alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
Exhibit 99.2

CERTIFICATIONS

In
connection with the annual report of Talisman Energy Inc. (the "Company") on Form 40-F for the fiscal year ending December 31, 2005, as filed with the
Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the "Report"), I, James W. Buckee, Chief Executive Officer of the Company, certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, as
adopted pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that:

|
|

|By: |  | /s/JAMES W. BUCKEE                                    | 
|--- |  | ----------------------------------------------------- | 
|    |  | James W. Buckee
President and
Chief Executive Officer | 

DATEDat Calgary, Alberta, as of March 13, 2006.

---



CERTIFICATIONS

In
connection with the annual report of Talisman Energy Inc. (the "Company") on Form 40-F for the fiscal year ending December 31, 2005, as filed with the
Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the "Report"), I, Michael D. McDonald, Executive Vice-President, Finance and Chief Financial Officer of the Company, certify,
pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, as adopted pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that:

|
|

|By: |  | /s/MICHAEL D. MCDONALD                                                            | 
|--- |  | --------------------------------------------------------------------------------- | 
|    |  | Michael D. McDonald
Executive Vice-President, Finance and Chief Financial Officer | 

|
|

DATEDat Calgary, Alberta, as of March 13, 2006.

---



QuickLinks
IN THE SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF MONTANA

No. DA 23-0668

STATE OF MONTANA, 

Plaintiff and Appellee, 

v. 

CLAYTON DOUGLAS KIRN,

Defendant and Appellant.

ORDER

Upon consideration of Appellant’s motion for extension of time, 

and good cause appearing,

IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that Appellant is granted an extension 

of time to and including May 17, 2024, within which to prepare, file, 

and serve Appellant’s opening brief on appeal.

Electronically signed by:

Mike McGrath

Chief Justice, Montana Supreme Court

April 9 2024

04/09/2024

Case Number: DA 23-0668
#### Sostenes Diaz MAYORGA, Petitioner, v. Michael B. MUKASEY, US Attorney General, Respondent.

No. 07-60444

Summary Calendar.

United States Court of Appeals, Fifth Circuit.

Jan. 25, 2008.

Sostenes Diaz Mayorga, Pro Se.

Thomas Ward Hussey, Director, U.S. Department of Justice Office of Immigration Litigation, Washington, DC, Shai’on A. Hudson, U.S. Citizenship & Immigration Services, Houston, TX, for Respondent.

Before KING, DAVIS and CLEMENT, Circuit Judges.

PER CURIAM: *

Sostenes Diaz Mayorga petitions for review of the Board of Immigration Appeals *630(BIA) order affirming the immigration judge’s (IJ) denial of his request for a continuance and dismissing his appeal. Mayorga argues that the IJ abused his discretion and deprived him of due process in denying his request for a continuance.

When, as in this case, the BIA affirms the IJ’s decision, relying on reasons set forth in the IJ’s decision, this court reviews both the BIA’s decision and that of the IJ. *See Ahmed v. Gonzales,*447 F.3d 433, 437 (5th Cir.2006). An IJ has discretion to grant an alien’s motion for a continuance upon a showing of good cause. 8 C.F.R. § 1003.29; *Ali v. Gonzales,*440 F.3d 678, 680 (2006). Because Mayorga failed to show good cause for the granting of a continuance, we find no abuse of discretion. *See Ahmed,*447 F.3d at 440; *Ali,*440 F.3d at 680.

There is no liberty or property interest in discretionary relief from removal. *See Assaad v. Ashcroft,*378 F.3d 471, 475 (5th Cir.2004). The IJ’s denial of a continuance so that Mayorga could pursue an adjustment of status did not violate due process. *See Ahmed,*447 F.3d at 440.

To the extent that Mayorga argues that the BIA should have remanded under 8 C.F.R. § 1003.1(e)(5) or referred the case to a three-member panel pursuant to § 1003.1(e)(6), he has not shown that his appeal satisfied the criteria for either a referral to a three-member panel or for a remand. *See*§ 1003.1(e)(5), (e)(6).

PETITION FOR REVIEW DENIED.

*

 Pursuant to 5th Cir. R. 47.5, the court has determined that this opinion should not be published and is not precedent except under the limited circumstances set forth in 5th Cir R. 47.5.4.
Exhibit 35.8



|     |  |                                                                          
|---- |  | -------------------------------------------------------------------------
|LOGO |  | CMBS Department MAC N9401-011
1055 10th Avenue S.E.
Minneapolis. MN 55414

Citigroup Commercial Mortgage Securities Inc.

390 Greenwich Street, 5th Floor

New York, New York 10013

RE: Annual Statement of Compliance

The undersigned, a duly authorized officer of Wells Fargo Bank, N.A., as Custodian for the Empire Hotel & Retail Companion Loan (in such
capacities, Wells Fargo), hereby certifies as follows as of and for the year ending December 31, 2014 (the reporting period):



| | (a) | A review of Wells Fargos activities during the reporting period and of its performance under the applicable servicing agreement(s) listed on Schedule A hereto (the Servicing Agreement(s)) has been made
under my supervision; and
| | --- | --------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------



| | (b) | To the best of my knowledge, based on such review, Wells Fargo has fulfilled all of its obligations under the Servicing Agreement(s) in all material respects throughout the reporting period, except as noted on Schedule
B.
| | --- | -----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

March 27, 2015



|                
|----------------
|/s/ Gail Vannest
|Gail Vannest    
|Vice President  



---

To: Citigroup Commercial Mortgage Securities Inc.

Schedule A

List of
Servicing Agreement(s) and Series

Pooling and Servicing Agreement dated as of February 1, 2013 by and among GS MORTGAGE SECURITIES CORPORATION
II, Depositor, WELLS FARGO BANK, NATIONAL ASSOCIATION, Master Servicer, LNR PARTNERS, LLC, Special Servicer, TRIMONT REAL ESTATE ADVISORS, INC., Operating Advisor WELLS FARGO BANK, NATIONAL ASSOCIATION Certificate Administrator and U.S. BANK
NATIONAL ASSOCIATION, Trustee relating to the series, GSMC 2013-GC10 Commercial Mortgage Pass-Through Certificates transaction , relating to the Empire Hotel & Retail Companion Loan, a Pari passu portion of which is included in the Series
CGCMT 2013-GCJ11 Commercial Mortgage Pass-Through Certificates transaction.



---

To: Citigroup Commercial Mortgage Securities Inc.

Schedule B

Material
Non-Compliance with Servicing Obligations

Not Applicable
[Federal Register Volume 82, Number 168 (Thursday, August 31, 2017)]
[Notices]
[Pages 41414-41415]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2017-18445]


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

FEDERAL RESERVE SYSTEM


Change in Bank Control Notices; Acquisitions of Shares of a Bank 
or Bank Holding Company

    The notificants listed below have applied under the Change in Bank 
Control Act (12 U.S.C. 1817(j)) and Sec.  225.41 of the Board's 
Regulation Y (12 CFR 225.41) to acquire shares of a bank

[[Page 41415]]

or bank holding company. The factors that are considered in acting on 
the notices are set forth in paragraph 7 of the Act (12 U.S.C. 
1817(j)(7)).
    The notices are available for immediate inspection at the Federal 
Reserve Bank indicated. The notices also will be available for 
inspection at the offices of the Board of Governors. Interested persons 
may express their views in writing to the Reserve Bank indicated for 
that notice or to the offices of the Board of Governors. Comments must 
be received not later than September 14, 2017.
    A. Federal Reserve Bank of Chicago (Colette A. Fried, Assistant 
Vice President) 230 South LaSalle Street, Chicago, Illinois 60690-1414:
    1. James C. Volkert, individually and as trustee of the James C. 
Volkert Revocable Living Trust, the James C. Volkert Revocable Living 
Trust, Susan A. Volkert, Jacquelyn Volkert, and Michael Volkert, all of 
Montgomery, Illinois; as a group acting in concert to retain voting 
shares of Montgomery Bancshares, Inc., and thereby indirectly retain 
voting shares of Bank of Montgomery, both in Montgomery, Illinois.
    B. Federal Reserve Bank of Kansas City (Dennis Denney, Assistant 
Vice President) 1 Memorial Drive, Kansas City, Missouri 64198-0001:
    1. Jeff Schumacher, Lincoln, Nebraska; to acquire voting shares of 
North Central Bancorp, Inc., and thereby indirectly acquire BankFirst, 
both in Norfolk, Nebraska.

    Board of Governors of the Federal Reserve System, August 25, 
2017.
Yao-Chin Chao,
Assistant Secretary of the Board.
[FR Doc. 2017-18445 Filed 8-30-17; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6210-01-P
<PAGE>   1


EXHIBIT 11.0 -  Computation of Earnings per Share


The following represents the computation of earnings per share reflecting the
assumption that the granted shares under the option and warrants plan which
would be dilutive will be exercised.

<TABLE>
<CAPTION>
                                                                           Three Months Ended
                                                                                March 31,
                                                                      -----------------------------
                                                                          2001            2000
                                                                      -----------      -----------
<S>                                                                   <C>              <C>
Net income                                                            $   457,458      $   427,561

Less: Compensation expense relating to assumed conversion
of warrants and options, net of tax                                       (92,367)              --

Add: Interest expense relating to convertible debt                             --            4,600
                                                                      -----------      -----------
Adjusted net income for computation                                   $   365,091      $   432,161
                                                                      ===========      ===========

Weighted average common shares outstanding                             12,165,250       12,121,756


Common share equivalents relating to stock options, warrants,
and convertible debt                                                      525,167          401,499
                                                                      -----------      -----------

Adjusted common and common equivalent
shares for computation                                                 12,690,417       12,523,255
                                                                      ===========      ===========

Net income per share:

     Basic                                                                   $.04             $.04
                                                                             ====             ====

     Diluted                                                                 $.03             $.03
                                                                             ====             ====
</TABLE>


The accompanying notes are an integral part of these statements.
IN THE SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF MONTANA

No. DA 22-0305

JAMES JOSEPH MAIN, JR.,

Petitioner and Appellant,

v.

STATE OF MONTANA,

Respondent and Appellant.

ORDER

Upon consideration of Appellant’s motion for extension of time, and 

good cause appearing,

IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that Appellant is granted an extension 

of time to and including April 19, 2023, within which to prepare, file, 

and serve Appellant’s opening brief on appeal.

Electronically signed by:

Mike McGrath

Chief Justice, Montana Supreme Court

March 13 2023

03/13/2023

Case Number: DA 22-0305
<PAGE>

                                                                    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 on Form 10-Q of Health
Fitness Corporation (the "Company") for the period ended September 30, 2005, as
filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on November 14, 2005 (the
"Periodic Report"), I, Jerry V. Noyce, Chief Executive Officer of the Company,
hereby certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, as adopted pursuant to
Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that:

      1.    The Periodic 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 Periodic Report fairly presents, in
            all material respects, the financial condition and results of
            operations of the Company.

/s/ Jerry V. Noyce
-----------------------
Jerry V. Noyce
Chief Executive Officer
November 14, 2005
**EXHIBIT 11.0**Computation of Earnings per ShareThe following represents the computation of earnings per share reflecting the assumption that thegranted shares under the option and warrants plan which would be dilutive will be exercised.                   Three Months Ended June 30,  Six Months Ended June 30,   2007  2006  2007  2006 Net earnings applicable to commonshareholders, basic $173,004  $727,474  $684,671  $1,290,737                  Add: Dividend to preferred shareholders  —   —   —   96,410 Less: Change in fair value of warrants  —   (406,694)  —   (841,215)             Net earnings, diluted $173,004  $320,780  $684,671  $545,932                               Weighted average common sharesoutstanding, basic  19,702,693   18,931,169   19,508,107   17,005,769 Common share equivalents relating to:                Preferred stock  —   —   —   1,916,022 Stock options  591,132   719,502   639,016   786,722 Warrants  230,849   660,158   235,229   597,161 Restricted stock  33,333   —   33,149   —              Weighted average common sharesoutstanding  20,558,007   20,310,829   20,415,501   20,305,674                               Net earnings per share:                Basic $0.01  $0.04  $0.04  $0.08 Diluted $0.01  $0.02  $0.03  $0.03                  Anti-dilutive preferred stock, stockoptions and warrants not included inthe diluted earnings per sharecomputations  421,250   1,955,272   421,250   1,988,270 See notes to consolidated financial statements.
| (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 thatcertain Pooling and Servicing Agreement dated as of June 1, 2013, by and amongWELLS FARGO COMMERCIAL MORTGAGE SECURITIES, INC., as Depositor, WELLS FARGOBANK, NATIONAL ASSOCIATION, as Master Servicer, RIALTO CAPITAL ADVISORS, LLC,as Special Servicer, PENTALPHA SURVEILLANCE LLC, as Trust Advisor, WELLS FARGOBANK, NATIONAL ASSOCIATION, as Certificate Administrator, as Tax Administratorand as Custodian, and U.S. BANK NATIONAL ASSOCIATION, as Trustee, with respectto Commercial Mortgage Pass-Through Certificates WFRBS Series 2013-C14 (the"Agreement"). Capitalized terms used herein not otherwise definedshall have the meanings assigned in the Agreement.

 

Pursuant to Section 11.12 ofthis Agreement, I, Daniel Bober, Executive Vice President of CommercialMortgage Services do hereby certify that:

 

1.  A review of theactivities of the Master Servicer during the period from January 1, 2016through December 31, 2016 (the “Reporting Period”), and of itsperformance per the Agreement during such period has been made under mysupervision, and

 

2.  To the best ofmy knowledge, based on such review, the Master Servicer, has fulfilled all ofits obligations under this Agreement in all material respects throughout theReporting Period.

 

 

IN WITNESS WHEREOF, theundersigned has executed this Certificate as of the 28th day of February 2017.

 

 

/s/Daniel Bober

Daniel Bober

Executive Vice President

Wells Fargo Bank

 

 

| Wells Fargo Bank, N.A. | (logo) Together we’ll  go far |
|------------------------|-------------------------------------|
NOT RECOMMENDED FOR FULL-TEXT PUBLICATION File Name: 05a0723n.06

Filed: August 18, 2005 No. 04-6095 UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE SIXTH CIRCUIT

GERALD E. THOMPSON, ) ) Plaintiff-Appellant, ) ON APPEAL FROM THE UNITED ) STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE v. ) WESTERN DISTRICT OF TENNESSEE ) SMITH & NEPHEW, INC., ) MEMORANDUM OPINION ) Defendant-Appellee. )
Before: BATCHELDER, GIBBONS and McKEAGUE, Circuit Judges. PER CURIAM. Plaintiff-appellant Gerald E. Thompson appeals from the summary judgment order of the district court, awarding judgment to defendant-appellee Smith & Nephew, Inc. Thompson had brought claims against his former em ployer under federal and state law, alleging that his discharge from employment was motivated by r ace discrimination. The district court ruled as a matter of law that the claims were barred by th e release signed by Thompson on the last day of his employment, despite his having appended the words “with reservations” to his signature. Having had the benefit of oral argument and having carefully considered the record on appeal, the briefs of the parties, and the applicable law, we are not persuaded that the district court erred in granting summary judgment to Smith & Nephew. Because we conclude that the reasoning which supports award of judgment to Smith & Nephew has been correctly articulated by the district court, issuance of a detailed written opinion by this court would be duplicative and serve no useful purpose.2 Accordingly, the judgment of the district c ourt is, upon the r easoning employed in its opinion dated August 12, 2004, hereby AFFIRMED.
```

[Congressional Bills 114th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[S. 839 Introduced in Senate (IS)]

114th CONGRESS
  1st Session
                                 S. 839

  To amend title XVIII of the Social Security Act to extend the rural 
   add-on payment in the Medicare home health benefit, and for other 
                               purposes.

_______________________________________________________________________

                   IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES

                             March 23, 2015

  Ms. Collins (for herself and Ms. Cantwell) introduced the following 
  bill; which was read twice and referred to the Committee on Finance

_______________________________________________________________________

                                 A BILL

 
  To amend title XVIII of the Social Security Act to extend the rural 
   add-on payment in the Medicare home health benefit, and for other 
                               purposes.

    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 ``Preserve Access to Medicare Rural 
Home Health Services Act of 2015''.
     (a) Rural Add-On Extension.--Section 421(a) of the Medicare 
Prescription Drug, Improvement, and Modernization Act of 2003 (Public 
Law 108-173; 117 Stat. 2283), as amended by section 5201(b) of the 
Deficit Reduction Act of 2005 (Public Law 109-171; 120 Stat. 46) and 
section 3131(c) of the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act 
(Public Law 111-148; 124 Stat. 428), is amended by striking ``2016'' 
each place it appears and inserting ``2021''.
    (b) Revision of Home Health Outlier Adjustment.--Section 
1895(b)(5)(A) of the Social Security Act (42 U.S.C. 1395fff(b)(5)(A)) 
is amended, in the second sentence, by inserting ``(or, in the case of 
each of 2016 through 2020, 2.25 percent)'' after ``2.5 percent''.
                                 <all>
```
1 ... S ee T EX . R. A PP . P. 47. 4. 

## COURT OF APPEALS SECOND DISTRICTOFTEXAS FORT WORTH NO. 2 - 08 - 27 0- CV I N RE J O HN E CH O L S AN D SO UTH W EST ERN RE L ATO RS COM P OSI TE ST RUCT URE S, I NC.

----- ----- -- OR I GI NALP R OCE E DI NG

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

### M E M ORANDU M OP I NI ON 1

----- ----- -- T h e c o u r t h a s c o n s id e r e d r e la t o r s ’ p e t it io n f o r w r it o f m a n d a m u s a n d is of t he opi ni on t hatr el i efs houl d be de ni ed. Accor di ngl y, r el at or s’ p e t i t i on f or
w r i t ofm and am us i s den i ed. R el at or s shal l pay al l cost s of t hi s or i gi nal pr oceedi ng, f orw hi ch l et execut i on i ssue.

DI XON HOL M AN J U S T I C E P A N E L B : L IV IN G S T O N , D A U P H IN O T , a n d H O L M A N , J J . H O LM A N , J. w oul d r equest a r esponse.2

DEL I VERE D: J un e 30, 2008
UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 97-2011

MID-STATE TRUST II, Plaintiff - Appellee, versus HENRY W. MARTIN, JR., Defendant - Appellant, and HENRY W. MARTIN, SR., a/k/a Henry W. Martin; IOLA MARTIN, Defendants.

_________________________ REAL ESTATE UNLIMITED, L.L.C., Movant. Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of South Carolina, at Greenville. Matthew J. Perry, Jr., Senior District Judge. (CA-97-350-6) Submitted: September 30, 1997 Decided: October 29, 1997 Before HALL and WILLIAMS, Circuit Judges, and PHILLIPS, Senior Circuit Judge.2 Dismissed by unpublished per curiam opinion. Henry W. Martin, Jr., Appellant Pro Se. Timothy Graham Sellers, DELANEY & SELLERS, P.A., Charlotte, North Carolina, for Appellee. Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. See Local Rule 36(c).3 PER CURIAM:Henry Martin seeks to appeal the district court's order remanding a removed action to state court. Martin admits that he was served with the initial pleading that commenced the state action in June 1996. He waited until February 1997 to file his notice of removal, well beyond the thirty-day period set forth at 28 U.S.C. § 1446(b) (1994). The district court remanded the matter to the state court from which it was removed because it was untimely. We dismiss the appeal for want of jurisdiction. See 28 U.S.C. § 1447(d) (1994); Quackenbush v. Allstate Ins. Co. , ___ U.S. ___, 64 U.S.L.W. 4379, 4381 (U.S. June 3, 1996) (No. 95-244); Wilkins v. Rogers , 581 F.2d 399, 403 (4th Cir. 1978). We dispense with oral argument because the facts and legal contentions are adequately presented in the materials before the court and argument would not aid the decisional process. We dismiss the petition for emergency writ, in which Martin seeks a stay of a state court order, for want of jurisdiction. See District of Columbia Court of Appeals v. Feldman, 460 U.S. 462, 482 (1983).

DISMISSED