alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
EX-10.3.1



 Exhibit 10.3(1) 

DIREXION SHARES ETF TRUST II 

FIRST AMENDMENT TO THE FUND ADMINISTRATION SERVICING AGREEMENT 

THIS FIRST AMENDMENT, dated as of July 7, 2014, to the Fund Administration Servicing Agreement dated as of January 28, 2014
(the “Agreement”), is entered into by and among DIREXION SHARES ETF TRUST II, a Delaware statutory trust (the “Trust”), DIREXION ASSET MANAGEMENT, LLC (the “Sponsor”) and U.S. BANCORP FUND SERVICES,
LLC, a Wisconsin limited liability company (“Fund Services”). 
 RECITALS 

WHEREAS, the parties have entered into the Agreement; and 

WHEREAS, the parties desire to amend the preamble of the Agreement to delete the listing of each series under the Trust and to delete
Exhibit A; and 
 WHEREAS, Section 12 of the Agreement allows for its amendment by a written instrument executed by all parties.

 NOW, THEREFORE, the parties agree that Exhibit A, the listing of the Funds, is hereby deleted from the Agreement and the
first and fourth paragraphs of the preamble of the Agreement are hereby superseded and replaced with the following: 
 THIS AGREEMENT
is made and entered into as of this 28th day of January, 2014, by and among DIREXION SHARES ETF TRUST II, a Delaware statutory trust (the “Trust”) acting for and on behalf of each
series as are currently authorized and issued by the Trust or may be authorized and issued by the Trust subsequent to the date of this Agreement (each a “Fund” and collectively the “Funds”), DIREXION ASSET MANAGEMENT, LLC,
the sponsor of the Funds (“Sponsor”) and U.S. BANCORP FUND SERVICES, LLC, a Wisconsin limited liability company (“Fund Services”). 

WHEREAS, the Trust and Sponsor desire to retain Fund Services to provide fund administration services to each Fund; 

Except to the extent amended hereby, the Agreement shall remain in full force and effect. 

IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the parties hereto have caused this First Amendment to be executed by a duly authorized officer on one or more
counterparts as of the day and year first written above. 
  
  

									
	 DIREXION SHARES ETF TRUST II

ASSOCIATION
	 		 	U.S. BANCORP FUND SERVICES, LLC
					
	By:	 	/s/ Patrick Rudnick	 		 	By:	 	/s/ Michael R. McVoy
	Name:	 	Patrick Rudnick	 		 	Name:	 	Michael R. McVoy
	Title:	 	Chief Financial Officer	 		 	Title:	 	Executive Vice President

 (signatures continued on the following page) 

  

					
	7/2014 – Direxion Shares ETF Trust II	  	1	  	










			
	DIREXION ASSET MANAGEMENT, LLC
		
	By:	 	/s/ Patrick Rudnick
	Name:	 	Patrick Rudnick
	Title:	 	Chief Financial Officer


  

					
	7/2014 – Direxion Shares ETF Trust II	  	2
#### Ft. Worth & Denver City R. R. v. Lamphear & Sanders.

(No. 2640, R. Book No. 4, p. 276.)

Appeal from Wichita County.

April 7, 1883.

Opinion by

Willson, J.

§ 308. *Jurisdiction; judgment by default.*Appellant was not cited to appear in the county court and answer the opposition to the award of the commissioners filed by appellees. [Rev. Stats, art. 4202.] Without service upon appellant of such citation, the court had no jurisdiction to render judgment by default against appellant. That appellant had also filed opposition to the award would not, we think, dispense with the citation required by law. Non-appearance by appellant to prosecute such opposition would not warrant the court in proceeding to a trial of the case upon the opposition of appellees, without citation served upon appellant. We think the judgment is erroneous in another respect. It should have described the land condemned, and vested in appellant the right of way therein. [Rev. Stats, art. 4208; Central R. R. Co. v. Merkle, 32 Tex. 723.]

Reversed and remanded.
Exhibit 35.5



|     |  |                                                                                   
|---- |  | ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------
|LOGO |  | Corporate Trust Services
 MAC R1204-010
9062 Old Annapolis Road Columbia, MD
21045
|     | 
|     |  | Tel: 410 884 2000                                                                 
|     |  | Fax: 410 715 2380                                                                 

Citibank, N.A.

388 Greenwich
Street

14th Floor

New York, New York 10013



|RE: | Annual Statement of Compliance for Sequoia Mortgage Trust 2011-2 Mortgage Pass-Through Certificates, Series 2011-2
|--- | ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Per the Amended and Restated Pooling and Servicing dated as of January 1, 2014 (the Agreement), the undersigned, a duly authorized officer of
Wells Fargo Bank, N.A., as Master Servicer (Wells Fargo), hereby certifies as follows as of and for the year ending December 31, 2014 (the Reporting Period):

(a) A review of Wells Fargos activities during the Reporting Period and of its performance under the Agreement has been made under such
officers supervision; and

(b) To the best of such officers knowledge, based on such review, Wells Fargo has fulfilled all of
its obligations under the Agreement in all material respects throughout the Reporting Period.

February 24, 2015



|                  
|------------------
|/s/ Kristen Cronin
|Kristen Cronin    
|Vice President    



|                       |  |     
|---------------------- |  | ----
|Wells Fargo Bank, N.A. |  | LOGO
EXHIBIT 32.a

                            CERTIFICATION PURSUANT TO
                 18 U.S.C. SECTION 1350, AS ADOPTED PURSUANT TO
                  SECTION 906 0F THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002


     In  connection  with the  Quarterly  Report  of  Westwood  One,  Inc.  (the
"Company")  on Form 10-Q for the period  ending March 31, 2005 as filed with the
Securities and Exchange  Commission  (the  "Report"),  I, Shane  Coppola,  Chief
Executive Officer of the Company, certify that to 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/ Shane Coppola
-----------------
Shane Coppola
May 10, 2005

This statement is being  furnished to the Securities and Exchange  Commission as
an exhibit to this Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q.

                                       21
News United States Air Force
 Around the Air Force: AGR Changes, Officer Exchange, CENTCOM Bomber Task ForcePublished Sept. 16, 2022
                        
                        By Staff Sgt. Kahdija Slaughter
                        
                        
                        Air Force TV
                **FORT GEORGE G. MEADE, Md. (AFNS) --**
                In this week’s look Around the Air Force, changes are coming to the Active Guard and Reserve program starting Oct. 1, an officer exchange with Australia helps the U.S. Air Force get ready for new aircraft, and Air Force Global Strike Command takes part in a Bomber Task Force mission over the Middle East. (Hosted by Airman 1st Class Saomy Sabournin)



For previous episodes, click **here** for the Air Force TV page.
Related links:**- AGR program changes on the horizon****- Military Pilot Exchange Program supports USAF E-7A acquisition****- US, partners conduct Middle East BTF through air, land, sea**USAF 



AF 



Air Force 



ATAF 



Around the Air Force 



AFTV
IN THE DISTRICT COURT OF APPEAL OF THE STATE O F FLORIDA FIFTH DISTRICT NOT FINAL UNTIL TIME E XPIRES TO FILE MOTION FOR REHEARING AND DISPOSITION THEREOF IF FILED W ATEKA N. THOMASON ,

Appellant ,
v. STAT E OF FLORIDA, Cas e No

. 5D 22 -6 07 L T Case No s. 2017 -3 00011 -C FDB

2 017 -3 00025 -C FDB 2017 -3 00027 -C FDB 2017 -3 00036 -C FDB 20 17 -3 00050 -C FDB Appellee. ________________________________/ Decision filed June 28, 2022 3.850 Appeal from the Circuit Court for Volusia County , Elizabeth A. Blackburn, J udge. Wateka N. Thomason, Oc ala, pro se. No Appearance for Appellee.

PER CURIAM.

A FFIRMED.

COHEN , EDWARDS and EISNAUGLE , JJ. , concur.
i v 

OFFICE OF THE ATTORNEY GENERAL OF TEXAS 

AUSTI@ 

Len Aleup A Zxsoutlvti Secretary-Director 

State Commission ror the Blind 

Land Cifice Bullding 

Austin, Texas /--A\ 

Dear Sir: 

s irom'the Fed9&k&estfng the oplna antistion ;readrr'as 

Qm t&is~ department whether Seos~paeaad by the:Forty-second 

sq3slcu’l931, ~W,O@ld, pewit:. 

pt ~Sndb irdm +ho~ S&gal 

0 ids the' .La&i+8ure ,i 

federal .goye&ae'nt.'~and~, tag make, Trbports.:$~ ,~tbe iedera1 go+e'rment. We bel~ieve thtit.undir tha $tio~lsiotis or-ssctiim 2 of the law creating ~ths Stata 

Cods~.l.on for the Blind, the sa.ia State Co~i~ss~on 
r honorable &On Alsup, Page 2 

i r 

for the Blind Is given the authority to aooept 

-:.3unds~ from th&federal government even though the 

federal govertient is not specifically referred 

to In the law. 

, 

Y3i.&a there is a~ possibility that iraderal 

lsgislatlon ,wlll be .~+sed writhing the next few 

weehe.lxi which this agency~m&y be given the authorltyto administer, additional work. for the 

blind raith .funds reoe%vLvd from the federal government, y would apprecia,te 

thlrc matter.” 

your prompt reply to 

T&s Department. held In opinion Bo. O-2070 that 

“the estate Commission ror the, Ej.&$-has speoific statutory 

authority to rdoeive girts, bequests, or devioee from inal-: 

vldnale; as&oa&atlona or co~poratbons, and may spei3a thein 

.l?i ad&#lant$a: Mth- ~the qrovlglgns’~,~~~ th!h -k.alP.~ ,A.rtlole 

*07&i !?p&+%i~;~~at~a -Qi.yfi :St&ntea. ,‘i in 

authority .to denier ist0.a oontxaot entitled ‘~Wentral. Control 

Plan” aa ~D@%I&?& hy the Utited States Offios-Q Educatfon, 

Department of :the .InteriorL Aa the State. Coma&selon for the 

Blind has a&dfi-o atatutory’au’thorlty~ to’raoaive gifts, bsqaests ,oxi devises dDm individuals, assooiations ~01‘ corporatbns, and may expend them In aooordanoe with the provisions 

of the Aot and as the Commission may also bake euoh measures 

in oooperation with other authorities, as ‘it may deem advisabla for the prevention of bllndneae or conservation of eyesight, and in approplste oasse, fsr the eduoation of children 

. 
. . 

< 

I. 

: 

,. 

anq'tha- vocatioraIlg@anoe of adults having seriously defectiv& sight, it is our;opinlbn that the above stated question 

should be ansv&re% .in.~the affirmative an&-la so answered. 

In.oonneotion with the foregoing we direct your atbent&p..to our opipion 310. @-ii!J$i~~ with.referen~e to the prooedure for the State %oml&sloh for:'the'.Bllna to follow In 

rdoeivlng mcinles donated;' .; 

Youra very truly 

APPROVED NMR 19., X943 

ATTOREEP Gb3EML OF T&AS ,A. 

a/s 

Ard.311 Wi&llams 

AssIstant 

--. .
#### H. L. Rankin v. Filburn & Ivers.

(No. 1094, Op. Book No. 2, p. 459.)

Error from Waller County.

Opinion by

White, P. J.

§ 797. Judgment• *by confession; where made under power of attorney;*affidavit, *etc.,, not necessary, when, etc.*Appellant, after being sued and served with citation in the suit, authorized an attorney, by power of attorney, to appear and confess judgment in favor of appellees for the amount of their claim. The attorney appeared and filed his power of attorney in the cause, and confessed the judgment, but there was no affidavit made of the justice of the debt, and no recital of the contents of the power of attorney was made in the judgment. *Held,*articles 13-17 and 1318 of the Revised Statutes must be construed *441together, and they have reference solely to cases where parties not served with process confess judgment through an attorney. In this case the defendant had been served with citation, and after such service had executed the power of attorney authorizing his attorney to appear and confess judgment, and it was not necessary to the validity of such judgment that the power of attorney should be acknowledged or proved for record, or its execution proved, nor that its contents should be recited in the judgment, nor that an affidavit of the justice of the plaintiff’s debt should be made and fifed in the case. [Chambers v. Hodges, 23 Tex. 104; Merritt v. Clow, 2 Tex. 582; Flannagan v. Brunner, 10 Tex. 257; Gerald v. Burthee, 29 Tex. 202; Schroeder v. Fromme, 31 Tex. 602.]

March 23, 1881.

§ 798. *Excessive judgment; cleminimis, etc. ¡remittitur.*The judgment was excessive to the amount of §1.14. *Held,*the maxim *de minimis non curat lex*might well be invoked, but inasmuch as defendants in error have entered a *remittitur*here, the judgment will be reformed so as to give the plaintiff in error the benefit of the *remittitur*without’ depriving the defendants in error of their right to recover the costs of this appeal. [Wright v. Bonta, 19 Tex. 385.]

Affirmed.
#### KAREN W. COOPER v. NORTON J. COOPER.

February 28, 1984.

Petition for certification granted.
Exhibit
      32.1





**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 U.S. Microbics, Inc., (the "Company")
      on
      Form 10-QSB for the period ending June 30, 2006, as filed with the Securities
      and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the "Report"), Robert C. Brehm,
      Chief Executive Officer of the Company, certify to the best of my knowledge,
      pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, as adopted pursuant to Section 906 of the
      Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that:





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





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


Date: August
                14, 2006
              By:
              /s/ Robert
                C.
                BrehmRobert C. Brehm
                Chief Executive
                  Officer
```

[Congressional Record Volume 141, Number 85 (Monday, May 22, 1995)]
[Daily Digest]
[Page D643]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]

Committee Meetings
(Committees not listed did not meet)
APPROPRIATIONS--AOC/GPO
Committee on Appropriations: Subcommittee on Legislative Branch held 
hearings on proposed budget estimates for fiscal year 1996, receiving 
testimony in behalf of their respective activities from George M. 
White, Architect of the Capitol; and Michael F. DiMario, Public 
Printer, Government Printing Office.
  Subcommittee will meet again on Friday, May 26.
CUBAN LIBERTY AND DEMOCRATIC SOLIDARITY ACT
Committee on Foreign Relations: Subcommittee on Western Hemisphere and 
Peace Corps Affairs held hearings on S. 381, to strengthen 
international sanctions against the Castro government in Cuba, and to 
develop a plan to support a transition government leading to a 
democratically elected government in Cuba, receiving testimony from 
Senator Simon; Representatives Torricelli and Menendez; Peter Tarnoff, 
Under Secretary of State for Political Affairs; and R. Richard Newcomb, 
Director, Office of Foreign Assets Control, Department of the Treasury.
  Hearings resume on Wednesday, June 7.
NOMINATIONS
Committee on Governmental Affairs: Committee concluded hearings on the 
nominations of Inez Smith Reid, to be an Associate Judge of the 
District of Columbia Court of Appeals, and Ronna Lee Beck, Linda Kay 
Davis, and Eric Tyson Washington, each to be an Associate Judge of the 
Superior Court of the District of Columbia, after the nominees 
testified and answered questions in their own behalf.
FEDERAL PENSION REFORM
Committee on Governmental Affairs: Subcommittee on Post Office and 
Civil Service held hearings on proposals to reform the Federal pension 
system, focusing on how Federal pension plans compare to private sector 
plans, receiving testimony from Johnny C. Finch, Assistant Comptroller 
General, and Bob Shelton, Assistant Division Director, Federal Human 
Resource Management Issues, both of the General Government Division, 
General Accounting Office; and Carolyn Merck, Specialist in Social 
Legislation, Education and Public Welfare Division, Congressional 
Research Service.
  Subcommittee will meet again on Monday, June 19.
```
- 399 -

Nebraska Supreme Court Advance Sheets

309 Nebraska Reports

STATE v. MALONE

Cite as 309 Neb. 399

State of Nebraska, appellee, v. 

Kevin W. Malone, appellant.

___ N.W.2d ___

Filed June 4, 2021. Nos. S-20-118, S-20-460. 

supplemental opinion

Appeals from the District Court for Douglas County: Shelly 

R. Stratman, Judge. Former opinion modified. Motion for 

rehearing overruled.

Richard L. Boucher and Bradley H. Supernaw, of Boucher 

Law Firm, for appellant.

Douglas J. Peterson, Attorney General, and Melissa R. 

Vincent for appellee.

Heavican, C.J., Miller-Lerman, Cassel, Stacy, Funke, 

Papik, and Freudenberg, JJ.

Per Curiam.

This case is before us on a motion for rehearing filed by the 

appellant, Kevin W. Malone, concerning our opinion in State 

v. Malone, 308 Neb. 929, 957 N.W.2d 892 (2021). We find 

no substantive merit to Malone’s motion and overrule it, but 

modify the opinion as follows:

In the analysis section, under the heading “2. Postconvic

tion Relief” and the subheading “(b) Claim of Prosecutorial 

Misconduct,” id. at 962, 957 N.W.2d at 920, we withdraw the 

second paragraph and substitute the following:

Nebraska Supreme Court Online Library

www.nebraska.gov/apps-courts-epub/

07/30/2021 09:10 AM CDT
- 400 -

Nebraska Supreme Court Advance Sheets

309 Nebraska Reports

STATE v. MALONE

Cite as 309 Neb. 399

The district court first rejected this argument as procedurally barred. However, Malone had amended his 

motion to add an allegation that his appellate counsel had 

been ineffective for failing to raise the claims of prosecutorial misconduct on direct appeal. The district court 

alternatively rejected Malone’s claim, reasoning that even 

if not procedurally barred, the claim failed to “set forth 

the facts and applicable law to establish an objection 

based on any of these prosecutorial [misconduct] claims 

would . . . have been successful.” We agree.

The remainder of the opinion shall remain unmodified.

Former opinion modified.

Motion for rehearing overruled.
IV 

110TH CONGRESS 

1ST SESSION H. CON. RES. 87 

Supporting the goals and ideals of a world day of remembrance for road 

crash victims. 

IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES 

MARCH 8, 2007 

Mr. WEXLER (for himself, Mr. BURTON of Indiana, Mr. TOM DAVIS of Virginia, Mr. LATOURETTE, Mr. PAYNE, Mr. BOREN, Mr. SERRANO, Ms. 

MCCOLLUM of Minnesota, Mr. VAN HOLLEN, Ms. LEE, Mr. ENGEL, Mr. 

CROWLEY, Mr. MORAN of Virginia, Mr. BRALEY of Iowa, Mr. HASTINGS

of Florida, and Mr. LANTOS) submitted the following concurrent resolution; which was referred to the Committee on Oversight and Government 

Reform 

CONCURRENT RESOLUTION 

Supporting the goals and ideals of a world day of 

remembrance for road crash victims. 

Whereas 40,000 people in the United States, and 1,200,000 

people globally, die in road crashes each year; 

Whereas another 20,000,000 to 50,000,000 people globally 

are injured each year as a result of speeding motor vehicles, the increasing use of motor vehicles, and rapid urbanization; 

Whereas the World Health Organization has predicted that 

by the year 2020 the annual number of deaths from 

mstockstill on PROD1PC66 with BILLS

2 

•HCON 87 IH 

motor vehicle crashes is likely to surpass the annual 

number of deaths from AIDS; 

Whereas the current estimated cost of motor vehicle crashes 

worldwide is $518,000,000,000 annually, representing between 3 and 5 percent of the gross domestic product of 

each nation; 

Whereas over 90 percent of motorist-related deaths occur in 

low- and middle-income countries; 

Whereas according to the World Health Organization motorist-related deaths and costs continue to rise in these 

countries due to a lack of appropriate road engineering 

and injury prevention programs in public health sectors; 

and 

Whereas the United Nations General Assembly adopted a resolution designating the third Sunday of November as a 

day of remembrance for road crash victims and their 

families, and called on nations globally to improve road 

safety: Now, therefore, be it 

1 Resolved by the House of Representatives (the Senate 

2 concurring), That Congress— 

3 (1) supports the goals and ideals of a world day 

4 of remembrance for road crash victims; and 

5 (2) encourages the people of the United States 

6 to support and participate in programs and activities 

7 to commemorate a world day of remembrance for 

8 road crash victims with appropriate ceremonies, pro9 grams, and other activities. 

Æ 

mstockstill on PROD1PC66 with BILLS
IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE ELEVENTH CIRCUIT

 

No. 10-14920

 

(D.C. Docket No. 6:07-cv-00897-JA-KRS)

WYDELL EVANS,

Petitioner-Appellant,

versus

SECRETARY,

DEPARTMENT OF CORRECTIONS,

Respondent-Appellee.

---------------------------

On Appeal from the United States District Court for the

Middle District of Florida

--------------------------

(Opinion May 23, 2012, 681 F.3d 1241, 11 Cir. 2012) th

(July 13, 2012)

Before DUBINA, Chief Judge, TJOFLAT, CARNES, BARKETT, HULL, MARCUS, WILSON, PRYOR,

MARTIN and JORDAN, Circuit Judges.

B Y T H E C O U R T :

A member of this Court in active service having requested a poll on the suggestions of rehearing en

banc and a majority of the judges in this Court in active service having voted in favor of granting a rehearing en banc,

IT IS ORDERED that the above cause shall be reheard by this court en banc. The previous panel's

opinion is hereby VACATED.

Case: 10-14920 Date Filed: 07/13/2012 Page: 1 of 1