alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
(logo)KPMG Peat Marwick LLP
     
           750 B Street
           San Diego, CA 92101



                        INDEPENDENT ACCOUNTANT'S REPORT



Wells Fargo and Companies:

We have examined the accompanying Management's Report on Compliance with Minimum
Servicing  Standards  (management's  assertion) about Wells Fargo and Companies'
compliance  with the minimum  servicing  standards  identified  in the  Mortgage
Bankers Association of America's UNIFORM SINGLE ATTESTATION PROGRAM FOR MORTGAGE
BANKERS  (USAP) as of and for the year ended  December 31, 1995.  Management  is
responsible  for Wells  Fargo  and  Companies'  compliance  with  those  minimum
servicing standards. Our responsibility is to express an opinion an management's
assertion about the entity's compliance based on our examination.

Our  examination  was  made in  accordance  with  standards  established  by the
American  Institute of Certified Public Accountants and,  accordingly,  included
examining,  on  a  test   basis,  evidence  about  Wells  Fargo  and  Companies'
compliance  with the  minimum  servicing  standards  and  performing  such other
procedures as we considered necessary in the circumstances.  We believe that our
examination  provides a reasonable  basis for our opinion.  Our examination does
not provide a legal determination on Wells Fargo and Companies'  compliance with
the minimum servicing standards.

In our opinion,  management's  assertion that Wells Fargo and Companies complied
with the aforementioned minimum servicing standards as of and for the year ended
December 3l, 1995 is fairly stated in all material respects.



                                                        /s/KPMG Peat Marwick LLP



January 16, 1996



(logo) Member Firm of
Klynveld Peat Marwick Goerdeler
Exhibit 99.1

CERTIFICATION PURSUANT TO  18 U.S.C. SECTION 1350,  AS ADOPTED PURSUANT TO  SECTION 906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002

Pursuant to the 18 U.S.C. § 1350, as adopted pursuant to § 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, each of the undersigned officers of
Com21, Inc. (the "Company"), does hereby certify with respect to the Annual Report of the Company on Form 10-K/A for the year ended December 31, 2002, as filed with
the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the "Report"), that:

(1)  The
Report fully complies with the requirements of section 13(a) or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934; and

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

Dated:
April 30, 2003

|/s/ GEORGE MERRICKGeorge Merrick
President, Chief Executive Officer    | 
|---------------------------------------------------------------------- | 
|Dated: April 30, 2003                                                  | 
|/s/ RALPH MARIMONRalph Marimon
Vice President, Chief Financial Officer | 

---

QuickLinks
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<ARTICLE> 5
       
<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   6-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          DEC-31-1998
<PERIOD-START>                             JAN-01-1998
<PERIOD-END>                               JUN-30-1998
<CASH>                                         696,979
<SECURITIES>                                         0
<RECEIVABLES>                                   98,146
<ALLOWANCES>                                         0
<INVENTORY>                                          0
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                                     0
<PP&E>                                      11,030,940
<DEPRECIATION>                               4,087,014
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                              13,494,243
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                       11,744,860
<BONDS>                                              0
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                             0
<OTHER-SE>                                   1,749,383
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                13,494,243
<SALES>                                      2,408,269
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                             2,408,269
<CGS>                                                0
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                        0
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                             2,219,124
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                     0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                             464,970
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                      0
<INCOME-TAX>                                         0
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                                  0
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                 (322,589)
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                        0
<EPS-DILUTED>                                        0
        

</TABLE>
Exhibit
      22.1





**CONSENT
      OF INDEPENDENT REGISTERED PUBLIC ACCOUNTING FIRM**








To
      the
      Board of Directors of


Cicero,
      Inc.





We
      consent to the incorporation by reference in the Annual Report on Form 10-K
      of
      our report dated March 16, 2007, (which report expresses an unqualified opinion
      and includes an explanatory paragraph relating to the Company's ability to
      continue as a going concern) of Cicero, Inc. (formerly Level 8 Systems, Inc.)
      and Subsidiaries for the year ended December 31, 2006.










/s/Margolis
&
Company
      P.C.





Certified
      Public Accountants








Bala
      Cynwyd, PA


March
      30,
      2007
Exhibit 32.2

CERTIFICATION OF CHIEF ACCOUNTING OFFICER

Pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act
of 2002 (18 U.S.C. 1350)

The undersigned, Kevin G. Wills, Executive Vice President and Chief Financial Officer of Saks Incorporated (the
Company), has executed this certification in connection with the filing with the Securities and Exchange Commission of the Companys Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q for the quarter ended May 2, 2009 (the Report).

The undersigned hereby certifies that:



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



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

IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the undersigned has executed this certification as of the 4th day of June, 2009.



|                                                    
|----------------------------------------------------
|/s/ Kevin G. Wills                                  
|Kevin G. Wills                                      
|Executive Vice President and Chief Financial Officer

A signed original of this written statement required by Section 906 has been provided to Saks Incorporated
and will be retained by Saks Incorporated and furnished to the Securities and Exchange Commission or its staff upon request.
#### § 1316.48 Notice of appearance.

Any person entitled to a hearing and desiring to appear in any hearing, shall, if he or she has not filed a request for hearing, file within the time specified in the notice of proposed rulemaking, a written notice of appearance in the following format (see the Table of DEA Mailing Addresses in § 1321.01 of this chapter for the current mailing address):

(Date)

Drug Enforcement Administration, Attn: Hearing Clerk/OALJ

(Mailing Address)

Subject: Notice of Appearance

Dear Sir:

Please take notice that _____________ (Name of person) will appear in the matter of: _____________ (Identification of the proceeding).

(A) (State with particularity the interest of the person in the proceeding.).

(B) (State with particularity the objections or issues, if any, concerning which the person desires to be heard.).

(C) (State briefly the position of the person with regard to the particular objections or issues.).

All notices to be sent pursuant to this appearance should be addressed to:

(Name)

(Street Address)

(City and State)

Respectfully yours,

(Signature of Person)

[81 FR 97041, Dec. 30, 2016]
cc: Hon. Michael Villani, District Judge Robert Earl Jones Attorney General/Carson City Clark County District Attorney Eighth District Court Clerk

2
38220.

#### RAPER v. ELLIOTT.

Decided November 3, 1960.

*Vernon W. Duncan,*for plaintiff in error.

*Raymond Reed, Robert K. Ballew,*contra.

Jordan, Judge.

The judgment of this court *(Raper v. Elliott,*101 Ga. App. 560, 115 S. E. 2d 237), affirming the trial court’s overruling of the general demurrer of the defendant, having been reversed by the Supreme Court of Georgia on certiorari *(Raper v. Elliott,*216 Ga. 328, 116 S. E. 2d 555), the said judgment of this court is vacated and judgment of the trial court overruling the general demurrer is reversed in accordance with the judgment of the Supreme Court.

*Judgment reversed.*

*Townsend, P. J., Carlisle and Frankum, JJ., concur.*
[No. 39403-7-I.

Division One.

January 26, 1998.]

#### The State of Washington, *Respondent,*v. Vincent Cruz, *Appellant.*

Appeal from a judgment of the Superior Court for King County, No. 96-1-02802-5, Charles V. Johnson, J., entered September 19, 1996. *Affirmed*by unpublished per curiam opinion.
Summary of Interagency working comments recei ved on draft rule under EO 12866 and EO 13563 review. Subject to further policy review.

1 Below is a summary of interagency comments recei ved during EO 12866 and EO 13563 review of the draft final rule establishing GHG emissions standards a nd fuel efficiency standards for medium and heavy duty trucks. They are for your consideration and subject to further policy review.

1) Interagency commenter requests the following inser t for Section 6-2 of the RIA (Please insert

after 1 st ¶):

The agencies also analyzed each alternative relative to an alternate baseline— 

### EIA’s AEO forecast projection of future new truck performance abse nt regulation. This baseline provides another measure of the impacts of the standards and the alternatives. The agencies were not able to fully analyze the net benefits of the rule under this baseline because we do not have access to the underlying cost assumptions of EIA’s model. However, Table 6-20a presents estimated CO 2 

### and oil reductions for the rule and the alternatives, relative to EIA projections of what would occur without the new regulation.

Table 6-20a: Annual CO 2 and Oil Reductions Relative to the AEO 2011 Projections

DOWNSTREAM

CO 2 REDUCTIONS (MMT) OIL REDUCTIONS (BILLION GALLONS)

2030 2050 2030 2050

Alt. 2 Less Stringent ‐‐ Total 15

‐ 12 1.5

‐ 1.3

Tractors 13

‐ 14 1.3

‐ 1.3

HD Pickup Trucks

‐ 2

‐ 5

‐ 0.1

‐ 0.5

Vocational Vehicles 4 5 0.3 0.5

Alt. 3 Preferred ‐‐ Total 22

‐ 2 2.1

‐ 0.3

Tractors 16

‐ 10 1.5

‐ 0.9

HD Pickup Trucks

‐ 1

‐ 3 0

‐ 0.4

Vocational Vehicles 6 9 0.6 0.9

Alt. 4 More Stringent ‐ Total 35 17 3.5 1.7

Tractors 24 1 2.3 0.2

HD Pickup Trucks 1

‐ 1 0.1

‐ 0.1

Vocational Vehicles 10 16 1 1.6

Alt. 5 Max Technology ‐ Total 60 56 5.9 5.5

Tractors 32 12 3.1 1.2

HD Pickup Trucks 6 8 0.7 0.8

Vocational Vehicles 22 35 2.1 3.4Summary of Interagency working comments recei ved on draft rule under EO 12866 and EO 13563 review. Subject to further policy review.

2 2) Section I.G. “O. G. Future HD GHG and Fu el Consumption Rulemakings”. Interagency
commenters note that this section does not address additional flexibility in future rulemakings. Will agencies add language to this section to indicate there will be additional flexibility in averaging, banking, and trading?
##### 

##### U.S. Geological Survey   Scientific Investigations Map 2848

## Earthquakes and Faults in the San Francisco Bay Area (1970-2003)

### *By* Benjamin M. Sleeter, James P. Calzia, Stephen R. Walter, Florence L. Wong, and George J. Saucedo

### 2004

| The map depicts both active and inactive faults and earthquakes magnitude 1.5 to 7.0 in the greater San Francisco Bay area. Twenty-two earthquakes magnitude 5.0 and greater are indicated on the map and listed chronologically in an accompanying table.  The data are compiled from records from 1970-2003.  The bathymetry was generated from a digital version of NOAA maps and hydrogeographic data for San Francisco Bay.  Elevation data are from the USGS National Elevation Database.  Landsat satellite image is from seven Landsat 7 Enhanced Thematic Mapper Plus scenes.  Fault data are reproduced with permission from the California Geological Survey.  The earthquake data are from the Northern California Earthquake Catalog. |
|----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|

Download the Earthquakes and Faults map as a PDF file (33 x 46 inches; 26.8 MB)

Download just the table for the map as a PDF file (448 KB).  You can open this in one window for reference while you pan and zoom around on the map in another window.

View the Earthquakes and Faults map as a JPG file.  This file is only 72 dpi which is screen resolution but not good enough to print.  It has been compressed  in file-size which reduced its quality but it works without Acrobat if you need that.  It is too large to fit on the screen but you can pan down and across to see it all. (33 x 46 inches; 1.6 MB)

For questions about the content of this report, contact Benjamin Sleeter

----

Download a current version of Acrobat   Reader for free

| Help   | PDF help   | Western reports  main page | Western Scientific Investigations Maps || Privacy   Statement | Disclaimer   | Accessibility || Geologic   Division | Geography Discipline   |

----

This map is also available in print from:

USGS Information Services, Box 25286,   Federal Center, Denver, CO 80225  telephone: 303-202-4210; e-mail: infoservices@usgs.gov

----

Department of the Interior
U.S. Geological Survey
Michael Diggles
Editorial Note on Part 170
Editorial Note: Nomenclature changes to part 170 appear at 66 FR 56035, Nov. 6, 2001, and 69 FR 13717, Mar. 24, 2004.

§ 170.230 Part 2 of a GRAS notice: Identity, method of manufacture, specifications, and physical or technical effect. In Part 2 of your GRAS notice, you must include: ( a ) Scientific data and information that identifies the notified substance. ( 1 ) Examples of appropriate data and information include the chemical name, applicable registry numbers (such as a Chemical Abstracts Service (CAS) registry number or an Enzyme Commission (EC) number), empirical formula, structural formula, quantitative composition, and characteristic properties.
( 2 ) When the source of a notified substance is a biological material, you must include data and information sufficient to identify: ( i ) The taxonomic source (*e.g.,* genus, species) including, as applicable, data and information at the sub-species level (*e.g.,* variety, strain);
( ii ) The part of any plant or animal used as the source; and
( iii ) Any known toxicants that could be in the source;
( b ) A description of the method of manufacture of the notified substance in sufficient detail to evaluate the safety of the notified substance as manufactured;
( c ) Specifications for food-grade material; and
( d ) When necessary to demonstrate safety, relevant data and information bearing on the physical or other technical effect the notified substance is intended to produce, including the quantity of the notified substance required to produce such effect.
March 17, 1998



Mr. R. G. Reherman
Mr. T. L. Burke
Southern Indiana Gas and Electric Company
20 N.W. Fourth Street
Evansville, Indiana  47741

J. H. Byington, Jr., Esq.
Winthrop, Stimson, Putnam & Roberts
40 Wall Street
New York, New York  10005

Dear Gentlemen:

    SIGCORP, Inc. and Southern Indiana Gas and Electric
Company will each file an Annual Report on Form 10-K for the
fiscal year ended December 31, 1997 ("Form 10-K") before
April 1, 1997 which will be accompanied by certain exhibits.

    We hereby authorize you, or any one of you, to complete
said Forms 10-K and to remedy any deficiencies with respect
to said Forms 10-K by appropriate amendment or amendments;
and we hereby make, constitute and appoint each of you our
true and lawful attorney for each of us and in each of our
names, places and steads, both in our individual capacities
as directors and that of officers of SIGCORP, Inc. and
Southern Indiana Gas and Electric Company, to sign and cause
to be filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission said
Forms 10-K, any appropriate amendment or amendments thereto,
and any exhibits thereto.

    The undersigned, SIGCORP, Inc. and Southern Indiana Gas
and Electric Company, also authorize you and any one of you
to sign said Forms 10-K and any amendment or amendments
thereto on its behalf as attorney-in-fact for its respective
officers, and to file the same as aforesaid

together with exhibits.

                         Very truly yours,

                         SIGCORP, INC. and
                         SOUTHERN INDIANA GAS AND
                         ELECTRIC COMPANY



                         By    R. G. Reherman,
                          Chairman, President
                          and Chief Executive
                          Officer, SIGCORP, Inc.
                          Chairman, Southern Indiana Gas
                          and Electric Company



John M. Dunn                  Ronald G. Reherman


John D. Engelbrecht           Richard W. Shymanski


Andrew E. Goebel              Donald E. Smith


Robert L. Koch II             James S. Vinson


Donald A. Rausch              T. L. Burke


                              S. M. Kerney
Editorial Note on Part 184
Editorial Note: Nomenclature changes to part 184 appear at 66 FR 56035, Nov. 6, 2001; 66 FR 66742, Dec. 27, 2001; 68 FR 15355, Mar. 31, 2003; 69 FR 13717, Mar. 24, 2004; 70 FR 40880, July 15, 2005; 70 FR 67651, Nov. 8, 2005; and 81 FR 49897, July 29, 2016.

§ 184.1297 Ferric chloride. ( a ) Ferric chloride (iron (III) chloride, FeC13, CAS Reg. No. 7705-08-0) may be prepared from iron and chlorine or from ferric oxide and hydrogen chloride. The pure material occurs as hydroscopic, hexagonal, dark crystals. Ferric chloride hexahydrate (iron (III) chloride hexahydrate, FeC13. 6H20, CAS Reg. No. 10025-77-1) is readily formed when ferric chloride is exposed to moisture.
( b ) The ingredient must be of a purity suitable for its intended use.
( c ) In accordance with § 184.1(b)(1) the ingredient is used in food as a flavoring agent as defined in § 170.3(o)(12) of this chapter, with no limitation other than current good manufacturing practice.
( d ) Prior sanctions for this ingredient different from the uses established in this section do not exist or have been waived.
[53 FR 16864, May 12, 1988, as amended at 73 FR 8607, Feb. 14, 2008]
Exhibit 23.1


              Consent of Independent Certified Public Accountants



The Board of Directors
BNCCORP, Inc.:


We consent to  incorporation  by reference of our report dated January 29, 2004,
relating to the consolidated balance sheets of BNCCORP, Inc. and subsidiaries as
of  December  31,  2003 and 2002,  and the related  consolidated  statements  of
income,  comprehensive income,  stockholders' equity, and cash flows for each of
the years in the three-year period ended December 31, 2003, which report appears
in the  December  31,  2003 Form 10-K of  BNCCORP,  Inc.,  and in the  following
Registration  Statements  of  BNCCORP,  Inc.:  Nos.  333-03512,  333-58584,  and
333-98647 on Form S-8.




Minneapolis, Minnesota
March 19, 2004
UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 04-6634

RAYMOND FRAZIER, Petitioner - Appellant, versus WILLIAM S. HAINES, Warden, Huttonsville Correctional Center; MARK WILLIAMSON, Warden, Denmar Correctional Center, Respondents - Appellees. Appeal from the United States District Court for the Southern District of West Virginia, at Huntington. Robert C. Chambers, District Judge. (CA-03-565-3) Submitted: July 29, 2004 Decided: August 5, 2004 Before LUTTIG, MICHAEL, and DUNCAN, Circuit Judges. Dismissed by unpublished per curiam opinion. Raymond Frazier, Appellant Pro Se. Dawn Ellen Warfield, OFFICE OF THE ATTORNEY GENERAL OF WEST VIRGINIA, Charleston, West Virginia, for Appellees. Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. See Local Rule 36(c).- 2 - PER CURIAM: Raymond Frazier seeks to appeal the district court’s order dismissing as untimely his petition filed under 28 U.S.C. § 2254 (2000). The order is not appealable unless a circuit justice or judge issues a certificate of appealability. 28 U.S.C. § 2253(c)(1) (2000). A certificate of appealability will not issue absent “a substantial showing of the denial of a constitutional right.” 28 U.S.C. § 2253(c)(2) (2000). A prisoner satisfies this standard by demonstrating that reasonable jurists would find that his constitutional claims are debatable and that any dispositive procedural rulings by the district court are also debatable or wrong. See Miller-El v. Cockrell , 537 U.S. 322, 336 (2003); Slack v. McDaniel , 529 U.S. 473, 484 (2000); Rose v. Lee , 252 F.3d 676, 683 (4th Cir. 2001). We have independently reviewed the record and conclude that Frazier has not made the requisite showing. Accordingly, we deny a certificate of appealability and dismiss the appeal. We dispense with oral argument because the facts and legal contentions are adequately presented in the materials before the court and argument would not aid the decisional process.

DISMISSED