alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<ARTICLE>               5
<LEGEND>              
                        THIS SCHEDULE CONTAINS SUMMARY FINANCIAL INFORMATION
                        EXTRACTED FROM THE UNAUDITED QUARTERLY FINANCIAL
                        STATEMENTS OF NIAGARA CORPORATION AND SUBSIDIARIES 
                        FOR THE THREE MONTHS ENDED MARCH 31, 1999 AND IS 
                        QUALIFIED IN ITS ENTIRETY BY REFERENCE
                        TO SUCH FINANCIAL STATEMENTS.
</LEGEND>
       
<S>                                 <C>
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                   DEC-31-1999
<PERIOD-START>                      JAN-01-1999
<PERIOD-END>                        MAR-31-1999 
<PERIOD-TYPE>                       3-MOS      
<CASH>                              111,277                
<SECURITIES>                        0                      
<RECEIVABLES>                       24,873,596             
<ALLOWANCES>                        815,000                
<INVENTORY>                         32,360,222             
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                    58,435,697       
<PP&E>                              105,074,622            
<DEPRECIATION>                      15,092,809             
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                      152,638,729            
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>               34,995,984             
<BONDS>                             43,302,110             
<COMMON>                            9,998                  
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>               0                      
<PREFERRED>                         0                      
<OTHER-SE>                          55,939,299             
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>        152,638,729            
<SALES>                             49,380,153             
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                    49,380,153             
<CGS>                               42,139,536             
<TOTAL-COSTS>                       42,139,536             
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                    4,104,668        
<LOSS-PROVISION>                    0                      
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                  895,780                
<INCOME-PRETAX>                     2,318,754              
<INCOME-TAX>                        900,000                
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                 1,418,754              
<DISCONTINUED>                      0                      
<EXTRAORDINARY>                     0                
<CHANGES>                           0                       
<NET-INCOME>                        1,418,754               
<EPS-PRIMARY>                       .15               
<EPS-DILUTED>                       .15                     
        

</TABLE>
Corey Thomas JONES and William Louis Cole, Jr., petitioners, v. UNITED STATES.

No. 13-6639.

Supreme Court of the United States

Nov. 4, 2013.

Petition for writ of certiorari to the United States Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit denied.
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

NORTHERN DISTRICT OF INDIANA

FORT WAYNE DIVISION

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA )

)

v. ) CAUSE NO. 1:13-CR-89

)

BRANDON D. SIZEMORE )

FINDINGS AND RECOMMENDATION

OF THE MAGISTRATE JUDGE

UPON A PLEA OF GUILTY

TO: THE HONORABLE THERESA L. SPRINGMANN, JUDGE, 

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

Upon Defendant’s request to enter a plea of guilty pursuant to Rule 11 of the Federal Rules

of Criminal Procedure, this matter came on for hearing before U.S. Magistrate Roger B. Cosbey,

on May 15, 2014, with the written consents of the defendant, counsel for the defendant, and

counsel for the United States of America.

The hearing on defendant’s plea of guilty was in full compliance with Rule 11, Federal

Rules of Criminal Procedure, before the Magistrate Judge in open court and on the record.

In consideration of that hearing and the statements made by the defendant under oath on

the record and in the presence of counsel, the remarks of the Assistant United States Attorney and

of counsel for defendant,

I FIND as follows:

(1) that defendant understands the nature of the charge against him to which the plea is

offered;

(2) that the defendant understands his right to trial by jury, to persist in his plea of not

guilty, to the assistance of counsel at trial, to confront and cross-examine adverse witnesses, and
his right against compelled self-incrimination;

(3) that the defendant understands what the maximum possible sentence is, including the

effect of the supervised release term, and defendant understands that the Sentencing Guidelines

apply and that the Court may depart from those guidelines under some circumstances;

(4) that the plea of guilty by the defendant has been knowingly and voluntarily made and

is not the result of force or threats or of promises apart from the plea agreement between the

parties;

(5) that defendant is competent to plead guilty;

(6) that the defendant understands that his answers may later be used against him in a

prosecution for perjury or false statement;

(7) that there is a factual basis for the defendant’s plea; and further,

I RECOMMEND that the Court accept the defendant’s plea of guilty and that the

Defendant be adjudged guilty of Count 1 as charged in the four-count Indictment, and have

sentence imposed. A Presentence Report has been ordered. Should this Report and

Recommendation be accepted and the Defendant adjudged guilty, sentencing will be scheduled

before Judge Theresa L. Springmann by separate order and notice. Objections to the Findings

and Recommendation are waived unless filed and served within fourteen (14) days. 28 U.S.C.

§ 636(b)(1)(B).

DATED this 15th day of May 2014.

/s/ Roger B. Cosbey 

Roger B. Cosbey

United States Magistrate Judge

2
자궁근종

자궁근종이란 무엇인

가요?

자궁근종은 가임기 여성에게 가장 흔한 양성(암이

아닌) 종양 또는 종양의 성장입니다. 자궁근종은 자

궁의 근육벽 안팎에서 자라며 단일 종양으로 자랄

수도 있고 여러 개가 생길 수도 있습니다. 근종은

사과 씨앗만큼 작거나 자몽만큼 클 수도 있습니다. 

근종은 시간이 지나면서 커지거나 거의 같은 크기

로 유지될 수 있습니다. 자궁근종의 또 다른 의학

용어는 평활근종 또는 그냥 "근종"입니다.

자궁근종의 증상은 무

엇인가요?

자궁근종이 항상 증상을 유발하는 것은 아닙니다. 

증상이 있는 사람은 자궁근종을 견디기 힘들어할

수 있습니다. 자궁근종의 증상에는 다음이 포함될

수 있습니다:

• 월경(생리) 의 ‍변화

o 생리 ‍기간 중 매시간 하나 이상의 탐폰이나 패

드를 적시거나 7일 이상 지속되는 심한 출혈이

있는 경우

o 생리 사이의 질 출혈

o 출혈이 심하고 불규칙하면 빈혈(적혈구 수 감

소)이 발생할 수 있습니다

o 생리통

• 빵빵함 또는 ‍압박감

o 하복부(배)에 "빵빵함"이 느껴집니다

o 소변이 자주 마렵거나 배뇨가 어려운 경우

• 통증

o 성관계 중 통증

o 복부 또는 허리 통증

• 생식 문제

o 불임

o 유산

o 조기 진통

자궁근종의 원인은 무

엇인가요?

자궁근종의 원인은 아무도 확실히 알지 못합니다. 

연구자들은 한 가지 이상의 요인이 작용할 수 있다

고 생각합니다. 이러한 요소에는 다음이 포함될 수

있습니다:

• 나이. 자궁근종의 위험은 나이가 들면서 증가하며

50세 전후에 최고조에 이릅니다. 일부 여성의 경우

폐경 후 자궁근종이 줄어들 수 있습니다.

• 가족력 또는 유전. 가족(어머니, 자매, 이모 등)이 자

궁근종을 앓고 있는 경우 위험도가 높아집니다.

• 인종/민족출신.자궁근종은아시아계,히스패닉계,백인

보다아프리카계미국인에게 2~3배더흔합니다. 아프리

카계미국인은또한더어린나이에자궁근종이생기는경

향이있으며,자궁근종이더빨리자라는경향이있습니다.

• 체중. 과체중이나 비만은 자궁근종의 위험을 높입

니다.

• 호르몬. 자궁근종은 에스트로겐과 프로게스테론과

같은 호르몬 수치의 영향을 받을 수 있습니다.

• 고혈압 은 자궁근종의 위험을 높입니다.

• 식이 요인. (예: 비타민 D 결핍, 두유 ‍섭취).

자궁근종이 있는지 어

떻게 알 수 있나요?

증상이 없다면 자궁근종 여부를 모를 수도 있습니

다. 어떤 경우에는 의료진이 정기적인 골반 검사 중

에 자궁근종을 발견하기도 합니다. 의료진은 자궁근

종 사진을 보기 위해 영상 검사를 지시할 수도 있습

니다. 수술(예: 자궁경 검사)을 통해 자궁근종의 초음

파 진단을 확인하고 자궁근종의 위치와 같은 추가

정보를 얻을 수 있습니다.

FDA 여성 건강국

www.fda.gov/womens
자궁근종은 어떻게

치료하나요?

증상이 있는 경우 도움이 될 수 있는 의학적 치료

법이 있습니다. 자궁근종을 치료하는 가장 좋은

방법에 대해 의료진과 상담하세요. 다음과 같은

여러 가지 사항을 고려할 것입니다:

• 현재 겪고 있는 증상과 그 심각도

• 향후 임신을 원하시는 경우

• 근종의 크기

• 근종의 위치

• 현재 나이와 폐경이 얼마나 가까운지에 따라

자궁근종이 있지만 증상이 없는 경우, 의학적 개입

이 필요하지 않을 수 있습니다. 의료진은 정기 검

진 시 자궁근종이 성장했는지 확인하고 새로운 증

상이나 악화되는 증상을 발견했는지 물어볼 수 있

습니다. 의료 서비스 제공자는 성장 또는 크기 변

화를 확인하기 위해 영상 검사를 권장할 수 있습니

다.

다음과 같은 증상을 관리하기 위해 약을 복용해야

하는지 의료진과 상의하세요:

• 심한 출혈로 인한 빈혈(적혈구 수 감소)을 치료하

거나 예방하기 위한 철분 보충제.

• 변비에 도움이 되는 대변 연화제.

• 자궁근종으로 인한 통증을 완화하는 데 도움이

되는 일반의약품(OTC) 또는 처방 진통제.

담당 의료진은 출혈을 조절하는 데 도움이

되는 호르몬 치료를 권장할 수 있습니다. 

여기에는 다음이 포함될 수 있습니다:

• 알약, 패치 또는 질 피임 링과 같은 피임 제품

• 프로게스테론 알약 또는 주사

• 호르몬(프로게스테론)이 함유된 자궁 내 장치

(IUD)

• 폐경 전 여성의 자궁근종과 관련된 심한 월경 출

혈을 관리하도록 승인된 최신 의약품.

치료를 시작하거나 중단하기 

전에 위험, 이점, 부작용에 대해 

의료진과 상의하세요. 

자궁근종으로 인해 중등도 또는 중증의 증상이 있

는 경우, 의료진은 위에서 설명한 대로 의학적 치료

또는 수술 시술을 권장할 수 있습니다. 수술 옵션에

는 다음이 포함됩니다:

• 자궁근종 절제술 - 자궁의 건강한 조직을 제거하지

않고 자궁근종을 제거하는 수술입니다.

• 자궁 적출술 - 자궁 전체를 제거하는 수술입니다.

• 섬유종 절제술 - 정상 자궁 조직의 손상을 피하면서

에너지를 사용하여 섬유종 조직을 파괴하는 수술

절차입니다. 근종은 제거되지 않고 크기가 줄어듭

니다.

• 자궁근종 색전술(UFE) 또는 자궁동맥 색전술

(UAE) - 자궁근종에 혈액을 공급하는 혈관에 가는

관을 삽입합니다. 그런 다음 작은 플라스틱 또는

젤 입자를 혈관에 주입합니다. 이는 근종으로 가는

혈액 공급을 차단하여 근종을 수축시킵니다.

모든 치료 옵션과 그에 따른 위험 

및 이점에 대해 의료진과 상담하세

요. 담당 의료진이 모든 질문에 답

변해 드리고 귀하에게 적합한 치료

법을 함께 결정할 수 있습니다.

이 팩트 시트는 미국 식품의약국(FDA)의 여성

건강국에서 개발했습니다. 이 정보는 교육 목적

으로 제공된 것으로 모든 정보를 포함하는 것은

아니며, 의료진과의 상담을 대체할 수 없습니

다.

자궁근종에 대해 자세히 알아보려

면 다음으로 이동하세요:

www.fda.gov/uterinefibroids

자궁근종 (Korean) JUNE 2022
case 2:13-cv-00491-RL-JEM   document 101   filed 11/10/14   page 1 of 6

case 2:13-cv-00491-RL-JEM   document 101   filed 11/10/14   page 2 of 6

case 2:13-cv-00491-RL-JEM   document 101   filed 11/10/14   page 3 of 6

case 2:13-cv-00491-RL-JEM   document 101   filed 11/10/14   page 4 of 6

case 2:13-cv-00491-RL-JEM   document 101   filed 11/10/14   page 5 of 6

case 2:13-cv-00491-RL-JEM   document 101   filed 11/10/14   page 6 of 6
EX-34.6
(logo) Grant Thornton

Accountants and Business Advisors


REPORT OF INDEPENDENT REGISTERED PUBLIC ACCOUNTING FIRM

Board of Directors and Shareholders
LandAmerica Tax and Flood Services, Inc.


We have examined management's assertion, included in the accompanying Report on
Assessment of Compliance with Regulation AB Servicing Criteria ("Management's
Report"), that Land America Tax and Flood Services, Inc. (the "Company")
complied with the servicing criteria set forth in Item 1122(d) of the U.S.
Securities and Exchange Commission's Regulation AB for the residential and
commercial mortgage backed securities for which the Company served as
third-party property tax payment provider on the underlying collateral (the
"Platform") as of and for the year ended December 31, 2007, excluding criteria
1122(d)(1)(i)-(iv), 1122(d)(2)(i)-(vii), 1122(d)(3)(i)-(iv), 1122(d)(4)(i)-(x)
and 1122(d)(4)(xiii)-(xv), which management has determined are not applicable to
the activities performed by the Company with respect to the Platform. Management
is responsible for the Company's compliance with the applicable servicing
criteria. Our responsibility is to express an opinion on management's assertion
about the Company's compliance with the applicable servicing criteria for the
Platform based on our examination.

Our examination was conducted in accordance with the standards of the Public
Company Accounting Oversight Board (United States) and, accordingly, included
examining, on a test basis, evidence about the Company's compliance with the
applicable servicing criteria for the Platform and performing such other
procedures as we considered necessary in the circumstances. Our examination
included testing selected asset-backed transactions and securities constituting
the Platform and evaluating whether the Company performed servicing activities
related to those transactions and securities in compliance with the applicable
servicing criteria for the period covered by this report. Accordingly, our
testing may not have included servicing activities related to each asset-backed
transaction or security constituting the Platform. Further, our examination was
not designed to detect material noncompliance that may have occurred prior to
the period covered by this report and that may have affected the Company's
servicing activities during the period covered by this report. We believe that
our examination provides a reasonable basis for our opinion. Our examination
does not provide a legal determination on the Company's compliance with the
applicable servicing criteria.

In our opinion, management's assertion that Land America Tax and Flood Services,
Inc. complied with the aforementioned applicable servicing criteria as of and
for the year ended December 31, 2007 is fairly stated, in all material respects.

/s/ Grant Thornton LLP

San Diego, CA
February 6, 2008


12340 El Camino Real
Suite 220
San Diego, CA 92130
T 858.704.8000
F 858.704.8099
W www.grantthornton.com

Grant Thornton LLP
US Member of Grant Thornton International
# United States Court of Appeals **for the Fifth Circuit**

No. 21-60629 Summary Calendar

Olasupo Fatubaro,

Petitioner ,

versus
Merrick Garland, U.S. Attorney General , Respondent

.

Petition for Review of an Order of the Board of Immigration Appeals

Agency No. A078 990 809

Before Jones, Haynes, and Oldham, Circuit Judges

. Per Curiam: * Olasupo Fatubaro, a native and citize n of Nigeria, ti mely petitions us for review of the Board of Immigration Appeals’ (BIA) denial of his motion to reconsider.

* Pursuant to 5th Circuit 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 5th Circuit Rule 47.5.4. United States Court of Appeals Fifth Circuit 

### FILED August 4, 2022 Lyle W. Cayce Clerk Case: 21-60629 Document: 00516419861 Page: 1 Date Filed: 08/04/2022No. 21-60629

2 We review the denial of a motion to reconsider under an abuse-ofdiscretion standard. Gonzales-Veliz v. Barr , 938 F.3d 219, 226 (5th Cir. 2019). Under this standard, Fatubaro must iden tify either a “change in the law, a misapplication of the law, or an aspect of the case that the BIA overlooked.” Zhao v. Gonzales , 404 F.3d 295, 304 (5th Cir. 2005)). The BIA's decision will stand unless it was “capricious, raci ally invidious [or] utterly without foundation in the evidence.” Id. (quoting Pritchett v. INS , 993 F.2d 80, 83 (5th Cir. 1993)). Fatubaro does not argue that the motion was timely received, and the BIA does not have a mailbox rule. See Matter of Liadov , 23 I. & N. Dec. 990, 991-93 (BIA 2006). We lack jurisdiction to consider Fa tubaro’s arguments. To the extent he argues that his motion should not have been denied for timeliness after being rejected for improper service and that his motion should have been equitably tolled, these arguments are unexhausted. Lopez-Dubon v. Holder , 609 F.3d 642, 644 (5th Cir. 2010). Fatubaro also argues that the BIA should not have declined to exer cise its sua sponte authority because he did not ask for this relief, and that it should no t have applied the departure bar when denying sua sponte relief, but we lack jurisdiction to review the exercise of that authority. Hernandez-Castillo v. Sessions , 875 F.3d 199, 207 (5th Cir. 2017). We also note that he argues the merits of his motion, but without jurisdiction we have no basis to consider that argument.

DISMISSED

. Case: 21-60629 Document: 00516419861 Page: 2 Date Filed: 08/04/2022
Ana Maria RODRIGUEZ, petitioner, v. DEPARTMENT OF STATE.

No. 11-10625.

Supreme Court of the United States

May 20, 2013.

Motion for leave to file a petition for rehearing denied.
Wachovia
Bank, National Association
 8739
Research Drive, URP4
 Charlotte,
NC 28288-1075







WACHOVIA
SECURITIES




1123
SERVICER’S CERTIFICATE




Reference
is hereby made to that certain Pooling and Servicing Agreement dated as of June
1, 2007, by and among Merrill Lynch Mortgage Investors, Inc., as Depositor,
Midland Loan Services, Inc. as Master Servicer, Wachovia Bank, National
Association, as Master Servicer, Midland Loan Services, Inc. as Special
Servicer, and LaSalle Bank, National Association, as Trustee, with respect to
Commercial Mortgage Pass-Through Certificates, Series 2007-7 (the
"Agreement").  Capitalized terms used herein not otherwise defined
shall have the meanings assigned in the Agreement.
 
 Pursuant
to Section 3.13 of this Agreement, Timothy Ryan and Marilyn Addison, Managing
Director of Customer Relationship Management and Director of Compliance Third
Party Oversight, do hereby certify that:
 
 1.
              A
      review of the activities of the Master Servicer  during the
      period from June 1, 2007 to December 31, 2007, and of its
      performance  under the Agreement during such period has been
      made under our supervision; and
 
 2.
              To
      the best of our knowledge, based on such review, the Master
      Servicer  has fulfilled all of its obligations under this
      Agreement in all material respects throughout the period June 1, 2007,
      through December 31, 2007.
 
 
 
 IN
WITNESS WHEREOF, the undersigned have executed this Certificate as of the
10th
day of March 2008.




/s/
      Timothy S. Ryan
              
              /s/
      Marilyn AddisonTimothy
      S. Ryan, Managing Director
              
              Marilyn
      Addison, DirectorWachovia
      Bank National Association
              
              Wachovia
      Bank National Association
   O:\Shared/SP/Income/Compliance 3rdParty
Oversight/Annual Certification/Certification_0308/2007/MLCFC 2007-7
Patrick Earl FRANCIS, aka Jerome Brown, petitioner, v. UNITED STATES.

No. 12-9531.

Supreme Court of the United States

May 13, 2013.

Petition for writ of certiorari to the United States Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit denied.
EXHIBIT 11.1

STATEMENT AND COMPUTATION OF EARNINGS PER SHARE



|                                          |  |                                  |  |                   |      
|----------------------------------------- |  | -------------------------------- |  | ----------------- | -----
|                                          |  | Three Months EndedMarch 31, 2006
|                                          |  |                                  |  | Earnings         
|                                          |  | Shares                           |  | Per Share        
|                                          |  | (in Thousands)                  
|Basic Weighted Average Shares Outstanding |  | 7,170                            |  |                   | $0.32
|                                          |  |                                  |  |                   |      
|Diluted                                   |  |                                  |  |                   |      
|Average Shares Outstanding                |  | 7,170                            |  |                   |      
|Common Stock Equivalents                  |  | 3                                |  |                   |      
|                                          |  |                                  |  |                   |      
|                                          |  | 7,173                            |  | $                 | 0.32 
|                                          |  |                                  |  |                   |      
|                                          | 
|                                          |  | Three MonthsEnded March 31, 2005
|                                          |  | Shares                           |  | EarningsPer Share
|                                          |  | (in Thousands)                  
|Basic Weighted Average Shares Outstanding |  | 7,144                            |  | $                 | 0.30 
|                                          |  |                                  |  |                   |      
|Diluted                                   |  |                                  |  |                   |      
|Average Shares Outstanding                |  | 7,144                            |  |                   |      
|Common Stock Equivalents                  |  | 21                               |  |                   |      
|                                          |  |                                  |  |                   |      
|                                          |  | 7,165                            |  | $                 | 0.30 
|                                          |  |                                  |  |                   |
United States District Court

For the Northern District of California

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

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

CANDIDA PALEGA, on behalf of herself and

on behalf of all others similarly situated,

Plaintiff,

 v.

THE PROPERTY SCIENCES GROUP

INCORPORATED,

Defendant. /

No. C 17-00855 WHA

ORDER DENYING

APPEARANCE BY TELEPHONE

The courtroom telephone equipment does not make it feasible to conduct hearings over

the telephone and, therefore, the Court must DENY defendant’s request. Local counsel may

nevertheless appear without lead counsel, provided that local counsel is prepared to discuss and

set dates according to lead counsel’s schedule. 

IT IS SO ORDERED.

Dated: May 19, 2017. WILLIAM ALSUP

UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE
[Federal Register Volume 60, Number 93 (Monday, May 15, 1995)]
[Notices]
[Page 25934]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 95-11902]



=======================================================================
-----------------------------------------------------------------------

SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION

[File No. 500-1]


In the Matter of: PanWorld Minerals International, Inc.; Order 
Directing Suspension of Trading

May 10, 1995.
    It appears to the Securities and Exchange Commission that there is 
a lack of adequate current information concerning the securities of 
PanWorld Minerals International, Inc. (``PanWorld'') and that questions 
have been raised about the adequacy and accuracy of publicly 
disseminated information concerning, among other things, the accuracy 
and adequacy of PanWorld's financial statements; and agreements between 
PanWorld and others.
    Therefore, it is Ordered, pursuant to Section 12(k) of the 
Securities Exchange Act of 1934, that trading in the securities of 
PanWorld Minerals International, Inc., over-the-counter, on NASDAQ or 
otherwise, is suspended for the period from 9:30 a.m. EDT May 10, 1995 
through 11:59 p.m. EDT on May 23, 1995.

    By the Commission.
Jonathan G. Katz,
Secretary.
[FR Doc. 95-11902 Filed 5-12-95; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 8010-01-M
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 Thunder Mountain Gold Inc, (the "Company") on Form 10-QSB for the period ending June 30, 2004, as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the "Report"), I, E. James Collord, President, Director and Chief Executive Officer of the Company, certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, as adopted pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that:



(1)

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



(2)

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





/s/ E. James Collord

By  __________________________________

E.  James Collord

President, Director and Chief Executive Officer

Date:  August 13, 2004