Doc# 1714    Filed: 04/26/19    Entered: 04/26/19 15:15:07    Page 3 of11

Case: 19-30088    Doc# 1714    Filed: 04/26/19    Entered: 04/26/19 15:15:07    Page 4 of11

Case: 19-30088    Doc# 1714    Filed: 04/26/19    Entered: 04/26/19 15:15:07    Page 5 of11

Case: 19-30088    Doc# 1714    Filed: 04/26/19    Entered: 04/26/19 15:15:07    Page 6 of11

Case: 19-30088    Doc# 1714    Filed: 04/26/19    Entered: 04/26/19 15:15:07    Page 7 of11

Case: 19-30088    Doc# 1714    Filed: 04/26/19    Entered: 04/26/19 15:15:07    Page 8 of11

Case: 19-30088    Doc# 1714    Filed: 04/26/19    Entered: 04/26/19 15:15:07    Page 9 of11

Case: 19-30088    Doc# 1714    Filed: 04/26/19    Entered: 04/26/19 15:15:07    Page 10of 11

Case: 19-30088    Doc# 1714    Filed: 04/26/19    Entered: 04/26/19 15:15:07    Page 11of 11
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 UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT

No. 08-61117

Summary Calendar

EDDIE SHORTY, 

Plaintiff - Appellant

v.

KENTRELL LIDDELL, Medical Director, Individually and in his official

capacity; THOMAS LEHMAN, Medical Director, Individually and in His

Official Capacity,

Defendants - Appellees

Appeal from the United States District Court 

for the Northern District of Mississippi

USDC No. 4:07-CV-207

Before GARZA, CLEMENT, and OWEN, Circuit Judges.

PER CURIAM:*

Eddie Shorty, pro se, appeals the district court’s dismissal of his § 1983

deliberate indifference claim against Dr. Kentrell Liddell and an un-named

nurse, and the court’s grant of summary judgment in favor of Dr. Thomas

Lehman. Shorty complains that he suffers from headaches, dizziness, weakness,

nausea, and vomiting. He alleged that medical personnel at his correctional

United States Court of Appeals

Fifth Circuit

F I L E D

December 18, 2009

Charles R. Fulbruge III

Clerk
No. 08-61117

2

facility did not provide adequate treatment for these problems, and that their

failure to do so constituted deliberate indifference to his serious medical needs

in violation of his rights under the Eighth Amendment. 

Shorty’s medical records show that he has a history of psychiatric

problems in addition to the chronic symptoms from which he suffers, and that

the symptoms pre-date his incarceration. The records also show that since his

incarceration in 1999, he has been treated more than fifty times for his health

complaints. Prison doctors prescribed numerous medications, which Shorty has

not always been compliant in taking. Prison doctors also gave Shorty several

diagnostic tests, including a brain scan. The etiology of Shorty’s symptoms is

unknown and may be related to his psychiatric problems; a prescription for an

anti-depressant appears to have lessened, at least for a time, his chronic

headaches. 

The district court concluded that the undisputed facts showed that Shorty

did not have a cognizable deliberate indifference claim. It granted summary

judgment in favor of Dr. Lehman, who had treated Shorty, and dismissed the

claims against Dr. Liddell, who was not alleged to have had any personal

involvement in Shorty’s treatment. The court also dismissed, for failure to state

a claim, Shorty’s allegations against the nurse who dispenses his medication but

who was not named in the complaint. 

We affirm for the reasons stated by the district court in its well-reasoned

and thorough opinion of December 1, 2008. AFFIRMED.