alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
<PAGE>


      SUBJECT TO THE TERMS, CONDITIONS AND RESTRICTIONS PRINTED ON THE BACK
                  OF THIS CERTIFICATE AND MADE A PART HEREOF.




               ORGANIZED UNDER THE LAWS OF THE STATE OF WISCONSIN


CERTIFICATE NUMBER _____                                       ___________ UNITS



                            BADGER STATE ETHANOL, LLC
                                  CLASS A UNITS

     THIS CERTIFIES THAT __________________________________________________ IS
THE OWNER AND REGISTERED HOLDER OF _____________________________________ CLASS A
UNITS OF BADGER STATE ETHANOL, LLC, TRANSFERABLE ONLY ON THE BOOKS OF THE
COMPANY BY THE HOLDER HEREOF IN PERSON OR BY DULY AUTHORIZED ATTORNEY UPON
SURRENDER OF THIS CERTIFICATE PROPERLY ENDORSED.

     IN WITNESS WHEREOF, THE COMPANY HAS CAUSED THIS CERTIFICATE TO BE EXECUTED
BY ITS DULY AUTHORIZED OFFICERS THIS _______ DAY OF _____________________, 2001.



----------------------------                         ---------------------------
SECRETARY                                            PRESIDENT

<PAGE>

The transferability of the Company Units represented by this certificate is
restricted. Such Units may not be sold, assigned, or transferred, nor will
any assignee, vendee, transferee, or endorsee thereof be recognized as having
acquired any such Units for any purposes, unless and to the extent such sale,
transfer, hypothecation, or assignment is permitted by, and is completed in
strict accordance with, applicable state and federal law and the terms and
conditions set forth in the Amended and Restated Operating Agreement and
agreed to by each Member.

The securities represented by this certificate may not be sold, offered for
sale, or transferred in the absence of either an effective registration under
the securities act of 1933, as amended, and under applicable state securities
laws, or an opinion of counsel satisfactory to the company that such
transaction is exempt from registration under the securities act of 1933, as
amended, and under applicable state securities laws.












     FOR VALUE RECEIVED, ______________ HEREBY SELL, ASSIGN AND TRANSFER UNTO
______________________________________________________________________________
______________________________________ UNITS REPRESENTED BY THE WITHIN
CERTIFICATE, AND DO HEREBY IRREVOCABLY CONSTITUTE AND APPOINT
____________________________, ATTORNEY, TO TRANSFER THE SAID UNITS ON THE
BOOKS OF THE WITHIN NAMED COMPANY, WITH FULL POWER OF SUBSTITUTION IN THE
PREMISES.

DATED
     ------------------------       ------------------------------------------
                                    Notice:  The signature to this assignment
IN THE PRESENCE OF                  must correspond with the name as written
                                    upon the face of this Certificate in every
                                    particular, without alteration or
-----------------------------       enlargement or any change whatever.
(logo) Transworld
                      M 0 R T G A G E  C 0 R P 0 R A T I 0 N



           Management's Assertion on Compliance With Minimum Servicing
                           Standards Set Forth in the
             UNIFORM SINGLE ATTESTATION PROGRAM FOR MORTGAGE BANKERS



                              Report of Management

We,  as  members  of  management  of  Transworld   Mortgage   Corporation   (the
"Corporation"),  are  responsible  for  complying  with  the  minimum  servicing
standards as set forth in the Mortgage Bankers  Association of America's UNIFORM
SINGLE  ATTESTATION   PROGRAM  FOR  MORTGAGE  BANKERS  ("USAP").   We  are  also
responsible for  establishing  and maintaining  effective  internal control over
compliance  with  these  standards.  We  have  performed  an  evaluation  of the
Corporation's  compliance with the minimum  servicing  standards as set forth in
the USAP as of December 31, 1996,  and for the period then ended.  Based on this
evaluation,  we assert  that  during  the year  ended  December  31,  1996,  the
Corporation complied with the minimum servicing standards set forth in the USAP.

As of and for this same period,  the  Corporation  had in effect a fidelity bond
and errors and omissions policy in the amount of $3.6 million.


                              /s/ Linda J. Shelton
                             Linda J. Shelton, Vice President of Quality Control



       13111 NORTHWEST FREEWAY HOUSTON, TEXAS 77040-6311  (713) 895-6600
                     P.O. BOX 1529 HOUSTON, TEXAS 77210-1529
<PAGE>
                                                                    EXHIBIT 12.1



                                 CERTIFICATIONS

I, Miin Wu, certify that:

1.   I have reviewed this annual report on Form 20-F of Macronix International
     Co., Ltd.;

2.   Based on my knowledge, this report does not contain any untrue statement of
     a material fact or omit to state a material fact necessary to make the
     statements made, in light of the circumstances under which such statements
     were made, not misleading with respect to the period covered by this
     report;

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

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

     a)   Designed such disclosure controls and procedures, or caused such
          disclosure controls and procedures to be designed under our
          supervision, to ensure that material information relating to the
          company, including its consolidated subsidiaries, is made known to us
          by others within those entities, particularly during the period in
          which this report is being prepared;

     b)   Evaluated the effectiveness of the company's disclosure controls and
          procedures and presented in this report our conclusions about the
          effectiveness of the disclosure controls and procedures, as of the end
          of the period covered by this report based on such evaluation; and

     c)   Disclosed in this report any change in the company's internal control
          over financial reporting that occurred during the period covered by
          the annual report that has materially affected, or is reasonably
          likely to materially affect, the company's internal control over
          financial reporting; and

5.   The company's other certifying officer(s) and I have disclosed, based on
     our most recent evaluation of internal control over financial reporting, to
     the company's auditors and the audit committee of company's board of
     directors (or persons performing the equivalent function):

     a)   All significant deficiencies and material weaknesses in the design or
          operation of internal control over financial reporting which are
          reasonably likely to adversely affect the company's ability to record,
          process, summarize and report financial information; and

     b)   Any fraud, whether or not material, that involves management or other
          employees who have a significant role in the company's internal
          control over financial reporting.



Date: June 28, 2004


By: /s/ Miin Wu
    ----------------------
Name:  Miin Wu
Title: President
Exhibit 23.1




CONSENT OF INDEPENDENT REGISTERED PUBLIC ACCOUNTING FIRM




We hereby consent to the incorporation by reference in the Registration Statements on Form S-3 (Nos. 333-129756, 333-138796 and 333-162746) of SIGA Technologies, Inc. of our report dated March 9, 2010, except as it relates to Note 3 as to which the date is October 19, 2010, relating to the financial statements and the effectiveness of internal control over financial reporting, which appears in this Form 10-K/A.










/s/ PRICEWATERHOUSECOOPERS LLP


New York, New York October 19, 2010




---
<PAGE>

                                                                    Exhibit 15.3

                                                                      [CCR LOGO]
                                                                MARKET KNOWLEDGE

                                                      Buenos Aires, January 2006

Sr.
Francis Cresall
Quilmes Industrial S.A.
12 de octubre y Gran Canarias - Quilmes

Att.

Ref: 20-F Annual Presentation to New York Stock

We hereby, CCR-IRI as Information Providers, authorize the company Quilmes
Industrial S.A. (Quinsa) to make use of our reports concerning the Beer Market
in Paraguay for period 1996 to 2005 on the Annual Memory and Form 20-F of such
Company.

Additionally, we authorize the company to make use of our name on Form 20-F and
to attach this authorization as an annex to such form, as we also authorize its
incorporation to any form the Company should present.

Sincerely,

/s/ Josefina Giordano
---------------------
Josefina Giordano
Commercial Directo
EXHIBIT 32.1

CERTIFICATION  PURSUANT TO 18 U.S.C.  SECTION 1350, AS ADOPTED BY SECTION 906 OF
THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002

I,  Kathleen  Bright,  as Chief  Executive  Officer of Radix  Marine,  Inc. (the
"Company")  certify,  pursuant to 18 U.S.C.  Section 1350, as adopted by Section
906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that to my knowledge:

(1) the  accompanying  Form 10-KSB report for the period ending June 30, 2004 as
filed with the U.S.  Securities and Exchange  Commission  (the  "Report")  fully
complies  with the  requirements  of  Section  13(a) or 15(d) of the  Securities
Exchange Act of 1934, as amended; 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: October 15, 2004             /s/ Kathleen Bright
                                    --------------------------------------------
                                    Kathleen Bright, CEO
<PAGE>

Exhibit 10.3

Vice President of Sales Bonus Arrangement

Fastenal Company's Vice President of Sales is paid a bonus under an individual
oral bonus arrangement.  Under this arrangement, the bonus paid to the Vice
President of Sales for any year is calculated based on the amount by which the
Company's consolidated pre-tax income for such year exceeds the Company's
consolidated pre-tax income for the prior year.
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 periodic report of Rancon Realty Fund IV (the Partnership) on Form 10-Q for the period
ended March 31, 2006 as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission (the Report), I, Daniel L. Stephenson, General Partner of the Partnership, hereby certify as of the date hereof, solely for purposes of Title 18, Chapter 63,
Section 1350 of the United States Code, that I perform the functions of chief executive officer and chief financial officer of the Partnership, and that to the best of my knowledge:

(1)    the Report fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) or 15(d), as applicable, 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 Partnership at the dates and for the periods indicated.

A signed original of this written
statement required by Section 906, or other document authenticating, acknowledging, or otherwise adopting the signature that appears in typed form with the electronic version of this written statement required by Section 906, has been
provided to the Partnership and will be retained by the Partnership and furnished to the Securities and Exchange Commission or its staff upon request.

This Certification has not been, and shall not be deemed, filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission



|                   |  |                                   
|------------------ |  | ----------------------------------
|                   | 
|Date: May 15, 2006 |  | /s/ Daniel Stephenson             
|                   |  | Daniel Stephenson, General Partner
|                   |  | Rancon Realty Fund IV
v150341_10-719 -- Converted by SECPublisher 2.1.1.8, created by BCL Technologies Inc., for SEC Filing


     

    Exhibit
10.71.9
11 TH COURT OF APPEALS

EASTLAND

, TEXAS

JUDGMENT

Donald Ray Stone

, * From the 35 th District Court

o f B rown County,

Trial Court No

. CR25659

.

Vs. No. 11

- 21

- 00 035

- CR * September 29 , 2023

The State of Texas

, * Memorandum Opinion by Williams , J

. (P anel consists of: Bailey , C.J.,

Trotter, J., and Williams, J. )

This court has inspected the record in this cause and concludes that there is no

error in the judgment below. Therefore, in accordance with this court ’ s opi nion,

the judgment of the trial court is in all things affirmed.
EXHIBIT 32.1
 
  (1)
    
    The Annual Report of Global Med Technologies, Inc. (the Company) on Form 10-K for the
fiscal year ended December 31, 2009 as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on
the date hereof (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: March 16, 2010
    /s/ Michael I. Ruxin, M.D.Michael I. Ruxin, M.D.Chief Executive Officer
IN THE SUPREME COURT OF PENNSYLVANIA 

WESTERN DISTRICT 

DONALD MESSINA, 

 Petitioner 

 v. 

COMMONWEALTH OF PENNSYLVANIA, 

CLARION COUNTY, 

 Respondents 

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

No. 80 WM 2014 

ORDER 

PER CURIAM 

AND NOW, this 11th day of December, 2014, the Application for Leave to File 

Original Process is GRANTED, and the Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus and the Writ 

of Truth are DENIED.
BLD-089 NOT PRECEDENTIAL

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE THIRD CIRCUIT

___________

No. 11-1026

___________

IN RE: OSSIE R. TRADER,

Petitioner

____________________________________

On a Petition for Writ of Mandamus from the

United States District Court for the Eastern District of Pennsylvania

(Related to D.C. Crim. No. 94-cr-00534-002)

____________________________________

Submitted Pursuant to Rule 21, Fed. R. App. P.

January 13, 2011

Before: SLOVITER, JORDAN and GREENAWAY, JR., Circuit Judges

(Opinion filed: January 20, 2011)

_________

OPINION

_________

PER CURIAM

Ossie Trader has filed a petition for a writ of mandamus. He seeks an order 

directing the District Court to remove the docket entry terminating his motion to dismiss 

the indictment based on the Speedy Trial Act. We have repeatedly explained to Trader 

that he waived his speedy trial claim by pleading guilty. See In re: Trader, C.A. No. 09-

1522. If Trader continues to file frivolous pleadings or appeals, he will face sanctions. 

See In re Oliver, 682 F.2d 443 (3d Cir. 1982).
2

For the above reasons, we will deny the petition for mandamus.
II

106TH CONGRESS

2D SESSION S. 2186

To suspend temporarily the duty on Solvent Violet 13.

IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES

MARCH 7, 2000

Mr. EDWARDS (for himself and Mr. HELMS) introduced the following bill;

which was read twice and referred to the Committee on Finance

A BILL

To suspend temporarily the duty on Solvent Violet 13.

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

3 SECTION 1. TEMPORARY SUSPENSION OF DUTY ON SOL4 VENT VIOLET 13.

5 (a) IN GENERAL.—Subchapter II of chapter 99 of

6 the Harmonized Tariff Schedule of the United States is

7 amended by inserting in numerical sequence the following

8 new heading:

‘‘ 9902.32.00 Solvent Violet 13

(CAS No. 81–

48–1) (provided

for in subheading

3204.19.25) ....... Free No change No change On or before

12/31/2002 ’’.
2

•S 2186 IS

1 (b) EFFECTIVE DATE.—The amendment made by

2 subsection (a) applies to goods entered, or withdrawn from

3 warehouse for consumption, on or after the 15th day after

4 the date of the enactment of this Act.

Æ
Motion Denied; Petition for Writ of Mandamus Denied and Memorandum Opinion 

filed October 26, 2012.

In The

Fourteenth Court of Appeals

NO. 14-12-00948-CV

IN RE CHERYL LYNN HOERMANN, Relator

ORIGINAL PROCEEDING

WRIT OF MANDAMUS

On Appeal from the County Court at Law

Washington County, Texas

Trial Court Cause No. CCL-4371

MEMORANDUM OPINION

On October 15, 2012, relator Cheryl Lynn Hoermann, filed a petition for writ of 

mandamus in this Court. See Tex. Gov’t Code Ann. §22.221 (Vernon 2004); see also 

Tex. R. App. P. 52. In the petition, relator asks this Court to compel the Honorable Judge

Matthew Reue, presiding judge of the County Court at Law of Washington County, to

vacate his order signed September 4, 2012, denying her motion to dismiss the third-party 

intervention filed by Boyd Howsley. Relator also filed a motion to stay proceedings in 

the trial court during pendency of this proceeding.
2

Relator has not established that she is entitled to relief. Accordingly, we deny 

relator’s petition for writ of mandamus and motion for stay. 

PER CURIAM

Panel consists of Justices Frost, Christopher, Jamison.
<TABLE> <S> <C>


<ARTICLE>                     5
       
<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   3-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>               DEC-31-1995
<PERIOD-START>                  JUL-01-1995
<PERIOD-END>                    SEP-30-1995
<CASH>                                    3
<SECURITIES>                              0
<RECEIVABLES>                         5,129
<ALLOWANCES>                              0
<INVENTORY>                          26,553
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                     32,355
<PP&E>                               33,086
<DEPRECIATION>                      (11,891)
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                       70,733
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                16,229
<BONDS>                                   0
<COMMON>                             24,515
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                     0
<PREFERRED>                               0
<OTHER-SE>                                0
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>         70,733
<SALES>                                   0
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                      5,380
<CGS>                                 3,445
<TOTAL-COSTS>                         4,683
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                          0
<LOSS-PROVISION>                          0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                      743
<INCOME-PRETAX>                         (42)
<INCOME-TAX>                            (13)
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                       0
<DISCONTINUED>                            0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                           0
<CHANGES>                                 0
<NET-INCOME>                            (29)
<EPS-PRIMARY>                           .00
<EPS-DILUTED>                          (.01)
        


</TABLE>
<PAGE>

                                                                    Exhibit 99.1

                            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 XETA Technologies, Inc. (the
"Company") on Form 10-Q for the fiscal quarter ended April 30, 2003, as filed
with the Securities and Exchange Commission (the "Report"), I, Jack R. Ingram,
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/  Jack R. Ingram
                                          ---------------------------------
                                          Jack R. Ingram
                                          Chief Executive Officer
                                          June 11, 2003
UNPUBLISHED

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

No. 06-7154

THOMAS FRANKLIN BOWLING,

Petitioner - Appellant,

versus

S.K. YOUNG, Warden,

Respondent - Appellee.

Appeal from the United States District Court for the Western

District of Virginia, at Roanoke. Jackson L. Kiser, Senior

District Judge. (7:02-cv-01091-jlk)

Submitted: November 15, 2006 Decided: November 21, 2006

Before WIDENER, WILKINSON, and MOTZ, Circuit Judges.

Dismissed by unpublished per curiam opinion.

Thomas Franklin Bowling, Appellant Pro Se.

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.

See Local Rule 36(c).
- 2 -

PER CURIAM:

Thomas Franklin Bowling seeks to appeal the district

court’s order denying his Fed. R. Civ. P. 60(b) motion for

reconsideration of the district court’s order denying relief on his

28 U.S.C. § 2254 (2000) petition. The order is not appealable

unless a circuit justice or judge issues a certificate of

appealability. 28 U.S.C. § 2253(c)(1) (2000); Reid v. Angelone,

369 F.3d 363, 369 (4th Cir. 2004). A certificate of appealability

will not issue absent “a substantial showing of the denial of a

constitutional right.” 28 U.S.C. § 2253(c)(2) (2000). A prisoner

satisfies this standard by demonstrating that reasonable jurists

would find that any assessment of the constitutional claims by the

district court is debatable or wrong and that any dispositive

procedural ruling by the district court is likewise debatable.

Miller-El v. Cockrell, 537 U.S. 322, 336-38 (2003); Slack v.

McDaniel, 529 U.S. 473, 484 (2000); Rose v. Lee, 252 F.3d 676,

683-84 (4th Cir. 2001). We have independently reviewed the record

and conclude that Bowling has not made the requisite showing.

Accordingly, we deny a certificate of appealability and dismiss the

appeal. 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.

DISMISSED