alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
EX-35.1
Aurora Loan Services


Owner: None



Depositor: Structured Asset Securities Corporation
Attention: Mortgage Finance SARM 2007-2
745 7th Avenue, 7th Floor
New York, New York 10019

Master Servicer: Aurora Loan Services LLC
Michele Olds
10350 Park Meadows Drive
Littleton, CO 80124

Trustee: Wells Fargo Bank, N.A.
Attention: Kimberly J. Wiggins / SARM 2007-2
49062 Old Annapolis Road
Columbia, MD 21046

Securities Admin



Subject: Annual Officer's Certification
Fiscal Year: 2007
Investor Code: H06
Investor Name: SARM 2007-2

I, Terry Gentry, the undersigned, a duly authorized officer of Aurora Loan
Services LLC (the "Servicer"), do certify the following for the Calendar Year
2007:

1. A review of the activities of the Servicer during the period beginning on
the cut-off date and ending on December 31, 2007 (the reporting period) and of
its performance under the Agreement for such period has been made under my
supervision.

2. To the best of my knowledge, based on such review, the Servicer has
fulfilled all of its obligations under the Agreement in all material aspects
throughout such reporting period.



Certified by: AURORA LOAN SERVICES LLC

By /s/ Terry L. Gentry
Name: Terry L. Gentry
Title: Managing Director
#### In the Matter of Margaret M. Potter et al., Appellants, et al., Petitioner, v Town Board of Town of Aurora et al., Respondents. (Appeal No. 1.) In the Matter of Margaret M. Potter et al., Appellants, v Town Board of Town of Aurora et al., Respondents. (Appeal No. 2.)

Decided June 11, 2009

Appeals dismissed, without costs, by the Court of Appeals, sua sponte, upon the ground that no substantial constitutional question is directly involved.
[Federal Register Volume 74, Number 91 (Wednesday, May 13, 2009)]
[Notices]
[Pages 22532-22533]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: E9-11117]


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

DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY

Federal Energy Regulatory Commission

[Project No. 13414-000]


City of Burlington, IA; Notice of Preliminary Permit Application 
Accepted for Filing and Soliciting Comments, Motions To Intervene, and 
Competing Applications

May 4, 2009.
    On March 31, 2009, the City of Burlington, Iowa filed an 
application, pursuant to section 4(f) of the Federal Power Act, 
proposing to study the feasibility of the City of Burlington 
Hydroelectric Project, to be located on the Mississippi River, in Des 
Moines County, Iowa and Henderson County, Illinois.
    The proposed City of Burlington Hydroelectric Project would be 
located at the existing U.S. Army Corps of Engineers' Lock and Dam No. 
18 near Gladstone, Illinois and Burlington, Iowa. Lock and Dam No. 18's 
impoundment equals about 12,152 surface acres.
    The proposed project would consist of: (1) Thirty submersible 500-
kilowatt turbine/generators with total installed hydraulic capacity of 
36,000 cubic feet per second and total installed generating capacity of 
15 megawatts; (2) a new 1-mile-long transmission line; (3) appurtenant 
facilities. The City of Burlington Project would have an estimated 
average annual generation of 76,831 megawatts-hours, which would be 
sold to Alliant Energy, Inc.
    Applicant Contact: Mr. Doug Worden, City Manager, City of 
Burlington, Iowa, 400 Washington Street, Burlington, Iowa 52601, (319) 
753-8120.
    FERC Contact: John Ramer, (202) 502-8969.
    Deadline for filing comments, motions to intervene, competing 
applications (without notices of intent), or notices of intent to file 
competing applications: 60 days from the issuance of this notice. 
Comments, motions to intervene, notices of intent, and competing 
applications may be filed electronically via the Internet. See 18 CFR 
385.2001(a)(1)(iii) and the instructions on the Commission's Web site 
under the ``e-Filing'' link. If unable to be filed electronically, 
documents may be paper-filed. To paper-file, an original and eight 
copies should be mailed to: Kimberly D. Bose, Secretary, Federal Energy 
Regulatory Commission, 888 First Street, NE., Washington, DC 20426. For 
more information on how to submit these types of filings please go to 
the Commission's Web site located at

[[Page 22533]]

http://www.ferc.gov/filing-comments.asp. More information about this 
project can be viewed or printed on the ``eLibrary'' link of 
Commission's Web site at http://www.ferc.gov/docs-filing/elibrary.asp. 
Enter the docket number (P-13414) in the docket number field to access 
the document. For assistance, call toll-free 1-866-208-3372.

Kimberly D. Bose,
Secretary.
[FR Doc. E9-11117 Filed 5-12-09; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6717-01-P
SHIV INVESTMENTS OF 

JACKSONVILLE, LLC,

Petitioner,

v.

THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE 

CITY OF JACKSONVILLE, and 

THE CITY OF JACKSONVILLE,

Respondent.

___________________________/

IN THE DISTRICT COURT OF APPEAL

FIRST DISTRICT, STATE OF FLORIDA

NOT FINAL UNTIL TIME EXPIRES TO 

FILE MOTION FOR REHEARING AND 

DISPOSITION THEREOF IF FILED

CASE NO. 1D14-2252

Opinion filed September 19, 2014.

Petition for Writ of Certiorari.

Paul M. Harden, Jacksonville, for Petitioner.

Craig D. Feiser and Jason R. Teal, Assistant General Counsel, Jacksonville, for 

Respondents.

PER CURIAM.

DENIED.

PADOVANO, THOMAS, and CLARK, JJ., CONCUR.
#### State v. Spencer

Case below: 177 N.C. App. 813

No. 364P06

Defs Motion for Dismissal (COA05-623)

Denied 01/25/07
From: The District Court of the 4th Judicial District. County of Missoula.

#### STATE OF MONTANA, Plaintiff, vs. CLIFFORD DELGER, Defendant,

CAUSE NO. DC-97-12978 DECISION

On November 10, 2008, the defendant was sentenced to a commitment to the Department of Corrections for a term of five (5) years for violation of the conditions of a suspended sentence for the offense of Theft, a felony.

On February 12,2009, the defendant’s application for review of that sentence was heard by the Sentence Review Division of the Montana Supreme Court.

The defendant was present and was represented by Eric Olson. The state was not represented.

Before hearing the application, the defendant was advised that the Sentence Review Division has the authority not only to reduce the sentence or affirm it, but also increase it. The defendant was further advised that there is no appeal from a decision of the Sentence Review Division. The defendant acknowledged that he understood this and stated that he wished to proceed.

Rule 17 of the Rules of the Sentence Review Division of the Supreme Court of Montana provides that “the sentence imposed by the District Court is presumed correct, and the sentence will not be reduced or increased unless itis deemed clearly inadequate or excessive.” (§46-18-904(3), MCA).

The Division finds that the reasons advanced for modification are insufficient to hold that the sentence imposed by the District Court is inadequate or excessive.

Therefore, it is the unanimous decision of the Sentence Review Division that the sentence shall be affirmed.

Done in open Court this 12th day of February, 2009.

DATED this 27th day of February, 2009.

Chairperson, Hon. Stewart Stadler, Member, Hon. Blair Jones and Member, Richard Simonton.
# National Mentoring Month, 2009

 During National Mentoring Month, we recognize the millions of individuals who dedicate themselves to making a difference in the lives of others, and we underscore our commitment to supporting these soldiers in America's armies of compassion.

 Every day across our great Nation, men and women of many different backgrounds work to inspire our next generation of leaders. By sharing their time and experiences, mentors help instill important values that encourage America's youth to set high goals and achieve their dreams. Mentors demonstrate that the strength of our Nation lies in the hearts and souls of our citizens and that a positive influence in someone's life helps them secure a more hopeful future.

 My Administration has been committed to building a culture of service, citizenship, and responsibility. Through the Mentoring Children of Prisoners program, volunteers help provide consistent guidance and support so that these children can lead lives of opportunity and achievement. The USA Freedom Corps is strengthening mentoring opportunities in America and spreading a message of hope across our Nation. The Helping America's Youth initiative, led by First Lady Laura Bush, motivates caring adults to connect with youth to help them to grow up to be responsible and successful adults. By working together, we can enrich the lives of our next generation and continue a legacy of kindness and encouragement.

 I appreciate our Nation's mentors and all those who contribute to their community by helping to change a child's life. For more information on volunteering to be a mentor, visit volunteer.gov. During National Mentoring Month, we honor the many Americans who have touched the lives of others with their compassion, and we reflect on their efforts toward building a stronger and brighter future for all.

 NOW, THEREFORE, I, GEORGE W. BUSH, President of the United States of America, by virtue of the authority vested in me by the Constitution and laws of the United States, do hereby proclaim January 2009 as National Mentoring Month. I call upon the people of the United States to recognize the importance of mentoring, to look for opportunities to serve as mentors in their communities, and to observe this month with appropriate activities and programs.

 IN WITNESS WHEREOF, I have hereunto set my hand this thirtieth day of December, in the year of our Lord two thousand eight, and of the Independence of the United States of America the two hundred and thirty-third.

[FR Doc. E9-113

Billing code 3195-W9-P
In the 1950s, scientific 

integrity was put into

question by a packet of salt...

Written & Directed by José Ricardo García 

Produced by Leon Geršković 

www.nist.gov/ad-x2

NATIONAL INSTITUTE OF

STANDARDS AND TECHNOLOGY U.S. DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE
# The Attorney General of Texas
April 7, 1980

Honorable Forrest Green, Chairman Agriculture and Livestock Committee House ofRepresentatives Austin, Texas 78769 Opinion No. NW-161 Re: Whether government employees may carry handguns while hunting and trapping predatory animals and rodent pests. Dear Representative Green: On behalf of the House Committee on Agriculture and Livestock, you have requested our opinion as to whether chapter 46 of the Penal Code prohibits governmental employees from carrying handguns while hunting and trapping predatory animals and rodent pests asaduty oftheir employment. Section 46.02 ofthe Penal Code provides that (a) a person commits an offense if he intentionally, knowingly, orrecklessly carries onor about hisperson ahandgun, illegal knife, or club. Section 46.03 states, however, that section 46.02 is not applicable to a person: (4) engaging in lawful hunting, fishing, or other

sporting activity if the weapon is a type commonly used inthe activity.

. .. Section 1ofarticle 192b,V.T.C.S., requires the State ofTexas to

.. . cooperate through the Agricultural and Mechanical College System of Texas with the United States Department of the Interior, Fish and Wildlife Service in the control of coyotes, wolves, mountain lions, bobcats! the Russian boar, and other pre.datory animals and m the control of prairie dogs, pocket gophers, jack rabbits, ground squirrels, rats and other rodent pests for the protection of livestock, food and feed supplies, crops and ranges.

P. 517Honorable Forrest Green - Page Two (14N-161)

Since article 192b,V.T.C.S., authorizes the hunting ofvarious predatory animals and rodent pests, it is clear that employees affected thereby may carry handguns if when actually engaged in hunting activities the handguns constitute weapons of a type “commonly used in the activity” of controlling such animals. Thus, if handguns are commonly used to control the animals described in section 1ofarticle 192b,V.T.C.S., it is our opinion that governmental employees, while en aged in such activities, may lawfully carry handguns under the exception ofsection 46.03 4)of the Penal Code. f SUMMARY Governmental employees may carry handguns while hunting predatory animals androdent pests, provided such weapons are ofa type commonly used in the activity ofcontrolling such animals. /I

Attorney General ofTexas JOHN W.FAINTER, JR. First Assistant Attorney General TEDL.HARTLEY Executive Assistant Attorney General Prepared by Rick Gilpin Assistant Attorney General APPROVED: OPINION COMMITTEE C.Robert Heath, Chairman Susan Garrison Rick Gilpin Bruce Youngblood

P. 518
#### Durden *v.*Trubee, for use.

By an order passed in term, on September 16th, a motion for a new trial was set for a hearing during the next week at the superior court of an adjoining county, and the movant was allowed “until the hearing ” to make out and file a brief of the evidence. On September 22d, an order was passed postponing the hearing of the motion till September 28th, and allowing the movant till that time “to perfect the brief of evidence.” On September 29th, it was ordered that the hearing of the motion be postponed till October 13th, and that movant have until then to “prepare and submit the brief of evidence, without prejudice to the right of the other side to move to dismiss the motion on the ground that the brief of evidence had not been prepared as theretofore required.” No brief of evidence was ever filed or submitted to the court until October 13th, and the motion for a new trial was then dismissed for want of a brief of evidence.

There was no error in dismissing the motion. The order of September 22d limited the time within which the brief of evidence might be filed to September 28th. The court had no authority to pass the order of September 29th, and even if rightly granted, it expressly preserved the right of respondent to move to dismiss the motion for a new trial for failure to file in time the brief of evidence, as required by previous order.

August 14, 1894.

Motion for a new trial. Before J ad ge J enkins. Morgan superior court. September term, 1898.

J. H. Holland, for plaintiff in error.

Roster & Butler, *contra.*

*Judgment affirmed.*
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<ARTICLE> 5
       
<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   9-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          APR-30-1996
<PERIOD-END>                               JAN-31-1996
<CASH>                                          39,950
<SECURITIES>                                         0
<RECEIVABLES>                                        0
<ALLOWANCES>                                         0
<INVENTORY>                                          0
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                                39,950
<PP&E>                                          73,781
<DEPRECIATION>                                       0
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                 113,731
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                                0
<BONDS>                                              0
<COMMON>                                       137,000
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<OTHER-SE>                                    (23,269)
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                   113,731
<SALES>                                              0
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                                51,447
<CGS>                                                0
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                        0
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                     0
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                     0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                                   0
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                  2,730
<INCOME-TAX>                                     2,412
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                                318
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                       318
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                        0
<EPS-DILUTED>                                        0
        

</TABLE>
```

[Congressional Bills 109th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[S. 3934 Introduced in Senate (IS)]

109th CONGRESS
  2d Session
                                S. 3934

  To terminate authorization for the project for navigation, Rockport 
                             Harbor, Maine.

_______________________________________________________________________

                   IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES

                           September 25, 2006

   Ms. Snowe introduced the following bill; which was read twice and 
       referred to the Committee on Environment and Public Works

_______________________________________________________________________

                                 A BILL

 
  To terminate authorization for the project for navigation, Rockport 
                             Harbor, Maine.

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

SECTION 1. TERMINATION OF AUTHORIZATION.

    (a) In General.--The portion of the project for navigation, 
Rockport Harbor, Maine, authorized by the first section of the Act of 
August 11, 1888 (25 Stat. 400), located within the 12-foot anchorage 
described in subsection (b) is not authorized.
    (b) Description of Anchorage.--The anchorage referred to in 
subsection (a) is more particularly described as--
            (1) beginning at the westernmost point of the anchorage at 
        N128800.00, E349311.00;
            (2) thence running north 12 degrees, 52 minutes, 37.2 
        seconds, east 127.08 feet to a point at N128923.88, E349339.32;
            (3) thence running north 17 degrees, 40 minutes, 13.0 
        seconds, east 338.61 feet to a point at N129246.51, E349442.10;
            (4) thence running south 89 degrees, 21 minutes, 21.0 
        seconds, east 45.36 feet to a point at N129246.00, E349487.46;
            (5) thence running south 44 degrees, 13 minutes, 32.6 
        seconds, east 18.85 feet to a point at N129232.49, E349500.61;
            (6) thence running south 17 degrees, 40 minutes 13.0 
        seconds, west 340.50 feet to a point at N128908.06, E349397.25;
            (7) thence running south 12 degrees, 52 minutes, 37.2 
        seconds, west 235.41 feet to a point at N128678.57, E349344.79; 
        and
            (8) thence running north 15 degrees, 32 minutes, 59.3 
        seconds, west 126.04 feet to the point of origin.
                                 <all>
```
#### Frances ENDENCIA, Plaintiff-Appellant, v. ADT SECURITY SERVICES, INC., Defendant-Appellee.

No. 08-4071.

United States Court of Appeals, Seventh Circuit.

Submitted May 21, 2009.*

Decided May 21, 2009.

Frances Endencia, Bartlett, IL, pro se.

Anthony R. Rutkowski, MacCabe & McGuire, Chicago, IL, for Defendant-Ap-pellee.

Before WILLIAM J. BAUER, Circuit Judge, JOHN L. COFFEY, Circuit Judge, and DANIEL A. MANION, Circuit Judge.

*

 After examining the briefs and the record, we have concluded that oral argument is unnecessary. Thus, the appeal is submitted on the briefs and the record. *See*Fed. R.App. P. 34(a)(2).

*458ORDER

Frances Endencia contracted with ADT Security to monitor the burglar alarm at her veterinary clinic in Streamwood, Illinois. She asserts that the clinic was vandalized—she found a dog dead and blood on another animal’s bedding—and accuses ADT of negligence because it never detected a security breach. Endencia also contends that ADT was somehow responsible for the decision of the Illinois Veterinarian Licensing & Disciplinary Board to suspend indefinitely her license to practice veterinary medicine. She sued ADT in the Circuit Court of Cook County, but ADT removed the action to federal court on the ground of diversity of citizenship. ADT then moved to dismiss, arguing that its only duty to Endencia was contractual and quoting an exculpatory clause in the contract that relieves ADT of liability for damage caused by break-ins. The district court dismissed Endencia’s complaint for failure to state a claim.

As best we can tell, Endencia principally argues on appeal that ADT is liable despite the exculpatory clause. Illinois courts, though, have held that limitations of liability in alarm service contracts are enforceable and consistent with public policy. *Chi. Steel Rule & Die Fabricators Co. v. ADT Security Sys., Inc.,*327 Ill.App.3d 642, 261 Ill.Dec. 590, 763 N.E.2d 839, 846 (2002); *N. River Ins. Co. v. Jones,*275 Ill.App.3d 175, 211 Ill.Dec. 604, 655 N.E.2d 987, 992 (1995). Endencia also contends that her complaint states a claim under 805 III. Comp. Stat. 10/8, but that statute is unrelated to her ease. Finally, she alleges wrongdoing by the Village of Streamwood, but the Village is not a party to this action.

AFFIRMED.
exv10w1



 





Exhibit 10.1




GUARANTY




     The undersigned, Brocade Communications Systems, Inc., a Delaware corporation (“Brocade”),
hereby unconditionally guaranties to the extent set forth in the Indenture, dated February 7, 2003
between McDATA Corporation, as issuer (the “Issuer”), and Wells Fargo Bank, National Association,
as successor in interest to Wells Fargo Bank Minnesota, National Association, as Trustee (the
“Trustee”), as supplemented by First Supplemental Indenture dated as of January 29, 2007 by and
among the Issuer, the Trustee, and Brocade (as amended, restated or supplemented from time to time,
the “Indenture”), and subject to the provisions of the Indenture, as supplemented, (a) the due and
punctual payment of the principal of, premium, if any, and interest on the Securities, when and as
the same shall become due and payable, whether at maturity, by acceleration or otherwise, the due
and punctual payment of interest on overdue principal of, premium, if any, and, to the extent
permitted by law, interest, all in accordance with the terms set forth in Article Three of the
First Supplemental Indenture, and (b) in case of any extension of time of payment or renewal of any
Securities or any of such other obligations, that the same will be promptly paid in full when due
or performed in accordance with the terms of the extension or renewal, whether at stated maturity,
by acceleration or otherwise.



     The obligations of Brocade to the Holders pursuant to this Guaranty and the Indenture, as
supplemented, are expressly set forth in Article Three of the First Supplemental Indenture and
reference is hereby made to the Indenture, as supplemented, for the precise terms and limitations
of this Guaranty.



     Capitalized terms used but not defined herein shall have the meanings ascribed to such terms
in the Indenture, as supplemented.



[Signature on Following Page]




1









 








     IN WITNESS WHEREOF, Brocade has caused this Guaranty to be duly executed as of the date set
forth below.



Dated: January 29, 2007




	 	 	 	 	 
	 	Brocade:



BROCADE COMMUNICATION SYSTEMS, INC.

 	 
	 	By:  	/s/ Richard Deranleau
 	 
	 	 	Name:  	Richard Deranleau 	 
	 	 	Title:  	Chief Financial Officer 	 
	 




2