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**

 

In connection with the Annual Report of Galaxy Next Generation, Inc. (the “Company”) on Form 10-K/A (Amendment No. 1) pursuant for the year ended June 30, 2020, as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the “Report”), I, Gary LeCroy, Chief Executive 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.

Date: October 16, 2020

 

*/s/ Gary LeCroy        *
No. 58904.

protest 229018-K (Philadelphia).

#### J. W. Hampton, Jr., & Co. of Phila. *v.*United States,

Opinion by

Johnson, J.

In accordance with stipulation of counsel that the merchandise consists of figures similar in all material respects to those passed upon in *Wm. S. Pitcairn Corp.*v. *United States*(39 C. C. P. A. 15, C. A. D. 458), the claim of the plaintiff was sustained.
No. 50923.

#### Protests 14520-K, etc., of Walter Hoffman et al. (New York).

Opinion by

Mollison, J.

It was stipulated that certain items of the mer■chandise consist of goatskins similar in all material respects to those the subject of *United States*v. *Winograd Bros., Inc.*(32 C. C. P. A. 153, C. A. D. 302). In accordance therewith the claim for free entry under paragraph 1681 was sustained.
CERTIFICATE OF TRUST

            The undersigned, the trustees of Merrill Lynch Preferred Capital
Trust IV, desiring to form a business trust pursuant to Delaware Business Trust
Act, 12 Del. C. ss. 3810, hereby certify as follows:

            (a)   The name of the business trust being formed hereby (the
                  "Trust") is "Merrill Lynch Preferred Capital Trust IV."

            (b)   The name and business address of the trustee of the Trust
                  which has its principal place of business in the State of
                  Delaware is as follows:

                        Chase Manhattan Bank Delaware
                        c/o John J. Cashin
                        1201 Market Street
                        Wilmington, Delaware 19801

            (c)   This Certificate of Trust shall be effective as of the date of
                  filing.

Dated: December 19, 1997


                                     /s/ THERESA LANG
                                     ---------------------------------------
                                     Name:   Theresa Lang
                                     Title:  Regular Trustee


                                     /s/ STANLEY SCHAEFER
                                     ---------------------------------------
                                     Name:   Stanley Schaefer
                                     Title:  Regular Trustee


                                     Chase Manhattan Bank Delaware


                                     By:  /s/ JOHN J. CASHIN
                                          ----------------------------------
                                          Name:   John J. Cashin
                                          Title:  Vice President
<PAGE>

                                                                    EXHIBIT 23.1



                              ACCOUNTANTS' CONSENT



The Board of Directors
Innotech, Inc.:


We consent to incorporation by reference in the registration statement (No. 333-
16959) on Form S-8 of Innotech, Inc. of our report dated February 7, 1997,
except as to note 15, which is as of March 21, 1997, relating to the balance
sheets of Innotech, Inc. as of December 31, 1996 and 1995, and the related
statements of loss, stockholders' equity (deficit) and cash flows for each of
the years in the three-year period ended December 31, 1996, which report appears
in the December 31, 1996 Annual Report on Form 10-K of Innotech, Inc.



                                                           KPMG Peat Marwick LLP



Roanoke, Virginia
March 28, 1997
Annual Reports for the Arkansas Natural Resources Conservation Service for years 2003 - 2009 can be found at the following website:https://web.archive.org/web/20100101050714/http://www.ar.nrcs.usda.gov/news/publications.html. Please be advised there are no pdf versions of these reports available as the ftp site has been discontinued.
----

List of marketing authorisations granted by the EEA EFTA States for the first half of 2003

(2006/C 233/08)

With reference to EEA Joint Committee Decision No 74/1999 of 28 May 1999, the EEA Joint Committee is invited to note, at the meeting on 10 March 2006, the following lists concerning marketing authorisations for medicinal products for the period 1 January — 30 June 2003:

----

ANNEX I

1.   New Marketing Authorisations:

The following marketing authorisations have been granted in the EEA EFTA States during the period 1 January — 30 June 2003:

----

ANNEX II

2.   Renewed Marketing Authorisations

The following marketing authorisations have been renewed in the EEA EFTA States during the period 1 January — 30 June 2003:

----

ANNEX III

3.   Extended Marketing Authorisations

The following marketing authorisations have been extended in the EEA EFTA States during the period 1 January — 30 June 2003:

----

ANNEX IV

4.   Withdrawn Marketing Authorisations

The following marketing authorisations have been withdrawn in the EEA EFTA States during the period 1 January — 30 June 2003:

----
# Main

&"Arial,Bold"Part 1SupplementUSSGL Crosswalk - Reclassified Statement of Operations and Changes in Net Position		&"Arial,Bold"Fiscal Year 2018 ReportingSection V

&"Arial,Bold"IRC Meeting 9/25/2018

# Footnotes and Additional Inform
Case 2:05-cv-06020-PBT Document 10 Filed 02/21/2006 Page 1 of 18

BLACKWATER SECURITY CONSULTING, LLC et al v. WESTCHESTER SURPLUS LINES INSURANCE COMPANY et al Doc. 10

Dockets.Justia.com
Case 2:05-cv-06020-PBT Document 10 Filed 02/21/2006 Page 2 of 18
Case 2:05-cv-06020-PBT Document 10 Filed 02/21/2006 Page 3 of 18
Case 2:05-cv-06020-PBT Document 10 Filed 02/21/2006 Page 4 of 18
Case 2:05-cv-06020-PBT Document 10 Filed 02/21/2006 Page 5 of 18
Case 2:05-cv-06020-PBT Document 10 Filed 02/21/2006 Page 6 of 18
Case 2:05-cv-06020-PBT Document 10 Filed 02/21/2006 Page 7 of 18
Case 2:05-cv-06020-PBT Document 10 Filed 02/21/2006 Page 8 of 18
Case 2:05-cv-06020-PBT Document 10 Filed 02/21/2006 Page 9 of 18
Case 2:05-cv-06020-PBT Document 10 Filed 02/21/2006 Page 10 of 18
Case 2:05-cv-06020-PBT Document 10 Filed 02/21/2006 Page 11 of 18
Case 2:05-cv-06020-PBT Document 10 Filed 02/21/2006 Page 12 of 18
Case 2:05-cv-06020-PBT Document 10 Filed 02/21/2006 Page 13 of 18
Case 2:05-cv-06020-PBT Document 10 Filed 02/21/2006 Page 14 of 18
Case 2:05-cv-06020-PBT Document 10 Filed 02/21/2006 Page 15 of 18
Case 2:05-cv-06020-PBT Document 10 Filed 02/21/2006 Page 16 of 18
Case 2:05-cv-06020-PBT Document 10 Filed 02/21/2006 Page 17 of 18
Case 2:05-cv-06020-PBT Document 10 Filed 02/21/2006 Page 18 of 18
----

----

I Tiedonantoja

Komissio

----

VIHANNESLAJIEN LAJIKKEIDEN YLEINEN LUETTELO

kuudes täydennysosa 24. kokonaispainokseen

(2006/C 241 A/01)

SISÄLLYS

Selitykset

Vihanneslajien luettelo

----

SELITYKSET

----

(1)EUVL C 275 A, 8.11.2005, s. 1. Luettelo sellaisena kuin se on viimeksi muutettuna viidennellä täydennysosalla (EUVL C 158 A, 7.7.2006, s. 23).

(2)EYVL L 193, 20.7.2002, s. 33. Direktiivi sellaisena kuin se on viimeksi muutettuna direktiivillä 2004/117/EY (EUVL L 14, 18.1.2005, s. 18).

----

1.ALLIUM ASCALONICUM L.

2.ALLIUM CEPA L.

5.ALLIUM SATIVUM L.

16.BRASSICA OLERACEA L. CONVAR. CAPITATA (L.) ALEF. VAR. ALBA DC.

17.BRASSICA OLERACEA L. CONVAR. CAPITATA (L.) ALEF. VAR. RUBRA DC.

20.BRASSICA RAPA L. VAR. RAPA

21.CAPSICUM ANNUUM L.

23.CICHORIUM INTYBUS L. (PARTIM)

24.CICHORIUM INTYBUS L. (PARTIM)

26.CUCUMIS MELO L.

27.CUCUMIS SATIVUS L.

32.DAUCUS CAROTA L.

34.LACTUCA SATIVA L.

35.LYCOPERSICON LYCOPERSICUM (L.) KARSTEN EX FARW.

38.PHASEOLUS VULGARIS L.

39.PISUM SATIVUM L. (PARTIM)

40.RAPHANUS SATIVUS L.

43.SOLANUM MELONGENA L.

----
# C_2018161EN.01001001.xml

| 7.5.2018 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 161/10 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

7.5.2018

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 161/10

---

Judgment of the Court (Grand Chamber) of 6 March 2018 — European Commission v FIH Holding A/S, FIH Erhvervsbank A/S

(Case C-579/16 P) (1)

1

((Appeal - State aid - Definition of ‘aid’ - Definition of ‘economic advantage’ - Market economy operator principle - Conditions governing applicability and application - Financial crisis - Successive bank bail outs - Whether account to be taken, in the assessment of the second bail out, of the risks arising from commitments entered into by a Member State in the first bail out))

(2018/C 161/11)

Language of the case: English

Parties

Parties

Appellant: European Commission (represented by: A. Bouchagiar, L. Flynn and K. Blanck-Putz, acting as Agents)

Appellant:

Other parties to the proceedings: FIH Holding A/S, FIH Erhvervsbank A/S (represented by: O. Koktvedgaard, advokat)

Other parties to the proceedings:

Operative part of the judgment

Operative part of the judgment

The Court:

| 1. | Sets aside the judgment of the General Court of 15 September 2016, FIH Holding and FIH Erhvervsbank v Commission (T-386/14, EU:T:2016:474); |
| --- | --- |

1.

Sets aside the judgment of the General Court of 15 September 2016, FIH Holding and FIH Erhvervsbank v Commission (T-386/14, EU:T:2016:474);

| 2. | Dismisses the first plea in the action before the General Court; |
| --- | --- |

2.

Dismisses the first plea in the action before the General Court;

| 3. | Refers the case back to the General Court of the European Union for it to give judgment on the second plea in law; |
| --- | --- |

3.

Refers the case back to the General Court of the European Union for it to give judgment on the second plea in law;

| 4. | Reserves the costs. |
| --- | --- |

4.

Reserves the costs.

---

(1)  OJ C 14, 16.1.2017.

1

---
Exhibit (21)

LIST OF SUBSIDIARIES

100% Owned Subsidiaries of EastGroup Properties, Inc.

     EastGroup Properties General Partners, Inc.
     EastGroup Properties Holdings, Inc.
     EastGroup TRS, Inc.

Partnerships and LLC's with Partners and Members Indented:

     EastGroup Properties, LP
          99% EastGroup Properties Holdings, Inc.
          1% EastGroup Properties General Partners, Inc.
     EastGroup Property Services, LLC
          100% EastGroup Properties, LP
     EastGroup Property Services of Florida, LLC
          100% EastGroup Property Services, LLC
     EastGroup Jacksonville, LLC
          100% EastGroup Properties, LP
     EastGroup Kearn Creek, LLC
          100% EastGroup Properties, LP
     55 Castilian, LLC
          80% EastGroup Properties, LP
          20% BDC Castilian, LLC
     Sample I-95 Associates
          99% EastGroup Properties, LP
          1% EastGroup Properties General Partners, Inc.
     University Business Center Associates
          80% Profit interest EastGroup Properties, LP
          49% Capital interest EastGroup Properties, LP
          31% Capital interest EastGroup Properties, Inc.
          20% JCB Limited



                                       62
No. 51638.

#### Protest 117785-K of V. W. Davis (Duluth).

Opinion by

Cline, J.

It was stipulated that the merchandise is the same in all material respects as that passed upon in *Tower & Sons*v. *United States*(14 Cust. Ct. 94, C. D. 919). In accordance therewith the claim for free entry was sustained.
**GENERAL FUND RECEIPT (GFR) ACCOUNT GUIDE**

**Effective Fiscal 2020**

**Scenario 7 Non-Custodial Statement Collections: Seigniorage**

SFFAS No. 7, paragraph 305. “Seigniorage.—Seigniorage is the face value of newly minted coins less the cost of production (which includes the cost of metal, manufacturing, and transportation). It results from the sovereign power of the Government to directly create money and, although not an inflow of resources from the public, does increase the Government’s net position in the same manner as an inflow of resources. Because it is not demanded, earned, or donated, it is an other financing source rather than revenue. It should be recognized as an other financing source when coins are delivered to the Federal Reserve Banks in return for deposits.”

**Beginning Trial Balance**

**Year 2 1st Quarter**

Also Post:

**1st Quarter Preclosing Trial Balance**

**Financial Statements Quarter 1 Year 2**

**Year 2 4th Quarter Entries**

Also Post:

**Year 2 Preclosing Trial Balance**

**Year 2 – Preclosing Adjusting Entries**

**Year 2 Preclosing Adjusted Trial Balance**

**Financial Statements**

**Reclassified Statements:**

**Closing Entries**

**Post-Closing Trial Balance**

                                                                                                                 Page **190** of **213                                                       IRC Handout April 23, 2020**
No. 52196.

protest 126486-K (Memphis).

#### Southern Publishing Association *v.*United States,

Ekwall, Judge:

'Plaintiff herein filed protest against the assessment of duty upon a quantity of medical books imported from Canada. The collector assessed duty thereon at the rate of 20 percent ad valorem under paragraph 1410, Tariff Act of 1930, as modified.

It is claimed on the part of t-he plaintiff, who appeared without counsel, that these books are not properly subject to duty in that they are replacements for an equal number o'f the same works which had been previously imported and entered for consumption, and on which duties had been paid. The books covered by this first importation were later returned to Canada. Plaintiff further claims that the assessment made by the collector on this second importation constituted clerical error.

The testimony of the vice president and general manager of the plaintiff corporation discloses that the ground upon which he claims clerical error is that having paid duty on the first importation, a portion of which was returned to Canada, the Government should not take duty upon a second importation which was in the nature of a replacement. The reason for the return to Canada of a portion of the books covered by the first importation was that the Canadian publisher found that his stock was depleted and requested the return of some of those which had been exported to this country, with the understanding that the books returned would be replaced when a new edition was printed.

Counsel for the Government moved to dismiss the protest as untimely under section 514, Tariff Act of 1930. The entry was liquidated on October 26, 1945, and protest filed on June 27, 1946, 8 months thereafter. Said section 514 requires that protests be filed within 60 days after liquidation, or in cases of clerical error, within 60 days after the refusal of the collector to reliquidate the entry on the ground of such clerical error. It is plain that the protest filed on June 27 is untimely and should be dismissed. An earlier letter of complaint filed with the collector on September 28, 1945, even if it could be considered a protest, is premature, having been filed prior to liquidation.

Even were the court at liberty to consider the merits, it is apparent that this was an initial importation and as such must be assessed with duty as provided in section 1 of the said tariff act providing that “all articles when imported from any foreign country into the United States * * *” shall pay “the rates of duty *272which are prescribed by the schedules and paragraphs of the dutiable list of this title * * Moreover, there is nothing in the record to warrant a finding of clerical error as that term has been defined by the "courts. See the leading case of *McQuillan*v. *United States,*18 C. C. P. A. (Customs) 215, T. D. 44401.

For the reasons given above we hold that the protest is untimely and should be and the same hereby is dismissed.

Judgment will be rendered accordingly.
# C_2017202EN.01001801.xml

| 26.6.2017 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 202/18 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

26.6.2017

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 202/18

---

Order of the General Court of 3 May 2017 — De Nicola v EIB

(Case T-75/16 P) (1)

1

((Appeal - Civil Service - EIB staff - Appraisal - Career evaluation report - Appraisal year 2010 - Errors of law - Appeal in part manifestly inadmissible and in part manifestly unfounded))

(2017/C 202/31)

Language of the case: Italian

Parties

Parties

Appellant: Carlo De Nicola (Strassen, Luxembourg) (represented by: G. Ferabecoli, lawyer)

Appellant:

Other party to the proceedings: European Investment Bank (EIB) (represented initially by: G. Nuvoli and T. Gilliams, and subsequently by: G. Nuvoli and G. Faedo, acting as Agents, and A. Dal Ferro, lawyer)

Other party to the proceedings:

Re:

Re:

Appeal brought against the order of the European Union Civil Service Tribunal (Single Judge) of 18 December 2015, De Nicola v EIB (F-128/11, EU:F:2015:168), seeking to have that order set aside.

De Nicola

EIB

Operative part of the order

Operative part of the order

| 1. | The appeal is dismissed. |
| --- | --- |

1.

The appeal is dismissed.

| 2. | Mr Carlo De Nicola shall bear his own costs and pay those incurred by the European Investment Bank (EIB) in the present appeal. |
| --- | --- |

2.

Mr Carlo De Nicola shall bear his own costs and pay those incurred by the European Investment Bank (EIB) in the present appeal.

---

(1)  OJ C 118, 4.4.2016.

1

---
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF PENNSYLVANIA

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA : CRIMINAL ACTION

:

v. :

:

FERNANDO GARCIA : NO. 04-662-1

ORDER

AND NOW, this 10th day of January, 2012, for the

reasons set forth in the accompanying Memorandum, it is hereby

ORDERED that:

(1) the petition of Fernando Garcia for relief under

28 U.S.C. § 2255 (improperly characterized as a writ of audita

querela) (Doc. #126) is DENIED;

(2) a certificate of appealability is not issued; and

(3) the motion of Fernando Garcia for appointment of

counsel (Doc. #127) is DENIED.

BY THE COURT:

 /s/ Harvey Bartle III 

 J.

Case 2:04-cr-00662-HB Document 136 Filed 01/10/12 Page 1 of 1
# RSNC

Part 1SUPPLEMENTAL		Fiscal Year 2017 ReportingSection VI

&"Arial,Bold"Bulletin No. 2017-06	&"Arial,Bold"DRAFT RSNC - &P	&"Arial,Bold"IRC Handout 4/20/2017
Case No. 9,012.

#### MANDEVILLE v. LOVE.

[2 Cranch, C. C. 249.]1

Circuit Court, District of Columbia.

Oct. Term, 1821.

Judgment — Supersedeas—Sureties.

A judgment of the circuit court cannot be superseded without two sureties.

[Cited in Chesapeake & Ohio Canal Co. v. Bancroft, Case No. 2,644.]

Mr. Wallach, for defendant,

moved the court to quash an execution which had issued upon a supersedeas of a judgment of this court, acknowledged by the original defendant and one surety only; whereas the act of Maryland of 1791, c. 67, requires two.

Mr. Lear, for plaintiff.

THE COURT

(nem. con.) quashed the execution.
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF PENNSYLVANIA

VILETTO BOSNIAK & ROSS

BY: Charles W. Sweeney, III, Esquire Attorney for Defendants

I.D.# 62339

1515 Market Street, Suite 1802

Philadelphia, PA 19102

(215) 564-3042

TRINA HERRING : CIVIL ACTION

OSCAR HERRING

:

VS.

:

MICHAEL McCREA

GANNETT FLEMMING, INC. : NO. 02 CV 4391

ENTRY OF APPEARANCE

TO THE CLERK OF COURT:

Kindly enter my appearance for the Defendants, Michael McCrea and

Gannett Flemming, Inc., in the above matter.

Jury trial is hereby demanded.

VILETTO BOSNIAK & ROSS

BY: 

 Charles W. Sweeney, III

 Attorney for Defendants

 

Case 2:02-cv-04391-BWK Document 5 Filed 12/24/2002 Page 1 of 1
No. 61298.

protests 264049-K, etc. (New York).

#### Sam Yeung Co. et al. *v.*United States,

Opinion by

Oliver, C. J.

The issue presented herein was decided adversely to plaintiffs’ contention in *Dale Products Corp. et al.*v. *United States*(31 Cust. Ct. 170, C. D. 1565) and *United States*v. *Astra Trading Corp.*(44 C. C. P. A. 8, C. A. D. 627). When the case was called for trial, plaintiffs requested a continuance pending trial of a new test case. The request was denied and an order of dismissal for lack of prosecution was entered. The protests were, therefore, dismissed.
Before the Second Division,

March 6, 1946

No. 50926.

#### Protest 95284-K of James McCutcheon & Co. (New York).

Opinion by

Tilson, J.

An examination of the official record failing to disclose any reason which would justify the court in disturbing the action of the collector, the protest was overruled.
Exhibit 31.4

CERTIFICATION

I, James
A. Johnson, certify that:

1. I have reviewed this Amendment No. 1 to the annual report on Form 10-K of ZymoGenetics, Inc.; and

2. Based on my knowledge, this report does not contain any untrue statement of a material fact or omit to state a material fact necessary to make the
statements made, in light of the circumstances under which such statements were made, not misleading with respect to the period covered by this report.

Date: August 24, 2010



By:

/s/ James A. JohnsonJames A. Johnson Chief
Financial Officer
No. 58454.

protest 234142-K (Los Angeles).

#### Acrow, Incorporated, and Frank P. Dow Co., Inc. *v.*United States,

Opinion by

Ford, J.

In accordance with stipulation of counsel that certain items of the merchandise consist of building shores or jacks similar in all material respects as those involved in Abstract 57727, the claim of the plaintiffs was sustained.
Case 2:05-cv-20302-HB Document 2 Filed 05/26/05 Page 1 of 29
Case 2:05-cv-20302-HB Document 2 Filed 05/26/05 Page 2 of 29
Case 2:05-cv-20302-HB Document 2 Filed 05/26/05 Page 3 of 29
Case 2:05-cv-20302-HB Document 2 Filed 05/26/05 Page 4 of 29
Case 2:05-cv-20302-HB Document 2 Filed 05/26/05 Page 5 of 29
Case 2:05-cv-20302-HB Document 2 Filed 05/26/05 Page 6 of 29
Case 2:05-cv-20302-HB Document 2 Filed 05/26/05 Page 7 of 29
Case 2:05-cv-20302-HB Document 2 Filed 05/26/05 Page 8 of 29
Case 2:05-cv-20302-HB Document 2 Filed 05/26/05 Page 9 of 29
Case 2:05-cv-20302-HB Document 2 Filed 05/26/05 Page 10 of 29
Case 2:05-cv-20302-HB Document 2 Filed 05/26/05 Page 11 of 29
Case 2:05-cv-20302-HB Document 2 Filed 05/26/05 Page 12 of 29
Case 2:05-cv-20302-HB Document 2 Filed 05/26/05 Page 13 of 29
Case 2:05-cv-20302-HB Document 2 Filed 05/26/05 Page 14 of 29
Case 2:05-cv-20302-HB Document 2 Filed 05/26/05 Page 15 of 29
Case 2:05-cv-20302-HB Document 2 Filed 05/26/05 Page 16 of 29
Case 2:05-cv-20302-HB Document 2 Filed 05/26/05 Page 17 of 29
Case 2:05-cv-20302-HB Document 2 Filed 05/26/05 Page 18 of 29
Case 2:05-cv-20302-HB Document 2 Filed 05/26/05 Page 19 of 29
Case 2:05-cv-20302-HB Document 2 Filed 05/26/05 Page 20 of 29
Case 2:05-cv-20302-HB Document 2 Filed 05/26/05 Page 21 of 29
Case 2:05-cv-20302-HB Document 2 Filed 05/26/05 Page 22 of 29
Case 2:05-cv-20302-HB Document 2 Filed 05/26/05 Page 23 of 29
Case 2:05-cv-20302-HB Document 2 Filed 05/26/05 Page 24 of 29
Case 2:05-cv-20302-HB Document 2 Filed 05/26/05 Page 25 of 29
Case 2:05-cv-20302-HB Document 2 Filed 05/26/05 Page 26 of 29
Case 2:05-cv-20302-HB Document 2 Filed 05/26/05 Page 27 of 29
Case 2:05-cv-20302-HB Document 2 Filed 05/26/05 Page 28 of 29
Case 2:05-cv-20302-HB Document 2 Filed 05/26/05 Page 29 of 29