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

[Congressional Bills 117th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[S. 2869 Introduced in Senate (IS)]

<DOC>

117th CONGRESS
  1st Session
                                S. 2869

To temporarily limit the authority of the Administrator of the Federal 
 Emergency Management Agency to prescribe chargeable premium rates for 
      flood insurance under the National Flood Insurance Program.

_______________________________________________________________________

                   IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES

                           September 28, 2021

 Mr. Rubio (for himself, Mr. Cassidy, Mrs. Hyde-Smith, and Mr. Cornyn) 
introduced the following bill; which was read twice and referred to the 
            Committee on Banking, Housing, and Urban Affairs

_______________________________________________________________________

                                 A BILL

 
To temporarily limit the authority of the Administrator of the Federal 
 Emergency Management Agency to prescribe chargeable premium rates for 
      flood insurance under the National Flood Insurance Program.

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

SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE.

    This Act may be cited as the ``NFIP Risk Rating 2.0 Delay Act of 
2021''.

SEC. 2. PREMIUM RATE FREEZE.

    Notwithstanding section 1308(a) of the National Flood Insurance Act 
of 1968 (42 U.S.C. 4015(a)), during the period beginning on the date of 
enactment of this Act and ending on September 30, 2022, the chargeable 
premium rates for flood insurance coverage under the National Flood 
Insurance Act of 1968 (42 U.S.C. 4001 et seq.), as in effect on the day 
before that date of enactment--
            (1) shall remain in effect; and
            (2) may not be adjusted by the Administrator of the Federal 
        Emergency Management Agency.
                                 <all>
```
Michigan Supreme Court

Lansing, Michigan

Robert P. Young, Jr., Chief Justice

Stephen J. Markman

Brian K. Zahra

Bridget M. McCormack

David F. Viviano 

Richard H. Bernstein

Joan L. Larsen, Justices

I, Larry S. Royster, Clerk of the Michigan Supreme Court, certify that the

foregoing is a true and complete copy of the order entered at the direction of the Court.

 December 7, 2016

t1130

Order 

Clerk

December 7, 2016

153653

AUTO-OWNERS INSURANCE COMPANY,

Plaintiff/

Counterdefendant-Appellant,

v SC: 153653

COA: 330686 

Ingham CC: 13-000722-CK

CODY WILSON, by his Guardian Ad Litem and

Next Friend, Philip Wilson, and PHILIP WILSON,

Individually,

Defendants/

Counterplaintiffs-Appellees, 

and

PROGRESSIVE MICHIGAN INSURANCE

COMPANY,

Defendant-Appellee,

and

AUTO-OWNERS INSURANCE COMPANY,

Third-Party Plaintiff-Appellant,

v

PROGRESSIVE MICHIGAN INSURANCE

COMPANY,

Third-Party Defendant-Appellee.

_________________________________________/

On order of the Court, the application for leave to appeal the March 22, 2016 order 

of the Court of Appeals is considered, and it is DENIED, because we are not persuaded 

that the question presented should now be reviewed by this Court.
#### Bank of Auburn *against*Throop. Weed and Aikin *against*the Same.

Where the TMfeory° anot°, J^gmeni feta-yj who hod pre-the- maker, af-terwards r.tco-Ver a judg- and’ ej'e-[¿agments bcdh ^¡T^Ltecurtott *fie*judg-mentm favour of the endorser, vered; the tionofthe yoid-the second suit) sheriff,dout 'of S?smKf”S sale of the defendant’s pro-jJÍ^Jñd^satisiy the second execution in fa-vour of the holders of the note.

THE defendant, *T.,*was the maker of a promissory note endorsed by *W.*& *A.,*plaintiffs in the second suit, which was discounted at the *Bank of Auburn,*for the benefit of *T.*The note being protested for non-payment, the *Bunk of Auburn*commenced a suit against *T.,*and recovered a judgment against him on the 27th of *October,*and a *fi. fa.*was issued on the same day. *T.,*for the security and indemni-*tv*of the endorsers, previously confessed a judgment m *J 31*J jo their favour, which was entered up on the 14th of August, and a *fi.fa.*issued thereon, on the 10th of *October;*both executions were delivered to the sheriff of *Cayuga.*The *Bank of*Auburn, plaintiffs in the first suit, having, as was stated in the affidavits, reason to.apprehend, that the money raised on the execution in favour of *W.*& *A.,*was not in-*1 m*tended to be applied to the payment of the judgment in fa-vour of the bank, now applied to the Court for a rule directing the sheriff of *C.,*out of the proceeds of the sale of thereal and personal property of the defendant, on the ex■ecutions in his hands, first to pay and satisfy the execution in favour of the bank. .

*Foot*and *Cady,*in support of the motion. They cited *Smith*v. *Page, 15 Johns. Rep.*395. *Lansing*v. *Orcuit,*07 *1*° 16 *Johns. Rep. 4. Lambert*v. *Paulding, ante,*371. *Wil*T. , ^ ’ *hams*v. *Rogers, 5 Johns. Rep.*163,

*Butler,*contra.

*Per Curiam.*

We have no doubt of our power to control the process of the Court, in such a case as this, for the purposes of justice and equity, and to prevent the necessity of resorting to a Court of Chancery. This Court will take *506notice ot the equitable rights ot parties' *c,e8irty*ascertained 5 and this Is a dear < ^ ant* complete justice may be done to a Court of equity. ■JQT^tea: ras in a We shall, therefore, grant the motion.

Rule granted.
CERTIFICATION



I, Leftheris Georgakopoulos, certify that:



1. I have reviewed this amended quarterly report on Form 10-QSB of Acrongenomics Inc.;



2. Based on my knowledge, this amended quarterly 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 amended quarterly report;



3. Based on my knowledge, the financial statements, and other financial information included in this amended quarterly report, fairly present in all material respects the financial condition, results of operations and cash flows of the registrant as of, and for, the periods presented in this amended quarterly report;



4. The registrant's other certifying officers and I are responsible for establishing and maintaining disclosure controls and procedures (as defined in Exchange Act Rules 13a-14 and 15d-14) for the registrant and we have:



a) designed such disclosure controls and procedures 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 amended quarterly report is being prepared;



b) evaluated the effectiveness of the registrant's disclosure controls and procedures as of a date within 90 days prior to the filing date of this amended quarterly report (the "Evaluation Date"); and



c) presented in this amended quarterly report our conclusions about the effectiveness of the disclosure controls and procedures based on our evaluation as of the Evaluation Date;



5. The registrant's other certifying officers and I have disclosed, based on our most recent evaluation, to the registrant's auditors and the audit committee of registrant's board of directors (or persons performing the equivalent function):



a) all significant deficiencies in the design or operation of internal controls which could adversely affect the registrant's ability to record, process, summarize and report financial data and have identified for the registrant's auditors any material weaknesses in internal controls; and



b) any fraud, whether or not material, that involves management or other employees who have a significant role in the registrant's internal controls; and







Date: August 19, 2004

/s/ Leftheris Georgakopoulos

Leftheris Georgakopoulos

President
Concurring opinion issued December 6, 2018

In The

Court of Appeals 

For The 

First District of Texas 

————————————

NO. 01-18-00647-CV

———————————

IN THE INTEREST OF A.K.T., A CHILD

On Appeal from the 314th District Court

Harris County, Texas

Trial Court Case No. 2017-03858J

CONCURRING OPINION

I concur in the judgment. I write separately to caution against the dangers of 

kitchen-sink approaches to opinion writing, particularly in the area of parentaltermination appeals. There is ample evidence to support the judgment in this case. 

That being the case, the court can and should be selective in highlighting the 

evidence that supports the outcome, avoiding reliance on more dubious factors.
2

With particular reference to evaluating the best interests of the child, one of 

the nonexclusive factors to be considered is “the parental abilities of the individuals 

seeking custody.”1I would not emphasize the mother’s lack of income or resources 

when there is no reason to do so. A parent’s inability or unwillingness to care for a 

child can and should be considered in a best-interest analysis without reducing the 

issue to a matter of the parent’s indigency. Why not stop there and rely on the other 

evidence that supports termination under the other best-interest factors? We don’t 

terminate parent-child relationships because the parents are poor.2 And we must take 

care not to write judicial opinions that suggest that we do.

With these observations, I concur in the court’s judgment.

Michael Massengale

Justice

Panel consists of Justices Jennings, Higley, and Massengale.

Justice Massengale, concurring in the judgment.

 

1 See Holley v. Adams, 544 S.W.2d 367, 372 (Tex. 1976).

2 See TEX. FAM. CODE § 161.001(c)(2) (“A court may not make a finding under 

Subsection (b) and order termination of the parent-child relationship based on 

evidence that the parent . . . is economically disadvantaged . . . .”).
## In **T he**  **Court of Appeals Seventh District of Texas at Amarillo**  No. 07 - 23 - 00150 - CV FRANKLIN MEMBRENO , A PPELLANT V. MADALENO REYNOSA, MARIA CISNEROS, AND JORGE CUEVAS , APPELLEE S On Appeal from the County Court at Law No . 2 Travis County, Texas Trial Court No . C - 1 - CV - 22 - 000148 , Honorable Eric Shepperd , Presiding 

### August 9 , 2023 MEMORANDUM OPINION Before QUINN, C.J., and DOSS and YARBROUGH, JJ. Pending before the court is the agreed motion of Madaleno Reynosa, Maria Cisneros, and Jorge Cuevas, Appellees, and Franklin Membreno, Appellant, to dismiss this appeal pursuant to their settlement agreement. T EX . R. A PP . P. 42.1(a)(2). We grant the mot ion and dismiss the appeal pursuant to their settlement agreement. In accordance with the motion, costs are assessed against the party incurring them. See T EX . R. A PP . P. 42.1(d). Per Curiam
Upland Cotton 2022

Harvested Acres by County

for Selected States

U.S. Department of Agriculture, National Agricultural Statistics Service

Acres

Not Estimated

< 7,500

7,500 - 14,999

15,000 - 19,999

20,000 - 24,999

25,000 - 49,999

50,000 +
Exhibit 32.2



CERTIFICATION PURSUANT TO

SECTION 1350 OF CHAPTER 63 OF 18 U.S.C.

AS ADOPTED PURSUANT TO

SECTION 906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002



In connection with the Annual Report of Cardima, 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, Barry D. Michaels, Interim Chief Financial Officer of the Company, certify pursuant to § 1350 of Chapter 63 of 18 U.S.C., as adopted pursuant to § 906 of the
Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that:



| | (1) |  | The Report fully complies with the requirements of section 13(a) or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934; and
| | --- |  | ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------



| | (2) |  | The information contained in the Report fairly presents, in all material respects, the financial condition and results of operations of the Company.
| | --- |  | ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------



|                               
|-------------------------------
|/s/    BARRY D. MICHAELS       
|Barry D. Michaels              
|Interim Chief Financial Officer
|March 31, 2004
DERRICK C. LARRY,

Petitioner,

v.

J.H. WHITEHURST,

Respondent.

___________________________/

IN THE DISTRICT COURT OF APPEAL

FIRST DISTRICT, STATE OF FLORIDA

NOT FINAL UNTIL TIME EXPIRES TO 

FILE MOTION FOR REHEARING AND 

DISPOSITION THEREOF IF FILED

CASE NO. 1D16-0914

Opinion filed December 6, 2016.

Petition for Writ of Certiorari -- Original Jurisdiction.

Derrick C. Larry, pro se, Petitioner.

Kenneth S. Steely, General Counsel, and Sheron Wells, Assistant General Counsel, 

Florida Department of Corrections; Rana M. Wallace, General Counsel, and Mark 

Hiers, Assistant General Counsel, Florida Commission on Offender Review, 

Tallahassee, for Respondent.

PER CURIAM.

The petition for writ of certiorari is denied on the merits.

ROBERTS, C.J., MAKAR and M.K. THOMAS, JJ., CONCUR.
# C_2015321EN.01000102.xml

| 29.9.2015 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 321/1 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

29.9.2015

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 321/1

---

Non-opposition to a notified concentration

(Case M.7719 — Barloworld Handling/BayWa/JV)

(Text with EEA relevance)

(2015/C 321/02)

On 22 September 2015, the Commission decided not to oppose the above notified concentration and to declare it compatible with the internal market. This decision is based on Article 6(1)(b) of Council Regulation (EC) No 139/2004 (1). The full text of the decision is available only in English language and will be made public after it is cleared of any business secrets it may contain. It will be available:

1

| — | in the merger section of the Competition website of the Commission (http://ec.europa.eu/competition/mergers/cases/). This website provides various facilities to help locate individual merger decisions, including company, case number, date and sectoral indexes, |
| --- | --- |

—

in the merger section of the Competition website of the Commission (http://ec.europa.eu/competition/mergers/cases/). This website provides various facilities to help locate individual merger decisions, including company, case number, date and sectoral indexes,

| — | in electronic form on the EUR-Lex website (http://eur-lex.europa.eu/homepage.html?locale=en) under document number 32015M7719. EUR-Lex is the on-line access to the European law. |
| --- | --- |

—

in electronic form on the EUR-Lex website (http://eur-lex.europa.eu/homepage.html?locale=en) under document number 32015M7719. EUR-Lex is the on-line access to the European law.

---

(1)  OJ L 24, 29.1.2004, p. 1.

1

---
Exhibit 10.9

 

SPOUSAL CONSENT

配偶同意函

 

I, Yang YU, am the lawful spouse of Liang ZHANG. I hereby acknowledge fully and consent unconditionally and irrevocably that a certain percentage of the equity interest in Shenzhen Lanting Huitong Technology Ltd.  that is held by and registered in the name of my spouse shall be disposed of pursuant to the arrangements under the Equity Disposal Agreement and the Share Pledge Agreement, which were executed by my spouse on June 9, 2011.

 

本人,于阳,张良之合法配偶,在此充分认可且无条件地、不可撤销地同意:本人配偶所持有的并登记于其名下的深圳市兰亭汇通科技有限公司一定比例之股权,应将按照本人配偶于2011年6月9日签署的《股权处置协议》及《股份质押协议》项下之安排进行处分。

 

I further undertake not to take any action against the above arrangements, including making any claim that such equity interest constitutes my property or community property between myself and my spouse or any relevant rights or interests in connection with such equity interest.

 

本人进一步保证任何行事不得与上述安排相悖,包括不得主张上述股权构成本人财产或夫妻共同财产以及任何其他与上述股权可能相关的权利或权益。

 

 

	
 
    	
/s/Yang Yu
    
	
 
    	
于阳 / Yang YU
    
	
 
    	
 
    
	
 
    	
日期/Date: June 9, 2011
    


 











 

SPOUSAL CONSENT

配偶同意函

 

I, Wen XU, am the lawful spouse of Jun LIU. I hereby acknowledge fully and consent unconditionally and irrevocably that a certain percentage of the equity interest in Shenzhen Lanting Huitong Technology Ltd.  that is held by and registered in the name of my spouse shall be disposed of pursuant to the arrangements under the Equity Disposal Agreement and the Share Pledge Agreement, which were executed by my spouse on June 9, 2011.

 

本人,徐雯,刘俊之合法配偶,在此充分认可且无条件地、不可撤销地同意:本人配偶所持有的并登记于其名下的深圳市兰亭汇通科技有限公司一定比例之股权,应将按照本人配偶于2011年6月9日签署的《股权处置协议》及《股份质押协议》项下之安排进行处分。

 

I further undertake not to take any action against the above arrangements, including making any claim that such equity interest constitutes my property or community property between myself and my spouse or any relevant rights or interests in connection with such equity interest.

 

本人进一步保证任何行事不得与上述安排相悖,包括不得主张上述股权构成本人财产或夫妻共同财产以及任何其他与上述股权可能相关的权利或权益。

 

	
 
    	
/s/Wen Xu
    
	
 
    	
徐雯 / Wen XU
    
	
 
    	
 
    
	
 
    	
日期/Date: June 9, 2011
## 2013 RIN supply (million RINs)

RINs Volume GeneratedGenerated Generated GeneratedGenerated Generated D codeFuel type DomesticImportedDomestic + importsCorrectionsExported Total DomesticImportedDomestic + importsCorrectionsExported Total 3 & 7Biogas 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 3 & 7Ethanol 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 3 & 7Heating oil 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 3 & 7Renewable diesel 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 3 & 7Renewable gasoline 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 4 Biodiesel 2,067 234 2,300 282 2,018 1,378 156 1,534 188 1,346 4 Renewable diesel 119 319 439 94 345 72 188 260 55 205 5Biogas 26 0 26 26 26 0 26 26 5Ethanol 23 435 458 458 23 435 458 458 5 Heating oil 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 5Naphtha 3 0 3 3 2 0 2 2 5Renewable diesel 70 0 70 6 64 41 0 41 4 38 6Biodiesel 9 46 55 55 6 31 37 37 6 Ethanol 13,099 0 13,099 62212,477 13,099 0 13,099 62212,477 6 Renewable diesel 0 196 196 106 90 0 116 116 63 53

3 & 7 1 0 1 0 0 1 1 0 1 0 0 1 4 2,186 553 2,739 94 282 2,363 1,450 344 1,793 55 188 1,550 5 123 435 558 6 0 552 92 435 528 4 0 524 6 13,108 243 13,350 106 62212,622 13,105 146 13,251 63 62212,567 All advanced 2,309 988 3,298 100 282 2,915 1,543 779 2,322 59 188 2,075 Total 15,417 1,231 16,648 207 90415,537 14,648 925 15,573 122 81014,641 Total ethanol 13,122 435 13,557 0 62212,935 13,122 435 13,557 0 62212,935 Total biodiesel 2,076 280 2,355 0 282 2,073 1,384 187 1,570 0 188 1,382 Total renewable diesel 190 516 706 207 0 499 114 303 417 122 0 295
# C_2015402EN.01000301.xml

| 4.12.2015 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 402/3 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

4.12.2015

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 402/3

---

Euro exchange rates (1)

1

3 December 2015

(2015/C 402/04)

1 euro =

1 euro =

| | Currency | Exchange rate |
| --- | --- | --- |
| USD | US dollar | 1,0671 |
| JPY | Japanese yen | 131,58 |
| DKK | Danish krone | 7,4584 |
| GBP | Pound sterling | 0,71220 |
| SEK | Swedish krona | 9,2250 |
| CHF | Swiss franc | 1,0840 |
| ISK | Iceland króna | |
| NOK | Norwegian krone | 9,1740 |
| BGN | Bulgarian lev | 1,9558 |
| CZK | Czech koruna | 27,036 |
| HUF | Hungarian forint | 310,93 |
| PLN | Polish zloty | 4,2859 |
| RON | Romanian leu | 4,4585 |
| TRY | Turkish lira | 3,0768 |
| AUD | Australian dollar | 1,4550 |
| CAD | Canadian dollar | 1,4213 |
| HKD | Hong Kong dollar | 8,2701 |
| NZD | New Zealand dollar | 1,6038 |
| SGD | Singapore dollar | 1,5010 |
| KRW | South Korean won | 1 240,24 |
| ZAR | South African rand | 15,2736 |
| CNY | Chinese yuan renminbi | 6,8273 |
| HRK | Croatian kuna | 7,6358 |
| IDR | Indonesian rupiah | 14 733,44 |
| MYR | Malaysian ringgit | 4,5088 |
| PHP | Philippine peso | 50,269 |
| RUB | Russian rouble | 72,2652 |
| THB | Thai baht | 38,263 |
| BRL | Brazilian real | 4,0476 |
| MXN | Mexican peso | 17,6658 |
| INR | Indian rupee | 71,1343 |

Currency

Exchange rate

USD

US dollar

1,0671

JPY

Japanese yen

131,58

DKK

Danish krone

7,4584

GBP

Pound sterling

0,71220

SEK

Swedish krona

9,2250

CHF

Swiss franc

1,0840

ISK

Iceland króna

NOK

Norwegian krone

9,1740

BGN

Bulgarian lev

1,9558

CZK

Czech koruna

27,036

HUF

Hungarian forint

310,93

PLN

Polish zloty

4,2859

RON

Romanian leu

4,4585

TRY

Turkish lira

3,0768

AUD

Australian dollar

1,4550

CAD

Canadian dollar

1,4213

HKD

Hong Kong dollar

8,2701

NZD

New Zealand dollar

1,6038

SGD

Singapore dollar

1,5010

KRW

South Korean won

1 240,24

ZAR

South African rand

15,2736

CNY

Chinese yuan renminbi

6,8273

HRK

Croatian kuna

7,6358

IDR

Indonesian rupiah

14 733,44

MYR

Malaysian ringgit

4,5088

PHP

Philippine peso

50,269

RUB

Russian rouble

72,2652

THB

Thai baht

38,263

BRL

Brazilian real

4,0476

MXN

Mexican peso

17,6658

INR

Indian rupee

71,1343

---

(1)  Source: reference exchange rate published by the ECB.

1

Source

---
IN THE SUPREME COURT OF TENNESSEE

AT NASHVILLE

IN RE: PROPOSED AMENDMENTS TO SUPREME COURT RULE 31 –

ALTERNATIVE DISPUTE RESOLUTION

No. M2000-03060-SC-RL-RL

Filed: April 26, 2001

ORDER

On December 14, 2000, the Court entered an order soliciting written responses from the bar

and the public concerning the Alternative Dispute Resolution Commission’s recommendation to

amend Rule 31, Tenn. S. Ct. R. A copy of the Commission’s proposed amended rule was attached

to the order as Exhibit 1. The deadline for written responses was March 30, 2001.

The Court directed the Commission to serve the order on the bar associations of the State.

However, it appears that the order was not served on the bar associations due to an oversight; for this

reason, the Court is extending the deadline for the submission of written comments. 

The Court hereby extends the deadline for filing written comments to Thursday, May 31,

2001. Comments should be addressed to:

Cecil V. Crowson, Clerk

Tennessee Supreme Court

100 Supreme Court Bldg.

401 Seventh Avenue North

Nashville, TN 37219-1407

The clerk is directed to provide a copy of this order to the media and to the Commission. The

Court directs the Commission to serve copies of the Court’s original order and Exhibit 1 (entered

on December 14, 2000) and this supplemental order upon the bar associations of the State. The

Commission is directed to file a certificate of service with the clerk certifying compliance with this

order.

FOR THE COURT:

____________________________________

Riley Anderson, Chief Justice
Exhibit 10.21








SECOND AMENDMENT TO EMPLOYMENT AGREEMENT




WHEREAS, Julio M. Quintana (“Executive”) and Tesco Corporation entered into the Employment Agreement dated December 31, 2008 and as amended on March 15, 2009 (the “Agreement”); and




WHEREAS, Section 7(i)(v) of the Agreement has an error with respect to the timing of payment and no amount is vested thereunder and the parties desire to amend Section 7(f) of the Agreement to add requirements under new guidance from the Internal Revenue Service;




NOW, THEREFORE in consideration of mutual covenants herein contained, it is agreed that the Agreement shall be amended as follows:




1.
Section 7(f) shall be amended to add the following at the end thereof:




“Notwithstanding anything herein to the contrary, to the extent any amounts payable under Sections 7(c), (d) or (e) are deferred compensation and not otherwise exempt from the requirements of Code Section 409A, no payment will be paid or commence to be paid hereunder until the date which is the 60th day after the Date of Termination.”




2.
Section 7(i)(v) shall be amended so that the word “second” shall be replaced with the word “first” in each place in which it occurs.




This Second Amendment may be executed by portable document format (pdf) or facsimile signature which signature shall be binding on the parties hereto.




WHEREAS, the parties have executed this Second Amendment effective as of December 31, 2010.




EXECUTIVE                                                                                     TESCO CORPORATION





JULIO M. QUINTANA








/s/ Julio M. Quintana                                                                By: /s/ Norman W. Robertson


Julio M. Quintana                                                                                     Norman W. Robertson


Chairman of the Board


1