alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
<PAGE>

                                                                   Exhibit 10.10

                                     Patriot
                             The Patriot Group, LLC



                                November 8, 2004

                   American Business Financial Services, Inc.
  Residential Mortgage Loan Warehouse and Residual Master Repurchase Agreement
  ----------------------------------------------------------------------------

American Business Financial Services, Inc.
The Wanamaker Building
100 Penn Squire East, 8th Floor
Philadelphia, Pennsylvania 19109

Attention:    Anthony J. Santilli, Chairman, President, Chief Executive Officer
              and Chief Operating Officer

Ladies and Gentlemen:

         Reference is made to the Commitment Letter dated October 26, 2004
executed and delivered by The Patriot Group, LLC, on behalf of itself, its
affiliates and subsidiaries ("Patriot"), and accepted by American Business
Financial Services, Inc. (together with its affiliates and subsidiaries, "ABFS")
on October 27, 2004, as amended by an exchange of e-mails on November 5, 2004
(the "Commitment Letter"). Terms not defined herein shall have the meanings
ascribed to them in the Commitment Letter.

         This letter constitutes written notification that Patriot has obtained
the approval of the Committed Facility by its investment committee within the
time frame required by the Commitment Letter and hereby confirms its commitment
to execute the Committed Facility on the terms and subject to the conditions set
forth in the Commitment Letter. Accordingly, Patriot shall permanently retain
the Commitment Fee of $950,000 previously paid to Patriot.

         At the present time, all of the conditions to execution and delivery of
the Committed Facility have not been met. In order to be of assistance to ABFS,
Patriot hereby extends its deadline for execution and delivery of definitive
documentation for the Committed Facility and satisfaction of initial conditions
of the Wet Warehouse and Residual Repo to November 22, 2004. Moreover, the
deadline for the credit of $250,000 toward the Closing Fee (as contemplated in
Annex I to Exhibit A-1 of the Commitment Letter) is hereby extended to November
22, 2004.

         Patriot also remains interested in providing an interim residual
repurchase facility to ABFS if agreement is reached as to the size and terms of,
and additional collateral for, this facility, and ABFS can obtain the necessary
consents.


<PAGE>

         We await your guidance as to whether and how ABFS wishes to proceed
with respect to an interim residual repurchase facility and look forward to
working with you to complete the Committed Facility.

                                           Very truly yours,

                                           THE PATRIOT GROUP, LLC



                                           By:    /s/   Charles A. Forbes, Jr.
                                                  ------------------------------
                                           Name:  Charles A. Forbes, Jr.
                                           Title: Co-Chief Executive Officer
News United States Air Force
 Spangdahlem refuels BTF bombers with VIPER kit for first timePublished Oct. 14, 2021
                        
                        By 1st Lt. Megan Morrissey
                        
                        
                        52nd Fighter Wing
                **SPANGDAHLEM AIR BASE, Germany (AFNS)  --**
                Two **B-1B Lancers** from **Dyess Air Force Base**’s 9th Expeditionary Bomb Squadron, currently operating from Royal Air Force Fairford, England, conducted hot-pit refueling using the innovative **Versatile Integrated Partner Equipment Refueling** (VIPER) kit at **Spangdahlem Air Base**, Germany, Oct. 11.
Spangdahlem AB employed the VIPER kit by refueling B-1s participating in **Bomber Task Force - Europe 22-1**, following NATO allied integration during an operation in the Baltic Region. This marks the first time the refueling system was used outside of **F-16 Fighting Falcons** in the **U.S. Air Forces in Europe–Air Forces Africa** theatre.
“The innovation is hopefully going to change the standard for how we do our jobs,” said Master Sgt. Jason Yunker, 52nd Logistic Readiness Squadron operations superintendent and VIPER kit co-creator. “Today was monumental in showcasing the VIPER kit’s ability to put the ‘agile’ in **Agile Combat Employment**, and not just supporting our F-16s, but with any aircraft.”
In February 2021, the VIPER kit was a top-five finalist in the **AFWERX Spark Tank**and received $1.2 million in funding to complete the project.
In June 2020, Polish Air Force members assisted in fueling a U.S. Air Force F-16 during one of the 480th Fighter Squadron’s Aviation Detachment Rotations, using Polish fuel trucks. This marked the first time a non-U.S. Air Force fuel truck was used and a large step towards partner nation integration.
“The Agile Combat Employment concept ensures our multi-capable Airmen can sustain and execute missions from austere locations throughout Europe,” said Col. Leslie Hauck, 52nd Fighter Wing commander. “Spangdahlem’s strategic location supports a range of fighter, mobility and bomber missions and the Sabers building the innovative advancements our forces need to support the all-domain warfighter.”
Spangdahlem’s support in a BTF mission sustains the **European Defense Initiative**’s objective to actively develop new warfighting concepts to be employed alongside U.S. allies and partners throughout the European theatre.FS 



USAF 



AF 



Air Force 



USAFE 



Spangdahlem Air Base 



VIPER kit 



Bomber Task Force - Europe 22-1 



BTF 



Agile Combat Employment 



MCA 



Multi-Capable Airmen 



innovation 



Allies 



partnerships
News United States Air Force
 Air Force confirms Wright-Patterson AFB to host F-35 support organizationPublished May 30, 2019
                        
                        By 88th Air Base Wing Public Affairs
                **WRIGHT-PATTERSON AIR FORCE BASE, Ohio (AFNS) --**
                Outgoing Secretary of the Air Force Heather Wilson confirmed the selection of Wright Patterson Air Force Base, to host the F-35 Hybrid Product Support Integrator Organization.
The decision confirms completion of the strategic basing process which in December 2018 identified Wright-Patterson AFB as the preferred location and an environmental assessment which found no significant impact.
The F-35 Hybrid Product Support Integrator organization is already operational in Crystal City, Virginia, where it was established in 2016 as part of the F-35 Joint Program Office. There are currently HPSI personnel at 16 locations globally.
The HPSI is the Joint Program Office’s sustainment execution arm for the entire F-35 fleet to include joint and international partner aircraft. It is focused on the delivery of readiness and sustainment performance for the F-35 user while reducing life-cycle costs.
A planning team with the Air Force Life Cycle Management Center is now preparing for the HPSI organization’s reception and beddown at Area A of Wright-Patterson AFB.
When fully staffed, the F-35 Hybrid Product Support Organization will comprise 440 people, with most located at Wright-Patterson AFB. It will include representatives of the Air Force, Navy, Marine Corps, partner nations and industry personnel who will all report to the Product Support Manager in the F-35 Joint Program Office.
The F-35 HPSI will integrate support across the supply chain, maintenance, sustainment engineering, logistics information technology and training disciplines. It delivers global support for fielded F-35s while preparing for future force expansion.
The HPSI lead will be an Air Force general officer or senior executive service member. The JPO expects to announce the F-35 HPSI director soon. In the interim, the organization is being led at the Crystal City location by Royal Air Force Air Commodore Charles “Doc” Docherty.Air Force We Need 



AFWN 



Wright-Patterson Air Force Base 



Secretary of the Air Force Heather Wilson 



F-35 Hybrid Product Support Integrator Organization 



HPSI 



strategic basing 



F-35 



joint 



Joint Program Office 



innovation 



Area A
IN THE COURT OF CRIMINAL APPEALS

OF TEXAS

NO. AP-76,568

EX PARTE MICHAEL BRANDON REID, Applicant

ON APPLICATION FOR A WRIT OF HABEAS CORPUS

CAUSE NO. 6381-B IN THE DISTRICT COURT

FROM HASKELL COUNTY

Per curiam.

O P I N I O N

Pursuant to the provisions of Article 11.07 of the Texas Code of Criminal Procedure, the

clerk of the trial court transmitted to this Court this application for writ of habeas corpus. Ex parte

Young, 418 S.W.2d 824, 826 (Tex. Crim. App. 1967). Applicant pleaded guilty and was convicted

of manufacture and deliveryof a controlled substance and sentenced to twenty years’ imprisonment. 

He did not appeal his conviction. 

Applicant contends that his conviction was in violation of his right to due process. The State

and the trial court agree that Applicant is entitled to relief.

Relief is granted. The judgment in Cause No. 6381 in the 39 Judicial District Court of th
2

Haskell County is set aside, and Applicant is remanded to the custody of the sheriff of Haskell

County to answer the charges as set out in the indictment.

Copies of this opinion shall be sent to theTexasDepartment of Criminal Justice–Correctional

Institutions Division and Pardons and Paroles Division.

Delivered: May 25, 2011

Do Not Publish
| (logo)  WELLS FARGO | **Commercial  Mortgage Servicing**D1050-084,  8th Floor  401 South Tryon St.  Charlotte, NC 28202  1-800-326-1334 |
|---------------------|-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|

 

  

MorganStanley Capital I Inc. 

1585Broadway

NewYork, New York 10036 

Attention:Stephen Holmes

 

 

**ANNUAL STATEMENT OFCOMPLIANCE**

 

Reference is hereby made to that certainPooling and Servicing Agreement dated as of October 1, 2011, by and amongMorgan Stanley Capital I Inc ., as Depositor, Wells Fargo Bank, NationalAssociation, as Master Servicer and Midland Loan Services, A Division of PNCBank, NA, as Special Servicer, U.S. Bank National Association, as Trustee,Trimont Real Estate Advisors, Inc., as Trust Advisor, and Wells Fargo Bank,National Association, as Custodian, Certificate Administrator, CertificateRegistrar and Authenticating Agent, with respect to Commercial MortgagePass-Through Certificates Series 2011-C3 (the "Agreement").Capitalized terms used herein not otherwise defined shall have the meaningsassigned in the Agreement.

 

Pursuant to Section 13.9 of the Agreement,I, Leslie Hayton, Managing Director of Commercial Mortgage Services do herebycertify that:

 

1.       Areview of the activities of the Master Servicer during the period from January1, 2018 through December 31, 2018 (the “Reporting Period”), and of itsperformance per the Agreement during such period has been made under mysupervision, and

 

2.       To thebest of my knowledge, based on such review, the Master Servicer, has fulfilledall of its obligations under the Agreement in all material respects throughoutthe Reporting Period.

 

 

IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the undersigned hasexecuted this Certificate as of the 28th day of February 2019.

 

/s/Leslie Hayton

LeslieHayton

ManagingDirector

WellsFargo Bank

 

 

| Wells  Fargo Bank, N.A. | (logo)  Together we’ll go far |
|-------------------------|-------------------------------------|
#### J. C. & C. P. McNeil v. Ballinger & Mott.

(No. 1454, Op. Book No. 2, p. 750.)

Appeal from Brazoria County.

February 28, 1883.

Opinion by

Hurt, J.

§ 841. *Citation; defective statement of time in.*Appellees recovered a judgment by default against appellants. The citation served upon them summoned them to appear and answer “on the third Monday in July, A. D. 187, it being the 17th day of that month in that year.” *Held,*that the citation was fatally defective. The statute requires that the citation shall state the *time*and place of holding the court. [R. S. 1215.] This citation states an impossible time. The want of proper certainty in a writ in point of time cannot be supplied by construction or intendment. [Wright v. Wilmot, 22 Tex. 398.]

Reversed and remanded.'
<PAGE>
                                                                    EXHIBIT 99.1


                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 on Form 10-Q of EDAC
Technologies Corporation (the "Company") for the period ended March 29, 2003, as
filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the
"Report"), the undersigned, Dominick A. Pagano, Chief Executive Officer of the
Company, hereby certifies, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, that:

         (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.



Dated: May 9, 2003                                       /s/ Dominick A. Pagano
                                                         -----------------------
                                                         Dominick A. Pagano
                                                         Chief Executive Officer


         A signed original of this written statement required by Section 906 has
been provided to EDAC Technologies Corporation and will be retained by EDAC
Technologies Corporation and furnished to the Securities and Exchange Commission
or its staff upon request
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.                  

###### Defense Nuclear Facilities Safety Board

# AGENCY:

Defense Nuclear Facilities Safety Board.

# ACTION:

Notice.

# SUMMARY:

This notice announces the membership of the Defense Nuclear Facilities Safety Board (DNFSB) Senior Executive Service (SES) Performance Review Board (PRB).

# DATES:

*Effective Date:*                         September 17, 2010.                    

# ADDRESS: 

Send comments concerning this notice to: Defense Nuclear Facilities Safety Board, 625 Indiana Avenue, NW., Suite 700, Washington, DC 20004-2001.

# FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

                        Deborah Biscieglia by telephone at (202) 694-7041 or by e-mail at                         *debbieb@dnfsb.gov.*

# SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

5 U.S.C. 4314 (c)(1) through (5) requires each agency to establish, in accordance with regulations prescribed by the Office of Personnel Management, one or more performance review boards. The PRB shall review and evaluate the initial summary rating of the senior executive's performance, the executive's response, and the higher level official's comments on the initial summary rating. In addition, the PRB will review and recommend executive performance bonuses and pay increases.

The DNFSB is a small, independent Federal agency; therefore, the members of the DNFSB SES Performance Review Board listed in this notice are drawn from the SES ranks of other agencies. The following persons comprise a standing roster to serve as members of the Defense Nuclear Facilities Safety Board SES Performance Review Board:

Christopher E. Aiello, Director of Human Resources, Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation

David M. Capozzi, Director of Technical and Information Services, United States Access Board

DeDe Greene, Executive Officer, Civil Rights Division, Department of Justice

Christopher W. Warner, General Counsel, U.S. Chemical Safety and Hazard Investigation Board

Dated: September 10, 2010.

Brian Grosner,

Chairman, Executive Resources Board.

[FR Doc. 2010-23180 Filed 9-16-10; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 3670-01-P
#### LEO LIASKOS v. BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT OF ENGLEWOOD CLIFFS.

Jan. 14, 1980.

Petitions for certification denied.
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<ARTICLE> 5
<CIK> 0000771998
<NAME> OUTLOOK INCOME/GROWTH FUND VIII
<MULTIPLIER> 1000
       
<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   9-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          DEC-31-1995
<PERIOD-END>                               SEP-30-1995
<CASH>                                            1920
<SECURITIES>                                         0
<RECEIVABLES>                                      883
<ALLOWANCES>                                         0
<INVENTORY>                                          0
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                                  2082
<PP&E>                                           21934
<DEPRECIATION>                                  (4553)
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                   20465
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                              289
<BONDS>                                          15001
<COMMON>                                             0
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<OTHER-SE>                                        5175
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                     20465
<SALES>                                              0
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                                  2493
<CGS>                                                0
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                        0
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                  1916
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                     0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                                1267
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                  (690)
<INCOME-TAX>                                         0
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                              (690)
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                   2680
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                      1650
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                   116.45
<EPS-DILUTED>                                        0
        

</TABLE>
UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 01-7233

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Plaintiff - Appellee, versus JOHN LEE WILLIAMS, JR., Defendant - Appellant. Appeal from the United States District Court for the Western District of North Carolina, at Charlotte. Richard L. Voorhees, District Judge. (CR-97-182, CA-00-654-3) Submitted: September 18, 2001 Decided: October 9, 2001 Before LUTTIG, WILLIAMS, and KING, Circuit Judges. Dismissed by unpublished per curiam opinion. John Lee Williams, Jr., Appellant Pro Se. Robert Jack Higdon, Jr., OFFICE OF THE UNITED STATES ATTORNEY, Charlotte, North Carolina, for Appellee. Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. See Local Rule 36(c).2 PER CURIAM:John Lee Williams, Jr., appeals the district court’s order denying his motion filed under 28 U.S.C.A. § 2255 (West Supp. 2001). We have reviewed the record and the district court’s opinion and find no reversible error. Accordingly, we deny a certificate of appealability and dismiss the appeal on the reasoning of the district court. See United States v. Williams , Nos. CR-97-182; CA00-654-3 (W.D.N.C. June 26, 2001). 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.

DISMISSED
#### Martin Hinzie v. Joe Ward.

(No. 1129, Op. Book No. 3, p. 348.)

Appeal from Anderson County.

Opinion by

Watts, J.

§ 1314. *Judgment in trial of right of property; amendment of, at same term rendered; voidable cannot be attacked collaterally.*Appellant Hinzie had an execution levied upon a bale of cotton as the property of one Stephens. Appellee Ward-claimed the cotton, and gave bond for the trial of the right of property thereto. Upon trial before the justice, Ward failed to establish his claim to the cotton, and the justice rendered judgment against him for tho costs. At a subsequent day of the same term-the justice added to the judgment a judgment against Ward and the sureties upon his claim bond for the value of the cotton. Execution was issued upon this judgment as amended, and was levied upon sheep belonging to Ward, which were sold, etc. Ward brought this suit for damages for the sale of his sheep. Hinzie attempted to justify with his judgment and execution thereon. The court below held that the judgment last rendered by the justice against Ward and his sureties was void, and no justification for the sale of the sheep, and rendered. judgment in favor of appellee against appellant for damages. *Held:*Wh,en the court determined that the claimant Ward had failed to establish his claim *to*the cotton, the statute prescribed the judgment which should follow as a sequence to that judgment. [E. S. 4843.] The announcement by the court of this determination was notice to the claimant and his sureties that the law required the justice to render judgment against them on the bond for the value of the cotton, with interest. It is well settled that the judgments and decrees of a court are under its control, and subject to its revision during the term at which the same were rendered. Even if the judgment rendered by the justice upon the claim bond was irregular, it was merely voida*766ble, and not void, and a judgment of a court of competent jurisdiction which is merely irregular and voidable, and not void, cannot be attacked in a collateral proceeding. The court erred in holding the justice’s judgment to be void and no justification for the sale of the sheep by virtue of it.

December 14, 1881.

Reversed and remanded.
#### J. G. Kerr v. John A. Murrell.

(No. 1142, Op. Book No. 2, p. 38.)

Appeal from Montague County.

May 6, 1880.

Opinion by

Walker, A. S., J.

§ 890. *Appeal bond from justice's to county court.*In the last clause of the condition of the bond the word “be ” w'as omitted, the same reading thus: “or shall pay or satisfy the judgment or decree that may-rendered against the obligors in this bond.” *Held,*that this was manifestly a clerical omission, and did not affect the validity of the obligation. [Belcher v. Weaver, 46 Tex. 298; Nichols v. Stewart, 15 Tex. 235.]

§ 891. *Pleadings in justice’s court; oral.*K. sued M. in justice’s court as indorser upon a note. Upon appeal to the county court, exceptions were sustained to the citation because it did not allege that the principal maker of the note was dead, insolvent or a non-resident of the state. *Held,*that this was error. Pleadings in justice’s court are not required to be written, but may be oral, and the plaintiff was entitled to prove the necessary facts to entitle him to recover against the defendant, without alleging those facts in a written pleading. On appeal, the trial is *de novo,*and as the citation was not the plaintiff’s case, it was idle to be excepting to it as a pleading. The plaintiff, by his appeal, was not thereby deprived of the benefit of his oral pleadings in the justice’s court, nor of his right in the county court to plead orally the facts of his case.

Beversed and remanded.