TCR_Public/140202.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, February 2, 2014, Vol. 18, No. 32

                            Headlines

ACIS CLO 2013-2: S&P Affirms 'BB' Rating on Class E Notes
ACIS CLO 2014-3: S&P Assigns Prelim. BB Rating on Class E Notes
ALLEGRO CLO I: S&P Assigns 'BB' Rating on Class D Notes
ALM X: Moody's Assigns 'B2' Rating on $13MM Class E Notes
ARROWPOINT CLO 2014-2: S&P Assigns Prelim. BB- Rating on E Notes

BABCOCK & BROWN: S&P Lowers Rating on Class G-1 Notes to 'BB'
BABSON MID-MARKET: S&P Affirms 'BB+' Rating on Class E Notes
BALLYROCK CLO 2006-1: S&P Hikes Rating on Class E Notes From BB+
BANC OF AMERICA 2007-3: Moody's Affirm C Rating on 5 Note Classes
BANC ONE 200-C1: Moody's Affirms C Rating on Class X Securities

BEAR STEARNS 2002-PBW1: Moody's Affirms Caa1 Rating on Cl. H Notes
BEAR STEARNS 2004-BO1: Moody's Hikes Rating on M-7 Notes to Caa2
BLUEMOUNTAIN CLO 2013-3: S&P Affirms BB Rating on Class E Notes
CITIGROUP 2006-HE1: Moody's Raises Rating on Cl. M-2 Notes to 'B1'
CITIGROUP 2007-C6: Moodys Affirms 'Ba3' Rating on Cl. X Notes

COMM 1999-1: Moody's Affirms 'Caa3' Rating on Class X Securities
COMM 2011-FL1: Moody's Affirms Ba2 Rating on Class F Certs
COMM 2011-FL1: Moody's Affirms Ba2 Rating on Class F Notes
COMM 2013-CCRE6: Moody's Affirms B2 Rating on Class F Notes
COMM 2014-CCRE14: Moody's Assigns 'B2' Rating on Class F Certs

CREDIT SUISSE 2002-CKS4: Moody's Affirms C Rating on 2 Notes
CREDIT SUISSE 2006-C4: Moody's Affirms C Rating on 3 Cert Classes
CREDIT SUISSE 2004-C3: Moody's Affirms C Rating on 2 Cert Classes
CREDIT SUISSE 2007-TFL1: Moody's Affirms C Rating on 2 Certs
CREDIT SUISSE 2007-TFL-2: Moody's Ups Cl. A-2 Certs Rating to Ba2

CRF 19 LLC: S&P Puts BB+ Rating on Class C Notes on Watch Neg.
CS FIRST BOSTON 1998-C1: Moody's Affirms Caa1 Rating on A-X Secs.
CSMC TRUST 2014-IVR1: S&P Assigns 'BB' Rating on Class B-3 Notes
DBCCRE 2014-ARCP: S&P Assigns 'BB' Rating on $25MM Class E Notes
DEUTSCHE MORTGAGE 1998-C1: Moody's Affirms Caa3 Rating on X Certs

DEUTSCHE 2007-OA4: Moody's Puts Ca Rating on A-4 Secs. on Review
DLJ COMMERCIAL 1998-CF1: Moody's Affirms Caa1 Rating on S Certs
DLJ COMMERCIAL 1998-CF2: Moody's Cuts Cl. S Notes Rating to Caa3
DLJ COMMERCIAL 1999-CG1: Moody's Affirms Caa3 Cl. S Certs Rating
DLJ COMMERCIAL 1999-CG2: Moody's Affirms Caa3 Rating on S Certs

DLJ MORTGAGE 1997-CF2: Moody's Affirms Caa3 Rating on S Certs
DRYDEN XVI: Moody's Affirms 'Ba2' Rating on $17.5MM Cl. D Notes
EXETER AUTOMOBILE: S&P Assigns Prelim. BB Rating on Class D Notes
GE BUSINESS LOAN: S&P Affirms 'BB' Rating on Class D Notes
GREYLOCK SYNTHETIC: Moody's Hikes Rating on 2 Note Classes

GS MORTGAGE 2012-GC16: Moody's Affirms Ba2 Rating on Class E Notes
HARBOR SERIES 2006-1: Moody's Affirms Caa3 Rating on 3 Notes
HARBOR SERIES 2006-1: Moody's Affirms Caa2 Rating on Class A Notes
HIGHBRIDGE LOAN: S&P Assigns 'BB' Rating on $17MM Class D Notes
JP MORGAN 2005-A2: Moody's Cuts Cl. 5-A-1 Notes Rating to 'Caa3'

JP MORGAN 2005-LDP3: Rights Transfer No Impact on Moody's Ratings
JP MORGAN 2011-CCHP: Moody's Cuts Class E Notes' Rating to 'Ba3'
KINGSLAND IV: S&P Affirms BB Rating on Class E Notes
KINGSLAND V: S&P Affirms BB+ Rating on Class D-1 Notes
KKR FINANCIAL: Moody's Rates $22MM Class D Notes 'Ba3'

KODIAK CDO I: Moody's Hikes Rating on $103.5MM Notes to Caa1
LB COMMERCIAL 1998-C1: Moody's Affirms Caa2 Rating on IO Certs
LB MULTIFAMILY 1991-4: Moody's Affirms 'Caa1' Cl. A-1 Notes Rating
LCM XV: S&P Assigns Prelim. 'BB-' Rating on Class E Notes
LIGHTPOINT CLO V: S&P Lowers Rating on Class D Notes to 'BB-'

MADISON PARK IV: Moody's Hikes Rating on $21MM Cl. E Notes to Ba1
MERRILL LYNCH 1997-C2: Moody's Affirms Caa2 Rating on IO Certs
MERRILL LYNCH 1998-C3: Moody's Cuts Rating on IO Certs to Caa3
MIDOCEAN CREDIT CLO II: S&P Assigns 'BB' Rating on Class E Notes
MORGAN STANLEY 1997-WF1: Moody's Affirms Caa3 Rating on X-1 Notes

MORGAN STANLEY 2005-IQ10: Moody's Affirms C Rating on 2 Certs
MORGAN STANLEY 2006-TOP21: Moody's Affirms C Rating on Cl. L Notes
MORGAN STANLEY 2007-XLF: Moody's Affirms Ca Rating on M-HRO Certs
MORTGAGE CAPITAL: Moody's Affirms Caa2 Rating on Class X Certs
NEWPORT WAVES: Moody's Cuts Ratings on 2 Note Classes to Caa1(sf)

OFSI FUND III: S&P Raises Ratings on 2 Note Classes to 'B+'
OPTEUM MORTGAGE 2006-1: Moody's Cuts Cl.II-A1 Notes Rating to Caa1
OPTEUM MORTGAGE: Moody's Cuts Rating on Class II-A1 Notes to Caa1
PRUDENTIAL SECURITIES 2000-C1: Moody's Affirms C Rating on M Notes
PUTNAM STRUCTURED 2001-1: Moody's Affirms C Rating on C-1 Notes

SALOMON BROTHERS 1999-C1: Moody's Cuts Cl. X Notes Rating to Caa3
SARATOGA CLO I: Moody's Affirms Ba2 Rating on $6.75MM Notes
SCHOONER TRUST 2007-8: Moody's Affirms Ba1 Rating on Class F Notes
SEAWALL 2007-2: Moody's Affirms 'Ba2' Rating on Cl. C Notes
STRUCTURED ASSET 2003-S3: Moody's Ups Cl. M4 Secs. Rating to Caa3

TABERNA PREFERRED: Moody's Hikes Rating on $188.5MM Notes to Caa2
WACHOVIA BANK 2003-C3: S&P Lowers Rating on Class K Notes to D
WACHOVIA BANK 2003-C5: Moody's Cuts Rating on X-C Notes to Caa3
WACHOVIA BANK 2004-C10: S&P Cuts Rating on Cl. N Certs to 'D'
WFRBS COMMERCIAL 2011-C2: Moody's Affirms B2 Rating on F Certs

WFRBS COMMERCIAL 2014-LC14: Fitch To Rate $12MM F Securities 'Bsf'
WHITEHORSE VII: S&P Affirms 'BB-' Rating on Class B-2L Notes

* Moody's Takes Action on $1.2BB of Subprime RMBS Issued 2005-2007
* Moody's Takes Action on $31MM of Alt-A RMBS Issued From 2005
* Moody's Takes Action on $44.2MM of Prime Jumbo RMBS
* Moody's Takes Action on $711MM of Subprime RMBS
* Moody's Takes Action on $679MM of Subprime RMBS Issued 2005-2007

* Moody's Ups Ratings on $340MM of Subprime RMBS by Various Trusts
* S&P Raises 18 Ratings on 25 U.S. Synthetic CDO Transactions


                             *********

ACIS CLO 2013-2: S&P Affirms 'BB' Rating on Class E Notes
---------------------------------------------------------
Standard & Poor's Ratings Services affirmed its ratings on ACIS
CLO 2013-2 Ltd./ACIS CLO 2013-2 LLC's $849.43 million floating-
rate notes following the transaction's effective date as of
Nov. 14, 2013.

Most U.S. cash flow collateralized loan obligations (CLOs) close
before purchasing the full amount of their targeted level of
portfolio collateral.  On the closing date, the collateral manager
typically covenants to purchase the remaining collateral within
the guidelines specified in the transaction documents to reach the
target level of portfolio collateral.  Typically, the CLO
transaction documents specify a date by which the targeted level
of portfolio collateral must be reached.  The "effective date" for
a CLO transaction is usually the earlier of the date on which the
transaction acquires the target level of portfolio collateral, or
the date defined in the transaction documents.  Most transaction
documents contain provisions directing the trustee to request the
rating agencies that have issued ratings upon closing to affirm
the ratings issued on the closing date after reviewing the
effective date portfolio.

"An effective date rating affirmation reflects our opinion that
the portfolio collateral purchased by the issuer, as reported to
us by the trustee and collateral manager, in combination with the
transaction's structure, provides sufficient credit support to
maintain the ratings that we assigned on the transaction's closing
date.  The effective date reports provide a summary of certain
information that we used in our analysis and the results of our
review based on the information presented to us," S&P said.

"We believe the transaction may see some benefit from allowing a
window of time after the closing date for the collateral manager
to acquire the remaining assets for a CLO transaction.  This
window of time is typically referred to as a "ramp-up period."
Because some CLO transactions may acquire most of their assets
from the new issue leveraged loan market, the ramp-up period may
give collateral managers the flexibility to acquire a more diverse
portfolio of assets," S&P added.

For a CLO that has not purchased its full target level of
portfolio collateral by the closing date, S&P's ratings on the
closing date and prior to its effective date review are generally
based on the application of its criteria to a combination of
purchased collateral, collateral committed to be purchased, and
the indicative portfolio of assets provided to S&P by the
collateral manager, and may also reflect its assumptions about the
transaction's investment guidelines.  This is because not all
assets in the portfolio have been purchased.

"When we receive a request to issue an effective date rating
affirmation, we perform quantitative and qualitative analysis of
the transaction in accordance with our criteria to assess whether
the initial ratings remain consistent with the credit enhancement
based on the effective date collateral portfolio.  Our analysis
relies on the use of CDO Evaluator to estimate a scenario default
rate at each rating level based on the effective date portfolio,
full cash flow modeling to determine the appropriate percentile
break-even default rate at each rating level, the application of
our supplemental tests, and the analytical judgment of a rating
committee," S&P noted.

"In our published effective date report, we discuss our analysis
of the information provided by the transaction's trustee and
collateral manager in support of their request for effective date
rating affirmation.  In most instances, we intend to publish an
effective date report each time we issue an effective date rating
affirmation on a publicly rated U.S. cash flow CLO," S&P said.

"On an ongoing basis after we issue an effective date rating
affirmation, we will periodically review whether, in our view, the
current ratings on the notes remain consistent with the credit
quality of the assets, the credit enhancement available to support
the notes, and other factors, and take rating actions as we deem
necessary," S&P said.

RATINGS AFFIRMED

ACIS CLO 2013-2 Ltd./ACIS CLO 2013-2 LLC

Class                      Rating                       Amount
                                                      (mil. $)
A                          AAA (sf)                     388.00
B                          AA (sf)                       69.00
C-1 (deferrable)           A (sf)                        28.00
C-2 (deferrable)           A (sf)                        25.00
D (deferrable)             BBB (sf)                      31.00
E (deferrable)             BB (sf)                       26.00
F (deferrable)             B (sf)                        13.00
Combination notes(i)       A (sf)                       269.43

(i) The combination notes consist of a $269.43 million maximum
     initial principal balance, comprising $204.98 million of the
     class A notes, $36.45 million of the class B notes, and
     $28.00 million of the class C-1 notes.


ACIS CLO 2014-3: S&P Assigns Prelim. BB Rating on Class E Notes
---------------------------------------------------------------
Standard & Poor's Ratings Services assigned its preliminary
ratings to ACIS CLO 2014-3 Ltd./ACIS CLO 2014-3 LLC's
$377.0 million floating- and fixed-rate notes.

The note issuance is a collateralized loan obligation
securitization backed by a revolving pool consisting primarily of
broadly syndicated senior secured loans.

The preliminary ratings are based on information as of Jan. 28,
2014.  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 credit enhancement provided to the rated notes through
      the subordination of cash flows that are payable to the
      subordinated notes.

   -- The transaction's credit enhancement, which is sufficient to
      withstand the defaults applicable for the supplemental tests
      (not including excess spread) and cash flow structure, which
      can withstand the default rate projected by Standard &
      Poor's CDO Evaluator model, as assessed by Standard & Poor's
      using the assumptions and methods outlined in its corporate
      collateralized debt obligation (CDO) criteria.

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

   -- The diversified collateral portfolio, which consists
      primarily of broadly syndicated speculative-grade senior
      secured term loans.

   -- The collateral manager's experienced management team.

   -- S&P's projections of the timely interest and ultimate
      principal payments on the rated notes, which S&P assessed
      using its cash flow analysis and assumptions commensurate
      with the assigned preliminary ratings under various
      interest-rate scenarios, including LIBOR ranging from
      0.2429%-12.7531%.

   -- The transaction's overcollateralization and interest
      coverage tests, a failure of which will lead to the
      diversion of interest and principal proceeds to reduce the
      rated notes' outstanding balance.

   -- The transaction's interest diversion test, a failure of
      which will lead to the reclassification of a certain amount
      of excess interest proceeds that are available before paying
      uncapped administrative expenses and fees, collateral
      manager incentive fees, and subordinated note payments, to
      principal proceeds to purchase additional collateral assets
      during the reinvestment period.

PRELIMINARY RATINGS ASSIGNED

ACIS CLO 2014-3 Ltd./ACIS CLO 2014-3 LLC

Class                  Rating                        Amount
                                                   (mil. $)
A-X                    AAA (sf)                        3.50
A-1A                   AAA (sf)                       205.0
A-1F                   AAA (sf)                        25.0
A-2A                   AAA (sf)                        15.0
A-2B                   AAA (sf)                         2.0
B                      AA (sf)                        56.00
C (deferrable)         A (sf)                         29.00
D (deferrable)         BBB (sf)                       19.00
E (deferrable)         BB (sf)                        17.50
F (deferrable)         B+ (sf)                         5.00
Subordinated notes     NR                             39.75

NR-Not rated.


ALLEGRO CLO I: S&P Assigns 'BB' Rating on Class D Notes
-------------------------------------------------------
Standard & Poor's Ratings Services assigned its ratings to Allegro
CLO I Ltd./Allegro CLO I LLC's $324.10 million floating-rate
notes.

The note issuance is backed by a revolving pool consisting
primarily of broadly syndicated senior secured loans.

The ratings reflect S&P's view of:

   -- The credit enhancement provided to the rated notes through
      the subordination of cash flows that are payable to the
      subordinated notes.

   -- The transaction's credit enhancement, which is sufficient to
      withstand the defaults applicable for the supplemental tests
      (excluding excess spread), and cash flow structure, which
      can withstand the default rate projected by Standard &
      Poor's CDO Evaluator model, as assessed by Standard & Poor's
      using the assumptions and methods outlined in its corporate
      collateralized debt obligation criteria.

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

   -- The diversified collateral portfolio, which consists
      primarily of broadly syndicated speculative-grade senior
      secured term loans.

   -- The collateral manager's experienced management team.

   -- S&P's projections regarding the timely interest and ultimate
      principal payments on the rated notes, which S&P assessed
      using its cash flow analysis and assumptions commensurate
      with the assigned ratings under various interest rate
      scenarios, including LIBOR ranging from 0.26%-12.78%.

   -- The transaction's overcollateralization and interest
      coverage tests, a failure of which will lead to the
      diversion of interest and principal proceeds to reduce the
      balance of the rated notes outstanding.

   -- The transaction will benefit from a reinvestment
      overcollateralization test, a failure of which will lead to
      the reclassification of principal proceeds of up to 50% of
      the excess interest proceeds that are available before
      paying uncapped administrative expenses and fees, hedge
      payments, incentive management fees, and subordinate note
      payments.

   -- The weighted average recovery rates in the identified
      portfolio are below the minimum weighted average recovery
      rates covenanted to in the transaction documents.  However,
      the target pool presented to Standard & Poor's for its
      analysis represents that the portfolio will satisfy the
      minimum covenanted weighted average recovery rates.  If the
      collateral manager is unable to acquire portfolio collateral
      during the ramp-up period with characteristics similar to
      the unidentified collateral in the target portfolio, the
      break-even default rates (BDRs) may decrease and the
      difference between the BDRs and the scenario default rates
      could be diminished.  If this difference becomes negative,
      S&P may not affirm the ratings on the effective date.

RATINGS ASSIGNED

Allegro CLO I Ltd./Allegro CLO I LLC

Class                   Rating              Amount
                                          (mil. $)
A-1                     AAA (sf)            213.80
A-2                     AA (sf)              45.70
B (deferrable)          A (sf)               28.50
C (deferrable)          BBB (sf)             19.10
D (deferrable)          BB (sf)              17.00
Subordinate (A) notes   NR                   22.63
Subordinate (B) notes   NR                   22.63

NR-Not rated.


ALM X: Moody's Assigns 'B2' Rating on $13MM Class E Notes
---------------------------------------------------------
Moody's Investors Service has assigned ratings to six classes of
notes issued by ALM X, Ltd.
Moody's rating action is as follows:

$410,000,000 Class A-1 Senior Secured Floating Rate Notes due 2025
(the "Class A-1 Notes"), Definitive Rating Assigned Aaa (sf)

$90,000,000 Class A-2 Senior Secured Floating Rate Notes due 2025
(the "Class A-2 Notes"), Definitive Rating Assigned Aa2 (sf)

$65,000,000 Class B Senior Secured Deferrable Floating Rate Notes
due 2025 (the "Class B Notes"), Definitive Rating Assigned A2 (sf)

$42,000,000 Class C Senior Secured Deferrable Floating Rate Notes
due 2025 (the "Class C Notes"), Definitive Rating Assigned Baa3
(sf)

$37,000,000 Class D Secured Deferrable Floating Rate Notes due
2025 (the "Class D Notes"), Definitive Rating Assigned Ba3 (sf)

$13,000,000 Class E Secured Deferrable Floating Rate Notes due
2025 (the "Class E Notes"), Definitive Rating Assigned B2 (sf)

The Class A-1 Notes, the Class A-2 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."

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.

ALM X 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 and
unsecured loans. The Issuer's documents require the portfolio to
be at least 98% ramped as of the closing date.

Apollo Credit Management (CLO), 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 will issue 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 November 2013.

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

Par amount: $700,000,000

Diversity Score: 50

Weighted Average Rating Factor (WARF): 2800

Weighted Average Spread (WAS): 3.80%

Weighted Average Coupon (WAC): 7.0%

Weighted Average Recovery Rate (WARR): 47%

Weighted Average Life (WAL): 8 years.

Methodology Underlying the Rating Action

The principal methodology used in this rating was "Moody's Global
Approach to Rating Collateralized Loan Obligations" published in
November 2013.

Factors that Would Lead to an Upgrade or Downgrade of the Rating

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 an
important 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-1 Notes: 0

Class A-2 Notes: 0

Class B Notes: -2

Class C Notes: -1

Class D Notes: 0

Class E Notes: 0

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

Rating Impact in Rating Notches

Class A-1 Notes: 0

Class A-2 Notes: -2

Class B Notes: -3

Class C Notes: -2

Class D Notes: -1

Class E Notes: -3

The V Score for this transaction is Medium/High. This V Score has
been assigned in a manner similar to the Medium/High V Score
assigned for the global cash flow CLO sector, as described in the
special report titled "V Scores and Parameter Sensitivities in the

Moody's V Scores provide a relative assessment of the quality of
available credit information and the potential variability around
the various inputs to a rating determination. The V Score ranks
transactions by the potential for significant rating changes owing
to uncertainty around the assumptions due to data quality,
historical performance, the level of disclosure, transaction
complexity, the modeling and the transaction governance that
underlie the ratings. V Scores apply to the entire transaction,
rather than individual tranches.


ARROWPOINT CLO 2014-2: S&P Assigns Prelim. BB- Rating on E Notes
----------------------------------------------------------------
Standard & Poor's Ratings Services assigned its preliminary
ratings to Arrowpoint CLO 2014-2 Ltd./Arrowpoint CLO 2014-2
Corp.'s $377.00 million floating-rate notes.

The note issuance is a collateralized loan obligation backed by a
revolving pool consisting primarily of broadly syndicated senior
secured loans.

The preliminary ratings are based on information as of Jan. 28,
2014.  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 credit enhancement provided to the preliminary rated
      notes through the subordination of cash flows that are
      payable to the subordinated notes.

   -- The transaction's credit enhancement, which is sufficient to
      withstand the defaults applicable for the supplemental tests
      (excluding excess spread) and cash-flow structure, which can
      withstand the default rate projected by Standard & Poor's
      CDO Evaluator model, as assessed by Standard & Poor's using
      the assumptions and methods outlined in its corporate
      collateralized debt obligation criteria.

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

   -- The diversified collateral portfolio, which consists
      primarily of broadly syndicated speculative-grade senior
      secured term loans.

   -- The collateral manager's experienced management team.

   -- S&P's projections regarding the timely interest and ultimate
      principal payments on the preliminary rated notes, which S&P
      assessed using its cash flow analysis and assumptions
      commensurate with the assigned preliminary ratings under
      various interest-rate scenarios, including LIBOR ranging
      from 0.2419%-12.7531%.

   -- The transaction's overcollateralization and interest
      coverage tests, a failure of which will lead to the
      diversion of interest and principal proceeds to reduce the
      balance of the rated notes outstanding.

PRELIMINARY RATINGS ASSIGNED

Arrowpoint CLO 2014-2 Ltd./Arrowpoint CLO 2014-2 Corp.

Class                   Rating          Amount (mil. $)
A-1L                    AAA (sf)                 250.00
B                       AA (sf)                   50.00
C (deferrable)          A (sf)                    29.00
D (deferrable)          BBB (sf)                  22.00
E (deferrable)          BB- (sf)                  19.00
F (deferrable)          B (sf)                     7.00
Subordinated notes      NR                        42.00

NR-Not rated.


BABCOCK & BROWN: S&P Lowers Rating on Class G-1 Notes to 'BB'
-------------------------------------------------------------
Standard & Poor's Ratings Services lowered its rating on Babcock &
Brown Air Funding I Ltd.'s series 2007-1 class G-1 notes to 'BB
(sf)' from 'BBB- (sf)', and removed it from CreditWatch with
negative implications, where they were placed on Dec. 24, 2013.
Babcock & Brown Air Funding I Ltd is an asset-backed securities
transaction backed by the lease revenue and sales proceeds from a
portfolio of commercial aircraft.

The downgrade reflects S&P's opinion of the aircraft portfolio's
continued higher-than-expected value decline and resulting
increased loan-to-value ratio (LTV) and reduced credit
enhancement.  Since S&P downgraded the notes in June 2012, the LTV
ratio (without giving credit to the reserve accounts) has
increased to 90.3% from 84.9% for the remaining $585.9 million
balance of the class G-1 notes.

As of the December 2013 servicer report, 35 aircraft remain in the
portfolio: 19 Boeing and 16 Airbus.  The 35 aircraft are leased
out to 25 airlines from 19 countries, and there are currently two
aircraft off-lease.  The appraised value (the lower of mean and
median of the adjusted base values) of the remaining 35 aircraft
as of the Sept. 30, 2013, appraisal date was $663.2 million.

S&P will continue to review whether, in its view, the ratings
currently assigned to the notes remain consistent with the credit
enhancement available to support them, and S&P will take rating
actions as it deems necessary.

RATING AND CREDITWATCH ACTIONS

Babcock & Brown Air Funding I Ltd.

              Rating       Rating
Class         To           From
G-1           BB (sf)      BBB- (sf)/Watch Neg


BABSON MID-MARKET: S&P Affirms 'BB+' Rating on Class E Notes
------------------------------------------------------------
Standard & Poor's Ratings Services raised its ratings on the class
A-1, A-2B, B, C, and D notes from Babson Mid-Market CLO Ltd. 2007-
II, a U.S. collateralized loan obligation (CLO) managed by Babson
Capital Management LLC.  In addition, S&P affirmed its ratings on
the class A-2R and E notes and removed our ratings on the class A-
1, A-2B, B, C, D, and E notes from CreditWatch, where S&P had
placed them with positive implications on Nov. 14, 2013.

The upgrades reflect a large paydown on the class A-1 and A-2R
notes, as well as the improved credit quality of the underlying
collateral since S&P's March 2012 rating actions.  S&P's rating
affirmations reflect its view that the credit support available is
commensurate with the current rating levels.

The rating actions follow S&P's review of the transaction's
performance, using data from the trustee report dated Dec. 10,
2013.

According to the December 2013 trustee report, the transaction
held $8.06 million in underlying collateral obligations that the
transaction considered to be defaulted.  This was down from the
$8.74 million in defaulted obligations noted in the January 2012
trustee report, which S&P used for its March 2012 rating actions.

The amount of 'CCC' rated collateral held in the transaction's
asset portfolio also declined since the time of S&P's last rating
action.  According to the December 2013 trustee report, the
transaction held $6.77 million in 'CCC' rated collateral, compared
with $32.84 million in January 2012.

The transaction exited its reinvestment period in April 2013.
Principal amortization of the underlying collateral has resulted
in a paydown of $44.49 million on the class A-1 notes and a
paydown of $7.91 million on the class A-2R notes over the period
of time since S&P's last rating action.

The transaction has withstood a loss in the collateral balance--
designated by a combination of principal proceeds and total par
value of the collateral pool--over the period of time since S&P's
last rating action.  The $52.41 million paydown on the notes
compares with a drop in total collateral of $60.83 million.  The
decreased collateral balance reduced the credit support available
to the rated notes.  However, the transaction's
overcollateralization ratio tests have improved.

S&P's review of this transaction included a cash flow analysis,
based on the portfolio and transaction as reflected in the
aforementioned trustee report, to estimate future performance.  In
line with S&P's criteria, its 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, S&P's analysis considered
the transaction's ability to pay timely interest and/or ultimate
principal to each of the rated tranches.  The results of the cash
flow analysis demonstrated, in S&P's view, that all of the rated
outstanding classes have adequate credit enhancement available at
the rating levels associated with this rating action.

S&P will continue to review whether, in its view, the ratings
assigned to the notes remain consistent with the credit
enhancement available to support them, and S&P will take rating
actions as it deems necessary.

CAPITAL STRUCTURE AND KEY MODEL ASSUMPTIONS COMPARISON

Class
                           Jan. 2012        Dec. 2013
                              Notional balance (mil. $)
A-1                           241.44            196.94
A-2B                            4.40            4.40
A-2R                           38.55            30.63
B                              23.00            23.00
C                              27.00            27.00
D                              18.75            18.75
E                              15.50            15.50

                              Weighted average spread (%)
                                4.01             3.15
                                   Coverage tests (%)
A/B O/C                       128.16           135.26
C O/C                         117.81           122.31
D O/C                         111.56           114.69
E O/C                         106.87           109.06
A/B I/C                       910.29           999.62
C I/C                         776.52           806.11
D I/C                         662.97           650.66
E I/C                         537.70           493.16

O/C--Overcollateralization test. I/C--Interest coverage test.

RATING AND CREDITWATCH ACTIONS

Babson Mid-Market CLO Ltd. 2007-II

                   Rating       Rating
Class              To           From
A-1                AAA (sf)     AA+(sf)/ Watch Pos
A-2B               AAA (sf)     AA+(sf)/ Watch Pos
A-2R               AAA (sf)     AAA (sf)
B                  AAA (sf)     AA(sf)/ Watch Pos
C                  AA+ (sf)     A+(sf)/ Watch Pos
D                  A (sf)       BBB+(sf)/ Watch Pos
E                  BB+ (sf)     BB+(sf)/ Watch Pos


BALLYROCK CLO 2006-1: S&P Hikes Rating on Class E Notes From BB+
----------------------------------------------------------------
Standard & Poor's Ratings Services raised its ratings on the class
C, D, and E notes from Ballyrock CLO 2006-1 Ltd., a collateralized
loan obligation (CLO) transaction managed by Ballyrock Investment
Advisors LLP, and removed them from CreditWatch, where S&P placed
them with positive implications on Nov. 14, 2013.  At the same
time, S&P affirmed its ratings on the class A and B notes from the
same transaction.

Ballyrock CLO 2006-1 Ltd. ended its reinvestment period on
Aug. 27, 2012, and all principal proceeds are being used to pay
down the senior notes.  The class A-1 notes have paid down
$147.76 million since S&P's last upgrade on April 16, 2013, and
are currently about 8.22% of their original notional balance.

The overcollateralization (O/C) available to support the notes has
increased since S&P's April 2013 rating actions.  As of the
Dec. 20, 2013, trustee report, each class' overcollateralization
(O/C) ratio has improved since April 2013:

   -- The class B O/C ratio is 264.90%, up from 142.00%;

   -- The class C O/C ratio is 192.30%, up from 130.00%;

   -- The class D O/C ratio is 136.30%, up from 115.40%; and

   -- The class E O/C ratio is 121.00%, up from 110.00%.

In addition, as of the Dec. 20, 2013, trustee report, the
transaction held no defaulted assets.

S&P's ratings on the class D and E notes are constrained by the
top obligor test, a supplemental test in its criteria, at 'A+
(sf)' and 'BBB+ (sf)', respectively.

The affirmations on the class A and B notes reflect the
availability of credit support at the current rating level.

S&P will continue to review whether, in its view, the ratings
assigned to the notes remain consistent with the credit
enhancement available to support them, and S&P will take rating
actions as it deems necessary.

RATING AND CREDITWATCH ACTIONS

Ballyrock CLO 2006-1 Ltd.
              Rating
Class     To           From
C         AAA (sf)     AA+ (sf)/Watch Pos
D         A+ (sf)      BBB+ (sf)/Watch Pos
E         BBB+ (sf)    BB+ (sf)/Watch Pos

RATINGS AFFIRMED

Ballyrock CLO 2006-1 Ltd.
Class       Rating
A           AAA (sf)
B           AAA (sf)

TRANSACTION INFORMATION

Issuer:             Ballyrock CLO 2006-1 Ltd.
Co-issuer:          Ballyrock CLO 2006-1 Inc.
Collateral manager: Ballyrock Investment Advisors LLC
Trustee:            U.S. Bank N.A.
Transaction type:   Cash flow CLO


BANC OF AMERICA 2007-3: Moody's Affirm C Rating on 5 Note Classes
-----------------------------------------------------------------
Moody's Investors Service has affirmed the ratings of 19 classes
of Banc of America Commercial Mortgage Trust 2007-3 as follows:

Cl. A-3, Affirmed Aaa (sf); previously on Mar 1, 2013 Affirmed Aaa
(sf)

Cl. A-AB, Affirmed Aaa (sf); previously on Mar 1, 2013 Affirmed
Aaa (sf)

Cl. A-4, Affirmed Aa3 (sf); previously on Mar 1, 2013 Affirmed Aa3
(sf)

Cl. A-5, Affirmed Aa3 (sf); previously on Mar 1, 2013 Affirmed Aa3
(sf)

Cl. A-1A, Affirmed Aa3 (sf); previously on Mar 1, 2013 Affirmed
Aa3 (sf)

Cl. A-M, Affirmed Baa1 (sf); previously on Mar 1, 2013 Affirmed
Baa1 (sf)

Cl. A-MF, Affirmed Baa1 (sf); previously on Mar 1, 2013 Affirmed
Baa1 (sf)

Cl. A-MFL, Affirmed Baa1 (sf); previously on Mar 1, 2013 Affirmed
Baa1 (sf)

Cl. A-J, Affirmed B3 (sf); previously on Mar 1, 2013 Affirmed B3
(sf)

Cl. B, Affirmed Caa2 (sf); previously on Mar 1, 2013 Affirmed Caa2
(sf)

Cl. C, Affirmed Caa3 (sf); previously on Mar 1, 2013 Affirmed Caa3
(sf)

Cl. D, Affirmed Ca (sf); previously on Mar 1, 2013 Affirmed Ca
(sf)

Cl. E, Affirmed Ca (sf); previously on Mar 1, 2013 Affirmed Ca
(sf)

Cl. F, Affirmed C (sf); previously on Mar 1, 2013 Affirmed C (sf)

Cl. G, Affirmed C (sf); previously on Mar 1, 2013 Affirmed C (sf)

Cl. H, Affirmed C (sf); previously on Mar 1, 2013 Affirmed C (sf)

Cl. J, Affirmed C (sf); previously on Mar 1, 2013 Affirmed C (sf)

Cl. K, Affirmed C (sf); previously on Mar 1, 2013 Affirmed C (sf)

Cl. XW, Affirmed Ba3 (sf); previously on Mar 1, 2013 Affirmed Ba3
(sf)

Ratings Rationale

The ratings on the eight P&I classes A-3 through A-MFL 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 ten P&I classes A-J through K were affirmed
because the ratings are consistent with Moody's expected loss.

The rating on the one IO class, class XW, was affirmed based on
the credit performance of the referenced classes are consistent
with Moody's expectations.

Moody's rating action reflects a base expected loss of 8.9% of the
current balance compared to 10.6% at Moody's last review. Moody's
base expected loss plus realized losses is now 11.8% of the
original pooled balance compared to 10.6% at the last review.

Factors That Would Lead To An Upgrade Or Downgrade Of The Rating

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 this rating was "Moody's
Approach to Rating U.S. CMBS Conduit Transactions" published in
September 2000.

Description of Models Used

Moody's review used the excel-based CMBS Conduit Model v 2.64,
which it uses for both conduit and fusion transactions. Conduit
model results at the Aa2 (sf) level are driven by property type,
Moody's actual and stressed DSCR, and Moody's property quality
grade (which reflects the capitalization rate Moody's uses to
estimate Moody's value). Conduit model results at the B2 (sf)
level are based on a paydown analysis using the individual loan-
level Moody's LTV ratio. Moody's may consider other concentrations
and correlations in its analysis. Based on the model pooled credit
enhancement levels of Aa2 (sf) and B2 (sf), the required credit
enhancement on the remaining conduit classes are either
interpolated between these two data points or determined based on
a multiple or ratio of either of these two data points. For fusion
deals, Moody's merges the credit enhancement for loans with
investment-grade credit assessments with the conduit model credit
enhancement for an overall model result. Moody's incorporates
negative pooling (adding credit enhancement at the credit
assessment level) for loans with similar credit assessments in the
same transaction.

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 24 compared to 26 at Moody's last review.

Deal Performance

As of the January 10, 2014 distribution date, the transaction's
aggregate certificate balance has decreased by 22% to $2.76
billion from $3.52 billion at securitization. The certificates are
collateralized by 127 mortgage loans ranging in size from less
than 1% to 12% of the pool, with the top ten loans constituting
56% of the pool. There are no defeased loans and no loans with
credit assessments.

Twenty-four loans, constituting 22% 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.

Nineteen loans have been liquidated from the pool, resulting in an
aggregate realized loss of $170 million (for an average loss
severity of 27%). Nine loans, constituting 9% of the pool, are
currently in special servicing. The largest specially serviced
loan is the Renaissance Mayflower Hotel Loan ($190 million -- 6.9%
of the pool), which is secured by a 657-unit full service hotel
located in Washington, D.C. The loan was previously modified and
matures on March 1, 2014. The loan transferred back to the special
servicer in June 2013 due to imminent default. The lender is
discussing potential modification options with the borrower.

The remaining eight specially serviced loans are secured by a mix
of property types. Moody's estimates an aggregate $57.8 million
loss for the specially serviced loans (22.7% expected loss on
average).

Moody's has assumed a high default probability for twenty-one
poorly performing loans, constituting 25.5% of the pool, and has
estimated an aggregate loss of $100.4 million (a 14.3% expected
loss based on a 35% probability default) from these troubled
loans.

Moody's received full year 2012 operating results for 95% of the
pool and full or partial year 2013 operating results for 86% of
the pool. Moody's weighted average conduit LTV is 113% compared to
125% at Moody's last 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 9.6%.

Moody's actual and stressed conduit DSCRs are 1.47X and 0.94X,
respectively, compared to 1.34X and 0.85X 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 25% of the pool balance. The
largest loan is the Presidential Towers Loan ($325 million --
11.8% of the pool), which is secured by which is secured by four
connected 50-story apartment buildings totaling 2,346 units
located in the in-town submarket of downtown Chicago, Illinois. As
of January 2014, the multifamily units were 93% leased compared to
94% at last review. The property's 87,000 square foot (SF) retail
component completed renovations in 2011 and was 50% leased as of
January 2014 compared to 44% at last review. Moody's LTV and
stressed DSCR are 103% and 0.84X, respectively, compared to 134%
and 0.64X at prior review.

The second largest loan is the Pacific Shores Building 9 & 10 Loan
($184 million -- 6.7% of the pool), which is secured by two Class
A office buildings located in a suburban office park in Redwood
City, California. The property serves as Facet Biotech's corporate
headquarters. Abbott Laboratories acquired Facet Biotech in April
2010. Shorenstein Properties is the loan sponsor. The property is
100% leased, which is the same at last review. At last review,
Moody's had stressed the cash flow due to concerns about the
upcoming lease maturity of the two tenants at the property. The
tenants have renewed their leases on a long term basis at higher
rents. Moody's LTV and stressed DSCR are 96% and 1.08X,
respectively.

The third largest loan is the Hilton Anatole Loan ($175 million
-- 6.3% of the pool), which represents a pari passu interest in a
$350 million first mortgage that is spread between two CMBS deals.
The property is also encumbered by a $20 million mezzanine loan.
The loan is secured by a 1606-unit full service hotel located in
Dallas, Texas. The loan sponsor is Crow Holdings. Moody's LTV and
stressed DSCR are 114% and 1.05X, respectively, compared to 120%
and 1.65X at last review.


BANC ONE 200-C1: Moody's Affirms C Rating on Class X Securities
---------------------------------------------------------------
Moody's Investors Service has affirmed the rating of one class of
Banc One/FCCC Commercial Mortgage Loan Trust, Series 2000-C1 as
follows:

Cl. X, Affirmed C (sf); previously on Feb 15, 2013 Downgraded to C
(sf)

Ratings Rationale

The rating of the IO class, Class X, was affirmed due to this
security not receiving any interest generated from the spread
between the net collateral weighted-average coupon (WAC) of the
loans and the WAC pass-through rate of the remaining principal
bond, which the IO references. Moody's anticipates that the IO
class will not receive any interest in the future because no
single loan in the pool has a coupon greater than the pass-through
rate of the remaining principal bond. The IO class is the only
outstanding Moody's-rated class in this transaction.

Factors That Would Lead To An Upgrade Or Downgrade Of The Rating

The rating of an IO class is based on the credit performance of
its referenced classes. An IO class may be upgraded based on a
lower weighted average rating factor or WARF due to an overall
improvement in the credit quality of its reference classes. An IO
class may be downgraded based on a higher WARF due to a decline in
the credit quality of its reference classes, paydowns of higher
quality reference classes or non-payment of interest. Classes that
have paid off through loan paydowns or amortization are not
included in the WARF calculation. Classes that have experienced
losses are grossed up for losses and included in the WARF
calculation, even if Moody's has withdrawn the rating.

Methodology Underlying The Rating Action

The principal methodology used in this rating was "Moody's
Approach to Rating CMBS Large Loan/Single Borrower Transactions"
published in July 2000.

Description of Models Used

Moody's uses a variation of Herf to measure diversity of loan
size, where a higher number represents greater diversity. Loan
concentration has an important bearing on potential rating
volatility, including risk of multiple notch downgrades under
adverse circumstances. The credit neutral Herf score is 40. The
pool has a Herf of 10 compared to 12 at prior review.

Moody's review incorporated the use of the excel-based Large Loan
Model v 8.6. The large loan model derives 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, property
type, and sponsorship. These aggregated proceeds are then further
adjusted for any pooling benefits associated with loan level
diversity, other concentrations and correlations.

Deal Performance

As of the January 21, 2014 distribution date, the transaction's
aggregate certificate balance has decreased by 99.8% to $1.4
million from $857.1 million at securitization. The Certificates
are collateralized by 11 mortgage loans ranging in size from less
than 1% to 16% of the pool. Approximately 91% of the loans fully
amortize. All properties are located in the Greater Chicago MSA
area, of which 72% are secured by multi-family properties.

Two loans, representing 26% 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 our
ongoing monitoring of a transaction, Moody's reviews the watchlist
to assess which loans have material issues that could impact
performance.

Eleven loans have been liquidated from the pool, resulting in an
aggregate realized loss of $1.77 million (11% loss severity on
average). Currently, there are no loans in special servicing.


BEAR STEARNS 2002-PBW1: Moody's Affirms Caa1 Rating on Cl. H Notes
------------------------------------------------------------------
Moody's Investors Service has affirmed the ratings on two classes
in Bear Stearns Commercial Mortgage Securities Trust Commercial
Mortgage Pass-Through Certificates, Series 2002-PBW1 as follows:

Cl. H, Affirmed Caa1 (sf); previously on Mar 8, 2013 Affirmed Caa1
(sf)

Cl. X-1, Affirmed Caa3 (sf); previously on Mar 8, 2013 Downgraded
to Caa3 (sf)

Ratings Rationale

The rating on the P&I class was affirmed because the rating is
consistent with Moody's expected loss.

The rating on the IO class was affirmed based on the credit
performance (or the weighted average rating factor or WARF) of the
referenced classes.

Factors That Would Lead to an Upgrade or Downgrade of the Rating

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 an
increase in the performance of the one remaining loan or
defeasance of the one remaining loan.

Factors that could lead to a downgrade of the ratings include a
decline in the performance of the one remaining loan.

Methodology Underlying The Rating Action

The principal methodology used in this rating was "Moody's
Approach to Rating CMBS Large Loan/Single Borrower Transactions"
published in July 2000.

Description of Models Used

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 one, compared to three at Moody's last review.

When the Herf falls below 20, Moody's uses the excel-based Large
Loan Model v 8.6 and then reconciles and weights the results from
the conduit and large loan models in formulating a rating
recommendation. The large loan model derives 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, property
type and sponsorship. Moody's also further adjusts these
aggregated proceeds for any pooling benefits associated with loan
level diversity and other concentrations and correlations.

Deal Performance

As of the January 13, 2014 distribution date, the transaction's
aggregate certificate balance has decreased by 99% to $1 million
from $921 million at securitization. The certificates are
collateralized by one mortgage loan. The remaining loan, the First
and Cedar Building Loan ($1 million -100% of the pool), is secured
by a 45,000 square foot office building located in Seattle,
Washington. The property was 55% leased as of September 2013
compared to 77% as of January 2013. The loan is fully amortizing
and matures March 2017. The loan has amortized 69% since
securitization. Moody's LTV and stressed DSCR are 31% and 3.23X,
respectively, compared to 36% and 2.82X at last review.

The remaining loan is 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.

Eleven loans have been liquidated from the pool, resulting in an
aggregate realized loss of $45 million (for an average loss
severity of 79%).


BEAR STEARNS 2004-BO1: Moody's Hikes Rating on M-7 Notes to Caa2
----------------------------------------------------------------
Moody's Investors Service has upgraded the ratings of the class
M-6 and class M-7 notes issued by Bear Stearns Asset Backed
Securities I Trust 2004-BO1 and the class M-2 notes issued by
Truman Capital Mortgage Loan Trust 2004-1.

Complete rating actions are as follows:

Issuer: Bear Stearns Asset Backed Securities I Trust 2004-BO1

Cl. M-6, Upgraded to Ba3 (sf); previously on Feb 4, 2013 Affirmed
B1 (sf)

Cl. M-7, Upgraded to Caa2 (sf); previously on Feb 4, 2013 Affirmed
Ca (sf)

Issuer: Truman Capital Mortgage Loan Trust 2004-1

Cl. M-2, Upgraded to B2 (sf); previously on Feb 4, 2013 Affirmed
B3 (sf)

Ratings Rationale

The actions are a result of the recent performance of the
underlying pools and reflect Moody's updated loss expectations on
the pools.

The ratings upgraded are primarily due to the build-up in credit
enhancement provided by subordination, overcollateralization and
excess spread.

The principal methodology used in these ratings was "US RMBS
Surveillance Methodology" published in November 2013.

Factors that would lead to an upgrade or downgrade of the rating

Ratings in the US RMBS sector remain exposed to the high level of
macroeconomic uncertainty, and in particular the unemployment
rate. The unemployment rate fell to 6.7% in December 2013 from
7.9% in December 2012 . Moody's forecasts an unemployment central
range of 6.5% to 7.5% for the 2014 year. Deviations from this
central scenario could lead to rating actions in the sector.

House prices are another key driver of US RMBS performance.
Moody's expects house prices to continue to rise in 2014. Lower
increases than Moody's expects or decreases could lead to negative
rating actions.

Finally, performance of RMBS continues to remain highly dependent
on servicer procedures. Any change resulting from servicing
transfers or other policy or regulatory change can impact the
performance of these transactions.


BLUEMOUNTAIN CLO 2013-3: S&P Affirms BB Rating on Class E Notes
---------------------------------------------------------------
Standard & Poor's Ratings Services affirmed its ratings on
BlueMountain CLO 2013-3 Ltd./BlueMountain CLO 2013-3 LLC's
$381.75 million floating-rate and fixed-rate notes following the
transaction's effective date as of Nov. 8, 2013.

Most U.S. cash flow collateralized loan obligations (CLOs) close
before purchasing the full amount of their targeted level of
portfolio collateral.  On the closing date, the collateral manager
typically covenants to purchase the remaining collateral within
the guidelines specified in the transaction documents to reach the
target level of portfolio collateral.  Typically, the CLO
transaction documents specify a date by which the targeted level
of portfolio collateral must be reached.  The "effective date" for
a CLO transaction is usually the earlier of the date on which the
transaction acquires the target level of portfolio collateral, or
the date defined in the transaction documents.  Most transaction
documents contain provisions directing the trustee to request the
rating agencies that have issued ratings upon closing to affirm
the ratings issued on the closing date after reviewing the
effective date portfolio (typically referred to as an "effective
date rating affirmation").

"An effective date rating affirmation reflects our opinion that
the portfolio collateral purchased by the issuer, as reported to
us by the trustee and collateral manager, in combination with the
transaction's structure, provides sufficient credit support to
maintain the ratings that we assigned on the transaction's closing
date.  The effective date reports provide a summary of certain
information that we used in our analysis and the results of our
review based on the information presented to us," S&P said.

"We believe the transaction may see some benefit from allowing a
window of time after the closing date for the collateral manager
to acquire the remaining assets for a CLO transaction.  This
window of time is typically referred to as a "ramp-up period."
Because some CLO transactions may acquire most of their assets
from the new issue leveraged loan market, the ramp-up period may
give collateral managers the flexibility to acquire a more diverse
portfolio of assets," S&P added.

For a CLO that has not purchased its full target level of
portfolio collateral by the closing date, S&P's ratings on the
closing date and prior to its effective date review are generally
based on the application of its criteria to a combination of
purchased collateral, collateral committed to be purchased, and
the indicative portfolio of assets provided to S&P by the
collateral manager, and may also reflect S&P's assumptions about
the transaction's investment guidelines.  This is because not all
assets in the portfolio have been purchased.

"When we receive a request to issue an effective date rating
affirmation, we perform quantitative and qualitative analysis of
the transaction in accordance with our criteria to assess whether
the initial ratings remain consistent with the credit enhancement
based on the effective date collateral portfolio.  Our analysis
relies on the use of CDO Evaluator to estimate a scenario default
rate at each rating level based on the effective date portfolio,
full cash flow modeling to determine the appropriate percentile
break-even default rate at each rating level, the application of
our supplemental tests, and the analytical judgment of a rating
committee," S&P added.

In S&P's published effective date report, it discusses its
analysis of the information provided by the transaction's trustee
and collateral manager in support of their request for effective
date rating affirmation.  In most instances, S&P intends to
publish an effective date report each time it issues an effective
date rating affirmation on a publicly rated U.S. cash flow CLO.

On an ongoing basis after S&P issues an effective date rating
affirmation, it will periodically review whether, in its view, the
current ratings on the notes remain consistent with the credit
quality of the assets, the credit enhancement available to support
the notes, and other factors, and take rating actions as it deems
necessary.

RATINGS AFFIRMED

BlueMountain CLO 2013-3 Ltd./BlueMountain CLO 2013-3 LLC

Class                      Rating                       Amount
                                                      (mil. $)
A                          AAA (sf)                     255.25
B-1                        AA (sf)                       23.25
B-2                        AA (sf)                       15.00
C (deferrable)             A (sf)                        37.25
D (deferrable)             BBB (sf)                      20.25
E (deferrable)             BB (sf)                       18.00
F (deferrable)             B (sf)                        12.75


CITIGROUP 2006-HE1: Moody's Raises Rating on Cl. M-2 Notes to 'B1'
------------------------------------------------------------------
Moody's Investors Service has downgraded the rating of class M-1
and upgraded the rating of class M-2 issued by Citigroup Mortgage
Loan Trust 2006-HE1.

Complete rating actions are as follows:

Issuer: Citigroup Mortgage Loan Trust 2006-HE1

Cl. M-1, Downgraded to Baa3 (sf); previously on Nov 4, 2013 Baa2
(sf) Placed Under Review for Possible Downgrade

Cl. M-2, Upgraded to B1(sf); previously on Jul 22, 2013 Upgraded
to B3 (sf)

Ratings Rationale

The downgrade on Cl. M-1 concludes the review action announced in
November 2013, and is primarily the result of an interest
shortfall caused by the July 2013 reimbursement of extraordinary
expenses of $565,540 incurred by the trustee. Structural
limitations in the transaction prevent recoupment of missed
interest payments even if funds are available in subsequent
periods. Missed interest payments can typically only be made up
from excess interest after the overcollateralization builds to the
target amount. In this transaction, the overcollateralization is
currently below target so the missed interest payment to the
tranche is unlikely to be paid. The upgrade on Cl M-2 is primarily
the result of improving performance of the underlying pool and
reflects the missed interest payment on the tranche in July'13.

The principal methodology used in this rating was "US RMBS
Surveillance Methodology" published in November 2013. Please see
the Credit Policy page on www.moodys.com for a copy of this
methodology.

Factors that would lead to an upgrade or downgrade of the rating

Ratings in the US RMBS sector remain exposed to the high level of
macroeconomic uncertainty, and in particular the unemployment
rate. The unemployment rate fell to 6.7% in December 2013 from
7.9% in December 2012 . Moody's forecasts an unemployment central
range of 6.5% to 7.5% for the 2014 year. Deviations from this
central scenario could lead to rating actions in the sector. House
prices are another key driver of US RMBS performance. Moody's
expects house prices to continue to rise in 2014. Lower increases
than Moody's expects or decreases could lead to negative rating
actions. Finally, performance of RMBS continues to remain highly
dependent on servicer procedures. Any change resulting from
servicing transfers or other policy or regulatory change can
impact the performance of these transactions.


CITIGROUP 2007-C6: Moodys Affirms 'Ba3' Rating on Cl. X Notes
-------------------------------------------------------------
Moody's Investors Service has affirmed the ratings of seven
classes of Citigroup Commercial Mortgage Trust Commercial Mortgage
Pass-Through Certificates, Series 2007-C6 as follows:

Cl. A-1A, Affirmed Aaa (sf); previously on Feb 28, 2013 Affirmed
Aaa (sf)

Cl. A-3, Affirmed Aaa (sf); previously on Feb 28, 2013 Affirmed
Aaa (sf)

Cl. A-4, Affirmed Aaa (sf); previously on Feb 28, 2013 Affirmed
Aaa (sf)

Cl. A-3B, Affirmed Aaa (sf); previously on Feb 28, 2013 Affirmed
Aaa (sf)

Cl. A-4FL, Affirmed Aaa (sf); previously on Feb 28, 2013 Affirmed
Aaa (sf)

Cl. A-SB, Affirmed Aaa (sf); previously on Feb 28, 2013 Affirmed
Aaa (sf)

Cl. X, Affirmed Ba3 (sf); previously on Feb 28, 2013 Affirmed Ba3
(sf)

Ratings Rationale

The ratings on the 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
performance (or the weighted average rating factor or WARF) of the
referenced classes.

Moody's rating action reflects a base expected loss of 14.2% of
the current balance compared to 11.9% at Moody's last review.
Moody's base expected loss plus realized losses is now 13.4% of
the original pooled balance, compared to 11.8% at the last review.

Factors That Would Lead to an Upgrade or Downgrade of the Rating

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 this rating was "Moody's
Approach to Rating U.S. CMBS Conduit Transactions" published in
September 2000.

Description of Models Used

Moody's review used the excel-based CMBS Conduit Model v 2.64,
which it uses for both conduit and fusion transactions. Conduit
model results at the Aa2 (sf) level are driven by property type,
Moody's actual and stressed DSCR, and Moody's property quality
grade (which reflects the capitalization rate Moody's uses to
estimate Moody's value). Conduit model results at the B2 (sf)
level are based on a paydown analysis using the individual loan-
level Moody's LTV ratio. Moody's may consider other concentrations
and correlations in its analysis. Based on the model pooled credit
enhancement levels of Aa2 (sf) and B2 (sf), the required credit
enhancement on the remaining conduit classes are either
interpolated between these two data points or determined based on
a multiple or ratio of either of these two data points. For fusion
deals, Moody's merges the credit enhancement for loans with
investment-grade credit assessments with the conduit model credit
enhancement for an overall model result. Moody's incorporates
negative pooling (adding credit enhancement at the credit
assessment level) for loans with similar credit assessments in the
same transaction.

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 50, compared to 51 at last review.

Deal Performance

As of the January 10, 2014 distribution date, the transaction's
aggregate certificate balance has decreased by 15% to $4.04
billion from $4.76 billion at securitization. The certificates are
collateralized by 293 mortgage loans ranging in size from less
than 1% to 11% of the pool, with the top ten loans constituting
31% of the pool. Two loans, constituting 0.5% of the pool, have
defeased and are secured by US government securities.

Sixty-four loans, constituting 23% 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.

Eighteen loans have been liquidated from the pool, resulting in an
aggregate realized loss of $66.6 million (for an average loss
severity of 31%). Forty loans, constituting 14% of the pool, are
currently in special servicing. The largest specially serviced
loan is the Moreno Valley Mall Loan ($81.8 million -- 2% of the
pool), which is secured by a former GGP mall located in Moreno
Valley, California. The property is currently REO and the servicer
indicated it intends to stabilize the property.

The remaining 39 specially serviced loans are secured by a mix of
property types. Moody's estimates an aggregate $304 million loss
for the specially serviced loans (54% expected loss on average).

Moody's has assumed a high default probability for 53 poorly
performing loans, constituting 24% of the pool and has estimated
an aggregate loss of $160.2 million (a 16% expected loss based on
a 49% probability default) from these troubled loans.

Moody's received full year 2011 operating results for 93% of the
pool and full year 2012 operating results for 96% of the pool.
Moody's weighted average conduit LTV is 111% compared to 114% at
Moody's last 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 9.25%.

Moody's actual and stressed conduit DSCRs are 1.36X and 0.98X,
respectively, compared to 1.33X and 0.95X 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 17% of the pool balance. The
largest loan is the DDR Southeast Pool Loan ($441.0 million --
10.9% of the pool), which represents a 50% pari-passu interest in
a first mortgage loan secured by 52 anchored retail properties
located in California (1 property), Florida (29), Georgia (8),
Indiana (1), Maryland (2), Massachusetts (1), New Jersey (1),
North Carolina (6), Ohio (2) and Virginia (1). Seventy-five
percent of the properties are grocery anchored. The portfolio was
88% leased as of April 2013 compared to 90% at last review. This
loan is interest only for its entire 10 year term. Moody's LTV and
stressed DSCR are 123% and 0.75X, respectively, compared to 120%
and .77X at last review.

The second largest loan is the Greensboro Corporate Center Loan
($127.6 million -- 3.2% of the pool), which is secured by a
439,000 SF office building located in Tyson's Corner outside of
McLean, Virginia. The property was 91% leased as of November 2013,
the same as at last review. Performance improved since 2011 due to
higher rental income. The largest tenant's lease expires in
September 2014 and is currently in ongoing renewal negotiations.
Moody's analysis factors in potential roll-over risk. Moody's LTV
and stressed DSCR are 137% and 0.71X, respectively, compared to
132% and 0.74X at last review.

The third largest loan is the Wells Fargo Capitol Center ($120.3
million -- 3.0% of the pool), which is secured by a 560,000 SF
class A office tower located in the central business district of
Raleigh, North Carolina. The property was 89% leased as of
November 2013 but will increase to 95% with newly signed leases
that commence by March 2014. Moody's LTV and stressed DSCR are
151% and 0.70X, respectively, compared to 180% and 0.59X at last
review.


COMM 1999-1: Moody's Affirms 'Caa3' Rating on Class X Securities
----------------------------------------------------------------
Moody's Investors Service has affirmed the rating of one class of
COMM 1999-1 as follows:

Cl. X, Affirmed Caa3 (sf); previously on Feb 21, 2013 Affirmed
Caa3 (sf)

Ratings Rationale

The rating of the IO class, Class X, was affirmed based on the
credit performance (or the weighted average rating factor or WARF)
of its referenced classes. The IO class is the only outstanding
Moody's-rated class in this transaction.

Factors That Would Lead To An Upgrade Or Downgrade Of The Rating

The rating of an IO class is based on the credit performance of
its referenced classes. An IO class may be upgraded based on a
lower weighted average rating factor or WARF due to an overall
improvement in the credit quality of its reference classes. An IO
class may be downgraded based on a higher WARF due to a decline in
the credit quality of its reference classes, paydowns of higher
quality reference classes or non-payment of interest. Classes that
have paid off through loan paydowns or amortization are not
included in the WARF calculation. Classes that have experienced
losses are grossed up for losses and included in the WARF
calculation, even if Moody's has withdrawn the rating.

Methodology Underlying The Rating Action

The principal methodology used in this rating was "Moody's
Approach to Rating CMBS Large Loan/Single Borrower Transactions"
published in July 2000.

Moody's analysis incorporated a loss and recovery approach in
assessing the credit quality of the non-rated P&I classes in this
deal since Moody's considers the one remaining loan in the pool to
be a troubled loan. In this approach, Moody's determines a
probability of default for each specially serviced or 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 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 or troubled loans to the most junior class(es)
and the recovery as a pay down of principal to the most senior
class(es).

Description of Models Used

Moody's review incorporated the use of the excel-based Large Loan
Model v 8.6. The large loan model derives 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, property
type, and sponsorship. These aggregated proceeds are then further
adjusted for any pooling benefits associated with loan level
diversity, other concentrations and correlations.

Deal Performance

As of the January 15, 2014 distribution date, the transaction's
aggregate certificate balance has decreased by 99% to $3 million
from $1.3 billion at securitization. The Certificates are
collateralized by one mortgage loan, the Westhill Plaza Shopping
Center. This loan 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 our ongoing monitoring of a
transaction, Moody's reviews the watchlist to assess which loans
have material issues that could impact performance.

Twenty loans have been liquidated from the pool, resulting in an
aggregate realized loss of $53 million (53% loss severity on
average).

Moody's has assumed a high default probability for the Westhill
Plaza Shopping Center ($3 million, 100% of the pool), which is
collateralized by a 115,238 SF anchored retail property in Grand
Chute, Wisconsin. As of September 2013, the property was 97%
occupied. However, one tenant, Darkside Ventures, occupies 21% of
NRA for three months of each year and 0% the rest of each year, so
physical occupancy for nine months of the year is 76%. The
property passed its ARD date in June, and a hard lockbox and an
increased interest rate (deferred) was established, per the master
servicer. Moody's LTV and stressed DSCR are 163% and 0.54X,
respectively, compared to 125% and 0.86X at prior review.


COMM 2011-FL1: Moody's Affirms Ba2 Rating on Class F Certs
----------------------------------------------------------
Moody's Investors Service affirmed the ratings on six classes and
downgraded the rating on one IO class of COMM 2011-FL1 Mortgage
Trust, Commercial Mortgage Pass-Through Certificates, Series 2011-
FL1.

Moody's rating action is as follows:

Cl. A, Affirmed Aaa (sf); previously on May 23, 2013 Affirmed Aaa
(sf)

Cl. B, Affirmed Aa2 (sf); previously on May 23, 2013 Affirmed Aa2
(sf)

Cl. C, Affirmed A2 (sf); previously on May 23, 2013 Affirmed A2
(sf)

Cl. D, Affirmed Baa2 (sf); previously on May 23, 2013 Affirmed
Baa2 (sf)

Cl. E, Affirmed Baa3 (sf); previously on May 23, 2013 Affirmed
Baa3 (sf)

Cl. F, Affirmed Ba2 (sf); previously on May 23, 2013 Affirmed Ba2
(sf)

Cl. X, Downgraded to Baa1 (sf); previously on May 23, 2013
Affirmed A3 (sf)

Ratings Rationale

Moody's has affirmed the ratings on the P&I classes because the
transaction's key metrics, including Moody's loan-to-value (LTV)
ratio and Moody's stressed debt service coverage ratio (DSCR), are
within acceptable ranges. The downgrade of the rating on the IO
class (the Class X) is based on the the decline of its weighted
average rating factor or WARF of its referenced classes.

Factors That Would Lead To An Upgrade Or Downgrade Of The Rating

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 defeasance in the pool 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, an increase in loan
concentration, an increase in expected losses from specially
serviced and troubled loans or interest shortfalls.

Methodology Underlying The Rating Action

The principal methodology used in this rating was "Moody's
Approach to Rating CMBS Large Loan/Single Borrower Transactions,"
published in July 2000.

Description Of Models Used

Moody's review incorporated the use of the excel-based Large Loan
Model v 8.6. The large loan model derives 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, property
type and sponsorship. Moody's also further adjusts these
aggregated proceeds for any pooling benefits associated with loan
level diversity and other concentrations and correlations.

Deal Performance

As of the January 17, 2014 payment date, the transaction's
aggregate certificate balance has decreased by 82%, to $113
million from $619 million at securitization. The certificates are
collateralized by one mortgage loan remaining in the pool, the
Standard Hotel Loan. Three loans paid off since last review.

The Standard Hotel Loan ($113 million, or 100% of trust balance)
is secured by fee interest in a 337-room boutique hotel located in
New York's Meatpacking District. There is additional debt in the
form of mezzanine debt outside the trust. The loan's final
maturity date, including three one-year extension options, is in
July 2016.

The property's Net Cash Flow (NCF) for the first nine months of
2013 was $13.1 million, up 6.1% from $12.3 million achieved during
the same period in 2012. The property's RevPAR also registered the
same growth rate of 6.1% to achieve $343.19 during the first nine
months of 2013. Moody's stabilized NCF is $16.4 million, up
slightly from our last review. Moody's current credit assessment
is Ba2, the same as last review.

Moody's stressed trust LTV is 72.8%, compared to 66.9% at the last
review. Moody's stressed trust DSCR is 1.57X, compared to 1.67X at
the last review. Moody's stressed DSCR is based on Moody's net
cash flow and a 9.25% stress rate that the agency applied to the
trust loan balance. There are no outstanding interest shortfalls
or losses suffered to date.


COMM 2011-FL1: Moody's Affirms Ba2 Rating on Class F Notes
----------------------------------------------------------
Moody's Investors Service affirmed the ratings on six classes and
downgraded the rating on one IO class of COMM 2011-FL1 Mortgage
Trust, Commercial Mortgage Pass-Through Certificates, Series
2011-FL1.

Moody's rating action is as follows:

   -- Cl. A, Affirmed Aaa (sf); previously on May 23, 2013
      Affirmed Aaa (sf)

   -- Cl. B, Affirmed Aa2 (sf); previously on May 23, 2013
      Affirmed Aa2 (sf)

   -- Cl. C, Affirmed A2 (sf); previously on May 23, 2013 Affirmed
      A2 (sf)

   -- Cl. D, Affirmed Baa2 (sf); previously on May 23, 2013
      Affirmed Baa2 (sf)

   -- Cl. E, Affirmed Baa3 (sf); previously on May 23, 2013
      Affirmed Baa3 (sf)

   -- Cl. F, Affirmed Ba2 (sf); previously on May 23, 2013
      Affirmed Ba2 (sf)

   -- Cl. X, Downgraded to Baa1 (sf); previously on May 23, 2013
      Affirmed A3 (sf)

                         RATINGS RATIONALE

Moody's has affirmed the ratings on the P&I classes because the
transaction's key metrics, including Moody's loan-to-value (LTV)
ratio and Moody's stressed debt service coverage ratio (DSCR), are
within acceptable ranges.  The downgrade of the rating on the IO
class (the Class X) is based on the the decline of its weighted
average rating factor or WARF of its referenced classes.

FACTORS THAT WOULD LEAD TO AN UPGRADE OR DOWNGRADE OF THE RATING

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 defeasance in the pool 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, an increase in loan
concentration, an increase in expected losses from specially
serviced and troubled loans or interest shortfalls.

             METHODOLOGY UNDERLYING THE RATING ACTION

                    DESCRIPTION OF MODELS USED

Moody's review incorporated the use of the excel-based Large Loan
Model v 8.6.  The large loan model derives 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, property
type and sponsorship.  Moody's also further adjusts these
aggregated proceeds for any pooling benefits associated with loan
level diversity and other concentrations and correlations.

                          DEAL PERFORMANCE

As of the Jan. 17, 2014 payment date, the transaction's aggregate
certificate balance has decreased by 82%, to $113 million from
$619 million at securitization.  The certificates are
collateralized by one mortgage loan remaining in the pool, the
Standard Hotel Loan.  Three loans paid off since last review.
The Standard Hotel Loan ($113 million, or 100% of trust balance)
is secured by fee interest in a 337-room boutique hotel located in
New York's Meatpacking District.  There is additional debt in the
form of mezzanine debt outside the trust.  The loan's final
maturity date, including three one-year extension options, is in
July 2016.

The property's Net Cash Flow (NCF) for the first nine months of
2013 was $13.1 million, up 6.1% from $12.3 million achieved during
the same period in 2012.  The property's RevPAR also registered
the same growth rate of 6.1% to achieve $343.19 during the first
nine months of 2013.  Moody's stabilized NCF is $16.4 million, up
slightly from Moody's last review.  Moody's current credit
assessment is Ba2, the same as last review.

Moody's stressed trust LTV is 72.8%, compared to 66.9% at the last
review.  Moody's stressed trust DSCR is 1.57X, compared to 1.67X
at the last review.  Moody's stressed DSCR is based on Moody's net
cash flow and a 9.25% stress rate that the agency applied to the
trust loan balance.  There are no outstanding interest shortfalls
or losses suffered to date.


COMM 2013-CCRE6: Moody's Affirms B2 Rating on Class F Notes
-----------------------------------------------------------
Moody's Investors Service has affirmed the ratings of 15 classes
of COMM 2013-CCRE6, Commercial Mortgage Pass-Through Certificates,
Series 2013-CCRE6 as follows:

Cl. A-1, Affirmed Aaa (sf); previously on Mar 11, 2013 Definitive
Rating Assigned Aaa (sf)

Cl. A-2, Affirmed Aaa (sf); previously on Mar 11, 2013 Definitive
Rating Assigned Aaa (sf)

Cl. A-SB, Affirmed Aaa (sf); previously on Mar 11, 2013 Definitive
Rating Assigned Aaa (sf)

Cl. A-3FL*, Affirmed Aaa (sf); previously on Mar 11, 2013
Definitive Rating Assigned Aaa (sf)

Cl. A-3FX, Affirmed Aaa (sf); previously on Mar 11, 2013
Definitive Rating Assigned Aaa (sf)

Cl. A-4, Affirmed Aaa (sf); previously on Mar 11, 2013 Definitive
Rating Assigned Aaa (sf)

Cl. A-M, Affirmed Aaa (sf); previously on Mar 11, 2013 Definitive
Rating Assigned Aaa (sf)

Cl. B, Affirmed Aa3 (sf); previously on Mar 11, 2013 Definitive
Rating Assigned Aa3 (sf)

Cl. C, Affirmed A3 (sf); previously on Mar 11, 2013 Definitive
Rating Assigned A3 (sf)

Cl. D, Affirmed Baa3 (sf); previously on Mar 11, 2013 Definitive
Rating Assigned Baa3 (sf)

Cl. E, Affirmed Ba2 (sf); previously on Mar 11, 2013 Definitive
Rating Assigned Ba2 (sf)

Cl. F, Affirmed B2 (sf); previously on Mar 11, 2013 Definitive
Rating Assigned B2 (sf)

Cl. PEZ, Affirmed A1 (sf); previously on Mar 11, 2013 Definitive
Rating Assigned A1 (sf)

Cl. X-A, Affirmed Aaa (sf); previously on Mar 11, 2013 Definitive
Rating Assigned Aaa (sf)

Cl. X-B, Affirmed A2 (sf); previously on Mar 11, 2013 Definitive
Rating Assigned A2 (sf)

* Certificates may be exchanged for Class A-3FX Certificates of
like balance.

RATINGS RATIONALE

The affirmations of the 13 P&I classes are due to key parameters,
including Moody's loan-to-value (LTV) ratio, Moody's stressed debt
service coverage ratio (DSCR) and the Herfindahl Index (Herf),
remaining within acceptable ranges.

The ratings of the two IO Classes, Classes X-A and X-B, are
consistent with the expected credit performance of their
referenced classes and thus are affirmed.

Moody's rating action reflects a base expected loss of 2.5% of the
current balance.

FACTORS THAT WOULD LEAD TO AN UPGRADE OR DOWNGRADE OF THE RATING

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 this rating was "Moody's
Approach to Rating Fusion U.S. CMBS Transactions" published in
April 2005.

DESCRIPTION OF MODELS USED

Moody's review used the excel-based CMBS Conduit Model v 2.64,
which it uses for both conduit and fusion transactions. Conduit
model results at the Aa2 (sf) level are driven by property type,
Moody's actual and stressed DSCR, and Moody's property quality
grade (which reflects the capitalization rate Moody's uses to
estimate Moody's value). Conduit model results at the B2 (sf)
level are based on a paydown analysis using the individual loan-
level Moody's LTV ratio. Moody's may consider other concentrations
and correlations in its analysis. Based on the model pooled credit
enhancement levels of Aa2 (sf) and B2 (sf), the required credit
enhancement on the remaining conduit classes are either
interpolated between these two data points or determined based on
a multiple or ratio of either of these two data points. For fusion
deals, Moody's merges the credit enhancement for loans with
investment-grade credit assessments with the conduit model credit
enhancement for an overall model result. Moody's incorporates
negative pooling (adding credit enhancement at the credit
assessment level) for loans with similar credit assessments in the
same transaction.

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 20, the same as at securitization.

DEAL PERFORMANCE

As of the January 10, 2014 distribution date, the transaction's
aggregate certificate balance has decreased by 1% to $1.48 billion
from $1.49 billion at securitization. The certificates are
collateralized by 48 mortgage loans ranging in size from less than
1% to 9% of the pool, with the top ten loans constituting 65% of
the pool. One loan, constituting 9% of the pool, has an
investment-grade credit assessment.

Two loans, constituting 2% 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.

No loans have been liquidated from the pool and no loans are
currently in special servicing.

Moody's has assumed a high default probability for two poorly
performing loans, constituting 2% of the pool, and has estimated
an aggregate loss of $4.3 million (a 15% expected loss based on a
50% probability default) from these troubled loans.

Moody's received full year 2012 operating results for 100% of the
pool, and full or partial year 2013 operating results for 93% of
the pool. Moody's weighted average conduit LTV is 93%, compared to
96% at securitization. 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 10.6% to the most recently available
net operating income (NOI). Moody's value reflects a weighted
average capitalization rate of 9.7%.

Moody's actual and stressed conduit DSCRs are 2.00X and 1.14X,
respectively, compared to 1.90X and 1.09X 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 loan with a credit assessment is the Federal Center Plaza Loan
($130 million -- 8.8% of the pool), which is secured by two
adjacent office buildings totaling 725,000 square feet in
Washington, DC. The property was 100% leased as of September 2013,
with federal government agencies as the largest tenants. Moody's
credit assessment and stressed DSCR are Baa1 and 1.70X,
respectively.

The top three conduit loans represent 23% of the pool balance. The
largest loan is the Moffett Towers Loan ($117.1 million -- 8.1% of
the pool), which is secured by three eight-story Class A office
buildings totaling 950,000 square feet located in Sunnyvale,
California. Each building is LEED Gold certified and the
properties have 2,881 parking spaces as well as shared amenities.
Moody's LTV and stressed DSCR are 103% and 0.95X, respectively,
compared to 105% and 0.95X at securitization.

The second largest loan is the The Avenues Loan ($110 million --
7.4% of the pool), which is secured by a 600,000 square foot
retail component of a 1.1M square foot super-regional mall in
Jacksonville, Florida. The property was 86% leased as of September
2013, compared to 91% at securitization. Moody's LTV and stressed
DSCR are 71% and 1.40X, respectively, same as at securitization.

The third loan is the Rochester Hotel Portfolio Loan ($108.8
million -- 7.3% of the pool), which is secured by two full-
service, one limited-service and one extended stay hotel located
in Rochester, Minnesota. The hotels total 1,230 keys and are each
connected to the Mayo Clinic via climate controlled pedestrian
tunnels. Moody's LTV and stressed DSCR are 97% and 1.25X,
respectively, compared to 100% and 1.24X at securitization.


COMM 2014-CCRE14: Moody's Assigns 'B2' Rating on Class F Certs
--------------------------------------------------------------
Moody's Investors Service has assigned ratings to thirteen classes
of CMBS securities, issued by COMM 2014-CCRE14 Mortgage Trust,
Commercial Mortgage Pass-Through Certificates.

Cl. A-1, Definitive Rating Assigned Aaa (sf)

Cl. A-2, Definitive Rating Assigned Aaa (sf)

Cl. A-SB, Definitive Rating Assigned Aaa (sf)

Cl. A-3, Definitive Rating Assigned Aaa (sf)

Cl. A-4, Definitive Rating Assigned Aaa (sf)

Cl. X-A*, Definitive Rating Assigned Aaa (sf)

Cl. A-M**, Definitive Rating Assigned Aaa (sf)

Cl. B**, Definitive Rating Assigned Aa3 (sf)

Cl. PEZ**, Definitive Rating Assigned A1 (sf)

Cl. C**, Definitive Rating Assigned A3 (sf)

Cl. D, Definitive Rating Assigned Baa3 (sf)

Cl. E, Definitive Rating Assigned Ba3 (sf)

Cl. F, Definitive Rating Assigned B2 (sf)

Reflects Interest-Only Class

Reflects Exchangeable Class

Ratings Rationale

The Certificates are collateralized by 59 fixed-rate loans secured
by 87 properties including three credit assessed loans. The
ratings are based on the collateral and the structure of the
transaction.

Moody's CMBS ratings methodology combines both commercial real
estate and structured finance analysis. Based on commercial real
estate analysis, Moody's determines the credit quality of each
mortgage loan and calculates an expected loss on a loan specific
basis. Under structured finance, the credit enhancement for each
certificate typically depends on the expected frequency, severity,
and timing of future losses. Moody's also considers a range of
qualitative issues as well as the transaction's structural and
legal aspects.

The credit risk of loans is determined primarily by two factors:
1) Moody's assessment of the probability of default, which is
largely driven by each loan's DSCR, and 2) Moody's assessment of
the severity of loss upon a default, which is largely driven by
each loan's LTV ratio.

The Moody's Actual DSCR of 1.81X (1.40x excluding credit assessed
loans) is greater than the 2007 conduit/fusion transaction average
of 1.31X. The Moody's Stressed DSCR of 1.05X (1.01x excluding
credit assessed loans) is greater than the 2007 conduit/fusion
transaction average of 0.92X.

Moody's Trust LTV ratio of 99.3% (107.4% excluding credit assessed
loans) is lower than the 2007 conduit/fusion transaction average
of 110.6%.

Moody's also considers both loan level diversity and property
level diversity when selecting a ratings approach.

With respect to loan level diversity, the pool's loan level
(includes cross collateralized and cross defaulted loans)
Herfindahl Index is 20.8 (22.5 excluding credit assessed loans).
The transaction's loan level diversity is at the lower end of the
band of Herfindahl scores found in most multi-borrower
transactions issued since 2009. With respect to property level
diversity, the pool's property level Herfindahl Index is 24.3
(31.5 excluding credit assessed loans). The transaction's property
diversity profile is lower than the indices calculated in most
multi-borrower transactions issued since 2009.

Moody's also grades properties on a scale of 1 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 pool's
weighted average property quality grade is 2.0, which is lower
than the indices calculated in most multi-borrower transactions
since 2009.

This deal has a super-senior Aaa class with 30% credit
enhancement. Although the additional enhancement offered to the
senior most certificate holders provides additional protection
against pool loss, the super-senior structure is credit negative
for the certificate that supports the super-senior class. If the
support certificate were to take a loss, the loss would have the
potential to be quite large on a percentage basis. Thin tranches
need more subordination to reduce the probability of default in
recognition that their loss-given default is higher. This
adjustment helps keep expected loss in balance and consistent
across deals. The transaction was structured with additional
subordination at class A-M to mitigate the potential increased
severity to class A-M.

The principal methodology used in this rating was "Moody's
Approach to Rating Fusion U.S. CMBS Transactions" published in
April 2005.

Moody's analysis employs the excel-based CMBS Conduit Model v2.64
which derives credit enhancement levels based on an aggregation of
adjusted loan level proceeds derived from Moody's loan level DSCR
and LTV ratios. Major adjustments to determining proceeds include
loan structure, property type, sponsorship and diversity. Moody's
analysis also uses the CMBS IO calculator version 1.0 which
references 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%, 15%, and 23%, the model-indicated rating for the currently
rated junior Aaa class would be Aa1, Aa2, A1, 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 rating

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 paydowns
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 the overall
performance of the pool, loan concentration, increased expected
losses from specially serviced and troubled loans or interest
shortfalls.


CREDIT SUISSE 2002-CKS4: Moody's Affirms C Rating on 2 Notes
------------------------------------------------------------
Moody's Investors Service has affirmed the ratings on four classes
in Credit Suisse First Boston Mortgage Securities Corp. Commercial
Mortgage Pass-Through Certificates 2002-CKS4 as follows:

Cl. A-X, Affirmed Caa3 (sf); previously on Feb 22, 2013 Downgraded
to Caa3 (sf)

Cl. G, Affirmed Caa1 (sf); previously on Feb 22, 2013 Affirmed
Caa1 (sf)

Cl. H, Affirmed C (sf); previously on Feb 22, 2013 Affirmed C (sf)

Cl. J, Affirmed C (sf); previously on Feb 22, 2013 Affirmed C (sf)

Ratings Rationale

The ratings on the P&I classes were affirmed because the ratings
are consistent with Moody's expected loss.

The rating on the IO class was affirmed based on the credit
performance (or the weighted average rating factor or WARF) of the
referenced classes.

Moody's rating action reflects a base expected loss of 64.1% of
the current balance compared to 46.3% at Moody's last review.
Moody's base expected loss plus realized losses is now 8.1% of the
original pooled balance compared to 7.8% at the last review.

Factors That Would Lead To An Upgrade Or Downgrade Of The Rating

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 this rating was "Moody's
Approach to Rating CMBS Large Loan/Single Borrower Transactions"
published in July 2000.

Description of Models Used

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 three, the same as at Moody's last review.

When the Herf falls below 20, Moody's uses the excel-based Large
Loan Model v 8.6 and then reconciles and weights the results from
the conduit and large loan models in formulating a rating
recommendation. The large loan model derives 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, property
type and sponsorship. Moody's also further adjusts these
aggregated proceeds for any pooling benefits associated with loan
level diversity and other concentrations and correlations.

Moody's analysis incorporated a loss and recovery approach in
rating the P&I classes in this deal since 89% of the pool is in
special servicing and performing loans only represent 11% of the
pool. In this approach, Moody's determines a probability of
default for each specially serviced 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 classes and the
recovery as a pay down of principal to the most senior class(es).

Deal Performance

As of the January 17, 2014 distribution date, the transaction's
aggregate certificate balance has decreased by 97% to $38 million
from $1.2 billion at securitization. The certificates are
collateralized by six mortgage loans ranging in size from less
than 2% to 50.5% of the pool. The pool does not contain any
defeased loans, loans with credit assessments or any loans on the
master servicer's watchlist.

Thirty-nine loans have been liquidated at a loss from the pool,
resulting in an aggregate realized loss of $75 million (for an
average loss severity of 29%). Five loans, constituting 89% of the
pool, are currently in special servicing. The largest specially
serviced loan is the Forum at Gateways Loan ($19 million -- 50.5%
of the pool), which is secured by a 258,000 square foot (SF)
retail property located in Sterling Heights, Michigan. The loan
was transferred to special servicing in July 2010 and became real
estate owned (REO) in September 2011. The property was 77% leased
as of November 2013 compared to 61% as of December 2012. L.A.
Fitness recently signed a lease for approximately 16% of the net
rentable area. The special servicer will continue efforts to
stabilize the property before marketing it for sale.

The second largest specially serviced loan is the Williamsburg
Crossing Loan ($12 million - 31.9% of the pool), which is secured
by a 150,000 SF retail property located in Williamsburg, Virginia.
The loan transferred to special servicing in March 2011 and has
been REO since July 2012. The property was 63% leased as of
November 2013, down from 65% as of December 2012.

The remaining three specially serviced loans are secured by
multifamily and office properties. Moody's estimates an aggregate
$24 million loss for the specially serviced loans (70% expected
loss on average).

The performing loan is the Best Buy -- Sandy, UT Loan ($4 million
-- 11.1% of the pool), which is secured by a 30,000 SF retail
property located in Sandy, Utah. The property is fully leased to
Best Buy through August 2022. The loan has amortized 14% since
securitization and matures in September 2014. Moody's LTV and
stressed DSCR are 101% and 0.99X, respectively, compared to 98%
and 1.02X at last review.


CREDIT SUISSE 2006-C4: Moody's Affirms C Rating on 3 Cert Classes
-----------------------------------------------------------------
Moody's Investors Service has affirmed the ratings of 13 classes
in Credit Suisse Commercial Mortgage Trust Commercial Securities
Pass-Through Certificates, Series 2006-C4 as follows:

Cl. A-1-A, Affirmed Aaa (sf); previously on Feb 28, 2013 Affirmed
Aaa (sf)

Cl. A-3, Affirmed Aaa (sf); previously on Feb 28, 2013 Affirmed
Aaa (sf)

Cl. A-4FL, Affirmed Aaa (sf); previously on Feb 28, 2013 Affirmed
Aaa (sf)

Cl. A-J, Affirmed B3 (sf); previously on Feb 28, 2013 Affirmed B3
(sf)

Cl. A-M, Affirmed Baa2 (sf); previously on Feb 28, 2013 Affirmed
Baa2 (sf)

Cl. A-X, Affirmed Ba3 (sf); previously on Feb 28, 2013 Affirmed
Ba3 (sf)

Cl. A-Y, Affirmed Aaa (sf); previously on Feb 28, 2013 Affirmed
Aaa (sf)

Cl. B, Affirmed Caa2 (sf); previously on Feb 28, 2013 Affirmed
Caa2 (sf)

Cl. C, Affirmed Caa3 (sf); previously on Feb 28, 2013 Affirmed
Caa3 (sf)

Cl. D, Affirmed Ca (sf); previously on Feb 28, 2013 Affirmed Ca
(sf)

Cl. E, Affirmed C (sf); previously on Feb 28, 2013 Affirmed C (sf)

Cl. F, Affirmed C (sf); previously on Feb 28, 2013 Affirmed C (sf)

Cl. G, Affirmed C (sf); previously on Feb 28, 2013 Affirmed C (sf)

RATINGS RATIONALE

The ratings on the investment grade 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 below-investment grade P&I classes were
affirmed because the ratings are consistent with Moody's expected
loss.

The rating on the WAC IO class (Class AX) was affirmed based on
the weighted average rating factor or WARF of the referenced
classes.

The rating on Class A-Y was affirmed due to the credit assessment
of the referenced loans (residential cooperatives).

Moody's rating action reflects a base expected loss of 8.7% of the
current balance compared to 10.8% at Moody's last review. Moody's
base expected loss plus realized losses is now 13.6% of the
original pooled balance compared to 13.1% at the last review.

Factors That Would Lead To An Upgrade Or Downgrade Of The Rating

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 this rating were "Moody's Approach to
Rating Fusion U.S. CMBS Transactions" published in April 2005 and
"Moody's Approach to Rating CMBS Large Loan/Single Borrower
Transactions" published in July 2000.

Description of Models Used

Moody's review used the excel-based CMBS Conduit Model v 2.64,
which it uses for both conduit and fusion transactions. Conduit
model results at the Aa2 (sf) level are driven by property type,
Moody's actual and stressed DSCR, and Moody's property quality
grade (which reflects the capitalization rate Moody's uses to
estimate Moody's value). Conduit model results at the B2 (sf)
level are based on a paydown analysis using the individual loan-
level Moody's LTV ratio. Moody's may consider other concentrations
and correlations in its analysis. Based on the model pooled credit
enhancement levels of Aa2 (sf) and B2 (sf), the required credit
enhancement on the remaining conduit classes are either
interpolated between these two data points or determined based on
a multiple or ratio of either of these two data points. For fusion
deals, Moody's merges the credit enhancement for loans with
investment-grade credit assessments with the conduit model credit
enhancement for an overall model result. Moody's incorporates
negative pooling (adding credit enhancement at the credit
assessment level) for loans with similar credit assessments in the
same transaction.

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 13 compared to 16 at Moody's last review.

When the Herf falls below 20, Moody's uses the excel-based Large
Loan Model v 8.6 and then reconciles and weights the results from
the conduit and large loan models in formulating a rating
recommendation. The large loan model derives 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, property
type and sponsorship. Moody's also further adjusts these
aggregated proceeds for any pooling benefits associated with loan
level diversity and other concentrations and correlations.

Deal Performance

As of the January 17, 2014 distribution date, the transaction's
aggregate certificate balance has decreased by 21% to $3.40
billion from $4.27 billion at securitization. The certificates are
collateralized by 289 mortgage loans ranging in size from less
than 1% to 24% of the pool, with the top ten loans (excluding
defeasance) constituting 46% of the pool. Forty-five loans,
constituting 3% of the pool, are secured by residential
cooperatives, and have investment grade credit assessments. Four
loans, constituting 1% of the pool, have defeased and are secured
by US government securities.

Ninety-four loans, constituting 36% 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.

Sixty-one loans have been liquidated from the pool, contributing
to an aggregate realized loss of $284 million (for an average loss
severity of 41%). Eighteen loans, constituting 5% of the pool, are
currently in special servicing. The largest specially serviced
loan is the Baylor Medical Towers Loan ($32 million -1% of the
pool), which is collateralized by a 155,000 square foot office
property with ground-floor retail in Houston, Texas.

The remaining 17 specially serviced loans are secured by a mix of
property types. Moody's estimates an aggregate $98 million loss
for the specially serviced loans (60% expected loss on average).

Moody's has assumed a high default probability for 62 poorly
performing loans, constituting 16% of the pool, and has estimated
an aggregate loss of $93 million (a 17% expected loss based on a
51% probability default) from these troubled loans.

Moody's received full year 2012 operating results for 95% of the
pool and full or partial year 2013 operating results for 88% of
the pool. Moody's weighted average conduit LTV is 102% compared to
107% at Moody's last 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 13.1% to the most recently
available net operating income (NOI). Moody's value reflects a
weighted average capitalization rate of 9.3%.

Moody's actual and stressed conduit DSCRs are 1.38X and 1.03X,
respectively, compared to 1.31X and 0.98X 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 45 loans with a credit assessment are secured by residential
cooperatives and collectively represent $110 million of loan
balance (3% of the pool). Moody's credit assessment for the
cooperative loans is Aaa, unchanged from the last review.

The top three performing conduit loans represent 38% of the pool
balance. The largest loan is the 11 Madison Avenue Loan ($806
million -- 24% of the pool), which is secured by a 2.2 million
square-foot office property in the Park Avenue South submarket of
New York City. The property serves as a headquarters location for
the global financial services firm Credit Suisse. Credit Suisse
currently occupies approximately 1.8 million square feet at the
property (81% of the property net rentable area (NRA)) under a
lease which expires in April 2017, which is just seven months
after the scheduled loan maturity in September 2016. The loan
sponsor is currently in discussions with Credit Suisse to extend
its lease on a long term basis. Moody's LTV and stressed DSCR are
111% and 0.83X, respectively, compared to 120% and 0.76X at prior
review.

The second largest loan is the 280 Park Avenue Loan ($298 million-
- 9% of the pool), which represents a participation interest in a
$439 million senior mortgage loan. The loan is secured by a 1.2
million square foot office property in Midtown Manhattan near
Grand Central Terminal. The loan is on the watchlist for poor
performance, as occupancy has remained well below market levels
for several years. As of September 2013 reporting, property
occupancy was just 60%, up slightly from the 56% reported a year
earlier. Both the largest and third-largest tenants (together
representing approximately 12% of property NRA) are expected to
vacate at their lease expirations by the end of January 2014.
Cohen and Steers will backfill the space vacated by the largest
tenant as part of a new lease for a full floor of the building
(approximately 92,000 square feet). The borrower reports strong
leasing activity for the property following a major lobby
renovation which has recently been completed. Moody's LTV and
stressed DSCR are 84% and 1.10X, respectively, which is
essentially unchanged from Moody's last review.

The third largest loan is the Ritz-Carlton South Beach Loan ($181
million -- 5% of the pool). The loan is secured by a 376-key,
oceanfront hotel property in Miami Beach, Florida. The loan is on
the watchlist for low DSCR, however performance has improved
steadily in recent years, with RevPAR increasing from $208 in 2010
to $370 in the trailing twelve months leading up to September
2013. Occupancy has also increased over the same period, from 72%
to 84%, reflecting a rebound in the South Beach hotel market as
well as a recent renovation of the property, coupled with a
revamped marketing plan. Moody's LTV and stressed DSCR are 131%
and 0.83X, respectively, compared to 143% and 0.76X at the last
review.


CREDIT SUISSE 2004-C3: Moody's Affirms C Rating on 2 Cert Classes
-----------------------------------------------------------------
Moody's Investors Service affirmed the ratings of nine classes of
Credit Suisse First Boston Commercial Mortgage Pass-Through
Certificates, Series 2004-C3 as follows:

Cl. A-1-A, Affirmed Aaa (sf); previously on Feb 14, 2013 Affirmed
Aaa (sf)

Cl. A-5, Affirmed Aaa (sf); previously on Feb 14, 2013 Affirmed
Aaa (sf)

Cl. B, Affirmed Baa2 (sf); previously on Feb 14, 2013 Downgraded
to Baa2 (sf)

Cl. C, Affirmed Ba3 (sf); previously on Feb 14, 2013 Downgraded to
Ba3 (sf)

Cl. D, Affirmed B3 (sf); previously on Feb 14, 2013 Downgraded to
B3 (sf)

Cl. E, Affirmed Caa3 (sf); previously on Feb 14, 2013 Downgraded
to Caa3 (sf)

Cl. F, Affirmed C (sf); previously on Feb 14, 2013 Downgraded to C
(sf)

Cl. G, Affirmed C (sf); previously on Feb 14, 2013 Downgraded to C
(sf)

Cl. A-X, Affirmed Ba3 (sf); previously on Feb 14, 2013 Affirmed
Ba3 (sf)

Ratings Rationale

The ratings of the investment grade 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 below-investment grade P&I
classes are affirmed because they are consistent with Moody's
expected loss. The rating of the interest-only class was affirmed
based on the weighted average rating factor or WARF of the
referenced classes is consistent with Moody's expectations.

Moody's rating action reflects a base expected loss of
approximately 7.8% of the current deal balance compared to 6.3% at
last review. Since last review the pool has paid down by
approximately 38%. Moody's base expected loss plus realized loss
is now 8.5% compared to 9.4% at last review.

Factors That Would Lead To An Upgrade Or Downgrade Of The Rating

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 and an
increase in realized and expected losses from specially serviced
and troubled loans or interest shortfalls.

Methodology Underlying The Rating Action

The principal methodologies used in this rating were "Moody's
Approach to Rating U.S. CMBS Conduit Transactions" published in
September 2000 and "Moody's Approach to Rating CMBS Large
Loan/Single Borrower Transactions" published in July 2000.

Description Of Models Used

Moody's review used the excel-based CMBS Conduit Model v 2.64,
which it uses for both conduit and fusion transactions. Conduit
model results at the Aa2 (sf) level are driven by property type,
Moody's actual and stressed DSCR, and Moody's property quality
grade (which reflects the capitalization rate Moody's uses to
estimate Moody's value). Conduit model results at the B2 (sf)
level are based on a paydown analysis using the individual loan-
level Moody's LTV ratio. Moody's may consider other concentrations
and correlations in its analysis. Based on the model pooled credit
enhancement levels of Aa2 (sf) and B2 (sf), the required credit
enhancement on the remaining conduit classes are either
interpolated between these two data points or determined based on
a multiple or ratio of either of these two data points. For fusion
deals, Moody's merges the credit enhancement for loans with
investment-grade credit assessments with the conduit model credit
enhancement for an overall model result. Moody's incorporates
negative pooling (adding credit enhancement at the credit
assessment level) for loans with similar credit assessments in the
same transaction.

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 10 compared to 17 at Moody's last review.

In cases where the Herf falls below 20, Moody's uses the excel-
based Large Loan Model v8.6 and then reconciles and weights the
results from the Conduit and Large Loan models in formulating a
rating recommendation. The large loan model derives 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, property type and sponsorship. These aggregated
proceeds are then further adjusted for any pooling benefits
associated with loan level diversity, other concentrations and
correlations.

Deal Performance

As of the January 17, 2014 payment date, the transaction's
aggregate certificate balance has decreased by approximately 59%
to $667.5 million from $1.64 billion at securitization. The
Certificates are collateralized by 95 mortgage loans ranging in
size from less than 1% to 20% of the pool, with the top ten loans
representing approximately 45% of the pool. Seventeen loans,
representing 28% of the pool, have defeased and are collateralized
with U.S. Government Securities.

Thirty-four loans, representing 21% 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 our
ongoing monitoring of a transaction, Moody's reviews the watchlist
to assess which loans have material issues that could impact
performance.

Twenty-four loans have been liquidated from the pool, resulting in
an aggregate realized loss of $87.3 million (48% average loss
severity). There are ten loans, representing approximately 9% of
the pool, that are currently in special servicing. The largest
specially serviced loan is the Tower at Northwoods ($17.2 million
-- 2.6% of the pool), which is secured by an 185,000 square foot
(SF) office property in Danvers, Massachusetts. The loan was
transferred to special servicing in February 2009 and became REO
effective May 2013. The remaining specially serviced loans are
secured by a mix of hospitality, multi-family, office and retail
properties. The master servicer has recognized an aggregate $36.6
million in appraisal reductions for nine of the specially serviced
loans. The master servicer has deemeed four loans as non-
recoverable. Moody's estimates an aggregate loss of $40.5 million
(71% loss severity) for the specially serviced loans.

Moody's has assumed a high default probability for four poorly
performing loan, representing approximately less than 1% of the
pool. Moody's has estimated an approximately $835,000 loss (15.6%
expected loss on a 50% probability of default) from these troubled
loans.

Moody's received full year 2012 and partial 2013 operating results
for 99% and 70% of the pool, respectively. Moody's weighted
average conduit LTV is 93% compared to 89% 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 approximately 12% to the most recently
available net operating income (NOI). Moody's value reflects a
weighted average capitalization rate of 9.7%.

Moody's actual and stressed conduit DSCRs are 1.28X and 1.19X,
respectively, compared to 1.36X and 1.23X 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 approximately 31% of the
pool. The largest conduit loan is the Pacific Design Center Loan
($135.5 million -- 20% of the pool), which is secured by a 961,000
SF office and design showroom building located in West Hollywood,
California. In addition to the showroom and office space, the
property also houses a 384-seat theater and screening room,
conference facilities, and a two-story gallery leased to the
Museum of Contemporary Art, a fitness facility and two
restaurants. As of November 2013, the property was 66% leased
compared to 68% at last review. Financial performance has
continued to decline year over year. The sponsor is Cohen Brothers
Realty. Moody's LTV and stressed DSCR are 112% and 0.97X,
respectively, compared to 100% and 1.08X at last review.

The second largest conduit loan is the BC Wood Portfolio Loan
($38.6 million -- 5.8% of the pool), which is secured by four
shopping centers located in Louisville, Lexington and Paris,
Kentucky, all built between 1951 and 1989. Totaling approximately
893,000 SF, the weighted average occupancy for the portfolio, as
of December 2013, was 87% compared to 92% at last review.
Financial performance remains stable. The loan sponsor is Brian C.
Wood. Moody's LTV and stressed DSCR are 94% and 1.13X,
respectively, compared to 95% and 1.12X at last review.

The third largest conduit loan is the 615 Chestnut Street Loan
($33.1 million -- 5.0% of the pool), which is secured by a 17-
story, 376,000 SF office property in Philadelphia's central
business district. As of June 2013, the property was 99% leased.
The largest tenant is the US Attorney's Office Eastern District of
Pennsylvania, which leases 43% of the net rentable area (NRA)
through July 2019. Financial performance remains stable. The loan
sponsor is Norman Wolgin. Moody's LTV and stressed DSCR are 73%
and 1.41X, respectively, compared to 74% and 1.4X at last review.


CREDIT SUISSE 2007-TFL1: Moody's Affirms C Rating on 2 Certs
------------------------------------------------------------
Moody's Investors Service affirmed the ratings of 13 classes,
including two interest-only (IO) classes of Credit Suisse First
Boston Mortgage Securities Corp. Commercial Pass-Through
Certificates Series 2007-TFL1 as follows:

Cl. A-2, Affirmed Aaa (sf); previously on Feb 21, 2013 Affirmed
Aaa (sf)

Cl. A-X-1, Affirmed B2 (sf); previously on Feb 21, 2013 Affirmed
B2 (sf)

Cl. A-X-2, Affirmed Caa2 (sf); previously on Feb 21, 2013 Affirmed
Caa2 (sf)

Cl. B, Affirmed Aa1 (sf); previously on Feb 21, 2013 Affirmed Aa1
(sf)

Cl. C, Affirmed Aa3 (sf); previously on Feb 21, 2013 Affirmed Aa3
(sf)

Cl. D, Affirmed A2 (sf); previously on Feb 21, 2013 Affirmed A2
(sf)

Cl. E, Affirmed Baa1 (sf); previously on Feb 21, 2013 Affirmed
Baa1 (sf)

Cl. F, Affirmed Ba1 (sf); previously on Feb 21, 2013 Affirmed Ba1
(sf)

Cl. G, Affirmed B1 (sf); previously on Feb 21, 2013 Affirmed B1
(sf)

Cl. H, Affirmed Caa1 (sf); previously on Feb 21, 2013 Affirmed
Caa1 (sf)

Cl. J, Affirmed Caa2 (sf); previously on Feb 21, 2013 Affirmed
Caa2 (sf)

Cl. K, Affirmed C (sf); previously on Feb 21, 2013 Affirmed C (sf)

Cl. L, Affirmed C (sf); previously on Feb 21, 2013 Affirmed C (sf)

Ratings Rationale

The affirmations of the principal and interest (P&I) classes are
due to key parameters, including Moody's loan to value (LTV) ratio
and Moody's stressed debt service coverage ratio (DSCR), remaining
within acceptable ranges. The rating of IO Class A-X-1 is
consistent with the weighted average rating factor (WARF) of its
respective classes and thus is affirmed. The rating of IO Class A-
X-2 is consistent with the expected credit performance of its
referenced loan, the Hines Portfolio Loan, and thus is affirmed.

Factors That Would Lead to an Upgrade or Downgrade of the Rating

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 the overall
performance of the pool, an increase in loan concentration,
increased expected losses from specially serviced and troubled
loans or interest shortfalls.

Methodology Underlying The Rating Action

The principal methodology used in this rating was "Moody's
Approach to Rating CMBS Large Loan/Single Borrower Transactions"
published in July 2000.

Description of Models Used

Moody's review incorporated the use of the excel-based Large Loan
Model v 8.6. The large loan model derives 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, property
type, and sponsorship. These aggregated proceeds are then further
adjusted for any pooling benefits associated with loan level
diversity, other concentrations and correlations.

Deal Performance

As of the January 15, 2014 Payment Date, the transaction's
aggregate certificate balance has decreased by 71% to $364.1
million from $1,266 million at securitization due primarily to the
payoff of eight loans originally in the trust. The certificates
are currently collateralized by three floating rate mortgage loans
ranging in size from 27% to 41% of the pool balance. The largest
loan, the JW Marriott Las Vegas Resort & Spa loan, is in special
servicing.

Moody's weighted average LTV for the pool is 115%, compared to
123% at the prior review. Moody's stressed debt service coverage
ratio (DSCR) for the pooled trust mortgage balance is 1.23X,
compared to 1.16X at the prior review. All three loans are current
for debt service payments.

The JW Marriott Las Vegas Resort & Spa loan ($149.9 million -- 41%
of the pooled balance), is secured by a 548-guestroom full-service
hotel with a 56,750 square foot casino and 44,396 square feet of
retail/restaurant space. The hotel is located in Summerlin (Las
Vegas), Nevada and was constructed in 1999 and renovated in 2006.
The loan was transferred to special servicing in September 2011 as
a result of imminent default. The loan matured on November 9, 2011
and went into default as the borrower failed to pay off the loan
at maturity. The $159.9 million whole loan includes a $10.0
million junior participation interest that is not included in the
trust. An Appraisal Reduction in the amount of $54.0 was applied
in November 2013.

The loan is current for debt service payments. The borrower was
granted a 15-month forbearance ending in February 2015. All cash
flow is being trapped from both the hotel and casino operations.
Moody's credit assessment is C, the same as at last review.

The Hines Portfolio loan ($116.8 million -- 32%) is secured by 16
cross-collateralized and cross-defaulted properties with a total
of 1.6 million square feet. One property, with a gross leasable
area of 32,589 square feet, was released from the loan collateral.
The majority of the properties are located in California's Silicon
Valley (79%) and the remainder are located on the San Francisco
Peninsula. Property types include Research & Development (R&D)
properties (51%), office (40%) and industrial (9%).

The loan was modified in September 2012. Significant terms of the
loan modification include an extension of the final maturity date
to February 9, 2015 and an exchange of the $30.0 million
Participation B-2 interest held by Torchlight Investors for an
equity interest. The borrower and Torchlight Investors jointly
funded $14.45 million into a newly formed reserve account to be
used for leasing and capital costs. On-going reserves are to be
funded up to $7.5 million from excess cash flow in addition to
$100,265 per month impounded for lease turnover. The whole loan
includes a $104.5 million non-trust junior secured loan component.
As of September 2013 the portfolio was 75% leased, the same as at
last review and at securitization. Moody's credit assessment is
Caa2, the same as at last review.

The Renaissance Aruba Beach Resort & Casino Loan ($97.5. Million
-- 27%) is secured by a fee and leasehold interest in a full-
service hotel with 558-guestrooms (including 118 time-share
units), two casinos, two shopping centers and a private island.
The gaming component accounts for about 40% of total revenue. The
loan was modified in February 2012 with a principal pay down of
$15.9 million and an extension of the loan maturity date to June
9, 2014. The whole loan includes a $54.9 million non-trust junior
secured loan component. Trust debt has paid down 24% since
securitization. RevPAR for the trailing 12-month period ending in
November 2013 was $136, a 2.5% increase over the same period in
the prior year. Moody's credit assessment is Ba3, the same as at
last review.


CREDIT SUISSE 2007-TFL-2: Moody's Ups Cl. A-2 Certs Rating to Ba2
-----------------------------------------------------------------
Moody's Investors Service upgraded the rating on one class and
affirmed eight classes, including two interest-only (IO) classes,
of Credit Suisse First Boston Mortgage Securities Corp. Commercial
Mortgage Pass-Through Certificates, Series 2007-TFL2 as follows:

Cl. A-1, Affirmed A2 (sf); previously on Feb 6, 2013 Affirmed A2
(sf)

Cl. A-2, Upgraded to Ba2 (sf); previously on Feb 6, 2013 Affirmed
B1 (sf)

Cl. A-3, Affirmed B2 (sf); previously on Feb 6, 2013 Affirmed B2
(sf)

Cl. A-X-1, Affirmed Caa1 (sf); previously on Feb 6, 2013 Affirmed
Caa1 (sf)

Cl. A-X-2, Affirmed B2 (sf); previously on Feb 6, 2013 Affirmed B2
(sf)

Cl. B, Affirmed B3 (sf); previously on Feb 6, 2013 Affirmed B3
(sf)

Cl. C, Affirmed Caa1 (sf); previously on Feb 6, 2013 Affirmed Caa1
(sf)

Cl. D, Affirmed Caa3 (sf); previously on Feb 6, 2013 Affirmed Caa3
(sf)

Cl. E, Affirmed C (sf); previously on Feb 6, 2013 Affirmed C (sf)

Ratings Rationale

The upgrade of Class A-2 was due to the expectation that there
will be no future significant interest shortfalls affecting that
class and the stable performance since last review of the two
remaining loans in the trust. The ratings of other principal and
interest (P&I) classes are consistent with Moody's expected loss
and thus are affirmed. The ratings of the interest-only classes
are consistent with the expected credit performance of the
referenced classes or loans, and thus are affirmed.

Factors That Would Lead to an Upgrade or Downgrade of the Rating

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 the overall
performance of the pool, an increase in loan concentration,
increased expected losses from specially serviced and troubled
loans or interest shortfalls.

Methodology Underlying the Rating Action

The principal methodology used in this rating was "Moody's
Approach to Rating CMBS Large Loan/Single Borrower Transactions"
published in July 2000.

Description of Models Used

Moody's review incorporated the use of the excel-based Large Loan
Model v 8.6. The large loan model derives 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, property
type, and sponsorship. These aggregated proceeds are then further
adjusted for any pooling benefits associated with loan level
diversity, other concentrations and correlations.

Deal Performance

As of the January 15, 2014 Payment Date, the transaction's
certificate balance decreased by approximately 54% to $698.5
million from $1.5 billion at securitization due to the liquidation
of four loans and partial pay downs of the remaining two loans in
the pool. The pool is comprised of two floating--rate loans,
including one secured by a casino hotel (59% of the pooled
balance) and the other secured by a portfolio of office properties
(41%).

Classes B through L have experienced significant interest
shortfalls totaling $7.2 million as of the January 2014 Payment
Date. Moody's expects the interest shortfalls associated with the
liquidated Resorts Atlantic City loan and the Biscayne Landing
loan to remain permanent. Interest shortfalls are caused by
special servicing fees, including workout and liquidation fees,
appraisal subordinate entitlement reductions (ASERs) and
extraordinary trust expenses.

Currently, there is one specially serviced loan, the Whitehall
Seattle Portfolio loan ($287.9 million - 41% of the pooled
balance). A restructure of the loan closed in October 2013 and the
loan is pending return to the master servicer.

The trust has experienced $306.4 million in losses since
securitization due to losses from the liquidation of both the
Resorts Atlantic City loan and the Biscayne Landing loan. Classes
F, G, H, J, K and L have experienced full losses.

Moody's weighted average loan to value (LTV) ratio is 85% compared
to 88% at last review. Moody's pooled stressed debt service
coverage (DSCR) is 1.34X compared to 1.30X at last review.

The largest loan in the pool, the Planet Hollywood loan ($410.6
million -- 59%), is collateralized by a 2,516-guestroom hotel and
casino located on Las Vegas Boulevard in Las Vegas, Nevada.
Property performance suffered during the recession but the loan
was recapitalized by Harrah's Entertainment in 2010 and the loan
was modified. The property net cash flow has rebounded to $70
million for the trailing 12-month period ending in September 2013.
There is additional non-trust subordinate mortgage debt with a
current balance of $84.2 million. The loan has a final extended
maturity date in April 2015. Moody's current credit assessment is
B2 compared to B3 at last review.

The second loan in the pool, the Whitehall Seattle Portfolio loan
($287.9 million -- 41%), is collateralized by 11 office properties
in Seattle, Washington. The loan was transferred to special
servicing in December 2011 and is pending return to the master
servicer. A restructure of the loan closed in October 2013 that
included a foreclosure of the First Mezzanine Loan by a Walton
Street sponsored fund. Terms of the restructure include an
extension of the loan maturity date to April 9, 2015, new capital
contribution in the amount of $37.5 million, a $3.8 million
principal repayment, annual amortization and a cash flow sweep to
fund a Rollover Reserve. There is additional non-trust subordinate
mortgage debt with a current balance of $173.8 million. The
portfolio was 61% leased, as of September 2013, compared to 64% at
last review. Moody's current credit assessment is B2, the same as
at last review.


CRF 19 LLC: S&P Puts BB+ Rating on Class C Notes on Watch Neg.
--------------------------------------------------------------
Standard & Poor's Ratings Services placed its ratings on CRF 19
LLC's class B, C, D, and E notes on CreditWatch with negative
implications.

The CreditWatch placements reflect the rising delinquencies and
increasing cumulative net loss rates we have observed within the
transaction's underlying asset portfolio.

CRF 19 LLC is an asset-backed securities transaction
collateralized primarily by a pool of small business development
loans that are not insured or guaranteed by any governmental
agency.  These loans are generally secured by owner-occupied,
multipurpose commercial real estate.

Between July 2012 and January 2014, the total delinquency rate (as
a percentage of the then-current pool balance) increased to 43.50%
from 27.40%, the 90-plus-day delinquency rate (as a percentage of
the then-current pool balance) increased to 43.07% from 26.76%,
and the cumulative net loss rate (as a percentage of the original
pool balance) increased to 6.85% from 5.75%.

S&P will resolve the CreditWatch placements after a comprehensive
review of the transaction is completed.

RATINGS PLACED ON CREDITWATCH NEGATIVE

CRF 19 LLC
                        Rating
Class         To                   From
B             A (sf)/Watch Neg     A (sf)
C             BB+ (sf)/Watch Neg   BB+ (sf)
D             B- (sf)/Watch Neg    B- (sf)
E             CCC- (sf)/Watch Neg  CCC- (sf)


CS FIRST BOSTON 1998-C1: Moody's Affirms Caa1 Rating on A-X Secs.
-----------------------------------------------------------------
Moody's Investors Service has affirmed the rating of one class of
CS First Boston Mortgage Securities Corp 1998-C1 as follows:

Cl. A-X, Affirmed Caa1 (sf); previously on Feb 14, 2013 Affirmed
Caa1 (sf)

Ratings Rationale

The rating of the IO class, Class A-X, was affirmed based on the
credit performance of its referenced classes. The IO class is the
only outstanding Moody's-rated class in this transaction.

Factors That Would Lead To An Upgrade Or Downgrade Of The Rating

The rating of an IO class is based on the credit performance of
its referenced classes. An IO class may be upgraded based on a
lower weighted average rating factor or WARF due to an overall
improvement in the credit quality of its reference classes. An IO
class may be downgraded based on a higher WARF due to a decline in
the credit quality of its reference classes, paydowns of higher
quality reference classes or non-payment of interest. Classes that
have paid off through loan paydowns or amortization are not
included in the WARF calculation. Classes that have experienced
losses are grossed up for losses and included in the WARF
calculation, even if Moody's has withdrawn the rating.

Methodology Underlying The Rating Action

The methodologies used in this rating were "Moody's Approach to
Rating U.S. CMBS Conduit Transactions" published in September
2000, "Moody's Approach to Rating CMBS Large Loan/Single Borrower
Transactions" published in July 2000 and "Commercial Real Estate
Finance: Moody's Approach to Rating Credit Tenant Lease
Financings" published in November 2011.

Description of Models Used

Moody's review used the excel-based CMBS Conduit Model v 2.64,
which it uses for both conduit and fusion transactions. Conduit
model results at the Aa2 (sf) level are driven by property type,
Moody's actual and stressed DSCR, and Moody's property quality
grade (which reflects the capitalization rate Moody's uses to
estimate Moody's value). Conduit model results at the B2 (sf)
level are based on a paydown analysis using the individual loan-
level Moody's LTV ratio. Moody's may consider other concentrations
and correlations in its analysis. Based on the model pooled credit
enhancement levels of Aa2 (sf) and B2 (sf), the required credit
enhancement on the remaining conduit classes are either
interpolated between these two data points or determined based on
a multiple or ratio of either of these two data points. For fusion
deals, Moody's merges the credit enhancement for loans with
investment-grade credit assessments with the conduit model credit
enhancement for an overall model result. Moody's incorporates
negative pooling (adding credit enhancement at the credit
assessment level) for loans with similar credit assessments in the
same transaction.

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 1, the same as at Moody's prior review.

When the Herf falls below 20, Moody's uses the excel-based Large
Loan Model v 8.6 and then reconciles and weights the results from
the conduit and large loan models in formulating a rating
recommendation. The large loan model derives 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, property
type and sponsorship. Moody's also further adjusts these
aggregated proceeds for any pooling benefits associated with loan
level diversity and other concentrations and correlations.

Moody's analysis incorporated a Credit Tenant Lease (CTL)
financing approach in assessing the credit quality of the pool's
CTL component. In this approach, the rating of the CTL component
is based primarily on the senior unsecured debt rating (or the
corporate family rating) of the tenants, usually investment-grade-
rated companies, leasing the real estate collateral supporting the
bonds. The tenants' credit rating is the key factor in determining
the probability of default on the underlying lease. The lease
generally is "bondable," which means it is an absolute net lease,
yielding a fixed rent paid to the trust through a lock box,
sufficient under all circumstances to pay in full all interest and
principal of the loan. The leased property should be owned by a
bankruptcy-remote special purpose borrower, which grants a first-
lien mortgage and assignment of rents to the securitization trust.
Moody's determines a dark value of the collateral, (which assumes
the property is vacant or dark), which the agency uses to
determine a recovery rate upon a loan's default. Moody's currently
uses a Gaussian copula model, incorporated in its public CDO
rating model CDOROMv2.10-15, to generate a portfolio loss
distribution to assess the ratings.

Deal Performance

As of the January 17, 2014 distribution date, the transaction's
aggregate certificate balance has decreased by 94% to $148 million
from $2.4 billion at securitization. The certificates are
collateralized by 56 mortgage loans ranging in size from less than
1% to 10% of the pool. Ten loans, representing 11% of the pool,
have defeased and are secured by US government securities.

Four loans, representing 5% 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.

Fifty-three loans have been liquidated from the pool, resulting in
an aggregate realized loss of $89 million. There are currently no
loans in special servicing.

Moody's was provided with full year 2012 and full or partial year
2013 operating results for 96% and 65% of the pool, respectively.
Moody's weighted average conduit LTV is 66% compared to 65% at
Moody's last 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 18% to the most recently available net
operating income (NOI). Moody's value reflects a weighted average
capitalization rate of 9.36%.

Moody's actual and stressed conduit DSCRs are 1.12X and 2.97X,
respectively, compared to 1.22X and 3.14X 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 CTL component consists of 38 loans, totaling 79% of the pool,
secured by properties leased to ten tenants. The pool's largest
exposures are Best Buy ($29.1 million - 19% of the pool balance),
CarMax ($22.1 million - 15%) and Elder-Beerman ($21.5 million --
15%). The bottom-dollar weighted average rating factor (WARF) for
this pool is 3,964 compared to 3,933 at last review. WARF is a
measure of the overall quality of a pool of diverse credits. The
bottom-dollar WARF is a measure of the default probability within
the pool.


CSMC TRUST 2014-IVR1: S&P Assigns 'BB' Rating on Class B-3 Notes
----------------------------------------------------------------
Standard & Poor's Ratings Services assigned ratings to CSMC Trust
2014-IVR1's $279.368 million mortgage pass-through certificates
series 2014-IVR1.

The certificate issuance is a residential mortgage-backed
securities transaction backed by residential mortgage loans.

The ratings reflect S&P's view of:

   -- The pool's high-quality collateral.

   -- The credit enhancement and associated structural deal
      mechanics.

RATINGS ASSIGNED

CSMC Trust 2014-IVR1

Class            Rating             Amount (mil. $)
A-1              AAA (sf)                   248.039
A-2              AAA (sf)                    19.688
A-X-1            AAA (sf)                  Notional(i)
A-X-2            AAA (sf)                  Notional(ii)
A-X-3            AAA (sf)                  Notional(i)
A-X-4            AAA (sf)                  Notional(ii)
B-1              A (sf)                       4.024
B-2              BBB (sf)                     3.449
B-3              BB (sf)                      4.168
B-4              NR                           3.305
B-5              NR                           4.743
A-X-5            AAA (sf)                  Notional(i)
A-3              AAA (sf)                   248.039
A-6              AAA (sf)                   248.039
A-5              AAA (sf)                   267.727
A-X-6            AAA (sf)                  Notional(iii)
A-4              AAA (sf)                   267.727
A-X-7            AAA (sf)                  Notional(iii)
A-7              AAA (sf)                   267.727
A-X-8            AAA (sf)                  Notional(ii)
A-9              AAA (sf)                    19.688
A-8              AAA (sf)                    16.688
A-10             AAA (sf)                   187.409
A-11             AAA (sf)                    80.318
A-12             AAA (sf)                   187.409
A-13             AAA (sf)                    80.318
A-14             AAA (sf)                   187.408
A-15             AAA (sf)                    80.318
A-X-9            AAA (sf)                  Notional(iii)

  (i) The class A-X-1, A-X-3, and A-X-5 certificates will accrue
      interest on a notional amount equal to the class A-1
      certificates' principal amount.

(ii) The class A-X-2, A-X-4, and A-X-8 certificates will accrue
      interest on a notional amount equal to the class A-2
      certificates' principal amount.

(iii) The class A-X-6, A-X-7, and A-X-9 certificates will accrue
      interest on a notional amount equal to the aggregate class
      A-1 and A-2 certificates' principal amounts.

  NR-Not rated.


DBCCRE 2014-ARCP: S&P Assigns 'BB' Rating on $25MM Class E Notes
----------------------------------------------------------------
Standard & Poor's Ratings Services assigned its ratings to DBCCRE
2014-ARCP Mortgage Trust's $620 million commercial mortgage pass-
through certificates.

The certificate issuance is a commercial mortgage-backed
securities transaction backed by first mortgage liens on the fee
and leasehold interests in 82 single-tenanted commercial
properties.

The ratings reflect S&P's view of the collateral's economics, the
collateral pool's relative diversity, the sponsor's experience,
the trustee-provided liquidity, the transaction's structure, and
our overall qualitative assessment of the transaction.

RATINGS ASSIGNED

DBCCRE 2014-ARCP Mortgage Trust

Class       Rating                 Amount
                                 (mil. $)
A           AAA (sf)              345.400
X           AA- (sf)           417.390(i)
B           AA- (sf)               71.990
C           A- (sf)                53.970
D           BBB- (sf)              59.077
E           BB (sf)                63.733
F           BB- (sf)               25.830

(i)Notional balance.


DEUTSCHE MORTGAGE 1998-C1: Moody's Affirms Caa3 Rating on X Certs
-----------------------------------------------------------------
Moody's Investors Service has affirmed the rating of one class in
Deutsche Mortgage & Asset Receiving Corporation, Commercial
Mortgage Pass-Through Certificates, Series 1998-C1 as follows:

Cl. X, Affirmed Caa3 (sf); previously on Feb 14, 2013 Downgraded
to Caa3 (sf)

Ratings Rationale

The rating on the IO class, Class X, was affirmed based on the
credit performance of its referenced classes. The IO class is the
only outstanding Moody's-rated class in this transaction.

Factors That Would Lead To An Upgrade Or Downgrade Of The Rating

The rating of an IO class is based on the credit performance of
its referenced classes. An IO class may be upgraded based on a
lower weighted average rating factor or WARF due to an overall
improvement in the credit quality of its reference classes. An IO
class may be downgraded based on a higher WARF due to a decline in
the credit quality of its reference classes, paydowns of higher
quality reference classes or non-payment of interest. Classes that
have paid off through loan paydowns or amortization are not
included in the WARF calculation. Classes that have experienced
losses are grossed up for losses and included in the WARF
calculation, even if Moody's has withdrawn the rating.

Methodology Underlying The Rating Action

The methodologies used in this rating were "Moody's Approach to
Rating U.S. CMBS Conduit Transactions" published in September 2000
and "Moody's Approach to Rating CMBS Large Loan/Single Borrower
Transactions" published in July 2000.

Description Of Models Used

Moody's review used the excel-based CMBS Conduit Model v 2.64,
which it uses for both conduit and fusion transactions. Conduit
model results at the Aa2 (sf) level are driven by property type,
Moody's actual and stressed DSCR, and Moody's property quality
grade (which reflects the capitalization rate Moody's uses to
estimate Moody's value). Conduit model results at the B2 (sf)
level are based on a paydown analysis using the individual loan-
level Moody's LTV ratio. Moody's may consider other concentrations
and correlations in its analysis. Based on the model pooled credit
enhancement levels of Aa2 (sf) and B2 (sf), the required credit
enhancement on the remaining conduit classes are either
interpolated between these two data points or determined based on
a multiple or ratio of either of these two data points. For fusion
deals, Moody's merges the credit enhancement for loans with
investment-grade credit assessments with the conduit model credit
enhancement for an overall model result. Moody's incorporates
negative pooling (adding credit enhancement at the credit
assessment level) for loans with similar credit assessments in the
same transaction.

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 5 compared to 6 at prior review.

When the Herf falls below 20, Moody's uses the excel-based Large
Loan Model v 8.6 and then reconciles and weights the results from
the conduit and large loan models in formulating a rating
recommendation. The large loan model derives 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, property
type and sponsorship. Moody's also further adjusts these
aggregated proceeds for any pooling benefits associated with loan
level diversity and other concentrations and correlations.

Deal Performance

As of the January 15, 2014 distribution date, the transaction's
aggregate certificate balance has decreased by 99% to $22 million
from $1.8 billion at securitization. The certificates are
collateralized by 11 mortgage loans ranging in size from less than
1% to 33% of the pool, with the top ten loans (excluding
defeasance) constituting 95% of the pool. One loan, constituting
6% of the pool, has defeased and is secured by US government
securities.

One loan, constituting 2% of the pool, is 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.

Fifty-five loans have been liquidated from the pool, resulting in
an aggregate realized loss of $96.8 million. Three loans,
constituting 39% of the pool, are currently in special servicing.
The largest specially serviced loan is the Old Town Center Loan
($5.3 million -- 24% of the pool), which is secured by a 101,000
square foot theme park located in Kissimmee, Florida. The property
includes 75 specialty shops, eight restaurants and 18 thrill
rides. The loan was transferred to special servicing in February
2012. As of October 2013, the property was 90% leased.

The remaining two specially serviced loans are secured by a mix of
property types. Moody's estimates an aggregate $5.3 million loss
for the specially serviced loans (61% expected loss on average).

Moody's received full year 2012 operating results for 100% of the
pool and full or partial year 2013 operating results for 86% of
the pool. Moody's weighted average conduit LTV is 64% compared to
60% at Moody's last 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 31% 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 1.06X and 2.08X,
respectively, compared to 1.42X and 2.04X 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 performing conduit loans represent 46% of the pool
balance. The largest loan is the Homebase Brea Union Plaza Loan
($7.1 million -- 28% of the pool), which is secured by a 110,000
square foot Home Depot located in Brea, California. Home Depot's
lease expires in August 2017. Moody's LTV and stressed DSCR are
77% and 1.26X, respectively, compared to 83% and 1.18X at prior
review.

The second largest loan is the K-Mart Des Moines Loan ($2.4
million -- 11% of the pool). The loan is secured by a 106,000
square-foot K-Mart located in Des Moines, Iowa. The property is
100% leased to K-Mart through September 2022. Moody's LTV and
stressed DSCR are 48% and, 2.22X, respectively, compared to 53%
and 2.05X at the last review.

The third largest loan is the Forest Hills Care Center Loan
(698,000 -- 3% of the pool). The loan is secured by a 100 bed
retirement center in Forest Hills, New York. The property was 88%
occupied as of September 2013. Moody's LTV and stressed DSCR are
58% and 2.58X, respectively.


DEUTSCHE 2007-OA4: Moody's Puts Ca Rating on A-4 Secs. on Review
----------------------------------------------------------------
Moody's Investors Service has placed the rating of Class A-4 from
Deutsche Alt-A Securities Mortgage Loan Trust, Series 2007-OA4 on
review for upgrade. The transaction is backed by Option ARM loans.

Complete rating action is as follows:

Issuer: Deutsche Alt-A Securities Mortgage Loan Trust, Series
2007-OA4

Cl. A-4, Ca (sf) Placed Under Review for Possible Upgrade;
previously on Dec 3, 2010 Confirmed at Ca (sf)

Ratings Rationale

The rating placed on review for upgrade is due to the discrepancy
between the Prospectus Supplement (prosup) and the Pooling &
Servicing Agreement (PSA) with regards to the allocation of losses
to the Class A-4. The prosup states that Class A-4 will receive
its share of losses once the mezzanine certificates are written
down. The PSA is inconsistent in its treatment of Class A-4. The
PSA omits Class A-4 from its loss allocation section, but includes
the bond in the Net Monthly Excess Cashflow waterfall with regards
to allowing recoupment of losses on the bond. Citing to the
omission of Class A-4 in the loss allocation section of the PSA,
Wells Fargo, the bond administrator for the transaction, is not
allocating any losses to this bond.

The principal methodology used in this rating was "US RMBS
Surveillance Methodology" published in November 2013. Please see
the Credit Policy page on www.moodys.com for a copy of this
methodology.

Factors that Would Lead to an Upgrade or Downgrade of the Rating

Ratings in the US RMBS sector remain exposed to the high level of
macroeconomic uncertainty, and in particular the unemployment
rate. The unemployment rate fell to 6.7% in December 2013 from
7.9% in December 2012 . Moody's forecasts an unemployment central
range of 6.5% to 7.5% for the 2014 year. Deviations from this
central scenario could lead to rating actions in the sector. House
prices are another key driver of US RMBS performance. Moody's
expects house prices to continue to rise in 2014. Lower increases
than Moody's expects or decreases could lead to negative rating
actions. Finally, performance of RMBS continues to remain highly
dependent on servicer procedures. Any change resulting from
servicing transfers or other policy or regulatory change can
impact the performance of these transactions.


DLJ COMMERCIAL 1998-CF1: Moody's Affirms Caa1 Rating on S Certs
------------------------------------------------------------
Moody's Investors Service has affirmed the rating of one class of
DLJ Commercial Mortgage Corp., Commercial Mortgage Pass-Through
Certificates, Series 1998-CF1 as follows:

Cl. S, Affirmed Caa1 (sf); previously on Feb 14, 2013 Affirmed
Caa1 (sf)

Ratings Rationale

The rating of the IO class, Class S, was affirmed based on the
weighted average rating factor (WARF) of its referenced classes.
The IO class is the only outstanding Moody's-rated class in this
transaction.

Factors That Would Lead to an Upgrade or Downgrade of the Rating

The rating of an IO class is based on the credit performance of
its referenced classes. An IO class may be upgraded based on a
lower weighted average rating factor or WARF due to an overall
improvement in the credit quality of its reference classes. An IO
class may be downgraded based on a higher WARF due to a decline in
the credit quality of its reference classes, paydowns of higher
quality reference classes or non-payment of interest. Classes that
have paid off through loan paydowns or amortization are not
included in the WARF calculation. Classes that have experienced
losses are grossed up for losses and included in the WARF
calculation, even if Moody's has withdrawn the rating.

Methodology Underlying The Rating Action

The methodologies used in this rating were "Moody's Approach to
Rating U.S. CMBS Conduit Transactions" published in September 2000
and "Moody's Approach to Rating CMBS Large Loan/Single Borrower
Transactions" published in July 2000.

Description of Models Used

Moody's review utilized the excel-based CMBS Conduit Model v 2.64
which is used for both conduit and fusion transactions. Conduit
model results at the Aa2 (sf) level are driven by property type,
Moody's actual and stressed DSCR and Moody's property quality
grade (which reflects the capitalization rate used by Moody's to
estimate Moody's value). Conduit model results at the B2 (sf)
level are driven by a paydown analysis based on the individual
loan level Moody's LTV ratio. Other concentrations and
correlations may be considered in our analysis. Based on the model
pooled credit enhancement levels at Aa2 (sf) and B2 (sf), the
remaining conduit classes are either interpolated between these
two data points or determined based on a multiple or ratio of
either of these two data points. For fusion deals, the credit
enhancement for loans with investment-grade credit assessments is
melded with the conduit model credit enhancement into an overall
model result. Negative pooling, or adding credit enhancement at
the credit assessment level, is incorporated for loans with
similar credit assessments in the same transaction.

Moody's uses a variation of Herf to measure diversity of loan
size, where a higher number represents greater diversity. Loan
concentration has an important bearing on potential rating
volatility, including risk of multiple notch downgrades under
adverse circumstances. The credit neutral Herf score is 40. The
pool has a Herf of 5, the same as at prior review.

In cases where the Herf falls below 20, Moody's uses the excel-
based Large Loan Model v8.6 and then reconciles and weights the
results from the Conduit and Large Loan models in formulating a
rating recommendation. The large loan model derives 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, property type and sponsorship. These aggregated
proceeds are then further adjusted for any pooling benefits
associated with loan level diversity, other concentrations and
correlations.

Deal Performance

As of the January 15, 2014 distribution date, the transaction's
aggregate certificate balance has decreased by 96% to $34.9
million from $838.8 million at securitization. The Certificates
are collateralized by 15 mortgage loans ranging in size from 1% to
24% of the pool. One loan, representing 7% of the pool has
defeased and is secured by US Government securities.

Two loans, representing 25% 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 our
ongoing monitoring of a transaction, Moody's reviews the watchlist
to assess which loans have material issues that could impact
performance.

Eleven loans have been liquidated from the pool, resulting in an
aggregate realized loss of $13.6 million (24% loss severity on
average). Currently, there are no loans in special servicing.

Moody's was provided with full year 2012 for 100% of the pool.
Moody's weighted average conduit LTV is 88% compared to 86% at
Moody's prior review. Moody's conduit component excludes defeased
loans. Moody's net cash flow (NCF) reflects a weighted average
haircut of 19% to the most recently available net operating income
(NOI). Moody's value reflects a weighted average capitalization
rate of 11.0%.

Moody's actual and stressed conduit DSCRs are 1.02X and 1.49X,
respectively, compared to 1.05X and 1.50X 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 exposures represent 65% of the pool. The largest
exposure is the Walgreens Portfolio ($10.8 million -- 30.9% of the
pool), which consists of five cross-collateralized and cross-
defaulted loans each secured by properties fully leased to
Walgreens. Two are located in California, two in Nevada and one in
Washington. Moody's LTV and stressed DSCR are 87% and 1.37X,
respectively, compared to 96% and 1.24X at the prior review.

The second largest conduit loan is the Shops at Lyndale Phase II
Loan ($8.3 million -- 23.8% of the pool), which is secured by a
108,000 square foot (SF) anchored retail property in Richfield,
Minnesota. As of October 2013, the property was 77% leased.
Moody's LTV and stressed DSCR are 112% and 1.06X, respectively.

The third largest conduit loan is the Randall's Store Loan ($3.7
million -- 10.6% of the pool), which is secured by 59,000 SF
grocery store located in Sugar Land, Texas. The property is fully
leased to Randalls through November 2022, which extends five years
beyond the loan maturity date in December 2017. Moody's LTV and
stressed DSCR are 86% and 1.39X, respectively, compared to 87% and
1.37X at the prior review.


DLJ COMMERCIAL 1998-CF2: Moody's Cuts Cl. S Notes Rating to Caa3
----------------------------------------------------------------
Moody's Investors Service downgraded the rating of one interest-
only class of DLJ Commercial Mortgage Corp., Commercial Mortgage
Pass-Through Certificates, Series 1998-CF2 as follows:

Cl. S, Downgraded to Caa3 (sf); previously on Feb 22, 2013
Affirmed Caa1 (sf)

Ratings Rationale

The rating of the IO Class, Class S, was downgraded due to the
decline in credit performance of its reference classes as a result
of principal paydowns of higher quality reference classes. The IO
class is the only outstanding Moody's-rated class in this
transaction.

Factors That Would Lead to an Upgrade or Downgrade of the Rating

The rating of an IO class is based on the credit performance of
its referenced classes. An IO class may be upgraded based on a
lower weighted average rating factor or WARF due to an overall
improvement in the credit quality of its reference classes. An IO
class may be downgraded based on a higher WARF due to a decline in
the credit quality of its reference classes, paydowns of higher
quality reference classes or non-payment of interest. Classes that
have paid off through loan paydowns or amortization are not
included in the WARF calculation. Classes that have experienced
losses are grossed up for losses and included in the WARF
calculation, even if Moody's has withdrawn the rating.

Methodology Underlying The Rating Action

The methodologies used in this rating were "Moody's Approach to
Rating U.S. CMBS Conduit Transactions" published in September 2000
and "Moody's Approach to Rating CMBS Large Loan/Single Borrower
Transactions" published in July 2000.

Description of Models Used

Moody's review utilized the excel-based CMBS Conduit Model v 2.64
which is used for both conduit and fusion transactions. Conduit
model results at the Aa2 (sf) level are driven by property type,
Moody's actual and stressed DSCR and Moody's property quality
grade (which reflects the capitalization rate used by Moody's to
estimate Moody's value). Conduit model results at the B2 (sf)
level are driven by a paydown analysis based on the individual
loan level Moody's LTV ratio. Other concentrations and
correlations may be considered in our analysis. Based on the model
pooled credit enhancement levels at Aa2 (sf) and B2 (sf), the
remaining conduit classes are either interpolated between these
two data points or determined based on a multiple or ratio of
either of these two data points. For fusion deals, the credit
enhancement for loans with investment-grade credit assessments is
melded with the conduit model credit enhancement into an overall
model result. Negative pooling, or adding credit enhancement at
the credit assessment level, is incorporated for loans with
similar credit assessments in the same transaction.

Moody's uses a variation of Herf to measure diversity of loan
size, where a higher number represents greater diversity. Loan
concentration has an important bearing on potential rating
volatility, including risk of multiple notch downgrades under
adverse circumstances. The credit neutral Herf score is 40. The
pool has a Herf of 4 compared to 12 at Moody's prior review.

In cases where the Herf falls below 20, Moody's uses the excel-
based Large Loan Model v 8.6 and then reconciles and weights the
results from the Conduit and Large Loan models in formulating a
rating recommendation. The large loan model derives 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, property type and sponsorship. These aggregated
proceeds are then further adjusted for any pooling benefits
associated with loan level diversity, other concentrations and
correlations.

Deal Performance

As of the January 13, 2014 distribution date, the transaction's
aggregate certificate balance has decreased by 97% to $32.8
million from $1.1 billion at securitization. The Certificates are
collateralized by 14 mortgage loans ranging in size from less than
1% to 39% of the pool, with the top ten loans representing 77% of
the pool. Three loans, representing 18% of the pool have defeased
and are secured by US Government securities.

Sixty-six loans have been liquidated from the pool, resulting in
an aggregate realized loss of $25.2 million (53% loss severity on
average). One loan, representing 39% of the pool, is currently in
special servicing. This loan is the Holiday Inn Hurstbourne Loan
($12.6 million; 39% of the pool), which is secured by a 267-key
hotel located in Louisville, Kentucky. The loan is real estate
owned (REO) and is currently under contract for sale. Moody's
expects a significant loss from this specially serviced loan.

Moody's was provided with full year 2012 and full or partial year
2013 operating results for 77% and 69% of the pool, respectively.
Moody's weighted average conduit LTV is 43% compared to 56% 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 9% to the most recently available
net operating income (NOI). Moody's value reflects a weighted
average capitalization rate of 11.3%.

Moody's actual and stressed conduit DSCRs are 1.33X and 3.12X,
respectively, compared to 1.41X and 2.31X 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 23% of the pool balance. The
largest loan is the Spanish Villa Apartments Loan ($3.8 million --
11.6% of the pool), which is secured by a 232-unit apartment
complex located in Savannah, Georgia. This property was 84% leased
as of September 2013. This loan was previously on the watchlist
for low DSCR, but was removed in August 2013. Moody's LTV and
stressed DSCR are 63% and 1.63X, respectively.

The second largest loan is the Super 8-Midtown (1G) Loan ($2.3
million -- 7.1% of the pool), which is secured by a 243-key
limited service hotel located in Albuquerque, New Mexico. The loan
is on the watchlist due to a low DSCR. Moody's LTV and stressed
DSCR are 46% and 2.80X, respectively, compared to 43% and 2.99X at
prior review.

The third largest loan is the K-Mart Montwood Point Loan ($1.4
million -- 4.3% of the pool), which is secured by a 102,017 square
foot anchored retail center located in El Paso, Texas. The
property was 100% leased as of September 2013, compared to 99% at
last review. Moody's LTV and stressed DSCR are 28% and 4.26X.


DLJ COMMERCIAL 1999-CG1: Moody's Affirms Caa3 Cl. S Certs Rating
----------------------------------------------------------------
Moody's Investors Service affirmed the rating of one interest-only
class of DLJ Commercial Mortgage Pass-Through Certificates, Series
1999-CG1 as follows:

Cl. S, Affirmed Caa3 (sf); previously on Feb 21, 2013 Affirmed
Caa3 (sf)

RATINGS RATIONALE

The rating of the IO class, Class S, was affirmed based on the
weighted average rating factor or WARF of its referenced classes.

FACTORS THAT WOULD LEAD TO AN UPGRADE OR DOWNGRADE OF THE RATING

The rating of an IO class is based on the credit performance of
its referenced classes. An IO class may be upgraded based on a
lower weighted average rating factor or WARF due to an overall
improvement in the credit quality of its reference classes. An IO
class may be downgraded based on a higher WARF due to a decline in
the credit quality of its reference classes, paydowns of higher
quality reference classes or non-payment of interest. Classes that
have paid off through loan paydowns or amortization are not
included in the WARF calculation. Classes that have experienced
losses are grossed up for losses and included in the WARF
calculation, even if Moody's has withdrawn the rating.

METHODOLOGY UNDERLYING THE RATING ACTION

The principal methodology used in this rating was "Moody's
Approach to Rating CMBS Large Loan/Single Borrower Transactions"
published in July 2000.

DESCRIPTION OF MODELS USED

Moody's uses a variation of Herf to measure diversity of loan
size, where a higher number represents greater diversity. Loan
concentration has an important bearing on potential rating
volatility, including risk of multiple notch downgrades under
adverse circumstances. The credit neutral Herf score is 40. The
pool has a Herf of 2 compared to 6 at the prior review.

In cases where the Herf falls below 20, Moody's uses the excel-
based Large Loan Model v8.6 and then reconciles and weights the
results from the Conduit and Large Loan models in formulating a
rating recommendation. The large loan model derives 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, property type and sponsorship. These aggregated
proceeds are then further adjusted for any pooling benefits
associated with loan level diversity, other concentrations and
correlations.

DEAL PERFORMANCE

As of the January 10, 2014 distribution date, the transaction's
aggregate certificate balance has decreased by approximately 99%
to $17.1 million from $1.24 billion at securitization. The
Certificates are collateralized by two mortgage loans.

No loans are on the master servicer's watchlist and no loans are
currently in special servicing. Thirty-four loans have been
liquidated from the pool, resulting in an aggregate realized loss
of $41.4 million (31% loss severity on average).

Moody's was provided with full year 2012 and partial year 2013
operating results for 100% the pool. Moody's weighted average
conduit LTV is 55% compared to 68% 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
13% to the most recently available net operating income (NOI).
Moody's value reflects a weighted average capitalization rate of
9.75%.

Moody's actual and stressed conduit DSCRs are 1.64X and 1.95X,
respectively, compared to 1.14X and 1.63X 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 pool consists of two loans. The largest loan is the Links at
Bixby Loan ($8.77 million -- 51.0% of the pool), which is secured
by a 324-unit multifamily property located in Bixby, Oklahoma. As
of June 2013, occupancy was 100%, the same as at last review.
Performance remains stable. The loan has amortized approximately
40% since securitization. Moody's LTV and stressed DSCR are 65%
and 1.67X, respectively, compared to 74% and 1.47X at last review.

The second largest loan is the Shoppes at Longwood Loan ($8.55
million -- 49% of the pool), which is secured by a 142,000 square
foot grocery anchored retail center located in Kennett Square,
Pennsylvania. The largest tenants include Super Fresh (31% of the
NRA; lease expiration 8/2017) and TJ Maxx (17% of the NRA; lease
expiration in January 2018). As of October 2013, the property was
96% leased, essentially the same as at last review. Two tenants
signed new leases in December 2013, bringing the occupancy to
100%. The loan has amortized approximately 40% since
securitization. Moody's LTV and stressed DSCR are 46% and 2.23X,
respectively, compared to 54% and 1.91X at last review.


DLJ COMMERCIAL 1999-CG2: Moody's Affirms Caa3 Rating on S Certs
---------------------------------------------------------------
Moody's Investors Service has affirmed the rating of one class of
DLJ Commercial Mortgage Corp. Commercial Mortgage Pass-Through
Certificates, Series 1999-CG2 as follows:

Cl. S, Affirmed Caa3 (sf); previously on Feb 28, 2013 Affirmed
Caa3 (sf)

Ratings Rationale

The rating of the IO class, Class S, was affirmed based on the
weighted average rating factor (WARF) of its referenced classes.
The IO class is the only outstanding Moody's-rated class in this
transaction.

Factors That Would Lead to an Upgrade or Downgrade of the Rating

The rating of an IO class is based on the credit performance of
its referenced classes. An IO class may be upgraded based on a
lower weighted average rating factor or WARF due to an overall
improvement in the credit quality of its reference classes. An IO
class may be downgraded based on a higher WARF due to a decline in
the credit quality of its reference classes, paydowns of higher
quality reference classes or non-payment of interest. Classes that
have paid off through loan paydowns or amortization are not
included in the WARF calculation. Classes that have experienced
losses are grossed up for losses and included in the WARF
calculation, even if Moody's has withdrawn the rating.

Methodology Underlying The Rating Action

The methodologies used in this rating were "Moody's Approach to
Rating U.S. CMBS Conduit Transactions" published in September 2000
and "Moody's Approach to Rating CMBS Large Loan/Single Borrower
Transactions" published in July 2000.

Description of Models Used

Moody's review utilized the excel-based CMBS Conduit Model v 2.64
which is used for both conduit and fusion transactions. Conduit
model results at the Aa2 (sf) level are driven by property type,
Moody's actual and stressed DSCR and Moody's property quality
grade (which reflects the capitalization rate used by Moody's to
estimate Moody's value). Conduit model results at the B2 (sf)
level are driven by a paydown analysis based on the individual
loan level Moody's LTV ratio. Other concentrations and
correlations may be considered in our analysis. Based on the model
pooled credit enhancement levels at Aa2 (sf) and B2 (sf), the
remaining conduit classes are either interpolated between these
two data points or determined based on a multiple or ratio of
either of these two data points. For fusion deals, the credit
enhancement for loans with investment-grade credit assessments is
melded with the conduit model credit enhancement into an overall
model result. Negative pooling, or adding credit enhancement at
the credit assessment level, is incorporated for loans with
similar credit assessments in the same transaction.

Moody's uses a variation of Herf to measure diversity of loan
size, where a higher number represents greater diversity. Loan
concentration has an important bearing on potential rating
volatility, including risk of multiple notch downgrades under
adverse circumstances. The credit neutral Herf score is 40. The
pool has a Herf of 9, the same as at Moody's prior review.

In cases where the Herf falls below 20, Moody's uses the excel-
based Large Loan Model v 8.6 and then reconciles and weights the
results from the Conduit and Large Loan models in formulating a
rating recommendation. The large loan model derives 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, property type and sponsorship. These aggregated
proceeds are then further adjusted for any pooling benefits
associated with loan level diversity, other concentrations and
correlations.

Deal Performance

As of the January 10, 2014 distribution date, the transaction's
aggregate certificate balance has decreased by 98% to $30 million
from $1.55 billion at securitization. The Certificates are
collateralized by 19 mortgage loans ranging in size from less than
1% to 23% of the pool, with the top ten loans representing 85% of
the pool. The pool contains no loans that have investment grade
credit assessments. One loan, representing 2% of the pool, has
defeased and is secured by US Government securities.

Seven loans, representing 19% 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 our
ongoing monitoring of a transaction, Moody's reviews the watchlist
to assess which loans have material issues that could impact
performance.

Fifty-six loans have been liquidated from the pool, resulting in
an aggregate realized loss of $62 million (26% loss severity on
average). One loan, representing 5% of the pool, is currently in
special servicing. The specially serviced loan is secured by a
multifamily property. Moody's analysis incorporates a high loss
estimate for the specially serviced loan.

Moody's has assumed a high default probability for one poorly
performing loan representing less than 2% of the pool and has
incorporated an elevated expected loss for this loan.

Moody's was provided with full year 2012 and full or partial year
2013 operating results for 94% and 84% of the pool, respectively.
Moody's weighted average conduit LTV is 53% compared to 61% 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 10.5% 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 1.51X and 2.59X,
respectively, compared to 1.42X 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 45% of the pool balance. The
largest loan is the Hazelcrest Place Loan ($7 million -- 23% of
the pool), which is secured by a 241 unit multifamily property in
Hazel Park, Michigan. As of September 2013, occupancy was 98%.
Performance has been stable. Moody's LTV and stressed DSCR are 66%
and 1.53X, respectively, compared to 68% and 1.46X at prior
review.

The second largest loan is the Garden City Tower Loan ($4 million
-- 12% of the pool), which is secured by a 170-unit multifamily
property in Garden City, Michigan. The property was 98% leased as
of September 2013. Moody's LTV and stressed DSCR are 51% and
1.98X, respectively, compared to 61% and 1.65X at prior review.

The third largest loan is the Summit Square Shopping Center Loan
($3 million -- 10% of the pool), which is secured by a 58,000
square foot retail center in Houston, Texas. Retailers include
Party City and Sears. The property was 100% occupied as of the
most recent reporting. Moody's LTV and stressed DSCR are 33% and
3.28X, respectively, compared to 34% and 3.17X at prior review.


DLJ MORTGAGE 1997-CF2: Moody's Affirms Caa3 Rating on S Certs
-------------------------------------------------------------
Moody's Investors Service has affirmed the rating of one class of
DLJ Mortgage Acceptance Corp., Commercial Mortgage Pass-Through
Certificates, Series 1997-CF2 as follows:

Cl. S, Affirmed Caa3 (sf); previously on Feb 22, 2013 Affirmed
Caa3 (sf)

Ratings Rationale

The rating of the IO class, Class S, was affirmed based on the
credit performance of its referenced classes. The IO class is the
only outstanding Moody's-rated class in this transaction.

Factors That Would Lead to an Upgrade or Downgrade of the Rating

The rating of an IO class is based on the credit performance of
its referenced classes. An IO class may be upgraded based on a
lower weighted average rating factor or WARF due to an overall
improvement in the credit quality of its reference classes. An IO
class may be downgraded based on a higher WARF due to a decline in
the credit quality of its reference classes, paydowns of higher
quality reference classes or non-payment of interest. Classes that
have paid off through loan paydowns or amortization are not
included in the WARF calculation. Classes that have experienced
losses are grossed up for losses and included in the WARF
calculation, even if Moody's has withdrawn the rating.

Methodology Underlying the Action

The principal methodology used in this rating was "Moody's
Approach to Rating CMBS Large Loan/Single Borrower Transactions"
published in July 2000.

Description of Models Used

Moody's review incorporated the use of the excel-based Large Loan
Model v 8.6. The large loan model derives 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, property
type and sponsorship. These aggregated proceeds are then further
adjusted for any pooling benefits associated with loan level
diversity, other concentrations and correlations.

Deal Performance

As of the January 15, 2014 distribution date, the transaction's
aggregate certificate balance has decreased by 97% to $20.9
million from $661.9 million at securitization. The Certificates
are collateralized by two mortgage loans.

Twelve loans have been liquidated from the pool, resulting in an
aggregate realized loss of $34.5 million (35% loss severity on
average). Currently, there are no loans in special servicing.

Moody's was provided with both full year 2012 and partial year
2013 operating results for 100% of the pool. Moody's weighted
average conduit LTV is 70% compared to 79% at Moody's prior
review. Moody's net cash flow (NCF) reflects a weighted average
haircut of 14% to the most recently available net operating income
(NOI). Moody's value reflects a weighted average capitalization
rate of 10.0%.

Moody's actual and stressed conduit DSCRs are 1.18X and 1.57X,
respectively, compared to 0.99X and 1.39X 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 largest loan is the West Ridge Market Loan ($20.5 million --
98% of the pool), which is secured by an anchored retail center
located in Minnetonka, Minnesota. As of October 2013 the property
was 97% leased. The property's anchors include Dick's Sporting
Goods, Bed Bath & Beyond and Michael's Stores. Moody's LTV and
stressed DSCR are 71% and 1.53X, respectively.

The other remaining loan is fully amortizing and leased to CVS
through December 2017, which extends five months beyond the loan
maturity date in July 2017.


DRYDEN XVI: Moody's Affirms 'Ba2' Rating on $17.5MM Cl. D Notes
---------------------------------------------------------------
Moody's Investors Service has upgraded the ratings on the
following notes issued by Dryden XVI-Leveraged Loan CDO 2006:

U.S.$32,500,000 Class B Mezzanine Secured Deferrable Floating Rate
Notes Due October 20, 2020, Upgraded to Aa3 (sf); previously on
March 22, 2013 Upgraded to A3 (sf)

U.S.$16,250,000 Class C Mezzanine Secured Deferrable Floating Rate
Notes Due October 20, 2020, Upgraded to Baa2 (sf); previously on
March 22, 2013 Affirmed Ba1 (sf)

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

U.S.$375,000,000 Class A-1 Senior Secured Floating Rate Notes Due
October 20, 2020 (current outstanding balance of $203,903,795.30),
Affirmed Aaa (sf); previously on March 22, 2013 Affirmed Aaa (sf)

U.S.$20,000,000 Class A-2 Senior Secured Floating Rate Notes Due
October 20, 2020, Affirmed Aaa (sf); previously on March 22, 2013
Upgraded to Aaa (sf)

U.S.$17,500,000 Class D Mezzanine Secured Deferrable Floating Rate
Notes Due October 20, 2020, Affirmed Ba2 (sf); previously on March
22, 2013 Affirmed Ba2 (sf)

Dryden XVI-Leveraged Loan CDO 2006, issued in December 2006, is a
collateralized loan obligation (CLO) backed primarily by a
portfolio of senior secured loans. The portfolio is managed by
Prudential Investment Management, Inc. The transaction's
reinvestment period ended in January 2013.

Ratings Rationale

These rating actions are primarily a result of deleveraging of the
senior notes and an increase in the transaction's over-
collateralization ratios since the last rating action in March
2013. The Class A-1 notes have been paid down by approximately 41%
or $154.3 million since the last rating action. Based on the
trustee's 9 January 2014 report, the over-collateralization (OC)
ratios for the Class A, Class B, Class C and Class D notes are
136.7%, 121.0%, 114.4%, and 108.1%, up from 124.6%, 114.8%,
110.4%, and 106.1% in March 2013.

Nevertheless, the credit quality of the portfolio has deteriorated
since the last rating action. Based on the trustee's January 2014
report, the weighted average rating factor is currently 2581
compared to 2504 in March 2013.

Methodology Used for the Rating Action

The methodology Moody's used in this rating was "Moody's Global
Approach to Rating Collateralized Loan Obligations" published in
November 2013.

Factors that Would Lead to an Upgrade or Downgrade of the Rating

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.

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. 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% (2191)

Class A-1: 0

Class A-2: 0

Class B: +2

Class C: +3

Class D: +1

Moody's Adjusted WARF + 20% (3286)

Class A-1: 0

Class A-2: 0

Class B: -2

Class C: -1

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 Section 2.3 of
the "Moody's Global Approach to Rating Collateralized Loan
Obligations," published in November 2013.

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 $340.7 million, defaulted
par of $3.6 million, a weighted average default probability of
19.48% (implying a WARF of 2739), a weighted average recovery rate
upon default of 51.64%, a diversity score of 63 and a weighted
average spread of 3.31%.

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.


EXETER AUTOMOBILE: S&P Assigns Prelim. BB Rating on Class D Notes
-----------------------------------------------------------------
Standard & Poor's Ratings Services assigned its preliminary
ratings to Exeter Automobile Receivables Trust 2014-1's
$500 million automobile receivables-backed notes series 2014-1.

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

The preliminary ratings are based on information as of Jan. 27,
2014.  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 availability of approximately 48.45%, 40.10%, 33.12%,
      and 24.54% credit support for the class A, B, C, and D
      notes, respectively, based on stressed cash flow scenarios
      (including excess spread), which provide coverage of more
      than 2.55x, 2.10x, 1.60x, and 1.30x our 17.0%-18.0% expected
      cumulative net loss.

   -- The timely interest and principal payments made to the
      preliminary rated notes by the assumed legal final maturity
      dates under stressed cash flow modeling scenarios that S&P
      believes is appropriate for the assigned preliminary
      ratings.

   -- S&P's expectation that under a moderate ('BBB') stress
      scenario, all else being equal, its ratings on the class A,
      B, and C notes would remain within one rating category of
      S&P's preliminary 'AA (sf)', 'A (sf)', and 'BBB (sf)'
      ratings, respectively, during the first year; and

   -- S&P's ratings on the class D notes would remain within two
      rating categories of its preliminary 'BB (sf)' rating.
      These potential rating movements are consistent with S&P's
      credit stability criteria, which outline the outer bound of
      credit deterioration as a one-category downgrade within the
      first year for 'AA' rated securities and a two-category
      downgrade within the first year for 'A' through 'BB' rated
      securities under the moderate stress conditions.

   -- The collateral characteristics of the subprime automobile
      loans securitized in this transaction.

   -- The transaction's payment and credit enhancement structures.

   -- The transaction's legal structure.

PRELIMINARY RATINGS ASSIGNED

Exeter Automobile Receivables Trust 2014-1

Class     Rating        Type           Interest         Amount
                                       rate(i)     (mil. $)(i)
A         AA (sf)       Senior         Fixed            317.71
B         A (sf)        Subordinate    Fixed             67.71
C         BBB (sf)      Subordinate    Fixed             48.17
D         BB (sf)       Subordinate    Fixed             66.41

(i) The interest rates and actual sizes of these tranches will be
     determined on the pricing date.


GE BUSINESS LOAN: S&P Affirms 'BB' Rating on Class D Notes
----------------------------------------------------------
Standard & Poor's Ratings Services placed its ratings on the class
A, B, and C notes from GE Business Loan Trust 2003-2 and its
ratings on the class A, B, C, and D notes from GE Business Loan
Trust 2004-2 on CreditWatch with negative implications.

The transactions are asset-backed securitizations backed by
payments from small business loans that are primarily
collateralized by first liens on commercial real estate.  The
transactions distribute principal payments on a pro rata basis,
with principal payments distributed to the rated classes based on
set percentages.

The CreditWatch placements reflect the rising delinquencies and
increased defaults in these transactions' underlying portfolios.

S&P will resolve the CreditWatch placements following its
completion of a comprehensive review of the transactions.

CREDITWATCH ACTIONS

GE Business Loan Trust
Series 2003-2
                       Rating
Class      To                     From
A          AA+ (sf)/Watch Neg     AA+ (sf)
B          A (sf)/Watch Neg       A (sf)
C          BBB (sf)/Watch Neg     BBB (sf)

GE Business Loan Trust
Series 2004-2
                       Rating
Class      To                     From
A          AA- (sf)/Watch Neg     AA- (sf)
B          A (sf)/Watch Neg       A (sf)
C          BBB (sf)/Watch Neg     BBB (sf)
D          BB (sf)/Watch Neg      BB (sf)


GREYLOCK SYNTHETIC: Moody's Hikes Rating on 2 Note Classes
----------------------------------------------------------
Moody's Investors Service announced the following rating action on
Greylock Synthetic CDO 2006:

Issuer: Greylock Synthetic CDO 2006

Series 2 $51,000,000 Sub-Class A3-$LMS Notes Due 2017 (current
outstanding notional of $30,000,000), Upgraded to Ba2 (sf);
previously on June 7, 2013 Upgraded to Ba3 (sf)

Series 2 $20,000,000 Sub-Class A3A-$FMS Notes Due 2017, Upgraded
to Ba2 (sf); previously on June 7, 2013 Upgraded to Ba3 (sf)

Series 2 $20,000,000 Sub-Class A3B-$LMS Notes Due 2017, Upgraded
to Ba2 (sf); previously on June 7, 2013 Upgraded to Ba3 (sf)

Series 2 $5,000,000 Sub-Class A3-$FMS Notes Due 2017, Upgraded to
Ba2 (sf); previously on June 7, 2013 Upgraded to Ba3 (sf)

Series 2 $70,000,000 Sub-Class A4-$L Notes Due 2017, Upgraded to
Ba3 (sf); previously on June 7, 2013 Upgraded to B2 (sf)

Series 2 $20,000,000 Sub-Class A4-$F Notes Due 2017, Upgraded to
Ba3 (sf); previously on June 7, 2013 Upgraded to B2 (sf)

Series 2 $13,000,000 Sub-Class A6-$L Notes Due 2017 (current
outstanding notional of $5,500,000), Upgraded to B3 (sf);
previously on June 7, 2013 Upgraded to Caa2 (sf)

Series 2 $2,000,000 Sub-Class B2A-$L Notes Due 2017, Upgraded to
Caa2 (sf); previously on June 7, 2013 Affirmed Caa3 (sf)

Series 2 $1,500,000 Sub-Class B2B-$L Notes Due 2017, Upgraded to
Caa2 (sf); previously on June 7, 2013 Affirmed Caa3 (sf)

This transaction is a corporate synthetic collateralized debt
obligation (CSO) referencing a portfolio of corporate senior
unsecured and subordinated bonds, originally rated in 2006.

Ratings Rationale

The rating action is due to the shortened time to maturity of the
CSO and the level of credit enhancement remaining in the
transaction. The CSO has a remaining life of 3.2 years.

The portfolio's ten-year weighted average rating factor (WARF) is
844, excluding settled credit events. Moody's rates the majority
of the reference credits investment grade, with 3.5% rated Caa
(sf) or lower compared to 4.0% in June 2013. In addition, the
number of reference credits with a negative outlook is 15,
compared to 3 with a positive outlook; there are no reference
credits on review for downgrade, compared to two on review for
upgrade.

The average gap between MIRs and Moody's senior unsecured ratings
is -0.6 for over-concentrated sectors and 0.8 notches for non-over
concentrated sectors. Currently, the over-concentrated sectors are
Banking, Finance, Insurance and Real Estate comprising 27% of the
portfolio.

Based on the trustee's December 2013 report, 6 credit events,
equivalent to 4.2% of the portfolio based on the portfolio's
notional value at closing, have taken place. Since inception, the
subordination of the rated tranche has declined by 1.7% due to
credit events on Fannie Mae, Freddie Mac, Lehman Brothers, Station
Casinos, CIT Group and Ambac Assurance Corp.

Methodology Underlying the Rating Action:

The principal methodology used in this rating was "Moody's
Approach to Rating Corporate Synthetic Collateralized Debt
Obligations" published in November 2013.

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

These transactions are subject to a high level of uncertainty,
primarily because of 1) unexpected volatility in the credit and
macroeconomic environment; 2) divergence in the legal
interpretation of documentation by different transactional parties
because of embedded ambiguities; and 3) unexpected changes in the
portfolio composition as a result of the actions of the
transaction parties.

For CSOs, the performance of the credit default swaps can be
affected either positively or negatively by 1) variations over
time in default rates for instruments with a given rating; 2)
variations in recovery rates for instruments with particular
seniority/security characteristics; and 3) uncertainty about the
default and recovery correlations characteristics of the reference
pool. Given the tranched nature of CSO liabilities, rating
transitions in the reference pool can have leveraged rating
implications for the ratings of the CSO liabilities that could
lead to a high degree of rating volatility, which is likely to be
higher for the more junior or thinner liabilities.

In addition to the base case analysis described above, Moody's
also conducted sensitivity analyses, discussed below. Results are
in the form of the difference in the number of notches from the
base case, in which a higher number of notches corresponds to
lower expected losses, and vice-versa.

Moody's ran a scenario in which it reduced the maturity of the CSO
by six months keeping all other things equal. The result of this
run was on average 0.7 notches higher than in the base case for
tranches maturing on March 20, 2017.

Moody's conducted a sensitivity analysis in which the adverse
selection adjustment is removed and the default probabilities of
reference credits in over-concentrated sectors is adjusted by the
equivalent of the average gap between our ratings and the
corresponding MIRs, capped at zero. The result of this run was on
average 1.8 notches higher than in the base case for tranches
maturing on March 20, 2017.

Moody's conducted a stress analysis in which it defaulted all
entities rated Caa or lower. The result was on average 1.4 notches
lower than in the base case for tranches maturing on March 20,
2017.

In addition to the quantitative factors Moody's models explicitly,
rating committees also consider qualitative factors in the rating
process. These qualitative factors include a transaction's
structural protections, recent deal performance in the current
market environment, the legal environment, specific documentation
features and the portfolio manager's track record. All information
available to rating committees, including macroeconomic forecasts,
input from other Moody's analytical groups, market factors, and
judgments regarding the nature and severity of credit stress on
the transactions, can influence the final rating decision.


GS MORTGAGE 2012-GC16: Moody's Affirms Ba2 Rating on Class E Notes
------------------------------------------------------------------
Moody's Investors Service affirmed the ratings of 11 classes of GS
Mortgage Securities Corporation II, Commercial Mortgage Pass-
Through Certificates, Series 2012-GC6 as follows:

   -- Cl. A-1, Affirmed Aaa (sf); previously on Feb 7, 2013
      Affirmed Aaa (sf)

   -- Cl. A-2, Affirmed Aaa (sf); previously on Feb 7, 2013
      Affirmed Aaa (sf)

   -- Cl. A-3, Affirmed Aaa (sf); previously on Feb 7, 2013
      Affirmed Aaa (sf)

   -- Cl. A-AB, Affirmed Aaa (sf); previously on Feb 7, 2013
      Affirmed Aaa (sf)

   -- Cl. A-S, Affirmed Aaa (sf); previously on Feb 7, 2013
      Affirmed Aaa (sf)

   -- Cl. B, Affirmed Aa3 (sf); previously on Feb 7, 2013 Affirmed
      Aa3 (sf)

   -- Cl. C, Affirmed A3 (sf); previously on Feb 7, 2013 Affirmed
      A3 (sf)

   -- Cl. D, Affirmed Baa3 (sf); previously on Feb 7, 2013
      Affirmed Baa3 (sf)

   -- Cl. E, Affirmed Ba2 (sf); previously on Feb 7, 2013 Affirmed
      Ba2 (sf)

   -- Cl. F, Affirmed B2 (sf); previously on Feb 7, 2013 Affirmed
      B2 (sf)

   -- Cl. X-A, Affirmed Aaa (sf); previously on Feb 7, 2013
      Affirmed Aaa (sf)

                         RATINGS RATIONALE

The ratings of the 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 of the interest-only class was affirmed based
on the weighted average rating factor or WARF of its referenced
classes.

Moody's rating action reflects a base expected loss of
approximately 2.2% of the current deal balance compared to 2.1% at
last review.

FACTORS THAT WOULD LEAD TO AN UPGRADE OR DOWNGRADE OF THE RATING

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 and an
increase in realized and expected losses from specially serviced
and troubled loans or interest shortfalls.

              METHODOLOGY UNDERLYING THE RATING ACTION

                    DESCRIPTION OF MODELS USED

Moody's review used the excel-based CMBS Conduit Model v 2.64,
which it uses for both conduit and fusion transactions.  Conduit
model results at the Aa2 (sf) level are driven by property type,
Moody's actual and stressed DSCR, and Moody's property quality
grade (which reflects the capitalization rate Moody's uses to
estimate Moody's value).  Conduit model results at the B2 (sf)
level are based on a paydown analysis using the individual loan-
level Moody's LTV ratio.  Moody's may consider other
concentrations and correlations in its analysis.  Based on the
model pooled credit enhancement levels of Aa2 (sf) and B2 (sf),
the required credit enhancement on the remaining conduit classes
are either interpolated between these two data points or
determined based on a multiple or ratio of either of these two
data points.  For fusion deals, Moody's merges the credit
enhancement for loans with investment-grade credit assessments
with the conduit model credit enhancement for an overall model
result.  Moody's incorporates negative pooling (adding credit
enhancement at the credit assessment level) for loans with similar
credit assessments in the same transaction.

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 26, the same as at Moody's last review.

                          DEAL PERFORMANCE

As of the Jan. 10, 2014 payment date, the transaction's aggregate
certificate balance has decreased by approximately 2% to
$1.13 billion from $1.15 billion at securitization.  The
Certificates are collateralized by 80 mortgage loans ranging in
size from less than 1% to 11% of the pool, with the top ten loans
representing approximately 53% of the pool.  There is one loan
with an investment-grade credit assessment, representing
approximately 9% of the pool.

Twelve loans, representing 14% 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.

To date, the pool has not experienced any realized losses.  There
are currently two loans in special servicing, representing
approximately 2.0% of the pool.  The largest loan is the Olympia
Medical Plaza Loan ($19.4 million - 1.7%of the pool), which is
secured by a 90,000 SF medical office building located less than
five mile east of Beverly Hills in Los Angeles, California.  The
loan was transferred to special servicing in November 2013.  The
loan has since been returned to the Master Servicer subsequent to
the most recent remittance statement.  The second specially
serviced loan is the Lockaway Self Storage Loan ($2.35 million --
0.2% of the pool), which is secured by a 29-unit self storage
property in Killeen, TX.  The loan became REO effective July 2013.
The special servicer is reviewing sales options to achieve the
best possible outcome.  Moody's estimates a modest loss for this
loan.

Moody's received full year 2012 and partial 2013 operating results
for 100% and 93% of the pool, respectively.  Moody's weighted
average conduit LTV is 91% compared to 93% at last review.
Moody's net cash flow reflects a weighted average haircut of 13.3%
to the most recently available net operating income.  Moody's
value reflects a weighted average capitalization rate of 9.6%.
Moody's actual and stressed conduit DSCRs are 1.48X and 1.17X,
respectively, compared to 1.46X and 1.13X at 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% stress rate the agency applied to the loan
balance.

The loan with an investment grade credit assessment is the ELS
Portfolio Loan ($99.5 million -- 8.8% of the pool), which is
secured by 12 cross-collateralized/cross-defaulted loans
collateralized by manufactured housing communities and
recreational vehicle (RV) parks.  Located across six states, the
portfolio consists of 5,225 pads.  As of Sept. 2012, the weighted
average occupancy was 89% compared to 93% compared at last review,
excluding the RV parks.  Financial performance remains stable.
The loan's partial interest-only term has expired.  The sponsor is
MHC Operating Ltd. Partnership. Moody's credit assessment and
stressed DSCR are Baa3 and 1.45X, essentially the same as at
securitization.

The top three conduit loans represent approximately 21% of the
pool.  The largest conduit loan is the Meadowood Mall Loan
($121.7 million -- 10.8% of the pool), which is secured by 404,865
square feet (SF) of mall space that is part of a larger 878,000
SF, single-story, enclosed regional mall in Reno, Nevada.  Mall
anchors include J.C. Penney, Sears, Macy's and Macy's Men's and
Home store.  As of Sept. 2013, the collateral was 87% leased
compared to 88% at last review, excluding Sports Authority, which
vacated in December 2011.  The tenant is obligated to continue
paying rent through 2015.  At securitization, Moody's did not
account for this tenant's rent in the cash flow analysis.  As of
September 2013, the comparable inline sales per square foot were
$416 compared to $400 in 2012 and $379 in 2011.  Financial
performance has improved since last review and securitization.
The sponsors are the Mills Ltd. Partnership, Simon Property Group
and GM Pension Trusts.  Moody's LTV and stressed DSCR are 92% and
1.08X, respectively, compared to 96% and 1.05X at securitization.
The second largest conduit loan is the SunTrust International
Center Loan ($61.2 million -- 5.4% of the pool), which is secured
by a 421,000 SF, 31-story office building in downtown Miami,
Florida.  As of Sept. 2013, the property was approximately 79%
leased compared to 83% leased at last review.  The largest tenant
is Akerman, Senterfitt and Edison (28% of the net rentable area
(NRA); lease expiration in 10/2018).  Financial performance has
improved since last review.  The loan's partial term interest-only
period has expired and the loan has amortized approximately 1%
since securitization.  The sponsor is Crocker Partners.  Moody's
LTV and stressed DSCR are 109% and 0.97X, respectively, compared
to 113% and 0.93X, the same as at securitization.

The third largest conduit loan is the LHG Hotel Portfolio
($57.8 million -- 5.1% of the pool), which is secured by a
portfolio of 12 limited service hotels, comprised of 852 rooms
across six states.  The hotel flags are Fairfield Inn, Fairfield
Inn & Suites, Courtyard by Marriot and Country Inn & Suites.  For
the trailing 12-month period ending in September 2013, the
weighted average occupancy rate and revenue per available room
(RevPAR) were 78% and $86.63 compared to 75.9% and $77.02 for the
same period in 2012.  The loan has amortized approximately 2.3%
since securitization.  The sponsor is TMI Hospitality, Inc.
Moody's LTV and stressed DSCR are 80% and 1.53X, respectively,
compared to 91% and 1.36X at last review.


HARBOR SERIES 2006-1: Moody's Affirms Caa3 Rating on 3 Notes
------------------------------------------------------------
Moody's Investors Service has affirmed the ratings on the
following notes issued by Harbor Series 2006-1 LLC:

Cl. A, Affirmed Caa2 (sf); previously on Mar 1, 2013 Downgraded to
Caa2 (sf)

Cl. B, Affirmed Caa3 (sf); previously on Mar 1, 2013 Affirmed Caa3
(sf)

Cl. C, Affirmed Caa3 (sf); previously on Mar 1, 2013 Affirmed Caa3
(sf)

Cl. D, Affirmed Caa3 (sf); previously on Mar 1, 2013 Affirmed Caa3
(sf)

Ratings Rationale

Moody's has affirmed the ratings on the transaction because its
key transaction metrics are commensurate with the existing
ratings. The affirmations are 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 December 20, 2013 trustee report, the
aggregate Note balance of the transaction is $158.8 million from
$160 million at issuance, with the reference pool amortization
being paid to the notes on a pro-rata basis. This transaction
features a pro-rata to senior-sequential waterfall switch which is
based upon certain thresholds.

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 collateral it does not
rate. The rating agency modeled a bottom-dollar WARF of 747,
compared to 653 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 (46.3% compared to 47.5% at last
review), A1-A3 (14.3% compared to 13.0% at last review), Baa1-Baa3
(13.2% compared to 15.0% at last review), Ba1-Ba3 (15.6% compared
to 16.5% at last review), B1-B3 (5.5% the same as at last review),
and Caa1-C (5.0% compared to 2.5% at last review).

Moody's modeled a WAL of 2.4 years, compared to 3.6 years at last
review. The WAL is based on assumptions about extensions on the
underlying collateral.

Moody's modeled a fixed WARR of 47.5%, compared to 47.3% at last
review.

Moody's modeled a MAC of 16.7%, compared to 15.8% at last review.

Methodology Underlying the Rating Action

The principal methodology used in this rating was "Moody's
Approach to Rating SF CDOs" published in May 2012.

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.
The rated notes are particularly sensitive to changes in the
ratings of the underlying collateral and credit assessments.
Notching down the collateral pool by one notch would result in an
average modeled rating movement on the rated notes of zero to one
notch. Notching up the collateral pool by one notch would result
in an average modeled rating movement on the rated notes of zero
to one notch.

The primary sources of uncertainty in Moody's assumptions are the
extent of growth in the current macroeconomic environment given
the weak recovery and commercial real estate property markets.
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.
However, sustained growth will not be possible until investment
increases steadily for a significant period, non-performing
properties are cleared from the pipeline and fears of a euro area
recession abate.


HARBOR SERIES 2006-1: Moody's Affirms Caa2 Rating on Class A Notes
------------------------------------------------------------------
Moody's Investors Service has affirmed the ratings on the
following notes issued by Harbor Series 2006-1 LLC:

   -- Cl. A, Affirmed Caa2 (sf); previously on Mar 1, 2013
      Downgraded to Caa2 (sf)

   -- Cl. B, Affirmed Caa3 (sf); previously on Mar 1, 2013
      Affirmed Caa3 (sf)

   -- Cl. C, Affirmed Caa3 (sf); previously on Mar 1, 2013
      Affirmed Caa3 (sf)

   -- Cl. D, Affirmed Caa3 (sf); previously on Mar 1, 2013
      Affirmed Caa3 (sf)

                         RATINGS RATIONALE

Moody's has affirmed the ratings on the transaction because its
key transaction metrics are commensurate with the existing
ratings.  The affirmations are 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 Dec. 20, 2013 trustee report, the aggregate
Note balance of the transaction is $158.8 million from
$160 million at issuance, with the reference pool amortization
being paid to the notes on a pro-rata basis.  This transaction
features a pro-rata to senior-sequential waterfall switch which is
based upon certain thresholds.

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 collateral it does not
rate.  The rating agency modeled a bottom-dollar WARF of 747,
compared to 653 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 (46.3% compared to 47.5% at last
review), A1-A3 (14.3% compared to 13.0% at last review), Baa1-Baa3
(13.2% compared to 15.0% at last review), Ba1-Ba3 (15.6% compared
to 16.5% at last review), B1-B3 (5.5% the same as at last review),
and Caa1-C (5.0% compared to 2.5% at last review).

Moody's modeled a WAL of 2.4 years, compared to 3.6 years at last
review.  The WAL is based on assumptions about extensions on the
underlying collateral.

Moody's modeled a fixed WARR of 47.5%, compared to 47.3% at last
review.

Moody's modeled a MAC of 16.7%, compared to 15.8% at last review.

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.
The rated notes are particularly sensitive to changes in the
ratings of the underlying collateral and credit assessments.
Notching down the collateral pool by one notch would result in an
average modeled rating movement on the rated notes of zero to one
notch.  Notching up the collateral pool by one notch would result
in an average modeled rating movement on the rated notes of zero
to one notch.

The primary sources of uncertainty in Moody's assumptions are the
extent of growth in the current macroeconomic environment given
the weak recovery and commercial real estate property markets.
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.
However, sustained growth will not be possible until investment
increases steadily for a significant period, non-performing
properties are cleared from the pipeline and fears of a euro area
recession abate.


HIGHBRIDGE LOAN: S&P Assigns 'BB' Rating on $17MM Class D Notes
---------------------------------------------------------------
Standard & Poor's Ratings Services assigned its ratings to
Highbridge Loan Management 3-2014 Ltd./Highbridge Loan Management
3-2014 LLC's $378.25 million floating-rate notes.

The note issuance is a collateralized loan obligation
securitization backed by a revolving pool consisting primarily of
broadly syndicated senior secured loans.

The ratings reflect S&P's view of:

   -- The credit enhancement provided to the rated notes through
      the subordination of cash flows that are payable to the
      subordinated notes.

   -- The transaction's credit enhancement, which is sufficient to
      withstand the defaults applicable for the supplemental tests
      (not counting excess spread), and cash flow structure, which
      can withstand the default rate projected by Standard &
      Poor's CDO Evaluator model, as assessed by Standard & Poor's
      using the assumptions and methods outlined in its corporate
      collateralized debt obligation (CDO) criteria.

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

   -- The diversified collateral portfolio, which primarily
      comprises broadly syndicated speculative-grade senior
      secured term loans.

   -- The asset manager's experienced management team.

   -- S&P's projections regarding the timely interest and ultimate
      principal payments on the rated notes, which S&P assessed
      using its cash flow analysis and assumptions commensurate
      with the assigned ratings under various interest-rate
      scenarios, including LIBOR ranging from 0.2386%-13.8385%.

   -- The transaction's overcollateralization and interest
      coverage tests, a failure of which will lead to the
      diversion of interest and principal proceeds to reduce the
      balance of the rated notes outstanding.

   -- The transaction's interest reinvestment test, a failure of
      which will lead to the reclassification of excess interest
      proceeds that are available before paying subordinated
      management fees, uncapped administrative expenses, deferred
      base management fees, and subordinated note payments to
      principal proceeds to purchase additional collateral assets
      during the reinvestment period.

RATINGS ASSIGNED

Highbridge Loan Management 3-2014 Ltd./Highbridge Loan Management
3-2014 LLC

Class                     Rating             Amount
                                           (Mil. $)
A-1                       AAA (sf)           246.00
A-2                       AA (sf)             50.00
B (deferrable)            A (sf)              37.25
C (deferrable)            BBB (sf)            20.25
D (deferrable)            BB (sf)             17.00
E (deferrable)            B (sf)               7.75
Subordinated notes        NR                  31.45

NR--Not rated.


JP MORGAN 2005-A2: Moody's Cuts Cl. 5-A-1 Notes Rating to 'Caa3'
----------------------------------------------------------------
Moody's Investors Service has downgraded the ratings of three
tranches in two transactions issued by J.P. Morgan and Morgan
Stanley. The tranches are backed by Alt-A RMBS loans issued from
2005 to 2006.

Complete rating actions are as follows:

Issuer: J.P. Morgan Alternative Loan Trust 2005-A2

Cl. 5-A-1, Downgraded to Caa3 (sf); previously on Dec 17, 2010
Downgraded to Caa2 (sf)

Issuer: Morgan Stanley Mortgage Loan Trust 2006-8AR

Cl. 4-A-1, Downgraded to B1 (sf); previously on Sep 4, 2012
Confirmed at Ba1 (sf)

Cl. 6-A-1, Downgraded to B1 (sf); previously on Sep 4, 2012
Confirmed at Ba1 (sf)

Ratings Rationale

The ratings downgraded come as a result of the weaker than
expected performance of the pools' collateral. Additionally, in
the Class 4-A1 and Class 6-A1 the rating actions reflect the risk
of tail end losses that the tranches are exposed to after
subordinates and senior support bonds are depleted.

Factors that would lead to an upgrade or downgrade of the rating

Ratings in the US RMBS sector remain exposed to the high level of
macroeconomic uncertainty, and in particular the unemployment
rate. The unemployment rate fell to 6.7% in December 2013 from
7.9% in December 2012 . Moody's forecasts an unemployment central
range of 6.5% to 7.5% for the 2014 year. Deviations from this
central scenario could lead to rating actions in the sector.

House prices are another key driver of US RMBS performance.
Moody's expects house prices to continue to rise in 2014. Lower
increases than Moody's expects or decreases could lead to negative
rating actions.

Finally, performance of RMBS continues to remain highly dependent
on servicer procedures. Any change resulting from servicing
transfers or other policy or regulatory change can impact the
performance of these transactions.


JP MORGAN 2005-LDP3: Rights Transfer No Impact on Moody's Ratings
-----------------------------------------------------------------
Moody's Investors Service was informed that C-III Initial Assets
LLC (C3), as the Directing Certificateholder of J.P. Morgan Chase
Commercial Mortgage Securities Corp Commercial Mortgage Pass-
Through Certificates, Series 2005-LDP3, hereby gives notice of the
removal of CW Capital Asset Management LLC (CWCapital) as the
existing Special Servicer and its appointment of C-III Asset
Management LLC (C-III) as the successor Special Servicer. The
Proposed Special Servicer Transfer and Replacement will become
effective upon satisfaction of the conditions precedent set forth
in the governing documents.

Moody's has reviewed the Proposed Special Servicer Replacement.
Moody's has determined that this proposed special servicing
replacement will not, in and of itself, and at this time, result
in a downgrade or withdrawal of the current ratings to any class
of certificates rated by Moody's for J.P. Morgan Chase Commercial
Mortgage Securities Corp Commercial Mortgage Pass-Through
Certificates, Series 2005-LDP3 (the Certificates). Moody's opinion
only addresses the credit impact associated with the proposed
designation and transfer of special servicing rights. Moody's is
not expressing any opinion as to whether this change has, or could
have, other non-credit related effects that may have a detrimental
impact on the interests of note holders and/or counterparties.


JP MORGAN 2011-CCHP: Moody's Cuts Class E Notes' Rating to 'Ba3'
----------------------------------------------------------------
Moody's Investors Service affirmed the ratings on two classes and
downgraded the ratings on two classes of JP Morgan Chase
Commercial Mortgage Securities Corp., Commercial Mortgage Pass-
Through Certificates, Series 2011-CCHP. Moody's rating action is
as follows:

Cl. B, Affirmed Aaa (sf); previously on Jul 2, 2013 Affirmed Aaa
(sf)

Cl. C, Affirmed Aa2 (sf); previously on Jul 2, 2013 Affirmed Aa2
(sf)

Cl. D, Downgraded to A3 (sf); previously on Jul 2, 2013 Affirmed
A1 (sf)

Cl. E, Downgraded to Ba3 (sf); previously on Jul 2, 2013
Downgraded to Ba1 (sf)

Ratings Rationale

Moody's has affirmed the ratings on the two classes because the
transaction's key metrics, including Moody's loan-to-value (LTV)
ratio and Moody's stressed debt service coverage ratio (DSCR), are
within acceptable ranges. The two senior classes benefitted from
the release of two properties (Hilton Ft. Lauderdale Airport and
Sheraton Baltimore City Center) and resulting pay down of the
loan. The downgrade of the two junior classes are due to worse
than expected performance of the assets remaining in the pool.

Factors That Would Lead To An Upgrade Or Downgrade Of The Rating

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 defeasance in the pool 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, an increase in loan
concentration, an increase in expected losses from specially
serviced and troubled loans or interest shortfalls.

Methodology Underlying The Rating Action

The principal methodology used in this rating was "Moody's
Approach to Rating CMBS Large Loan/Single Borrower Transactions,"
published in July 2000.

Description of Models Used

Moody's review incorporated the use of the excel-based Large Loan
Model v 8.6. The large loan model derives 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, property
type and sponsorship. Moody's also further adjusts these
aggregated proceeds for any pooling benefits associated with loan
level diversity and other concentrations and correlations.

Deal Performance

As of the January 15, 2014 distribution date, the transaction's
aggregate certificate balance has decreased by 60%, to $170
million from $425 million at securitization. The certificates are
collateralized by one mortgage loan, secured by seven full service
hotels. Six properties in total, including two since last review,
have been released from the trust.

The certificates represent beneficial ownership of a floating
rate, interest-only, first mortgage loan that had an initial
maturity date in July 2013 plus three one-year extension options.
The mortgage loan is secured by seven cross-collateralized and
cross-defaulted, fee and leasehold interests in full-service hotel
properties. The portfolio totals 2,855 keys located in six states
in the US and one property in Toronto, Canada.

The remaining hotels include the Sheraton Philadelphia Center, the
Westin New Orleans, the Buttes, A Marriott Resort, the Marriott
Atlanta Downtown, the Westin Bristol Place Toronto Airport, the
Westin Chicago Northwest, and the Westin Tampa Harbor Island.

The Westin Tampa Harbor Island is encumbered with an above-market
ground lease that extends through February 28, 2028 plus one ten-
year extension option remaining. At securitization, the sponsor
was in discussion with the ground lessor to purchase the ground
lease position. The servicer has informed Moody's that the
borrower is not pursuing the ground lease acquisition as the
ground lessor is not interested in selling. At the loan's final
maturity date in 2016, the Westin Tampa Harbor Island will have
approximately 22 years remaining on the ground lease assuming that
the 10-year extension option will have been exercised.

The portfolio's Adjusted EBITDA for the first nine months of 2013
was $25.6 million, up slightly from the $25.2 million achieved
during the same period in 2012. In general, US lodging properties
have showed meaningful improvement since 2011 as the economy and
demand for hotels have continued to improve. The positive trend of
the Westin Tampa Harbor Island and the Westin New Orleans
performance is offset by the decline in the Sheraton Philadelphia
Center, the Westin Bristol Place Toronto Airport, and the Marriott
Atlanta Downtown.

Moody's stressed trust LTV is 76.6% compared to 66.4% at the last
review. Moody's stressed trust DSCR is 1.60X compared to 1.37X at
the last review. Moody's stressed DSCR is based on Moody's net
cash flow and a 9.25% stress rate that the agency applied to the
trust loan balance. The trust has not experienced any losses to
date. As of the current distribution date, interest shortfalls
totaling $12,446 affect Class E.


KINGSLAND IV: S&P Affirms BB Rating on Class E Notes
----------------------------------------------------
Standard & Poor's Ratings Services raised its ratings on the class
A-1, A-1R, B, C, and D notes from Kingsland IV Ltd., a U.S.
collateralized loan obligation (CLO) managed by Kingsland Capital
Management LLC.  At the same time S&P affirmed its rating on the
class E notes, and removed all six of these ratings from
CreditWatch, where S&P placed them with positive implications on
Nov. 14, 2013.

The upgrades mainly reflect improvements in the credit quality of
the assets in the transaction's underlying portfolio since S&P's
March 2012 review.  The affirmation reflects S&P's view that the
available credit enhancement is sufficient to support the notes at
the current rating level.

The transaction is in its reinvestment period ending in April
2014.  All principal proceeds from the transaction are currently
being used to reinvest in new collateral.

The portfolio's credit quality has improved, including fewer
defaulted obligations in the collateral pool, since S&P's past
review based on the February 2012 trustee report.

According to the December 2013 trustee report that S&P reviewed
for the rating actions, the transaction contained $2.29 million in
defaulted assets, down from the $3.86 million noted in the
February 2012 trustee report.  In addition, the exposure to 'CCC'
rated assets has declined to approximately $23.15 million from
$28.56 million in February 2012.  The par value of the
transaction's performing assets increased by $6.45 million.  These
improvements resulted in higher overcollateralization (O/C) ratios
for all the classes.  However, there are $12.0 million in assets
(approximately 2.54% of the pool) in the collateral pool, which
mature shortly after the CLO's final maturity.  At this time, S&P
do not believe these long-dated assets present a material risk to
the timely payment of the rated notes.

S&P will continue to review whether, in its view, the ratings
assigned to the notes remain consistent with the credit
enhancement available to support them, and S&P will take rating
actions as necessary.

RATING ACTIONS

Kingsland IV Ltd.

                 Rating
Class        To           From
A-1          AA+ (sf)     AA (sf)/Watch Pos
A-1R         AA+ (sf)     AA (sf)/Watch Pos
B            AA (sf)      A+ (sf)/Watch Pos
C            A- (sf)      BBB+ (sf)/Watch Pos
D            BBB- (sf)    BB+ (sf)/Watch Pos
E            BB (sf)      BB (sf)/Watch Pos

TRANSACTION INFORMATION
Issuer:              Kingsland IV Ltd.
Co-issuer:           Kingsland IV Corp.
Collateral manager:  Kingsland Capital Management LLC
Trustee:             The Bank of New York Mellon
Transaction type:    Cash flow CLO

CLO--Collateralized loan obligation.


KINGSLAND V: S&P Affirms BB+ Rating on Class D-1 Notes
------------------------------------------------------
Standard & Poor's Ratings Services raised its ratings on the class
A-1, A-2R, A-2B, B, and C notes from Kingsland V Ltd., a U.S.
collateralized loan obligation (CLO) managed by Kingsland Capital
Management LLC.  At the same time, S&P affirmed its ratings on the
class D-1, D-2, and E notes.  In addition, S&P removed all eight
of these ratings from CreditWatch, where it placed them with
positive implications.

The upgrades mainly reflect improvements in the credit quality of
the assets in the transaction's underlying portfolio since S&P's
last review.  The affirmations reflect S&P's view that the
available credit enhancement is sufficient to support the notes at
the current rating levels.

The transaction is in its reinvestment period, which ends in July
2014.  All principal proceeds from the transaction are currently
being used to reinvest in new collateral.

The portfolio's credit quality has improved since S&P's last
review, which was based on the May 2012 trustee report.
Specifically, the collateral pool has fewer defaulted obligations.
Based on the December 2013 trustee report, S&P's review of which
led to the rating actions, the transaction contained $2.30 million
in defaulted assets, down from the $2.86 million noted in the May
2012 trustee report.  In addition, the transaction's exposure to
'CCC' rated assets has declined to approximately $22.79 million
from the $34.42 million cited in the May 2012 report.  The par
value of the performing assets in the transaction increased by
$5.65 million.  These improvements resulted in higher
overcollateralization ratios for all the classes.  However,
$13.250 million (approximately 2.80% of the pool) of the assets in
the collateral pool mature shortly after the CLO's final maturity
date.  Currently, S&P do not believe these long-dated assets
present a material risk to the timely payment of the rated notes.

S&P will continue to review whether, in its view, the ratings
assigned to the notes remain consistent with the credit
enhancement available to support them, and S&P will take further
rating actions as necessary.

RATINGS RAISED AND REMOVED FROM CREDITWATCH

Kingsland V Ltd.

                 Rating
Class        To           From
A-1          AA+ (sf)     AA (sf)/Watch Pos
A-2R         AAA (sf)     AA+ (sf)/Watch Pos
A-2B         AA+ (sf)     AA (sf)/Watch Pos
B            AA (sf)      A+ (sf)/Watch Pos
C            A- (sf)      BBB+ (sf)/Watch Pos

RATINGS AFFIRMED AND REMOVED FROM CREDITWATCH
Kingsland V Ltd.

                 Rating
Class        To           From
D-1          BB+ (sf)     BB+ (sf)/Watch Pos
D-2          BB+ (sf)     BB+ (sf)/Watch Pos
E            B (sf)       B (sf)/Watch Pos

TRANSACTION INFORMATION
Issuer:              Kingsland V Ltd.
Co-issuer:           Kingsland V Corp.
Collateral manager:  Kingsland Capital Management LLC
Trustee:             The Bank of New York Mellon
Transaction type:    Cash flow CLO

CLO--Collateralized loan obligation.


KKR FINANCIAL: Moody's Rates $22MM Class D Notes 'Ba3'
------------------------------------------------------
Moody's Investors Service has assigned ratings to eight classes of
Notes issued by KKR Financial CLO 2013-2, Ltd.

U.S. $100,000,000 Class A-1A Senior Secured Floating Rate Notes
due 2026 (the "Class A-1A Notes"), Definitive Rating Assigned Aaa
(sf)

U.S. $10,000,000 Class A-1B Senior Secured Fixed Rate Notes due
2026 (the "Class A-1B Notes"), Definitive Rating Assigned Aaa (sf)

U.S. $115,000,000 Class A-1C Senior Secured Floating Rate Notes
due 2026 (the "Class A-1C Notes"), Definitive Rating Assigned Aaa
(sf)

U.S. $38,000,000 Class A-2A Senior Secured Floating Rate Notes due
2026 (the "Class A-2A Notes"), Definitive Rating Assigned Aa2 (sf)

U.S. $10,000,000 Class A-2B Senior Secured Fixed Rate Notes due
2026 (the "Class A-2B Notes"), Definitive Rating Assigned Aa2 (sf)

U.S. $18,500,000 Class B Senior Secured Deferrable Floating Rate
Notes due 2026 (the "Class B Notes"), Definitive Rating Assigned
A2 (sf)

U.S. $25,750,000 Class C Senior Secured Deferrable Floating Rate
Notes due 2026 (the "Class C Notes"), Definitive Rating Assigned
Baa3 (sf)

U.S. $22,000,000 Class D Senior Secured Deferrable Floating Rate
Notes due 2026 (the "Class D Notes"), Definitive Rating Assigned
Ba3 (sf)

The Class A-1A Notes, the Class A-1B Notes, the Class A-1C Notes,
the Class A-2A Notes, the Class A-2B Notes, the Class B Notes, the
Class C Notes and the Class D Notes are referred to herein,
collectively, 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.

KKR CLO is a managed cash flow CLO. The issued notes will be
collateralized primarily by broadly syndicated first lien senior
secured corporate loans. At least 90.0% of the portfolio must
consist of senior secured loans, cash, and eligible investments,
and up to 10.0% of the portfolio may consist of second lien loans,
senior secured bonds, senior unsecured bonds, senior secured
floating rate notes, and unsecured loans. The Issuer's documents
require the portfolio to be at least 29.5% ramped as of the
closing date.

KKR Financial Advisors II, 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.

In addition to the Rated Notes, the Issuer issued 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 November 2013.

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

Par amount: $369,000,000

Diversity Score: 50

Weighted Average Rating Factor (WARF): 2850

Weighted Average Spread (WAS): 3.70%

Weighted Average Coupon (WAC): 6.50%

Weighted Average Recovery Rate (WARR): 47.0%

Weighted Average Life (WAL): 8.0 years.

Methodology Underlying the Rating Action

The principal methodology used in this rating was "Moody's Global
Approach to Rating Collateralized Loan Obligations" published in
November 2013. Please see the Credit Policy page on www.moodys.com
for a copy of this methodology.

Factors that would lead to an upgrade or downgrade of the rating

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 an
important 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 2850 to 3278)

Rating Impact in Rating Notches

Class A-1A Notes: 0

Class A-1B Notes: 0

Class A-1C Notes: 0

Class A-2A Notes: -2

Class A-2B Notes: -2

Class B Notes: -2

Class C Notes: -1

Class D Notes: -1

Percentage Change in WARF -- increase of 30% (from 2850 to 3705)

Rating Impact in Rating Notches

Class A-1A Notes: -1

Class A-1B Notes: -1

Class A-1C Notes: -1

Class A-2A Notes: -3

Class A-2B Notes: -3

Class B Notes: -3

Class C Notes: -2

Class D Notes: -1

The V Score for this transaction is Medium/High. This V Score has
been assigned in a manner similar to the Medium/High V Score
assigned for the global cash flow CLO sector, as described in the
special report titled "V Scores and Parameter Sensitivities in the
Global Cash Flow CLO Sector," dated July 6, 2009 and available on
www.moodys.com.

Moody's V Scores provide a relative assessment of the quality of
available credit information and the potential variability around
the various inputs to a rating determination. The V Score ranks
transactions by the potential for significant rating changes owing
to uncertainty around the assumptions due to data quality,
historical performance, the level of disclosure, transaction
complexity, the modeling and the transaction governance that
underlie the ratings. V Scores apply to the entire transaction,
rather than individual tranches.


KODIAK CDO I: Moody's Hikes Rating on $103.5MM Notes to Caa1
------------------------------------------------------------
Moody's Investors Service announced that it has upgraded the
ratings on the following notes issued by Kodiak CDO I, Ltd.:

$338,500,000 Class A-1 First Priority Senior Secured Floating Rate
Notes Due 2037 (current balance of $131,936,969.14), Upgraded to
Ba3 (sf); previously on November 23, 2010 Downgraded to B2 (sf)

$103,500,000 Class A-2 Second Priority Senior Secured Floating
Rate Notes Due 2037, Upgraded to Caa1 (sf); previously on November
23, 2010 Upgraded to Caa3 (sf)

$83,000,000 Class B Third Priority Senior Secured Floating Rate
Notes Due 2037, Upgraded to Caa2 (sf); previously on April 9, 2009
Downgraded to Ca (sf)

$30,000,000 Class C Fourth Priority Secured Deferrable Floating
Rate Notes Due 2037 (current balance of $31,562,518.51), Upgraded
to Caa3 (sf); previously on November 23, 2010 Downgraded to C (sf)

Kodiak CDO I, Ltd., issued on September 19, 2006, is a collateral
debt obligation backed by a portfolio of REIT trust preferred
securities (TruPS) and CMBS securities.

Ratings Rationale

According to Moody's, the rating actions taken on the notes are
primarily a result of deleveraging of the Class A-1 notes and an
improvement in the overcollateralization ratios of the senior
notes since February 2013.

Moody's notes that the Class A-1 notes have been paid down by
approximately 19.3% or $31.5 million since February 2013, as a
result of diversion of excess interest proceeds and disbursement
of principal proceeds from redemptions of underlying assets. Due
to this deleveraging, the Class A-1 notes' par coverage improved
to 289.4% from 251.5% as calculated by Moody's since February
2013. Based on the latest trustee report dated December 2013, the
Class A/B Overcollateralization Test is reported at 127.32% (limit
124.86%) versus February 2013 level of 124.52%.

Going forward, the notes will continue to benefit from excess
interest and principal proceeds from scheduled amortizations and
potential future redemptions of assets in the underlying
portfolio.

Although four out-of-the-money interest rate swaps have matured
since the last rating action, the transaction is still negatively
affected by remaining large out-of-the-money fixed-floating
interest rate swaps. This continues to divert a large portion of
the interest proceeds to make payments to the hedge counterparty.
However, the aggregate notional balance of all the swaps continues
to amortize and the majority of the interest rate swaps will be
maturing in the third quarter of 2016.

Moody's notes that the key model inputs used in its analysis, such
as par, weighted average rating factor, and weighted average
recovery rate, may be different from the trustee's reported
numbers. In its base case, Moody's analyzed the underlying
collateral pool to have a performing par of $382 million,
defaulted/deferring par of $98.9 million, a weighted average
default probability of 50.11% (implying a WARF of 4616), Moody's
Asset Correlation of 15 % and a weighted average recovery rate
upon default of 10%. In addition to the quantitative factors that
are explicitly modeled, qualitative factors are part of rating
committee considerations. Moody's considers the structural
protections in the transaction, recent deal performance under
current market conditions, the legal environment, and specific
documentation features. All information available to rating
committees, including macroeconomic forecasts, inputs from other
Moody's analytical groups, market factors, and judgments regarding
the nature and severity of credit stress on the transactions, may
influence the final rating decision.

Methodology Underlying the Rating Action

The principal methodology used in this rating was "Moody's
Approach to Rating TRUP CDOs" published in May 2011.

Factors that would lead to an upgrade or downgrade of the rating

Moody's notes that this transaction is subject to a number of
factors and circumstances that could lead to either an upgrade or
downgrade of the ratings, as described below:

1) Macroeconomic uncertainty: TruPS CDOs performance may be
negatively impacted by uncertainties of credit conditions in the
general economy.

2) Portfolio credit risk: A better than expected credit
performance of the underlying assets collateralizing the
transaction, can lead to positive transaction performance.
Conversely, a weaker than expected credit performance of the
underlying portfolio can have adverse consequences on the
transaction's performance.

3) Deleveraging: An important source of uncertainty in this
transaction is whether deleveraging from unscheduled principal
proceeds and excess interest proceeds will continue and at what
pace. A faster-than-anticipated pace of deleveraging may have
significant impact on the ratings of the notes.

4) Exposure to non-publicly rated assets: The deal is exposed to a
large number of securities whose default probabilities are
assessed through credit estimates. Moody's evaluates the
sensitivity of the ratings of the notes to the volatility of these
credit assessments.

Loss and Cash Flow Analysis

The transaction's portfolio was modeled using CDOROM v.2.10-15 to
develop the default distribution from which the Moody's Asset
Correlation parameter was obtained. This parameter was then used
as an input in a cash flow model using CDOEdge. CDOROM v.2.10-15
is available on moodys.com under Products and Solutions --
Analytical models, upon return of a signed free license agreement.

The portfolio of this CDO is mainly comprised of trust preferred
securities issued by small to medium sized REIT companies that are
generally not publicly rated by Moody's. To evaluate the credit
quality of REIT TruPS without public ratings, Moody's relies on
the assessment of Moody's REIT team based on the credit analysis
of the underlying REIT firms' annual statutory financial reports.

Moody's performed a number of sensitivity analyses of the results
to certain key factors driving the ratings. Moody's analyzed the
sensitivity of the model results to changes in the portfolio WARF
(representing an improvement or a deterioration in the credit
quality of the collateral pool), assuming that all other factors
are held equal. If the WARF is increased by 384 points from the
base case of 4616, the model-implied rating of the Class A-1 notes
is one notch worse than the base case result. Similarly, if the
WARF is decreased by 300 points, the model-implied rating of the
Class A-1 notes is one notch better than the base case result


LB COMMERCIAL 1998-C1: Moody's Affirms Caa2 Rating on IO Certs
--------------------------------------------------------------
Moody's Investors Service has affirmed the rating of one interest-
only class of LB Commercial Mortgage Trust, Commercial Mortgage
Pass-Through Certificates, Series 1998-C1 as follows:

Cl. IO, Affirmed Caa2 (sf); previously on Feb 15, 2013 Downgraded
to Caa2 (sf)

Ratings Rationale

The rating of the IO class, Class IO, was affirmed based on the
credit performance of its referenced classes. The IO class is the
only outstanding Moody's-rated class in this transaction.

Factors That Would Lead To An Upgrade Or Downgrade Of The Rating

The rating of an IO class is based on the credit performance of
its referenced classes. An IO class may be upgraded based on a
lower weighted average rating factor or WARF due to an overall
improvement in the credit quality of its reference classes. An IO
class may be downgraded based on a higher WARF due to a decline in
the credit quality of its reference classes, paydowns of higher
quality reference classes or non-payment of interest. Classes that
have paid off through loan paydowns or amortization are not
included in the WARF calculation. Classes that have experienced
losses are grossed up for losses and included in the WARF
calculation, even if Moody's has withdrawn the rating.

Methodology Underlying The Rating Action

The methodologies used in this rating were "Moody's Approach to
Rating U.S. CMBS Conduit Transactions" published in September 2000
and "Moody's Approach to Rating CMBS Large Loan/Single Borrower
Transactions" published in July 2000.

Description of Models Used

Moody's review utilized the excel-based CMBS Conduit Model v 2.64
which is used for both conduit and fusion transactions. Conduit
model results at the Aa2 (sf) level are driven by property type,
Moody's actual and stressed DSCR and Moody's property quality
grade (which reflects the capitalization rate used by Moody's to
estimate Moody's value). Conduit model results at the B2 (sf)
level are driven by a paydown analysis based on the individual
loan level Moody's LTV ratio. Other concentrations and
correlations may be considered in our analysis. Based on the model
pooled credit enhancement levels at Aa2 (sf) and B2 (sf), the
remaining conduit classes are either interpolated between these
two data points or determined based on a multiple or ratio of
either of these two data points. For fusion deals, the credit
enhancement for loans with investment-grade credit assessments is
melded with the conduit model credit enhancement into an overall
model result. Negative pooling, or adding credit enhancement at
the credit assessment level, is incorporated for loans with
similar credit assessments in the same transaction.

Moody's uses a variation of Herf to measure diversity of loan
size, where a higher number represents greater diversity. Loan
concentration has an important bearing on potential rating
volatility, including risk of multiple notch downgrades under
adverse circumstances. The credit neutral Herf score is 40. The
pool has a Herf of 10 compared to 6 at the prior review.

In cases where the Herf falls below 20, Moody's uses the excel-
based Large Loan Model v 8.6 and then reconciles and weights the
results from the Conduit and Large Loan models in formulating a
rating recommendation. The large loan model derives 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, property type and sponsorship. These aggregated
proceeds are then further adjusted for any pooling benefits
associated with loan level diversity, other concentrations and
correlations.

Deal Performance

As of the January 21, 2014 distribution date, the transaction's
aggregate certificate balance has decreased by 97% to $50.5
million from $1.73 billion at securitization. The pool has paid
down 50% since Moody's last review. The Certificates are
collateralized by 20 mortgage loans ranging in size from less than
1% to 17% of the pool, with the top ten loans representing 79% of
the pool. Five loans, representing 12% of the pool have defeased
and are secured by US Government securities.

Two loans, representing 8% 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 our
ongoing monitoring of a transaction, Moody's reviews the watchlist
to assess which loans have material issues that could impact
performance.

Twenty loans have been liquidated from the pool with a loss,
contributing to an aggregate realized loss of $53.3 million (42%
loss severity on average). Currently, one loan, representing 7% of
the pool, is in special servicing. Moody's estimates a minimal
loss on this loan.

Moody's was provided with full year 2011 and full year 2012
operating results for 100% and 93% of the pool, respectively.
Moody's weighted average conduit LTV is 40% compared to 59% at
Moody's prior review. Moody's conduit component excludes specially
serviced loans. Moody's net cash flow (NCF) reflects a weighted
average haircut of 14% to the most recently available net
operating income (NOI). Moody's value reflects a weighted average
capitalization rate of 9.4%.

Moody's actual and stressed conduit DSCRs are 1.44X and 3.21X,
respectively, compared to 1.27X and 2.08X 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 largest conduit loan is the Imperial Palm Apartments Loan
($8.7 million -- 17.3% of the pool), which is secured by a 638
unit senior rental community located in Largo, Florida. As of
September 2013, the property was 94% leased compared to 93% at
last review. The loan is stable and benefiting from amortization.
Moody's LTV and stressed DSCR are 46% and 2.13X, respectively,
compared to 52% and 1.86X at last review.

The second largest conduit loan is the Bradley Industrial Park
Loan ($5.8 million -- 11.5% of the pool), which is secured by nine
industrial / warehouse buildings totaling 587,000 SF and located
in Blauvelt, New York. The loan is fully amortizing and matures in
December 2017. Moody's LTV and stressed DSCR are 30% and 3.46X,
respectively.

The third largest conduit loan is the 1526 Charles Boulevard Loan
($5.2 million -- 10.3% of the pool), which is secured by a 144-
unit (528 bed) student housing complex located in Greenville,
North Carolina. All of the property's floor plans consists of
either three or four bedrooms units. As of September 2013, the
property was 93% leased. The loan is fully amortizing and matures
in December 2023. Moody's LTV and stressed DSCR are 60% and 1.61X,
respectively, compared to 62% and 1.57X at last review.


LB MULTIFAMILY 1991-4: Moody's Affirms 'Caa1' Cl. A-1 Notes Rating
------------------------------------------------------------------
Moody's Investors Service has affirmed the ratings of two classes
of LB Multifamily Mortgage Trust, Series 1991-4 as follows:

Cl. A-1 Senior Secured Pass-Through Apr 25, 2021, Affirmed at Caa1
(sf); previously on Feb 08, 2013 Affirmed at Caa1 (sf)

Cl. A-2 Senior Secured Pass-Through Apr 25, 2021, Affirmed at B1
(sf); previously on Feb 08, 2013 Affirmed at B1 (sf)

Ratings Rationale

The rating of class A-1 is affirmed because the rating is
consistent with Moody's expected loss.

The rating of class A-2 is affirmed because the reserve fund
provides for sufficient credit support to maintain class A-2's
current rating.

Factors That Would Lead to an Upgrade or Downgrade of the Rating

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 an
increase in the performance of the one remaining loan or
defeasance of the one remaining loan.

Factors that could lead to a downgrade of the ratings include a
decline in the performance of the one remaining loan.

Methodology Underlying The Rating Action

The principal methodology used in this rating was "Moody's
Approach to Rating CMBS Large Loan/Single Borrower Transactions"
published in July 2000.

Description of Models Used

No models were used in the rating action.

Deal Performance

As of the December 26, 2013 distribution date, the transaction's
aggregate certificate balance has decreased by 99% to $238,310
from $105.8 million at securitization. The Certificates are
collateralized by one mortgage loan, which is secured by a multi-
family property located in Huntington Beach, California. The loan
is fully amortizing and matures in 2019. It has amortized by 66%
since securitization. The loan is current.

The pool has experienced aggregate realized losses totaling $33.5
million, which have eliminated non-rated Classes B, C and D and
resulted in a $9.2 million loss for Class A-1. Class A-2 has not
experienced any losses to date. Realized losses allocated to the
Class A-2 certificates are offset by a reserve fund held by the
Trustee. It is anticipated that there are sufficient funds
available in the reserve fund to offset any potential losses to
Class A-2. However, due to exposure to only one remaining small
balance loan Moody's is concerned about the possibility of
interest shortfalls.


LCM XV: S&P Assigns Prelim. 'BB-' Rating on Class E Notes
---------------------------------------------------------
Standard & Poor's Ratings Services assigned its preliminary
ratings to LCM XV L.P./LCM XV LLC's $560.5 million floating-rate
notes.

The note issuance is a collateralized loan obligation
securitization backed by a revolving pool consisting primarily of
broadly syndicated senior secured loans.

The preliminary ratings are based on information as of Jan. 27,
2014.  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 credit enhancement provided to the preliminary rated
      notes through the subordination of cash flows that are
      payable to the subordinated notes.

   -- The transaction's credit enhancement, which is sufficient to
      withstand the defaults applicable for the supplemental tests
      (not counting excess spread), and cash flow structure, which
      can withstand the default rate projected by Standard &
      Poor's CDO Evaluator model, as assessed by Standard & Poor's
      using the assumptions and methods outlined in its corporate
      collateralized debt obligation criteria.

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

   -- The diversified collateral portfolio, which consists
      primarily of broadly syndicated speculative-grade senior
      secured term loans.

   -- The collateral manager's experienced management team.

   -- S&P's projections regarding the timely interest and ultimate
      principal payments on the preliminary rated notes, which S&P
      assessed using its cash flow analysis and assumptions
      commensurate with the assigned preliminary ratings under
      various interest-rate scenarios, including LIBOR ranging
      from 0.3105% to 13.8391%.

   -- The transaction's overcollateralization and interest
      coverage tests, a failure of which will lead to the
      diversion of interest and principal proceeds to reduce the
      balance of the rated notes outstanding.

   -- The transaction's interest diversion test, a failure of
      which will lead to the reclassification of excess interest
      proceeds that are available before paying uncapped
      administrative expenses, subordinated management fees,
      amounts deposited to the supplemental reserve account, and
      subordinated note payments into principal proceeds for the
      purchase of additional collateral assets during the
      reinvestment period or to pay the notes sequentially, at the
      option of the collateral manager.

PRELIMINARY RATINGS ASSIGNED

LCM XV L.P./LCM XV LLC

Class               Rating        Amount
                                (mil. $)
X                   AAA (sf)        4.00
A                   AAA (sf)      378.00
B                   AA (sf)        63.00
C (deferrable)      A (sf)         55.50
D (deferrable)      BBB (sf)       30.00
E (deferrable)      BB- (sf)       30.00
Subordinated notes  NR             63.50

NR--Not rated.


LIGHTPOINT CLO V: S&P Lowers Rating on Class D Notes to 'BB-'
-------------------------------------------------------------
Standard & Poor's Ratings Services raised its ratings on the class
A-1, A-2, B, and C notes from Lightpoint CLO V Ltd., a U.S. cash
flow collateralized loan obligation (CLO) transaction, and removed
the ratings on the class A-1, A-2, and B notes from CreditWatch,
where S&P had placed them with positive implications on Nov. 14,
2013.  At the same time, S&P lowered its rating on the class D
notes from the same transaction.

The transaction exited its reinvestment period in August 2013 and
has commenced paydowns to the class A-1 notes.  The upgrades
reflect paydowns of $122.13 million to the class A-1 notes since
the time of S&P's last rating action in January 2012.  This has
led to an increase in overcollateralization ratios for the A-1,
A-2, B, and C tranches.

S&P notes that Lightpoint CLO V Ltd. currently holds no defaulted
collateral (as per the monthly trustee report dated Dec. 11,
2013).  S&P also notes that this transaction has significantly
reduced its exposure to loans issued by 'CCC' rated obligors since
our last rating action.  According to the December 2013 trustee
report, 0.42% of the collateral has a rating in the 'CCC'
category, compared with 4.87% (as reflected in the trustee report
dated Dec. 12, 2011, which S&P used for its January 2012 rating
action).

S&P's rating on the class B notes reflects the application of its
largest obligor default test--a supplemental test S&P introduced
as a part of its 2009 corporate credit criteria that is intended
to address potential concentration of exposure to obligors in a
transaction's portfolio.

Despite the paydowns and the improvement in coverage levels in the
senior part of the capital structure, the transaction has
sustained a loss in par $5.62 million as a result of trading
activity over the past two years.  S&P has lowered its rating on
the class D notes because the loss in par has affected the credit
support available to sustain this class' current rating.  Further,
the loss in par has shrunk the class D's overcollateralization
ratio by 0.17%, to 103.83%, from 104.00% at the time of S&P's last
rating action.

S&P will continue to review whether the ratings currently assigned
to the notes remain consistent with the credit enhancement
available to support them, and S&P will take rating actions as it
deems necessary.

RATING AND CREDITWATCH ACTIONS

                Rating
Class        To         From
A-1          AAA (sf)   AA+ (sf)/Watch Pos
A-2          AA+ (sf)   AA (sf)/ Watch Pos
B            A+ (sf)    A (sf)/Watch Pos
C            BBB+ (sf)  BBB (sf)
D            BB- (sf)   BB (sf)


MADISON PARK IV: Moody's Hikes Rating on $21MM Cl. E Notes to Ba1
-----------------------------------------------------------------
Moody's Investors Service announced that it has upgraded the
ratings of the following notes issued by Madison Park Funding IV,
Ltd.:

U.S. $31,250,000 Class B Floating Rate Notes Due 2021 Notes,
Upgraded to Aa1 (sf); previously on July 22, 2011 Upgraded to Aa3
(sf)

U.S. $30,000,000 Class C Deferrable Floating Rate Notes Due 2021
Notes, Upgraded to A2 (sf); previously on July 22, 2011 Upgraded
to Baa1 (sf)

U.S. $20,000,000 Class D Deferrable Floating Rate Notes Due 2021
Notes, Upgraded to Baa2 (sf); previously on July 22, 2011 Upgraded
to Ba1 (sf)

U.S. $21,000,000 Class E Deferrable Floating Rate Notes Due 2021
Notes, Upgraded to Ba1 (sf); previously on July 22, 2011 Upgraded
to Ba2 (sf)

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

U.S. $50,000,000 Class A-1b Floating Rate Notes Due 2021 Notes,
Affirmed Aaa (sf); previously on July 22, 2011 Upgraded to Aaa
(sf)

U.S. $110,000,000 Class A-2 Floating Rate Notes Due 2021 Notes,
Affirmed Aaa (sf); previously on July 22, 2011 Upgraded to Aaa
(sf)

U.S. $200,000,000 Class A-1a Floating Rate Notes Due 2021 Notes,
Affirmed Aaa (sf); previously on February 27, 2007 Assigned Aaa
(sf)

Madison Park Funding IV, Ltd., issued in February 2007, is a
collateralized loan obligation backed primarily by a portfolio of
senior secured loans. The portfolio is managed by Credit Suisse
Alternative Capital, Inc. The transaction's reinvestment period
will end in March 2014.

Ratings Rationale

These rating actions reflect the benefit of the short period of
time remaining before the end of the deal's reinvestment period in
March 2014. In light of the reinvestment restrictions during the
amortization period, and therefore the limited ability of the
manager to effect significant changes to the current collateral
pool, Moody's analyzed the deal assuming a higher likelihood that
the collateral pool characteristics will maintain a positive
buffer relative to certain covenant requirements. In particular,
Moody's assumed that the deal will benefit from higher spread
compared to the covenant level in January 2013. Moody's modeled a
WAS of 3.55% compared to a covenant level of 2.6% in January 2013.
The deal has also benefited from a shortening of the portfolio's
weighted average life and higher portfolio weighted average
recovery rate since January 2013. Furthermore, the transaction's
reported collateral quality and OC ratios have been stable since
January 2013.

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

Moody's notes that this transaction is subject to a number of
factors and circumstances that could lead to either an upgrade or
downgrade of the ratings, as described below:

1) Macroeconomic uncertainty: CLO performance may be negatively
impacted by a) uncertainties of credit conditions in the general
economy and b) the large concentration of upcoming speculative-
grade debt maturities which may create challenges for issuers to
refinance.

2) Collateral Manager: Performance may also be impacted, either
positively or negatively, by a) the manager's investment strategy
and behavior and b) divergence in legal interpretation of CLO
documentation by different transactional parties due to embedded
ambiguities.

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

4) Recovery of defaulted assets: Market value fluctuations in
defaulted assets reported by the trustee and those assumed to be
defaulted by Moody's may create volatility in the transaction's
overcollateralization levels. Further, the timing of recoveries
and the manager's decision to work out versus sell defaulted
assets create additional uncertainties. 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.

5) 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
may accelerate due to high prepayment levels in the loan market
and/or collateral sales by the manager, which may have significant
impact on the notes' ratings. Faster than expected note repayment
will usually have a positive impact on CLO notes, beginning with
those having the highest payment priority.

6) Post-Reinvestment Period Trading: Subject to certain
requirements, the transaction is allowed to reinvest certain
proceeds after the end of the reinvestment period, and as such the
manager has the flexibility to deteriorate some collateral quality
metrics to the covenant levels. In particular, Moody's tested for
a possible extension of the actual weighted average life in its
analysis given that the post-reinvestment period reinvesting
criteria has loose restrictions on the weighted average life of
the portfolio.

In addition to the base case analysis, Moody's also performed
sensitivity analyses to test the impact on all rated notes of
various default probabilities. Below is a summary of the impact of
different default probabilities (expressed in terms of WARF
levels) on all rated notes (shown in terms of the number of
notches' difference versus the current model output, where a
positive difference corresponds to lower expected loss), assuming
that all other factors are held equal:

Moody's Adjusted WARF -- 20% (2221)

Class A-1a: 0

Class A-1b: 0

Class A-2: 0

Class B: +1

Class C: +2

Class D: +3

Class E: +2

Moody's Adjusted WARF + 20% (3332)

Class A-1a: 0

Class A-1b: 0

Class A-2: 0

Class B: -2

Class C: -2

Class D: -1

Class E: -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 Section 2.3 of
the "Moody's Global Approach to Rating Collateralized Loan
Obligations" rating methodology published in November 2013.

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 be different from the trustee's reported numbers. In its
base case, Moody's analyzed the underlying collateral pool as
having a performing par and principal proceeds balance of $512
million, defaulted par of $5.5 million, a weighted average default
probability of 18.73% (implying a WARF of 2777), a weighted
average recovery rate upon default of 50.8%, a diversity score of
67 and a weighted average spread of 3.55%.

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


MERRILL LYNCH 1997-C2: Moody's Affirms Caa2 Rating on IO Certs
--------------------------------------------------------------
Moody's Investors Service has affirmed the rating of one class of
Merrill Lynch Mortgage Investors Commercial Mortgage Pass-Through
Certificates, Series 1997-C2 as follows:

IO, Affirmed Caa2 (sf); previously on Feb 21, 2013 Affirmed Caa2
(sf)

Ratings Rationale

The rating of the IO class, Class IO, was affirmed based on the
weighted average rating factor (WARF) of its referenced classes.
The IO class is the only outstanding Moody's-rated class in this
transaction.

Factors That Would Lead to an Upgrade or Downgrade of the Rating

The rating of an IO class is based on the credit performance of
its referenced classes. An IO class may be upgraded based on a
lower weighted average rating factor or WARF due to an overall
improvement in the credit quality of its reference classes. An IO
class may be downgraded based on a higher WARF due to a decline in
the credit quality of its reference classes, paydowns of higher
quality reference classes or non-payment of interest. Classes that
have paid off through loan paydowns or amortization are not
included in the WARF calculation. Classes that have experienced
losses are grossed up for losses and included in the WARF
calculation, even if Moody's has withdrawn the rating.

Methodology Underlying The Rating Action

The methodologies used in this rating were "Moody's Approach to
Rating U.S. CMBS Conduit Transactions" published in September 2000
and "Moody's Approach to Rating CMBS Large Loan/Single Borrower
Transactions" published in July 2000.

Description of Models Used

Moody's review utilized the excel-based CMBS Conduit Model v 2.64
which is used for both conduit and fusion transactions. Conduit
model results at the Aa2 (sf) level are driven by property type,
Moody's actual and stressed DSCR and Moody's property quality
grade (which reflects the capitalization rate used by Moody's to
estimate Moody's value). Conduit model results at the B2 (sf)
level are driven by a paydown analysis based on the individual
loan level Moody's LTV ratio. Other concentrations and
correlations may be considered in our analysis. Based on the model
pooled credit enhancement levels at Aa2 (sf) and B2 (sf), the
remaining conduit classes are either interpolated between these
two data points or determined based on a multiple or ratio of
either of these two data points. For fusion deals, the credit
enhancement for loans with investment-grade credit assessments is
melded with the conduit model credit enhancement into an overall
model result. Negative pooling, or adding credit enhancement at
the credit assessment level, is incorporated for loans with
similar credit assessments in the same transaction.

Moody's uses a variation of Herf to measure diversity of loan
size, where a higher number represents greater diversity. Loan
concentration has an important bearing on potential rating
volatility, including risk of multiple notch downgrades under
adverse circumstances. The credit neutral Herf score is 40. The
pool has a Herf of 3 compared to 4 at prior review.

In cases where the Herf falls below 20, Moody's uses the excel-
based Large Loan Model v 8.6 and then reconciles and weights the
results from the Conduit and Large Loan models in formulating a
rating recommendation. The large loan model derives 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, property type and sponsorship. These aggregated
proceeds are then further adjusted for any pooling benefits
associated with loan level diversity, other concentrations and
correlations.

Deal Performance

As of the January 10, 2014 distribution date, the transaction's
aggregate certificate balance has decreased by 96% to $29.8
million from $686.3 million at securitization. The Certificates
are collateralized by six mortgage loans ranging in size from 1%
to 40% of the pool,

Two loans, representing 42% 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 our
ongoing monitoring of a transaction, Moody's reviews the watchlist
to assess which loans have material issues that could impact
performance.

Eighteen loans have been liquidated from the pool, resulting in an
aggregate realized loss of $23.3 million (39% loss severity on
average). Currently, there are no loans in special servicing.

Moody's was provided with full year 2012 and/or partial year 2013
operating results for 100% and 67% of the pool, respectively.
Moody's weighted average LTV of the pool is 66% compared to 70% at
Moody's prior review. Moody's net cash flow (NCF) reflects a
weighted average haircut of 14% to the most recently available net
operating income (NOI). Moody's value reflects a weighted average
capitalization rate of 9.8%.

Moody's actual and stressed DSCRs are 1.15X and 1.76X,
respectively, compared to 1.11X and 1.63X 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 loans represent 90% of the pool. The largest loan is
the Northlake Tower Festival Loan ($12.1 million -- 40.4% of the
pool), which is secured by a 322,000 square foot (SF) anchored
retail center located in Tucker, Georgia. As of September 2013,
the property was 84% leased. This loan has passed its anticipated
repayment date (ARD) in March 2013 and the loan's final maturity
date is in December 2027. Moody's LTV and stressed DSCR are 90%
and 1.20X, respectively, compared to 102% and 1.06X at the prior
review.

The second largest loan is The Links at Jonesboro Loan ($9.3
million -- 31.3% of the pool), which is secured by a 432-unit
apartment complex located in Jonesboro, Arkansas. As of June 2013,
the property was 99% leased. The loan is fully amortizing and
matures in December 2022. Moody's LTV and stressed DSCR are 49%
and 2.10X, respectively, compared to 55% and 1.87X at the prior
review.

The third largest loan is the Dogwood Lakes Apartments Loan ($5.4
million -- 18.1% of the pool), which is secured by a 276-unit
apartment complex located in Benton, Arkansas. As of June 2013,
the property was 100% leased. The loan is fully amortizing and
matures in October 2022. Moody's LTV and stressed DSCR are 53% and
1.93X, respectively, compared to 54% and 1.89X at the prior
review.


MERRILL LYNCH 1998-C3: Moody's Cuts Rating on IO Certs to Caa3
--------------------------------------------------------------
Moody's Investors Service has downgraded the rating of one class
of Merrill Lynch Mortgage Investors, Inc., Commercial Mortgage
Pass Through Certificates, Series 1998-C3 as follows:

Cl. IO, Downgraded to Caa3 (sf); previously on Feb 21, 2013
Affirmed Caa1 (sf)

Ratings Rationale

The rating of the IO Class was downgraded due to the decline in
credit performance of its reference classes as a result of
principal paydowns of higher quality reference classes. The IO
class is the only outstanding Moody's-rated class in this
transaction.

Factors That Would Lead To An Upgrade Or Downgrade Of The Rating

The rating of an IO class is based on the credit performance of
its referenced classes. An IO class may be upgraded based on a
lower weighted average rating factor or WARF due to an overall
improvement in the credit quality of its reference classes. An IO
class may be downgraded based on a higher WARF due to a decline in
the credit quality of its reference classes, paydowns of higher
quality reference classes or non-payment of interest. Classes that
have paid off through loan paydowns or amortization are not
included in the WARF calculation. Classes that have experienced
losses are grossed up for losses and included in the WARF
calculation, even if Moody's has withdrawn the rating.

Methodology Underlying The Rating Action

The methodologies used in this rating were "Moody's Approach to
Rating U.S. CMBS Conduit Transactions" published in September 2000
and "Moody's Approach to Rating CMBS Large Loan/Single Borrower
Transactions" published in July 2000.

Description of Models Used

Moody's review utilized the excel-based CMBS Conduit Model v 2.64
which is used for both conduit and fusion transactions. Conduit
model results at the Aa2 (sf) level are driven by property type,
Moody's actual and stressed DSCR and Moody's property quality
grade (which reflects the capitalization rate used by Moody's to
estimate Moody's value). Conduit model results at the B2 (sf)
level are driven by a paydown analysis based on the individual
loan level Moody's LTV ratio. Other concentrations and
correlations may be considered in our analysis. Based on the model
pooled credit enhancement levels at Aa2 (sf) and B2 (sf), the
remaining conduit classes are either interpolated between these
two data points or determined based on a multiple or ratio of
either of these two data points. For fusion deals, the credit
enhancement for loans with investment-grade credit assessments is
melded with the conduit model credit enhancement into an overall
model result. Negative pooling, or adding credit enhancement at
the credit assessment level, is incorporated for loans with
similar credit assessments in the same transaction.

Moody's uses a variation of Herf to measure diversity of loan
size, where a higher number represents greater diversity. Loan
concentration has an important bearing on potential rating
volatility, including risk of multiple notch downgrades under
adverse circumstances. The credit neutral Herf score is 40. The
pool has a Herf of 7 compared to 11 at prior review.

In cases where the Herf falls below 20, Moody's uses the excel-
based Large Loan Model v 8.6 and then reconciles and weights the
results from the Conduit and Large Loan models in formulating a
rating recommendation. The large loan model derives 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, property type and sponsorship. These aggregated
proceeds are then further adjusted for any pooling benefits
associated with loan level diversity, other concentrations and
correlations.

Deal Performance

As of the Jan 16, 2014 distribution date, the transaction's
aggregate certificate balance has decreased by 97% to $18 million
from $638 million at securitization. The Certificates are
collateralized by 11 mortgage loans ranging in size from 3% to 22%
of the pool, with the top ten loans representing 97% of the pool.
Two loans representing 16% of the pool have defeased and are
secured by US Government securities.

Three loans, representing 29% 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 our
ongoing monitoring of a transaction, Moody's reviews the watchlist
to assess which loans have material issues that could impact
performance.

Eleven loans have been liquidated from the pool, resulting in an
aggregate realized loss of $36 million (60% loss severity on
average). No loans are currently in special servicing.

Moody's was provided with full year 2012 and full or partial year
2013 operating results for 100% and 68% of the pool, respectively.
Moody's weighted average conduit LTV is 40% compared to 55% 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 13% to the most recently available
net operating income (NOI). Moody's value reflects a weighted
average capitalization rate of 10%.

Moody's actual and stressed conduit DSCRs are 1.43X and 3.01X,
respectively, compared to 1.33X and 2.11X 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 47% of the pool balance. The
largest loan is the Republic Beverage Building Loan ($4 million --
22% of the pool), which is secured by a 385,000 square foot (SF)
industrial property located in Grand Prairie, Texas. The property
is 100% leased to Republic Beverage Co. through August 2018.
Performance remains stable. The loan fully amortizes over its 20-
year loan term. Moody's LTV and stressed DSCR are 43% and 2.38X,
respectively, compared to 50% and 2.05X at prior review.

The second largest loan is the Santa Monica Sav-On Loan ($3
million -- 16% of the pool), which is secured by a 27,500 SF
retail property located in West Hollywood, California. The
property is 96% leased to CVS through August 2022. Performance
remains stable. The loan fully amortizes over its 24-year loan
term. Moody's LTV and stressed DSCR are 43% and 2.26X,
respectively, compared to 45% and 2.19X at prior review.

The third largest loan is the Willowbrook Apartments Loan ($2
million -- 10% of the pool), which is secured by a 105 unit
multifamily property located in Beaverton, Oregon. The property
was 96% occupied as of June 2013, and fully amortizes over its 25-
year loan term. Moody's LTV and stressed DSCR are 28% and 3.62X,
respectively, compared to 41% and 2.50X at prior review.


MIDOCEAN CREDIT CLO II: S&P Assigns 'BB' Rating on Class E Notes
----------------------------------------------------------------
Standard & Poor's Ratings Services assigned its ratings to
MidOcean Credit CLO II/MidOcean Credit CLO II LLC's
$372.00 million floating-rate notes.

The note issuance is a collateralized loan obligation
securitization backed by a revolving pool consisting primarily of
broadly syndicated senior secured loans.

The ratings reflect S&P's view of:

   -- The credit enhancement provided to the rated notes through
      the subordination of cash flows that are payable to the
      subordinated notes.

   -- The transaction's credit enhancement, which is sufficient to
      withstand the defaults applicable for the supplemental tests
      (not counting excess spread), and cash flow structure, which
      can withstand the default rate projected by Standard &
      Poor's CDO Evaluator model, as assessed by Standard & Poor's
      using the assumptions and methods outlined in its corporate
      collateralized debt obligation criteria.

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

   -- The diversified collateral portfolio, which consists
      primarily of broadly syndicated speculative-grade senior
      secured term loans.

   -- The collateral manager's experienced management team.

   -- S&P's projections regarding the timely interest and ultimate
      principal payments on the rated notes, which S&P assessed
      using its cash flow analysis and assumptions commensurate
      with the assigned ratings under various interest-rate
      scenarios, including LIBOR ranging from 0.2386%-12.8177%.

   -- The transaction's overcollateralization and interest
      coverage tests, a failure of which will lead to the
      diversion of interest and principal proceeds to reduce the
      balance of the rated notes outstanding.

   -- The transaction's interest diversion test, a failure of
      which will lead to the reclassification of a certain amount
      of excess interest proceeds, which are available before
      paying uncapped administrative expenses and fees;
      subordinated hedge termination payments; collateral manager
      incentive fees; and subordinated note payments to principal
      proceeds for additional collateral asset purchases during
      the reinvestment period.

RATINGS ASSIGNED

MidOcean Credit CLO II/MidOcean Credit CLO II LLC

Class                 Rating             Amount (mil $)
A                     AAA (sf)                   250.00
B                     AA (sf)                     56.00
C (deferrable)        A (sf)                      25.00
D (deferrable)        BBB (sf)                    21.00
E (deferrable)        BB (sf)                     20.00
Income notes          NR                          42.75

NR-Not rated.


MORGAN STANLEY 1997-WF1: Moody's Affirms Caa3 Rating on X-1 Notes
-----------------------------------------------------------------
Moody's Investors Service affirmed the rating of one class of
Morgan Stanley Commercial Mortgage Trust, Commercial Mortgage
Pass-Through Certificates, Series 1997-WF1 as follows:

Cl. X-1, Affirmed Caa3 (sf); previously on Feb 22, 2013 Affirmed
Caa3 (sf)

Ratings Rationale

The rating of the IO class, Class X-1, was affirmed based on the
credit performance of its referenced class. The IO class is the
only outstanding Moody's-rated class in this transaction.

Factors that Would Lead to an Upgrade or Downgrade of the Rating

The rating of an IO class is based on the credit performance of
its referenced classes. An IO class may be upgraded based on a
lower weighted average rating factor or WARF due to an overall
improvement in the credit quality of its reference classes. An IO
class may be downgraded based on a higher WARF due to a decline in
the credit quality of its reference classes, paydowns of higher
quality reference classes or non-payment of interest. Classes that
have paid off through loan paydowns or amortization are not
included in the WARF calculation. Classes that have experienced
losses are grossed up for losses and included in the WARF
calculation, even if Moody's has withdrawn the rating.

Methodology Underlying the Rating Action

The principal methodology used in this rating was "Moody's
Approach to Rating CMBS Large Loan/Single Borrower Transactions"
published in July 2000.

Description of Models Used

Moody's review incorporated the use of the excel-based Large Loan
Model v 8.6. The large loan model derives 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, property
type, and sponsorship. These aggregated proceeds are then further
adjusted for any pooling benefits associated with loan level
diversity, other concentrations and correlations.

Deal Performance

As of the January 15, 2014 distribution date, the transaction's
aggregate certificate balance has decreased by 99.7% to $1.7
million from $559.2 million at securitization. The Certificates
are collateralized by two mortgage loans ranging in size from 16%
to 84% of the pool.

There are no loans on the master servicer's watchlist. One loan
has been liquidated from the pool, resulting in a realized loss of
$2.7 million (23% loss severity). There are currently no loans in
special servicing.

Moody's was provided with full year 2011 and full year 2012
operating results for 100% and 84% of the pool, respectively.
Moody's weighted average conduit LTV is 23% compared to 30% 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 10.0%.

Moody's actual and stressed conduit DSCRs are 1.18X and >4.00X,
respectively, compared to 1.12X and 3.63X 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 largest loan in the pool is the ABCO Desert Market Shopping
Center Loan ($1.4 million -- 84% of the pool), which is secured by
a 62,000 square foot (SF) retail shopping center located in
Phoenix, Arizona. As of September 2013, the property was 92%
leased compared to 94% at last review. Moody's LTV and stressed
DSCR are 24% and >4.0X, respectively, compared to 32% and 3.34X at
prior review.

The second loan is the Walgreens - Jacksonville Loan ($279,900 --
16% of the pool), which is secured by 13,400 SF property located
in Jacksonville, Florida. The property is 100% leased to
Walgreens. Moody's LTV and stressed DSCR are 15% and >4.0X,
respectively, compared to 22% and >4.0X at prior review.


MORGAN STANLEY 2005-IQ10: Moody's Affirms C Rating on 2 Certs
-------------------------------------------------------------
Moody's Investors Service has affirmed the ratings on 12 classes
in Morgan Stanley Capital I Inc., Commercial Mortgage Pass-Through
Certificates, Series 2005-IQ10 as follows:

Cl. A-4A, Affirmed Aaa (sf); previously on Feb 1, 2013 Affirmed
Aaa (sf)

Cl. A-4B, Affirmed Aaa (sf); previously on Feb 1, 2013 Affirmed
Aaa (sf)

Cl. A-1A, Affirmed Aaa (sf); previously on Feb 1, 2013 Affirmed
Aaa (sf)

Cl. A-J, Affirmed Baa1 (sf); previously on Feb 1, 2013 Affirmed
Baa1 (sf)

Cl. B, Affirmed Ba1 (sf); previously on Feb 1, 2013 Affirmed Ba1
(sf)

Cl. C, Affirmed B1 (sf); previously on Feb 1, 2013 Downgraded to
B1 (sf)

Cl. D, Affirmed Caa1 (sf); previously on Feb 1, 2013 Downgraded to
Caa1 (sf)

Cl. E, Affirmed Caa2 (sf); previously on Feb 1, 2013 Downgraded to
Caa2 (sf)

Cl. F, Affirmed C (sf); previously on Feb 1, 2013 Downgraded to C
(sf)

Cl. G, Affirmed C (sf); previously on Feb 1, 2013 Downgraded to C
(sf)

Cl. X-1, Affirmed Ba3 (sf); previously on Feb 1, 2013 Affirmed Ba3
(sf)

Cl. X-Y, Affirmed Aaa (sf); previously on Feb 1, 2013 Affirmed Aaa
(sf)

Ratings Rationale

Classes A-4A through C 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.

Classes D through G were affirmed because the ratings are
consistent with Moody's expected loss.

The ratings on the IO classes were affirmed based on the credit
performance (or the weighted average rating factor or WARF) of
their referenced classes.

Moody's rating action reflects a base expected loss of 4.6% of the
current balance, compared to 7.0% at Moody's last review. Moody's
base expected loss plus realized losses is now 7.9% of the
original pooled balance, the same as at the last review.

Factors That Would Lead to an Upgrade or Downgrade of the Rating

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 this rating was "Moody's
Approach to Rating Fusion U.S. CMBS Transactions" published in
April 2005.

Description of Models Used

Moody's review used the excel-based CMBS Conduit Model v 2.64,
which it uses for both conduit and fusion transactions. Conduit
model results at the Aa2 (sf) level are driven by property type,
Moody's actual and stressed DSCR, and Moody's property quality
grade (which reflects the capitalization rate Moody's uses to
estimate Moody's value). Conduit model results at the B2 (sf)
level are based on a paydown analysis using the individual loan-
level Moody's LTV ratio. Moody's may consider other concentrations
and correlations in its analysis. Based on the model pooled credit
enhancement levels of Aa2 (sf) and B2 (sf), the required credit
enhancement on the remaining conduit classes are either
interpolated between these two data points or determined based on
a multiple or ratio of either of these two data points. For fusion
deals, Moody's merges the credit enhancement for loans with
investment-grade credit assessments with the conduit model credit
enhancement for an overall model result. Moody's incorporates
negative pooling (adding credit enhancement at the credit
assessment level) for loans with similar credit assessments in the
same transaction.

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 24 compared to 25 at Moody's last review.

Deal Performance

As of the January 15, 2014 distribution date, the transaction's
aggregate certificate balance has decreased by 38% to $959 million
from $1.5 billion at securitization. The certificates are
collateralized by 170 mortgage loans ranging in size from less
than 1% to 9% of the pool, with the top ten loans constituting 48%
of the pool. Sixty-one residential cooperative loans, constituting
10% of the pool, have investment-grade credit assessments. Five
loans, constituting 2% of the pool, have defeased and are secured
by US government securities.

Thirty-six loans, constituting 21% 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.

Eleven loans have been liquidated from the pool, resulting in an
aggregate realized loss of $78 million (for an average loss
severity of 45%). One loan, constituting less than 1% of the pool,
is currently in special servicing. The only loan currently in
special servicing is the Alamo Plaza Loan ($9 million -- 0.9% of
the pool), which is secured by an 85,000 square foot (SF) retail
property located in Gilroy, California. The property has been in
special servicing since August 2010 and has been real estate owned
since May 2012. The property is expected to be sold in 2014.

Moody's has assumed a high default probability for nine poorly
performing loans, constituting 10% of the pool, and has estimated
an aggregate loss of $15 million (a 17% expected loss based on a
55% probability default) from these troubled loans.

Moody's received full year 2012 operating results for 93% of the
pool, and full or partial year 2013 operating results for 84% of
the pool. Moody's weighted average conduit LTV is 81% compared to
83% at Moody's last review. Moody's conduit component excludes
loans with credit assessments, defeased loans, and specially
serviced and troubled loans. Moody's net cash flow (NCF) reflects
a weighted average haircut of 8.5% 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 1.61X and 1.34X,
respectively, compared to 1.57X and 1.29X 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 23% of the pool. The largest
loan is the 1875 K Street Loan ($85 million -- 8.9% of the pool),
which is secured by a 188,000 SF Class A office building located
in Washington D.C. The property was 67% leased as of September
2013 compared to 80% at last review. The property's second and
third largest tenants, representing 25% of the net rentable area
combined, vacated after Moody's last review. The loan was placed
on the watchlist on January 8, 2014. Moody's valuation is based on
a stabilized occupancy level and market rent. Moody's LTV and
stressed DSCR are 126% and 0.73X, respectively, compared to 124%
and 0.74X at last review.

The second largest loan is the L-3 Communications Loan ($77
million -- 8.0% of the pool), which is secured by an eight
building office/industrial complex totaling 901,000 SF located in
Salt Lake City, Utah. The complex has been fully leased since
securitization. Performance has improved due to an increase in
rents. Moody's utilized a lit/dark analysis for this loan as the
largest tenant, L-3 Communications, leases 83% of the NRA with
lease expirations staggered from 2015 through 2022. Moody's LTV
and stressed DSCR are 83% and 1.21X, respectively, compared to 85%
and 1.17X at last review.

The third largest loan is the Central Mall Forth Smith Loan ($54
million -- 5.6% of the pool), which is secured by a regional mall
totaling 861,000 SF (collateral is 738,000 SF) located in Fort
Smith, Arkansas. The property is the only regional mall within a
55 mile radius. The property was 92% leased as of September 20132,
which is the same as at last review. Moody's LTV and stressed DSCR
are 92% and 1.12X, respectively, compared to 95% and 1.08X at last
review.


MORGAN STANLEY 2006-TOP21: Moody's Affirms C Rating on Cl. L Notes
------------------------------------------------------------------
Moody's Investors Service has affirmed the ratings of 18 classes
in Morgan Stanley Capital I Trust, Commercial Pass-Through
Certificates, Series 2006-TOP21 as follows:

Cl. A-3, Affirmed Aaa (sf); previously on Feb 1, 2013 Affirmed Aaa
(sf)

Cl. A-4, Affirmed Aaa (sf); previously on Feb 1, 2013 Affirmed Aaa
(sf)

Cl. A-AB, Affirmed Aaa (sf); previously on Feb 1, 2013 Affirmed
Aaa (sf)

Cl. A-M, Affirmed Aaa (sf); previously on Feb 1, 2013 Affirmed Aaa
(sf)

Cl. A-J, Affirmed Aa3 (sf); previously on Feb 1, 2013 Affirmed Aa3
(sf)

Cl. B, Affirmed A2 (sf); previously on Feb 1, 2013 Affirmed A2
(sf)

Cl. C, Affirmed A3 (sf); previously on Feb 1, 2013 Affirmed A3
(sf)

Cl. D, Affirmed Baa3 (sf); previously on Feb 1, 2013 Affirmed Baa3
(sf)

Cl. E, Affirmed Ba1 (sf); previously on Feb 1, 2013 Affirmed Ba1
(sf)

Cl. F, Affirmed Ba3 (sf); previously on Feb 1, 2013 Affirmed Ba3
(sf)

Cl. G, Affirmed B2 (sf); previously on Feb 1, 2013 Affirmed B2
(sf)

Cl. H, Affirmed Caa1 (sf); previously on Feb 1, 2013 Affirmed Caa1
(sf)

Cl. J, Affirmed Caa3 (sf); previously on Feb 1, 2013 Affirmed Caa3
(sf)

Cl. K, Affirmed Caa3 (sf); previously on Feb 1, 2013 Affirmed Caa3
(sf)

Cl. L, Affirmed C (sf); previously on Feb 1, 2013 Downgraded to C
(sf)

Cl. M, Affirmed C (sf); previously on Feb 1, 2013 Downgraded to C
(sf)

Cl. N, Affirmed C (sf); previously on Feb 1, 2013 Affirmed C (sf)

Cl. X, Affirmed Ba3 (sf); previously on Feb 1, 2013 Affirmed Ba3
(sf)

Ratings Rationale

The ratings on P&I classes A-AB through 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 on P&I classes H through N were
affirmed because the ratings are consistent with Moody's expected
loss.

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 3.0% of the
current balance compared to 3.2 % at Moody's last review. Moody's
base expected loss plus realized losses is now 3.1% of the
original pooled balance, compared to 3.2% at the last review.

Factors That Would Lead to an Upgrade or Downgrade of the Rating

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 this rating was "Moody's
Approach to Rating Fusion U.S.

Description of Models Used

Moody's review used the excel-based CMBS Conduit Model v 2.64,
which it uses for both conduit and fusion transactions. Conduit
model results at the Aa2 (sf) level are driven by property type,
Moody's actual and stressed DSCR, and Moody's property quality
grade (which reflects the capitalization rate Moody's uses to
estimate Moody's value). Conduit model results at the B2 (sf)
level are based on a paydown analysis using the individual loan-
level Moody's LTV ratio. Moody's may consider other concentrations
and correlations in its analysis. Based on the model pooled credit
enhancement levels of Aa2 (sf) and B2 (sf), the required credit
enhancement on the remaining conduit classes are either
interpolated between these two data points or determined based on
a multiple or ratio of either of these two data points. For fusion
deals, Moody's merges the credit enhancement for loans with
investment-grade credit assessments with the conduit model credit
enhancement for an overall model result. Moody's incorporates
negative pooling (adding credit enhancement at the credit
assessment level) for loans with similar credit assessments in the
same transaction.

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 20, compared to 22 at Moody's last review.

Deal Performance

As of the January 13, 2014 distribution date, the transaction's
aggregate certificate balance has decreased by 30% to $976.8
billion from $1.40 billion at securitization. The Certificates are
collateralized by 100 mortgage loans ranging in size from less
than 1% to 14% of the pool. The pool includes five loans,
representing 6% of the pool, with investment-grade credit
assessments. The pool contains two defeased loans, representing
1.4% of the pool, which are secured by US Government Securities.

Twenty five loans, representing 21% 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 our
ongoing monitoring of a transaction, Moody's reviews the watchlist
to assess which loans have material issues that could impact
performance.

Five loans have been liquidated from the pool since
securitization, resulting in an aggregate $13.2 million loss (45%
loss severity on average). There are currently no loans in special
servicing.

Moody's has assumed a high default probability for seven poorly
performing loans, constituting 5% of the pool, and has estimated
an aggregate loss of $6.4 million (a 15% expected loss based on a
50% probability default) from these troubled loans.

Moody's was provided with full year 2012 and partial year 2013
operating results for 100% and 88% of the loans respectively.
Excluding specially serviced loans, Moody's weighted average LTV
is 84% compared to 89% at Moody's prior review. Moody's net cash
flow reflects a weighted average haircut of 12% to the most
recently available net operating income. Moody's value reflects a
weighted average capitalization rate of 9.4%.

Excluding specially serviced loans, Moody's actual and stressed
DSCRs are 1.64X and 1.29X, respectively, compared to 1.47X and
1.20X at 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 31% of the pool
balance. The largest loan is the Monmouth Mall Loan ($130.8
million -- 13.8% of the pool), which is secured by the borrower's
interest in a 980,500 square foot (SF) regional mall located in
Eatontown, New Jersey. The property is also encumbered by a $26.7
million junior loan which secures non-pooled classes MMA and MMB.
The mall is anchored by Macy's, J.C. Penney and Lord & Taylor.
Boscov's, a former anchor tenant comprising 261,000 SF, vacated
the center four years ago, although its lease does not expire
until January 2032. As of September 2013, total occupancy was 94%.
The inline space was 88% leased compared to 86% at last review.
The loan had a 60-month interest-only period and is now amortizing
on a 360-month schedule maturing in September 2015. Moody's LTV
and stressed DSCR for the A-note are 84% and 1.09X, respectively,
compared to 85% and 1.08X at last review.

The second largest loan is the InTown Suites Portfolio - Roll Up
Loan ($80.9 million -- 8.5% of the pool), which is secured by 30
extended-stay hotels totaling 3,791 rooms. The hotels are located
in 27 cities and 17 states. Revenue per available room (RevPAR)
for the 12-month period ending June 2013 was $188 compared to $182
in 2012. The loan is amortizing on a 300-month schedule maturing
in November 2015 and has paid down 19% since securitization.
Moody's LTV and stressed DSCR are 67% and 1.90X, respectively,
compared to 80% and 1.59X at last review.

The third largest loan is the SBC-Hoffman Estates Loan ($79.8
million -- 8.4% of the pool) which is secured by a 1.7 million SF
office complex located approximately 25 miles northwest of Chicago
in Hoffman Estates, Illinois. The loan is structured as a pari
passu note with a total balance of $156.4 million. The complex is
100% leased to SBC Services Inc. through August 2016. The lease is
guaranteed by AT&T Corporation. The loan had an anticipated
repayment date (ARD) in December 2010. Since last review, the loan
balance has decreased by 8% due to hyper-amortization. Moody's
utilized a Lit/Dark analysis to reflect potential cash flow
volatility due to the single tenant exposure. Moody's LTV and
stressed DSCR are 76% and 1.36X, respectively, compared to 88% and
1.17X, respectively, at last review.


MORGAN STANLEY 2007-XLF: Moody's Affirms Ca Rating on M-HRO Certs
-----------------------------------------------------------------
Moody's Investors Service affirmed the ratings on four classes,
and upgraded the ratings of two classes of Morgan Stanley Capital
Inc., Commercial Mortgage Pass-Through Certificates, Series 2007
XLF. Moody's rating action is as follows:

   -- Cl. A-2, Affirmed Aaa (sf); previously on Mar 27, 2013
      Affirmed Aaa (sf)

   -- Cl. B, Affirmed Aa1 (sf); previously on Mar 27, 2013
      Upgraded to Aa1 (sf)

   -- Cl. C, Upgraded to Aa2 (sf); previously on Mar 27, 2013
      Upgraded to A1 (sf)

   -- Cl. D, Upgraded to A3 (sf); previously on Mar 27, 2013
      Affirmed Baa2 (sf)

   -- Cl. M-HRO, Affirmed Ca (sf); previously on Mar 27, 2013
      Downgraded to Ca (sf)

   -- Cl. N-HRO, Affirmed C (sf); previously on Mar 27, 2013
      Downgraded to C (sf)

                         RATINGS RATIONALE

Moody's has affirmed the ratings on the two pooled P&I classes
because the transaction's key metrics, including Moody's loan-to-
value (LTV) ratio and Moody's stressed debt service coverage ratio
(DSCR), are within acceptable ranges.  The ratings on the rake
classes, M-HRO and N-HRO, were affirmed because the ratings are
consistent with Moody's expected loss.  Moody's has upgraded the
ratings on two pooled P&I classes based on improving performance
of underlying loans in the pool.  Moody's rates pooled classes
A-2, B, C and D, and non-pooled, or rake classes, M-HRO and N-HRO,
that are tied to the HRO Hotel Portfolio Loan.  Moody's does not
rate pooled classes E, F, G, H and J, and they act as additional
credit support for the more senior classes.

FACTORS THAT WOULD LEAD TO AN UPGRADE OR DOWNGRADE OF THE RATING

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 defeasance in the pool 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, an increase in loan
concentration, an increase in expected losses from specially
serviced and troubled loans or interest shortfalls.

              METHODOLOGY UNDERLYING THE RATING ACTION

The principal methodology used in this rating was "Moody's
Approach to Rating CMBS Large Loan/Single Borrower Transactions,"
published in July 2000.

                    DESCRIPTION OF MODELS USED

Moody's review incorporated the use of the excel-based Large Loan
Model v 8.6.  The large loan model derives 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, property
type and sponsorship.  Moody's also further adjusts these
aggregated proceeds for any pooling benefits associated with loan
level diversity and other concentrations and correlations.

                         DEAL PERFORMANCE

As of the January 15, 2014 payment date, the transaction's
aggregate certificate balance has decreased by 78%, to
$301 million from $1.368 billion at securitization.  The
certificates are collateralized by three mortgage loans remaining
in the pool.  All three loans are secured by hotel properties.
There have not been additional loans pay offs since last review.
The largest loan is the Crowne Plaza Times Square Loan
($136 million -- 47% of pooled balance), which is secured by
leasehold interests in a 770-key, full service hotel located at
49th Street and Broadway in the Times Square area of New York, NY.
In addition to the hotel rooms, loan collateral includes
approximately 180,328 square feet of office space, 42,121 square
feet of retail space and a 159-car parking garage.

This loan was returned to master servicer, and as part of the
modification and extension the final maturity has been extended to
Dec. 9, 2014.  The senior participation was reduced by
$10 million, and will continue to receive $3 million/year
amortization during the extension period.

The property's operating performance is showing improvement, and
Moody's expects the trust debt amount to be repaid in full at
final maturity date.  The property's Revenue per Available Room
(RevPAR) for the first nine months of 2013 was up by 6% from the
same period in 2012 to achieve $266.30.  Moody's LTV for the
pooled debt is 66% compared to 67% at the last review and Moody's
stressed DSCR is 1.65X compared to 1.62X at the last review.
Moody's current credit assessment is Ba1, compared to Ba2 at the
last review.

The HRO Hotel Portfolio Loan ($131 million -- 46% of pooled
balance plus $13 million of rakes) is secured by five full-service
hotels totaling 1,910 keys.  The loan has paid down approximately
14% since securitization due to the release of two properties, the
Sheraton College Park (205 rooms) and the Sheraton Danbury
(242 rooms).  The $144 million whole loan includes non-pooled
trust debt of $13 million, certificate Classes M-HRO and N-HRO.
The five remaining hotels are branded as Westin, Sheraton, Hilton
and Marriott.

The loan transferred to special servicer (CWCapital Asset
Management LLC) in October 2012 due to maturity default.  The
portfolio's net cash flow for the trailing twelve month period
ending September 2013 was $11.3 million, up from $9.3 million
achieved in 2012. According to management's budget for 2014, NCF
is expected to improve to $13.4 million.  Moody's LTV for the
pooled debt is 115%, and Moody's stressed DSCR is 1.11X.  Moody's
current credit assessment is Caa3, the same as last review.

The smallest loan in the pool, La Mer Hotel (formerly known as Le
Meridian, Cancun) Loan ($21 million -- 7% of pooled balance)
secured by fee simple interest in a 213-key resort property
located in Cancun, Mexico.  The property was built in1998, and was
managed by Starwood and Hotels and Resorts at securitization.  The
beachfront property was purchased by the current borrower
(Sandos), and the loan was modified and extended with a final
maturity date of Dec. 9, 2014.  The three one-year extension
options were to be automatic if the borrower met certain
requirements.  As part of the modification, B and C Notes
(totaling $29.9 million) held outside of the trust were
extinguished, and amortization kicked in as of February 2012.

Since the acquisition, the borrower has been covering all
operating deficits.  The property's performance is starting to
show improvement.  The RevPAR for the first seven months of 2013
was $68.41, up from $40.63 achieved during the same period in
2012.  And NCF for the property turned positive in the first seven
months of 2013.  Moody's LTV for the pooled debt is 135% and
Moody's current credit assessment is Caa3, the same as last
review.

As the collateral for this loan is located outside of the US, it
is subject to Moody's Local-Currency Bond Ceilings that reflect
all country risks -- including economic, financial, political, and
legal -- that, taken together, constrain local-currency ratings of
domiciled obligors or locally-originated structured transactions.
Mexico's Local-Currency Bond Ceiling is currently A1, having been
downgraded from Aaa on Dec. 21, 2012.  Mexico's Baa1 sovereign
rating remains unchanged at this time.

Moody's pooled portion of the trust weighted average loan to value
(LTV) ratio is 93% compared to 94% at last review.  Moody's
weighted average stressed debt service coverage ratio (DSCR) for
the pooled portion of the trust is at 1.28X compared to 1.11X at
last review.

The transaction has had cumulative losses to date of approximately
$52 million, affecting pooled classes J ($10.2 million), K
($20.6 million) and L ($21.1 million), and non-pooled (rake)
classes M-JPM ($2,867), N-HRO ($39,483) and N-STR ($17).  Pooled
classes K and L suffered 100% losses. Interest shortfalls affect
pooled classes G, ($50,655), H ($122,644), J ($140,414), and L
($13,956), and non-pooled (rake) classes M-HRO ($58,304) and N-HRO
($113,417). In addition, total outstanding advances made by the
servicer as of the current Payment date totals $54,827.


MORTGAGE CAPITAL: Moody's Affirms Caa2 Rating on Class X Certs
--------------------------------------------------------------
Moody's Investors Service has affirmed one class in Mortgage
Capital Funding, Inc., Multifamily/Commercial Mortgage Pass-
Through Certificates, Series 1998-MC2 as follows:

Cl. X, Affirmed Caa2 (sf); previously on Feb 15, 2013 Downgraded
to Caa2 (sf)

RATINGS RATIONALE

The rating on the IO class, Class X, was affirmed based on the
credit performance of its referenced classes. The IO class is the
only outstanding Moody's rated class in this transaction.

Factors That Would Lead to an Upgrade or Downgrade of the Rating

The rating of an IO class is based on the credit performance of
its referenced classes. An IO class may be upgraded based on a
lower weighted average rating factor or WARF due to an overall
improvement in the credit quality of its reference classes. An IO
class may be downgraded based on a higher WARF due to a decline in
the credit quality of its reference classes, paydowns of higher
quality reference classes or non-payment of interest. Classes that
have paid off through loan paydowns or amortization are not
included in the WARF calculation. Classes that have experienced
losses are grossed up for losses and included in the WARF
calculation, even if Moody's has withdrawn the rating.

Methodology Underlying The Rating Action

The methodologies used in this rating were "Moody's Approach to
Rating U.S. CMBS Conduit Transactions" published in September 2000
and "Moody's Approach to Rating CMBS Large Loan/Single Borrower
Transactions" published in July 2000.

Description of Models Used

Moody's review used the excel-based CMBS Conduit Model v 2.64,
which it uses for both conduit and fusion transactions. Conduit
model results at the Aa2 (sf) level are driven by property type,
Moody's actual and stressed DSCR, and Moody's property quality
grade (which reflects the capitalization rate Moody's uses to
estimate Moody's value). Conduit model results at the B2 (sf)
level are based on a paydown analysis using the individual loan-
level Moody's LTV ratio. Moody's may consider other concentrations
and correlations in its analysis. Based on the model pooled credit
enhancement levels of Aa2 (sf) and B2 (sf), the required credit
enhancement on the remaining conduit classes are either
interpolated between these two data points or determined based on
a multiple or ratio of either of these two data points. For fusion
deals, Moody's merges the credit enhancement for loans with
investment-grade credit assessments with the conduit model credit
enhancement for an overall model result. Moody's incorporates
negative pooling (adding credit enhancement at the credit
assessment level) for loans with similar credit assessments in the
same transaction.

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 16 compared to 19 at last review.

When the Herf falls below 20, Moody's uses the excel-based Large
Loan Model v 8.6 and then reconciles and weights the results from
the conduit and large loan models in formulating a rating
recommendation. The large loan model derives 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, property
type and sponsorship. Moody's also further adjusts these
aggregated proceeds for any pooling benefits associated with loan
level diversity and other concentrations and correlations.

Deal Performance

As of the January 21, 2014 payment date, the transaction's
aggregate certificate balance has decreased by 98% to $23.7
million from $1 billion at securitization. The certificates are
collateralized by 16 mortgage loans ranging in size from less than
1% to 52% of the pool. Eleven of the loans are cross-collaterized
and cross-defaulted and in total represent 52% of the pool.

Fourteen loans, constituting 80% 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-one loans have been liquidated from the pool, resulting in
an aggregate realized loss of $15.2 million. No loans are
currently in special servicing.

Moody's has assumed a high default probability for one poorly
performing loans, constituting 2% of the pool, and has estimated
an aggregate loss of $256,000 (50% expected loss).

Moody's received full year 2012 operating results for 100% of the
pool and full or partial year 2013 operating results for 93% of
the pool. Moody's weighted average conduit LTV is 46% compared to
55% at Moody's last review. Moody's net cash flow (NCF) reflects a
weighted average haircut of 18% to the most recently available net
operating income (NOI). Moody's value reflects a weighted average
capitalization rate of 10.4%.

Moody's actual and stressed conduit DSCRs are 1.09X and 2.66X,
respectively, compared to 1.02X and 2.64X 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 performing conduit loans represent 88% of the pool
balance. The largest exposure is the Reuben Portfolio ($12.5
million -- 52% of the pool), which is comprised of 11 cross-
collaterized and cross-defaulted loans that are secured by 12
retail, office and multifamily properties located in Columbus,
Ohio. The portfolio has amortized over 50% since securitization
and all the loans mature in March 2018. Moody's LTV and stressed
DSCR are 44% and 2.59X, respectively, compared to 53% and 2.02X at
prior review.

The second largest conduit loan is the K-Mart Kahului Loan ($4.5
million -- 19% of the pool), which is secured by a retail property
located in Maui, Hawaii. The property is fully leased to K-Mart
through February 2014, which coincides with the loan maturity
date. Moody's LTV and stressed DSCR are 66% and 1.64X,
respectively, compared to 74% and 1.45X at prior review.

The third largest conduit loan is the 3300 N. 27th Street Loan
($3.9 million -- 16% of the pool), which is secured by retail
property located in Lincoln, Nebraska. The property is fully
leased to Home Depot through October 2018. The loan is fully
amortizing and matures in March 2018. Moody's LTV and stressed
DSCR are 38% and 2.84, respectively, compared to 48% and 2.24X at
prior review.


NEWPORT WAVES: Moody's Cuts Ratings on 2 Note Classes to Caa1(sf)
-----------------------------------------------------------------
Moody's Investors Service announced the following rating action on
Newport Waves CDO:

Moody's Investors Service has downgraded the ratings on the
following notes issued by Newport Waves CDO:

Series 8 EUR10,000,000 Sub-Class A3-ELS Notes Due 2017 Notes,
Downgraded to B3 (sf); previously on November 19, 2013 B2 (sf)
Placed Under Review for Possible Downgrade

Series 2 $38,000,000 Sub-Class A4-$L Notes Due 2017 Notes,
Downgraded to Caa1 (sf); previously on November 19, 2013 B3 (sf)
Placed Under Review for Possible Downgrade

Series 2 $1,000,000 Sub-Class A4A-$L Notes Due 2017 Notes,
Downgraded to Caa1 (sf); previously on November 19, 2013 B3 (sf)
Placed Under Review for Possible Downgrade

Series 2 $10,000,000 Sub-Class A3A-$LMS Notes Due 2017 Notes,
Downgraded to B3 (sf); previously on November 19, 2013 B2 (sf)
Placed Under Review for Possible Downgrade

Series 2 $20,000,000 Sub-Class A1-$FMS Notes Due 2017 Notes,
Downgraded to Ba2 (sf); previously on November 19, 2013 Ba1 (sf)
Placed Under Review for Possible Downgrade

Moody's also upgraded the ratings on the following notes issued by
Newport Waves CDO:

EUR20,000,000 B2-ES Newport Waves CDO Linked CDS Notes, Upgraded
to Caa3 (sf); previously on March 11, 2009 Downgraded to Ca (sf)

Series 2 $25,000,000 Sub-Class B3-$F Notes Due 2017 Notes,
Upgraded to Caa3 (sf); previously on October 8, 2010 Downgraded to
Ca (sf)

Moody's also confirmed the ratings on the following notes Newport
Waves CDO:

Series 1 $15,000,000 Sub-Class A3-$LMS Notes Due 2014 Notes,
Confirmed at B2 (sf); previously on November 19, 2013 B2 (sf)
Placed Under Review for Possible Downgrade

Series 2 $32,500,000 Sub-Class A3-$LMS Notes Due 2017 Notes,
Confirmed at B2 (sf); previously on November 19, 2013 B2 (sf)
Placed Under Review for Possible Downgrade

Series 5 $60,000,000 Sub-Class A3-$LMS Notes Due 2014 Notes,
Confirmed at B2 (sf); previously on November 19, 2013 B2 (sf)
Placed Under Review for Possible Downgrade

Series 2 $2,000,000 Sub-Class A6-$L Notes Due 2017 Notes,
Confirmed at Caa2 (sf); previously on November 19, 2013 Caa2 (sf)
Placed Under Review for Possible Downgrade

Series 2 $2,000,000 Sub-Class A6A-$L Notes Due 2017 Notes,
Confirmed at Caa2 (sf); previously on November 19, 2013 Caa2 (sf)
Placed Under Review for Possible Downgrade

Series 5 $50,000,000 Sub-Class A1-$LMS Notes Due 2014 Notes,
Confirmed at Ba2 (sf); previously on November 19, 2013 Ba2 (sf)
Placed Under Review for Possible Downgrade

Series 10 $10,000,000 Sun-Class A5-$L Notes Due 2017 Notes,
Confirmed at Caa1 (sf); previously on November 19, 2013 Caa1 (sf)
Placed Under Review for Possible Downgrade

This transaction is a corporate synthetic collateralized debt
obligation (CSO) referencing a portfolio of corporate senior
unsecured and subordinated bonds, originally rated in 2007.

Ratings Rationale

The actions reflect key changes to Moody's modeling assumptions,
which incorporate 1) removing the 30% macro default probability
stress for corporate credits, 2) lowering the average recovery
rate assumptions for most types of debt, 3) modifying the modeling
framework for corporate asset correlations, 4) introducing an
adverse selection adjustment on default probabilities where
relevant, and 5) simplifying the cheapest-to-deliver haircut that
applies to recoveries.

This action concludes the review of affected CSOs, announced on 19
November 2013, when Moody's placed the CSOs' ratings on review
primarily because of the update to the CSO methodology.

The portfolio's ten-year weighted average rating factor (WARF) is
764, excluding settled credit events. Moody's rates the majority
of the reference credits investment-grade, with 2.8% rated Caa
(sf) or lower compared to 0.5% in June 2013. In addition, the
number of reference credits with a negative outlook is 19,
compared to 3 with a positive outlook; the number of reference
credits whose ratings are on review for downgrade 2 compared none
on review for upgrade.

The average gap between MIRs and Moody's senior unsecured ratings
is -1.5 notches for over-concentrated sectors and -0.6 notches for
non-over concentrated sectors. Currently, the over-concentrated
sectors are Banking, Finance, Insurance and Real Estate comprising
41% of the portfolio.

Based on the trustee's November 2013 report, four credit events on
three long and one short position, equivalent to a net 1.5% of the
portfolio based on the portfolio's notional value at closing, have
taken place. Since inception, the subordination of the rated
tranches has declined by 1.2% due to credit events on Bradford &
Bingley BS, Lehman Brothers Holdings Inc., Ambac Assurance Corp.,
and Eastman Kodak Co.

The current subordination of Series 2 Class B3-$F and EUR Swap 2
B2-ES is 1.9% and 2.4%, respectively; these tranches are likely to
reach their scheduled maturity without incurring losses.

The CSO has a remaining life of 0.4 years for tranches maturing on
June 20, 2014 and 3.4 years for tranches maturing on June 20,2017.

Factors that Would Lead to an Upgrade or Downgrade of the Rating

These transactions are subject to a high level of uncertainty,
primarily because of 1) unexpected volatility in the credit and
macroeconomic environment; 2) divergence in the legal
interpretation of documentation by different transactional parties
because of embedded ambiguities; and 3) unexpected changes in the
portfolio composition as a result of the actions of the
transaction parties.

For CSOs, the performance of the credit default swaps can be
affected either positively or negatively by 1) variations over
time in default rates for instruments with a given rating; 2)
variations in recovery rates for instruments with particular
seniority/security characteristics; and 3) uncertainty about the
default and recovery correlations characteristics of the reference
pool. Given the tranched nature of CSO liabilities, rating
transitions in the reference pool can have leveraged rating
implications for the ratings of the CSO liabilities that could
lead to a high degree of rating volatility, which is likely to be
higher for the more junior or thinner liabilities.

In addition to the base case analysis described above, Moody's
also conducted sensitivity analyses, discussed below. Results are
in the form of the difference in the number of notches from the
base case, in which a higher number of notches corresponds to
lower expected losses, and vice-versa.

- Moody's ran a scenario in which it reduced the maturity of the
CSO by six months, keeping all other things equal. The result of
this run was on average 0.3 notches higher than in the base case
for tranches maturing on June 20, 2017.

Moody's conducted a sensitivity analysis in which the adverse
selection adjustment is removed and the default probabilities of
reference credits is adjusted by the equivalent of the average gap
between our ratings and the corresponding MIRs. The result of this
run was on average 3.5 notches higher than in the base case for
tranches maturing on both June 20, 2014 and June 20, 2017.

Moody's conducted a stress analysis in which it defaulted all
entities rated Caa (sf) or lower. The result was on average 2.1
notches lower for tranches maturing on June 20, 2014, and 0.6
notches lower for tranches maturing on June 20, 2017 than in the
base case.

In addition to the quantitative factors Moody's models explicitly,
rating committees also consider qualitative factors in the rating
process. These qualitative factors include a transaction's
structural protections, recent deal performance in the current
market environment, the legal environment, specific documentation
features and the portfolio manager's track record. All information
available to rating committees, including macroeconomic forecasts,
input from other Moody's analytical groups, market factors, and
judgments regarding the nature and severity of credit stress on
the transactions, can influence the final rating decision.


OFSI FUND III: S&P Raises Ratings on 2 Note Classes to 'B+'
-----------------------------------------------------------
Standard & Poor's Ratings Services raised its ratings on the class
B, C, E-1, and E-2 notes from OFSI Fund III Ltd., a collateralized
loan obligation (CLO) transaction managed by Orchard First Source
Asset Management LLC.  At the same time, S&P affirmed its ratings
on the class A-1, A-2, and D notes from the same transaction.  S&P
also removed the ratings on the class B, C, D, E-1, and E-2 notes
from CreditWatch, where S&P placed them with positive implications
on Nov. 14, 2013.

OFSI Fund III Ltd. has ended its reinvestment period, and all
principal proceeds have been used to pay down the senior notes.
Since S&P's last upgrade on Jan. 23, 2013, the class A-1 and A-2
notes have paid down a total of $162.27 million, and are currently
at about 38.74% of their original notional balance.

As a result of the paydowns, the overcollateralization (O/C)
available to support the notes has increased.  As of the Dec. 6,
2013, trustee report, each class' overcollateralization (O/C)
ratio has improved since the ratios noted in the Dec. 6, 2012,
report, which S&P used for its January 2013 rating actions:

   -- The class B O/C ratio is 163.62%, up from 130.71%;

   -- The class C O/C ratio is 136.14%, up from 119.26%;

   -- The class D O/C ratio is 120.23%, up from 111.56%; and

   -- The class E-2 O/C ratio is 110.93%, up from 106.62%.

As of the Dec. 6, 2013, trustee report, the transaction held
$6.13 million in defaulted assets, marginally lower than that held
on Dec. 6, 2012.  In addition, the 'CCC' rated assets were about
$52.00 million, down from the $65.50 million noted in December
2012.

S&P notes that the transaction has exposure to one large obligor,
which accounts for about 7.97% of the performing pool.

S&P's ratings on the class D and E notes were driven by the top
obligor test, a supplemental test in S&P's criteria.  As a result,
S&P affirmed its rating on the class D notes and removed it from
CreditWatch with positive implications.

The affirmations on the class A-1 and A-2 notes reflect sufficient
credit support at the current rating level.

S&P will continue to review whether, in its view, the ratings
assigned to the notes remain consistent with the credit
enhancement available to support them, and S&P will take rating
actions as it deems necessary.

RATING AND CREDITWATCH ACTIONS

OFSI Fund III Ltd.
                   Rating
Class         To           From
B             AAA (sf)     AA+ (sf)/Watch Pos
C             AA+ (sf)     A+ (sf)/Watch Pos
D             BBB+ (sf)    BBB+ (sf)/Watch Pos
E-1           B+ (sf)      CCC+ (sf)/Watch Pos
E-2           B+ (sf)      CCC+ (sf)/Watch Pos

RATINGS AFFIRMED

OFSI Fund III Ltd.
Class         Rating

A-1           AAA (sf)
A-2           AAA (sf)

TRANSACTION INFORMATION

Issuer:             OFSI Fund III Ltd.
Co-issuer:          OFSI Fund III Corp.
Collateral manager: Orchard First Source Asset Management LLC
Trustee:            U.S. Bank N.A.
Transaction type:   Cash flow CLO


OPTEUM MORTGAGE 2006-1: Moody's Cuts Cl.II-A1 Notes Rating to Caa1
------------------------------------------------------------------
Moody's Investors Service has downgraded the rating of the Class
II-A1 issued by Opteum Mortgage Acceptance Corporation Asset
Backed Pass-Through Certificates 2006-1. The tranche is backed by
Alt-A RMBS loans issued in 2006.

Complete rating actions are as follows:

Issuer: Opteum Mortgage Acceptance Corporation Asset Backed Pass-
Through Certificates 2006-1

Cl. II-A1, Downgraded to Caa1 (sf); previously on Jun 20, 2013
Downgraded to B1 (sf)

Ratings Rationale

The rating downgraded comes as a result of the weaker than
expected performance of the pools' collateral.

The principal methodology used in this rating was "US RMBS
Surveillance Methodology" published in November 2013.

Factors that would lead to an upgrade or downgrade of the rating

Ratings in the US RMBS sector remain exposed to the high level of
macroeconomic uncertainty, and in particular the unemployment
rate. The unemployment rate fell to 6.7% in December 2013 from
7.9% in December 2012 . Moody's forecasts an unemployment central
range of 6.5% to 7.5% for the 2014 year. Deviations from this
central scenario could lead to rating actions in the sector.

House prices are another key driver of US RMBS performance.
Moody's expects house prices to continue to rise in 2014. Lower
increases than Moody's expects or decreases could lead to negative
rating actions.

Finally, performance of RMBS continues to remain highly dependent
on servicer procedures. Any change resulting from servicing
transfers or other policy or regulatory change can impact the
performance of these transactions.


OPTEUM MORTGAGE: Moody's Cuts Rating on Class II-A1 Notes to Caa1
-----------------------------------------------------------------
Moody's Investors Service has downgraded the rating of the Class
II-A1 issued by Opteum Mortgage Acceptance Corporation Asset
Backed Pass-Through Certificates 2006-1.  The tranche is backed by
Alt-A RMBS loans issued in 2006.

Complete rating actions are as follows:

Issuer: Opteum Mortgage Acceptance Corporation Asset Backed Pass-
Through Certificates 2006-1
Cl. II-A1, Downgraded to Caa1 (sf); previously on Jun 20, 2013
Downgraded to B1 (sf)

                        RATINGS RATIONALE

The rating downgraded comes as a result of the weaker than
expected performance of the pools' collateral.

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

Ratings in the US RMBS sector remain exposed to the high level of
macroeconomic uncertainty, and in particular the unemployment
rate.  The unemployment rate fell to 6.7% in December 2013 from
7.9% in December 2012.  Moody's forecasts an unemployment central
range of 6.5% to 7.5% for the 2014 year.  Deviations from this
central scenario could lead to rating actions in the sector.

House prices are another key driver of US RMBS performance.
Moody's expects house prices to continue to rise in 2014.  Lower
increases than Moody's expects or decreases could lead to negative
rating actions.

Finally, performance of RMBS continues to remain highly dependent
on servicer procedures.  Any change resulting from servicing
transfers or other policy or regulatory change can impact the
performance of these transactions.


PRUDENTIAL SECURITIES 2000-C1: Moody's Affirms C Rating on M Notes
------------------------------------------------------------------
Moody's Investors Service affirmed the rating of two classes of
Prudential Securities Secured Financing Corporation, Series Key
2000-C1 as follows:

Cl. M, Affirmed C (sf); previously on Feb 28, 2013 Affirmed C (sf)

Cl. X, Affirmed Caa3 (sf); previously on Feb 28, 2013 Downgraded
to Caa3 (sf)

Ratings Rationale

The rating of the remaining P&I class is affirmed because it is
consistent with the realized and expected losses from specially
serviced and troubled loans. The rating of the IO, Class X, was
affirmed based on the weighted average rating factor or WARF of
its referenced classes.

Factors That Would Lead to an Upgrade or Downgrade of the Rating

Due the credit quality of the remaining referenced tranches and
the IO methodology, Class X cannot be upgraded. The IO class may
be further downgraded due to non-payment of interest. Classes that
have paid off through loan paydowns or amortization are not
included in the WARF calculation. Classes that have experienced
losses are grossed up for losses and included in the WARF
calculation, even if Moody's has withdrawn the rating.

Methodology Underlying The Rating Action

The methodologies used in this rating were "Moody's Approach to
Rating U.S. CMBS Conduit Transactions" published in September 2000
and "Moody's Approach to Rating CMBS Large Loan/Single Borrower
Transactions" published in July 2000.

Description of Models Used

Moody's review utilized the excel-based CMBS Conduit Model v2.64
which is used for both conduit and fusion transactions. Conduit
model results at the Aa2 (sf) level are driven by property type,
Moody's actual and stressed DSCR and Moody's property quality
grade (which reflects the capitalization rate used by Moody's to
estimate Moody's value). Conduit model results at the B2 (sf)
level are driven by a paydown analysis based on the individual
loan level Moody's LTV ratio. Other concentrations and
correlations may be considered in our analysis. Based on the model
pooled credit enhancement levels at Aa2 (sf) and B2 (sf), the
remaining conduit classes are either interpolated between these
two data points or determined based on a multiple or ratio of
either of these two data points. For fusion deals, the credit
enhancement for loans with investment-grade credit assessments is
melded with the conduit model credit enhancement into an overall
model result. Negative pooling, or adding credit enhancement at
the credit assessment level, is incorporated for loans with
similar credit assessments in the same transaction.

Moody's uses a variation of Herf to measure diversity of loan
size, where a higher number represents greater diversity. Loan
concentration has an important bearing on potential rating
volatility, including risk of multiple notch downgrades under
adverse circumstances. The credit neutral Herf score is 40. The
pool has a Herf of 4 compared to 5 at the prior review.

In cases where the Herf falls below 20, Moody's uses the excel-
based Large Loan Model v8.6 and then reconciles and weights the
results from the Conduit and Large Loan models in formulating a
rating recommendation. The large loan model derives 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, property type and sponsorship. These aggregated
proceeds are then further adjusted for any pooling benefits
associated with loan level diversity, other concentrations and
correlations.

Deal Performance

As of the January 17, 2014 distribution date, the transaction's
aggregate certificate balance has decreased by 99% to $8.55
million from $816.3 million at securitization. The Certificates
are collateralized by six mortgage loans ranging in size from 1%
to 25% of the pool.

There is one loan, representing approximately 22% of the pool, 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 our ongoing monitoring of a transaction, Moody's reviews
the watchlist to assess which loans have material issues that
could impact performance.

Twenty-four loans have been liquidated from the pool, resulting in
an aggregate realized loss of $28.3 million (27% loss severity on
average). No loans are currently in special servicing.

Moody's has assumed a high default probability for one poorly
performing loan, the Eagles Run Apartments, Phase II Loan,
representing approximately 22% of the pool. Moody's has estimated
an approximately $694,000 loss (38% expected loss on a 75%
probability of default) from this troubled loan.

Moody's was provided with full year 2012 and partial year 2013
operating results for 100% and 91% of the pool, respectively.
Moody's weighted average conduit LTV is 56% compared to 58% at
Moody's prior review. Moody's conduit component excludes loans
with credit assessments, defeased and CTL loans and specially
serviced and troubled loans. Two out of the top three loans in the
pool have exposure to single tenants, for which Moody's applied a
lit/dark analysis. Moody's net cash flow (NCF) reflects a weighted
average haircut of approximately 23% to the most recently
available net operating income (NOI). Moody's value reflects a
weighted average capitalization rate of 9.9%.

Moody's actual and stressed conduit DSCRs are 1.15X and 2.46X,
respectively, compared to 1.21X and 2.36X 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 77% of the pool. The largest
conduit loan is the Random House Distribution Warehouse Loan ($3.0
million -- 35.2% of the pool), which is secured by a 300,000 SF
distribution center located in Jackson, Tennessee. The property is
fully leased to Perseus Distribution through October 2014. The
loan passed its anticipated repayment date (ARD) of December 2009
and has amortized 32% since securitization. Due to the single
tenant nature of the property, Moody's value reflects a lit/dark
analysis. Moody's LTV and stressed DSCR are 68% and 1.59X,
respectively, compared to 72% and 1.51X at last review.

The second largest performing loan is the Eagles Run Apartments,
Phase II Loan ($1.85 million -- 21.6% of the pool), which is
secured by a 78-unit, garden-style multifamily property in
Atlanta, Georgia. Built in 1972, the property was approximately
57% leased as of October 2013 compared to 53% at last review.
Property performance has declined year over year due to lower
occupancy, higher operating expenses and poor market conditions.
This loan is on the master servicer's watchlist due to low DSCR,
which was below 0.30X as of year-end 2012. Moody's views this as a
troubled loan. Moody's LTV and stressed DSCR are 169% and 0.61X,
respectively, compared to 174% and 0.59X at last review.

The third largest performing loan is the Kmart Store Loan ($1.72
million -- 20.1% of the pool), which is secured by an 87,000 SF
retail property located in Menomonie, Wisconsin. The property is
fully leased to Kmart through December 2014 which is one month
prior to the loan maturity date of January 2015. The loan has
amortized approximately 37% since securitization. Due to the
single tenant nature of the property, Mood's value reflects a
lit/dark analysis. Moody's LTV and stressed DSCR are 69% and
1.52X, respectively, compared to 74% and 1.43X, respectively at
last review.


PUTNAM STRUCTURED 2001-1: Moody's Affirms C Rating on C-1 Notes
---------------------------------------------------------------
Moody's Investors Service has upgraded the rating on the following
note issued by Putnam Structured Product Funding 2001-1 Ltd.
("Putnam 2001-1"):

   -- U.S. $24,000,000 Class B Floating Rate Notes Due 2037,
      Upgraded to Baa2 (sf); previously on Feb 21, 2013 Upgraded
      to Ba2 (sf)

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

   -- U.S. $105,000,000 Class A1-SS Floating Rate Notes Due 2032,
      Affirmed Aaa (sf); previously on Feb 21, 2013 Upgraded to
      Aaa (sf)

   -- U.S. $56,000,000 Class A1-MM-a Floating Rate Notes Due 2032,
      Affirmed Aaa (sf); previously on Feb 21, 2013 Upgraded to
      Aaa (sf)

   -- U.S. $50,000,000 Class A1-MM-b Floating Rate Notes Due 2032,
      Affirmed Aaa (sf); previously on Feb 21, 2013 Upgraded to
      Aaa (sf)

   -- U.S. $9,000,000 Class C-1 Floating Rate Notes due 2037,
      Affirmed C (sf); previously on Feb 21, 2013 Affirmed C (sf)

   -- U.S. $9,000,000 Class C-2 Fixed Rate Notes Due 2037,
      Affirmed C (sf); previously on Feb 21, 2013 Affirmed C (sf)

                         RATINGS RATIONALE

Moody's has upgraded the ratings of one class and affirmed the
ratings of five classes of notes issued by Putnam 2001-1.  The
upgrades are due to greater than expected amortization resulting
in approximately $24.8 million of paydown to three senior pari-
passu bond classes since last review.  The affirmations are due to
the key transaction parameters performing within levels
commensurate with the existing ratings levels.  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.

Putnam 2001-1 is a cash transaction whose reinvestment period
ended in November 2006.  The transaction is backed by a portfolio
of: i) asset backed securities (ABS) (23.5% of the pool balance)
which are primarily in the form of home equity and Alt-A
securities; ii) commercial mortgage backed securities (CMBS)
(11.5%); iii) CRE CDO bonds (13.0%); iv) corporate bonds (16.9%);
and v) real estate investment trust (REIT) debt (35.1%).  As of
the trustee's Dec. 31, 2013 report, the aggregate note balance of
the transaction, including preferred shares, is $89.7 million,
compared to $300 million at issuance.

The pool contains one asset totaling $232.5 thousand (0.3% of the
collateral pool balance) that is listed as a defaulted security as
of the trustee's Dec. 31, 2013 report.  The defaulted security is
a CRE CDO.  While there have been limited implied losses on the
underlying collateral to date, Moody's does expect moderate losses
to occur on the defaulted security.

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 collateral it does not
rate.  The rating agency modeled a bottom-dollar WARF of 1788,
compared to 2161 at last review.  The current ratings on the
Moody's-rated collateral and the assessments of the non-Moody's
rated collateral are as follows: Aaa-Aa3 (13.1% compared to 15.3%
at last review); A1-A3 (6.3% compared to 8.8% at last review);
Baa1-Baa3 (55.3% compared to 48.3% at last review); Ba1-Ba3 (3.7%
compared to 2.6% at last review); B1-B3 (5% compared to 3.5% at
last review); and Caa1-Ca/C 16.6%, compared to 20.9% at last
review.

Moody's modeled a WAL of 3.6 years, compared to 2.4 at last
review.  The WAL is based on assumptions about extensions on the
underlying collateral.

Moody's modeled a fixed WARR of 37.8%, compared to 35.4% at last
review.

Moody's modeled a MAC of 3.2%, compared to 1.7% at last review.

             Methodologies Underlying the Rating Action

Factors that would lead to an upgrade or downgrade of the rating:
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 recovery rates of the underlying
collateral and credit assessments.  Reducing the recovery rates of
the collateral pool by 10% from 37.8% would result in an average
modeled rating movement on the rated notes of zero to one notch
down (e.g., one notch down implies a ratings movement from Baa3 to
Ba1). Increasing the recovery rate of the collateral pool by 10%
would result in an average modeled rating movement on the rated
notes of zero to one notch up (e.g., two notches up implies a
ratings movement from Ba2 to Baa3).

The primary sources of uncertainty in Moody's assumptions are the
extent of growth in the current macroeconomic environment given
the weak recovery and commercial real estate property markets.
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.
However, sustained growth will not be possible until investment
increases steadily for a significant period, non-performing
properties are cleared from the pipeline and fears of a euro area
recession abate.


SALOMON BROTHERS 1999-C1: Moody's Cuts Cl. X Notes Rating to Caa3
-----------------------------------------------------------------
Moody's Investors Service downgraded the rating of one class of
Salomon Brothers Mortgage Securities VII, Inc., Commercial
Mortgage Pass-Through, Series 1999-C1:

Cl. X, Downgraded to Caa3 (sf); previously on Feb 15, 2013
Affirmed Caa1 (sf)

Ratings Rationale

The rating of the IO, Class X, was downgraded due to the decline
in weighted average rating factor or WARF of its reference classes
resulting from principal paydown of higher quality referenced
classes.

Factors That Would Lead to an Upgrade or Downgrade of the Rating

Due the credit quality of the remaining referenced tranches and
the IO methodology, Class X cannot be upgraded. The IO class may
be further downgraded due to non-payment of interest. Classes that
have paid off through loan paydowns or amortization are not
included in the WARF calculation. Classes that have experienced
losses are grossed up for losses and included in the WARF
calculation, even if Moody's has withdrawn the rating.

Methodology Underlying The Rating Action

The principal methodology used in this rating was "Moody's
Approach to Rating CMBS Large Loan/Single Borrower Transactions"
published in July 2000.

Description of Models Used

Moody's uses a variation of Herf to measure diversity of loan
size, where a higher number represents greater diversity. Loan
concentration has an important bearing on potential rating
volatility, including risk of multiple notch downgrades under
adverse circumstances. The credit neutral Herf score is 40. The
pool has a Herf of 3 compared to 14 at the prior review.

In cases where the Herf falls below 20, Moody's uses the excel-
based Large Loan Model v8.6 and then reconciles and weights the
results from the Conduit and Large Loan models in formulating a
rating recommendation. The large loan model derives 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, property type and sponsorship. These aggregated
proceeds are then further adjusted for any pooling benefits
associated with loan level diversity, other concentrations and
correlations.

Deal Performance

As of the January 21, 2014 distribution date, the transaction's
aggregate certificate balance has decreased by 99% to $8.77
million from $734.8 million at securitization. The Certificates
are collateralized by five mortgage loans ranging in size from
less than 1% to 14% of the pool, excluding defeasance. The pool
contains two loans, representing approximately 69% of the pool,
that have defeased and are collateralized with US Government
bonds.

Fourteen loans have been liquidated from the pool, resulting in an
aggregate realized loss of $19.7 million (54% loss severity on
average). Currently, there are two loans in special servicing,
representing approximately 23% of the pool. Moody's has estimated
an aggregate $1.03 million loss for the specially serviced loans
(51.8% expected loss).

Moody's was provided with full year 2012 and partial year 2013
operating results for the sole conduit loan. The Breighton
Apartments Loan ($747,292 -- 8.5% of the pool) is secured by a 96-
unit multi-family property in Oklahoma City, Oklahoma. As of
September 2013, the property was 95% leased. Financial performance
remains stable and the loan has amortized 24% since
securitization. The loan is scheduled to fully amortize by June
2028. Moody's LTV and stressed DSCR are 46% and 2.23X,
respectively, compared to 53% and 1.95X at last review.


SARATOGA CLO I: Moody's Affirms Ba2 Rating on $6.75MM Notes
-----------------------------------------------------------
Moody's Investors Service has upgraded the ratings on the
following notes issued Saratoga CLO I, Limited:

$49,000,000 Class A-2 Floating Rate Notes Due 2019, Upgraded to
Aaa (sf); previously on September 23, 2011 Upgraded to Aa1 (sf)

$24,000,000 Class B Floating Rate Deferrable Notes Due 2019,
Upgraded to A2 (sf); previously on September 23, 2011 Upgraded to
Baa1 (sf)

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

$179,000,000 Class A-1 Floating Rate Notes Due 2019 (current
outstanding balance of $118,554,510.71), Affirmed Aaa (sf);
previously on June 30, 2006 Assigned Aaa (sf)

$11,250,000 Class C Floating Rate Deferrable Notes Due 2019,
Affirmed Ba1 (sf); previously on September 23, 2011 Upgraded to
Ba1 (sf)

$6,750,000 Class D Floating Rate Deferrable Notes Due 2019
(current outstanding balance of $5,282,811.11), Affirmed Ba2 (sf);
previously on September 23, 2011 Upgraded to Ba2 (sf)

Saratoga CLO I, Limited, issued in September 2002 and refinanced
in 2006, is a collateralized loan obligation (CLO) backed
primarily by a portfolio of senior secured loans. The portfolio is
managed by Invesco, Inc. The transaction's reinvestment period
ended in December 2011.

Ratings Rationale

These rating actions are primarily a result of deleveraging of the
senior notes and an increase in the transaction's over-
collateralization ratios since January 2013. The Class A-1 notes
have been paid down by approximately 15% or $26.4 million since
January 2013. Based on the trustee's 8 January 2014 report, the
over-collateralization (OC) ratios for the Class A and Class B
notes are 131.6%, and 115.1%, up from 128.7%, and 114.6% one year
ago. The Class C and Class D OC ratios are reported at 108.7% and
106.0% in January 2014, down from 108.9% and 106.5% in January
2013.

Methodology Used for the Rating Action

The principal methodology used in this rating was "Moody's Global
Approach to Rating Collateralized Loan Obligations" published in
November 2013.

Factors that Would Lead to an Upgrade or Downgrade of the Rating

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.

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. 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% (2184)

Class A-1: 0

Class A-2: 0

Class B: +2

Class C: +2

Class D: +1

Moody's Adjusted WARF + 20% (3276)

Class A-1: 0

Class A-2: 0

Class B: -2

Class C: -1

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 Section 2.3 of
the "Moody's Global Approach to Rating Collateralized Loan
Obligations," published in November 2013.

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 $220.7 million, defaulted
par of $2.7 million, a weighted average default probability of
17.71% (implying a WARF of 2730), a weighted average recovery rate
upon default of 51.99%, a diversity score of 49 and a weighted
average spread of 3.33%.

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.


SCHOONER TRUST 2007-8: Moody's Affirms Ba1 Rating on Class F Notes
------------------------------------------------------------------
Moody's Investors Service has affirmed the ratings on 15 classes
of Schooner Trust, Commercial Mortgage Pass-Through Certificates,
Series 2007-8 as follows:

   -- Cl. A-1, Affirmed Aaa (sf); previously on Feb 4, 2013
       Affirmed Aaa (sf)

   -- Cl. A-2, Affirmed Aaa (sf); previously on Feb 4, 2013
       Affirmed Aaa (sf)

   -- Cl. A-J, Affirmed Aaa (sf); previously on Feb 4, 2013
       Affirmed Aaa (sf)

   -- Cl. B, Affirmed Aa2 (sf); previously on Feb 4, 2013 Affirmed
       Aa2 (sf)

   -- Cl. C, Affirmed A2 (sf); previously on Feb 4, 2013 Affirmed
       A2 (sf)

   -- Cl. D, Affirmed Baa2 (sf); previously on Feb 4, 2013
       Affirmed Baa2 (sf)

   -- Cl. E, Affirmed Baa3 (sf); previously on Feb 4, 2013
       Affirmed Baa3 (sf)

   -- Cl. F, Affirmed Ba1 (sf); previously on Feb 4, 2013 Affirmed
       Ba1 (sf)

   -- Cl. G, Affirmed Ba2 (sf); previously on Feb 4, 2013 Affirmed
       Ba2 (sf)

   -- Cl. H, Affirmed Ba3 (sf); previously on Feb 4, 2013 Affirmed
       Ba3 (sf)

   -- Cl. J, Affirmed B1 (sf); previously on Feb 4, 2013 Affirmed
       B1 (sf)

   -- Cl. K, Affirmed B3 (sf); previously on Feb 4, 2013 Affirmed
       B3 (sf)

   -- Cl. L, Affirmed Caa1 (sf); previously on Feb 4, 2013
       Affirmed Caa1 (sf)

   -- Cl. XC, Affirmed Ba3 (sf); previously on Feb 4, 2013
       Affirmed Ba3 (sf)

   -- Cl. XP, Affirmed Aaa (sf); previously on Feb 4, 2013
       Affirmed Aaa (sf)

                        RATINGS RATIONALE

The ratings on the 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 IO classes were affirmed based on the credit
performance (or the weighted average rating factor or WARF) of the
referenced classes.

Moody's rating action reflects a base expected loss of 1.4% of the
current balance, compared to 1.9% at Moody's last review.  Moody's
base expected loss plus realized losses is now 1.1% of the
original pooled balance, compared to 1.5% at the last review.

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

                     DESCRIPTION OF MODELS USED

Moody's review used the excel-based CMBS Conduit Model v 2.64,
which it uses for both conduit and fusion transactions.  Conduit
model results at the Aa2 (sf) level are driven by property type,
Moody's actual and stressed DSCR, and Moody's property quality
grade (which reflects the capitalization rate Moody's uses to
estimate Moody's value).  Conduit model results at the B2 (sf)
level are based on a paydown analysis using the individual loan-
level Moody's LTV ratio.  Moody's may consider other
concentrations and correlations in its analysis.  Based on the
model pooled credit enhancement levels of Aa2 (sf) and B2 (sf),
the required credit enhancement on the remaining conduit classes
are either interpolated between these two data points or
determined based on a multiple or ratio of either of these two
data points.  For fusion deals, Moody's merges the credit
enhancement for loans with investment-grade credit assessments
with the conduit model credit enhancement for an overall model
result.  Moody's incorporates negative pooling (adding credit
enhancement at the credit assessment level) for loans with similar
credit assessments in the same transaction.

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 54, the same as at Moody's last review.

                          DEAL PERFORMANCE

As of the Jan. 13, 2014 distribution date, the transaction's
aggregate certificate balance has decreased by 21% to
$411.3 million from $518.1 million at securitization.  The
certificates are collateralized by 54 mortgage loans ranging in
size from less than 1% to 12% of the pool, with the top ten loans
constituting 58% of the pool.  Two loans, constituting 11% of the
pool, have investment-grade credit assessments.

Two loans, constituting 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.

The pool has experienced no losses since securitization and there
are currently no loans in special servicing.  Moody's has assumed
a high default probability for one poorly performing loan,
constituting 1% of the pool.

Moody's received full year 2011 operating results for 86% of the
pool, and full year 2012 operating results for 97% of the pool.
Moody's weighted average conduit LTV is 87% compared to 90% at
Moody's last 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 13% 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 1.40X and 1.18X,
respectively, compared to 1.41X and 1.14X 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 largest loan with a credit assessment is The Atrium on Bay
Pooled Interest A-Note ($38.7 million -- 9.4%), which is secured
by a 1.05 million square foot (SF) office/retail complex located
in the central business district of Toronto, Ontario.  The loan
represents a 33% pari passu interest in a $116 million first
mortgage. A $74 million B note held outside the trust also
encumbers the property.  The property was 97% leased as of August
2013.  The largest tenant is the Canadian Imperial Bank of
Commerce (CIBC) which leases 36% of the net rentable area (NRA).
The property was sold in June 2011 by Hines Real Estate
Investments to H&R REIT Properties.  Property performance has
remained stable since last review.  Moody's current credit
assessment and stressed DSCR are A3 and 1.80X, the same as last
review.

The second loan with a credit estimate is the 107 Woodlawn Road
West Loan ($7.8 million -- 1.9%), which is secured by a 618,400 SF
industrial property located in Guelph, Ontario.  The property is
100% leased to Synnex Canada, a distributor technology products to
resellers, through February 2019.  The loan is amortizing on a 15
year schedule and has paid down by 35% since securitization.
Moody's current credit assessment and stressed DSCR are Aa3 and
2.10X, respectively, compared to A2 and 2.04X at last review.
The top three conduit loans represent 24% of the pool balance.
The largest loan is the Londonderry Mall Loan ($47.2 million --
11.5% of the pool), which is secured by a 777,000 SF regional
shopping center located in Edmonton, Alberta.  The loan represents
a 67% pari passu interest in a $70.8 million first mortgage. As of
May 2013, the property was 97% leased compared to 99% in December
2011.  Moody's LTV and stressed DSCR are 92% and 0.99X, compared
to 94% and 0.98X at last review.

The second largest loan is the Mega Centre Cote-Vertu Loan
($25.5 million -- 6.2% of the pool), which is secured by a 277,000
SF anchored retail center located in Montreal, Quebec.  Walmart
signed a lease effective January 2014 and now occupies 33% of the
NRA through January of 2029.  As of January 2014, the property is
100% leased compared to 67% at last review.  Moody's LTV and
stressed DSCR are 104% and 0.88X, respectively, compared to 113%
and 0.82X at last review.

The third largest loan is the Atrium II Loan ($25.1 million --
6.1% of the pool), which is secured by a 110,000 SF office
building located in Calgary, Alberta.  The property is owned by
Dundee REIT.  The property was 86% leased as of March 2013,
compared to 100% at last review.  Moody's LTV and stressed DSCR
are 115% and 0.84X, respectively, compared to 117% and 0.83X at
last review.


SEAWALL 2007-2: Moody's Affirms 'Ba2' Rating on Cl. C Notes
-----------------------------------------------------------
Moody's Investors Service has affirmed the ratings on the
following notes issued by Seawall 2007-2, Ltd. "Seawall 2007-2":

Cl. A, Affirmed Baa1 (sf); previously on Mar 14, 2013 Downgraded
to Baa1 (sf)

Cl. B, Affirmed Ba1 (sf); previously on Mar 14, 2013 Downgraded to
Ba1 (sf)

Cl. C, Affirmed Ba2 (sf); previously on Mar 14, 2013 Downgraded to
Ba2 (sf)

Cl. X, Affirmed Aa3 (sf); previously on Mar 14, 2013 Downgraded to
Aa3 (sf)

Super Senior Notes, Affirmed Aa1 (sf); previously on Mar 14, 2013
Downgraded to Aa1 (sf)

Ratings Rationale

Moody's has affirmed the ratings on the transaction because its
key transaction metrics are commensurate with existing ratings.
The affirmations are the result of Moody's on-going surveillance
of commercial real estate collateralized debt obligation (CRE CDO
Synthetic) transactions.

Seawall 2007-2 is a static synthetic CRE CDO transaction. The
transaction is backed by a portfolio of commercial mortgage backed
securities reference obligations (CMBS) (100% of the pool
balance). As of the trustee's December 26, 2013 report, the
aggregate note balance of the transaction is $986.5 million,
compared to $1.0 billion at issuance. Additionally, Class X is
interest-only with a notional balance that references all classes
of notes.

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 collateral it does not
rate. The rating agency modeled a bottom-dollar WARF of 14, the
same as last review. The current ratings on the Moody's-rated
collateral and the assessments of the non-Moody's rated collateral
are as follows: Aaa-Aa3: 96%, same as last review; A1-A3 2%, same
as last review; and Baa1-Baa3: 2%, same as last review.

Moody's modeled a WAL of 2.7 years, compared to 3.5 at last
review.

Moody's modeled a fixed WARR of 73.1%, same as last review.

Moody's modeled a MAC of 50.2%, compared to 50.9% at last review.

Methodology Underlying the Rating Action:

The principal methodology used in this rating was "Moody's
Approach to Rating SF CDOs" published in May 2012.

Other factors used in this rating are described in "Moody's
Approach to Rating Structured Finance Interest-Only Securities"
published in February 2012.

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

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
ratings of the underlying collateral and credit assessments.
Notching down 100% of the collateral pool by one notch would
result in an average modeled rating movement on the rated notes of
one to two notches (e.g., one notch down implies a ratings
movement of Baa3 to Ba1). Notching up approximately 22% of the
collateral pool by one notch would result in an average modeled
rating movement on the rated notes of zero to two notches (e.g.,
two notches down implies a ratings movement of Baa3 to Ba2).

The primary sources of uncertainty in Moody's assumptions are the
extent of growth in the current macroeconomic environment given
the weak recovery and commercial real estate property markets.
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.
However, sustained growth will not be possible until investment
increases steadily for a significant period, non-performing
properties are cleared from the pipeline and fears of a euro area
recession abate.


STRUCTURED ASSET 2003-S3: Moody's Ups Cl. M4 Secs. Rating to Caa3
-----------------------------------------------------------------
Moody's Investors Service has upgraded the ratings of the class M3
and class M4 from Structured Asset Securities Corp Trust 2004-S3,
backed primarily by second lien mortgages.

Complete rating action is as follows:

Issuer: Structured Asset Securities Corp Trust 2004-S3

Cl. M3, Upgraded to B3 (sf); previously on Jul 6, 2010 Downgraded
to Caa2 (sf)

Cl. M4, Upgraded to Caa3 (sf); previously on Jul 6, 2010
Downgraded to C (sf)

Ratings Rationale

The rating actions are a result of the recent performance of
second lien loans backed pools and reflect Moody's updated loss
expectations on this pool. The ratings upgraded are primarily due
to the build-up in credit enhancement due to non-amortizing
subordinate tranches and overcollateralization, and excess spread.
Performance has remained generally stable from our last review.

Factors that would lead to an upgrade or downgrade of the rating

Ratings in the US RMBS sector remain exposed to the high level of
macroeconomic uncertainty, and in particular the unemployment
rate. The unemployment rate fell to 6.7% in December 2013 from
7.9% in December 2012 . Moody's forecasts an unemployment central
range of 6.5% to 7.5% for the 2014 year. Deviations from this
central scenario could lead to rating actions in the sector.

House prices are another key driver of US RMBS performance.
Moody's expects house prices to continue to rise in 2014. Lower
increases than Moody's expects or decreases could lead to negative
rating actions.

Finally, performance of RMBS continues to remain highly dependent
on servicer procedures. Any change resulting from servicing
transfers or other policy or regulatory change can impact the
performance of this transaction.


TABERNA PREFERRED: Moody's Hikes Rating on $188.5MM Notes to Caa2
-----------------------------------------------------------------
Moody's Investors Service announced that it has upgraded the
ratings on the following notes issued by Taberna Preferred Funding
III, Ltd.:

U.S. $188,500,000 Class A-1a Notes (current balance
$343,499,028.94), Upgraded to Caa1 (sf); previously on April 28,
2010 Downgraded to Caa2 (sf);

U.S. $10,000,000 Class A-1c Notes (current balance $8,619,799.97),
Upgraded to Caa1 (sf); previously on April 28, 2010 Downgraded to
Caa2 (sf).

Taberna Preferred Funding III, Ltd, issued in September 2005, is a
collateralized debt obligation backed primarily by a portfolio of
REIT trust preferred securities (TruPS).

Ratings Rationale

According to Moody's, the rating actions taken on the notes are
primarily a result of the termination of the hedge agreement which
resulted in the resumption of interest payments on the Class A-1a
and Class A-1c notes in May 2013 and the improvement in the
overcollateralization ratios of the senior notes.

The full pay-down of termination payments related to the out-of-
the-money interest rate swap in the transaction in February 2013
has freed up interest proceeds to pay interest on the Class A-1
Notes that was otherwise previously being used to pay the hedge
counterparty. As a result of the declaration of acceleration of
the notes following the Event of Default (EOD) in the transaction,
all proceeds after paying Class A-1, and Class A-2 interest
sequentially are currently being used to pay down the principal of
the Class A-1 notes. As per the most recent trustee payment date
report in December 2013, Class A-1a and Class A-1c received about
$1.24 million in principal pay-down from excess interest proceeds.
Accordingly, the notes are also expected to benefit from proceeds
from potential future redemptions of any assets in the underlying
portfolio, including 8.9% of the performing portfolio that will
mature before 2017.

As per the most recent trustee payment date report dated December
2013 Moody's calculates the Class A-1 overcollateralization ratio
at 120.69% compared to the January 2013 level of 101.73%.

The full pay-down of termination payments related to the out-of-
the-money interest rate swap in the transaction in February 2013
has freed up interest proceeds to pay interest on the Class A-1
Notes that was otherwise previously being used to pay the hedge
counterparty. As a result of the declaration of acceleration of
the notes following the Event of Default (EOD) in the transaction,
all proceeds after paying Class A-1, and Class A-2 interest
sequentially are currently being used to pay down the principal of
the Class A-1 notes. As per the most recent trustee payment date
report in December 2013, Class A-1a and Class A-1c received about
$1.24 million in principal pay-down from excess interest proceeds.
Accordingly, the notes are also expected to benefit from proceeds
from potential future redemptions of any assets in the underlying
portfolio, including 8.9% of the performing portfolio that will
mature before 2017.

Methodology Underlying the Rating Action

The principal methodology used in this rating was "Moody's
Approach to Rating TRUP CDOs" published in May 2011.

Factors that Would lead to an Upgrade or Downgrade of the Rating

Moody's notes that this transaction is subject to a number of
factors and circumstances that could lead to either an upgrade or
downgrade of the ratings, as described below:

1) Macroeconomic uncertainty: TruPS CDOs performance may be
negatively impacted by uncertainties of credit conditions in the
general economy.

2) Portfolio credit risk: A better than expected credit
performance of the underlying assets collateralizing the
transaction, can lead to positive transaction performance.
Conversely, a weaker than expected credit performance of the
underlying portfolio can have adverse consequences on the
transaction's performance.

3) Deleveraging: An important source of uncertainty in this
transaction is whether deleveraging from unscheduled principal
proceeds and excess interest proceeds will continue and at what
pace. A faster-than-anticipated pace of deleveraging may have
significant impact on the ratings of the notes.

4) Exposure to non-publicly rated assets: The deal is exposed to a
large number of securities whose default probabilities are
assessed through credit estimates. Moody's evaluates the
sensitivity of the ratings of the notes to the volatility of these
credit assessments.

Loss and Cash Flow Analysis

The transaction's portfolio was modeled using CDOROM v.2.10-15 to
develop the default distribution from which the Moody's Asset
Correlation parameter was obtained. This parameter was then used
as an input in a cash flow model using CDOEdge. CDOROM v.2.10-15
is available on moodys.com under Products and Solutions --
Analytical models, upon return of a signed free license agreement.

The portfolio of this CDO is mainly comprised of trust preferred
securities issued by small to medium sized REIT companies that are
generally not publicly rated by Moody's. To evaluate the credit
quality of REIT TruPS without public ratings, Moody's relies on
the assessment of Moody's REIT team based on the credit analysis
of the underlying REIT firms' annual statutory financial reports.

Sensitivity Analysis

Moody's performed a number of sensitivity analyses of the results
to certain key factors driving the ratings. Moody's analyzed the
sensitivity of the model results to changes in the portfolio WARF
(representing an improvement or a deterioration in the credit
quality of the collateral pool), assuming that all other factors
are held equal. If the WARF is increased by 309 points from the
base case of 4181, the model-implied rating of the Class A-1 Notes
is one notch worse than the base case result. Similarly, if the
WARF is decreased by 581 points, the model-implied rating of the
Class A-1 Notes is one notch better than the base case result.


WACHOVIA BANK 2003-C3: S&P Lowers Rating on Class K Notes to D
--------------------------------------------------------------
Standard & Poor's Ratings Services lowered its rating on the class
K commercial mortgage pass-through certificates from Wachovia Bank
Commercial Mortgage Trust's series 2003-C3, a U.S. commercial
mortgage-backed securities (CMBS) transaction, to 'D (sf)' from
'CCC (sf)'.

The downgrade reflects accumulated interest shortfalls outstanding
for 15 consecutive months, and based on S&P's analysis, it expects
interest shortfalls to continue for the near term.  According to
the Jan. 15, 2014, trustee remittance report, the current reported
monthly interest shortfalls totaled $51,894 and resulted primarily
from:

   -- Interest reduction due to nonrecoverability determination
      equal to $48,908 for the Connecticut General Life Office
      Building loan ($10.1 million, 51.0%); and

   -- Special servicing fees totaling $3,323.

As of the Jan. 15, 2014, trustee remittance report, there were six
loans remaining in the pool with a trust balance of $19.9 million.
Of the six loans, two ($15.9 million, 80.2%) are with the special
servicer (LNR Partners LLC).  The Connecticut General Life Office
Building is the largest loan in the pool and was transferred to
special servicing in February 2013 due to payment default
resulting from cash flow issues.  According to the master
servicer, Wells Fargo Bank N.A., expenses are expected to increase
when the building is reconfigured for multiple tenants and for
tenant improvement and leasing commission costs associated with a
new tenant, Harper Collins.  Although the property generates
positive cash flow, it is unclear whether it is sufficient to
cover operating expenses.  As a result, the master servicer has
determined this loan to be non-recoverable and is awaiting further
information.  The loan is secured by an 189,000-sq.-ft. office
building in Scranton, Pa.  The other specially serviced loan is
Pocalla Springs Apartments ($5.8 million, 29.2%), which is secured
by a 172-unit multifamily property in Sumter, S.C.  The loan was
transferred to special servicing in January 2013 due to maturity
default.

The current reported interest shortfalls have affected all classes
subordinate to and including class K.

RATING LOWERED

Wachovia Bank Commercial Mortgage Trust
Commercial mortgage pass-through certificates series 2003-C3

                                          Reported
         Rating                      interest shortfalls ($)
Class  To      From        C/E (%)    Current    Accumulated
K      D (sf)  CCC (sf)      23.20     32,754         49,040

C/E--Credit enhancement.


WACHOVIA BANK 2003-C5: Moody's Cuts Rating on X-C Notes to Caa3
---------------------------------------------------------------
Moody's Investors Service has upgraded the ratings on two classes
and downgraded the rating on one class in Wachovia Bank Commercial
Mortgage Trust, Commercial Mortgage Pass-through Certificates,
Series 2003-C5 as follows:

Cl. N, Upgraded to Baa3 (sf); previously on Oct 3, 2013 Upgraded
to B2 (sf)

Cl. O, Upgraded to B1 (sf); previously on Oct 3, 2013 Upgraded to
B3 (sf)

Cl. X-C, Downgraded to Caa3 (sf); previously on Oct 3, 2013
Downgraded to Caa2 (sf)

Ratings Rationale

The ratings on the P&I classes were upgraded based primarily on an
increase in credit support resulting from loan paydowns and
amortization. The deal has paid down 52% since Moody's last
review.

The rating on the IO Class (Class X-C) was downgraded due to the
decline in the credit performance of its reference classes
resulting from principal paydowns of higher quality reference
classes.

Moody's rating action reflects a base expected loss of 12.6% of
the current balance, compared to 8.0% at Moody's last review.
Moody's base expected loss plus realized losses is now 0.9% of the
original pooled balance compared to 1.0% at the last review.

Factors That Would Lead To An Upgrade Or Downgrade Of The Rating

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 this rating were "Moody's Approach to
Rating U.S. CMBS Conduit Transactions" published in September 2000
and "Moody's Approach to Rating CMBS Large Loan/Single Borrower
Transactions" published in July 2000.

Description Of Models Used

Moody's review used the excel-based CMBS Conduit Model v 2.64,
which it uses for both conduit and fusion transactions. Conduit
model results at the Aa2 (sf) level are driven by property type,
Moody's actual and stressed DSCR, and Moody's property quality
grade (which reflects the capitalization rate Moody's uses to
estimate Moody's value). Conduit model results at the B2 (sf)
level are based on a paydown analysis using the individual loan-
level Moody's LTV ratio. Moody's may consider other concentrations
and correlations in its analysis. Based on the model pooled credit
enhancement levels of Aa2 (sf) and B2 (sf), the required credit
enhancement on the remaining conduit classes are either
interpolated between these two data points or determined based on
a multiple or ratio of either of these two data points. For fusion
deals, Moody's merges the credit enhancement for loans with
investment-grade credit assessments with the conduit model credit
enhancement for an overall model result. Moody's incorporates
negative pooling (adding credit enhancement at the credit
assessment level) for loans with similar credit assessments in the
same transaction.

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 7 compared to 8 at last review.

When the Herf falls below 20, Moody's uses the excel-based Large
Loan Model v 8.6 and then reconciles and weights the results from
the conduit and large loan models in formulating a rating
recommendation. The large loan model derives 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, property
type and sponsorship. Moody's also further adjusts these
aggregated proceeds for any pooling benefits associated with loan
level diversity and other concentrations and correlations.

Deal Performance

As of the January 15, 2014 distribution date, the transaction's
aggregate certificate balance has decreased by 98% to $20.9
million from $1.2 billion at securitization. The certificates are
collateralized by ten mortgage loans ranging in size from 3% to
16% of the pool, with the top five loans constituting 69% of the
pool. One loan, constituting 11% of the pool, has defeased and is
secured by US government securities.

Two loans, constituting 20% 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.

Six loans have been liquidated from the pool, resulting in an
aggregate realized loss of $8.7 million (for an average loss
severity of 44%). The Randhurst Crossings Shopping Center Loan
($3.2 million --15% of the pool) is the only loan in special
servicing. Moody's estimates a significant loss for this specially
serviced loan.

Moody's received full year 2011 and 2012 operating results for
100% of the pool. Moody's weighted average conduit LTV is 63%
compared to 64% at Moody's last 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 11% to the most
recently available net operating income (NOI). Moody's value
reflects a weighted average capitalization rate of 9.25%.

Moody's actual and stressed conduit DSCRs are 1.30X and 2.20X,
respectively, compared to 1.48X and 1.85X 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 43% of the pool balance. The
largest conduit loan is the Brandon Oaks Loan ($3.3 million -- 16%
of the pool) which is secured by a 160--unit apartment complex
located in Brandon, Florida. The property was 82% leased as of
September 2013 compared to 89% at last review. Moody's LTV and
stressed DSCR are 60% and 1.62X, respectively, compared to 64% and
1.53X at last review.

The second largest loan is the Forest Hill Centre Loan ($2.8
million -- 13% of the pool), which is secured by a 53,000 SF
grocery anchored retail center located in Lexington, North
Carolina. The property was 82% leased as of September 2013
compared to 85% at year end 2012. Food Lion leases 62% of the net
rentable area through November 2019. Moody's LTV and stressed DSCR
are 67% and 1.48X, respectively, compared to 77% and 1.29X at last
review.

The third largest loan is the Rite Aid Loan ($2.7 million -- 13%
of the pool), which is secured by a 16,700 SF box store located in
Las Vegas, Nevada. The property is 100% leased to Rite Aid through
July 2024. The lease expiration is co-terminus with the loan
maturity. The loan is fully amortizing.


WACHOVIA BANK 2004-C10: S&P Cuts Rating on Cl. N Certs to 'D'
-------------------------------------------------------------
Standard & Poor's Ratings Services lowered its rating on the class
N commercial mortgage pass-through certificates from Wachovia Bank
Commercial Mortgage Trust's series 2004-C10, a U.S. commercial
mortgage-backed securities transaction, to 'D (sf)' from
'CCC- (sf)'.

The downgrade reflects accumulated interest shortfalls outstanding
for nine consecutive months.  Based on S&P's analysis, it expects
the interest shortfalls to continue in the near term.

As of the Jan. 17, 2014, trustee remittance report, the current
reported monthly interest shortfalls totaled $13,760.  The
shortfalls were primarily from appraisal subordinate entitlement
reduction amounts of $12,400 related to appraisal reduction
amounts totaling $2.6 million on two ($4.6 million, 2.8%) of the
four assets ($13.7 million, 8.4%) that are currently with the
special servicer, LNR Partners LLC.  In addition, the shortfalls
were primarily from special servicing fees totaling $1,359.  The
current reported interest shortfalls have affected all classes
subordinate to and including class N.

As of the Jan. 17, 2014, trustee remittance report, the collateral
pool had an aggregate pool trust balance of $163.6 million, down
from $1.3 billion at issuance.  The pool currently has 17 assets,
down from 103 loans at issuance.  To date, the transaction has
experienced losses totaling $20.7 million (1.6% of its original
pool trust balance).


WFRBS COMMERCIAL 2011-C2: Moody's Affirms B2 Rating on F Certs
--------------------------------------------------------------
Moody's Investors Service has affirmed the ratings of 11 classes
in WF-RBS Commercial Mortgage Trust 2011-C2, Commercial Mortgage
Pass-Through Certificates, Series 2011-C2 as follows:

Cl. A-1, Affirmed Aaa (sf); previously on Mar 7, 2013 Affirmed Aaa
(sf)

Cl. A-2, Affirmed Aaa (sf); previously on Mar 7, 2013 Affirmed Aaa
(sf)

Cl. A-3, Affirmed Aaa (sf); previously on Mar 7, 2013 Affirmed Aaa
(sf)

Cl. A-4, Affirmed Aaa (sf); previously on Mar 7, 2013 Affirmed Aaa
(sf)

Cl. B, Affirmed Aa2 (sf); previously on Mar 7, 2013 Affirmed Aa2
(sf)

Cl. C, Affirmed A2 (sf); previously on Mar 7, 2013 Affirmed A2
(sf)

Cl. D, Affirmed Baa3 (sf); previously on Mar 7, 2013 Affirmed Baa3
(sf)

Cl. E, Affirmed Ba2 (sf); previously on Mar 7, 2013 Affirmed Ba2
(sf)

Cl. F, Affirmed B2 (sf); previously on Mar 7, 2013 Affirmed B2
(sf)

Cl. X-A, Affirmed Aaa (sf); previously on Mar 7, 2013 Affirmed Aaa
(sf)

Cl. X-B, Affirmed Ba3 (sf); previously on Mar 7, 2013 Affirmed Ba3
(sf)

RATINGS RATIONALE

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

Moody's rating action reflects a base expected loss of 1.7% of the
current balance, the same as at Moody's last review. Moody's base
expected loss plus realized losses is now 1.7% of the original
pooled balance, same as at last review.

Factors That Would Lead to an Upgrade or Downgrade of the Rating

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 this rating was "Moody's
Approach to Rating Fusion U.S. CMBS Transactions" published in
April 2005.

Description of Models Used

Moody's review used the excel-based CMBS Conduit Model v 2.64,
which it uses for both conduit and fusion transactions. Conduit
model results at the Aa2 (sf) level are driven by property type,
Moody's actual and stressed DSCR, and Moody's property quality
grade (which reflects the capitalization rate Moody's uses to
estimate Moody's value). Conduit model results at the B2 (sf)
level are based on a paydown analysis using the individual loan-
level Moody's LTV ratio. Moody's may consider other concentrations
and correlations in its analysis. Based on the model pooled credit
enhancement levels of Aa2 (sf) and B2 (sf), the required credit
enhancement on the remaining conduit classes are either
interpolated between these two data points or determined based on
a multiple or ratio of either of these two data points. For fusion
deals, Moody's merges the credit enhancement for loans with
investment-grade credit assessments with the conduit model credit
enhancement for an overall model result. Moody's incorporates
negative pooling (adding credit enhancement at the credit
assessment level) for loans with similar credit assessments in the
same transaction.

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 21 compared to 22 at Moody's last review.

Deal Performance

As of the January 17, 2014 distribution date, the transaction's
aggregate certificate balance has decreased by 3% to $1.26 billion
from $1.30 billion at securitization. The certificates are
collateralized by 50 mortgage loans ranging in size from less than
1% to 13% of the pool, with the top ten loans (excluding
defeasance) constituting 57% of the pool. Five loans, constituting
15% of the pool, have investment grade credit assessments. One
loan, constituting 0.5% of the pool, has defeased and is secured
by US government securities.

Five loans, constituting 17% 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.

No loans have been liquidated from the pool. One loan,
constituting 0.8% of the pool, is currently in special servicing.
The specially serviced loan is the Campus South & Oakbrook Loan
($10 million -- 0.8% of the pool). The loan is secured by two
suburban office properties totaling 86,000 square feet (SF) 20
miles outside of Washington, D.C. in Reston, Virginia. The loan
transferred to special servicing on September 5, 2013 due to
imminent monetary default. The property was 70% leased as of June
2013. Moody's has estimated a modest loss for this loan.

Moody's received full year 2012 operating results for 96% of the
pool and full or partial year 2013 operating results for 98% of
the pool. Moody's weighted average conduit LTV is 85% compared to
83% at Moody's last 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 9% to the most recently
available net operating income (NOI). Moody's value reflects a
weighted average capitalization rate of 9.2%.

Moody's actual and stressed conduit DSCRs are 1.58X and 1.22X,
respectively, compared to 1.63X and 1.22X at 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 largest loan with a credit assessment is the Borgata Ground
Leases Loan ($59.3 million -- 4.7% of the pool), which is secured
by five parcels of land underlying portions of the Borgata Hotel
Casino & Spa Complex in Atlantic City, New Jersey. The property is
leased pursuant to four separate ground leases, all of which
expire in December 2070. Performance has remained stable. Moody's
credit assessment and stressed DSCR are Baa1 and 1.04X,
respectively, the same as at last review.

The second largest loan with a credit assessment is the Westfield
Westland Mall Loan ($54.5 million -- 4.3% of the pool), which is
secured by 225,000 square feet (SF) of net rentable area (NRA)
contained within a 829,000 SF super regional mall located in
Hialeah, Florida. The mall is anchored by Macy's, Sears and JC
Penney, all of which are owned by the respective tenants and not
included in the collateral. Occupancy as of September 2013 was
97%, the same as last review. Performance has remained stable.
Moody's credit assessment and stressed DSCR are Baa2 and 1.64X,
respectively, compared to Baa2 and 1.44X at the last review.

The third largest loan with a credit assessment is the Port
Charlotte Town Center Loan ($38.2 million -- 3% of the pool),
which is secured by 490,000 SF of NRA contained within a 774,000
SF super regional mall in Port Charlotte, Florida. The mall
contains five anchors and a movie theater. The property is located
along Tamiami Trail (US 141). Occupancy as of September 2013 was
88%, the same as at last review. Moody's credit assessment and
stressed DSCR are Baa3 and 1.37X, respectively, compared to Baa3
and 1.42X at the last review.

The fourth largest loan with a credit assessment is the Showcase
Mall Phase II Loan ($22.5 million -- 1.8% of the pool), which is
secured by 42,000 SF of the Showcase Mall, a 332,000 SF retail
project fronting Las Vegas Boulevard and adjacent to the MGM. The
property is leased to two tenants (Grand Canyon Shops and Adidas)
as well as a kiosk leased to Vegas.com. Performance has remained
stable. Moody's credit assessment and stressed DSCR are Baa1 and
1.78X, respectively, compared to Baa1 and 1.65X at the last
review.

The fifth largest loan with a credit assessment is the Hilton
Garden Inn -- Mountain View Loan ($10.2 million -- 0.8% of the
pool), which is secured by a 160-room, full service hotel located
off of Camino Real, the main commercial thoroughfare connecting
San Jose and the San Francisco peninsula. The borrower developed
the property in 1999 for $14.2 million, excluding the value of the
land which the family has owned since 1952. Moody's credit
assessment and stressed DSCR are A1 and 3.21X, respectively,
compared to A2 and 2.62X at the last review.

The top three performing conduit loans represent 26% of the pool
balance. The largest loan is the Hollywood & Highland Loan ($161.6
million -- 12.9% of the pool), which is secured by three five-
story multi-tenant retail buildings and one six-story theater
located on Hollywood Blvd in Los Angeles, California. Tenants
include retail shops, restaurants/eateries, nightclubs, one multi-
screen cinema, a grand ballroom, a bowling alley, and a large
event theater. The previously signed ten-year agreement with
Cirque du Soleil was terminated, resulting in a decline in
operating performance. As of September 2013, the retail space was
86% leased compared to 89% at last review. Moody's LTV and
stressed DSCR are 97% and 0.95X, respectively, compared to 62% and
0.99X at prior review.

The second largest loan is the Arboretum Loan ($87.7 million -- 7%
of the pool), which is secured by a Wal-Mart anchored retail
center totaling 563,000 SF located in Charlotte, North Carolina.
The property consists of 12 single-story buildings, five pad
sites, and a 16-screen movie theater. As of September 2013, the
property was 99% leased, the same as at last review. Moody's LTV
and stressed DSCR are 102% and 0.95X, respectively, essentially
the same as at last review.

The third largest loan is the 1412 Broadway Loan ($81 million --
6.5% of the pool), which is secured by a 24-story, Class B office
building located at the northeast corner of 39th Street and
Broadway in the Garment District of Manhattan in New York City. Of
412,000 SF of leasable area, 24,000 SF (6%) is retail and 388,000
SF (94%) is office with total occupancy of 95% as of September
2013, the same as at last review. Moody's LTV and stressed DSCR
are 104% and 0.91X, respectively, compared to 111% and 0.86X at
the last review.


WFRBS COMMERCIAL 2014-LC14: Fitch To Rate $12MM F Securities 'Bsf'
------------------------------------------------------------------
Fitch Ratings has issued a presale report on WFRBS Commercial
Mortgage Trust 2014-LC14 Pass-Through Certificates.

Fitch expects to rate the transaction and assign Rating Outlooks
as follows:

  -- $66,263,000 Class A-1 'AAAsf'; Outlook Stable;
  -- $189,675,000 Class A-2 'AAAsf'; Outlook Stable;
  -- $80,000,000 Class A-3 'AAAsf'; Outlook Stable;
  -- $175,000,000 Class A-4 'AAAsf'; Outlook Stable;
  -- $278,492,000 Class A-5 'AAAsf'; Outlook Stable;
  -- $89,487,000 Class A-SB 'AAAsf'; Outlook Stable;
  -- $95,739,000b Class A-S 'AAAsf'; Outlook Stable;
  -- $974,656,000* Class X-A 'AAAsf'; Outlook Stable;
  -- $193,048,000* Class X-B 'BBB-sf'; Outlook Stable;
  -- $81,614,000b Class B 'AA-sf'; Outlook Stable;
  -- $47,085,000b Class C 'A-sf'; Outlook Stable;
  -- $224,438,000b Class PEX 'A-sf'; Outlook Stable;
  -- $64,349,000a Class D 'BBB-sf'; Outlook Stable;
  -- $21,973,000a Class E 'BBsf'; Outlook Stable;
  -- $12,556,000a Class F 'Bsf'; Outlook Stable.

(*) Notional amount and interest-only.
(a) Privately placed pursuant to Rule 144A.
(b) Class A-S, B and C certificates may be exchanged for class PEX
certificates; and class PEX certificates may be exchanged for
class A-S, B and C certificates.

The expected ratings are based on information provided by the
issuer as of Jan. 25, 2014.  Fitch does not expect to rate the
$87,892,034 class X-C a* or the $53,363,034 class Ga.

The certificates represent the beneficial ownership in the trust,
primary assets of which are 71 loans secured by 144 commercial
properties having an aggregate principal balance of approximately
$1.26 billion as of the cutoff date.  The loans were contributed
to the trust by Wells Fargo Bank, National Association; Ladder
Capital Finance LLC; Rialto Mortgage Finance, LLC; The Royal Bank
of Scotland plc.' and RBS Financial Products Inc.

Fitch reviewed a comprehensive sample of the transaction's
collateral, including site inspections on 74.1% of the properties
by balance, cash flow analysis and asset summary reviews of 84.3%
of the pool.

Fitch Leverage: The pool has higher Fitch leverage, with a
weighted average Fitch LTV and DSCR of 101.7% and 1.19x,
respectively.  The average 2012 Fitch DSCR and LTV were 1.24x and
97.2%, respectively.  The average 2013 Fitch DSCR and LTV were
1.29x and 101.6%, respectively.

Credit Opinion Loan: The third largest loan in the pool (6.4%) has
a Fitch credit opinion of 'BBB-sf' on a stand-alone basis.  The
loan is secured by The Outlet Collection-Jersey Gardens, a 1.3
million square foot (sf) outlet mall located in Elizabeth, NJ.
This loan has a pari passu participation held outside the trust,
and servicing of the loan will be governed by the pooling and
servicing agreement (PSA) of WFRBS 2013-C18.

Lower Concentration: Loan concentration is slightly lower than
recent transactions.  The largest loan represents 11.1% of the
pool, and the top 10 loans represent 48.6%.  The average top 10
concentrations for full year 2013 and 2012 conduit transactions
were 54.3% and 54.2%, respectively.  The LCI is 362 and the SCI is
371, which indicate an average level of loan diversity and an
above-average level of sponsor diversity. The 2013 average LCI was
367 and the 2013 average SCI was 458.

For this transaction, Fitch's net cash flow (NCF) was 8.0% below
the most recent net operating income (NOI) (for properties for
which historical NOI was provided, excluding properties that were
stabilizing during the most recent reporting period).
Unanticipated further declines in property-level NCF could result
in higher defaults and loss severity on defaulted loans, and could
result in potential rating actions on the certificates.  Fitch
evaluated the sensitivity of the ratings assigned to WFRBS 2014-
LC14 certificates and found that the transaction displays average
sensitivity 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.  The presale report includes a detailed explanation
of additional stresses and sensitivities on pages 79 - 80.

The master servicer will be Wells Fargo Bank, National
Association, rated 'CMS1-' by Fitch.  The special servicer will be
Rialto Capital Advisors, LLC rated 'CSS2-' by Fitch.


WHITEHORSE VII: S&P Affirms 'BB-' Rating on Class B-2L Notes
------------------------------------------------------------
Standard & Poor's Ratings Services affirmed its ratings on
WhiteHorse VII Ltd./WhiteHorse VII LLC's $372 million floating-
rate notes, following the transaction's effective date as of
Nov. 20, 2013.

Most U.S. cash flow collateralized loan obligations (CLOs) close
before purchasing the full amount of their targeted level of
portfolio collateral.  On the closing date, the collateral manager
typically covenants to purchase the remaining collateral within
the guidelines specified in the transaction documents to reach the
target level of portfolio collateral.  Typically, the CLO
transaction documents specify a date by which the targeted level
of portfolio collateral must be reached.  The "effective date" for
a CLO transaction is usually the earlier of the date on which the
transaction acquires the target level of portfolio collateral, or
the date defined in the transaction documents.  Most transaction
documents contain provisions directing the trustee to request the
rating agencies that have issued ratings upon closing to affirm
the ratings issued on the closing date after reviewing the
effective date portfolio (typically referred to as an "effective
date rating affirmation").

"An effective date rating affirmation reflects our opinion that
the portfolio collateral purchased by the issuer, as reported to
us by the trustee and collateral manager, in combination with the
transaction's structure, provides sufficient credit support to
maintain the ratings that we assigned on the transaction's closing
date.  The effective date reports provide a summary of certain
information that we used in our analysis and the results of our
review based on the information presented to us," S&P noted.

S&P believes the transaction may see some benefit from allowing a
window of time after the closing date for the collateral manager
to acquire the remaining assets for a CLO transaction.  This
window of time is typically referred to as a "ramp-up period."
Because some CLO transactions may acquire most of their assets
from the new issue leveraged loan market, the ramp-up period may
give collateral managers the flexibility to acquire a more diverse
portfolio of assets.

For a CLO that has not purchased its full target level of
portfolio collateral by the closing date, S&P's ratings on the
closing date and prior to its effective date review are generally
based on the application of its criteria to a combination of
purchased collateral, collateral committed to be purchased, and
the indicative portfolio of assets provided to S&P by the
collateral manager, and may also reflect its assumptions about the
transaction's investment guidelines.  This is because not all
assets in the portfolio have been purchased.

"When we receive a request to issue an effective date rating
affirmation, we perform quantitative and qualitative analysis of
the transaction in accordance with our criteria to assess whether
the initial ratings remain consistent with the credit enhancement
based on the effective date collateral portfolio.  Our analysis
relies on the use of CDO Evaluator to estimate a scenario default
rate at each rating level based on the effective date portfolio,
full cash flow modeling to determine the appropriate percentile
break-even default rate at each rating level, the application of
our supplemental tests, and the analytical judgment of a rating
committee," S&P added.

In S&P's published effective date report, it discusses its
analysis of the information provided by the transaction's trustee
and collateral manager in support of their request for effective
date rating affirmation.  In most instances, S&P intends to
publish an effective date report each time it issues an effective
date rating affirmation on a publicly rated U.S. cash flow CLO.

On an ongoing basis after S&P issues an effective date rating
affirmation, it will periodically review whether, in its view, the
current ratings on the notes remain consistent with the credit
quality of the assets, the credit enhancement available to support
the notes, and other factors, and take rating actions as it deems
necessary.

RATINGS AFFIRMED

WhiteHorse VII Ltd./WhiteHorse VII LLC

Class                      Rating                       Amount
                                                      (mil. $)
A-1L                       AAA (sf)                     238.80
A-2L                       AA (sf)                       52.40
A-3L (deferrable)          A (sf)                        31.20
B-1L (deferrable)          BBB (sf)                      20.00
B-2L (deferrable)          BB- (sf)                      20.80
B-3L (deferrable)          B (sf)                         8.80


* Moody's Takes Action on $1.2BB of Subprime RMBS Issued 2005-2007
------------------------------------------------------------------
Moody's Investors Service has upgraded the ratings of 37 tranches
from 19 transactions and downgraded the rating of two tranches
from two transactions, which are all backed by Subprime mortgage
loans.

Complete rating actions are as follows:

Issuer: Accredited Mortgage Loan Trust 2005-3, Asset-Backed Notes,
Series 2005-3

Cl. M-3, Upgraded to B2 (sf); previously on Jun 27, 2013 Upgraded
to Caa1 (sf)

Cl. M-4, Upgraded to Ca (sf); previously on Jun 1, 2010 Downgraded
to C (sf)

Issuer: Accredited Mortgage Loan Trust 2005-4

Cl. M-1, Upgraded to B1 (sf); previously on Sep 28, 2010
Downgraded to B3 (sf)

Issuer: Aegis Asset Backed Securities Trust 2005-5

Cl. IA4, Upgraded to B3 (sf); previously on Jul 18, 2011
Downgraded to Caa2 (sf)

Cl. IIA, Upgraded to Ba3 (sf); previously on Jul 18, 2011
Downgraded to B2 (sf)

Issuer: Asset Backed Securities Corporation Home Equity Loan
Trust, Series AMQ 2007-HE2

Cl. A2, Downgraded to Ca (sf); previously on Aug 14, 2012
Downgraded to Caa2 (sf)

Issuer: GSAMP Trust 2005-HE4

Cl. M-3, Upgraded to Caa2 (sf); previously on Mar 12, 2013
Affirmed Ca (sf)

Issuer: GSAMP Trust 2005-HE6

Cl. M-1, Upgraded to B1 (sf); previously on Jul 15, 2011
Downgraded to B3 (sf)

Cl. M-2, Upgraded to Caa3 (sf); previously on Jul 15, 2011
Downgraded to C (sf)

Issuer: J.P. Morgan Mortgage Acquisition Corp. 2005-FLD1

Cl. M-4, Upgraded to Ba3 (sf); previously on Mar 12, 2013 Affirmed
B2 (sf)

Cl. M-5, Upgraded to Caa3 (sf); previously on Mar 12, 2013
Affirmed C (sf)

Issuer: J.P. Morgan Mortgage Acquisition Corp. 2005-OPT1

Cl. M-3, Upgraded to B3 (sf); previously on May 13, 2013 Upgraded
to Caa2 (sf)

Issuer: J.P. Morgan Mortgage Acquisition Corp. 2006-FRE1

Cl. A-1, Upgraded to Ba1 (sf); previously on Dec 28, 2010 Upgraded
to Ba3 (sf)

Cl. A-3, Upgraded to Ba1 (sf); previously on Dec 28, 2010 Upgraded
to Ba3 (sf)

Cl. A-4, Upgraded to B1 (sf); previously on Dec 28, 2010 Upgraded
to B3 (sf)

Cl. M-1, Upgraded to Caa3 (sf); previously on Jul 14, 2010
Downgraded to C (sf)

Issuer: Morgan Stanley ABS Capital I Inc. Trust 2005-HE3

Cl. M-4, Upgraded to B2 (sf); previously on Mar 12, 2013 Affirmed
Caa1 (sf)

Cl. M-5, Upgraded to Ca (sf); previously on Mar 12, 2013 Affirmed
C (sf)

Issuer: Morgan Stanley Capital I Inc. Trust 2006-NC2

Cl. A-1, Upgraded to Caa1 (sf); previously on Sep 12, 2012
Confirmed at Caa3 (sf)

Cl. A-2c, Upgraded to B2 (sf); previously on Dec 28, 2010 Upgraded
to Caa1 (sf)

Cl. A-2d, Upgraded to Caa2 (sf); previously on Jul 15, 2010
Downgraded to Ca (sf)

Issuer: Morgan Stanley Home Equity Loan Trust 2005-2

Cl. M-4, Upgraded to B1 (sf); previously on Mar 14, 2013 Upgraded
to B3 (sf)

Cl. M-5, Upgraded to Ca (sf); previously on Mar 14, 2013 Affirmed
C (sf)

Issuer: Morgan Stanley Home Equity Loan Trust 2006-2

Cl. A-3, Upgraded to Ba1 (sf); previously on Dec 28, 2010 Upgraded
to Ba3 (sf)

Cl. A-4, Upgraded to B2 (sf); previously on Dec 28, 2010 Upgraded
to Caa1 (sf)

Issuer: New Century Home Equity Loan Trust 2005-4

Cl. M-2, Upgraded to Ba2 (sf); previously on Jun 27, 2013 Upgraded
to B1 (sf)

Cl. M-3, Upgraded to Caa2 (sf); previously on Jun 27, 2013
Upgraded to Ca (sf)

Cl. M-4, Upgraded to Ca (sf); previously on Jun 1, 2010 Downgraded
to C (sf)

Issuer: NovaStar Mortgage Funding Trust Series 2006-4

Cl. A-2B, Downgraded to Ca (sf); previously on Jul 14, 2010
Downgraded to Caa1 (sf)

Issuer: Saxon Asset Securities Trust 2005-3

Cl. M-3, Upgraded to B2 (sf); previously on Mar 15, 2013 Affirmed
Caa1 (sf)

Issuer: Soundview Home Loan Trust 2005-4

Cl. M-2, Upgraded to Caa1 (sf); previously on Jun 18, 2013
Upgraded to Caa3 (sf)

Cl. M-3, Upgraded to Ca (sf); previously on Jun 17, 2010
Downgraded to C (sf)

Issuer: Soundview Home Loan Trust 2005-DO1

Cl. M-4, Upgraded to Ba2 (sf); previously on Mar 14, 2013 Upgraded
to B1 (sf)

Cl. M-5, Upgraded to Caa1 (sf); previously on Mar 14, 2013
Affirmed Caa3 (sf)

Issuer: Soundview Home Loan Trust 2006-1

Cl. A-3, Upgraded to Ba1 (sf); previously on Jul 18, 2011
Downgraded to Ba3 (sf)

Cl. A-4, Upgraded to Ba3 (sf); previously on Jul 18, 2011 Upgraded
to B1 (sf)

Issuer: Soundview Home Loan Trust 2007-1

Cl. II-A-2, Upgraded to Caa1 (sf); previously on Jul 18, 2011
Downgraded to Caa3 (sf)

Issuer: Terwin Mortgage Trust, Series TMTS 2005-10HE

Cl. M-2, Upgraded to Ba1 (sf); previously on Jul 15, 2011
Downgraded to Ba3 (sf)

Cl. M-3, Upgraded to Caa2 (sf); previously on Jul 15, 2011
Downgraded to Caa3 (sf)

Ratings Rationale

The downgrades of NovaStar Mortgage Funding Trust Series 2006-4,
Cl. A-2B and Asset Backed Securities Corporation Home Equity Loan
Trust, Series AMQ 2007-HE2, Cl. A-2 are a result of the change in
principal priority for the respective group 2 senior bonds from
sequential-pay to pro-rata pay upon the recent depletion of the
mezzanine classes. The upgrade actions are a result of improving
performance of the related pools, and reflects Moody's updated
loss expectations on those pools.

The principal methodology used in these ratings was "US RMBS
Surveillance Methodology" published in November 2013.

Factors that would lead to an upgrade or downgrade of the rating

The primary source of assumption uncertainty is the uncertainty in
our central macroeconomic forecast and performance volatility due
to servicer-related issues. The unemployment rate fell from 7.9%
in December 2012 to 6.7% in December 2013. Moody's forecasts an
unemployment central range of 6.5% to 7.5% for the 2014 year.
Moody's expects house prices to continue to rise in 2014.
Performance of RMBS continues to remain highly dependent on
servicer procedures. Any change resulting from servicing transfers
or other policy or regulatory change can impact the performance of
these transactions.


* Moody's Takes Action on $31MM of Alt-A RMBS Issued From 2005
--------------------------------------------------------------
Moody's Investors Service has downgraded the ratings of two
tranches and upgraded the rating of one tranche backed by Alt-A
RMBS loans, issued by two RMBS transactions.

Complete rating actions are as follows:

Issuer: Banc of America Alternative Loan Trust 2005-2

Cl. 3-A-1, Downgraded to B1 (sf); previously on Aug 8, 2012
Confirmed at Ba2 (sf)

Cl. 4-A-1, Downgraded to Ba3 (sf); previously on Aug 8, 2012
Upgraded to Ba2 (sf)

Issuer: CWALT, Inc. Mortgage Pass-Through Certificates, Series
2005-J4

Cl. M-2, Upgraded to Caa3 (sf); previously on Aug 27, 2012
Upgraded to Ca (sf)

Ratings Rationale

The ratings downgraded are a result of deteriorating performance
and structural features resulting in higher expected losses for
the bonds than previously anticipated. The rating upgraded is due
to an increase in the credit enhancement available to the bonds.

The principal methodology used in these ratings was "US RMBS
Surveillance Methodology" published in November 2013.

Factors that would lead to an upgrade or downgrade of the rating

Ratings in the US RMBS sector remain exposed to the high level of
macroeconomic uncertainty, and in particular the unemployment
rate. The unemployment rate fell to 6.7% in December 2013 from
7.9% in December 2012. Moody's forecasts an unemployment central
range of 6.5% to 7.5% for the 2014 year. Deviations from this
central scenario could lead to rating actions in the sector.

House prices are another key driver of US RMBS performance.
Moody's expects house prices to continue to rise in 2014. Lower
increases than Moody's expects or decreases could lead to negative
rating actions.

Finally, performance of RMBS continues to remain highly dependent
on servicer procedures. Any change resulting from servicing
transfers or other policy or regulatory change can impact the
performance of these transactions.


* Moody's Takes Action on $44.2MM of Prime Jumbo RMBS
-----------------------------------------------------
Moody's Investors Service has downgraded the ratings of five
tranches and upgraded the ratings of three tranches issued by
various issuers. The tranches are backed by Prime Jumbo RMBS loans
issued from five transactions between 2004 and 2007.

Complete rating actions are as follows:

Issuer: Chase Mortgage Finance Trust Series 2006-S2

Cl. 1-A3, Downgraded to Caa2 (sf); previously on May 26, 2010
Downgraded to Caa1 (sf)

Cl. 1-A4, Downgraded to Caa2 (sf); previously on May 26, 2010
Downgraded to Caa1 (sf)

Cl. 1-AX, Downgraded to Caa2 (sf); previously on Apr 18, 2013
Downgraded to Caa1 (sf)

Issuer: Citicorp Mortgage Securities Trust, Series 2007-2

Cl. IA-7, Upgraded to B2 (sf); previously on Jun 4, 2010
Downgraded to Caa1 (sf)

Issuer: Citicorp Mortgage Securities, Inc. 2005-4

Cl. IA-5, Upgraded to Caa3 (sf); previously on May 19, 2010
Downgraded to C (sf)

Issuer: RFMSI Series 2004-SA1 Trust

Cl. A-III, Downgraded to Baa3 (sf); previously on May 2, 2012
Downgraded to Baa1 (sf)

Issuer: Wells Fargo Mortgage Backed Securities 2006-AR19 Trust

Cl. A-6, Upgraded to Caa1 (sf); previously on Apr 5, 2010
Downgraded to Caa2 (sf)

Cl. A-IO, Downgraded to Caa1 (sf); previously on Aug 17, 2012
Upgraded to B1 (sf)

Ratings Rationale

The rating downgrades are a result of deteriorating performance
and structural features resulting in higher expected losses for
the bonds than previously anticipated. The rating upgrades are due
to improving performance of the related pools and faster than
expected pay down of the bonds.

The principal methodology used in these ratings was "US RMBS
Surveillance Methodology" published in November 2013.

Factors that would lead to an upgrade or downgrade of the rating

Ratings in the US RMBS sector remain exposed to the high level of
macroeconomic uncertainty, and in particular the unemployment
rate. The unemployment rate fell to 6.7% in December 2013 from
7.9% in December 2012. Moody's forecasts an unemployment central
range of 6.5% to 7.5% for the 2014 year. Deviations from this
central scenario could lead to rating actions in the sector. House
prices are another key driver of US RMBS performance. Moody's
expects house prices to continue to rise in 2014. Lower increases
than Moody's expects or decreases could lead to negative rating
actions. Finally, performance of RMBS continues to remain highly
dependent on servicer procedures. Any change resulting from
servicing transfers or other policy or regulatory change can
impact the performance of these transactions.


* Moody's Takes Action on $711MM of Subprime RMBS
-------------------------------------------------
Moody's Investors Service has upgraded the ratings of 36 tranches
and downgraded the ratings of two tranches from 20 transactions
issued by various trusts, backed by Subprime mortgage loans.

Complete rating actions are as follows:

Issuer: ABFC 2002-NC1 Trust

Cl. M-1, Downgraded to Ba1 (sf); previously on May 4, 2012
Downgraded to Baa2 (sf)

Issuer: ABFC Asset-Backed Certificates, Series 2003-WMC1

Cl. M-2, Upgraded to B1 (sf); previously on Apr 16, 2013 Upgraded
to B3 (sf)

Cl. M-3, Upgraded to B3 (sf); previously on Apr 16, 2013 Upgraded
to Caa2 (sf)

Issuer: ABFC Asset-Backed Certificates, Series 2004-HE1

Cl. M-1, Upgraded to B3 (sf); previously on May 4, 2012 Confirmed
at Caa2 (sf)

Issuer: ABFC Asset-Backed Certificates, Series 2004-OPT3

Cl. A-4, Downgraded to Baa1 (sf); previously on Apr 19, 2013
Downgraded to A2 (sf)

Issuer: ABFC Mortgage Loan Asset-Backed Certificates, Series 2001-
AQ1

Cl. A-6, Upgraded to Baa2 (sf); previously on May 31, 2012
Confirmed at Ba1 (sf)

Cl. A-7, Upgraded to Baa2 (sf); previously on May 31, 2012
Confirmed at Ba1 (sf)

Issuer: Bear Stearns Asset Backed Securities I Trust 2005-FR1

Cl. M-1, Upgraded to Ba1 (sf); previously on May 21, 2010
Downgraded to Ba3 (sf)

Cl. M-2, Upgraded to Caa3 (sf); previously on May 21, 2010
Downgraded to C (sf)

Issuer: Bear Stearns Asset Backed Securities I Trust 2005-TC1

Cl. M-1, Upgraded to B1 (sf); previously on May 21, 2010
Downgraded to Caa1 (sf)

Cl. M-2, Upgraded to Caa3 (sf); previously on May 21, 2010
Downgraded to C (sf)

Issuer: Bear Stearns Asset Backed Securities I Trust 2005-TC2

Cl. M-2, Upgraded to B2 (sf); previously on Apr 23, 2013 Upgraded
to Caa1 (sf)

Cl. M-3, Upgraded to Caa2 (sf); previously on Apr 23, 2013
Upgraded to Ca (sf)

Issuer: Bear Stearns Asset Backed Securities I Trust 2006-EC1

Cl. M-2, Upgraded to Caa2 (sf); previously on Apr 23, 2013
Upgraded to Ca (sf)

Issuer: Bear Stearns Asset Backed Securities I Trust 2006-EC2

Cl. M-2, Upgraded to Ca (sf); previously on May 21, 2010
Downgraded to C (sf)

Issuer: Bear Stearns Asset Backed Securities I Trust 2006-HE3

Cl. A-2, Upgraded to Baa3 (sf); previously on Apr 23, 2013
Upgraded to Ba1 (sf)

Cl. A-3, Upgraded to Ba1 (sf); previously on Apr 23, 2013 Upgraded
to Ba3 (sf)

Cl. M-1, Upgraded to Caa3 (sf); previously on May 21, 2010
Downgraded to C (sf)

Issuer: Bear Stearns Asset Backed Securities I Trust 2006-HE5

Cl. I-A-2, Upgraded to B3 (sf); previously on May 21, 2010
Downgraded to Caa1 (sf)

Cl. I-A-3, Upgraded to Caa3 (sf); previously on May 21, 2010
Downgraded to C (sf)

Cl. II-A, Upgraded to B3 (sf); previously on May 21, 2010
Downgraded to Caa2 (sf)

Issuer: Bear Stearns Asset Backed Securities Trust 2004-HE1

Cl. M-2, Upgraded to Caa1 (sf); previously on Apr 1, 2013 Affirmed
Caa3 (sf)

Issuer: Long Beach Mortgage Loan Trust 2005-3

Cl. II-A3, Upgraded to Caa1 (sf); previously on Apr 30, 2010
Downgraded to Caa3 (sf)

Issuer: Long Beach Mortgage Loan Trust 2005-WL2

Cl. M-2, Upgraded to Caa2 (sf); previously on Apr 30, 2010
Downgraded to Ca (sf)

Issuer: RAMP Series 2005-RZ1 Trust

Cl. M-5, Upgraded to Ba1 (sf); previously on Jul 15, 2011
Downgraded to Ba2 (sf)

Cl. M-6, Upgraded to Ba3 (sf); previously on Jul 15, 2011
Downgraded to B2 (sf)

Cl. M-7, Upgraded to B3 (sf); previously on Jul 15, 2011
Downgraded to Caa2 (sf)

Cl. M-8, Upgraded to Caa3 (sf); previously on Jul 15, 2011
Downgraded to C (sf)

Issuer: RAMP Series 2005-RZ2 Trust

Cl. M-3, Upgraded to Baa1 (sf); previously on Jul 15, 2011
Downgraded to Baa3 (sf)

Cl. M-4, Upgraded to Ba3 (sf); previously on Jul 15, 2011
Downgraded to B2 (sf)

Cl. M-5, Upgraded to Caa3 (sf); previously on Jul 15, 2011
Downgraded to C (sf)

Issuer: RAMP Series 2005-RZ4 Trust

Cl. M-1, Upgraded to Baa3 (sf); previously on Jul 15, 2011
Downgraded to Ba2 (sf)

Cl. M-2, Upgraded to B1 (sf); previously on Jul 15, 2011
Downgraded to B3 (sf)

Cl. M-3, Upgraded to Caa3 (sf); previously on Jul 15, 2011
Downgraded to C (sf)

Issuer: RAMP Series 2006-RZ1 Trust

Cl. M-1, Upgraded to Baa3 (sf); previously on Jul 15, 2011
Downgraded to Ba2 (sf)

Cl. M-2, Upgraded to B3 (sf); previously on Jul 15, 2011
Downgraded to Caa2 (sf)

Cl. M-3, Upgraded to Caa3 (sf); previously on Jul 15, 2011
Downgraded to C (sf)

Issuer: RASC Series 2005-KS1 Trust

Cl. M-1, Upgraded to B2 (sf); previously on Apr 6, 2010 Downgraded
to Caa1 (sf)

Ratings Rationale

The actions are a result of the recent performance of the
underlying pools and reflect Moody's updated loss expectations on
the pools. The upgrades are a result of improving performance of
the related pools and/or faster pay-down of the bonds due to high
prepayments/faster liquidations. The downgrades are a result of
deteriorating performance and/or structural features resulting in
higher expected losses for the bonds than previously anticipated.

The principal methodology used in these ratings was "US RMBS
Surveillance Methodology" published in November 2013.

Factors that would lead to an upgrade or downgrade of the rating

Ratings in the US RMBS sector remain exposed to the high level of
macroeconomic uncertainty, and in particular the unemployment
rate. The unemployment rate fell to 6.7% in December 2013 from
7.9% in December 2012 . Moody's forecasts an unemployment central
range of 6.5% to 7.5% for the 2014 year. Deviations from this
central scenario could lead to rating actions in the sector.House
prices are another key driver of US RMBS performance. Moody's
expects house prices to continue to rise in 2014. LoAr increases
than Moody's expects or decreases could lead to negative rating
actions. Finally, performance of RMBS continues to remain highly
dependent on servicer procedures. Any change resulting from
servicing transfers or other policy or regulatory change can
impact the performance of these transactions.


* Moody's Takes Action on $679MM of Subprime RMBS Issued 2005-2007
------------------------------------------------------------------
Moody's Investors Service has upgraded the ratings of 10 tranches
and downgraded the ratings of 8 tranches from 12 transactions
backed by Subprime mortgage loans.

Complete rating actions are as follows:

Issuer: Argent Securities Inc., Series 2005-W5

Cl. A-2C, Downgraded to Caa3 (sf); previously on Aug 21, 2012
Downgraded to Caa1 (sf)

Cl. A-2D, Downgraded to Caa3 (sf); previously on Apr 12, 2010
Downgraded to Caa2 (sf)

Issuer: CWABS Asset-Backed Certificates Trust 2005-7

Cl. MV-2, Upgraded to B2 (sf); previously on Apr 14, 2010
Downgraded to Caa1 (sf)

Issuer: CWABS Asset-Backed Certificates Trust 2005-BC5

Cl. M-1, Upgraded to Ba3 (sf); previously on Jun 27, 2013 Upgraded
to B2 (sf)

Cl. M-2, Upgraded to Caa3 (sf); previously on Jun 27, 2013
Upgraded to Ca (sf)

Issuer: CWABS Asset-Backed Certificates Trust 2006-10

Cl. 1-AF-2, Downgraded to Caa1 (sf); previously on Aug 21, 2012
Downgraded to B3 (sf)

Issuer: CWABS Asset-Backed Certificates Trust 2006-BC2

Cl. 2-A-4, Upgraded to Caa2 (sf); previously on Aug 21, 2012
Confirmed at Ca (sf)

Issuer: CWABS Asset-Backed Certificates Trust 2006-BC5

Cl. 2-A-2, Downgraded to Caa1 (sf); previously on Apr 14, 2010
Confirmed at B3 (sf)

Issuer: CWABS Asset-Backed Certificates Trust 2007-BC1

Cl. 2-A-1, Downgraded to B2 (sf); previously on Apr 14, 2010
Confirmed at Ba3 (sf)

Issuer: First NLC Trust 2005-2

Cl. M-1, Upgraded to Ba1 (sf); previously on Apr 6, 2010
Downgraded to B1 (sf)

Cl. M-2, Upgraded to Caa3 (sf); previously on Apr 6, 2010
Downgraded to Ca (sf)

Issuer: MASTR Asset Backed Securities Trust 2005-HE2

Cl. M-2, Upgraded to B3 (sf); previously on Mar 4, 2013 Upgraded
to Caa2 (sf)

Issuer: MASTR Asset Backed Securities Trust 2005-WMC1

Cl. M-4, Upgraded to B1 (sf); previously on Mar 4, 2013 Upgraded
to B3 (sf)

Cl. M-5, Upgraded to Caa3 (sf); previously on Mar 4, 2013 Affirmed
C (sf)

Issuer: Option One Mortgage Loan Trust 2007-2

Cl. I-A-1, Downgraded to Ca (sf); previously on Aug 6, 2010
Downgraded to Caa3 (sf)

Cl. II-A-1, Downgraded to Ca (sf); previously on Aug 6, 2010
Downgraded to Caa3 (sf)

Cl. III-A-2, Downgraded to Ca (sf); previously on Aug 6, 2010
Downgraded to Caa3 (sf)

Issuer: OwnIt Mortgage Loan Trust 2005-1

Cl. M-2, Upgraded to Caa1 (sf); previously on Jul 14, 2010
Downgraded to Caa3 (sf)

Ratings Rationale

The actions are a result of the recent performance of the
underlying pools and reflect Moody's updated loss expectations on
the pools.

The principal methodology used in these ratings was "US RMBS
Surveillance Methodology" published in November 2013.

Factors that would lead to an upgrade or downgrade of the rating

Ratings in the US RMBS sector remain exposed to the high level of
macroeconomic uncertainty, and in particular the unemployment
rate. The unemployment rate fell to 6.7% in December 2013 from
7.9% in December 2012 . Moody's forecasts an unemployment central
range of 6.5% to 7.5% for the 2014 year. Deviations from this
central scenario could lead to rating actions in the sector. House
prices are another key driver of US RMBS performance. Moody's
expects house prices to continue to rise in 2014. Lower increases
than Moody's expects or decreases could lead to negative rating
actions. Finally, performance of RMBS continues to remain highly
dependent on servicer procedures. Any change resulting from
servicing transfers or other policy or regulatory change can
impact the performance of these transactions.


* Moody's Ups Ratings on $340MM of Subprime RMBS by Various Trusts
------------------------------------------------------------------
Moody's Investors Service has upgraded the ratings of 16 tranches
from seven transactions backed by Subprime mortgage loans.

Complete rating actions are as follows:

Issuer: Amortizing Residential Collateral Trust 2004-1

Cl. M1, Upgraded to Baa3 (sf); previously on May 4, 2012
Downgraded to Ba1 (sf)

Cl. M2, Upgraded to Ba1 (sf); previously on May 4, 2012 Downgraded
to Ba2 (sf)

Cl. M5, Upgraded to Caa2 (sf); previously on Mar 18, 2011
Downgraded to Ca (sf)

Issuer: Citigroup Mortgage Loan Trust, Series 2003-HE3

Cl. A, Upgraded to Baa1 (sf); previously on Apr 9, 2012 Downgraded
to Baa3 (sf)

Underlying Rating: Upgraded to Baa1 (sf); previously on Apr 9,
2012 Downgraded to Baa3 (sf)

Financial Guarantor: Ambac Assurance Corporation (Segregated
Account - Unrated)

Issuer: Citigroup Mortgage Loan Trust, Series 2004-RES1

Cl. M-2, Upgraded to B1 (sf); previously on Apr 9, 2012 Confirmed
at Caa1 (sf)

Cl. M-3, Upgraded to Caa2 (sf); previously on Apr 9, 2012
Confirmed at C (sf)

Cl. M-4, Upgraded to Caa3 (sf); previously on Apr 9, 2012
Confirmed at C (sf)

Issuer: Park Place Securities, Inc., Asset-Backed Pass-Through
Certificates, Series 2004-WHQ1

Cl. M-2, Upgraded to B1 (sf); previously on Apr 1, 2013 Affirmed
B3 (sf)

Cl. M-3, Upgraded to Caa1 (sf); previously on Apr 1, 2013 Affirmed
Caa3 (sf)

Issuer: People's Choice Home Loan Securities Trust 2004-2

Cl. M1, Upgraded to A2 (sf); previously on Apr 1, 2013 Downgraded
to A3 (sf)

Issuer: ACE Securities Corp. Home Equity Loan Trust, Series 2005-
HE7

Cl. A-1B2, Upgraded to Baa2 (sf); previously on Jun 27, 2013
Upgraded to Ba1 (sf)

Cl. A-2D, Upgraded to Baa2 (sf); previously on Jun 27, 2013
Upgraded to Ba1 (sf)

Issuer: Citigroup Mortgage Loan Trust 2006-HE2

Cl. A-1, Upgraded to Ba2 (sf); previously on Aug 20, 2012
Confirmed at B1 (sf)

Cl. A-2C, Upgraded to B1 (sf); previously on Apr 6, 2010
Downgraded to B3 (sf)

Cl. A-2D, Upgraded to Caa1 (sf); previously on Aug 20, 2012
Confirmed at Caa3 (sf)

Cl. M-1, Upgraded to Ca (sf); previously on Apr 6, 2010 Downgraded
to C (sf)

Ratings Rationale

The actions are a result of the recent performance of the
underlying pools and reflect Moody's updated loss expectations on
the pools. The upgrades are a result of improving performance of
the related pools and/or faster pay-down of the bonds due to high
prepayments/faster liquidations.

The rating action on Class M-1 issued by People's Choice 2004-2
also reflects the correction of an error. In prior rating actions,
the bond was assumed to have a weak interest reimbursement
mechanism, whereby missed interest payments to the bond are
reimbursed at the bottom of the waterfall in subsequent periods.
However, further review of the interest waterfall detailed in the
pooling and servicing agreement revealed that the transaction has
a strong reimbursement mechanism, whereby missed interest payments
to the bonds are reimbursed at the top of the waterfall in
subsequent periods. The error has now been corrected, and the
rating action reflects this change.

The principal methodology used in these ratings was "US RMBS
Surveillance Methodology" published in November 2013.
Factors that would lead to an upgrade or downgrade of the rating

The primary source of assumption uncertainty is the uncertainty in
our central macroeconomic forecast and performance volatility due
to servicer-related issues. The unemployment rate fell from 7.9%
in December 2012 to 6.7% in December 2013. Moody's forecasts an
unemployment central range of 6.5% to 7.5% for the 2014 year.
Moody's expects house prices to continue to rise in 2014.
Performance of RMBS continues to remain highly dependent on
servicer procedures. Any change resulting from servicing transfers
or other policy or regulatory change can impact the performance of
these transactions.


* S&P Raises 18 Ratings on 25 U.S. Synthetic CDO Transactions
-------------------------------------------------------------
Standard & Poor's Ratings Services took various rating actions on
25 synthetic collateralized debt obligation (CDO) transactions:

   -- S&P placed its ratings on seven tranches from seven
      investment-grade corporate-backed synthetic CDO transactions
      on CreditWatch positive.

   -- S&P placed its rating on one tranche from a CDO of a
      corporate CDO transaction on CreditWatch positive.

   -- S&P raised its ratings on 16 tranches from 13 investment-
      grade corporate-backed synthetic CDO transactions and
      removed these ratings from CreditWatch positive.

   -- S&P raised its rating on one tranche from a high-yield
      corporate-backed synthetic CDO transaction and removed this
      rating from CreditWatch positive.

   -- S&P raised its rating on a tranche from one loss-based
      leveraged super senior transaction.

   -- S&P also affirmed its ratings on two tranches from two
      investment-grade corporate-backed synthetic CDO transactions
      and removed these ratings from CreditWatch positive.

These rating actions followed S&P's monthly review of synthetic
CDO transactions.

The CreditWatch positive placements and upgrades reflect the
seasoning of the transactions, the rating stability of the
obligors in the underlying reference portfolios over the past few
months, and the synthetic rated overcollateralization ratios that
rose above 100% at the next highest rating level.

RATINGS RAISED

Archstone Synthetic CDO II SPC
                           Rating
Class               To                     From
D-2                 AAA (sf)               AA (sf)/Watch Pos

Athenee CDO PLC
Series 2007-5
                           Rating
Class               To                     From
                    BB- (sf)               B+ (sf)/Watch Pos


Credit Default Swap
Series 795246
                           Rating
Class               To                    From
Trnch               Bsrb (sf)             B-srb (sf)/Watch Pos

Greylock Synthetic CDO 2006
Series 2
                           Rating
Class               To                     From
A3-$FMS             BBB- (sf)              BB+ (sf)/Watch Pos
A3-$LMS             BBB- (sf)              BB+ (sf)/Watch Pos
A3A-$FMS            BBB- (sf)              BB+ (sf)/Watch Pos
A3B-$LMS            BBB- (sf)              BB+ (sf)/Watch Pos

Infiniti SPC Limited
Series 10A-2
                           Rating
Class               To                     From
10A-2               BBB+ (sf)              BBB (sf)/Watch Pos

Marvel Finance 2007-3 LLC
                           Rating
Class               To                     From
IA                  BB+ (sf)               BB (sf)/Watch Pos

Morgan Stanley ACES SPC
Series 2006-35
                           Rating
Class               To                     From
I                   BB- (sf)               B+ (sf)/Watch Pos

PARCS Master Trust
Class 2007-6 Calvados
                           Rating
Class               To                     From
Trust Unit          BBB (sf)               BB (sf)/Watch Pos

PARCS-R Master Trust
Series 2007-12
                           Rating
Class               To                     From
Trust Unit          A- (sf)                BBB+ (sf)/Watch Pos

PARCS-R Master Trust
Series 2007-2
                           Rating
Class               To                     From
Units               A (sf)                 BBB+ (sf)

Repacs Trust Series 2007 Rigi Debt Units
                           Rating
Class               To                     From
Debt Units          BB+ (sf)               BB- (sf)/Watch Pos

STARTS (Cayman) Ltd.
Series 2007-16
                           Rating
Class               To                     From
B2-J2               B+ (sf)                B (sf)/Watch Pos

STARTS (Cayman) Ltd.
Series 2007-28
                           Rating
Class               To                     From
A4-D4               B+ (sf)                B (sf)/Watch Pos

Strata Trust Series 2007-5
                           Rating
Class               To                     From
Nts                 BB+ (sf)               BB- (sf)/Watch Pos

Strata Trust Series 2007-7
                           Rating
Class               To                     From
Nts                 A- (sf)                BBB- (sf)/Watch Pos

RATINGS PLACED ON CREDITWATCH POSITIVE
Cloverie PLC
Series 2007-43
                           Rating
Class               To                     From
Nts                 BB- (sf)/Watch Pos     BB- (sf)

Cloverie PLC
Series 2007-44
                           Rating
Class               To                     From
Nts                 BB- (sf)/Watch Pos     BB- (sf)

Credit Default Swap
Series CRA700426
                           Rating
Class               To                     From
Swap                AA+srp (sf)/Watch Pos  AA+srp (sf)

Credit Default Swap
Series CRA700436
                           Rating
Class               To                     From
Swap                AA+srp (sf)/Watch Pos  AA+srp (sf)

Landgrove Synthetic CDO SPC
Series 2007-2
                           Rating
Class               To                     From
A                   BB (sf)/Watch Pos      BB (sf)


Marvel Finance 2007-4 LLC
                           Rating
Class               To                     From
IA                  BBB- (sf)/Watch Pos    BBB- (sf)

Mt. Kailash Series II
                           Rating
Class               To                     From
Cr Link Ln          B+ (sf)/Watch Pos      B+ (sf)

Rutland Rated Investments
Series 2006-3

                           Rating
Class               To                     From
A6-$LS              B (sf)/Watch Pos       B (sf)

RATINGS AFFIRMED
Morgan Stanley ACES SPC
Series 2007-6
                           Rating
Class               To                     From
IIA                 A (sf)                 A (sf)/Watch Pos

Morgan Stanley ACES SPC
Series 2008-8
                           Rating
Class               To                     From
IA                  A (sf)                 A (sf)/Watch Pos

                             *********

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.

A list of Meetings, Conferences and Seminars appears in each
Wednesday's edition of the TCR.  Submissions about insolvency-
related conferences are encouraged.  Send announcements to
conferences@bankrupt.com by e-mail.

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 the nation's bankruptcy courts.  The
list includes links to freely downloadable of these small-dollar
petitions in Acrobat PDF documents.

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.

                           *********

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, Ivy B. Magdadaro, Carlo Fernandez,
Christopher G. Patalinghug, and Peter A. Chapman, Editors.

Copyright 2014.  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 202-241-8200.


                  *** End of Transmission ***