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

<ARTICLE> 5
<LEGEND>
THIS SCHEDULE CONTAINS SUMMARY FINANCIAL INFORMATION EXTRACTED FROM CONDENSED
CONSOLIDATED BALANCE SHEETS AND CONSOLIDATED STATEMENTS OF OPERATIONS AND IS
QUALIFIED IN ITS ENTIRETY BY REFERENCE TO SUCH 10-Q.
</LEGEND>
       
<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   3-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          JAN-03-1999
<PERIOD-START>                             DEC-29-1997
<PERIOD-END>                               MAR-29-1998
<CASH>                                       1,418,502
<SECURITIES>                                         0
<RECEIVABLES>                                        0
<ALLOWANCES>                                         0
<INVENTORY>                                    261,661
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                             2,664,034
<PP&E>                                      43,038,916
<DEPRECIATION>                               8,026,687
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                              41,182,389
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                        6,583,063
<BONDS>                                              0
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                        82,238
<OTHER-SE>                                  31,445,319
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                41,182,389
<SALES>                                     17,368,990
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                            17,608,738
<CGS>                                        5,797,847
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                9,061,191
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                     0
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                     0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                              21,729
<INCOME-PRETAX>                              2,748,918
<INCOME-TAX>                                 1,044,314
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                          1,704,604
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                 1,704,604
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                      .21
<EPS-DILUTED>                                      .20
        

</TABLE>
Ramiro D. RAMIREZ, Jr., Petitioner, v. UNITED STATES.

No. 19-7561.

Supreme Court of the United States.

March 9, 2020.

Petition for writ of certiorari to the United States Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit denied.
DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND SECURITY, et al., Applicants, v. NEW YORK, et al.

No. 19A785.

Supreme Court of the United States.

April 24, 2020

Motion to temporarily lift or modify stay denied. This order does not preclude a filing in the District Court as counsel considers appropriate.
* 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.

IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT

 

No. 98-20360

Summary Calendar

 

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,

Plaintiff-Appellee,

versus

ALMA ROSA CARRILLO,

Defendant-Appellant.

- - - - - - - - - -

Appeal from the United States District Court

for the Southern District of Texas

USDC No. H-95-CR-314-13

- - - - - - - - - -

December 17, 1998

Before EMILIO M. GARZA, DeMOSS, and BENAVIDES, Circuit Judges.

PER CURIAM:*

Court-appointed counsel for Alma Rosa Carrillo moves to

withdraw as appellate counsel and has filed a brief as required

by Anders v. California, 386 U.S. 738 (1967). We have

independently reviewed counsel’s brief and the record and found

no nonfrivolous issue. Accordingly, counsel is excused from

further responsibilities herein, and the APPEAL IS DISMISSED. 

See 5TH CIR. R. 42.2.
Lavorice Dondrell CUNNINGHAM, Petitioner, v. UNITED STATES.

No. 19-7331

Supreme Court of the United States.

Feb. 24, 2020

Petition for writ of certiorari to the United States Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit denied.
Exhibit 32.1


                                  CERTIFICATION


            Pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002


The  undersigned  officer  hereby  certifies  that,  to his  knowledge,  (1) the
quarterly report on Form 10-Q of Productivity Technologies Corp. for the quarter
ended  September  30, 2004 as to which this  Certification  is an exhibit  fully
complies  with the  requirements  of  Section  13(a) or 15(d) of the  Securities
Exchange  Act of 1934 (15  U.S.C.  78m(a)  or  78o(d))  and (2) the  information
contained  in  such  Report  fairly  presents,  in all  material  respects,  the
financial  condition  and results of  operations  of  Productivity  Technologies
Corp..


Date: November 16, 2004


/s/ Samuel N. Seidman
---------------------------
Samuel N. Seidman,
Chairman and Chief Executive Officer
Darrell J. WILLIAMS, petitioner, v. Cecilia REYNOLDS, Warden.

No. 18-8280.

Supreme Court of the United States

July 15, 2019.

Petition for rehearing denied.
In the Matter of DISCIPLINE OF Ephraim Chukwuemeka UGWUONYE.

No. D-3046.

Supreme Court of the United States

Aug. 5, 2019.

Ephraim Chukwuemeka Ugwuonye, of Silver Spring, Maryland, is suspended from the practice of law in this Court, and a rule will issue, returnable within 40 days, requiring him to show cause why he should not be disbarred from the practice of law in this Court.
EXHIBIT 2

Case 2:23-cv-00583-JRG Document 1-2 Filed 12/08/23 Page 1 of 18 PageID #: 33
Case 2:23-cv-00583-JRG Document 1-2 Filed 12/08/23 Page 2 of 18 PageID #: 34
Case 2:23-cv-00583-JRG Document 1-2 Filed 12/08/23 Page 3 of 18 PageID #: 35
Case 2:23-cv-00583-JRG Document 1-2 Filed 12/08/23 Page 4 of 18 PageID #: 36
Case 2:23-cv-00583-JRG Document 1-2 Filed 12/08/23 Page 5 of 18 PageID #: 37
Case 2:23-cv-00583-JRG Document 1-2 Filed 12/08/23 Page 6 of 18 PageID #: 38
Case 2:23-cv-00583-JRG Document 1-2 Filed 12/08/23 Page 7 of 18 PageID #: 39
Case 2:23-cv-00583-JRG Document 1-2 Filed 12/08/23 Page 8 of 18 PageID #: 40
Case 2:23-cv-00583-JRG Document 1-2 Filed 12/08/23 Page 9 of 18 PageID #: 41
Case 2:23-cv-00583-JRG Document 1-2 Filed 12/08/23 Page 10 of 18 PageID #: 42
Case 2:23-cv-00583-JRG Document 1-2 Filed 12/08/23 Page 11 of 18 PageID #: 43
Case 2:23-cv-00583-JRG Document 1-2 Filed 12/08/23 Page 12 of 18 PageID #: 44
Case 2:23-cv-00583-JRG Document 1-2 Filed 12/08/23 Page 13 of 18 PageID #: 45
Case 2:23-cv-00583-JRG Document 1-2 Filed 12/08/23 Page 14 of 18 PageID #: 46
Case 2:23-cv-00583-JRG Document 1-2 Filed 12/08/23 Page 15 of 18 PageID #: 47
Case 2:23-cv-00583-JRG Document 1-2 Filed 12/08/23 Page 16 of 18 PageID #: 48
Case 2:23-cv-00583-JRG Document 1-2 Filed 12/08/23 Page 17 of 18 PageID #: 49
Case 2:23-cv-00583-JRG Document 1-2 Filed 12/08/23 Page 18 of 18 PageID #: 50
# C_2017215EN.01006601.xml

| 5.7.2017 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 215/66 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

5.7.2017

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 215/66

---

Designation of the acting Hearing Officer in trade proceedings

(2017/C 215/05)

With effect from 1 July 2017, the member of the Commission responsible for trade policy designated Mr Piotr OGONOWSKI to act as Hearing Officer, in accordance with Article 3 of the Decision of the President of the European Commission of 29 February 2012 on the function and terms of reference of the hearing officer in certain trade proceedings (OJ L 107, 19.4.2012, p. 5).

---
John J. KORESKO, petitioner, v. R. Alexander ACOSTA, Secretary of Labor.

No. 18-6756.

Supreme Court of the United States

Jan. 14, 2019.

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

FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF TEXAS

SHERMAN DIVISION

XLINK RESOURCE GROUP, LLC,

Plaintiff,

v.

EXPO PETROLEUM OIL AND GAS USA,

LLC; MAYOMI OLOOTU; JAMES UDUAK 

UBOM; ARCHER TACTICAL GROUP;

ARCHER ENERGY CORPORATION;

DAVID TOLLAKSEN; and JIM TRICE,

Defendants.

§

§

§

§

§

§

§

§

§

§

§

§

§

CIVIL CAUSE NO. 4:24-CV-00035-ALM

ORDER GRANTING MOTION TO EXTEND TIME LIMIT TO SERVE SUMMONS 

AND COMPLAINT UPON DEFENDANTS EXPO-PETROLEUM OIL AND GAS USA, 

LLC, MAYOMI OLOOTU, AND JAMES UDUAK UBOM

The Court finds that good cause exists to grant Plaintiff’s Motion to Extend Time Limit To 

Serve Summons and Complaint upon Defendants Expo-Petroleum Oil And Gas USA, LLC, Mayomi 

Olootu, And James Uduak Ubom, and GRANTS an extension until and including June 10, 2024, to 

serve the Summons and Complaint

Case 4:24-cv-00035-ALM Document 28 Filed 04/12/24 Page 1 of 1 PageID #: 307
PULTE HOMES OF NEW YORK LLC, petitioner, v. TOWN OF CARMEL, NEW YORK, et al.

No. 18-647.

Supreme Court of the United States

Jan. 22, 2019.

Petition for writ of certiorari to the United States Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit denied.
IN RE Mo Savoy HICKS, Petitioner

No. 19-7312

Supreme Court of the United States.

February 24, 2020

Petition for writ of habeas corpus denied.
Timothy COURTNEY, Petitioner, v. UNITED STATES.

No. 19-7635.

Supreme Court of the United States.

March 23, 2020

Petition for writ of certiorari to the United States Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit denied.
# C_2017422EN.01002001.xml

| 8.12.2017 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 422/20 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

8.12.2017

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 422/20

---

Authorisation for State aid pursuant to Articles 107 and 108 of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union

Cases where the Commission raises no objections

(Text with EEA relevance, except for products falling under Annex I of the Treaty)

(2017/C 422/02)

| Date of adoption of the decision | 29.09.2017 |
| --- | --- |
| Aid number | SA.47085 (2017/N) |
| Member State | Belgium |
| Region | BELGIQUE-BELGIE | — |
| Title (and/or name of the beneficiary) | Vergoeding van verliezen die door aardappelproducenten zijn geleden ingevolge maatregelen tegen schadelijke organismen. |
| Legal basis | Koninklijk besluit van 5 december 2004 tot vaststelling van de door de aardappelproducenten verschuldigde tijdelijke crisisbijdragen voor het vergoeden van verliezen ingevolge maatregelen tegen schadelijke organismen. |
| Type of measure | Scheme | — |
| Objective | Aid for the costs of prevention, control and eradication of animal diseases and plant pests and aid to make good the damage caused by animal diseases and plant pests |
| Form of aid | Direct grant |
| Budget | Overall budget: EUR 3,35 (in millions)
  Annual budget: EUR 0,67 (in millions) |
| Intensity | 100 % |
| Duration (period) | until 31.12.2022 |
| Economic sectors | Crop and animal production; hunting and related service activities |
| Name and address of the granting authority | Federale Overheidsdienst Volksgezondheid, Veiligheid van de Voedselketen en Leefmilieu |
| Victor Hortaplein 40 bus 10 — 1060 Brussel |

Date of adoption of the decision

29.09.2017

Aid number

SA.47085 (2017/N)

Member State

Belgium

Region

BELGIQUE-BELGIE

—

Title (and/or name of the beneficiary)

Vergoeding van verliezen die door aardappelproducenten zijn geleden ingevolge maatregelen tegen schadelijke organismen.

Legal basis

Koninklijk besluit van 5 december 2004 tot vaststelling van de door de aardappelproducenten verschuldigde tijdelijke crisisbijdragen voor het vergoeden van verliezen ingevolge maatregelen tegen schadelijke organismen.

Type of measure

Scheme

—

Objective

Aid for the costs of prevention, control and eradication of animal diseases and plant pests and aid to make good the damage caused by animal diseases and plant pests

Form of aid

Direct grant

Budget

Overall budget: EUR 3,35 (in millions)

Annual budget: EUR 0,67 (in millions)

Intensity

100 %

Duration (period)

until 31.12.2022

Economic sectors

Crop and animal production; hunting and related service activities

Name and address of the granting authority

Federale Overheidsdienst Volksgezondheid, Veiligheid van de Voedselketen en Leefmilieu

Victor Hortaplein 40 bus 10 — 1060 Brussel

Other information

—

The authentic text(s) of the decision, from which all confidential information has been removed, can be found at:

http://ec.europa.eu/competition/elojade/isef/index.cfm.

---
UNPUBLISHED

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS 

FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT 

No. 05-7138

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, 

 Plaintiff - Appellee, 

 v. 

DAVID M. KISSI, 

 Defendant - Appellant. 

No. 05-7205

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, 

 Plaintiff - Appellee, 

 v. 

DAVID M. KISSI, 

 Defendant - Appellant. 

No. 05-7212

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, 

 Plaintiff - Appellee, 

 v. 

DAVID M. KISSI, 

 Defendant - Appellant. 
No. 07-4916

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, 

 Plaintiff - Appellee, 

 v. 

DAVID M. KISSI, 

 Defendant - Appellant. 

Appeals from the United States District Court for the District 

of Maryland, at Greenbelt. Alexander Williams, Jr., District 

Judge and Joseph R. Goodwin, Chief District Judge. (8:05-cr00254; 8:05-ca-01983) 

Submitted: October 31, 2008 Decided: December 9, 2008 

Before NIEMEYER, KING, and GREGORY, Circuit Judges. 

Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion. 

In Nos. 05-7138/7205/7212, David M. Kissi, Appellant Pro Se. 

Sandra Wilkinson, Assistant United States Attorney Baltimore, 

Maryland, for Appellee. In No. 07-4916, Donald Kaplan, 

Baltimore, Maryland, for Appellant. Rod J. Rosenstein, United 

States Attorney, Jonathan Biran, Barbara S. Sale, Assistant 

United States Attorneys, Baltimore, Maryland, for Appellee.

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. 

2 
3 

PER CURIAM: 

 In these consolidated cases, David Kissi appeals from 

his convictions of bankruptcy fraud, obstruction of justice, and 

criminal contempt, 18 U.S.C. §§ 157, 401(3), and 1503 (2006). 

In No. 05-7138, Kissi appeals the district court’s detention 

order entered in May 2005. In Nos. 05-7205/7212, Kissi appeals 

from a district court order denying fifteen pending motions. 

Our review of the record with respect to these appeals discloses 

no reversible error. Accordingly, we affirm for the reasons 

stated by the district court. United States v. Kissi, No. 8:05-

cr-00254 (D. Md. May 27, 2005; July 26, 2005). 

 Appeal 07-4916 is Kissi’s direct criminal appeal. 

Kissi’s appellate counsel claims that trial counsel was 

ineffective for failing to seek an expert witness to testify 

regarding Kissi’s mental disorders. To allow for adequate 

development of the record, a defendant must ordinarily bring a 

claim of ineffective assistance of counsel in a 28 U.S.C.A. 

§ 2255 (West 2006 and Supp. 2008) motion unless it conclusively 

appears on the face of the record that counsel provided 

inadequate assistance. United States v. Richardson, 195 F.3d 

192, 198 (4th Cir. 1999). We find that the record does not 

establish ineffective representation. We have also reviewed the 

claims raised by Kissi in his supplemental pro se brief and find 

them to be without merit. 
4 

 Accordingly, we affirm Kissi’s conviction. We 

dispense with oral argument because the facts and legal 

contentions are adequately presented in the materials before the 

court and argument would not aid the decisional process. 

AFFIRMED
C OURT OF A PPEALS FOR THE
F IRST D ISTRICT OF T EXAS AT H OUSTON

O RDER

Appellate case name: Ana Maria Lara v. Jose Sanchez

Appel la te case number: 01

- 1 8

- 00 0 2 5

- CV

Trial court case number: 201 6

- 1 9246

Trial court: 61st District Court of Harris County

Appellant, Ana Maria Lara, has filed a notice of interlocutory appeal of the trial court’s “Order Appointing Receiver for Cardenas Auto Sales

. ” On March 1, 2018, we granted the parties ’ joint motion to abate th e appeal pending arbitration regarding “the

threshold issue in this matter ” and abated the appeal

. Lara and appellee, Jose Sanchez,
have filed “ Second Joint Status Report Regarding Arbitration Proceeding” in which they

ask th at th e “appeal remain abated until June 29 , 2018.”

Accordingly, the parties shall file

, no later than Friday, June 29 , 2018 , a motion

to reinstate and dismiss or otherwise dispose of the appeal, a motion to reinstate and proceed with the appeal, or a report adv ising the Court of the status of the arbitration proceedings . If the parties do not respond as directed, the case may be reinstated on the

Court’s active docket and the appeal may proceed under the applicable Texas Rules of Appellate Procedure

. The appeal remains abated, treated as a closed case, and removed from this
Court’s active docket.

It is so ORDERED.

Judge’s signature: /s/ Russell Lloyd

 Acting individually  Acting for the Court

Date: _ May 17, 2018

_
Dorothy BINNS, petitioner, v. CITY OF MARIETTA, GEORGIA.

No. 18-5853.

Supreme Court of the United States

Jan. 7, 2019.

Petition for writ of certiorari to the United States Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit denied.
Mallory JONES, et al., Petitioners, v. Ramone LAMKIN, Individually and in His Official Capacity as Marshal of the Civil and Magistrate Court of Richmond County, Georgia, et al.

No. 19-726.

Supreme Court of the United States.

April 6, 2020

Motion of National Fraternal Order of Police for leave to file a brief as *amicus curiae* granted. Petition for writ of certiorari to the United States Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit denied.
1 

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 

FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF TEXAS 

TYLER DIVISION 

DENNIS W. PARTAKA, et al., 

 Plaintiffs, 

v. 

FNU JOHNSON, et al., 

 Defendants. 

§ 

§ 

§ 

§ 

§ 

§ 

§ 

§ 

§ 

§ 

§ 

Case No. 6:24-cv-31-JDK-JDL 

ORDER ADOPTING REPORT AND RECOMMENDATION 

OF THE UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE 

Plaintiff Jonathan Pendelton, a former Texas Department of Criminal Justice 

inmate proceeding pro se, brings this civil rights lawsuit under 42 U.S.C. § 1983. The 

case was referred to United States Magistrate Judge John D. Love pursuant to 28 

U.S.C. § 636. 

On April 17, 2024, Judge Love issued a Report and Recommendation 

recommending that the Court dismiss this case with prejudice for failure to state a 

claim upon which relief can be granted and deny any request by Plaintiff seeking a 

class action proceeding in this case. Docket No. 24. Plaintiff objected. Docket No. 26. 

Where a party timely objects to the Report and Recommendation, the Court 

reviews the objected-to findings and conclusions of the Magistrate Judge de novo. 28 

U.S.C. § 636(b)(1). In conducting a de novo review, the Court examines the entire 

record and makes an independent assessment under the law. Douglass v. United 

Servs. Auto. Ass’n, 79 F.3d 1415, 1430 (5th Cir. 1996) (en banc), superseded on other 

Case 6:24-cv-00031-JDK-JDL Document 32 Filed 06/03/24 Page 1 of 2 PageID #: 118
2 

grounds by statute, 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1) (extending the time to file objections from 

ten to fourteen days). However, conclusory or general objections need not be 

considered by the District Court. See Gonzales v. Collier, 2023 WL 5473699, at *1 & 

n.2 (S.D. Tex. Aug. 24, 2023) (citing Aldrich v. Bock, 327, F. Supp. 2d 743, 747 (E.D. 

Mich. 2004) (“An objection that does nothing more than state a disagreement with a 

magistrate [judge’s] suggested resolution, or simply summarizes what has been 

presented before, is not an ‘objection’ as that term is used in this context.”)). 

Here, Plaintiff’s objections fail to address the substance of the Magistrate 

Judge’s Report. Rather, he maintains that the “plaintiffs are not going to let the 

defendants get away with this.” Docket No. 26. Plaintiff identifies no error in the 

Report. Further, Plaintiff’s mere “Notice” of an intent to file a class action (Docket 

No. 27) is insufficient. 

Having conducted a de novo review of the record in this case and the 

Magistrate Judge’s Report, the Court has determined that the Report of the 

Magistrate Judge is correct, and Plaintiff’s objections are without merit. Accordingly, 

the Court hereby ADOPTS the Report of the Magistrate Judge (Docket No. 11) as 

the opinion of the District Court. Plaintiff’s claims are DISMISSED with prejudice 

for failure to state a claim upon which relief can be granted. Any request for class 

certification is DENIED. 

So ordered and signed on this 

Jun 3, 2024

Case 6:24-cv-00031-JDK-JDL Document 32 Filed 06/03/24 Page 2 of 2 PageID #: 119
Daniel TEITELBAUM, Petitioner, v. OHIO.

No. 19-7786.

Supreme Court of the United States.

March 30, 2020

Petition for writ of certiorari to the Court of Appeals of Ohio, Franklin County denied.
Altius WILLIX, Petitioner, v. UNITED STATES.

No. 19-8082.

Supreme Court of the United States.

April 20, 2020

Petition for writ of certiorari to the United States Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit denied.
```

[Congressional Bills 106th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[H.R. 2307 Enrolled Bill (ENR)]

        H.R.2307

                       One Hundred Sixth Congress

                                 of the

                        United States of America

                          AT THE SECOND SESSION

           Begun and held at the City of Washington on Monday,
             the twenty-fourth day of January, two thousand

                                 An Act

 
To designate the building of the United States Postal Service located at 
  5 Cedar Street in Hopkinton, Massachusetts, as the ``Thomas J. Brown 
                         Post Office Building''.

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

SECTION 1. DESIGNATION.

    The building of the United States Postal Service located at 5 Cedar 
Street in Hopkinton, Massachusetts, shall be known and designated as 
the ``Thomas J. Brown Post Office Building''.

SEC. 2. REFERENCES.

    Any reference in a law, map, regulation, document, paper, or other 
record of the United States to the building referred to in section 1 
shall be deemed to be a reference to the ``Thomas J. Brown Post Office 
Building''.

                               Speaker of the House of Representatives.

                            Vice President of the United States and    
                                               President of the Senate.
```
<PAGE>
 
Exhibit 24.1
------------
                           ACT Teleconferencing, Inc.

                               Power of Attorney
                          of Directors and/or Officers


          The undersigned directors and/or officers of ACT Teleconferencing,
Inc., a Colorado corporation, does hereby make, constitute and appoint Gerald D.
Van Eeckhout and Gavin Thomson, and either of them, the undersigned's true and
lawful attorneys-in-fact, with power of substitution, for the undersigned and in
the undersigned's names, place and stead, to sign and affix the undersigned's
names as such directors and/or officers of said Corporation to an Annual Report
on Form 10-K or other applicable form, and all amendments, thereto, to be filed
by said Corporation in March, 1998 with the Securities and Exchange Commission,
Washington, D.C., under the Securities Act of 1934, as amended, with all
exhibits thereto and other supporting documents, with said Commission, granting
unto said attorneys-in-fact, and either of them, full power and authority to do
and perform any and all acts necessary or incidental to the performance and
execution of the powers herein expressly granted.

          IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the undersigned has hereunto set the undersigned's
hand this 28th day of February 1998.



                              /s/ Ronald J. Bach
                              ------------------
                              Ronald J. Bach

                              /s/ James F. Seifert
                              --------------------
                              James F. Seifert

                              /s/ Donald Sturtevant
                              ---------------------
                              Donald Sturtevant

                              /s/ Carolyn R. Van Eeckhout
                              ---------------------------
                              Carolyn R. Van Eeckhout

                                    Page 42