alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
**Exhibit32.1**

**CERTIFICATIONPURSUANT TO 18 U.S.C. SECTION 1350, AS ADOPTEDPURSUANT TO SECTION 906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002**

Inconnection with the Quarterly Report of Carreker Corporation (the Company) onForm 10-Q for the quarter ending October 31, 2006 as filed with the Securitiesand Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the “Report”), I, John D. Carreker,Jr., Chief Executive Officer of the Company, certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. §1350, as adopted pursuant to § 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that:

(1)  The Reportfully complies with the requirements of section 13(a) or 15(d) of theSecurities Exchange Act of 1934; and

(2)  Theinformation contained in the Report fairly presents, in all material respects,the financial condition and results of operations of the Company.
| /s/    | JOHN D. CARREKER, JR.                           |   |
|--------|-------------------------------------------------|--------|
|   |
|   | John D.  Carreker, Jr., Chief Executive Officer |

 

 

Dated:    December 7, 2006

1

----
#### Albert L. Dow and others, Respondents, v. Henry Lansdale and others, Appellants.

Judgment affirmed, with costs. Opinion by

Dykman, J.
Case: 19-30088    Doc# 4288    Filed: 10/18/19    Entered: 10/18/19 12:27:14    Page 1 of2

Case: 19-30088    Doc# 4288    Filed: 10/18/19    Entered: 10/18/19 12:27:14    Page 2 of2
EX-35 (a)

(logo) OCWEN

ANNUAL SERVICER COMPLIANCE STATEMENT
PURSUANT TO ITEM 1123 OF REGULATION AB

March 8, 2007


RE: Soundview 2006-EQ2


For the fiscal year ended December 31, 2006 (the "Reporting Period"), Ocwen Loan
Servicing, LLC ("OLS") furnishes this annual servicer compliance statement
pursuant to Item 1123 of Regulation AB, indicating its compliance with the
servicing standards of the Securities & Exchange Commission as set forth in
Regulation AB, 17 CFR section 229.1100, et seq., ("Regulation AB"). In this
regard, I make the following representations, which are true to the best of my
knowledge and belief in all material respects.


1.   A review of the servicing activities of OLS during the Reporting Period,
     and of its performance under the Pooling and Servicing Agreement dated as
     of December I, 2006 (the "Agreement"), has been performed under my
     supervision.

2.   To the best of my knowledge, based on this review, OLS has fulfilled all of
     its obligations under the Agreement in all material respects throughout the
     Reporting Period.



By: /s/ Ronald M. Faris
Name: Ronald M. Faris
Title: President


Ocwen Loan Servicing LLC
1661 Worthington Road Suite 100
Centrepark West
West Palm Beach, FL 33409
**EXHIBIT 35.1**

 

**WASHINGTON MUTUAL BANK**

**OFFICER’S CERTIFICATEANNUAL STATEMENT OF COMPLIANCE**

            I, H. John Berens, an authorized officer of Washington Mutual Bank (the “Servicer”), do hereby certify to WaMu AssetAcceptance Corp. (the “Depositor”), pursuant to the Pooling and Servicing Agreement dated as of January 1, 2007 (as amended, the “Servicing Agreement”) by and between the Depositor, the Servicer, LaSalle Bank, NationalAssociation, as Trustee, and Christiana Bank & Trust Company, as Delaware Trustee,  the following with respect to Washington Mutual Mortgage Pass-Through Certificates WMALT Series 2007-1 Trustfor the 2007 fiscal year (the “Relevant Year”):

1.  A review of the activities of the Servicer during the Relevant Year and of performance under the Servicing Agreement has been made under mysupervision.

2.  To the best of my knowledge, based on such review, the Servicer has fulfilled all of its obligations under the Servicing Agreement in allmaterial respects throughout the Relevant Year.

Dated as of March 1, 2008.

 

| /s/ H. John Berens Name:  H. John Berens Title:    Senior Vice President |
|----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|
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

Weil, Gotshal & Manges LLP 

767 Fifth Avenue 

New York, NY 10153-0119

EXHIBIT B 

COMPENSATION BY WORK TASK CODE FOR 

SERVICES RENDERED BY WEIL, GOTSHAL & MANGES LLP 

FOR THE PERIOD AUGUST 1, 2019 THROUGH AUGUST 31, 2019 

TASK 

CODE DESCRIPTION HOURS AMOUNT 

002 Asset Sales/363 Sales 12.50 $9,804.00 

003 Automatic Stay 64.00 $56,050.50 

004 Bankruptcy Litigation 298.50 $265,446.50 

005 Bar Date Motion/Claims Reconciliation/Claim Reconciliation Issue 111.90 $107,348.50 

006 Case Administration (docket updates, WIP and calendar) 20.30 $11,799.50 

008 Chapter 11 Plan/Plan Confirmation 395.40 $439,677.50 

009 Communications with Client 8.60 $8,072.50 

010 Corporate Governance and Board Issues 74.70 $88,896.00 

011 Customer, Supplier and Vendor Issues 8.80 $8,116.50 

013 Disclosure Statement 110.60 $88,247.50 

014 Employee Issues 202.00 $186,472.00 

015 Equity Committee 1.20 $1,250.00 

016 Exclusivity 88.70 $101,535.00 

017 Executory Contracts/Lease Issues 126.20 $95,572.00 

018 General Case Strategy(includes calls with client and team calls) 108.40 $100,247.00 

019 Hearings and Court Matters 174.40 $199,856.00 

020 Legislative Issues/Inverse Reform 10.20 $11,427.50 

021 Non-Bankruptcy Litigation 0.30 $168.00 

022 Non-Working Travel 195.10 $111,239.25 

024 Reclamation/503(b)(9) 21.60 $15,186.00 

025 Regulatory Issues including CPUC and FERC 33.00 $36,711.00 

026 Retention/Billing/Fee Applications: WGM 61.50 $42,284.00 

027 Retention/Fee Application: Ordinary Course Professionals 1.90 $1,321.50 

028 Retention/Fee Application: Other Professionals 23.40 $17,421.50

029 Schedules/Statement of Financial Affairs 4.80 $5,632.50 

030 Tax Issues 337.60 $381,180.50 

031 U.S. Trustee issues/ meetings/ communications/monthly operating 3.80 $3,901.00 

032 Unsecured Creditor Issues/ Communications/Meetings 4.70 $3,754.00 

035 Real Estate and Real Property Issues 81.90 $80,670.00 

036 Tort Claimants Committee, including Wildfire Claimants 81.00 $88,528.00 

037 Insurance Issues 11.30 $10,333.50 

Total: 2,678.30 $2,578,149.25 

Case: 19-30088 Doc# 4325-2 Filed: 10/20/19 Entered: 10/20/19 15:43:43 Page 1

of 1
#### STATE v. JOHN L. PETERSON.

(Filed 9 June, 1950.)

Obscenity § 2—

Evidence in this prosecution of defendant for peeping secretly into a room occupied by a woman, *held*sufficient to be submitted to the jury. G.S. 14-202.

Appeal by defendant from *Harris, J.,*at January Term, 1950, of Durham.

No error.

*Attorney-General McMullan and Assistant Attorney-General Bruton for the State.*

*R. M. Gantt for defendant, appellant.*

Per Curiam.

The defendant was convicted by the jury of violating the statute (G.S. 14-202) which makes it a misdemeanor to “peep secretly into any room occupied by a woman.” From judgment imposing sentence defendant appealed.

The only error assigned by the defendant is the denial of his motion for judgment of nonsuit. It was contended that the evidence was insufficient to show that the lighted room into which the defendant was seen peeping on the night in question was then occupied by a woman. But from the record we note a State’s witness testified he saw the defendant looking through a Venetian blind into a room usually occupied by a woman, that the defendant ran, and as witness, in immediate pursuit, passed this window he “saw someone in the room, a woman in the room.”"

We think the evidence sufficient to carry the case to the jury.

In the trial we find

No error.
N OTE : This disposition is nonprecedential.



# United States **Court of Appeals**  **for the Federal Circuit**

______________________

SRM GROUP, INC., Appellant

v.

SECRETARY OF THE DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND SECURITY, Appellee

______________________

2021

- 2104

______________________

Appeal from the Civilian Board of Contract Appeals in
No s . 5194, 5938, Administrative Judge Catherine B. Hyatt, Administrative Judge Harold D. Lester

, Jr., Administrative Judge Jeri Kaylene Somers.

______________________

JUDGMENT

______________________

G. S COTT W ALTERS

, Smith, Currie & Hancock LLP, Atlanta, GA, argued for appellant. Also represented by
A LEXANDER G ORELIK

, J ACOB W ILLIAM S COTT , Washington,
DC.

P. D AVIS O LIVER

, Comm ercial Litigation Branch, Civil Division, United States Department of Justice, Case: 21-2104 Document: 32 Page: 1 Filed: 04/12/2022Washington, DC, argued for appellee. Also represented by
B RIAN M. B OYNTON

, P ATRICIA M. M C C ARTHY

.

______________________

T HIS C AUSE ha ving been heard and considered, it is

O RDERED and A DJUDGED :

P ER C URIAM (D YK

, R EYNA

, and T ARANTO

, Circuit Judges ).

AFFIRMED. See Fed . Cir. R. 36.

E NTERED BY O RDER OF THE C OURT

April 12, 2022
Date /s/ Peter R. Marksteiner
Peter R. Marksteiner
Clerk of Court Case: 21-2104 Document: 32 Page: 2 Filed: 04/12/2022
Annual Performance Incentive Plan for 2009 (second half)



 EXHIBIT 10(e)(26) 
 Annual Performance Incentive Plan (“APIP”) for Second Half 2009 
 Under the 2009 APIP, executive officers of the Company are eligible to receive performance related cash payments. Payments are, in general, only made if performance objectives established by the Compensation Committee of the Board of
Directors (the “Committee”) are met. 
 In consideration of the challenging and unpredictable economy, we have prioritized
cash flow from operations and earnings per share. 2009 APIP performance measures and targets were set for the first half of the year in February 2009, and separate performance measures and targets for the second half of the year were approved on
July 30, 2009. Each six-month period of APIP performance will be calculated separately. 
 The Committee established overall
threshold, base, target and maximum measures of performance for the second half of 2009 APIP. The performance measures, weightings and target ranges for the second half of 2009 are cash flow from operations (weighted at 65%) of $500 million-$700
million and earnings per share (weighted at 35%) of $0.26-$0.29. Certain additional goals were established for some officers based on business unit goals. 
 Individual payments will be subject to the review and approval of the Committee following the completion of the 2009 fiscal year.
#### Delora M. Hunter and another, Administrators, etc., Respondents, v. The Cooperstown and Susquehanna Valley Railroad Company, Appellant.

Judgment and order reversed, and new trial ordered, with costs to abide the event.

Opinion by

Follett, J.
### MEMORANDUM OPINION

N o. 04

- 10

- 00715

- CV

Frank J. GARCIA

, Appellant

v.

Lorraine D. GARCIA

, Appellee

From the 166th Judicial District Court

, Bexar County, Texas

Trial Court No. 2009

- CI

- 16642

Honorable Janet P. Littlejohn , Judge Presiding

PER CURIAM

Sitting: Karen Angelini, Justice

Sandee Bryan Marion, Justice

Phylis J. Speedlin, Justice

Delivered and Filed: December 8, 2010

DISMISSED

Appellant has filed a motion to dismiss this appeal. The motion co ntains a certificate of

service to appellee, who has not opposed the motion. Therefore, we grant the motion and dismiss

the appeal. See T EX

. R. A PP

. P. 42.1(a). Costs of appeal are taxed against appellant. See id.

42.1(d).

PER CURIAM
<TABLE> <S> <C>


<ARTICLE>                     5

<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   3-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          MAR-31-1999
<PERIOD-END>                               SEP-30-1999
<CASH>                                       1,915,991
<SECURITIES>                                         0
<RECEIVABLES>                                        0
<ALLOWANCES>                                         0
<INVENTORY>                                          0
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                             1,922,009
<PP&E>                                               0
<DEPRECIATION>                                       0
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                               2,392,814
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                           43,467
<BONDS>                                              0
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                           170
<OTHER-SE>                                   3,086,149
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                 2,349,347
<SALES>                                              0
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                                     0
<CGS>                                                0
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                  555,852
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                     0
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                     0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                             (22,229)
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                      0
<INCOME-TAX>                                         0
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                                  0
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                  (533,623)
<EPS-BASIC>                                    (0.03)
<EPS-DILUTED>                                    (0.03)



</TABLE>
#### Charles Guion, Appellant, v. Michael Magra, Respondent.

Judgment affirmed, with costs.

Opinion by

Boardman, J.;

Mem. by Follett, J.;

dissenting opinion by

Hardin, P. J.
* Pursuant to 5 TH C IR . R. 47.5, the court has determined

that this opinion should not be published and is not precedent except under the limited circumstances set forth in 5 TH C IR . R. 47.5.4. IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT

No. 97-40231 Summary Calendar

CARLOS ARNULFO MARQUEZ, Plaintiff-Appellant,

versus UNITED STATES OF AMERICA et al, Defendants, PRIMO JOEL GUZMAN, Defendant-Appellee.

- - - - - - - - - - Appeal from the United States District Court for the Southern District of Texas

UDC No. L-95-CV-92

- - - - - - - - - - January 28, 1998 Before JOLLY, BENAVIDES, and PARKER, Circuit Judges. PER CURIAM: * Carlos Arnulfo Marquez, no. 54677-079, appeals the district court’s dismissal with prejudice of his action brought pursuant to Bivens v. Six Unknown Named Agents of Federal Bureau of Narcotics , 403 U.S. 388 (1971). Marquez complained that the Government deprived him of his property without due process by destroying his possessions in Government custody without giving him prior notice. An intentional deprivation of property doesNo. 97-40231 -2- not offend due process if a meaningful post-deprivation remedy is available. Hudson v. Palmer , 468 U.S. 517, 533 (1984). Texas recognizes such a remedy. Myers v. Adams , 728 S.W.2d 771, 772 (Tex. 1987). Marquez should seek relief in the Texas state courts and not under Bivens
. See Hudson , 468 U.S. at 533; Myers , 728 S.W.2d at 772. Although the district court dismissed Marquez’s action as barred by the relevant statute of limitations, this court can and does affirm on the above alternative basis. See Bickford v. International Speedway Corp. , 654 F.2d 1028, 1031 (5th Cir. 1981). AFFIRMED.
**Exhibit 32.2**

**CERTIFICATIONPURSUANT TO18 U.S.C. SECTION 1350,AS ADOPTED PURSUANT TOSECTION 906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002**

In connection withthe Quarterly Report of New England Realty Associates Limited Partnership (the “Partnership”)on Form 10-Q for the period ending June 30, 2006 as filed with theSecurities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the “Report”), I, HaroldBrown, the Treasurer and a Director of the Partnership’s General Partner,NewReal, Inc., certify, pursuant to 18.U.S.C. §1350, as adopted pursuantto §906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that, to the best of my knowledge:

(1)            TheReport fully complies with the requirements of section 13(a) or15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934; and

(2)            Theinformation contained in the Report fairly presents, in all material respects,the financial  condition and result ofoperations of the Partnership.
|        | /s/  HAROLD BROWN             |
|--------|-----------------------------------------|
|   | Harold Brown                            |
|   | Principal Financial Officer             |
|   | (Treasurer and Director of              |
|   | the Partnership’s General Partner, |
|   | NewReal, Inc.)                     |

 

August 9, 2006

----
**Exhibit 32.1**
 
 **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, the undersigned officers of VioQuest Pharmaceuticals, Inc. do hereby certify that:
 
 
 (a) the Quarterly Report on Form 10-QSB of VioQuest Pharmaceuticals, Inc. for the quarter ended June 30, 2004 (the Report) fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934; and
 
 (b) information contained in the Report fairly presents, in all material respects, the financial condition and results of operations of VioQuest Pharmaceuticals, Inc.
 
 
 Date: November 12, 2004
By:
/s/ Ronald BrandtRonald Brandt
Interim Chief Executive OfficerDate: November 12, 2004
By:
/s/ Brian LenzBrian Lenz
Interim Chief Financial Officer
#### Victor Seaman, Respondent, v. Timothy O'Leary, Appellant, Impleaded, etc.

Order affirmed, with costs. Opinion by

Pratt, J.*;*

Dykman, J not sitting.
APPENDIX B 

NOTE

TOTAL PRINCIPAL 

AMOUNT 

OUTSTANDING

NET PRESENT VALUE OF 

REMAINING SCHEDULED 

INTEREST PAYMENTS1

TOTAL MAKEWHOLE PREMIUM

§ 1. Notes Established Under the 2005 Base Indenture (California Law)

6.05% Notes due 

March 1, 2034 $3,000,000,000 $2,145,052,413 $0 

5.80% Notes due 

March 1, 2037 $950,000,000 $765,203,918 $0 

6.35% Notes due 

February 15, 2038 $400,000,000 $366,844,911 $0 

6.25% Notes due 

March 1, 2039 $550,000,000 $514,385,285 $0 

5.40% Notes due 

January 15, 2040 $800,000,000 $680,312,989 $0 

3.50% Notes due 

October 1, 2020 $800,000,000 $7,039,982 $0 

4.25% Notes due 

May 15, 2021 $300,000,000 $11,014,245 $0 

3.25% Notes due 

September 15, 2021 $250,000,000 $9,667,876 $0 

4.50% Notes due 

December 15, 2041 $250,000,000 $189,330,933 $0 

4.45% Notes due 

April 15, 2042 $400,000,000 $304,385,310 $0 

2.45% Notes due 

August 15, 2022 $400,000,000 $20,348,828 $0 

3.75% Notes due 

August 15, 2042 $350,000,000 $226,901,700 $0 

3.25% Notes due 

June 15, 2023 $375,000,000 $34,913,620 $0 

4.60% Notes due 

June 15, 2043 $375,000,000 $306,596,997 $0 

1

 These calculations are based on the net present values of the remaining scheduled interest payments assuming a Redemption Date of 

June 30, 2020, and applying the Adjusted Treasury Rate as of November 25, 2019, plus the applicable basis point margin. These figures 

are being used for demonstrative purposes only. Nothing in this Appendix or the Debtors’ Opposition Brief should be interpreted as a 

waiver or concession as to the Noteholders’ entitlement to any Make-Whole Premiums under any of the Notes or Indentures at issue. 

Case: 19-30088 Doc# 5190-2 Filed: 12/20/19 Entered: 12/20/19 19:06:35 Page 1

of 2
NOTE

TOTAL PRINCIPAL 

AMOUNT 

OUTSTANDING

NET PRESENT VALUE OF 

REMAINING SCHEDULED 

INTEREST PAYMENTS1

TOTAL MAKEWHOLE PREMIUM

3.85% Notes due 

November 15, 2023 $300,000,000 $37,618,865 $0 

5.125% Notes due 

November 15, 2043 $500,000,000 $459,005,581 $0 

3.75% Notes due 

February 15, 2024 $450,000,000 $58,944,646 $0 

4.75% Notes due 

February 15, 2044 $675,000,000 $581,407,717 $0 

3.40% Notes due 

August 15, 2024 $350,000,000 $47,135,696 $0 

4.30% Notes due 

March 15, 2045 $600,000,000 $483,107,514 $0 

3.50% Notes due 

June 15, 2025 $600,000,000 $99,020,427 $0 

4.25% Notes due 

March 15, 2046 $450,000,000 $366,072,586 $0 

2.95% Notes due 

March 1, 2026 $600,000,000 $94,835,994 $0 

4.00% Notes due 

December 1, 2046 $600,000,000 $470,957,757 $0 

3.30% Notes due 

March 15, 2027 $400,000,000 $82,901,625 $0 

§ 2. Notes Established Under the 2017 Base Indenture (New York Law)

3.30% Notes due 

December 1, 2027 $1,150,000,000 $261,604,374 $0 

3.95% Notes due 

December 1, 2047 $850,000,000 $675,558,088 $0 

§ 3. Notes Established Under the 2018 Base Indenture (New York Law)

4.25% Notes due 

August 1, 2023 $500,000,000 $63,454,603 $0 

4.65% Notes due 

August 1, 2028 $300,000,000 $103,584,503 $0 

Case: 19-30088 Doc# 5190-2 Filed: 12/20/19 Entered: 12/20/19 19:06:35 Page 2

of 2
Case: 19-30088 Doc# 4509 Filed: 10/29/19 Entered: 10/29/19 15:07:30 Page 1 of

1
Exhibit 10.7

                             FIRST AMENDMENT TO THE

                             IMS HEALTH INCORPORATED

                             RETIREMENT EXCESS PLAN


                        EFFECTIVE AS OF SEPTEMBER 1, 1999


      1. Section VII(a) of the IMS Health Incorporated Retirement Excess Plan
(the "Plan") is hereby amended to read in its entirety as follows:

            "(a) The Company shall be the plan administrator (the "Plan
            Administrator") under the Plan and as such shall be responsible for
            the administration of the Plan , except that any action authorized
            to be taken by the Plan Administrator hereunder may also be taken by
            any committee or person(s) duly authorized by the Board of Directors
            of the Company or the duly authorized delegees of such duly
            authorized committee or person(s). The Plan Administrator shall have
            the authority to determine all questions arising in connection with
            the Plan, to interpret the provisions of the Plan and construe all
            of its terms, to adopt, amend, and rescind rules and regulations for
            the administration of the Plan, and generally to conduct and
            administer the Plan and to make all determinations in connection
            with the Plan as may be necessary or advisable. All such actions of
            the Plan Administrator shall be conclusive and binding upon all
            participants and beneficiaries."

      2. Section VII(b) of the Plan is hereby amended by deleting the first
sentence thereof, and replacing it with the following:

            "(b) The Board of Directors of the Company may, in its sole
            discretion, terminate, suspend or amend this Plan at any time or
            from time to time, in whole or in part; PROVIDED, HOWEVER, that in
            the event of termination, the rights of participants to their
            accrued benefits hereunder shall be come nonforfeitable.
            Notwithstanding the foregoing, the Employee Benefits Committee of
            the Company may amend the Plan without the approval of the Board of
            Directors


<PAGE>


            of the Company with respect to amendments that such Committee
            determines do not have a significant effect on the cost of the
            Plan."

      3. Section IV(a) of the Plan is hereby amended by deleting therefrom the
reference to the term "Committee" and replacing therefor the term "Plan
Administrator".


                                      -2-