alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
Exhibit 32.1



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



Pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002 (subsections (a) and (b) of Section 1350, Chapter 63 of Title 18, United States Code), the undersigned officer of Validian Corporation (the Company), does hereby certify, to such officers knowledge, that:



The Annual Report on Form 10-KSB, as amended by this Amendment No. 1 on Form 10-KSB/A, for the year ended December 31, 2003 (the Form 10-KSB) of the Company fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) or 15(d), as applicable, of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 and the information contained in the Form 10-KSB fairly presents, in all material respects, the financial condition and results of operations of the Company as of, and for, the periods presented in the Form 10-KSB.



[ex32a002.gif]



The foregoing certification is being furnished as an exhibit to the Form 10-KSB pursuant to Item 601(b)(32) of Regulation S-B and Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002 (subsections (a) and (b) of Section 1350, Chapter 63 of Title 18, United States Code) and, accordingly, is not being filed as part of the Form 10-KSB for purposes of Section 18 of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended, and is not incorporated by reference into any filing of the Company, whether made before or after the date hereof, regardless of any general incorporation language in such filing.



























1
Page 1 of 2

.

AO 187 (Rev. 7/87) Exhibit and List 

United States District Court

SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA-MIAMI DIVISION

DELIO BATISITA,

CARLOS LOPEZ,

MARIANA LOPEZ,

and RAFAELA VALIENTE,

Plaintiffs,

vs.

AVANT ASSURANCE, INC., 

REINIER CORTES and 

ANDREA GONZALEZ QUINTERO,

Defendants.

 TRIAL EXHIBIT LIST

CASE NO.: 1:22-CV-22671-ALTONAGA

 PRESIDING JUDGE

HONORABLE 

CECILIA M. ALTONAGA

PLAINTIFF’S ATTORNEY 

FAIRLAW FIRM

Toussaint Cummings, Esq.

Brian H. Pollock, Esq.

135 San Lorenzo Ave

Suite 770

Coral Gables, FL 33146

DEFENDANT’S ATTORNEY

CUETO LAW GROUP P.L.

Santiago Cueto Esq., 

Daniel Tropp, Esq. 

4000 Ponce de Leon Blvd., 

Suite 470 

Coral Gables, FL 33146 

 TRIAL DATE(S)

July 10-13, 2023

 COURT REPORTER COURTROOM DEPUTY

NO.

DATE

OFFERED MARKED OBJECTIONS ADMITTED Exhibit

Joint Exhibits

1 Photographs of Avant Documents (Plaintiffs Bates 000001-17)

2

Avant Assurance Independent Contractor (IC) Standards Guide 

(Plaintiffs 000018-23)

3 Mariana Lopez Resignation Letter (Plaintiffs 000024)

4

Emails (Plaintiffs 000025-34, 000042-68, 000129-138, DOC 

000010-15, Defendants Mariana and Carlos Lopez 00002)

5 Independent Contractor Non-Disclosure Agreement (000036)

6 Avant Client Consent Statement

7 Work Schedules Created by Alix Ledesma

8 Avant 2022 Compensation and Bonus Plans (Avant 000022-23)

9

Delio Batista State Licenses and Certifications (Plaintiffs 000071-

78)

10 Delio Batista Text messages (000081-000112)

11 Plaintiff Carlos Lopez Text Messages (Bates 000113-000127).

12 Spreadsheet of Payments to Plaintiffs (provided by Defendants).

13

All Monthly Commission Statement Spreadsheets sent from 

Defendants to Plaintiffs

Case 1:22-cv-22671-CMA Document 92 Entered on FLSD Docket 07/06/2023 Page 1 of 2
Page 2 of 2

.

14

All Monthly Commission Statement Emails sent from 

Defendants to Plaintiffs 

15 Defendants’ Responses to Plaintiffs’ First Request for Admissions

16

Defendants’ Responses to Plaintiffs First Request for 

Interrogatories 

Respectfully Submitted on July 6, 2023.

s/Brian H. Pollock, Esq.

Brian H. Pollock, Esq. (174742)

brian@fairlawattorney.com

Toussaint Cummings (119877)

toussaint@fairlawattorney.com

FAIRLAW FIRM

135 San Lorenzo Avenue

Suite 770

Coral Gables, FL 33156

Tel: 305.230.4884

Counsel for Plaintiffs

Case 1:22-cv-22671-CMA Document 92 Entered on FLSD Docket 07/06/2023 Page 2 of 2
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 

SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA

Case No. 22-81574-CV-MIDDLEBROOKS 

MICHAEL BASKT, 

 Plaintiff, 

v. 

BASA INVESTMENTS LLC, et al. 

 Defendants. 

_____________________________________/ 

ORDER OF ARREST FOR CRIMINAL CONTEMPT 

THIS CAUSE comes before the Court upon Plaintiff’s two Emergency Motions Enforcing 

Contempt Orders against Mr. Ariel Banegas and Ms. Astrid Banegas (DE 3; DE 4), filed October 

10, 2022 in U.S. Bankruptcy Court and, the Order of Reference to this Court by U.S. Bankruptcy 

Judge Erik P. Kimball on October 13, 2022. (DE 1-1 citing Bankruptcy Court case numbers 22-

10741-EPK, 22-12083-EPK, and 22-12084-EPK (jointly administered under Case No. 22-10741-

EPK)). The Defendants are accused of committing willful and repeated violations of Judge 

Kimball’s orders. Based upon the severity of the Defendants’ actions, as described in Judge 

Kimball’s Order of Reference and the bankruptcy trustee’s Emergency Motions, Judge Kimball 

recommends a term of incarceration as punishment. 

 Fed. R. Civ. P. 42(a) controls out-of-court criminal contempt. Rule 42 states: “Any person 

who commits criminal contempt may be punished for that contempt after prosecution on notice.” 

Rule 42 allows the initiation of a contempt proceeding by one of three ways: (1) notice in open 

court, (2) an order to show cause, (3) or in an arrest order. Consistent with Rule 42, this Order 

Case 9:22-cv-81574-DMM Document 6 Entered on FLSD Docket 10/14/2022 Page 1 of 2
2 

states below “the time and place of trial” and Defendants are hereby afforded a “reasonable time 

to prepare a defense.” Fed. R. Crim. P. 42(a)(1). 

This Order incorporates by reference the verified Emergency Motions (DE 3; DE 4), and 

Judge Kimball’s “Order Referring Motions for Criminal Contempt to District Court” (DE 1-1), 

which combined contain “the essential facts constituting the charged criminal contempt” within 

the meaning of Rule 42. The information set forth in these filings set forth probable cause to 

believe that Mr. Ariel Banegas and Ms. Astrid have endangered and are continuing to endanger 

the safety of the public, and as such immediate arrest is warranted. 

It is hereby ORDERED and ADJUDGED: 

(1) Warrants for the arrest of Mr. Ariel Banegas and Ms. Astrid Banegas SHALL ISSUE. 

Such warrants are attached to this Order. 

(2) Pursuant to Fed. R. Crim. P. 42, a trial will be held on November 21, 2022, at 10:00 a.m.

or such later date as the Court may set, before the Honorable Donald M. Middlebrooks, 

District Judge, in the Paul Rogers Federal Courthouse, West Palm Beach, FL. 

(3) The Clerk of Court is hereby DIRECTED to open a new criminal matter for the purpose 

of the prosecution of this Criminal Contempt case, with this Arrest Order serving as the 

charging document. 

SIGNED in Chambers, at West Palm Beach, Florida, this 14th day of October 2022. 

cc: Counsel of Record 

 U.S. Bankruptcy Judge Erik P. Kimball 

Case 9:22-cv-81574-DMM Document 6 Entered on FLSD Docket 10/14/2022 Page 2 of 2
1

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA

WEST PALM BEACH DIVISION

CASE NO. 22-CV-81294-CANNON

DONALD J. TRUMP,

Plaintiff,

v.

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,

Defendants.

_______________________________/

PLAINTIFF’S NOTICE OF FILING

Plaintiff Donald J. Trump, through the undersigned counsel, hereby files the attached letter 

in response to the Special Master’s Order dated November 7, 2022, ECF 164. See Attachment A.

Dated: November 10, 2022 Respectfully submitted,

/s/ Lindsey Halligan .

Lindsey Halligan

Florida Bar No. 109481 

511 SE 5th Avenue

Fort Lauderdale, FL 33301

Email: lindseyhalligan@outlook.com

James M. Trusty

Ifrah Law PLLC

1717 Pennsylvania Ave. NW, Suite 650

Washington, D.C. 20006

Telephone: (202) 524-4176

Email: jtrusty@ifrahlaw.com

Christopher M. Kise

Chris Kise & Associates, P.A.

201 East Park Avenue, 5th Floor

Tallahassee, FL 32301

Telephone: (850) 270-0566

Email: chris@ckise.net

Case 9:22-cv-81294-AMC Document 175 Entered on FLSD Docket 11/10/2022 Page 1 of 3
2

M. Evan Corcoran 

Silverman Thompson Slutkin White, LLC

400 East Pratt Street – Suite 900 

Baltimore, MD 21202 

Telephone: (410) 385-2225 

Email: ecorcoran@silvermanthompson.com 

Counsel for Plaintiff Donald J. Trump

Case 9:22-cv-81294-AMC Document 175 Entered on FLSD Docket 11/10/2022 Page 2 of 3
3

CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE

I HEREBY CERTIFY that on November 10, 2022, I electronically filed the foregoing 

document with the Clerk of the Court using CM/ECF. I also certify that the foregoing document 

is being served this day on all counsel of record via transmission of Notices of Electronic Filing 

generated by CM/ECF.

/s/ Lindsey Halligan .

Lindsey Halligan

Case 9:22-cv-81294-AMC Document 175 Entered on FLSD Docket 11/10/2022 Page 3 of 3
GAO/AIMD-00-248R Vietnam Veterans of America, Inc.

United States General Accounting Office

Washington, DC 20548

Accounting and Information

Management Division

B-285444

June 30, 2000

The Honorable Henry J. Hyde

Chairman, Committee on the Judiciary

House of Representatives

Subject: Federally Chartered Corporation: Review of the Financial Statement Audit

Reports for the Vietnam Veterans of America, Inc., for Fiscal Years 1998 and 1999

Dear Mr. Chairman:

As requested, we reviewed the audit reports covering the financial statements of the Vietnam

Veterans of America, Inc., a federally chartered corporation, for the fiscal years ended

February 28, 1998 and 1999. The corporation’s purpose is to assist Vietnam-era veterans and

their families.

Federally chartered corporations are required under 36 U.S.C. 10101 to

• present the corporation’s assets and liabilities and reasonable detail on the corporation’s

income and expenses in annual financial statements,

• obtain an annual financial audit by an independent public accountant, and

• submit the auditor’s report and the corporation’s financial statements to the Congress.

The objective of our review was to determine whether the audit reports complied with the

financial reporting requirements of the law. In carrying out our work, we reviewed the

corporation’s financial statements and the accompanying notes, performed certain analytical

procedures related to information presented in the financial statements, reviewed the

auditors’ reports, and made inquiries to corporation officials or the auditors as we deemed

necessary. We did not review the auditors’ working papers. Our review disclosed no

reportable instances of noncompliance.
B-285444

Page 2 GAO/AIMD-00-248R Vietnam Veterans of America, Inc.

The audit reports included the auditors’ opinions that the financial statements of the

corporation were presented fairly, in all material respects, in accordance with generally

accepted accounting principles. We are returning the audit reports you sent with your letter.

Sincerely yours,

David L. Clark

Director, Audit Oversight and Liaison

Enclosure

(911987)
135 San Lorenzo Avenue, Suite 770, Coral Gables, Florida 33146

TEL 305.230.4884 FAX 305.230.4844

www.fairlawattorney.com

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA

CASE NO.: 1:22-CV-23074-BLOOM/OTAZO-REYES

OCTAVIO COLLADO,

Plaintiff,

vs.

450 NORTH RIVER DRIVE, LLC,

D/B/A KIKI ON THE RIVER, 

RJ RIVER, LLC AND 

ROMAN JONES,

Defendants.

______________________________/

PLAINTIFF’S NOTICE OF FILING CONSENT TO JOIN 

(Adolfo Roche) 

 

Plaintiff, Octavio Collado, notices the Court and all parties of the filing of the Consent to 

Join in these proceedings by Adolfo Roche.

Dated this 20th day of April 2023. 

s/Brian H. Pollock, Esq.

Brian H. Pollock, Esq.

Fla. Bar No. 174742

brian@fairlawattorney.com

FAIRLAW FIRM

135 San Lorenzo Avenue

Suite 770

Coral Gables, FL 33146

Tel: 305.230.4884

Counsel for Plaintiff(s)

Case 1:22-cv-23074-BB Document 126 Entered on FLSD Docket 04/20/2023 Page 1 of 1
NASA LogoNTRSNTRS - NASA Technical Reports ServerSearchmore_vertCollectionsAboutNewsHelpLogin Back to ResultsHigh-voltage, high-power, solid-state remote power controllers for aerospace applicationsTwo general types of remote power controller (RPC) that combine the functions of a circuit breaker and a switch were developed for use in direct-current (dc) aerospace systems. Power-switching devices used in these designs are the relatively new gate-turnoff thyristor (GTO) and poweer metal-oxide-semiconductor field-effect transistors (MOSFET). The various RPC's can switch dc voltages to 1200 V and currents to 100 A. Seven different units were constructed and subjected to comprehensive laboratory and thermal vacuum testing. Two of these were dual units that switch both positive and negative voltages simultaneously. The RPC's using MOSFET's have slow turnon and turnoff times to limit voltage spiking from high di/dt. The GTO's have much faster transition times. All RPC's have programmable overload tripout and microsecond tripout for large overloads. The basic circuits developed can be used to build switchgear limited only by the ratings of the switching device used.Document ID19850012953Acquisition SourceLegacy CDMSDocument TypeTechnical Publication (TP)AuthorsSturman, J. C.*(NASA Lewis Research Center Cleveland, OH, United States)*Date AcquiredSeptember 5, 2013Publication DateMarch 1, 1985Subject CategorySpacecraft Propulsion And PowerReport/Patent NumberNAS 1.60:2437NASA-TP-2437E-2359Accession Number85N21263Funding Number(s)PROJECT: RTOP 506-55-22Distribution LimitsPublicCopyrightWork of the US Gov. Public Use Permitted.Available DownloadsNameType19850012953.pdfSTIcloud_downloadcontent_copyvisibilityRelated RecordsThere are no records associated with this record.visibility_offNo Preview Available
 No Fear Act | Freedom of Information Act | Office of the Inspector General | Agency Financial ReportsNASA Web Privacy Policy and Important Notices | NASA Guidelines for Quality of InformationDisclaimers, Copyright, Terms of Use | Accessibility | NASA OCIO | USA.gov | NASA.govContact Us | Site MapSTI LogoNASA Official: JoAnne R. Calhoun Site Curator: STI Compliance and Distribution Services Last Modified: September 12, 2024
<TABLE> <S> <C>


<ARTICLE>                     5

<MULTIPLIER>                                   1000
       
<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   9-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                              JUN-30-1999
<PERIOD-START>                                 JUL-01-1998
<PERIOD-END>                                   MAR-31-1999
<CASH>                                         0
<SECURITIES>                                   36,880
<RECEIVABLES>                                  140,622
<ALLOWANCES>                                   7,807
<INVENTORY>                                    213,851
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                               543,005
<PP&E>                                         528,345
<DEPRECIATION>                                 314,065
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                 1,444,149
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                          538,386
<BONDS>                                        608,003
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                          0
<PREFERRED>                                    43,047
<COMMON>                                       2,520
<OTHER-SE>                                     147,965
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                   1,444,149
<SALES>                                        904,606
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                               977,439
<CGS>                                          834,710
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                  868,413
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                               111,100
<LOSS-PROVISION>                               0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                             23,892
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                (6,772)
<INCOME-TAX>                                   (121)
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                            (6,651)
<DISCONTINUED>                                 0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                0
<CHANGES>                                      0
<NET-INCOME>                                   (6,651)
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                  0
<EPS-DILUTED>                                  0
        



</TABLE>
* Pursuant to 5 TH C IR . R. 47.5, the court has determined

that this opinion should not be published and is not precedent except under the limited circumstances set forth in 5 TH C IR . R. 47.5.4. United States Court of Appeals Fifth Circuit 

## FILED December 29, 2003 Charles R. Fulbruge III Clerk IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT

No. 03-60247 Summary Calendar

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Plaintiff-Appellee,

versus JAMES ALLEN MORRIS, Defendant-Appellant.

-------------------- Appeal from the United States District Court for the Northern District of Mississippi

USDC No. 2:02-CR-74-1

-------------------- Before JOLLY, WIENER, and CLEMENT, Circuit Judges.
PER CURIAM: * James Allen Morris appeals his guilty-plea convictions of possession with intent to distribute in excess of five grams of a mixture and substance containing cocaine base and being a felon in possession of a firearm. Morris argues that the district court abused its discretion in denying without an evidentiary hearing his motion to withdraw his guilty pleas. Morris’s argument touches only on two of the seven pertinent factors , i.e. , whether he had close assistance of counsel andNo. 03-60247 -2- whether his plea was knowing and voluntary. See United States v.
Carr , 740 F.2d 339, 343-44 (5th Cir. 1984). There is no support in the record for his assertion that he did not have close assistance of counsel. Morris stated at the guilty plea hearing that he was satisfied with his counsel’s representation and that his counsel had discussed his entire case with him. Moreover, Morris made no assertion that it was his belief that he would be able to appeal the denial of his suppression motion until he moved to withdraw his pleas. It was Morris’s burden to establish a “fair and just” reason for withdrawing his guilty pleas, and he has failed to do so. See United States v. Brewster , 137 F.3d 853, 858 (5th Cir. 1998). Morris also argues that the district court erred in denying his suppression motion. By entering an unconditional plea, Morris waived his challenge to the district court’s denial of his suppression motion. See United States v. Smallwood , 920 F.2d 1231, 1240 (5th Cir. 1991). Therefore, we may not review his appeal of the denial of the suppression motion

. See United States v. Musquiz , 45 F.3d 927, 931 (5th Cir. 1995). The district court’s judgment is AFFIRMED.
§ 241.6 Deferred payments for certain qualifying projects. ( a ) Whenever a project's Eligibility Factor exceeds zero, the project sponsor will be permitted to defer a portion of its share of flood control costs. The maximum allowable amount deferred equals the total non-Federal share less (for structural projects) five percent of total project costs and less (for all projects) any amounts for LERRD paid for or acquired by the sponsor prior to the time the PCA is signed. If for example, the non-Federal share of a structural project = 35.0 percent (after the ability to pay adjustment, if any) of which 10 percent is LERRD already paid for by the local sponsor, the maximum allowable amount to be deferred = 20 percent of project flood control costs (35 less the 5 percent cash requirements, less the 10 percent LERRD already acquired). Deferred payments at the option of the sponsor will be allowed regardless of the outcome of the benefits test described in § 241.5(a) whenever the Eligibility Factor exceeds zero.
( b ) When EF ≥1, the project sponsor may defer as much as the maximum allowable amount as described in § 241.6(a).
( c ) When 0 <EF <1, the sponsor may defer a fraction of the maximum allowable amount described in § 241.6(a), where the fraction equals the Eligibility Factor expressed to three decimal places. Continuing the example described in § 241.6(a), if EF = .712, total allowed deferral equals .712 × 20 percent = 14.2 percent of total project costs.
( d ) The deferred payment can be made in equal installments over any period of time selected by the non-Federal sponsor, provided that all repayments are made between the end of construction and thirty years thereafter. The amount repaid shall include interest during the repayment period as well as interest for the appropriate portion of the construction period for any amounts deferred prior to the end of construction. The rate of interest shall be determined in accordance with the provisions of section 106 of Pub. L. 99-662, 33 U.S.C. 2216.
[54 FR 40581, Oct. 2, 1989, as amended at 60 FR 5134, Jan. 26, 1995]
USEPA / AmerenUECallaway Power PlantIntake Structure Site VisitMarch 4, 2009 USEPA IntakeStructure Site Visit2Callaway Power Plant General NotesOne nuclear steamgenerating unit:~1,300 MWBegan Operation:1984Capacity Factor:87.5% (2008)~18% of AmerenUEbaseload generationMarch 4, 2009 USEPA IntakeStructure Site Visit3Callaway Power PlantIntake Structure DesignNatural draft cooling tower568,000 gpm average circulating water flow17,000 gpm (38cfs) average intake withdrawal3,360 gpm average blowdown dischargeShoreline intakeThree intake bays/pumpsDesign flow = 60.5 MGDIf intake structure is lost, plant shutdownwithin ~12 hoursMarch 4, 2009 USEPA IntakeStructure Site Visit4Callaway Power PlantIntake Structure DrawingXPG117XPG218BATTERYROOMRADIO &MICROWAVEROOMPG220BPG119APB218PB117PG220PG119ShallowWellDeepWellFilter & StrainerControlsPotableWater TankInstrumentRackPump & ValveControl CabinetTraveling ScreenControlsTraveling ScreensPlantDischargeLineFree DischargeValvesIntake PumpsAnnunciatorsBatteryChargersELEVATION 546' 6"March 4, 2009 USEPA IntakeStructure Site Visit5Callaway Power PlantTraveling Screen & Bar Rack DesignBar rackScreen approach velocity <1fps1/8” mesh screensScreen rotationDetermined by∆P“Normal” @ 6”“Fast” @ 18”Auto rotation every eight hoursMarch 4, 2009 USEPA IntakeStructure Site Visit6Callaway Power PlantIntake Bay DrawingDesiltingScreenWashTraveling ScreensFishGateMaingateSandLogsTrashGrateIntakePumpMarch 4, 2009 USEPA IntakeStructure Site Visit7Callaway Power PlantIntake Structure Debris & IcingDebris issuesIntake bay “desilting spray” designNormal operation: 30 minutes every 12 hoursIcing issuesProcedure implemented to reduce impactLow river levelProcedure implemented to reduce impactMarch 4, 2009 USEPA IntakeStructure Site Visit8Callaway Power PlantIntake Structure DebrisMarch 4, 2009 USEPA IntakeStructure Site Visit9Callaway Power PlantIntake Impingement Mortality StudiesNo T&E species~96.1% shad & drumMarch 4, 2009 USEPA IntakeStructure Site Visit10Callaway Power PlantComments and questions
BRIAN QUINN

Chief Justice

JAMES T. CAMPBELL Justice

MACKEY K. HANCOCK Justice

PATRICK A. PIRTLE Justice 

# Court of Appeals

Seventh District of Texas Potter County Courts Building

501 S. Fillmore, Suite 2-A Amarillo, Texas 79101-2449 www.txcourts.gov/7thcoa.aspx VIVIAN LONG

Clerk

MAILING ADDRESS:

P. O. Box 9540

79105-9540

(806) 342-2650

August 28, 2015

John Bennett Attorney at Law

P. O. Box 19144 Amarillo, TX 79114

* DELIVERED VIA E-MAIL * Warren L. Clark

Asst. Criminal District Attorney

Randall County Justice Center

2309 Russell Long Blvd., Suite 120 Canyon, TX 79015

* DELIVERED VIA E-MAIL *

RE: Case Numbers: 07-15-00181-CR, 07-15-00182-CR

Trial Court Case Numbers: 18,607-B, 18,608-B

Style: Michael Don Denton v. The State of Texas

Dear Counsel:

Appellant’s brief is filed Thursday, August 27, 2015.

Very truly yours, 

# Vivian Long

VIVIAN LONG, CLERK