alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
#### UNIVERSAL COMMUNICATION SYSTEMS, INC., a Nevada Corporation, Michael J. Zwebner, individually and others similarly situated, Plaintiffs-Appellants, v. TURNER BROADCASTING SYSTEMS, INC., Georgia Corporation, Cable News Network, Inc., Georgia Corporation, et al., Defendants-Appellees.

No. 05-12698

Non-Argument Calendar.

United States Court of Appeals, Eleventh Circuit.

Feb. 14, 2006.

John H. Faro, Faro & Associates, LLC, Miami, FL, for Plaintiffs-Appellants.

Adolfo E. Jimenez, Holland & Knight, Miami, FL, for Defendants-Appellees.

Before ANDERSON, MARCUS and WILSON, Circuit Judges.

PER CURIAM:

Plaintiffs-Appellants Universal Communications Systems (“Universal”) sued Defendants-Appellees Turner Broadcasting Systems (“Turner”) alleging defamation. Universal has failed to demonstrate, at any level of this case, how Turner was responsible (directly or indirectly) for the publication of the allegedly defamatory statements. Accordingly, we AFFIRM the district court’s order dismissing the action and refusing to alter or amend the order of dismissal, and we REMAND the ease to the district coui’t to determine the reasonable attorneys’ fees incurred by appellees in defending this appeal.1

1

. Turner’s motion for damages and costs on appeal under Rule 38 of the Federal Rules of Appellate Procedure is GRANTED in the amount of double costs and reasonable attorneys’ fees in defending this appeal. The Clerk of this Court shall assess the costs, and the amount of attorneys’ fees shall be determined by the district court on remand. Universal’s Motion for Imposition of Professional Sanctions against Turner is DENIED. Turner’s Motion to Strike Motion for Imposition of Professional Sanctions is DENIED as moot.
<partyblock><br><br><div align="center"><b><font size="+1">The People of the State of New 	York, Respondent,<br><br>against<br><br>Orlando Scott, Appellant. </font></b></div><br><br></partyblock>
### Part F—Separation of Staff Officers and Employees
### SAT Report PMN Number: P-13-0338 SAT Date: 3/19/2013 Print Date: 4/1/2013

Related cases : Health related cases :

Concern levels : Type of Concern: Health Eco Comments Level of Concern: 1-2 1

Persistence Bioaccum Toxicity Comments 1 1 1 PMN 3 1 1 Hyd Pdt

Exposure Based Review : Health: N o Ecotox: N o Routes of exposure : Health: Dermal Inhalation Ecotox: N o releases to water Fate: ; Hyd Pdt slow Keywords : Keywords: SENS-DERMAL/RESPIRATORY, IRR, LUNG, ONCO-LUNG Summary of Assessment :
Fate : Fate Summary: P-13-0338 FATE: Liquid with MP < 25 C (E) S = Reacts Hydrolysis half-life = hrs VP < 1.0E-6 torr at 25 C (E) BP > 400 C (E) H < 1.00E-8 (E) POTW removal (%) = PMN 90-99 via hydrolysis; then Hyd Pdt 90-99 via sorptionTime for complete ultimate aerobic biodeg = Hyd Pdt > mo Sorption to soils/sediments = Hyd Pdt strong PBT Potential: PMN P1B1; Hyd Pdt P3B1 *CEB FATE: Migration to ground water = Hyd Pdt slow

Health : Health Summary: Absorption of the low molecular weight fraction is poor all routes based on physical/chemical properties. There is concern for dermal and respiratory sensitization, irritation, lung effects, and oncogenicity from inhalation only based on the isocyanate groups. The MSDS warns for asthma, skin allergies, and respiratory disorders. Low moderate concern.

Ecotox : Test Organism Test Type Test End Point Predicted Measured Comments

fish 96-h LC50 * daphnid 48-h LC50 * green algal 96-h EC50 * fish

_ chronic value * daphnid

_ chronic value *
algal

_ chronic value *
Sewage Sludge 3-h EC50

_ Sewage Sludge

_ Chronic Value _

Ecotox Values Comments: Predictions are based on SARs for Nonionic Polymers- N CO; SAR chemical class = N onionic Polymers- N CO; S = reacts (P); p H7; effective concentrations based on 100% active ingredients and mean measured concentrations; hardness <180.0 mg/L as CaCO3; and TOC <2.0 mg/L;

Factors Values Comments Assessment Factor 10 Concentration of Concern ( p pb) *

SARs N onionic Polymers SAR Class N onionic Polymers- N CO Ecotox Category N onionic Polymers
Ecotox Factors Comments:
SAT Chair: Becky Jones
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

29

30

31

DAY HIGH

 16,631

 17,453

 21,279

 24,169

 24,053

 23,508

 23,434

 23,251

 22,031

 20,439

 20,151

 17,422

 16,613

 19,204

 18,936

 18,243

 20,906

 19,316

 19,795

 18,092

 19,371

 20,004

 17,306

 17,848

 17,646

 17,850

 17,899

 16,642

 14,511

 13,376

 12,657

 6,682

 7,732

 6,992

 6,955

 7,102

 7,376

 7,451

 8,288

 7,674

 8,510

 8,961

 6,223

 8,129

 7,487

 4,820

 8,217

 5,081

 7,645

 8,138

 7,226

 8,629

 5,642

 7,922

 6,185

 9,525

 5,981

 10,172

 10,482

 8,765

 8,004

 7,652

 10,701

 11,007

 11,332

 12,891

 14,273

 14,626

 14,757

 15,046

 13,702

 13,897

 14,511

 13,173

 12,758

 12,481

 11,307

 11,837

 12,139

 12,909

 12,963

 12,919

 13,600

 11,556

 11,836

 11,738

 12,915

 12,283

 13,596

 13,451

 11,400

 10,255

 9,590

LOW MEAN

UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR

U.S. BUREAU OF RECLAMATION-CENTRAL VALLEY PROJECT-CALIFORNIA

AUGUST 2010 WATER QUALITY REPORT RUN DATE: September 9, 2010

ELECTRICAL CONDUCTIVITY, UMHOS 

Comments:

0 reading indicates that the station was out of service.

PORT CHICAGO TOP IN SUISUN BAY
#### In the Matter of Isidore Oshlag.

Referee’s report approved and proceeding dismissed. Order to be settled on notice. Present—Ingraham, P. J., McLaughlin, Laughlin, Clarke and Scott, JJ.
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

DAY HIGH

 3,452

 2,854

 3,296

 3,284

 4,330

 5,581

 6,735

 6,526

 5,994

 5,820

 5,646

 6,828

 6,561

 5,814

 5,120

 4,856

 5,761

 5,771

 6,041

 6,204

 6,917

 7,047

 7,427

 5,429

 5,029

 4,506

 4,504

 4,368

 584

 558

 542

 501

 504

 641

 853

 723

 587

 687

 624

 856

 1,022

 1,054

 1,133

 1,164

 1,047

 1,062

 870

 711

 544

 574

 456

 605

 379

 485

 494

 558

 1,361

 1,310

 1,089

 1,070

 1,308

 1,832

 2,462

 2,455

 2,059

 2,087

 2,221

 2,588

 2,797

 2,641

 2,585

 2,604

 2,734

 2,328

 2,298

 2,551

 2,753

 2,859

 2,914

 1,674

 1,434

 1,381

 1,374

 1,428

LOW MEAN

UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR

U.S. BUREAU OF RECLAMATION-CENTRAL VALLEY PROJECT-CALIFORNIA

FEBRUARY 2002 WATER QUALITY REPORT RUN DATE: March 11, 2002

ELECTRICAL CONDUCTIVITY, UMHOS 

Comments:

0 reading indicates that the station was out of service.

PITTSBURG BOTTOM ON THE SACRAMENTO RIVER
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

29

30

31

DAY HIGH

 149

 153

 172

 161

 218

 194

 181

 164

 141

 147

 149

 159

 167

 181

 194

 204

 203

 198

 199

 195

 306

 300

 294

 0

 0

 0

 0

 259

 291

 295

 290

 99

 75

 108

 109

 89

 150

 133

 88

 94

 99

 95

 94

 114

 108

 123

 118

 125

 117

 98

 137

 126

 256

 251

 0

 0

 0

 0

 251

 239

 237

 237

 117

 113

 129

 130

 149

 173

 154

 123

 117

 122

 129

 136

 143

 149

 157

 163

 163

 164

 163

 166

 200

 269

 262

 0

 0

 0

 0

 253

 256

 255

 252

LOW MEAN

UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR

U.S. BUREAU OF RECLAMATION-CENTRAL VALLEY PROJECT-CALIFORNIA

MARCH 2001 WATER QUALITY REPORT RUN DATE: April 9, 2001

ELECTRICAL CONDUCTIVITY, UMHOS 

Comments:

0 reading indicates that the station was out of service.

RIO VISTA ON THE SACRAMENTO RIVER
(No. 74-CC-601

#### Checker Express Company, Claimant, *vs.*State of Illinois, Department of Transportation, Respondent.

*Opinion filed May 10, 1974.*

Checker Express Company, Claimant, pro se.

William J. Scott, Attorney General; Howard W. Feldman, Assistant Attorney General, for Respondent.

Per Curiam.
#### § 234.53 Computation of the lump-sum refund payment.

(a) The lump-sum refund payment is calculated as follows:

(1) Combine the railroad employee's creditable earnings, including military service, under the Social Security Act and Railroad Retirement Act for each of the years 1951 through 1974;

(2) Determine the amount of the employee's creditable earnings in excess of the amounts for each year shown in the chart in paragraph (b) of this section;

(3) Multiply the results of paragraph (a)(2) of this section by the percentage shown in the chart in paragraph (b) of this section; and

(4) Add the results of paragraph (a)(3) of this section. The total is the amount of the lump-sum refund payment.

(b) *Chart for calculation of lump-sum refund payment.*

| Year | Amount | Percentage |
| --- | --- | --- |
| 1951-53 | $3,600 | 1.5 |
| 1954-56 | 4,200 | 2.0 |
| 1957-58 | 4,200 | 2.25 |
| 1959 | 4,800 | 2.5 |
| 1960-61 | 4,800 | 3.0 |
| 1962 | 4,800 | 3.125 |
| 1963-65 | 5,400 | 3.625 |
| 1966 | 6,600 | 4.2 |
| 1967 | 6,600 | 4.4 |
| 1968 | 7,800 | 3.3 |
| 1969-70 | 7,800 | 4.2 |
| 1971 | 7,800 | 4.6 |
| 1972 | 9,000 | 4.6 |
| 1973 | 10,800 | 4.85 |
| 1974 | 13,200 | 4.95 |
Exhibit 31.4

CERTIFICATION OF PRINCIPAL FINANCIAL OFFICER

PURSUANT TO

SECTION 302
OF THE

SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002

I, Jonathan W. Kim, certify that:



|1. | I have reviewed this annual report on Form 10-K/A of MagnaChip Semiconductor Corporation for the year ended December 31, 2015;
|-- | ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------



|2. | Based on my knowledge, this 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 report.
|-- | ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Dated: April 29, 2016



|                                            
|--------------------------------------------
|/s/ Jonathan W. Kim                         
|Jonathan W. Kim                             
|Chief Financial Officer                     
|(Principal Financial and Accounting Officer)
Proposed Rule: Mandatory Reporting of Greenhouse Gas EmissionsMeeting DocumentationDateStaffContactInformation(Name, email,phone #)Name of Organization(Attach list of allattendees names andemails if possible)Summary of Discussion (e.g., applicability,reporting requirements, etc.)WrittenCommentsProvided?Did they alsosubmit to Docket?Date sent toEPA- CCD06/13/2008EmailCorrespondenceMarian Van Pelt,ICF International,mvanpelt@icfi.com202-862-1129on behalf of EPAunder Contract EPW-07-068, TaskOrder 68Robert RussellRJR Consultingrjrussell1280@msn.com(614) 322-94501 board ft. = 1 inch thick x 12 inches x 12inches square; so there are 12 bd.ft. in 1 cu.ft..Then just going to the listing of the amount ofBlowing Agent per cu.ft yields the followingcalculation:So for example, in the first category of XPSBoardstock; we have 20 MM bt.ft. of foam = 1,666,666 cu.ft. of foam.Going back to what I sent on the amount ofblowing agent used per cu.ft = 0.20 lbs./cu ft.;for XPS boardstock 1,666,666 cu.ft. x 0.20lbs./cu.ft = 333,333.2 lbs. of HFC-134a.The full grouping would look like:(calculations done)XPS Boardstock= 333,333.2 lbs. HFC-134aXPS Sheet = 33,333.2 lbs. HFC-152aPU, Domestic Refrigeration= 630,000 lbs.HFC-245fa / HFC-134a CommercialRefrigeration= 83,333.3 lbs. HFC-245fa /HFC-134a PU Sandwich Panels= 52,500 lbs.HFC-134aN/AN/A
I 

116TH CONGRESS 

2D SESSION H. R. 5709 

To require the Comptroller General to evaluate and issue a report on the 

structural and economic impacts of climate resiliency at the Federal 

Emergency Management Agency, including recommendations on how to 

improve the building codes and standards that the Agency uses to prepare for climate change and address resiliency in housing, public buildings, and infrastructure such as roads and bridges. 

IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES 

JANUARY 29, 2020 

Mr. NEGUSE (for himself and Mr. ROONEY of Florida) introduced the following bill; which was referred to the Committee on Transportation and 

Infrastructure 

A BILL 

To require the Comptroller General to evaluate and issue 

a report on the structural and economic impacts of climate resiliency at the Federal Emergency Management 

Agency, including recommendations on how to improve 

the building codes and standards that the Agency uses 

to prepare for climate change and address resiliency in 

housing, public buildings, and infrastructure such as 

roads and bridges. 

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


kjohnson on DSK79L0C42PROD with BILLS
2 

•HR 5709 IH

1 SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE. 

2 This Act may be cited as the ‘‘Climate Resilient Com3 munities Act’’. 

4 SEC. 2. CLIMATE RESILIENCY REPORT BY GAO. 

5 (a) IN GENERAL.—Not later than 1 year after the 

6 date of enactment of this Act and every 5 years thereafter, 

7 the Comptroller General shall evaluate and issue a report 

8 to Congress on the structural and economic impacts of cli9 mate resiliency at the Federal Emergency Management 

10 Agency (FEMA), including recommendations on how to 

11 improve the Agency’s use of building codes and standards 

12 to prepare for climate change and address resiliency in 

13 housing, public buildings, and infrastructure such as roads 

14 and bridges. 

15 (b) REPORT ISSUES.—The report required under 

16 subsection (a) shall include the following: 

17 (1) Economic analysis of the benefits to consid18 ering and prioritizing resiliency when building new 

19 infrastructure. 

20 (2) Number of structures (buildings, roads, 

21 bridges) that were not destroyed because of pre-dis22 aster mitigation planning, and the resultant cost 

23 savings. 

24 (3) Economic analysis of the benefits to consid25 ering and prioritizing resiliency when rebuilding 

26 after natural disasters. 


kjohnson on DSK79L0C42PROD with BILLS
3 

•HR 5709 IH

1 (4) Recommendations to improve the building 

2 codes and standards that FEMA uses to consider 

3 climate impacts and risks, including— 

4 (A) flooding; 

5 (B) wildfires; 

6 (C) hurricanes; 

7 (D) heat waves; 

8 (E) droughts; 

9 (F) rises in sea level; and 

10 (G) extreme weather. 

11 (5) Assessment of the building codes and stand12 ards that are currently being used by FEMA to 

13 make resiliency decisions, including recommenda14 tions for updates to such codes and standards. 

Æ 


kjohnson on DSK79L0C42PROD with BILLS
### §1452. Status and allowances of assigned personnel

Any person in the employ or service of the Government of the United States, while assigned for service to or in cooperation with another government under the authority of this chapter, shall be considered, for the purpose of preserving his rights, allowances, and privileges as such, an officer or employee of the Government of the United States and of the Government agency from which assigned and he shall continue to receive compensation from that agency. He may also receive, under such regulations as the President may prescribe, representation allowances similar to those allowed under section 4085 of this title. The authorization of such allowances and other benefits and the payment thereof out of any appropriations available therefor shall be considered as meeting all the requirements of section 5536 of title 5.

(Jan. 27, 1948, ch. 36, title III, §302, 62 Stat. 8; Pub. L. 97–241, title III, §304(a)(1)(B), (3), Aug. 24, 1982, 96 Stat. 292.)

#### **Editorial Notes**

#### Amendments

1982—Pub. L. 97–241 substituted "person in the employ or service of the Government of the United States" for "citizen of the United States", "section 4085 of this title" for "section 1131(3) of this title", and "section 5536 of title 5" for "section 1765 of the Revised Statutes". Prior to the amendment by Pub. L. 97–241, "section 5536 of title 5" had been substituted for "section 1765 of the Revised Statutes" (which was formerly classified to section 70 of title 5) on authority of Pub. L. 89–554, §7(b), Sept. 6, 1966, 80 Stat. 631, the first section of which enacted Title 5, Government Organization and Employees, thereby requiring no change in text.
### §§1920, 1921. Repealed. Pub. L. 87–195, pt. III, §642(a)(2), Sept. 4, 1961, 75 Stat. 460

Section 1920, act Aug. 26, 1954, ch. 937, ch. II, §400, as added Aug. 14, 1957, Pub. L. 85–141, §8(a), 71 Stat. 360; amended June 30, 1958, Pub. L. 85–477, ch. II, §205(a), 72 Stat. 266; July 24, 1959, Pub. L. 86–108, ch. II, §205(a), 73 Stat. 249; May 14, 1960, Pub. L. 86–472, ch. II, §204(a), 74 Stat. 136, authorized assistance for special programs to maintain political or economic stability, for programs of economic development in Latin America and for schools and libraries abroad. See section 2171 et seq. of this title.

Section 1921, act Aug. 26, 1954, ch. 937, ch. II, §401, as added July 24, 1959, Pub. L. 86–108, ch. II, §205(b), 73 Stat. 249; amended May 14, 1960, Pub. L. 86–472, ch. II, §204(b), 74 Stat. 136, authorized contributions to the United Nations Emergency Fund. See section 2221 of this title.
Michigan Supreme Court

Lansing, Michigan

Bridget M. McCormack, Chief Justice

Brian K. Zahra

David F. Viviano

Richard H. Bernstein

Elizabeth T. Clement

Megan K. Cavanagh

Elizabeth M. Welch, Justices

I, Larry S. Royster, Clerk of the Michigan Supreme Court, certify that the

foregoing is a true and complete copy of the order entered at the direction of the Court.

 February 5, 2021

Order 

Clerk

February 5, 2021

161797(58)

161805

PEOPLE OF THE STATE OF MICHIGAN, 

Plaintiff-Appellee, 

SC: 161797

v COA: 343818 

Arenac CC: 17-004120-FH 

MICHELINE NICOLE LEFFEW, 

Defendant-Appellant. _______________________________________ 

PEOPLE OF THE STATE OF MICHIGAN, 

Plaintiff-Appellee, 

SC: 161805

v COA: 344240 

Arenac CC: 17-004119-FH 

JEREMIAH JAMES LEFFEW, 

Defendant-Appellant.

______________________________________/

On order of the Chief Justice, the joint motion of defendants-appellants to extend 

the time for filing their supplemental briefs is GRANTED. The supplemental briefs will 

be accepted as timely filed if submitted on or before March 3, 2021.
xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?


C\_2012007EN.01000401.xml


| | | | |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |
| 10.1.2012 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 7/4 |

---

Information communicated by Member States regarding State aid granted under Commission Regulation (EC) No 800/2008 declaring certain categories of aid compatible with the common market in application of Articles 87 and 88 of the Treaty (General Block Exemption Regulation)

(Text with EEA relevance)

2012/C 7/03

| | | |
| --- | --- | --- |
| Reference number of the State Aid | SA.33212 (11/X) | |
| Member State | Greece | |
| Member State reference number | GR | |
| Name of the Region (NUTS) | Anatoliki Makedonia, Thraki, Kentriki Makedonia, Thessalia, Ipeiros, Ionia Nisia, Dytiki Ellada, Sterea Ellada, Peloponnisos, Attiki, Voreio Aigaio, Kriti Mixed | |
| Granting authority | | | | --- | | General Secretariat for Research and Technology | | Mesogeion Ave 14-18 | | 115 10 Athens | | GREECE | | http://www.gsrt.gr | | |
| Title of the aid measure | European RTD Cooperation — Granting Act of Greek Organizations which succesfully participated to the 1st Call of 8 May 2008 of the European Joint Technological Initiatives: | | | | --- | --- | | 1. | ENIAC (European Nanoelectronics Inititative Advisory Council) & | | | | | --- | --- | | 2. | ARTEMIS (Advanced Research and Technology for Embedded Intelligence and Systems) | | |
| National legal basis (Reference to the relevant national official publication) | | | | | --- | --- | | | PD 274/2000 | | | | | --- | --- | | | PD 103/2003 | | | | | --- | --- | | | Law 1514/1985 | | | | | --- | --- | | | Law 2919/2001 | | | | | --- | --- | | | Law 3614/2007 | | |
| Type of measure | Scheme | |
| Amendment of an existing aid measure | — | |
| Duration | 13.7.2009-31.12.2012 | |
| Economic sector(s) concerned | All economic sectors eligible to receive aid | |
| Type of beneficiary | SME | |
| Annual overall amount of the budget planned under the scheme | EUR 0,68 million | |
| For guarantees | — | |
| Aid Instrument (Article 5) | Direct grant | |
| Reference to the Commission Decision | — | |
| If co-financed by Community funds | ERDF — EUR 2,30 million | |
| Objectives | Maximum aid intensity in % or maximum aid amount in national currency | SME-bonuses in % |
| Experimental development (Article 31(2)(c)) | 83,3 % | 0 % |
| Fundamental research (Article 31(2)(a)) | 83,3 % | — |
| Industrial research (Article 31(2)(b)) | 83,3 % | 0 % |

Web link to the full text of the aid measure:

http://www.gsrt.gr/central.aspx?sId=108I471I1183I646I446316&olID=717&neID=673&neTa=1\_214\_0&ncID=0&neHC=0&tbid=0&lrID=2&oldUIID=aI717I0I108I471I1183I0I2&actionID=load&JScript=1

---
Exhibit 11 -- Statement Re: Computation of Per-Share Earnings

<TABLE>
<CAPTION>
                                                          Three months ended
                                                             November 30,
                                                          1997         1996
                                                        ---------    ---------
Primary

   <S>                                                  <C>          <C>
   Average shares outstanding                           1,606,283    1,571,170
   Net effect of dilutive stock options -
     based on the treasury stock method
     using average market price                           137,434      147,728
                                                        ---------    ---------
   Total                                                1,743,717    1,718,898
                                                        =========    =========
   Net income                                            $209,408     $195,817
                                                        =========    =========
   Per-share amount                                         $0.12        $0.11
                                                            =====        =====
Fully Diluted

   Average shares outstanding                           1,606,283    1,571,170
   Net effect of dilutive stock options -
     based on the treasury stock method
     using the quarter end market price, if
     Higher than average market price                     137,434      147,728
                                                        ---------    ---------
   Total                                                1,743,717    1,718,898
                                                        =========    =========
   Net income                                            $209,408     $195,817
                                                        =========    =========
   Per-share amount                                         $0.12        $0.11
                                                            =====        =====
</TABLE>
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 on Form 10-K of Maidenform Brands, Inc. (the "Company") for the year ended December 29,
2007, as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the "Report"), I, Thomas J. Ward, Chief Executive Officer and Vice Chairman of the Board of Directors 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:



| |  | By: | /s/THOMAS J. WARD
| |  | --- | -----------------
| |  |     | Name:            
| |  |     | Title:           

March 11,
2008

---