alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
# Fourth Court of Appeals

**San Antonio, Texas**

MEMORANDUM OPINION

N o. 04

- 19

- 00529

- CV

Isabel MARTINEZ

, Appellant

v.

Ana LITOFSKY and Michael Litofsky,

Appellees

From the County Court a t Law No. 10, Bexar County, Texas

Trial Court No. 2019CV05367

Honorable John Francis Davis, Judge Presiding

PER CURIAM

Sitting: Sandee Bryan Marion, Chief Justice

Rebeca C. Martinez, Justice

Patricia O. Alvarez, Justice

Delivered and Fil ed: October 23, 2019

DI SMISSED FOR WANT OF PROSECUTION

Appellant’s brief was due to be filed by September 4, 2019

. Because the brief was not

timely filed, appellant was ordered to show cause in writing by September 30, 2019, why this

appeal should not be dismissed for want of prosecution. T EX

. R. A PP

. P . 38.8(a). Appellant did

not respond to this court’s order. Accordingly, the appeal is dismissed for want of prosecution.

See id

.

PER CURIAM
Jordan BLAND, Appellant, v. STATE of Florida, Appellee.

No. 1D18-2868

District Court of Appeal of Florida, First District.

June 24, 2019

**DECISION WITHOUT PUBLISHED OPINION**

Affirmed.
Kenny MITCHELL, Appellant, v. STATE of Florida, Appellee.

Case No. 5D18-3790

District Court of Appeal of Florida, Fifth District.

Decision filed July 2, 2019

**DECISION WITHOUT PUBLISHED OPINION**

AFFIRMED.
ITEM 6. (A)

                                   EXHIBIT 11

                STATEMENT RE COMPUTATION OF NET INCOME PER SHARE
            (DOLLARS IN THOUSANDS, EXCEPT FOR NET INCOME PER SHARE)


                                                              THREE MONTHS ENDED
                                                                   MARCH  31,
                                                              ------------------
                                                                2002      2001
                                                              --------  --------
Net income                                                    $ 11,169  $  8,404
Less:  Preferred stock dividend                                     41        41
                                                              --------  --------
Net income applicable to common stock                         $ 11,128  $  8,363

Weighted average common shares outstanding                     922,038   936,158

Net Income per common share-basic and diluted                 $  12.07  $   8.93


<PAGE>
**Exhibit 13.1**

 

**CERTIFICATION PURSUANT TO**

**18 U.S.C. SECTION 1350,**

**AS ADOPTED PURSUANT TO**

**SECTION 906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002**

 

The undersigned, who is carrying out the functions of chief executive officer for Brookfield Infrastructure Partners L.P. (the “Partnership”) pursuant to a Master Services Agreement, dated December 4, 2007, among Brookfield Asset Management Inc., the Partnership, Brookfield Infrastructure L.P., Brookfield Infrastructure Holdings (Canada) Inc., Brookfield Asset Management Barbados Inc. and others, hereby certifies, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. 1350, as adopted pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that, to his knowledge on the date hereof, (i) the annual report of the Partnership on Form 20-F for the fiscal year ended December 31, 2010 (the “Annual Report”), as amended by Amendment No. 2 on Form 20-F/A, fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended, and (ii) the information contained in such Annual Report, as amended by Amendment No. 2 on Form 20-F/A, fairly presents in all material respects the financial condition and results of operations of the Partnership.

 

 

Date: June 10, 2011

 

 
|   | By:    | /s/   Samuel Pollock                               |
|--------|--------|----------------------------------------------------|
|   | Name:  | Samuel   Pollock                                   |
|   | Title: | CEO,   Brookfield Infrastructure Group Corporation |

 

1

----
# L_2021225DE.01010401.xml

| 25.6.2021 | DE | Amtsblatt der Europäischen Union | L 225/104 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

25.6.2021

DE

Amtsblatt der Europäischen Union

L 225/104

---

Berichtigung des Beschlusses (EU) 2018/546 der Europäischen Zentralbank vom 15. März 2018 zur Übertragung von Befugnissen zum Erlass von Eigenmittelbeschlüssen (EZB/2018/10)

(
  Amtsblatt der Europäischen Union L 90 vom 6. April 2018
  )

Auf Seite 107, Artikel 1 Nummer 14 Satz 2:

Anstatt:

„Ein Beschluss mit zusätzlichen Bestimmungen, wie Bedingungen oder Auflagen, gilt als ablehnender Beschluss, es sei denn, dass solche zusätzlichen Bestimmungen a) sicherstellen, dass das beaufsichtigte Unternehmen die Voraussetzungen des einschlägigen Unionsrechts im Sinne von Artikel 3 Absatz 4, Artikel 4 Absatz 3 und Artikel 5 Absatz 6 erfüllt und schriftlich vereinbart wurden oder b) lediglich auf eine oder mehrere Voraussetzungen, die das Institut gemäß den Bestimmungen der Artikel 3 Absatz 4, 4 Absatz 3 und 5 Absatz 6 erfüllen muss, erneut hinweisen oder Informationen über die Erfüllung einer oder mehrerer dieser Voraussetzungen anfordern,“

muss es heißen:

„Ein Beschluss mit Nebenbestimmungen, wie Bedingungen oder Auflagen, gilt als ablehnender Beschluss, es sei denn, a) solche Nebenbestimmungen wurden schriftlich vereinbart und stellen sicher, dass das beaufsichtigte Unternehmen die in Artikel 3 Absatz 4, Artikel 4 Absatz 3 und Artikel 5 Absatz 6 genannten Anforderungen des einschlägigen Unionsrechts erfüllt oder b) in solchen Nebenbestimmungen werden eine oder mehrere Anforderungen lediglich erneut aufgegriffen, die das Institut gemäß den Bestimmungen der Artikel 3 Absatz 4, Artikel 4 Absatz 3 und Artikel 5 Absatz 6 ohnehin erfüllen muss, oder es werden Informationen darüber verlangt, inwieweit eine oder mehrere dieser Anforderungen erfüllt sind,“

---
Document Headings

                    Document headings vary by document type but may contain                    the following:                  
                -                       the agency or agencies that issued and signed a document                    
                -                       the number of the CFR title and the number of each part                      the document amends, proposes to amend, or is directly                      related to                    
                -                       the agency docket number / agency internal file number                    
                -                       the RIN which identifies each regulatory action listed in                      the Unified Agenda of Federal Regulatory and Deregulatory                      Actions                    

                    See the                                          Document Drafting Handbook                                        for more details.                  

###### Federal Accounting Standards Advisory Board

# AGENCY:

Federal Accounting Standards Advisory Board.

# ACTION:

Notice.

# SUMMARY:

Notice is hereby given that the Federal Accounting Standards Advisory Board (FASAB) has agreed to changes in the name,

structure, and governance of the Accounting Standards Implementation Committee (ASIC or “the Committee”), formerly the Accounting and Auditing Policy Committee (AAPC).

# ADDRESSES:

                        The updated ASIC Charter, Operating Procedures, and the new Statement of Responsibilities and Characteristics of Members of the Accounting Standards Implementation Committee are available at                         *https://fasab.gov/​about-asic/​.*

# FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

Ms. Monica R. Valentine, Executive Director, 441 G Street NW, Suite 1155, Washington, DC 20548, or call (202) 512-7350.

*Authority:*31 U.S.C. 3511(d); Federal Advisory Committee Act, 5 U.S.C. 1001-1014.                    

Dated: February 3, 2025.

Monica R. Valentine,

Executive Director.

[FR Doc. 2025-02290 Filed 2-5-25; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 1610-02-P
Case No. 5:17-cv-00593-LHK

[PROPOSED] ORDER GRANTING DEFENDANT VALBIN CORPORATION’S MOTION FOR PARTIAL

SUMMARY JUDGMENT AGAINST NABIL JANY AND JANAN DAWOOD

1

56166039.v1

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

26

27

28

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

SAN JOSE DIVISION

RASHAD SALEH, individually and on behalf

of others similarly situated,

Plaintiffs

vs.

VALBIN CORPORATION, a Virginia

corporation;

Defendant.

Case No: 5:17-cv-00593-LHK

[PROPOSED] ORDER GRANTING

DEFENDANT VALBIN

CORPORATION’S MOTION FOR

PARTIAL SUMMARY JUDGMENT

AGAINST NABIL JANY AND JANAN

DAWOOD

DATE: January 18, 2018

TIME: 1:30 p.m.

CTRM: 8

Having considered Defendant Valbin Corporation’s Notice and Motion for Partial

Summary Judgment against Nabil Jany and Janan Dawood and the arguments relevant thereto,

IT IS on this 18th day of January, 2018, ORDERED that:

The Motion if granted, and

JUDGMENT shall be and hereby is entered in favor of Defendant Valbin Corporation’s

and against Nabil Jany and Janan Dawood.

Dated: ___________, 2018 _________________________________________

THE HONORABLE LUCY H. KOH

UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE

October 13, 2017 is

Case 5:17-cv-00593-LHK Document 59 Filed 10/13/17 Page 1 of 1
STATE of Louisiana v. Jeremiah DOUGLAS

NO. 2019-KK-0505

Supreme Court of Louisiana.

May 28, 2019

Denied.
1 

2 

3 

4 

5 

6 

7 

8 

9 

10 

11 

12 

13 

14 

15 

16 

17 

18 

19 

20 

21 

22 

23 

24 

25 

26 

27 

28 

NOTICE OF APPEARANCE OF AMANDA D. PHILLIPS 

CASE NO. 5:17-cv-00561-NC 

sf-3744850

JENNIFER LEE TAYLOR (SBN 161368)

JTaylor@mofo.com 

JOYCE LIOU (SBN 277720) 

JLiou@mofo.com 

AMANDA D. PHILLIPS (SBN 305614) 

APhillips@mofo.com 

MORRISON & FOERSTER LLP 

425 Market Street 

San Francisco, California 94105-2482 

Telephone: (415) 268-7000 

Facsimile: (415) 268-7522 

Attorneys for Defendants 

UBIQUITI NETWORKS, INC. AND 

CHING-HAN TSAI 

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 

NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 

SAN JOSE DIVISION 

SYNOPSYS, INC., 

Plaintiff, 

 vs. 

UBIQUITI NETWORKS, INC., UBIQUITI 

NETWORKS INTERNATIONAL LIMITED, 

CHING-HAN TSAI, and DOES 1-20, 

inclusive 

Defendants. 

Case No. 5:17-cv-00561-NC

NOTICE OF APPEARANCE OF 

AMANDA D. PHILLIPS 

Case 3:17-cv-00561-WHO Document 14 Filed 02/28/17 Page 1 of 2
1 

2 

3 

4 

5 

6 

7 

8 

9 

10 

11 

12 

13 

14 

15 

16 

17 

18 

19 

20 

21 

22 

23 

24 

25 

26 

27 

28 

NOTICE OF APPEARANCE OF AMANDA D. PHILLIPS

CASE NO. 5:17-cv-00561-NC 1 

sf-3744850

TO THE HONORABLE COURT AND ALL COUNSEL OF RECORD: 

PLEASE TAKE NOTICE of the appearance of Amanda D. Phillips of the firm

Morrison & Foerster LLP, as counsel of record for and on behalf of Defendants Ubiquiti 

Networks, Inc. and Ching-Han Tsai in the above-referenced action. The Court and counsel for 

Plaintiff are respectfully requested to add Amanda D. Phillips to the service list for this action, 

and to send copies of all pleadings and notices to the following address: 

Amanda D. Phillips

Morrison & Foerster LLP 

425 Market Street 

San Francisco, CA 94105 

APhillips@mofo.com 

Amanda D. Phillips is licensed to practice law in the State of California, is a member in 

good standing of the California State Bar, and is admitted to practice before the United States 

District Court of the Northern District of California. 

Dated: February 28, 2017 JENNIFER LEE TAYLOR

JOYCE LIOU 

AMANDA PHILLIPS 

MORRISON & FOERSTER LLP

By: /s/ Amanda D. Phillips 

AMANDA D. PHILLIPS 

Attorneys for Defendants 

UBIQUITI NETWORKS, INC., 

CHING-HAN TSAI 

Case 3:17-cv-00561-WHO Document 14 Filed 02/28/17 Page 2 of 2
1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

26

27

28

1

STIPULATED REQUEST FOR DISMISSAL OF DEFENDANT EQUIFAX, INC.; [PROPOSED] ORDER

Scott Sagaria (State Bar No.217981)

sjsagaria@sagarialaw.com

Elliot Gale (State Bar No. 263326)

egale@sagarialaw.com

Joe Angelo (State Bar No. 268542)

jangelo@sagarialaw.com

SAGARIA LAW, P.C.

3017 Douglas Blvd., Ste. 100

Roseville, California 95661

Telephone: (408) 279-2288

Facsimile: (408) 279-2299

Attorneys for Plaintiff

Stacy Case

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA — OAKLAND DIVISION

STACY CASE,

Plaintiff,

vs.

EQUIFAX, INC.; et. al.,

Defendants.

Federal Case No.: 4:17-CV-00399-JSW

STIPULATED REQUEST FOR 

DISMISSAL OF DEFENDANT EQUIFAX, 

INC.; [PROPOSED] ORDER

TO THE COURT, CLERK OF COURT, AND ALL PARTIES:

IT IS HEREBY STIPULATED by and between plaintiff Stacy Case and defendant 

Equifax, Inc. (“Equifax”), that Equifax be dismissed from this action with prejudice pursuant to 

Federal Rules of Civil Procedure, section 41(a)(2), and that each party shall bear its own 

attorneys’ fees and costs. 

//

//

//

//

AS MODIFIED HEREIN

Case 4:17-cv-00399-JSW Document 40 Filed 06/21/17 Page 1 of 2
1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

26

27

28

2

STIPULATED REQUEST FOR DISMISSAL OF DEFENDANT EQUIFAX, INC.; [PROPOSED] ORDER

DATED: June 21, 2017 Sagaria Law, P.C.

By: /s/ Elliot W. Gale

Elliot W. Gale

Attorneys for Plaintiff

Stacy Case

DATED: June 21, 2017 Nokes & Quinn

By: /s/ Thomas P. Quinn, Jr.

Thomas P. Quinn, Jr.

Attorneys for Defendant

Equifax, Inc.

I, Elliot Gale, am the ECF user whose identification and password are being used to file this 

Stipulation. I hereby attest that Thomas P. Quinn, Jr. has concurred in this filing.

/s/ Elliot Gale

[PROPOSED] ORDER

Pursuant to the stipulation of the Parties, Equifax is dismissed with prejudice, and that each 

party shall bear its own attorneys’ fees and costs. 

IT IS SO ORDERED.

DATED:

JEFFREY S. WHITE

UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE

Plaintiff has dismissed all defendants, and the Clerk 

shall close this file. June 21, 2017

Case 4:17-cv-00399-JSW Document 40 Filed 06/21/17 Page 2 of 2
Antowan HAWKINS, Petitioner, v. STATE of Florida, Respondent.

No. 1D19-1125

District Court of Appeal of Florida, First District.

June 6, 2019

**DECISION WITHOUT PUBLISHED OPINION**

Denied.
117TH CONGRESS 

1ST SESSION S. 89 

AN ACT 

To require the Secretary of Veterans Affairs to secure medical opinions for veterans with service-connected disabilities who die from COVID–19 to determine whether their 

service-connected disabilities were the principal or contributory causes of death, and for other purposes. 
2 

†S 89 ES

1 Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representa2 tives of the United States of America in Congress assembled, 

3 SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE. 

4 This Act may be cited as the ‘‘Ensuring Survivor 

5 Benefits during COVID–19 Act of 2021’’. 

6 SEC. 2. MEDICAL OPINIONS FOR CERTAIN VETERANS WITH 

7 SERVICE-CONNECTED DISABILITIES WHO DIE 

8 OF COVID–19. 

9 (a) IN GENERAL.—The Secretary of Veterans Affairs 

10 shall secure a medical opinion to determine if a service11 connected disability was the principal or contributory 

12 cause of death before notifying the survivor of the final 

13 decision in any case in which all of the following factors 

14 are met: 

15 (1) A claim for compensation is filed under 

16 chapter 13 of title 38, Unites States Code, with re17 spect to a veteran with one or more service-con18 nected disabilities who dies. 

19 (2) The death certificate for the veteran identi20 fies Coronavirus Disease 2019 (COVID–19) as the 

21 principal or contributory cause of death. 

22 (3) The death certificate does not clearly iden23 tify any of the service-connected disabilities of the 

24 veteran as the principal or contributory cause of 

25 death. 
3 

†S 89 ES

1 (4) A service-connected disability of the veteran 

2 includes a condition more likely to cause severe ill3 ness from COVID–19 as determined by the Centers 

4 for Disease Control and Prevention. 

5 (5) The claimant is not entitled to benefits 

6 under section 1318 of such title. 

7 (6) The evidence to support the claim does not 

8 result in a preliminary finding in favor of the claim9 ant. 

10 (b) OUTREACH.—The Secretary shall provide infor11 mation to veterans, dependents, and veterans service orga12 nizations about applying to dependency and indemnity 

13 compensation when a veteran dies from COVID–19. The 

14 Secretary shall provide such information through the 

15 website of the Department of Veterans Affairs and via 

16 other outreach mechanisms. 

Passed the Senate July 21, 2021. 

Attest: 

Secretary. 
117TH CONGRESS 

1ST SESSION S. 89 

AN ACT 

To require the Secretary of Veterans Affairs to sedeath, and for other purposes. ities were the principal or contributory causes of determine whether their service-connected disabil- connected disabilities who die from COVID–19 to cure medical opinions for veterans with service-
1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

26

27

28

United States District Court

Northern District of California

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

CURLEY JOHN BROUSSARD,

Plaintiff,

v.

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,

Defendant.

Case No. 17-cv-00654-HSG (PR)

ORDER GRANTING PLAINTIFF'S 

MOTION FOR COPY OF COMPLAINT

Re: Dkt. No. 12

Good cause appearing, plaintiff’s motion for a copy of his complaint is GRANTED. 

Plaintiff states that he cannot afford the cost of photocopying the complaint with exhibits and asks 

the Court to take into account his in forma pauperis status. In order to relieve plaintiff of 

photocopying fees, the Court will, in this instance, return to plaintiff the hard copy of the 

complaint with exhibits.1

The Court sua sponte extends the deadline for plaintiff to file an amended complaint to 

June 1, 2017.

This order terminates Docket No. 12.

IT IS SO ORDERED.

Dated:

HAYWOOD S. GILLIAM, JR.

United States District Judge

 

1

Plaintiff is advised that a filer who has been granted in forma pauperis status may initiate a court 

action without paying the required filing fee up front; instead, the filer is allowed to pay the filing 

fee in installments. However, a filer who has been granted in forma pauperis status is not exempt 

from paying for photocopies.

4/18/2017
## United States Court of Appeals FOR THE EIGHTH CIRCUIT

___________ No. 07-3662

___________ United States of America, * * Appellee, * Appeal from the United States * District Court for the v. * Southern District of Iowa. * Jeremy Lynn Foglesong, * [UNPUBLISHED] * Appellant. *

___________ Submitted: November 3, 2008 Filed: December 2, 2008

___________ Before MURPHY, BYE, and BENTON, Circuit Judges.

___________ PER CURIAM. Jeremy Foglesong challenges the 51-month prison sentence the district court imposed after he pleaded guilty to being a fe lon in possession of firearms. On appeal, Foglesong argues that the district court erre d in classifying his prior Iowa conviction for operating a vehicle without the owner’s consent as a “crime of violence” under U.S.S.G. § 2K2.1.
In reviewing a sentence, we must first ensure that the district court did not commit a significant procedural error, such as improperly calculating the Guidelines range. See Gall v. United States , 128 S. Ct. 586, 597 (2007). We review de novo the district court’s application of the Guidelines. See United States v. Espinosa , 539 F.3d-2- 926, 928-29 (8th Cir. 2008) (error in cal culating Guidelines range would be procedural error within meaning of Gall ; reviewing de novo district court’s application of Guidelines).

In United States v. Lindquist , 421 F.3d 751, 753-55 (8th Cir. 2005), we held that a prior Iowa conviction for operati ng a vehicle without the owner’s consent qualified as a “crime of violence” under section 2K2.1, because of its similarity to the Missouri offense of tampering with an auto mobile by operation, wh ich this court had previously declared to be a “crime of violence.” Sin ce then, however, the Supreme Court issued its decision in Begay v. United States , 128 S. Ct. 1581, 1583, 1585-86 (2008) (to be “violent felony” under Arme d Career Criminal Act, crime must be “roughly similar, in kind as well as in degr ee of risk posed,” to examples listed in statute; listed crimes all typically involve purposeful, viol ent, and aggressive conduct). Following Begay , we held in United States v. Williams , 537 F.3d 969, 970-71, 974-76 (8th Cir. 2008) (rehearing denied), that th e Missouri offenses of auto tampering and auto theft without consent we re no longer “crimes of violence” for purposes of section 2K2.1. We now likewise hold that the Iowaoffense of operating a vehicle without the owner’s consent is no longer a “cri me of violence” under section 2K2.1.
Accordingly, we vacate Foglesong’s sent ence, and we remand for resentencing in accordance with this opinion.

______________________________
Soloman Jason HARRELL, Jr., Appellant, v. STATE of Florida, Appellee.

Case No. 5D18-2046

District Court of Appeal of Florida, Fifth District.

Decision filed July 2, 2019

**DECISION WITHOUT PUBLISHED OPINION**

AFFIRMED.
Anthony D. RIGGINS, Appellant/Petitioner(s), v. STATE of Florida, Appellee/Respondent(s).

CASE NO.:2D18-3910

District Court of Appeal of Florida, Second District.

May 15, 2019

**DECISION WITHOUT PUBLISHED OPINION**

Denied.
Jason SMITH, DOC# T69473, Appellant, v. STATE of Florida, Appellee.

Case No. 2D18-3130

District Court of Appeal of Florida, Second District.

Opinion filed April 26, 2019

**DECISION WITHOUT PUBLISHED OPINION**

Affirmed.
1 

2 

3 

4 

5 

6 

7 

8 

9 

10 

11 

12 

13 

14 

15 

16 

17 

18 

19 

20 

21 

22 

23 

24 

25 

26 

27 

28 

United States District Court 

Northern District of Californi

a

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 

NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, 

Plaintiff, 

v. 

BRANDON JONES, 

Defendant. 

Case No. 17-cr-00034-JSW-2 

ORDER TO SHOW CAUSE 

 On May 28, 2019, the Court received a voicemail from one of the government’s witnesses, 

and, on May 29, 2019, the Court forwarded the voicemail to the government. The government is 

hereby ORDERED TO SHOW CAUSE as to why the voicemail itself should not be disclosed to 

defense counsel. The government’s response is due no later than May 30, 2019 at 5 p.m. 

 The Court further ORDERS the parties to advise their witnesses to refrain from 

communicating directly with the Court. 

IT IS SO ORDERED. 

Dated: May 29, 2019 

______________________________________ 

JEFFREY S. WHITE 

United States District Judge
Exhibit
99.4
 
 
 CERTIFICATE
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 (the “Report”) on the Form 10-K of Laural
Resources, Inc. (the “Company”) for the year ended May 31, 2009, as filed with
the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof, I, Robert MacKay,
Chief Accounting Officer, Chief Financial Officer and Director, certify,
pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, as adopted pursuant to Section 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 and Exchange Act of 1934, as amended; and
 
 2.     The
information contained in this Report fairly presents, in all material respects,
the financial condition and results of operation of the Company.
 
 
 Date:
August 7, 2009
 ROBERT
MACKAY
 Robert
MacKay
 Chief
Accounting Officer, Chief Financial Officer and Director
 
 
 -1-