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


<ARTICLE>                     5
<LEGEND>
</LEGEND>
<CIK>                         319671
<NAME>                        GLOBAL GOLD CORPORATION
<MULTIPLIER>                  1
<CURRENCY>                    U.S. DOLLARS

<S>                                                  <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                                        9-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                                    JAN-01-1999
<PERIOD-END>                                         SEP-30-1999
<EXCHANGE-RATE>                                      1
<CASH>                                               1,142
<SECURITIES>                                         240,000
<RECEIVABLES>                                        11,735
<ALLOWANCES>                                         0
<INVENTORY>                                          0
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                                     252,877
<PP&E>                                               0
<DEPRECIATION>                                       0
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                       252,877
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                                189,123
<BONDS>                                              0
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                             4,348
<OTHER-SE>                                           59,406
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                         252,877
<SALES>                                              0
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                                     0
<CGS>                                                0
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                        76,536
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                     0
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                     0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                                   0
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                      (76,536)
<INCOME-TAX>                                         510
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                                  (77,046)
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                         (77,046)
<EPS-BASIC>                                          (0.018)
<EPS-DILUTED>                                        (0.018)


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

                                  EXHIBIT 32.2

            In  connection   with  the  Quarterly   Report  of  Mountains   West
Exploration,  Inc.  (the  "Company") on Form 10-Q for the period ending June 30,
2006 as filed with the  Securities  and Exchange  Commission  on the date hereof
(the "Report").

            I, Douglas Stukel,  Treasurer and principal financial officer of the
Company,  certify,  pursuant  to 18 USC  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 operations of the
Company.




                                             /s/ Douglas Stukel
                                             -----------------------------------
                                             Douglas Stukel, Treasurer
                                             (principal financial officer)


Dated:  August 21, 2006
LaSalle
      Bank N.A.135
      South LaSalle StreetSuite
      1625Chicago,
      IL 60603Global
      Securities and Trust Services





Annual
Statement of Compliance
 
 VIA:
EMAIL
 
 Bear
Stearns Asset Backed Securities I LLC
 383
Madison Avenue
 New York,
New York 10179
 regabnotifications@bear.com
 
 EMC
Mortgage Corporation
 2780 Lake
Vista Drive
 Irving,
Texas 75067
 
 Re:           Bear
Stearns Asset Backed Securities Trust 2007-AQ2
 
 
 Reference
is made to the Pooling and Servicing Agreement dated as of February 1, 2007 (the
“Agreement”), among Bear Stearns Asset Backed Securities I LLC, as Depositor,
EMC Mortgage Corporation, as Seller and Master Servicer, and LaSalle Bank
National Association, as Trustee.
 
 I,
Barbara L. Marik, a Senior Vice President of LaSalle Bank National Association,
as Trustee hereby certify that:
 
 (1)
A review of the activities of the Trustee during the preceding calendar year and
of the performance of the Trustee under the Agreement has been made under my
supervision; and
 
 (2)
To the best of my knowledge, based on such review, the Trustee has fulfilled all
its obligations under the Agreement in all material respects throughout such
year or a portion thereof.
 
 
 Date:
February 27, 2008
 
 LaSalle
Bank National Association, as Trustee
 
 
 /s/
Barbara L. Marik
 Barbara
L. Marik
 Senior
Vice President
#### In the Matter of Barker Central School District et al., Respondents, v Niagara County Industrial Development Agency et al., Appellants, et al., Respondents. In the Matter of Town of Somerset et al., Respondents, v Niagara County Industrial Development Agency et al., Appellants. (And Another Proceeding).

Submitted August 17, 2009;

decided September 17, 2009

Reported below, 62 AD3d 1239.

Motion by Independent Power Producers of New York, Inc. for leave to file a brief amicus curiae on the motion for leave to appeal herein granted and the brief is accepted as filed, and for leave to file a brief amicus curiae on the appeal herein granted, three copies of the brief to be served and an original and 24 copies filed within 30 days.

Judge Read taking no part.
Exhibit






Exhibit 10.1


FOURTH AMENDMENT TO
TALMER BANCORP, INC. EQUITY INCENTIVE PLAN


March 25, 2015




THIS FOURTH AMENDMENT to the Talmer Bancorp, Inc. Equity Incentive Plan (the “Amendment”) is effective as of March 25, 2015.  All capitalized terms used, but not defined, in this Amendment have the same meanings as in the Talmer Bancorp, Inc. Equity Incentive Plan, as amended (the “Plan”).


Recitals


The Plan has been approved and adopted by the board of directors and shareholders of Talmer Bancorp, Inc. (the “Company”). 


Pursuant to Section 11.01 of the Plan, the board of directors of the Company has adopted this Amendment to the Plan as of March 25, 2015. 


Amendments


The Plan is hereby amended as follows:


1.    Section 8.06 of the Plan is hereby deleted and replaced with the following:


8.06    Rights as a Shareholder.  Any dividends or distributions made with respect to any Restricted Share Rights shall, in the sole discretion of the Administrator, be either paid out to the Participants or held by the Company and not distributed to the Participants until such time, and to the extent that, the Restricted Share Rights vest in accordance with the terms hereof.    


2.    After the date of this Amendment, all references in the Plan to the “Plan” shall mean the Plan, as amended by this Amendment.  The Plan is hereby amended accordingly.


3.    The Plan and this Amendment, together, set forth the entire agreement and understanding of the parties to them, and supersede all prior agreements, arrangements and communications, whether oral or written, with respect to their subject matter.  Except as modified by this Amendment, the Plan remains unchanged and, as modified, continues in full force and effect.  In the event of any conflict between the terms of the Plan and the terms of this Amendment, the terms of this Amendment shall control.
1

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

26

27

28

IN THE SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF MONTANA

) Cause No. DA-21-0461

)

STATE OF MONTANA, )

) ORDER 

Plaintiff and Appellee ) 

 and ) 

)

MELISSA ANN TRAINER, ) 

) 

 Respondent and Appellant )

Upon review of Respondent’s Motion for Extension for Filing Opening Brief, and 

good cause therefrom:

It is Hereby ORDERED the Respondent’s Motion for Extension to file Opening 

Brief has been granted. Appellant shall have until February 9, 2022, within which to file the 

opening brief.

cc: Jami Rebsom

 Rebecca Swandal

Electronically signed by:

Mike McGrath

Chief Justice, Montana Supreme Court

December 22 2021

12/22/2021

Case Number: DA 21-0461
##### 



Exhibit 32.1

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

In connection with the Quarterly Report of American Building Control, Inc.
(the Company) on Form 10-Q for the period ended June 30, 2003 as filed with
the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof, I, Bryan C.W. Tate,
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:



|(a) |  | This Form 10-Q fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) or
15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934; and                              
|--- |  | -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
|   
|(b) |  | The information contained in the Form 10-Q fairly presents, in all
material respects, the financial condition and results of operations of
the Company.

/s/ Bryan C.W. Tate

Bryan C.W. Tate
Chief Executive Officer
August 8, 2003
UNPUBLISHED

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

No. 07-6123

In Re: MICHAEL A. HARRIS,

Petitioner.

On Petition for Writ of Mandamus.

(No. 5:05-cv-00092-FPS)

Submitted: April 19, 2007 Decided: April 25, 2007

Before NIEMEYER, KING, and GREGORY, Circuit Judges.

Petition denied by unpublished per curiam opinion.

Michael A. Harris, Petitioner Pro Se.

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.
- 2 -

PER CURIAM:

Michael A. Harris petitions for a writ of mandamus,

alleging the district court has unduly delayed acting on his 28

U.S.C. § 2241 (2000) petition. He seeks an order from this court

directing the district court to act. Our review of the docket

sheet reveals that the magistrate judge filed on March 9, 2007, a

recommendation that the § 2241 petition be denied. Accordingly,

because significant action has recently occurred in this case, we

deny the mandamus petition. We grant Harris’ motion to proceed in

forma pauperis. 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.

PETITION DENIED
667 A.2d 669

#### IN THE MATTER OF DENISE D. ASHLEY, AN ATTORNEY AT LAW.

November 16, 1995.

ORDER

The Disciplinary Review Board having filed a report with the Court on May 24, 1995, recommending that DENISE D. ASHLEY of CAMDEN, who was admitted to the bar of this State in 1984 and who is currently on disability inactive status, be disbarred for the knowing misappropriation of client funds, in violation of *RPC*1.15;

And respondent having been ordered to show cause why she should not be disbarred or otherwise disciplined;

And good cause appearing;

It is ORDERED that the report and recommendation of the Disciplinary Review Board are adopted and DENISE D. ASHLEY is disbarred, effective immediately, and that her name be stricken from the roll of attorneys of this State; and it is further

ORDERED that all funds, if any, currently existing in any New Jersey financial institution maintained by DENISE D. ASHLEY, pursuant to *Rule*1:21-6 be restrained from disbursement except on application to this Court, for good cause shown, and shall be transferred by the financial institution to the Clerk of the Superior Court, who is directed to deposit the funds in the Superior Court Trust Fund, pending further Order of this Court; and it is further

*589ORDERED that DENISE D. ASHLEY comply with *Rule*1:20-20 dealing with disbarred attorneys; and it is further

ORDERED that DENISE D. ASHLEY reimburse the Disciplinary Oversight Committee for appropriate administrative costs.
II 

109TH CONGRESS 

2D SESSION S. 3587 

To reduce temporarily the duty on certain footwear with coated or laminated 

textile fabrics. 

IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES 

JUNE 28, 2006 

Mr. CARPER introduced the following bill; which was read twice and referred 

to the Committee on Finance 

A BILL 

To reduce temporarily the duty on certain footwear with 

coated or laminated textile fabrics. 

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

3 SECTION 1. CERTAIN FOOTWEAR WITH COATED OR LAMI4 NATED TEXTILE FABRICS. 

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: 


ycherry on PROD1PC64 with BILLS
2 

•S 3587 IS 

‘‘ 9902.64.03 Footwear, other than men’s 

or women’s, except vulcanized footwear and footwear 

with waterproof molded bottoms, including bottoms 

comprising an outer sole and 

all or part of the upper, valued over $20/pair, not covering the ankle, designed to 

be worn in lieu of, but not 

over, other footwear as a 

protection against water, oil, 

grease or chemicals or cold 

or inclement weather where 

such protection includes protection against water that is 

imparted by the use of a 

coated or laminated textile 

fabric (provided in subheading 6404.19.20) ............ 20% No change No change On or before 

12/31/2009 ’’. 

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 


ycherry on PROD1PC64 with BILLS
##### 



EXHIBIT 99.1

CERTIFICATION PURSUANT TO 18 U.S.C. SECTION 1350

In connection with the accompanying Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q of Bull Run
Corporation (the Company) for the quarterly period ended February 28, 2003
(the Quarterly Report), I,
Robert S. Prather, Jr., President and Chief Executive Officer of the Company,
hereby certify pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, as adopted pursuant to
Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that the Quarterly Report fully
complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) or 15(d) of the Securities
Exchange Act of 1934 and that the information contained in the Quarterly Report
fairly presents, in all material respects, the financial condition and results
of operations of the Company.

|                     |  |                                                                                       
|-------------------- |  | --------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
|Date: April 11, 2003 |  | /s/ ROBERT S. PRATHER, JR.Robert S. Prather, Jr.
President and Chief Executive Officer

CERTIFICATION PURSUANT TO 18 U.S.C. SECTION 1350

In connection with the accompanying Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q of Bull Run
Corporation (the Company) for the quarterly period ended February 28, 2003
(the Quarterly Report), I,
Frederick J. Erickson, Vice President  Finance and Chief Financial Officer of
the Company, hereby certify pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, as adopted
pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that the Quarterly
Report fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) or 15(d) of the
Securities Exchange Act of 1934 and that the information contained in the
Quarterly Report fairly presents, in all material respects, the financial
condition and results of operations of the Company.

|                     |  |                                                                                                    
|-------------------- |  | ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
|Date: April 11, 2003 |  | /s/ FREDERICK J. ERICKSONFrederick J. Erickson
Vice President - Finance and Chief Financial Officer

28
A04A1305.

#### THE STATE v. BIBBINS.

(630 SE2d 134)

Bernes, Judge.

In *Bibbins v. State,*280 Ga. 283 (627 SE2d 29) (2006), the Supreme Court of Georgia reversed the judgment of this Court in *State v. Bibbins,*271 Ga. App. 90 (609 SE2d 362) (2004). Therefore, we vacate our earlier opinion and adopt the opinion of the Supreme Court as our own. Furthermore, pursuant to the Supreme Court’s *837instruction, we vacate the trial court’s order entered in this case and remand for entry of a valid ruling on Bibbins’ motion to suppress.

Decided April 13, 2006.

*William T. McBroom, District Attorney, Thomas J. Ison, Jr., Assistant District Attorney,*for appellant.

*Virgil L. Brown & Associates, Virgil L. Brown, Eric D. Hearn, Ronald J. Ellington,*for appellee.

*Judgment vacated and case remanded with direction.*

*Ruffin, C. J., Andrews, R J., Johnson, P. J., Miller, Ellington and Adams, JJ., concur.*
EX-33.9
(logo) WELLS FARGO

Wells Fargo Bank, NA
Document Custody
1015 - 10th Avenue SE
Minneapolis, MN 55014


ASSESSMENT OF COMPLIANCE WITH APPLICABLE SERVICING CRITERIA

Corporate Trust Services division of Wells Fargo Bank, National Association
(the "Company") is responsible for assessing compliance with the servicing
criteria set forth in Item 1122(d) of Regulation AB promulgated by the
Securities and Exchange Commission. The Company has determined that the
servicing criteria are applicable in regards to the servicing platform as of and
for the period as follows:

Platform: Publicly-issued (i.e., transaction-level reporting required under
the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended) residential mortgage-backed
securities and commercial mortgage-backed securities issued on or after January
1, 2006 for which the Company provides document custody services, excluding any
publicly issued transactions issued by any government sponsored entity (the
"Platform").

Applicable Servicing Criteria: The servicing criteria set forth in Item
1l22(d)(1)(iv), 1122(d)(4)(i) and 1122(d)(4)(ii), in regard to the activities
performed by the Company with respect to the Platform (the "Applicable Servicing
Criteria"). Management of the Company has determined that all other servicing
criteria set forth in Item 1122(d) are not applicable to the Platform.

Period: As of and for the twelve months ended December 31, 2007 (the
"Period").

With respect to the Platform and the Period, the Company provides the
following assessment of compliance with respect to the Applicable Servicing
Criteria:

l. The Company is responsible for assessing its compliance with the
Applicable Servicing Criteria.

2. The Company has assessed compliance with the Applicable Servicing
Criteria. In performing this assessment, the Company used the criteria set forth
by the Securities and Exchange Commission in paragraph (d) of Item 1122 of
Regulation AB.

3. Based on such assessment, as of and for the Period, the Company has
complied, in all material respects with the Applicable Servicing Criteria.

KPMG LLP, a registered public accounting firm, has issued an attestation
report with respect to the Company's assessment of compliance as of and for the
Period.


WELLS FARGO BANK, NATIONAL ASSOCIATION

By: /s/ Shari Gillund

Its: Senior Vice President


Dated: February 29, 2008
IN THE SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF MONTANA No. DA 20
- 0 1 73 STATE OF MONTANA,

Plaintiff and Appellee, v. JOSEPH PAUL DEWISE,

Defendant and Appellant .

**ORDER** Upon consideration of Appellant’s motion for extension of time, and good cause appearing, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that Appellant is granted an extension of time to and including June 9, 2021 , within which to prepare, file, and serve Appellant’s opening brief on appeal.

Electronically signed by: Mike McGrath Chief Justice, Montana Supreme Court

May 5 2021

05/05/2021

Case Number: DA 20-0173
#### Patricia Murphy, Respondent, v Polytechnic University et al., Appellants.

[872 NYS2d 505]

In an action to recover damages for personal injuries, the defendants appeal, as limited by their brief, from so much of an order of the Supreme Court, Kings County (Kramer, J), dated December 31, 2007, as denied their motion for summary judgment dismissing the complaint.

Ordered that the order is affirmed insofar as appealed from, with costs.

The plaintiff, a member of the women’s softball team of the defendant Polytechnic University, allegedly was injured when, during a team practice, she was hit in the head with a bat swung by her coach, the defendant James Barrett, also known as Jimmy Barrett. On their motion for summary judgment dismissing the complaint, the defendants demonstrated their entitlement to judgment as a matter of law based upon the doctrine of primary assumption of the risk, which provides that a voluntary participant in a sport or recreational activity consents to those commonly appreciated risks which are inherent in and arise out of the nature of the sport or activity generally and flow from such participation *(see Morgan v State of New York,*90 NY2d 471, 484 [1997]), such as the risk of getting hit with a bat swung during softball practice *(see Chaikin v Long Is. City YMCA,*29 AD3d 619, 619-620 [2006]; *Napoli v Mount Alvernia, Inc.,*239 AD2d 325, 326 [1997]). However, in opposition, the plaintiff raised triable issues of fact as to whether the defendants “unreasonably increased” that risk *(Benitez v New York City*
      *817
      *Bd. of Educ.,*73 NY2d 650, 658 [1989]; *see Muniz v Warwick School Dist.,*293 AD2d 724 [2002]; *Stryker v Jericho Union Free School Dist.,*244 AD2d 330, 330-331 [1997]), and as to whether she was injured as a result of “reckless . . . conduct” *(Morgan v State of New York,*90 NY2d at 485; *cf. McGee v Board of Educ. of City of N.Y.,*16 AD2d 99, 101-102 [1962]). Accordingly, the Supreme Court properly denied the defendants’ motion for summary judgment dismissing the complaint. Florio, J.E, Covello, Balkin and Leventhal, JJ., concur. [See 18 Misc 3d 623.]