alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
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 Annual Report of Boston Financial Tax Credit Fund VIII
(the "Fund") on Form 10-KSB for the year ended March 31, 2005 as filed with the
Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the "Report"), the
undersigned, the Principal Executive Officer and Principal Financial Officer,
hereby certifies pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, as adopted pursuant to
Section 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
     Partnership.


                                       /s/Jenny Netzer
                                       ------------------------------------
                                       Jenny Netzer
                                       Principal Executive Officer and
                                       Principal Financial Officer
                                       Arch Street VIII, LP, as
                                       Managing General Partner of
                                       Boston Financial Tax Credit Fund VIII


                                       Date:  July 13, 2005


A signed original of this written statement required by section 906 has been
provided to the Fund and will be retained by the Fund and furnished to the
Securities and Exchange Commission or its staff upon request.
<PAGE>


EXHIBIT 3.3 -- CERTIFICATE OF AMENDMENT


                            CERTIFICATE OF AMENDMENT
                         TO CERTIFICATE OF INCORPORATION
                                       OF
                             NATIONAL TECHTEAM, INC.


         William F. Coyro, Jr. and Michael A. Sosin certify that:

         1.       They are President and Secretary, respectively, of National
TechTeam, Inc., a Delaware corporation (the "Corporation").

         2.       Article First of the Certificate of Incorporation is amended
in its entirety to read:

         "FIRST, the name of the corporation is TechTeam Global, Inc."

         3.       The foregoing Amendment of Certificate of Incorporation has
been duly approved by the board of directors on February 26, 2002, in accordance
with Section 141 (f) of the Delaware General Corporation Law.

         4.       The foregoing Amendment of Certificate of Incorporation has
been duly approved by the required vote of stockholders as of May 8, 2002 in
accordance with Section 228 (a) of the Delaware General Corporation Law. The
total number of outstanding share of the Corporation is 11,386,327. The number
of shares voted in favor of the amendment equaled or exceeded the 50% votes
required.

         We further declare under penalty of law that the matters set forth in
this certificate are true and correct to our own knowledge.


                                              /s/ William F. Coyro, Jr.
                                              -------------------------
         Dated:   May 8, 2002                 William F. Coyro, Jr.
                                              President


                                              /s/ Michael A. Sosin
                                              ---------------------
                                              Michael A. Sosin
                                              Secretary
1 

FEDERAL MINE SAFETY AND HEALTH REVIEW COMMISSION

1331 PENNSYLVANIA AVE., N.W., SUITE 520N

WASHINGTON, DC 20004-1710

BEFORE: Jordan, Chair; Althen, Rajkovich, and Baker, Commissioners

 

ORDER

BY THE COMMISSION: 

This matter arises under the Federal Mine Safety and Health Act of 1977, 30 U.S.C. 

§ 801 et seq. (2018) (“Mine Act”). The Commission has received a motion from the operator 

seeking to reopen a penalty assessment which had become a final order of the Commission 

pursuant to section 105(a) of the Mine Act, 30 U.S.C. § 813(a). The Secretary states that he does 

not oppose the motion. 

Having reviewed movant’s unopposed motion to reopen, we reopen this matter and 

remand it to the Chief Administrative Law Judge for further proceedings pursuant to the Mine 

Act and the Commission’s Procedural Rules, 29 C.F.R. Part 2700. Consistent with Rule 28, the 

Secretary shall file a petition for assessment of penalty within 45 days of the date of this 

order. See 29 C.F.R. § 2700.28.

SECRETARY OF LABOR,

 MINE SAFETY AND HEALTH 

 ADMINISTRATION (MSHA) 

 v. 

CALLENDER CONSTRUCTION

COMPANY, INC.

:

: 

: 

: 

: 

: 

: 

: 

Docket No. LAKE 2020-0189-M 

A.C. No. 11-00214-494016 

July 18, 2023
The granting of this motion is not precedential for the consideration of any other motion 

before the Commission.

_________________________________

Mary Lu Jordan, Chair

_________________________________ 

William I. Althen, Commissioner 

_________________________________ 

Marco M. Rajkovich, Jr., Commissioner

_________________________________ 

Timothy J. Baker, Commissioner 
3

Distribution:

Bruce Callender, President

Callender Construction Company, Inc.

928 West Washington Street

Pittsfield, IL 62363

calconst928@yahoo.com

Emily Toler Scott, Esq.

Office of the Solicitor

U.S. Department of Labor

Division of Mine Safety and Health

201 12th Street South, Suite 401

Arlington, VA 22202

scott.emily.t@dol.gov

April Nelson, Esq.

Associate Solicitor

Office of the Solicitor

U.S. Department of Labor

Division of Mine Safety and Health

201 12th Street South, Suite 401

Arlington, VA 22202

Nelson.April@dol.gov

Melanie Garris, Chief

Office of Civil Penalty Compliance

U.S. Department of Labor

Office of Assessments

Mine Safety and Health Administration

201 12th Street South, Suite 401

Arlington, VA 22202

Garris.Melanie@dol.gov

Chief Administrative Law Judge Glynn Voisin

Federal Mine Safety & Health Review Commission

Office of the Chief Administrative Law Judge

1331 Pennsylvania Avenue, NW, Suite 520 N

Washington, DC 20004-1710

GVoisin@fmshrc.gov
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<PAGE>
 
<ARTICLE> 5
<LEGEND>
THIS SCHEDULE CONTAINS SUMMARY FINANCIAL INFORMATION EXTRACTED FROM THE BALANCE
SHEET AND THE RELATED STATEMENT OF INCOME FOR THE 9 MONTH PERIOD ENDED
SEPTEMBER 30, 1995 AND IS QUALIFIED IN ITS ENTIRETY BY REFERENCE TO SUCH
FINANCIAL STATEMENTS. THE INFORMATION HEREIN HAS BEEN RESTATED FOR THE EFFECTS
OF A REVERSE MERGER AND REORGANIZATION ON DECEMBER 15, 1997 AND THE ADOPTION OF
STATEMENT OF FINANCIAL ACCOUNTING STANDARDS NO. 128, "EARNINGS PER SHARE," ON
JANUARY 1, 1998.
</LEGEND>
       
<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   9-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          DEC-31-1995
<PERIOD-START>                             JAN-01-1995
<PERIOD-END>                               SEP-30-1995           
<CASH>                                          32,691     
<SECURITIES>                                         0     
<RECEIVABLES>                               11,514,389     
<ALLOWANCES>                                   127,578     
<INVENTORY>                                  7,934,361     
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                            19,603,234     
<PP&E>                                       2,421,249     
<DEPRECIATION>                                 175,796     
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                              23,069,218     
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                       17,011,188     
<BONDS>                                              0     
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0     
<PREFERRED>                                          0     
<COMMON>                                         2,000     
<OTHER-SE>                                   2,810,881     
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                23,069,218     
<SALES>                                     32,466,231     
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                            32,466,231     
<CGS>                                       24,730,633     
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                4,422,551     
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                               507,975     
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                39,767     
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                             533,016     
<INCOME-PRETAX>                              2,740,691     
<INCOME-TAX>                                         0     
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                                  0     
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0     
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0     
<CHANGES>                                            0     
<NET-INCOME>                                 2,740,691     
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                    0.562     
<EPS-DILUTED>                                    0.562     
        

</TABLE>
Exhibit 11

AMENDED

                        SHOWPOWER, INC. AND SUBSIDIARIES
                     COMPUTATION OF INCOME PER COMMON SHARE


<TABLE>
<CAPTION>
                                               Three Months                        Nine Months
                                            Ended September 30,                Ended September 30,
                                         -------------------------          -------------------------
                                            1998            1997               1998           1997
                                         -----------    ----------          ----------     ----------
<S>                                      <C>            <C>                 <C>            <C>       
Net income (loss)                        $  547,913     $  693,228          $ (120,899)    $  850,965

Weighted average
    shares outstanding                    3,293,074      1,913,080           2,439,074      1,661,747

Dilutive effect after application
    of treasury stock method

    Restricted shares                       111,656         96,423             105,809         64,282
    Employee stock options                   38,516              -              16,849              -

Shares used in calculating
    diluted income per share              3,443,246      2,009,503           2,561,732      1,726,029

Basic net income (loss) per share        $     0.17     $     0.36          $    (0.05)    $     0.51

Diluted net income (loss) per share      $     0.16     $     0.34          $    (0.05)    $     0.49
</TABLE>
#### GAGHAGEN et al. v. LEHMER, Ex'r.

No. 23967.

Jan. 29, 1935.

*373Huser & Huser and E. Huser, for plaintiffs in error.

James O. Wright, for defendant in error.

CORN, J.

This is an appeal to review an order of the district court of Okfuskee, county overruling a motion to vacate a default. judgment against the defendants upon promissory notes and for the foreclosure of two real estate mortgages on lands located in Seminole and Okfuske.e counties.

Said action was filed March 21, 1930. Summonses were regularly issued, and according to the return of the deputy sheriff of Seminole county were served on both of the defendants herein on the 27th day of March, 1930. O. M. Serán and Wm. G. Johnston were also defendants in the lower court, but are not parties to this appeal. Judgment was rendered for the plaintiffs on the 5th day of May, 1930. A part of the judgment is as follows:

> “And the court, having examined the process served upon them and each of them, finds that the said Ella Gaghagen and Clarence Gaghagen and each of them were duly served with summons more than 20 days prior to this date, and have each failed and refused to plead, answer, or demur, and are decreed to be in default, and the allegations of the plaintiff’s petition taken as confessed by them and each of. them. ”

On January 19, 1932, after several terms of. said court had passed, the defendants herein filed their motion to vacate the said judgment for the reason they had not been served with summons according to law. And on January 23, 1932, the said defendants filed their amended motion to vacate said judgment. A part of said amended motion is as. follows:

> “These movants further state to the court that, if they are permitted to defend in said action, they will be able to establish certain credits due* on said indebtedness and to reduce the amount of said judgment substantially. *”*

We feel it is not necessary for the purpose of deciding this case to discuss whether the summons in said cause was issued and served according to law, as the amended motion to vacate, filed by the said defendants on the 23rd day of January, 1932, was based on nonjurisdietional ' as well as jurisdictional grounds, and they thereby entered their general appearance in the ease, and for that reason the trial court properly refused to vacate said judgment. The rule is well established by decisions of this court that when a party against whom a default judgment is rendered files a *motion to vacate*said judgment, the same being based upon non jurisdictional as well as jurisdictional grounds, said party enters a general appearance as though said appearance had been made at the trial. See Burnett et al. v. Clayton, 123 Okla. 156, 252 P. 397; Myers v. Chamness, 102 Okla. 131, 228 P. 988; Morgan v. Karcher et al., 81 Okla. 210, 197 P. 433; Lookabaugh v. Epperson, 28 Okla. 472, 114 P. 738; and the cases cited therein.

We therefore hold that the order of the trial court in overruling the motion to va- ' cate said judgment should be, and is, affirmed.

McNEILL, 0. J., OSBORN, V. C. J., and RILEY, BAYLESS, WELCH, PHELPS, and GTBSON, JJ., concur. BUSBY, J., absent.
1The Honorable Gary A. Fenner, United States District Judge for the Western

District of Missouri, sitting by designation. 

2The Honorable Paul A. Magnuson, Chief Judge, United States District Court

for the District of Minnesota. 

United States Court of Appeals

FOR THE EIGHTH CIRCUIT

___________

No. 98-3650

___________

United States of America, *

*

Appellee, *

* Appeal from the United States

v. * District Court for the District 

* of Minnesota.

James Franklin Patten, *

* [UNPUBLISHED]

Appellant. *

___________

Submitted: March 12, 1999

Filed: May 13, 1999

___________

Before BEAM and HEANEY, Circuit Judges and FENNER,1 District Judge.

___________

PER CURIAM.

James Franklin Patten appeals the district court's2 imposition of a twelve-month

sentence under U.S.S.G. § 7B1.4 for violating a condition of his supervised release.
-2-

Having carefully reviewed the record and the parties' briefs, we affirm the district

court's ruling without further discussion. See 8th Cir. R. 47B.

A true copy.

Attest:

CLERK, U.S. COURT OF APPEALS, EIGHTH CIRCUIT.
THE THIRTEENTH COURT OF APPEALS

13-20-00126-CV

Dr. Lalitha Madhav Janaki

v.

Christus Spohn Hospital - Corpus Christi and Christus Spohn Hospital Corpus Christi -

Shoreline

On Appeal from the

319th District Court of Nueces County, Texas

Trial Court Cause No. 2017-DCV-4930-G

JUDGMENT

THE THIRTEENTH COURT OF APPEALS, having considered this cause on 

appeal, concludes that the judgment of the trial court should be affirmed. The Court 

orders the judgment of the trial court AFFIRMED. Costs of the appeal are adjudged 

against appellant.

We further order this decision certified below for observance.

April 8, 2021
48%

52%

Purchase Refinance

October 2015

$28 $341

Billion Billion

YTD 2015

1.38%

4,044

October 2015 Highlights

YTD: ten months ended October 31, 2015

SF delinquency rate is 90+ days; MF rate is 60+ days 

0.03%
Form 6478

Department of the Treasury 

Internal Revenue Service

Biofuel Producer Credit 

▶ Attach to your tax return.

▶ Go to www.irs.gov/Form6478 for instructions and the latest information.

OMB No. 1545-0231

2017

Attachment 

Sequence No. 83

Name(s) shown on return Identifying number

Type of Fuel (a) 

Number of Gallons 

Sold or Used

(b) 

Rate

(c) 

Column (a) x Column (b)

1 Qualified second generation biofuel production (see instructions 

for election) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1

2 Enter the amount from column (c) on line 1. Include this amount in your income for 2017, and enter 

your IRS registration number (see instructions). . . . . . . 2

3 Biofuel producer credit from partnerships, S corporations, cooperatives, estates, and trusts (see 

instructions) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3

4 Add lines 2 and 3. Cooperatives, estates, and trusts, go to line 5. Partnerships and S corporations, 

stop here and report this amount on Schedule K. All others, stop here and report this amount on

Form 3800, Part III, line 4c . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4

5 Amount allocated to patrons of the cooperative or beneficiaries of the estate or trust (see 

instructions) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5

6 Cooperatives, estates, and trusts, subtract line 5 from line 4. Report this amount on Form 3800, 

Part III, line 4c . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6

For Paperwork Reduction Act Notice, see separate instructions. Cat. No. 13605J Form 6478 (2017)
[Federal Register Volume 66, Number 33 (Friday, February 16, 2001)]
[Notices]
[Page 10689]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 01-3926]


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

FEDERAL EMERGENCY MANAGEMENT AGENCY

[FEMA-1354-DR]


Arkansas; Amendment No. 2 to Notice of a Major Disaster 
Declaration

AGENCY: Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA).

ACTION: Notice.

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

SUMMARY: This notice amends the notice of a major disaster for the 
State of Arkansas, (FEMA-1354-DR), dated December 29, 2000, and related 
determinations.

EFFECTIVE DATE: January 8, 2001.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Madge Dale, Response and Recovery 
Directorate, Federal Emergency Management Agency, Washington, DC 20472, 
(202) 646-3772.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The notice of a major disaster for the State 
of Arkansas is hereby amended to include the Hazard Mitigation Grant 
Program among those areas determined to have been adversely affected by 
the catastrophe declared a major disaster by the President in his 
declaration of December 29, 2000:

    All counties in the State of Arkansas are eligible to apply for 
assistance under the Hazard Mitigation Grant Program.


(The following Catalog of Federal Domestic Assistance Numbers (CFDA) 
are to be used for reporting and drawing funds: 83.537, Community 
Disaster Loans; 83.538, Cora Brown Fund Program; 83.539, Crisis 
Counseling; 83.540, Disaster Legal Services Program; 83.541, 
Disaster Unemployment Assistance (DUA); 83.542, Fire Suppression 
Assistance; 83.543, Individual and Family Grant (IFG) Program; 
83.544, Public Assistance Grants; 83.545, Disaster Housing Program; 
83.548, Hazard Mitigation Grant Program.)
James L. Witt,
Director.
[FR Doc. 01-3926 Filed 2-15-01; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6718-02-P
<TABLE> <S> <C>


<ARTICLE>                     5

<LEGEND>
This schedule contains summary financial information extracted from the
registrant's audited consolidated financial statements for the fiscal year ended
June 30, 2000 and is qualified  in its  entirety by reference to such  financial
statements.
</LEGEND>

<CURRENCY>                      U.S. Dollars


<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   Year
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                              JUN-30-2000
<PERIOD-START>                                  JUL-1-1999
<PERIOD-END>                                   JUN-30-2000
<EXCHANGE-RATE>                                          1
<CASH>                                           3,129,593
<SECURITIES>                                     2,155,617
<RECEIVABLES>                                      953,163
<ALLOWANCES>                                             0
<INVENTORY>                                              0
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                                 6,508,165
<PP&E>                                           1,573,140
<DEPRECIATION>                                           0
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                   8,885,397
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                            1,012,070
<BONDS>                                                  0
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                    0
<PREFERRED>                                          7,336
<COMMON>                                            79,024
<OTHER-SE>                                       6,818,801
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                     8,885,397
<SALES>                                                  0
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                                 5,117,111
<CGS>                                                    0
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                   13,676,892
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                         0
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                         0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                                  29,247
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                 (8,183,438)
<INCOME-TAX>                                             0
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                             (8,183,438)
<DISCONTINUED>                                           0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                          0
<CHANGES>                                                0
<NET-INCOME>                                    (8,183,438)
<EPS-BASIC>                                          (1.10)
<EPS-DILUTED>                                        (1.10)



</TABLE>
#### Rogelio CONCHAS-FERNANDEZ, Petitioner, v. Eric H. HOLDER, Jr., Attorney General, Respondent.

No. 08-73855.

United States Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit.

Submitted Dec. 14, 2010.*

Filed Jan. 6, 2011.

Rogelio Conchas-Fernandez, El Monte, CA, pro se.

Law Offices of Leticia T. Moreno, APC, Commerce, CA, for Petitioner.

Michael Christopher Heyse, Trial, Dana Michelle Camilleri, DOJ-U.S. Department of Justice, OIL, DOJ-U.S. Department of Justice, Washington, DC, CAC-District Counsel, Esquire, Los Angeles, CA, Ronald E. LeFevre, Office of the District Counsel, Department of Homeland Security, San Francisco, CA, for Respondent.

Before: GOODWIN, WALLACE, and THOMAS, Circuit Judges.

*

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

MEMORANDUM **

Rogelio Conchas-Fernandez, a native and citizen of Mexico, petitions for review of the Board of Immigration Appeals’ (“BIA”) order denying his motion to accept an untimely brief. Our jurisdiction is governed by 8 U.S.C. § 1252. We review for abuse of discretion the BIA’s rejection of an untimely brief, *Zetino v. Holder,*622 F.3d 1007, 1012 (9th Cir.2010), and we deny in part and dismiss in part the petition for review.

The BIA was within its discretion in declining to accept Conchas-Fernandez’s untimely brief. *See Zetino,*622 F.3d at 1013 (concluding the applicable regulations indicate the BIA *“could have*considered” the brief, but it was under no obligation to do so, and the BIA did not act arbitrarily, irrationally, or contrary to the law in denying it). Conchas-Fernandez’s contentions that the BIA did not adequately explain its reason for declining to accept the untimely brief or address his ineffective assistance of counsel claim are belied by the record. *Cf. Garcia Gomez v. Gonzales,*498 F.3d 1050, 1051 (9th Cir.2007).

We lack jurisdiction to review ConchasFernandez’s contentions regarding eligibility for a 212(c) waiver and voluntary departure because he failed to raise these issues before the BIA and thereby failed to exhaust his administrative remedies. *33*See Barron v. Ashcroft,*858 F.3d 674, 678 (9th Cir.2004).

PETITION FOR REVIEW DENIED in part; DISMISSED in part.

**

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