alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
<PAGE>
 
                                                                   EXHIBIT 10.40
                                                                   -------------
                                        

                                 OVERLINE NOTE
                                 -------------


$10,000,000   March 1, 1998

FOR VALUE RECEIVED, MATRIX FINANCIAL SERVICES CORPORATION, an Arizona
corporation ("BORROWER"), promises to pay to the order of BANK ONE, TEXAS, N.A.
("BANK ONE") that portion of the principal amount of $10,000,000 that may from
time to time be disbursed and outstanding under this note together with
interest.

This note is the "Overline Note" under the Amended and Restated Loan Agreement
(as renewed, extended, amended, or restated, the "LOAN AGREEMENT") dated as of
January 31, 1997, between Borrower, Bank One, certain other Lenders, and Bank
One, Texas, N.A., as Agent for Lenders. All of the defined terms in the Loan
Agreement have the same meanings when used, unless otherwise defined, in this
note.

This note incorporates by reference the principal and interest payment terms in
the Loan Agreement for this note, including, without limitation, the final
maturity, which is the Warehouse-Actual-Termination Date. Principal and interest
are payable to the holder of this note through Agent at either (a) its offices
at 1717 Main Street, Dallas, Texas 75201, or (b) at any other address so
designated by Agent in written notice to Borrower.

This note incorporates by reference all other provisions in the Loan Agreement
applicable to this note, such as provisions for disbursements of principal,
applicable-interest rates before and after Default, voluntary and mandatory
prepayments, acceleration of maturity, exercise of Rights, payment of attorneys'
fees, court costs, and other costs of collection, certain waivers by Borrower
and other obligors, assurances and security, choice of Texas and United States
federal Law, usury savings, and other matters applicable to Loan Documents under
the Loan Agreement.


                                MATRIX FINANCIAL SERVICES CORPORATION,

                         as Borrower


                                By _____________________________________________
                                    Thomas J. Osselaer, Executive Vice President
Exhibit 31.2

                          CERTIFICATION

I, Richard J. Surratt, certify that:

1.  I have reviewed this annual report on Form 10-K of FLYi,
Inc.:

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;

3.  Omitted

4.  The registrant's other certifying officer(s) and I are
responsible for establishing and maintaining disclosure controls
and procedures (as defined in Exchange Act Rules 13a-15(e) and
15d-15(e)) for the registrant and have:

     a)  Designed such disclosure controls and procedures, or
     caused such disclosure controls and procedures to be
     designed under our supervision, to ensure that material
     information relating to the registrant, including its
     consolidated subsidiaries, is made known to us by others
     within those entities, particularly during the period in
     which this report is being prepared;

     b)  Evaluated the effectiveness of the registrant's
     disclosure controls and procedures and presented in this
     report our conclusions about the effectiveness of the
     disclosure controls and procedures, as of the end of the
     period covered by this report based on such evaluation; and

     c)  Disclosed in this report any change in the registrant's
     internal control over financial reporting that occurred
     during the registrant's most recent fiscal quarter (the
     registrant's fourth fiscal quarter in the case of an annual
     report) that has materially affected, or is reasonably
     likely to materially affect, the registrant's internal
     control over financial reporting; and

5.  The registrant's other certifying officer(s) and I have
disclosed, based on our most recent evaluation of internal
control over financial reporting, to the registrant's auditors
and the audit committee of registrant's board of directors (or
persons performing the equivalent functions):

     a)  All significant deficiencies and material weaknesses in
     the design or operation of internal control over financial
     reporting which are reasonably likely to adversely affect
     the registrant's ability to record, process, summarize and
     report financial information; and

     b)  Any fraud, whether or not material, that involves
     management or other employees who have a significant role in
     the registrant's internal control over financial reporting.

Date:  March 16, 2005

/s/ Richard J. Surratt
Richard J. Surratt
Executive Vice President, Treasurer, and Chief Financial Officer
EXHIBIT 32 (B)


                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 United Bancshares, Inc. (the
"Company") on Form 10-K for the year ending December 31, 2003 as filed with the
Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the "Report"), I, Brenda
M. Hudson-Nelson, Chief Financial Officer of the Company, certify, pursuant to
18 U.S.C. ss.1350, as adopted pursuant to ss.906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of
2002, that to the best of my 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 result of operations of
          the Company.


/s/ Brenda M. Hudson-Nelson
----------------------------
Brenda M. Hudson-Nelson
Chief Financial Officer
March 30, 2004
<PAGE>
 
                                                                      EXHIBIT 11

                     INTERNATIONAL IMAGING MATERIALS, INC.

              CALCULATION OF NET INCOME PER SHARE OF COMMON STOCK
                    (IN THOUSANDS, EXCEPT PER SHARE AMOUNTS)

<TABLE>
<CAPTION>
 
 
                                                                Fiscal Year Ended March 31
                                                                --------------------------
                                                                 1995     1996      1997
                                                                -------  -------  --------
<S>                                                             <C>      <C>      <C>
 
Net income                                                       $9,970   $9,903   $11,296
 
Weighted average shares outstanding                               8,326    8,750     8,571
Common stock equivalents for restricted stock, stock options
    and warrants                                                    767      474       396
                                                                 ------   ------   -------
    Weighted average common shares outstanding as adjusted        9,093    9,224     8,967
                                                                 ======   ======   =======
 
    Net income per share of common stock                         $ 1.10   $ 1.07   $  1.26
                                                                 ======   ======   =======
 
</TABLE>
EXHIBIT 32.1


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


        In connection with the Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q of RPM Advantage.
(the "Registrant") for the period ended June 30, 2011, as filed with the
Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the "Report"),
I, David R. Pressler, Chief Executive Officer of the Registrant, certify,
pursuant to 18 U.S.C. 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, 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
Company.


Date:   July 15, 2011


By:

/s/ DAVID R. PRESSLER


David R. Pressler
Chief Executive Officer
(principal executive officer)
EXHIBIT 32.1


                    CERTIFICATION OF CHIEF EXECUTIVE OFFICER
                               CET SERVICES, INC.
                      PURSUANT TO 18 U.S.C. SECTION 1350


     I hereby certify that, to the best of my knowledge, the Amendment
No. 1 to the Annual Report on Form 10-KSB of CET Services, Inc. for the
period ending December 31, 2005:

     (1)  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 aspects, the financial condition and results of operations of CET
Services, Inc.




/s/ Steven H. Davis
Steven H. Davis
Chief Executive Officer
April 21, 2006



A signed original of this written statement required by Section 906 of the
Sarbanes Oxley Act of 2002 has been provided to CET Services, Inc. and will
be retained by CET Services, Inc. and furnished to the Securities and
Exchange Commission upon request.
COMPLETENESS CHECKLIST FOR 8-HOUR OZONE RACT SIP SUBMITTAL 

Planning Area: Feather River Air Quality Management District 

Title 40 CFR, Part 51, Appendix V – 

Criteria for Determining the Completeness 

of Plan Submissions 

Enclosed Notes 

ADMINISTRATIVE MATERIALS 

2.1(a) Submittal Letter from Governor's 

Designee X See ARB Executive Order G-125-346. 

2.1(b) Evidence of Adoption X 

See Feather River Air Quality 

Management District Board’s 

Resolution No. 2006-10 as certified by 

Board Clerk. 

2.1(c) Legal Authority Citation X See ARB Executive Order G-125-346. 

2.1(d) Copy of : 

a. Attainment Plan 

b: Contingency Measures 

 Not applicable 

2.1(e) Evidence of Compliance with State's 

Procedural Requirements X 

See Feather River Air Quality 

Management District Board Resolution 

No. 2006-10 as certified by Board 

Clerk and ARB Executive Order G-125-

346. 

2.1(f) Evidence of Public Notice Consistent with 

40 CFR part 51.102 X See attachment 3 of the District submittal. 

2.1(g) Certification of Public Hearing in 

Accordance with Notice X See attachment 3 of the District submittal. 

2.1(h) Compilation of Public Comments and 

Responses There were no comments. 

2.2(a) Identification of Regulated Pollutant Not applicable. 

2.2(b) Identification of Attainment Area/Status Not applicable. 

2.2(c) Estimate of Plan's Impact on Emissions Not applicable. 

2.2(d) Demonstration that Plan 

Approval/Implementation Protects 

NAAQS 

 Not applicable. 

2.2(e) Modeling Support Not applicable. 

2.2(f)- Compliance/Enforcement and 

2.2(i) Justification Not applicable.
* This order and judgment is not binding precedent, except under the

doctrines of law of the case, res judicata, and col lateral estoppel. This court generally disfavors the citation of orders and judg ments; nevertheless, an order and judgment may be cited under the terms and condi tions of 10th Cir. R. 36.3.

** After examining the briefs and the appellate recor d, this three-judge panel has determined unanimously that oral argumentwould not be of material assistance in the determination of this appeal. See Fed. R. App. P. 34(a); 10th Cir. R. 34.1.9. The cause is therefore ordered sub mitted without oral argument. 

## F I L E D United States Court of Appeals Tenth Circuit 

### AUG 6 1998 

### PATRICK FISHER Clerk UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

TENTH CIRCUIT
JOSE MACAIBA CANELL, Plaintiff-Appellant, vs. KEN McCLAIN, Defendant-Appellee. No. 97-3281 (D.C. No. 97-CV-3124-GTV)

(D. Kan.)

ORDER AND JUDGMENT *

Before PORFILIO , KELLY , and HENRY , Circuit Judges. ** Plaintiff-Appellant Jose Macaiba-Canell, appearing pro se and in forma pauperis, appeals from the district court’s denial of his letter motion for rehearing, which the court construed as a Fed. R. C iv. P. 60(b)(6) motion. Our jurisdiction arises under 28 U.S.C. §1291, and we a ffirm. We review the district court's denial of a Rule 60( b)(6) motion for abuse ofdiscretion. SeeCashner v. Freedom Stores, Inc. , 98 F.3d 572, 576 (10th Cir.

1996). In his complaint filed April 9, 1997, Mr. M acaiba-Canell alleges he was injured by a corrections officer on June 28, 1992. The district court dismissed the case pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1915(e)(2)(B)(ii). Mr . Macaiba-Canell’s Bivens claim is subject to Kansas’s two-year general perso nal injury statute. See Kan. Stat. Ann. § 60-513(a)(4) (1994); Industrial Constructors Corp. v. United States Bureau of Reclamation , 15 F.3d 963, 968 (10th Cir. 1994). The face of the complaint indicates Mr. Macaiba-Canell’s claim is t ime-barred, and we cannot say that the district court abused its discretion in de termining that his tolling arguments were legally insufficient. See Aldrich v. McCulloch Properties , 627 F.2d 1036, 1041 n.4 (10th Cir. 1980). AFFIRMED. Entered for the Court Paul J. Kelly, Jr. Circuit Judge
No. 00-791.

#### Bastrop County *v.*Janes.

C. A. 5th Cir. Cer-tiorari denied.
<PAGE>
                                  EXHIBIT 32.2

                    CERTIFICATION OF CHIEF FINANCIAL OFFICER
                                   PURSUANT TO
                             18 U.S.C. SECTION 1350,
                             AS ADOPTED PURSUANT TO

SECTION 906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002

I, Marshall F. Sparks, Chief Financial Officer of Global Food Technologies,
Inc., certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, as adopted pursuant to
Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that this Quarterly Report on
Form 10-QSB for the fiscal quarter ended September 30, 2005, 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 this Quarterly
Report on Form 10-QSB for the fiscal quarter ended September 30, 2005, fairly
presents, in all material respects, the financial condition and results of
operations of Global Food Technologies, Inc.

Date: November 22, 2005                /s/ Marshall F. Sparks
                                       ---------------------------------------
                                       Marshall F. Sparks,
                                       Chief Financial Officer and Secretary
* Pursuant to Local Rule 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 Local Rule 47.5.4. IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT

No. 95-31147 Conference Calendar

ISSAC I. OMOIKE, Plaintiff-Appellant,

versus LOUISIANA STATE UNIVERSITY, Defendant-Appellee.

- - - - - - - - - - Appeal from the United States District Court for the Middle District of Louisiana

USDC No. 94-CV-894

- - - - - - - - - - December 11, 1996 Before WIENER, BARKSDALE, and BENAVIDES, Circuit Judges.
PER CURIAM: * Issac I. Omoike does not challenge the district court’s order granting the defendant’s motion for summary judgment and dismissing his complaint based on the doctrine of res judicata. Omoike merely challenges the district court’s rulings made in his earlier suit which made the same claims as those made in the instant complaint.No. 95-31147 - 2 - Because Omoike has not disputed the district court’s determinations that the instant suit is identical to Omoike’s complaint in civil action # 91-6530B-M1, that he sued the same defendant in both suits, and that the prior action was dismissed on the merits by a court of competent jurisdiction, the complaint was properly dismissed based on the doctrine of res judicata.
See Fed. R. Civ. P. 56(c); Nilsen v. City of Moss Point, Miss. , 701 F.2d 556, 559 (5th Cir. 1983) (en banc). The rulings in the prior action became final when Omoike failed to file a timely notice of appeal from the dismissal of that action, and Omoike cannot contest such rulings in the present action. Omoike argued for the first time in his notice of appeal that the district judge and magistrate judge are biased against him. Therefore, this issue is subject to plain error review.
See United States v. Calverley , 37 F.3d 160, 162-64 (5th Cir. 1994) (en banc), cert. denied , 115 S. Ct. 1266 (1995). Omoike’s allegations of judicial bias involve questions of fact which, by their nature, are not obvious error. See Robertson v. Plano City of Texas , 70 F.3d 21, 23 (5th Cir. 1995). The bias issue is not subject to appellate review. Because Omoike has failed to raise an issue of arguable merit, the appeal is dismissed as frivolous. See Howard v. King , 707 F.2d 215, 219-20 (5th Cir. 1983); 5th Cir. Rule 42.2.
APPEAL DISMISSED.
Exhibit 99.1

Securities and Exchange Commission
100 F Street, NE
Washington, D.C. 20549

Dear
Sirs,

Deloitte &
Associados, SROC S.A. was previously the independent registered public accounting firm for Portugal Telecom, SGPS, S.A. (the "Company") and reported on
the consolidated financial statements of the Company for the years ended December 31, 2013 and 2012. We have read the Company's statements included under Item 16F of its Annual Report on
Form 20-F for the fiscal year ended December 31, 2014 and agree with such statements except that we are not in a position to agree or disagree with the Company's statement that newly
engaged accountants were not consulted regarding any of the matters or events set forth in Item 16F(a)(2) of Form 20-F.

Very
truly yours,

Lisbon,
May 15, 2015

/s/ DELOITTE & ASSOCIADOS, SROC S.A. Deloitte & Associados, SROC S.A.


---



QuickLinks
| **INTEGRITY MUTUAL FUNDS, INC. AND SUBSIDIARIES** | Exhibit 32.1 |
|---------------------------------------------------|--------------|

**CERTIFICATIONPURSUANT TO18 U.S.C. SECTION 1350,AS ADOPTED PURSUANT TOSECTION 906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002**

In connection with the AnnualReport of Integrity Mutual Funds, Inc. (the "Company") on Form 10-K for the yearended December 31, 2008, as filed with the U.S. Securities and ExchangeCommission on the date hereof (the "Report"), I, Bradley P. Wells, ChiefExecutive Officer of the Company, certify, pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-OxleyAct of 2002 (18 U.S.C. Section 1350), that to the best of my 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 Company. |

 

| Date: March 17, 2009 | By /s/ Bradley P. Wells         |
|----------------------|---------------------------------|
|                 | Bradley P. Wells                |
|                 | Interim Chief Executive Officer |
|                 | and President                   |
#### Gregory C. GONZALEZ, Appellant, v. STATE of Florida, Appellee.

No. 69-12.

District Court of Appeal of Florida, Second District.

Feb. 4, 1970.

Appeal dismissed.
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 

FOR THE WESTERN DISTRICT OF PENNSYLVANIA 

Plaintiff, 

v. 

JOHN LAMANNA, et al., 

Civil Action No. 03-323 Erie 

I Defendants. 

MEMORANDUMORDER 

This civil rights action was received by the Clerk of Court on October 7, 2003, l 

and was referred to United States Magistrate Judge Susan Paradise Baxter for report 

and recommendation in accordance with the Magistrates Act, 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1), 

and Rules 72.1.3 and 72.1.4 of the Local Rules for Magistrates. 

The Magistrate Judge's Report and Recommendation [Doc. No. 11 51, filed on 

February 23, 2007, recommended that Defendants' motion to dismiss or, in the 

alternative, motion for summary judgment as to the dental claims [Doc. No. 1021 be 

granted in part and denied in part as follows: summary judgment should be granted in 

favor of Defendants Lamanna and Collins on the Bivens claim, while summary 

judgment should be denied as to the negligence claim against the United States. The 

parties were allowed ten (10) days from the date of service to file objections. Service 

was made on Plaintiff by certified mail and on Defendants. Objections were filed by 

Defendant United States on March 2, 2007 [Doc. 1171. Objections were filed by Plaintiff 

on March 5, 2007 [Doc. No. 11 81. After de novo review of the motion and documents in 

the case, together with the Report and Recommendation and the objections thereto, the 

following order is entered: 

h AND NOW, this.& day of March, 2007; 

IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that the Defendants' motion to dismiss or, in the 

alternative, motion for summary judgment as to the dental claims [Doc. No. 1021 is 

GRANTED in part and DENIED in part as follows: summary judgment is GRANTED in 

favor of Defendants Lamanna and Collins on the Bivins claim; summary judgment is 

Case 1:03-cv-00323-SPB Document 121 Filed 03/12/07 Page 1 of 2
-. 4 

DENIED as to the negligence claim against Defendant United States. 

The Report and Recommendation [Doc. No. 1151 of Magistrate Judge Baxter, 

filed on February 23, 2007, is adopted as the opinion of the Court. 

sl Sean J. McLaughlin United States District Judge 

cm: All parties of record Susan Paradise Baxter, U.S. Magistrate Judge 

Case 1:03-cv-00323-SPB Document 121 Filed 03/12/07 Page 2 of 2