alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
Exhibit 99.2
                                                                    ------------

                        Report of Independent Accountants
                       on Applying Agreed-Upon Procedures


The First National Bank of Atlanta
77 Reeds Way
New Castle Corporate Commons
New Castle, Delaware 19720

and

The Bank of New York
101 Barclay Street
Corporate Backed Asset Unit
New York, New York 10286


                 Wachovia Credit Card Master Trust Series 1995-1

We have performed the procedures enumerated below, which were agreed to by The
First National Bank of Atlanta (the "Company"), a wholly-owned subsidiary of
Wachovia Corporation, and The Bank of New York, solely to assist you with
respect to the monthly servicer's certificates (the "certificates") prepared by
the Company during the period November 1, 1999 through October 31, 2000 pursuant
to subsection 3.6(b) of the Amended and Restated Pooling and Servicing Agreement
dated as of June 4, 1999 between The First National Bank of Atlanta and The Bank
of New York, Trustee of the Wachovia Credit Card Master Trust (the "Agreement").
This engagement to apply agreed-upon procedures was performed in accordance with
standards established by the American Institute of Certified Public Accountants.
The sufficiency of the procedures is solely the responsibility of the specified
parties. Consequently, we make no representation regarding the sufficiency of
the procedures described below either for the purpose for which this report has
been requested or for any other purpose.

We performed the procedures enumerated in the letter dated November 6, 2000 to
the Company and Wachovia Bank, N.A., as included as Attachment A to this letter,
to each certificate prepared by the Company pursuant to subsection 3.6(b) of the
Agreement for the period November 1, 1999 through October 31, 2000. As a result
of the procedures performed, we noted all amounts set forth in the certificates
agreed to recalculated amounts or were in agreement with the corresponding
amounts in the Company's servicing records.

We were not engaged to, and did not, perform an audit, the objective of which
would be the expression of an opinion on the specified items included in the
certificates. Accordingly, we do not express such an opinion. Had we performed
additional procedures, other matters might have come to our attention that would
have been reported to you.

This report is intended solely for the information and use of The First National
Bank of Atlanta and The Bank of New York and is not intended to be and should
not be used by anyone other than these specified parties.


                                                  /s/  Ernst & Young LLP       .
                                                  ------------------------------

November 14, 2000

                                       8
**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**

     In connection with theQuarterly Report of China Pharma Holdings, Inc.(the "Company") on Form        10-Q for the period ended September 30, 2009as filed with theSecurities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the "Report"), I, Frank Waung, Chief Financial Officer of the Company, certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C.        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 and 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.

|                                                                                                                                                  |   Date: November 10, 2009 |                  |                    |
|--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|------------------------------------------|-----------------------|-------------------------|
|                                                                                                                                             |                                          |
|                                                                                                                                                  |   By:                          |  /s/ Frank Waung |                    |   |
|                                                                                                                                                  |                                     |                  | Frank Waung             |   |   |
|                          |                                     |                  | Chief Financial Officer |
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 Quarterly Report of Debt Resolve, Inc. (the Company) on
Form 10-Q for the period ended June 30, 2009 as filed with the Securities and
Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the Report), I, David M. Rainey,
Interim Chief Executive Officer and Chief Financial Officer of the Company,
certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. section 1350 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.



|                         |     |                                                                         
|------------------------ | --- | ------------------------------------------------------------------------
|                         |     |                                                                         
|Dated: November 23, 2009 | By: | /s/ DAVID M. RAINEY                                                     
|                         |     | David M. Rainey                                                         
|                         |     | Interim Chief Executive Officer, President and Chief
  Financial Officer
|                         |     |                                                                         

47

---
HINDe TRUCKS TM 

A Toyota Group Company 

March 11,2010 

The Honorable Ray LaHood 

United States Department ofTransportation 

1200 New Jersey Avenue, SE 

Washington, DC 20590 

On behalf ofHino Motors Sales U.S.A., Inc, I am writing to express our strong support for the 

application ofDelta Air Lines for new nonstop service between Detroit and Haneda. 

Approval ofDelta's new service would be a major benefit for our region, where many corporations 

have strong trade and market presence with Japan. There are over 500 Japanese companies located in 

Michigan and hundreds more whose business models rely on access to Japan and it's market. The growth of 

our business ties with Japan has created demand for increased capacity to Tokyo. Our business travelers look 

to the convenience offlying into Tokyo's downtown Haneda airport. 

Detroit is a proven and successful gateway to Asia, and as an airport that can support trans-pacific 

routes. This summer Delta is adding new service to Seoul and Hong Kong, fulfilling the commitment Delta 

made to DTW to make it the airlines gateway to Asia. The addition ofHaneda as a destination is a natural fit 

that would clearly benefit our business travelers. 

thank you for consideration ofthis request. 

Sincerely~ _~~ ... _ 

""6"""ay"'ar---,.". 

President & CEO 


Hino Motors Sales U.S.A., Inc. 


25 Years Evolving Excellence. 


Hino Trucks is proud to celebrate 25 years in America, and it's thanks to you, our 


customers and clients, who demand more from a truck, than just good looks. 


Hino Trucks. Business in Motion. 


Hino Motors Sales U.S.A., Inc. 


. 41180 Bridge Street· Novi, MI48375 • Ph (248) 699-9300 • Fax (248) 699-9310 • wWI/II.hino.com
| (1) The Report fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934; |
|----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|

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

| Dated:    March 31, 2011 |   |
|----------------------------------------------|--------|

| /s/ Glenn Spina                                Glenn SpinaChief Executive Officer                                                                           |
|-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|
|                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                        |
|                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                        |
| /s/ Brian P. Alessi                                           Brian P. AlessiChief Financial Officer |
<PAGE>   1

                                  EXHIBIT 21.1


                     SUBSIDIARIES OF BRISTOL HOTEL COMPANY


     1.    Airport Utilities, Inc.
     2.    Austin Innkeepers, Inc.
     3.    Bristol Dallas Downtown, Inc.
     4.    Bristol-Harvey Partners, Ltd.
     5.    Bristol HHCL Company
     6.    Bristol Hotel Asset Company
     7.    Bristol Hotel Beverage Company
     8.    Bristol Hotel Management Corporation
     9.    Bristol HTS Company
     10.   Bristol IP Company
     11.   Bristol Plano Company
     12.   Endlease, Inc.
     13.   Glenjon, Inc.
     14.   Harvey BHP, Inc.
     15.   Harvey Hotel Company, Ltd.
     16.   Harvey Hotel Corporation
     17.   Harvey Hotel DFW, Inc.
     18.   Harvey Hotel Management Corporation
     19.   Harvey Hotel Purchasing Company
     20.   Harvey Hotels Financing I, Inc.
     21.   Harvey Hotels Financing II, Inc.
     22.   Harvey Hotels GenPar, Inc.
     23.   Harvey Hotels Investments I, Ltd.
     24.   Harvey Hotels Investments II, Ltd.
     25.   Harvey Hotels Limpar, Inc.
     26.   HHH Hotel Corporation
     27.   HHHC GenPar, L.P.
     28.   Houston Inns Service Company
     29.   Lammons Hotel Courts, Inc.
     30.   Limited Service Inns, Inc. of Mississippi
     31.   Mid-Atlanta Investment Company
     32.   Penrod Club
     33.   Rier Inn, Inc.
     34.   Rier Properties, Inc.
     35.   Rodgers Hotel Courts, Inc.
     36.   United Inns, Inc. of Tennessee
     37.   Wichita Harvey Partners, Ltd.
     38.   Bristol Plano Club
Re: Sola Optical 

Herb Levine to: Dante Rodriguez 10/26/2011 02:04 PM

Dante,

The new data point is interesting, well below the MCL. My suggestion would be to collect a couple more, 

but do so on a more frequent basis. My recommendation would be to sample monthly a couple of times 

and then if the recent data are confirmed declare success.

The guidance and regs are pretty flexible. The guidance, see page 72 and 73 of link, says that 2 to 5 

years of post remediation sampling might be required. That time frame has been satisfied, we could try a 

statistical analysis of the data from '07 to present to determine a trend. If the trend is convincing, as I 

suspect it would be then it would support the claim that the plume has attained the ARAR. The link 

discusses a couple of statistical methods, pretty simple to calculate. For example see Figures 4-3 and 

4-4. 

I would be happy to discuss further with you.

http://www.geotransinc.com/publications/Monitoring_P_and_T_systems.pdf

Herb Levine, US EPA, 415.972.3062

Dante Rodriguez Hi Herb - As explained in my voicemail, I'm follo... 10/26/2011 09:50:21 AM

From: Dante Rodriguez/R9/USEPA/US

To: Herb Levine/R9/USEPA/US@EPA

Date: 10/26/2011 09:50 AM

Subject: Sola Optical

Hi Herb - 

As explained in my voicemail, I'm following up on Sola Optical to see if there is a technical justification for 

wrapping it up now and moving on to delisting. Attached is the last groundwater monitoring report (not 

including appendix) that I have, which does not include 2010 data (for which there was one event). The 

contractor told me that the June 2010 result for 1,1-DCA (the last contaminant exceeding MCL) was 2.5 

ug/l in well W-27 (the last well monitored), safely below the MCL of 5.0 ug/l. They will send me the data 

sheets documenting this. They haven't yet put together the complete annual report (although the 1,1-DCA 

number for well W-27 is the only really relevant number). Can you please review and let me know your 

thoughts? Thanks! 

Dante Rodriguez, P.E.

Remedial Project Manager

U.S. EPA Region 9

(415) 972-3166

rodriguez.dante@epa.gov

[attachment "Y_SolaMonRept2010_scan.pdf" deleted by Herb Levine/R9/USEPA/US] 

======================================================

SDMS DOCID# 1138655
February 24, 2015

JUDGMENT

The Fourteenth Court of Appeals

CHRISTINE ADIUKU, KATE OPARA, CARAMELA NZENWA, AND 

ANGELA ALIMOLE, Appellants

NO. 14-13-00722-CV V.

KELECHI IKEMENEFUNA, CHINYERE AGONSI, BEATRICE OPARAJI, 

ANN EBERE, KELECHI OGUN, MARIA ARRIRIGUZO, CHINYERE AGIM,

AND VIRGINIA AKUCHIE, ON BEHALF OF MBAISE ASSOCIATION OF 

HOUSTON, Appellees

________________________________

This cause, an appeal from the judgment in favor of appellees, Kelechi 

Ikemenefuna, Chinyere Agonsi, Beatrice Oparaji, Ann Ebere, Kelechi Ogun, Maria 

Arririguzo, Chinyere Agim, and Virginia Akuchie, on Behalf of MBAISE

Association of Houston, signed May 14, 2013, was heard on the transcript of the 

record. We have inspected the record and hold the trial court erred when it granted 

appellees partial summary judgment imposing liability and damages based on 

appellees’ causes of action for conversion, breach of fiduciary duty, and registering 

an organization with a deceptively similar name. We therefore order that the 

portions of the judgment that imposed liability and damages for those causes of 

action are REVERSED and ordered severed and REMANDED for proceedings in 

accordance with this court’s opinion.

Further, we hold the trial court erred when it found liability and awarded 

damages to appellees on their fraud by nondisclosure cause of action. We 
therefore order that the part of the judgment that imposed liability and damages 

based on appellees’ fraud by nondisclosure cause of action is REVERSED and we 

RENDER judgment that they take nothing by that claim.

Further, we hold the trial court erred when it awarded appellees attorney’s 

fees. We therefore order that the part of the judgment awarding appellees 

attorney’s fees is REVERSED and we RENDER judgment that they take nothing 

in attorney’s fees.

Further, we find no error in the remainder of the judgment, including the 

partial summary judgment on appellants’ affirmative defenses and the trial court’s 

declaration that appellant Christine Adiuku is no longer president of MBAISE

Association of Houston, and we order it AFFIRMED.

We order that each party shall pay its costs by reason of this appeal.

We further order this decision certified below for observance.
FILED

U.S. COURT OF APPEALS

ELEVENTH CIRCUIT

MAY 26, 2010

JOHN LEY

 CLERK

[DO NOT PUBLISH]

IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE ELEVENTH CIRCUIT

________________________

No. 09-12668

________________________

D. C. Docket No. 08-00196-CR-KOB-TMP

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,

Plaintiff-Appellee,

versus

EDWARD BROWNING MCCLAIN,

a.k.a. E.B. McClain,

Defendant-Appellant.

________________________

Appeal from the United States District Court

for the Northern District of Alabama

_________________________

(May 26, 2010)

Before BLACK, HULL and ANDERSON, Circuit Judges.

PER CURIAM:

After oral argument and careful consideration, we readily conclude that the

judgment in this case should be affirmed. First, we summarily reject appellant’s
argument that the district court abused its discretion in failing to grant a mistrial on

the grounds that appellant’s trial should have been severed from that of codefendant Pettagrue. Appellant has failed to establish either the requisite prejudice,

or that severance was the proper remedy for prejudice. United States v. Browne,

505 F.3d 1229, 1268-69 (11 Cir. 2007) (citing Zafiro v. United States, 506 U.S. th

534, 538-39, 113 S.Ct. 933, 938 (1993)). Indeed, with respect to the prejudice

prong, appellant’s argument is not as strong as the similar argument which we

rejected in United States v. Blankenship, 382 F.3d 1110, 1122 and 1125 (11 Cir.

th

2004). Furthermore, appellant failed to establish that the district court’s cautionary

instruction was insufficient to remedy any possible prejudice, or that severance was

the only permissible remedy. See id. at 1122, 1125-26. 

We also conclude that there is no merit in appellant’s challenge grounded

upon Batson v. Kentucky, 476 U.S. 79, 106 S.Ct. 1712 (1986). Like the district

court, we assume that appellant established a prima facie case. However, we

cannot conclude that the district court was clearly erroneous in finding that the

government’s reasons for each strike were credible and race neutral. 

Finally, we reject summarily appellant’s challenge to the sufficiency of the

2
evidence. There was ample evidence to support the jury’s verdict. 

1

AFFIRMED.

We do not reach the constitutionality of the honest services mail fraud statute, 18 1

U.S.C. § 1346, because McClain did not present a facial or as applied challenge to the

constitutionality of that statute in his briefs on appeal. 

3
Exh.
10.32

      
        
          
            	
                    

                  	
                    OCZ
      Technology Group, Inc.

                  	 
      


          

        

      

      


      
        
          	
                  6373
      San Ignacio Ave.., San Jose, CA 95119

                	
                  Tel:
      (408) 733-8400   Fax: (408)
733-4900

                


        

      

      


      December
30, 2009

       

      
        
          
            
              
                	
                        Mr. Richard
      L. Hunter

                      	 
      
	   
      	 
      
	 
        	 
      


              

            

          

        

      

      


      Re:
Appointment to the Board of Directors (the “Board”) of OCZ Technology Group,
Inc. (the “Company”)

      


      Dear
Dick:

      


      On behalf
of the Board, I am pleased to advise you that the Board has determined to
unanimously recommend to the stockholders of the Company your appointment as a
member of the Board.  We are prepared to make the recommendation and
effect the appointment as soon as possible, but we would like your confirmation
that you are prepared to serve before we take this
action.  Accordingly, please return a copy of this letter to me
executed below to confirm your willingness to serve.

      


      Also, for
diligence and SEC disclosure purposes, we have enclosed a form of Director and
Officer Questionnaire and request that you complete the questionnaire and return
it Kerry Smith, our Chief Financial Officer, as soon as possible.

      


      You will
receive the same compensation as all other directors, which is as
follows:  $5,000 as a general quarterly stipend; $1,000 per meeting of
the Board attended by you in person; $500 per meeting of the Board attended by
you via telephone; $5,000 annually should you serve on the Audit Committee of
the Board; $2,500 annually for each of other committee of the Board on which you
serve but do not chair; and $7,500 annually for each committee of the Board for
which you serve as the chair.

      


      We hope
that you will be available to attend our next regular Board meeting on Tuesday,
January 26, 2010 at 10:00 AM, California time.  We are looking forward
to your joining the Board and I am personally looking forward to working with
you.

      


      
        
          
            
              
                	 
      	
                        Yours
      truly,

                      
	 
      	 
      
	 
      	 	
                         
      

                      
	 
      	
                        Ryan
      Petersen

                      


              

            

          

        

      

      


      This is
to advise you that I am prepared to serve on the Board if appointed by the
stockholders of the Company.
* Pursuant to 5TH CIR. R. 47.5, the court has determined that this opinion should not be

published and is not precedent except under the limited circumstances set forth in 5TH CIR.

R. 47.5.4.

United States Court of Appeals

Fifth Circuit

FILED

March 3, 2006

Charles R. Fulbruge III

Clerk

IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT

 

No. 03-60603

Summary Calendar

 

FELIPE AGADO-RIVAS,

 Petitioner,

versus

ALBERTO R. GONZALES, U. S. ATTORNEY GENERAL,

 Respondent.

--------------------------------------------------------

Petition for Review of an Order of the

Board of Immigration Appeals

BIA No. A91-832-804

--------------------------------------------------------

Before BARKSDALE, STEWART and CLEMENT, Circuit Judges.

PER CURIAM:*

Felipe Agado-Rivas (Agado) petitionsfor review of the Board of Immigration Appeals’ (the

Board’s) denial of his motion to reconsider its decision finding him removable and ineligible for

cancellation of removal due to his prior conviction for possession of cocaine. See 8 U.S.C.

§§ 1227(a)(2)(A)(iii), 1229b(a). Since Agado’s possession-of-cocaine conviction is appropriately

classified as an aggravated felony, this court lacks jurisdiction over the instant petition for review.
-2-

See United States v. Hernandez-Avalos, 251 F.3d 505, 510 (5th Cir. 2001); 8 U.S.C.

§ 1252(a)(2)(C). Based on the foregoing, Agado’s petition for review is DISMISSED FOR

LACK OF JURISDICTION.