TCR_Public/170820.mbx          T R O U B L E D   C O M P A N Y   R E P O R T E R

              Sunday, August 20, 2017, Vol. 21, No. 231

                            Headlines

APEX CREDIT 2017-II: Moody's Assigns (P)Ba3 Rating to Cl. E Notes
ARCAP 2004-1: Moody's Hikes Rating on Class D Debt to B2
ATLAS SENIOR IV: S&P Affirms BB-(sf) Rating on Class B-2L Notes
BANC OF AMERICA 2006-5: Moody's Affirms C Ratings on 2 Tranches
BANC OF AMERICA 2007-3: Fitch Affirms 'CCsf' Rating on 2 Tranches

BATTALION CLO XI: S&P Assigns Prelim BB(sf) Rating on Class E Notes
BBCMS TRUST 2017-DELC: Moody's Assigns Prov. B3 Rating to F Certs
BEAR STEARNS 2005-PWR10: Fitch Hikes Cl. B Certs Rating From BB
BEAR STEARNS 2006-PWR14: Fitch Hikes Class A-J Certs Rating to Bsf
BX TRUST 2017-SLCT: S&P Assigns B(sf) Rating on Class F Certs

BXP TRUST 2017-CC: S&P Gives Prelim BB-(sf) Rating on Class E Certs
CALIFORNIA STREET V: Moody's Hikes Rating on Class D Notes to Ba1
CARLYLE GLOBAL 2013-1: Moody's Assigns Ba3 Rating to Cl. D-R Notes
CD MORTGAGE 2017-CD5: Fitch Assigns 'B-sf' Rating to Class F Notes
CEDAR FUNDING VIII: S&P Gives Prelim BB-(sf) Rating on Cl. E Notes

CGDBB COMMERCIAL 2017-BIOC: S&P Rates Class E Notes BB-(sf)
CITIGROUP 2013-GC15: Fitch Affirms 'Bsf' Rating on Cl. F Certs
CITIGROUP COMMERCIAL 2015-101A: S&P Affirms B+ on 2 Tranches
CITIGROUP COMMERCIAL 2017-1500: S&P Gives (P)B Rating on F Certs
COMM 2012-CCRE3: Moody's Affirms B2(sf) Rating on Class G Notes

COMM MORTGAGE 2013-GAM: Fitch Affirms 'BB-sf' Rating on Cl. F Debt
CREDIT SUISSE 2003-CPN1: Moody's Affirms C Rating on Class H Certs
DRYDEN SENIOR XXVIII: S&P Assigns BB- Rating on Class B-2R Notes
EASTLAND CLO: Moody's Affirms B1(sf) Rating on Class D Notes
FANNIE MAE 2017-C06: Fitch to Rate 38 Note Classes 'Bsf'

FIRST UNION 1999-C2: Moody's Affirms C(sf) Rating on Class IO Certs
FLAGSHIP CREDIT 2017-3: S&P Gives Prelim BB- Rating on Cl. E Notes
GALAXY CLO XIX: S&P Assigns Prelim. B- Rating on Class E-R Notes
GREENWICH CAPITAL 2004-GG1: Moody's Lower Class J Debt to C(sf)
GREENWICH CAPITAL 2006-GG7: Moody's Cuts B2 Rating to Cl. A-J Debt

HARBOR LLC 2006-1: Moody's Lowers Rating on 2 Tranches to Ca(sf)
HEMPSTEAD LTD II: Moody's Assigns Ba3(sf) Rating to Cl. D Notes
JAMESTOWN CLO IV: Moody's Lowers Class E Notes Rating to Caa1
JP MORGAN 2003-C1: Moody's Affirms C(sf) Ratings on 2 Tranches
JP MORGAN 2005-LDP3: Moody's Affirms C(sf) Rating on Cl. G Certs

JP MORGAN 2010-C1: Fitch Cuts Class C Debt Rating to BBsf
JP MORGAN 2017-FL10: S&P Assigns B- Rating on Class F Certs
KKR CLO 12: Moody's Assigns Ba3(sf) Rating to Class E-R Notes
LB-UBS COMMERCIAL 2007-C1: Fitch Hikes Cl. D Certs Rating to CCC
LB-UBS COMMERCIAL 2007-C6: S&P Affirms CCC Rating on Cl. D Certs

MACH ONE 2004-1: Fitch Affirms 'Dsf' Rating on Class O Notes
MAD MORTGAGE 2017-330M: S&P Assigns BB(sf) Rating on Class E Certs
MADISON PARK XXIII: S&P Assigns BB-(sf) Rating on Class E Notes
MAGNETITE XIX: Moody's Assigns B3(sf) Rating to Class F Notes
ML-CFC COMMERCIAL 2006-3: Fitch Hikes Class C Debt Rating to Bsf

MORGAN STANLEY 2005-IQ9: Fitch Cuts Ratings on 4 Tranches to 'Csf'
MORGAN STANLEY 2007-TOP27: S&P Hikes Class B Certs Rating to B+
MOUNTAIN VIEW 2017-1: Moody's Assigns Ba3 Rating to Cl. E Notes
NASSAU LTD 2017-I: S&P Assigns BB- Rating on Class D Notes
NOMURA CRE 2007-2: Fitch Affirms 'CCCsf' Rating on Cl. B Notes

OCP CLO 2016-11: S&P Assigns BB-(sf) Rating on Class D-R Notes
OFSI BSL VIII: S&P Assigns BB(sf) Rating on Class E Notes
PRESTIGE AUTO 2017-1: S&P Gives Prelim BB Rating on Class E Notes
PROTECTIVE FINANCE 2007-PL: Moody's Affirms B2 Rating on 2 Ratings
RAIT PREFERRED II: Moody's Hikes Rating on 2 Tranches to B3

REALT 2007-2: S&P Affirms B+(sf) Rating on 2 Tranches
ROCKWALL CDO II: S&P Raises Class B-2L Notes Rating to BB+ (sf)
SCHOONER TRUST 2007-8: Moody's Lowers Class XC Certs Rating to C
SCRT 2017-2: Moody's Assigns B1(sf) Rating to Class M-1 Debt
SEQUOIA MORTGAGE 2017-6: Moody's Gives (P)Ba3 Rating to B-4 Certs

SORIN REAL I: Moody's Affirms C(sf) Ratings on 4 Tranches
TELOS CLO 2013-3: Moody's Assigns Ba3(sf) Rating to Cl. E-R Notes
UBS COMMERCIAL 2017-C2: S&P Rates Class H-RR Certs 'B+(sf)'
UBS COMMERCIAL 2017-C3: Fitch to Rates Class G-RR Debt 'B-sf'
VENTURE CLO XIV: Moody's Gives Prov. Ba3 Rating to Class E-R Notes

WACHOVIA BANK 2003-C5: Moody's Affirms Ca Rating on Cl. X-C Certs
WESTLAKE AUTOMOBILE 2016-1: S&P Affirms BB Rating on Class E Debt
WESTLAKE AUTOMOBILE 2017-2: S&P Rates $800MM Class E Notes 'BB(sf)'
WFRBS COMMERCIAL 2012-C9: Fitch Affirms Bsf Rating on Class F Certs
WOODMONT LP 2017-3: S&P Gives Prelim BB(sf) Rating on Class E Notes

WRIGHTWOOD CAPITAL 2005-1: Moody's Hikes Class D Debt Rating to B1
[*] Fitch Lowers 348 Wells Fargo Trustee US RMBS Classes
[*] Fitch Takes Actions on 8 SLM Loan Trusts
[*] Moody's Withdraws Ratings on 8 Tranches From 5 RMBS BofA Deals
[*] S&P Discontinues Ratings on 123 Classes From 38 CDO Deals

[*] S&P Puts Ratings on 45 Tranches From 13 CLO Deals on Watch Pos.
[*] S&P Takes Various Actions on 164 Classes From 14 US RMBS Deals
[*] S&P Takes Various Actions on 74 Classes From 11 US RMBS Deals

                            *********

APEX CREDIT 2017-II: Moody's Assigns (P)Ba3 Rating to Cl. E Notes
-----------------------------------------------------------------
Moody's Investors Service has assigned provisional ratings to six
classes of notes issued by Apex Credit CLO 2017-II Ltd.

Moody's rating action is:

US$2,500,000 Class X Senior Secured Floating Rate Notes due 2029
(the "Class X Notes"), Assigned (P)Aaa (sf)

US$288,000,000 Class A Senior Secured Floating Rate Notes due 2029
(the "Class A Notes"), Assigned (P)Aaa (sf)

US$51,750,000 Class B Senior Secured Floating Rate Notes due 2029
(the "Class B Notes"), Assigned (P)Aa2 (sf)

US$29,250,000 Class C Secured Deferrable Floating Rate Notes due
2029 (the "Class C Notes"), Assigned (P)A2 (sf)

US$22,500,000 Class D Secured Deferrable Floating Rate Notes due
2029 (the "Class D Notes"), Assigned (P)Baa3 (sf)

US$22,500,000 Class E Secured Deferrable Floating Rate Notes due
2029 (the "Class E Notes"), Assigned (P)Ba3 (sf)

The Class X Notes, the Class A Notes, the Class B Notes, the Class
C Notes, the Class D Notes, and the Class E Notes are referred to
herein, collectively, as the "Rated Notes."

Moody's issues provisional ratings in advance of the final sale of
financial instruments, but these ratings only represent Moody's
preliminary credit opinions. Upon a conclusive review of a
transaction and associated documentation, Moody's will endeavor to
assign definitive ratings. A definitive rating, if any, may differ
from a provisional rating.

RATINGS RATIONALE

Moody's provisional ratings of the Rated Notes address the expected
losses posed to noteholders. The provisional ratings reflect the
risks due to defaults on the underlying portfolio of assets, the
transaction's legal structure, and the characteristics of the
underlying assets.

Apex CLO 2017-II is a managed cash flow CLO. The issued notes will
be collateralized primarily by broadly syndicated first lien senior
secured corporate loans. At least 90% of the portfolio must consist
of senior secured loans and eligible investments, and up to 10% of
the portfolio may consist of second lien loans and unsecured loans.
Moody's expects the portfolio to be approximately 85% ramped as of
the closing date.

Apex Credit Partners LLC (the "Manager") will direct the selection,
acquisition and disposition of the assets on behalf of the Issuer
and may engage in trading activity, including discretionary
trading, during the transaction's four-year and three months
reinvestment period. Thereafter, the Manager may reinvest
unscheduled principal payments and proceeds from sales of credit
risk assets, subject to certain restrictions.

In addition to the Rated Notes, the Issuer will issue one class of
subordinated notes. The transaction incorporates interest and par
coverage tests which, if triggered, divert interest and principal
proceeds to pay down the notes in order of seniority.

Moody's modeled the transaction using a cash flow model based on
the Binomial Expansion Technique, as described in Section 2.3.2.1
of the "Moody's Global Approach to Rating Collateralized Loan
Obligations" rating methodology published in October 2016.

For modeling purposes, Moody's used the following base-case
assumptions:

Par amount: $450,000,000

Diversity Score: 70

Weighted Average Rating Factor (WARF): 2705

Weighted Average Spread (WAS): 3.60%

Weighted Average Coupon (WAC): 6.50%

Weighted Average Recovery Rate (WARR): 45.50%

Weighted Average Life (WAL): 8.25 years.

Methodology Underlying the Rating Action:

The principal methodology used in these ratings was "Moody's Global
Approach to Rating Collateralized Loan Obligations" published in
October 2016.

Factors That Would Lead to an Upgrade or Downgrade of the Ratings:

The performance of the Rated Notes is subject to uncertainty. The
performance of the Rated Notes is sensitive to the performance of
the underlying portfolio, which in turn depends on economic and
credit conditions that may change. The Manager's investment
decisions and management of the transaction will also affect the
performance of the Rated Notes.

Together with the set of modeling assumptions above, Moody's
conducted an additional sensitivity analysis, which was a component
in determining the ratings assigned to the Rated Notes. This
sensitivity analysis includes increased default probability
relative to the base case.

Below is a summary of the impact of an increase in default
probability (expressed in terms of WARF level) on the Rated Notes
(shown in terms of the number of notch difference versus the
current model output, whereby a negative difference corresponds to
higher expected losses), assuming that all other factors are held
equal:

Percentage Change in WARF -- increase of 15% (from 2705 to 3111)

Rating Impact in Rating Notches

Class X Notes: 0

Class A Notes: 0

Class B Notes: -1

Class C Notes: -2

Class D Notes: -1

Class E Notes: 0

Percentage Change in WARF -- increase of 30% (from 2705 to 3517)

Rating Impact in Rating Notches

Class X Notes: 0

Class A Notes: -1

Class B Notes: -3

Class C Notes: -4

Class D Notes: -2

Class E Notes: -1


ARCAP 2004-1: Moody's Hikes Rating on Class D Debt to B2
--------------------------------------------------------
Moody's Investors Service has upgraded and affirmed the ratings on
the following notes issued by ARCap 2004-1 Resecuritization Trust
Collateralized Debt Obligation Certificates, Series 2004-1. ("ARCap
2004-1"):

Moody's rating action is:

Cl. C, Upgraded to Baa3 (sf); previously on Aug 11, 2016 Upgraded
to Ba3 (sf)

Cl. D, Upgraded to B2 (sf); previously on Aug 11, 2016 Upgraded to
Caa1 (sf)

Cl. E, Affirmed Ca (sf); previously on Aug 11, 2016 Affirmed Ca
(sf)

Cl. F, Affirmed C (sf); previously on Aug 11, 2016 Affirmed C (sf)

The Class C, Class D, Class E, and Class F Notes are referred to
herein as the "Rated Notes"

RATINGS RATIONALE

Moody's has upgraded the ratings of two classes of notes due to
materially greater than expected recoveries on defaulted and high
credit risk assets resulting in full amortization of the Class B
notes. This is in combination with improvements in the intra-rating
distribution of the remaining collateral pool as evidenced by over
43% of the collateral pool experienced ratings upgrades or improved
assessments of the credit quality of non-Moody's rated assets. The
affirmations are due to the key transaction metrics performing
within levels commensurate with existing ratings. The rating action
is the result of Moody's on-going surveillance of commercial real
estate collateralized debt obligation (CRE CDO and RE-REMIC)
transactions.

ARCap 2004-1 is a cash transaction backed by a portfolio of
commercial mortgage backed securities (CMBS) (100% of the
portfolio). As of the trustee's July 18, 2017 report, the aggregate
note balance of the transaction, including preferred shares, is
$252.1 million from $340.9 million at issuance with paydowns
directed to the senior most outstanding class. The paydowns are a
result of regular amortization on the underlying collateral.

Moody's has identified the following as key indicators of the
expected loss in CRE CDO transactions: the weighted average rating
factor (WARF), the weighted average life (WAL), the weighted
average recovery rate (WARR), and Moody's asset correlation (MAC).
Moody's typically models these as actual parameters for static
deals and as covenants for managed deals.

WARF is a primary measure of the credit quality of a CRE CDO pool.
Moody's has updated its assessments for the collaterals it does not
rate. The rating agency modeled a bottom-dollar WARF of 4929,
compared to 4981 at last review. The current ratings on the
Moody's-rated collateral and the assessments of the non-Moody's
rated collateral follow: Aaa-Aa3 (15.1%, compared to 4.5% at last
review); Baa1-Baa3 (8.8%, compared to 4.1% at last review); Ba1-Ba3
(11.7%, compared to 11.0% at last review); B1-B3 (21.0%, compared
to 12.5% at last review); Caa1-Ca/C (43.4%, compared to 53.8% at
last review).

Moody's modeled a WAL of 2.7 years, compared to 3.0 years at last
review. The WAL is based on assumptions about extensions on the
underlying look-through CMBS loan assets.

Moody's modeled a fixed WARR of 0.0%, compared to 0.0% at last
review.

Moody's modeled a MAC of 15.1%, compared to 14.2% at last review.

Methodology Underlying the Rating Action:

The principal methodology used in these ratings was "Moody's
Approach to Rating SF CDOs" published in June 2017.

Factors That Would Lead to Upgrade or Downgrade of the Ratings:

The performance of the notes is subject to uncertainty, because it
is sensitive to the performance of the underlying portfolio, which
in turn depends on economic and credit conditions that are subject
to change. The servicing decisions of the master and special
servicer and surveillance by the operating advisor with respect to
the collateral interests and oversight of the transaction will also
affect the performance of the Rated Notes.

Moody's Parameter Sensitivities: Changes to any one or more of the
key parameters could have rating implications for the Rated Notes,
although a change in one key parameter assumption could be offset
by a change in one or more of the other key parameter assumptions.
The Rated Notes are particularly sensitive to changes in the
recovery rate of the underlying collateral and credit assessments.
Holding all other key parameters static, increasing the recovery
rate of 100% of the collateral by +5% would result modeled rating
movement on the Rated Notes of three to twenty notches upward (e.g.
one notch up implies a rating movement from Baa3 to Baa2).

The primary sources of uncertainty in Moody's assumptions are the
extent of growth in the current macroeconomic environment.
Commercial real estate property values continue to improve
modestly, along with a rise in investment activity and
stabilization in core property type performance. Limited new
construction and moderate job growth have aided this improvement.


ATLAS SENIOR IV: S&P Affirms BB-(sf) Rating on Class B-2L Notes
---------------------------------------------------------------
S&P Global Ratings assigned its ratings to the class A-1L-R,
A-2L-R, A-3L-R, and B-1L-R replacement notes from Atlas Senior Loan
Fund IV Ltd., a collateralized loan obligation (CLO) originally
issued in 2014 that is managed by Crescent Capital Group L.P. S&P
said, "We withdrew our ratings on the original class A-1L, A-2L,
A-3L, and B-1L notes following payment in full on the Aug. 15,
2017, refinancing date. At the same time, we affirmed our ratings
on the class B-2L and B-3L notes, which were not part of the
refinancing."

S&P related, "On the Aug. 15, 2017, refinancing date, the proceeds
from the class A-1L-R, A-2L-R, A-3L-R, and B-1L-R replacement note
issuances were used to redeem the original class A-1L, A-2L, A-3L,
and B-1L notes as outlined in the transaction document provisions.
Therefore, we withdrew our ratings on the original notes in line
with their full redemption, and we are assigning ratings to the
replacement notes."

The replacement notes are being issued via a supplemental indenture
and carry a lower spread over LIBOR than the original notes.

S&P said, "Our review of this transaction included a cash flow
analysis, based on the portfolio and transaction as reflected in
the trustee report, to estimate future performance. In line with
our criteria, our cash flow scenarios applied forward-looking
assumptions on the expected timing and pattern of defaults, and
recoveries upon default, under various interest rate and
macroeconomic scenarios. In addition, our analysis considered the
transaction's ability to pay timely interest or ultimate principal,
or both, to each of the rated tranches.

"The assigned ratings reflect our opinion that the credit support
available is commensurate with the associated rating levels.

"We will continue to review whether, in our view, the ratings
assigned to the notes remain consistent with the credit enhancement
available to support them, and we will take rating actions as we
deem necessary."

  RATINGS ASSIGNED

  Atlas Senior Loan Fund IV Ltd.
  Replacement class         Rating       Amount (mil $)
  A-1L-R                    AAA (sf)             311.80
  A-2L-R                    AA (sf)               44.70
  A-3L-R                    A (sf)                44.70
  B-1L-R                    BBB (sf)              32.90

  RATINGS WITHDRAWN

  Atlas Senior Loan Fund IV Ltd.
                            Rating
  Original class     To              From
  A-1L               NR              AAA (sf)
  A-2L               NR              AA (sf)
  A-3L               NR              A (sf)
  B-1L               NR              BBB (sf)

  RATINGS AFFIRMED
  Class                     Rating
  B-2L                      BB- (sf)
  B-3L                      B (sf)

  OTHER OUTSTANDING CLASS
  Class                      Rating
  Subordinated notes         NR

  NR--Not rated.


BANC OF AMERICA 2006-5: Moody's Affirms C Ratings on 2 Tranches
---------------------------------------------------------------
Moody's Investors Service has affirmed the ratings of three classes
in Banc of America Commercial Mortgage Inc. Commercial Mortgage
Pass-Through Certificates, Series 2006-5:

Cl. A-J, Affirmed Caa2 (sf); previously on Aug 18, 2016 Downgraded
to Caa2 (sf)

Cl. B, Affirmed C (sf); previously on Aug 18, 2016 Affirmed C (sf)

Cl. XC, Affirmed C (sf); previously on Jun 9, 2017 Downgraded to C
(sf)

RATINGS RATIONALE

The rating on Classes A-J and B were affirmed because the ratings
are consistent with Moody's expected loss.

The rating on the IO Class (Class XC) was affirmed based on the
credit quality of its referenced classes.

Moody's rating action reflects a base expected loss of 22.6% of the
current balance compared to 6.9% at Moody's last review. Moody's
base expected loss plus realized losses is now 12.6% of the
original pooled balance, compared to 13.5% at the last review.
Moody's provides a current list of base expected losses for conduit
and fusion CMBS transactions on moodys.com at
http://www.moodys.com/viewresearchdoc.aspx?docid=PBS_SF215255.

FACTORS THAT WOULD LEAD TO AN UPGRADE OR DOWNGRADE OF THE RATINGS:

The performance expectations for a given variable indicate Moody's
forward-looking view of the likely range of performance over the
medium term. Performance that falls outside the given range can
indicate that the collateral's credit quality is stronger or weaker
than Moody's had previously expected.

Factors that could lead to an upgrade of the ratings include a
significant amount of loan paydowns or amortization, an increase in
the pool's share of defeasance or an improvement in pool
performance.

Factors that could lead to a downgrade of the ratings include a
decline in the performance of the pool, loan concentration, an
increase in realized and expected losses from specially serviced
and troubled loans or interest shortfalls.

METHODOLOGY UNDERLYING THE RATING ACTION

The principal methodology used in these ratings was "Moody's
Approach to Rating Large Loan and Single Asset/Single Borrower
CMBS" published in July 2017.

Additionally, the methodology used in rating Cl. XC was "Moody's
Approach to Rating Structured Finance Interest-Only (IO)
Securities" published in June 2017.

Moody's analysis incorporated a loss and recovery approach in
rating the P&I classes in this deal since 87% of the pool is in
special servicing. In this approach, Moody's determines a
probability of default for each specially serviced and troubled
loan that it expects will generate a loss and estimates a loss
given default based on a review of broker's opinions of value (if
available), other information from the special servicer, available
market data and Moody's internal data. The loss given default for
each loan also takes into consideration repayment of servicer
advances to date, estimated future advances and closing costs.
Translating the probability of default and loss given default into
an expected loss estimate, Moody's then applies the aggregate loss
from specially to the most junior class and the recovery as a pay
down of principal to the most senior class.

DEAL PERFORMANCE

As of the July 10, 2017 distribution date, the transaction's
aggregate certificate balance has decreased by 95% to $90.1 million
from $2.24 billion at securitization. The certificates are
collateralized by eight mortgage loans ranging in size from 2% to
36% of the pool. The pool contains no loans with investment-grade
structured credit assessments and no defeased loans.

Forty-five loans have been liquidated from the pool, contributing
to an aggregate realized loss of $262.3 million (for an average
loan loss severity of 48%). Seven loans, constituting 87% of the
pool, are currently in special servicing. The largest specially
serviced loan is the Oaks at Park South -- A Note Loan ($31 million
-- 5% of the pool). The loan is secured by a 510-unit multifamily
property located in Oxon Hill, Maryland, approximately 9 miles
south of downtown Washington, DC. The loan transferred to special
servicing for imminent default due to outstanding maintenance and
potential waste issues at the property. The loan was previously
modified which included a 30-month maturity extension to March 2019
and the creation of an additional $6.4 million B note which
included unpaid interest and expenses at the time of the
modification.

The remaining six specially serviced loans are secured by a mix of
property types. Moody's estimates an aggregate $19.3 million loss
for the specially serviced loans.

The remaining sole non-specially serviced loan represents 13% of
the pool balance. The Cummins Nashville Loan ($10.7 million -- 13%
of the pool), is secured by an 87,230 square foot office property
located in Nashville, Tennessee that was built in 2001. The
property is 100% leased to Cummins, Inc. who is in the process of a
5-year renewal of their lease through 2023. The servicer indicated
that the borrower has requested a payoff statement for August 31,
2017. Moody's LTV and stressed DSCR are 84% and 1.19X,
respectively.


BANC OF AMERICA 2007-3: Fitch Affirms 'CCsf' Rating on 2 Tranches
-----------------------------------------------------------------
Fitch Ratings affirms Banc of America Commercial Mortgage Trust
(BACM) commercial mortgage pass-through certificates series 2007-3.


KEY RATING DRIVERS

The affirmations reflect sufficient credit enhancement (CE)
relative to the concentrated nature of the pool and expected
losses.

Concentration & Adverse Selection: The pool is highly concentrated
with only 21 of the original 152 loans remaining, of which 18 (89%
of the pool) are specially serviced.

As of the July 2017 distribution date, the pool's aggregate
principal balance has been reduced by 91.9% to $285.4 million from
$3.5 billion at issuance. Due to the concentrated nature of the
pool, Fitch performed a sensitivity analysis which grouped the
remaining loans based on loan structural features, collateral
quality and performance which ranked them by their perceived
likelihood of repayment. This includes the three non-specially
serviced loans, and 18 specially serviced loans. The ratings
reflect this sensitivity analysis.

Increased Concentration of Specially Serviced Loans: Eighteen loans
(89%) are currently in special servicing, the majority of which
have transferred due to maturity defaults. The two largest loans
are specially serviced loans accounting for 47% of pool balance.

The largest specially serviced loan is the JQH Hotel Portfolio (35%
of the pool) which is secured by five hotel properties (three
full-service and two limited-service) under the Embassy Suites,
Renaissance, and Residence flags, built between 2000 and 2005. The
hotels are situated in various cities in Tennessee, Texas, and
Missouri. The loan was transferred to special servicing in July
2016 due to the Revocable Trust of John Q. Hammons and its
affiliates filing for Chapter 13 Bankruptcy. Per the special
servicer, a hearing in December 2016 ruled in the debtor's favor
regarding the Right of First Refusal (ROFR) litigation and
dismissed it under the bankruptcy and an appeal has been filed by
JD Holdings. The borrower has engaged UBS to market and sell the
remaining hotels.

The second largest specially serviced asset is the Stonecrest
Marketplace loan (12%), which is secured by a 264,609 sf retail
property located in Lithonia, GA, an eastern suburb of Atlanta. The
loan was transferred to special servicing in February 2017 due to
imminent maturity default. Per the special servicer, the borrower
has advised it will cooperate with a receiver appointment and
foreclosure proceedings. A receiver was appointed in June 2017 and
foreclosure will be commenced with a tentative foreclosure date of
Sept. 1, 2017. The largest tenants include Big Lots (lease expiry
2019), Babies R Us (2018), Ross Stores (2018), Marshalls (2018),
and DSW (2018). As of March 2017, the property is 95.2% occupied.
The most recent servicer-reported DSCR as of year-end 2016 is
1.11x.

Long Term Loans: The remaining non-specially serviced loans all
have maturity dates in 2022.

RATING SENSITIVITIES

Rating Outlooks on classes A-J through C remain Stable due to high
credit enhancement; however, ratings on these classes have been
capped due to the increased concentration of the remaining pool,
high percentage of specially serviced loans, and long-term
maturities of the remaining three non-specially serviced loans
scheduled to mature in 2022. Ratings on the distressed classes may
be subject to further downgrades as losses are realized.

USE OF THIRD-PARTY DUE DILIGENCE PURSUANT TO SEC RULE 17G-10

No third-party due diligence was provided or reviewed in relation
to this rating action.

Fitch has affirmed and revised recovery estimates on the following
ratings:

-- $6.1 million class A-J at 'BBBsf'; Outlook Stable;
-- $35.2 million class B at 'BBsf'; Outlook Stable;
-- $48.3 million class C at 'Bsf'; Outlook Stable;
-- $26.4 million class D at 'CCCsf'; RE 100%;
-- $26.4 million class E at 'CCsf'; RE revised to 100% from 40%;
-- $35.2 million class F at 'CCsf'; RE revised to 100% from 0%;
-- $30.8 million class G at 'Csf'; RE 0%;
-- $48.3 million class H at 'Csf'; RE 0%;
-- $28.9 million class J at 'Dsf'; RE 0%;
-- $0 class K at 'Dsf'; RE 0%;
-- $0 class L at 'Dsf'; RE 0%;
-- $0 class M at 'Dsf'; RE 0%;
-- $0 class N at 'Dsf'; RE 0%;
-- $0 class O at 'Dsf'; RE 0%;
-- $0 class P at 'Dsf'; RE 0%;
-- $0 class Q at 'Dsf'; RE 0%.

Fitch does not rate the class S certificates. Classes A-1, A-2,
A-2FL, A-3, A-4, A-5, A-1A, A-M, A-MF, A-MFL, and A-AB certificates
have paid in full. Fitch previously withdrew the rating on the
interest-only class XW certificates.


BATTALION CLO XI: S&P Assigns Prelim BB(sf) Rating on Class E Notes
-------------------------------------------------------------------
S&P Global Ratings assigned its preliminary ratings to Battalion
CLO XI Ltd./Battalion CLO XI LLC's $590.0 million floating-rate
notes.

The note issuance is a collateralized loan obligation transaction
primarily backed by broadly syndicated senior secured term loans.

The preliminary ratings are based on information as of Aug. 16,
2017. Subsequent information may result in the assignment of final
ratings that differ from the preliminary ratings.

The preliminary ratings reflect:

-- The diversified collateral pool, which consists primarily of
broadly syndicated speculative-grade senior secured term loans that
are governed by collateral quality tests.

-- The credit enhancement provided through the subordination of
cash flows, excess spread, and overcollateralization.

-- The collateral manager's experienced team, which can affect the
performance of the rated notes through collateral selection,
ongoing portfolio management, and trading.

-- The transaction's legal structure, which is expected to be
bankruptcy remote.

  PRELIMINARY RATINGS ASSIGNED
  Battalion CLO XI Ltd./Battalion CLO XI LLC  
  
  Class                   Rating          Amount (mil. $)
  X                       AAA (sf)                   4.00
  A                       AAA (sf)                 395.00
  B                       AA (sf)                   88.50
  C (deferrable)          A (sf)                    39.50
  D (deferrable)          BBB (sf)                  37.00
  E (deferrable)          BB (sf)                   26.00
  Subordinate notes       NR                        65.75

  NR--Not rated.


BBCMS TRUST 2017-DELC: Moody's Assigns Prov. B3 Rating to F Certs
-----------------------------------------------------------------
Moody's Investors Service has assigned provisional ratings to seven
classes of CMBS securities, issued by BBCMS 2017-DELC Mortgage
Trust, Commercial Mortgage Pass-Through Certificates, Series
2017-DELC:

Cl. A, Assigned (P)Aaa (sf)

Cl. B, Assigned (P)Aa3 (sf)

Cl. C, Assigned (P)A3 (sf)

Cl. D, Assigned (P)Baa3 (sf)

Cl. E, Assigned (P)Ba3 (sf)

Cl. F, Assigned (P)B3 (sf)

Cl. X-CP*, Assigned (P)Aa3 (sf)

* Reflects interest-only classes

RATINGS RATIONALE

The Certificates are collateralized by a single loan backed by a
first lien commercial mortgage related to one property, the Hotel
del Coronado (the "Property"). The ratings are based on the
collateral and the structure of the transaction.

The Hotel del Coronado is a 757-guestroom (679 collateral
guestrooms and 78 condominium hotel guestrooms that are not part of
the collateral), luxury hotel and resort located in Coronado, CA
which is part of the greater San Diego area. The Property was
originally built with 380 guestrooms in 1888, at which point it was
considered to be the largest resort hotel in the world. The
Property is considered an American landmark with its signature
Victorian design and classic red and white color scheme. In 1977,
the Hotel del Coronado was designated a National Historic Landmark
by the National Trust for Historic Preservation. The Property is
AAA Four-Diamond rated and offers a full array of luxury amenities
including 64,035 SF of indoor meeting space, nearly 70,000 SF of
outdoor and pre-function space, a 12,500 SF spa, fitness center,
multiple food and beverage outlets, four pools, numerous retail
shops, and 905 parking spaces.

The Hotel del Coronado is located on Coronado Island in the City of
Coronado, approximately 5.2 miles west of downtown San Diego,
California. Coronado Island is located across the San Diego Bay and
is connected to the main land by the Silver Strand isthmus (U.S.
Highway 75 is the main route along the isthmus) and by the San
Diego-Coronado Bay Bridge. The Property has access to three
regional freeways, Interstate 5, Interstate 805, and Interstate 15
via the San Diego-Coronado Bay Bridge. San Diego International
Airport is located approximately 8.5 miles from the Property.

Moody's approach to rating this transaction involved the
application of both Moody's Large Loan and Single Asset/Single
Borrower CMBS methodology and Moody's IO Rating methodology. The
rating approach for securities backed by a single loan compares the
credit risk inherent in the underlying collateral with the credit
protection offered by the structure. The structure's credit
enhancement is quantified by the maximum deterioration in property
value that the securities are able to withstand under various
stress scenarios without causing an increase in the expected loss
for various rating levels. In assigning single borrower ratings,
Moody's also considers a range of qualitative issues as well as the
transaction's structural and legal aspects.

The credit risk of commercial real estate loans is determined
primarily by two factors: 1) the probability of default, which is
largely driven by the DSCR, and 2) and the severity of loss in the
event of default, which is largely driven by the LTV of the
underlying loan.

The Whole Loan first mortgage balance of $507,600,000 represents a
Moody's LTV of 110.9%. The Moody's Whole Loan First Mortgage Actual
DSCR is 2.89X and Moody's Whole Loan First Mortgage Stressed DSCR
is 0.95X.

Moody's also grades properties on a scale of 0 to 5 (best to worst)
and considers those grades when assessing the likelihood of debt
payment. The factors considered include property age, quality of
construction, location, market, and tenancy. The Property's
property quality grade is 1.25, reflecting the strong quality of
this asset.

Notable strengths of the transaction include: asset quality,
property location, limited new supply, historical operating
performance, newly formed affiliation with Hilton, and an
experienced and committed Sponsor.

Notable credit challenges of the transaction include: lack of
diversity for this single asset transaction, property type
volatility, the 78 non-collateral condominium hotel units,
dependence on tourism, subordinate debt, and the lack of loan
amortization.

The principal methodology used in these ratings was "Moody's
Approach to Rating Large Loan and Single Asset/Single Borrower
CMBS" published in July 2017.

Additionally, the methodology used in rating Class X-CP was
"Moody's Approach to Rating Structured Finance Interest-Only (IO)
Securities" published in June 2017.

Moody's approach for single borrower and large loan multi-borrower
transactions evaluates credit enhancement levels based on an
aggregation of adjusted loan level proceeds derived from Moody's
loan level LTV ratios. Major adjustments to determining proceeds
include leverage, loan structure, and property type. These
aggregated proceeds are then further adjusted for any pooling
benefits associated with loan level diversity, other concentrations
and correlations.

Moody's analysis considers the following inputs to calculate the
proposed IO rating based on the published methodology: original and
current bond ratings and credit estimates; original and current
bond balances grossed up for losses for all bonds the IO(s)
reference(s) within the transaction; and IO type corresponding to
an IO type as defined in the published methodology.

Moody's Parameter Sensitivities: If Moody's value of the collateral
used in determining the initial rating were decreased by 5%, 14.4%,
and 22.9%, the model-indicated rating for the currently rated (P)
Aaa (sf) classes would be Aa1 (sf), Aa2 (sf), and A2 (sf),
respectively. Parameter Sensitivities are not intended to measure
how the rating of the security might migrate over time; rather they
are designed to provide a quantitative calculation of how the
initial rating might change if key input parameters used in the
initial rating process differed. The analysis assumes that the deal
has not aged. Parameter Sensitivities only reflect the ratings
impact of each scenario from a quantitative/model-indicated
standpoint. Qualitative factors are also taken into consideration
in the ratings process, so the actual ratings that would be
assigned in each case could vary from the information presented in
the Parameter Sensitivity analysis.

These ratings: (a) are based solely on information in the public
domain and/or information communicated to Moody's by the issuer at
the date it was prepared and such information has not been
independently verified by Moody's; (b) must be construed solely as
a statement of opinion and not a statement of fact or an offer,
invitation, inducement or recommendation to purchase, sell or hold
any securities or otherwise act in relation to the issuer or any
other entity or in connection with any other matter. Moody's does
not guarantee or make any representation or warranty as to the
correctness of any information, rating or communication relating to
the issuer. Moody's shall not be liable in contract, tort,
statutory duty or otherwise to the issuer or any other third party
for any loss, injury or cost caused to the issuer or any other
third party, in whole or in part, including by any negligence (but
excluding fraud, dishonesty and/or willful misconduct or any other
type of liability that by law cannot be excluded) on the part of,
or any contingency beyond the control of Moody's, or any of its
employees or agents, including any losses arising from or in
connection with the procurement, compilation, analysis,
interpretation, communication, dissemination, or delivery of any
information or rating relating to the issuer.

Factors that would lead to an upgrade or downgrade of the ratings:

The performance expectations for a given variable indicate Moody's
forward-looking view of the likely range of performance over the
medium term. Performance that falls outside the given range may
indicate that the collateral's credit quality is stronger or weaker
than Moody's had previously anticipated. Factors that may cause an
upgrade of the ratings include significant loan pay downs or
amortization, an increase in the pool's share of defeasance or
overall improved pool performance. Factors that may cause a
downgrade of the ratings include a decline in overall performance
and Property income, increased expected losses from a specially
serviced and troubled loan or interest shortfalls.

Moody's ratings address only the credit risks associated with the
transaction. Other non-credit risks have not been addressed and may
have a significant effect on yield to investors.

The ratings do not represent any assessment of (i) the likelihood
or frequency of prepayment on the mortgage loans, (ii) the
allocation of net aggregate prepayment interest shortfalls, (iii)
whether or to what extent prepayment premiums might be received, or
(iv) in the case of any class of interest-only certificates, the
likelihood that the holders thereof might not fully recover their
investment in the event of a rapid rate of prepayment of the
mortgage loans.


BEAR STEARNS 2005-PWR10: Fitch Hikes Cl. B Certs Rating From BB
---------------------------------------------------------------
Fitch Ratings upgrades one class and affirms 15 classes of Bear
Stearns Commercial Mortgage Securities Trust (BSCMS), series
2005-PWR10 commercial mortgage pass-through certificates.

KEY RATING DRIVERS

The upgrade to class B reflects the increase in defeased collateral
and the stable performance of the remaining loans since Fitch's
prior rating action. The affirmation to class A-J is due to the
class being fully covered by defeasance. As of the July 2017
remittance report, the pool has been reduced by 95.6% to $115.8
million from $2.6 billion at issuance. There have been $272.9
million in realized losses, accounting for 10.4% of the original
pool balance. Cumulative interest shortfalls in the amount of $22
million are currently affecting class C and classes H through S.

Pool Concentration/Adverse Selection: The transaction is highly
concentrated with only 16 of the original 214 loans remaining. Of
the 16 remaining loans, four are on the servicer's watchlist (26.2%
of the pool balance) and nine loans (71.2%) have been defeased. Of
the non-defeased loans, 58.1% are office properties and 35.8% are
retail. The largest loan is an office building in New York City
(15% of the pool).

Due to the pool's concentrated nature, a sensitivity analysis was
performed which grouped and ranked the remaining loans by their
structural features, performance, and estimated likelihood of
repayment.

Defeasance: Nine of the remaining loans, accounting for 71.2% of
the remaining pool balance, have been defeased, all with maturities
in 2020.

Fitch Loans of Concern: Fitch has designated four (11.7%) Fitch
Loans of Concern. The loans have been flagged for low debt service
coverage ratios (DSCR) and net operating income (NOI), as well as
impending lease expirations and locations in tertiary markets.

Longer Term Loans: The remaining loans have maturity dates as
follows: 2020 (95.4%) and 2025 (4.6%).

RATING SENSITIVITIES

The Stable Outlook on class A-J reflects the remaining balance
being fully covered by defeased collateral. The Stable Outlook on
class B reflects the class being partially covered by defeased
collateral and sufficient credit enhancement. Further upgrades are
likely to be limited due to the portfolio's concentration and
adverse selection. Downgrades could occur if pool performance
deteriorates or loans default at maturity.

Fitch has upgraded the following rating:

-- $19.8 million class B to 'BBBsf' from 'BBsf'; Outlook Stable.

Fitch has affirmed the following ratings:

-- $72.7 million class A-J at 'AAAsf'; Outlook Stable;
-- $23.4 million class C at 'Dsf'; RE 0%;
-- $0.0 million class D at 'Dsf'; RE 0%;
-- $0.0 million class E at 'Dsf'; RE 0%;
-- $0.0 million class F at 'Dsf'; RE 0%;
-- $0.0 million class G at 'Dsf'; RE 0%;
-- $0.0 million class H at 'Dsf'; RE 0%;
-- $0.0 million class J at 'Dsf'; RE 0%;
-- $0.0 million class K at 'Dsf'; RE 0%;
-- $0.0 million class L at 'Dsf'; RE 0%;
-- $0.0 million class M at 'Dsf'; RE 0%;
-- $0.0 million class N at 'Dsf'; RE 0%;
-- $0.0 million class O at 'Dsf'; RE 0%;
-- $0.0 million class P at 'Dsf'; RE 0%;
-- $0.0 million class Q at 'Dsf'; RE 0%.

Classes A-1, A-2, A-3, A-AB, A-4, A-1A, and A-M have been repaid in
full. Fitch does not rate the $0.0 million class S. Fitch
previously withdrew the rating on the interest-only classes X-1 and
X-2.


BEAR STEARNS 2006-PWR14: Fitch Hikes Class A-J Certs Rating to Bsf
------------------------------------------------------------------
Fitch Ratings upgrades one class and affirms the remaining classes
of Bear Stearns Commercial Mortgage Securities Trust series
2006-PWR14 commercial mortgage pass-through certificates.

KEY RATING DRIVERS

Increasing Credit Enhancement: The upgrade to class A-J reflects
increasing credit enhancement (CE) and better than expected
recoveries on loans that paid off on or near their maturity dates.

As of the July 2017 distribution date, the transaction has paid
down 92.5% since issuance, to $185.6 million from $2.5 billion.

Concentrated Pool; High Percentage of Loans of Concern: The pool is
highly concentrated with only 15 loans remaining. Due to the
concentrated nature of the pool, Fitch performed a sensitivity
analysis which grouped the remaining loans based on loan structural
features, collateral quality and performance which ranked them by
their perceived likelihood of repayment. This includes defeased
loans, fully amortizing loans, balloon loans, and Fitch loans of
concern including the specially serviced loans. The ratings reflect
this sensitivity analysis.

Fitch loans of concern comprise 77% of the pool and include the
largest remaining loan, One Newark Center (A+B Note, 49.4%), and
the five specially serviced loans (19%). The affirmations of
distressed ratings on classes B through E reflect Fitch's concern
with the concentrations and high percentage of Fitch loans of
concern.

Defeasance: Three loans totalling 12.4% are defeased.
Maturity Schedule: Excluding the specially serviced loans, 29% are
ARD loans with final maturities in 2020 through 2036. The largest
loan, One Newark Center (A+B Note, 49%) has been modified and
matures in December 2017. One loan is a balloon loan (1.3%) and one
loan is fully amortizing (1.4%); both mature in 2021.

The One Newark Center loan, which currently consists of an $82
million A Note and $9.7 million B Note, is collateralized by a
418,026 sf office property located in Newark, NJ, on the corner of
Raymond Boulevard and McCarter Highway across from Newark Penn
Station in the central business district. The loan was modified in
2012 and was split into an A/B Note structure, extended through
December 2017 and the interest rate reduced. On the modified loan
terms, the A Note reported a year-end 2016 DSCR of 1.72x and
reported occupancy of 90% as of March 2017. The loan is on the
watchlist for upcoming maturity. The servicer is reporting that the
borrower is exploring refinance options.

RATING SENSITIVITIES+
The Rating Outlook of class A-J is stable, as no rating changes are
expected. Due to the increased credit enhancement from paydown,
losses are less likely than at Fitch's previous rating action. The
class is reliant on the performing loans, including One Newark
Center, to pay off. The remaining classes' ratings are distressed
and reflect the expectation of losses on both the specially
serviced loans and performing Fitch loans of concern. Downgrades
are expected as losses are more imminent or realized.

Fitch has upgraded the following class:
-- $60.5 million class A-J to 'Bsf' from 'CCCsf'; Outlook Stable
    assigned.

Fitch has affirmed the following classes:

-- $46.3 million class B at 'CCCsf'; RE revised to 50% from 0%;
-- $24.7 million class C at 'CCsf'; RE 0%;
-- $37 million class D at 'Csf'; RE 0%.
-- $17.2 million class E at 'Dsf'; RE 0%

Fitch does not rate class P. Class A-1, A-2, A3, A-AB, A-4, and A-M
have paid in full. Class F, G, H, J, K, L, M, N, and O are affirmed
at 'Dsf; RE 0%' due to full losses incurred. Fitch has previously
withdrawn the ratings on the interest-only classes X-1, X-2 and
X-W.


BX TRUST 2017-SLCT: S&P Assigns B(sf) Rating on Class F Certs
-------------------------------------------------------------
S&P Global Ratings assigned its ratings to BX Trust 2017-SLCT's
$1.324 billion commercial mortgage pass-through certificates.

The note issuance is a commercial mortgage-backed securities
transaction backed by one two-year, floating-rate commercial
mortgage loan totaling $1.393 billion ($1.324 billion securitized
balance, which excludes the risk retention class), with five
one-year extension options, secured by the fee simple and leasehold
interest in 55 extended-stay, 40 limited-service, and one
full-service hotel properties.

The ratings reflect S&P's view of the collateral's historical and
projected performance, the sponsors' and managers' experience, the
trustee-provided liquidity, the loan's terms, and the transaction's
structure.

  RATINGS ASSIGNED
  BX Trust 2017-SLCT

  Class       Rating(I)           Amount ($)
  A           AAA (sf)           465,500,000
  X-CP        BBB- (sf)          375,487,500(ii)
  X-EXT       BBB- (sf)          441,750,000(ii)
  B           AA- (sf)           161,500,000
  C           A- (sf)            120,650,000
  D           BBB- (sf)          159,600,000
  E           BB- (sf)           250,800,000
  F           B (sf)             165,775,000
  RR(iii)     NR                  69,675,000

(i)The issuer will issue the certificates to qualified
institutional buyers in line with Rule 144A of the Securities Act
of 1933.

(ii)Notional balance. The notional amount of the class X-CP
certificates will be equal to the aggregate of the portion balances
of the B-2 portion of the class B certificates, the C-2 portion of
the class C certificates, and the D-2 portion of the class D
certificates. The notional amount of the class X-EXT certificates
will be equal to the aggregate certificate balance of class B, C
and D certificates.

(iii)Nonoffered vertical risk retention class.

NR--Not rated.


BXP TRUST 2017-CC: S&P Gives Prelim BB-(sf) Rating on Class E Certs
-------------------------------------------------------------------
S&P Global Ratings assigned its preliminary rating to BXP Trust
2017-CC's $350 million commercial mortgage pass-through
certificates series 2017-CC.

The certificate issuance is backed by a trust loan, which is a $350
million portion of a $550 million whole commercial mortgage loan,
secured by a first lien on the borrower's fee interest in Colorado
Center, 1.2 million sq.-ft. office campus located in the Santa
Monica submarket of Los Angeles. The remaining $200 million of the
whole commercial mortgage loan is comprised of six companion notes
that are currently held by the loan sellers and will be securitized
in separate transactions. The whole commercial mortgage loan will
be serviced and administered according to the trust and servicing
agreement for this securitization. The whole commercial mortgage
loan has a 10-year fixed-rate term.

The preliminary ratings are based on information as of Aug. 11,
2017. Subsequent information may result in the assignment of final
ratings that differ from the preliminary ratings.

S&P said, "The preliminary ratings reflect our view of the
collateral's historic and projected performance, the sponsors' and
managers' experience, the trustee-provided liquidity, the loan's
terms, and the transaction's structure. We determined that the
mortgage loan has a beginning and ending loan-to-value (LTV) ratio
of 83.1%, based on S&P Global Ratings' value and the $550 million
whole commercial mortgage loan balance."

  PRELIMINARY RATINGS ASSIGNED

  BXP Trust 2017-CC

   Class     Rating(i)         Amount ($)
  A         AAA (sf)          93,100,000
  X-A(ii)   AAA (sf)          93,100,000(ii)
  X-B(ii)   AA- (sf)          62,700,000(ii)
  B         AA- (sf)          62,700,000
  C         A- (sf)           47,120,000
  D         BBB- (sf)         57,855,000
  E         BB- (sf)          71,725,000
  RR(iii)   NR                17,500,000

(i)The rating on each class of securities is preliminary and
subject to change at any time. The issuer will issue the
certificates to qualified institutional buyers in line with Rule
144A of the Securities Act of 1933.
(ii)Notional balance. The notional amount of the class X-A
certificates will be equal to the balance of the class A
certificates, and the notional amount of the class X-B certificates
will be equal to the balance of the class B certificates.
(iii)Non-offered vertical risk retention certificate.
NR--Not rated.


CALIFORNIA STREET V: Moody's Hikes Rating on Class D Notes to Ba1
-----------------------------------------------------------------
Moody's Investors Service has upgraded the ratings on the following
notes issued by California Street CLO V, Ltd.:

US$25,000,000 Class A-2 Senior Secured Floating Rate Notes due
2024, Upgraded to Aaa (sf); previously on August 17, 2016 Upgraded
to Aa1 (sf)

US$16,000,000 Class B Senior Secured Deferrable Floating Rate Notes
due 2024, Upgraded to Aa3 (sf); previously on August 17, 2016
Upgraded to A1 (sf)

US$14,000,000 Class C Senior Secured Deferrable Floating Rate Notes
due 2024, Upgraded to A3 (sf); previously on August 17, 2016
Upgraded to Baa2 (sf)

US$12,240,000 Class D Secured Deferrable Floating Rate Notes due
2024, Upgraded to Ba1 (sf); previously on August 17, 2016 Affirmed
Ba2 (sf)

Moody's also affirmed the rating on the following notes:

US$311,300,000 Class A-1 Senior Secured Floating Rate Notes due
2024 (current outstanding balance of $159,059,438), Affirmed Aaa
(sf); previously on August 17, 2016 Affirmed Aaa (sf)

California Street CLO V, Ltd., formerly known as Symphony CLO V,
Ltd., issued in December 2007, is a collateralized loan obligation
(CLO) backed primarily by a portfolio of senior secured loans. The
transaction's reinvestment period ended in January 2015.

RATINGS RATIONALE

These rating actions are primarily a result of deleveraging of the
senior notes and an increase in the transaction's
over-collateralization (OC) ratios since August 2016. The Class
A-1notes have been paid down by approximately 43% or $120.4 million
since then. Based on Moody's calculations, the OC ratios for the
Class A, Class B, Class C, and Class D notes are currently 138.84%,
127.73%, 119.38%, and 112.92%, respectively, versus August 2016
levels of 124.30%, 118.09%, 113.15%, and 109.15%, respectively.

Methodology Underlying the Rating Action:

The principal methodology used in these ratings was "Moody's Global
Approach to Rating Collateralized Loan Obligations" published in
October 2016.

Factors that Would Lead to an Upgrade or Downgrade of the Ratings:

This transaction is subject to a number of factors and
circumstances that could lead to either an upgrade or downgrade of
the ratings:

1) Macroeconomic uncertainty: CLO performance is subject to a)
uncertainty about credit conditions in the general economy and b)
the large concentration of upcoming speculative-grade debt
maturities, which could make refinancing difficult for issuers.

2) Collateral Manager: Performance can also be affected positively
or negatively by a) the manager's investment strategy and behavior
and b) differences in the legal interpretation of CLO documentation
by different transactional parties owing to embedded ambiguities.

3) Collateral credit risk: A shift towards collateral of better
credit quality, or better credit performance of assets
collateralizing the transaction than Moody's current expectations,
can lead to positive CLO performance. Conversely, a negative shift
in credit quality or performance of the collateral can have adverse
consequences for CLO performance.

4) Deleveraging: An important source of uncertainty in this
transaction is whether deleveraging from unscheduled principal
proceeds will continue and at what pace. Deleveraging of the CLO
could accelerate owing to high prepayment levels in the loan market
and/or collateral sales by the manager, which could have a
significant impact on the notes' ratings. Note repayments that are
faster than Moody's current expectations will usually have a
positive impact on CLO notes, beginning with those with the highest
payment priority.

5) Recovery of defaulted assets: Fluctuations in the market value
of defaulted assets reported by the trustee and those that Moody's
assumes as having defaulted could result in volatility in the
deal's OC levels. Further, the timing of recoveries and whether a
manager decides to work out or sell defaulted assets create
additional uncertainty. Moody's analyzed defaulted recoveries
assuming the lower of the market price and the recovery rate in
order to account for potential volatility in market prices.
Realization of higher than assumed recoveries would positively
impact the CLO.

6) Long-dated assets: The presence of assets that mature after the
CLO's legal maturity date exposes the deal to liquidation risk on
those assets. This risk is borne first by investors with the lowest
priority in the capital structure. Moody's assumes that the
terminal value of an asset upon liquidation at maturity will be
equal to the lower of an assumed liquidation value (depending on
the extent to which the asset's maturity lags that of the
liabilities) or the asset's current market value.

7) Post-Reinvestment Period Trading: Subject to certain
requirements, the deal can reinvest certain proceeds after the end
of the reinvestment period, and as such the manager has the ability
to erode some of the collateral quality metrics to the covenant
levels. Such reinvestment could affect the transaction either
positively or negatively.

8) Exposure to assets with low credit quality and weak liquidity:
The presence of assets rated Caa3 with a negative outlook, Caa2 or
Caa3 on review for downgrade or the worst Moody's speculative grade
liquidity (SGL) rating, SGL-4, exposes the notes to additional
risks if these assets default. The historical default rate is
higher than average for these assets. Due to the deal's exposure to
such assets, which constitute around $9.1 million of par, Moody's
ran a sensitivity case defaulting those assets.

In addition to the base case analysis, Moody's also conducted
sensitivity analyses to test the impact of a number of default
probabilities on the rated notes relative to the base case modeling
results, which may be different from the current public ratings of
the notes. Below is a summary of the impact of different default
probabilities (expressed in terms of WARF) on all of the rated
notes (by the difference in the number of notches versus the
current model output, for which a positive difference corresponds
to lower expected loss):

Moody's Adjusted WARF -- 20% (2079)

Class A-1: 0

Class A-2: 0

Class B: +2

Class C: +2

Class D: +2

Moody's Adjusted WARF + 20% (3118)

Class A-1: 0

Class A-2: -1

Class B: -1

Class C: -2

Class D: -1

Loss and Cash Flow Analysis:

Moody's modeled the transaction using a cash flow model based on
the Binomial Expansion Technique, as described in "Moody's Global
Approach to Rating Collateralized Loan Obligations."

The key model inputs Moody's used in its analysis, such as par,
weighted average rating factor, diversity score and the weighted
average recovery rate, are based on its published methodology and
could differ from the trustee's reported numbers. In its base case,
Moody's analyzed the collateral pool as having a performing par and
principal proceeds balance of $253.0 million, defaulted par of $5.1
million, a weighted average default probability of 15.97% (implying
a WARF of 2598), a weighted average recovery rate upon default of
50.09%, a diversity score of 37 and a weighted average spread of
2.95% (before accounting for LIBOR floors).

Moody's incorporates the default and recovery properties of the
collateral pool in cash flow model analysis where they are subject
to stresses as a function of the target rating on each CLO
liability reviewed. Moody's derives the default probability from
the credit quality of the collateral pool and Moody's expectation
of the remaining life of the collateral pool. The average recovery
rate for future defaults is based primarily on the seniority of the
assets in the collateral pool. In each case, historical and market
performance and the collateral manager's latitude for trading the
collateral are also factors.


CARLYLE GLOBAL 2013-1: Moody's Assigns Ba3 Rating to Cl. D-R Notes
------------------------------------------------------------------
Moody's Investors Service has assigned definitive ratings to five
classes of notes issued by Carlyle Global Market Strategies CLO
2013-1, Ltd.:

US$380,000,000 Class A-1-R Senior Secured Floating Rate Notes due
2030 (the "Class A-1-R Notes"), Assigned Aaa (sf)

US$71,000,000 Class A-2-R Senior Secured Floating Rate Notes due
2030 (the "Class A-2-R Notes"), Assigned Aa2 (sf)

US$36,000,000 Class B-R Senior Secured Deferrable Floating Rate
Notes due 2030 (the "Class B-R Notes"), Assigned A2 (sf)

US$38,000,000 Class C-R Senior Secured Deferrable Floating Rate
Notes due 2030 (the "Class C-R Notes"), Assigned Baa3 (sf)

US$27,000,000 Class D-R Senior Secured Deferrable Floating Rate
Notes due 2030 (the "Class D-R Notes"), Assigned Ba3 (sf)

The Issuer is a managed cash flow collateralized loan obligation
(CLO). The issued notes are collateralized primarily by a portfolio
of senior secured, broadly syndicated corporate loans.

Carlyle CLO Management L.L.C. (the "Manager") manages the CLO. It
directs the selection, acquisition, and disposition of collateral
on behalf of the Issuer.

The Class A-1-R Notes, the Class A-2-R Notes, the Class B-R Notes,
the Class C-R Notes, and the Class D-R notes are collectively
referred to herein as the "Refinancing Notes."

RATINGS RATIONALE

Moody's ratings on the Refinancing Notes address the expected
losses posed to noteholders. The definitive ratings reflect the
risks due to defaults on the underlying portfolio of assets, the
transaction's legal structure, and the characteristics of the
underlying assets.

The Issuer has issued the Refinancing Notes on August 14, 2017 (the
"Refinancing Date") in connection with the refinancing of all
classes of the secured notes (the "Refinanced Original Notes")
previously issued on February 14, 2013 (the "Original Closing
Date"). On the Refinancing Date, the Issuer used proceeds from the
issuance of the Refinancing Notes to redeem in full the Refinanced
Original Notes.

In addition to the issuance of the Refinancing Notes, a variety of
other changes to transaction features will occur in connection with
the refinancing. These include: reinstatement and extension of the
reinvestment period; extensions of the stated maturity and non-call
period; changes to certain collateral quality tests; changes to the
overcollateralization test levels; and changes to comply with the
Volcker Rule.

Moody's modeled the transaction using a cash flow model based on
the Binomial Expansion Technique, as described in Section 2.3.2.1
of the "Moody's Global Approach to Rating Collateralized Loan
Obligations" rating methodology published in October 2016.

The key model inputs Moody's used in its analysis, such as par,
weighted average rating factor, diversity score and weighted
average recovery rate, are based on its published methodology and
could differ from the trustee's reported numbers. For modeling
purposes, Moody's used the following base-case assumptions:

Performing par and principal proceeds balance: $599,113,720

Defaulted par: $2,017,774

Diversity Score: 70

Weighted Average Rating Factor (WARF): 3069

Weighted Average Spread (WAS): 3.55%

Weighted Average Recovery Rate (WARR): 49.0%

Weighted Average Life (WAL): 9 years

Methodology Underlying the Rating Action:

The principal methodology used in these ratings was "Moody's Global
Approach to Rating Collateralized Loan Obligations" published in
October 2016.

Factors That Would Lead to an Upgrade or a Downgrade of the
Ratings:

The performance of the Refinancing Notes is subject to uncertainty.
The performance of the Refinancing Notes is sensitive to the
performance of the underlying portfolio, which in turn depends on
economic and credit conditions that may change. The Manager's
investment decisions and management of the transaction will also
affect the performance of the Refinancing Notes.

Together with the set of modeling assumptions above, Moody's
conducted an additional sensitivity analysis, which was a component
in determining the ratings assigned to the Refinancing Notes. This
sensitivity analysis includes increased default probability
relative to the base case.

Below is a summary of the impact of an increase in default
probability (expressed in terms of WARF level) on the Refinancing
Notes (shown in terms of the number of notch difference versus the
current model output, whereby a negative difference corresponds to
higher expected losses), assuming that all other factors are held
equal:

Percentage Change in WARF -- increase of 15% (from 3069 to 3529)

Rating Impact in Rating Notches

Class A-1-R Notes: 0

Class A-2-R Notes: -2

Class B-R Notes: -2

Class C-R Notes: -1

Class D-R Notes: 0

Percentage Change in WARF -- increase of 30% (3069 to 3990)

Rating Impact in Rating Notches

Class A-1-R Notes: -1

Class A-2-R Notes: -3

Class B-R Notes: -4

Class C-R Notes: -2

Class D-R Notes: -1


CD MORTGAGE 2017-CD5: Fitch Assigns 'B-sf' Rating to Class F Notes
------------------------------------------------------------------
Fitch Ratings has assigned the following ratings and Ratings
Outlooks to CD 2017-CD5 Mortgage Trust, Series 2017-CD5:

--$32,096,000 class A-1 'AAAsf'; Outlook Stable;
--$70,987,000 class A-2 'AAAsf'; Outlook Stable;
--$225,000,000 class A-3 'AAAsf'; Outlook Stable;
--$252,232,000 class A-4 'AAAsf'; Outlook Stable;
--$47,057,000 class A-AB 'AAAsf'; Outlook Stable;
--$730,440,000b class X-A 'AAAsf'; Outlook Stable;
--$71,700,000b class X-B 'A-sf'; Outlook Stable;
--$103,068,000 class A-S 'AAAsf'; Outlook Stable;
--$39,211,000 class B 'AA-sf'; Outlook Stable;
--$32,489,000 class C 'A-sf'; Outlook Stable;
--$39,211,000ab class X-D 'BBB-sf'; Outlook Stable;
--$15,684,000ab class X-E 'BB-sf'; Outlook Stable;
--$39,211,000a class D 'BBB-sf'; Outlook Stable;
--$15,684,000a class E 'BB-sf'; Outlook Stable;
--$8,962,000ad class F 'B-sf'; Outlook Stable.

Since Fitch published its expected ratings on July 17, 2017, the
issuer removed the interest-only class X-C and the class X-B was
increased to $71,700,000 and will reference class B and class C.
The rating for class X-C was withdrawn. The classes above reflect
the final ratings and deal structure.

The following are not rated by Fitch:

--$30,249,217ad class G;
--$35,402,658c VRR Interest.

(a) Privately placed and pursuant to Rule 144A.
(b) Notional amount and interest only.
(c) Vertical credit risk retention interest representing
approximately 3.8% of the pool balance (as of the closing date).
(d) Class F and G certificates, in the aggregate initial
certificate balance of approximately $39,211,217, constitute the
eligible horizontal residual interest to satisfy a portion of the
sponsor's risk retention obligation. The combined interest retained
by both the vertical credit risk retention and horizontal residual
interest is no less than 5%.

The certificates represent the beneficial ownership interest in the
trust, primary assets of which are 48 loans secured by 134
commercial properties having an aggregate principal balance of
$931,648,876 as of the cut-off date. The loans were contributed to
the trust by Citigroup Global Markets Realty Corp. and German
American Capital Corporation.

Fitch reviewed a comprehensive sample of the transaction's
collateral, including site inspections on 75.9% of the properties
by balance, cash flow analysis of 78.1%, and asset summary reviews
on 100% of the pool.

KEY RATING DRIVERS

Lower Fitch Leverage than Recent Transactions: The pool's leverage
is lower than recent Fitch-rated multiborrower transactions. The
Fitch debt service coverage ratio (DSCR) and loan to value (LTV)
for the pool are 1.27x and 97.7%, respectively, which is better
than the year-to-date (YTD) 2017 averages of 1.23x and 102.4%.
Excluding investment-grade credit opinion loans, the pool has a
Fitch DSCR and LTV of 1.23x and 108%, respectively.

Investment-Grade Credit Opinion Loans: Three loans, representing
22.7% of the pool, have investment-grade credit opinions; this is
better than the YTD 2017 average credit opinion concentration of 9%
in recent transactions. General Motors Building (10.7% of the pool)
has an investment-grade credit opinion of 'AAAsf'* on a stand-alone
basis, while 245 Park Avenue (5.5% of the pool) and Olympic Tower
(6.4% of the pool) have investment-grade credit opinions of
'BBB-sf'* and 'BBBsf'*, respectively, on a stand-alone basis.

Significant Hotel Exposure: The pool has an above-average
concentration of hotel properties compared to other recent
Fitch-rated transactions. Loans secured by hotel properties
comprise 21.7% of the pool, compared to the YTD 2017 average of
14.8%. Hotel properties have an above-average probability of
default in Fitch's multiborrower model, all else equal.

RATING SENSITIVITIES

For this transaction, Fitch's net cash flow (NCF) was 11.6% below
the most recent year's net operating income (NOI) for properties
for which a full-year NOI was provided, excluding properties that
were stabilizing during this period. Unanticipated further declines
in property-level NCF could result in higher defaults and loss
severities on defaulted loans and in potential rating actions on
the certificates.

Fitch evaluated the sensitivity of the ratings assigned to the CD
2017-CD5 certificates and found that the transaction displays
average sensitivities to further declines in NCF. In a scenario in
which NCF declined a further 20% from Fitch's NCF, a downgrade of
the junior 'AAAsf' certificates to 'A-sf' could result. In a more
severe scenario, in which NCF declined a further 30% from Fitch's
NCF, a downgrade of the junior 'AAAsf' certificates to 'BBB-sf'
could result.


CEDAR FUNDING VIII: S&P Gives Prelim BB-(sf) Rating on Cl. E Notes
------------------------------------------------------------------
S&P Global Ratings assigned its preliminary ratings to Cedar
Funding VIII CLO Ltd./Cedar Funding VIII CLO LLC's $441.00 million
floating-rate notes.

The note issuance is a collateralized loan obligation transaction
backed by primarily broadly syndicated speculative-grade senior
secured term loans that are governed by collateral quality tests.

The preliminary ratings are based on information as of Aug. 10,
2017. Subsequent information may result in the assignment of final
ratings that differ from the preliminary ratings.

The preliminary ratings reflect:

-- The diversified collateral pool, which consists primarily of
broadly syndicated speculative-grade senior secured term loans that
are governed by collateral quality tests.

-- The credit enhancement provided through the subordination of
cash flows, excess spread, and overcollateralization.

-- The collateral manager's experienced team, which can affect the
performance of the rated notes through collateral selection,
ongoing portfolio management, and trading.

-- The transaction's legal structure, which is expected to be
bankruptcy remote.

  PRELIMINARY RATINGS ASSIGNED

  Cedar Funding VIII CLO Ltd./Cedar Funding VIII CLO LLC

  Class                  Rating            Amount
                                         (mil. $)
  A-1                    AAA (sf)          310.25
  A-2                    NR                 18.75
  B                      AA (sf)            51.25
  C (deferrable)         A (sf)             29.75
  D (deferrable)         BBB- (sf)          25.25
  E (deferrable)         BB- (sf)           24.50
  Subordinated notes     NR                 49.75

  NR—Not rated.


CGDBB COMMERCIAL 2017-BIOC: S&P Rates Class E Notes BB-(sf)
-----------------------------------------------------------
S&P Global Ratings assigned its ratings to CGDBB Commercial
Mortgage Trust 2017-BIOC's $825.0 million commercial mortgage
pass-through certificates series 2017-BIOC.

The certificate issuance is a commercial mortgage-backed securities
transaction backed by a two-year, floating-rate commercial mortgage
loan totaling $825 million, with three one-year extension options,
secured by a first lien on the borrowers' fee interests in a
portfolio of 15 office and laboratory properties totaling 2.2
million sq. ft. The properties are located in California and
Massachusetts.

The ratings reflect S&P's view of the collateral's historical and
projected performance, the sponsor's and managers' experience, the
trustee-provided liquidity, the loan's terms, and the transaction's
structure.

  RATINGS ASSIGNED
  CGDBB Commercial Mortgage Trust 2017-BIOC

  Class            Rating(i)           Amount ($)
  A                AAA (sf)          415,467,000
  X-NCP            BBB- (sf)         261,010,000(ii)
  B                AA- (sf)           97,757,000
  C                A- (sf)            73,317,000
  D                BBB- (sf)          89,936,000
  E                BB- (sf)          107,273,000
  Class VRR(iii)   NR                 41,250,000

(i)The issuer will issue the certificates to qualified
institutional buyers in line with Rule 144A of the Securities Act
of 1933.
(ii)Notional balance. The notional amount of the class X-NCP
certificates will be equal to the aggregate of the certificate
balances of the class B, C, and D certificates.
(iii)Non-offered vertical interest certificate.
NR--Not rated.


CITIGROUP 2013-GC15: Fitch Affirms 'Bsf' Rating on Cl. F Certs
--------------------------------------------------------------
Fitch Ratings has affirmed 13 classes of Citigroup Commercial
Mortgage Trust (CGCMT) commercial mortgage pass-through
certificates, series 2013-GC15.

KEY RATING DRIVERS

Overall Stable Performance: The affirmations reflect the relatively
stable performance, with no material changes to pool metrics since
issuance. As of the July 2017 remittance reporting, the pool's
aggregate principal balance has paid down by 5.2% to $1.06 billion
from $1.12 billion at issuance; the pool has experienced no
realized losses to date. Five loans (5.7% of the pool balance) are
fully defeased.

Loans of Concern: Seven loans (9.4% of the pool balance) have been
identified as Fitch Loans of Concern (FLOC), including two (6.7%)
of the top 10 loans and one loan (0.4%) in special servicing. The
largest FLOC, the Sky Song Center (4.4%; Scottsdale, AZ) and
Columbia Square (2.3%; San Diego, CA) loans, are secured by office
properties that have experienced occupancy declines and will face
further pressure with significant near-term rollover.

The specially serviced loan (0.4%) is secured by a 33,190 square
foot mixed-use property in Kissimmee, FL that has experienced cash
flow issues due to significant occupancy declines. Per servicer
reporting, occupancy fell to 38% by year-end 2016, compared to 100%
at issuance. The loan transferred to special servicing in December
2015 for imminent default, and has been in payment default since
February 2016. A receiver was appointed in July 2016 and the
servicer continues to pursue foreclosure.

High Percentage of Interest-Only Loans: Five loans (22.7% of pool)
are interest-only for the full term. Additionally, 15 loans (26%)
were structured as partial interest-only of which 12 (15.9%) have
transitioned into their amortization periods.

Pool Concentrations: The pool is highly diverse with the top 10
loans representing 39.8% of the pool balance, well below
Fitch-rated transactions between 2013 and year to date 2017 ranging
from 49.3% to 54.8%. Upcoming loan maturities consist of 21.5% of
the pool in 2018, with the remaining 78.5% in 2023. Approximately
32.5% of the pool is secured by retail properties (38 loans),
including five loans within the top 15 (11.8%), none of which are
classified as regional malls.

RATING SENSITIVITIES

Stable Outlook: Rating Outlooks on all classes remain Stable due to
increasing credit enhancement and continued stable performance of
the pool since issuance. Fitch does not foresee positive or
negative ratings migration until a material economic or asset level
event changes the transaction's portfolio-level metrics. Future
upgrades are possible as CE improves when 21.5% of the pool is
expected to pay off at their scheduled 2018 maturities. Downgrades
may be possible should overall performance decline significantly.

Fitch has affirmed the following classes:

-- $235.8 million class A-2 at 'AAAsf', Outlook Stable;
-- $150 million class A-3 at 'AAAsf', Outlook Stable;
-- $264.2 million class A-4 at 'AAAsf', Outlook Stable;
-- $72.2 million class A-AB at 'AAAsf', Outlook Stable;
-- $94.8 million class A-S at 'AAAsf', Outlook Stable;
-- $817 million* class X-A at 'AAAsf', Outlook Stable;
-- $18.1 million* class X-C at 'BBsf', Outlook Stable;
-- $54.4 million class B at 'AA-sf', Outlook Stable;
-- $204.9 million** class PEZ at 'A-sf', Outlook Stable;
-- $55.8 million class C at 'A-sf', Outlook Stable;
-- $50.2 million class D at 'BBB-sf', Outlook Stable;
-- $18.1 million class E at 'BBsf', Outlook Stable;
-- $16.7 million class F at 'Bsf', Outlook Stable.

*Notional amount and interest-only.
**Class A-S, B, and C certificates may be exchanged for class PEZ
certificates, the class PEZ certificates may be exchanged for up to
the full certificate principal amount of the class A-S, B, and C
certificates.

The class A-1 certificates have paid in full. Fitch does not rate
the class G certificates.


CITIGROUP COMMERCIAL 2015-101A: S&P Affirms B+ on 2 Tranches
------------------------------------------------------------
S&P Global Ratings affirmed its ratings on nine classes of
commercial mortgage pass-through certificates from Citigroup
Commercial Mortgage Trust 2015-101A, a U.S. commercial
mortgage-backed securities (CMBS) transaction.

S&P said, "The affirmations on the principal- and interest-paying
certificate classes follow our analysis of the transaction,
primarily using our criteria for rating U.S. and Canadian CMBS
transactions. Our analysis included a review of the net rentable
436,204-sq.-ft. class A office property in Manhattan, N.Y., which
secures the $200.0 million fixed-rate interest-only (IO) mortgage
loan that serves as collateral for the stand-alone transaction. We
also considered the deal structure and liquidity available to the
trust. The affirmations also reflect our expectation that the
available credit enhancement for these classes will be within our
estimate of the necessary credit enhancement required for the
current ratings and our views regarding the collateral's current
and future performance .

"We affirmed our ratings on the class X-A and X-B IO certificates
based on our criteria for rating IO securities, in which the
ratings on the IO securities would not be higher than the
lowest-rated reference class. The notional balance on class X-A
references class A, and the notional balance on Class X-B
references classes B and C.

"The analysis of stand-alone (single borrower) transactions is
predominantly a recovery-based approach that assumes a loan
default. Using this approach, our property-level analysis included
a revaluation of the office property that secures the mortgage loan
in the trust. We also considered the stable servicer-reported net
operating income (NOI) and occupancy for the past two years. We
then derived our sustainable in-place net cash flow, which we
divided by a 6.50% capitalization rate to determine our
expected-case value. This yielded an overall S&P Global Ratings
loan-to-value ratio and debt service coverage (DSC) of 85.0% and
1.59x, respectively, on the trust balance."

According to the July 14, 2017, trustee remittance report, the IO
mortgage loan has a trust- and whole-loan balance of $200.0
million, pays an annual fixed interest rate of 4.65%, and matures
on Jan. 10, 2035. The transaction has no secondary financing at
present, but the borrower can incur mezzanine debt after meeting
certain performance hurdles. According to the transaction
documents, the borrowers will pay the special servicing, work-out,
and liquidation fees, as well as costs and expenses incurred from
appraisals and inspections conducted by the special servicer. To
date, the trust has not incurred any principal losses.

S&P said, "We based our analysis partly on a review of the
property's historical NOI for the trailing three-months ended March
31, 2017 and years ended Dec. 31, 2016 and 2015, and the May 31,
2017, rent roll provided by the master servicer to determine our
opinion of a sustainable cash flow for the office property. The
master servicer, Wells Fargo Bank N.A., reported a DSC of 1.94x on
the trust balance for the year ended Dec. 31, 2016, and occupancy
was 99.7% according to the May 31, 2017, rent roll. Based on the
May 2017 rent roll, the five largest tenants make up 94.2% of the
collateral's total net rentable area (NRA). In addition, we noted
that there are minimal lease rollovers until 2024, when Two Sigma
Investments LLC, the second-largest tenant by NRA and representing
34.0% of total rents and reimbursements, has an option to terminate
its lease agreement."

RATINGS LIST

Citigroup Commercial Mortgage Trust 2015-101A
Commercial mortgage pass-through certificates series 2015-101A
                                         Rating                    
            
  Class       Identifier          To               From            

  A           17290MAA2           AAA (sf)         AAA (sf)        

  X-A         17290MAE4           AAA (sf)         AAA (sf)        

  X-B         17290MAG9           A+ (sf)          A+ (sf)         

  B           17290MAJ3           AA (sf)          AA (sf)         

  C           17290MAL8           A+ (sf)          A+ (sf)         

  D           17290MAN4           BBB+ (sf)        BBB+ (sf)       

  E           17290MAQ7           BB (sf)          BB (sf)         

  F           17290MAS3           B+ (sf)          B+ (sf)         

  G           17290MAU8           B+ (sf)          B+ (sf)   


CITIGROUP COMMERCIAL 2017-1500: S&P Gives (P)B Rating on F Certs
----------------------------------------------------------------
S&P Global Ratings assigned its preliminary ratings to Citigroup
Commercial Mortgage Trust 2017-1500's $240 million commercial
mortgage pass-through certificates series 2017-1500.

The certificate issuance is a commercial mortgage-backed securities
transaction backed by a $240 million trust mortgage loan secured by
a first lien on the borrower's fee interest in 1500 Market, a 1.76
million- sq.-ft. office complex located in Philadelphia within the
Market Street West submarket.

The preliminary ratings are based on information as of Aug. 16,
2017. Subsequent information may result in the assignment of final
ratings that differ from the preliminary ratings.

The preliminary ratings reflect S&P's view of the collateral's
historical and projected performance, the sponsor's and managers'
experience, the trustee-provided liquidity, the loan's terms, and
the transaction's structure.

  PRELIMINARY RATINGS ASSIGNED
  Citigroup Commercial Mortgage Trust 2017-1500

  Class       Rating(i)            Amount ($)
  A           AAA (sf)            108,752,000
  X-CP        A- (sf)             153,533,000(ii)
  X-NCP       A- (sf)             153,533,000(ii)
  B           AA- (sf)             25,589,000
  C           A- (sf)              19,192,000
  D           BBB- (sf)            23,542,000
  E           BB- (sf)             31,986,000
  F           B (sf)               18,639,000
  HRR(iii)    B- (sf)              12,300,000

(i)The issuer will issue the certificates to qualified
institutional buyers in line with Rule 144A of the Securities Act
of 1933. (ii)Notional balance. The notional amount of the class
X-CP and X-NCP certificates will be equal to the aggregate
certificate balance of the class A, B, and C certificates.
(iii)Non-offered horizontal interest certificate.


COMM 2012-CCRE3: Moody's Affirms B2(sf) Rating on Class G Notes
---------------------------------------------------------------
Moody's Investors Service has affirmed thirteen classes in COMM
2012-CCRE3 Mortgage Trust, Commercial Mortgage Pass-Through
Certificates, Series 2012-CCRE3:

Cl. A-2, Affirmed Aaa (sf); previously on Aug 4, 2016 Affirmed Aaa
(sf)

Cl. A-SB, Affirmed Aaa (sf); previously on Aug 4, 2016 Affirmed Aaa
(sf)

Cl. A-3, Affirmed Aaa (sf); previously on Aug 4, 2016 Affirmed Aaa
(sf)

Cl. A-M, Affirmed Aaa (sf); previously on Aug 4, 2016 Affirmed Aaa
(sf)

Cl. B, Affirmed Aa3 (sf); previously on Aug 4, 2016 Affirmed Aa3
(sf)

Cl. C, Affirmed A3 (sf); previously on Aug 4, 2016 Affirmed A3
(sf)

Cl. D, Affirmed Baa1 (sf); previously on Aug 4, 2016 Affirmed Baa1
(sf)

Cl. E, Affirmed Baa3 (sf); previously on Aug 4, 2016 Affirmed Baa3
(sf)

Cl. F, Affirmed Ba2 (sf); previously on Aug 4, 2016 Affirmed Ba2
(sf)

Cl. G, Affirmed B2 (sf); previously on Aug 4, 2016 Affirmed B2
(sf)

Cl. PEZ, Affirmed Aa3 (sf); previously on Aug 4, 2016 Affirmed Aa3
(sf)

Cl. X-A, Affirmed Aaa (sf); previously on Aug 4, 2016 Affirmed Aaa
(sf)

Cl. X-B, Affirmed Ba3 (sf); previously on Aug 4, 2016 Affirmed Ba3
(sf)

RATINGS RATIONALE

The ratings on ten P&I classes were affirmed because the
transaction's key metrics, including Moody's loan-to-value (LTV)
ratio, Moody's stressed debt service coverage ratio (DSCR) and the
transaction's Herfindahl Index (Herf), are within acceptable
ranges.

The ratings on the two IO classes, Class X-A and X-B, were affirmed
based on the credit quality of their referenced classes.

The rating on the PEZ class was affirmed based on the weighted
average rating factor (WARF) of the exchangeable classes.

Moody's rating action reflects a base expected loss of 1.5% of the
current balance compared to 1.4% at Moody's prior review. Moody's
base expected loss plus realized losses is now 1.4% of the original
pooled balance compared to 1.3% at the prior review. Moody's
provides a current list of base expected losses for conduit and
fusion CMBS transactions on moodys.com at
http://www.moodys.com/viewresearchdoc.aspx?docid=PBS_SF215255.

FACTORS THAT WOULD LEAD TO AN UPGRADE OR DOWNGRADE OF THE RATINGS:

The performance expectations for a given variable indicate Moody's
forward-looking view of the likely range of performance over the
medium term. Performance that falls outside the given range can
indicate that the collateral's credit quality is stronger or weaker
than Moody's had previously expected.

Factors that could lead to an upgrade of the ratings include a
significant amount of loan paydowns or amortization, an increase in
the pool's share of defeasance or an improvement in pool
performance.

Factors that could lead to a downgrade of the ratings include a
decline in the performance of the pool, loan concentration, an
increase in realized and expected losses from specially serviced
and troubled loans or interest shortfalls.

METHODOLOGY UNDERLYING THE RATING ACTION

The methodologies used in these ratings were "Approach to Rating US
and Canadian Conduit/Fusion CMBS" published in July 2017, and
"Moody's Approach to Rating Large Loan and Single Asset/Single
Borrower CMBS" published in July 2017. The methodology used in
rating the exchangeable class, Cl. PEZ was "Moody's Approach to
Rating Repackaged Securities" published in June 2015.

Additionally, the methodology used in rating Cl. X-A and Cl. X-B
was "Moody's Approach to Rating Structured Finance Interest-Only
(IO) Securities" published in June 2017.

DEAL PERFORMANCE

As of the July 17, 2017 distribution date, the transaction's
aggregate certificate balance has decreased by 7.5% to $1.16
billion from $1.25 billion at securitization. The Certificates are
collateralized by 48 mortgage loans ranging in size from less than
1% to 11% of the pool, with the top ten loans (excluding
defeasance) representing 66% of the pool. Five loans, representing
5% of the pool have defeased and are secured by US Government
securities.

Nine loans, representing 17% of the pool, are on the master
servicer's watchlist. The watchlist includes loans which meet
certain portfolio review guidelines established as part of the CRE
Finance Council (CREFC) monthly reporting package. As part of
Moody's ongoing monitoring of a transaction, Moody's reviews the
watchlist to assess which loans have material issues that could
impact performance. No loans have been liquidated from the pool and
there are no loans in special servicing at this time.

Moody's received full or partial year 2016 operating results for
98% of the pool and partial year 2017 results for 83% of the pool.
Moody's weighted average conduit LTV is 85%, the same as at last
review. Moody's conduit component excludes loans with structured
credit assessments, defeased and CTL loans and specially serviced
and troubled loans. Moody's net cash flow (NCF) reflects a weighted
average haircut of 8% to the most recently available net operating
income (NOI). Moody's value reflects a weighted average
capitalization rate of 9.6%.

Moody's actual and stressed conduit DSCRs are 1.94X and 1.25X,
respectively, compared to 1.88X and 1.25X at the last review.
Moody's actual DSCR is based on Moody's net cash flow (NCF) and the
loan's actual debt service. Moody's stressed DSCR is based on
Moody's NCF and a 9.25% stressed rate applied to the loan balance.

The top three performing conduit loans represent 29% of the pool
balance. The largest loan is the 260 and 261 Madison Avenue Loan
($126 million -- 10.9% of the pool), which is secured by two
Class-B office towers located in midtown Manhattan on Madison
Avenue between 36th and 37th Street. The properties total 840,000
square feet (SF) of office space, 37,000 SF of retail space, and a
46,000 SF parking garage. This loan represents a pari passu
interest in a $231 million loan. As of March 2017, the properties
had a combined occupancy of approximately 90%, compared to 88% as
of December 2015. Moody's LTV and stressed DSCR are 97% and 0.98X,
respectively, the same as at last review.

The second largest loan is the Solano Mall Loan ($105.0 million --
9.1% of the pool), which is secured by a 561,015 SF portion of 1.1
million SF super regional mall located in Fairfield, California.
The mall is anchored by Macy's, Sears, and J.C. Penney, which are
not part of the collateral. The largest collateral tenant is
Edwards Cinemas (11.2% of NRA, lease expiration December 2024)
which serves as a significant draw to the center. The property was
94% leased as of March 2017, compared to 92% at last review.
Property cash flow declined in 2016 due to lower total revenues.
The loan is interest-only for the entire 10-year term. Moody's LTV
and stressed DSCR are 95% and 1.11X, respectively, compared to 85%
and 1.18X at the last review.

The third largest loan is the Crossgates Mall Loan ($99.9 million
-- 8.6% of the pool), which is secured by a 1.3 million portion of
a 1.7 million SF super regional mall located in Albany, New York.
This loan represents a pari passu interest in a $277.5 million
mortgage loan. The mall is anchored by Macy's, J.C. Penny, Dick's
Sporting Goods, Best Buy and a Regal Crossgates 18 IMAX theater.
The property was 91.5% leased as of March 2017, compared to 89% at
last review. Moody's LTV and stressed DSCR are 101% and 1.04X,
respectively.


COMM MORTGAGE 2013-GAM: Fitch Affirms 'BB-sf' Rating on Cl. F Debt
------------------------------------------------------------------
Fitch Ratings has affirmed all classes of COMM 2013-GAM Mortgage
Trust with Stable Rating Outlooks.

KEY RATING DRIVERS

Stable Collateral Performance: The affirmation is due to relatively
stable collateral performance of the Green Acres Mall since Fitch's
last rating action. Occupancy has remained strong at 97.9% at March
2017 compared to 97.6% at year-end (YE) 2016 and YE 2015. The
servicer-reported YE 2016 net cash flow (NCF) debt service coverage
ratio (DSCR) was 1.80x, compared to 1.78x at YE 2015 and 1.71 at
issuance. Additionally, as of the August 2017 distribution date the
pool's aggregate certificate balance has paid down approximately
8.9% as a result of scheduled amortization.

Amortization: The loan will amortize by $60 million over the
eight-year loan term.

Single Asset Concentration: The transaction is secured by a single
property and so is more susceptible to single-event risk related to
the market, sponsor, or the largest tenants occupying the
property.

Declining Anchor Sales; Stable to Improved Inline Sales: The
property has seen a decline in anchor sales including Macy's, which
has dropped to $187 psf from $204 psf at YE 2015 and $225 at
issuance while Macy's Men's & Furniture declined to $148 from $173
at issuance. JCPenney's sales have declined to $146 psf from $168
psf at YE 2015 and $197 at issuance. Kohl's sales have declined to
$90 psf from $95 psf at YE 2015 and $111 at issuance. BJ's
Wholesale Club has increased to $911psf from $896 at YE 2015 but
declined from $928 at issuance. Century 21 has sales of $279 psf.
Sears does not report sales. Comparable in-line sales were $611 per
square foot (psf) as of trailing 12 months (TTM) March 2017,
compared with $650 psf at YE2015, $580 psf at YE2014, $545 psf at
YE2013 and $501 psf at issuance.

Major in-line tenants include Michael's, Forever 21, Modell's
Sporting Goods, Old Navy, H&M, Express, and Victoria's Secret.

RATING SENSITIVITIES

The Rating Outlooks remain Stable, which reflects the stable
collateral performance. Upgrades may occur with continued stable to
improved performance. Although downgrades are not likely, they may
occur should performance significantly deteriorate. Fitch will
continue to monitor the mall's performance to ensure that revenues
and expenses considered at the time of Fitch's initial ratings
remain in line over the loan's term.

USE OF THIRD-PARTY DUE DILIGENCE PURSUANT TO SEC RULE 17G-10

No third-party due diligence was provided or reviewed in relation
to this rating action.

Fitch has affirmed the following classes:

-- $26.2 million A-1 at 'AAAsf'; Outlook Stable;
-- $154.9 million class A-2 at 'AAAsf'; Outlook Stable;
-- $181.1 class X-A at 'AAAsf'; Outlook Stable;
-- $26 million class B at 'AA-sf'; Outlook Stable;
-- $17 million class C at 'Asf'; Outlook Stable;
-- $24.8 million class D at 'BBBsf'; Outlook Stable;
-- $19 million class E at 'BBB-sf'; Outlook Stable;
-- $27.6 million class F at 'BB-sf'; Outlook Stable.


CREDIT SUISSE 2003-CPN1: Moody's Affirms C Rating on Class H Certs
------------------------------------------------------------------
Moody's Investors Service has affirmed the ratings of two classes
in Credit Suisse First Boston Mortgage Securities Corp. Commercial
Mortgage Pass-Through Certificates, Series 2003 CPN1:

Cl. H, Affirmed C (sf); previously on Aug 18, 2016 Reinstated to C
(sf)

Cl. A-Y, Affirmed Aaa (sf); previously on Aug 18, 2016 Affirmed Aaa
(sf)

RATINGS RATIONALE

The rating on the P&I class was affirmed because the rating is
consistent with realized losses from previously liquidated loans.

The rating on the IO class was affirmed based on the credit quality
its referenced loans.

Moody's rating action reflects a base expected loss of 0.0% of the
current balance, unchanged from the prior review. Realized losses
represent 9.2% of the original pooled balance, essentially
unchanged from the last review. Moody's provides a current list of
base expected losses for conduit and fusion CMBS transactions on
moodys.com at
http://www.moodys.com/viewresearchdoc.aspx?docid=PBS_SF215255.

Moody's does not anticipate losses from the remaining collateral in
the current environment. However, over the remaining life of the
transaction, losses may emerge from macro stresses to the
environment and changes in collateral performance. Moody's ratings
reflect the potential for future losses under such conditions.

FACTORS THAT WOULD LEAD TO AN UPGRADE OR DOWNGRADE OF THE RATINGS:

The performance expectations for a given variable indicate Moody's
forward-looking view of the likely range of performance over the
medium term. Performance that falls outside the given range can
indicate that the collateral's credit quality is stronger or weaker
than Moody's had previously expected.

Factors that could lead to an upgrade of the ratings include a
significant amount of loan paydowns or amortization, an increase in
the pool's share of defeasance or an improvement in pool
performance.

Factors that could lead to a downgrade of the ratings include a
decline in the performance of the pool, loan concentration, an
increase in realized and expected losses from specially serviced
and troubled loans or interest shortfalls.

METHODOLOGY UNDERLYING THE RATING ACTION

The principal methodology used in these ratings was "Moody's
Approach to Rating Large Loan and Single Asset/Single Borrower
CMBS" published in July 2017.

Additionally, the methodology used in rating Cl. A-Y was "Moody's
Approach to Rating Structured Finance Interest-Only (IO)
Securities" published in June 2017.

DEAL PERFORMANCE

As of the July 17, 2017 distribution date, the transaction's
aggregate certificate balance has decreased by over 99% to
approximately $130,000 from $1.01 billion at securitization. The
certificates are collateralized by five mortgage loans ranging in
size from 2% to 32% of the pool. Two loans, constituting 35% of the
pool, have defeased and are secured by US government securities.
The remaining three loans, constituting 65% of the pool, have an
investment-grade structured credit assessment and are secured by
two residential co-operatives (co-ops) located in Manhattan and one
co-operative located in Elizabeth, New Jersey. The co-op loans have
a structured credit assessment of aaa (sca.pd), the same as last
review.

Eleven loans have been liquidated from the pool, resulting in an
aggregate realized loss of $93 million (for an average loss
severity of 64%).

Moody's received full year 2016 operating results for the
non-defeased loans.


DRYDEN SENIOR XXVIII: S&P Assigns BB- Rating on Class B-2R Notes
----------------------------------------------------------------
S&P Global Ratings assigned its ratings to the class A-1R, A-2R,
A-3R, B-1R, B-2R, and B-3R replacement notes from Dryden XXVIII
Senior Loan Fund, a collateralized loan obligation (CLO) originally
issued in 2013 that is managed by PGIM Inc. S&P said, "We also
assigned a rating to the new class X notes, which were created in
connection with the refinancing. We withdrew our ratings on the
original class A-1L, A-2L, A-3L, B-1L, B-2L, and B-3L notes
following payment in full on the Aug. 15, 2017, refinancing date.

S&P related, "On the Aug. 15, 2017, refinancing date, the proceeds
from the class A-1R, A-2R, A-3R, B-1R, B-2R, and B-3R replacement
note issuances were used to redeem the original class A-1L, A-2L,
A-3L, B-1L, B-2L, and B-3L notes as outlined in the transaction
document provisions. Therefore, we withdrew our ratings on the
refinanced notes in line with their full redemption, and we are
assigning ratings to the replacement classes."

The replacement notes are being issued via an amended indenture,
which, in addition to outlining the terms of the replacement notes,
will also upsize the transaction to $530.55 million in total
liabilities, and extend the reinvestment period, non-call period,
and final maturity date.

S&P said, "Our review of this transaction included a cash flow
analysis, based on the portfolio and transaction as reflected in
the trustee report, to estimate future performance. In line with
our criteria, our cash flow scenarios applied forward-looking
assumptions on the expected timing and pattern of defaults, and
recoveries upon default, under various interest rate and
macroeconomic scenarios. In addition, our analysis considered the
transaction's ability to pay timely interest or ultimate principal,
or both, to each of the rated tranches.

"The assigned ratings reflect our opinion that the credit support
available is commensurate with the associated rating levels.

"We will continue to review whether, in our view, the ratings
assigned to the notes remain consistent with the credit enhancement
available to support them, and we will take rating actions as we
deem necessary."

  RATINGS ASSIGNED

  Dryden XXVIII Senior Loan Fund
  Replacement class         Rating      Amount (mil. $)
  A-1R                      AAA (sf)             296.50
  A-2R                      AA (sf)               77.00
  A-3R                      A (sf)                30.50
  B-1R                      BBB (sf)              25.55
  B-2R                      BB- (sf)              23.30
  B-3R                      B- (sf)                7.45

  New class                 Rating      Amount (mil. $)
  X                         AAA (sf)               4.00

  RATINGS WITHDRAWN

  Dryden XXVIII Senior Loan Fund
                    Rating
  Class       To             From
  A-1L        NR             AAA (sf)
  A-2L        NR             AA (sf)
  A-3L        NR             A (sf)
  B-1L        NR             BBB (sf)
  B-2L        NR             BB- (sf)
  B-3L        NR             B (sf)


EASTLAND CLO: Moody's Affirms B1(sf) Rating on Class D Notes
------------------------------------------------------------
Moody's Investors Service has upgraded the ratings on the following
notes issued by Eastland CLO, Ltd.:

US$81,500,000 Class B Floating Rate Senior Secured Deferrable
Interest Extendable Notes Due 2022, Upgraded to Aaa (sf);
previously on March 30, 2017 Upgraded to Aa1 (sf)

Moody's also affirmed the ratings on the following notes:

US$78,500,000 Class A-3 Floating Rate Senior Secured Extendable
Notes Due 2022 (current outstanding balance of $55,611,936.92),
Affirmed Aaa (sf); previously on March 30, 2017 Affirmed Aaa (sf)

US$68,500,000 Class C Floating Rate Senior Secured Deferrable
Interest Extendable Notes Due 2022, Affirmed Ba1 (sf); previously
on March 30, 2017 Affirmed Ba1 (sf)

US$48,000,000 Class D Floating Rate Senior Secured Deferrable
Interest Extendable Notes Due 2022 (current outstanding balance of
$37,636,187.11), Affirmed B1 (sf); previously on March 30, 2017
Affirmed B1 (sf)

US$5,000,000 Class P Securities Due 2022, Affirmed Aaa (sf);
previously on March 30, 2017 Affirmed Aaa (sf)

Eastland CLO, Ltd., issued in March 2007, is a collateralized loan
obligation (CLO) backed primarily by a portfolio of senior secured
loans, with exposure to CLO tranches. The transaction's
reinvestment period ended in May 2014.

RATINGS RATIONALE

The rating upgrade is primarily a result of deleveraging of the
senior notes and an increase in the transaction's
overcollateralization (OC) ratios since March 2017. Since then, the
Class A-1 notes and Class A-2b notes paid down in full, by $18.1
million and $186.6 million, respectively, and the Class A-3 notes
paid down by $22.9 million or 29.2%. Based on Moody's calculation,
The Class A, Class B, Class C and Class D notes OC ratios improved
to 473.2%, 191.9%, 128.0%, and 108.2%, respectively, versus March
2017 levels of 171.2%, 133.0%, 111.9% and 103.0%, respectively.

Nevertheless, the credit quality of the portfolio has deteriorated.
Based on Moody's calculation, The weighted average rating factor
(WARF) has increased to 3384, from 2912 in March 2017. In addition,
the deal holds a material dollar amount of thinly traded or
untraded loans, whose lack of liquidity may pose additional risks
relating to the issuer's ultimate ability or inclination to pursue
a liquidation of such assets, especially if the sales can be
transacted only at heavily discounted price levels.

Methodology Underlying the Rating Action:

The principal methodology used in these ratings was "Moody's Global
Approach to Rating Collateralized Loan Obligations" published in
October 2016.

Factors that Would Lead to an Upgrade or Downgrade of the Ratings:

This transaction is subject to a number of factors and
circumstances that could lead to either an upgrade or downgrade of
the ratings:

1) Macroeconomic uncertainty: CLO performance is subject to a)
uncertainty about credit conditions in the general economy and b)
the large concentration of upcoming speculative-grade debt
maturities, which could make refinancing difficult for issuers.

2) Collateral Manager: Performance can also be affected positively
or negatively by a) the manager's investment strategy and behavior
and b) differences in the legal interpretation of CLO documentation
by different transactional parties owing to embedded ambiguities.

3) Collateral credit risk: A shift towards collateral of better
credit quality, or better credit performance of assets
collateralizing the transaction than Moody's current expectations,
can lead to positive CLO performance. Conversely, a negative shift
in credit quality or performance of the collateral can have adverse
consequences for CLO performance.

4) Deleveraging: An important source of uncertainty in this
transaction is whether deleveraging from unscheduled principal
proceeds will continue and at what pace. Deleveraging of the CLO
could accelerate owing to high prepayment levels in the loan market
and/or collateral sales by the manager, which could have a
significant impact on the notes' ratings. Note repayments that are
faster than Moody's current expectations will usually have a
positive impact on CLO notes, beginning with those with the highest
payment priority.

5) Recovery of defaulted assets: Fluctuations in the market value
of defaulted assets reported by the trustee and those that Moody's
assumes as having defaulted could result in volatility in the
deal's OC levels. Further, the timing of recoveries and whether a
manager decides to work out or sell defaulted assets create
additional uncertainty. Realization of higher than assumed
recoveries would positively impact the CLO.

6) Long-dated and illiquid assets: Repayment of the notes at their
maturity will be highly dependent on the issuer's successful
monetization of illiquid assets and those that mature after the
CLO's legal maturity date (long-dated assets). This risk in turn
may be contingent upon issuer's ability and willingness to sell
these assets. This risk is borne first by investors with the lowest
priority in the capital structure. However, actual long-dated and
illiquid asset exposures and prevailing market prices and
conditions at the time of liquidation will drive the deal's actual
losses, if any.

7) Exposure to credit estimates: The deal contains a number of
securities whose default probabilities Moody's has assessed through
credit estimates. Moody's normally updates such estimates at least
once annually, but if such updates do not occur, the transaction
could be negatively affected by any default probability adjustments
Moody's assumes in lieu of updated credit estimates.

In addition to the base case analysis, Moody's also conducted
sensitivity analyses to test the impact of a number of default
probabilities on the rated notes relative to the base case modeling
results, which may be different from the current public ratings of
the notes. Below is a summary of the impact of different default
probabilities (expressed in terms of WARF) on all of the rated
notes (by the difference in the number of notches versus the
current model output, for which a positive difference corresponds
to lower expected loss):

Moody's Adjusted WARF -- 20% (2707)

Class A-3: 0

Class B: 0

Class C: +2

Class D: +1

Moody's Adjusted WARF + 20% (4060)

Class A-3: 0

Class B: 0

Class C: -2

Class D: 0

Loss and Cash Flow Analysis:

Moody's modeled the transaction using a cash flow model based on
the Binomial Expansion Technique, as described in "Moody's Global
Approach to Rating Collateralized Loan Obligations."

The key model inputs Moody's used in its analysis, such as par,
weighted average rating factor, diversity score and the weighted
average recovery rate, are based on its published methodology and
could differ from the trustee's reported numbers. In its base case,
Moody's analyzed the collateral pool as having a performing par and
principal proceeds balance of $251.5 million, defaulted par of
$55.2 million, a weighted average default probability of 21.74%
(implying a WARF of 3384), a weighted average recovery rate upon
default of 46.34%, a diversity score of 17 and a weighted average
spread of 3.24% (before accounting for LIBOR floors).

Moody's incorporates the default and recovery properties of the
collateral pool in cash flow model analysis where they are subject
to stresses as a function of the target rating on each CLO
liability reviewed. Moody's derives the default probability from
the credit quality of the collateral pool and Moody's expectation
of the remaining life of the collateral pool. The average recovery
rate for future defaults is based primarily on the seniority of the
assets in the collateral pool. Moody's generally applies recovery
rates for CLO securities as published in "Moody's Approach to
Rating SF CDOs". In some cases, alternative recovery assumptions
may be considered based on the specifics of the analysis of the CLO
transaction. In each case, historical and market performance and
the collateral manager's latitude for trading the collateral are
also factors.

A material proportion of the collateral pool includes debt
obligations whose credit quality Moody's assesses through credit
estimates. Moody's analysis reflects adjustments with respect to
the default probabilities associated with credit estimates.
Specifically, Moody's assumed an equivalent of Caa3 for assets with
credit estimates that have not been updated within the last 15
months, which represent approximately 9.0% of the collateral pool.
Additionally, for each credit estimates whose related exposure
constitutes more than 3% of the collateral pool, Moody's applied a
two-notch equivalent assumed downgrade.


FANNIE MAE 2017-C06: Fitch to Rate 38 Note Classes 'Bsf'
--------------------------------------------------------
Fitch Ratings expects to assign the following ratings and Rating
Outlooks to Fannie Mae's risk transfer transaction, Connecticut
Avenue Securities, series 2017-C06:

-- $156,644,000 class 1M-1 notes 'BBB-sf'; Outlook Stable;
-- $93,986,000 class 1M-2A notes 'BB+sf'; Outlook Stable;
-- $93,986,000 class 1M-2B notes 'BB-sf'; Outlook Stable;
-- $93,986,000 class 1M-2C notes 'Bsf'; Outlook Stable;
-- $281,958,000 class 1M-2 exchangeable notes 'Bsf'; Outlook
    Stable;
-- $93,986,000 class 1A-I1 exchangeable notional notes 'BB+sf';
    Outlook Stable;
-- $93,986,000 class 1E-A1 exchangeable notes 'BB+sf'; Outlook
    Stable;
-- $93,986,000 class 1A-I2 exchangeable notional notes 'BB+sf';
    Outlook Stable;
-- $93,986,000 class 1E-A2 exchangeable notes 'BB+sf'; Outlook
    Stable;
-- $93,986,000 class 1A-I3 exchangeable notional notes 'BB+sf';
    Outlook Stable;
-- $93,986,000 class 1E-A3 exchangeable notes 'BB+sf'; Outlook
    Stable;
-- $93,986,000 class 1A-I4 exchangeable notional notes 'BB+sf';
    Outlook Stable;
-- $93,986,000 class 1E-A4 exchangeable notes 'BB+sf'; Outlook
    Stable;
-- $93,986,000 class 1B-I1 exchangeable notional notes 'BB-sf';
    Outlook Stable;
-- $93,986,000 class 1E-B1 exchangeable notes 'BB-sf'; Outlook
    Stable;
-- $93,986,000 class 1B-I2 exchangeable notional notes 'BB-sf';
    Outlook Stable;
-- $93,986,000 class 1E-B2 exchangeable notes 'BB-sf'; Outlook
    Stable;
-- $93,986,000 class 1B-I3 exchangeable notional notes 'BB-sf';
    Outlook Stable;
-- $93,986,000 class 1E-B3 exchangeable notes 'BB-sf'; Outlook
    Stable;
-- $93,986,000 class 1B-I4 exchangeable notional notes 'BB-sf';
    Outlook Stable;
-- $93,986,000 class 1E-B4 exchangeable notes 'BB-sf'; Outlook
    Stable;
-- $93,986,000 class 1C-I1 exchangeable notional notes 'Bsf';
    Outlook Stable;
-- $93,986,000 class 1E-C1 exchangeable notes 'Bsf'; Outlook
    Stable;
-- $93,986,000 class 1C-I2 exchangeable notional notes 'Bsf';
    Outlook Stable;
-- $93,986,000 class 1E-C2 exchangeable notes 'Bsf'; Outlook
    Stable;
-- $93,986,000 class 1C-I3 exchangeable notional notes 'Bsf';
    Outlook Stable;
-- $93,986,000 class 1E-C3 exchangeable notes 'Bsf'; Outlook
    Stable;
-- $93,986,000 class 1C-I4 exchangeable notional notes 'Bsf';
    Outlook Stable;
-- $93,986,000 class 1E-C4 exchangeable notes 'Bsf'; Outlook
    Stable;
-- $187,972,000 class 1E-D1 exchangeable notes 'BB-sf'; Outlook
    Stable;
-- $187,972,000 class 1E-D2 exchangeable notes 'BB-sf'; Outlook
    Stable;
-- $187,972,000 class 1E-D3 exchangeable notes 'BB-sf'; Outlook
    Stable;
-- $187,972,000 class 1E-D4 exchangeable notes 'BB-sf'; Outlook
    Stable;
-- $187,972,000 class 1E-D5 exchangeable notes 'BB-sf'; Outlook
    Stable;
-- $187,972,000 class 1E-F1 exchangeable notes 'Bsf'; Outlook
    Stable;
-- $187,972,000 class 1E-F2 exchangeable notes 'Bsf'; Outlook
    Stable;
-- $187,972,000 class 1E-F3 exchangeable notes 'Bsf'; Outlook
    Stable;
-- $187,972,000 class 1E-F4 exchangeable notes 'Bsf'; Outlook
    Stable;
-- $187,972,000 class 1E-F5 exchangeable notes 'Bsf'; Outlook
    Stable;
-- $187,972,000 class 1-X1 exchangeable notional notes 'BB-sf';
    Outlook Stable;
-- $187,972,000 class 1-X2 exchangeable notional notes 'BB-sf';
    Outlook Stable;
-- $187,972,000 class 1-X3 exchangeable notional notes 'BB-sf';
    Outlook Stable;
-- $187,972,000 class 1-X4 exchangeable notional notes 'BB-sf';
    Outlook Stable;
-- $187,972,000 class 1-Y1 exchangeable notional notes 'Bsf';
    Outlook Stable;
-- $187,972,000 class 1-Y2 exchangeable notional notes 'Bsf';
    Outlook Stable;
-- $187,972,000 class 1-Y3 exchangeable notional notes 'Bsf';
    Outlook Stable;
-- $187,972,000 class 1-Y4 exchangeable notional notes 'Bsf';
    Outlook Stable;
-- $117,869,000 class 2M-1 notes 'BBB-sf'; Outlook Stable;
-- $119,342,000 class 2M-2A notes 'BBsf'; Outlook Stable;
-- $120,816,000 class 2M-2B notes 'BB-sf'; Outlook Stable;
-- $120,816,000 class 2M-2C notes 'Bsf'; Outlook Stable;
-- $360,974,000 class 2M-2 exchangeable notes 'Bsf'; Outlook
    Stable;
-- $119,342,000 class 2A-I1 exchangeable notional notes 'BBsf';
    Outlook Stable;
-- $119,342,000 class 2E-A1 exchangeable notes 'BBsf'; Outlook
    Stable;
-- $119,342,000 class 2A-I2 exchangeable notional notes 'BBsf';
    Outlook Stable;
-- $119,342,000 class 2E-A2 exchangeable notes 'BBsf'; Outlook
    Stable;
-- $119,342,000 class 2A-I3 exchangeable notional notes 'BBsf';
    Outlook Stable;
-- $119,342,000 class 2E-A3 exchangeable notes 'BBsf'; Outlook
    Stable;
-- $119,342,000 class 2A-I4 exchangeable notional notes 'BBsf';
    Outlook Stable;
-- $119,342,000 class 2E-A4 exchangeable notes 'BBsf'; Outlook
    Stable;
-- $120,816,000 class 2B-I1 exchangeable notional notes 'BB-sf';
    Outlook Stable;
-- $120,816,000 class 2E-B1 exchangeable notes 'BB-sf'; Outlook
    Stable;
-- $120,816,000 class 2B-I2 exchangeable notional notes 'BB-sf';
    Outlook Stable;
-- $120,816,000 class 2E-B2 exchangeable notes 'BB-sf'; Outlook
    Stable;
-- $120,816,000 class 2B-I3 exchangeable notional notes 'BB-sf';
    Outlook Stable;
-- $120,816,000 class 2E-B3 exchangeable notes 'BB-sf'; Outlook
    Stable;
-- $120,816,000 class 2B-I4 exchangeable notional notes 'BB-sf';
    Outlook Stable;
-- $120,816,000 class 2E-B4 exchangeable notes 'BB-sf'; Outlook  
    Stable;
-- $120,816,000 class 2C-I1 exchangeable notional notes 'Bsf';
    Outlook Stable;
-- $120,816,000 class 2E-C1 exchangeable notes 'Bsf'; Outlook
    Stable;
-- $120,816,000 class 2C-I2 exchangeable notional notes 'Bsf';
    Outlook Stable;
-- $120,816,000 class 2E-C2 exchangeable notes 'Bsf'; Outlook
    Stable;
-- $120,816,000 class 2C-I3 exchangeable notional notes 'Bsf';
    Outlook Stable;
-- $120,816,000 class 2E-C3 exchangeable notes 'Bsf'; Outlook
    Stable;
-- $120,816,000 class 2C-I4 exchangeable notional notes 'Bsf';
    Outlook Stable;
-- $120,816,000 class 2E-C4 exchangeable notes 'Bsf'; Outlook
    Stable;
-- $240,158,000 class 2E-D1 exchangeable notes 'BB-sf'; Outlook
    Stable;
-- $240,158,000 class 2E-D2 exchangeable notes 'BB-sf'; Outlook
    Stable;
-- $240,158,000 class 2E-D3 exchangeable notes 'BB-sf'; Outlook
    Stable;
-- $240,158,000 class 2E-D4 exchangeable notes 'BB-sf'; Outlook
    Stable;
-- $240,158,000 class 2E-D5 exchangeable notes 'BB-sf'; Outlook
    Stable;
-- $241,632,000 class 2E-F1 exchangeable notes 'Bsf'; Outlook
    Stable;
-- $241,632,000class 2E-F2 exchangeable notes 'Bsf'; Outlook
    Stable;
-- $241,632,000class 2E-F3 exchangeable notes 'Bsf'; Outlook
    Stable;
-- $241,632,000class 2E-F4 exchangeable notes 'Bsf'; Outlook
    Stable;
-- $241,632,000class 2E-F5 exchangeable notes 'Bsf'; Outlook
    Stable;
-- $240,158,000 class 2-X1 exchangeable notional notes 'BB-sf';
    Outlook Stable;
-- $240,158,000 class 2-X2 exchangeable notional notes 'BB-sf';
    Outlook Stable;
-- $240,158,000 class 2-X3 exchangeable notional notes 'BB-sf';
    Outlook Stable;
-- $240,158,000 class 2-X4 exchangeable notional notes 'BB-sf';
    Outlook Stable;
-- $241,632,000 class 2-Y1 exchangeable notional notes 'Bsf';
    Outlook Stable;
-- $241,632,000 class 2-Y2 exchangeable notional notes 'Bsf';
    Outlook Stable;
-- $241,632,000 class 2-Y3 exchangeable notional notes 'Bsf';
    Outlook Stable;
-- $241,632,000 class 2-Y4 exchangeable notional notes 'Bsf';
    Outlook Stable.

The following classes will not be rated by Fitch:

-- $15,862,354,897 class 1A-H reference tranche;
-- $8,245,344 class 1M-1H reference tranche;
-- $4,947,606 class 1M-AH reference tranche;
-- $4,947,606 class 1M-BH reference tranche;
-- $4,947,606 class 1M-CH reference tranche;
-- $78,322,000 class 1B-1 notes;
-- $4,122,672 class 1B-1H reference tranche;
-- $82,444,672 class 1B-2H reference tranche;
-- $14,850,014,032 class 2A-H reference tranche;
-- $6,204,224 class 2M-1H reference tranche;
-- $6,282,140 class 2M-AH reference tranche;
-- $6,359,055 class 2M-BH reference tranche;
-- $6,359,055 class 2M-CH reference tranche;
-- $73,668,000 class 2B-1 notes;
-- $3,877,765 class 2B-1H reference tranche;
-- $77,545,765 class 2B-2H reference tranche.

The notes are general senior unsecured obligations of Fannie Mae
(rated 'AAA'/Outlook Stable) subject to the credit and principal
payment risk of a pool of certain residential mortgage loans held
in various Fannie Mae-guaranteed MBS. The 'BBB-sf' rating for the
1M-1 note reflects the 2.80% subordination provided by the 0.60%
class 1M-2A, the 0.60% class 1M-2B, the 0.60% class 1M-2C, the
0.50% class 1B-1 and their corresponding reference tranches as well
as the 0.50% 1B-2H reference tranche. The 'BBB-sf' rating for the
2M-1 note reflects the 3.45% subordination provided by the 0.81%
class 2M-2A, the 0.82% class 2M-2B, the 0.82% class 2M-2C, the
0.50% class 2B-1 and their corresponding reference tranches as well
as the 0.50% 2B-2H reference tranche.

The CAS 2017-C06 transaction includes two separate loan groups. One
loan group will consist of loans with loan-to-value (LTV) ratios
greater than 60% and less than or equal to 80% (Group 1), and
another that consists of loans with LTVs greater than 80% and less
than or equal to 97% (Group 2). The two groups will have identical
structures.

Connecticut Avenue Securities, series 2017-C06 (CAS 2017-C06) is
Fannie Mae's 22nd risk transfer transaction issued as part of the
Federal Housing Finance Agency's Conservatorship Strategic Plan for
2013 to 2017 for each of the government sponsored enterprises
(GSEs) to demonstrate the viability of multiple types of risk
transfer transactions involving single family mortgages.

The objective of the transaction is to transfer credit risk from
Fannie Mae to private investors with respect to a $32 billion pool
of mortgage loans currently held in previously issued MBS
guaranteed by Fannie Mae where principal repayment of the notes are
subject to the performance of a reference pool of mortgage loans.
As loans liquidate, are modified or other credit events occur, the
outstanding principal balance of the debt notes will be reduced by
the loan's actual loss severity percentage related to those credit
events.

While the transaction structure simulates the behavior and credit
risk of traditional RMBS mezzanine and subordinate securities,
Fannie Mae will be responsible for making monthly payments of
interest and principal to investors. Due to the counterparty
dependence on Fannie Mae, Fitch's expected rating on the 1M-1,
1M-2A, 1M-2B, 1M-2C, 2M-1, 2M-2A, 2M-2B and 2M-2C notes will be
based on the lower of: the quality of the mortgage loan reference
pool and credit enhancement (CE) available through subordination
and on Fannie Mae's Issuer Default Rating.

The notes will be issued as LIBOR-based floaters. In the event that
the one-month LIBOR rate falls below the applicable negative LIBOR
trigger value described in the offering memorandum, the interest
payment on the interest-only notes will be capped at the excess of
(i) the interest amount payable on the related class of
exchangeable notes for that payment date over (ii) the interest
amount payable on the class of floating rate related combinable and
recombinable (RCR) notes included in the same combination for that
payment date. If there are no floating rate classes in the related
exchange, then the interest payment on the interest-only notes will
be capped at the aggregate of the interest amounts payable on the
classes of RCR notes included in the same combination that were
exchanged for the specified class of interest-only RCR notes for
that payment date.

KEY RATING DRIVERS

High-Quality Mortgage Pool (Positive): The reference mortgage loan
pools consist of high-quality mortgage loans that were acquired by
Fannie Mae in the first quarter of 2017 (1Q 2017). The group 1
reference pool will consist of loans with LTVs greater than 60% and
less than or equal to 80%, and Group 2 will consist of loans with
LTVs greater than 80% and less than or equal to 97%. Overall, the
reference pool's collateral characteristics are similar to recent
CAS transactions and reflect the strong credit profile of
post-crisis mortgage originations.

Higher HomeReady Exposure (Negative): Both groups contain loans
(1.07% Group 1 and 8.17% Group 2) originated to Fannie Mae's
HomeReady program, the highest percentages of any Fitch-rated
transaction to date. HomeReady is an affordable low down payment
program that can allow for non-standard sources of income and down
payment for qualifying borrowers. The credit profile of HomeReady
borrowers is weaker on average than the overall mortgage pool,
which is reflected in increased credit enhancement.

Mortgage Insurance Guaranteed by Fannie Mae (Positive): The
majority of the loans in Group 2 are covered either by borrower
paid mortgage insurance (BPMI) or lender paid MI (LPMI). Fannie Mae
will be guaranteeing the MI coverage amount, which will typically
be the MI coverage percentage multiplied by the sum of the unpaid
principal balance as of the date of the default, up to 36 months of
delinquent interest, taxes and maintenance expenses. While the
Fannie Mae guarantee allows for credit to be given to MI, Fitch
applied a haircut to the amount of BPMI available due to the
automatic termination provision as required by the Homeowners
Protection Act when the loan balance is first scheduled to reach
78%.

12.5-Year Hard Maturity (Positive): The notes benefit from a
12.5-year legal final maturity. Thus, any credit or modification
events on the reference pool that occur beyond year 12.5 are borne
by Fannie Mae and do not affect the transaction. Fitch accounted
for the 12.5-year hard maturity in its default analysis and applied
a reduction to its lifetime default expectations.

Limited Size/Scope of Third-Party Diligence (Neutral): Fitch
received third party due diligence on a loan production basis, as
opposed to a transaction specific review. Fitch believes that
regular, periodic third-party reviews (TPRs) conducted on a loan
production basis are sufficient for validating Fannie Mae's quality
control processes. Fitch views the results of the due diligence
review as consistent with its opinion of Fannie Mae as an above
average aggregator; as a result, no adjustments were made to
Fitch's loss expectations based on due diligence. See due diligence
section for more details.

Solid Alignment of Interests (Positive): While the transaction is
designed to transfer credit risk to private investors, Fitch
believes that it benefits from a solid alignment of interests.
Fannie Mae will be retaining credit risk in the transaction by
holding the 1A-H and 2-AH senior reference tranches, which have an
initial loss protection of 3.80% and 4.25%, respectively, as well
as the first loss B-2H reference tranches, sized at 0.50% for each
group. Fannie Mae is also retaining an approximately 5% vertical
slice/interest in each group's M-1, M-2A, M-2B, M-2C, and B-1
tranches.

RATING SENSITIVITIES

Fitch's analysis incorporates sensitivity analyses to demonstrate
how the ratings would react to steeper market value declines (MVDs)
than assumed at both the metropolitan statistical area (MSA) and
national levels. The implied rating sensitivities are only an
indication of some of the potential outcomes and do not consider
other risk factors that the transaction may become exposed to or be
considered in the surveillance of the transaction.

This defined stress sensitivity analysis demonstrates how the
ratings would react to steeper MVDs at the national level. The
analysis assumes MVDs of 10%, 20% and 30%, in addition to the model
projected sMVD. It indicates there is some potential rating
migration with higher MVDs, compared with the model projection.

Fitch also conducted defined rating sensitivities which determine
the stresses to MVDs that would reduce a rating by one full
category, to non-investment grade, and to 'CCCsf'. For example,
additional MVDs of 12%, 18% and 13% would potentially reduce the
'BBB-sf' Group 1 rated class down one rating category, to
non-investment grade, and to 'CCCsf', respectively. Additional MVDs
of 11%, 11% and 37% would potentially reduce the 'BBB-sf' Group 2
rated class down one rating category, to non-investment grade, and
to 'CCCsf', respectively.


FIRST UNION 1999-C2: Moody's Affirms C(sf) Rating on Class IO Certs
-------------------------------------------------------------------
Moody's Investors Service has upgraded the rating of one class and
affirmed two classes in First Union National Bank-Chase Manhattan
Bank Commercial Mortgage Trust, Commercial Mortgage Pass-Through
Certificates, Series 1999-C2:

L, Upgraded to Aaa (sf); previously on Aug 19, 2016 Upgraded to Aa2
(sf)

M, Affirmed Ca (sf); previously on Aug 19, 2016 Affirmed Ca (sf)

IO, Affirmed C (sf); previously on Jun 9, 2017 Downgraded to C
(sf)

RATINGS RATIONALE

The rating on the P&I class was upgraded based primarily on an
increase in credit support resulting from amortization, as well as
defeasance. The deal has paid down 23% since Moody's last review
and defeasance now represents 47% of the pool.

The rating on the P&I class was affirmed because the rating is
commensurate with realized losses and outstanding interest
shortfalls impacting the class.

The rating on the IO class was affirmed based on the credit
performance of its referenced classes.

Moody's rating action reflects a base expected loss of 18.5% of the
current balance compared to 16.8% at Moody's last review. Moody's
base expected loss plus realized losses is now 2.2% of the original
pooled balance, compared to 2.3% at the last review. Moody's
provides a current list of base expected losses for conduit and
fusion CMBS transactions on moodys.com at
http://www.moodys.com/viewresearchdoc.aspx?docid=PBS_SF215255.

FACTORS THAT WOULD LEAD TO AN UPGRADE OR DOWNGRADE OF THE RATINGS:

The performance expectations for a given variable indicate Moody's
forward-looking view of the likely range of performance over the
medium term. Performance that falls outside the given range can
indicate that the collateral's credit quality is stronger or weaker
than Moody's had previously expected.

Factors that could lead to an upgrade of the ratings include a
significant amount of loan paydowns or amortization, an increase in
the pool's share of defeasance or an improvement in pool
performance.

Factors that could lead to a downgrade of the ratings include a
decline in the performance of the pool, loan concentration, an
increase in realized and expected losses from specially serviced
and troubled loans or interest shortfalls.

METHODOLOGY UNDERLYING THE RATING ACTION

The methodologies used in these ratings were "Moody's Approach to
Rating Large Loan and Single Asset/Single Borrower CMBS" published
in July 2017, and "Moody's Approach to Rating Credit Tenant Lease
and Comparable Lease Financings" published in October 2016.

Additionally, the methodology used in rating Cl. IO was "Moody's
Approach to Rating Structured Finance Interest-Only (IO)
Securities" published in June 2017.

DEAL PERFORMANCE

As of the July 17, 2017 distribution date, the transaction's
aggregate certificate balance has decreased by 99% to $13 million
from $1.18 billion at securitization. The certificates are
collateralized by 19 mortgage loans ranging in size from 2% to 12%
of the pool . The pool contains a credit tenant lease (CTL)
component that includes nine loans, representing 53% of the pool.
The remaining 47% of the pool consists of defeased loans which are
secured by US government securities.

Moody's received full year 2016 operating results for 100% of the
pool, and partial year 2017 operating results for 33% of the pool.

The CTL component (53% of the pool) is secured by properties leased
to four tenants. The largest exposures are Rite Aid Corporation
(approximately $5.4 million -- 40.3 % of the pool; senior unsecured
rating: B3/Caa1 -- ratings under review -- direction uncertain) and
Walgreen Co. ($0.6 million -- 4.5 % of the pool; senior unsecured
rating: Baa2 -- stable outlook). Three of the tenants have a
Moody's rating and Moody's has completed an updated credit
assessment for the non-Moody's rated tenant. The bottom-dollar
weighted average rating factor (WARF) for this pool is 4300,
compared to 3842 at the last review. At last review the CTL
component included an additional Walgreen Co. loan which has since
defeased. WARF is a measure of the overall quality of a pool of
diverse credits. The bottom-dollar WARF is a measure of default
probability.


FLAGSHIP CREDIT 2017-3: S&P Gives Prelim BB- Rating on Cl. E Notes
------------------------------------------------------------------
S&P Global Ratings assigned its preliminary ratings to Flagship
Credit Auto Trust 2017-3's $223.00 million automobile
receivables-backed notes series 2017-3.

The note issuance is an asset-backed securities transaction backed
by subprime auto loan receivables.

The preliminary ratings are based on information as of Aug. 10,
2017. Subsequent information may result in the assignment of final
ratings that differ from the preliminary ratings.

The preliminary ratings reflect:

-- The availability of approximately 49.74%, 39.96%, 31.14%,
24.05%, and 19.48% credit support (including excess spread) for the
class A, B, C, D, and E notes, respectively, based on stressed cash
flow scenarios. These credit support levels provide coverage of
approximately 3.50x, 3.00x, 2.30x, 1.75x, and 1.40x our
12.75%-13.25% expected cumulative net loss range for the class A,
B, C, D, and E notes, respectively. These break-even scenarios
cover total cumulative gross defaults (using a recovery assumption
of 40%) of approximately 83%, 67%, 52%, 40%, and 32%,
respectively.

-- The timely interest and principal payments made under stressed
cash flow modeling scenarios that are appropriate to the assigned
ratings.

-- The expectation that under a moderate ('BBB') stress scenario,
all else being equal, S&P's ratings on the class A and B notes
would not be lowered by more than one rating category from its
preliminary 'AAA (sf)' and 'AA (sf)' ratings throughout the
transaction's life, and our ratings on the class C and D notes
would not be lowered more than two rating categories from its
preliminary 'A (sf)' and 'BBB (sf)' ratings. The rating on the
class E notes would remain within two rating categories of its
preliminary 'BB- (sf)' rating within the first year, but the class
would eventually default under the 'BBB' stress scenario after
receiving 35%-40% of its principal. The above rating movements are
within the one-category rating tolerance for 'AAA' and 'AA' rated
securities during the first year and three-category tolerance over
three years; a two-category rating tolerance for 'A', 'BBB', and
'BB' rated securities during the first year; and a three-category
tolerance for 'A' and 'BBB' rated securities over three years. The
'BB' rated securities are permitted to default under a 'BBB' stress
scenario (see "Methodology: Credit Stability Criteria," published
May 3, 2010).

-- The credit enhancement in the form of subordination,
overcollateralization, a reserve account, and excess spread.

-- The characteristics of the collateral pool being securitized.

-- The transaction's payment and legal structures.

PRELIMINARY RATINGS ASSIGNED

Flagship Credit Auto Trust 2017-3  

  Class       Rating       Type            Interest    Amount
                                           rate(i)     (mil. $)
  A           AAA (sf)     Senior          Fixed        129.41
  B           AA (sf)      Subordinate     Fixed         32.93
  C           A (sf)       Subordinate     Fixed         26.57
  D           BBB (sf)     Subordinate     Fixed         21.38
  E           BB- (sf)     Subordinate     Fixed         12.71

(i) The actual coupons of these tranches will be determined on the
pricing date.


GALAXY CLO XIX: S&P Assigns Prelim. B- Rating on Class E-R Notes
----------------------------------------------------------------
S&P Global Ratings assigned its preliminary ratings to the class
A-1-R, A-2-R, B-R, C-R, D-1-R, D-2-R, and E-R replacement notes
from Galaxy XIX CLO Ltd., a collateralized loan obligation (CLO)
originally issued in February 2015 that is managed by PineBridge
Investments LLC. The replacement notes will be issued via a
proposed supplemental indenture.

The preliminary ratings reflect S&P's opinion that the credit
support available is commensurate with the associated rating
levels.

The preliminary ratings are based on information as of Aug. 14,
2017. Subsequent information may result in the assignment of final
ratings that differ from the preliminary ratings.

On the Aug. 24, 2017, refinancing date, the proceeds from the
issuance of the replacement notes are expected to redeem the
original notes. S&P said, "At that time, we anticipate withdrawing
the ratings on the original notes and assigning ratings to the
replacement notes. However, if the refinancing doesn't occur, we
may affirm the ratings on the original notes and withdraw our
preliminary ratings on the replacement notes."

The replacement notes are being issued via a proposed supplemental
indenture, which, in addition to outlining the terms of the
replacement notes, will also:

-- Extend the stated maturity, reinvestment period, weighted
average life test date, and non-call period; and

-- Change the overcollateralization test levels.

S&P said, "Our review of this transaction included a cash flow
analysis, based on the portfolio and transaction as reflected in
the trustee report, to estimate future performance (see table). In
line with our criteria, our cash flow scenarios applied
forward-looking assumptions on the expected timing and pattern of
defaults, and recoveries upon default, under various interest rate
and macroeconomic scenarios. In addition, our analysis considered
the transaction's ability to pay timely interest or ultimate
principal, or both, to each of the rated tranches.

"We will continue to review whether, in our view, the ratings
assigned to the notes remain consistent with the credit enhancement
available to support them, and we will take further rating actions
as we deem necessary."

  PRELIMINARY RATINGS ASSIGNED

  Galaxy XIX CLO Ltd.
  Replacement class         Rating      Amount (mil. $)
  A-1-R                     AAA (sf)             313.00
  A-2-R                     AA (sf)               61.00
  B-R (deferrable)          A (sf)                36.50
  C-R (deferrable)          BBB (sf)              27.00
  D-1-R (deferrable)        BB- (sf)              16.20
  D-2-R (deferrable)        BB- (sf)               5.00
  E-R (deferrable)          B- (sf)                9.00
  Class A sub notes         NR                    41.95
  Class B sub notes         NR                     0.25

  NR—Not rated.


GREENWICH CAPITAL 2004-GG1: Moody's Lower Class J Debt to C(sf)
---------------------------------------------------------------
Moody's Investors Service has affirmed the ratings on five classes
and downgraded the ratings on two classes in Greenwich Capital
Commercial Funding Corp., 2004-GG1:

Cl. F, Affirmed Baa1 (sf); previously on Aug 18, 2016 Affirmed Baa1
(sf)

Cl. G, Affirmed Ba2 (sf); previously on Aug 18, 2016 Affirmed Ba2
(sf)

Cl. H, Downgraded to Caa3 (sf); previously on Aug 18, 2016
Downgraded to Caa1 (sf)

Cl. J, Downgraded to C (sf); previously on Aug 18, 2016 Downgraded
to Caa3 (sf)

Cl. K, Affirmed C (sf); previously on Aug 18, 2016 Downgraded to C
(sf)

Cl. L, Affirmed C (sf); previously on Aug 18, 2016 Affirmed C (sf)

Cl. XC, Affirmed C (sf); previously on Jun 9, 2017 Downgraded to C
(sf)

RATINGS RATIONALE

The ratings of Classes F and G were affirmed because the
transaction's key metrics, including Moody's loan-to-value (LTV)
ratio, Moody's stressed debt service coverage ratio (DSCR), and the
transaction's Herfindahl Index (Herf) are within acceptable
ranges.

The ratings of Classes H and J were downgraded primarily due to
higher expected losses on the pool's largest loan, the Aegon Center
-- A Note (78.4% of the pool).

The ratings of Clases K and L were affirmed because the ratings are
consistent with Moody's expected loss plus realized losses.

The rating on the IO class XC was affirmed because of the credit
quality of the referenced classes.

Moody's rating action reflects a base expected loss of 39.9% of the
current pooled balance, compared to 30.4% at Moody's last review.
Moody's base expected loss plus realized losses is now 4.6% of the
original pooled balance, compared to 4.4% at the last review.
Moody's provides a current list of base expected losses for conduit
and fusion CMBS transactions on moodys.com at
http://www.moodys.com/viewresearchdoc.aspx?docid=PBS_SF215255.

FACTORS THAT WOULD LEAD TO AN UPGRADE OR DOWNGRADE OF THE RATINGS:

The performance expectations for a given variable indicate Moody's
forward-looking view of the likely range of performance over the
medium term. Performance that falls outside the given range can
indicate that the collateral's credit quality is stronger or weaker
than Moody's had previously expected.

Factors that could lead to an upgrade of the ratings include a
significant amount of loan paydowns or amortization, an increase in
the pool's share of defeasance or an improvement in pool
performance.

Factors that could lead to a downgrade of the ratings include a
decline in the performance of the pool, loan concentration, an
increase in realized and expected losses from specially serviced
and troubled loans or interest shortfalls.

METHODOLOGY UNDERLYING THE RATING ACTION

The principal methodology used in these ratings was "Moody's
Approach to Rating Large Loan and Single Asset/Single Borrower
CMBS" published in July 2017.

Additionally, the methodology used in rating Cl. XC was "Moody's
Approach to Rating Structured Finance Interest-Only (IO)
Securities" published in June 2017.

DEAL PERFORMANCE

As of the 12 July, 2017 distribution date, the transaction's
aggregate certificate balance has decreased by 96% to $104.6
million from $2.6 billion at securitization. The certificates are
collateralized by five mortgage loans ranging in size from less
than 1% to 78.4% of the pool. One loan, constituting 0.4% of the
pool, has defeased and are secured by US government securities.

Moody's uses a variation of Herf to measure the diversity of loan
sizes, where a higher number represents greater diversity. Loan
concentration has an important bearing on potential rating
volatility, including the risk of multiple notch downgrades under
adverse circumstances. The credit neutral Herf score is 40. The
pool has a Herf of two, the same as at Moody's last review.

One loan, constituting 78.4% of the pool, are on the master
servicer's watchlist. The watchlist includes loans that meet
certain portfolio review guidelines established as part of the CRE
Finance Council (CREFC) monthly reporting package. As part of
Moody's ongoing monitoring of a transaction, the agency reviews the
watchlist to assess which loans have material issues that could
affect performance.

Twenty loans have been liquidated from the pool at a loss,
contributing to an aggregate realized loss of $77.7 million (for an
average loss severity of 37%). There are currently no loans in
special servicing.

Moody's has assumed a high default probability for one poorly
performing loan, constituting 20.2% of the pool, and has estimated
an aggregate loss of $21.1 million (a 100% expected loss based on a
100% probability default) from these troubled loans.

Moody's received full year 2016 operating results for 100% of the
pool.

The top three conduit loans represent 79.5% of the pool balance.
The largest loan is the Aegon Center - A Note Loan ($82.0 million
-- 78.4% of the pool), which is secured by a 34-story Class A
office building, now known as 400 West Market, located in
Louisville, Kentucky. In addition to the office component, the
collateral also consists of the leasehold interest in an adjacent
504-space parking garage. The property is currently on the
watchlist due to its occupancy rate falling below 80%. The Loan was
transferred to the special servicer in March 2012 due to imminent
monetary default, but was returned to the Master Servicer in
November 2013 after a loan modification. The modification included
the birfucation of the loan and creation of an $82.0 million A-note
and $21.1 million hope note. The modification also temporarily
reduced the A-note interest rate and extended the maturity of the
loan through April 2019. The property was 74% leased as of June
2017, compared to 79% as of December 2016. The increase in vacancy
is due to Humana Insurance Company's early termination of their
lease in December 2016; which was initially set to expire in March
2018.

The second largest loan is the Bangor Plaza Loan ($0.8 million --
0.8% of the pool), which is secured by a 135,000 SF
grocery-anchored shopping center located in Pen Argyl,
Pennsylvania, approximately 20 miles north of Allentown. The
property was 84% leased as of June 2017. The loan is fully
amortizing and has paid down 84% since securitization. Moody's LTV
and stressed DSCR are 9% and 4.00X, respectively, compared to 13%
and 4.00X at the last review.

The third largest loan is the Rancho Santa Barbara MHP Loan ($0.3
million -- 0.3% of the pool), which is secured by a 334 unit
manufactured housing community located in Santa Barbara,
California, approximately 100 miles northwest of the Los Angeles
CBD. The loan is fully amortizing and has paid down 83% since
securitization. The property was 100% leased as of March 2017.
Moody's LTV and stressed DSCR are 3% and 4.00X, respectively,
compared to 4% and 4.00X at the last review.


GREENWICH CAPITAL 2006-GG7: Moody's Cuts B2 Rating to Cl. A-J Debt
------------------------------------------------------------------
Moody's Investors Service has affirmed the ratings on five classes
and downgraded the ratings on three classes in Greenwich Capital
Commercial Funding Corp., Series 2006-GG7:

Cl. A-M, Affirmed Aa3 (sf); previously on Sep 1, 2016 Affirmed Aa3
(sf)

Cl. A-J, Downgraded to B2 (sf); previously on Sep 1, 2016
Downgraded to Ba3 (sf)

Cl. B, Downgraded to Caa2 (sf); previously on Sep 1, 2016
Downgraded to B3 (sf)

Cl. C, Downgraded to C (sf); previously on Sep 1, 2016 Downgraded
to Caa3 (sf)

Cl. D, Affirmed C (sf); previously on Sep 1, 2016 Downgraded to C
(sf)

Cl. E, Affirmed C (sf); previously on Sep 1, 2016 Affirmed C (sf)

Cl. F, Affirmed C (sf); previously on Sep 1, 2016 Affirmed C (sf)

Cl. G, Affirmed C (sf); previously on Sep 1, 2016 Affirmed C (sf)

RATINGS RATIONALE

The rating on Class A-M was affirmed because the transaction's key
metrics, including Moody's loan-to-value (LTV) ratio, Moody's
stressed debt service coverage ratio (DSCR) and the transaction's
Herfindahl Index (Herf), are within acceptable ranges. The ratings
on the Classes D, E, F, and G, were affirmed because the ratings
are consistent with Moody's expected loss.

The ratings on the Classes A-J, B, and C, were downgraded due to
anticipated losses from specially serviced and troubled loans.

Moody's rating action reflects a base expected loss of 37.0% of the
current pooled balance, compared to 32.3% at Moody's last review.
Moody's base expected loss plus realized losses is now 13.4% of the
original pooled balance, compared to 12.6% at the last review.
Moody's provides a current list of base expected losses for conduit
and fusion CMBS transactions on moodys.com at
http://www.moodys.com/viewresearchdoc.aspx?docid=PBS_SF215255.

FACTORS THAT WOULD LEAD TO AN UPGRADE OR DOWNGRADE OF THE RATINGS:

The performance expectations for a given variable indicate Moody's
forward-looking view of the likely range of performance over the
medium term. Performance that falls outside the given range can
indicate that the collateral's credit quality is stronger or weaker
than Moody's had previously expected.

Factors that could lead to an upgrade of the ratings include a
significant amount of loan paydowns or amortization, an increase in
the pool's share of defeasance or an improvement in pool
performance.

Factors that could lead to a downgrade of the ratings include a
decline in the performance of the pool, loan concentration, an
increase in realized and expected losses from specially serviced
and troubled loans or interest shortfalls.

METHODOLOGY UNDERLYING THE RATING ACTION

The principal methodology used in these ratings was "Moody's
Approach to Rating Large Loan and Single Asset/Single Borrower
CMBS" published in July 2017.

Moody's analysis incorporated a loss and recovery approach in
rating the P&I classes in this deal since 55% of the pool is in
special servicing and Moody's has identified additional troubled
loans representing 31% of the pool. In this approach, Moody's
determines a probability of default for each specially serviced and
troubled loan that it expects will generate a loss and estimates a
loss given default based on a review of broker's opinions of value
(if available), other information from the special servicer,
available market data and Moody's internal data. The loss given
default for each loan also takes into consideration repayment of
servicer advances to date, estimated future advances and closing
costs. Translating the probability of default and loss given
default into an expected loss estimate, Moody's then applies the
aggregate loss from specially serviced to the most junior class(es)
and the recovery as a pay down of principal to the most senior
class(es).

DEAL PERFORMANCE

As of the July 12, 2017 distribution date, the transaction's
aggregate certificate balance has decreased by 83% to $613.6
million from $3.6 billion at securitization. The certificates are
collateralized by 13 mortgage loans ranging in size from less than
1% to 26% of the pool.

Moody's uses a variation of Herf to measure the diversity of loan
sizes, where a higher number represents greater diversity. Loan
concentration has an important bearing on potential rating
volatility, including the risk of multiple notch downgrades under
adverse circumstances. The credit neutral Herf score is 40. The
pool has a Herf of 6, the same as at Moody's last review.

Thirty-six loans have been liquidated from the pool, resulting in
an aggregate realized loss of $258.7 million (for an average loss
severity of 40%). Ten loans, constituting 55% of the pool, are
currently in special servicing. The largest specially serviced loan
is Portals I Loan ($155 million -- 25.3% of the pool), which is
secured by 449,933 square foot (SF) office property located in
Washington, DC. The loan was transferred to the special servicer in
May 2016 for imminent maturity default and became REO in January
2017. As of June 2017, the property was 71% leased, unchanged from
the prior year. The property's vacancy rate is higher than the
submarket's rate of 15%.

The second largest specially serviced loan is Corporate Center Loan
($36.5 million -- 6.0% of the pool), which is secured by a
leasehold interest in a 342,686 SF office building located in
downtown Fort Lauderdale, Florida. The loan transferred to the
special servicer in April 2012 due to monetary default. The
property became REO in May 2017. Moody's has assumed a significant
loss on this property.

The third largest specially serviced loan is Lorden Plaza ($26.0
million -- 4.2% of the pool), which is secured by a 148,803 SF
grocery anchored retail center in Milford, New Hampshire. The loan
transferred to special servicing in March 2016 for imminent
maturity default and became REO in November 2016. The largest
tenant, Shaw's Supermarkets (48% of NRA), has a lease expiration in
February 2022. As of March 2017, the property was 88% leased. The
special servicers indicated their strategy is to lease-up the
property and correct deferred maintenance.

The remaining seven specially serviced loans are secured by a mix
of property types. Moody's has also assumed a high default
probability for two poorly performing loans, constituting 31% of
the pool. Moody's estimates an aggregate $212.5 million loss for
the specially serviced and troubled loans (40% expected loss on
average).

The largest non-specially loan is the JP Morgan International Plaza
I & II Loan ($159.0 million -- 25.9% of the pool), which is secured
by two class A suburban office buildings in Farmers Branch, Texas.
The property is fully leased to JP Morgan through February 2018.
The property is also encumbered by a $30.75 million B-note, held
outside of the Trust. This loan was transferred to special
servicing in November 2015 after the Borrower advised the special
servicer they will be unable to repay the loan at the original
maturity date in June 2016. The loan was modified with a 20 month
maturity extension (to February 2018) and the loan returned to the
master servicer in August 2016. The loan is currently performing
and is current on its debt service payments. As of July 2016, the
property was appraised for $147.2 million ($195 PSF). Due to the
tenant concentration risk and upcoming lease expiration date,
Moody's has identified this as a troubled loan.

The second largest loan is the Montehiedra Town Center -- A note
Loan ($86.7 million -- 14.1% of the pool), which is secured by a
540,000 SF regional mall in San Juan (Rio Piedras), Puerto Rico.
The loan was transferred to special servicing in May 2013 for
imminent default due to cash flow issues and expiring leases. In
January 2015, the loan was modified into a $90 million A Note and a
$30 million B Note. The A Note interest rate was reduced from 6.04%
to 5.33% per annum. The B Note interest rate was reduced to 3.00%
per annum, which accrues on each payment date but will not be paid
current. The modification also provided for a 5-year maturity
extension to allow the repositioned property to stabilize
operations. In conjunction with the modification, a Borrower
affiliate guaranteed a $20 million capital infusion and provided
the Lender with cooperation covenants in the event of a future
default backed by a $25 million guaranty. Currently, the borrower
is performing under the terms of the loan modification. Moody's
identified the B-Note as a troubled loan and anticipates a loss on
this loan. As of March 2017, the property was 92.7% leased and the
property has been between 88% and 93% occupied since 2009. Anchor
tenants include: Kmart (lease expiration: November 2050, 25% of
NRA), The Home Depot (November 2050, 20% of NRA), Marshalls
(January 2019, 10% of NRA), and Tiendas Capri (January 2018, 6.0%
of NRA). Moody's LTV and stressed DSCR on the A note are 124% and
0.78X, respectively, compared to 119% and 0.77X at the last review.


HARBOR LLC 2006-1: Moody's Lowers Rating on 2 Tranches to Ca(sf)
----------------------------------------------------------------
Moody's Investors Service has affirmed and downgraded the ratings
on the following notes issued by Harbor Series 2006-1 LLC.

Moody's rating action is:

Cl. A, Affirmed Caa2 (sf); previously on Sep 21, 2016 Affirmed Caa2
(sf)

Cl. B, Downgraded to Ca (sf); previously on Sep 21, 2016 Affirmed
Caa3 (sf)

Cl. C, Downgraded to Ca (sf); previously on Sep 21, 2016 Affirmed
Caa3 (sf)

Cl. D, Affirmed Ca (sf); previously on Sep 21, 2016 Downgraded to
Ca (sf)

The Class A Notes, Class B Notes, Class C Notes and Class D Notes
are referred to herein as the "Rated Notes"

RATINGS RATIONALE

Moody's has affirmed the ratings on two classes of notes because
the key transaction metrics are commensurate with the existing
ratings. Moody's has downgraded the ratings on two classes of notes
because the classes realized a combination of amortization and
losses that have reduced their balances to $0. They will
subsequently be withdrawn. The rating action is the result of
Moody's on-going surveillance of commercial real estate
collateralized debt obligation (CRE CDO Synthetic) transactions.

Harbor Series 2006-1 LLC is a static synthetic transaction backed
by a portfolio of credit default swaps on commercial mortgage
backed securities (CMBS) (100% of the reference obligation pool
balance). As of the July 20, 2017 trustee report, the aggregate
issued note balance of the transaction has decreased to $53.5
million from $160 million at issuance, with the reference pool
amortization being paid to the notes on a senior sequential basis.
This transaction features a pro-rata to senior-sequential and
vice-versa waterfall switch which is based upon certain thresholds.
Since last review, the reference pool has realized losses,
resulting in the full write-down of the remaining balances of
Classes B, C, and D; and partial write-down of Class A.

Moody's has identified the following as key indicators of the
expected loss in CRE CDO transactions: the weighted average rating
factor (WARF), the weighted average life (WAL), the weighted
average recovery rate (WARR), and Moody's asset correlation (MAC).
Moody's typically models these as actual parameters for static
deals and as covenants for managed deals.

WARF is a primary measure of the credit quality of a CRE CDO pool.
Moody's has updated its assessments for the reference obligations
it does not rate. The rating agency modeled a bottom-dollar WARF of
3649, compared to 3551 at last review. The current ratings on the
Moody's-rated reference obligations and the assessments of the
non-Moody's rated reference obligations follow: Aaa-Aa3 and 8.5%
compared to 0.7% at last review, A1-A3 and 0.2% compared to 13.1%
at last review, Baa1-Baa3 and 0.0% compared to 5.2% at last review,
Ba1-Ba3 and 38.4% compared to 23.0% at last review, B1-B3 and 7.7%
compared to 17.3% at last review, Caa1-Ca/C and 45.3% compared to
40.7% at last review.

Moody's modeled a WAL of 1.3 years, compared to 0.6 years at last
review. The WAL is based on assumptions about extensions on the
underlying look-through loans within the reference obligations.

Moody's modeled a fixed WARR of 10.1%, compared to 6.3% at last
review.

Moody's modeled a MAC of 18.7%, compared to 27.1% at last review.

Methodology Underlying the Rating Action:

The principal methodology used in these ratings was "Moody's
Approach to Rating SF CDOs" published in June 2017.

Factors That Would Lead to Upgrade or Downgrade of the Ratings:

The performance of the notes is subject to uncertainty, because it
is sensitive to the performance of the underlying portfolio, which
in turn depends on economic and credit conditions that are subject
to change. The servicing decisions of the master and special
servicer and surveillance by the operating advisor with respect to
the collateral interests and oversight of the transaction will also
affect the performance of the Rated Notes.

Moody's Parameter Sensitivities: Changes to any one or more of the
key parameters could have rating implications for some of the Rated
Notes, although a change in one key parameter assumption could be
offset by a change in one or more of the other key parameter
assumptions. The Rated Notes are particularly sensitive to changes
in the ratings of the underlying reference obligations and credit
estimates. Notching down 100% of the reference obligations pool by
one notch would result in an average modeled rating movement on the
Rated Notes of zero notches downward (e.g., one notch down implies
a ratings movement of Baa3 to Ba1). Notching 100% of the reference
obligations pool by one notch would result in an average modeled
rating movement on the Rated Notes of one notch upward (e.g., one
notch up implies a ratings movement of Baa3 to Baa2).

The primary sources of uncertainty in Moody's assumptions are the
extent of growth in the current macroeconomic environment.
Commercial real estate property values continue to improve
modestly, along with a rise in investment activity and
stabilization in core property type performance. Limited new
construction and moderate job growth have aided this improvement.


HEMPSTEAD LTD II: Moody's Assigns Ba3(sf) Rating to Cl. D Notes
---------------------------------------------------------------
Moody's Investors Service has assigned ratings to six classes of
notes issued by Hempstead II CLO Ltd.

Moody's rating action is:

US$5,000,000 Class X Senior Secured Floating Rate Notes due 2029
(the "Class X Notes"), Definitive Rating Assigned Aaa (sf)

US$378,000,000 Class A-1 Senior Secured Floating Rate Notes due
2029 (the "Class A-1 Notes"), Definitive Rating Assigned Aaa (sf)

US$61,500,000 Class A-2 Senior Secured Floating Rate Notes due 2029
(the "Class A-2 Notes"), Definitive Rating Assigned Aa2 (sf)

US$37,500,000 Class B Mezzanine Secured Deferrable Floating Rate
Notes due 2029 (the "Class B Notes"), Definitive Rating Assigned A2
(sf)

US$38,000,000 Class C Mezzanine Secured Deferrable Floating Rate
Notes due 2029 (the "Class C Notes"), Definitive Rating Assigned
Baa3 (sf)

US$35,000,000 Class D Mezzanine Secured Deferrable Floating Rate
Notes due 2029 (the "Class D Notes"), Definitive Rating Assigned
Ba3 (sf)

The Class X Notes, the Class A-1 Notes, the Class A-2 Notes, the
Class B Notes, the Class C Notes, and the Class D Notes are
referred to herein as the "Rated Notes."

RATINGS RATIONALE

Moody's ratings of the Rated Notes address the expected losses
posed to noteholders. The ratings reflect the risks due to defaults
on the underlying portfolio of assets, the transaction's legal
structure, and the characteristics of the underlying assets.

Hempstead II CLO Ltd. is a managed cash flow CLO. The issued notes
will be collateralized primarily by broadly syndicated first lien
senior secured corporate loans. At least 90% of the portfolio must
consist of senior secured loans, cash, and eligible investments,
and up to 10% of the portfolio may consist of second lien loans and
unsecured loans. The portfolio is at least 80% ramped as of the
closing date.

Guggenheim Partners Investment Management, LLC (the "Manager") will
direct the selection, acquisition and disposition of the assets on
behalf of the Issuer and may engage in trading activity, including
discretionary trading, during the transaction's four-year
reinvestment period. Thereafter, the Manager may reinvest
unscheduled principal payments and proceeds from sales of credit
risk assets, subject to certain restrictions.

In addition to the Rated Notes, the Issuer issued one class of
subordinated notes.

The transaction incorporates interest and par coverage tests which,
if triggered, divert interest and principal proceeds to pay down
the notes in order of seniority.

Moody's modeled the transaction using a cash flow model based on
the Binomial Expansion Technique, as described in Section 2.3.2.1
of the "Moody's Global Approach to Rating Collateralized Loan
Obligations" rating methodology published in October 2016.

For modeling purposes, Moody's used the following base-case
assumptions:

Par amount: $600,000,000

Diversity Score: 60

Weighted Average Rating Factor (WARF): 3143

Weighted Average Spread (WAS): 3.70%

Weighted Average Coupon (WAC): 6.50%

Weighted Average Recovery Rate (WARR): 48.5%

Weighted Average Life (WAL): 8 years.

Methodology Underlying the Rating Action:

The principal methodology used in these ratings was "Moody's Global
Approach to Rating Collateralized Loan Obligations" published in
October 2016.

Factors That Would Lead to Upgrade or Downgrade of the Ratings:

The performance of the Rated Notes is subject to uncertainty. The
performance of the Rated Notes is sensitive to the performance of
the underlying portfolio, which in turn depends on economic and
credit conditions that may change. The Manager's investment
decisions and management of the transaction will also affect the
performance of the Rated Notes.

Together with the set of modeling assumptions above, Moody's
conducted an additional sensitivity analysis, which was a component
in determining the ratings assigned to the Rated Notes. This
sensitivity analysis includes increased default probability
relative to the base case.

Below is a summary of the impact of an increase in default
probability (expressed in terms of WARF level) on the Rated Notes
(shown in terms of the number of notch difference versus the
current model output, whereby a negative difference corresponds to
higher expected losses), assuming that all other factors are held
equal:

Percentage Change in WARF -- increase of 15% (from 3143 to 3614)

Rating Impact in Rating Notches

Class X Notes: 0

Class A-1 Notes: 0

Class A-2 Notes: -2

Class B Notes: -2

Class C Notes: -1

Class D Notes: -1

Percentage Change in WARF -- increase of 30% (from 3143 to 4086)

Rating Impact in Rating Notches

Class X Notes: 0

Class A-1 Notes: -1

Class A-2 Notes: -3

Class B Notes: -4

Class C Notes: -2

Class D Notes: -1


JAMESTOWN CLO IV: Moody's Lowers Class E Notes Rating to Caa1
-------------------------------------------------------------
Moody's Investors Service has downgraded the rating on the
following notes issued by Jamestown CLO IV Ltd.:

US$5,400,000 Class E Senior Secured Deferrable Floating Rate Notes
due July 2026, Downgraded to Caa1 (sf); previously on June 26, 2014
Assigned B2 (sf)

Moody's also affirmed the ratings on the following notes:

US$257,000,000 Class A-1A Senior Secured Floating Rate Notes due
July 2026, Affirmed Aaa (sf); previously on June 26, 2014 Assigned
Aaa (sf)

Up to U.S.$50,000,000 Class A-1B Senior Secured Floating Rate Notes
due July 2026, Affirmed Aaa (sf); previously on June 26, 2014
Assigned Aaa (sf)

US$77,000,000 Class A-1C Senior Secured Floating Rate Notes due
July 2026, Affirmed Aaa (sf); previously on June 26, 2014 Assigned
Aaa (sf)

US$50,000,000 Class A-1L Loans due July 2026, Affirmed Aaa (sf);
previously on June 26, 2014 Assigned Aaa (sf)

US$73,800,000 Class A-2 Senior Secured Floating Rate Notes due July
2026, Affirmed Aa2 (sf); previously on June 26, 2014 Assigned Aa2
(sf)

US$26,400,000 Class B Senior Secured Deferrable Floating Rate Notes
due July 2026, Affirmed A2 (sf); previously on June 26, 2014
Assigned A2 (sf)

US$36,000,000 Class C Senior Secured Deferrable Floating Rate Notes
due July 2026, Affirmed Baa3 (sf); previously on June 26, 2014
Assigned Baa3 (sf)

US$33,600,000 Class D Senior Secured Deferrable Floating Rate Notes
due July 2026, Affirmed Ba3 (sf); previously on June 26, 2014
Assigned Ba3 (sf)

Jamestown CLO IV Ltd., issued in June 2014, is a collateralized
loan obligation (CLO) backed primarily by a portfolio of senior
secured loans. The transaction's reinvestment period will end in
July 2018.

RATINGS RATIONALE

The rating downgrade on the Class E notes reflects the par loss and
credit deterioration in the underlying CLO portfolio. Based on the
trustee's July 2017 report, the total collateral par balance is
$585.8 million, or $14.2 million less than the $600 million initial
par amount targeted during the deal's ramp-up. Furthermore, the
current trustee-reported weighted average rating factor (WARF) and
weighted average spread (WAS) of 3074 and 3.74%, respectively, are
failing the covenants of 3060 and 3.94%, respectively. Based on
Moody's calculation, assets that have a corporate family rating
equivalent to Caa1 or lower (after applicable adjustments for
negative outlook or review for downgrade) represent approximately
14.9% of the performing portfolio.

The rating action also reflects the limited time remaining before
the end of the deal's reinvestment period in July 2018, which could
constrain the issuer's ability to effect significant changes to the
current collateral pool.

Methodology Underlying the Rating Action:

The principal methodology used in these ratings was "Moody's Global
Approach to Rating Collateralized Loan Obligations" published in
October 2016.

Factors that Would Lead to an Upgrade or Downgrade of the Ratings:

This transaction is subject to a number of factors and
circumstances that could lead to either an upgrade or downgrade of
the ratings:

1) Macroeconomic uncertainty: CLO performance is subject to a)
uncertainty about credit conditions in the general economy and b)
the large concentration of upcoming speculative-grade debt
maturities, which could make refinancing difficult for issuers.

2) Collateral Manager: Performance can also be affected positively
or negatively by a) the manager's investment strategy and behavior
and b) differences in the legal interpretation of CLO documentation
by different transactional parties owing to embedded ambiguities.

3) Collateral credit risk: A shift towards collateral of better
credit quality, or better credit performance of assets
collateralizing the transaction than Moody's current expectations,
can lead to positive CLO performance. Conversely, a negative shift
in credit quality or performance of the collateral can have adverse
consequences for CLO performance.

4) Deleveraging: An important source of uncertainty in this
transaction is whether deleveraging from unscheduled principal
proceeds will commence and at what pace. Deleveraging of the CLO
could accelerate owing to high prepayment levels in the loan market
and/or collateral sales by the manager, which could have a
significant impact on the notes' ratings. Note repayments that are
faster than Moody's current expectations will usually have a
positive impact on CLO notes, beginning with those with the highest
payment priority.

5) Recovery of defaulted assets: Fluctuations in the market value
of defaulted assets reported by the trustee and those that Moody's
assumes as having defaulted could result in volatility in the
deal's OC levels. Further, the timing of recoveries and whether a
manager decides to work out or sell defaulted assets create
additional uncertainty. Realization of higher than assumed
recoveries would positively impact the CLO.

6) Other collateral quality metrics: Reinvestment is allowed and
the manager has the ability to negatively affect the collateral
quality metrics' existing buffers against the covenant levels,
which could negatively affect the transaction.

7) Weighted Average Spread: CLO performance can be sensitive to
WAS, which is a key factor driving the amount of excess spread
available as credit enhancement when a deal fails its
over-collateralization or interest coverage tests. A decrease in
excess spread, including as a result of losing the net interest
benefit of LIBOR floors, or because market conditions make it
difficult for the deal to source assets of appropriate credit
quality in order to maintain its WAS target, would reduce the
effective credit enhancement available for the notes.

8) Exposure to assets with low credit quality and weak liquidity:
The presence of assets rated Caa3 with a negative outlook, Caa2 or
Caa3 on review for downgrade or the worst Moody's speculative grade
liquidity (SGL) rating, SGL-4, exposes the notes to additional
risks if these assets default. The historical default rate is
higher than average for these assets.

In addition to the base case analysis, Moody's also conducted
sensitivity analyses to test the impact of a number of default
probabilities on the rated notes relative to the base case modeling
results, which may be different from the current public ratings of
the notes. Below is a summary of the impact of different default
probabilities (expressed in terms of WARF) on all of the rated
notes (by the difference in the number of notches versus the
current model output, for which a positive difference corresponds
to lower expected loss):

Moody's Adjusted WARF - 20% (2434)

Class A-1A: 0

Class A-1B: 0

Class A-1C: 0

Class A-1L: 0

Class A-2: +1

Class B: +3

Class C: +3

Class D: +2

Class E: +4

Moody's Adjusted WARF + 20% (3650)

Class A-1A: 0

Class A-1B: 0

Class A-1C: 0

Class A-1L: 0

Class A-2: -3

Class B: -2

Class C: -1

Class D: 0

Class E: -2

Loss and Cash Flow Analysis:

Moody's modeled the transaction using a cash flow model based on
the Binomial Expansion Technique, as described in "Moody's Global
Approach to Rating Collateralized Loan Obligations."

The key model inputs Moody's used in its analysis, such as par,
weighted average rating factor, diversity score and the weighted
average recovery rate, are based on its published methodology and
could differ from the trustee's reported numbers. In its base case,
Moody's analyzed the collateral pool as having a performing par and
principal proceeds balance of $579.0 million, defaulted par of
$11.8 million, a weighted average default probability of 23.43%
(implying a WARF of 3042), a weighted average recovery rate upon
default of 49.18%, a diversity score of 66 and a weighted average
spread of 3.70% (before accounting for LIBOR floors).

Moody's incorporates the default and recovery properties of the
collateral pool in cash flow model analysis where they are subject
to stresses as a function of the target rating on each CLO
liability reviewed. Moody's derives the default probability from
the credit quality of the collateral pool and Moody's expectation
of the remaining life of the collateral pool. The average recovery
rate for future defaults is based primarily on the seniority of the
assets in the collateral pool. In each case, historical and market
performance and the collateral manager's latitude for trading the
collateral are also factors.


JP MORGAN 2003-C1: Moody's Affirms C(sf) Ratings on 2 Tranches
--------------------------------------------------------------
Moody's Investors Service has upgraded the ratings on one class and
affirmed the ratings on two classes in J.P. Morgan Chase Commercial
Mortgage Securities Corp. 2003-C1:

Cl. F, Upgraded to A3 (sf); previously on Sep 15, 2016 Upgraded to
Baa2 (sf)

Cl. G, Affirmed C (sf); previously on Sep 15, 2016 Affirmed C (sf)

Cl. X-1, Affirmed C (sf); previously on Jun 9, 2017 Downgraded to C
(sf)

RATINGS RATIONALE

The rating on Class F was upgraded based primarily on an increase
in credit support resulting from loan paydowns and amortization.
The deal has paid down 18% since Moody's last review.

The rating on Class G was affirmed because the ratings are
consistent with Moody's expected loss plus realized losses. Class G
has already experienced a 69% realized loss as result of previously
liquidated loans.

The rating on the IO class, Class X-1, was affirmed based on the
credit quality of its referenced classes.

Moody's rating action reflects a base expected loss of 6.6% of the
current pooled balance, compared to 3.9% at Moody's last review.
Moody's base expected loss plus realized losses is now 8.8% of the
original pooled balance, compared to 8.7% at the last review.

FACTORS THAT WOULD LEAD TO AN UPGRADE OR DOWNGRADE OF THE RATINGS:

The performance expectations for a given variable indicate Moody's
forward-looking view of the likely range of performance over the
medium term. Performance that falls outside the given range can
indicate that the collateral's credit quality is stronger or weaker
than Moody's had previously expected.

Factors that could lead to an upgrade of the ratings include a
significant amount of loan paydowns or amortization, an increase in
the pool's share of defeasance or an improvement in pool
performance.

Factors that could lead to a downgrade of the ratings include a
decline in the performance of the pool, loan concentration, an
increase in realized and expected losses from specially serviced
and troubled loans or interest shortfalls.

METHODOLOGY UNDERLYING THE RATING ACTION

The principal methodology used in these rating was "Moody's
Approach to Rating Large Loan and Single Asset/Single Borrower
CMBS" published in July 2017.

Additionally, the methodology used in rating Cl. X-1 was "Moody's
Approach to Rating Structured Finance Interest-Only (IO)
Securities" published in June 2017.
DEAL PERFORMANCE

As of the July 12, 2017 distribution date, the transaction's
aggregate certificate balance has decreased by 98% to $19.7 million
from $1.068 billion at securitization. The certificates are
collateralized by six mortgage loans ranging in size from 1% to 52%
of the pool. Two loans, constituting 12% of the pool, have defeased
and are secured by US government securities.

Moody's uses a variation of Herf to measure the diversity of loan
sizes, where a higher number represents greater diversity. Loan
concentration has an important bearing on potential rating
volatility, including the risk of multiple notch downgrades under
adverse circumstances. The credit neutral Herf score is 40. The
pool has a Herf of 2, compared to 3 at Moody's last review.

There are currently no loans on the watchlist.

Fifteen loans have been liquidated from the pool, resulting in an
aggregate realized loss of $92 million (for an average loss
severity of 70%). One loan, the Blue Ash Corporate Center Loan
($2.6 million -- 13.0% of the pool), is currently in special
servicing. The loan is secured by a 57,000 square foot (SF) office
property located in Blue Ash, Ohio. The loan transferred to the
Special Servicer in December 2012 for payment default, and then
subsequently maturity default. A receiver was appointed in
September 2015. As of March 2017, the property was 74% leased, the
same as in June 2016.

Moody's received full year 2016 operating results for 100% of the
pool, and full or partial year 2017 operating results for 16% of
the pool (excluding specially serviced and defeased loans). Moody's
weighted average conduit LTV is 37%, compared to 51% at Moody's
last review. Moody's conduit component excludes loans with
structured credit assessments, defeased and CTL loans, and
specially serviced and troubled loans. Moody's net cash flow (NCF)
reflects a weighted average haircut of 21% to the most recently
available net operating income (NOI). Moody's value reflects a
weighted average capitalization rate of 9.5%.

Moody's actual and stressed conduit DSCRs are 1.21X and 2.78X,
respectively, compared to 1.18X and 1.99X at the last review.
Moody's actual DSCR is based on Moody's NCF and the loan's actual
debt service. Moody's stressed DSCR is based on Moody's NCF and a
9.25% stress rate the agency applied to the loan balance.

The top three conduit loans represent 76% of the pool balance. The
largest loan is the Mark IV Las Vegas Loan ($10.3 million -- 52.3%
of the pool), which is secured by three adjoining industrial
properties totaling 451,000 SF and located in Las Vegas, Nevada.
The collateral was 94% leased as of December 2016, compared to 100%
leased as of December 2015. Moody's LTV and stressed DSCR are 35%
and 2.94X, respectively, compared to 53% and 1.95X at the last
review.

The second largest loan is the Ocoee Crossing Shopping Center Loan
($2.4 million -- 12.3% of the pool), which is secured by a 63,000
SF grocery-anchored retail center located in Cleveland, Tennessee.
The property was 94% leased as of December 2016, compared to 100%
leased in December 2015. Moody's LTV and stressed DSCR are 41% and
2.50X, respectively, compared to 42% and 2.45X at the last review.

The third largest loan is the Walgreens-Lyndon Lane Loan ($2.1
million -- 10.9% of the pool), which is secured by a 15,000 SF
retail property. Walgreens leases the entire property with a long
term triple net lease expiring in October 2061. Moody's LTV and
stressed DSCR are 44% and 2.36X, respectively, compared to 49% and
2.11X at the last review.


JP MORGAN 2005-LDP3: Moody's Affirms C(sf) Rating on Cl. G Certs
----------------------------------------------------------------
Moody's Investors Service has upgraded the rating on one class and
affirmed the rating on one class in J.P. Morgan Chase Commercial
Mortgage Securities Corp., Commercial Pass-Through Certificates,
Series 2005 LDP3:

Cl. F, Upgraded to Baa3 (sf); previously on Sep 8, 2016 Upgraded to
B1 (sf)

Cl. G, Affirmed C (sf); previously on Sep 8, 2016 Affirmed C (sf)

RATINGS RATIONALE

The rating on Class F was upgraded based primarily on an increase
in credit support resulting from loan paydowns and amortization.
The deal has paid down 36% since Moody's last review.

The rating on Class G was affirmed because the ratings are
consistent with Moody's expected loss plus realized losses. Class G
has already experienced a 69% realized loss as result of previously
liquidated loans.

Moody's rating action reflects a base expected loss of 7.7% of the
current pooled balance, compared to 3.6% at Moody's last review.
Moody's base expected loss plus realized losses is now 5.3% of the
original pooled balance, the same as at the last review. Moody's
provides a current list of base expected losses for conduit and
fusion CMBS transactions on moodys.com at
http://www.moodys.com/viewresearchdoc.aspx?docid=PBS_SF215255.

FACTORS THAT WOULD LEAD TO AN UPGRADE OR DOWNGRADE OF THE RATINGS:

The performance expectations for a given variable indicate Moody's
forward-looking view of the likely range of performance over the
medium term. Performance that falls outside the given range can
indicate that the collateral's credit quality is stronger or weaker
than Moody's had previously expected.

Factors that could lead to an upgrade of the ratings include a
significant amount of loan paydowns or amortization, an increase in
the pool's share of defeasance or an improvement in pool
performance.

Factors that could lead to a downgrade of the ratings include a
decline in the performance of the pool, loan concentration, an
increase in realized and expected losses from specially serviced
and troubled loans or interest shortfalls.

METHODOLOGY UNDERLYING THE RATING ACTION

The principal methodology used in these ratings was "Moody's
Approach to Rating Large Loan and Single Asset/Single Borrower
CMBS" published in July 2017.

Moody's analysis incorporated a loss and recovery approach in
rating the P&I classes in this deal since 67% of the pool is in
special servicing. In this approach, Moody's determines a
probability of default for each specially serviced and troubled
loan that it expects will generate a loss and estimates a loss
given default based on a review of broker's opinions of value (if
available), other information from the special servicer, available
market data and Moody's internal data. The loss given default for
each loan also takes into consideration repayment of servicer
advances to date, estimated future advances and closing costs.
Translating the probability of default and loss given default into
an expected loss estimate, Moody's then applies the aggregate loss
from specially serviced loans to the most junior class and the
recovery as a pay down of principal to the most senior class.

DEAL PERFORMANCE

As of the July 17, 2017 distribution date, the transaction's
aggregate certificate balance has decreased by over 99% to $6.8
million from $2 billion at securitization. The certificates are
collateralized by three remaining mortgage loans.

Twenty-nine loans have been liquidated from the pool, resulting in
an aggregate realized loss of $107.5 million (for an average loss
severity of 50%). One loan, the Maineville Crossing Loan ($4.7
million -- 67% of the pool), is currently in special servicing. The
specially serviced loan is secured by a mixed use office/retail
property located approximately 28 miles northeast of the Cincinnati
CBD in Maineville, Ohio. The loan transferred to special servicing
in September 2015 due to a balloon default. The borrower entered
into a forbearance from May to August 2016. As per the March 2017
rent roll the property was 100% leased, compared to 94% as of June
2014.

As of the July 17, 2017 remittance statement cumulative interest
shortfalls were $2.47 million. Moody's anticipates interest
shortfalls will continue because of the exposure to specially
serviced loans and/or modified loans. Interest shortfalls are
caused by special servicing fees, including workout and liquidation
fees, appraisal entitlement reductions (ASERs), loan modifications
and extraordinary trust expenses.

The two performing loans represent 33% of the pool balance. The
largest performing loan is the LaSalle Bank- St. Charles, IL Loan
($1.9 million -- 27.9% of the pool), which is secured by a 6,000
square foot (SF) single tenant retail property located in St.
Charles, Illinois (approximately 40 miles west of Chicago). As of
March 2016, the property was 100% leased to Bank of America through
August 2021. Moody's value incorporates a lit/dark analysis due to
the property's single tenancy. Moody's LTV and stressed DSCR are
90% and 1.05X, respectively.

The other performing loan is the Ambassador Caffery Plaza Loan
($0.36 million -- 5.1% of the pool), which is secured by a 9,938
square foot (SF) retail property located in Lafayette, Louisiana.
As per the June 2017 rent roll the property was 100% leased, the
same as of March 2016. The loan is fully amortizing and has
amortized 72% since securitization. Moody's LTV and stressed DSCR
are 19.7% and >4.00X, respectively.


JP MORGAN 2010-C1: Fitch Cuts Class C Debt Rating to BBsf
---------------------------------------------------------
Fitch Ratings has downgraded and removed from Rating Watch Negative
two classes of JP Morgan Chase Commercial Mortgage Securities
Trust, commercial mortgage pass through certificates, series
2010-C1. Fitch has also affirmed seven classes.  

KEY RATING DRIVERS

The downgrade of classes B and C is due to continued performance
uncertainty, high volatility and increasing concentration risk
surrounding the largest loan in the pool, Gateway Salt Lake, which
now represents approximately 26% of the total collateral pool.
Additionally, approximately 70% of the remaining pool balance
secured by retail properties.

Gateway Salt Lake is a 623,972 square foot (sf) open-air lifestyle
center located in Salt Lake City, UT. Presently, major tenants
include Gateway Theatres (11.9% of net rentable area [NRA]), Barnes
& Noble (4.1%) and The Depot (4.0%). Dick's Sporting Goods, a
former anchor tenant that occupied 14.5% of the NRA, vacated in
January 2017 upon lease expiration.

The Gateway Salt Lake loan transferred to the special servicer in
August 2015 for imminent default following several years of
declining performance as a result of newer competition in the
market. In mid-2016, the servicer negotiated a loan assumption and
write-down of debt, which resulted in realized losses to the pool
of approximately $41.3 million. In addition, the maturity date was
extended until February 2021. The corrected loan returned to the
master servicer in May 2016 and has remained current under its new
owner, Vestar, an operator of retail and entertainment destinations
in the Western U.S.

Vestar is in the process of repositioning the property with a focus
on entertainment tenants. Although a near-term decline in
performance was expected (per the servicer) as the new sponsor
implements their business plan to the center, stabilizing the
property may become increasingly challenging as the retail sector
weakens. Store closures, declining sales, and review of brick and
mortar exposure are items of great focus for retailers as they
navigate through a softening market and adapt to changing consumer
habits.

Since loan modification in April 2016, property performance has
continued to decline with decreasing occupancy and rental revenue.
As of June 2017, the property was 48% occupied, compared to 75% a
year ago. The servicer reported year-to-date second quarter 2017
debt service coverage ratio, on a net operating income basis, was
0.96x, down from 1.95x at year-end 2016. The loan is currently on
the servicer watchlist due to poor financial performance. In
addition to lower occupancy and cash flow, many tenants at the
center have co-tenancy clauses in their leases; these tenants are
negotiating lower rents or other favourable lease terms with the
sponsor.

As of the June 2017 rent roll, leases representing 23% of the
property NRA are set to expire within the next 12 month, the
majority of which either have renewed for one year or are under
negotiation for renewal. Dave & Busters has signed a 10 year lease
to occupy 44,000 sf of the property. An additional 60,000 sf of
space is currently in various stages of lease negotiations.

RATING SENSITIVITIES

The Negative Outlooks on classes A-3, X-A, B and C indicate Fitch's
ongoing concerns with current transaction performance; however, the
Gateway remains a performing loan and another default is not
expected in the near term; the property has the potential to
improve should the sponsor successfully increase occupancy per
their repositioning plan. While recovery of 'AAAsf' proceeds is
expected at this time, should the borrower's business plan fail to
materialize and the loan re-transfer to special servicing, the
'AAAsf' rated classes may be susceptible to future interest
shortfalls. Additionally, should any of the other performing loans
fail to refinance at maturity all of the classes on Outlook
Negative could be vulnerable to a downgrade. The distressed classes
reflect either low recovery prospects or already realized losses
(in the cases of the 'Dsf' rated classes). Upgrades are unlikely
given pool concerns and concentration, but could be possible with
sustained improvement in the Gateway Salt Lake loan.

USE OF THIRD-PARTY DUE DILIGENCE PURSUANT TO SEC RULE 17G-10

No third-party due diligence was provided or reviewed in relation
to this rating action.

Fitch has downgraded the following classes:

-- $16.1 million class B to 'BBBsf' from 'Asf'; Outlook Negative;
-- $26.9 million class C to 'BBsf' from 'BBB-sf'; Outlook
    Negative.

Fitch has affirmed the following classes and revised Rating
Outlooks as indicated:

-- $97 million class A-2 at 'AAAsf'; Outlook to Stable from
    Negative;
-- $61.5 million class A-3 at 'AAAsf'; Outlook Negative;
-- Interest-only class X-A at 'AAAsf'; Outlook Negative;
-- $14.3 million class D at 'CCsf'; RE 50%;
-- $8.9 million class E at 'Dsf'; RE 0%;
-- $0 class F at 'Dsf'; RE 0%;
-- $0 class G at 'Dsf'; RE 0%;
-- $0 class H at 'Dsf'; RE 0%.


JP MORGAN 2017-FL10: S&P Assigns B- Rating on Class F Certs
-----------------------------------------------------------
S&P Global Ratings assigned its ratings to J.P. Morgan Chase
Commercial Mortgage Securities Trust 2017-FL10's $382.090 million
commercial mortgage pass-through certificates.

The certificate issuance is backed by six commercial mortgage loans
with a $402.2 million aggregate principal balance, secured by the
fee and/or leasehold interests in 14 properties across five U.S.
states.

The ratings reflect S&P Global Ratings' view of the collateral's
historical and projected performance, the sponsors' and managers'
experience, the trustee-provided liquidity, the loans' terms, and
the transaction's structure.

  RATINGS ASSIGNED

  J.P. Morgan Chase Commercial Mortgage Securities Trust 2017-FL10

  Class              Rating(i)       Amount ($)
  A                  AAA (sf)       219,260,000
  X-CP(ii)           B- (sf)        382,090,000
  X-EXT(ii)          B- (sf)        382,090,000
  B                  AA (sf)         47,690,000
  C                  A (sf)          36,005,000
  D                  BBB- (sf)       38,855,000
  E                  BB- (sf)        30,115,000
  F                  B- (sf)         10,165,000
  VRR interest(iii)  NR              20,110,000

(i)The certificates will be issued to qualified institutional
buyers according to Rule 144A of the Securities Act of 1933.

(ii)Notional balance. The class X-CP certificates' notional amount
will be equal to the class A, B, C, D, E, and F certificates'
aggregate balances from time to time. The class X-EXT certificates'
notional amount will be equal to the aggregate of the class A, B,
C, D, E, and F certificates' balances from time to time.

(iii)The VRR interest component provides credit support to the
limited extent that losses are incurred on the underlying mortgage
loans, as such losses are allocated between the VRR interest and
the nonretained certificates, pro rata, according to their
respective percentage allocation entitlements (vertical split).

NR--Not rated.


KKR CLO 12: Moody's Assigns Ba3(sf) Rating to Class E-R Notes
-------------------------------------------------------------
Moody's Investors Service has assigned the following ratings to the
following notes (the "Refinancing Notes") issued by KKR CLO 12 Ltd.
(the "Issuer"):

US$256,000,000 Class A-1-R Senior Secured Floating Rate Notes Due
2027 (the "Class A-1-R Notes"), Assigned Aaa (sf)

US$25,000,000 Class B-1-R Senior Secured Floating Rate Notes Due
2027 (the "Class B-1-R Notes"), Assigned Aa1 (sf)

US$20,000,000 Class B-2-R Senior Secured Fixed Rate Notes Due 2027
(the "Class B-2-R Notes"), Assigned Aa1 (sf)

US$20,000,000 Class C-R Senior Secured Deferrable Floating Rate
Notes Due 2027 (the "Class C-R Notes"), Assigned A2 (sf)

US$28,000,000 Class D-R Senior Secured Deferrable Floating Rate
Notes Due 2027 (the "Class D-R Notes"), Assigned Baa3 (sf)

US$19,000,000 Class E-R Senior Secured Deferrable Floating Rate
Notes Due 2027 (the "Class E-R Notes"), Assigned Ba3 (sf)

The Issuer is a managed cash flow collateralized loan obligation
(CLO). The issued notes are collateralized primarily by a portfolio
of senior secured, broadly syndicated corporate loans.

KKR Financial Advisors II, LLC (the "Manager") manages the CLO. It
directs the selection, acquisition, and disposition of collateral
on behalf of the Issuer.

RATINGS RATIONALE

Moody's ratings on the Refinancing Notes address the expected loss
posed to noteholders. The ratings reflect the risks due to defaults
on the underlying portfolio of assets, the transaction's legal
structure, and the characteristics of the underlying assets.

The Issuer has issued the Refinancing Notes on August 16, 2017 (the
"Refinancing Date") in connection with the refinancing of certain
classes of notes (the "Refinanced Original Notes") previously
issued on the Original Closing Date. On the Refinancing Date, the
Issuer used the proceeds from the issuance of the Refinancing Notes
to redeem in full the Refinanced Original Notes.

Methodology Underlying the Rating Action:

The principal methodology used in these ratings was "Moody's Global
Approach to Rating Collateralized Loan Obligations" published in
October 2016.

Factors That Would Lead to an Upgrade or a Downgrade of the
Ratings:

The performance of each class of the Issuer's notes is subject to
uncertainty relating to certain factors and circumstances, and this
uncertainty could lead Moody's to change its ratings:

1) Macroeconomic uncertainty: CLO performance is subject to
uncertainty about credit conditions in the general economy.

2) Collateral Manager: Performance can also be affected positively
or negatively by a) the Manager's investment strategy and behavior
and b) differences in the legal interpretation of CLO documentation
by the Manager or other transaction parties owing to embedded
ambiguities.

3) Collateral credit risk: Investing in collateral of better credit
quality, or better than Moody's expected credit performance of the
assets collateralizing the transaction can lead to positive CLO
performance. Conversely, a negative shift in the credit quality or
performance of the collateral can have adverse consequences for CLO
performance.

4) Deleveraging: During the amortization period, the pace of
deleveraging from unscheduled principal proceeds is an important
source of uncertainty. Deleveraging of the CLO could accelerate
owing to high prepayment levels in the loan market and/or
collateral sales by the Manager, which could have a significant
impact on the ratings. Note repayments that are faster than Moody's
current expectations will usually have a positive impact on CLO
notes, beginning with those notes having the highest payment
priority.

5) Weighted Average Spread (WAS): CLO performance can be sensitive
to WAS, which is a key factor driving the amount of excess spread
available as credit enhancement when a deal fails its
over-collateralization or interest coverage tests. A decrease in
excess spread, including as a result of losing the net interest
benefit of LIBOR floors, or because market conditions make it
difficult for the deal to source assets of appropriate credit
quality in order to maintain its WAS target, would reduce the
effective credit enhancement available for the notes.

Together with the set of modeling assumptions described below,
Moody's conducted additional sensitivity analyses, which were
considered in determining the ratings assigned to the rated notes.
In particular, in addition to the base case analysis, Moody's
conducted sensitivity analyses to test the impact of a number of
default probabilities on the rated notes relative to the base case
modeling results. Below is a summary of the impact of different
default probabilities, expressed in terms of WARF level, on the
rated notes (shown in terms of the number of notches difference
versus the base case model output, where a positive difference
corresponds to a lower expected loss):

Moody's Assumed WARF - 20% (2379)

Class A-1-R: 0

Class B-1-R: +1

Class B-2-R: +1

Class C-R: +3

Class D-R: +3

Class E-R: +1

Moody's Assumed WARF + 20% (3569)

Class A-1-R: 0

Class B-1-R: -2

Class B-2-R: -2

Class C-R: -2

Class D-R: -2

Class E-R: -1

Loss and Cash Flow Analysis:

Moody's modeled the transaction using a cash flow model based on
the Binomial Expansion Technique, as described in "Moody's Global
Approach to Rating Collateralized Loan Obligations."

The key model inputs Moody's used in its analysis, such as par,
weighted average rating factor, diversity score, weighted average
recovery rate, and weighted average spread, are based on its
published methodology and could differ from the trustee's reported
numbers. For modeling purposes, Moody's used the following
base-case assumptions

Performing par and principal proceeds balance: $400,000,000

No defaulted par

Diversity Score: 61

Weighted Average Rating Factor (WARF): 2974 (corresponding to a
weighted average default probability of 24.81%)

Weighted Average Spread (WAS): 3.70%

Weighted Average Recovery Rate (WARR): 49.4%

Moody's incorporates the default and recovery properties of the
collateral pool in cash flow model analysis where they are subject
to stresses as a function of the target rating on each CLO
liability reviewed. Moody's derives the default probability from
the credit quality of the collateral pool and Moody's expectation
of the remaining life of the collateral pool. The average recovery
rate for future defaults is based primarily on the seniority of the
assets in the collateral pool. In each case, historical and market
performance and the collateral manager's latitude for trading the
collateral are also factors.


LB-UBS COMMERCIAL 2007-C1: Fitch Hikes Cl. D Certs Rating to CCC
----------------------------------------------------------------
Fitch Ratings upgrades two classes and affirms nine classes of
LB-UBS Commercial Mortgage Trust commercial mortgage pass-through
certificates, series 2007-C1.

KEY RATING DRIVERS

Paydown and Increased Credit Enhancement: The upgrades are the
result of increased credit enhancement, as well as better than
expected recoveries on loans that paid in full on or near their
maturity date. As of the July 2017 distribution date, the
transaction has paid down 93.5% to $181.2 million from $2.8 billion
at issuance.

Significant Concentration of Specially Serviced Loans and High
Expected Losses: Seventeen (92%) of the remaining 18 loans are
specially serviced including eight REO (41.3%), five loans in
foreclosure (34.7%) and three non-performing matured loans (16%).
Although credit enhancement is high, significant losses are
expected.

The largest assets in the pool were originally a crossed loan pool
of two suburban office/flex properties totalling 263,000 sf located
in West Greenwich, RI (17.1%). Both properties are now REO and
according to the special servicing, are being listed for sale.

The second largest loan in the pool is collateralized by a 412,000
sf industrial building located in Vero Beach, FL, which serves as a
CVS distribution facility. The loan transferred to special
servicing in January 2017 after the borrower failed to payoff the
loan at maturity. The special servicer filed for foreclosure in
June 2017.

One Performing Loan: The transaction's one performing loan (8.1%)
is the third largest loan in the deal and is collateralized by a
106,944 sf open air neighborhood retail center located in
Montgomery AL. Tenants include Ross Dress for Less (28% of the NRA,
lease expiration in 2020); Office Depot (20% NRA, 2021); Dollar
Tree (11% NRA, 2021); Shoe Carnival (11%, 2021); Verizon (5%,
2022). The property has maintained high occupancy throughout the
loan term from 96%-100%. Occupancy as of March 2017 was 97%.
Reported NOI has been consistently low, and the NOI DSCR was 1.17x
as of March 2017 and 1.18x as of YE 2016. Tenants Ross Dress for
Less and Verizon both signed new leases in early 2017 at their
respective lease expirations. The current loan per square foot is
$137. The balloon loan's maturity date is in December 2018.

RATING SENSITIVITIES

The Rating Outlook of class C is Stable, as no rating changes are
expected. Due to the increased credit enhancement from paydown,
losses are no longer expected. The class is reliant on the
performing loan to pay off. The remaining classes' ratings are
distressed and reflect the expectation of losses on the specially
serviced loans. Downgrades are expected as losses become more
imminent or are realized.

USE OF THIRD-PARTY DUE DILIGENCE PURSUANT TO SEC RULE 17G-10
No third-party due diligence was provided or reviewed in relation
to this rating action.

Fitch has upgraded the following classes:

-- $4.5 million class C to 'BBsf' from 'CCsf'; Outlook Stable
    assigned;
-- $37.1 million class D to 'CCCsf' from 'CCsf'; RE revised to
    20%.

Fitch has affirmed the following classes:

-- $18.6 million class E at 'CCsf'; RE 0%;
-- $32.5 million class F at 'Csf'; RE 0%;
-- $32.5 million class G at 'Csf'; RE 0%;
-- $41.8 million class H at 'Csf'; RE 0%;
-- $14.1 million class J at 'Dsf'; RE 0%;
-- $0 million class K at 'Dsf'; RE 0%;
-- $0 million class L at 'Dsf'; RE 0%;
-- $0 million class M at 'Dsf'; RE 0%;
-- $0 million class N at 'Dsf'; RE 0%.

The class A-1, A-2, A-3, A-AB, A-4, A-1A, A-M, A-J and B
certificates have all paid in full. Fitch does not rate the class
P, Q, S, T, or BMP certificates. Fitch previously withdrew the
rating on the interest-only class X-CL, X-CP, and X-W certificates.


LB-UBS COMMERCIAL 2007-C6: S&P Affirms CCC Rating on Cl. D Certs
----------------------------------------------------------------
S&P Global Ratings raised its ratings on four classes of commercial
mortgage pass-through certificates from LB-UBS Commercial Mortgage
Trust 2007-C6, a U.S. commercial mortgage-backed securities (CMBS)
transaction. In addition, we affirmed our ratings on two other
classes from the same transaction.

S&P said, "Our rating actions follow our analysis of the
transaction, primarily using our criteria for rating U.S. and
Canadian CMBS transactions, which included a review of the credit
characteristics and performance of the remaining assets in the
pool, the transaction's structure, and the liquidity available to
the trust.

"We raised our ratings on classes A-M, A-MFL, A-J, and B to reflect
our expectation of the available credit enhancement for these
classes, which we believe is greater than our most recent estimate
of necessary credit enhancement for the respective rating levels.
The upgrades also follow our views regarding the collateral's
current and future performance and lower trust balance.

"The affirmations on classes C and D reflect our expectation that
the available credit enhancement for these classes will be within
our estimate of the necessary credit enhancement required for the
current ratings, as well as our views regarding the collateral's
current and future performance.

"While available credit enhancement levels suggest further positive
rating movements on classes A-J and B and positive rating movement
on class C, our analysis also considered the susceptibility to
reduced liquidity support from the 53 specially serviced assets
($422.9 million, 71.0%)."

TRANSACTION SUMMARY

As of the July 17, 2017, trustee remittance report, the collateral
pool balance was $595.6 million, which is 20.0% of the pool balance
at issuance. The pool currently includes 24 loans (reflecting the
Islandia Shopping Center A and B notes as one loan) and 41 real
estate owned (REO) assets, down from 181 loans at issuance.
Fifty-three of these assets are currently with the special servicer
(including the Hickory Grove loan, see below), four ($31.4 million,
5.3%) are defeased, and seven ($127.2 million, 21.4%) are on the
master servicer's watchlist. The master servicer, Wells Fargo Bank
N.A., reported financial information for 87.7% of the nondefeased
assets in the pool, of which 88.1% was year-end 2016 data, and the
remainder was year-end 2015 data.

S&P said, "We calculated a 0.90x S&P Global Ratings weighted
average debt service coverage (DSC) and 107.6% S&P Global Ratings
weighted average loan-to-value (LTV) ratio using a 7.25% S&P Global
Ratings weighted average capitalization rate. The DSC, LTV ratio,
and capitalization rate calculations exclude the 53 specially
serviced assets, four defeased loans, and the Islandia Shopping
Center subordinate B hope note ($10.1 million, 1.7%). The top 10
nondefeased assets have an aggregate outstanding pool trust balance
of $493.1 million (82.8%). Using adjusted servicer-reported
numbers, we calculated an S&P Global Ratings weighted average DSC
and LTV of 0.85x and 112.0%, respectively, for four of the top 10
nondefeased assets. The remaining assets are specially serviced and
discussed below.

"To date, the transaction has experienced $159.0 million in
principal losses, or 5.3% of the original pool trust balance. We
expect losses to reach approximately 10.6% of the original pool
trust balance in the near term, based on losses incurred to date
and additional losses we expect upon the eventual resolution of the
53 specially serviced assets."

CREDIT CONSIDERATIONS

As of the July 17, 2017, trustee remittance reports, 52 assets
($409.3 million, 68.7%) in the pool were with the special servicer,
LNR Partners LLC. The Hickory Grove loan ($13.6 million, 2.3%) was
previously on the master servicer's watchlist and transferred to
special servicing after the July 2017 trustee remittance report due
to maturity default. The loan matured on July 11, 2017. Details on
the three largest specially serviced assets, all of which are part
of the top 10 nondefeased assets, are as follows:

The PECO Portfolio REO asset ($261.0 million, 43.8%) has a $266.8
million total reported exposure and is the largest nondefeased
asset in the pool. The loans, which comprise 39
cross-collateralized and cross-defaulted loans, were transferred to
the special servicer on Aug. 2, 2012, because of imminent payment
default and the properties became REO between June 2014 and March
2015. The asset consisted of 39 retail properties totaling 4.3
million sq. ft. in 13 U.S. states. According to the special
servicer, nine of the properties have been sold and released to
date, and it is working on leasing up the remaining properties. S&P
said, "It is our understanding from LNR that the sale proceeds from
these properties were used to repay prior advances, deferred
interest, and principal. A $112.2 million appraisal reduction
amount is in effect against the asset. We expect a moderate loss
(between 26% and 59%) upon its eventual resolution."

The 707 Broad Street loan ($42.0 million, 7.1%) has a total
reported exposure of $42.2 million and is the third-largest
nondefeased asset in the pool. The loan is secured by a
543,951-sq.-ft. office building in Newark, N.J. The loan, which has
a late but less-than-one-month-delinquent payment status, was
transferred to special servicer on June 9, 2017, due to imminent
maturity default. The loan matures on Sept. 11, 2017. The reported
DSC and occupancy for the three months ended March 2017 were 1.14x
and 96.9%, respectively. S&P expects a moderate loss upon this
loan's eventual resolution.

The Lakeland Town Center loan ($25.1 million, 4.2%) has a $25.4
million total reported exposure and is the fourth-largest
nondefeased asset in the pool. The loan is secured by a
304,375-sq.-ft. retail center in Lakeland, Fla. The loan, which has
a nonperforming maturity balloon payment status, was transferred to
the special servicer on Oct. 12, 2016, because of imminent default.
The special servicer indicated that the property is currently 73.0%
occupied and DSC was 1.00x for the three months ended March 31,
2017. S&P expects a moderate loss upon this loan's eventual
resolution.

The remaining assets with the special servicer each have individual
balances that represent less than 3.8% of the total pool trust
balance. S&P estimated losses for the 53 specially serviced assets,
arriving at a weighted average loss severity of 37.1%.

RATINGS LIST

LB-UBS Commercial Mortgage Trust 2007-C6
Commercial mortgage pass-through certificates series 2007-C6
                                        Rating                     
          
  Class         Identifier          To               From          
  
  A-M           52109PAG0           AAA (sf)         AA (sf)       
  
  A-J           52109PAH8           BBB- (sf)        BB- (sf)      
  
  B             52109PAJ4           BB+ (sf)         B (sf)        
  
  C             52109PAK1           B- (sf)          B- (sf)       
  
  D             52109PAL9           CCC (sf)         CCC (sf)      
  
  A-MFL         52109PAU9           AAA (sf)         AA (sf)


MACH ONE 2004-1: Fitch Affirms 'Dsf' Rating on Class O Notes
------------------------------------------------------------
Fitch Ratings has affirmed six classes of MACH ONE 2004-1, LLC
(MACH ONE).

KEY RATING DRIVERS

The affirmations are the result of increased credit enhancement
(CE) from continued deleveraging and positive credit migration of
the underlying collateral since Fitch's last rating action.

Since the last rating action, the transaction has paid down by $6.3
million; principal paydowns since issuance total $558.4 million.
Over this period, 45.2% of the underlying collateral has been
upgraded a weighted average of 5.2 notches and none of the
underlying collateral has been downgraded.

The portfolio has become increasingly more concentrated with four
assets from three obligors remaining. Currently, 54.8% of the
portfolio has a Fitch-derived rating below investment grade and
13.8% has a distressed rating in the 'CCC' category and below,
compared to 83.5% and 14.9%, respectively, at the last rating
action.

As of the July 28, 2017 payment date, the class J through N notes
are current on their interest payments.

This transaction was analyzed under the framework described in the
reports, 'Global Structured Finance Rating Criteria' and
'Structured Finance CDOs Surveillance Rating Criteria'. Due to
portfolio concentration, the transaction was not analyzed within a
cash flow model framework and the Portfolio Credit Model was not
run. A look-through analysis of the underlying obligors and
individual assets was performed to determine collateral coverage of
the remaining liabilities (see 'Structured Finance CDOs
Surveillance Rating Criteria': Obligor Concentrations). Based on
this analysis, the class J through M notes are covered by
collateral with credit characteristics at their assigned ratings.

For the class N and O notes, Fitch analyzed each class' sensitivity
to the default of the distressed assets ('CCCsf' and below). Given
the high probability of default of the underlying assets and the
expected limited recovery prospects upon default, the class N notes
have been affirmed at 'CCCsf', indicating that default is possible.
The class O notes have been affirmed at 'Dsf' due to incurred
principal losses (approximately $2.6 million since issuance).

RATING SENSITIVITIES

The Negative Outlooks of classes L and M reflect the potential for
negative credit migration. Negative migration and defaults beyond
those projected by the look-through analysis as well as increasing
concentration of weaker credit quality assets could lead to
downgrades. Upgrades are possible if recoveries are better than
expected and if there is additional positive credit migration of
the underlying portfolio.

USE OF THIRD-PARTY DUE DILIGENCE PURSUANT TO SEC RULE 17G-10

No third-party due diligence was provided or reviewed in relation
to this rating action.

Fitch has affirmed the following classes and revised Outlooks as
indicated:

-- $2,870,963 class J notes at 'Asf'; Outlook Stable;
-- $8,844,000 class K notes at 'BBsf'; Outlook Stable;
-- $8,040,000 class L notes at 'BBsf'; Outlook to Negative from
    Stable;
-- $8,844,000 class M notes at 'BBsf'; Outlook to Negative from
    Stable;
-- $6,432,000 class N notes at 'CCCsf';
-- $3,814,201 class O notes at 'Dsf'.

The class A-1 through H notes have all paid in full. Classes P-1
through P-6 are not rated. The rating on class X was previously
withdrawn.


MAD MORTGAGE 2017-330M: S&P Assigns BB(sf) Rating on Class E Certs
------------------------------------------------------------------
S&P Global Ratings assigned its ratings to MAD Mortgage Trust
2017-330M's $500.0 million commercial mortgage pass-through
certificates series 2017-330M.

The certificate issuance is a commercial mortgage-backed securities
transaction backed by a seven-year, fixed-rate commercial mortgage
loan totaling $500 million, secured by a first lien on the
borrower's fee interest in 330 Madison Avenue, a 39-story office
building totaling 849,372 sq. ft. located within Midtown
Manhattan's Grand Central office submarket.  

The ratings reflect S&P's view of the collateral's historical and
projected performance, the sponsor's and manager's experience, the
trustee-provided liquidity, the loan's terms, and the transaction's
structure.

  RATINGS ASSIGNED
  MAD Mortgage Trust 2017-330M

  Class       Rating                 Amount ($)
  A           AAA (sf)              267,045,000
  B           AA- (sf)               59,375,000
  C           A- (sf)                44,460,000
  D           BBB- (sf)              54,625,000
  E           BB (sf)                49,495,000
  RR(i)       NR                     25,000,000

  (i) Non-offered vertical risk retention class.
  NR--Not rated.


MADISON PARK XXIII: S&P Assigns BB-(sf) Rating on Class E Notes
---------------------------------------------------------------
S&P Global Ratings assigned its ratings to Madison Park Funding
XXIII Ltd./Madison Park Funding XXIII LLC's $735 million
floating-rate notes.

The note issuance is a collateralized loan obligation backed by
broadly syndicated speculative-grade senior secured term loans.

The ratings reflect:

-- The diversified collateral pool, which consists primarily of
broadly syndicated speculative-grade senior secured term loans that
are governed by collateral quality tests.

-- The credit enhancement provided through the subordination of
cash flows, excess spread, and overcollateralization.

-- The collateral manager's experienced team, which can affect the
performance of the rated notes through collateral selection,
ongoing portfolio management, and trading.

-- The transaction's legal structure, which is expected to be
bankruptcy remote.

  RATINGS ASSIGNED
  Madison Park Funding XXIII Ltd./Madison Park Funding XXIII LLC

  Class                 Rating          Amount
                                    (mil. $)
  A                     AAA (sf)        488.00
  B                     AA (sf)         108.00
  C (deferrable)        A (sf)           60.00
  D (deferrable)        BBB- (sf)        48.00
  E (deferrable)        BB- (sf)         31.00
  Subordinated notes    NR               80.00

  NR--Not rated.


MAGNETITE XIX: Moody's Assigns B3(sf) Rating to Class F Notes
-------------------------------------------------------------
Moody's Investors Service has assigned ratings to six classes of
notes issued by Magnetite XIX, Limited.

Moody's rating action is:

US$320,000,000 Class A Senior Secured Floating Rate Notes due 2030
(the "Class A Notes"), Definitive Rating Assigned Aaa (sf)

US$55,000,000 Class B Senior Secured Floating Rate Notes due 2030
(the "Class B Notes"), Definitive Rating Assigned Aa2 (sf)

US$28,750,000 Class C Deferrable Mezzanine Floating Rate Notes due
2030 (the "Class C Notes"), Definitive Rating Assigned A2 (sf)

US$30,000,000 Class D Deferrable Mezzanine Floating Rate Notes due
2030 (the "Class D Notes"), Definitive Rating Assigned Baa3 (sf)

US$26,250,000 Class E Deferrable Mezzanine Floating Rate Notes due
2030 (the "Class E Notes"), Definitive Rating Assigned Ba3 (sf)

US$7,500,000 Class F Deferrable Mezzanine Floating Rate Notes due
2030 (the "Class F Notes"), Definitive Rating Assigned B3 (sf)

The Class A Notes, the Class B Notes, the Class C Notes, the Class
D Notes, the Class E Notes, and the Class F Notes are referred to
herein as the "Rated Notes."

RATINGS RATIONALE

Moody's ratings of the Rated Notes address the expected losses
posed to noteholders. The ratings reflect the risks due to defaults
on the underlying portfolio of assets, the transaction's legal
structure, and the characteristics of the underlying assets.

Magnetite XIX is a managed cash flow CLO. The issued notes will be
collateralized primarily by broadly syndicated first lien senior
secured corporate loans. At least 90% of the portfolio must consist
of senior secured loans (excluding first lien last out loans), and
up to 10% of the portfolio may consist of collateral obligations
that are second lien loans and unsecured loans. The portfolio is
approximately 65% ramped as of the closing date.

BlackRock Financial Management, Inc. (the "Manager") will direct
the selection, acquisition and disposition of the assets on behalf
of the Issuer and may engage in trading activity, including
discretionary trading, during the transaction's five-year
reinvestment period. Thereafter, the Manager may reinvest
unscheduled principal payments and proceeds from sales of credit
risk assets, subject to certain restrictions.

In addition to the Rated Notes, the Issuer issued one class of
subordinated notes.

The transaction incorporates interest and par coverage tests which,
if triggered, divert interest and principal proceeds to pay down
the notes in order of seniority.

Moody's modeled the transaction using a cash flow model based on
the Binomial Expansion Technique, as described in Section 2.3.2.1
of the "Moody's Global Approach to Rating Collateralized Loan
Obligations" rating methodology published in October 2016.

For modeling purposes, Moody's used the following base-case
assumptions:

Par amount: $500,000,000

Diversity Score: 65

Weighted Average Rating Factor (WARF): 3018

Weighted Average Spread (WAS): 3.45%

Weighted Average Coupon (WAC): 7.50%

Weighted Average Recovery Rate (WARR): 48.0%

Weighted Average Life (WAL): 9 years.

Methodology Underlying the Rating Action:

The principal methodology used in these ratings was "Moody's Global
Approach to Rating Collateralized Loan Obligations" published in
October 2016.

Factors That Would Lead to Upgrade or Downgrade of the Ratings:

The performance of the Rated Notes is subject to uncertainty. The
performance of the Rated Notes is sensitive to the performance of
the underlying portfolio, which in turn depends on economic and
credit conditions that may change. The Manager's investment
decisions and management of the transaction will also affect the
performance of the Rated Notes.

Together with the set of modeling assumptions above, Moody's
conducted an additional sensitivity analysis, which was a component
in determining the ratings assigned to the Rated Notes. This
sensitivity analysis includes increased default probability
relative to the base case.

Below is a summary of the impact of an increase in default
probability (expressed in terms of WARF level) on the Rated Notes
(shown in terms of the number of notch difference versus the
current model output, whereby a negative difference corresponds to
higher expected losses), assuming that all other factors are held
equal:

Percentage Change in WARF -- increase of 15% (from 3018 to 3471)

Rating Impact in Rating Notches

Class A Notes: -1

Class B Notes: -2

Class C Notes: -2

Class D Notes: -1

Class E Notes: -1

Class F Notes: -1

Percentage Change in WARF -- increase of 30% (from 3018 to 3923)

Rating Impact in Rating Notches

Class A Notes: -1

Class B Notes: -4

Class C Notes: -4

Class D Notes: -2

Class E Notes: -1

Class F Notes: -4


ML-CFC COMMERCIAL 2006-3: Fitch Hikes Class C Debt Rating to Bsf
----------------------------------------------------------------
Fitch Ratings has upgraded two and affirmed 11 classes of ML-CFC
Commercial Mortgage Trust (MLCFC) commercial mortgage pass-through
certificates series 2006-3.

KEY RATING DRIVERS

Increased Credit Enhancement: The upgrades are the result of
increased credit enhancement(CE) due to collateral paydown and
better than expected recoveries on loans that paid off at or close
to their maturity dates. Over the past 12 months, 17 loans ($129
million) paid in full with zero losses, and five loans ($31
million) were liquidated with $19.6 million in incurred losses to
the trust.

As of the August 2017 distribution date, the pool's aggregate
principal balance has been reduced by 96% to $90.6 million from
$2.43 billion at issuance. One loan (8.8% of the pool balance) is
fully defeased. Interest shortfalls are currently affecting classes
D through Q.

Pool Concentration/Adverse Selection: The transaction is highly
concentrated with only 14 of the original 213 loans remaining. Of
the 14 remaining loans, two loans are on the servicer's watchlist
(34%). Of the non-defeased loans, 45% are retail properties and 33%
are office.

Due to the pool's concentrated nature, a sensitivity analysis was
performed which grouped and ranked the remaining loans by their
structural features, performance, estimated likelihood of
repayment, and estimated losses on the specially serviced assets.

Fitch Loans of Concern: Fitch has designated nine loans (92%) as
Fitch Loans of Concern (FLOCs) in this pool, including seven loans
(49%) in special servicing. The two non-specially serviced FLOCs
(43%) are secured by single-tenant office properties, which have
been flagged for near-term loan maturities, impending lease
expirations, and secondary market locations.

The largest specially serviced loan is secured by a 295,000 square
foot (sf) retail center located in Woonsocket, RI (24% of the pool
balance). The loan, which is currently the second largest in the
pool, transferred to special servicing in June 2013 due to monetary
default and became REO in April 2014. The property had begun to
experience cash flow issues after the lease expiration and vacancy
of an anchor tenant's lease in 2013 (Shaw's Supermarket, previously
18% of the net rentable area [NRA]).

The servicer has been working to stabilize leasing at the property,
successfully re-tenanting the vacated Shaw's space with two new
tenants: Planet Fitness (7%) and Trampoline Park (11.7%), both of
which took occupancy in first quarter 2017. However, Sears, which
leases 60,700sf (20.5% NRA), vacated the property earlier this year
but continues to remit rental payments under its lease obligation
which expires in August 2018. Excluding the dark Sears space, the
property is currently 61% occupied.

RATING SENSITIVITIES

The Rating Outlooks on classes B and C are considered Stable due to
sufficient credit enhancement. Although CE on these classes is
high, Fitch remains concerned with the increasing concentrations,
the near-term loan maturities, as well as performance volatility
and adverse selection of the remaining collateral in the pool. The
classes are subject to downward rating migration should realized
losses exceed Fitch's expectation, or should loans not refinance at
maturity as expected.

USE OF THIRD-PARTY DUE DILIGENCE PURSUANT TO SEC RULE 17G-10

No third-party due diligence was provided or reviewed in relation
to this rating action.

Fitch has upgraded the following ratings:
-- $10.5 million class B to 'BBBsf' from 'Bsf'; Outlook Stable;
-- S18.2 million class C to 'Bsf' from 'CCsf'; Stable Outlook
    assigned.

Fitch has affirmed the following classes:
-- $48.5 million class D at 'Csf'; RE 40%;
-- $13.3 million class E at 'Dsf'; RE 0%;
-- $0 million class F at 'Dsf'; RE 0%;
-- $0 million class G at 'Dsf'; RE 0%;
-- $0 million class H at 'Dsf'; RE 0%;
-- $0 class J at 'Dsf'; RE 0%;
-- $0 class K at 'Dsf'; RE 0%;
-- $0 class L at 'Dsf'; RE 0%;
-- $0 class M at 'Dsf'; RE 0%;
-- $0 class N at 'Dsf'; RE 0%;
-- $0 class P at 'Dsf'; RE 0%.

The class A-1, A-2 A-3, A-SB, A-4, A-1A, AM, and AJ certificates
have paid in full. Fitch does not rate the class Q certificate or
the interest-only class XR certificate. Fitch previously withdrew
the ratings on the interest-only class XP and XC certificates.


MORGAN STANLEY 2005-IQ9: Fitch Cuts Ratings on 4 Tranches to 'Csf'
------------------------------------------------------------------
Fitch Ratings has downgraded seven and affirmed seven classes of
Morgan Stanley Capital I Trust's commercial mortgage pass-through
certificates, series 2005-IQ9.  

KEY RATING DRIVERS

Concentration and Adverse Selection: As of the July 2017
distribution date, the pool's aggregate principal balance had been
paid down by 88.3% to $179.3 million from $1.531 billion at
issuance. Fitch modeled losses of 38.1% of the remaining pool;
expected losses on the original pool balance total 6.4%, including
$29.8 million (1.9% of the original pool balance) in realized
losses to date.

The pool is concentrated with 46 loans remaining and the top 10
loans accounting for 82.5%; the largest loan represents 63.2% of
the pool. There are five Fitch Loans of Concern (66.8% of the pool)
including the number one loan (Central Mall Portfolio, 63.2%) and
one specially serviced loan (London Towne Houses, 1.7%). Two loans
are defeased (2.4% of the pool). Remaining maturities are
concentrated in 2017 (5.1%), 2018 (67.6%), and 2019 (16.4%).
Interest shortfalls are currently affecting classes K through P.

Largest Loan of Concern: The Central Mall Portfolio is secured by
three malls (1,752,673 square feet [sf]) located in tertiary
markets (Lawton, OK, Texarkana, TX, and Port Arthur, TX); anchor
tenants in each mall include Sears, JC Penney, and Dillard's. The
loan had previously transferred to special servicing in October
2014 for imminent maturity default after the borrower expressed
concerns over its ability to refinance the portfolio, prior to its
December 2014 maturity date. While in special servicing the loan
maturity date was extended three times: first to June 2015, second
to June 2016 and third to June 2018, with an option to extend to
June 2019. Pursuant to the third modification agreement the
borrower made interest-only payments from June 2016 to February
2017, and resumed principal and interest payments in March 2017.
The loan returned to the master servicer in August 2016. As of
year-end (YE) 2016, reported portfolio occupancy and NOI DSCR was
90% and 1.36x, respectively, but as of May 2017 portfolio-wide
sales are on a declining trend. In addition, Sears has announced
store closures at two of the three properties.

RATING SENSITIVITIES

The rating of class A-J is expected to remain stable as credit
enhancement remains high and is expected to increase through loan
payoffs and amortization. Concerns remain with the largest loan,
the Central Mall Portfolio; Fitch applied stresses which indicated
that classes B and below are sensitive to fluctuations in loan
performance. Rating Outlooks on classes B through D are Negative as
they may be subject to future rating actions should realized
losses, particularly on the Central Mall Portfolio, be greater than
expected.

Fitch has downgraded the following classes as indicated:

-- $11.5 million class C to 'BBBsf' from 'Asf', Outlook Negative;
-- $26.8 million class D to 'BBsf' from 'BBBsf', Outlook
    Negative;
-- $15.3 million class E to 'CCCsf' from 'BBsf', RE 60%;
-- $15.3 million class F to 'Csf' from 'Bsf', RE 0%;
-- $11.5 million class G to 'Csf' from 'CCCsf', RE 0%;
-- $17.2 million class H to 'Csf' from 'CCCsf', RE 0%;
-- $5.7 million class J to 'Csf' from 'CCsf', RE 0%.

Fitch has affirmed the following classes and revised Outlooks as
indicated:

-- $76 million class A-J at 'AAAsf', Outlook Stable;
-- $32.6 million class B at 'Asf', Outlook to Negative from
    Stable;
-- $7.7 million class K at 'Csf', RE 0%;
-- $2.8 million class L at 'Dsf', RE 0%;
-- $0 class M at 'Dsf', RE 0%;
-- $0 class N at 'Dsf', RE 0%;
-- $0 class O at 'Dsf', RE 0%.

The class A-1, A-1A, A-2, A-3, A-4, A-AB and A-5 certificates have
paid in full. Fitch does not rate the class P certificates. Fitch
previously withdrew the ratings on the interest-only class X-1, X-2
and X-Y certificates.


MORGAN STANLEY 2007-TOP27: S&P Hikes Class B Certs Rating to B+
---------------------------------------------------------------
S&P Global Ratings raised its ratings on the class A-J and B
commercial mortgage pass-through certificates from Morgan Stanley
Capital I Trust 2007-TOP27, a U.S. commercial mortgage-backed
securities (CMBS) transaction. We also affirmed our ratings on
classes C and AW34 from the same transaction. S&P said, "At the
same time, we discontinued our ratings on classes A-M and A-MFL and
withdrew our rating on the class X interest-only (IO) certificates
from the same transaction.

"Our rating actions on the pooled principal- and interest-paying
certificates follow our analysis of the transaction, primarily
using our criteria for rating U.S. and Canadian CMBS transactions,
which included a review of the credit characteristics and
performance of the remaining assets in the pool, the transaction's
structure, and the liquidity available to the trust.

"The upgrades on the class A-J and B pooled certificates reflect
our expectation of the available credit enhancement for these
classes, which we believe is greater than our most recent estimate
of necessary credit enhancement for the rating levels. The upgrades
also follow our views regarding the collateral's current and future
performance, as well as the significantly lower trust balance.

"The affirmation on the class C pooled certificates reflects our
expectation that the available credit enhancement for the class
will be within our estimate of the necessary credit enhancement
required for the current rating, as well as our views regarding the
collateral's current and future performance.

"The affirmation on the class AW34 nonpooled certificates reflects
our analysis of the 330 West 34th Street loan. The $50.1 million
loan is secured by the leased fee interest in a 46,413-sq.-ft.
parcel of land beneath a 638,982-sq.-ft. office and retail building
located at 330 West 34th Street in Manhattan, and is the sole
source of cash flow for the class AW34 certificates. Our analysis
included assessing the ground lease loan in terms of the debt
service coverage (DSC), both during the term at the loan's
contracted interest and at maturity using a refinancing constant.
In addition, our rating also reflects a credit enhancement minimum
equal to 1% of the transaction or loan amount, per U.S. and
Canadian CMBS criteria, to address the potential for unexpected
trust expenses that may be incurred during the loan's life."

The discontinued ratings on classes A-M and A-MFL follow their full
repayment as noted in the July 13, 2017, trustee remittance
report.

S&P said, "Finally, based on our criteria for rating IO securities,
we withdrew our 'AAA (sf)' rating on the class X IO certificates
following the full repayment of all principal- and interest-paying
classes rated 'AA- (sf)' or higher."

TRANSACTION SUMMARY

As of the July 13, 2017, trustee remittance report, the collateral
pool balance was $293.0 million, which is 10.8% of the pool balance
at issuance, and the trust balance, including the nonpooled class,
was $343.1 million. The pool includes seven loans and one real
estate owned (REO) asset, down from 225 loans at issuance. Four of
these assets ($59.6 million, 20.4% of the pool balance) are with
the special servicer, two loans ($11.8 million, 4.0%) are on the
master servicer's watchlist, and no loans are defeased. The master
servicer, Wells Fargo Bank N.A., reported partial- or full-year
2016 financial information for 92.0% of the loans in the pool.

S&P said, "Excluding the four specially serviced assets, we
calculated a 0.69x S&P Global Ratings weighted average DSC and
109.3% S&P Global Ratings weighted average loan-to-value ratio
using a 7.28% S&P Global Ratings weighted average capitalization
rate on the remaining loans in the pool.

"To date, the pool transaction has experienced $135.9 million in
principal losses, or 5.0% of the original pool trust balance. We
expect losses to reach approximately 6.1% of the original pool
trust balance in the near term, based on losses incurred to date
and additional losses we expect upon the eventual resolution of the
four specially serviced assets."

CREDIT CONSIDERATIONS

As of the July 13, 2017, trustee remittance report, four assets in
the pool were with the special servicer, C-III Asset Management LLC
(C-III). Details of the two largest specially serviced assets are
as following:

The Residence - Inn Herndon loan ($26.5 million, 9.0%), the
second-largest asset in the pool, has a reported total exposure of
$26.6 million. The loan is secured by a 168-key extended-stay
lodging property in Herndon, Va. The loan was transferred to the
special servicer on May 24, 2017, due to imminent maturity default.
The loan matured on June 1, 2017. The loan, which has a reported
nonperforming matured balloon payment status, had a reported DSC
and occupancy for the three months ended March 31, 2017, of 0.67x
and 60.6%, respectively. C-III stated that it is exploring various
liquidation strategies. S&P expects a moderate loss upon the loan's
eventual resolution.

The Towne Square Mall REO asset ($23.6 million, 8.0%), the
third-largest asset in the pool, has a total reported exposure of
$26.8 million. The asset is a357,355-sq.-ft. retail property in
Owensboro, Ky. The loan was transferred to the special servicer on
Feb. 6, 2015, due to imminent default and the property became REO
on April 8, 2016. The reported DSC and occupancy as of year-end
2016 were 0.63x and 68.0%, respectively. An appraisal reduction
amount of $19.5 million is in effect against this asset. S&P
expects a significant loss upon its eventual resolution.

The two remaining assets with the special servicer each have
individual balances that represent less than 3.0% of the total pool
trust balance. We estimated losses for the four specially serviced
assets, arriving at a weighted average loss severity of 51.5%.

With respect to the specially serviced assets noted above, a
minimal loss is less than 25%, a moderate loss is 26%-59%, and a
significant loss is 60% or greater.

RATINGS LIST

  Morgan Stanley Capital I Trust 2007-TOP27
  Commercial mortgage pass-through certificates series 2007-TOP27
                                        Rating                     
          
  Class           Identifier          To              From         
    
  A-M             61754JAG3           NR              AA+ (sf)     
    
  A-MFL           61754JBA5           NR              AA+ (sf)     
    
  A-J             61754JAH1           A (sf)          BBB- (sf)    
    
  B               61754JAK4           B+ (sf)         B- (sf)      
    
  C               61754JAL2           B- (sf)         B- (sf)      
    
  X               61754JAJ7           NR              AAA (sf)     
    
  AW34            61754JAZ1           BB+ (sf)        BB+ (sf)     
    
  
  NR--Not rated.


MOUNTAIN VIEW 2017-1: Moody's Assigns Ba3 Rating to Cl. E Notes
---------------------------------------------------------------
Moody's Investors Service has assigned ratings to five classes of
notes issued by Mountain View CLO 2017-1 Ltd.

Moody's rating action is:

US$320,000,000 Class A Senior Secured Floating Rate Notes Due 2029
(the "Class A Notes"), Assigned Aaa (sf)

US$60,000,000 Class B Senior Secured Floating Rate Notes Due 2029
(the "Class B Notes"), Assigned Aa2 (sf)

US$30,000,000 Class C Mezzanine Secured Deferrable Floating Rate
Notes Due 2029 (the "Class C Notes"), Assigned A2 (sf)

US$25,000,000 Class D Mezzanine Secured Deferrable Floating Rate
Notes Due 2029 (the "Class D Notes"), Assigned Baa3 (sf)

US$25,000,000 Class E Junior Secured Deferrable Floating Rate Notes
Due 2029 (the "Class E Notes"), Assigned Ba3 (sf)

The Class A Notes, the Class B Notes, the Class C Notes, the Class
D Notes, and the Class E Notes are referred to herein as the "Rated
Notes."

RATINGS RATIONALE

Moody's ratings of the Rated Notes address the expected losses
posed to noteholders. The ratings reflect the risks due to defaults
on the underlying portfolio of assets, the transaction's legal
structure, and the characteristics of the underlying assets.

Mountain View CLO 2017-1 is a managed cash flow CLO. The issued
notes will be collateralized primarily by broadly syndicated first
lien senior secured corporate loans. At least 92.5% of the
portfolio must consist of senior secured loans and eligible
investments, and up to 7.5% of the portfolio may consist of
second-lien loans, senior unsecured loans, and first-lien last out
loans. The portfolio is approximately 80% ramped as of the closing
date.

Seix CLO Management LLC (the "Manager") will direct the selection,
acquisition and disposition of the assets on behalf of the Issuer
and may engage in trading activity, including discretionary
trading, during the transaction's four year reinvestment period.
Thereafter, the Manager may reinvest unscheduled principal payments
and proceeds from sales of credit risk assets, subject to certain
restrictions.

In addition to the Rated Notes, the Issuer issued one class of
subordinated notes.

The transaction incorporates interest and par coverage tests which,
if triggered, divert interest and principal proceeds to pay down
the notes in order of seniority.

Moody's modeled the transaction using a cash flow model based on
the Binomial Expansion Technique, as described in Section 2.3.2.1
of the "Moody's Global Approach to Rating Collateralized Loan
Obligations" rating methodology published in October 2016.

For modeling purposes, Moody's used the following base-case
assumptions:

Par amount: $500,000,000

Diversity Score: 65

Weighted Average Rating Factor (WARF): 2800

Weighted Average Spread (WAS): 3.70%

Weighted Average Coupon (WAC): 7.50%

Weighted Average Recovery Rate (WARR): 47.0%

Weighted Average Life (WAL): 8.25 years.

Methodology Underlying the Rating Action:

The principal methodology used in these ratings was "Moody's Global
Approach to Rating Collateralized Loan Obligations" published in
October 2016.

Factors That Would Lead to an Upgrade or Downgrade of the Ratings:

The performance of the Rated Notes is subject to uncertainty. The
performance of the Rated Notes is sensitive to the performance of
the underlying portfolio, which in turn depends on economic and
credit conditions that may change. The Manager's investment
decisions and management of the transaction will also affect the
performance of the Rated Notes.

Together with the set of modeling assumptions above, Moody's
conducted an additional sensitivity analysis, which was a component
in determining the ratings assigned to the Rated Notes. This
sensitivity analysis includes increased default probability
relative to the base case.

Below is a summary of the impact of an increase in default
probability (expressed in terms of WARF level) on the Rated Notes
(shown in terms of the number of notch difference versus the
current model output, whereby a negative difference corresponds to
higher expected losses), assuming that all other factors are held
equal:

Percentage Change in WARF -- increase of 15% (from 2800 to 3220)

Rating Impact in Rating Notches

Class A Notes: 0

Class B Notes: -2

Class C Notes: -2

Class D Notes: -1

Class E Notes: 0

Percentage Change in WARF -- increase of 30% (from 2800 to 3640)

Rating Impact in Rating Notches

Class A Notes: -1

Class B Notes: -3

Class C Notes: -4

Class D Notes: -2

Class E Notes: -1


NASSAU LTD 2017-I: S&P Assigns BB- Rating on Class D Notes
----------------------------------------------------------
S&P Global Ratings assigned its ratings to Nassau 2017-I
Ltd./Nassau 2017-I LLC's $391.00 million floating-rate notes.

The note issuance is a collateralized loan obligation backed
primarily by broadly syndicated speculative-grade senior secured
term loans that are governed by collateral quality tests.

The ratings reflect: The diversified collateral pool, which
consists primarily of broadly syndicated speculative-grade senior
secured term loans that are governed by collateral quality tests.
The credit enhancement provided through the subordination of cash
flows, excess spread, and overcollateralization.

The collateral manager's experienced team, which can affect the
performance of the rated notes through collateral selection,
ongoing portfolio management, and trading. The transaction's legal
structure, which is expected to be bankruptcy remote.

  RATINGS ASSIGNED
  Nassau 2017-1 Ltd./Nassau 2017-I LLC

  Class                 Rating    Amount (mil. $)
  A-1a                  AAA (sf)           231.30
  A-1b                  AAA (sf)            30.00
  A-2                   AA (sf)             59.50
  B                     A (sf)              29.80
  C                     BBB- (sf)           21.20
  D                     BB- (sf)            19.20
  Subordinated notes    NR                  47.00

NR--Not rated.


NOMURA CRE 2007-2: Fitch Affirms 'CCCsf' Rating on Cl. B Notes
--------------------------------------------------------------
Fitch Ratings has affirmed all classes of Nomura CRE CDO 2007-2,
Ltd. /LLC (Nomura 2007-2).  

KEY RATING DRIVERS

The affirmations reflect the CDO's continued delevering relative to
the high concentration with only 10 assets remaining. Since the
last rating action, principal paydowns totaled $58.4 million
resulting in the full payoff of class A-2 and significant paydown
of class B ($33 million). Three loans with $16 million in modeled
losses paid off in full; losses on the one loan collateralized by a
junior position were in line with Fitch expectations.

The transaction is very concentrated with only 10 assets remaining.
Five loans ($32.8 million) are viewed as unlikely to pay in full
due to their defaulted status, significant near-term lease
expirations or no status update regarding their upcoming loan
maturity. Should the other five remaining assets ($26.8 million)
pay off as expected, proceeds are insufficient to repay class B's
current balance of $37.6 million. Defaulted assets accounted for
approximately 41% of interest collections per the July 2017 trustee
report.

Defaulted assets increased to 43.8% compared to 42.3% at last
review due to the pool's increased concentration. Fitch loans of
concern (FLOC) decreased to 7.7% compared to 37.7% at last review,
primarily due to the sale of the Ilikai Waikiki Hotel A-2 and
Sheraton Hotel loans which represented 27.6% of the pool;
Chesterfield subsequently defaulted and another loan is no longer a
FLOC. The credit quality of the rated securities remained flat
since last review at 'CC/C'.

As of the July 2017 trustee report, the CDO is failing all
overcollateralization tests. The transaction is
under-collateralized in excess of $250 million. Classes D and below
are not receiving any interest payments. Interest is being
capitalized on these classes. Class C and below have negative
credit enhancement (CE).

A deterministic analysis was performed due to the pool
concentration; a 100% probability of default was assumed and a
look-through analysis was performed on the remaining assets with
respect to principal coverage and interest coverage. This
transaction was analyzed according to the 'Surveillance Criteria
for U.S. CREL CDOs'. Cash flow modeling was not performed, as it
would not provide analytical value given that the remaining assets
were modeled at 100% default probability in all stresses.

RATING SENSITIVITIES

Upgrades to class B are unlikely due to the asset quality of the
remaining collateral. Proceeds from non-defaulted assets total
$33.5 million, which is less than class B's current balance of
$37.6 million and approximately 41% of interest proceeds are
generated from defaulted assets. Class C and below have negative CE
and are subject to further downgrade to 'Dsf' should the classes
default at legal maturity or earlier.

USE OF THIRD-PARTY DUE DILIGENCE PURSUANT TO SEC RULE 17G-10

No third-party due diligence was provided or reviewed in relation
to this rating action.

Fitch has affirmed the following ratings:
-- $37.6 million class B affirm at 'CCCsf'; RE 70%;
-- $26.6 million class C affirm at 'Csf'; RE 0%;
-- $28.9 million class D affirm at 'Csf'; RE 0%;
-- $21.9 million class E affirm at 'Csf'; RE 0%;
-- $23.4 million class F affirm at 'Csf'; RE 0%;
-- $27.4 million class G affirm at 'Csf'; RE 0%;
-- $22.5 million class H affirm at 'Csf'; RE 0%;
-- $28.5 million class J affirm at 'Csf'; RE 0%;
-- $29.8 million class K affirm at 'Csf'; RE 0%;
-- $11.9 million Class L affirm at 'Csf'; RE 0%;
-- $8.0 million Class M affirm at 'Csf'; RE 0%;
-- $12.3 million Class N affirm at 'Csf'; RE 0%;
-- $21.7 million Class O affirm at 'Csf'; RE 0%.

Fitch does not rate the $48.5 million preferred shares. Classes
A-1, AR and A-2 were paid in full.


OCP CLO 2016-11: S&P Assigns BB-(sf) Rating on Class D-R Notes
--------------------------------------------------------------
S&P Global Ratings assigned its ratings to the class A-1L-R,
A-1a-R, A-1b-R, A-2-R, B-R, C-R, and D-R replacement notes from OCP
CLO 2016-11 Ltd., a collateralized loan obligation (CLO) originally
issued in 2016 that is managed by Onex Credit Partners LLC. S&P
said, "We withdrew our ratings on the original class A-1L, A-1a,
A-1b, A-2a, A-2b, B, C, D-1, and D-2 notes following payment in
full on the Aug. 10, 2017, refinancing date."

On the Aug. 10, 2017, refinancing date, the proceeds from the class
A-1L-R, A-1a-R, A-1b-R, A-2-R, B-R, C-R, and D-R replacement note
issuances were used to redeem the original class A-1L, A-1a, A-1b,
A-2a, A-2b, B, C, D-1, and D-2 notes as outlined in the transaction
document provisions. S&P said, "Therefore, we withdrew our ratings
on the refinanced notes in line with their full redemption, and we
are assigning ratings to the replacement classes."

The replacement notes are being issued via an amended indenture,
which, in addition to outlining the terms of the replacement notes,
will also extend the reinvestment period, non-call period, and
final maturity date.

S&P said, "Our review of this transaction included a cash flow
analysis, based on the portfolio and transaction as reflected in
the trustee report, to estimate future performance. In line with
our criteria, our cash flow scenarios applied forward-looking
assumptions on the expected timing and pattern of defaults, and
recoveries upon default, under various interest rate and
macroeconomic scenarios. In addition, our analysis considered the
transaction's ability to pay timely interest or ultimate principal,
or both, to each of the rated tranches.

"The assigned ratings reflect our opinion that the credit support
available is commensurate with the associated rating levels.

"We will continue to review whether, in our view, the ratings
assigned to the notes remain consistent with the credit enhancement
available to support them, and we will take rating actions as we
deem necessary."

RATINGS ASSIGNED

  OCP CLO 2016-11 Ltd.
  Replacement class         Rating      Amount (mil. $)
  A-1L-R(i)                 AAA (sf)             207.00
  A-1a-R                    AAA (sf)              95.50
  A-1b-R(i)                 AAA (sf)               0.00
  A-2-R                     AA (sf)               75.50
  B-R                       A (sf)                32.00
  C-R                       BBB (sf)              30.00
  D-R                       BB- (sf)              17.30

(i)Includes the $207 million aggregate outstanding amount of class
A-1L-R loans that may be converted into class A-1b-R notes if a
conversion option has been exercised.

RATINGS WITHDRAWN

  OCP CLO 2016-11 Ltd.
                    Rating
  Class       To             From
  A-1L        NR             AAA (sf)
  A-1a        NR             AAA (sf)
  A-1b        NR             AAA (sf)
  A-2a        NR             AA (sf)
  A-2b        NR             AA (sf)
  B           NR             A (sf)
  C           NR             BBB (sf)
  D-1         NR             BB- (sf)
  D-2         NR             BB- (sf)

  NR--Not rated.


OFSI BSL VIII: S&P Assigns BB(sf) Rating on Class E Notes
---------------------------------------------------------
S&P Global Ratings assigned its ratings to OFSI BSL VIII Ltd./OFSI
BSL VIII LLC's $371 million floating-rate notes.

The note issuance is a collateralized loan obligation transaction
backed by broadly syndicated speculative-grade senior secured term
loans that are governed by collateral quality tests.

The ratings reflect:

-- The diversified collateral pool, which consists primarily of
broadly syndicated speculative-grade senior secured term loans that
are governed by collateral quality tests.

-- The credit enhancement provided through the subordination of
cash flows, excess spread, and overcollateralization.

-- The collateral manager's experienced team, which can affect the
performance of the rated notes through collateral selection,
ongoing portfolio management, and trading.

-- The transaction's legal structure, which is expected to be
bankruptcy remote.

  RATINGS ASSIGNED
  OFSI BSL VIII Ltd./OFSI BSL VIII LLC
  Class                   Rating          Amount
                                        (mil. $)
  X                       AAA (sf)          3.00
  A                       AAA (sf)        252.00
  B                       AA (sf)          56.00
  C (deferrable)          A (sf)           20.00
  D (deferrable)          BBB (sf)         20.00
  E (deferrable)          BB (sf)          20.00
  Subordinate notes
  (deferrable)            NR               37.00

  NR--Not rated.


PRESTIGE AUTO 2017-1: S&P Gives Prelim BB Rating on Class E Notes
-----------------------------------------------------------------
S&P Global Ratings assigned its preliminary ratings to Prestige
Auto Receivables Trust 2017-1's $335.2 million automobile
receivables-backed notes series 2017-1.

The note issuance is an asset-backed securities transaction backed
by subprime auto loan receivables.

The preliminary ratings are based on information as of Aug. 10,
2017. Subsequent information may result in the assignment of final
ratings that differ from the preliminary ratings.

The preliminary ratings reflect:

-- The availability of approximately 47.8%, 41.3%, 32.1%, 25.5%,
and 21.8% of credit support for the class A, B, C, D, and E notes,
respectively (based on stressed cash flow scenarios, including
excess spread), which provides coverage of more than 3.50x, 3.00x,
2.30x, 1.75x, and 1.50x our 13.00%-13.75% expected cumulative net
loss range for the class A, B, C, D, and E notes, respectively.
These credit support levels are commensurate with the assigned
preliminary 'AAA (sf)', 'AA (sf)', 'A (sf)', 'BBB (sf)', and 'BB
(sf)' ratings on the class A, B, C, D, and E notes.

-- S&P's expectation that under a moderate, or 'BBB', loss
scenario, all else equal, its preliminary ratings on the class A,
B, and C notes would not decline by more than one rating category,
and its preliminary ratings on the class D and E notes would not
decline by more than two rating categories (all else being equal).
These potential rating movements are consistent with S&P's credit
stability criteria, which outline the outer bound of credit
deterioration equal to a one-category downgrade within the first
year for 'AAA' and 'AA' rated securities, a two-category downgrade
within the first year for 'A' through 'BB' rated securities, and
within three rating categories in a three-year horizon for 'AAA'
through 'BBB' rated securities under moderate stress conditions
(see "Methodology: Credit Stability Criteria," published May 3,
2010).

-- The credit enhancement in the form of subordination,
overcollateralization, a reserve account, and excess spread.

-- The timely interest and ultimate principal payments made under
the stressed cash flow modeling scenarios, which are consistent
with the assigned preliminary ratings.

-- The collateral characteristics of the securitized pool of
subprime auto loans.

-- Prestige Financial Services Inc.'s securitization performance
history since 2001.

-- The transaction's payment and legal structures.

PRELIMINARY RATINGS ASSIGNED

Prestige Auto Receivables Trust 2017-1

  Class       Rating       Type          Interest      Amount
                                         rate      (mil. $)(i)
  A-1         A-1+ (sf)    Senior        Fixed         45.700
  A-2         AAA (sf)     Senior        Fixed        117.000
  A-3         AAA (sf)     Senior        Fixed         50.260
  B           AA (sf)      Subordinate   Fixed         35.850
  C           A (sf)       Subordinate   Fixed         44.100
  D           BBB (sf)     Subordinate   Fixed         31.020
  E           BB (sf)      Subordinate   Fixed         11.293

(i)The actual size of these tranches will be determined on the
pricing date.


PROTECTIVE FINANCE 2007-PL: Moody's Affirms B2 Rating on 2 Ratings
------------------------------------------------------------------
Moody's Investors Service has affirmed the ratings on eighteen
classes in Protective Finance Corporation REMIC, Commercial
Mortgage Pass-Through Certificates, Series 2007-PL:

Cl. A-M, Affirmed Aaa (sf); previously on Aug 17, 2016 Affirmed Aaa
(sf)

Cl. A-J, Affirmed Aaa (sf); previously on Aug 17, 2016 Affirmed Aaa
(sf)

Cl. B, Affirmed Aaa (sf); previously on Aug 17, 2016 Affirmed Aaa
(sf)

Cl. C, Affirmed Aaa (sf); previously on Aug 17, 2016 Affirmed Aaa
(sf)

Cl. D, Affirmed Aaa (sf); previously on Aug 17, 2016 Upgraded to
Aaa (sf)

Cl. E, Affirmed Aa1 (sf); previously on Aug 17, 2016 Upgraded to
Aa1 (sf)

Cl. F, Affirmed Aa2 (sf); previously on Aug 17, 2016 Upgraded to
Aa2 (sf)

Cl. G, Affirmed Aa3 (sf); previously on Aug 17, 2016 Upgraded to
Aa3 (sf)

Cl. H, Affirmed A3 (sf); previously on Aug 17, 2016 Upgraded to A3
(sf)

Cl. J, Affirmed Baa2 (sf); previously on Aug 17, 2016 Upgraded to
Baa2 (sf)

Cl. K, Affirmed Ba1 (sf); previously on Aug 17, 2016 Upgraded to
Ba1 (sf)

Cl. L, Affirmed Ba2 (sf); previously on Aug 17, 2016 Upgraded to
Ba2 (sf)

Cl. M, Affirmed B1 (sf); previously on Aug 17, 2016 Affirmed B1
(sf)

Cl. N, Affirmed B2 (sf); previously on Aug 17, 2016 Affirmed B2
(sf)

Cl. O, Affirmed B3 (sf); previously on Aug 17, 2016 Affirmed B3
(sf)

Cl. P, Affirmed Caa1 (sf); previously on Aug 17, 2016 Affirmed Caa1
(sf)

Cl. Q, Affirmed Caa3 (sf); previously on Aug 17, 2016 Affirmed Caa3
(sf)

Cl. IO, Affirmed B2 (sf); previously on Jun 9, 2017 Downgraded to
B2 (sf)

RATINGS RATIONALE

The ratings on seventeen P&I classes were affirmed because the
transaction's key metrics, including Moody's loan-to-value (LTV)
ratio, Moody's stressed debt service coverage ratio (DSCR) and the
transaction's Herfindahl Index (Herf), are within acceptable
ranges.

The rating on the IO Class was affirmed based on the credit quality
of its referenced classes.

Moody's rating action reflects a base expected loss of 2.0% of the
current balance compared to 2.3% at last review. The combined base
plus realized loss now totals 1.0% compared to 1.2% at last review.
Moody's provides a current list of base expected losses for conduit
and fusion CMBS transactions on moodys.com at
http://www.moodys.com/viewresearchdoc.aspx?docid=PBS_SF215255.

FACTORS THAT WOULD LEAD TO AN UPGRADE OR DOWNGRADE OF THE RATINGS:

The performance expectations for a given variable indicate Moody's
forward-looking view of the likely range of performance over the
medium term. Performance that falls outside the given range can
indicate that the collateral's credit quality is stronger or weaker
than Moody's had previously expected.

Factors that could lead to an upgrade of the ratings include a
significant amount of loan paydowns or amortization, an increase in
the pool's share of defeasance or an improvement in pool
performance.

Factors that could lead to a downgrade of the ratings include a
decline in the performance of the pool, loan concentration, an
increase in realized and expected losses from specially serviced
and troubled loans or interest shortfalls.

METHODOLOGY UNDERLYING THE RATING ACTION

The principal methodology used in these ratings was "Approach to
Rating US and Canadian Conduit/Fusion CMBS" published in July 2017.


Additionally, the methodology used in rating Cl. IO was "Moody's
Approach to Rating Structured Finance Interest-Only (IO)
Securities" published in June 2017.

DEAL PERFORMANCE

As of the July 14, 2017 distribution date, the transaction's
aggregate certificate balance has decreased by 76% to $248.9
million from $1.02 billion at securitization. The certificates are
collateralized by 87 mortgage loans ranging in size from less than
1% to 8% of the pool, with the top ten loans constituting 43% of
the pool. Of the remaining loans, 97% fully amortize throughout
their loan term. The pool does not contain any defeased loans or
loans with a structured credit assessment.

Moody's uses a variation of Herf to measure the diversity of loan
sizes, where a higher number represents greater diversity. Loan
concentration has an important bearing on potential rating
volatility, including the risk of multiple notch downgrades under
adverse circumstances. The credit neutral Herf score is 40. The
pool has a Herf of 35 compared to 41 at last review.

There is one loan on the master servicer's watchlist constituting
0.3% of the pool. There are no loans in special servicing. Two
loans have been liquidated from the pool, resulting in an aggregate
realized loss of $5.3 million (for an average loss severity of
67%).

Moody's has assumed a high default probability for two poorly
performing loans, constituting 0.9% of the pool, and has estimated
an aggregate loss of $318,464 (a 15% expected loss based on a 50%
probability default) from these troubled loans.

Moody's received full year 2015 and 2016 operating results for 91%
of the pool. Moody's weighted average conduit LTV is 52%, compared
to 56% at Moody's last review. Moody's conduit component excludes
loans with structured credit assessments, defeased and CTL loans,
and specially serviced and troubled loans. Moody's net cash flow
(NCF) reflects a weighted average haircut of 12% to the most
recently available net operating income (NOI). Moody's value
reflects a weighted average capitalization rate of 9.5%.

Moody's actual and stressed conduit DSCRs are 1.41X and 2.53X,
respectively, compared to 1.38X and 2.30X at the last review.
Moody's actual DSCR is based on Moody's NCF and the loan's actual
debt service. Moody's stressed DSCR is based on Moody's NCF and a
9.25% stress rate the agency applied to the loan balance.

The top three conduit loans represent 20% of the pool balance. The
largest loan is the Beckley Portfolio Loan ($19.3 million -- 7.7%
of the pool), which are secured by two cross-collateralized
shopping centers located adjacent from one another in Beckley, West
Virginia. The shopping centers are anchored by Lowe's and Kohl's.
The fully-amortizing loans have amortized over 41% since
securitization. Moody's LTV and stressed DSCR are 42% and 2.46X,
respectively.

The second largest conduit loan is the Conway Commons Loan ($16.7
million -- 6.7% of the pool), which is secured by an anchored
retail center located in Conway, Arkansas. Overall property
performance has been stable for the past three years. The three
largest tenants total 46% of the NRA and are leased to Kohl's,
Belk, and TJ Maxx. The fully-amortizing loan has amortized over 25%
since securitization. Moody's LTV and stressed DSCR are 35% and
2.68X, respectively.

The third largest conduit loan is the Belle Isle Apartments Loan
($14.4 million -- 5.0% of the pool), which is secured by a 336-unit
multifamily located in Orlando, Florida, eight miles southeast of
the Orlando CBD and nine miles northwest of the Orlando
International Airport. The property was 100% leased as of year-end
2016, compared to 98% in July 2015. The loan has amortized 19%
since securitization. Moody's LTV and stressed DSCR are 73% and
1.30X, respectively.


RAIT PREFERRED II: Moody's Hikes Rating on 2 Tranches to B3
-----------------------------------------------------------
Moody's Investors Service has upgraded and affirmed the ratings on
the following notes issued by RAIT Preferred Funding II, Ltd.

Moody's rating action is:

Cl. B, Upgraded to Baa3 (sf); previously on Sep 7, 2016 Upgraded to
Ba2 (sf)

Cl. C, Upgraded to B2 (sf); previously on Sep 7, 2016 Affirmed Caa1
(sf)

Cl. D, Upgraded to B3 (sf); previously on Sep 7, 2016 Affirmed Caa2
(sf)

Cl. E, Upgraded to B3 (sf); previously on Sep 7, 2016 Affirmed Caa2
(sf)

Cl. F, Affirmed Caa3 (sf); previously on Sep 7, 2016 Affirmed Caa3
(sf)

Cl. G, Affirmed Caa3 (sf); previously on Sep 7, 2016 Affirmed Caa3
(sf)

Cl. H, Affirmed Caa3 (sf); previously on Sep 7, 2016 Affirmed Caa3
(sf)

Cl. J, Affirmed Caa3 (sf); previously on Sep 7, 2016 Affirmed Caa3
(sf)

The Class B Notes, Class C Notes, Class D Notes, Class E Notes,
Class F Notes, Class G Notes, Class H Notes, and Class J Notes, are
referred to herein as the "Rated Notes."

RATINGS RATIONALE

Moody's has upgraded ratings on four classes of notes because of
higher than anticipated recoveries on high credit risk collateral
resulting in higher subordination levels, combined with improved
credit quality of the remaining pool as evidenced by WARF and WARR.
Moody's has affirmed the ratings on four classes of notes because
the key transaction metrics are commensurate with the existing
ratings. The rating action is the result of Moody's on-going
surveillance of commercial real estate collateralized debt
obligation (CRE CDO CLO) transactions.

RAIT Preferred Funding II. Ltd. is a static cash transaction wholly
backed by a portfolio of i) whole loans (90.6% of the deal
balance), ii) mezzanine interests and preferred equity
participations (2.4%), and iii) B-notes (7.0%). As of the July 10,
2017 trustee report, the aggregate note balance of the transaction,
including preferred shares, has decreased to $297.9 million from
$833 million at issuance, with the pay-down directed to the senior
most outstanding class of notes. Previously, there were partial
cancellations to the Class D, E, F and G notes. In general, holding
all key parameters static, the junior note cancellations results in
slightly higher expected losses and longer weighted average lives
on the senior notes, while producing slightly lower expected losses
on the mezzanine and junior notes. However, this does not cause, in
and of itself, a downgrade or upgrade of any outstanding classes of
notes.

The pool contains one asset totaling $18.5 million (7.0% of the
collateral pool balance) that is listed as defaulted as of the
trustee's July 10, 2017 report. This asset (100.0% of the defaulted
balance) is a B-note. While there have been limited realized losses
on the underlying collateral to date, Moody's does expect
moderate/high losses to occur on the defaulted asset.

Moody's has identified the following as key indicators of the
expected loss in CRE CLO transactions: the weighted average rating
factor (WARF), the weighted average life (WAL), the weighted
average recovery rate (WARR), and Moody's asset correlation (MAC).
Moody's typically models these as actual parameters for static
deals and as covenants for managed deals.

WARF is a primary measure of the credit quality of a CRE CLO pool.
Moody's has updated its assessments for the collateral it does not
rate. The rating agency modeled a bottom-dollar WARF (excluding
defaulted assets) of 8461, compared to 8814 at last review. The
current distribution of Moody's rated collateral and assessments
for non-Moody's rated collateral is: B1-B3 and 0.0% compared to
1.2% at last review, Caa1-Ca/C and 100.0% compared to 98.8% at last
review.

Moody's modeled a WAL of 2.7 years, compared to 2.4 years at last
review. The WAL is based on assumptions about extensions on the
underlying loan collateral.

Moody's modeled a fixed WARR of 51.8%, compared to 50.2% at last
review.

Moody's modeled a MAC of 100%, the same as at last review.

Methodology Underlying the Rating Action:

The principal methodology used in these ratings was "Moody's
Approach to Rating SF CDOs" published in June 2017.

Factors That Would Lead to Upgrade or Downgrade of the Ratings:

The performance of the notes is subject to uncertainty, because it
is sensitive to the performance of the underlying portfolio, which
in turn depends on economic and credit conditions that are subject
to change. The servicing decisions of the master and special
servicer and surveillance by the operating advisor with respect to
the collateral interests and oversight of the transaction will also
affect the performance of the Rated Notes.

Moody's Parameter Sensitivities: Changes to any one or more of the
key parameters could have rating implications for some of the Rated
Notes, although a change in one key parameter assumption could be
offset by a change in one or more of the other key parameter
assumptions. The Rated Notes are particularly sensitive to changes
in the ratings of the underlying collateral and assessments.
Holding all other parameters constant, increasing the recovery rate
of 100% of the collateral pool by 10% would result in an average
modeled rating movement on the Rated Notes of zero to thirteen
notches upward (e.g., one notch up implies a ratings movement of
Baa3 to Baa2). Reducing the recovery rate of 100% of the collateral
pool by 10% would result in an average modeled rating movement on
the Rated Notes of zero to thirteen notches downward (e.g., one
notch down implies a ratings movement of Baa3 to Ba1).

The primary sources of uncertainty in Moody's assumptions are the
extent of growth in the current macroeconomic environment.
Commercial real estate property values continue to improve
modestly, along with a rise in investment activity and
stabilization in core property type performance. Limited new
construction and moderate job growth have aided this improvement.


REALT 2007-2: S&P Affirms B+(sf) Rating on 2 Tranches
-----------------------------------------------------
S&P Global Ratings raised its ratings on the class D-1 and D-2
commercial mortgage pass-through certificates from Real Estate
Asset Liquidity Trust's (REALT)series 2007-2, a Canadian commercial
mortgage-backed securities (CMBS) transaction. In addition, S&P
affirmed its ratings on 10 other classes and discontinued our
ratings on three other classes from the same transaction.

S&P said, "Our rating actions on the principal- and interest-paying
certificates follow our analysis of the transaction, primarily
using our criteria for rating U.S. and Canadian CMBS transactions,
which included a review of the credit characteristics and
performance of the remaining loans in the pool, the transaction's
structure, and the liquidity available to the trust.

"We raised our ratings on classes D-1 and D-2 to reflect our
expectation of the available credit enhancement for these classes,
which we believe is greater than our most recent estimate of
necessary credit enhancement for the respective rating levels. The
upgrades also follow our views regarding the collateral's current
and future performance and significantly lower trust balance.

"We affirmed our ratings on classes E-1, E-2, F, G, H, J, K, and L
to reflect our expectation that the available credit enhancement
for the class will be within our estimate of the necessary credit
enhancement required for the current ratings and our views
regarding the collateral's current and future performance. In
addition, our analysis also considered that these classes
experienced interest shortfalls as depicted in the July 2017
trustee remittance report due to a one-time expense related to a
liquidated specially serviced loan. Based on our analysis, we
expect the accumulated interest shortfalls on these classes to be
repaid in full in the next few months.

"We affirmed our 'AAA (sf)' ratings on the class XC-1 and XC-2
interest-only (IO) certificates based on our criteria for rating IO
securities.

"Lastly, we discontinued our ratings on classes A-J, B, and C
following their full repayment as noted in the July 12, 2017,
trustee remittance report."

TRANSACTION SUMMARY

As of the July 12, 2017, trustee remittance report, the collateral
pool balance was C$17.2 million, which is 4.6% of the pool balance
at issuance. The pool currently includes five loans. There are no
defeased or specially serviced loans reported currently in the
deal, but four loans (C$7.2 million, 42.2%) are on the master
servicer's watchlist due their maturities. The four loans matured
in May or June 2017 and it is S&P's understanding from the master
servicer that the borrowers for these loans obtained or are in the
process of obtaining refinancing proceeds. The master servicer,
First National Financial L.P., reported financial information for
100.0% of the remaining loans in the pool, of which 78.2% was
partial-year or year-end 2016 data, and the remainder was year-end
2015 data.

S&P calculated a 1.27x S&P Global Ratings weighted average debt
service coverage and 64.4% S&P Global Ratings weighted average
loan-to-value ratio using an 8.12% S&P Global Ratings weighted
average capitalization rate. To date, the transaction has
experienced C$918,703 in principal losses, or 0.2% of the original
pool trust balance.

RATINGS LIST

  Real Estate Asset Liquidity Trust
  Commercial mortgage pass-through certificates series 2007-2

                                    Rating            Rating
  Class         Identifier          To                From         
    
  A-J           75585RJS5           NR                AA (sf)      
    
  XC-1          75585RJU0           AAA (sf)          AAA (sf)     
    
  B             75585RJV8           NR                A+ (sf)      
    
  C             75585RJW6           NR                BBB+ (sf)    
    
  D-1           75585RJX4           AAA (sf)          BB+ (sf)     
    
  E-1           75585RJY2           BB (sf)           BB (sf)      
    
  D-2           75585RKM6           AAA (sf)          BB+ (sf)     
    
  E-2           75585RKN4           BB (sf)           BB (sf)      
    
  F             75585RKP9           BB- (sf)          BB- (sf)     
    
  G             75585RKQ7           B+ (sf)           B+ (sf)      
    
  H             75585RKR5           B+ (sf)           B+ (sf)      
    
  J             75585RKS3           B (sf)            B (sf)       
    
  K             75585RKT1           B (sf)            B (sf)       
    
  L             75585RKU8           B- (sf)           B- (sf)      
    
  XC-2          75585RKX2           AAA (sf)          AAA (sf)     
    

  NR--Not rated.


ROCKWALL CDO II: S&P Raises Class B-2L Notes Rating to BB+ (sf)
---------------------------------------------------------------
S&P Global Ratings raised its ratings on the class A-1Lb, A-2L,
A-3L, B-1L, and B-2L notes from Rockwall CDO II Ltd., a U.S. hybrid
collateralized loan obligation (CLO) managed by Highland Capital
Management L.P. At the same time, S&P removed these ratings from
CreditWatch, where it placed them with positive implications on May
22, 2017.

The rating actions follow S&P's review of the transaction's
performance using data from the July 21, 2017, trustee report.

The upgrades reflect increased credit support following the
transaction's $441.91 million in collective paydowns since S&P's
August 2015 rating actions. These paydowns resulted in improved
reported overcollateralization (O/C) ratios since the July 2015
trustee report, which S&P used for its previous rating actions:

-- The class A O/C ratio improved to 135.03% from 113.08%.
-- The class B-1L O/C ratio improved to 120.58% from 108.83%.
-- The class B-2L retention O/C ratio improved to 112.96% from
106.47%.

S&P said, "The collateral portfolio's credit quality has
deteriorated slightly since our last rating actions. The
concentration of trustee-reported 'CCC' obligations as a percentage
of the aggregate par amount has increased, with 6.09% reported as
of the July 21, 2017, trustee report, compared with 2.74% reported
as of the July 23, 2015, trustee report. Over the same period,
nonperforming obligations as a percentage of the aggregate par
amount have increased to 11.35% from 4.97%. Despite the increase in
'CCC' rated and defaulted collateral, the transaction has benefited
significantly from the paydowns and drop in the weighted average
life due to the underlying collateral's seasoning.

"On a stand-alone basis, the results of the cash flow analysis
indicated a higher rating on the class B-1L and B-2L notes.
However, because of the reduction in the portfolio's weighted
average rating, high exposure to 'CCC' and 'D' rated collateral
obligations, and increasing concentration risk, our rating actions
consider additional sensitivity runs, and we limited the upgrade on
these classes to offset future potential credit migration in the
underlying collateral.

"We will continue to review whether, in our view, the ratings
assigned to the notes remain consistent with the credit enhancement
available to support them, and will take further rating actions as
we deem necessary."

  RATINGS RAISED

  Rockwall CDO II Ltd.

  Class                 Rating
                 To                From
  A-1Lb          AAA (sf)          AA (sf)/Watch Pos
  A-2L           AAA (sf)          A+ (sf)/Watch Pos
  A-3L           AA+ (sf)          BBB+ (sf)/Watch Pos
  B-1L           BBB+ (sf)         BB+ (sf)/Watch Pos
  B-2L           BB+ (sf)          BB- (sf)/Watch Pos


SCHOONER TRUST 2007-8: Moody's Lowers Class XC Certs Rating to C
----------------------------------------------------------------
Moody's Investors Service has downgraded the ratings on two classes
in Schooner Trust Commercial Mortgage Pass-Through Certificates,
Series 2007-8:

Cl. L, Downgraded to Caa3 (sf); previously on Nov 11, 2016
Downgraded to Caa2 (sf)

Cl. XC, Downgraded to C (sf); previously on Jun 9, 2017 Downgraded
to B3 (sf)

RATINGS RATIONALE

The ratings on the Class L was downgraded due to higher realized
losses. Class L has experienced a 28% realized loss due to
previously liquidated loans.

The rating on the IO Class (Class XC) was downgraded due to a
decline in the credit quality of its reference classes resulting
from principal paydowns of higher quality referenced classes.

Moody's does not anticipate losses from the remaining collateral in
the current environment. However, over the remaining life of the
transaction, losses may emerge from macro stresses to the
environment and changes in collateral performance. Moody's ratings
reflect the potential for future losses under varying levels of
stress. Moody's base expected loss plus realized losses is now 1.6%
of the original pooled balance, compared to 2.5% at the last
review. Moody's provides a current list of base expected losses for
conduit and fusion CMBS transactions on moodys.com at
http://v3.moodys.com/viewresearchdoc.aspx?docid=PBS_SF215255.

FACTORS THAT WOULD LEAD TO AN UPGRADE OR DOWNGRADE OF THE RATINGS:

The performance expectations for a given variable indicate Moody's
forward-looking view of the likely range of performance over the
medium term. Performance that falls outside the given range can
indicate that the collateral's credit quality is stronger or weaker
than Moody's had previously expected.

Factors that could lead to an upgrade of the ratings include a
significant amount of loan paydowns or amortization, an increase in
the pool's share of defeasance or an improvement in pool
performance.

Factors that could lead to a downgrade of the ratings include a
decline in the performance of the pool, loan concentration, an
increase in realized and expected losses from specially serviced
and troubled loans or interest shortfalls.

METHODOLOGY UNDERLYING THE RATING ACTION

The principal methodology used in these ratings was "Moody's
Approach to Rating Large Loan and Single Asset/Single Borrower
CMBS" published in July 2017.

Additionally, the methodology used in rating Cl. XC was "Moody's
Approach to Rating Structured Finance Interest-Only (IO)
Securities" published in June 2017.

DEAL PERFORMANCE

As of the July 12, 2017 distribution date, the transaction's
aggregate certificate balance has decreased by 99.7% to $1.7
million from $518.1 million at securitization. The certificates are
collateralized by one mortgage loans representing 100% of the
pool.

Two loans have been liquidated from the pool, contributing to an
aggregate realized loss of $8.3 million (for an average loss
severity of 66%).

The remaining loan in the pool is the 35 and 37 West Columbia
Street West Loan ($1.7 million).The loan is secured by a 60 unit
student housing complex located in Waterloo, Ontario (approximately
70 miles southwest of Toronto). As of August 2016, the property was
93% leased. The loan maturity date has been extended to October 1,
2017. Moody's LTV and stressed DSCR are 80% and 1.21X,
respectively.


SCRT 2017-2: Moody's Assigns B1(sf) Rating to Class M-1 Debt
------------------------------------------------------------
Moody's Investors Service has assigned definitive rating to Class
M-1 issued by Freddie Mac Seasoned Credit Risk Transfer Trust,
Series 2017-2 (SCRT 2017-2).

SCRT 2017-2 is a securitization of 9,939 fixed and step-rate
modified seasoned loans secured by residential properties with an
aggregate outstanding trust balance of $ 2,474,629,247. This is the
second Re-Performing Loan (RPL) credit risk transfer deal in 2017
sponsored by Freddie Mac. All the mortgage loans underlying the
pool were previously modified and the majority (86%) of which have
been current for at least the prior 24 months. The loans are
divided into two groups: Group H and Group M.

Group H is comprised of 5,779 first lien mortgage loans that were
subject to step rate modifications and Group M is comprised of
4,160 first lien mortgage loans that were subject to fixed rate and
step-rate modifications.

The complete rating actions are:

Issuer: Freddie Mac Seasoned Credit Risk Transfer Trust, Series
2017-2

Cl. M-1, Definitive Rating Assigned B1 (sf)

RATINGS RATIONALE

Summary Credit Analysis and Rating Rationale

Moody's expected losses on the mortgage loans is 11% in Moody's
base case scenario. Moody's estimated expected losses using two
approaches -- (1) pool-level approach, and (2) re-performing loan
level analysis. In the pool-level approach, Moody's estimate losses
on the pool by applying Moody's assumptions on expected future
delinquencies, default rates, loss severities and prepayments as
observed from Moody's surveillance of similar collateral as well as
from the Freddie Mac Single Family Loan-Level dataset. In applying
Moody's loss severity assumptions, Moody's accounted for the lack
of principal and interest advancing in this transaction.

In the loan level analysis, Moody's applied loan-level baseline
lifetime propensity to default assumptions, and considered the
historical performance of seasoned modified loans with similar
collateral characteristics and payment histories. Moody's then
adjusted this base default propensity up for (1) loans that have
the risk of coupon step-ups and (2) loans with high updated loan to
value ratios (LTVs). To calculate the final expected loss for the
pool, Moody's applied a loan-level loss severity assumption based
on the loans' updated estimated LTVs. Moody's further adjusted the
loss severity assumption upwards for loans in states that give
super-priority status to homeowner association (HOA) liens, to
account for potential risk of HOA liens trumping a mortgage.

Our final loss estimates also incorporates adjustments for the
strength of the third party due diligence, the servicing framework
and the representations and warranties (R&W) framework of the
transaction.

The methodologies used in this rating were "Moody's Approach to
Rating Securitisations Backed by Non-Performing and Re-Performing
Loans" published in August 2016 and "US RMBS Surveillance
Methodology" published in January 2017.

Collateral Description

SCRT 2017-2 is a securitization of 9,939 fixed-rate and step-rate
modified seasoned loans which are divided into two groups: Group H
and Group M.

Group H is comprised of 5,779 first lien mortgage loans that were
subject to step-rate modifications, and have a weighted average
updated FICO score of 687 and a weighted average (WA) current
Loan-To-Value Ratio (LTV) of 87.3%. The total unpaid principal
balance of Group H mortgage loans is $1,519,856,308 which includes
$278,288,853 of non-interest bearing deferred principal balance.

Group M is comprised of 4,160 first lien mortgage loans that were
subject to fixed-rate and step-rate modifications, and have a
weighted average (WA) updated FICO score of 672 and a WA current
Loan-To-Value Ratio (LTV) of 99.7%. The total unpaid principal
balance of Group M mortgage loans is $954,772,939 which includes
$209,769,174 of non-interest bearing deferred principal balance.

Our loss analysis considered the number of step-ups that the
borrowers have experienced, as well as the potential payment shock
from the remaining step-ups.

Valuations of the related mortgaged properties were obtained
through Freddie Mac's automated valuation model, Home Value
Explorer (HVE), where available. When a HVE value was not
available, a Freddie Mac MSA, state or national (in order of
availability) home price index was used to estimate the property
value. As part of the due diligence process, Freddie Mac also
obtained updated BPO for 2,421 properties and Comparative Market
Analysis ("CMA") for 66 properties. Updated property values
obtained through an AVM may not reflect accurate values of the
properties. In assessing the updated property values, Moody's
assessed the strength of the AVMs and performed additional
validation on the values using home price index projections from
Moody's Analytics.

This transaction has a high percentage of deferred balances, which
are the full obligation of the borrowers, and must be paid in full
at the earliest of (i) the sale of properties (ii) voluntary payoff
or (iii) final scheduled payment date of the loans. For loans that
default in the future or get modified after the closing date, the
servicer may opt for partial principal forgiveness to the extent
permitted under the pooling and servicing agreement. Given that
none of the deferred balances are a result of HAMP principal
reduction amount (PRA) where the deferred amounts could be forgiven
over a period of time, Moody's expects a large percentage of the
amounts to be recovered. However, based on performance data and
information from servicers, Moody's applied a default rate slightly
higher than what Moody's assumed for the overall pool given that
these borrowers have experienced past credit events that required
loan modification. Moody's also assumed a severity of approximately
95% on the deferred amounts as servicers can recover a portion of
the deferred balance.

Third Party Review (TPR)

Third party due diligence review was performed on 100% of the loans
for data integrity and title review. However, compliance and pay
history review was performed on sample of 1,291 loans. The review
procedures were intended to discover certain material discrepancies
and possible material defects in the due diligence sample.

The initial custodial receipt indicates that a portion of the
underlying loans have document exceptions. Freddie Mac will
indemnify the trust for any losses due to collateral deficiencies
for a period of 36 months.

Representation and Warranties (R&W)

Freddie Mac is providing a discrete set of R&W with respect to the
mortgage loans to the trust and is the only party from which the
trust may seek repurchase of a mortgage loan or an indemnity for a
loss as a result of any material breach that provides for
repurchase or indemnity as a remedy. R&Ws contain knowledge
qualifiers but there is a clawback that neutralizes them.

The R&Ws sunset after 36 months (except for a REMIC R&W which will
not expire). Moody's considers the sunset provision as a weakness
in the R&Ws framework. In addition, certain mortgage loans, as of
the closing date, have existing HOA, tax and municipal liens. To
the extent that any such mortgage loan experiences a loss
attributable to such lien within the first 36 months following the
closing date, Freddie Mac will indemnify the trust in the amount of
the applicable existing lien. The enforcement mechanism in this
transaction is weak because of the absence of a pre-designated
independent third party breach reviewer. However, it is mitigated
by the strength of the R&W provider (Freddie Mac) as well as the
review mechanism of the R&Ws. Overall, Moody's has not made any
additional adjustment to Moody's expected loss for the R&W
framework.

Transaction Parties

Nationstar Mortgage LLC will act as the primary servicer for the
transaction. Moody's assess the overall servicing arrangement for
this transaction as adequate. Based on an operational review,
Moody's found the company to be an average servicer with the
infrastructure, including staff, technology, processes, and
oversight, to effectively service the transaction. Nationstar
Mortgage is an indirectly held, wholly owned subsidiary of
Nationstar Mortgage Holdings Inc. Moody's rate Nationstar Mortgage
at B2 stable.

Freddie Mac will serve as the Sponsor and Trustee of the Trust.
Wilmington Trust, National Association will function as Trust
Agent. Bank of New York Mellon Trust Company, N.A. is the Custodian
for the Trust and U.S. Bank National Association will serve as the
Securities Administrator for the Trust.

Alignment of Interest

Unlike Freddie Mac's Structured Agency Credit Risk (STACR) and
Freddie Mac Whole Loan Securities (FWLS) transactions where Freddie
Mac generally retains a portion of the subordinate tranches, in
this transaction, Freddie will not retain any portion of the
subordinate tranches. However, as the guarantor of the senior
certificates, Freddie Mac may be exposed to losses in a severe
stress scenario. This represents a weak alignment of interest
compared to transactions where issuers retain a portion of the
offered certificates and Moody's considered this risk in Moody's
analysis.

Transaction Structure

SCRT 2017-2 has a two-pool 'Y' structure. This structure has two
pools of collateral, two groups of senior certificates and one
shared group of subordinated certificates. The transaction
allocates scheduled and unscheduled principal pro rata between
senior certificates and subordinate certificates unless step-down
tests are satisfied. There are four performance triggers (step-down
test) in the transaction (i) the minimum credit enhancement test,
(ii) the aged securitization test, (iii) the cumulative loss test
and (iv) the delinquency test. If any one of the step-down
performance test is breached, the senior principal distribution
amount will include all principal payment allocated to the
subordinate certificates. This will delay the paydown and increase
the weighted average life (WAL) of the rated subordinate
certificate. Moody's ran 96 different loss and prepayment scenarios
through Moody's cash flow model to assess the rating implications
of Moody's projected loss levels. The assigned rating on the Class
M-1 reflects the expected loss on the bond under the various
scenarios.

We believe there is a very low likelihood that the rated
certificates in Freddie Mac SCRT 2017-2 will incur any losses from
extraordinary expenses or indemnification payments owing to
potential future lawsuits against key deal parties. First, the
loans have significant performance history. Nearly all (97.5%) of
the loans in this pool were originated in 2005 or earlier and,
although some loans were previously delinquent and modified, they
have a substantial history of payment performance. Second, Freddie
Mac, who guarantees the senior classes is incentivized to actively
manage the pool to optimize performance. Freddie Mac has strong
oversight over the originators and servicers in the transaction.
Third, the transaction has reasonably well defined processes in
place to identify loans with defects on an ongoing basis. In this
transaction, an independent breach reviewer must review loans for
breaches of representations and warranties when a loan becomes 180
days delinquent, which reduces the likelihood that parties will be
sued for inaction.

Factors that would lead to an upgrade or downgrade of the rating:

Down

Levels of credit protection that are insufficient to protect
investors against current expectations of loss could drive the
ratings down. Losses could rise above Moody's original expectations
as a result of a higher number of obligor defaults or deterioration
in the value of the mortgaged property securing an obligor's
promise of payment. Transaction performance also depends greatly on
the US macro economy and housing market. Other reasons for
worse-than-expected performance include poor servicing, error on
the part of transaction parties, inadequate transaction governance
and fraud.

Up

Levels of credit protection that are higher than necessary to
protect investors against current expectations of loss could drive
the ratings up. Losses could decline from Moody's original
expectations as a result of a lower number of obligor defaults or
appreciation in the value of the mortgaged property securing an
obligor's promise of payment. Transaction performance also depends
greatly on the US macro economy and housing market.


SEQUOIA MORTGAGE 2017-6: Moody's Gives (P)Ba3 Rating to B-4 Certs
-----------------------------------------------------------------
Moody's Investors Service has assigned provisional ratings to the
classes of residential mortgage-backed securities (RMBS) issued by
Sequoia Mortgage Trust (SEMT) 2017-6. The certificates are backed
by one pool of prime quality, first-lien mortgage loans, including
25 large-balance conforming mortgage loans. The assets of the trust
consist of 478 fully amortizing, fixed rate mortgage loans,
substantially all of which have an original term to maturity of 30
years. The borrowers in the pool have high FICO scores, significant
equity in their properties and liquid cash reserves.

The complete rating actions are:

Issuer: Sequoia Mortgage Trust 2017-6

Cl. A-1, Assigned (P)Aaa (sf)

Cl. A-2, Assigned (P)Aaa (sf)

Cl. A-3, Assigned (P)Aaa (sf)

Cl. A-4, Assigned (P)Aaa (sf)

Cl. A-5, Assigned (P)Aaa (sf)

Cl. A-6, Assigned (P)Aaa (sf)

Cl. A-7, Assigned (P)Aaa (sf)

Cl. A-8, Assigned (P)Aaa (sf)

Cl. A-9, Assigned (P)Aaa (sf)

Cl. A-10, Assigned (P)Aaa (sf)

Cl. A-11, Assigned (P)Aaa (sf)

Cl. A-12, Assigned (P)Aaa (sf)

Cl. A-13, Assigned (P)Aaa (sf)

Cl. A-14, Assigned (P)Aaa (sf)

Cl. A-15, Assigned (P)Aaa (sf)

Cl. A-16, Assigned (P)Aaa (sf)

Cl. A-17, Assigned (P)Aaa (sf)

Cl. A-18, Assigned (P)Aaa (sf)

Cl. A-19, Assigned (P)Aa1 (sf)

Cl. A-20, Assigned (P)Aa1 (sf)

Cl. A-21, Assigned (P)Aa1 (sf)

Cl. A-22, Assigned (P)Aaa (sf)

Cl. A-23, Assigned (P)Aaa (sf)

Cl. A-24, Assigned (P)Aaa (sf)

Cl. B-1, Assigned (P)Aa3 (sf)

Cl. B-2, Assigned (P)A2 (sf)

Cl. B-3, Assigned (P)Baa3 (sf)

Cl. B-4, Assigned (P)Ba3 (sf)

RATINGS RATIONALE

Summary Credit Analysis

Moody's expected cumulative net loss on the aggregate pool is 0.30%
in a base scenario and reaches 3.40% at a stress level consistent
with the Aaa ratings. Moody's loss estimates are based on a
loan-by-loan assessment of the securitized collateral pool using
Moody's Individual Loan Level Analysis (MILAN) model. Loan-level
adjustments to the model included: adjustments to borrower
probability of default for higher and lower borrower DTIs,
borrowers with multiple mortgaged properties, self-employed
borrowers, origination channels and at a pool level, for the
default risk of HOA properties in super lien states. The adjustment
to Moody's Aaa stress loss above the model output also includes
adjustments related to aggregator and originators assessments. The
model combines loan-level characteristics with economic drivers to
determine the probability of default for each loan, and hence for
the portfolio as a whole. Severity is also calculated on a
loan-level basis. The pool loss level is then adjusted for
borrower, zip code, and MSA level concentrations.

Collateral Description

The SEMT 2017-6 transaction is a securitization of 478 first lien
residential mortgage loans, with an aggregate unpaid principal
balance of $355,413,851. There are 125 originators in this pool,
including First Republic Bank (18.41%). None of the originators
other than First Republic Bank contributed 10% or more of the
principal balance of the loans in the pool. The loan-level third
party due diligence review (TPR) encompassed credit underwriting,
property value and regulatory compliance. In addition, Redwood has
agreed to backstop the rep and warranty repurchase obligation of
all originators other than First Republic Bank.

The loans were all aggregated by Redwood Residential Acquisition
Corporation (Redwood), which Moody's has assessed as an Above
Average aggregator of prime jumbo residential mortgages. As of the
July 2017 remittance report, there have been no losses on
Redwood-aggregated transactions that Moody's has rated to date, and
delinquencies to date have also been very low.

Structural considerations

Similar to recent rated Sequoia transactions, in this transaction,
Redwood is adding a feature prohibiting the servicer, or securities
administrator, from advancing principal and interest to loans that
are 120 days or more delinquent. These loans on which principal and
interest advances are not made are called the Stop Advance Mortgage
Loans ("SAML"). The balance of the SAML will be removed from the
principal and interest distribution amounts calculations. Moody's
views the SAML concept as something that strengthens the integrity
of senior and subordination relationships in the structure. Yet, in
certain scenarios the SAML concept, as implemented in this
transaction, can lead to a reduction in interest payment to certain
tranches even when more subordinated tranches are outstanding. The
senior/subordination relationship between tranches is strengthened
as the removal of SAML in the calculation of the senior percentage
amount, directs more principal to the senior bonds and less to the
subordinate bonds. Further, this feature limits the amount of
servicer advances that could increase the loss severity on the
liquidated loans and preserves the subordination amount for the
most senior bonds. On the other hand, this feature can cause a
reduction in the interest distribution amount paid to the bonds;
and if that were to happen such a reduction in interest payment is
unlikely to be recovered. The final ratings on the bonds, which are
expected loss ratings, take into consideration Moody's expected
losses on the collateral and the potential reduction in interest
distributions to the bonds. Furthermore, the likelihood that in
particular the subordinate tranches could potentially permanently
lose some interest as a result of this feature was considered.

Tail Risk & Subordination Floor

The transaction cash flows follow a shifting interest structure
that allows subordinated bonds to receive principal payments under
certain defined scenarios. Because a shifting interest structure
allows subordinated bonds to pay down over time as the loan pool
shrinks, senior bonds are exposed to increased performance
volatility, known as tail risk. The transaction provides for a
subordination floor of 1.50% of the closing pool balance, which
mitigates tail risk by protecting the senior bonds from eroding
credit enhancement over time.

Third-party Review and Reps & Warranties

One TPR firm conducted a due diligence review of 100% of the
mortgage loans in the pool. For 478 loans, the TPR firm conducted a
review for credit, property valuation, compliance and data
integrity ("full review") and limited review for 63 First Republic
loans. For the 63 loans, Redwood Trust elected to conduct a limited
review, which did not include a TPR firm check for TRID
compliance.

For the full review loans, the third party review found that the
majority of reviewed loans were compliant with Redwood's
underwriting guidelines and had no valuation or regulatory defects.
Most of the loans that were not compliant with Redwood's
underwriting guidelines had strong compensating factors.
Additionally, the third party review didn't identify material
compliance-related exceptions relating to the TILA-RESPA Integrated
Disclosure (TRID) rule for the full review loans.

No TRID compliance reviews were performed by the TPR firm on the
limited review loans. Therefore, there is a possibility that some
of these loans could have unresolved TRID issues. We, however
reviewed the initial compliance findings of loans from the same
originator where a full review was conducted and there were no
material compliance findings. As a result, Moody's did not increase
Moody's Aaa loss for the limited review loans.

After a review of the TPR appraisal findings, Moody's found the
exceptions to be minor in nature and did not pose a material
increase in the risk of loan loss. Moody's note that there are five
escrow holdback loans, including two loans where escrow holdbacks
amounts are more than 10%. In the event the escrow funds greater
than 10% have not been disbursed within six months of the Closing
Date, the Seller shall repurchase the affected Escrow Holdback
Mortgage Loan, on or before the date that is six months after the
Closing Date at the applicable Repurchase Price. Given that the
small number of such loans and that the seller has the obligation
to repurchase, Moody's did not make an adjustment for these loans.

The originators and the seller have provided unambiguous
representations and warranties (R&Ws) including an unqualified
fraud R&W. There is provision for binding arbitration in the event
of dispute between investors and the R&W provider concerning R&W
breaches.

Trustee & Master Servicer

The transaction trustee is Wilmington Trust, National Association.
The paying agent and cash management functions will be performed by
Citibank, N.A. and the custodian functions will be performed by
Wells Fargo Bank, N.A., rather than the trustee. In addition,
CitiMortgage Inc., as Master Servicer, is responsible for servicer
oversight, and termination of servicers and for the appointment of
successor servicers. In addition, CitiMortgage is committed to act
as successor if no other successor servicer can be found.

Factors that would lead to an upgrade or downgrade of the ratings:

Down

Levels of credit protection that are insufficient to protect
investors against current expectations of loss could drive the
ratings down. Losses could rise above Moody's original expectations
as a result of a higher number of obligor defaults or deterioration
in the value of the mortgaged property securing an obligor's
promise of payment. Transaction performance also depends greatly on
the US macro economy and housing market. Other reasons for
worse-than-expected performance include poor servicing, error on
the part of transaction parties, inadequate transaction governance
and fraud.

Up

Levels of credit protection that are higher than necessary to
protect investors against current expectations of loss could drive
the ratings up. Losses could decline from Moody's original
expectations as a result of a lower number of obligor defaults or
appreciation in the value of the mortgaged property securing an
obligor's promise of payment. Transaction performance also depends
greatly on the US macro economy and housing market.


SORIN REAL I: Moody's Affirms C(sf) Ratings on 4 Tranches
---------------------------------------------------------
Moody's Investors Service has upgraded and affirmed the ratings on
the following notes issued by Sorin Real Estate CDO I Ltd.

Moody's rating action is:

Class A2 Floating Rate Senior Notes, Affirmed Ba1 (sf); previously
on Aug 11, 2016 Upgraded to Ba1 (sf)

Class B Floating Rate Senior Notes, Upgraded to Ba3 (sf);
previously on Aug 11, 2016 Upgraded to B2 (sf)

Class C Floating Rate Subordinate Notes, Affirmed C (sf);
previously on Aug 11, 2016 Affirmed C (sf)

Class D Floating Rate Subordinate Notes, Affirmed C (sf);
previously on Aug 11, 2016 Affirmed C (sf)

Class E Floating Rate Subordinate Notes, Affirmed C (sf);
previously on Aug 11, 2016 Affirmed C (sf)

Class F Fixed Rate Subordinate Notes, Affirmed C (sf); previously
on Aug 11, 2016 Affirmed C (sf)

The Class A2, Class B, Class C, Class D, Class E, and Class F Notes
are referred to herein as the "Rated Notes"

RATINGS RATIONALE

Moody's has upgraded the ratings of one class of notes due to
amortization of high credit risk assets in the asset pool. This
more than offset the decrease in credit quality of the remaining
pool balance as evidenced by WARF and WARR. Five classes of notes
were affirmed due to the key transaction metrics performing within
levels commensurate with existing ratings. The rating action is the
result of Moody's on-going surveillance of commercial real estate
collateralized debt obligation (CRE CDO and RE-REMIC)
transactions.

Sorin Real Estate CDO I, Ltd. is a cash transaction whose
reinvestment period ended in September 2010. The transaction is
collateralized by a portfolio of: i) asset backed securities (ABS),
primarily in the form of subprime residential mortgage backed
securities (78.1%); ii) collateralized debt obligations (CDO)
(21.3%); and iii) commercial mortgage backed securities (CMBS)
(0.5% of the pool balance). As of the trustee's June 30, 2017
report, the aggregate note balance of the transaction, including
preferred shares, has decreased to $93.4 million from $403.0
million at issuance, with the pay-down directed to the senior most
class of notes, as a result of amortization, recoveries from
defaulted assets, and interest proceeds diverted to pay principal
due to the failure of certain par value tests.

Moody's has identified the following as key indicators of the
expected loss in CRE CDO transactions: the weighted average rating
factor (WARF), the weighted average life (WAL), the weighted
average recovery rate (WARR), and Moody's asset correlation (MAC).
Moody's typically models these as actual parameters for static
deals and as covenants for managed deals.

WARF is a primary measure of the credit quality of a CRE CDO pool.
Moody's has updated its assessments for the collaterals it does not
rate. The rating agency modeled a bottom-dollar WARF of 3937,
compared to 2015 at last review. The current ratings on the
Moody's-rated collateral and the assessments of the non-Moody's
rated collateral follow: Aaa-Aa3 (0.0%, compared to 22.5% at last
review); Baa1-Baa3 (0.0%, compared to 32.2% at last review);
Ba1-Ba3 (35.1%, compared to 10.8% at last review); B1-B3 (32.0%,
compared to 18.8% at last review); Caa1-Ca/C (32.9%, compared to
15.6% at last review).

Moody's modeled a WAL of 2.8 years, compared to 2.0 years at last
review. The WAL is based on assumptions about extensions on the
underlying look-through loan assets.

Moody's modeled a fixed WARR of 0.0%, compared to 8.0% at last
review.

Moody's modeled a MAC of 24.6%, compared to 12.4% at last review.
The greater MAC is due to higher credit risk assets concentrated in
fewer obligors.

Methodology Underlying the Rating Action:

The principal methodology used in these ratings was "Moody's
Approach to Rating SF CDOs" published in June 2017.

Factors That Would Lead to Upgrade or Downgrade of the Ratings:

The performance of the notes is subject to uncertainty, because it
is sensitive to the performance of the underlying portfolio, which
in turn depends on economic and credit conditions that are subject
to change. The servicing decisions of the master and special
servicer and surveillance by the operating advisor with respect to
the collateral interests and oversight of the transaction will also
affect the performance of the Rated Notes.

Moody's Parameter Sensitivities: Changes to any one or more of the
key parameters could have rating implications for the Rated Notes,
although a change in one key parameter assumption could be offset
by a change in one or more of the other key parameter assumptions.
The Rated Notes are particularly sensitive to changes in the
recovery rate of the underlying collateral and credit assessments.
Holding all other key parameters static, increasing the recovery
rate of 100% of the collateral by +5% would result modeled rating
movement on the Rated Notes of zero to one notch upward (e.g. one
notch up implies a rating movement from Baa3 to Baa2).

The primary sources of uncertainty in Moody's assumptions are the
extent of growth in the current macroeconomic environment.
Commercial real estate property values continue to improve
modestly, along with a rise in investment activity and
stabilization in core property type performance. Limited new
construction and moderate job growth have aided this improvement.


TELOS CLO 2013-3: Moody's Assigns Ba3(sf) Rating to Cl. E-R Notes
-----------------------------------------------------------------
Moody's Investors Service has assigned a rating to six classes of
notes issued by Telos CLO 2013-3, Ltd.:

US$4,000,000 Class X Amortizing Senior Secured Floating Rate Notes
due 2019 (the "Class X Notes"), Assigned Aaa (sf)

US$295,900,000 Class A-R Senior Secured Floating Rate Notes due
2026 (the "Class A-R Notes"), Assigned Aaa (sf)

US$50,100,000 Class B-R Senior Secured Floating Rate Notes due 2026
(the "Class B-R Notes"), Assigned Aa2 (sf)

US$24,100,000 Class C-R Mezzanine Secured Deferrable Floating Rate
Notes due 2026 (the "Class C-R Notes"), Assigned A2 (sf)

US$30,300,000 Class D-R Mezzanine Secured Deferrable Floating Rate
Notes due 2026 (the "Class D-R Notes"), Assigned Baa3 (sf)

US$24,100,000 Class E-R Mezzanine Secured Deferrable Floating Rate
Notes due 2026 (the "Class E-R Notes"), Assigned Ba3 (sf)

The Class X Notes, Class A-R Notes, Class B-R Notes, Class C-R
Notes, Class D-R Notes and Class E-R Notes are referenced to herein
as the "Refinancing Notes".

RATINGS RATIONALE

Moody's rating of the Refinancing Notes addresses the expected loss
posed to noteholders. The rating reflects the risks due to defaults
on the underlying portfolio of assets, the transaction's legal
structure, and the characteristics of the underlying assets.

The Issuer has issued the Refinancing Notes in connection with the
refinancing of all of the secured notes previously issued on 26
February 2013.

In addition to changes to the capital structure described above and
to the coupons of the notes, key modifications to the CLO that
occurred in connection with the refinancing include: extensions of
the non-call period, reinvestment period, weighted average life
test and stated maturity of the notes, changes to the collateral
quality matrix and modifiers, and a variety of other changes to
transaction features.

Telos CLO 2013-3, LLC is a managed cash flow CLO. The issued notes
are collateralized primarily by broadly syndicated first lien
senior secured corporate loans. At least 90% of the portfolio must
consist of senior secured loans and eligible investments, and up to
10% of the portfolio may consist of second lien loans and unsecured
loans. The underlying portfolio is 100% ramped as of the
refinancing closing date.

Telos Asset Management LLC (the "Manager") manages the CLO. It
directs the selection, acquisition, and disposition of collateral
on behalf of the Issuer. After the reinvestment period, which ends
in July 2019, the Manager may reinvest unscheduled principal
payments and proceeds from sales of credit risk obligations,
subject to certain restrictions.

The transaction incorporates interest and par coverage tests which,
if triggered, divert interest and principal proceeds to pay down
the notes in order of seniority.

Moody's modeled the transaction using a cash flow model based on
the Binomial Expansion Technique, as described in Section 2.3.2.1
of the "Moody's Global Approach to Rating Collateralized Loan
Obligations" rating methodology published in October 2016.

The key model inputs Moody's used in its analysis, such as par,
weighted average rating factor, diversity score and weighted
average recovery rate, are based on its published methodology and
could differ from the trustee's reported numbers. For modeling
purposes, Moody's used the following base-case assumptions:

Performing par and principal proceeds balance: $460,308,670

Diversity Score: 55

Weighted Average Rating Factor (WARF): 3098

Weighted Average Spread (WAS): 4.10% (before accounting for LIBOR
floors)

Weighted Average Recovery Rate (WARR): 47.5%

Weighted Average Life (WAL): 6 years

Methodology Underlying the Rating Action:

The principal methodology used in these ratings was "Moody's Global
Approach to Rating Collateralized Loan Obligations" published in
October 2016.

Factors That Would Lead to an Upgrade or a Downgrade of the
Ratings:

The performance of the Refinancing Notes is subject to uncertainty.
The performance of the Refinancing Notes is sensitive to the
performance of the underlying portfolio, which in turn depends on
economic and credit conditions that may change. The Manager's
investment decisions and management of the transaction will also
affect the performance of the Refinancing Notes.

Together with the set of modeling assumptions above, Moody's
conducted an additional sensitivity analysis, which was a component
in determining the rating assigned to the Refinancing Notes. This
sensitivity analysis includes increased default probability
relative to the base case.

Below is a summary of the impact of an increase in default
probability (expressed in terms of WARF level) on the Refinancing
Notes (shown in terms of the number of notch difference versus the
current model output, whereby a negative difference corresponds to
higher expected losses), assuming that all other factors are held
equal:

Percentage Change in WARF -- increase of 15% (from 3098 to 3563)

Rating Impact in Rating Notches

Class X Notes: 0

Class A-R Notes: 0

Class B-R Notes: -1

Class C-R Notes: -2

Class D-R Notes: -1

Class E-R Notes: -1

Percentage Change in WARF -- increase of 30% (from 3098 to 4027)

Rating Impact in Rating Notches

Class X Notes: 0

Class A-R Notes: -1

Class B-R Notes: -2

Class C-R Notes: -3

Class D-R Notes: -2

Class E-R Notes: -1     


UBS COMMERCIAL 2017-C2: S&P Rates Class H-RR Certs 'B+(sf)'
-----------------------------------------------------------
S&P Global Ratings assigned its ratings to UBS Commercial Mortgage
Trust 2017-C2's $898.7 million commercial mortgage pass-through
certificates series 2017-C2.

The certificate issuance is a commercial mortgage-backed securities
transaction backed by 59 commercial mortgage loans with an
aggregate principal balance of $898.7 million ($804.1 million of
offered certificates), secured by the fee and leasehold interests
in 204 properties across 28 states.

The ratings reflect the credit support provided by the transaction
structure, S&P's view of the underlying collateral's economics, the
trustee-provided liquidity, the collateral pool's relative
diversity, and our overall qualitative assessment of the
transaction.

  RATINGS ASSIGNED
  UBS Commercial Mortgage Trust 2017-C2

  Class              Rating(i)       Amount ($)
  A-1                AAA (sf)        34,851,000
  A-2                AAA (sf)        77,613,000
  A-SB               AAA (sf)        46,089,000
  A-3                AAA (sf)       210,000,000
  A-4                AAA (sf)       260,524,000
  X-A                AAA (sf)       629,077,000(ii)
  X-B                A- (sf)        175,332,000(ii)
  A-S                AA+ (sf)       103,348,000
  B                  AA- (sf)        39,317,000
  C                  A- (sf)         32,667,000
  D-RR(iii)          BBB+ (sf)       14,514,000
  E-RR(iii)          BBB (sf)         8,987,000
  F-RR(iii)          NR              16,850,000
  G-RR(iii)          BB- (sf)        16,850,000
  H-RR(iii)          B+ (sf)          8,987,000
  NR-RR(iii)         NR              28,084,591

(i)The certificates will be issued to qualified institutional
buyers according to Rule 144A of the Securities Act of 1933.
(ii)Notional balance.
(iii)Non-offered certificates. NR--Not rated.


UBS COMMERCIAL 2017-C3: Fitch to Rates Class G-RR Debt 'B-sf'
-------------------------------------------------------------
Fitch Ratings has issued a presale report on UBS Commercial
Mortgage Trust 2017-C3 commercial mortgage pass-through
certificates.

Fitch expects to rate the transaction and assign Rating Outlooks:

-- $24,572,000 class A-1 'AAAsf'; Outlook Stable;
-- $97,843,000 class A-2 'AAAsf'; Outlook Stable;
-- $45,701,000 class A-SB 'AAAsf'; Outlook Stable;
-- $146,000,000 class A-3 'AAAsf'; Outlook Stable;
-- $181,922,000 class A-4 'AAAsf'; Outlook Stable;
-- $496,038,000b class X-A 'AAAsf'; Outlook Stable;
-- $135,525,000b class X-B 'A-sf'; Outlook Stable;
-- $74,406,000 class A-S 'AAAsf'; Outlook Stable;
-- $32,774,000 class B 'AA-sf'; Outlook Stable;
-- $28,345,000 class C 'A-sf'; Outlook Stable;
-- $17,715,000ac class D-RR 'BBBsf'; Outlook Stable;
-- $13,287,000ac class E-RR 'BBB-sf'; Outlook Stable;
-- $10,629,000ac class F-RR 'BBsf'; Outlook Stable;
-- $10,630,000ac class G-RR 'B-sf'; Outlook Stable.

The following class is not expected to be rated:

-- $24,802,195ac class NR-RR.

(a) Privately placed and pursuant to Rule 144A.
(b) Notional amount and interest only.
(c) Horizontal credit risk retention interest representing at least
5% of the estimated fair value of all classes of regular
certificates issued by the issuing entity (as of the closing
date).

The expected ratings are based on information provided by the
issuer as of Aug. 9, 2017.

The certificates represent the beneficial ownership interest in the
trust, primary assets of which are 42 loans secured by 64
commercial properties having an aggregate principal balance of
$708,626,196 as of the cut-off date. The loans were contributed to
the trust by UBS AG, Societe Generale, KeyBank National
Association, Natixis Real Estate Capital LLC, and Rialto Mortgage
Finance, LLC.

Fitch reviewed a comprehensive sample of the transaction's
collateral, including site inspections on 72.8% of the properties
by balance, cash flow analysis of 87.9%, and asset summary reviews
on 100% of the pool.

KEY RATING DRIVERS

Lower Fitch Leverage Than Recent Transactions: The pool's leverage
is below recent comparable Fitch-rated multiborrower transactions.
The pool's Fitch debt service coverage ratio (DSCR) and loan to
value (LTV) are 1.30x and 95.7%, respectively, better than the
year-to-date (YTD) 2017 averages of 1.25x and 101.7%, respectively.
Excluding credit opinion loans, the pool's normalized Fitch DSCR
and LTV are 1.31x and 101.0%, compared to the YTD averages of 1.20x
and 106.6%, respectively.

Above-Average Concentrated Pool: The transaction is slightly more
concentrated than other Fitch-rated multiborrower transactions. The
top 10 loans comprise 55.6% of the pool, above the YTD 2017 average
of 53.4%. The transaction's loan concentration index of 419 is also
slightly above the YTD 2017 average of 400.

Investment-Grade Credit Opinion Loans: Three loans, representing
16.7% of the pool, have investment-grade credit opinions: Del Amo
Fashion Center (7.1% of the pool), 245 Park Avenue (5.4% of the
pool) and Park West Village (4.2% of the pool). Combined, the three
credit opinion loans have a weighted average (WA) Fitch DSCR and
LTV of 1.28x and 69.2%, respectively.

RATING SENSITIVITIES

For this transaction, Fitch's net cash flow (NCF) was 12.4% below
the most recent year's net operating income (NOI) for properties
for which a full-year NOI was provided, excluding properties that
were stabilizing during this period). Unanticipated further
declines in property-level NCF could result in higher defaults and
loss severities on defaulted loans and in potential rating actions
on the certificates.

Fitch evaluated the sensitivity of the ratings assigned to UBS
2017-C3 certificates and found that the transaction displays
average sensitivities to further declines in NCF. In a scenario in
which NCF declined a further 20% from Fitch's NCF, a downgrade of
the junior 'AAAsf' certificates to 'A-sf' could result. In a more
severe scenario, in which NCF declined a further 30% from Fitch's
NCF, a downgrade of the junior 'AAAsf' certificates to 'BBBsf'
could result.


VENTURE CLO XIV: Moody's Gives Prov. Ba3 Rating to Class E-R Notes
------------------------------------------------------------------
Moody's Investors Service has assigned the following provisional
ratings to the following notes (the "Refinancing Notes") to be
issued by Venture XIV CLO, Limited.

US$346,000,000 Class A-R Senior Secured Floating Rate Notes due
2029 (the "Class A-R Notes"), Assigned (P)Aaa (sf)

US$60,000,000 Class B-R Senior Secured Floating Rate Notes due 2029
(the "Class B-R Notes"), Assigned (P)Aa1 (sf)

US$55,500,000 Class C-R Mezzanine Secured Deferrable Floating Rate
Notes due 2029 (the "Class C-R Notes"), Assigned (P)A2 (sf)

US$34,000,000 Class D-R Mezzanine Secured Deferrable Floating Rate
Notes due 2029 (the "Class D-R Notes"), Assigned (P)Baa3 (sf)

US$31,750,000 Class E-R Junior Secured Deferrable Floating Rate
Notes due 2029 (the "Class E-R Notes"), Assigned (P)Ba3 (sf)

Moody's issues provisional ratings in advance of the final sale of
financial instruments, but these ratings only represent Moody's
preliminary credit opinions. Upon a conclusive review of a
transaction and associated documentation, Moody's will endeavor to
assign definitive ratings. A definitive rating, if any, may differ
from a provisional rating.

The Issuer is a managed cash flow collateralized loan obligation
(CLO). The issued notes are collateralized primarily by a portfolio
of senior secured, broadly syndicated corporate loans.

MJX Venture Management LLC (the "Manager"), as successor collateral
manager to MJX Asset Management LLC, will manage the CLO. It will
direct the selection, acquisition, and disposition of collateral on
behalf of the Issuer.

RATINGS RATIONALE

Moody's provisional ratings on the Refinancing Notes address the
expected losses posed to noteholders. The provisional ratings
reflect the risks due to defaults on the underlying portfolio of
assets, the transaction's legal structure, and the characteristics
of the underlying assets.

The Issuer is expected to issue the Refinancing Notes on August 28,
2017 (the "Refinancing Date") in connection with the refinancing of
all classes of secured notes (the "Refinanced Original Notes")
previously issued on August 14, 2013 (the "Original Closing Date").
On the Refinancing Date, the Issuer will use the proceeds from the
issuance of the Refinancing Notes to redeem in full the Refinanced
Original Notes

In addition to the issuance of the Refinancing Notes, a variety of
other changes to transaction features will occur in connection with
the refinancing. These include: extension of the reinvestment
period; extensions of the stated maturity and non-call period;
changes to certain collateral quality tests; changes to the
waterfall and coverage tests; assignment of the collateral manager
role from MJX Asset Management LLC to MJX Venture Management LLC;
changes to the initial asset matrix and possibly recovery rate
modifier matrix, and a variety of other changes to transaction
features.

Moody's modeled the transaction using a cash flow model based on
the Binomial Expansion Technique, as described in Section 2.3.2.1
of the "Moody's Global Approach to Rating Collateralized Loan
Obligations" rating methodology published in October 2016.

The key model inputs Moody's used in its analysis, such as par,
weighted average rating factor, diversity score and weighted
average recovery rate, are based on its published methodology and
could differ from the trustee's reported numbers. For modeling
purposes, Moody's used the following base-case assumptions:

Performing par and principal proceeds balance: $561,568,713

Defaulted par: $9,401,570

Diversity Score: 75

Weighted Average Rating Factor (WARF): 2970

Weighted Average Spread (WAS): 3.90%

Weighted Average Recovery Rate (WARR): 48.0%

Weighted Average Life (WAL): 8 years

Methodology Underlying the Rating Action:

The principal methodology used in these ratings was "Moody's Global
Approach to Rating Collateralized Loan Obligations" published in
October 2016.

Factors That Would Lead to an Upgrade or Downgrade of the Ratings:

The performance of the Refinancing Notes is subject to uncertainty.
The performance of the Refinancing Notes is sensitive to the
performance of the underlying portfolio, which in turn depends on
economic and credit conditions that may change. The Manager's
investment decisions and management of the transaction will also
affect the performance of the Refinancing Notes.

Together with the set of modeling assumptions above, Moody's
conducted an additional sensitivity analysis, which was a component
in determining the ratings assigned to the Refinancing Notes. This
sensitivity analysis includes increased default probability
relative to the base case.

Below is a summary of the impact of an increase in default
probability (expressed in terms of WARF level) on the Refinancing
Notes (shown in terms of the number of notch difference versus the
current model output, whereby a negative difference corresponds to
higher expected losses), assuming that all other factors are held
equal:

Percentage Change in WARF -- increase of 15% (from 2970 to 3416)

Rating Impact in Rating Notches

Class A-R Notes: 0

Class B-R Notes: 0

Class C-R Notes: -1

Class D-R Notes: -1

Class E-R Notes: -1

Percentage Change in WARF -- increase of 30% (from 2970 to 3861)

Rating Impact in Rating Notches

Class A-R Notes: 0

Class B-R Notes: -2

Class C-R Notes: -3

Class D-R Notes: -2

Class E-R Notes: -1


WACHOVIA BANK 2003-C5: Moody's Affirms Ca Rating on Cl. X-C Certs
-----------------------------------------------------------------
Moody's Investors Service has affirmed the rating on one interest
only (IO) class of Wachovia Bank Commercial Mortgage Trust 2003-C5,
Commercial Mortgage Pass-through Certificates, Series 2003-C5:

Cl. X-C, Affirmed Ca (sf); previously on Jun 9, 2017 Downgraded to
Ca (sf)

RATINGS RATIONALE

The rating on the IO class X-C was affirmed based on the credit
quality of its referenced classes. The IO class is the only
outstanding Moody's-rated class in this transaction.

Moody's rating action reflects a base expected loss of 13.5% of the
current balance, compared to 15.0% at Moody's last review. Moody's
base expected loss plus realized losses is now 1.0% of the original
pooled balance, compared to 0.9% at the last review. Moody's
provides a current list of base expected losses for conduit and
fusion CMBS transactions on moodys.com at
http://www.moodys.com/viewresearchdoc.aspx?docid=PBS_SF215255.

FACTORS THAT WOULD LEAD TO AN UPGRADE OR DOWNGRADE OF THE RATING:

An IO class may be subject to ratings upgrades if there is an
improvement in the credit quality of its referenced classes,
subject to the limits and provisions of the updated IO
methodology.

An IO class may be subject to ratings downgrades if there is (i) a
decline in the credit quality of the reference classes and/or (ii)
paydowns of higher quality reference classes, subject to the limits
and provisions of the updated IO methodology.

METHODOLOGY UNDERLYING THE RATING ACTION

The methodologies used in this rating were "Moody's Approach to
Rating Large Loan and Single Asset/Single Borrower CMBS" published
in July 2017, and "Moody's Approach to Rating Structured Finance
Interest-Only (IO) Securities" published in June 2017.

DEAL PERFORMANCE

As of the July 17, 2017 distribution date, the transaction's
aggregate certificate balance has decreased by 99% to $14.4 million
from $1.2 billion at securitization. The Certificates are
collateralized by nine mortgage loans ranging in size from less
than 1% to 20% of the pool. Two loans, representing 12% of the pool
have defeased and are secured by US Government securities.

One loans, representing 14% of the pool, is on the master
servicer's watchlist. The watchlist includes loans which meet
certain portfolio review guidelines established as part of the CRE
Finance Council (CREFC) monthly reporting package. As part of
Moody's ongoing monitoring of a transaction, Moody's reviews the
watchlist to assess which loans have material issues that could
impact performance.

Six loans have been liquidated from the pool, resulting in an
aggregate realized loss of $9.7 million (43% loss severity on
average). One loan, the Randhurst Crossings Shopping Center Loan
($2.9 million -- 20% of the pool), is currently in special
servicing. The loan is secured by an approximately 17,000 square
foot (SF) retail center located in Mount Prospect, IL. As of June
2017, the property was 65% leased, compared to 85% at the prior
review. The loan transferred into special servicing in November
2012 due to a maturity default.

Moody's was provided with full year 2016 and full or partial year
2017 operating results for 100% and 53% of the pool, respectively.
Moody's weighted average conduit LTV is 43% compared to 47% at
Moody's prior review. Moody's conduit component excludes loans with
credit assessments, defeased and CTL loans and specially serviced
and troubled loans. Moody's net cash flow (NCF) reflects a weighted
average haircut of 12% to the most recently available net operating
income (NOI). Moody's value reflects a weighted average
capitalization rate of 9.1%.

Moody's actual and stressed conduit DSCRs are 1.19X and 2.40X,
respectively, compared to 1.17X and 2.13X at prior review. Moody's
actual DSCR is based on Moody's NCF and the loan's actual debt
service. Moody's stressed DSCR is based on Moody's NCF and a 9.25%
stressed rate applied to the loan balance.

The top three conduit loans represent 44% of the pool balance. The
largest loan is the Brandon Oaks Loan ($2.3 million -- 16.2% of the
pool), which is secured by a 160-unit multifamily property located
in Brandon, FL. As of March 2017, the property was 98% leased,
compared to 97% at the prior review. Moody's LTV and stressed DSCR
are 27% and 3.59X, respectively.

The second largest loan is the 1815 East Flamingo Road Loan ($2.0
million -- 14.1% of the pool), which is secured by an approximately
17,000 SF single tenant retail property in Las Vegas, NV. The
property is 100% leased to Dollar General through July 2024.
Moody's LTV and stressed DSCR are 48% and 1.96X, respectively.

The third largest loan is the Forest Hill Centre Loan ($2.0 million
-- 13.7% of the pool), which is secured by an approximately 53,000
SF grocery anchored retail center in Lexington, NC. As of March
2017, the property was 80% leased, compared to 82% leased at the
prior review. Moody's LTV and stressed DSCR are 57% and 1.75X,
respectively.


WESTLAKE AUTOMOBILE 2016-1: S&P Affirms BB Rating on Class E Debt
-----------------------------------------------------------------
S&P Global Ratings raised its ratings on nine classes and affirmed
its ratings on seven classes from Westlake Automobile Receivables
Trust 2015-1, 2015-2, 2015-3, and 2016-1.

S&P said, "T[he] rating actions reflect collateral performance to
date and our expectations regarding future collateral performance,
as well as each transaction's structure and credit enhancement.
Additionally, we incorporated secondary credit factors, including
credit stability, payment priorities under various scenarios, and
sector- and issuer-specific analysis. Considering all these
factors, we believe the creditworthiness of the notes remains
consistent with the raised and affirmed ratings.

"We maintained our previously revised loss expectations on the
series 2015-1 and 2015-2 transactions. Given that we now have
sufficient data to project losses on series 2015-3 and  2016-1, we
are revising the loss levels upward to reflect that they are
performing in line with series 2015-1 and 2015-2."  

  Table 1
  Collateral Performance (%)
  As of the July 2017 distribution date

                         Pool    Current    60+ day
  Series           Mo.   factor      CNL    delinq.
  2015-1           28    16.76     11.76       2.13
  2015-2           25    27.22     11.18       2.18
  2015-3           21    34.15      9.99       1.79
  2016-1           18    41.10      9.26       2.06

  Mo.--Month. Delinq.—Delinquencies.
  CNL--cumulative net loss.

  Table 2
  CNL Expectations (%)

                 Original             Former             Revised
                 lifetime           lifetime            lifetime
  Series         CNL exp.           CNL exp.            CNL exp.
                            (As of Sept 2016)   (As of July 2017)
  2015-1      11.50-12.00         12.25-12.75         12.25-12.75
  2015-2      11.50-12.00         13.00-13.50         13.00-13.50
  2015-3      11.25-11.75                 N/A         13.00-13.50
  2016-1      11.50-12.00                 N/A         13.00-13.50

CNL exp.--Cumulative net loss expectations.
N/A–-Not applicable.

Each transaction contains a sequential principal payment structure
in which the notes are paid principal by seniority. Each
transaction also has credit enhancement in the form of a
nonamortizing reserve account, overcollateralization, subordination
for the higher-rated tranches, and excess spread. The credit
enhancement for each of the transactions is at the specified
target, and each class' credit support continues to increase as a
percentage of the amortizing collateral balance.

In addition, since the transactions closed, the credit support for
each series has increased as a percentage of the amortizing pool
balance. The raised and affirmed ratings reflect our view that the
total credit support as a percentage of the amortizing pool
balance, compared with S&P's expected remaining losses, is
commensurate with the raised and affirmed ratings.

  Table 3
  Hard Credit Support (%)
  As of the July 2017 distribution date

                             Total hard    Current total hard
                         credit support        credit support
  Series         Class   at issuance(i)     (% of current)(i)
  2015-1         C                16.00                 70.46
  2015-1         D                 8.00                 17.96
  2015-2         B                27.00                 99.78
  2015-2         C                17.00                 61.76
  2015-2         D                 8.00                 29.44
  2015-2         E                 3.00                 11.07
  2015-3         A-2-A            35.00                102.93
  2015-3         A-2-B            35.00                102.93
  2015-3         B                27.00                 81.05
  2015-3         C                17.00                 50.73
  2015-3         D                 8.00                 24.98
  2015-3         E                 3.00                 10.33
  2016-1         A-2A             36.00                 86.25
  2016-1         A-2B             36.00                 86.25
  2016-1         B                29.00                 69.22
  2016-1         C                18.00                 44.28
  2016-1         D                10.00                 24.21
  2016-1         E                 5.00                 11.43

(i)Calculated as a percentage of the total gross receivable pool
balance, consisting of a reserve account, overcollateralization,
and, if applicable, subordination.

S&P said, "We incorporated a cash flow analysis to assess the loss
coverage level, giving credit to excess spread. Our various cash
flow scenarios included forward-looking assumptions on recoveries,
timing of losses, and voluntary absolute prepayment speeds that we
believe are appropriate given each transaction's performance to
date. Aside from our break-even cash flow analysis, we also
conducted sensitivity analyses for these series to determine the
impact that a moderate ('BBB') stress scenario would have on our
ratings if losses began trending higher than our revised base-case
loss expectation.

"We will continue to monitor the performance of all of the
outstanding transactions to ensure that the credit enhancement
remains sufficient, in our view, to cover our cumulative net loss
expectations under our stress scenarios for each of the rated
classes."

  RATINGS RAISED

  Westlake Automobile Receivables Trust
                             Rating
  Series        Class     To         From
  2015-1        D         AA+ (sf)   A- (sf)
  2015-2        D         AAA (sf)   A- (sf)
  2015-2        E         BBB (sf)   BB (sf)
  2015-3        B         AAA (sf)   AA (sf)
  2015-3        C         AAA (sf)   A (sf)
  2015-3        D         AA- (sf)   BBB (sf)
  2016-1        B         AAA (sf)   AA (sf)
  2016-1        C         AAA (sf)   A (sf)
  2016-1        D         AA- (sf)   BBB (sf)

  RATINGS AFFIRMED

  Westlake Automobile Receivables Trust
  Series        Class     Rating
  2015-1        C         AAA (sf)
  2015-2        B         AAA (sf)
  2015-2        C         AAA (sf)
  2015-3        E         BB (sf)
  2016-1        A-2A      AAA (sf)
  2016-1        A-2B      AAA (sf)
  2016-1        E         BB (sf)


WESTLAKE AUTOMOBILE 2017-2: S&P Rates $800MM Class E Notes 'BB(sf)'
-------------------------------------------------------------------
S&P Global Ratings assigned its ratings to Westlake Automobile
Receivables Trust 2017-2's $800.00 million automobile
receivables-backed notes series 2017-2.

The note issuance is an asset-backed securities transaction backed
by subprime auto loan receivables.

The ratings reflect:

-- The availability of approximately 48.37%, 41.92%, 32.69%,
25.50%, and 22.20% credit support for the class A, B, C, D, and E
notes, respectively, based on stress cash flow scenarios (including
excess spread). These provide approximately 3.50x, 3.00x, 2.30x,
1.75x, and 1.50x, respectively, of our 13.25%-13.75% expected
cumulative net loss range.

-- The transaction's ability to make timely interest and principal
payments under stressed cash flow modeling scenarios appropriate
for the assigned ratings.

-- S&P's expectation that under a moderate ('BBB') stress
scenario, all else being equal, for the transaction's life its
ratings on the class A and B notes would not be lowered from the
assigned ratings, its rating on the class C notes would remain
within one rating category of the assigned rating, and its rating
on the class D notes would remain within two rating categories of
the assigned rating. S&P's rating on the class E notes would remain
within two rating categories of the assigned rating over one year,
but would ultimately default at month 61, which is within the
bounds of its credit stability criteria (see "Methodology: Credit
Stability Criteria," published May 3, 2010).

-- The collateral characteristics of the securitized pool of
subprime automobile loans.

-- The originator/servicer's long history in the
subprime/specialty auto finance business.

-- S&P's analysis of approximately 10 years (2006-2016) of static
pool data on the company's lending programs.

-- The transaction's payment, credit enhancement, and legal
structures.

  RATINGS ASSIGNED

  Westlake Automobile Receivables Trust 2017-2

  Class      Rating     Type         Interest         Amount
                                     rate           (mil. $)
  A-1        A-1+ (sf)  Senior       Fixed            214.00
  A-2-A      AAA (sf)   Senior       Fixed            249.22
  A-2-B      AAA (sf)   Senior       Floating(i)       40.00
  B          AA (sf)    Subordinate  Fixed             74.84
  C          A (sf)     Subordinate  Fixed             98.90
  D          BBB (sf)   Subordinate  Fixed             81.72
  E          BB (sf)    Subordinate  Fixed             41.32

(i)The class A-2-B coupon is expressed as a spread tied to
one-month LIBOR.


WFRBS COMMERCIAL 2012-C9: Fitch Affirms Bsf Rating on Class F Certs
-------------------------------------------------------------------
Fitch Ratings has upgraded one class and affirmed 10 classes of
WFRBS Commercial Mortgage Trust (WFRBS) commercial mortgage
pass-through certificates, series 2012-C9.  

KEY RATING DRIVERS

Stable Performance and Increase in Credit Enhancement (CE): The
upgrade and affirmations are the result of an increase in CE from
loan payoffs, amortization, as well as the defeasance of seven
loans (11.1%). The pool's underlying collateral's overall
performance has been stable. As of the July 2017 distribution date,
the pool's aggregate principal balance has paid down by 10.9% to
$937.98 million from $1.05 billion at issuance. Since Fitch's last
rating action, four loans totalling $30.5 million were repaid at or
prior to their scheduled maturity date. The pool has experienced no
realized losses to date and there are currently no specially
serviced loans.

Retail and Hotel Exposure: Loans secured by retail properties
represent 33.8% of the current pool balance, including three of the
top four loans (20.4%). The largest loan in the pool, Chesterfield
Towne Center (11%), is the only enclosed regional mall, and it has
exposure to anchors Macy's, and noncollateral Sears and JC Penney.
There are 11 hospitality properties which comprise 17.4% of the
pool. Five hotels are in the top 20 (11.5% of the pool balance).

Amortization: There are no full-term interest-only (IO) loans. One
self-storage loan (0.5%) begins to amortize later this year. All
other loans, including the partial-term IO loans (17.3%), are
currently amortizing.

Near-Term Loan Maturities: The pool has four loans (8.4% of the
current pool) that mature later in 2017 including two hotels in the
top 20 (5.5%) and an office property located in Houston, TX that is
on the master servicer's watchlist (1.5%). All other loans mature
or reach their anticipated repayment date (ARD) in 2022.

RATING SENSITIVITIES

Rating Outlooks for all classes are Stable due to overall stable
performance of the pool and continued amortization and increasing
CE. Fitch incorporated additional sensitivity stresses due to the
retail and hospitality concentration. Further rating upgrades may
be limited, but may occur with continued improvement in loan
performance and significant additional paydown or defeasance.
Rating downgrades to the classes are possible should overall pool
performance decline.

USE OF THIRD-PARTY DUE DILIGENCE PURSUANT TO SEC RULE 17G-10

No third party due diligence was provided or reviewed in relation
to this rating action.

Fitch has upgraded the following class:

-- $64.5 million class B to 'AAsf' from 'AA-sf', Outlook to
    Stable from Positive.

Fitch has affirmed the following ratings:

-- $81.7 million class A-2 at 'AAAsf', Outlook Stable;
-- $444.2 million class A-3 at 'AAAsf', Outlook Stable;
-- $96.2 million class A-SB at 'AAAsf', Outlook Stable;
-- $93.4 million class A-S at 'AAAsf', Outlook Stable;
-- Interest-only class X-A at 'AAAsf', Outlook Stable;
-- Interest-only class X-B at 'A-sf', Outlook to Stable from
    Positive;
-- $36.8 million class C at 'A-sf', Outlook to Stable from
    Positive;
-- $42.1 million class D at 'BBB-sf', Outlook Stable;
-- $21.1 million class E at 'BBsf', Outlook Stable;
-- $19.7 million class F at 'Bsf', Outlook Stable.

Class A-1 is paid in full. Fitch does not rate the class G
certificates.


WOODMONT LP 2017-3: S&P Gives Prelim BB(sf) Rating on Class E Notes
-------------------------------------------------------------------
S&P Global Ratings assigned its preliminary ratings to Woodmont
2017-3 LP/Woodmont 2017-3 GP/Woodmont 2017-3 LLC's $306.25 million
floating-rate notes.

The note issuance is a collateralized loan obligation transaction
backed by middle-market speculative-grade senior secured term
loans.

The preliminary ratings are based on information as of Aug. 10,
2017. Subsequent information may result in the assignment of final
ratings that differ from the preliminary ratings.

The preliminary ratings reflect:

-- The diversified collateral pool, which consists primarily of
middle-market speculative-grade senior secured term loans that are
governed by collateral quality tests.

-- The credit enhancement provided through the subordination of
cash flows, excess spread, and overcollateralization.

-- The collateral manager's experienced team, which can affect the
performance of the rated notes through collateral selection,
ongoing portfolio management, and trading.

-- The transaction's legal structure, which is expected to be
bankruptcy remote.

  PRELIMINARY RATINGS ASSIGNED

  Woodmont 2017-3 LP/Woodmont 2017-3 GP/Woodmont 2017-3 LLC  

  Class                 Rating          Amount
                                    (mil. $)
  A-1                   AAA (sf)       196.000
  A-2                   AAA (sf)        19.250
  B                     AA (sf)         22.750
  C (deferrable)        A (sf)          24.500
  D (deferrable)        BBB- (sf)       21.500
  E (deferrable)        BB (sf)         22.250
  Subordinated notes    NR              47.075

  NR--Not rated.


WRIGHTWOOD CAPITAL 2005-1: Moody's Hikes Class D Debt Rating to B1
------------------------------------------------------------------
Moody's Investors Service has upgraded and affirmed the ratings on
the following notes issued by Wrightwood Capital Real Estate CDO
2005-1.

Moody's rating action is as follows:

Cl. B, Upgraded to Baa3 (sf); previously on Aug 19, 2016 Affirmed
Ba3 (sf)

Cl. C, Upgraded to Ba3 (sf); previously on Aug 19, 2016 Affirmed B2
(sf)

Cl. D, Upgraded to B1 (sf); previously on Aug 19, 2016 Affirmed B3
(sf)

Cl. E, Affirmed Caa3 (sf); previously on Aug 19, 2016 Affirmed Caa3
(sf)

Cl. F, Affirmed Caa3 (sf); previously on Aug 19, 2016 Affirmed Caa3
(sf)

Cl. G, Affirmed Caa3 (sf); previously on Aug 19, 2016 Affirmed Caa3
(sf)

Cl. H, Affirmed Caa3 (sf); previously on Aug 19, 2016 Affirmed Caa3
(sf)

The Class B, Class C, Class D, Class E, Class F, Class G, and Class
H Notes are referred to herein as the "Rated Notes"

RATINGS RATIONALE

Moody's has upgraded the ratings of three classes of notes due to
greater than expected recoveries on high credit risk assets in the
asset pool. This more than offset the decrease in credit quality of
the remaining pool balance as evidenced by WARF. Four classes of
notes were affirmed due to the key transaction metrics performing
within levels commensurate with existing ratings. The rating action
is the result of Moody's on-going surveillance of commercial real
estate collateralized debt obligation (CRE CDO and RE-REMIC)
transactions.

Wrightwood 2005-1 is a cash transaction whose reinvestment period
ended in August 2010. The transaction is wholly backed by a
portfolio of whole loans and senior participations collateralized
by the following property types: i) office (71.7% of the collateral
pool balance), and ii) industrial (28.3%). As of the trustee's July
31, 2017 report, the aggregate note balance of the transaction,
including preferred shares, is $169.8 million, down from $650.0
million at issuance, with the pay-down directed to the senior most
class of notes, as a result of amortization.

Moody's has identified the following as key indicators of the
expected loss in CRE CDO transactions: the weighted average rating
factor (WARF), the weighted average life (WAL), the weighted
average recovery rate (WARR), and Moody's asset correlation (MAC).
Moody's typically models these as actual parameters for static
deals and as covenants for managed deals.

WARF is a primary measure of the credit quality of a CRE CDO pool.
Moody's has updated its assessments for the collaterals it does not
rate. The rating agency modeled a bottom-dollar WARF of 9362,
compared to 8455 at last review. The current distribution of
Moody's rated collateral and assessments for non-Moody's rated
collateral is as follows: Caa1-Ca/C and 100.0% compared to 100.0%
at last review.

Moody's modeled a WAL of 1.7 years, compared to 2.0 years at last
review. The WAL is based on assumptions about extensions on the
underlying assets.

Moody's modeled a fixed WARR of 56.4%, compared to 57.5% at last
review.

Moody's modeled a MAC of 100%, same as last review.

Methodology Underlying the Rating Action:

The principal methodology used in these ratings was "Moody's
Approach to Rating SF CDOs" published in June 2017.

Factors That Would Lead to an Upgrade or Downgrade of the Ratings:

The performance of the notes is subject to uncertainty, because it
is sensitive to the performance of the underlying portfolio, which
in turn depends on economic and credit conditions that are subject
to change. The servicing decisions of the master and special
servicer and surveillance by the operating advisor with respect to
the collateral interests and oversight of the transaction will also
affect the performance of the Rated Notes.

Moody's Parameter Sensitivities: Changes to any one or more of the
key parameters could have rating implications for the Rated Notes,
although a change in one key parameter assumption could be offset
by a change in one or more of the other key parameter assumptions.
The Rated Notes are particularly sensitive to changes in the
recovery rate of the underlying collateral and credit assessments.
Holding all other key parameters static, increasing the recovery
rate of 100% of the collateral by +10% would result in modeled
rating movement on the Rated Notes of zero to ten notches upward
(e.g. one notch up implies a rating movement from Baa3 to Baa2).
Decreasing the recovery rate of 100% of the collateral by -10%
would result in modeled rating movement on the Rated Notes of zero
to eight notches downward (e.g. one notch down implies a rating
movement from Baa3 to Ba1)

The primary sources of uncertainty in Moody's assumptions are the
extent of growth in the current macroeconomic environment.
Commercial real estate property values continue to improve
modestly, along with a rise in investment activity and
stabilization in core property type performance. Limited new
construction and moderate job growth have aided this improvement.


[*] Fitch Lowers 348 Wells Fargo Trustee US RMBS Classes
--------------------------------------------------------
Fitch Ratings downgrades 348 U.S. RMBS classes ($2.4 billion) from
84 transactions issued between 2004 and 2007. The downgrades
reflect the risk of future payment disruption from the retention of
trust funds by Wells Fargo Bank NA (Wells Fargo) to reserve against
expenses the bank may incur to defend itself against investor
lawsuits that allege the bank failed in its trustee duties.

A list of the Affected Ratings is available at:

                       http://bit.ly/2wL2l6A

All of the affected classes that were previously rated 'Bsf' or
higher prior to actions had been on Rating Watch Negative. The
rating revisions generally follow the preliminary rating guidance
provided in the prior rating action commentaries that placed the
classes on Rating Watch Negative. All classes have now been removed
from Rating Watch Negative.

The downgraded classes have not been directly affected by Wells
Fargo's actions to date, but are at increased risk for payment
disruption in the future if Wells Fargo continues the behaviour
exhibited on the June remittance date when rated classes in called
transactions incurred unrecovered principal and unpaid interest.
While some of the classes in those called transactions may
ultimately recover their full principal amount, the lack of
interest payments resulted in a default under Fitch's rating
definitions and those classes were downgraded to 'Dsf' on Aug. 1.

KEY RATING DRIVERS

The timing of a resolution to the litigation and Wells Fargo's fund
retention strategy remains uncertain. Wells Fargo has not provided
any clear public guidance on their withholding strategy going
forward. Fitch assumes that Wells Fargo will continue to
pre-emptively retain funds in trust accounts to reserve against
future expenses in scenarios where they may not be able to
reimburse themselves from the trust in the future, such as when a
transaction is called or when the remaining pool balance is
relatively small.

The amount Wells Fargo withheld from the called transactions in
June reflects an assumption of future legal expenses of $3,000 per
loan originally in the trust, plus $130,000 for each transaction.
Notably, on the July distribution date, Wells Fargo withheld a
total of approximately $65,000 on the only called transaction
involved in ongoing litigation. Fitch assumes the lower amount
withheld for that transaction is due to its inclusion in the
recently approved Lehman Brothers RMBS settlement, which is
expected to result in its removal from the ongoing trustee
litigation.

Lacking any additional guidance from Wells Fargo, Fitch will assume
a withholding amount of $3,000 per loan and $130,000 per
transaction when analysing the risk of future payment disruption to
outstanding rated classes.

Fitch's rating analysis of payment disruption risk made
distinctions based on pool size, credit enhancement and whether the
transaction is callable.

At greatest risk are transactions in litigation that are currently
callable or callable within the near future and include bonds with
credit enhancement less than an estimated future retained amount
(based on an assumption of $3,000 per loan and $130,000 per
transaction). 298 of the 348 classes downgraded fall into this
category, including 44 classes that were previously investment
grade. Distinctions in ratings were made based on sensitivity
analysis that considered smaller retained amounts and considered
the economic incentive to call the transaction based on the
weighted average pool coupon and the pool delinquency. All classes
in this category were revised to a non-investment grade rating,
with the high majority at 'Bsf' or below.

At next greatest risk are classes with credit enhancement less than
the estimated future withholding amount, but within transactions
that will not soon be eligible to be called. 34 of the 348 classes
downgraded fall into this category, including five classes that
were previously investment grade. All classes in this category were
revised to a non-investment grade rating, with the high majority at
'Bsf' or below.

Ratings on some classes with credit enhancement greater than the
estimated future retained amount were downgraded to reflect that
credit enhancement will decline over time and that the future
retained amount assumption is only an estimate. Ratings were
downgraded on classes if the relationship multiple of credit
enhancement to the estimated future withholding amount was less
than 2.0x, 1.75x, 1.5x, 1.25x, 1.1x and 1.05x for existing ratings
of 'AAAsf', 'AAsf', 'Asf', 'BBBsf', 'BBsf' and 'Bsf', respectively.
16 of the 348 classes downgraded fall into this category, including
nine investment grade classes.

The consideration of the relationship between each bond's credit
enhancement to the estimated future retained amount is a variation
to Fitch's published rating criteria to reflect the specific risk
of the transactions currently included in lawsuits against
trustees.

RATING SENSITIVITIES

The ratings will be affected by future court decisions or the
resolution of pending litigation that can influence the risk of
payment disruption on the affected trusts.

The ratings may also be affected by a change in the fund retention
strategy by Wells Fargo.

It is currently uncertain how Wells Fargo's action affects the
probability that trusts named in litigation may be called through
an optional redemption. Fitch is currently assuming the probability
of a call is not affected.


[*] Fitch Takes Actions on 8 SLM Loan Trusts
--------------------------------------------
Fitch Ratings has taken rating actions on the notes of SLM Private
Credit Student Loan Trust (SLM) 2005-A, SLM 2005-B, SLM 2006-A, SLM
2006-B, SLM 2006-C, SLM 2007-A, SLM Private Education Loan Trust
(SLM PE) 2013-B and SLM PE 2013-C, and Navient Private Education
Loan Trust (Navient PE) 2015-A and Navient PE 2016-A.

Overall, Fitch has affirmed 20 tranches, upgraded 17 tranches and
downgraded 4 tranches of SLM, SLM PE, and Navient PE transactions.

A list of the Affected Ratings is available at:

                       http://bit.ly/2uJ5CSx

The rating actions reflect the transaction performance and
available credit enhancement (CE) as well as the implementation of
the recent publication of Fitch's "U.S. Private Student Loan ABS
Rating Criteria" (PSL criteria) on Aug. 4, 2017, which specified
some changes to the rating approach for notes with sequential pay
structure within the same class of notes, and removed the
one-rating category tolerance for default multiples in
surveillance.

SLM 2006-B's class A-5W notes are a portion of A-5 notes, receiving
interest and principal payments pro-rata with A-5 notes.

KEY RATING DRIVERS

Collateral Quality: All trusts are collateralized by private
student loans originated by Navient Corp. ('BB'/Stable/'B'). SLM
trusts were originated under the Signature Education Loan Program,
LAWLOANS program, MBA Loans program, and MEDLOANS program. SLM
2007-A also included loans originated under the Direct to Consumer
and Private Credit Consolidation. In addition to previously
mentioned programs, SLM PE and Navient PE also included Navient's
Smart Option program, launched in 2009.

Fitch's remaining default projections are 10.5%, 10.7%, 11.1%,
12.5%, 12.2%, 13.7%, 7.9%, 7.8%, 13.9%, 13.5% of the current pool
balance of SLM 2005-A, 2005-B, 2006-A, 2006-B, 2006-C, 2007-A, SLM
PE 2013-B, 2013-C, Navient PE 2015-A, 2016-A respectively. Recovery
assumption is 18% for all transactions.

Stress Multiple Definition: The agency applied a default stress
multiple in the lower end of the multiple range envisaged by
Fitch's PSL Criteria (resulting in a 3.5x multiple at 'AAAsf') to
SLM 2005-A and SLM 2005-B and a median/low multiple to all other
transactions (resulting in a 3.75x multiple at 'AAAsf'). The higher
multiple to post-2005 transactions reflects the higher volatility
in portfolios' default behavior for more seasoned deals and the
short performance data available on more recent deals.

CE: For all transactions, available CE is sufficient to provide
loss coverage in line with the assigned rating category. CE is
provided by a combination of overcollateralization (OC; the excess
of the trust's asset balance over the bond balance), excess spread,
and subordination of more junior notes. All transactions have
reached their target overcollateralization floor level.

Updated Analysis at Tranche Level: Under the PSL Criteria, Fitch
analyzes structure at tranche level (e.g. class A-3 and A-4 notes
within the A notes) rather than class level (class A notes as a
whole). The upgrades on the most senior tranches of SLM
transactions (class A-3 notes for SLM 2005-A and 2005-B, class A-4
notes for SLM 2006-A and 2006-C, class A-2 and A-3 notes for SLM
2007-A) reflect the current sequential payment structure within the
class A notes for all transactions. Principal payments within the A
notes may switch to a pro rata/pari passu amortization if the
collateral balance falls below the outstanding balance of the class
A notes. In Fitch's view, this trigger is unlikely to be breached
before the most senior tranches are redeemed in full, also under
'AAAsf' stressed scenarios.

Adequate Liquidity Support: For all transactions, liquidity support
is provided by a fully-funded non-amortizing reserve account. In
Fitch's view the available reserve accounts can cover 1-3 months of
senior costs and interest payments on the notes, adequately
mitigating payment interruption risk in all transactions.

Satisfactory Servicing Capabilities: Navient Solutions Inc. is the
servicer for all the loans in the trusts. Fitch has reviewed the
servicing operations of Navient and considers it to be an effective
private student loan servicer.

RATING SENSITIVITIES

SLM 2005-A
Expected impact on the note rating of increased defaults (class
A-3/A-4/B/C):
Current Ratings: 'AAAsf'/'A+sf'/'A-sf'/'BBBsf'
Increase base case defaults by 10%:'AAAsf'/'Asf'/'BBB+sf'/'BBBsf'
Increase base case defaults by 25%: 'AAAsf'/'A-sf'/'BBBsf'/'BB+sf'
Increase base case defaults by 50%:
'AAAsf'/'BBBsf'/'BB+sf'/'BB-sf'

Expected impact on the note rating of reduced recoveries ((class
A-3/A-4/B/C):
Current Ratings: 'AAAsf'/'A+sf'/'A-sf'/'BBBsf'
Reduce base case recoveries by 10%: 'AAAsf'/'A+sf'/'A-sf'/'BBBsf'
Reduce base case recoveries by 20%: 'AAAsf'/'A+sf'/'A-sf'/'BBBsf'
Reduce base case recoveries by 30%: 'AAAsf'/'A+sf'/'A-sf'/'BBBsf'

Expected impact on the note rating of increased defaults and
reduced recoveries (class A-3/A-4/B/C):
Current Ratings: 'AAAsf'/'A+sf'/'A-sf'/'BBBsf'
Increase base case defaults and reduce base case recoveries each by
10%: 'AAAsf'/'Asf'/'BBB+sf'/'BBBsf'
Increase base case defaults and reduce base case recoveries each by
25%: 'AAAsf'/'A-sf'/'BBBsf'/'BB+sf'
Increase base case defaults and reduce base case recoveries each by
50%: 'AAAsf'/'BBBsf'/'BBsf'/'Bsf'

SLM 2005-B
Expected impact on the note rating of increased defaults (class
A-3/A-4/B/C):
Current Ratings: 'AAAsf'/'A+sf'/'A-sf'/'BBBsf'
Increase base case defaults by 10%:'AAAsf'/'Asf'/'BBB+sf'/'BBB-sf'
Increase base case defaults by 25%: 'AAAsf'/'A-sf'/'BBBsf'/'BB+sf'
Increase base case defaults by 50%: 'AAAsf'/'BBBsf'/'BB+sf'/'B+sf'

Expected impact on the note rating of reduced recoveries ((class
A-3/A-4/B/C):
Current Ratings: 'AAAsf'/'A+sf'/'A-sf'/'BBBsf'
Reduce base case recoveries by 10%: 'AAAsf'/'A+sf'/'A-sf'/'BBBsf'
Reduce base case recoveries by 20%: 'AAAsf'/'A+sf'/'A-sf'/'BBBsf'
Reduce base case recoveries by 30%: 'AAAsf'/'Asf'/'A-sf'/'BBBsf'

Expected impact on the note rating of increased defaults and
reduced recoveries (class A-3/A-4/B/C):
Current Ratings: 'AAAsf'/'A+sf'/'A-sf'/'BBBsf'
Increase base case defaults and reduce base case recoveries each by
10%: 'AAAsf'/'Asf'/'BBB+sf'/'BBB-sf'
Increase base case defaults and reduce base case recoveries each by
25%: 'AAAsf'/'A-sf'/'BBBsf'/'BBsf'
Increase base case defaults and reduce base case recoveries each by
50%: 'AAAsf'/'BBBsf'/'BBsf'/'CCCsf'

SLM 2006-A
Expected impact on the note rating of increased defaults (class
A-4/A-5/B/C):
Current Ratings: 'AAAsf'/'A+sf'/'Asf'/'BBBsf'
Increase base case defaults by 10%:'AAAsf'/'Asf'/'A-sf'/'BBBsf'
Increase base case defaults by 25%: 'AAAsf'/'A-sf'/'BBBsf'/'BB+sf'
Increase base case defaults by 50%:
'AAAsf'/'BBBsf'/'BBB-sf'/'BB-sf'

Expected impact on the note rating of reduced recoveries (class
A-4/A-5/B/C):
Current Ratings: 'AAAsf'/'A+sf'/'Asf'/'BBBsf'
Reduce base case recoveries by 10%: 'AAAsf'/'A+sf'/'Asf'/'BBBsf'
Reduce base case recoveries by 20%: 'AAAsf'/'A+sf'/'Asf'/'BBBsf'
Reduce base case recoveries by 30%: 'AAAsf'/'A+sf'/'A-sf'/'BBBsf'

Expected impact on the note rating of increased defaults and
reduced recoveries (class A-4/A-5/B/C):
Current Ratings: 'AAAsf'/'A+sf'/'Asf'/'BBBsf'
Increase base case defaults and reduce base case recoveries each by
10%: 'AAAsf'/'Asf'/'A-sf'/'BBBsf'
Increase base case defaults and reduce base case recoveries each by
25%: 'AAAsf'/'A-sf'/'BBBsf'/'BB+sf'
Increase base case defaults and reduce base case recoveries each by
50%: 'AAAsf'/'BBBsf'/'BB+sf'/'Bsf'

SLM 2006-B
Expected impact on the note rating of increased defaults (class A-5
& class A-5W/B/C):
Current Ratings: 'Asf'/'BBB+sf'/'BBB-sf'
Increase base case defaults by 10%: 'A-sf'/'BBB+sf'/'BBB-sf'
Increase base case defaults by 25%: 'BBB+sf'/'BBB-sf'/'BBsf'
Increase base case defaults by 50%: 'BBB-sf'/'BBsf'/'Bsf'

Expected impact on the note rating of reduced recoveries (class A-5
& class A-5W/B/C):
Current Ratings: 'Asf'/'BBB+sf'/'BBB-sf'
Reduce base case recoveries by 10%: 'Asf'/'BBB+sf'/'BBB-sf'
Reduce base case recoveries by 20%: 'Asf'/'BBB+sf'/'BBB-sf'
Reduce base case recoveries by 30%: 'Asf'/'BBB+sf'/'BBB-sf'

Expected impact on the note rating of increased defaults and
reduced recoveries (class A-5 & class A-5W/B/C):
Current Ratings: 'Asf'/'BBB+sf'/'BBB-sf'
Increase base case defaults and reduce base case recoveries each by
10%: 'A-sf'/'BBBsf'/'BB+sf'
Increase base case defaults and reduce base case recoveries each by
25%: 'BBB+sf'/'BBB-sf'/'BBsf'
Increase base case defaults and reduce base case recoveries each by
50%: 'BB+sf'/'BBsf'/'CCCsf'
SLM 2006-C
Expected impact on the note rating of increased defaults (class
A-4/A-5/B/C):
Current Ratings: 'AAAsf'/'AA-sf'/'Asf'/'BBB-sf'
Increase base case defaults by 10%: 'AAAsf'/'A+sf'/'A-sf'/'BBB-sf'
Increase base case defaults by 25%: 'AAAsf'/'Asf'/'BBB+sf'/'BB+sf'
Increase base case defaults by 50%:
'AAAsf'/'BBB+sf'/'BBB-sf'/'Bsf'


Expected impact on the note rating of reduced recoveries (class
A-4/A-5/B/C):
Current Ratings: 'AAAsf'/'AA-sf'/'Asf'/'BBB-sf'
Reduce base case recoveries by 10%: 'AAAsf'/'AA-sf'/'Asf'/'BBB-sf'
Reduce base case recoveries by 20%: 'AAAsf'/'AA-sf'/'Asf'/'BBB-sf'
Reduce base case recoveries by 30%: 'AAAsf'/'AA-sf'/'Asf'/'BBB-sf'

Expected impact on the note rating of increased defaults and
reduced recoveries (class A-4/A-5/B/C):
Current Ratings: 'AAAsf'/'AA-sf'/'Asf'/'BBB-sf'
Increase base case defaults and reduce base case recoveries each by
10%: 'AAAsf'/'A+sf'/'A-sf'/'BBB-sf'
Increase base case defaults and reduce base case recoveries each by
25%: 'AAAsf'/'Asf'/'BBB+sf'/'BBsf'
Increase base case defaults and reduce base case recoveries each by
50%: 'AAAsf'/'BBBsf'/'BB+sf'/'CCCsf'

SLM 2007-A
Expected impact on the note rating of increased defaults (class
A-2/A-3/A-4/B/C-1/C-2):
Current Ratings: 'AAAsf'/'AAAsf'/ 'A-sf'/'BBBsf'/'BB+sf'/'BB+sf'
Increase base case defaults by 10%: 'AAAsf'/'AAAsf'/
'A-sf'/'BBBsf'/'BB+sf'/'BB+sf'
Increase base case defaults by 25%: 'AAAsf'/'AAAsf'/
'BBB+sf'/'BBB-sf'/'BBsf'/'BBsf'
Increase base case defaults by 50%: 'AAAsf'/'AAAsf'/
'BBB-sf'/'BBsf'/'CCCsf'/'CCCsf'

Expected impact on the note rating of reduced recoveries (class
A-2/A-3/A-4/B/C-1/C-2):
Current Ratings: 'AAAsf'/'AAAsf'/ 'A-sf'/'BBBsf'/'BB+sf'/'BB+sf'
Reduce base case recoveries by 10%: 'AAAsf'/'AAAsf'/
'A-sf'/'BBBsf'/'BB+sf'/'BB+sf'
Reduce base case recoveries by 20%: 'AAAsf'/'AAAsf'/
'A-sf'/'BBBsf'/'BB+sf'/'BB+sf'
Reduce base case recoveries by 30%: 'AAAsf'/'AAAsf'/
'A-sf'/'BBBsf'/'BB+sf'/'BB+sf'

Expected impact on the note rating of increased defaults and
reduced recoveries (class A-2/A-3/A-4/B/C-1/C-2):
Current Ratings: 'AAAsf'/'AAAsf'/ 'A-sf'/'BBBsf'/'BB+sf'/'BB+sf'
Increase base case defaults and reduce base case recoveries each by
10%: 'AAAsf'/'AAAsf'/ 'A-sf'/'BBBsf'/'BB+sf'/'BB+sf'
Increase base case defaults and reduce base case recoveries each by
25%: 'AAAsf'/'AAAsf'/ 'BBBsf'/'BBB-sf'/'BB-sf'/'BB-sf'
Increase base case defaults and reduce base case recoveries each by
50%: 'AAAsf'/'AAAsf'/ 'BB+sf'/'BB-sf'/'CCCsf'/'CCCsf'

SLM PE 2013-B
Expected impact on the note rating of increased defaults (class
A-1/A-2A/A-2B/B): 'AAAsf'/'AAAsf'/'AAAsf'/'AAAsf'
Current Ratings: 'AAAsf'/'AAAsf'/'AAAsf'/'AAAsf'
Increase base case defaults by 10%:
'AAAsf'/'AAAsf'/'AAAsf'/'AAAsf'
Increase base case defaults by 25%:
'AAAsf'/'AAAsf'/'AAAsf'/'AAAsf'
Increase base case defaults by 50%:
'AAAsf'/'AAAsf'/'AAAsf'/'AAAsf'

Expected impact on the note rating of reduced recoveries (class
A-1/A-2A/A-2B/B):
Current Ratings: 'AAAsf'/'AAAsf'/'AAAsf'/'AAAsf'
Reduce base case recoveries by 10%:
'AAAsf'/'AAAsf'/'AAAsf'/'AAAsf'
Reduce base case recoveries by 20%:
'AAAsf'/'AAAsf'/'AAAsf'/'AAAsf'
Reduce base case recoveries by 30%:
'AAAsf'/'AAAsf'/'AAAsf'/'AAAsf'

Expected impact on the note rating of increased defaults and
reduced recoveries (class A-1/A-2A/A-2B/B):
Current Ratings: 'AAAsf'/'AAAsf'/'AAAsf'/'AAAsf'
Increase base case defaults and reduce base case recoveries each by
10%: 'AAAsf'/'AAAsf'/'AAAsf'/'AAAsf'
Increase base case defaults and reduce base case recoveries each by
25%: 'AAAsf'/'AAAsf'/'AAAsf'/'AAAsf'
Increase base case defaults and reduce base case recoveries each by
50%: 'AAAsf'/'AAAsf'/'AAAsf'/'AAAsf'

SLM PE 2013-C
Expected impact on the note rating of increased defaults (class
A-2A/A-2B/B): 'AAAsf'/'AAAsf'/'AAAsf'
Current Ratings: 'AAAsf'/'AAAsf'/'AAAsf'
Increase base case defaults by 10%: 'AAAsf'/'AAAsf'/'AAAsf'
Increase base case defaults by 25%: 'AAAsf'/'AAAsf'/'AAAsf'
Increase base case defaults by 50%: 'AAAsf'/'AAAsf'/'AAAsf'

Expected impact on the note rating of reduced recoveries (class
A-2A/A-2B/B):
Current Ratings: 'AAAsf'/'AAAsf'/'AAAsf'
Reduce base case recoveries by 10%: 'AAAsf'/'AAAsf'/'AAAsf'
Reduce base case recoveries by 20%: 'AAAsf'/'AAAsf'/'AAAsf'
Reduce base case recoveries by 30%: 'AAAsf'/'AAAsf'/'AAAsf'

Expected impact on the note rating of increased defaults and
reduced recoveries (class A-2A/A-2B/B):
Current Ratings: 'AAAsf'/'AAAsf'/'AAAsf'
Increase base case defaults and reduce base case recoveries each by
10%: 'AAAsf'/'AAAsf'/'AAAsf'
Increase base case defaults and reduce base case recoveries each by
25%: 'AAAsf'/'AAAsf'/'AAAsf'
Increase base case defaults and reduce base case recoveries each by
50%: 'AAAsf'/'AAAsf'/'AAAsf'

Navient PE 2015-A
Expected impact on the note rating of increased defaults (class
A-2A/A-2B/A-3/B):
Current Ratings: 'AAAsf'/'AAAsf'/'AAAsf'/'AAsf'
Increase base case defaults by 10%: 'AAAsf'/'AAAsf'/'AAAsf'/'AAsf'
Increase base case defaults by 25%: 'AAAsf'/'AAAsf'/'AAAsf'/'A+sf'
Increase base case defaults by 50%: 'AAAsf'/'AAAsf'/'AAAsf'/'Asf'

Expected impact on the note rating of reduced recoveries (class
A-2A/A-2B/A-3/B):
Current Ratings: 'AAAsf'/'AAAsf'/'AAAsf'/'AAsf'
Reduce base case recoveries by 10%: 'AAAsf'/'AAAsf'/'AAAsf'/'AAsf'
Reduce base case recoveries by 20%: 'AAAsf'/'AAAsf'/'AAAsf'/'AAsf'
Reduce base case recoveries by 30%: 'AAAsf'/'AAAsf'/'AAAsf'/'AAsf'

Expected impact on the note rating of increased defaults and
reduced recoveries (class A-2A/A-2B/A-3/B):
Current Ratings: 'AAAsf'/'AAAsf'/'AAAsf'/'AAsf'
Increase base case defaults and reduce base case recoveries each by
10%: 'AAAsf'/'AAAsf'/'AAAsf'/'AA-sf'
Increase base case defaults and reduce base case recoveries each by
25%: 'AAAsf'/'AAAsf'/'AA+sf'/'A+sf'
Increase base case defaults and reduce base case recoveries each by
50%: 'AAAsf'/'AAsf'/'A+sf'/'A-sf'

Navient PE 2016-A
Expected impact on the note rating of increased defaults (class
A-1/A-2A/A-2B/B):
Current Ratings: 'AAAsf'/'AAAsf'/'AAAsf'/'AAsf'
Increase base case defaults by 10%: 'AAAsf'/'AAAsf'/'AAAsf'/'AAsf'
Increase base case defaults by 25%:
'AAAsf'/'AA+sf'/'AA+sf'/'AA-sf'
Increase base case defaults by 50%: 'AAAsf'/'AA-sf'/'AA-sf'/'Asf'

Expected impact on the note rating of reduced recoveries (class
A-1/A-2A/A-2B/B):
Current Ratings: 'AAAsf'/'AAAsf'/'AAAsf'/'AAsf'
Reduce base case recoveries by 10%:'AAAsf'/'AAAsf'/'AAAsf'/'AAsf'
Reduce base case recoveries by 20%: 'AAAsf'/'AAAsf'/'AAAsf'/'AAsf'
Reduce base case recoveries by 30%: 'AAAsf'/'AAAsf'/'AAAsf'/'AAsf'

Expected impact on the note rating of increased defaults and
reduced recoveries (class A-1/A-2A/A-2B/B):
Current Ratings: 'AAAsf'/'AAAsf'/'AAAsf'/'AAsf'
Increase base case defaults and reduce base case recoveries each by
10%: 'AAAsf'/'AAAsf'/'AAAsf'/'AAsf'
Increase base case defaults and reduce base case recoveries each by
25%: 'AAAsf'/'AA+sf'/'AA+sf'/'A+sf'
Increase base case defaults and reduce base case recoveries each by
50%: 'AAAsf'/'A+sf'/'A+sf'/'Asf'


[*] Moody's Withdraws Ratings on 8 Tranches From 5 RMBS BofA Deals
------------------------------------------------------------------
Moody's Investors Service has withdrawn the ratings of 8 tranches
from 5 Bank of America RMBS transactions.

Issuer: Banc of America Alternative Loan Trust 2004-1

Cl. 1-A-1, Withdrawn (sf); previously on Aug 14, 2017 Downgraded to
B1 (sf) and Remained On Review for Possible Downgrade

Cl. 2-A-1, Withdrawn (sf); previously on Aug 14, 2017 Downgraded to
B1 (sf) and Remained On Review for Possible Downgrade

Issuer: Banc of America Alternative Loan Trust 2004-2

Cl. 1-A-1, Withdrawn (sf); previously on Aug 14, 2017 Downgraded to
B1 (sf) and Remained On Review for Possible Downgrade

Cl. 3-A-1, Withdrawn (sf); previously on Aug 14, 2017 Downgraded to
B1 (sf) and Remained On Review for Possible Downgrade

Issuer: Banc of America Alternative Loan Trust 2004-4

Cl. 1-A-1, Withdrawn (sf); previously on Aug 14, 2017 Downgraded to
B1 (sf) and Remained On Review for Possible Downgrade

Cl. 2-A-1, Withdrawn (sf); previously on Aug 14, 2017 Downgraded to
B1 (sf) and Remained On Review for Possible Downgrade

Issuer: Banc of America Alternative Loan Trust 2004-8

Cl. 2-CB-1, Withdrawn (sf); previously on Aug 14, 2017 Downgraded
to B1 (sf) and Remained On Review for Possible Downgrade

Issuer: Banc of America Mortgage 2004-10 Trust

Cl. 1-A-3, Withdrawn (sf); previously on Aug 14, 2017 Downgraded to
B1 (sf) and Remained On Review for Possible Downgrade

RATINGS RATIONALE

On August 14, 2017, the 8 bonds that are subject to withdrawal
action were downgraded and remained on watch for possible
downgrade. These 8 bonds previously suffered losses at the time of
optional termination ("clean-up call") on June 25, 2017 when the
trustee, Wells Fargo Bank N.A. (Wells Fargo), as trustee of the
affected transactions, withheld some funds received from the
clean-up calls to establish reserve accounts to meet current and
future expenses for litigation costs and potential judgments
resulting from claims against Wells Fargo related to the trusts.
The August 14, 2017 announcement noted the lack of sufficient
guidance around the timing, amount and method of any future
distributions of unused funds currently held in these reserve
accounts and the lack of reports on remittances and actual flow of
funds needed to monitor ratings.

Moody's has withdrawn the rating[s] because it believes it has
insufficient or otherwise inadequate information to support the
maintenance of the rating[s].


[*] S&P Discontinues Ratings on 123 Classes From 38 CDO Deals
-------------------------------------------------------------
S&P Global Ratings discontinued its ratings on 114 classes from 33
cash flow (CF) collateralized loan obligation (CLO) transactions
and nine classes from five CF collateral debt obligations (CDO)
backed by commercial mortgage-backed securities (CMBS).

The discontinuances follow the complete paydowns of the notes as
reflected in the most recent trustee-issued note payment reports
for each transaction:

-- Airlie CLO 2006-II Ltd. (CF CLO): senior-most tranches paid
down; other rated tranches still outstanding.
-- AMMC CLO IX Ltd. (CF CLO): optional redemption in July 2017.
-- Anthracite CDO III Ltd. (CF CDO of CMBS): senior-most tranches
paid down; other rated tranches still outstanding.
-- ARCap 2004-1 Resecuritization Trust (CF CDO of CMBS):
senior-most tranches paid down; other rated tranches still
outstanding.
-- ARCap 2004-1 Resecuritization Trust Class B (CF CDO of CMBS):
tranche paid down.
-- Battalion CLO III Ltd. (CF CLO): optional redemption in July
2017.
-- BlueMountain CLO 2012-1 Ltd. (CF CLO): all rated tranches paid
down.
-- CVP Cascade CLO-3 Ltd. (CF CLO): optional redemption in July
2017.
-- CWCapital COBALT II Ltd. (CF CDO of CMBS): senior-most tranches
paid down; other rated tranches still outstanding.
-- Denali Capital CLO VII Ltd. (CF CLO): optional redemption in
July 2017.
-- Flatiron CLO 2007-1 Ltd. (CF CLO): senior-most tranches paid
down; other rated tranches still outstanding.
-- Gale Force 3 CLO Ltd. (CF CLO): optional redemption in July
2017.
-- GLG Ore Hill CLO 2013-1 Ltd. (CF CLO): senior-most tranches
paid down; other rated tranches still outstanding.
-- Global Leveraged Capital Credit Opportunity Fund I (CF CLO):
senior-most tranches paid down; other rated tranches still
outstanding.
-- GoldenTree Loan Opportunities XII Ltd. (CF CLO): senior-most
tranches paid down; other rated tranches still outstanding.
-- Golub Capital Partners CLO 14 Ltd. (CF CLO): senior-most
tranches paid down; other rated tranches still outstanding.
-- Golub Capital Partners CLO 15 Ltd. (CF CLO): senior-most
tranches paid down; other rated tranches still outstanding.
-- JFIN CLO 2007 Ltd. (CF CLO): optional redemption in July 2017.
-- JFIN Revolver CLO 2015 Ltd. (CF CLO): senior-most tranches paid
down; other rated tranches still outstanding.
-- KCAP Senior Funding I LLC (CF CLO): optional redemption in July
2017.
-- Madison Park Funding VI Ltd. (CF CLO): optional redemption in
July 2017.
-- Marlborough Street CLO Ltd. (CF CLO): senior-most tranches paid
down; other rated tranches still outstanding.
-- Mountain Capital CLO VI Ltd. (CF CLO): all rated tranches paid
down.
-- Mountain View CLO III Ltd. (CF CLO): senior-most tranches paid
down; other rated tranches still outstanding.
-- Neuberger Berman CLO XIII Ltd. (CF CLO): optional redemption in
July 2017.
-- Northwoods Capital IX Ltd. (CF CLO): all rated tranches paid
down.
-- PPM Grayhawk CLO Ltd. (CF CLO): senior-most tranches paid down;
other rated tranches still outstanding.
-- Sorin Real Estate CDO IV Ltd. (CF CLO): senior-most tranches
paid down; other rated tranches still outstanding.
-- Telos CLO 2013-3 Ltd. (CF CLO): optional redemption in July
2017.
-- Telos CLO 2016-7 (CF CLO): optional redemption in July 2017.
-- Tralee CDO I Ltd. (CF CLO): optional redemption in July 2017.
-- Trinitas CLO II Ltd. (CF CLO): senior-most tranches paid down;
other rated tranches still outstanding.
-- Vibrant CLO Ltd. (CF CLO): optional redemption in July 2017.
-- Voya CLO 2012-2 Ltd (CF CLO): optional redemption in July
2017.
-- Voya CLO 2012-3 Ltd. (CF CLO): optional redemption in July
2017.
-- Voya CLO III Ltd. (CF CLO): all rated tranches paid down.
-- Voya CLO IV Ltd. (CF CLO): senior-most tranches paid down;
other rated tranches still outstanding.
-- WhiteHorse IV Ltd. (CF CLO): optional redemption in July 2017.

RATINGS DISCONTINUED

  Airlie CLO 2006-II Ltd.
                              Rating
  Class               To                  From
  B                   NR                  AAA (sf)

  AMMC CLO IX Ltd.
                              Rating
  Class               To                  From
  A-R                 NR                  AAA (sf)
  B-1-R               NR                  AA (sf)
  B-2-R               NR                  AA (sf)
  C-R                 NR                  A (sf)
  D-R                 NR                  BBB (sf)
  E-R                 NR                  BB (sf)

  Anthracite CDO III Ltd.
                              Rating
  Class               To                  From
  CFL                 NR                  CCC+ (sf)
  CFX                 NR                  CCC+ (sf)

  ARCap 2004-1 Resecuritization Trust
                             Rating
  Class               To                  From
  B                   NR                  BB+ (sf)

  ARCap 2004-1 Resecuritization Trust Class B
                              Rating
  Class               To                  From
  B                   NR                  BB+ (sf)

  Battalion CLO III Ltd.
                              Rating
  Class               To                  From
  A-1                 NR                  AAA (sf)
  A-2                 NR                  AA (sf)
  B                   NR                  A (sf)
  C                   NR                  BBB (sf)
  D                   NR                  BB (sf)

  BlueMountain CLO 2012-1 Ltd.
                              Rating
  Class               To                  From
  A                   NR                  AAA (sf)
  B                   NR                  AA+ (sf)
  C                   NR                  A+ (sf)
  D                   NR                  BBB+ (sf)
  E                   NR                  BB (sf)

  CVP Cascade CLO-3 Ltd.
                              Rating
  Class               To                  From
  A-1                 NR                  AAA (sf)
  A-X                 NR                  AAA (sf)
  B                   NR                  AA (sf)
  C                   NR                  A (sf)
  D                   NR                  BBB (sf)
  E                   NR                  BB (sf)

  CWCapital COBALT II Ltd.
                              Rating
  Class               To                  From
  A-1A                NR                  BB- (sf)
  A-1AR               NR                  BB- (sf)
  A-1B                NR                  CCC- (sf)
  A-2B                NR                  CCC- (sf)

  Denali Capital CLO VII Ltd.
                              Rating
  Class               To                  From
  A-1L                NR                  AAA (sf)
  A-1LR               NR                  AAA (sf)
  A-2L                NR                  AA+ (sf)
  A-3L                NR                  AA- (sf)
  B-1L                NR                  BBB+ (sf)
  B-2L                NR                  BB+ (sf)

  Flatiron CLO 2007-1 Ltd.
                              Rating
  Class               To                  From
  A-1B                NR                  AAA (sf)

  Gale Force 3 CLO Ltd.
                              Rating
  Class               To                  From
  C                   NR                  AAA (sf)
  D                   NR                  AA+ (sf)
  E                   NR                  BB+ (sf)

  GLG Ore Hill CLO 2013-1 Ltd.
                              Rating
  Class               To                  From
  X-2                 NR                  AAA (sf)

  Global Leveraged Capital Credit Opportunity Fund I
                              Rating
  Class               To                  From
  C                   NR                  AAA (sf)

  GoldenTree Loan Opportunities XII Ltd.
                              Rating
  Class               To                  From
  X                   NR                  AAA (sf)

  Golub Capital Partners CLO 14 Ltd.
                              Rating
  Class               To                  From
  A                   NR                  AAA (sf)

  Golub Capital Partners CLO 15 Ltd.
                              Rating
  Class               To                  From
  A-1                 NR                  AAA (sf)

  JFIN CLO 2007 Ltd.
                              Rating
  Class               To                  From
  C                   NR                  AAA (sf)
  D                   NR                  AA+ (sf)

  JFIN Revolver CLO 2015 Ltd.
                              Rating
  Class               To                  From
  A-1                 NR                  AAA (sf)
  A-F                 NR                  AAA (sf)

  KCAP Senior Funding I LLC
                              Rating
  Class               To                  From  
  A-1                 NR                  AAA (sf)
  A-2                 NR                  AAA (sf)
  B-1                 NR                  AA+ (sf)
  B-2                 NR                  AA+ (sf)
  C-1                 NR                  A+ (sf)
  C-2                 NR                  A+ (sf)
  D-1                 NR                  BBB+ (sf)
  D-2                 NR                  BBB+ (sf)

  Madison Park Funding VI Ltd.
                              Rating
  Class               To                  From
  A-1                 NR                  AAA (sf)
  A-2                 NR                  AAA (sf)
  B                   NR                  AA+ (sf)
  C                   NR                  AA- (sf)
  D                   NR                  A- (sf)
  E                   NR                  BB+ (sf)

  Marlborough Street CLO Ltd.
                              Rating
  Class               To                  From
  D                   NR                  BBB+ (sf)

  Mountain Capital CLO VI Ltd.
                              Rating
  Class               To                  From
  E                   NR                  B- (sf)

  Mountain View CLO III Ltd.
                              Rating
  Class               To                  From
  A-2                 NR                  AAA (sf)
  B                   NR                  AAA (sf)

  Neuberger Berman CLO XIII Ltd.
                              Rating
  Class               To                  From
  A                   NR                  AAA (sf)
  B                   NR                  AA (sf)
  C                   NR                  A (sf)
  D                   NR                  BBB (sf)
  E                   NR                  BB (sf)
  F                   NR                  B+ (sf)

  Northwoods Capital IX Ltd.
                              Rating
  Class               To                  From
  A                   NR                  AAA (sf)
  B-1                 NR                  AA (sf)
  B-2                 NR                  AA (sf)
  C-1                 NR                  A (sf)
  C-2                 NR                  A (sf)
  D                   NR                  BBB (sf)
  E                   NR                  BB- (sf)

  PPM Grayhawk CLO Ltd.
                              Rating
  Class               To                  From
  B                   NR                  AA+ (sf)

  Sorin Real Estate CDO IV Ltd.
                              Rating
  Class               To                  From
  B                   NR                  B- (sf)

  Telos CLO 2013-3 Ltd.
                              Rating
  Class               To                  From
  A                   NR                  AAA (sf)
  B                   NR                  AA (sf)
  C                   NR                  A (sf)
  D                   NR                  BBB (sf)
  E                   NR                  BB (sf)
  F                   NR                  B (sf)

  Telos CLO 2016-7
                              Rating
  Class               To                  From
  A                   NR                  AAA (sf)
  B                   NR                  AA (sf)
  C                   NR                  A (sf)
  D                   NR                  BBB- (sf)
  E                   NR                  BB- (sf)

  Tralee CDO I Ltd.
                              Rating
  Class               To                  From
  A-1                 NR                  AAA (sf)
  A-2a                NR                  AAA (sf)
  A-2b                NR                  AAA (sf)
  B                   NR                  AA+ (sf)
  C                   NR                  A+ (sf)
  D                   NR                  BB+ (sf)

  Trinitas CLO II Ltd.
                             Rating
  Class               To                  From
  X                   NR                  AAA (sf)

  Vibrant CLO Ltd.
                              Rating
  Class               To                  From
  A-1AR               NR                  AAA (sf)
  A-1L                NR                  AAA (sf)
  A-2R                NR                  AA (sf)
  B-R                 NR                  A (sf)  
  C-R                 NR                  BBB (sf)
  D-R                 NR                  BB (sf)

  Voya CLO 2012-2 Ltd.
                              Rating
  Class               To                  From
  A-R                 NR                  AAA (sf)
  B-R                 NR                  AA (sf)
  C-R                 NR                  A (sf)
  D-R                 NR                  BBB (sf)
  E-R                 NR                  BB (sf)

  Voya CLO 2012-3 Ltd.
                              Rating
  Class               To                  From
  A-R                 NR                  AAA (sf)
  B-R                 NR                  AA (sf)
  C-R                 NR                  A (sf)
  D-R                 NR                  BBB (sf)
  E-R                 NR                  BB (sf)

  Voya CLO III Ltd.
                              Rating
  Class               To                  From
  D                   NR                  AA+ (sf)

  Voya CLO IV Ltd.
                              Rating
  Class               To                  From
  A-1                 NR                  AAA (sf)
  A-2                 NR                  AAA (sf)

  WhiteHorse IV Ltd.
                              Rating
  Class               To                  From
  B                   NR                  AA+ (sf)
  C                   NR                  A+ (sf)
  D                   NR                  BB+ (sf)

  NR--Not rated.


[*] S&P Puts Ratings on 45 Tranches From 13 CLO Deals on Watch Pos.
-------------------------------------------------------------------
S&P Global Ratings placed its ratings on 46 tranches from 13 U.S.
collateralized loan obligation (CLO) transactions on CreditWatch
with positive implications.

The affected tranches had an original issuance amount of $1.61
billion. Two transactions were issued in 2006, four were issued in
2007, three were issued in 2012, and four were issued in 2013.

The CreditWatch positive placements resulted from enhanced
overcollateralization due to paydowns to the senior tranches of
these CLO transactions. All of the transactions have exited their
reinvestment periods.

S&P said, "We expect to resolve today's CreditWatch placements
within 90 days after we complete a comprehensive cash flow analysis
and committee review for each of the affected transactions. We will
continue to monitor the collateralized debt obligation transactions
we rate and take rating actions, including CreditWatch placements,
as we deem appropriate."

RATINGS PLACED ON CREDITWATCH POSITIVE

  ACAS CLO 2013-1 Ltd.
                       Rating
  Class       To                    From
  B-1         AA (sf)/Watch Pos     AA (sf)
  B-2         AA (sf)/Watch Pos     AA (sf)
  C           A (sf)/Watch Pos      A (sf)
  D           BBB (sf)/Watch Pos    BBB (sf)
  E           BB (sf)/Watch Pos     BB (sf)
  F           B (sf)/Watch Pos      B (sf)

  Ares XXVI CLO Ltd.
                       Rating
  Class       To                    From
  B           AA (sf)/Watch Pos     AA (sf)
  C           A (sf)/Watch Pos      A (sf)
  D           BBB (sf)/Watch Pos    BBB (sf)
  E           BB (sf)/Watch Pos     BB (sf)

  CIFC Funding 2012-II Ltd.
                       Rating
  Class       To                    From
  A-2R-F      AA (sf)/Watch Pos     AA (sf)
  A-2R-L      AA (sf)/Watch Pos     AA (sf)
  A-3R        A (sf)/Watch Pos      A (sf)
  B-1R        BBB (sf)/Watch Pos    BBB (sf)
  B-2R        BB- (sf)/Watch Pos    BB- (sf)

  Crown Point CLO II Ltd.
                       Rating
  Class       To                    From
  A-2L        AA (sf)/Watch Pos     AA (sf)
  A-3L        A (sf)/Watch Pos      A (sf)
  B-1L        BBB (sf)/Watch Pos    BBB (sf)
  B-2L        BB- (sf)/Watch Pos    BB- (sf)
  Combination AA (sf)/Watch Pos     AA (sf)

  Halcyon Loan Advisors Funding 2012-1 Ltd.
                       Rating
  Class       To                    From
  A-2         AA+ (sf)/Watch Pos    AA+ (sf)
  B           A (sf)/Watch Pos      A (sf)
  C           BBB (sf)/Watch Pos    BBB (sf)

  Halcyon Loan Advisors Funding 2012-2 Ltd.
                       Rating
  Class       To                    From
  B           AA (sf)/Watch Pos     AA (sf)
  C           A (sf)/Watch Pos      A (sf)
  D           BBB (sf)/Watch Pos    BBB (sf)

  Hillmark Funding Ltd.
                       Rating
  Class       To                    From
  A-2         AA+ (sf)/Watch Pos    AA+ (sf)
  B           A+ (sf)/Watch Pos     A+ (sf)
  C           BB+ (sf)/Watch Pos    BB+ (sf)

  Kingsland IV Ltd.
                       Rating
  Class       To                    From
  C           AA+ (sf)/Watch Pos    AA+ (sf)
  D           AA- (sf)/Watch Pos    AA- (sf)
  E           BBB+ (sf)/Watch Pos   BBB+ (sf)

  Mountain View CLO III Ltd.
                       Rating
  Class       To                    From
  C           AA+ (sf)/Watch Pos    AA+ (sf)
  D           BBB+ (sf)/Watch Pos   BBB+ (sf)

  Nomad CLO Ltd.
                       Rating
  Class       To                    From
  A-2         AA+ (sf)/Watch Pos    AA+ (sf)
  B           A+ (sf)/Watch Pos     A+ (sf)
  C           BBB (sf)/Watch Pos    BBB (sf)

  Venture VIII CDO Ltd.
                       Rating
  Class       To                    From
  B           AA+ (sf)/Watch Pos    AA+ (sf)
  C           A+ (sf)/Watch Pos     A+ (sf)
  D           BBB- (sf)/Watch Pos   BBB- (sf)

  Voya CLO IV Ltd.
                       Rating
  Class       To                    From
  B           AA+ (sf)/Watch Pos    AA+ (sf)
  C           A+ (sf)/Watch Pos     A+ (sf)
  D           BBB+ (sf)/Watch Pos   BBB+ (sf)

  Wasatch CLO Ltd.
                       Rating
  Class       To                    From
  A-2         AA+ (sf)/Watch Pos    AA+ (sf)
  B           A+ (sf)/Watch Pos     A+ (sf)
  C           BBB- (sf)/Watch Pos   BBB- (sf)


[*] S&P Takes Various Actions on 164 Classes From 14 US RMBS Deals
------------------------------------------------------------------
S&P Global Ratings completed its review of 164 classes from 14 U.S.
residential mortgage-backed securities (RMBS) transactions issued
between 2002 and 2007. All of these transactions are backed by
prime jumbo collateral. The review yielded four upgrades, 30
downgrades, 89 affirmations, 27 withdrawals, and 14
discontinuances.

Analytical Considerations

S&P said, "We incorporate various considerations into our decisions
to raise, lower, or affirm ratings when reviewing the indicative
ratings suggested by our projected cash flows. These considerations
are based on transaction-specific performance or structural
characteristics (or both) and their potential effects on certain
classes." Some of these considerations include:

-- Collateral performance/delinquency trends;
-- Proportion of reperforming loans in the pool;
-- Tail risk;
-- Erosion of credit support;
-- Expected short duration;
-- Interest-only criteria;
-- Principal-only criteria; and
-- Available subordination and/or overcollateralization.

Rating Actions

The affirmations of ratings reflect S&P's opinion that its
projected credit support and collateral performance on these
classes has remained relatively consistent with its prior
projections.

A list of the Affected Ratings is available at:

          http://bit.ly/2vT9p4y


[*] S&P Takes Various Actions on 74 Classes From 11 US RMBS Deals
-----------------------------------------------------------------
S&P Global Ratings completed its review of 74 classes from 11 U.S.
residential mortgage-backed securities (RMBS) transactions issued
between 1999 and 2004. All of these transactions are backed by
prime jumbo collateral. The review yielded 10 upgrades, nine
downgrades, 46 affirmations, and nine withdrawals.

Analytical Considerations

S&P incorporates various considerations into its decisions to
raise, lower, or affirm ratings when reviewing the indicative
ratings suggested by its projected cash flows. These considerations
are based on transaction-specific performance or structural
characteristics (or both) and their potential effects on certain
classes. Some of these considerations include:

-- Collateral performance/delinquency trends;
-- Historical interest shortfalls;
-- Priority of principal payments;
-- Proportion of reperforming loans in the pool;
-- Tail risk; and
-- Available subordination.

Rating Actions

The affirmations of ratings reflect S&P's opinion that its
projected credit support and collateral performance on these
classes has remained relatively consistent with its prior
projections.

A list of the Affected Ratings is available at:

        http://bit.ly/2v7gpq3



                            *********

Monday's edition of the TCR delivers a list of indicative prices
for bond issues that reportedly trade well below par.  Prices are
obtained by TCR editors from a variety of outside sources during
the prior week we think are reliable.  Those sources may not,
however, be complete or accurate.  The Monday Bond Pricing table
is compiled on the Friday prior to publication.  Prices reported
are not intended to reflect actual trades.  Prices for actual
trades are probably different.  Our objective is to share
information, not make markets in publicly traded securities.
Nothing in the TCR constitutes an offer or solicitation to buy or
sell any security of any kind.  It is likely that some entity
affiliated with a TCR editor holds some position in the issuers
public debt and equity securities about which we report.

Each Tuesday edition of the TCR contains a list of companies with
insolvent balance sheets whose shares trade higher than $3 per
share in public markets.  At first glance, this list may look like
the definitive compilation of stocks that are ideal to sell short.
Don't be fooled.  Assets, for example, reported at historical cost
net of depreciation may understate the true value of a firm's
assets.  A company may establish reserves on its balance sheet for
liabilities that may never materialize.  The prices at which
equity securities trade in public market are determined by more
than a balance sheet solvency test.

On Thursdays, the TCR delivers a list of recently filed
Chapter 11 cases involving less than $1,000,000 in assets and
liabilities delivered to nation's bankruptcy courts.  The list
includes links to freely downloadable images of these small-dollar
petitions in Acrobat PDF format.

Each Friday's edition of the TCR includes a review about a book of
interest to troubled company professionals.  All titles are
available at your local bookstore or through Amazon.com.  Go to
http://www.bankrupt.com/books/to order any title today.

Monthly Operating Reports are summarized in every Saturday edition
of the TCR.

The Sunday TCR delivers securitization rating news from the week
then-ending.

TCR subscribers have free access to our on-line news archive.
Point your Web browser to http://TCRresources.bankrupt.com/and use
the e-mail address to which your TCR is delivered to login.

                            *********

S U B S C R I P T I O N   I N F O R M A T I O N

Troubled Company Reporter is a daily newsletter co-published
by Bankruptcy Creditors Service, Inc., Fairless Hills,
Pennsylvania, USA, and Beard Group, Inc., Washington, D.C., USA.  
Jhonas Dampog, Marites Claro, Joy Agravante, Rousel Elaine
Tumanda, Valerie Udtuhan, Howard C. Tolentino, Carmel Paderog,
Meriam Fernandez, Joel Anthony G. Lopez, Cecil R. Villacampa,
Sheryl Joy P. Olano, Psyche A. Castillon, Ivy B. Magdadaro, Carlo
Fernandez, Christopher G. Patalinghug, and Peter A. Chapman,
Editors.

Copyright 2017.  All rights reserved.  ISSN: 1520-9474.

This material is copyrighted and any commercial use, resale or
publication in any form (including e-mail forwarding, electronic
re-mailing and photocopying) is strictly prohibited without prior
written permission of the publishers.  Information contained
herein is obtained from sources believed to be reliable, but is
not guaranteed.

The TCR subscription rate is $975 for 6 months delivered via
e-mail.  Additional e-mail subscriptions for members of the same
firm for the term of the initial subscription or balance thereof
are $25 each.  For subscription information, contact Peter A.
Chapman at 215-945-7000 or Nina Novak at 202-362-8552.

                   *** End of Transmission ***