alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
| (logo)  WELLS FARGO | **CMBS  Department**

 

MAC  N9401-011

1055  10th Avenue SE

Minneapolis,  MN 55414 |
|---------------------|--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|

 

 

MorganStanley Capital I Inc. 

1585BROADWAY

NEWYORK, New York 10036-8200

 

RE:Annual Statement of Compliance for Morgan Stanley Bank of America Merrill LynchTrust 2013-C11, Commercial Mortgage Pass-Through Certificates, Series 2013-C11

 

Perthe Pooling and Servicing Agreement dated as of August 1, 2013 (the"Agreement"), the undersigned, a duly authorized officer of WellsFargo Bank, N.A., as Custodian ("Wells Fargo"), hereby certifies asfollows as of and for the year ending December 31, 2016 (the "ReportingPeriod"):

 

(a)A review of Wells Fargo's activities during the Reporting Period and of itsperformance under the Agreement has been made under such officer's supervision;and

 

(b)To the best of such officer's knowledge, based on such review, Wells Fargo hasfulfilled all of its obligations under the Agreement in all material respectsthroughout the Reporting Period.

 

 

February27, 2017

 

/s/Gail Vannest

GAILVANNEST

VicePresident

 

WellsFargo Bank, N.A.
#### David K. EVERSON; Patricia M. Everson, Plaintiffs—Appellants, v. Catherine C. EAGLES, Individually and in Her Official Capacity as Justice of the Superior Court of Guilford/Rockingham County, North Carolina, Defendant—Appellee. David K. Everson; Patricia M. Everson, Plaintiffs—Appellants, v. Patricia Timmons-Goodson, Individually and in Her Official Capacity as Justice of the Supreme Court of North Carolina, Defendant—Appellee.

Nos. 07-1844, 07-1845.

United States Court of Appeals, Fourth Circuit.

Submitted: Jan. 9, 2008.

Decided: Jan. 16, 2008.

David K. Everson, Patricia M. Everson, Appellants Pro Se. Grady L. Balentine, Office of the Attorney General, Raleigh, North Carolina, for Appellees.

Before WILKINSON, TRAXLER, and KING, Circuit Judges.

Affirmed by unpublished PER CURIAM opinion.

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.

PER CURIAM:

David K. and Patricia M. Everson appeal the district court’s orders granting *617Respondents’ motions to dismiss the Ever-sons’ 42 U.S.C. §§ 1981 and 1983 (2000) claims. The district court found the Ever-sons’ claims were barred by absolute judicial immunity, the Eleventh Amendment, the *Rooker-Feldman*
      * abstention doctrine, and because they failed to state a federal claim. The Eversons challenge each of the district court’s findings.

We have reviewed the record, the parties’ informal briefs, and the district court’s orders and find no reversible error. Accordingly, we affirm for the reasons stated by the district court. *Everson v. Eagles,*No. 1:06-cv-00901-JAB (M.D.N.C. June 4, 2007); *Everson v. Goodson,*No. 1:06-cv-00902-JAB (M.D.N.C. June 4, 2007). 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.

*AFFIRMED.*

*See District of Columbia Court of Appeals v. Feldman,*460 U.S. 462, 103 S.Ct. 1303, 75 L.Ed.2d 206 (1983); *Rooker v. Fidelity Trust Co.,*263 U.S. 413, 44 S.Ct. 149, 68 L.Ed. 362 (1923).
----

**Exhibit      32.1**

**CERTIFICATION      OF CHIEF EXECUTIVE OFFICER AND **

**CHIEF      FINANCIAL OFFICER**

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

| /s/                L. Paul Latham                                      |
|------------------------------------------------------------------------|
| L.                Paul Latham                                          |
| President                and Chief Executive Officer                   |
| of                Southwest Royalties, Inc., the                       |
| Managing                General Partner of                             |
| Southwest                Royalties Institutional Income Fund X-C, L.P. |
|                                                                   |
| May                14, 2007                                            |
|                                                                   |
|                                                                   |
| /s/                Mel G. Riggs                                        |
| Mel                G. Riggs                                            |
| Vice                President and Chief Financial Officer of           |
| Southwest                Royalties, Inc., the                          |
| Managing                General Partner of                             |
| Southwest                Royalties Institutional Income Fund X-C, L.P. |
|                                                                   |
| May                14,                2007                             |
<PAGE>   1
                                                                      EXHIBIT 11

             COLLABORATIVE CLINICAL RESEARCH, INC. AND SUBSIDIARIES

                        STATEMENT REGARDING COMPUTATION
                         OF NET INCOME (LOSS) PER SHARE
                     (IN THOUSANDS, EXCEPT PER SHARE DATA)


<TABLE>
<CAPTION>
                                                     Three Months
                                                    Ended March 31,
                                                   ------------------
                                                     1997      1996
                                                   -------    ------
<S>                                                <C>        <C>   
Net income (loss)                                  $  (418)   $   56
                                                   =======    ======

Weighted average common shares outstanding           6,651     2,475
Net effect of dilutive common share options
     and dilutive common share warrants - Note A        --       483
Net effect of preferred share dividends - Note B        --       138
                                                   -------    ------
Shares used in calculation of net income
     (loss) per common share                         6,651     3,096
                                                   =======    ======

Net income (loss) per common share - Note C        $ (0.06)   $ 0.02
                                                   =======    ======


<FN>
NOTE A - Common share options and warrants granted within a twelve month
         period preceding the Company's initial public offering are included as
         if they were outstanding for all periods presented, prior to the
         Company's initial public offering. The dilutive effect of all options
         outstanding was calculated using the treasury stock method.

NOTE B - Preferred share dividends declared within a twelve month period
         preceding the Company's initial public offering are included as if they
         were outstanding for all periods presented, prior to the Company's
         initial public offering. Preferred shares were converted into common
         shares upon completion of the initial public offering.

NOTE C - Fully diluted net income (loss) per common share has not been
         presented because the effect is either immaterial or anti-dilutive.
</TABLE>
[Federal Register Volume 82, Number 174 (Monday, September 11, 2017)]
[Notices]
[Pages 42665-42666]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2017-19157]


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

DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY

Federal Energy Regulatory Commission

[Docket No. ER17-2375-000]


GenOn Holdco 8, LLC; Supplemental Notice That Initial Market-
Based Rate Filing Includes Request for Blanket Section 204 
Authorization

    This is a supplemental notice in the above-referenced proceeding, 
of GenOn Holdco 8, LLC's application for market-based rate authority, 
with an accompanying rate tariff, noting that such application includes 
a request for blanket authorization, under 18 CFR part 34, of future 
issuances of securities and assumptions of liability.
    Any person desiring to intervene or to protest should file with the 
Federal Energy Regulatory Commission, 888 First Street NE., Washington, 
DC 20426, in accordance with Rules 211 and 214 of the Commission's 
Rules of Practice and Procedure (18 CFR 385.211 and 385.214). Anyone 
filing a motion to intervene or protest must serve a copy of that 
document on the Applicant.

[[Page 42666]]

    Notice is hereby given that the deadline for filing protests with 
regard to the applicant's request for blanket authorization, under 18 
CFR part 34, of future issuances of securities and assumptions of 
liability, is September 25, 2017.
    The Commission encourages electronic submission of protests and 
interventions in lieu of paper, using the FERC Online links at http://www.ferc.gov. To facilitate electronic service, persons with Internet 
access who will eFile a document and/or be listed as a contact for an 
intervenor must create and validate an eRegistration account using the 
eRegistration link. Select the eFiling link to log on and submit the 
intervention or protests.
    Persons unable to file electronically should submit an original and 
5 copies of the intervention or protest to the Federal Energy 
Regulatory Commission, 888 First Street NE., Washington, DC 20426.
    The filings in the above-referenced proceeding are accessible in 
the Commission's eLibrary system by clicking on the appropriate link in 
the above list. They are also available for electronic review in the 
Commission's Public Reference Room in Washington, DC. There is an 
eSubscription link on the Web site that enables subscribers to receive 
email notification when a document is added to a subscribed docket(s). 
For assistance with any FERC Online service, please email 
<a href="/cdn-cgi/l/email-protection#084e4d5a4b47666461666d5b7d7878677a7c486e6d7a6b266f677e"><span class="__cf_email__" data-cfemail="e5a3a0b7a6aa8b898c8b80b69095958a9791a583809786cb828a93">[email protected]</span></a> or call (866) 208-3676 (toll free). For TTY, 
call (202) 502-8659.

    Dated: September 5, 2017.
Nathaniel J. Davis, Sr.,
Deputy Secretary.
[FR Doc. 2017-19157 Filed 9-8-17; 8:45 am]
 BILLING CODE 6717-01-P


</pre><script data-cfasync="false" src="/cdn-cgi/scripts/5c5dd728/cloudflare-static/email-decode.min.js"></script></body>
</html>
U.S. BUREAU OF LABOR STATISTICS COMPENSATION AND WORKING CONDITIONS

Page 1

Occupations with the Most Injuries and Illnesses with Days Away from Work,

2002

by William J. Wiatrowski

Bureau of Labor Statistics

Originally Posted: May 26, 2004<

• In 2002, there were 4.7 million nonfatal occupational injuries and illnesses in the private sector. • Nearly 1 in 3 (about 1.4 million) required at least 1 day away from work beyond the day of the incident. • Truck drivers had the largest number of such lost-worktime incidents (112,200), followed by nursing aides (79,000)

and nonconstruction laborers (76,600). • Injured or ill truck drivers typically were men; half of their injuries were sprains or strains, often to the trunk or lower

extremities. • Most of the nursing aides, orderlies, and attendants who were injured or became ill were women suffering sprains and

strains to the back due to overexertion related to lifting or moving patients.

For more information, see Lost-Worktime Injuries and Illnesses: Characteristics and Resulting Days Away From Work, 2002, USDL 04-460 (U.S. Department of Labor, March 25, 2004), available on the Internet at http://www.bls.gov/news.release/

osh2.toc.htm

William J. Wiatrowski

Economist, Office of Safety, Health, and Working Conditions, Bureau of Labor Statistics.

Telephone: (202) 691-6305; E-mail: Wiatrowski.William@bls.gov

Data for Chart: Occupations with the Most Injuries and Illnesses with Days Away from Work, 2002

Occupations Injuries and Illnesses (thousands)

Sales workers, other commodities 24.7

Cooks 24.7

Supervisors and proprietors, sales occupations 26.1
U.S. BUREAU OF LABOR STATISTICS COMPENSATION AND WORKING CONDITIONS

Page 2

Occupations Injuries and Illnesses (thousands)

Carpenters 28.3

Assemblers 34.4

Construction laborers 41.9

Janitors and cleaners 42.0

Laborers, nonconstruction 76.6

Nursing aides, orderlies, and attendants 79.0

Truck drivers 112.2

U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics | Division of Information and Marketing Services, PSB Suite 2850, 2 Massachusetts Avenue, NE Washington, DC

20212-0001 | www.bls.gov/OPUB | Telephone: 1-202-691-5200 | Contact Us
NUMBER 13-16-00058-CR

COURT OF APPEALS

THIRTEENTH DISTRICT OF TEXAS

CORPUS CHRISTI - EDINBURG

MICHAEL DEWAYNE DIAZ, Appellant,

v.

THE STATE OF TEXAS, Appellee.

On appeal from the 130th District Court 

of Matagorda County, Texas.

MEMORANDUM OPINION

Before Justices Benavides, Perkes, and Longoria

Memorandum Opinion Per Curiam

This appeal was abated by this Court on February 10, 2016, and remanded to the 

trial court for a determination of whether appellant is indigent and entitled to appointed 

counsel. The trial court made findings of fact and conclusions of law and this Court 

ordered the Honorable Bill Leathers to notify this Court of the status of his representation. 
2

The Honorable Bill Leathers has notified this Court that he is appellant’s counsel. 

Accordingly this appeal is REINSTATED.

Appellant, Michael Dewayne Diaz, attempts to appeal a conviction for escape. 

The trial court has certified that “the defendant has waived the right of appeal.” See TEX.

R. APP. P. 25.2(a)(2). On March 4, 2016, this Court notified appellant’s counsel of the 

trial court’s certification and ordered counsel to: (1) review the record; (2) determine 

whether appellant has a right to appeal; and (3) forward to this Court, by letter, counsel’s 

findings as to whether appellant has a right to appeal, or, alternatively, advise this Court 

as to the existence of any amended certification.

On March 28, 2016, counsel responded by filing an affidavit with this Court. 

Counsel’s response does not establish that the certification currently on file with this Court 

is incorrect or that appellant otherwise has a right to appeal. 

The Texas Rules of Appellate Procedure provide that an appeal must be dismissed 

if the trial court’s certification does not show that the defendant has the right of appeal. 

TEX. R. APP. P. 25.2(d); see TEX. R. APP. P. 37.1, 44.3, 44.4. Accordingly, this appeal is 

DISMISSED. 

PER CURIAM

Do not publish.

See TEX. R. APP. P. 47.2(b).

Delivered and filed the

19th day of May, 2016.
CIRCUIT COURT OF THE CITY OF RICHMOND

#### Nancy L. Stephens v. Lynette McLauren

November 9, 2001

Case No. LM-267-1

By Judge Melvin R. Hughes, Jr.

This case is before the court on the plaintiff’s Motion for Partial Summary Judgment in connection with Requests for Admission, which were served with the Motion for Judgment. The case was filed on February 2, 2001, and the Motion for Judgment was served on February 14, 2001. Responses were filed with the plaintiff on October 17, 2001, and by that date are 217 days late. Plaintiff asserts that, as a result of defendant’s failure to respond to the Requests for Admissions, they should be deemed admitted, and thus there is no genuine issue regarding liability in this case.

Counsel for the defendant represents that, after service, the defendant provided all the documents to his insurer. The claims adjuster in charge of Ifae file later left employment with the insurer. Following, the file was taken over by another adjuster who either did not receive the complete file or overlooked the requests. The requests were not then provided to defense counsel. Indeed, counsel did not learn of the requests until the motion. After the motion was filed, counsel then contacted the adjuster who provided the material. Counsel then filed the responses. Counsel argues that the court should extend the time for filing arguing, *inter alia,*oversight and lack of any prejudice on the plaintiff. Trial is set for December 12, 2001.

This issue is governed by Rule 4:11(a) of the Rules of the Supreme Court, which gives a defendant 28 days to respond in the instance of service with the initial pleading. In this case, March 24, 2001, was the 28th day. Defendant responded 245 days after being served with the plaintiffs Requests for Admissions and did not move the court for an extension of time *135for filing responses. Defendant has not offered an excuse for the delay which would warrant permitting the filing eight months after the defendant was served. Therefore, Requests for Admission will be deemed admitted and the plaintiff's Motion for Partial Summary Judgment is granted.
Exhibit 12.1





DETERMINATION OF RATIO OF
EARNINGS TO FIXED CHARGES



|                                         |  | Three Months Ended March 31,
|---------------------------------------- |  | ----------------------------
|                                         |  | 2003                        
|Income before provision for income taxes |  | $                           
|Fixed charges                            |  |                             
|Amortization of deferred financing costs |  |                             
|Interest expense                         |  |                             
|                                         |  |                             
|Earnings before fixed charges            |  |                             
|Fixed charges                            |  |                             
|Amortization of deferred financing costs |  |                             
|Interest expense                         |  |                             
|                                         |  |                             
|Total fixed charges                      |  | $                           
|                                         |  |                             
|Ratio of earnings to fixed charges       |  |                             



20
Dismissed and Opinion Filed March 9, 2023 

S 

In The 

Court of Appeals 

Fifth District of Texas at Dallas 

No. 05-22-00548-CV 

JORDAN COGBURN, Appellant 

V. 

MELANIE CREEKMORE, Appellee 

On Appeal from the 15th Judicial District Court 

Grayson County, Texas 

Trial Court Cause No. CV-18-1125 

MEMORANDUM OPINION 

Before Justices Partida-Kipness, Smith, and Breedlove 

Opinion by Justice Partida-Kipness 

Before the Court is Appellant’s unopposed motion to dismiss appeal. In the 

motion, Appellant informs the Court that the parties have reached a settlement and 

resolved all outstanding issues in this case. Appellant asks this Court to dismiss the 

appeal with prejudice. We grant the motion and dismiss the appeal with prejudice. 

See TEX. R. APP. P. 42.1(a)(1). 

220548F.P05 

/Robbie Partida-Kipness/

ROBBIE PARTIDA-KIPNESS 

JUSTICE 
 –2– 

S 

Court of Appeals 

Fifth District of Texas at Dallas 

JUDGMENT 

JORDAN COGBURN, Appellant 

No. 05-22-00548-CV V. 

MELANIE CREEKMORE, Appellee 

 On Appeal from the 15th Judicial 

District Court, Grayson County, 

Texas 

Trial Court Cause No. CV-18-1125. 

Opinion delivered by Justice PartidaKipness. Justices Smith and 

Breedlove participating. 

 In accordance with this Court’s opinion of this date, the appeal is 

DISMISSED WITH PREJUDICE. 

 It is ORDERED that each party bear its own costs of this appeal. 

Judgment entered this 9th day of March 2023.
Joinder Agreement



 Exhibit 10.2 
 EXECUTION COPY 
 JOINDER AGREEMENT 

JOINDER AGREEMENT dated as of December 27, 2011, among Vistaprint Limited, a Bermuda company (the “Company”),
Vistaprint N.V., a public limited company organized under the laws of the Netherlands, with its statutory seat in Venlo, the Netherlands (the “New Borrower”), and JPMorgan Chase Bank, N.A. as Administrative Agent (the
“Administrative Agent”). 
 Reference is hereby made to the Credit Agreement dated as of October 21, 2011
(as amended, supplemented or otherwise modified from time to time, the “Credit Agreement”), among the Company, the Parent, the Subsidiary Borrowers from time to time party thereto, the Lenders from time to time party thereto and
JPMorgan Chase Bank, N.A. as Administrative Agent. Capitalized terms used herein but not otherwise defined herein shall have the meanings assigned to such terms in the Credit Agreement. Under the Credit Agreement, the Lenders have agreed, upon the
terms and subject to the conditions therein set forth, to make Loans to certain Borrowers (collectively with the Company, the “Borrowers”), and the Company and the New Borrower desire that the New Borrower become a Borrower. In
addition, the New Borrower hereby authorizes the Company to act on its behalf as and to the extent provided for in Article II of the Credit Agreement. 
 Each of the Company and the New Borrower represents and warrants that the representations and warranties of the Company in the Credit Agreement relating to the New Borrower and this Agreement are true and
correct in all material respects on and as of the date hereof, other than representations given as of a particular date, in which case they shall be true and correct in all material respects as of that date. The Company agrees that the Guarantee of
the Company contained in the Credit Agreement will apply to the Obligations of the New Borrower in accordance with the terms and conditions of Article X of the Credit Agreement. Upon execution of this Agreement by each of the Company, the New
Borrower and the Administrative Agent, the New Borrower shall be a party to the Credit Agreement and shall constitute a “Borrower” for all purposes thereof, and the New Borrower hereby agrees to be bound by all provisions of the Credit
Agreement. 
 This Agreement shall be governed by and construed in accordance with the laws of the State of New York.

 [Signature Pages Follow] 







 IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the parties hereto have caused this Agreement to be duly executed by
their authorized officers as of the date first appearing above. 
  

			
	VISTAPRINT LIMITED, as the Company
		
	By:	 	 /s/ Dawn Antoine

	Name: Dawn Antoine
	Title: Secretary
	
	VISTAPRINT N.V., as a Borrower
		
	By:	 	 /s/ Ernst J. Teunissen

	Name: Ernst J. Teunissen
	Title: Chief Financial Officer and Managing Director



  
 Joinder
Agreement 








 
			
	JPMORGAN CHASE BANK, N.A.,
	as Administrative Agent
		
	By:	 	 /s/ Scott McNamara

	Name: Scott McNamara
	Title: Vice President



  
 Joinder
Agreement