alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
EX-35 (e)
(logo) WELLS FARGO

Corporate Trust Services
MAC N2702-011
9062 Old Annapolis Road
Columbia, MD 21045
410 884-2000
410 715-2380 Fax

Wells Fargo Bank, N.A.

March 13, 2007

Morgan Stanley Capital I Inc.

RE: Annual Statement As To Compliance for Morgan Stanley Mortgage Loan Trust
2006-7

Per Section 9.11 of the Pooling and Servicing Agreement, dated as of 5/1/2006,
the undersigned Officer of Wells Fargo Bank, N.A., (Securities Administrator),
hereby certifies the following for the 2006 calendar year or portion thereof:

(A)  a review of such party's activities during the preceding calendar year or
     portion thereof and of such party's performance under this Agreement, or
     such other applicable agreement in the case of an Additional Servicer, has
     been made under such officer's supervision,

(B)  to the best of such officer's knowledge, based on such review, such party
     has fulfilled all its obligations under this Agreement, or such other
     applicable agreement in the case of an Additional Servicer, in all material
     respects throughout such year or portion thereof, or, if there has been a
     failure to fulfill any such obligation in any material respect, specifying
     each such failure known to such officer and the nature and status thereof
     and

(C)  in the case of the Master Servicer, to the best of such officer's
     knowledge, each Servicer has fulfilled all its obligations under its
     Servicing Agreement in all material respects throughout such year, or, if
     there has been a failure to fulfill any such obligation in any material
     respect specifying each such failure known to such officer and the nature
     and status thereof.


Certified By:
/s/ Reid Denny
Reid Denny, Vice President

Certified By:
/s/ Gordon Johnson
Gordon Johnson, Assistant Secretary
UNITED STATES
                       SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION
                             Washington, D.C. 20549

                                    Form 13F

                               Form 13F COVER PAGE

Report for the Calendar Year or Quarter Ended:  September 30, 1999

Check here if Amendment [    ]; Amendment Number: ____
    This Amendment (Check only one.): [    ] is a restatement.
                                      [    ] adds new holdings entries.

Institutional Investment Manager Filing this Report:

Name:      Citibank (Switzerland)
Address:   Seestrasse 25, CH-8021
           Zurich, Switzerland

Form 13F File Number:              28-1833

The institutional investment manager filing this report and the person by whom
it is signed hereby represent that the person signing the report is authorized
to submit it, that all information contained herein is true, correct and
complete, and that it is understood that all required items, statements,
schedules, lists, and tables, are considered integral parts of this form.

Person Signing this Report on Behalf of Reporting Manager:

Name:      Silvio Ammann
Title:     Treasurer
Phone:     41.1.205.7558

Signature, Place, and Date of Signing:

/s/ Silvio Ammann             Zurich, Switzerland        November 12, 1999
-----------------

Report Type (Check only one.):

[   ] 13F  HOLDINGS  REPORT.   (Check  here  if  all  holdings  of  this
      reporting manager are reported in this report.)

[ X ] 13F NOTICE. (Check here if no holdings reported are in this report,
      and all holdings are reported by other reporting manager(s).)

[   ] 13F COMBINATION REPORT. (Check here if a portion of the holdings for this
      reporting manager are reported in this report and a portion are reported
      by other reporting manager(s).)

List of Other Managers Reporting for this Manager:

Form 13F File Number 28-2427
Name:  Citigroup Inc.
AMENDMENT

                          1995 STOCK INCENTIVE PLAN

     Effective May 20, 1999, Sections 10(b) and 10(c) of
the 1995 Stock Incentive Plan are amended to provide as
follows:

     (b)  Award Upon Election.

          Each Outside Director who is elected by the Board
     to fill a vacancy on the Board after the date on which
     Nonqualified Stock Options were last awarded pursuant
     to Section 10(c) below, shall receive a Nonqualified
     Stock Option for 5,000 Shares on the date of the
     Board's regular meeting in December following his or
     her election; and if an Outside Director is so elected
     on the date of such meeting, he or she shall receive a
     Nonqualified Stock Option for 5,000 shares on the date
     of such meeting.

     (c)  Annual Awards.

          Each Outside Director shall receive a
     Nonqualified Stock Option for 2,500 Shares on the date
     of the Board's regular meeting in December of each
     year he or she serves as Outside Director, other than
     a year in which the Outside Director receives an award
     under Section 10(b) above.




                                                           Exhibit (10)(b)(i)
#### MITCHELL v. BRODNAX.

No. 5126.

Court of Appeal of Louisiana. Second Circuit.

Dec. 13, 1935.

*427Shotwell & Brown, of Monroe, for appellant.

Madison, Madison & Fuller, of Bastrop, for appellee.

DREW, Judge.

This is a suit to annul a judgment reviving a judgment obtained by J. Bardy Mitchell against Max Brodnax. The original judgment was obtained on February 6, 1914.

On January 29, 1924, Mitchell filed a suit to revive it. Brodnax was not cited until September 8, 1927, more than thirteen years after the original judgment was obtained. He did not answer the petition and on September 23, 1927, a judgment was rendered purporting to revive the judgment of date February 6, 1914.

The plaintiff herein contends that the judgment of revival is null and void and of no legal effect, for the reason it was revived and no citation issued to him within the ten-year period, and that no acknowledgment of the debt has ever been made.

Defendant contends that since the plaintiff did not make any appearance in the suit to revive filed against him, and no appeal having been taken, said judgment became final, and is a legal judgment. He further pleaded estoppel based upon the above facts.

The lower court rendered judgment for plaintiff and annulled the judgment of revival, from which judgment defendant has perfected this appeal.

The revival judgment — if a valid judgment — relates back to the expiration of the original judgment (McDaniel v. Smith, 13 La. App. 61, 127 So. 108), which was February 6, 1924, and the additional time before the expiration of the judgment, if the revival judgment is valid, would be ten years, and the original judgment would have and did prescribe on February 6, 1934. There is no intimation or suggestion that there has been any attempt to revive the judgment the second time. It therefore follows that, regardless of what we might hold as to the judgment of revival, rendered September 23, 1927, it could not keep the judgment alive for a later date than February 6, 1934, at which time prescription had run against it, under article 3547 of the Revised Civil Code.

The entire question as to the validity of the revival judgment is therefore at this time a moot question, and for that reason the appeal is dismissed at the cost of appellant.
Exhibit 32.1



CERTIFICATION



Pursuant to 18 U.S.C. § 1350, the undersigned officer of THE POTOMAC EDISON COMPANY (the Company), hereby certifies, to such
officers knowledge, that the Companys Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q for the fiscal quarter ended June 30, 2005 (the Report) fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 and that
the information contained in the Report fairly presents, in all material respects, the financial condition and results of operations of the Company.





|               |  |                                            
|-------------- |  | -------------------------------------------
|               |  | /s/    Paul J. Evanson                     
|August 5, 2005 |  | Paul J. Evanson Principal Executive Officer
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<ARTICLE> UT
<LEGEND>
                                                                      Exhibit 27
        THE SCHEDULE CONTAINS SUMMARY INFORMATION EXTRACTED FROM CONSOLIDATED
        STATEMENTS OF INCOME, CONSOLIDATED BALANCE SHEETS, AND CONSOLIDATED
        STATEMENTS OF CASH FLOWS, AND QUALIFIED IN ITS ENTIRETY BY REFERENCE TO
        SUCH FINANCIAL STATEMENTS.
</LEGEND>
<CIK> 0000077388
<NAME> PEOPLES GAS LIGHT AND COKE COMPANY
<MULTIPLIER>  1,000

<S>                                     <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                           6-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                       SEP-30-2000
<PERIOD-START>                          OCT-01-1999
<PERIOD-END>                            MAR-31-2000
<BOOK-VALUE>                            PER-BOOK
<TOTAL-NET-UTILITY-PLANT>                   1,289,411
<OTHER-PROPERTY-AND-INVEST>                    10,339
<TOTAL-CURRENT-ASSETS>                        540,656
<TOTAL-DEFERRED-CHARGES>                       27,392
<OTHER-ASSETS>                                 39,886
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                              1,907,684
<COMMON>                                      165,307
<CAPITAL-SURPLUS-PAID-IN>                           0
<RETAINED-EARNINGS>                           471,710
<TOTAL-COMMON-STOCKHOLDERS-EQ>                637,017
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                               0
<PREFERRED>                                         0
<LONG-TERM-DEBT-NET>                          250,000
<SHORT-TERM-NOTES>                                  0
<LONG-TERM-NOTES-PAYABLE>                           0
<COMMERCIAL-PAPER-OBLIGATIONS>                 33,975
<LONG-TERM-DEBT-CURRENT-PORT>                 377,000
<PREFERRED-STOCK-CURRENT>                           0
<CAPITAL-LEASE-OBLIGATIONS>                         0
<LEASES-CURRENT>                                    0
<OTHER-ITEMS-CAPITAL-AND-LIAB>                609,692
<TOT-CAPITALIZATION-AND-LIAB>               1,907,684
<GROSS-OPERATING-REVENUE>                     655,911
<OTHER-OPERATING-EXPENSES>                    524,915
<TOTAL-OPERATING-EXPENSES>                    524,915
<OPERATING-INCOME-LOSS>                       130,996
<OTHER-INCOME-NET>                              1,263
<INCOME-BEFORE-INTEREST-EXPEN>                132,259
<TOTAL-INTEREST-EXPENSE>                       17,795
<INCOME-TAX-EXPENSE>                           43,583
<NET-INCOME>                                   70,881
<PREFERRED-STOCK-DIVIDENDS>                         0
<EARNINGS-AVAILABLE-FOR-COMM>                  70,881
<COMMON-STOCK-DIVIDENDS>                       52,117
<TOTAL-INTEREST-ON-BONDS>                      15,900
<CASH-FLOW-OPERATIONS>                         84,351
<EPS-BASIC>                                       0
<EPS-DILUTED>                                       0



</TABLE>
Document headings vary by document type but may contain
                    the following: the agency or agencies that issued and signed a document
the number of the CFR title and the number of each part
                      the document amends, proposes to amend, or is directly
                      related to
the agency docket number / agency internal file number
the RIN which identifies each regulatory action listed in
                      the Unified Agenda of Federal Regulatory and Deregulatory
                      Actions See the
                    Document Drafting Handbook
                    for more details.
 Department of Homeland Security Bureau of Customs and Border Protection
 AGENCY: Bureau of Customs and Border Protection, U.S. Department of Homeland Security.
 ACTION: General Notice.
 SUMMARY: Pursuant to section 641 of the Tariff Act of 1930, as amended, (19 U.S.C. 1641) and the Customs Regulations (19 CFR 111.51), the following Customs broker licenses and all associated permits are cancelled without prejudice. Name
License No.
Issuing
                             portInternational Cargo Systems, Inc
15594
BostonDelmar Logistics, Inc
17142
Los AngelesRobert D. Hancock, Jr.
03755
HoustonRialto International, Inc
22077
Seattle
 Dated: August 18, 2008. Daniel Baldwin, Assistant Commissioner, Office of International Trade.


[FR Doc. E8-20676 Filed 9-4-08; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 9111-14-P
N OTE : This order is nonprecedential

. 

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

______________________

In Re RAMEY ALAINE CHISUM,

Petitioner

______________________

2024

- 144

______________________

On Petition for Writ of Mandamus to the United States

Court of Federal Claims in No. 1:24

- cv

- 00067

- EHM, Judge Edward H. Meyers.

______________________

ON PETITION AND ON MOTION

______________________

P ER C URIAM

.
O R D E R

Ramey Alaine Chisum petitions for a writ of mandamus directing the United States Court of Federal Claims to enter judgment in her favor and moves for leave to proceed in forma pauperis

. In the underlying proceedings before the Court of Federal Claims, the United States moved to dismiss, and

Ms. Chisum moved for summary judgment. The Court of Federal Claims stayed briefing on the summary judgment motion pending resolution of the motion to dismiss . Briefing on the motion to dismiss completed in late August 2024, and that motion remains pending. Case: 24-144 Document: 5 Page: 1 Filed: 09/16/2024IN RE CHISUM 2

In order to establish entitlement to the extraordinary remedy of a writ of mandamus, a petitioner must show: (1) “no other adequate means to attain the relief [it] desires,” (2) a “clear and indisputable” right to relief, and (3) that the writ is “appropri ate under the circumstances.” Cheney v. U.S. Dist. Ct. for D.C. , 542 U.S. 367, 380

– 81 (2004) (cleaned up). Here, at a minimum, Ms. Chisum has failed

to show s he is unable to get the relief s he is seeking without

our immediate intervention on mandamus. A nd, t o the extent Ms. Chisum challenges the trial court’s decision to stay consideration of her motion for summary judgment pending consideration of the government’s motion to dismiss , she has not shown the sort of unreasonable delay required for the extraordinary remedy of mandamus.

Accordingly,

I T I S O RDERED T HAT :

The petition and motion are denied.

September 1 6 , 2024

Date F OR THE C OURT Case: 24-144 Document: 5 Page: 2 Filed: 09/16/2024
<PAGE>
                                                                               .
                                                                               .
                                                                               .
                                                                Exhibit 10.67(b)

                    List of Contents of Exhibit and Schedules
                 to the Heads & Threads Merger Agreement

<TABLE>
<S>         <C>
Exhibits

   A        Definitions
   B-1      Form of New Employment Agreement
   B-2      Form of New Employment Agreement
   B-3      Form of New Employment Agreement
   C        Form of Solvency Opinion

Schedules

   4.1      Organization
   4.3      Company Subsidiaries
   4.5      No Violation
   4.6      Financial Statements
   4.7      Undisclosed Liabilities, Etc.
   4.8      Certain Changes
   4.9      Encumbrances
   4.10     Certain Properties
   4.11     Taxes
   4.12     Contracts
   4.13     Litigation
   4.14     Intellectual Property
   4.15     Compliance with Laws
   4.16     Environmental Matters
   4.17     Governmental Authorizations
   4.18     Employee Benefit Plans
   4.19     Related Party Transactions
   4.22     Insurance
   4.23     Bank Accounts; Powers of Attorney
   4.24     Product Warranties
   4.26     Certain Disclosures
   4.27     Employees
   6.2      Conduct of Business Prior to Closing
   8.2      Consents and Approvals
</TABLE>
DANTE DAVIS

,

Petitioner,

v.

STATE OF FLORIDA

,
Respondent. ___________________________/ IN THE DISTRICT COURT OF APPEAL FIRST DISTRICT, STATE OF FLORIDA

NOT FINAL UNTIL TIME EXPIRES TO FILE MOTION FOR REHEARING AND DISPOSITION THEREOF IF FILED

CA SE NO. 1D 14

- 5011

Opinion filed November 13, 2014.

Petition Alleging Ineffective Assistance of Appellate Counsel

-- Original Jurisdiction

.
Dante Davis, pro se

, Petitioner.

Pamela Jo Bondi, Attorney General, Tallahassee , for Respondent.

PER CU RIAM.

The petition alleging ineffective assistance of appellate counsel is denied on the

merits.

LEWIS, C.J., THOMAS and OSTERHAUS, JJ.

, CONCUR.
#### The People of the State of New York, Respondent, v Lance Cruell, Appellant.

Appeal by the defendant from a judgment of the Supreme Court, Queens County (Naro, J.), rendered May 26, 1987, convicting him of robbery in the first degree (two counts) and robbery in the second degree (two counts), upon a jury verdict, and imposing sentence.

Ordered that the judgment is affirmed.

The defendant asserts that the verdict rejecting his affirmative defense that the gun he used to commit the robberies was inoperable was against the weight of the evidence. We disagree. The defendant has the burden of establishing the affirmative defense by a preponderance of the evidence (Penal Law § 25.00 [2]). Here, the evidence was insufficient to establish that the gun was inoperable at the time of the crime *(see, e.g., People v Cotarelo,*71 NY2d 941). At best, the evidence established only that the weapon was inoperable five days after the crime. Indeed, the weapon, which showed evidence of having been fired, was recovered along with three cartridges from the car the defendant had been driving on the date of his *412arrest. Mangano, P. J., Bracken, Rubin and Rosenblatt, JJ., concur.
#### The People of the State of New York, Respondent, v Dominick Caponigro, Appellant.

Appeal by the defendant from four judgments of the County Court, Rockland County (Nelson, J.), all rendered July 5, 1988, convicting him of criminal possession of a controlled substance in the second degree under indictment No. 87-349-01, conspiracy in the fourth degree under indictment No. 88-63-01, conspiracy in the second degree under indictment No. 88-64-01, and conspiracy in the fourth degree under indictment No. 88-68-01, upon his pleas of guilty, and imposing sentences. The appeal brings up for review the denial of that branch of the defendant’s omnibus motion which was to suppress evidence obtained as a result of eavesdropping warrants.

Ordered that the judgments are affirmed.

The issue raised by the defendant with respect to the timely sealing of certain tape recordings made pursuant to a court-ordered telephone wiretap has been addressed on the appeal of his codefendant *(see, People v Fata,*159 AD2d 180 [decided herewith]), and we find no basis for a different determination here.

We note that the defendant does not have standing to seek suppression of those conversations intercepted over the codefendant Fata’s cordless telephone. The defendant failed to demonstrate that he was a party to any of those intercepted conversations or that he had a proprietary interest in the premises *(see, People v Marans,*127 AD2d 795; *People v La Rocca,*112 AD2d 1010; *see also, People v Wesley,*73 NY2d 351). In any event, assuming arguendo that the defendant does have standing, suppression was properly denied for the reasons stated in *People v Fata (supra).*

We find that the sentence imposed was not excessive *(People v Suitte,*90 AD2d 80). Kunzeman, J. P., Rubin, Fiber and Miller, JJ., concur.
EXHIBIT 31.1

             CERTIFICATION PURSUANT TO RULE 13A-14(D)/15D-14(D)
                  UNDER THE SECURITIES EXCHANGE ACT OF 1934
I, Anthony N. Renzi, 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 RAMP  Series  2006-RS3  Trust  (the  "Exchange  Act  periodic
     reports");

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.   I am responsible  for reviewing the  activities  performed by the servicers
     and based on my knowledge and the compliance reviews conducted in preparing
     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 servicers have fulfilled their obligations under the servicing
     agreements 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:

SunTrust Mortgage, Inc., JPMorgan Chase Bank, N.A.
and The Bank of New York Trust  Company,  N.A.

Date:  March 26, 2007

By: /s/ Anthony N. Renzi
    Name:  Anthony N. Renzi
    Title: Managing Director
COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE

FIRST DISTRICT OF TEXAS AT HOUSTON

ORDER

Appellate case name: In re Ryan Marine Services Inc. and Trionics, LLC

Appellate case number: 01-22-00713-CV

Trial court case number: 2022-00635

Trial court: 234th District Court

On October 7, 2022, relator filed an unopposed motion to transfer the clerk’s record and 

reporter’s record from 01–22–00650–CV into this original proceeding to serve as the mandamus 

record. We grant the motion to transfer. The Clerk of this Court is instructed to transfer the 

clerk’s record and reporter’s record from appellate cause number 01–22–00650–CV to 01–22–

00713–CV. 

It is so ORDERED.

Judge’s signature: ____/s/ Julie Countiss ______

 Acting individually  Acting for the Court

Date: ____October 18, 2022_____
Exhibit 35.1

                                     [LOGO]
                                     OCWEN



                      ANNUAL SERVICER COMPLIANCE STATEMENT
                     PURSUANT TO ITEM 1123 OF REGULATION AB

March 8, 2007

RE: GSAMP 2006-S3

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 ss.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 April 1, 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