alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
EXHIBIT 99.4


                     CHIEF FINANCIAL OFFICER CERTIFICATION
                      PURSUANT TO 18 U.S.C. SECTION 1350

         In connection with this first amended annual report of Ultrapetrol
(Bahamas) Limited (the "Company") on Form 20-F for the period ending December
31, 2002, as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date
hereof (the "Report"), the undersigned Chief Financial Officer of the Company,
hereby certifies pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350 that:

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

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

      This certification is made solely for the purposes of 18 U.S.C. Section
1350, and not for any other purpose.


Date: May 1, 2003


/s/ Alberto G. Deyros
--------------------------------
Alberto G. Deyros

Chief Financial Officer




02351.0001 #401975
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


     In  connection  with the Quarterly Report of Amalgamated Technologies, Inc.
(the  "Company")  on  Form  10-QSB for the quarter ended March 31, 2003 as filed
with  the  Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the "Report"),
I,  David Rector, Chief Executive and Financial Officer of the Company, certify,
pursuant  to  18  U.S.C. Section 1350, as adopted pursuant to Section 906 of the
Sarbanes-Oxley  Act  of  2002,  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.


/s/  David  Rector
------------------
Name:     David  Rector
Title:    Chief  Executive  and  Financial  Officer
Date:     May  13,  2003


                                    PAGE 13

<PAGE>
EXHIBIT
32.1 -- CERTIFICATION OF CHIEF EXECUTIVE OFFICER AND ACTING CHIEF FINANCIAL
OFFICER OF FIRST CAPITAL INTERNATIONAL, INC., PURSUANT TO SECTION 906 OF THE
SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002 AND SECTION 1350 OF 18 U.S.C. 63.








I, Alex
Genin, the Chief Executive Officer and Acting Chief Financial Officer of First
Capital International, Inc. hereby certify that First Capital International,
Inc.'s periodic report on Form 10Q and the financial statements contained
therein fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) or 15(d) of the
Securities Exchange Act of 1934 (15 U.S.C. 78m or 78o(d) and that information
contained in the periodic report on Form 10Q and the financial statements
contained therein fairly represents, in all material respects, the financial
condition and results of the operations of First Capital International,
Inc.








Date:  May
      20 2008
            /s/
      Alex GeninChief
      Executive Officer andActing
      Chief Financial Officer
[Federal Register Volume 65, Number 90 (Tuesday, May 9, 2000)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Page 26750]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 00-11588]


=======================================================================
-----------------------------------------------------------------------

POSTAL SERVICE

39 CFR Part 111


Barcode Requirements for Special Services Labels

AGENCY: Postal Service.

ACTION: Extension of compliance date for commercially printed special 
services labels.

-----------------------------------------------------------------------

SUMMARY: In response to information received by the Postal Service from 
the mailing community, the Postal Service is extending the compliance 
date for barcoded special services labels from June 10, 2000, to 
February 3, 2001.

DATES: Effective May 9, 2000. All parties must comply with the final 
rules (published on January 24, 2000, at 65 FR 3609) for barcoding of 
special services labels and forms by February 3, 2001.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Tandelyia Samuels, (202) 268-5236.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: On January 24, 2000, the Postal Service made 
a public announcement in the Federal Register, Volume 65, that any 
mailer using commercially printed special services labels on or after 
June 10, 2000, will be required to meet the new barcoded special 
services label requirements. In response to information received by the 
Postal Service from the mailing community since the January 24, 2000, 
announcement, the Postal Service is extending the compliance date for 
barcoded special services labels from June 10, 2000, to February 3, 
2001. Any mail with PS Form 3800, Certified Mail Receipt, PS Form 
3813P, Receipt for Insured Mail--Domestic-International, PS Form 8099, 
Receipt for Recorded Delivery, Label 200, Registered Mail, and PS Form 
3804, Return Receipt for Merchandise, on or after February 3, 2001, 
will be required to meet the barcode requirements. The final rule 
changes affecting the barcoding of special services labels and forms 
are set forth in the June 1 update to the Domestic Mail Manual (DMM) 
and in the International Mail Manual (IMM). The technical requirements 
for producing barcoded special services labels and forms are published 
in Publication 109, Special Services Technical Guide--Postal Forms and 
Labels, published March 2000. Publication 109 is available on the 
Postal Service Web site (http://www.usps.com). Click on ``Get Info,'' 
then ``Postal Periodicals and Publications,'' then ``Publications,'' 
and scroll to Publication 109.

Stanley F. Mires,
Chief Counsel, Legislative.
[FR Doc. 00-11588 Filed 5-8-00; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 7710-12-U
#### § 102.73 Initiation of proceedings.

Whenever it is charged that any person has engaged in an unfair labor practice within the meaning of Section 8(b)(7) of the Act, the Regional Director will investigate such charge, giving it the priority specified in subpart H of this part.

[82 FR 11764, Feb. 24, 2017]
#### ATLANTIC & PACIFIC TEA CO v DAVIS

Ohio Appeals, 8th Dist, Cuyahoga Co

No 9439.

Decided Feb 11, 1929

Squire, Sanders & Dempsey, Cleveland, for Tea Co.

L E Appleton, Cleveland, for Davis.

*281SULLIVAN, PJ.

It is argued that the record upon this point is insufficient to make the company liable because there is no application of the doctrine applying to master and servant, or to put it another way, to the principle of respondeat superior, and many authorities are quoted by learned counsel for defendant below, to support this contention, but it must not be forgotten that there is some substantive evidence in the record at least tending to show that the son in question had previously worked at the store and had performed acts of a similar nature for the clerk or manager and that he therefore could be characterized in law as a servant and employe of the defendant.

Keeping in mind that the former employment by the manager of the son on previous occasions remained unchallenged, it follows as a circumstance and inference that the clerk was acting within the scope of his authority, especially when we consider that to apply a different theory would be to establish a doctrine that would approve of the authority exercised in the case at bar by the manager to the detriment and danger of a patron, and customer of the store, who might be injured as a result of the act imposed upon the third person by one who is unquestionably in sole authority upon the premises.

It is apparent from the record that the open hatchway was in plain view of the manager and from this fact in the record it is unreasonable to conclude that it does not attach itself directly to the 'manager himself, independent of the order that was given to the son of the customer to open the trap door in the floor.

Our Supreme Court, under circumstances similar to those of'the case at bar, in the case of Schnable, a minor vs Cleveland, Chicago & St. Louis Railroad Co., 102 OS. 97, has laid down this ..doctrine and we think it applicable to the instant case.

It is our unanimous judgment that the doctrine in Ohio applicable to the facts in the record is laid down in Schnable supra, and governs this case.

Thus holding, the judgment of the Common Pleas Court is hereby affirmed.

Vickery and Levine, JJ, concur.
EXHIBIT 99.3

                                            BANA 1998 Transactions Certification

                    BANK OF AMERICA MORTGAGE SECURITIES, INC.
                       MORTGAGE PASS-THROUGH CERTIFICATES,
                      SERIES SET FORTH ON EXHIBIT I HERETO

                 OFFICER'S CERTIFICATE PURSUANT TO SECTION 3.17
                  OF THE AGREEMENTS LISTED ON EXHIBIT I HERETO
                  --------------------------------------------

            I, Gary K. Bettin, Senior Vice President of Bank of America, N.A.,
as successor to Bank of America, FSB (the "Master Servicer"), hereby certify
pursuant to Section 3.17 of the Pooling and Servicing Agreements listed on
Exhibit I hereto (collectively, the "Agreements") that: (a) a review of the
activities of the Master Servicer during calendar years 1998, 1999, 2000 and
2001 and of the performance of the Master Servicer under the Agreements has been
made under my supervision, (b) to the best of my knowledge, based on such
review, the Master Servicer has fulfilled all its material obligations in all
material respects under the Agreements throughout calendar years 1998, 1999,
2000 and 2001 and (c) to the best of my knowledge, each related servicer has
fulfilled its material obligations under its servicing agreement with the Master
Servicer in all material respects.

Dated: November 15, 2002


                                        BANK OF AMERICA, N.A.,
                                           as Master Servicer


                                        By:/s/ Gary K. Bettin
                                           -------------------------------------
                                           Name:  Gary K. Bettin
                                           Title:    Senior Vice President

<PAGE>

                                                                       EXHIBIT I

         PARTIES TO AGREEMENT              DATE OF AGREEMENT        SERIES
================================================================================

Bank of America Mortgage Securities,    April 1, 1998               1998-1
Inc., Bank of America, FSB and
Deutsche Bank National Trust Company
of California

Bank of America Mortgage Securities,    May 1, 1998                 1998-2
Inc., Bank of America, FSB and
Deutsche Bank National Trust Company
of California

Bank of America Mortgage Securities,    June 1, 1998                1998-3
Inc., Bank of America, FSB and The
Bank of New York

Bank of America Mortgage Securities,    July 1, 1998                1998-4
Inc., Bank of America, FSB and The
Bank of New York

Bank of America Mortgage Securities,    September 1, 1998           1998-5
Inc., Bank of America, FSB and The
Bank of New York

Bank of America Mortgage Securities,    November 1, 1998            1998-6
Inc., Bank of America, FSB and The
Bank of New York

Bank of America Mortgage Securities,    December 1, 1998            1998-7
Inc., Bank of America, FSB,
NationsBanc Mortgage Corporation and
The Bank of New York
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<PAGE>
<ARTICLE> 9
<MULTIPLIER> 1,000

<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   3-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          DEC-31-2000
<PERIOD-END>                               MAR-31-2000
<CASH>                                          15,974
<INT-BEARING-DEPOSITS>                               0
<FED-FUNDS-SOLD>                                38,445
<TRADING-ASSETS>                                    84
<INVESTMENTS-HELD-FOR-SALE>                     43,926
<INVESTMENTS-CARRYING>                           2,118
<INVESTMENTS-MARKET>                             2,054
<LOANS>                                        226,834
<ALLOWANCE>                                      3,013
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                 343,535
<DEPOSITS>                                     314,055
<SHORT-TERM>                                       500
<LIABILITIES-OTHER>                              2,785
<LONG-TERM>                                          0
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                        15,690
<OTHER-SE>                                      10,505
<TOTAL-LIABILITIES-AND-EQUITY>                 343,535
<INTEREST-LOAN>                                  5,039
<INTEREST-INVEST>                                  685
<INTEREST-OTHER>                                   222
<INTEREST-TOTAL>                                 5,946
<INTEREST-DEPOSIT>                               2,272
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                               2,350
<INTEREST-INCOME-NET>                            3,596
<LOAN-LOSSES>                                      115
<SECURITIES-GAINS>                                   0
<EXPENSE-OTHER>                                  2,853
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                  1,231
<INCOME-PRE-EXTRAORDINARY>                       1,231
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                       815
<EPS-BASIC>                                       0.32
<EPS-DILUTED>                                     0.32
<YIELD-ACTUAL>                                       0
<LOANS-NON>                                        821
<LOANS-PAST>                                         2
<LOANS-TROUBLED>                                     0
<LOANS-PROBLEM>                                      0
<ALLOWANCE-OPEN>                                 2,886
<CHARGE-OFFS>                                       21
<RECOVERIES>                                        34
<ALLOWANCE-CLOSE>                                3,013
<ALLOWANCE-DOMESTIC>                             3,013
<ALLOWANCE-FOREIGN>                                  0
<ALLOWANCE-UNALLOCATED>                              0


</TABLE>
UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 02-1836
KENNETH O. CARTER, Plaintiff - Appellant, versus STATE OF VIRGINIA, Government Employer Fault Liable; LAWSUIT RECIPIENT AND REPRESENTATIVE FOR STATE OF VIRGINIA GOVERNMENT, Attorney General, Jerry W. Kilgore; GROUNDS FOR DEFENDANT FAULT LIABLE IS EMPLOYEE MISUSE OF LAW AUTHORITY CAUSE PLAINTIFF, Defendants - Appellees.
No. 02-1839
KENNETH O. CARTER, Plaintiff - Appellant, versus JACK GOLDBERG, a/k/a Jake Goldberg; LAWSUIT RECIPIENT AND REPRESENTATIVE FOR STATE OF VIRGINIA GOVERNMENT, ATTORNEY GENERAL, JERRY W. KILGORE; GROUNDS FOR COMPENSATION DEFENDANT'S MISUSE OF LAW AUTHORITY CAUSE PLAINTIFF, Defendants - Appellees.2 Appeals from the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Virginia, at Newport News. Robert G. Doumar, Senior District Judge. (CA-02-18-4, CA-02-17) Submitted: September 19, 2002 Decided: September 27, 2002 Before WILKINS, LUTTIG, and TRAXLER, Circuit Judges. Dismissed by unpublished per curiam opinion. Kenneth O. Carter, Appellant Pro Se. Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. See Local Rule 36(c).3 PER CURIAM: Kenneth O. Carter seeks to appeal the district court’s orders denying relief on his 42 U.S.C. § 1983 (West Supp. 2001) complaint. We have reviewed the record and the district court’s opinion and find no reversible error. Accordingly, we deny leave to proceed in forma pauperis and dismiss the appeals on the reasoning of the district court. See Carter v. State of Virginia , No. CA-02-18-4 (E.D. Va. July 25, 2002); Carter v. Goldberg, No. CA-02-17 (E.D. Va. July 25, 2002). 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
**UN PUBLISHED** 
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

**No. 1**  **0 -**  **6 5**  **6 0** 

ANTONIO JOSEPH RICHARDSON , P etitioner

– Appell ant ,
v. STATE; WARDEN BROAD RIVER CORRECTIONAL INSTITUTION , Respondent s – Appell ee s .

Appeal from the United St ates District Court for the District of South Carolina , at Rock Hill
. Joseph F. Anderson, Jr. , District Judge. ( 0 :0 9

- c v - 00 33 6

- JF A )

Submitted : January 1 2 , 2011 Decided: January 2 8 , 2011

Before W ILKINSON, DUNCAN, and AGEE , Circuit Judge s .
Dismiss ed by un published per curiam opinion
. Antonio Joseph Richardson , Appellant Pro Se. Donald John Zelenka, Deputy Assistant Attorney General, Alphonso Simon, Jr., OFFICE OF THE ATTORNEY GENERAL OF SOUTH CAROLINA , Columbia, South Carolina, for Appellee.
Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.2 PER CURIAM: Antonio Joseph Richardson seeks to appeal the district
court ’ s order denying relief on his 28 U.S.C. § 2254 (2006) petition. The order is not appealable unless a circuit justic e or judge issues a certificate of appealability. See 28 U.S.C.
§ 2253(c)(1) (2006) . 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) (2006)
. When the district court denies relief on the merits, a prisoner satisfies this standard by demonstrating that reasonable jurists would find that the district court’s assessment of the constitutional claims is debatable or wrong. Slack v. McDaniel , 529 U.S. 473, 484 (2000); see Miller

- El v. Cockrell , 537 U.S. 322, 336

- 38 (2003). When the district court denies relief on procedural grounds, the prisoner must demonstrate both that the dispositive procedural ruling is debatable, and that the petition states a debatable claim of the denial of a constitutional right. Slack , 529 U.S. at 484

- 85. We have independently review ed the record and conclude that Richardson 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 materials3 before the court and argument would not aid the decisional
process. DISMISSE D
### 1 { CONFIDENTIAL

This document contains overall pr o duction process description

and distillation parameters. This is main commercial product used as

The process generates several waste streams.

The is produced at points I, II, and III. All three

- containing streams flow to a storage

vessel.

### 2 Overall Reaction process

–

• The pr eparation of

consists of two principle reactions.

• The first reaction is the

•

### 3 •

### 4 Cyclization:

### 5

### 6 R ecovery:

### 7 Production:

### 9

### 10 }
§ 93.61 General rules: Lake Hood segment. ( a ) No person may operate an aircraft at an altitude between 1,200 feet MSL and 2,000 feet MSL in that portion of this segment lying north of the midchannel of Knik Arm.
( b ) Each person operating an airplane within this segment (except that part described in paragraph (a) of this section) shall operate that airplane at an altitude of at least 600 feet MSL until maneuvering for a safe landing requires further descent.
#### YOUNGSTOWN (City) v EVANS BROWN In re

Ohio Supreme Court

Nos. 21722 & 21775.

Decided Nov. 20, 1929

Syllabus by

MARSHALL, CJ.

MUNICIPAL CORPORATIONS

(360 P5) The power conferred upon municipalities to enforce within their limits local police, sanitary and other similar regulations is only.limited by general laws in conflict therewith upon the same subject matter.

Section 3628 GC, is not a law defining offenses and prescribing the punishment therefor, and is not therefore effective to bring, an ordinance purporting to define and punish offenses in conflict with Section 3, Article XVIII, of the Constitution.

Robinson, Matthias and Allen, JJ., concur. Jones and Day, JJ., concur in proposition 1 of the syllabus and in the judgment.

Kinkade, J., not participating.
EXHIBIT 32.1

CERTIFICATION OF CHIEF EXECUTIVE OFFICER

AND CHIEF
FINANCIAL OFFICER

PURSUANT TO

SECTION 906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002

(18 U.S.C. 1350)

In connection with the Quarterly Report of Wells Real Estate Fund XII, L.P. (the Registrant) on Form 10-Q for the period
ended September 30, 2009, as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission (the Report), the undersigned, Leo F. Wells, III, Chief Executive Officer of the corporate general partner of one of the General Partners of the
Registrant, and Douglas P. Williams, Chief Financial Officer of the corporate general partner of one of the General Partners of the Registrant, hereby certify, pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002 (18 U.S.C. 1350), that, to
the best of our knowledge and belief:



| | (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 Registrant.
| | --- | -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------



| |  |                        
| |  | -----------------------
| |  | /s/ LEO F. WELLS, III  
| |  | Leo F. Wells, III      
| |  | Chief Executive Officer
| |  | November 12, 2009      



| |  |                        
| |  | -----------------------
| |  | /s/ DOUGLAS P. WILLIAMS
| |  | Douglas P. Williams    
| |  | Chief Financial Officer
| |  | November 12, 2009
[Federal Register Volume 65, Number 94 (Monday, May 15, 2000)]
[Notices]
[Page 30990]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 00-12273]


=======================================================================
-----------------------------------------------------------------------

FEDERAL HOUSING FINANCE BOARD


Sunshine Act Meeting

TIME AND DATE: 2:30 p.m., Wednesday, May 17, 2000.

PLACE:  Board Room, Second Floor, Federal Housing Finance Board, 1777 F 
Street, N.W., Washington, D.C. 20006.

STATUS:  The entire meeting will be open to the public.

MATTERS TO BE CONSIDERED DURING PORTIONS OPEN TO THE PUBLIC:  
    <bullet> Final Rule: Election of Federal Home Loan Bank Directors.
    <bullet> Designation of Federal Home Loan Bank Directors.
    <bullet> Discussion of Issues Pertaining to the Federal Home Loan 
Bank Capital Reform.

CONTACT PERSON FOR MORE INFORMATION: Elaine L. Baker, Secretary to the 
Board, (202) 408-2837.

William W. Ginsberg,
Managing Director.
[FR Doc. 00-12273 Filed 5-11-00; 2:12 pm]
BILLING CODE 6725-01-P