alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
**Exhibit 12.4**

I, Paul Thomason, certify that:

1.                 I have reviewedthis annual report on Form 20-F of Kabel Deutschland Vertrieb undService GmbH & Co. KG;

2.                 Based on myknowledge, this report does not contain any untrue statement of a material factor omit to state a material fact necessary to make the statements made, inlight of the circumstances under which such statements were made, notmisleading with respect to the period covered by this report; 

3.                 Based on myknowledge, the financial statements, and other financial information includedin this report, fairly present in all material respects the financialcondition, results of operations and cash flows of the Company as of, and for,the periods presented in this report; 

4.                 The Company’sother certifying officer(s) and I are responsible for establishing andmaintaining disclosure controls and procedures (as defined in Exchange ActRules 13a-15(e) and 15d-15(e)) for the Company and have: 

(a)          Designed such disclosurecontrols and procedures, or caused such disclosure controls and procedures tobe designed under our supervision, to ensure that material information relatingto the Company, including its consolidated subsidiaries, is made known to us byothers within those entities, particularly during the period in which thisreport is being prepared; 

(b)         Evaluated theeffectiveness of the Company’s disclosure controls and procedures and presentedin this report our conclusions about the effectiveness of the disclosurecontrols and procedures, as of the end of the period covered by this reportbased on such evaluation; and 

(c)          Disclosed in this reportany change in the Company’s internal control over financial reporting thatoccurred during the period covered by the annual report that has materiallyaffected, or is reasonably likely to materially affect, the Company’s internalcontrol over financial reporting; and

5.                 The Company’sother certifying officer(s) and I have disclosed, based on our most recentevaluation of internal control over financial reporting, to the Company’sauditors and the audit committee of the Company’s board of directors (orpersons performing the equivalent functions): 

(a)          All significantdeficiencies and material weaknesses in the design or operation of internalcontrol over financial reporting which are reasonably likely to adverselyaffect the Company’s ability to record, process, summarize and report financialinformation; and 

(b)         Anyfraud, whether or not material, that involves management or other employees whohave a significant role in the Company’s internal control over financialreporting.
| By:                 | /s/ PAUL  THOMASON            |   |
|---------------------|-------------------------------|--------|
| **Name:**           | **Paul Thomason**             |   |
| **Title:**          | ***Chief Financial Officer*** |   |
| Date: July 26, 2007 |

 

13

----
#### The People of the State of New York, Respondent, v Rupert Wint, Appellant.

Appeal by the defendant from a judgment of the County Court, Westchester County (Silver-man, J.), rendered January 20, 1989, convicting him of criminal sale of a controlled substance in the fourth degree, upon his plea of guilty, and imposing sentence.

*443Ordered that the judgment is affirmed.

We have reviewed the record and agree with the defendant’s assigned counsel that there are no meritorious issues which could be raised on appeal. Counsel’s application for leave to withdraw as counsel is granted *(see, Anders v California,*386 US 738; *People v Paige,*54 AD2d 631; *cf., People v Gonzalez,*47 NY2d 606). Thompson, J. P., Brown, Rubin, Balletta and Miller, JJ., concur.
##### 



Exhibit 10(s)
 
  
    Participant:
    
    [Recipient]Grant Date:
    
    [DATE]Shares of RestrictedStock Granted:
    
    [Shares Granted]
 Vesting Schedule:                 The Shares of Restricted Stock Granted shall vest, and the applicable
Restrictions set forth in the Terms shall lapse, in accordance with the following schedule,
subject to Participants continued employment with the Corporation through the applicable
vesting date:
 First Vesting -
    
    ____________, 2008Second Vesting -
    
    ____________, 2009Third Vesting -
    
    ____________, 2010
 Accelerated Vesting: Notwithstanding the foregoing vesting schedule, upon the occurrence of
(i) the Participants death or permanent disability, (ii) termination after a Change in
Control (as defined in the Plan), or (iii) retirement from employment providing the
Participant is at least age 60 and has been employed by the Company for at least 10 years),
all Shares of Restricted Stock Granted shall be deemed vested.Forfeiture: Except as set forth above regarding accelerated vesting, the Participants
rights in the Shares of Restricted Stock on which the Restrictions have not lapsed pursuant
to the vesting schedule provisions above shall be forfeited in full in the event that the
Participants employment with the Corporation or a parent or subsidiary corporation is
terminated for any reason.




---



##### 



Signature:
    
    
    
    Date:[Recipient]
 Florida East Coast Industries, Inc.(-s- Adolfo Henriques)By:Adolfo Henriques
Chairman & Chief Executive Officer
 Note: If there are any discrepancies in the name or address shown above, please make the
appropriate corrections on this form.
 Please return the signed original to Sherry Jones in the Jacksonville Legal Department in the
envelope provided and retain the Copy for your records.
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<PAGE>
<ARTICLE> 5
<LEGEND>
THIS SCHEDULE CONTAINS SUMMARY FINANCIAL INFORMATION EXTRACTED FROM THE
CONSOLIDATED BALANCE SHEET AND RELATED CONSOLIDATED STATEMENT OF INCOME OF J.C.
PENNEY COMPANY, INC. AND SUBSIDIARIES AS OF MAY 1, 1999, AND IS QUALIFIED IN ITS
ENTIRETY BY REFERENCE TO SUCH FINANCIAL STATEMENTS.
</LEGEND>
<MULTIPLIER> 1,000,000

<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   3-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          JAN-29-2000
<PERIOD-END>                               MAY-01-1999
<CASH>                                             168
<SECURITIES>                                       250
<RECEIVABLES>                                    4,667
<ALLOWANCES>                                       355
<INVENTORY>                                      6,049
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                                10,959
<PP&E>                                           8,351
<DEPRECIATION>                                   2,889
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                  23,788
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                            5,982
<BONDS>                                          6,821
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                        464
<COMMON>                                         3,219
<OTHER-SE>                                       3,866
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                    23,788
<SALES>                                          7,295
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                                 7,569
<CGS>                                            5,329
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                    6,999
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                   140
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                    13
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                                 150
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                    267
<INCOME-TAX>                                       100
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                                167
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                       167
<EPS-BASIC>                                      .62
<EPS-DILUTED>                                      .61


</TABLE>
EX-34 (e)
(logo) PRICEWATERHOUSECOOPERS

PricewaterhouseCoopers LLP
PricewaterhouseCoopers Center
300 Madison Avenue
New York NY 10017
Telephone (646) 471-3000
Facsimile (813) 286-6000


Report of Independent Registered Public Accounting Firm

To the Board of Directors of JPMorgan Chase Bank, National Association


We have examined management's assertion, included in the accompanying
Management's Report on Assessment of Compliance with Applicable Servicing
Criteria, that JPMorgan Chase Bank, National Association (the "Company")
complied with the servicing criteria set forth in Item 1122(d) of the Securities
and Exchange Commission's Regulation AB for the asset-backed securities
transactions backed by residential mortgages and home equity loans, for which
the Company acts as Custodian (the "Platform"), as of September 30, 2006 and for
the period from January 1, 2006 to September 30, 2006 excluding the criteria
1122(d) (1)(i)-(iv), (2)(i)-(vii), (3)(i)-(iv), and (4)(iii)-(xv), which the
Company has determined are not applicable to the activities performed by it with
respect to the Platform. Appendix A to management's assertion identifies the
individual asset-backed transactions and securities defined by management as
constituting the Platform. Management is responsible for the Company's
compliance with the servicing criteria. Our responsibility is to express an
opinion on management's assertion based on our examination.

Our examination was conducted in accordance with standards of the Public Company
Accounting Oversight Board (United States) and, accordingly, included examining,
on a test basis, evidence about the Company's compliance with the applicable
servicing criteria and performing such other procedures as we considered
necessary in the circumstances. Our examination included testing of selected
asset-backed transactions and securities that comprise the Platform, testing of
selected servicing activities related to the Platform, and determining whether
the Company processed those selected transactions and performed those selected
activities in compliance with the applicable servicing criteria. Our procedures
were limited to the selected transactions and servicing activities performed by
the Company during the period covered by this report. Our procedures were not
designed to detect noncompliance arising from errors that may have occurred
prior to or subsequent to our tests that may have affected the balances or
amounts calculated or reported by the Company during the period covered by this
report. We believe that our examination provides a reasonable basis for our
opinion. Our examination does not provide a legal determination on the Company's
compliance with the servicing criteria.

In our opinion, management's assertion that the Company complied with the
aforementioned applicable servicing criteria as of and for the period ended
September 30, 2006 for the Platform is fairly stated, in all material respects.


/s/ PricewaterhouseCoopers LLP

March 1, 2007
```

[Congressional Bills 117th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[H.R. 6458 Introduced in House (IH)]

<DOC>

117th CONGRESS
  2d Session
                                H. R. 6458

To amend title 38, United States Code, to eliminate the requirement to 
  specify an effective period of a transfer of Post-9/11 educational 
                       assistance to a dependent.

_______________________________________________________________________

                    IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

                            January 20, 2022

 Mr. Murphy of North Carolina (for himself, Mrs. Axne, and Mr. Trone) 
 introduced the following bill; which was referred to the Committee on 
                           Veterans' Affairs

_______________________________________________________________________

                                 A BILL

 
To amend title 38, United States Code, to eliminate the requirement to 
  specify an effective period of a transfer of Post-9/11 educational 
                       assistance to a dependent.

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

SECTION 1. ELIMINATION OF REQUIREMENT TO SPECIFY AN EFFECTIVE PERIOD OF 
              A TRANSFER OF POST-9/11 EDUCATIONAL ASSISTANCE TO A 
              DEPENDENT.

    Section 3319(e) of title 38, United States Code, is amended--
            (1) in paragraph (1), by adding ``and'' after the 
        semicolon;
            (2) in paragraph (2), by striking ``; and'' and inserting a 
        period; and
            (3) by striking paragraph (3).
                                 <all>
```
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<ARTICLE> 5
<LEGEND>
This schedule contains summary financial information extracted from
Securities and Exchange Commission Form 10-Q for the quarter ended
September 29, 1996 and is qualified in its entirety by reference to
such financial statements.
</LEGEND>
<MULTIPLIER> 1,000
       
<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   9-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          DEC-31-1996
<PERIOD-END>                               SEP-29-1996
<CASH>                                          50,400
<SECURITIES>                                     5,400
<RECEIVABLES>                                  533,300
<ALLOWANCES>                                  (28,600)
<INVENTORY>                                    642,700
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                             1,419,900
<PP&E>                                       2,167,300
<DEPRECIATION>                             (1,501,300)
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                               2,198,900
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                          902,900
<BONDS>                                        339,900
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                        75,400
<OTHER-SE>                                     589,100
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                 2,198,900
<SALES>                                      1,611,800
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                             1,611,800
<CGS>                                          896,900
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                1,595,900
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                     0
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                 6,300
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                              35,600
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                  6,700
<INCOME-TAX>                                     4,700
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                              2,000
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                               (54,500)
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                  (52,500)
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                   (1.16)
<EPS-DILUTED>                                        0
        

</TABLE>
N O T FO R PUB L ICAT IO N UNIT E D ST AT E S CO URT O F APPE AL S FO R T H E NINT H CIRCUIT
NO RM AN T . PO W E L L ,

Pe t i tione r-Appe lla

nt,
v. RICK W A L KE R; FRANK IE SUE DE L PAPA, R e sponde nts-Appe lle e s. No. 14-16837 D.C . No. 3:02-c v-00350-HDM -W GC
M E M O RANDUM *

Appe a l from

the Unite d

Stat e s Distric t C ourt for the Distric t of Ne v a da Howa rd D. M c Kibbe n, Distric t Judge , Pre siding Argue d and Subm i tte d Nove m

be r 18, 2016 San Fran c isc o , C a lifornia B e fore : K O Z INSKI , G I L M AN ** and FRIE DL AND , C irc uit Judge s. A fe d e ra l c o urt is ba

rre d from c onside ring a

ha be a s pe tition tha

t is proc e d ura lly de fa

ulte d unde r state la

w. Se e C ole m an v. Thom pson, 501 U.S. 722, 

# FIL ED D EC 15 2016 M OLLY C. DW Y ER, CLERK U
. S
. CO URT O F APPEALS

* This disposition is not a ppropria te for public a t ion a

nd is not pre c e de nt e xc e pt a s provide d

by Ninth C irc uit R

ule 36-3.

* * The Honora

ble R ona ld Le e Gilm a

n , Unite d State s C irc uit Judgefor the U .S. C ourt of Appe a ls for the Sixth C irc u it, sitting by de signa tion.pa ge 2

750 (1991). A c la im

of a c tua l innoc e nc e c an ove rc om e the proc e dura l de fa ult. Se e Sc hlup v. De lo, 513 U.S. 298, 321 (1995). The c la i m m u st re ly on ne w e vide nc e :

“ W ithout a

ny ne w e vide nc e of innoc e nc e , e v e n the e xiste nc e of a c onc e d e dly
m e ritorious c onstitutiona

l viola tion is not in itse lf suffic ie nt to e sta blish a
m isc a rria ge of justic e tha

t would a llow a ha

be a s c ourt to re a c h the m e rits of a ba rre d c la im .” Id. at 316. At ora l a rgum e nt, in re s ponse to a

que stion a

bout whe the r he wa s re ly ing on He rre ra v. C ollins, 506 U.S. 390 (1993), Powe ll
e xpre s sly disc la i m e d tha

t he wa s m aking a

sta nda lone a c tua l innoc e nc e c la i m . Ac c ordingly , we re vie w only whe the r Powe ll ha s m a de a c la im of a c tua l innoc e nc e a s a gate way

to ove rc om e his proc e dura l de fa ult. An e le m e nt of the sta

tute unde r whic h pe t itione r Norm an Powe ll wa s c onvic te d, Ne va d a

R e vise d Statute s § 202.287(1)(b), re quire d the gove rnm e nt to prove that the re wa s a l oc a l ordina nc e de s igna

ting theare a of the shooting a s a popula te d a re a . Powe ll a

rgue s tha t the re wa s no suc h

ordina nc e at the tim e of his
c onvic tion. Assum i ng tha t this is true , Powe ll’ s a

rgum e nt is not new e vide nc e . If,
a s Powe ll c la im s, the re wa s no qua lify ing loc a l ordina nc e until 1998, the

n Powe ll
c ould ha v e ra ise d this c la im

in 1995 whe n

he wa s c onvic te d . He did not ra ise it in his dire c t a ppe a l or first sta

te ha be a s pe tition. The re ha s be e n no c ha nge in la w orpa ge 3

ne wly disc ove re d e vide nc e tha

t de m onstra

te s Powe l l’ s innoc e nc e . Thus, we
c annot c onside r Powe ll’ s pe tition.
AFFIRM E D.
Amendment No.3 to Amended and Restated 2002 Long Term Incentive Plan



 Exhibit 10.4.3 
  
 THORNBURG MORTGAGE, INC. 
  
 AMENDMENT NO. 3 
 TO 
 AMENDED AND RESTATED 
 2002 LONG-TERM INCENTIVE
PLAN 
  
 Dated as of January 25, 2005 
  
 Pursuant to Section 8.2 of the Amended and Restated 2002
Long-Term Incentive Plan (the “Plan”), the Board of Directors of Thornburg Mortgage, Inc. (the “Company”) hereby revises and amends the terms of the Plan as follows, effective January 25, 2005: 
  
 Section 3.6.1 of the Plan shall be amended by adding the
following sentence at the end of the Section: 
  
 “The term of service on the Advisory Board and the term of continued participation in the incentive compensation distributions under the Plan under Section 3.6.2, shall be limited to a maximum of ten (10) years from the date of joining
the Advisory Board.” 
  
 The Plan, as amended
herein, is in all respects ratified and affirmed on behalf of the Company by its Board of Directors, including a majority of its non-employee Directors. 
  
 The Company has caused this Amendment No. 3 to the Plan to be executed in the name and on behalf of the Company by an officer of the
Company thereunto duly authorized as of the date written above. 
  

			
	 THORNBURG MORTGAGE, INC.
 a Maryland corporation

		
	 By:
	 	 /s/ Larry A. Goldstone


	 	 	 Larry A. Goldstone

	 	 	 President and Chief Operating Officer
#### Marie S. Heilmann v. Van Norden Trust Company.

Motion granted. Settle order on notice.
EX-33 (c)
Report on Assessment of Compliance

with Regulation AB Servicing Criteria

1. The undersigned authorized officer of LandAmerica Tax and Flood Services,
Inc. (the "Company") is responsible for assessing the Company's compliance with
the applicable servicing criteria as defined in 17 CFR Part 229 Section 1122(d)
(4) (xi) and 1122(d) (4) (xii) (the "Regulation AB Servicing Criteria") for
residential mortgage backed securities for which the Company served as
third-party property tax payment provider on the underlying collateral (the
"Platform"). Except as set forth in the preceding sentence, the servicing
criteria set forth in 17 CFR Part 229 Section 1122(d) are not applicable to the
activities the Company performed with respect to the Platform.

2. The Company used the criteria in 17 CFR Part 229 Section 1122(d) to assess
the compliance with the Regulation AB Servicing Criteria.

3. Under one of the services offered by the Company, some customers may elect to
remit tax payments directly to tax agencies without having the Company remit
those property tax payments through our tax payment service. We refer to these
customers as "non-outsourced servicer customers." With respect to these
non-outsourced customers and the services the Company delivered pursuant to the
servicing criteria set forth in 17 CFR Part 229 Section 1122(d)(4)(xi), the
Company's assertion is strictly limited to its processing of tax payments
submitted through the Company's tax payment service.

4. With respect to servicing criteria set forth in 17 CFR Part 229 Section
1122(d)(4)(xii), the Company's assertion is strictly limited to its processing
of property tax penalty payments. The Company has determined that its servicer
customers may also have access to systems that enable those servicers to process
penalties through obligor escrow accounts. Management's assessment of compliance
does not relate to the actual or potential activities of other parties with
access to obligor escrow accounts.

5. Based on such assessment, management believes that, as of and for the year
ended December 31, 2006, the Company has complied in all material respects with
the Regulation AB Servicing Criteria related to the servicing of the Platform.

6. The registered public accounting firm of Grant Thornton, LLP, has issued an
attestation report on the Company's assessment of compliance with the Regulation
AB Servicing Criteria as of and for the year ended December 31, 2006.

Date: February 20, 2007

LandAmerica Tax and Flood Services, Inc.

By: /s/ Bob Ige
Name: Bob Ige
Its:  Executive Vice President
#### OHIO CELLULAR PRODUCTS CORPORATION, Plaintiff-Appellant, and Donald E. Nelson, Third Party Defendant/Fourth Party Plaintiff-Appellant, v. ADAMS USA, INC. and Apehead Manufacturing, Inc., Defendants-Third Party Plaintiffs-Appellees, v. Patrick J. Arnold, Jr., Robert Fieseler, James E. Lammy, Sr., and Robert F. Rywalski, Fourth Party Defendants.

No. 02-1079.

United States Court of Appeals, Federal Circuit.

DECIDED: Nov. 7, 2002.

Before LOURIE, GAJARSA, and LINN, Circuit Judges.

*JUDGMENT*

PER CURIAM.

This CAUSE having been heard and considered, it is ORDERED and ADJUDGED:

*AFFIRMED. See*Fed. Cir. R. 36.