alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
[LETTERHEAD OF SUNTRUST MORTGAGE, INC.]



GMAC-RFC
2255 N. Ontario Street, Ste 400
Burbank, CA  91504
Attention: Compliance Officer


        Re: Annual Compliance Statement for RALI SERIES 2006-QS6 TRUST

        In connection  with the loans serviced by SunTrust  Mortgage,  Inc. (the
"Company")  pursuant to the Company's Servicing  Agreement(s)/Purchase  and Sale
Agreement(s)  with  GMAC-RFC  and  any  applicable  Reconstitution  Agreement(s)
(together,  the "Transaction  Agreements"),  I, the undersigned officer,  hereby
certify the following as of December 31, 2006:

(i)  The Company  conducted a review of its  activities  during the  immediately
     preceding  calendar  year  (or  applicable  portion  thereof)  and  of  its
     performance  under the Transaction  Agreements  during such period has been
     made under my supervision; and

(ii) To the  best  of my  knowledge,  based  on such  review,  the  Company  has
     fulfilled all of its obligations  under the  Transaction  Agreements in all
     material  respects  throughout  such calendar year (or  applicable  portion
     thereof),  except  that as of  January 1, 2006,  the  Company  did not have
     procedures for monitoring  compliance with requirements as specified in the
     applicable transaction agreements governing SEC Regulation AB transactions.
     To address the absence of such  procedures,  the Company's  management  has
     undertaken and completed the following  actions:  (a) completed a review of
     each  Transaction  Agreement and identified if there was specific  language
     affecting any of the Servicing  Criteria  outlined in Section 1122;  (b) to
     the degree that the Transaction  Agreements  required  specific  procedures
     related to the servicing  criteria,  the Company's  Reference Point Library
     (where all  policies and  procedures  are  maintained)  was updated to this
     effect;  (c)  for  each  pool,  a  Control  Matrix  was  completed  (and is
     maintained on a current basis)  identifying  which  Transaction  Agreements
     control each pool;  and (d)  established a monthly review process where the
     Company's  managers  review key factors of  performance  under  Transaction
     Agreements and respond to a questionnaire  indicating  compliance with such
     factors.



        IN WITNESS  WHEREOF,  I do hereby  certify the  foregoing as of the date
hereof.

        /s/ John R. Purcell, Jr.

        John R. Purcell, Jr.
        Senior Vice President - Manager, Servicing Division

        Date:  February 27, 2007
Form of Certificate of Amendment to Certificate of Trust os USB Capital VI.


 Exhibit 4.3 
  

CERTIFICATE OF AMENDMENT 
 TO

 CERTIFICATE OF TRUST 
 OF 
 USB CAPITAL VI 
  
 THIS Certificate of Amendment of USB Capital VI (the “Trust”), is being duly executed and filed by the undersigned trustee to amend a statutory
trust formed under the Delaware Statutory Trust Act (12 Del. C. § 3801 et seq.). 
  
 1. Name. The name of the statutory trust amended hereby is USB Capital VI. 
  
 2. Amendment of Trust. The Certificate of Trust of the Trust is hereby amended by changing the name and address of
the Trustee in the State of Delaware to: 
  
 Delaware Trust Company, National Association 
 300 Delaware Avenue, 9th Floor 
 Wilmington, Delaware 19801

  
 3. Effective Date. This Certificate of Amendment shall
be effective upon filing. 
  
 IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the undersigned
trustee of the Trust has executed this Certificate of Amendment in accordance with Section 3811(a)(2) of the Act. 
  

			
		
	 	 	 /s/ Daryl N. Bible


	Name:	 	Daryl N. Bible,
	 	 	not in his individual capacity but solely as Administrative Trustee
<TABLE> <S> <C>


<ARTICLE>                     5
<MULTIPLIER>                                   1,000

<S>                             <C>                      <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   3-MOS                    3-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>               SEP-30-1999              SEP-30-1998
<PERIOD-START>                  OCT-01-1999              OCT-01-1998
<PERIOD-END>                    JUN-30-2000              JUN-30-1999
<CASH>                          12,050                   8,943
<SECURITIES>                    1,452                    631
<RECEIVABLES>                   8,574                    8,107
<ALLOWANCES>                    0                        0
<INVENTORY>                     76,775                   76,454
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                100,278                  102,489
<PP&E>                          17,212                   13,114
<DEPRECIATION>                  (8,896)                  (6,701)
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                  122,365                  119,710
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>           87,096                   53,091
<BONDS>                         0                        0
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>           0                        0
<PREFERRED>                     415                      0
<COMMON>                        290                      264
<OTHER-SE>                      26,914                   17,849
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>    122,365                  119,710
<SALES>                         43,289                   23,893
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                11,583                   7,679
<CGS>                           0                        0
<TOTAL-COSTS>                   14,320                   9,089
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                0                        0
<LOSS-PROVISION>                0                        0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>              (1,533)                  (735)
<INCOME-PRETAX>                 (4,117)                  (2,065)
<INCOME-TAX>                    0                        0
<INCOME-CONTINUING>             0                        0
<DISCONTINUED>                  0                        0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                 0                        0
<CHANGES>                       0                        0
<NET-INCOME>                    (4,117)                  (2,065)
<EPS-BASIC>                     (0.31)                   (0.16)
<EPS-DILUTED>                   (0.31)                   (0.16)



</TABLE>
EXHIBIT 31.1
                                  CERTIFICATION

I, John V. Winfield, certify that:

1.  I have reviewed this quarterly report on Form 10-QSB of Portsmouth
Square, Inc.;

2.  Based on my knowledge, this quarterly report does 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 quarterly report;

3.  Based on my knowledge, the financial statements and other financial
information included in this report, fairly present in all material respects
the financial condition, results of operations and cash flows of the
registrant as of, and for, the periods presented in this annual report;

4.  The registrant's other certifying officer(s) and I are responsible for
establishing and maintaining disclosure controls and procedures (as defined
in Exchange Act Rules 13a-15(e) and 15d-15(e)) for the registrant and have:

    a) designed such disclosure controls and procedures, or caused such
disclosure controls and procedures to be designed under our supervision, to
ensure that material information relating to the registrant, including its
consolidated subsidiaries, is made known to us by others within those
entities, particularly during the period in which this report is being
prepared;

    b) evaluated the effectiveness of the registrant's disclosure controls
and procedures and presented in this report our conclusions about the
effectiveness of the disclosure controls and procedures, as of the end of the
period covered by this report based on such evaluation; and

    c) disclosed in this report any change in the registrant's internal
control over financial reporting that occurred during the registrant's most
recent fiscal quarter that has materially affected, or is reasonably likely
to materially affect, the registrant's internal control over financial
reporting; and

5.  The registrant's other certifying officer(s) and I have disclosed, based
on our most recent evaluation of internal control over financial reporting,
to the registrant's auditors and the audit committee of registrant's board of
directors (or persons performing equivalent functions):

    a) all significant deficiencies and material weakness in the design or
operation of internal control over financial reporting which are reasonably
likely to adversely affect the registrant's ability to record, process,
summarize and report financial information; and

    b) any fraud, whether or not material, that involves management or other
employees who have a significant role in registrant's internal control over
financial reporting.

Date: November 12, 2004                       /s/ John V. Winfield
                                              ---------------------------
                                              John V. Winfield, President
                                              and Chief Executive Officer
UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT
No. 96-536
In Re: HAROLD JOE STRICKLAND, JR., Petitioner.

On Petition for Writ of Mandamus. (CR-92-115-MU, CA-94-280-MU) Submitted: September 5, 1996 Decided: September 17, 1996 Before WIDENER and WILKINS, Circuit Judges, and PHILLIPS, Senior Circuit Judge. Petition denied by unpublished per curiam opinion. Harold Joe Strickland, Petitioner Pro Se. Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. See Local Rule 36(c).2 PER CURIAM: Harold J. Strickland, Jr., filed a petition for a writ of mandamus in this court requesting the court to compel the district court to respond to his habeas motion, 28 U.S.C. § 2255 (1988), as amended by Act of Apr. 24, 1996, 28 U.S.C.S. § 2255 (Law. Co-op. Advance Sheet June 1996), and various other motions he filed in the district court. We note that the district court entered an order in August 1996 directing the Respondent to file an answer to Strickland's habeas motion. Therefore, we grant Strickland in forma pauperis status and deny his petition because there has been no undue delay in the district court. We dispense with oral argument because the facts and legal contentions are adequately presented in the materials before the court and argument would not aid the decisional process.

PETITION DENIED
* 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. 97-40829 Conference Calendar

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Plaintiff-Appellee,

versus EDIS MAURICIO YANEZ-REYES, Defendant-Appellant.

- - - - - - - - - - Appeal from the United States District Court for the Southern District of Texas USDC No. B-97-CR-145-1

- - - - - - - - - - April 8, 1998 Before JOLLY, JONES, and DUHÉ, Circuit Judges.
PER CURIAM: * Edis Mauricio Yanez-Reyes appeals his guilty-plea conviction and sentencing for illegal reentry after deportation in violation of 8 U.S.C. § 1326(a) and (b)(2). He argues that his conviction and sentencing for violation of 8 U.S.C. § 1326(b)(2) is legally invalid because his previous convictions were not alleged in the indictment or proved at trial beyond a reasonable doubt. He also argues that the sentencing court violated his right to due process by determining that § 1326(b)(2) is merely a sentencing enhancement of the offense delineated in § 1326(a) rather than aNo. 97-40829 -2- separate offense. These arguments are foreclosed by the United States Supreme Court’s decision in Almendarez-Torres v. United States , ___ U.S. ___, 1998 WL 126904, at *3, *8 and *10-15 (U.S. Mar. 24, 1998). AFFIRMED.
UNPUBLISHED

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

No. 05-1479

CHERYL A. DAVIDSON,

Plaintiff - Appellant,

versus

JAMES TAYLOR; JOHN O’DONALD; DARRELL BETSILL,

Defendants - Appellees.

Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of

South Carolina, at Spartanburg. Henry M. Herlong, Jr., District

Judge. (CA-04-2013-7-HMH)

Submitted: September 27, 2005 Decided: September 29, 2005

Before LUTTIG, MOTZ, and DUNCAN, Circuit Judges.

Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion.

Cheryl A. Davidson, Appellant Pro Se. Vance J. Bettis, GIGNILLIAT,

SAVITZ & BETTIS, Columbia, South Carolina; Michael Stephen Pauley,

VINTON D. LIDE & ASSOCIATES, Lexington, South Carolina, for

Appellees.

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.

See Local Rule 36(c).
- 2 -

PER CURIAM:

Cheryl A. Davidson appeals the district court’s order

granting summary judgment to Defendants in Davidson’s 42 U.S.C.

§ 1983 (2000) suit. The district court referred this case to a

magistrate judge pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1)(B) (2000). The

magistrate judge issued a report and recommendation in which he

recommended granting summary judgment to Defendants. The district

court adopted the report and recommendation, finding that Davidson

failed to file specific objections.

The timely filing of specific objections to a magistrate

judge’s report and recommendation is necessary to preserve

appellate review of the substance of that recommendation when the

parties have been warned that failure to object will waive

appellate review. See Wright v. Collins, 766 F.2d 841, 845-46 (4th

Cir. 1985); see also Thomas v. Arn, 474 U.S. 140 (1985). On

appeal, Davidson does not challenge the district court’s conclusion

that her objections were merely general. See 4th Cir. R. 34 (b)

(failure to raise claim in informal brief waives consideration of

that claim). Accordingly, we conclude that Davidson has waived

appellate review of both the substance of the magistrate judge’s

report and the district court’s construction of her objections.

Thus, we affirm the order of the district court. We

dispense with oral argument, because the facts and legal
- 3 -

contentions are adequately presented in the materials before the

court and argument would not aid the decisional process.

AFFIRMED
**
**Exhibit 35**

**SERVICER’S ANNUAL CERTIFICATION**

**MECHANICS BANK**

**PURSUANT TOSECTION 4.10 OF THE SALE AND SERVICING AGREEMENT**

This Servicer’s Annual Certification is delivered pursuant to a saleand servicing agreement dated as of June 1, 2018 (the “Sale and Servicing Agreement”) by and among, California Republic Auto Receivables Trust 2018-1, California Republic Funding, LLC, MechanicsBank, as Seller, Servicer, Administrator, Calculation Agent and Custodian (in such capacity, the “Servicer”), and U.S. Bank National Association, as indenture trustee (the “Indenture Trustee”). All capitalized terms used but notdefined herein shall have the meaning assigned thereto in Appendix A to the Sale and Servicing Agreement. 

The undersigned, aResponsible Officer of the Servicer, hereby certifies that: 

1.      A review of the activities of theServicer and of the performance of its obligations under the Sale and Servicing Agreement during the period from January 1, 2021 to and including December 31, 2021 (the “Review Period”) was conducted under my supervision. 

2.      To the best of my knowledge, based on such review, the Servicer has fulfilled all of itsobligations under the Sale and Servicing Agreement in all material respects throughout the Review Period. 

[SIGNATURE APPEARS ON NEXT PAGE] 
**

IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the undersigned, in my capacity as specified below, has causedthis certificate to be executed as of the date indicated below. 

 

Dated: March 15, 2022
  
/s/ Nathan J. Duda

Nathan J. Duda

Chief Financial Officer
EXHIBIT 32.1
                            CERTIFICATION PURSUANT TO
                                 18 U.S.C. 1350,
                             AS ADOPTED PURSUANT TO
                  SECTION 906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002


In connection with the Annual Report of ONLINE  ORIGINALS,  INC. (the "Company")
on Form  10-K  for the  period  ended  November  30,  2009,  as  filed  with the
Securities and Exchange  Commission on the date hereof (the "Report"),  I, Shari
Sookarookoff,  Chief  Executive  Officer  and  Chief  Financial  Officer  of the
Company, certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. 1350, as adopted pursuant to Section 906
of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that:

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

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



Date: March 10, 2010



By:       /s/ Shari Sookarookoff
         -----------------------
         Shari Sookarookoff
         President/Chief Executive Officer and
         Chief Financial (Accounting) Officer
#### David Janisch, Individually and as Executor of Karen R. Janisch, Deceased, Respondent, v Murray S. Howland, Jr., et al., Defendants, and John P. Kelly, Individually and as Member of Buffalo Medical Group, Appellant.

Order unanimously reversed on the law without costs and defendant Kelly’s motion granted. Memorandum: An action for medical malpractice must be commenced within *2Vi*years from the act, omission or failure complained of, or *2Vi*years from the "last treatment where there is continuous treatment for the same illness, injury or condition which gave rise to the said act, omission or failure” (CPLR 214-a). The last date that decedent saw defendant Dr. Kelly was May 10, 1982. Thus, the action commenced against him on March 20, 1985 is time barred and the complaint against him must be dismissed.

Plaintiff’s contention that continuous treatment by defen*822dant Dr. Howland is sufficient to toll the Statute of Limitations against Dr. Kelly is without merit. The continuous treatment doctrine is not available here because there has been no showing that Howland (primary physician) and Kelly (diagnosing physician) were agents of each other or that there was a continuing relevant relationship between the two doctors or between decedent and Kelly *(see, Ruane v Niagara Falk Mem. Med. Center,*60 NY2d 908; *McDermott v Torre,*56 NY2d 399; *Swartz v Karlan,*107 AD2d 801; *La Bay v White Plains Hosp.,*97 AD2d 432; *Florio v Cook,*65 AD2d 548, *affd*48 NY2d 792). The fact that Howland and Kelly were members, employees, and shareholders of the Buffalo Medical Group did not make each the agent of the other and thus vicariously liable for the malpractice of the other *(see, Hill v St. Clare’s Hosp.,*67 NY2d 72; *Bradt v Hamel,*144 AD2d 921; *Pellegrino v Fillmore Hosp.,*140 AD2d 954). Howland’s continued reliance on Kelly’s diagnosis is insufficient, in and of itself, to establish a continuing relevant relationship so as to toll the Statute of Limitations against Kelly *(see, Damsker v Berger,*123 AD2d 343). (Appeal from order of Supreme Court, Erie County, Gossel, J.—summary judgment.) Present—Dillon, P. J., Denman, Green, Pine and Lowery, JJ.
Exhibit 31.1  CERTIFICATION
PURSUANT TO SECTION 302 OF THE SARBANESOXLEY ACT OF 2002  I, Sean O. Casey, M.D.,
certify that:  1.I have reviewed this annual report on Form 10-K
of Virtual Radiologic Corporation;  2.Based on my knowledge, this report does 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, the financial
statements, and other financial information included in this report, fairly
present in all material respects the financial condition, results of operations
and cash flows of the registrant as of, and for, the periods presented in this
report;  4.The registrants other certifying officer
and I are responsible for establishing and maintaining disclosure controls and
procedures (as defined in Exchange Act Rules 13a-15(e) and 15d-15(e))
for the registrant and have:  (a)Designed such disclosure controls and procedures, or
caused such disclosure controls and procedures to be designed under our
supervision, to ensure that material information relating to the registrant,
including its consolidated subsidiaries, is made known to us by others within
those entities, particularly during the period in which this report is being
prepared;  (b)Evaluated the effectiveness of the registrants
disclosure controls and procedures and presented in this report our conclusions
about the effectiveness of the disclosure controls and procedures, as of the
end of the period covered by this report based on such evaluation; and  (c)Disclosed in this report any change in the registrants
internal control over financial reporting that occurred during the registrants
most recent fiscal quarter (the registrants fourth fiscal quarter in the case
of an annual report) that has materially affected, or is reasonably likely to
materially affect, the registrants internal control over financial reporting;
and  5.The registrants other certifying officer
and I have disclosed, based on our most recent evaluation of internal control
over financial reporting, to the registrants auditors and the audit committee
of the registrants board of directors (or persons performing the equivalent
functions):  (a)All significant deficiencies and material weaknesses
in the design or operation of internal control over financial reporting which
are reasonably likely to adversely affect the registrants ability to record,
process, summarize and report financial information; and  (b)Any fraud, whether or not material, that involves
management or other employees who have a significant role in the registrants
internal control over financial reporting.   Date:
  March 17, 2008
  By:
  /s/ Sean O. Casey, M.D.Sean O. Casey, M.D.Chief Executive Officer