alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
Exhibit 34.7



|     |  |                                                                                                                             
|---- |  | ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
|LOGO |  | Plante & Moran, PLLC
10 South Riverside Plaza
9th Floor
Chicago. IL 60606
Tel: 312.207.1040
Fax: 312.207.1066
plantmoran.com

Report of Independent Registered Public Accounting Firm

To the Board of Directors

National Tax Search, LLC

We have examined National Tax Searchs compliance with Securities and Exchange Commissions Regulation AB Servicing Criteria, set forth in
Item 1122(d) of the Security and Exchange Commissions Regulation AB for the National Tax Search TaxQ system (the Platform) as of and for the year ended December 31, 2014. The Company has determined that only certain
servicing criteria, 1112(d)(1)(ii), 1122(d)1(iv), 1122(d)2(ii), 1122(d)2(v), 1122(d)2(vi), 1122(d)2(vii), 1122(d)(4)(xi), and 1122(d)(4)(xii), are applicable to the activities performed by it with respect to the Platform covered by this report. The
Company has determined that the remaining servicing criteria set forth in Item 1122(d) of the SEC Regulation AB are not applicable to the activities performed by it with respect to the Platform covered by this report.

Management is responsible for the Companys compliance with those servicing criteria. Our responsibility is to express an opinion on managements
assertion about the Companys compliance with the servicing criteria 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 a selection of a
sample of transactions and compliance activities related to the Platform during the examination period and determining whether the Company processed those transactions and performed those activities in compliance with the servicing criteria. Our
testing of selected transactions and compliance activities was limited to calculations, reports, and activities performed by the Company during the period covered by this report. Our procedures did not include determining whether errors may have
occurred prior to our tests that may have affected the balances or amounts calculated or reported by the Company during the period covered by this report for the selected transactions or any other transactions. 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 servicing criteria as of and for the year ended
December 31, 2014 for the Platform is fairly stated in all material respects.



/s/ Plante & Moran, PLCC


Chicago, IL

January 12, 2015



LOGO
### Michigan Supreme Court Lansing, Michigan

Marilyn Kelly,
Chief Justice

Michael F. Cavanag h
Elizabeth A. Weave r

Maura D. Corriga n Robert P. Young, Jr. Stephen J. Markma n Diane M. Hathaway,
J ustices

I, Corbin R. Davis, Clerk of the Mi chigan Supreme Cour t, certify that the foregoing is a true and complete copy of the order entered at the direction of the Court.

_______________________________________ __ Clerk September 11, 2009

p0831 

# Order

September 11, 2009

138321

ASSUMPTION GREEK ORTHODOX CHURCH, Plaintiff-Appellant,

v SC: 138321 COA: 275733 Macomb CC: 06-002779-CK THE CINCINNATI INSURANCE COMPANY, Defendant-Appellee.

________________ _______________ __________/

On order of the Court, the application fo r leave to appeal the November 25, 2008 judgment of the Court of Appeals is consid ered, and it is DENIED, because we are not persuaded that the questions presented should be reviewed by this Court.
| (logo) WELLS  FARGO | **Commercial  Mortgage Servicing**D1050-084,  8th Floor  401 South Tryon St.  Charlotte, NC 28202  1-800-326-1334 |
|---------------------|-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|

 

**ANNUAL STATEMENT OFCOMPLIANCE**

 

Referenceis hereby made to that certain Pooling and Servicing Agreement dated as ofNovember 1, 2011, by and among Wells Fargo Commercial Mortgage Securities,Inc.,as Depositor, Wells Fargo Bank, National Association, as Master Servicer,Midland Loan Services, A Division of PNC Bank, NA, as Special Servicer,Deutsche Bank Trust Company Americas, as Trustee, Wells Fargo Bank, NationalAssociation, as Certificate Administrator, Tax Administrator and Custodian, andTrimont Real Estate Advisors, Inc., as Trust Advisor, with respect toCommercial Mortgage Pass-Through Certificates Series 2011-C5 (the “Agreement”).Capitalized terms used herein not otherwise defined shall have the meaningsassigned in the Agreement.

 

Pursuantto Section 11.11 of this Agreement, I, Daniel Bober, Executive Vice Presidentof Commercial Mortgage Services do hereby certify that:

 

1.       Areview of the activities of the Master Servicer during the period from January1, 2017 through December 31, 2017 (the “Reporting Period”) , and of itsperformance per the Agreement during such period has been made under mysupervision, and

 

2.       Tothe best of my knowledge, based on such review, the Master Servicer, hasfulfilled all of its obligations under this Agreement in all material respectsthroughout the Reporting Period.

 

 

INWITNESS WHEREOF, the undersigned has executed this Certificate as of the 28th dayof February 2018.

 

 

/s/Daniel Bober

DanielBober

ExecutiveVice President 

WellsFargo Bank

 

 

| Wells Fargo Bank,  N.A. | (logo) Together  we’ll go far |
|-------------------------|-------------------------------------|
#### F. Stresau et al. v. Antonio Fidelli and Joseph Torrance.

(No. 1765, Op. Book No. 2, p. 794.)

Error from Galveston County.

Opinion by

Willson, J.

§ 847. *Non-joincler of parties defendant; must be pleaded in abatement.*If there are other parties who are jointly liable with the defendant, who are necessary *488or proper parties defendant in the suit, these facts should be pleaded *in limine,*in accordance with the rules governing in such cases. [R. S. 1574; Davis v. Willes, 47 Tex. 155; Williams v. The State, 23 Tex. 279.]

March 3, 1883.

§ 848. *Damages for breach of contract; measure of; exception to general rule.*In cases growing out of the non-performance of contracts, where there is no element of fraud, wilful negligence or malice, the measure of damages is the direct pecuniary loss suffered by the injured party. [O’Connor v. Van Homme, Dallam, 430; Smith v. Sherwood, 2 Tex. 464; Graham v. Roder, 5 Tex. 148; Robinson v. Varnell, 16 Tex. 382; Gordon v. Jones, 27 Tex. 620.] It is a general rule that future profits, which might have accrued upon the performance of a contract, cannot be allowed in estimating damages-for the breach of the contract. There is an exception to this rule, where, under the contract, labor is to be performed from which profit is to spring as the direct result of work to be done at a stipulated price, and one party is prevented from earning such profits by the wrongful act of the other. [R. R. Co. v. Shirley, 45 Tex. 357.] This-was a suit for damages for breach of contract, and damages were allowed appellees which the law did not authorize under the circumstances of the case.

Reversed and remanded.
* Pursuant to 5 TH CIR. R. 47.5, the court has determined that this opinion should not be published and is not precedent except under the limited circumstances set forth in 5 TH CIR

. R. 47.5.4.

### IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT

No. 08-20131 Summary Calendar

DANIEL T. MORRIS Plaintiff - Appellant v. FINANCIAL CASUALTY & SURETY, INC., MYRON STEVES & CO., INC., TIMOTHY J. FANGUY, MARGARET A. WREN, TIM FANGUY, BAIL BOND INC., A-1 UNLIMITED INC., LOUIS MARCOTTE III, BAIL BONDS UNLIMITED LLC, MARCOTTE LLC, PEEPLES FINANCIAL SERVICE, INC. Defendants - Appellees

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

4:07-CV-1396
Before HIGGINBOTHAM, BARKSDALE, and ELROD, Circuit Judges. PER CURIAM: * Following dismissal ofhis RICO action, Daniel Morris appeals the denial of his motion for leave to file an amended complaint. We affirm. United States Court of Appeals

Fifth Circuit 

### F I L E D October 3, 2008 Charles R. Fulbruge III ClerkNo. 08-20131

1 Lewis v. Fresne

, 252 F.3d 352, 356 (5th Cir. 2001).

2 Ryland v. Shapiro, 708 F.2d 967, 973 n.7 (5th Cir. 1983) (“An allegation that the defendants are motived by some class based discrimination is essential to the maintenance of a suit under the second portion of section 1582(2)”).

3 Atkinson v. Denton Pub. Co., 84 F.3d 144, 147 (5th Cir. 1996). 2 The district court dismissed Daniel Morris’ RICO action against defendants because Morris lacked standing. Morris also maintained two Louisiana causes of action. The RICO action provided the only ground for federal jurisdiction over Morris’ claims and the district court alsodismissed the supplemental state law claims. Morris does not appeal the dismissal of the RICO claim or state law claims. Subsequently, Morris sought leave to file an amended complaint. In the proposed amendment, Morris alleged that in a previous Louisiana state court action, several ofthedefendants i n this action had used threats and intimidation tocoerce him to abandon the litigation and to hinder his production ofevidence. Morris asserts these actions were in derogation of 42 U.S.C. § 1985(2). The district court’s denial ofleave toamend the complaint is reviewed for abuse of discretion. 1 In denying the motion, the district court noted that the amended complaint failed as a matter of lawto state a claim for reliefunder 42 U.S.C. § 1985(2) because Morris made no allegation of racial or class-based animus. 2 Morris’ amendment would have been futile. Moreover, Morris waited six months from the inception of the action and until after dismissal of his only federal claim to attempt to add the obstruction claim. We cannot find the district court’s denial of Morris’ motion an abuse of discretion. Morris also claims the district court denied him the use of discovery to augment his amended complaint. Discovery matters are reviewed for an abuse of discretion. 3 The record contains no motions to allow or compel discovery following the dismissal of the RICO and state law actions. Therefore, there isNo. 08-20131

3 no basis on which we could rule that the district court abused its discretion. AFFIRMED.
1 The HONORABLE ROBERT T. DAWSON, United States District Judge for the Western District of Arkansas. 

## United States Court of Appeals FOR THE EIGHTH CIRCUIT

___________ No. 01-3358

___________ United States of America, * * Appellee, * Appeal from the United States * District Court for the v. * Western District of Arkansas. * Tammie Nannette Fryman, * [UNPUBLISHED] * Appellant. *

___________ Submitted: February 4, 2002 Filed: February 4, 2002

___________ Before LOKEN, BEAM, and RILEY, Circuit Judges.

___________ PER CURIAM. Following a hearing, the district court 1 revoked Tammie Nannette Fryman’s probation based on the court’s finding that she had violated various probation conditions. Without objection from the parties, the court sentenced Fryman to 12 months imprisonment and 1 year supervised release. Fryman appeals her revocation sentence, arguing that the district court committed plain error by believing itself bound by the Chapter 7 Sentencing Guidelines policy statements.-2- We cannot agree with Fryman’s argument. The court’s comments appear to us simply to reflect the court’s understanding that it was required to consider the relevant Guidelines recommendation on a revocation sentence. See U.S.S.G. § 7B1.4(a), p.s. (table); United States v. Levi , 2 F.3d 842, 845 (8th Cir. 1993). Further, in these circumstances, any misunderstanding on the part of the district court would not rise to the level of plain error. See United States v. Montanye , 996 F.2d 190, 192 (8th Cir. 1993) (en banc). Accordingly, we affirm. A true copy. Attest: CLERK, U.S. COURT OF APPEALS, EIGHTH CIRCUIT.
Exhibit 32.01




CERTIFICATION OF CHIEF EXECUTIVE OFFICER
PURSUANT TO
18 U.S.C. SECTION 1350,
AS ADOPTED PURSUANT TO
SECTION 906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002


I, Tom Hofer certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, as adopted pursuant
to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that the Quarterly Report of
Vendalux Corporation on Form 10-QSB for the quarterly period ended June 30,
2004 fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) or 15(d) of the
Securities Exchange Act of 1934 and that information contained in such Form
10-QSB fairly presents in all material respects the financial condition and
results of operations of Vendalux Corporation.

By:       /s/
   ------------------------------
Name: Tom Hofer
Title:   Chief Executive Officer


A signed original of this written statement required by Section 906 of the
Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002 has been provided to the registrant and will be
retained by the registrant and furnished to the Securities and Exchange
Commission or its staff upon request.
News United States Air Force
 Name, rank, service and badges will be more identifiable on OCPPublished July 23, 2020
                        
                        By   Secretary of the Air Force Public Affairs
                **ARLINGTON, Va. (AFNS) --**
                Air and Space Professionals will soon be more recognizable in their Operational Camouflage Pattern uniforms.

OCP rank insignia, badges, name, and service tapes will now feature a lighter, three-color background pattern, versus the current seven-color pattern, to increase readability and ease rank recognition.



“We received significant feedback that prompted this update,” said Lisa Truesdale, Air Force military force management policy deputy director. “The current rank insignia, badges, name, and service tapes on the OCP uniform are sometimes challenging to see against a seven-color background. Simplifying these features on a lighter, three-color pattern—while not compromising the overall functionality of the uniform—will improve our situational awareness in day-to-day interactions.”



The Air Force name and service tapes will retain their current spice brown letter stitching, while Space Force versions will still feature space blue stitching. Stitching for the Air Force rank insignia and badges will remain spice brown.



The Army and Air Force Exchange Service has already begun to transition inventories to the new three-color pattern name and service tapes. The Defense Logistics Agency is placing orders for the three-color pattern as seven-color backgrounds are phased out; some of the three-color insignia name tags should be in the inventory by Nov. 2020.



TheU.S. Air Force Academy implemented the uniform change for the June 2020 class and Basic Military Training is on target for Oct. 2020.



The current seven-color background rank insignia, badges, name and service tapes are and will remain, authorized for wear.AFWN 



USAF 



AF 



Air Force 



OCP 



name 



rank 



Service 



badge 



Operational Camouflage Pattern 



insignia 



service tapes 



three color 



seven color 



pattern 



spice brown 



space blue 



space force 



uniforms 



readability
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<ARTICLE>  5
<LEGEND>
THIS SCHEDULE CONTAINS SUMMARY FINANCIAL INFORMATION EXTRACTED
FROM NOVA INTERNATIONAL FILMS, INC.'S QUARTERLY REPORT FOR THE
QUARTER ENDED JULY 31, 1999 AND IS QUALIFIED IN ITS ENTIRETY BY
REFERENCE TO SUCH FINANCIAL STATEMENTS.
</LEGEND>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                           9-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                       OCT-31-1999
<PERIOD-END>                            JUL-31-1999
<CASH>                                  1,482
<SECURITIES>                            0
<RECEIVABLES>                           0
<ALLOWANCES>                            0
<INVENTORY>                             0
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                        1,482
<PP&E>                                  0
<DEPRECIATION>                          0
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                          1,482
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                   2,424
<BONDS>                                 0
<COMMON>                                736
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                   0
<PREFERRED>                             0
<OTHER-SE>                              8,197,260
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>            1,482
<SALES>                                 0
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                        0
<CGS>                                   0
<TOTAL-COSTS>                           0
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                        3,014
<LOSS-PROVISION>                        0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                      0
<INCOME-PRETAX>                         (3,014)
<INCOME-TAX>                            0
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                     (3,014)
<DISCONTINUED>                          0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                         0
<CHANGES>                               0
<NET-INCOME>                            (3,014)
<EPS-BASIC>                           .000
<EPS-DILUTED>                           .000


</TABLE>
```

[Congressional Record Volume 141, Number 79 (Friday, May 12, 1995)]
[Senate]
[Page S6601]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]

                   EXECUTIVE AND OTHER COMMUNICATIONS

  The following communications were laid before the Senate, together 
with accompanying papers, reports, and documents, which were referred 
as indicated:

       EC-911. A communication from the Chairman of the Council of 
     the District of Columbia, transmitting, pursuant to law, 
     copies of DC Act 11-40, adopted by the Council on April 4, 
     1995; to the Committee on Governmental Affairs.
       EC-912. A communication from the Chairman of the Council of 
     the District of Columbia, transmitting, pursuant to law, 
     copies of DC Act 11-41, adopted by the Council on April 4, 
     1995; to the Committee on Governmental Affairs.
       EC-913. A communication from the Chairman of the Council of 
     the District of Columbia, transmitting, pursuant to law, 
     copies of DC Act 11-39, adopted by the Council on April 4, 
     1995; to the Committee on Governmental Affairs.
     

                          ____________________
```
EXHIBIT 99.2


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


In connection with the quarterly report of Rockport Healthcare Group, Inc. (the
"Company") on Form 10-QSB for the period ended June 30, 2002 as filed with the
Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the "Report"), I, Larry
Hinson, Chief Financial Officer of the Company, certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C.
section 1350, as adopted pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of
2002, that to the best of my knowledge:

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

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



/s/ Larry K. Hinson
-------------------------------------
Larry Hinson, Chief Financial Officer
August 14, 2002


<PAGE>
IA 

110TH CONGRESS 

1ST SESSION H. J. RES. 14 

Concerning the use of military force by the United States against Iran. 

IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES 

JANUARY 12, 2007 

Mr. JONES of North Carolina introduced the following joint resolution; which 

was referred to the Committee on Foreign Affairs 

JOINT RESOLUTION 

Concerning the use of military force by the United States 

against Iran. 

1 Resolved by the Senate and House of Representatives 

2 of the United States of America in Congress assembled, 

3 SECTION 1. REQUIREMENTS CONCERNING THE USE OF 

4 MILITARY FORCE AGAINST IRAN. 

5 (a) RULE OF CONSTRUCTION.—No provision of law 

6 enacted before the date of the enactment of this joint reso7 lution shall be construed to authorize the use of military 

8 force by the United States against Iran. 

9 (b) REQUIREMENTS.—Absent a national emergency 

10 created by attack by Iran, or a demonstrably imminent 

11 attack by Iran, upon the United States, its territories or 


bajohnson on PROD1PC77 with BILLS
2 

•HJ 14 IH 

1 possessions or its armed forces, the President shall consult 

2 with Congress, and receive specific authorization pursuant 

3 to law from Congress, prior to initiating any use of mili4 tary force against Iran. 

Æ 


bajohnson on PROD1PC77 with BILLS
Document Headings

                    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

###### Federal Emergency Management Agency

          - [Internal Agency Docket No. FEMA-1930-DR; Docket ID FEMA-2010-0002]

# AGENCY:

Federal Emergency Management Agency, DHS.

# ACTION:

Notice.

# SUMMARY:

This notice amends the notice of a major disaster declaration for the State of Iowa (FEMA-1930-DR), dated July 29, 2010, and related determinations.

# DATES:

*Effective Date:*                         September 7, 2010.                    

# FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

Peggy Miller, Office of Response and Recovery, Federal Emergency Management Agency, 500 C Street, SW., Washington, DC 20472, (202) 646-3886.

# SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

The Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA) hereby gives notice that pursuant to the authority vested in the Administrator, under Executive Order 12148, as amended, Michael R. Scott, of FEMA is appointed to act as the Federal Coordinating Officer for this disaster.

This action terminates the appointment of Thomas A. Hall as Federal Coordinating Officer for this disaster.

(The following Catalog of Federal Domestic Assistance  Numbers (CFDA) are to be used for reporting and drawing funds: 97.030, Community Disaster Loans; 97.031, Cora Brown Fund; 97.032, Crisis Counseling; 97.033, Disaster Legal Services; 97.034, Disaster Unemployment Assistance (DUA); 97.046, Fire Management Assistance Grant; 97.048, Disaster Housing Assistance to Individuals and Households in Presidentially Declared Disaster Areas; 97.049, Presidentially Declared Disaster Assistance—Disaster Housing Operations for Individuals and Households; 97.050, Presidentially Declared Disaster Assistance to Individuals and Households—Other Needs; 97.036, Disaster Grants—Public Assistance (Presidentially Declared Disasters); 97.039, Hazard Mitigation Grant.)

W. Craig Fugate,

Administrator, Federal Emergency Management Agency.

[FR Doc. 2010-23274 Filed 9-16-10; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 9111-23-P