alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<PAGE>
<ARTICLE> 5
<LEGEND>
THIS SCHEDULE CONTAINS SUMMARY FINANCIAL INFORMATION EXTRACTED FROM THE
CONDENSED CONSOLIDATED BALANCE SHEET AS OF SEPTEMBER 30, 1997 AND THE
CONDENSED CONSOLIDATED STATEMENT OF OPERATIONS FOR THE NINE MONTH PERIOD
ENDED SEPTEMBER 30, 1997 AND IS QUALIFIED IN ITS ENTIRETY BY REFERENCE TO
SUCH FINANCIAL STATEMENTS.
</LEGEND>
<MULTIPLIER> 1,000
       
<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   9-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          DEC-31-1997
<PERIOD-START>                             JAN-01-1997
<PERIOD-END>                               SEP-30-1997
<CASH>                                          19,012
<SECURITIES>                                         0
<RECEIVABLES>                                        0
<ALLOWANCES>                                         0
<INVENTORY>                                          0
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                                19,865
<PP&E>                                           6,081
<DEPRECIATION>                                 (3,604)
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                  32,979
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                            4,965
<BONDS>                                              0
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                        71,119
<OTHER-SE>                                    (53,620)
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                    32,979
<SALES>                                              0
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                                 2,236
<CGS>                                                0
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                   10,537
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                     0
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                     0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                                   0
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                (7,798)
<INCOME-TAX>                                         0
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                            (7,798)
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                   (7,798)
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                   (1.15)
<EPS-DILUTED>                                   (1.15)
        

</TABLE>
#### Lorie L. LEMOINE v. Brian LEMOINE.

No. 2010-CJ-1649.

Supreme Court of Louisiana.

July 28, 2010.

In re Lemoine, Lorie L.; — Plaintiff; Applying For Supervisory and/or Remedial Writs, Parish of W. Baton Rouge, 18th Judicial District Court Div. D, No. 34,476; to the Court of Appeal, First Circuit, No. 2010 CW1214.

Denied.

KNOLL, J., would grant.
#### UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. Dan Michael RUFFO, Defendant-Appellant.

No. 00-30057.

D.C. No. CR-93-02032-JET.

United States Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit.

Argued and Submitted Dec. 7, 2000.

Decided Jan. 5, 2001.

*645Before B. FLETCHER, FISHER, Circuit Judges, and SCHWARZER,* Senior District Judge.

*

 The Honorable William W Schwarzer, Senior United States District Judge for the Northern District of California, sitting by designation.

MEMORANDUM **

Dan Michael Ruffo appeals the three-year sentence imposed on revocation of supervised release. He contends that the district court failed to consider the applicable sentencing range set forth in the Sentencing Commission’s policy statement in U.S. Sentencing Guidelines Manual § 7B1.4(a) (1998). While the policy statement is not binding, the court must consider it. 18 U.S.C. § 3553(a)(4)(B); *United States v. George,*184 F.3d 1119, 1120-22 (9th Cir.1999). The applicable sentencing range specified by the policy statement was brought to the court’s attention in the Probation Office’s sentencing memorandum, which the court acknowledged having read. Moreover, both counsel made references to the policy statement at the revocation hearing. Under those circumstances, we conclude that the district court considered the policy statement’s sentencing range. Ruffo also contends that the court failed to state the reasons for imposing the sentence as required by 18 U.S.C. § 3553(c). While he offered no formal statement of reasons, throughout the hearing the judge expressed his concern that there was nothing to indicate that Russo had shown remorse or would change his behavior and become a law-abiding citizen. The record reflects the judge’s loss of hope that a lesser sentence would further rehabilitation and his belief that unless Ruffo were incarcerated, he would pose a danger to society. The judge’s statements leave no doubt that he imposed a lengthy sentence not only for punishment, but also to protect the community from further harm. *See United States v. Musa,*220 F.3d 1096, 1101 (9th Cir .2000).

Finally, the district judge did not abuse his discretion in failing to recuse himself. Because Ruffo was aware of the alleged grounds for recusal at sentencing, yet failed to advise the district judge of his belief that grounds for recusal existed, he bears a greater burden on appeal to demonstrate reversible error. *See United States v. Sibla,*624 F.2d 864, 868 (9th Cir.1980). Ruffo did not show that the *646district judge was party to any extra-judicial information or that the judge had a personal interest in the matter. Thus, Ruffo failed to sustain his burden inasmuch as no reasonable person with knowledge of the facts would question the judge’s impartiality. *See United States v. Nelson,*718 F.2d 315, 321 (9th Cir.1983).

AFFIRMED.

**

 This disposition is not appropriate for publication and may not be cited to or by the courts of this circuit except as provided by Ninth Circuit Rule 36-3.
Exhibit 31.2
                                  CERTIFICATION

I, David A. Kindlick, certify that:

1. I have reviewed this annual report on Form 10-K for the period ended December
31, 2003, of South Jersey Gas Company;

2. Based on my knowledge, this report does not contain any untrue statement of a
material fact or omit to state a material fact necessary to make the statements
made, in light of the circumstances under which such statements were made, not
misleading with respect to the period covered by this report;

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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





Date: March 12, 2004                /s/ David A. Kindlick
                                    -----------------------------------
                                    David A. Kindlick
                                    Executive Vice President &
                                    Chief Financial Officer
1

IN THE SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF MONTANA

Case No. 20 -0 391 TRACY FORTNER and MARCY FORTNER, Appellants, vs. BROADWATER CONSERVATION DISTRICT, Appellee. ORDER GRANTING APPELLEE’S SECOND MOTION FOR 30 DAY EXTENSION The Court being in receipt of Appellee’s Unopposed Second Motion for Extension of Time to File Opening Brief and good cause appearing, Now Therefore, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED the Appellee may file its Opening Brief on or before April 19 , 202 1 . DATED and ELECTRONICALLY SIGNED as noted below.

Electronically signed by: Mike McGrath Chief Justice, Montana Supreme Court

March 18 2021

03/18/2021

Case Number: DA 20-0391
Exhibit 32.1



Certification of Chief Executive Officer



Pursuant to 18 U.S.C. § 1350, as created by Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, the undersigned officer of
CV Therapeutics, Inc. (the Company) hereby certifies, to such officers knowledge, that:



(i) the accompanying Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q of the Company for the quarterly period ended June 30, 2004, (the
Report) fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) or Section 15(d), as applicable, of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended; and



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



|                      |  |                                                    
|--------------------- |  | ---------------------------------------------------
|Dated: August 6, 2004 |  | /s/ LOUIS G. LANGE, M.D., PH.D.                    
|                      |  | Louis G. Lange, M.D., Ph.D. Chief Executive Officer
(logo) Rialto 

CAPITAL

 

 

2015 Annual Statement of Servicer Compliance (Item 1123)

 

 

Pooling and Servicing Agreement (the “Pooling and Servicing Agreement”) dated as of June 1, 2014 by and among Deutsche Mortgage & Asset Receiving Corporation as Depositor, KeyBank National Association as Master Servicer, Rialto Capital Advisors, LLC as Special Servicer, Wells Fargo Bank, National Association as Trustee, Wells Fargo Bank, National Association as Certificate Administrator, Paying Agent and Custodian and Situs Holdings, LLC as Operating Advisor relating to the Deutsche Mortgage & Asset Receiving Corporation, COMM 2014-CCRE18 Mortgage Trust, Commercial Mortgage Pass-Through Certificates  **(COMM 2014-CCRE18)**

 

 

The undersigned, a duly authorized officer of Rialto Capital Advisors, LLC, as special servicer (the “Special Servicer”) herein certifies to the following:

 

1. All servicing activities and performance of such servicing activities under the Pooling and Servicing Agreement are performed on behalf of the Special Servicer.

 

2. A review of the servicing activities and performance by the Special Servicer for the period of  January 1, 2015 to December 31, 2015 (the “Reporting Period”) in accordance with the Pooling and Servicing Agreement has been conducted under my supervision.

 

3. To the best of my knowledge, based on such review, the Special Servicer has fulfilled all of its obligations under the terms of the Pooling and Servicing Agreement, in all material respects for the Reporting Period and if there has been a failure to fulfill any such obligations in any material respect, each failure and the nature and status thereof has been specifically identified herein.

 

  

Certified by: /s/ Adam Singer

Adam Singer, Managing Director

 

Date: March 1, 2016
#### George COOPER, Claimant, Appellant, v. C. Gordon ANDERSON, Trustee of Re-Mark Chemical Co., Inc., Debtor, Appellee.

No. 18076.

United States Court of Appeals Fifth Circuit.

April 11, 1960.

N. J. Durant, Miami, Fla., for appellant.

Robert A. Peterson, Miami Beach, Fla., Copeland, Therrel, Baisden & Peterson, Miami Beach, Fla., for appellee.

Before RIVES, Chief Judge, and TUTTLE and WISDOM, Circuit Judges.

PER CURIAM.

George Cooper, d/b/a Glade and Grove Supply Co., filed two claims against the trustee in bankruptcy of the estate of Re-Mark Chemical Co., Inc. Claim No. 53-A was in the amount of $17,591.20, for the payment of which Cooper asserted an equitable lien upon such merchandise as was in the possession of ReMark at the time of the institution of the bankruptcy proceedings and also at the time of the turnover under the plan approved by the district court. Claim No. 53-B was in the amount of $16,205.-18, which Cooper claimed Re-Mark held in trust for his benefit.

Much confusion is occasioned by the fact that the trustee’s written objection to the claims was based upon the sole ground “that the said claim is not an obligation of the corporate debtor, but is an individual obligation of another party.” However, upon the hearing before the referee in bankruptcy as special master, issues not raised by the pleadings were tried without objection. Compare Rule 15(b), Federal Rules of Civil Procedure, 28 U.S.C.A. The ledger sheets of Re-Mark, introduced without objection, showed a valid compulsory counterclaim [see Rule 13(a), Federal Rules of Civil Procedure] against Claim No. 53-A *450in the amount of $40,629.79, that is, more than enough to offset said claim.

Claim No. 53-B represents the proceeds of the sale of securities made by David Marks under a written power of attorney from Cooper. Cooper testified that Marks did not turn those proceeds over .to him, but told him that he had turned them over to Re-Mark Chemical Company, of which Marks was then President. The books of Re-Mark Chemical Company did not disclose the receipt of such proceeds. Marks was not called as a witness, and there was no evidence that Re-Mark ever actually received the proceeds of sale of those securities, except Cooper’s hearsay testimony of Marks’ self-serving statement to him. Moreover, the $40,629.79 which Re-Mark’s books showed to be owing by Cooper was more than enough to offset both Claim No. 53-A and Claim No. 53-B. The trustee did not ask for judgment for the excess.

Both claims were properly disallowed because there was no debt due. It is not necessary, therefore, to decide whether Claim No. 53-A would have been secured by an equitable lien, or whether Claim No. 53-B created any trust relationship. The judgment was right, and it is

Affirmed.
#### Traci Scarleth GURTH, Appellant, v. STATE of Florida, Appellee.

No. 4D10-653.

District Court of Appeal of Florida, Fourth District.

Dec. 29, 2010.

Ira D. Karmelin, West Palm Beach, for appellant.

No appearance required for appellee.

PER CURIAM.

Appellant challenges the sufficiency of the factual basis used to support her plea in this appeal of the denial of her Rule 3.800(a) motion. “A rule 3.800(a) motion cannot be used to challenge the factual basis for a plea.” *Marshall v. State,*35 So.3d 121 (Fla. 4th DCA 2010) (citing *Sanchez v. State,*979 So.2d 1004 (Fla. 3d DCA 2008)). Appellant’s challenge was to her conviction, not to her sentence, and was not cognizable in a rule 3.800(a) motion. *See Cook v. State,*885 So.2d 911 (Fla. 5th DCA 2004). Moreover, appellant’s motion cannot be considered under Rule 3.850, because her time for filing a Rule 3.850 motion has expired. *See*Fla. R.Crim. P. 3.850(b).

*Affirmed.*

STEVENSON, TAYLOR and MAY, JJ., concur.
| (logo) WELLS  FARGO | **Commercial  Mortgage Servicing**D1050-084,  8th Floor  401 South Tryon St.  Charlotte, NC 28202  1-800-326-1334 |
|---------------------|-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|

 

 

**ANNUAL STATEMENT OFCOMPLIANCE**

** **

Reference is hereby made to that certainPooling and Servicing Agreement dated as of August 1, 2014, by and amongJ.P. Morgan Chase Commercial Mortgage Securities Corp., as Depositor, WellsFargo Bank, National Association, as Master Servicer, LNR Partners, LLC, asSpecial Servicer, Wells Fargo Bank, National Association, as CertificateAdministrator, Wilmington Trust, National Association, as Trustee, andPentalpha Surveillance LLC, as Senior Trust Advisor with respect to CommercialMortgage Pass-Through Certificates Series 2014-C22 (the "Agreement").Capitalized terms used herein not otherwise defined shall have the meaningsassigned in theAgreement.

 

Pursuant to Section 11.09 of thisAgreement, I, Daniel Bober, Executive Vice President of Commercial MortgageServices do hereby certify that:

 

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

 

2.To the best of my knowledge, based on such review, the Master Servicer hasfulfilled all of its obligations under the Agreement in all material respectsthroughout the ReportingPeriod.

 

IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the undersigned hasexecuted this Certificate as of the 28th day of February2018.

 

/s/ Daniel Bober

Daniel Bober

Executive VicePresident

Wells Fargo Bank

 

 

| Wells Fargo Bank, N.A. | (logo) Together  we’ll go far |
|------------------------|-------------------------------------|
#### STATE ex rel. Harold Wayne JOHNSON v. STATE of Louisiana.

No. 2011-KH-0433.

Supreme Court of Louisiana.

Dec. 16, 2011.

*1199In re Johnson, Harold Wayne; — Plaintiff; Applying For Supervisory and/or Remedial Writs, Parish of Ouachita, 4th Judicial District Court Div. C, No. 08-F2172; to the Court of Appeal, Second Circuit, No. 45,828-KA.

Denied.

CLARK, J., recused.
**EXHIBIT 35.1**

 

**SERVICER COMPLIANCE STATEMENT**

**New Holland Credit Company, LLC**

 

The undersigned, a duly authorized officer of New Holland Credit Company, LLC (“NHCC”), as Servicer pursuant to the Sale and Servicing Agreement dated as of May 1, 2014 (as amended from time to time, the “Sale and Servicing Agreement”) by and among NHCC, CNH Capital Receivables LLC and CNH Equipment Trust 2014-B, does hereby certify that:

 

1.             NHCC is Servicer under the Sale and Servicing Agreement.

 

2.             The undersigned is duly authorized as required pursuant to the Sale and Servicing Agreement to execute and deliver this Certificate to the Indenture Trustee.

 

3.             This Certificate is delivered pursuant to Section 4.9(a) of the Sale and Servicing Agreement and Item 1123 of Regulation AB.

 

4.             A review of the Servicer’s activities during the 12 month period ending (and including) December 31, 2014 and of its performance under the Sale and Servicing Agreement has been made under my supervision.

 

5.             To the best of my knowledge, based on such review, the Servicer has fulfilled all of its obligations under the Sale and Servicing Agreement in all material respects throughout the 12 month period ending (and including) December 31, 2014.

 

6.             IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the undersigned has duly executed this Certificate this 30th day of March, 2015.

 

----

 

March 30, 2015

 
|   | By:    | /s/   Brett D. Davis |
|--------|--------|----------------------|
|   | Name:  | Brett   D. Davis     |
|   | Title: | President            |

 

----
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<ARTICLE> 5
       
<S>                             <C>                     <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   9-MOS                   9-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          JUN-30-1997             JUN-30-1998
<PERIOD-START>                             JUL-01-1996             JUL-01-1997
<PERIOD-END>                               MAR-31-1997             MAR-31-1998
<CASH>                                         675,991                 618,312
<SECURITIES>                                 1,571,948              19,262,285
<RECEIVABLES>                                        0                  34,116
<ALLOWANCES>                                         0                       0
<INVENTORY>                                     64,088               2,310,732
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                             2,331,153              22,290,674
<PP&E>                                         364,536                 503,419
<DEPRECIATION>                                  37,247                  73,787
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                               2,780,488              22,899,568
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                          308,294                 632,901
<BONDS>                                              0                       0
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                          125,000                       0
<PREFERRED>                                      6,316                       0
<COMMON>                                           920                   6,636
<OTHER-SE>                                   2,057,473              21,786,420
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                 2,780,488              22,899,568
<SALES>                                          7,069                   9,142
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                                 8,372                 572,215
<CGS>                                            2,200                   1,485
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                        0                 906,272
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                             2,014,566               2,598,131
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                     0                       0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                              46,129                  42,640
<INCOME-PRETAX>                            (1,978,105)             (2,976,313)
<INCOME-TAX>                                         0                       0
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                        (1,978,105)             (2,976,313)
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0                       0
<CHANGES>                                            0                       0
<NET-INCOME>                               (1,978,105)             (2,976,313)
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                   (2.15)                  (2.17)
<EPS-DILUTED>                                   (2.15)                  (2.17)
        

</TABLE>
**Exhibit 32.1**

 

HERITAGE OAKS BANCORP

 

Quarterly Report on Form 10QSBfor the Quarter ended June 30, 2003

 

**CERTIFICATION**

 

Pursuant to Section 906 of theSarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002

 

 

The undersigned, who is the Chief ExecutiveOfficer of Heritage Oaks Bancorp (the “Company”), hereby certify that (i) theQuarterly Report on Form 10QSB for the quarter ended June 30, 2003, as filed bythe Company with the Securities and Exchange Commission (the “QuarterlyReport”), to which this Certification is an Exhibit, fully complies with theapplicable requirements of Section 13(a) and 15(d) of the Exchange Act; and(ii) the information contained in this Quarterly Report fairly presents, in allmaterial respects, the financial condition and results of operations of the Company.

 

 
| Dated:  July 25, 2003 | /s/ Lawrence P. Ward                   |   |
|----------------------------|----------------------------------------|--------|
|                       | Lawrence P. Ward,                      |
|                       | President and Chief Executive  Officer |

 

1

----