alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
EXHIBIT 23.1





Consent of Independent Registered Public Accounting Firm





National General Holdings Corp.


New York, New York





We hereby consent to the incorporation by reference in the Registration Statements on Form S-8 (No. 333-194493), Form S-3 (No. 333-202637), and Form S-3ASR (No. 333-204903) of National General Holdings Corp. of our report dated February 29, 2016, relating to the consolidated financial statements and financial statement schedules, and our report relating to the effectiveness of National General Holdings Corp.’s internal control over financial reporting dated February 29, 2016, except as to the effect of the material weakness described in Management's Annual Report on Internal Control over Financial Reporting (Revised), which is dated March 16, 2017, which expresses an adverse opinion on the effectiveness of the Company's Internal Control over Financial Reporting, which appears in this Form 10-K/A.








/s/ BDO USA, LLP


New York, New York


Dated: March 16, 2017
| (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 tothat certain Trust and Servicing Agreement dated as of July 1, 2013, by andamong WELLS FARGO COMMERCIAL MORTGAGE SECURITIES, INC., as Depositor, WELLSFARGO BANK, NATIONAL ASSOCIATION, as Master Servicer, RIALTO CAPITAL ADVISORS,LLC, as Special Servicer, PARK BRIDGE LENDER SERVICES LLC, as Trust Advisor,WELLS FARGO BANK, NATIONAL ASSOCIATION as Certificate Administrator, as TaxAdministrator, and Custodian, and U.S. BANK NATIONAL ASSOCIATION, as Trustee,with respect to Commercial Mortgage Pass-Through Certificates Series 2013-LC12(the "Agreement"). Capitalized terms used herein not otherwisedefined shall have the meanings assigned in the Agreement.

 

 

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

 

1.           A review of the activities of the Master Servicer during the period fromJanuary 1, 2016 through December 31, 2016 (the “Reporting Period”),and of its performance per the Agreement during such period has been made undermy supervision, and

 

2.           To the best of my knowledge, based on such review, the Master Servicer hasfulfilled all of its obligations under this Agreement in all material respectsthroughout the Reporting 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 |
|------------------------|------------------------------------|
Submitted April *4,*

reversed and remanded for entry of a single conviction for first-degree failure to appear and for resentencing May 28, 2008

#### STATE OF OREGON, Plaintiff-Respondent, *v.*ALEJANDRO ADRIAN URENO-ALVAREZ, aka Alejandro Adrian Alvarez, aka Alejandro Ureno Alvarez, aka Ureno Alyandro Alvarez, *Defendant-Appellant.*

Umatilla County Circuit Court

CF060045; A133116

185 P3d 556

Peter Gartlan, Chief Defender, Legal Services Division, and Meredith Allen, Deputy Public Defender, Office of Public Defense Services, filed the brief for appellant.

Hardy Myers, Attorney General, Mary H. Williams, Solicitor General, and Michael R. Washington, Senior Assistant Attorney General, filed the brief for respondent.

Before Edmonds, Presiding Judge, and Wollheim, Judge, and Sercombe, Judge.

PER CURIAM

*302PER CURIAM

Defendant signed a release agreement in which he agreed to appear in court on a single date and time for four different pending cases. He failed to appear as required by the release agreement and was charged with two counts of first-degree failure to appear, ORS 162.205, and two counts of second-degree failure to appear, ORS 162.195. After a trial to the court, defendant was convicted on all four counts, and the court entered judgment for four separate convictions. On appeal, defendant argues that the trial court erred in failing to merge the four convictions into a single conviction for first-degree failure to appear, because defendant violated a single release agreement. The state concedes that, under *State v. Camarena-Velasco,*207 Or App 19, 139 P3d 979 (2006), the trial court erred in failing to merge the convictions into a single conviction for first-degree failure to appear. We agree and accept the concession.

Reversed and remanded for entry of a single conviction for first-degree failure to appear and for resentencing.
EXHIBIT 10.43


                                  EXHIBIT 10.43
                            NEW COMMITMENT AGREEMENT

         Reference is made to the Credit Agreement dated as of February 24, 1999
(as amended, modified, extended or restated from time to time, the "CREDIT
AGREEMENT") among by and among Sterile Recoveries, Inc., a Florida corporation
(the "BORROWER"), the other Credit Parties party thereto, the Lenders party
thereto and First Union National Bank, as Agent. All of the defined terms in the
Credit Agreement are incorporated herein by reference.

         1. Effective as of the Effective Date set forth below, the undersigned
Lender hereby confirms its additional Commitment (the "Additional Commitment"),
in an aggregate principal amount of up to the amount of set forth below, to make
Revolving Loans and to participate in Letters of Credit and Swingline Loans in
accordance with the Credit Agreement. If the undersigned Lender is already a
Lender under the Credit Agreement, such Lender acknowledges and agrees that such
Additional Commitment is in addition to any existing Commitment of such Lender
under the Credit Agreement. If the undersigned Lender is not already a Lender
under the Credit Agreement, such Lender hereby acknowledges, agrees and confirms
that, by its execution of this New Commitment Agreement, such Lender will, as of
the Effective Date, be a party to the Credit Agreement and be bound by the
provisions of the Credit Agreement and, to the extent of its Commitment, have
the rights and obligations of a Lender thereunder.

         2. This New Commitment Agreement shall be governed by and construed in
accordance with the laws of the State of Florida.

Amount of Additional Commitment                      $15,000,000

Effective Date of Additional Commitment              October 4, 2000


The terms set forth above
are hereby agreed to:

THE BANKERS BANK

By:  /s/ DALE A REID
     --------------------------------

Title:  EXECUTIVE VICE PRESIDENT
      -------------------------------


<PAGE>

CONSENTED TO (as required by the Credit Agreement):

FIRST UNION NATIONAL BANK,          STERILE RECOVERIES, INC.
as Agent

By:   /s/    JOYCE L. BARRY                  By:    /s/  D. JON MCGUIRE
  ---------------------------------             --------------------------------

Title:   SENIOR VICE PRESIDENT              Title:  VICE PRESIDENT
      -----------------------------               ------------------------------
II 

114TH CONGRESS 

1ST SESSION S. 88 

To amend the Clean Air Act to clarify the definition of accidental release, 

and for other purposes. 

IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES 

JANUARY 7, 2015 

Mr. VITTER introduced the following bill; which was read twice and referred 

to the Committee on Environment and Public Works 

A BILL 

To amend the Clean Air Act to clarify the definition of 

accidental release, and for other purposes. 

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 ‘‘General Duty Clari5 fication Act of 2015’’. 

6 SEC. 2. PREVENTION OF ACCIDENTAL RELEASES. 

7 Section 112(r) of the Clean Air Act (42 U.S.C. 

8 7412(r)) is amended— 

9 (1) in paragraph (1)— 


smartinez on DSK4TPTVN1PROD with BILLS
2 

•S 88 IS

1 (A) by striking ‘‘It shall be the objective’’ 

2 and inserting the following: 

3 ‘‘(A) IN GENERAL.—It shall be the objec4 tive’’; and 

5 (B) by adding at the end the following: 

6 ‘‘(B) REGULATIONS.— 

7 ‘‘(i) IN GENERAL.—Not later than 12 

8 months after the date of enactment of the 

9 General Duty Clarification Act of 2015, 

10 the Administrator shall promulgate regula11 tions defining the terms ‘extremely haz12 ardous substance’, ‘appropriate hazard as13 sessment techniques’, and ‘design and 

14 maintain a safe facility’ as used in this 

15 subsection. 

16 ‘‘(ii) UNIFORMITY.—Not later than 18 

17 months after the date of enactment of the 

18 General Duty Clarification Act of 2015, 

19 the Administrator shall issue guidelines to 

20 ensure that this paragraph is enforced by 

21 the regional offices of the Environmental 

22 Protection Agency in a uniform and appro23 priate manner across all regions of the 

24 United States.’’; 


smartinez on DSK4TPTVN1PROD with BILLS
3 

•S 88 IS

1 (2) in paragraph (2)(A), by inserting ‘‘, other 

2 than an emission resulting from an act intended to 

3 cause harm’’ before the period at the end; and 

4 (3) by adding at the end the following: 

5 ‘‘(12) DESIGNS, APPROACHES, OR TECH6 NOLOGIES.—In exercising any authority under this 

7 subsection, the Administrator shall not, directly or 

8 indirectly, impose any obligation on any owner or 

9 operator of any stationary source to consider or im10 plement particular designs, approaches, or tech11 nologies relating to manufacturing, processing, han12 dling, or storage.’’. 

Æ 


smartinez on DSK4TPTVN1PROD with BILLS
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

The undersigned hereby certifies, for the purposes of section 1350 of
chapter 63 of title 18 of the United States Code, in his capacity as Chief Executive Officer of SRI/Surgical Express, Inc. (SRI), that, to his knowledge, the Quarterly Report of SRI on Form 10-Q for the quarter ended March 31, 2009
(the Report), fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, and that the information contained in the Report fairly presents, in all material respects, the financial condition and
results of operations of SRI.



|                  |  |  |  |     |  |                        
|----------------- |  |  |  | --- |  | -----------------------
|Date: May 4, 2009 |  |  |  | By: |  | /s/ Gerald Woodard     
|                  |  |  |  |     |  | Gerald Woodard         
|                  |  |  |  |     |  | Chief Executive Officer
Michigan Supreme Court 

# Order

Lansing, Michigan

November 2, 2007 Clifford W. Taylor, Chief Justice

133854 Michael F. Cavanagh
Elizabeth A. Weaver Marilyn Kelly ARIEL PEREZ, SR., P ersonal Representative Maura D. Corrigan Robert P. Young, Jr. of the Estate of ARIEL E. PEREZ, JR., Stephen J. Markman, Deceased, Justices Plaintiff-Appellant,

v SC: 133854 COA: 271406 Oakland CC: 2005-065925-NM OAKLAND COUNTY an d ROBERTA RICE, Defendants-Appellees,

and

DR. SARATH HEMACHANDRA, Defendant.

________________ _______________ __________/

On order of the Court, the applicati on for leave to appeal the March 27, 2007 judgment of the Court of Appeals is cons idered, and it is DENIED, because we are not persuaded that the questions presented should be reviewed by this Court.

C AVANAGH , J., would grant leave to appeal.

K ELLY , J., dissents and states as follows:

The Court denies leave to appeal in yet another case of inmate suicide. 1 Once again, it declines to resolve the open question whether it is relevant to consider the foreseeability of such a suicide when determining proximat e cause. In this case, a jail employee removed Mr. Perez from a suicide watc h despite her knowled ge that he had recently tried to kill hims elf while in the jail’s custodial care. This Court should put to rest the question whether, in so doing, the employee committed gross negligence that was the proximate cause of the inmate’s death. 2

1 See the recent order denyin g leave to appeal in Cooper v Washtenaw Co , 477 Mich 953 (2006).

2 See Robinson v Detroit , 462 Mich 439, 462 (2000)._______________________________________ __ 2

This Court has acknowledged that a custodial relationshi p is a special relationship that gives rise to a duty to protect an in mate from harm, including self-inflicted harm. 3 In an inmate-suicide case, is that duty not mean ingless if the failure to protect the inmate from himself can never be the proximate cause of his death? This question should not
remain unanswered.

3 Hickey v Zezulka ( On Resubmission ), 439 Mich 40 8, 438 (1992).

d1030 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.

November 2, 2007

Clerk
```

[Congressional Bills 114th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[S. Con. Res. 2 Agreed to Senate (ATS)]

114th CONGRESS
  1st Session
S. CON. RES. 2

Authorizing the use of Emancipation Hall in the Capitol Visitor Center 
  for a ceremony to present the Congressional Gold Medal to the First 
 Special Service Force, in recognition of its superior service during 
                             World War II.

_______________________________________________________________________

                   IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES

                            January 8, 2015

  Mr. Tester submitted the following concurrent resolution; which was 
                        considered and agreed to

_______________________________________________________________________

                         CONCURRENT RESOLUTION

 
Authorizing the use of Emancipation Hall in the Capitol Visitor Center 
  for a ceremony to present the Congressional Gold Medal to the First 
 Special Service Force, in recognition of its superior service during 
                             World War II.

    Resolved by the Senate (the House of Representatives concurring),

SECTION 1. USE OF EMANCIPATION HALL FOR CEREMONY TO PRESENT 
              CONGRESSIONAL GOLD MEDAL TO FIRST SPECIAL SERVICE FORCE.

    Emancipation Hall in the Capitol Visitor Center is authorized to be 
used on February 3, 2015, for a ceremony to present the Congressional 
Gold Medal to the First Special Service Force collectively, in 
recognition of its superior service during World War II. Physical 
preparations for the conduct of the ceremony shall be carried out in 
accordance with such conditions as the Architect of the Capitol may 
prescribe.
                                 <all>
```
NOT FOR PUBLICATION

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT

PATSY N. SAKUMA, 

Plaintiff-Appellant, 

 v. 

ASSOCIATION OF APARTMENT 

OWNERS OF THE TROPICS AT 

WAIKELE, an incorporated association, by 

its board of directors; et al., 

Defendants-Appellees, 

and 

LOVE, YAMAMOTO & REVERE, LLP, a 

limited liability law partnership; 

YAMAMOTO & REVERE, LLP, a liability 

law partnership, 

Defendants.

No. 19-16615 

D.C. No. 1:16-cv-00274-DKWKJM 

MEMORANDUM*

Appeal from the United States District Court

for the District of Hawaii

Derrick Kahala Watson, District Judge, Presiding

Submitted January 20, 2021

**

* This disposition is not appropriate for publication and is not precedent 

except as provided by Ninth Circuit Rule 36-3.

** The panel unanimously concludes this case is suitable for decision 

without oral argument. See Fed. R. App. P. 34(a)(2).

FILED

JAN 26 2021

MOLLY C. DWYER, CLERK

U.S. COURT OF APPEALS
2 19-16615 

Before: McKEOWN, CALLAHAN, and BRESS, Circuit Judges.

Patsy N. Sakuma appeals pro se from the district court’s post-judgment 

orders in her action alleging Racketeer Influenced and Corrupt Organizations Act 

(“RICO”) and state law claims. We have jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. § 1291. We 

review for an abuse of discretion. Sch. Dist. No. 1J, Multnomah Cty., Or. v. 

ACandS, Inc., 5 F.3d 1255, 1262-63 (9th Cir. 1993). We affirm. 

The district court did not abuse its discretion by denying Sakuma’s Federal 

Rule of Civil Procedure 60(b)(6) motion for relief from judgment, or by denying 

leave to file a motion for reconsideration, because Sakuma failed to demonstrate 

any basis for the requested relief. See id. (setting forth grounds for relief under 

Rule 59(e) or 60(b)); see also Latshaw v. Trainer Wortham & Co., 452 F.3d 1097, 

1102-04 (9th Cir. 2006) (explaining that Rule 60(b)(6) relief may be granted only 

where extraordinary circumstances are present).

We do not consider Sakuma’s contentions concerning her prior appeal (Case 

No. 16-16791). 

Sakuma’s request for judicial notice, set forth in her opening brief, is denied 

as unnecessary.

AFFIRMED.
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<ARTICLE> 5
<MULTIPLIER> 1,000

<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   9-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          DEC-31-1999
<PERIOD-START>                             JAN-01-1999
<PERIOD-END>                               SEP-30-1999
<CASH>                                              34
<SECURITIES>                                         0
<RECEIVABLES>                                    9,270
<ALLOWANCES>                                      (122)
<INVENTORY>                                      2,791
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                                     0
<PP&E>                                          18,091
<DEPRECIATION>                                  (3,711)
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                  50,099
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                                0
<BONDS>                                              0
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                1
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                             6
<OTHER-SE>                                      38,505
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                    50,099
<SALES>                                         51,380
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                                51,380
<CGS>                                           34,642
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                   34,642
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                10,890
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                     0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                                 210
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                  5,638
<INCOME-TAX>                                     2,183
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                              3,455
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                     3,455
<EPS-BASIC>                                        .58
<EPS-DILUTED>                                      .55


</TABLE>
### BILL OF COSTS

TEXAS COURT OF APPEALS, EIGHTH DISTRICT, AT EL PASO

No. 08-14-00170-CV

Isaias Martinez

v.

Laura Gonzalez

(No. 2010CM5553 IN 65TH DISTRICT COURT OF EL PASO COUNTY)

Type of Fee Charges Paid By

MOTION FEE

MOTION FEE

MOTION FEE

REPORTER'S RECORD

CLERK'S RECORD

FILING $10.00

$10.00

$10.00

$498.75

$105.50

$195.00 E-PAID

E-PAID

E-PAID

UNKNOWN

UNKNOWN

E-PAID MONICA PADILLA

MONICA PADILLA

MONICA PADILLA

MONICA PADILLA

Balance of costs owing to the Eighth Court of Appeals, El Paso, Texas: 0.00

Court costs in this cause shall be paid as per the Judgment issued by this Court.

I, DENISE PACHECO

, CLERK OF THE EIGHTH COURT OF APPEALS OF

THE STATE OF TEXAS, do hereby certify that the above and foregoing is a true and

correct copy of the cost bill of THE COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE EIGHTH

DISTRICT OF TEXAS, showing the charges and payments, in the above numbered and

styled cause, as the same appears of record in this office.

IN TESTIMONY WHEREOF, witness my hand

and the Seal of the COURT OF APPEALS for

the Eighth District of Texas, this May 25, 2018.

Denise Pacheco, Clerk
EXHIBIT 13.1



CERTIFICATION OF PRINCIPAL EXECUTIVE
OFFICER 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 Enzymotec Ltd. (the
“Company”) on Form 20-F for the period ended December 31, 2013, as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission
on the date hereof (the “Report”), I, Ariel Katz, and I, Oren Bryan, do hereby certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C.
Section 1350, as adopted pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that, to my knowledge:



| | (1) | The Report fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended;
and
| | --- | ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------



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



|/s/ Ariel Katz                             | 
|------------------------------------------ | 
|Ariel Katz                                 | 
|President and Chief Executive Officer      | 
|(Principal Executive Officer)              | 
|Date: February 13, 2014                    | 
|                                           | 
|/s/ Oren Bryan                             | 
|Oren Bryan                                 | 
|Vice President and Chief Financial Officer | 
|(Principal Financial Officer)              | 
|Date: February 13, 2014                    |
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<ARTICLE> 5
       
<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   9-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          DEC-31-1996
<PERIOD-START>                             JAN-01-1996
<PERIOD-END>                               SEP-30-1996
<CASH>                                       6,581,367
<SECURITIES>                                         0
<RECEIVABLES>                                4,891,736
<ALLOWANCES>                                   128,228
<INVENTORY>                                    820,103
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                                     0
<PP&E>                                       5,703,248
<DEPRECIATION>                                 935,780
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                              24,538,230
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                                0
<BONDS>                                              0
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                         5,518
<OTHER-SE>                                  20,085,408
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                24,538,230
<SALES>                                     23,513,000
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                            23,513,000
<CGS>                                       16,032,000
<TOTAL-COSTS>                               16,032,000
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                             5,691,000
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                     0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                             714,000
<INCOME-PRETAX>                              1,076,000
<INCOME-TAX>                                   (14,000)
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                          1,090,000
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                 1,090,000
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                      .26
<EPS-DILUTED>                                      .26
        

</TABLE>