alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
B.1. Farm Debt Outstanding at Commercial Banks

Loan volume Percent change from Percent change from

(billions of dollars) previous quarter previous year

Real Non-real- Real Non-real- Real Non-realTotal estate estate Total estate estate Total estate estate

Quarter loans loans loans loans loans loans loans loans loans

1996: Q1... 61.7 24.0 37.7 -3.1 .5 -5.3 3.1 4.8 2.0

 Q2... 65.7 24.7 41.0 6.5 2.7 8.9 3.4 4.7 2.7

 Q3... 66.6 24.9 41.6 1.3 1.1 1.5 1.9 4.7 .3

 Q4... 65.5 25.0 40.5 -1.6 .3 -2.8 2.8 4.6 1.8

1997: Q1... 63.8 25.4 38.4 -2.6 1.4 -5.1 3.4 5.5 2.0

 Q2... 69.0 26.2 42.8 8.2 3.3 11.5 5.1 6.2 4.4

 Q3... 71.1 27.0 44.2 3.0 2.9 3.1 6.8 8.1 6.0

 Q4... 71.3 27.1 44.2 .3 .7 .0 8.9 8.5 9.1

1998: Q1... 70.1 27.6 42.4 -1.7 1.8 -3.9 9.8 9.0 10.4

 Q2... 75.0 28.5 46.5 7.1 3.2 9.6 8.6 8.8 8.5

 Q3... 76.3 28.9 47.4 1.7 1.3 1.9 7.2 7.2 7.3

 Q4... 74.7 29.3 45.5 -2.0 1.3 -4.0 4.8 7.8 3.0

1999: Q1... 72.7 29.7 42.9 -2.8 1.7 -5.6 3.7 7.6 1.1

 Q2... 75.8 30.8 45.1 4.4 3.5 5.0 1.1 8.0 -3.1

 Q3... 76.8 31.4 45.5 1.3 1.9 .9 .7 8.6 -4.1

 Q4... 76.0 31.8 44.2 -1.0 1.5 -2.8 1.7 8.8 -2.8

2000: Q1... 71.5 31.4 40.1 -5.9 -1.4 -9.2 -1.6 5.5 -6.5

 Q2... 79.7 33.7 45.9 11.4 7.5 14.4 5.0 9.6 1.9

 Q3... 80.1 33.9 46.2 .6 .5 .6 4.3 8.1 1.6

 Q4... 80.9 34.0 46.9 1.0 .3 1.5 6.4 6.8 6.1

2001: Q1... 79.4 34.3 45.1 -1.9 .8 -3.9 11.0 9.2 12.4

 Q2... 82.9 35.1 47.7 4.4 2.5 5.8 4.0 4.2 3.9

 Q3... 82.5 35.4 47.1 -.4 .8 -1.3 3.0 4.5 2.0

 Q4... 82.2 35.6 46.7 -.3 .4 -.9 1.6 4.6 -.5

2002: Q1... 80.1 36.0 44.1 -2.6 1.2 -5.5 .9 4.9 -2.2

 Q2... 83.7 37.0 46.7 4.4 2.7 5.9 1.0 5.1 -2.1

 Q3... 84.4 37.7 46.7 .9 2.1 -.1 2.3 6.5 -.9

 Q4... 83.9 38.0 45.9 -.6 .6 -1.6 2.0 6.8 -1.7

2003: Q1... 82.0 38.7 43.3 -2.3 1.9 -5.7 2.4 7.5 -1.9

 Q2... 84.5 39.6 44.9 3.1 2.5 3.7 1.1 7.3 -3.9

 Q3... 85.5 40.2 45.4 1.2 1.4 1.0 1.4 6.5 -2.8

 Q4... 86.1 40.6 45.5 .6 1.1 .2 2.7 7.0 -.9

2004: Q1... 84.3 41.4 42.9 -2.1 1.9 -5.7 2.8 7.0 -.9

 Q2... 88.9 42.9 46.0 5.4 3.6 7.2 5.2 8.3 2.4

 Q3... 91.5 43.9 47.6 2.9 2.3 3.5 6.9 9.2 4.9

 Q4... 92.3 44.5 47.7 .8 1.5 .2 7.1 9.6 4.9

2005: Q1... 89.3 45.0 44.3 -3.2 1.1 -7.2 5.9 8.7 3.3

 Q2... 93.5 46.2 47.3 4.7 2.7 6.6 5.1 7.7 2.7

 Q3... 96.7 47.1 49.5 3.4 2.0 4.8 5.7 7.4 4.0

 Q4... 97.5 47.6 49.9 .9 1.0 .8 5.7 6.9 4.6

2006: Q1... 96.2 48.4 47.7 -1.4 1.8 -4.4 7.7 7.6 7.7

 Q2... 101.0 49.8 51.2 5.1 2.9 7.2 8.1 7.8 8.3

 Q3... 104.2 51.1 53.0 3.1 2.5 3.6 7.8 8.4 7.1

 Q4... 105.4 52.2 53.2 1.2 2.1 .3 8.1 9.7 6.5

2007: Q1... 105.0 53.4 51.6 -.4 2.3 -3.0 9.2 10.2 8.1

 Q2... 109.3 54.8 54.5 4.1 2.7 5.6 8.2 9.9 6.5

 Q3... 110.8 56.0 54.9 1.4 2.2 .6 6.4 9.5 3.4

 Q4... 112.3 56.8 55.5 1.3 1.5 1.2 6.6 8.9 4.3

2008: Q1... 110.4 57.9 52.5 -1.7 1.9 -5.3 5.2 8.5 1.8

 Q2... 117.4 60.4 57.0 6.3 4.4 8.5 7.4 10.3 4.5

 Note. Data are as of end of quarter.

21
19

A.14. Survey of Terms of Bank Lending to Farmers, Selected Quarters 

Percent except as noted 

 USDA Farm Production Region 

 NE LS CB NP AP SE DL SP MN PA 

Proportion of farm loans 

 outstanding, 2003 Q1 survey, 

 region share of national 

 total 2.5 9.5 27.9 17.7 8.9 5.0 5.2 8.6 5.7 8.9 

Sample coverage, 2003 Q1 

 survey, sample share of total 

 regional loans 16.3 6.4 20.0 11.3 21.0 20.0 6.7 9.6 14.1 60.0 

Avg. loan size, 2003 Q1 survey 

(thousands of dollars) 29.1 26.8 52.5 38.6 45.3 62.9 67.1 50.1 14.4 82.2 

 

Survey date Weighted average interest rate during sample week 

 1995: Q4 10.8 10.3 8.3 9.6 7.9 10.1 10.3 9.8 9.3 8.9 

 1996: Q1 8.8 9.9 8.0 9.4 7.3 9.4 10.9 9.9 8.9 8.1 

 Q2 10.3 10.2 7.3 9.0 8.1 9.6 10.4 9.8 8.7 8.3 

 Q3 8.3 9.9 8.9 9.4 7.6 9.4 10.0 9.4 8.9 8.1 

 Q4 10.1 9.9 9.3 9.0 7.5 9.3 9.9 9.1 9.0 8.6 

 1997: Q1 8.8 9.5 9.5 9.3 8.0 9.9 9.5 9.5 10.1 8.7 

 Q2 9.4 10.1 9.2 9.5 8.3 9.9 10.2 9.7 10.0 8.7 

 Q3 9.3 9.8 9.6 9.9 8.5 10.1 9.9 9.7 10.5 8.7 

 Q4 9.2 9.5 9.3 9.8 7.5 9.8 9.4 9.4 10.1 8.8 

 1998: Q1 9.3 9.0 9.4 9.8 7.3 10.0 10.3 9.8 9.6 8.5 

 Q2 9.2 9.4 9.2 9.7 7.6 10.2 10.3 9.6 9.8 8.4 

 Q3 10.2 9.5 9.5 9.5 8.8 9.5 9.7 9.5 9.6 8.5 

 Q4 9.4 9.2 8.7 9.0 8.3 9.4 9.7 9.2 9.1 8.0 

 1999: Q1 8.4 8.9 8.9 9.1 8.2 9.0 9.6 9.1 9.0 7.5 

 Q2 9.6 9.1 8.8 9.0 8.0 9.0 9.8 9.0 8.7 8.0 

 Q3 10.2 8.9 8.7 9.3 8.2 8.9 10.0 8.8 9.0 8.5 

 Q4 9.1 9.2 8.8 9.4 8.3 8.8 9.8 9.0 9.5 8.8 

 2000: Q1 9.4 9.2 9.2 9.6 8.4 9.8 9.3 10.0 9.8 8.4 

 Q2 10.7 9.5 9.7 9.7 9.1 9.1 10.5 10.0 10.1 9.5 

 Q3 10.5 10.30 10.0 10.3 9.7 9.2 10.5 10.0 10.6 9.7 

 Q4 10.7 9.3 9.9 10.1 9.2 9.4 9.2 10.3 10.3 9.8 

 2001: Q1 9.3 9.1 9.4 9.7 8.4 7.8 9.5 9.0 9.8 8.8 

 Q2 8.2 8.7 8.3 8.8 7.4 8.1 8.3 9.2 8.6 7.9 

 Q3 8.3 9.8 7.9 8.2 6.3 7.6 8.7 8.8 7.8 7.2 

 Q4 6.9 7.9 6.3 7.0 5.2 6.3 8.7 7.6 6.1 5.2 

 (.23) (.78) (.38) (.29) (.36) (1.71) (.42) (.79) (.33) (.35) 

 2002: Q1 6.9 7.8 6.7 7.2 5.2 5.5 7.3 7.4 6.8 4.9 

 (.12) (.37) (.26) (.22) (.63) (1.14) (.39) (.45) (.26) (.25) 

 Q2 6.8 7.4 6.4 7.2 5.0 5.9 7.6 7.5 6.5 5.1 

 (.14) (.29) (.27) (.21) (.48) (1.03) (.23) (.34) (.36) (.26) 

 Q3 6.4 7.5 5.8 6.5 4.6 6.0 7.5 7.3 6.5 5.3 

 (.43) (.29) (.50) (.68) (.67) (1.19) (.34) (.68) (.41) (1.06) 

 Q4 5.7 6.9 5.1 5.5 4.6 5.2 6.7 7.6 6.4 4.5 

 (.35) (.45) (.47) (1.01) (.56) (.62) (.68) (.35) (.47) (.62) 

 2003: Q1 5.4 7.0 5.6 5.9 4.5 5.7 6.8 7.2 6.1 4.5 

 (.14) (.25) (.31) (.78) (.62) (.61) (.54) (.65) (.34) (.40) 

 

 Notes. NE is Northeast, LS is Lake States, CB is Cornbelt, NP is Northern Plains, AP is Appalachia, SE is Southeast, DL is Delta States, 

SP is Southern Plains, MN is Mountain States, and PA is Pacific. The numbers in parentheses are standard errors. They are calculated from 

100 replications of a bootstrap procedure (resampling of banks) in each region.
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

DISTRICT OF NEW HAMPSHIRE

Michael Ledger

v. Case No. 06-cv-411-SM

Ryan LeVierge, et al.

NOTICE OF RULING

Re: (Document No. 34) Motion to Strike Plaintiff’s

Expert Witnesses

Ruling: Denied. As discussed at the pretrial conference,

this motion was thought by the court to have been denied before

ruling on the motion for summary judgment. It is denied, for the

reasons given in plaintiff's objection, particularly because

defendants were aware of the disclosure in adequate time, no

prejudice resulted, and defendants have had a full opportunity

to, and, indeed, have taken depositions from each expert. In

addition, the trial has been continued for unrelated reasons,

giving defendants more than adequate time to prepare. 

Steven J. McAuliffe

Chief Judge

January 13, 2009

cc: Michael J. Sheehan, Esq.

Elizabeth L. Hurley, Esq.

John A. Curran, Esq.

Case 1:06-cv-00411-SM Document 47 Filed 01/13/09 Page 1 of 1
A.14. Survey of Terms of Bank Lending to Farmers, Selected Quarters

Percent except as noted

USDA Farm Production Region

NE LS CB NP AP SE DL SP MN PA

Proportion of farm loans

outstanding, 2006 Q1 survey,

region share of national

total 2.8 8.8 26.8 22.8 7.9 5.0 4.6 8.9 5.1 7.3

Sample coverage, 2006 Q1

survey, sample share of total

regional loans 11.1 5.3 18.3 33.0 22.4 11.8 7.6 5.5 9.1 28.1

Avg. loan size, 2006 Q1 survey

(thousands of dollars) 29.3 35.4 71.5 47.2 73.7 110.8 38.5 32.5 33.8 58.5

Survey date Weighted average interest rate during sample week

2001: Q1 9.3 9.1 9.4 9.7 8.4 7.8 9.5 9.0 9.8 8.8

Q2 8.2 8.7 8.3 8.8 7.4 8.1 8.3 9.2 8.6 7.9

Q3 8.3 9.8 7.9 8.2 6.3 7.6 8.7 8.8 7.8 7.2

Q4 6.9 7.9 6.3 7.0 5.2 6.3 8.7 7.6 6.1 5.2

2002: Q1 6.9 7.8 6.7 7.2 5.2 5.5 7.3 7.4 6.8 4.9

Q2 6.8 7.4 6.4 7.2 5.0 5.9 7.6 7.5 6.5 5.1

Q3 6.4 7.5 5.8 6.5 4.6 6.0 7.5 7.3 6.5 5.3

Q4 5.7 6.9 5.1 5.5 4.6 5.2 6.7 7.6 6.4 4.5

2003: Q1 5.3 7.0 5.6 5.7 4.4 5.6 6.7 7.4 6.1 4.5

Q2 6.0 6.7 5.3 6.5 4.6 6.1 7.3 5.7 6.4 5.2

Q3 6.0 6.9 4.7 5.6 4.5 4.8 6.7 5.5 5.6 4.3

Q4 6.5 6.5 4.0 5.1 4.6 5.2 6.7 7.5 5.4 4.2

2004: Q1 5.8 7.0 5.2 5.7 4.3 5.9 6.4 6.3 5.7 3.8

Q2 4.8 6.3 5.2 6.2 4.6 6.4 6.9 6.2 6.4 4.1

(0.19) (0.05) (0.66) (0.32) (0.45) (0.31) (0.57) (0.19) (0.40) (0.24)

Q3 6.2 6.6 4.8 5.5 4.8 5.2 6.1 6.7 6.7 4.9

(0.79) (0.14) (0.58) (1.15) (0.38) (0.75) (0.41) (0.45) (0.29) (0.08)

Q4 6.2 6.4 5.2 5.4 5.1 6.0 7.5 6.4 7.0 5.2

(0.48) (0.07) (0.45) (0.88) (1.01) (0.81) (0.30) (0.22) (0.30) (0.10)

2005: Q1 6.2 7.4 6.4 6.3 5.3 6.0 7.2 7.5 7.1 6.0

(0.19) (0.16) (0.14) (0.71) (0.60) (0.67) (0.34) (0.59) (0.17) (0.15)

Q2 6.7 7.4 5.8 6.6 6.0 6.4 7.5 7.3 7.7 6.7

(0.19) (0.21) (0.77) (0.75) (0.28) (0.65) (0.33) (0.19) (0.05) (0.18)

Q3 7.1 7.7 6.9 6.3 6.1 7.2 7.6 7.2 8.2 6.8

(0.18) (0.23) (0.28) (0.70) (0.20) (0.57) (0.43) (0.30) (0.09) (0.07)

Q4 6.8 7.7 6.8 7.3 6.6 7.4 8.0 8.1 8.2 7.5

(0.80) (0.19) (0.35) (0.45) (0.23) (0.58) (0.49) (0.10) (0.07) (0.16)

2006: Q1 7.9 8.0 7.4 7.8 7.3 7.8 8.0 8.7 8.5 7.8

(0.29) (0.15) (0.21) (0.37) (0.13) (0.37) (0.29) (0.12) (0.26) (0.25)

Notes. NE is Northeast, LS is Lake States, CB is Cornbelt, NP is Northern Plains, AP is Appalachia, SE is Southeast, DL is

Delta States, SP is Southern Plains, MN is Mountain States, and PA is Pacific. The numbers in parentheses are standard errors.

They are calculated from 100 replications of a bootstrap procedure (resampling of banks) in each region.

19
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE

DISTRICT OF NEW HAMPSHIRE

Steven J. Huard

v. 08-fp-120

Essex County Correctional Center

O R D E R

Plaintiff’s request to proceed in forma pauperis is granted,

but pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1915, as amended, the filing fee must

be paid as follows: the sum of $20.00 is due no later than June

30, 2008. In addition, 20% of each preceding month’s income

credited to plaintiff’s account to be remitted by the Essex

County Correctional Facility when the amount in the account

exceeds $10.00 until the sum of $350.00 has been paid. Failure

to pay the fee as ordered will result in dismissal of the action

without prejudice. In all other respects plaintiff’s request for

in forma pauperis has been granted. 

SO ORDERED.

____________________________________

James R. Muirhead

United States Magistrate Judge

Date: May 20, 2008

cc: Steven J. Huard, pro se

 Bonnie S. Reed, Financial Administrator

 New Hampshire Department of Corrections, Inmate Accounts

Case 1:08-cv-00120-WES Document 9 Filed 05/20/08 Page 1 of 1
**Exhibit 32.1**

 

ISONICS CORPORATION

 

Certification pursuant to 18 U.S.C. §1350

Principal Executive Officer

 

                Tomy knowledge: the quarterly report on Form 10-Q for the period ended January 31,2008, containing financial statements for the period then ended, fully complieswith the requirements of Section 13(a) of the Securities Act of 1934;and the information contained in the Form 10-Q fairly presents, in allmaterial respects, the financial condition and results of operations of IsonicsCorporation for the periods presented.

 

March 13,2008

 
| /s/ Christopher Toffales                                                         |   |
|----------------------------------------------------------------------------------|--------|
| Christopher Toffales, Principal Executive  Officer and   Chief Executive Officer |

 

----
[Federal Register Volume 73, Number 187 (Thursday, September 25, 2008)]
[Notices]
[Page 55584]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: E8-22520]


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

SMALL BUSINESS ADMINISTRATION

[Disaster Declaration <greek-i>11434]


Maine Disaster <greek-i>ME-00014

AGENCY: U.S. Small Business Administration.

ACTION: Notice.

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

SUMMARY: This is a Notice of the Presidential declaration of a major 
disaster for Public Assistance Only for the State of Maine ( FEMA-1788-
DR), dated 09/09/2008.
    Incident: Severe Storms, Flooding, and Tornadoes.
    Incident Period: 07/18/2008 through 08/16/2008.

DATES: Effective Date: 09/09/2008.
    Physical Loan Application Deadline Date: 11/10/2008.
    Economic Injury (EIDL) Loan Application Deadline Date: 06/10/2009.

ADDRESSES: Submit completed loan applications to: U.S. Small Business 
Administration, Processing and Disbursement Center, 14925 Kingsport 
Road, Fort Worth, TX 76155.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: A. Escobar, Office of Disaster 
Assistance, U.S. Small Business Administration, 409 3rd Street, SW., 
Suite 6050, Washington, DC 20416.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Notice is hereby given that as a result of 
the President's major disaster declaration on 09/09/2008, Private Non-
Profit organizations that provide essential services of governmental 
nature may file disaster loan applications at the address listed above 
or other locally announced locations.
    The following areas have been determined to be adversely affected 
by the disaster:

Primary Counties: Androscoggin, Cumberland, York.
Contiguous Counties (Economic Injury Loans Only):
    Maine: Franklin, Kennebec, Oxford, Sagadahoc.
    New Hampshire: Carroll, Strafford.

    The Interest Rates are:

------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                                 Percent
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Other (Including Non-Profit Organizations) with Credit             5.250
 Available Elsewhere..........................................
Businesses and Non-Profit Organizations without Credit             4.000
 Available Elsewhere..........................................
------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The number assigned to this disaster for physical damage and for 
economic injury is 11434.

(Catalog of Federal Domestic Assistance Numbers 59002 and 59008)

James E. Rivera,
Acting Associate Administrator for Disaster Assistance.
[FR Doc. E8-22520 Filed 9-24-08; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 8025-01-P
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 

DISTRICT OF NEW HAMPSHIRE

John R. Griffin, Jr.

v. Case No. 08-cv-07-01-PB

Town of Whitefield, et al.

O R D E R

The court declines to exercise supplemental jurisdiction

over the remaining state law claims against Caroline Lack. These

claims are dismissed without prejudice to plaintiff’s right to

pursue his claims in state court. Defendant Caroline Lack’s

motion to dismiss (Doc. No. 28), and the Defendants’ motions for

entry of judgment (Doc. Nos. 26 and 27) are denied as moot. The

clerk shall enter judgment in favor of the Town defendants and

close the case.

SO ORDERED.

/s/Paul Barbadoro

Paul Barbadoro

United States District Judge

October 14, 2008

cc: John R. Griffin, Jr., pro se

R. Matthew Cairns, Esq.

Russell F. Hilliard, Esq.

Robert K. Mekeel, Esq.

Case 1:08-cv-00007-PB Document 35 Filed 10/14/08 Page 1 of 1
#### Stephanie Vento, Plaintiff, v City of New York et al., Defendants. (And Third-Party Actions.) Fitzgerald & Fitzgerald, P.C., Nonparty Appellant; Shayne, Dachs, Stanisci, Corker & Sauer, Nonparty Respondent.

[807 NYS2d 54]

Order, Supreme Court, New York County (Eileen Bransten, J.), entered July 20, 2004, which, in a fee dispute between nonparty appellant discharged law firm and nonparty respondent substituted law firm, denied appellant’s motion to reject the report of the Special Referee recommending that appellant be paid no fee, unanimously affirmed, without costs.

The Special Referee adhered to the scope of the reference, which, reflecting appellant’s own requests for a hearing unam*330biguously waiving the contingency fee provision in its retainer agreement *(cf. Lai Ling Cheng v Modansky Leasing*Co., 73 NY2d 454, 458 [1989]), ordered a report on the “reasonable value, if any” of appellant’s services. Notably, the order of reference was not appealed *(see 587 Dev., Inc. v Pizzuto,*8 AD3d 5 [2004]; *see also New York State Crime Victims Bd. v Abbott,*212 AD2d 22, 28-29 [1995]). No basis exists to disturb the Special Referee’s finding that appellant’s witness lacked the requisite personal knowledge to provide either probative testimony regarding the specific work that appellant had performed in this personal injury action or the foundation necessary to admit hearsay documents under the business record exception, and that appellant had completely failed to adduce any evidence of time spent on particular services in support of its request for a quantum meruit recovery. We have considered appellant’s other contentions and find them unavailing. Concur—Tom, J.P., Andrias, Gonzalez and Sweeny, JJ. *[See 4*Misc 3d 1019(A), 2004 NY Slip Op 50968(U) (2004).]
EXHIBIT
32.2





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 National Holdings Corporation (the
“Company”) on Form 10-Q for the fiscal quarter ended June 30, 2009 as filed with
the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the “Report”), I,
Alan B. Levin, Chief Financial Officer of the Company, certify, pursuant to 18
U.S.C. § 1350, as adopted pursuant to § 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002,
that, to my knowledge:




(1)
            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.














/s/ Alan B.
Levin


Alan B. Levin


Chief Financial Officer


August 14, 2009
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE

DISTRICT OF NEW HAMPSHIRE

Robert V. Towle

v.

NH Department of Human Services,

Director, et al.

No. 07-fp-065

O R D E R

Plaintiff’s request to proceed in forma pauperis is granted,

but pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1915, as amended, the filing fee must

be paid as follows: the sum of $22.00 is due no later than April

11, 2007. In addition, 20% of each preceding month’s income

credited to plaintiff’s account to be remitted by the New

Hampshire State Prison when the amount in the account exceeds

$10.00 until the sum of $350.00 has been paid. Failure to pay

the fee as ordered will result in dismissal of the action without

prejudice. In all other respects plaintiff’s request for in

forma pauperis has been granted.

This case has been assigned civil number 07-cv-065-SM.

SO ORDERED.

Date: March 9, 2007

United States Magistrate Judge

ame"RMuirhead

cc: Robert V. Towle, pro se

Bonnie S. Reed, Financial Administrator

New Hampshire State Prison, Inmate Accounts

Case 1:07-cv-00065-SM Document 4 Filed 03/09/2007 Page 1 of 1

Towle v. NH Department of Human Services, Division for Children, Youth and Families, Director et al Doc. 4

Dockets.Justia.com
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE

DISTRICT OF NEW HAMPSHIRE

Daniel J. Riley

 Petitioner

v. Civil No. 08-cv-73-JD

Strafford County Department

 of Corrections, Superintendent

 Respondent

United States of America

 Intervenor

O R D E R

On February 27, 2008, the intervenor, United States of America, filed a Notice of

Removal removing a habeas corpus petition filed by petitioner, Daniel J. Riley, dated November

19, 2007, from the New Hampshire Supreme Court to this court. It has been assigned the civil

case number shown above. 

The United States of America shall electronically file a certified copy of the State Court

Record by March 17, 2008. Pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 2243, no further action is required by the

respondent or intervenor until directed by order of a judicial officer of this court.

SO ORDERED.

Date March 3, 2008 /s/ James R. Muirhead:

James R. Muirhead

United States Magistrate Judge

cc: Daniel J. Riley, pro se

Ann M. Rice, Esq.

Thomas Velardi, Esq.

Aixa Maldonado-Quinones, Esq.

Case 1:08-cv-00073-GZS Document 2 Filed 03/03/08 Page 1 of 1
GK INTELLIGENT SYSTEMS, INC.
                             A Delaware corporation

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


     In connection with the Quarterly Report of GK Intelligent Systems, Inc.
(the "Company") on Form 10-QSB for the quarter ended June 30, 1999 as filed with
the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the "Report"), I,
Gary F. Kimmons, President, Chief Executive Officer, and Chief Financial
Officer, certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. ss.ss. 1350, as adopted pursuant to
ss.ss. 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.



Dated: March 25, 2003                   /S/ Gary F. Kimmons
                                        --------------------------------------
                                        By: Gary F. Kimmons
                                        Its: President, Chief Executive Officer
                                             and Chief Financial Officer
<PAGE>   1
                                   EXHIBIT 23

                   CONSENT OF INDEPENDENT PUBLIC ACCOUNTANTS

As independent public accountants, we hereby consent to the incorporation of our
report included in this Form 10-K into the following Registration Statements of
Lafarge Corporation previously filed with the Securities and Exchange
Commission: (i) Registration Statement on Form S-8, File No. 2-92414, (ii)
Registration Statement on Form S-8, Form 33-9813, (iii) Registration Statement
on Form S-8, File No. 33-32645, (iv) Registration Statement on Form S-3, File
No. 33-32644 (which also constitutes Post-Effective Amendment No. 6 to
Registration Statement on Form S-1, File No. 2-82548), (v) Registration
Statement on Form S-8, File No. 33-20865, (vi) Registration Statement on Form
S-3, File No. 33-46093 (which also constitutes Post-Effective Amendment No. 7 of
Registration Statement on Form S-1, File No. 2-82548), (vii) Registration
Statement on Form S-8, File No. 33-51873, (viii) Registration Statement on Form
S-8, File No. 333-65897, (ix) Registration Statement on Form S-8, File No.
333-65899, and (x) Registration Statement on Form S-3, File No. 333-57333.



                                                           ARTHUR ANDERSEN LLP


Vienna, Virginia
March 27, 2001
#### Roy DAVENPORT and Edith Davenport, his wife; R. M. Gladden and Evah Gladden, his wife, and Robert F. Goodwin, Appellants, v. Fred W. BALL, Nick Nuccio, Earl W. Simmons, Ellsworth Simmons and Roy Haynes, as and constituting the Board of County Commissioners of Hillsborough County; Charlie Lankford and Elizabeth Lankford, his wife; A. S. Hurst and City of Tampa, Appellees.

Supreme Court of Florida. Special Division A.

Sept. 3, 1954.

PER CURIAM.

Affirmed.