alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
Letter from Amerika Samoa Bank dated April 17, 2007



 AMERIKA SAMOA BANK 
 17 April, 2007 
  
  
 Mr M Rollins 
 Chief Financial Officer 
 Elandia, Inc. 
 1500 Cordova Road, Suite 312 
 Fort
Lauderdale, FL 33316 
 U.S.A. 
  
 Dear Mr Rollins 
 NOTICE OF EVENT OF DEFAULT- AST Telecom, LLC (and
Parent) 
 I refer to our loan documentation dated 30 October 2006. 
 The following events of default has occurred and the Bank is entitled to exercise the rights given to it upon default: 
  

			
	 •     The Interest Cover ratio to be no less than 1.50 times.
	  	
		
	        Calculated as: EBIT	  	
	 Interest Expense
	  	

 Based on the audited financial statements for the year ended 31 December 2006, the above covenant was
breached, with calculation as follows: 
 (2,088) 
   743 
 = (2.81) 
  

			
	 •     The Debt Service Cover to be no more than 2.50 to 1.
	  	
		
	        Calculated as: Total Debt	  	
	 EBITDA
	  	

 Based on the audited financial statements for the year ended 31 December 2006, the above covenant was
breached, with calculation as follows: 
 5,013 
 1,882

 = 2.66:1 
  

			
	 •     The Current Ratio to be no less than 1.00 to 1.
	  	
		
	        Calculated as: Current Assets	  	
	 Current Liabilities
	  	

 Based on the audited financial statements for the year ended 31 December 2006, the above covenant was
breached, with calculation as follows: 
 11,229 
 19,622

 = 0.57:1 







 The Bank acknowledges the breach of notification obligations with respect to the purchase of “Latin Node” and
the implications with respect to section 8.1(e) of the loan agreement and section 5 of the continuing guarantee dated 30 October 2006. 
 In agreement
with the borrower and to accommodate the borrowers request for review of the current covenants to allow for future acquisitions and borrowing requirements, the Bank will conduct a review of these covenants and conditions by 30 April 2007.

 In light of its continuing relationship with the borrower, the Bank will permanently waive the breaches noted above and will not demand immediate
re-payment of the loan on this occasion but reserves its rights in relation to any other breaches of covenant that may occur in the future (including, without limitation, any other breaches of the Interest Cover Ratio). 
 This letter does not affect any other rights that we may have. 
 Yours
sincerely 
 /s/ Andrew Chambers 
  
 Andrew Chambers 
 Manager Commercial Banking 
 ANZ Amerika Samoa Bank
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 Report of PharmaNet Development Group, Inc. (the Company) on Form 10-Q for the nine month period ended September 30, 2008 as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the Report), I, Jeffrey P. McMullen, President and Chief Executive 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; 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/ JEFFREY P. MCMULLEN*              | 
| | Jeffrey P. McMullen                   | 
| | President and Chief Executive Officer | 
|

Date: November 10, 2008



* A signed original of this written statement required by Section 906 has been provided to the Company and will be retained by the Company and furnished to the Securities and Exchange Commission or its staff upon request.
#### UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. Tyre Jamar MAYERS, Defendant-Appellant.

No. 09-30190.

United States Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit.

Submitted March 8, 2011.*

Filed March 17, 2011.

Helen J. Brunner, Esquire, Carl Andrew Colasurdo, Office of the U.S. Attorney, Seattle, WA, for Plaintiff-Appellee.

Thomas Michael Kummerow, Washington Appellate Project, Seattle, WA, for Defendant-Appellant.

Before: FARRIS, LEAVY, and BYBEE, Circuit Judges.

*

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

*590MEMORANDUM **

Tyre Jamar Mayers appeals from his sentence imposed following his guilty plea to two counts of being a felon in possession of a firearm in violation of 18 U.S.C. § 922(g)(1). Mayers contends that the district court erred in determining that his prior conviction for theft in the first degree, in violation of former Revised Code of Washington § 9A.56.030(l)(b), was a “crime of violence” under U.S.S.G. § 2K2.1. As Mayers concedes, this contention is foreclosed by *United States v. Alderman,*601 F.3d 949 (9th Cir.2010).

AFFIRMED.

**

 This disposition is not appropriate for publication and is not precedent except as provided by 9th Cir. R. 36-3.
|                                                                 |   |                                                      |
|----------------------------------------------------------------------|--------|-----------------------------------------------------------|
|                                                                 |   |                                                      |
|                                                                 |   |                                                      |
| /s/      Yahia Gawad                                                 |   | /s/      James Essex                                      |
|                                                                 |   |                                                      |
|                                                                 |   |                                                      |
| Name:      Yahia GawadTitle:  Chief      Executive Officer |   | Name:      James EssexTitle:      Chief Financial Officer |
|                                                                 |   |                                                      |
|                                                                 |   |                                                      |
| Date:      June 14, 2010                                        |   |                                                      |

----
EXHIBIT
31.2





CHIEF FINANCIAL OFFICER CERTIFICATION





I, James
F. Carroll, certify that:





1. I have
reviewed this quarterly report on Form 10-Q of Freestone Resources,
Inc.





2. Based
on my knowledge, this quarterly 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 quarterly
report;





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





4. The
registrant’s other certifying officer and I are responsible for establishing and
maintaining disclosure controls and procedures (as defined in Exchange Act Rules
13a-14 and 15d-14) for the registrant and we 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 registrant, including its consolidated
subsidiaries, is made known to us by others within those entities, particularly
during the period in which this quarterly report is being prepared;





b)
evaluated the effectiveness of the registrant’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 registrant’s internal control over
financial reporting that occurred during the registrant’s most recent fiscal
quarter (the registrant’s fourth fiscal quarter in the case of an annual report)
that has materially affected, or is reasonably likely to materially affect, the
registrant’s internal control over financial reporting; and





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





a) all
significant deficiencies and material weaknesses in the design or operation of
internal controls over financial reporting which are reasonably likely to
adversely affect the registrant’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 registrant’s internal control over financial
reporting.








Date: May
11, 2009







/s/ James F. Carroll





James F.
Carroll


Chief
Financial Officer
Exhibit 33.2
                                 ------------

<PAGE>



          ASSERTION OF COMPLIANCE WITH APPLICABLE SERVICING CRITERIA



The Bank of New York and The Bank of New York Trust Company, N. A.
(collectively, the "Company") provides this platform-level assessment of
compliance with the servicing criteria specified in Item 1122(d) of Regulation
AB promulgated by the Securities and Exchange Commission.

Management has determined that the following servicing criteria are applicable
in regards to the following servicing platform for the following period:

Platform: Publicly-issued (i.e., transaction-level reporting initially
required under the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended) residential
mortgage-backed securities and other mortgage-related asset-backed securities
issued on or after January 1, 2006 (and like-kind transactions issued prior to
January 1, 2006) for which the Company provides trustee, securities
administration, paying agent or custodial services. The platform includes like
kind transactions for which the Company provided trustee, securities
administrator, paying agent or custodial services as a result of the Company's
acquisition as of October 1, 2006 of portions of JPMorgan Chase Bank, N.A.'s
corporate trust business, including structured finance agency and trust
transactions.

Applicable Servicing Criteria: All servicing criteria set forth in Item
1122(d), to the extent required by the related transaction agreements as to
any transaction, except for the following criteria: 1122 (d) (1)(ii), (iii),
(iv), (4) (iv), (v), (vi), (vii), (viii), (ix), (x), (xi), (xii) and (xiii).

Period: Twelve months ended December 31, 2006.

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

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

o  The Company has assessed compliance with the Applicable Servicing Criteria.

o  As of December 31, 2006 and for the Period, the Company was in material
compliance with the Applicable Servicing Criteria.



                                      1
<PAGE>


Ernst & Young LLP, an independent registered public accounting firm, has
issued an attestation report with respect to the Company's foregoing
assessment of compliance.



      The Bank of New York                    The Bank of New York
      The Bank of New York Trust              The Bank of New York Trust
         Company, N.A.                           Company, N.A.


      /s/ Robert L. Griffin                   /s/ Patrick J. Tadie
      ---------------------------             ---------------------------
      Robert L. Griffin                       Patrick J. Tadie
      Authorized Signer                       Authorized Signer


March 1, 2007



                                      2
#### LIANG CHEN, Petitioner, v. Eric H. HOLDER, Jr., Attorney General, Respondent.

No. 13-1580.

United States Court of Appeals, Fourth Circuit.

Submitted: Nov. 18, 2013.

Decided: Nov. 25, 2013.

Troy Nader Moslemi, Moslemi & Associates, New York, New York, for Petitioner. Stuart F. Delery, Assistant Attorney General, Francis W. Fraser, Acting Assistant Director, Justin R. Markel, Office of Immigration Litigation, Washington, D.C., for Respondent.

Before MOTZ, DUNCAN, and DAVIS, Circuit Judges.

Petition denied by unpublished PER CURIAM opinion.

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.

PER CURIAM:

Liang Chen, a native and citizen of China, petitions for review of an order of the Board of Immigration Appeals (Board) dismissing his appeal of the Immigration Judge’s decision denying relief from removal. Chen disputes the finding that he failed to qualify for asylum, withholding of removal and protection under the Convention Against Torture (CAT).

A determination regarding eligibility for asylum or withholding of removal is affirmed if supported by substantial evidence on the record considered as a whole. *INS v. Elias-Zacarias,*502 U.S. 478, 481, 112 S.Ct. 812, 117 L.Ed.2d 38 (1992). Administrative findings of fact, including findings on credibility, are conclusive unless any reasonable adjudicator would be compelled to decide to the contrary. 8 U.S.C. § 1252(b)(4)(B) (2012). This court reviews legal issues de novo, “affording appropriate deference to the [Board’s] interpretation of the [Immigration and Nationality Act] and any attendant regulations.” *Li Fang Lin v. Mukasey,*517 F.3d 685, 691-92 (4th Cir.2008). We will reverse the Board only if “the evidence ... presented *207was so compelling that no reasonable fact-finder could fail to find the requisite fear of persecution.” *Elias-Zacarias,*502 U.S. at 483-84, 112 S.Ct. 812; *see Rusu v. INS,*296 F.3d 316, 325 n. 14 (4th Cir.2002).

We have reviewed the evidence of record and conclude that substantial evidence supports the Board’s finding that Chen failed to meet his statutory burdens. We therefore uphold the denial of Chen’s requests for asylum and withholding of removal. *See Camara v. Ashcroft,*378 F.3d 361, 367 (4th Cir.2004) (“Because the burden of proof for withholding of removal is higher than for asylum-even though the facts that must be proved are the same-an applicant who is ineligible for asylum is necessarily ineligible for withholding of removal under [8 U.S.C.] § 1231(b)(3).”). Finally, to qualify for CAT protection, a petitioner bears the burden of demonstrating that “it is more likely than not that he or she would be tortured if removed to the proposed country of removal.” 8 C.F.R. § 1208.16(c)(2) (2013). Based on our review, we find that substantial evidence supports the agency’s conclusion that Chen did not qualify for this relief.

Accordingly, we deny the petition for review. We dispense with oral argument because the facts and legal contentions are adequately presented in the materials before this court and argument would not aid the decisional process.

*PETITION DENIED.*
#### Phillip J. OAKES, Plaintiff-Appellant v. Kaye HOWELL, Warden, Randall Williams Correctional Facility, Arkansas Department of Correction; Ray Hobbs, Director, Arkansas Department of Correction; Wendy Kelley, Deputy Director, Arkansas Department of Correction; George Wilson, Director, Corizon Inc.; Judith Savoy, Director of Nurses, Corizon Inc., Defendants-Appellees.

No. 13-2005.

United States Court of Appeals, Eighth Circuit.

Submitted: Nov. 22, 2013.

Filed: Dec. 16, 2013.

Dec. 16, 2013.

Phillip J. Oakes, Pine Bluff, AR, pro se.

James Owen Howe, Attorney General’s Office, Little Rock, AR, Michelle Banks Odum, Humphries & Lewis, White Hall, AR, for Defendant-Appellee.

Before LOKEN, BOWMAN, and GRUENDER, Circuit Judges.

PER CURIAM.

Arkansas inmate Phillip Oakes appeals the district court’s1 adverse grant of summary judgment in his 42 U.S.C. § 1983 action for damages, asserting a claim of deliberate indifference to his serious medical needs. After careful de novo review, *see Sutherland v. Mo. Dep’t of Corr.,*580 F.3d 748, 750 (8th Cir.2009) (standard of review), we find no basis for reversal, and accordingly we affirm, *see*8th Cir. R. 47B.

1

. The Honorable Kristine G. Baker, United States District Judge for the Eastern District of Arkansas, adopting the report and recommendations of the Honorable Joe J. Volpe, United States Magistrate Judge for the Eastern District of Arkansas.
EXHIBIT 32.1



CERTIFICATION PURSUANT TO SECTION 906

OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002



In connection with the Annual Report of CurrencySharesSMSwedish Krona Trust (the Trust) on Form 10-K for the fiscal year ended October 31, 2009 as filed with
the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the Report), I, Nick Bonos, Chief Executive Officer of Rydex Specialized Products LLC, the Sponsor of the Trust, certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. § 1350, as adopted pursuant
to § 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, 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 Trust.



Date: January 14, 2010



|                             
|-----------------------------
|/S/ NICK BONOS               
|Nick Bonos*                  
|Chief Executive Officer      
|(principal executive officer)



|* | The Registrant is
a trust and Nick Bonos is signing in his capacity as the principal executive officer of Rydex Specialized Products LLC, the Sponsor of the Registrant.
|- | ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Exhibit 32.1

DIGIMARC CORPORATION    CERTIFICATION

In connection with the periodic report of Digimarc Corporation (the "Company") on Form 10-Q for the period ended June 30, 2003 as filed
with the Securities and Exchange Commission (the "Report"), I, Bruce Davis, Chief Executive Officer of the Company, hereby certify as of the date hereof, solely for purposes of Title 18, Chapter 63,
Section 1350 of the United States Code, that to the best of my knowledge:



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 within the electronic version of this written statement required by Section 906, has been provided to the Company and will be retained by the Company 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:
August 14, 2003

| |  | By: | /s/BRUCE DAVISBruce Davis Chief Executive Officer
| |  | --- | -------------------------------------------------

---

QuickLinks
{"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":"Commission Publishes FY18-22 Initial Draft Strategic Plan","type":"rich","width":600,"height":338,"html":"<blockquote class=\"wp-embedded-content\" data-secret=\"Cmu0V7dQ83\"><a href=\"\/commission-publishes-fy18-22-initial-draft-strategic-plan\/\">Commission Publishes FY18-22 Initial Draft Strategic Plan<\/a><\/blockquote><iframe sandbox=\"allow-scripts\" security=\"restricted\" src=\"\/commission-publishes-fy18-22-initial-draft-strategic-plan\/embed\/#?secret=Cmu0V7dQ83\" width=\"600\" height=\"338\" title=\"“Commission Publishes FY18-22 Initial Draft Strategic Plan” — Federal Maritime Commission\" data-secret=\"Cmu0V7dQ83\" 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"}
#### UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. William Junior MONTANO, Defendant-Appellant.

No. 10-10263.

United States Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit.

Submitted March 8, 2011.*

Filed March 15, 2011.

Randall M. Howe, Esquire, Assistant U.S. Attorney, Office of the U.S. Attorney, Phoenix, AZ, for Plaintiff-Appellee.

*736Daniel L. Kaplan, Assistant Federal Public Defender, Federal Public Defend-ei’’s Office, Phoenix, AZ, for Defendant-Appellant.

Before: FARRIS, LEAVY, and BYBEE, Circuit Judges.

*

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

MEMORANDUM **

William Junior Montano appeals from the 12-month sentence imposed upon revocation of supervised release. We have jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. § 1291, and we affirm.

Montano contends that the district court procedurally erred by failing to discuss the relevant factors set forth in 18 U.S.C. § 3553(a) or adequately explain its reasons for the high-end Guidelines sentence, and that this constitutes reversible error under *United States v. Hammons,*558 F.3d 1100 (9th Cir.2009). The record reflects that the district court appropriately considered section 3553(a) factors and did not procedurally err, and that the 12-month sentence is substantively reasonable under the totality of circumstances particularly in light of Montano’s continued difficulty with abiding by the conditions of his supervised release as evidenced by the previous revocation and the fact that his last violation occurred only 3 weeks after he began his latest term of supervised release. *See United States v. Carty,*520 F.3d 984, 991-93 (9th Cir.2008) (en banc).

AFFIRMED.

**

 This disposition is not appropriate for publication and is not precedent except as provided by 9th Cir. R. 36-3.