alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
EX-34.3
(logo) Deloitte

Deloitte & Touche LLP
Suite 1500
191 Peachtree Street NE
Atlanta, GA 30303-1943
USA

Tel: +1 404 220 1500
www.deloitte.com


REPORT OF INDEPENDENT REGISTERED PUBLIC ACCOUNTING FIRM


To the Board of Directors of
LNR Partners Inc.
Miami Beach, Florida

We have examined management's assertion, included in the accompanying
Management's Report on Assessment of Compliance with SEC Regulation AB
Servicing Criteria, that LNR Partners Inc. (the "Company") complied with the
servicing criteria set forth in Item 1122(d) of the Securities and Exchange
Commission's Regulation AB for the commercial mortgage-backed securities
transactions for which the Asserting Party served as special servicer, that
were completed on or after January 1, 2006, and that were registered with the
Securities and Exchange Commission pursuant to the Securities Act of 1933 (the
"Platform") as of and for the year ended December 31, 2007, excluding criteria
229.1122(d)(1)(iii), (3)(i)(C), (3)(i)(D), (3)(ii), (3)(iii), (3)(iv), (4)(v),
(4)(ix), (4)(x), (4)(xi), (4)(xii), (4)(xiii) and (4)(xv), which management
has determined are not applicable to the activities performed by the Company
with respect to the Platform. Management is responsible for the Company's
compliance with the servicing criteria. Our responsibility is to express an
opinion on management's assertion about the Company's compliance with the
servicing criteria based on our examination.

Our examination was conducted in accordance with attestation standards
established by the American Institute of Certified Public Accountants, as
adopted by the Public Company Accounting Oversight Board (United States), and
accordingly, included examining, on a test basis, evidence about the Company's
compliance with the applicable servicing criteria, including tests on a sample
basis of the servicing activities related to the Platform, determining whether
the Company performed those selected activities in compliance with the
servicing criteria during the specified period, and performing such other
procedures as we considered necessary in the circumstances. Our procedures were
limited to selected servicing activities performed by the Company during the
period covered by this report and, accordingly, such samples may not have
included servicing activities related to each asset-backed transaction included
in the Platform. Further, an examination is not designed to detect
noncompliance arising from errors that may have occurred prior to the period
specified above that may have affected the balances or amounts calculated or
reported by the Company during the period covered by this report. We believe
that our examination provides a reasonable basis for our opinion. Our
examination does not provide a legal determination on the Company's compliance
with the servicing criteria.

In our opinion, management's assertion that the Company complied with the
aforementioned applicable servicing criteria as of and for the year ended
December 31, 2007 for the commercial mortgage-backed securities Platform is
fairly stated, in all material respects.


/s/ Deloitte & Touche LLP
February 22, 2008


Member of
Deloitte Touche Tohmatsu
#### In re L.C., I.C., L.C.

Case below: 181 N.C. App. 278

No. 039P07

Respondent’s (Father) PDR Under N.C.G.S. 7A-31 (COA06-575)

Denied 05/03/07

Hudson, J., Recused
<PAGE>

                                 HOLLINGER INC.

         Toronto, Ontario, Canada, March 14, 2005 - Hollinger Inc. ("Hollinger")
(TSX: HLG.C; HLG.PR.B) announced today that it has received correspondence from
counsel purporting to represent a majority of the aggregate principal amount of
Hollinger's outstanding 11.875% Senior Secured Notes in which such counsel has
taken the position that the proceeds of the special dividends received by
Hollinger from Hollinger International Inc. on January 18, 2005 and March 1,
2005 must be delivered to the collateral trustee for such Notes as collateral
for the Notes. In such correspondence, counsel seeks to have Hollinger set aside
the dividend proceeds pending resolution of the status of such proceeds. As
previously disclosed, Hollinger has determined that none of the dividend
proceeds are required to be lodged as collateral security for the Notes.

         Hollinger also announced today that the Hon. Blanche M. Manning of the
United States District Court, Northern District of Illinois, Eastern Division
has denied Hollinger's motion to dismiss the Second Amended Complaint filed by
Hollinger International Inc. against Hollinger and others in Illinois.

Company Background

         Hollinger's principal asset is its interest in Hollinger International
Inc. which is a newspaper publisher, the assets of which include the Chicago
Sun-Times, a large number of community newspapers in the Chicago area and a
portfolio of news media investments. Hollinger also owns a portfolio of
revenue-producing and other commercial real estate in Canada, including its head
office building located at 10 Toronto Street, Toronto, Ontario.


Media contact:
Larry Parnell
Hill & Knowlton
416-413-4623
larry.parnell@hillandknowlton.ca

                              www.hollingerinc.com
#### Ilene Mials et al., Appellants, v Leila Doreen Millington et al., Respondents.

[973 NYS2d 331]

In an action, inter alia, to recover damages for fraud, the plaintiffs appeal, as limited by their brief, from so much of an order of the Supreme Court, Kings County (Pfau, J.), dated April 4, 2013, as denied that branch of their motion which was, in effect, for summary judgment on the first cause of action to the extent that it was to compel the defendant Leila Doreen Millington to relinquish any right, title, and interest in two specified parcels of real property.

*967Ordered that the order is affirmed insofar as appealed from, with one bill of costs.

In June 1996 the plaintiff llene Miáis (hereinafter llene) and her husband transferred title to a parcel of real property to their daughter, the plaintiff Toni Mials (hereinafter Toni), and llene transferred title to a separate parcel of property to Toni. In December 2004, Toni transferred title to those properties to llene and Ilene’s friend, the defendant Leila Doreen Millington.

In August 2012 the plaintiffs commenced this action against, among others, Millington, seeking, inter alia, to recover damages for fraud and to compel Millington to relinquish any right, title, and interest in the subject properties. The plaintiffs alleged that the transfer of title in December 2004 was based on false promises by Millington. The plaintiffs then moved, inter alia, in effect, for summary judgment on the first cause of action, which alleged fraud, to the extent that it was for a direction that Millington relinquish any right, title, and interest in the properties. In an order dated April 4, 2013, the Supreme Court denied that branch of the plaintiffs’ motion

Contrary to the plaintiffs’ contention, they failed to establish their prima facie entitlement to judgment as a matter of law on the subject branch of the motion, as they failed to submit any evidence showing that llene did not execute the deed conveying title to the properties in December 2004, or that Millington induced the transfer of title with false promises as alleged in the complaint *(see Alvarez v Prospect Hosp.,*68 NY2d 320, 324 [1986]). Since the plaintiffs failed to make a prima facie showing of entitlement to judgment as a matter of law, there is no need to consider the sufficiency of the opposition papers *(see Winegrad v New York Univ. Med. Ctr.,*64 NY2d 851, 853 [1985]).

The parties’ remaining contentions are without merit.

Accordingly, the Supreme Court properly denied that branch of the plaintiffs’ motion which was, in effect, for summary judgment on the first cause of action to the extent that is was to compel Millington to relinquish any right, title, and interest in the subject properties. Rivera, J.P., Roman, Sgroi and Cohen, JJ., concur.
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 Annual Report of China Green Creative, Inc. (the Company) on Form 10-K for the fiscal year ended December 31, 2009, as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the Report), each of the undersigned officers of the Company certifies, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, as adopted pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that, to such officers 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 as of the dates and for the periods expressed in the Report.    Dated:  April 13, 2010 By: /s/ Deng Lin Deng Lin Chief Financial Officer (Principal Financial and Accounting Officer
#### N.C. Alliance for Transp. Reform, Inc. v. N.C. Dep’t of Transp.

Case below: 183 N.C. App.-(5 June 2007)

No. 308P07

Pit’s PDR Under N.C.G.S. § 7A-31 (COA06-490)

Denied 08/23/07
iii i i i



### MEMORANDUM OPINION No. 04-07-00880-CR Lupe GOMEZ , Appellant
v. The STATE of Texas, Appellee From the 399th Judicial District Court, Bexar County, Texas Trial Court No. 2006-CR-6522 Honorable Juanita A. Vasquez-Gardner, Judge Presiding Opinion by: Karen Angelini, Justice Sitting: Karen Angelini, Justice Rebecca Simmons, Justice Steven C. Hilbig, Justice Delivered and Filed: September 3, 2008 AFFIRMED Appellant Lupe Gomez was charged by indictment with burglary of a habitation with the intent to commit a felony (repeater). Gomez ente red an open plea of nolo contendere and pled true to having previously been convicted of murd er. He was then sentenced to forty years of imprisonment. Gomez timely filed a notice of appeal. His court-appointed appellate attorney has filed a brief in which she raises two arguable points of error, but nonetheless concludes that this appeal is frivolous and without merit. See Anders v. California , 386 U.S. 738 (1967); High v. State ,04-07-00880-CR

-2- 573 S.W.2d 807 (Tex. Crim. App. 1978). Counsel states that appellant was provided with a copy of the brief and motion to withdraw and was further info rmed of his right to re view the record and file his own brief. See Bruns v. State , 924 S.W.2d 176, 177 n.1 (Tex. App.—San Antonio 1996, no pet.). Gomez did not file a pro se brief. We have reviewed the record and counsel’s brie f. We agree that the appeal is frivolous and without merit. The judgment of the trial court is affirmed. Furthermore, we grant the motion to withdraw. See Nichols v. State , 954 S.W.2d 83, 85-86 (Tex. App.—San Antonio 1997, no pet.); Bruns , 924 S.W.2d at 177 n.1.
Karen Angelini, Justice Do not publish
I 

118TH CONGRESS 

1ST SESSION H. R. 2345 

To provide for a limitation on availability of funds for Bilaterial Economic 

Assistance, Department of State, US Emergency Refugee and Migration 

Assistance Fund for fiscal year 2024. 

IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES 

MARCH 29, 2023 

Mr. BIGGS (for himself, Mr. ROSENDALE, Mr. GAETZ, Mr. GOOD of Virginia, 

Mr. ROY, and Mr. CRANE) introduced the following bill; which was referred to the Committee on Foreign Affairs 

A BILL 

To provide for a limitation on availability of funds for 

Bilaterial Economic Assistance, Department of State, US 

Emergency Refugee and Migration Assistance Fund for 

fiscal year 2024. 

1 Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representa2 tives of the United States of America in Congress assembled, 


pbinns on DSKJLVW7X2PROD with $$_JOB
2 

•HR 2345 IH

1 SECTION 1. LIMITATION ON AVAILABILITY OF FUNDS FOR 

2 BILATERIAL ECONOMIC ASSISTANCE, DE3 PARTMENT OF STATE, US EMERGENCY REF4 UGEE AND MIGRATION ASSISTANCE FUND 

5 FOR FISCAL YEAR 2024. 

6 Notwithstanding any other provision of the law, 

7 amounts authorized to be appropriated or otherwise avail8 able for Bilaterial Economic Assistance, Department of 

9 State, US Emergency Refugee and Migration Assistance 

10 Fund for fiscal year 2024 may not exceed $100,000. 

Æ 


pbinns on DSKJLVW7X2PROD with $$_JOB
<PAGE>

                                                                    EXHIBIT 99.2

                                 HOLLINGER INC.

 U.S. FEDERAL JUDGE GRANTS HOLLINGER INC.'S MOTION TO VACATE PORTIONS OF COURT
     ORDER LIMITING INC.'S RIGHTS AS SHAREHOLDER OF HOLLINGER INTERNATIONAL

Toronto, Canada, March 1, 2004 - Hollinger Inc. (TSX: HLG.C; HLG.PR.B; HLG.PR.C)
said today that U.S. District Court Judge Blanche Manning had granted Hollinger
Inc.'s motions to intervene in the U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission's
lawsuit against Hollinger International and to vacate portions of the order
entered in that suit, which restricted Hollinger Inc.'s voting rights to elect
or remove directors of Hollinger International.

In response to the court's decision, the company issued the following statement:
"We are pleased that Judge Manning has upheld our right to intervene in this
matter and to protect our rights as a shareholder. Judge Manning found that
Hollinger Inc. should have been given notice of this action before the order was
entered on an emergency basis and that the SEC failed to inform the court that
its order could limit our voting rights. The Judge's decision to vacate the
order will allow us to appropriately protect our rights as the majority
shareholder of Hollinger International."

In her ruling today, Judge Manning said that she would stay entry of her Order
until the parties to the matter have had the opportunity to fully brief and be
heard on whether the facts warrant the impediments imposed on Inc.'s voting
rights by the original Order.

The Court Order challenged by Hollinger Inc. was sought by the U.S. Securities
and Exchange Commission in the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of
Illinois and consented to by Hollinger International on January 16. Hollinger
Inc. filed a motion to intervene in the matter on January 23 and filed a motion
to vacate portions of the Order on January 26. Hollinger Inc. sought to vacate
only those aspects of the order that limited its rights as a shareholder and did
not seek to vacate aspects of the Order that maintain the Special Committee of
the Hollinger International board of directors.

Hollinger's principal asset is its approximately 72.4% voting and 30.0% equity
interest in Hollinger International Inc. Hollinger International is a global
newspaper publisher with English-language newspapers in the United States, Great
Britain, and Israel. Its assets include The Daily Telegraph, The Sunday
Telegraph and The Spectator and Apollo magazines in Great Britain, the Chicago
Sun-Times and a large number of community newspapers in the Chicago area, The
Jerusalem Post and The International Jerusalem Post in Israel, a portfolio of
new media investments and a variety of other assets.

Media Contact:

Jim Badenhausen
646-805-2006                                                www.hollingerinc.com
```

[Congressional Bills 118th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[H.R. 2502 Introduced in House (IH)]

<DOC>

118th CONGRESS
  1st Session
                                H. R. 2502

To repeal the Gun-Free School Zones Act of 1990 and amendments to that 
                                  Act.

_______________________________________________________________________

                    IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

                             April 6, 2023

  Mr. Massie (for himself, Mr. Biggs, Mrs. Boebert, Mr. Brecheen, Mr. 
 Burlison, Mr. Clyde, Mr. Davidson, Mr. Duncan, Mr. Gaetz, Mr. Good of 
 Virginia, Mr. Gosar, Ms. Greene of Georgia, Ms. Hageman, Mr. LaMalfa, 
  Mrs. Luna, Mr. McClintock, Mrs. Miller of Illinois, Mr. Mooney, Mr. 
   Moore of Alabama, Mr. Perry, Mr. Reschenthaler, Mr. Roy, and Mr. 
  Rosendale) introduced the following bill; which was referred to the 
                       Committee on the Judiciary

_______________________________________________________________________

                                 A BILL

 
To repeal the Gun-Free School Zones Act of 1990 and amendments to that 
                                  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 ``Safe Students Act''.

SEC. 2. REPEAL OF THE GUN-FREE SCHOOL ZONES ACT OF 1990 AND AMENDMENTS 
              TO THAT ACT.

    (a) In General.--Section 922 of title 18, United States Code, is 
amended by striking subsection (q).
    (b) Related Amendments.--
            (1) Section 921(a) of such title is amended by striking 
        paragraphs (25) through (27) and redesignating paragraphs (28), 
        (29), and (32) through (37) as paragraphs (25) through (32), 
        respectively.
            (2) Section 924(a) of such title is amended--
                    (A) in paragraph (1)(B), by striking ``(k), or 
                (q)'' and inserting ``or (k)''; and
                    (B) by striking paragraph (4) and redesignating 
                paragraphs (5) through (8) as paragraphs (4) through 
                (7), respectively.
            (3) The Gun-Free School Zones Act of 1990 (18 U.S.C. 921 
        note, 922 note; section 1702 of Public Law 101-647; 104 Stat. 
        4844-4845) is repealed.
                                 <all>
```
### Michigan Supreme Court Lansing, Michigan

Robert P. Young, Jr.,
Chief Justice

Michael F. Cavanag h Marilyn Kell y Stephen J. Markma n Diane M. Hathawa y Mary Beth Kell y Brian K. Zahra,

J ustices

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

_______________________________________ __ Clerk June 28, 2011

p0620 

# Order

June 28, 2011

142403

PEOPLE OF THE STATE OF MICHIGAN, Plaintiff-Appellee,

v SC: 142403 COA: 287470 Wayne CC: 06-014041-FC CHOYA ANTHONY TINSLEY, Defendant-Appellant.

________________ _______________ __________/

On order of the Court, the application fo r leave to appeal the November 18, 2010 judgment of the Court of Appeals is consid ered, and it is DENIED, because we are not persuaded that the questions presented should be reviewed by this Court.
[Federal Register Volume 80, Number 9 (Wednesday, January 14, 2015)]
[Notices]
[Page 1986]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2015-00397]


=======================================================================
-----------------------------------------------------------------------

 SMALL BUSINESS ADMINISTRATION

[Disaster Declaration #14208 and #14209]


California Disaster #CA-00228

AGENCY: U.S. Small Business Administration.

ACTION: Notice.

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

SUMMARY: This is a notice of an Administrative declaration of a 
disaster for the State of California dated 01/07/2015.
    Incident: December Winter Storms.
    Incident Period: 12/03/2014 through 12/23/2014.
    Effective Date: 01/07/2015.
    Physical Loan Application Deadline Date: 03/09/2015.
    Economic Injury (EIDL) Loan Application Deadline Date: 10/07/2015.

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 Administrator's disaster declaration, applications for disaster 
loans may be filed 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: Tehama.

Contiguous Counties:
    California: Butte, Glenn, Mendocino, Plumas, Shasta, Trinity.

    The Interest Rates are:

------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                                Percent
------------------------------------------------------------------------
For Physical Damage:
  Homeowners With Credit Available Elsewhere.................      3.875
  Homeowners Without Credit Available Elsewhere..............      1.938
  Businesses With Credit Available Elsewhere.................      6.000
  Businesses Without Credit Available Elsewhere..............      4.000
  Non-Profit Organizations With Credit Available Elsewhere...      2.625
  Non-Profit Organizations Without Credit Available Elsewhere      2.625
For Economic Injury:
  Businesses & Small Agricultural Cooperatives Without Credit      4.000
   Available Elsewhere.......................................
  Non-Profit Organizations Without Credit Available Elsewhere      2.625
------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The number assigned to this disaster for physical damage is 14208 B 
and for economic injury is 14209 0.
    The State which received an EIDL Declaration # is California.

(Catalog of Federal Domestic Assistance Numbers 59002 and 59008)


    Dated: January 7, 2015.
Maria Contreras-Sweet,
Administrator.
[FR Doc. 2015-00397 Filed 1-13-15; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 8025-01-P
I 

118TH CONGRESS 

1ST SESSION H. R. 2476 

To keep schools safe using unobligated Federal funds available to the 

Secretary of Education to respond to the coronavirus. 

IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES 

APRIL 3, 2023 

Mr. WEBER of Texas introduced the following bill; which was referred to the 

Committee on Education and the Workforce 

A BILL 

To keep schools safe using unobligated Federal funds available to the Secretary of Education to respond to the 

coronavirus. 

1 Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representa2 tives of the United States of America in Congress assembled, 

3 SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE. 

4 This Act may be cited as the ‘‘Protect Our Children’s 

5 Schools Act’’. 

6 SEC. 2. KEEPING SCHOOLS SAFE. 

7 The unobligated balance of each amount appro8 priated or otherwise made available to the Secretary of 

9 Education to prevent, prepare for, or respond to the 

10 coronavirus shall be made available to local educational 


pbinns on DSKJLVW7X2PROD with $$_JOB
2 

•HR 2476 IH

1 agencies to keep the elementary schools and secondary 

2 schools served by such agencies safe. 

Æ 


pbinns on DSKJLVW7X2PROD with $$_JOB
#### Pioneer Tower Owners Association, Respondent, v State Farm Fire & Casualty Company et al., Appellants.

Submitted February 17, 2009;

decided February 19, 2009

Motion by New York Insurance Association, Inc. et al. for leave to appear amici curiae on the appeal herein granted only to the extent that the proposed brief is accepted as filed. Two copies of the brief must be served and 24 copies filed within seven days.