alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
B.7. Selected Measures of Financial Performance of Agricultural and Other Small Banks

Percent

Distribution of net income as a Average rate Rate N

share of average equity at of return of return 

agricultural banks on equity to assets 

25 percent Agri- Other Agri- Other A

Negative 0-4 5-9 10-14 15-19 20-24 and cultural Small cultural small cu

Period All banks income percent percent percent percent percent over banks Banks banks banks ba1996...... 100.0 2.1 5.6 33.4 41.6 14.2 2.6 .5 11.4 12.3 1.2 1.2 1997...... 100.0 1.6 5.9 34.5 39.7 14.2 3.1 1.1 11.4 12.3 1.2 1.2 1998...... 100.0 2.0 8.7 35.6 35.5 13.4 3.5 1.3 11.3 11.7 1.2 1.2 1999...... 100.0 2.9 7.9 34.8 33.3 14.2 4.9 1.9 11.8 11.9 1.2 1.1 2000...... 100.0 2.4 8.9 35.3 33.5 13.8 4.2 1.8 11.7 11.4 1.2 1.1 2001...... 100.0 3.1 12.6 37.6 28.6 13.1 3.7 1.3 10.8 10.4 1.1 1.0 2002...... 100.0 3.0 10.7 35.1 31.4 13.5 4.6 1.7 11.5 10.6 1.2 1.1 2003...... 100.0 2.7 12.2 36.6 29.3 12.9 4.4 1.8 11.2 10.7 1.2 1.1 2004...... 100.0 2.1 10.0 34.9 31.4 13.8 5.8 2.0 11.5 10.5 1.2 1.1 2005...... 100.0 1.7 10.1 34.5 29.9 14.6 6.4 2.8 11.8 10.7 1.2 1.1 2006...... 100.0 2.7 10.9 35.7 30.1 13.1 4.6 2.8 11.4 10.1 1.2 1.1 2002: Q2... n.a. n.a. n.a. n.a. n.a. n.a. n.a. n.a. 6.0 5.6 .6 .6  Q3... n.a. n.a. n.a. n.a. n.a. n.a. n.a. n.a. 8.9 8.3 .9 .8  Q4... n.a. n.a. n.a. n.a. n.a. n.a. n.a. n.a. 11.5 10.6 1.2 1.1 2003: Q1... n.a. n.a. n.a. n.a. n.a. n.a. n.a. n.a. 3.0 2.9 .3 .3  Q2... n.a. n.a. n.a. n.a. n.a. n.a. n.a. n.a. 6.0 5.6 .6 .6  Q3... n.a. n.a. n.a. n.a. n.a. n.a. n.a. n.a. 8.9 8.5 .9 .8  Q4... n.a. n.a. n.a. n.a. n.a. n.a. n.a. n.a. 11.2 10.7 1.2 1.1 2004: Q1... n.a. n.a. n.a. n.a. n.a. n.a. n.a. n.a. 2.9 2.7 .3 .3  Q2... n.a. n.a. n.a. n.a. n.a. n.a. n.a. n.a. 6.1 5.5 .6 .5  Q3... n.a. n.a. n.a. n.a. n.a. n.a. n.a. n.a. 8.9 8.0 .9 .8  Q4... n.a. n.a. n.a. n.a. n.a. n.a. n.a. n.a. 11.5 10.5 1.2 1.1 2005: Q1... n.a. n.a. n.a. n.a. n.a. n.a. n.a. n.a. 3.0 2.9 .3 .3  Q2... n.a. n.a. n.a. n.a. n.a. n.a. n.a. n.a. 5.9 5.6 .6 .6  Q3... n.a. n.a. n.a. n.a. n.a. n.a. n.a. n.a. 9.0 8.3 .9 .8  Q4... n.a. n.a. n.a. n.a. n.a. n.a. n.a. n.a. 11.8 10.7 1.2 1.1 2006: Q1... n.a. n.a. n.a. n.a. n.a. n.a. n.a. n.a. 3.0 2.7 .3 .3  Q2... n.a. n.a. n.a. n.a. n.a. n.a. n.a. n.a. 6.1 5.7 .6 .6  Q3... n.a. n.a. n.a. n.a. n.a. n.a. n.a. n.a. 9.0 8.0 .9 .9  Q4... n.a. n.a. n.a. n.a. n.a. n.a. n.a. n.a. 11.4 10.1 1.2 1.1 2007: Q1... n.a. n.a. n.a. n.a. n.a. n.a. n.a. n.a. 2.8 2.3 .3 .3  Note. Agricultural and other banks are defined in the introduction to section B; small banks have less than $500 million in assets. Total primary anavailable at the end of the period specified) are measured as a percentage of total assets. Quarterly data are cumulative through the end of the quarte n.a. Not available.27
United States Court of Appeals

FOR THE EIGHTH CIRCUIT

___________

No. 97-3514

___________

Daniel L. Johnson, *

*

Appellant, *

*

v. *

* Appeal from the United States

Dora B. Schriro; Michael Groose; * District Court for the

Jodie Jackson; Mike Kemna; Steve * Western District of Missouri.

Moore; Jennifer Miller; Jean Ann *

Johnson; William Galloway; Charles * [UNPUBLISHED]

P. Karns, Lt.; Tony Kirkendoll; Lynden *

Francis; Cynthia Prudden; Kelly *

Morris; Troy Steele; William Wade; *

Larry Johnston; Sherie Korneman, *

*

Appellees. *

___________

 Submitted: April 21, 1998

 Filed: April 27, 1998

___________

Before FAGG, BEAM, and HANSEN, Circuit Judges.

___________

PER CURIAM.
The Honorable Howard F. Sachs, United States District Judge for the Western 1

District of Missouri.

-2-

Daniel L. Johnson appeals the district court&s order dismissing his civil rights

1

complaint without prejudice under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 41(b) for failing to

comply with the district court&s order directing him to summarize his claims and clarify

issues related to specific defendants. Having carefully reviewed the record and the

parties& briefs, we find no abuse of discretion. See Edgington v. Missouri Dep&t of

Corrections, 52 F.3d 777, 779-80 (8th Cir. 1995). Accordingly, we affirm the

judgment of the district court. See 8th Cir. R. 47B.

A true copy.

Attest:

CLERK, U.S. COURT OF APPEALS, EIGHTH CIRCUIT.
* Pursuant to Local 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 Local Rule

47.5.4.

IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT

 

No. 95-60246

Summary Calendar

 

GARRY LEE MOORE,

Plaintiff-Appellant,

versus

MONROE COUNTY, MISSISSIPPI, ET AL,

Defendants,

JIMMY KIRKPATRICK; FRANK “PAT”

PATTERSON; ARTEY MARTIN; PORTER 

ROBERTS; RAY TUCKER; C. E. HENLEY;

DELNA FRANCIS,

Defendants-Appellees.

- - - - - - - - - -

Appeal from the United States District Court

for the Northern District of Mississippi

USDC No. 1:90-CV-270

- - - - - - - - - -

July 18, 1996

Before SMITH, BENAVIDES, and DENNIS, Circuit Judges.

PER CURIAM:*

Garry Lee Moore, #65396, appeals from the district court’s

grant of judgment as a matter of law dismissing his claims of

inadequate medical care, denial of access to the courts,

inadequate protection against abuse by a fellow inmate, and 
No. 95-60246

- 2 -

punishment without a disciplinary hearing. We have reviewed the

record and find no reversible error. Portis v. First Nat’l Bank

of New Albany, Miss., 34 F.3d 325, 327 (5th Cir. 1994); Hare v.

City of Corinth, 74 F.3d 633, 639 (5th Cir. 1996) (en banc);

Walker v. Navarro County Jail, 4 F.3d 410, 413 (5th Cir. 1993). 

The judgment is AFFIRMED.
18

A.13. Characteristics of Bank Loans to Farmers -- Small and Mid-sized Farm Lenders, by Risk Rating, Percent except as notedLoan characteristic All Minimal Low Moderate Acceptable Special Not rated Volume of loans (thousands of dollars) 307,038 44,104 83,906 78,000 19,012 526 8,551 Number of loans 13,716 1,293 3,765 3,604 577 59 874 Weighted average maturity (months)1 18.88 10.30 16.35 12.45 11.14 6.96 12.62 

Weighted average repricing interval (months)2 8.03 6.45 9.76 8.23 5.91 5.37 4.08 

Weighted average risk rating3 2.33 1.00 2.00 3.00 4.00 5.00 n.a

Weighted average interest rate4 7.38 7.00 7.45 7.27 8.52 9.17 7.49 

 Standard error5 .18 .37 .29 .16 .51 .17 .13 

 Interquartile range6 75th percentile 7.90 7.75 7.97 7.79 9.24 9.14 8.06  25th percentile 6.86 6.72 7.00 6.98 7.75 9.06 7.00  Purpose of loan Feeder livestock 7.38 6.75 7.32 7.50 n.a. n.a. 6.53  Other livestock 7.47 6.94 n.a. 8.33 n.a. 9.14 7.10  Other current operating expenses7 7.40 7.18 7.46 7.10 8.84 9.19 7.57 

 Farm machinery and equipment 7.57 6.88 7.66 7.91 8.17 n.a. 7.25  Farm real estate 7.00 6.72 7.12 7.46 n.a. n.a. n.a Other8 7.52 n.a. 8.16 7.69 6.91 n.a. 8.96 

Share of total loan volume Features of loan Floating rates 46.15 51.32 42.12 32.90 63.26 48.68 45.61  Under commitment 61.13 66.75 55.86 69.58 90.32 100.00 42.57  Callable 20.68 12.46 10.19 23.12 13.97 n.a. 39.90  Purpose of loan Feeder livestock 7.84 5.56 12.89 9.45 n.a. n.a. 2.11  Other livestock 7.84 20.89 4.04 2.79 n.a. 31.57 23.57  Other current operating expenses7 64.66 49.62 66.77 71.60 81.26 68.43 62.16 

 Farm machinery and equipment 6.09 1.33 5.52 7.12 4.07 n.a. 6.67  Farm real estate 9.70 22.61 10.71 6.45 n.a. n.a. n.a Other8 3.87 n.a. .08 2.59 14.67 n.a. 5.49 

 Type of collateral Farm real estate 20.81 22.61 19.26 18.24 61.36 51.32 n.a Other 76.57 76.75 75.97 81.19 37.80 48.68 100.00  Note. Most small and mid-sized farm lenders that reported loans to farmers had less than $25 million in farm loans. For explanation of footnotes, see table A.8. n.a. Not available.
IN THE SUPREME COURT OF PENNSYLVANIA

EASTERN DISTRICT

WELLS FARGO BANK, N.A.

v.

ANN S. BORIS AND VAMSIDHAR R. 

VURIMINDI

PETITION OF: VAMSIDHAR R. 

VURIMINDI

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

No. 478 EAL 2019

Petition for Allowance of Appeal 

from the Order of the Superior Court

ORDER

PER CURIAM

AND NOW, this 3rd day of March, 2020, the Petition for Allowance of Appeal is 

DENIED.
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE DISTRICT OF NEW HAMPSHIRE

)

THE FREEDOM FROM RELIGION

FOUNDATION, et al.,

)

)

)

Plaintiffs, )

)

v. ) Civil Action No. 07-356 (SM)

)

THE CONGRESS OF THE UNITED

STATES OF AMERICA, et al.,

)

)

)

Defendants. )

)

NOTICE OF APPEARANCE

The Clerk of Court will please enter the appearance of Theodore C. Hirt as counsel for

Defendants the United States of America and the Congress of the United States of America in the

above-captioned action.

Dated: January 7, 2008 Respectfully submitted,

JEFFREY S. BUCHOLTZ

Acting Assistant Attorney General

THOMAS P. COLANTUONO

United States Attorney

CARL J. NICHOLS

Deputy Assistant Attorney General

 /s/ Theodore C. Hirt 

THEODORE C. HIRT, D.C. Bar No. 242982

Assistant Director

U.S. Department of Justice

Civil Division, Federal Programs Branch

20 Massachusetts Ave. NW

Case 1:07-cv-00356-SM Document 7 Filed 01/07/08 Page 1 of 3
Washington, DC 20530

Telephone: (202) 514-4785

Facsimile: (202) 616-8470

E-mail: theodore.hirt@usdoj.gov

Counsel for the United States of America and the

United States Congress

Case 1:07-cv-00356-SM Document 7 Filed 01/07/08 Page 2 of 3
CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE

 I hereby certify that on January 7, 2008, the foregoing document was filed with the Clerk

of Court via the CM/ECF system, causing it to be served on Michael A. Newdow and Rosanna T.

Fox, counsel for the Plaintiffs, and David Bradley, counsel for the School District Defendants.

I further certify that on January 7, 2008, a true and correct copy of the foregoing document

was sent via e-mail to Nancy Smith, counsel for proposed intervenor-defendant the State of New

Hampshire, at Nancy.Smith@doj.nh.gov.

/s/ Theodore C. Hirt 

THEODORE C. HIRT

Assistant Director, Federal Programs Branch

U.S. Department of Justice

Case 1:07-cv-00356-SM Document 7 Filed 01/07/08 Page 3 of 3
#### The People of the State of New York, Respondent, v Robert Jones, Appellant.

[806 NYS2d 416]

Judgment, Supreme Court, Bronx County (Caesar D. Cirigliano, J.), rendered July 13, 2004, convicting defendant, after a jury trial, of two counts of assault in the first degree, and sentencing him to concurrent terms of 15 years, unanimously modified, on the law, to the extent of vacating the DNA databank fee, and otherwise affirmed.

Defendant’s motion for a trial order of dismissal was insufficiently specific *(see People v Gray,*86 NY2d 10 [1995]) to preserve his present challenge to the sufficiency of the evidence with respect to the assault on one of the two victims, and we decline to review it in the interest of justice. Were we to review this claim, we would find that the verdict was based upon legally sufficient evidence. We also conclude that the verdict was not against the weight of the evidence. The evidence established defendant’s liability as a principal, which is all the People were required to prove *(see People v Fullard,*233 AD2d 757 [1996], *lv denied*89 NY2d 1092 [1997]).

*432As the People concede, since the crime was committed prior to the effective date of the legislation (Penal Law § 60.35 [1] [a] [v] [former (1) (e)]), providing for the imposition of a DNA databank fee, that fee should not have been imposed.

Defendant’s remaining contentions are unpreserved and we decline to review them in the interest of justice. Were we to review these claims, we would reject them. Concur—Saxe, J.P., Friedman, Williams, Catterson and Malone, JJ.
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 

DISTRICT OF NEW HAMPSHIRE

Gerald Boulanger

v. Case No. 07-cv-301-PB

United States of America

ORDER

Re: Document No. 25, Motion for Certificate of 

Appealability 

Ruling: The request for a certificate of appealability raises

no new issues. I carefully considered defendant’s arguments and

explained my conclusions at the conclusion of the hearing.

Reasonable jurists would not disagree with my rulings. The

defendant has not made a substantial showing of the denial of a

constitutional right. The court reporter shall prepare a

transcript of my oral ruling and the transcript shall be added to

the docket. Motion denied. 

/s/ Paul Barbadoro

Paul Barbadoro

United States District Judge

Date: October 1, 2008

cc: Philip H. Utter, Esq.

Aixa Maldonald-Quinones, Esq.

Case 1:07-cv-00301-PB Document 31 Filed 10/01/08 Page 1 of 1
#### NPR, LLC, Respondent, v K.A.B.B., Inc., Appellant.

[811 NYS2d 706]

*675In an action, inter alia, to recover unpaid rent, the defendant appeals from a judgment of the Supreme Court, Orange County (Peter C. Patsalos, J.), entered September 9, 2004, which, upon an order of the same court dated June 18, 2004, granting the plaintiff’s motion for summary judgment, is in favor of the plaintiff and against it in the principal sums of $126,095.10 for unpaid rent, $1,241.24 for damage to property, and $32,175 for an attorney’s fee.

Ordered that the judgment is affirmed, with costs.

In June 2001 the plaintiff landlord completed efforts to remedy an environmental hazard (toxic mold) that existed in premises leased to the defendant tenant. By letter dated October 16, 2001, the defendant tenant complained that the efforts had been insufficient to eliminate the environmental hazard. Consequently, the defendant asserted that it would terminate its lease as soon as it secured new space. The plaintiff commenced this action, inter alia, to recover unpaid rent after the defendant vacated the premises prior to the expiration of the lease. The defendant appeals from a judgment entered in favor of the plaintiff upon the grant of summary judgment. We affirm.

The plaintiff demonstrated its prima facie entitlement to judgment as a matter of law by offering evidence that the toxic mold condition had been timely abated and that the demised premises did not pose an environmental hazard. In opposition, the defendant failed to raise a triable issue of fact that it was constructively evicted from the premises or otherwise permissibly terminated the lease (see *Zuckerman v City of New*York, 49 NY2d 557 [1980]).

The defendant’s remaining contentions are without merit. Cozier, J.P., Ritter, Rivera and Fisher, JJ., concur.
|  | (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/ Andrew              Cimerman |
|   | Andrew                Cimerman                                        |
|   | President                and Chief                  Executive Officer |

----
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

DISTRICT OF NEW HAMPSHIRE

Karen S. Bartlett

v. Civil No. 08-cv-00358-JL

Mutual Pharmaceutical

Company, Inc.

ORDER

The Motion for Judicial Notice Under Rule 201 of the Federal

Rules of Evidence (document no. 199) is granted without

objection. The court takes judicial notice of Sulindac’s package

insert as an “adjudicative fact,” see Fed. R. Evid. 201, and of

the various statutory and regulatory materials as “legislative

facts,” which “have relevance to legal reasoning and the

lawmaking process, whether in the formulation of a legal

principle or ruling by a judge or court or in the enactment of a

legislative body.” See Fed. R. Evid. 201(a), advisory

committee’s note (1972). The court expresses no opinion on

whether the statutory and regulatory materials may be admitted as

substantive evidence for the jury to consider. See Getty Petro.

Mktg. v. Capital Terminal Co., 391 F.3d 312, 322 (1st Cir. 2004)

(Lipez, J., concurring) (explaining that legislative facts, such

as statutes, are generally “presented to the court as law, not to

the jury as evidence”) (citing John W. Strong, McCormick on

Evidence § 335 (5th ed. 1999)).

Case 1:08-cv-00358-JL Document 247 Filed 07/16/10 Page 1 of 2
SO ORDERED.

 

Joseph N. Laplante

United States District Judge

Dated: July 16, 2010

cc: Keith M. Jensen, Esq.

Bryan Ballew, Esq.

Patrick J. O’Neal, Esq.

Christine M. Craig, Esq.

Eric Roberson, Esq.

Timothy P. Beaupre, Esq.

Jeffrey D. Geoppinger, Esq.

Joseph P. Thomas, Esq.

Linda E. Maichl, Esq.

Paul J. Cosgrove, Esq.

Stephen J. Judge, Esq.

Case 1:08-cv-00358-JL Document 247 Filed 07/16/10 Page 2 of 2
#### UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. Keith Wayne BURKS, Defendant-Appellant.

No. 02-30200.

D.C. No. CR-02-00004-EFS.

United States Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit.

*683Submitted Jan. 13, 2003.*

Decided Jan. 21, 2003.

Before BEEZER, KLEINFELD and PAEZ, Circuit Judges.

*

 The panel unanimously finds this case suitable for decision without oral argument. *See*Fed. R.App. P. 34(a)(2).

MEMORANDUM**

Keith Wayne Burks appeals the district court’s denial of his motion to suppress evidence seized at the time of his arrest. We have jurisdiction pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1291. We review de novo the district court’s denial of a motion to suppress and for clear error its factual findings. *United States v. Summers,*268 F.3d 683, 686 (9th Cir.2001). We affirm.

Contrary to Burks’ contention, the district court’s factual findings were not clearly erroneous because they were consistent with the testimony of Officer Johnson. *United States v. Jordan,*291 F.3d 1091, 1100 (9th Cir.2002).

The district court properly concluded that the officers did not seize Burks in violation of the Fourth Amendment because a reasonable person in Burks’ position would have believed he was free to leave. *See Florida v. Bostick,*501 U.S. 429, 434, 111 S.Ct 2382, 115 L.Ed.2d 389 (1991) (holding a seizure does not occur where a police officer approaches an individual and asks a few questions without any indicia of force or aggression); *Summers,*268 F.3d at 686-87 (holding that no investigatory stop occurred when police partially blocked the suspect’s car and asked several times for, identification because the suspect could have left on foot).

We deny all pending motions.

AFFIRMED.

**

 This disposition is not appropriate for publication and may not be cited to or by the courts of this circuit except as may be provided by Ninth Circuit Rule 36-3.
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE

DISTRICT OF NEW HAMPSHIRE

USA

v. Case No. 08-mc-77-JD

Alan J. Camuso

O R D E R

I herewith approve the Report and Recommendation of Magistrate Judge James R. 

Muirhead dated December 2, 2008, no objection having been filed. 

The taxpayer, Alan J. Camuso, is ordered to obey the summonses and is ordered to appear

on January 22, 2009 at 9:30 a.m. at 80 Daniel Street, Portsmouth, New Hampshire, before J. L.

Shing, to give testimony and produce all books and records in his possession or control required

and called for by the terms of the summonses of April 9, 2008. 

It is further ordered that the government be awarded its costs. 

SO ORDERED.

December 22, 2008 /s/ Joseph A. DiClerico, Jr.

Joseph A. DiClerico, Jr.

United States District Judge

cc: Seth R. Aframe, Esq.

Alan J. Camuso, pro se

Case 1:08-mc-00077-JD Document 5 Filed 12/22/08 Page 1 of 1
Exhibit
32.1





CERTIFICATION
OF PRINCIPAL EXECUTIVE OFFICER


AND
PRINCIPAL FINANCIAL OFFICER


PURSUANT
TO 18 U.S.C. SECTION 1350




In
connection with the accompanying Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q of MoneyLogix
Group, Inc. for the three month period ending June 30, 2010, I Binnay Sethi,
Chief Financial Officer of MoneyLogix Group, Inc. hereby certify pursuant to 18
U.S.C. Section 1350, as adopted pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley
Act of 2002, to the best of my knowledge and belief, that:




1.
  Such Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q for the three months ending 
June 30, 2010, 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 such Quarterly  Report on
Form 10-Q for the three months ended June 30, 2010, fairly represents in all
material respects, the financial condition and results of operations of
MoneyLogix Group, Inc.




Dated:
August 23, 2010





MONEYLOGIX
      GROUP, INC.By:
                  /s/ Binnay
      SethiBinnay
      SethiPresident,
      Chief Executive Officer and Chief
                    Financial
      Officer
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 M Power Entertainment, Inc. and
Subsidiaries(FKA GK Intelligent Systems, Inc.)(the "Company") on Form 10-QSB
for the period ending March 31, 2005, as filed with the Securities and
Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the "Report"), I, Gary F. Kimmons,
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, to the best of my knowledge and belief:

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

     (2) the information contained in the Report fairly presents, in all
         material respects, the financial condition and results of the
         operation of the Company.

/s/ Gary F. Kimmons
____________________________________
Gary F. Kimmons
Chief Executive Officer
June 21, 2005