alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
EX-34 (b)
REPORT OF INDEPENDENT REGISTERED PUBLIC ACCOUNTING FIRM

To the Board of Directors of Fifth Third Mortgage Company:

We have examined management's assertion, included in the accompanying
Management's Report on Assessment of Compliance with SEC Regulation AB Servicing
Criteria, that Fifth Third Mortgage Company (the "Company") complied with the
servicing criteria set forth in Title 17, Section 229.1122(d) of the Code of
Federal Regulations (the "CFR") for the Residential Mortgage Loans sold to
Non-Government-Sponsored Entities starting January 1, 2006 Platform (the
"Platform") as of and for the year ended December 31, 2006, excluding criteria
229.1122 (d)(1)(iii), (d)(2)(iv), (d)(3)(i)(c), (d)(4)(xi), (d)(4)(xii), and
(d)(4)(xv) of the CFR, which management has determined are not applicable to the
activities performed by the Company with respect to the Platform. Exhibit A to
management's assertion identifies the individual asset-backed transactions
defined by management as constituting the Platform. Management is responsible
for the Company's compliance with the servicing criteria. Our responsibility is
to express an opinion on management's assertion about the Company's compliance
with the servicing criteria based on our examination.

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

In our opinion, management's assertion that the Company complied with the
aforementioned applicable servicing criteria as of and for the year ended
December 31, 2006 for the Residential Mortgage Loans sold to
Non-Government-Sponsored Entities starting January 1, 2006 Platform is fairly
stated, in all material respects.


/s/ Deloitte & Touche LLP

Cincinnati, Ohio
March 9, 2007
Wolverine Exploration Inc.: Exhibit 10.2 - Filed by newsfilecorp.com





DEBT SETTLEMENT AGREEMENT 

THIS AGREEMENT, made and dated for reference the * day
of *, *. 

BETWEEN: 


	WOLVERINE EXPLORATION INC., a company duly
      incorporated pursuant to the laws of the State of Nevada and having an
      office at 4055 McLean Road, Quesnel, BC, V2J 6V5. 
	  
	(hereinafter called the “Company”)




OF THE FIRST PART 

AND: 

*. 

(hereinafter called the
“Creditor”) 

OF THE SECOND PART 

WHEREAS: 

A.           The Company is indebted to the Creditor in the amount of USD
$* as of the date hereof (the Debt”); and 

B.           The Creditor has agreed to accept common shares in the
capital stock of the Company in lieu of payment of the debt.

NOW THEREFORE THIS AGREEMENT WITNESSES that in
consideration of the premises and of the covenants, conditions and provisos
herein contained, and other good and valuable consideration, the parties hereto
agree as follows: 

1.           The Creditor hereby agrees to accept, subject to paragraph 2
hereof, * fully paid and non-assessable common shares in the capital of the
Company (the “Shares”) in lieu of payment of the Debt by the Company at a deemed
issuance price of USD $0.01 per Share. 

2.           The Creditor acknowledges that the issuance of the Shares as
contemplated by paragraph 1 of this Agreement is subject to compliance with
applicable securities laws. Further, the Creditor acknowledges that the
certificates representing the Shares will contain a restrictive legend
inhibiting the ability of the Creditor to trade such shares until the expiry of
a six month hold period.




- 2 -

3.           This Agreement shall enure to the benefit of and be binding
upon the parties hereto and their respective heirs, successors and assigns. 

4.           This Agreement shall be governed, construed and enforced
according to the laws of the Province of British Columbia and is subject to the
exclusive jurisdiction of the courts of the Province of British Columbia. 

5.           The parties agree to execute such further documents and
assurances as may be required to effect the intent hereof. 

6.           The Creditor agrees to abide by the provisions of applicable
securities laws in the disposition of any Shares of the Company acquired
pursuant to this Agreement. 

7.           The Creditor and the Company may execute this Agreement in
two or more counterparts, each of which is deemed to be an original and all of
which constitute one agreement, effective as of the date first above written.



	WOLVERINE EXPLORATION INC. 
	  
	  
	  
	Lee Costerd 
	 
	 
	 
	*
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<ARTICLE>     5
<LEGEND>      THIS SCHEDULE CONTAINS SUMMARY FINANCIAL INFORMATION
              EXTRACTED FROM THE OXIR INVESTMENTS, INC. FINANCIAL
              STATEMENTS FOR THE PERIOD ENDED SEPTEMBER 30, 1999
              AND IS QUALIFIED IN ITS ENTIRETY BY REFERENCE TO
              SUCH FINANCIAL STATEMENTS.
<MULTIPLIER>  1

<S>                          <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                3-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          JUN-30-2000
<PERIOD-START>                              JUL-1-1999
<PERIOD-END>                               SEP-30-1999
<CASH>                                         113,255
<SECURITIES>                                 3,025,403
<RECEIVABLES>                                        0
<ALLOWANCES>                                         0
<INVENTORY>                                          0
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                             3,142,627
<PP&E>                                       5,774,282
<DEPRECIATION>                                       0
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                               9,239,989
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                        4,050,427
<BONDS>                                        206,154
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                     2,798,769
<OTHER-SE>                                   2,184,639
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                 9,239,989
<SALES>                                              0
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                             1,384,341
<CGS>                                                0
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                  968,814
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                     0
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                     0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                              55,261
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                360,266
<INCOME-TAX>                                    12,606
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                            347,660
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                   347,660
<EPS-BASIC>                                      .02
<EPS-DILUTED>                                      .02


</TABLE>
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<ARTICLE> 9
<MULTIPLIER> 1000
       
<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   YEAR
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          JUN-30-1997
<PERIOD-START>                             JUL-01-1996
<PERIOD-END>                               JUN-30-1997
<CASH>                                           4,369
<INT-BEARING-DEPOSITS>                           4,109
<FED-FUNDS-SOLD>                                     0
<TRADING-ASSETS>                                     0
<INVESTMENTS-HELD-FOR-SALE>                     36,054
<INVESTMENTS-CARRYING>                           6,777
<INVESTMENTS-MARKET>                             6,637
<LOANS>                                        305,820
<ALLOWANCE>                                      2,890
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                 368,126
<DEPOSITS>                                     244,795
<SHORT-TERM>                                    79,308
<LIABILITIES-OTHER>                              7,306
<LONG-TERM>                                     14,159
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                            26
<OTHER-SE>                                      22,532
<TOTAL-LIABILITIES-AND-EQUITY>                 368,126
<INTEREST-LOAN>                                 22,212
<INTEREST-INVEST>                                3,960
<INTEREST-OTHER>                                   143
<INTEREST-TOTAL>                                26,315
<INTEREST-DEPOSIT>                              12,090
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                              17,388
<INTEREST-INCOME-NET>                            8,927
<LOAN-LOSSES>                                        0
<SECURITIES-GAINS>                                  12
<EXPENSE-OTHER>                                  8,512
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                  1,825
<INCOME-PRE-EXTRAORDINARY>                       1,825
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                     1,204
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                      .42
<EPS-DILUTED>                                      .42
<YIELD-ACTUAL>                                    7.78
<LOANS-NON>                                        759
<LOANS-PAST>                                         0
<LOANS-TROUBLED>                                     0
<LOANS-PROBLEM>                                  2,573
<ALLOWANCE-OPEN>                                 2,946
<CHARGE-OFFS>                                       59
<RECOVERIES>                                         3
<ALLOWANCE-CLOSE>                                2,890
<ALLOWANCE-DOMESTIC>                             2,890
<ALLOWANCE-FOREIGN>                                  0
<ALLOWANCE-UNALLOCATED>                             15
        

</TABLE>
Document Headings

                    Document headings vary by document type but may contain                    the following:                  
                -                       the agency or agencies that issued and signed a document                    
                -                       the number of the CFR title and the number of each part                      the document amends, proposes to amend, or is directly                      related to                    
                -                       the agency docket number / agency internal file number                    
                -                       the RIN which identifies each regulatory action listed in                      the Unified Agenda of Federal Regulatory and Deregulatory                      Actions                    

                    See the                                          Document Drafting Handbook                                        for more details.                  

###### Department of Transportation

###### Federal Motor Carrier Safety Administration

          - [Docket No. FMCSA-2006-26367]

# AGENCY:

Federal Motor Carrier Safety Administration (FMCSA), Department of Transportation (DOT).

      ( print page 48572)    

# ACTION:

Announcement of Charter Renewal of the Motor Carrier Safety Advisory Committee (MCSAC).

# SUMMARY:

FMCSA announces the charter renewal of the MCSAC, a Federal Advisory Committee that provides the Agency with advice and recommendations on motor carrier safety programs and motor carrier safety regulations through a consensus process. This charter renewal took effect on September 29, 2017, and will expire after 2 years.

# FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

                        Ms. Shannon L. Watson, Senior Advisor to the Associate Administrator for Policy, Federal Motor Carrier Safety Administration, U.S. Department of Transportation, 1200 New Jersey Avenue SE., Washington, DC 20590, (202) 385-2395,                         *mcsac@dot.gov.*

# SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

Pursuant to Section 10(a)(2) of the Federal Advisory Committee Act (Pub. L. 92-463), FMCSA is giving notice of the charter renewal for the MCSAC. The MCSAC was established to provide FMCSA with advice and recommendations on motor carrier safety programs and motor carrier safety regulations.

                    The MCSAC is composed of up to 20 voting representatives from safety advocacy, safety enforcement, labor, and industry stakeholders of motor carrier safety. The diversity of the Committee ensures the requisite range of views and expertise necessary to discharge its responsibilities. See the MCSAC Web site for details on pending tasks at                     *http://www.fmcsa.dot.gov/​mcsac.*

Issued on: October 12, 2017.

Larry W. Minor,

Associate Administrator for Policy.

[FR Doc. 2017-22581 Filed 10-17-17; 8:45 am]

 BILLING CODE P
#### Julias D. Ferigno et al., Appellants, v Citicorp Mortgage, Inc., et al., Respondents, et al., Defendants.

[666 NYS2d 482]

—In an action to recover damages for personal injuries, etc., the plaintiffs appeal, (1) as limited by their brief, from so much of an order of the Supreme Court, Suffolk County (Doyle, J.), dated December 3, 1996, as granted the motion of the defendant Alliance Realty Group for summary judgment dismiss*485ing the complaint insofar as it is asserted against that defendant, and (2) from a judgment of the same court, entered December 23, 1996, which, upon so much of the order dated December 3, 1996, as granted the motion of the defendant Citicorp Mortgage, Inc. for summary judgment, dismissed the complaint insofar as it is asserted against that defendant.

Ordered that the order is affirmed insofar as appealed from; and it is further,

Ordered that the judgment is affirmed; and it is further,

Ordered that the respondents, appearing separately and filing separate briefs, are awarded one bill of costs.

The plaintiff Julias D. Ferigno was injured after he attempted to enter a basement through a ground-floor doorway and fell to the basement floor. It is undisputed that he was aware that there was no staircase leading from the doorway into the basement. It is well established that the imposition of liability for a dangerous condition on real property must be predicated upon occupancy, ownership, control, or special use of the premises *(see, Libby v Waldbaum’s Inc.,*213 AD2d 457). The evidence submitted in support of the motions for summary judgment established that, at the time of the accident, neither Citicorp Mortgage, Inc., nor Alliance Realty Group, Inc., occupied, owned, controlled, or made special use of the subject premises. Accordingly, because no triable issues of fact existed, summary judgment was properly granted.

The plaintiff’s remaining contentions are either unpreserved for appellate review or without merit. Bracken, J. P., Thompson, Krausman and Luciano, JJ., concur.
1 COURT OF APPEALS EIGHTH DISTRICT OF TEXAS EL PASO, TEXAS

IN RE: COPART, INC., COPART OF HOUSTON, INC., AND HOUSTON COPART SALVAGE AUTO AUCTIONS, LP

,

Relator s

. §

§

§

§

§

§ No. 08

- 1 8

- 00 204

- C V

AN ORIGINAL PROCEEDING

IN MANDAMUS

O R D E R

In this original proceeding, Relators are challenging an order entered by the Honorable

Luis Aguilar, former judge of the 243rd District Court of El Paso County, Texas, on November

1 3 , 2018, in trial cause number 2017DCV4011, granting the Real Party in Interest’s motion to

permit pre

- arbitration discovery. Judge Aguilar’s term ended on December 31, 2018, and this

original proceeding remains pending. The Honorable Selena Solis became judge of the 243rd

District Court on January 1, 2019.

Rule 7.2(a) of the Texas Rules of Appellate Procedure provides for the automatic

substitution of a public officer’s successor as a party in an original proceeding. See T EX .R.A PP .P.

7.2(a). On our own motion , we order that Judge Solis is substituted as the Respondent in this

original proceeding. The Clerk of the Court is directed to change the records for the case to reflect

that Judge Solis is substituted as the Respondent.

Rule 7.2(b) additionally requir es an appellate court to abate an original proceeding to allow2

the successor to reconsider the original party’s decision. See T EX .R.A PP .P. 7.2(b). On our own

motion, we abate this original proceeding for forty

- five days to allow Judge Solis to reconsider the

order being challenged by Relators in this original proceeding. The stay order entered by this

Court on November 20, 2018 is lifted for the limited purpose of allowing Judge Solis to reconsider

the order challenged by Relators. Relators shall provid e the Court with a certified or sworn copy

of any pertinent orders entered by Judge Solis. If necessary, Relators will be provided an

opportunity to file an amended mandamus petition and appendix.

IT IS SO ORDERED this 12 th day of April

, 20 1 9

.

PER CURIAM

Before McClure , C.J., R odriguez and Palafox , JJ.
#### Harold Brooks LEASURE, Jr., Plaintiff-Appellant, v. AA ADVANTAGE FORWARDERS, et al., Defendants-Appellees.

No. 07-5684.

United States Court of Appeals, Sixth Circuit.

May 5, 2008.

Before: DAUGHTREY, COOK, and FARRIS,* Circuit Judges.

*

 The Honorable Jerome Farris, United States Circuit Judge for the Ninth Circuit, sitting by designation.

PER CURIAM.

Harold Brooks Leasure, Jr. brought a civil RICO suit against eleven businesses and six individuals, alleging that they comprised and controlled a RICO enterprise that fraudulently stole Leasure’s businesses. The district court granted summary judgment to the defendants on several independent grounds, including an *439absence of proximate cause. Reviewing de novo and viewing the evidence in the light most favorable to Leasure, *Holloway v. Brush,*220 F.3d 767, 772 (6th Cir.2000), we affirm.

In June 1999, defendant Coleman American entered into a contract to purchase several moving and storage businesses owned by Leasure. Shortly thereafter, Coleman American discovered that a number of the businesses’ accounts receivable were uncollectible. Coleman American brought suit against Leasure in the Circuit Court of Christian County, Kentucky, arguing that Leasure misrepresented his businesses’ accounts receivable. Coleman American prevailed on fraud and breach of contract claims. Leasure then brought this civil RICO suit.

To sustain a civil RICO action, 18 U.S.C. § 1964(c), the plaintiff must show that “the alleged violation led directly to the plaintiffs injuries.” *Anza v. Ideal Steel Supply Corp.,*547 U.S. 451, 461, 126 S.Ct. 1991, 164 L.Ed.2d 720 (2006). Leasure asserts that he was injured because the defendants acquired his businesses by fraud. He also alleges that defendant Coleman American brought a fraudulent lawsuit against him in state court and argues, somewhat inconsistently, that (1) Coleman American’s lawsuit was based on records falsified by Coleman American, and (2) that Coleman American knew that Leasure had miscalculated the accounts receivable before it purchased the businesses, but purchased the businesses anyway so that it could exact a large money judgment from Leasure.

The only record evidence that Leasure cites to support this theory is a statement made by Richard Cundith, Coleman American’s accountant. During the state court proceeding, Cundith testified that he advised Coleman American against purchasing Leasure’s businesses because the businesses had no formal set of records. Though this might show that the defendants were aware that some of Leasure’s representations might have been inaccurate, it does not support an inference that the defendants knew that some of Leasure’s accounts receivable would be uncollectible.

Leasure also suggests that the short time frame between the sale and the filing of Coleman American’s state lawsuit shows that the defendants knew about the inaccuracies in Leasure’s disclosures before the sale. Nothing supports this inference. To the contrary, the record shows that Coleman American only discovered the inaccuracies after it purchased Leasure’s businesses and unsuccessfully attempted to collect on certain accounts.

AFFIRMED.
111TH CONGRESS 

1ST SESSION H. R. 3072 

AN ACT 

To designate the facility of the United States Postal Service 

located at 9810 Halls Ferry Road in St. Louis, Missouri, 

as the ‘‘Coach Jodie Bailey Post Office Building’’. 

1 Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representa2 tives of the United States of America in Congress assembled, 
2 

•HR 3072 EH

1 SECTION 1. COACH JODIE BAILEY POST OFFICE BUILDING. 

2 (a) DESIGNATION.—The facility of the United States 

3 Postal Service located at 9810 Halls Ferry Road in St. 

4 Louis, Missouri, shall be known and designated as the 

5 ‘‘Coach Jodie Bailey Post Office Building’’. 

6 (b) REFERENCES.—Any reference in a law, map, reg7 ulation, document, paper, or other record of the United 

8 States to the facility referred to in subsection (a) shall 

9 be deemed to be a reference to the ‘‘Coach Jodie Bailey 

10 Post Office Building’’. 

Passed the House of Representatives July 29, 2009. 

Attest: 

Clerk. 

111TH CONGRESS 

1ST SESSION H. R. 3072 

AN ACT 

To designate the facility of the United States PostPost Office Building’’. St. Louis, Missouri, as the ‘‘Coach Jodie Bailey al Service located at 9810 Halls Ferry Road in
IN THE COMMONWEALTH COURT OF PENNSYLVANIA

Jameel Ansari and :

Mahdiyya Ansari, :

:

Appellants :

: 

 v. : No. 1331 C.D. 2020

: Submitted: November 4, 2022

Department of Code :

Enforcement Valley Township, :

Chester County :

PER CURIAM

MEMORANDUM AND ORDER

AND NOW, this 12

th day of October, 2023, the above-captioned appeal 

and the motion to supplement the record are QUASHED based on Appellants’ 

failure to file post-trial motions. M.C. and E.K. Lees, Inc. v. Capenos, 119 A.3d 

1092 (Pa. Cmwlth. 2015).