alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
1 Ja-Ja At u-Mani, a/

k/a Curt is Gouldi

n, was al

so a plai ntiff in the compl aint. Howe ver, his case was dismissed

on motion of

the Defendants prior to resolution of Mr. Farnswort h’s cas e and the dec

ision wa s not appeal

ed. 

### IN THE COURT OF APPEALS OF TENNESSEE

AT KNOXVILLE Submitted on Bri

efs Septembe

r 28, 2000 PAUL FARNSWORTH, a/k /a RONNIE BRADFIELD v. DONITA M OORE, ET AL 

### . Direct Appeal from the Circuit Court for Bledsoe County No. 2056 Thomas W. Graham, Judge _______FILED DECEMBER 27, 2000_____________

No. E2000–01623-COA-R3-CV

______________________________ The Plaintiff, an inmat

e of the penal sy

stem o f this State, sues the Warden of the Southeastern Tennessee State Regional Correctional Facility and certain other offi cials of the facility seeking monetary dama ges and an i njunction based on five separate causes of action. The Trial Court dismissed his complaint, finding that because he refused to submit to

a medical evaluation provided by the Defendant pu

rsuant to the orde

rs of the Court, the

Court was unable

to make an evaluation and as a result of

his violation of Ten

n.R.Civ.P. 41.02, dismi

ssed his suit. We aff

irm. Tenn.R.App.P.3 Appe

al as of Right; Judgme

nt of the Circuit Cour

t Affirmed; Cause Remanded
H OUSTON M. G ODDARD , P.J., delivered the opinion of the court, in which H ERSCHEL P. F RANKS and C HARLES D. S USANO , J R ., JJ., joined. Paul Farnsworth,

a/k/a Ronnie Bra

dfield, Henning , Tennessee, App ellant, Pro Se Paul G. Summers, Attorney General and Reporter, Michael Moore, Solicitor Genera l, and Pamela S. Lorc

h, Assistant Attorne

y General , Nashville, Tenne

ssee, for the App

ellees Donita Moore, et al.

OPINION Paul Farnsworth, a/k/a Ronnie Bradfield, 1 seeks damages from Jame s Bowl en, Warden of the Southeastern T

ennessee State

Regional Correctional Facility, and certain other offic ials of the Correctional Facility. He seeks damages alleging five separate causes of action which are set out in the Appendix to this opinion.2 41.02. In volunta ry Dismiss al – Effect Thereof. (1) For fa ilure of the plaintiff to pro secute or to c omply with these rules

or any order of court

, a defendant may

move for dismissal of an action or of any cl aim against the defendan t. -2- The Trial Court ultimately found that Mr. Farnsworth had “refu se d to submit to a medical evaluation provided by the Defendant pursuant to the orders of this Court.” The Court then found that it was impossible for it to make an e valuatio n and, because Mr. Farnsworth was in direct violation of Tenn.R.Civ.P. 41.02, 2 dismissed his suit. Our review of the record persuades us that the Trial Court did not abuse his discret ion in dismissing the case and his action was appropriate under the circumstances.
For the foregoing reasons the judgment of the Trial Court is affirmed and the cause remanded for collection of costs below. Costs of appeal are adjudged against Mr. Farnsworth.

_________________________________________ HOUSTON M. GODDARD, PRESIDING JUDGE
{"version":"1.0","provider_name":"Federal Maritime Commission","provider_url":"https:\/\/www.fmc.gov","author_name":"Catie-Megan Moran","author_url":"https:\/\/www.fmc.gov\/author\/cmoranfmc-gov\/","title":"Consumer Alert– UPDATE \u2013 Transporte Medrano, Inc. d\/b\/a Medrano Express","type":"rich","width":600,"height":338,"html":"<blockquote class=\"wp-embedded-content\" data-secret=\"m4T0bzap9M\"><a href=\"\/consumer-alert-update-transporte-medrano-inc-d-b-a-medrano-express\/\">Consumer Alert– UPDATE \u2013 Transporte Medrano, Inc. d\/b\/a Medrano Express<\/a><\/blockquote><iframe sandbox=\"allow-scripts\" security=\"restricted\" src=\"\/consumer-alert-update-transporte-medrano-inc-d-b-a-medrano-express\/embed\/#?secret=m4T0bzap9M\" width=\"600\" height=\"338\" title=\"“Consumer Alert– UPDATE \u2013 Transporte Medrano, Inc. d\/b\/a Medrano Express” — Federal Maritime Commission\" data-secret=\"m4T0bzap9M\" frameborder=\"0\" marginwidth=\"0\" marginheight=\"0\" scrolling=\"no\" class=\"wp-embedded-content\"><\/iframe><script type=\"text\/javascript\">\n\/*! This file is auto-generated *\/\n!function(c,l){\"use strict\";var e=!1,o=!1;if(l.querySelector)if(c.addEventListener)e=!0;if(c.wp=c.wp||{},c.wp.receiveEmbedMessage);else if(c.wp.receiveEmbedMessage=function(e){var t=e.data;if(!t);else if(!(t.secret||t.message||t.value));else if(\/[^a-zA-Z0-9]\/.test(t.secret));else{for(var r,s,a,i=l.querySelectorAll('iframe[data-secret=\"'+t.secret+'\"]'),n=l.querySelectorAll('blockquote[data-secret=\"'+t.secret+'\"]'),o=0;o<n.length;o++)n[o].style.display=\"none\";for(o=0;o<i.length;o++)if(r=i[o],e.source!==r.contentWindow);else{if(r.removeAttribute(\"style\"),\"height\"===t.message){if(1e3<(s=parseInt(t.value,10)))s=1e3;else if(~~s<200)s=200;r.height=s}if(\"link\"===t.message)if(s=l.createElement(\"a\"),a=l.createElement(\"a\"),s.href=r.getAttribute(\"src\"),a.href=t.value,a.host===s.host)if(l.activeElement===r)c.top.location.href=t.value}}},e)c.addEventListener(\"message\",c.wp.receiveEmbedMessage,!1),l.addEventListener(\"DOMContentLoaded\",t,!1),c.addEventListener(\"load\",t,!1);function t(){if(o);else{o=!0;for(var e,t,r,s=-1!==navigator.appVersion.indexOf(\"MSIE 10\"),a=!!navigator.userAgent.match(\/Trident.*rv:11\\.\/),i=l.querySelectorAll(\"iframe.wp-embedded-content\"),n=0;n<i.length;n++){if(!(r=(t=i[n]).getAttribute(\"data-secret\")))r=Math.random().toString(36).substr(2,10),t.src+=\"#?secret=\"+r,t.setAttribute(\"data-secret\",r);if(s||a)(e=t.cloneNode(!0)).removeAttribute(\"security\"),t.parentNode.replaceChild(e,t);t.contentWindow.postMessage({message:\"ready\",secret:r},\"*\")}}}}(window,document);\n<\/script>\n"}
<PAGE>

                                                                     Exhibit 4.6

                                 July 14, 2000



Thomas H. Sullivan, Esq.
Black Label Wireless, Inc.
c/o TeleCorp PCS, Inc.
1010 N. Glebe Road
Arlington, Virginia 22201

Dear Mr. Sullivan:

          This is in reference to the Credit Agreement dated as of July 14, 2000
among Black Label Wireless, Inc., a Delaware corporation (the "Borrower"), the
                                                               --------
financial institutions signatory thereto from time to time, as lenders (the
"Lenders") and Lucent Technologies Inc., as agent for the Lenders (in such
--------
capacity, the "Agent") (as it may be amended, restated, supplemented or
               -----
otherwise modified from time to time, the "Credit Agreement").  All capitalized
                                           ----------------
terms used but not otherwise defined herein have the meanings given to them in
the Credit Agreement.

          Notwithstanding the terms and provisions of the Credit Agreement,
neither Sections 2.9(b), 2.12(a)(ii) and 2.12(b), the last sentence of Section
        ---------------  -----------     -------                       -------
2.11, nor the concluding paragraph of Section 2.12(a)(iii) thereof shall be
----                                  --------------------
applicable to Lucent in its capacity as a Lender thereunder or to any of
Lucent's Affiliates in their capacities as Lenders thereunder, and the Borrower
shall have no obligation to pay any amounts due thereunder to Lucent or its
Affiliates in such capacities.  Furthermore, in respect of any Loans made by
Lucent or its Affiliates as Lenders, the LIBOR Rate shall mean the LIBOR Base
Rate.

          All other terms and provisions of the Credit Agreement shall continue
in full force and effect.  This letter shall be considered a Loan Document for
the purposes of the Credit Agreement.  If this letter accurately sets forth the
agreement among the parties, please confirm by signing below.

                                 Very truly yours,

                                 Lucent Technologies Inc., as Agent


                                 By: /s/ Lucent Technologies Inc.
                                    -----------------------------
                                    Name:
                                    Title:
<PAGE>

ACKNOWLEDGED AND AGREED:

Black Label Wireless, Inc., as Borrower


By:  /s/ Thomas H. Sullivan
   ------------------------------
   Name:  Thomas H. Sullivan
   Title: President


Lucent Technologies Inc., as Lender


By:  /s/ Lucent Technologies Inc.
   ------------------------------
   Name:
   Title:

                                       2
{"version":"1.0","provider_name":"Federal Maritime Commission","provider_url":"https:\/\/www.fmc.gov","author_name":"Catie-Megan Moran","author_url":"https:\/\/www.fmc.gov\/author\/cmoranfmc-gov\/","title":"Copenhagen Event is Forum for Addressing Issues & Future of Container Shipping","type":"rich","width":600,"height":338,"html":"<blockquote class=\"wp-embedded-content\" data-secret=\"MhkGgVpbB9\"><a href=\"\/copenhagen-event-is-forum-for-addressing-issues-future-of-container-shipping\/\">Copenhagen Event is Forum for Addressing Issues & Future of Container Shipping<\/a><\/blockquote><iframe sandbox=\"allow-scripts\" security=\"restricted\" src=\"\/copenhagen-event-is-forum-for-addressing-issues-future-of-container-shipping\/embed\/#?secret=MhkGgVpbB9\" width=\"600\" height=\"338\" title=\"“Copenhagen Event is Forum for Addressing Issues & Future of Container Shipping” — Federal Maritime Commission\" data-secret=\"MhkGgVpbB9\" frameborder=\"0\" marginwidth=\"0\" marginheight=\"0\" scrolling=\"no\" class=\"wp-embedded-content\"><\/iframe><script type=\"text\/javascript\">\n\/*! This file is auto-generated *\/\n!function(c,l){\"use strict\";var e=!1,o=!1;if(l.querySelector)if(c.addEventListener)e=!0;if(c.wp=c.wp||{},c.wp.receiveEmbedMessage);else if(c.wp.receiveEmbedMessage=function(e){var t=e.data;if(!t);else if(!(t.secret||t.message||t.value));else if(\/[^a-zA-Z0-9]\/.test(t.secret));else{for(var r,s,a,i=l.querySelectorAll('iframe[data-secret=\"'+t.secret+'\"]'),n=l.querySelectorAll('blockquote[data-secret=\"'+t.secret+'\"]'),o=0;o<n.length;o++)n[o].style.display=\"none\";for(o=0;o<i.length;o++)if(r=i[o],e.source!==r.contentWindow);else{if(r.removeAttribute(\"style\"),\"height\"===t.message){if(1e3<(s=parseInt(t.value,10)))s=1e3;else if(~~s<200)s=200;r.height=s}if(\"link\"===t.message)if(s=l.createElement(\"a\"),a=l.createElement(\"a\"),s.href=r.getAttribute(\"src\"),a.href=t.value,a.host===s.host)if(l.activeElement===r)c.top.location.href=t.value}}},e)c.addEventListener(\"message\",c.wp.receiveEmbedMessage,!1),l.addEventListener(\"DOMContentLoaded\",t,!1),c.addEventListener(\"load\",t,!1);function t(){if(o);else{o=!0;for(var e,t,r,s=-1!==navigator.appVersion.indexOf(\"MSIE 10\"),a=!!navigator.userAgent.match(\/Trident.*rv:11\\.\/),i=l.querySelectorAll(\"iframe.wp-embedded-content\"),n=0;n<i.length;n++){if(!(r=(t=i[n]).getAttribute(\"data-secret\")))r=Math.random().toString(36).substr(2,10),t.src+=\"#?secret=\"+r,t.setAttribute(\"data-secret\",r);if(s||a)(e=t.cloneNode(!0)).removeAttribute(\"security\"),t.parentNode.replaceChild(e,t);t.contentWindow.postMessage({message:\"ready\",secret:r},\"*\")}}}}(window,document);\n<\/script>\n"}
{"version":"1.0","provider_name":"Federal Maritime Commission","provider_url":"https:\/\/www.fmc.gov","author_name":"Catie-Megan Moran","author_url":"https:\/\/www.fmc.gov\/author\/cmoranfmc-gov\/","title":"Chairman Lidinsky’s Speech Before the Cotton Club","type":"rich","width":600,"height":338,"html":"<blockquote class=\"wp-embedded-content\" data-secret=\"01o0KcukHt\"><a href=\"\/chairman-lidinskys-speech-before-the-cotton-club\/\">Chairman Lidinsky’s Speech Before the Cotton Club<\/a><\/blockquote><iframe sandbox=\"allow-scripts\" security=\"restricted\" src=\"\/chairman-lidinskys-speech-before-the-cotton-club\/embed\/#?secret=01o0KcukHt\" width=\"600\" height=\"338\" title=\"“Chairman Lidinsky’s Speech Before the Cotton Club” — Federal Maritime Commission\" data-secret=\"01o0KcukHt\" frameborder=\"0\" marginwidth=\"0\" marginheight=\"0\" scrolling=\"no\" class=\"wp-embedded-content\"><\/iframe><script type=\"text\/javascript\">\n\/*! This file is auto-generated *\/\n!function(c,l){\"use strict\";var e=!1,o=!1;if(l.querySelector)if(c.addEventListener)e=!0;if(c.wp=c.wp||{},c.wp.receiveEmbedMessage);else if(c.wp.receiveEmbedMessage=function(e){var t=e.data;if(!t);else if(!(t.secret||t.message||t.value));else if(\/[^a-zA-Z0-9]\/.test(t.secret));else{for(var r,s,a,i=l.querySelectorAll('iframe[data-secret=\"'+t.secret+'\"]'),n=l.querySelectorAll('blockquote[data-secret=\"'+t.secret+'\"]'),o=0;o<n.length;o++)n[o].style.display=\"none\";for(o=0;o<i.length;o++)if(r=i[o],e.source!==r.contentWindow);else{if(r.removeAttribute(\"style\"),\"height\"===t.message){if(1e3<(s=parseInt(t.value,10)))s=1e3;else if(~~s<200)s=200;r.height=s}if(\"link\"===t.message)if(s=l.createElement(\"a\"),a=l.createElement(\"a\"),s.href=r.getAttribute(\"src\"),a.href=t.value,a.host===s.host)if(l.activeElement===r)c.top.location.href=t.value}}},e)c.addEventListener(\"message\",c.wp.receiveEmbedMessage,!1),l.addEventListener(\"DOMContentLoaded\",t,!1),c.addEventListener(\"load\",t,!1);function t(){if(o);else{o=!0;for(var e,t,r,s=-1!==navigator.appVersion.indexOf(\"MSIE 10\"),a=!!navigator.userAgent.match(\/Trident.*rv:11\\.\/),i=l.querySelectorAll(\"iframe.wp-embedded-content\"),n=0;n<i.length;n++){if(!(r=(t=i[n]).getAttribute(\"data-secret\")))r=Math.random().toString(36).substr(2,10),t.src+=\"#?secret=\"+r,t.setAttribute(\"data-secret\",r);if(s||a)(e=t.cloneNode(!0)).removeAttribute(\"security\"),t.parentNode.replaceChild(e,t);t.contentWindow.postMessage({message:\"ready\",secret:r},\"*\")}}}}(window,document);\n<\/script>\n"}
OrgNo OrgName Reason for Action License No. Termination Date Comment

007512 CONSOLIDATED TRANSPORT SERVICES, INC. Failure to maintain bonds 007512NF 11/25/2022

019096 CONTOUR LOGISTICS INC. Failure to maintain bonds 019096NF 11/1/2022

031279 DAEHAN STEEL AMERICA, INC. Voluntary Surrender 026526NF 11/1/2022

005167 EUROPEAN OCEAN FREIGHT INC. Failure to maintain a bond 002232F 11/10/2022

029442 GLOBEX FORWARDING CORP Failure to maintain a bond 029442F 11/10/2022 NVOCC 002944N remains active

025648 INTERNATIONAL SHIPPING USA INC. Voluntary Surrender 025648NF 10/28/2022

030027 KRYPTON MARITIME SOLUTIONS USA LLC Failure to maintain bonds 030027NF 11/11/2022

028509 LOGISTICS SOLUTIONS AND CONSULTING LLC Failure to maintain a bond 028509N 11/25/2022 OFF 028509F remains active

000800 ORION MARINE CORPORATION Voluntary Surrender 016240N 11/8/2022

005520 PIONEER INTERNATIONAL FORWARDING CO., INC. Failure to maintain a bond 002651F 11/1/2022

024704 SOL INTERCARGO INC Failure to maintain a bond 024704N 11/19/2022

027432 STGERMAIN HEAVY INDUSTRIAL PROJECTS L.L.C. Failure to maintain a bond 027432F 11/13/2022

028609 TEAM LOGIX, LLC Failure to maintain bonds 028609NF 11/16/2022

026566 WORLD FREIGHT USA, INC. Failure to maintain bonds 026566NF 11/13/2022

FEDERAL MARITIME COMMISSION

Ocean Transportation Intermediary License Revocations & Surrenders

November 1, 2022 to November 30, 2022
NOT FOR PUBLICATION

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT

NATA S HA SHPAK; et al.,

Plaintiffs

- Appellees,

v.

MALCOLM CURTIS and JUDITH

CURTIS,

Defendants

- Appellants,

and

BELZONA SYSTEMS OF CALIFORNIA,

INC.; et al.,

Defendants. No. 16

- 56323

D.C. No.

5:16

- cv

- 01687

- MWF

- KK

ORDER *

Appeal from the United States District Court

for the Central District of California

Michael W. Fitzgerald, District Judge, Presiding

Submitted February 8, 2018 **

Pasadena, California

* This disposition is not appropriate for publication and is not precedent

except as provided by Ninth Circuit Rule 36

- 3.

** The panel unanimously concludes this case is suitable for decision

without oral argument. See Fed. R. App. P. 34(a)(2). 

# FILED

FEB 12 2018

MOLLY C. DWYER, CLER K

U.S. COURT OF APPEAL S2

Before: GRABER and HURWITZ, Circuit Judges, and MARBLEY, *** District

Judge.

This is an appeal from the district court’s rejection of a “notice of removal,”

which sought to “remove” an action pending in the United States District Court for

the Eastern District of New York to the Central District of California. The notice,

however denominated, was in substance a motion to transfer venue under 28 U.S.C.

§ 1404(a), and the district court’s order thus effectively was a denial of the requested

transfer. That order was not a final judgment under 28 U.S.C. § 1291. See Pac. Car

& Foundry Co. v. Pence , 403 F.2d 949, 951 (9th Cir. 1968) (“[O] rders respecting

venu e entered under § 1404(a) and § 1406(a) are interlocutory in nature and are not

app ealable prior to final judgment.”)

. We therefore dismiss the appeal for want of

jurisdiction. Th is order shall const itute the mandate of this court.

*** The Honorable Algenon L. Marbley, United States District Judge for

the Southern District of Ohio, sitting b y designation.
_______________________________________ __ Michigan Supreme Court 

# Order

Lansing, Michigan

December 28, 2005 Clifford W. Taylor, Chief Justice
128948 Michael F. Cavanagh Elizabeth A. Weaver Marilyn Kelly Maura D. Corrigan NORMAN ALBERT MARKEL, Plaintiff-Appellant, Robert P. Young, Jr. Stephen J. Markman, Justices

v SC: 128948 COA: 252054 Macomb CC: 2 002-002176-NI DAN DEGRAW, and COUNTY OF MACOMB, Defendants-Appellees.

________________ _______________ __________/

On order of the Court, the application for leave to appeal the May 12, 2005 judgment of the Court of Appeals is cons idered, and it is DENIED, because we are not persuaded that the questions presented should be reviewed by this Court.

C AVANAGH and K ELLY , JJ., would grant leave to appeal.

l1221 I, Corbin R. Davis, Clerk of the Mi chigan Supreme Cour t, certify that the foregoing is a true and complete copy of the order entered at the direction of the Court.

December 28, 2005

Clerk
#### In re CARMINE'S BROADWAY FEAST INC.

No. 2010-1528.

United States Court of Appeals, Federal Circuit.

May 27, 2011.

Before GAJARSA, MAYER, and PROST, Circuit Judges.

ON MOTION

ORDER

GAJARSA, Circuit Judge.

Carmine’s Broadway Feast Inc. and the Under Secretary for Commerce for Intellectual Property and Director of the United States Patent and Trademark Office jointly move to vacate the Trademark Trial and Appeal Board decision as moot and to remand for further proceedings.

The Board affirmed a rejection of Carmine’s Broadway’s trademark application as likely to cause confusion with two trademark registrations, U.S. Registration Nos. 1,444,609 and 2,864,349. Registration No. 2,864,349 has since been cancelled, and Registration No. 1,444,609 is now owned by Carmine’s Broadway and therefore no longer poses a bar to the present trademark registration.

Carmine’s Broadway’s ownership of Registration No. 1,444,609 subsequent to the Board’s decision does not mean that vacatur by this court is appropriate. *See, e.g., U.S. Bancorp Mortgage Co. v. Bonner Mall Partnership,*513 U.S. 18, 29, 115 *982S.Ct. 386, 130 L.Ed.2d 233 (1994) (holding that “mootness by reason of settlement does not justify vacatur of a judgment under review”)- The proper course is to remand the case so that the Board can consider the Carmine’s Broadway’s request for vacatur of the Board’s decision.

Accordingly,

It Is Ordered That:

(1) The motion for vacatur is denied.

(2) The motion to remand for further proceedings is granted.
I 

111TH CONGRESS 

1ST SESSION H. R. 3572 

To provide a cost-of-living increase for Social Security benefits for 2010 

of 2.9 percent. 

IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES 

SEPTEMBER 15, 2009 

Mr. ALEXANDER introduced the following bill; which was referred to the 

Committee on Ways and Means 

A BILL 

To provide a cost-of-living increase for Social Security 

benefits for 2010 of 2.9 percent. 

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

3 SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE. 

4 This Act may be cited as the ‘‘COLA Assistance Act 

5 of 2009’’. 

6 SEC. 2. SOCIAL SECURITY COST-OF-LIVING INCREASE OF 

7 2.9 PERCENT FOR 2010. 

8 Notwithstanding any provision of section 215(i) of 

9 the Social Security Act (42 U.S.C. 415(i)) to the con10 trary— 


smartinez on DSKB9S0YB1PROD with BILLS
2 

•HR 3572 IH

1 (1) for purposes of such section 215(i), the ap2 plicable increase percentage (as defined in section 

3 215(i)(1)(C) of such Act) with respect to the base 

4 quarter (as defined in section 215(i)(1)(A)(i) of such 

5 Act) in 2009 shall be deemed to be 2.9 percent; and 

6 (2) for purposes of such section 215(i) (and any 

7 provision of law cross-referring to such section 

8 215(i) or otherwise providing for increases based on 

9 increases occurring under such section 215(i)), the 

10 increase under section 215(i)(2)(A)(ii) of such Act 

11 resulting from the application of this section shall be 

12 deemed to be an increase under such section 215(i) 

13 and not a general benefit increase. 

Æ 


smartinez on DSKB9S0YB1PROD with BILLS
Table of Contents
 Exhibit 13.6
CERTIFICATION PURSUANT TO 18 U.S.C.  SECTION 1350,
AS ADOPTED PURSUANT TO
SECTION 906 OF THE U.S. SARBANES‐OXLEY ACT OF 2002 In connection with the Annual Report of TAM Capital Inc. (the "Company") on Form 20‐F for the fiscal year ended December 31, 2008, as filed with the U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof, as amended by this Amendment No. 2 (the "Report"), I, Líbano Miranda Barroso, Chief Financial Officer, certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. section 1350, as adopted pursuant to section 906 of the U.S. Sarbanes‐Oxley Act of 2002, that to the best of my knowledge: (i)          the Report fully complies with the requirements of section 13(a) or 15(d) of the U.S. Securities Exchange Act of 1934; and (ii)         the information contained in the Report fairly presents, in all material respects, the financial condition and results of operations of the Company. Date:  June 8, 2010 By:/s/ Líbano Miranda BarrosoLíbano Miranda Barroso
Chief Financial Officer


---