alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
{"version":"1.0","provider_name":"U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit","provider_url":"https:\/\/cafc.uscourts.gov","author_name":"25005pwpadmin","author_url":"https:\/\/cafc.uscourts.gov\/author\/25005pwpadmin\/","title":"Operating Status - U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit","type":"rich","width":600,"height":338,"html":"<blockquote class=\"wp-embedded-content\" data-secret=\"1g0fN0PNfK\"><a href=\"https:\/\/cafc.uscourts.gov\/home\/the-court\/notices-announcements\/operating-status\/\">Operating Status<\/a><\/blockquote><iframe sandbox=\"allow-scripts\" security=\"restricted\" src=\"https:\/\/cafc.uscourts.gov\/home\/the-court\/notices-announcements\/operating-status\/embed\/#?secret=1g0fN0PNfK\" width=\"600\" height=\"338\" title=\"“Operating Status” — U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit\" data-secret=\"1g0fN0PNfK\" frameborder=\"0\" marginwidth=\"0\" marginheight=\"0\" scrolling=\"no\" class=\"wp-embedded-content\"><\/iframe><script>\n\/*! This file is auto-generated *\/\n!function(d,l){\"use strict\";l.querySelector&&d.addEventListener&&\"undefined\"!=typeof URL&&(d.wp=d.wp||{},d.wp.receiveEmbedMessage||(d.wp.receiveEmbedMessage=function(e){var t=e.data;if((t||t.secret||t.message||t.value)&&!\/[^a-zA-Z0-9]\/.test(t.secret)){for(var s,r,n,a=l.querySelectorAll('iframe[data-secret=\"'+t.secret+'\"]'),o=l.querySelectorAll('blockquote[data-secret=\"'+t.secret+'\"]'),c=new RegExp(\"^https?:$\",\"i\"),i=0;i<o.length;i++)o[i].style.display=\"none\";for(i=0;i<a.length;i++)s=a[i],e.source===s.contentWindow&&(s.removeAttribute(\"style\"),\"height\"===t.message?(1e3<(r=parseInt(t.value,10))?r=1e3:~~r<200&&(r=200),s.height=r):\"link\"===t.message&&(r=new URL(s.getAttribute(\"src\")),n=new URL(t.value),c.test(n.protocol))&&n.host===r.host&&l.activeElement===s&&(d.top.location.href=t.value))}},d.addEventListener(\"message\",d.wp.receiveEmbedMessage,!1),l.addEventListener(\"DOMContentLoaded\",function(){for(var e,t,s=l.querySelectorAll(\"iframe.wp-embedded-content\"),r=0;r<s.length;r++)(t=(e=s[r]).getAttribute(\"data-secret\"))||(t=Math.random().toString(36).substring(2,12),e.src+=\"#?secret=\"+t,e.setAttribute(\"data-secret\",t)),e.contentWindow.postMessage({message:\"ready\",secret:t},\"*\")},!1)))}(window,document);\n<\/script>\n","description":"The Federal Circuit’s current operating status is detailed below."}
EXHIBIT 32.2 Certification of Chief Financial Officer Pursuant to
Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002 In connection with
Amendment No. 1 to the Annual Report on Form 10-K/A for the year ended December 31, 2005
(the "Report"), by SPAR Group, Inc. (the "Registrant"), the undersigned hereby certifies
that, to his knowledge: 1.  The
Report fully complies with the requirements of section 13(a) or 15(d) of the
          Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended, 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/ Charles CimitileCharles Cimitile
Chief Financial Officer, Treasurer and SecretaryDate: April 17, 2006 A signed original of
this written statement required by Section 906 has been provided to SPAR Group, Inc. and
will be retained by SPAR Group, Inc., and furnished to the Securities and Exchange
Commission or its staff upon request. 8
{"version":"1.0","provider_name":"U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit","provider_url":"https:\/\/cafc.uscourts.gov","author_name":"25005pwpadmin","author_url":"https:\/\/cafc.uscourts.gov\/author\/25005pwpadmin\/","title":"19-1001: CUSTOMEDIA TECHNOLOGIES, LLC v. DISH NETWORK CORPORATION [ORDER], Precedential - U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit","type":"rich","width":600,"height":338,"html":"<blockquote class=\"wp-embedded-content\" data-secret=\"Mu2wS0RQc6\"><a href=\"https:\/\/cafc.uscourts.gov\/11-01-2019-19-1001-customedia-technologies-llc-v-dish-network-corporation-order-precedential-19-1001-order-11-1-2019-1\/\">19-1001: CUSTOMEDIA TECHNOLOGIES, LLC v. DISH NETWORK CORPORATION [ORDER], Precedential<\/a><\/blockquote><iframe sandbox=\"allow-scripts\" security=\"restricted\" src=\"https:\/\/cafc.uscourts.gov\/11-01-2019-19-1001-customedia-technologies-llc-v-dish-network-corporation-order-precedential-19-1001-order-11-1-2019-1\/embed\/#?secret=Mu2wS0RQc6\" width=\"600\" height=\"338\" title=\"“19-1001: CUSTOMEDIA TECHNOLOGIES, LLC v. DISH NETWORK CORPORATION [ORDER], Precedential” — U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit\" data-secret=\"Mu2wS0RQc6\" frameborder=\"0\" marginwidth=\"0\" marginheight=\"0\" scrolling=\"no\" class=\"wp-embedded-content\"><\/iframe><script>\n\/*! This file is auto-generated *\/\n!function(d,l){\"use strict\";l.querySelector&&d.addEventListener&&\"undefined\"!=typeof URL&&(d.wp=d.wp||{},d.wp.receiveEmbedMessage||(d.wp.receiveEmbedMessage=function(e){var t=e.data;if((t||t.secret||t.message||t.value)&&!\/[^a-zA-Z0-9]\/.test(t.secret)){for(var s,r,n,a=l.querySelectorAll('iframe[data-secret=\"'+t.secret+'\"]'),o=l.querySelectorAll('blockquote[data-secret=\"'+t.secret+'\"]'),c=new RegExp(\"^https?:$\",\"i\"),i=0;i<o.length;i++)o[i].style.display=\"none\";for(i=0;i<a.length;i++)s=a[i],e.source===s.contentWindow&&(s.removeAttribute(\"style\"),\"height\"===t.message?(1e3<(r=parseInt(t.value,10))?r=1e3:~~r<200&&(r=200),s.height=r):\"link\"===t.message&&(r=new URL(s.getAttribute(\"src\")),n=new URL(t.value),c.test(n.protocol))&&n.host===r.host&&l.activeElement===s&&(d.top.location.href=t.value))}},d.addEventListener(\"message\",d.wp.receiveEmbedMessage,!1),l.addEventListener(\"DOMContentLoaded\",function(){for(var e,t,s=l.querySelectorAll(\"iframe.wp-embedded-content\"),r=0;r<s.length;r++)(t=(e=s[r]).getAttribute(\"data-secret\"))||(t=Math.random().toString(36).substring(2,12),e.src+=\"#?secret=\"+t,e.setAttribute(\"data-secret\",t)),e.contentWindow.postMessage({message:\"ready\",secret:t},\"*\")},!1)))}(window,document);\n<\/script>\n","description":"Opinions\/Orders posted: CUSTOMEDIA TECHNOLOGIES, LLC v. DISH NETWORK CORPORATION [ORDER](pdf) Appeal Number: 19-1001 Origin: PTO Precedential To see more opinions and orders, follow this link: Opinions and Orders."}
NOT FOR PUBLICATION

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT

GEORGE A. SABA; NABEEL SLAIEH, 

Plaintiffs-Appellants, 

 v. 

MARK D. HOULE, individually and as U.S. 

Bankruptcy Judge; et al., 

Defendants-Appellees.

No. 17-56827 

D.C. No. 

5:17-cv-01389-JVS-SP 

MEMORANDUM*

Appeal from the United States District Court

for the Central District of California

James V. Selna, District Judge, Presiding

Submitted November 18, 2019**

Before: GOODWIN, LEAVY, and SILVERMAN, Circuit Judges.

George A. Saba and Nabeel Slaieh, proceeding pro se, appeal the district 

court’s judgment dismissing their action alleging claims under 42 U.S.C. §§ 1981, 

1983, and 1985 and state law. These claims stem from Slaieh’s Chapter 7 

bankruptcy case, where Saba was Slaieh’s counsel. We have jurisdiction under 28 

* This disposition is not appropriate for publication and is not precedent 

except as provided by Ninth Circuit Rule 36-3.

** The panel unanimously concludes this case is suitable for decision 

without oral argument. See Fed. R. App. P. 34(a)(2).

FILED

NOV 20 2019

MOLLY C. DWYER, CLERK

U.S. COURT OF APPEALS
 2 

U.S.C. § 1291. We review the district court’s dismissal de novo. Leeson v. 

Transamerica Disability Income Plan, 671 F.3d 969, 974 (9th Cir. 2012) (lack of

subject matter jurisdiction); Olsen v. Idaho State Bd. of Medicine, 363 F.3d 916, 

922 (9th Cir. 2004) (absolute immunity). We affirm.

The district court properly dismissed the claims against Judge Houle as 

barred by absolute immunity. See 42 U.S.C. § 1983 (barring injunctive relief 

against judicial officers for their judicial conduct “unless a declaratory decree was 

violated or declaratory relief was unavailable”); Mireles v. Waco, 502 U.S. 9, 9, 

11-12 (1991) (per curiam) (judges are absolutely immune from suits for damages 

based on their judicial conduct except when performing nonjudicial functions or 

acting in the complete absence of jurisdiction).

The district court properly dismissed the claims against Chapter 7 Trustee 

Simons and Simons’s counsel and real estate broker as barred by the Barton 

doctrine. See Barton v. Barbour, 104 U.S. 126, 129 (1991); Beck v. Fort James 

Corp. (In re Crown Vantage, Inc.), 421 F.3d 963, 970-71 (9th Cir. 2005) (the 

Barton doctrine requires “that a party must first obtain leave of the bankruptcy 

court before it initiates an action in another forum against a bankruptcy trustee or 

other officer appointed by the bankruptcy court for acts done in the officer’s 

official capacity;” without such leave, “the other forum lacks subject matter 

jurisdiction over the suit”). Moreover, because Saba has not alleged that these 
 3 

defendants caused him injury, he lacks standing to bring any claims against them. 

See Lujan v. Defenders of Wildlife, 504 U.S. 555, 560-61 (1992) (explaining the 

constitutional requirements of standing). 

AFFIRMED.
No. 11-9347.

#### Traylor *v.*Busby, Acting Warden, et al.

C. A. 9th Cir. Certiorari denied.
{"version":"1.0","provider_name":"U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit","provider_url":"https:\/\/cafc.uscourts.gov","author_name":"Patrick Chesnut","author_url":"https:\/\/cafc.uscourts.gov\/author\/chesnutp\/","title":"Swearing-in of the Honorable Leonard P. Stark - U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit","type":"rich","width":600,"height":338,"html":"<blockquote class=\"wp-embedded-content\" data-secret=\"TOoVHT8ABO\"><a href=\"https:\/\/cafc.uscourts.gov\/swearing-in-of-the-honorable-leonard-p-stark\/\">Swearing-in of the Honorable Leonard P. Stark<\/a><\/blockquote><iframe sandbox=\"allow-scripts\" security=\"restricted\" src=\"https:\/\/cafc.uscourts.gov\/swearing-in-of-the-honorable-leonard-p-stark\/embed\/#?secret=TOoVHT8ABO\" width=\"600\" height=\"338\" title=\"“Swearing-in of the Honorable Leonard P. Stark” — U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit\" data-secret=\"TOoVHT8ABO\" frameborder=\"0\" marginwidth=\"0\" marginheight=\"0\" scrolling=\"no\" class=\"wp-embedded-content\"><\/iframe><script>\n\/*! This file is auto-generated *\/\n!function(d,l){\"use strict\";l.querySelector&&d.addEventListener&&\"undefined\"!=typeof URL&&(d.wp=d.wp||{},d.wp.receiveEmbedMessage||(d.wp.receiveEmbedMessage=function(e){var t=e.data;if((t||t.secret||t.message||t.value)&&!\/[^a-zA-Z0-9]\/.test(t.secret)){for(var s,r,n,a=l.querySelectorAll('iframe[data-secret=\"'+t.secret+'\"]'),o=l.querySelectorAll('blockquote[data-secret=\"'+t.secret+'\"]'),c=new RegExp(\"^https?:$\",\"i\"),i=0;i<o.length;i++)o[i].style.display=\"none\";for(i=0;i<a.length;i++)s=a[i],e.source===s.contentWindow&&(s.removeAttribute(\"style\"),\"height\"===t.message?(1e3<(r=parseInt(t.value,10))?r=1e3:~~r<200&&(r=200),s.height=r):\"link\"===t.message&&(r=new URL(s.getAttribute(\"src\")),n=new URL(t.value),c.test(n.protocol))&&n.host===r.host&&l.activeElement===s&&(d.top.location.href=t.value))}},d.addEventListener(\"message\",d.wp.receiveEmbedMessage,!1),l.addEventListener(\"DOMContentLoaded\",function(){for(var e,t,s=l.querySelectorAll(\"iframe.wp-embedded-content\"),r=0;r<s.length;r++)(t=(e=s[r]).getAttribute(\"data-secret\"))||(t=Math.random().toString(36).substring(2,12),e.src+=\"#?secret=\"+t,e.setAttribute(\"data-secret\",t)),e.contentWindow.postMessage({message:\"ready\",secret:t},\"*\")},!1)))}(window,document);\n<\/script>\n","description":"During a private ceremony held in chambers this afternoon at the National Courts Building in Washington, D.C., Leonard P. Stark was sworn in as a United States Judge for the Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit.\u00a0 Chief Judge Kimberly A. Moore administered the oath of office to Judge Stark, which was witnessed by several […]","thumbnail_url":"https:\/\/cafc.uscourts.gov\/wp-content\/uploads\/Judge-Stark-Swearing-In-1024x729.jpg"}
{"version":"1.0","provider_name":"U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit","provider_url":"https:\/\/cafc.uscourts.gov","author_name":"25005pwpadmin","author_url":"https:\/\/cafc.uscourts.gov\/author\/25005pwpadmin\/","title":"Notice of Continued Extension of Access Restrictions for the National Courts Building - U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit","type":"rich","width":600,"height":338,"html":"<blockquote class=\"wp-embedded-content\" data-secret=\"psR2Z5niD8\"><a href=\"https:\/\/cafc.uscourts.gov\/notice-of-continued-extension-of-access-restrictions-for-the-national-courts-building-5\/\">Notice of Continued Extension of Access Restrictions for the National Courts Building<\/a><\/blockquote><iframe sandbox=\"allow-scripts\" security=\"restricted\" src=\"https:\/\/cafc.uscourts.gov\/notice-of-continued-extension-of-access-restrictions-for-the-national-courts-building-5\/embed\/#?secret=psR2Z5niD8\" width=\"600\" height=\"338\" title=\"“Notice of Continued Extension of Access Restrictions for the National Courts Building” — U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit\" data-secret=\"psR2Z5niD8\" frameborder=\"0\" marginwidth=\"0\" marginheight=\"0\" scrolling=\"no\" class=\"wp-embedded-content\"><\/iframe><script>\n\/*! This file is auto-generated *\/\n!function(d,l){\"use strict\";l.querySelector&&d.addEventListener&&\"undefined\"!=typeof URL&&(d.wp=d.wp||{},d.wp.receiveEmbedMessage||(d.wp.receiveEmbedMessage=function(e){var t=e.data;if((t||t.secret||t.message||t.value)&&!\/[^a-zA-Z0-9]\/.test(t.secret)){for(var s,r,n,a=l.querySelectorAll('iframe[data-secret=\"'+t.secret+'\"]'),o=l.querySelectorAll('blockquote[data-secret=\"'+t.secret+'\"]'),c=new RegExp(\"^https?:$\",\"i\"),i=0;i<o.length;i++)o[i].style.display=\"none\";for(i=0;i<a.length;i++)s=a[i],e.source===s.contentWindow&&(s.removeAttribute(\"style\"),\"height\"===t.message?(1e3<(r=parseInt(t.value,10))?r=1e3:~~r<200&&(r=200),s.height=r):\"link\"===t.message&&(r=new URL(s.getAttribute(\"src\")),n=new URL(t.value),c.test(n.protocol))&&n.host===r.host&&l.activeElement===s&&(d.top.location.href=t.value))}},d.addEventListener(\"message\",d.wp.receiveEmbedMessage,!1),l.addEventListener(\"DOMContentLoaded\",function(){for(var e,t,s=l.querySelectorAll(\"iframe.wp-embedded-content\"),r=0;r<s.length;r++)(t=(e=s[r]).getAttribute(\"data-secret\"))||(t=Math.random().toString(36).substring(2,12),e.src+=\"#?secret=\"+t,e.setAttribute(\"data-secret\",t)),e.contentWindow.postMessage({message:\"ready\",secret:t},\"*\")},!1)))}(window,document);\n<\/script>\n","description":"The United States Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit and the United States Court of Federal Claims have entered a new joint order extending their prior administrative order of June 26, 2020, concerning access to the National Courts Building complex in Washington, D.C. \u00a0 Effective immediately, building access will continue to remain limited to […]"}
§ 101.813 Remote control operation of mobile television pickup stations. ( a ) Mobile television pickup stations (including nonbroadcast) may be operated by remote control from the fixed locations for periods not to exceed 6 months.
( b ) The Commission may, upon adequate showing by the licensee as to why the television pickup operations should not be conducted under a fixed station authorization, renew the authority granted under the provisions of paragraph (a) of this section.
( c ) Reference should be made to § 101.125 concerning mobile station antenna height restrictions and to paragraphs (c) and (f) of § 101.131 concerning control points.
357P15

#### State v. James David Nanney

Def’s *Pro Se*Motion for Notice of Appeal (COA15-476)

Dismissed *ex mero motu*
No. 11-9220.

#### Ellison *v.*Illinois.

Sup. Ct. Ill. Certiorari denied.
Exhibit 32.1





Section 1350


CERTIFICATION








The undersigned officer hereby certifies that, to his knowledge, (1) the Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q of COMFORCE Corporation for the quarter ended March 28, 2010 as to which this Certification is an exhibit fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 (15 U.S.C. 78m(a) or 78o(d)) and (2) the information contained in such Report fairly presents, in all material respects, the financial condition and results of operations of COMFORCE Corporation.





Signed May 6, 2010.








/s/ John C. FanningJohn C. FanningChairman and Chief Executive Officer
17 March 2016

414P15

#### State v. James Edward Joyner

Defs PDR Under N.C.G.S. § 7A-31 (COA15-442)

Special Order
Exhibit 32.1



Certification of the President and Chief Executive Officer pursuant

to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002.



In connection with Bancshares of Florida, Inc.s (Company) Quarterly Report on Form 10-QSB for the period ended June 30, 2003
(Report), I certify 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 as of, and for the period ended,
June 30, 2003.
| | -- |  | ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------



Date:  August 13, 2003



|/S/    MICHAEL L. MCMULLAN                               
|---------------------------------------------------------
|Michael L. McMullan President and Chief Executive Officer
No. 11-250.

#### Mitchell *v.*United States.

C. A. 7th Cir. Certiorari denied.
Editorial Note on Part 1
Editorial Note: Nomenclature changes to part 1 appear at 63 FR 54077, Oct. 8, 1998.

§ 1.7008 Creation of broadband internet access service coverage maps. ( a ) After consultation with the Federal Geographic Data Committee, the Commission shall use the availability and quality of service data submitted by providers in the Broadband Data Collection to create: ( 1 ) The Broadband Map, which shall depict areas of the country that remain unserved by providers and depict the extent of availability of broadband internet access service;
( 2 ) A map that depicts the availability of fixed broadband internet access service; and
( 3 ) A map that depicts the availability of mobile broadband internet access service.
( b ) The Commission shall use the maps created in paragraph (a) of this section to determine areas where broadband internet access service is and is not available and when making any funding award for broadband internet access service deployment for residential and mobile customers.
( c ) Based on the most recent Broadband Data Collection information collected from providers, the Commission shall update the maps created in paragraph (a) of this section at least biannually using the data collected from providers.
( d ) ( 1 ) The Commission shall collect verified data for use in the coverage maps from: ( i ) State, local, and Tribal entities primarily responsible for mapping or tracking broadband internet access service coverage in their areas;
( ii ) Third parties, if the Commission determines it is in the public interest to use their data in the development of the coverage maps or the verification of data submitted by providers; and
( iii ) Other Federal agencies.
( 2 ) To the extent government entities or third parties choose to file verified data, they must follow the same filing process as providers submitting their broadband internet access service data in the data portal. Government entities and third parties that file on-the-ground test data must submit such data using the same metrics and testing parameters the Commission requires of mobile service providers when responding to a Commission request to verify mobile providers' broadband network coverage with on-the-ground data (*see* § 1.7006(c)(1)).
( 3 ) Providers shall review the verified data submitted by governments and third parties in the online portal, work with the submitter to resolve any coverage discrepancies, make any corrections they deem necessary based on such review, and submit any updated data to the Commission within 60 days of the date that the provider is notified that the data has been submitted in the online portal by the government entity or third party.
[85 FR 50907, Aug. 18, 2020, as amended at 86 FR 18162, Apr. 7, 2021; 87 FR 21514, Apr. 11, 2022; 89 FR 66268, Aug. 15, 2024]
```

[Congressional Bills 103th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[H.R. 4558 Introduced in House (IH)]

103d CONGRESS
  2d Session
                                H. R. 4558

   To enhance fairness in compensating owners of patents used by the 
                             United States.

_______________________________________________________________________

                    IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

                              June 9, 1994

  Mr. Frost introduced the following bill; which was referred to the 
                       Committee on the Judiciary

_______________________________________________________________________

                                 A BILL

 
   To enhance fairness in compensating owners of patents used by the 
                             United States.

    Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representatives of the 
United States of America in Congress assembled,

SECTION 1. JUST COMPENSATION.

    (a) Amendment.--Section 1498(a) of title 28, United States Code, is 
amended by adding at the end of the first paragraph the following: 
``Reasonable and entire compensation shall include the owner's 
reasonable costs, including reasonable fees for expert witnesses and 
attorneys, in pursuing the action if the owner is an independent 
inventor, a nonprofit organization, or an entity that had no more than 
500 employees at any time during the 5-year period preceding the use or 
manufacture of the patented invention by or for the United States.''.
    (b) Effective Date.--The amendment made by subsection (a) shall 
apply to actions under section 1498(a) of title 28, United States Code, 
that are pending on, or brought on or after, January 1, 1993.

                                 <all>
```
EXHIBIT
99.1



CERTIFICATE OF CHIEF EXECUTIVE
OFFICER AND CHIEF FINANCIAL OFFICER



This Certificate is being delivered pursuant to the requirements of Section 1350 of Chapter 63 (Mail Fraud) of Title 18 (Crimes and Criminal Procedures) of the United States Code and shall not be relied on by any person for
any other purpose.



The undersigned, who are the
Chief Executive Officer and Chief Financial Officers, respectively, of SciQuest, Inc. (the Company), hereby each certify as follows:



The Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q of the Company (the Report), which accompanies this Certificate, fully complies with the
requirements of Section 13(a) or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, and all information contained in the Report fairly presents, in all material respects, the financial condition and results of operations of the Company.



Dated this 9th day of May, 2003





/s/    STEPHEN J.
WIEHEStephen J. Wiehe, Chief Executive Officer








/s/    JAMES J.
SCHEUERJames J. Scheuer, Chief Financial Officer