alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
Exhibit 35.3



|     |  |                                                                                                              
|---- |  | -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
|LOGO |  | Commercial Mortgage Servicing D1086-120,
12th Floor 550 South Tryon Street Charlotte, NC 28202
1-800-326-1334

ANNUAL STATEMENT OF COMPLIANCE

Reference is hereby made to that certain Pooling and Servicing Agreement dated as of August 1, 2014, by and among Morgan Stanley Capital I
Inc., as Depositor, Wells Fargo Bank, National Association, as Master Servicer, Rialto Capital Advisors, LLC, as Special Servicer, Pentalpha Surveillance LLC, as Trust Advisor, Citibank, N.A., , as Trustee, Certificate Administrator, Certificate
Registrar and Authenticating Agent and Wells Fargo Bank, National Association, as Custodian, with respect to Commercial Mortgage Pass-Through Certificates Series 2014-C17 (the Agreement). Capitalized terms used herein not otherwise
defined shall have the meanings assigned in the Agreement.

Pursuant to Section 13.9 of the Agreement, I, Daniel Bober, Executive Vice
President of Commercial Mortgage Services do hereby certify that:



| | 1. | A review of the activities of the Master Servicer during the period from January 1, 2015 through December 31, 2015 (the Reporting Period) , and of its performance per the Agreement during such period has
been made under my supervision, and
| | -- | -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------



| | 2. | To the best of my knowledge, based on such review, the Master Servicer, has fulfilled all of its obligations under the Agreement in all material respects throughout the Reporting Period.
| | -- | ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the undersigned has executed this Certificate as of the 4th day of
March 2016.



|                        
|------------------------
|LOGO                    
|Daniel Bober            
|Executive Vice President
|Wells Fargo Bank        



|                       |  |     
|---------------------- |  | ----
|Wells Fargo Bank, N.A. |  | LOGO
UN PUBLISHED
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

No. 23

- 1244

SALLY K. FAVALORO , Plaintiff

- Appellant ,

v. FLORENCE COUNTY; LUCAS JAMES ASPER; MICHAEL MONTGOMERY SHETTERLY , Defendants

- Appellees

.

Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of South Carolina , at Florence

. Joseph Dawson, III , District Judge. ( 4:21

- cv - 01698

- JD )

Submitted : November 2 1 , 2023 Decided: November 27, 2023

Before WILKINSON and NIEMEYER , Circuit Judges , and TRAXLER , Senior Circuit Judge

.

Affirmed by un published per curiam opinion

.
Sally Favaloro, Appellant Pro Se.

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. USCA4 Appeal: 23-1244 Doc: 8 Filed: 11/27/2023 Pg: 1 of 22 PER CURIAM : Sally K. Favaloro appeals the district court’s orders accepting the recommendation of the magistrate judge, dismissing Favaloro’s 42 U.S.C. § 1983 action with prejudice, and denying reconsideration. We have reviewed the record and find no reversible error

. Accordingly , we affirm the district court’s orders. Favaloro v. Florence Cnty. , No. 4:21

-

cv - 01698

- JD (D.S.C. Nov. 9, 2022; Feb. 6, 2023). We dispense with oral argument because the facts and legal contentions are adequately presented in the materials before this court and argument would not aid the decisional process.
AFFIRMED USCA4 Appeal: 23-1244 Doc: 8 Filed: 11/27/2023 Pg: 2 of 2
#### Kelvin WELLS v. Geneva BANKS.

No. 2010-CJ-1832.

Supreme Court of Louisiana.

Aug. 11, 2010.

In re Wells, Kelvin; — Plaintiff; Applying For Writ of Certiorari and/or Review, Parish of E. Baton Rouge, 19th Judicial District Court Div. H, No. 135,511; to the Court of Appeal, First Circuit, No. 2010 CU 0308.

Stay denied; Writ denied.
FIRST DISTRICT COURT OF APPEAL

STATE OF FLORIDA

_____________________________

No. 1D18-201

_____________________________

STONEY GLENN,

Appellant,

v.

STATE OF FLORIDA,

Appellee.

_____________________________

On appeal from the Circuit Court for Leon County.

Kevin J. Carroll, Judge.

December 14, 2018

PER CURIAM.

AFFIRMED.

WOLF, LEWIS, and WETHERELL, JJ., concur.

_____________________________

Not final until disposition of any timely and 

authorized motion under Fla. R. App. P. 9.330 or 

9.331.

_____________________________

Robert A. Morris, Tallahassee, for Appellant.
2

Pamela Jo Bondi, Attorney General, and Quentin Humphrey, 

Assistant Attorney General, Tallahassee, for Appellee.
This opinion is subject to administrative correction before final disposition.

Before MONAHAN, STEPHENS, and DEERWESTER Appellate Military Judges

_________________________ 

### UNITED STATES Appellee

v. Jordano DEJESUS

- RIVERA Corporal (E

- 4) , U.S. Marine Corps Appellant
No. 202000219
Decided: 19 May 2021 Appeal from the United States Navy

- Marine Co rps Trial Judiciary Military Judge : Andrea C. Goode Sentence adjudged 23 June 2020 by a special court

- martial convened at Marine Corps Base Camp Pendleton, California , consisting of a military judge sitting alone

. Sentence in the Entry of Judgment : reduct ion to E

- 1, confinement for 180 days , and a bad

- conduct discharge. For Appellant: Lieutenant Commander W. Scott Stoebner , JAGC, USN For Appellee: Brian K. Keller, Esq.United States v. Dejesus

- R ivera , NMCCA No. 201900219 Opinion of the Court

2 _________________________ This opinion does not serve as binding precedent under NMCCA Rule of Appellate Procedure 30.2 (a)

.

_________________________ PER CURIAM : After careful consideration of the record, submitted without assignment of error, we have determined that the findings and sentence are correct in law and fact and that no error materially prejudicial to A ppellant’s substantial rights occurred. Uniform Code of Military Justice arts. 59, 66, 10 U.S.C. §§ 859, 866. T he findings and sentence are AFFIRMED

.

FOR THE COURT:

RODGER A. DREW, JR. Clerk of Court
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<ARTICLE> 5
<LEGEND>
THIS SCHEDULE CONTAINS SUMMARY FINANCIAL INFORMATION EXTRACTED FROM THE
SEPTEMBER 30, 2000 BALANCE SHEET AND THE STATEMENT OF INCOME AND RETAINED
EARNINGS FOR THE NINE MONTHS ENDED SEPTEMBER 30, 2000 INCLUDED IN THE COMPANY'S
SEPTEMBER 30, 2000 10-Q AND IS QUALIFIED IN ITS ENTIRETY BY REFERENCE TO SUCH
10-Q.
</LEGEND>

<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   9-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          DEC-31-2000
<PERIOD-START>                             JAN-01-2000
<PERIOD-END>                               SEP-30-2000
<CASH>                                          62,236
<SECURITIES>                                         0
<RECEIVABLES>                                6,170,863<F1>
<ALLOWANCES>                                         0
<INVENTORY>                                          0
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                             6,233,099
<PP&E>                                               0
<DEPRECIATION>                                       0
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                              84,733,099<F2>
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                               23
<BONDS>                                              0
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                  2,726,700
<COMMON>                                         2,000
<OTHER-SE>                                  82,004,376<F3>
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                84,733,099
<SALES>                                              0
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                             4,535,092<F4>
<CGS>                                                0
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                   56,815
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                     0
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                     0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                                   0
<INCOME-PRETAX>                              4,478,277
<INCOME-TAX>                                    74,000
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                          4,404,277
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                 4,404,277
<EPS-BASIC>                                       3.49
<EPS-DILUTED>                                     3.49
<FN>
<F1>Receivables are due from affiliated companies.
<F2>An investment in preferred shares of Chieftain International (U.S.) Inc., at
cost of $78,500,000 has been included in total assets.
<F3>Additional paid-in capital of $14,998,000 (attributable to common stock) and
$60,676,203 (attributable to preferred stock) has been added to retained
earnings of $6,330,173 in calculating other stockholders' equity.
<F4>Revenues are earned exclusively from transactions with parent company.
</FN>


</TABLE>
**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 DrugMax, Inc. (the “Company”) on Form
      10-Q for the quarter ended October 1, 2005, as filed with the Securities and
      Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the “Report”), I, Edgardo Mercadante,
      Chairman and Chief Executive Officer of the Company, certify pursuant to 18
      U.S.C. ss. 1350, as adopted pursuant to ss. 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of
      2002, that to my knowledge:




(1)
      The
      Report fully complies with 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 result of operations of the Company.




*/s/
                  Edgardo
                  Mercadante*Edgardo
                  MercadanteChief Executive OfficerNovember 15,
                2005




33
Michigan Supreme Court

Lansing, Michigan

Stephen J. Markman

, Chief Justice

Brian K. Zahra

Bridget M. McCormack

David F. Viviano

Richard H. Bernstein

Kurtis T. Wilder

Elizabeth T. Clement

, Justices

I, Larry S. Royster, Clerk of the Michigan Supreme Court, certify that the

foregoing is a true and complete copy of the order entered at the direction of the Court.

September 12, 2018

d0905 

# Order

Clerk September 12, 2018

156438(25)

PEOPLE OF THE STATE OF MICHIGAN,

Plaintiff

- Appellee,

v SC: 156438

COA: 338053

Wayne CC: 89

- 000877

- FC

LAVARON ANTOINE MORRIS,

Defendant

- Appellant.

_________________________________________/

On order of the Court, the motion for reconsideration of this Court’s May 29, 2018

order is considered, and it is DENIED, because it d oes not appear that the order was

entered erroneously.
Exhibit 32.1

RF MONOLITHICS, INC.

CERTIFICATE PURSUANT TO SECTION 906

OF SARBANES  OXLEY ACT OF 2002

The undersigned, David M. Kirk, Chief Executive Officer and President of RF Monolithics, Inc. (the Company), DOES HEREBY CERTIFY that:



| | 1. | The Companys Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q for the fiscal quarter ended November 30, 2008 (the Report) fully complies with the requirements of section 13(a)
or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended; and
| | -- | --------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------



| | 2. | Information contained in the Report fairly presents, in all material respects, the financial condition and results of operation of the Company.
| | -- | -----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

The foregoing certification is being furnished solely pursuant to 18 U.S.C. §1350 and is not being filed as part of the Report or as a separate
disclosure document.

IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the undersigned has caused this instrument to be executed this 14th day of January, 2009.



/s/ David M. KirkName: David M. KirkTitle: Chief Executive Officer and President




|* | A signed original of this written statement required by Section 906 has been provided to the Company and will be retained by the Company and furnished to the Securities and
Exchange Commission or its staff upon request.
|- | ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
#### STATE OF NEW JERSEY v. MICHAEL MCKENNY.

November 2, 1987.

Petition for certification denied.
1 In The 

### Court of Appeals Ninth District of Texas at Beaumont

_________________ NO. 09
- 12
- 00391
- CV



### _________________
IN RE COMMITMENT OF ERICK LAWSON

________________________________________________________________________

On Appeal from the 435th District Court Montgomery County, Texas Trial Cause No. 07
- 08
- 08159 CV

________________________________________________________________________ MEMORANDUM OPINION In an a ppeal from an order entered in a sexually

- violent

- predator proceeding modifying the terms of a commitment order , changing the entity that approves where Erick Lawson must reside , we questioned our appellate jurisdiction over such order

. Upon consideration of the statute and the responses of the parties, w e conclu de that the trial court’s order is not appealable, and we also conclude that mandamus relief on the issues Lawson raises is not warranted. Accordingly, we dismiss the appeal for lack of jurisdiction.2

Recently, in In re Commitment of Holt and In re Commit ment of Cortez , we addressed the same issues Lawson raises in his brief, and we concluded that we did not have appellate jurisdiction over these same issues. In re Commitment of Holt , No. 09

- 12

- 00406

- CV, 2013 WL _______, at *___ (Tex. App.

— Beaumont July 1 1, 2013, no pet. h.); In re Commitment of Cortez , No. 09

- 12

- 00385

- CV, 2013 WL 3270613, at *2 (Tex. App.

— Beaumont June 27, 2013, no pet. h.)

. We also considered whether Holt and Cortez raised issues entitling them to mandamus relief. See Holt , 2013 WL ___ ____, at *___; Cortez , 2013 WL 3270613, at **2

- 6

. For the same reasons stated in Holt and Cortez , we conclude that we lack appellate jurisdiction to review the trial court’s order dated July 26, 2012, and that Lawson has not demonstrated that he is entitl ed to mandamus relief. Accordingly, we dismiss Lawson’s appeal.
APPEAL DISMISSED.

___________________________ CHARLES KREGER Justice Submitted on July 10, 2013 Opinion Delivered August 15, 2013 Before Gaultney, Kreger, an d Horton, JJ.
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.
 Small Business Administration [Disaster Declaration #12347 and #12348]
 AGENCY: U.S. Small Business Administration.
 ACTION: Notice.
 SUMMARY: This is a Notice of the Presidential declaration of a major disaster for Public Assistance Only for the State of ARIZONA (FEMA-1940-DR), dated 10/04/2010. *Incident:*
                         Severe Storms and Flooding. *Incident Period:*
                         07/20/2010 through 08/07/2010.
 DATES: *Effective Date*: 10/04/2010. *Physical Loan Application Deadline Date:*
                         12/03/2010. *Economic Injury (EIDL) Loan Application Deadline Date:*
                         07/05/2011.
 ADDRESSES: Submit completed loan applications to: U.S. Small Business Administration, Processing and Disbursement Center, 14925 Kingsport Road, Fort Worth, TX 76155.
 FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: A. Escobar, Office of Disaster Assistance, U.S. Small Business Administration, 409 3rd Street, SW., Suite 6050, Washington, DC 20416.


SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Notice is hereby given that as a result of the President's major disaster declaration on 10/04/2010, Private Non-Profit organizations that provide essential services of governmental nature may file disaster loan applications at the address listed above or other locally announced locations. The following areas have been determined to be adversely affected by the disaster: *Primary Counties:* Coconino. *The Interest Rates are*: PercentFor Physical Damage:Non-Profit Organizations With Credit Available Elsewhere
3.625Non-Profit Organizations Without Credit Available Elsewhere
3.000For Economic Injury:Non-Profit Organizations Without Credit Available Elsewhere
3.000
 The number assigned to this disaster for physical damage is 12347B and for economic injury is 12348B. (Catalog of Federal Domestic Assistance Numbers 59002 and 59008) James E. Rivera, Associate Administrator for Disaster Assistance.


[FR Doc. 2010-25627 Filed 10-12-10; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 8025-01-P
IN THE COURT OF CRIMINAL APPEALS

OF TEXAS

NO. WR-89,505-01

IN RE KEITH EDWARD HENDRICKS, Relator

ON APPLICATION FOR A WRIT OF MANDAMUS

CAUSE NOS. 1438707-A AND 143708-A IN THE 178th DISTRICT COURT

FROM HARRIS COUNTY

Per curiam.

O R D E R

Relator has filed a motion for leave to file an application for a writ of mandamus pursuant

to the original jurisdiction of this Court. In it, Relator contends that he filed applications for a writ

of habeas corpus in the 178th District Court of Harris County, the District Court entered a timely

order designating issues on June 4, 2018, more than 180 days have passed since the date the State

received the applications, and the applications have not been timely forwarded to this Court as

mandated by Texas Rule of Appellate Procedure 73.4(b)(5). 

Respondent, the District Clerk of Harris County, is ordered to file a response, which may be

made by submitting the record on such habeas corpus applications, submitting proof of the date of

receipt by the State showing 180 days has not yet elapsed, or stating that Relator has not filed 
2

applications for a writ of habeas corpus in Harris County. This application for leave to file a writ

of mandamus shall be held in abeyance until Respondent has submitted the appropriate response. 

Such response shall be submitted within 30 days of the date of this order.

Filed: February 27, 2019

Do not publish
```

[Congressional Bills 115th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[H.R. 7364 Introduced in House (IH)]

<DOC>

115th CONGRESS
  2d Session
                                H. R. 7364

 To amend the Consumer Financial Protection Act of 2010 to extend the 
supervisory authority of the Bureau of Consumer Financial Protection to 
      include assessing compliance with the Military Lending Act.

_______________________________________________________________________

                    IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

                           December 20, 2018

   Mr. Barr introduced the following bill; which was referred to the 
 Committee on Financial Services, and in addition to the Committee on 
   Armed Services, for a period to be subsequently determined by the 
  Speaker, in each case for consideration of such provisions as fall 
           within the jurisdiction of the committee concerned

_______________________________________________________________________

                                 A BILL

 
 To amend the Consumer Financial Protection Act of 2010 to extend the 
supervisory authority of the Bureau of Consumer Financial Protection to 
      include assessing compliance with the Military Lending Act.

    Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representatives of the 
United States of America in Congress assembled,

SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE.

    This Act may be cited as the ``Financial Protection for Our 
Military Families Act''.

SEC. 2. BUREAU EXAMINATION AUTHORITY WITH RESPECT TO MILITARY LENDING 
              ACT COMPLIANCE.

    The Consumer Financial Protection Act of 2010 (12 U.S.C. 5481 et 
seq.) is amended--
            (1) in section 1024(b)(1)(A), by inserting before the 
        semicolon the following: ``and section 987 of title 10, United 
        States Code'';
            (2) in section 1025(b)(1)--
                    (A) by redesignating subparagraphs (B) and (C) as 
                subparagraphs (C) and (D), respectively; and
                    (B) by inserting after subparagraph (A) the 
                following:
                    ``(B) with respect to insured depository 
                institutions, assessing compliance with the 
                requirements of section 987 of title 10, United States 
                Code;''; and
            (3) in section 1026(c)(1), by inserting before the period 
        the following: ``and with the requirements of section 987 of 
        title 10, United States Code, of insured depository 
        institutions described in subsection (a)''.
                                 <all>
```
585 A.2d 383

#### STATE OF NEW JERSEY v. MALCOLM ROBBINS.

October 2, 1990.

Petition for certification granted.
No. 13,774.

#### The McCormick Harvesting Machine Company *v.*Maas.

Filed Nov. 21, 1889.

Bill of *Exceptions.*— Date *of Presentation to Judge.*— Must *be Stated, in the Dill.*— In order that a bill of exceptions may become a part of the record, it must be presented to the judge within the time limited, and the date of its presentation must be stated *in*the bill.

From the Dubois Circuit Court.

*H. M. Logsdon, H. Kramer*and *O. A. Trippet,*for appellant.

*E. Swan*and *W. H. Thomas,*for appellee.

Mitchell, J.

— A motion for a new trial was overruled in the present case, on the 22d day of September, 1886, and ninety days’ time given within which to prepare and file a bill of exceptions. The bill seems to have been filed with the clerk on the 6th day of January, 1887, after the expiration of the time limited. The date on which it was presented to the judge for examination and approval is not ■ stated in the bill, as the statute requires (section 629, R. S. 1881). The objection is made that there is no bill of exceptions in the record which can be considered by the court. Under repeated decisions this objection must prevail. *Rigler*v. *Rigler,*120 Ind. *431; McCoy*v. *State, ex rel., post,*p. 160; *Buchart*v. *Burger,*115 Ind. 123; *Orton*v. *Tilden,*110 Ind. 131; *Joseph*v. *Mather,*110 Ind. 114.

In order that it may become a part of the record a bill of exceptions must be presented to the judge within the time limited, and the date of its presentation must be stated *in the hill.*

In the absence of a bill of exceptions the record presents no question for consideration.

The judgment is therefore affirmed, with costs.