alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
P.1 

OAR Box 1865 

Prepped by Charmelle Mathews 

Document Number: 

29) IV-E-17 

Docket Number: 

A-83-27 

Printed 12/3/2008 9:15:27 AM Sheet 29 of 105 
P.2 

A-83-27 

IV-E-17 

CONTACT REPORT 

-r 

Date >J ,^\Ucl/ r M Originator 

CONTACT BY: TELEPHONE ft MEETING D Other 

MorS 

NAME, TITLE & ORGANIZATION Sruec fteua^rfj 

CWev/fc^ uS/1 

ADDRESS & TELEPHONE NUMBER 57 5 /Mdrh. £ ^ 

?V/os 

PURPOSE OR SUBJECT (Give project number if appropriate) 

SUMMARY 

M

r

- Seue^r t ^jiar^ecL ^ c f^df" CtavrcM o/dej prod^Jtt $s,d 

frxdr^t a /ou)-Solfjr fj-e.1 ©;/ (ft$.clod( o;/ j d{ fivt af- t'h' 

f Cys/ierrts. 1^*- ^ tas "^ Svi( fur cc^i Aw r o f o,aS-o.SC> 0 Sw^r. 

"fta. L5p O is prociucecv b^ d<s^lU"kon d^ioC We/iotfno o j /QUJAJJ^I 

CT-JJ^- oils . Chev/rcv\ n&s fujo revduu/vi n^c/rockj j Jx/r/ea n'-^i J^'t^ 

b u t t ^ a/«- OSect /o nrd&t&t jUo l for c<m\ftrs;vr\ fro^e^*? 

/VV~ fie^d^t tas bee^ e^-fV*^ ^ M^j U ia fro^/rdr^y 

5j[[jr ccM kv{" d f r«-^* r M f r

o^^ r fr«ic>tyvi f £>r v/dr-'o^ j cr^c V 

ACTION CD 

Distribution: 
P.3 

• 

^ 

5 

• ^ 

o 

^ 

o / — 

^ 

^ 

c ^ 

0 

-4 

— •** 

o 

(P 

i . ^ 

^ 

0 

<T 

'<D 

^ 

/•o 

3-2 § 

^ C 

In > 

rfilP 

pi p. 

Io T 

O 

o 

*** AC 

XL 

« 

8 

Hob 

^-J^<£ 

r< (-A 

0 o 

— rn 

6 6 

0 d 

4 

c - ' -

^ Q 

0 6 

1, 

- C 

J 

5 

S 

"i ^ 

5 

1 °\ * • 

H o : 

c 

LAO « 

•%o^ 

m m 

Q* 

o o 

0' d 

Ss-e> r ^ 

d d 

0—»^>> 

d o 

O o 

O 0 

P o 

6 Q 

T 5 

o o 

O O 

^ rfi 

^ d 

£ o 

tr <tj 

d o 

o o 

O'O 

° 2 

d 6 

° 5 

t 

o 

P 

-«= * 

->N 

"? 

^ 

o 

o 

d 

0* 

-75 

d 

r— 

0 

3 

c 

-5 

vjlf ^ 

f» y 

d d 

o o 

r-3 

ri rt 

6 d 

VP o 

d o 

O o 

<^^L 

/T3 

P 

£ o 

^*ip 

Od 

^2 

d d 

M 5 iy> 

Od 

0 - ^ 

o d 

o o 

o tf 

o O 

6 <> 

- M o 

UJLiJ 

< 

ns 

\y\ 

c^ 

prt 

o 

'6 

^ 

> 
P.4 

^ 5 Ik. 

rv> ^_ ns 

O d d 

nr — 

o; ^. o 

0*-

* 

O 

d 

o d d 

-TS — — 

d o d 

P o o OP 

d d d o 0 

yp^r^n j 

ns1 

dd°N 

ip 

d 

oi oi O 

IP 

6 

i 

d 

o 

>s 

<&o 

+> A, -IryJ^ oo o 

•\n 0 —.^ilOf^ I^TS rr* r^ r^ "^ 

6 o'oo o 

o7 

0 

05 <^«. 

nS nf • 

o 

o ^ 

nj ni 

A 

• 

\ 

~— 

O d d 

V o—0 ~> o 

rK ^ r^ ^ ~ * 

o' o d o ^ o' 

n V\ 

rs ^r 

o 

r--: 

ns m 

o 

d 

,o —-

\p.<r\ £ 

09

 >« 

1^4 

0 -d d d o 

s^-

^ <5 i J 5 S ^ •' ^ 

*g<tf&\£c£ 

o 

d 

o>~ 

n j 

3^* •Ml 

O 

rv\ 

Jn 

J? 

u 

& 

o 

ft 

KJ 

o 

-a
EX-10.1






EXHIBIT 10.1




AMENDMENT NO. 1 TO EMPLOYMENT AGREEMENT




          This Amendment No. 1 to Employment Agreement (this “Amendment”) is entered into as of March 9,
2009 by and between R.H. Donnelley Corporation, a Delaware corporation (“Company”) and David C.
Swanson (“Executive”).




          WHEREAS, Executive is presently serving as Chairman and Chief Executive Officer of the Company
pursuant to an Amended and Restated Employment Agreement dated as of December 31, 2008 (the
“Agreement”), and the parties hereto desire to amend the Agreement.




          NOW, THEREFORE, in consideration of the premises and mutual covenants and agreements contained
herein, the Company and Executive hereby agree as follows:




          1. Section 8(c)(i) of the Agreement is amended to read as follows:





Base Salary through the Date of Termination at the rate in effect at the time Notice of
Termination, as defined in Section 8(g)(i) herein, is given, or if higher, at the rate in
effect immediately prior to the event or circumstance leading to the termination of
employment, plus a pro-rata (based on number of days employed during calendar year divided
by 360) portion of the actual Bonus, plus all other amounts to which Executive is entitled
under any then-existing compensation or benefit plan of the Company. Such pro-rata Bonus
shall be payable in lump sum (less applicable withholdings) when such awards are generally
distributed to current employees for the current fiscal year, but no later than March 15 of
the year following the year in which the Bonus was earned.



          2. Except as modified and amended hereby, the Agreement shall remain in full force and
effect in accordance with its terms.




          IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the parties hereto have duly executed this Amendment as of the day and
year first above written.




	 	 	 	 	 
	 	 	 
	 	                                                   /s/ David C. Swanson
 	 
	 	David C. Swanson 	 
	 	 	 
	 
	 	R.H. DONNELLEY CORPORATION

 	 
	 	By:  	/s/ Gretchen Zech
 	 
	 	 	Gretchen Zech 	 
	 	 	Senior Vice President, Human Resources
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 

FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA 

PENSACOLA DIVISION 

TIMOTHY BOISVERT, 

 Plaintiff, 

 v. Case No. 3:20cv5612/RV/HTC 

GC SERVICES, LP, 

 Defendant. 

 / 

ORDER OF DISMISSAL

 The Court having been advised that this matter has been 

compromised and settled between the parties (doc. 13), it is ORDERED: 

 (1) This cause is hereby DISMISSED, with prejudice and without 

taxation of costs. 

 (2) In the event settlement is not consummated for any reason, the 

Court reserves the power, upon motion filed by any party within 60 days 

after date, to amend, alter or vacate and set aside this order of dismissal. 

 DONE AND ORDERED this 6th day of October, 2020. 

 Roger Vinson 

ROGER VINSON 

 Senior United States District Judge

Case 3:20-cv-05612-RV-HTC Document 14 Filed 10/06/20 Page 1 of 1
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 quarterly report of Sputnik, Inc. (the “Company”) on Form
      10-QSB for the period ended June 30, 2007 as filed with the Securities and
      Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the “Report”), the undersigned, in the
      capacities and on the dates indicated below, hereby certifies, pursuant to
      18
      U.S.C. Section 1350, as adopted pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley
      Act of 2002, that to his 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/
                David LaDukeName:David
                LaDukeTitle:President,
                Chief Executive Officer, andTreasurer


August
      14, 2007







A
      signed
      original of this written statement required by Section 906 has been provided
      to
      Sputnik, Inc. and will be retained by Sputnik, Inc. and furnished to the
      Securities and Exchange Commission or its staff upon request.
§ 3560.255 Requesting rental assistance. ( a ) *Submitting requests.* Borrowers seeking an allocation of rental assistance for MFH must request the rental assistance from the Agency as follows. ( 1 ) *Renewal rental assistance.* To the extent sufficient funds are available, the Agency will automatically renew expiring rental assistance agreements at the existing number of units.
( 2 ) *New construction units.* Loan applicants proposing to use Agency rental assistance must include their request for rental assistance in their loan proposal in accordance with § 3560.56.
( 3 ) *Servicing units.* Borrowers requesting rental assistance must have tenants or eligible tenant applicants on a waiting list who are RA eligible.
( b ) *Denial of requests.* ( 1 ) If a rental assistance request is denied due to the loan applicant's or borrower's ineligibility, the Agency will send the loan applicant or borrower written notification of the decision with an explanation of the denial.
( 2 ) If a rental assistance request to renew expiring rental assistance agreements is denied because funding is not available, the Agency will notify the borrower and the borrower must notify the tenants of rent increases in accordance with their lease and state and local law. Tenants losing rental assistance due to a lack of Agency funding may quit the lease and vacate the housing without penalty in accordance with the terms of their lease.
( 3 ) Loan applicants or borrowers determined to be eligible for RA as a result of an appeal or funding review will receive RA, if RA funding is available, beginning with the month following the date of the appeal or funding review decision or beginning in the first month that RA funding becomes available.
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 this Quarterly Report of Analytica Bio-Energy Corp., on Form 10-Q for the nine months ended September 30, 2014 as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the "Report"), I, Luiz Brasil, Chief Executive Officer of the Company, certify to the best of my knowledge, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Sec. 1350, as adopted pursuant to Sec. 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that:  (1) Such Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q for the period ended September 30, 2014, fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934; and September 30, 2014 fairly presents, in all material respects, the financial condition and result of operations of Analytica Bio-Energy Corp.  October 20, 2014By:/s/ Luiz BrasilLuiz BrasilPresident and Chief Executive Officer(Principal Executive Officer and Principal Financial Officer)
2005-1621.

#### Ohio Consumers’ Counsel v. Pub. Util. Comm.

Public Utilities Commission, No. 04-1931-EL-AAM. This cause is pending before the court as an appeal from the Public Utilities Commission. Upon consideration of appellant’s motion to consolidate 2005-1621, *Ohio Consumers’ Counsel v. Pub. Util. Comm.,*Public Utilities Commission, No. 04-1931-EL-AAM, 2005-1679, *Ohio Consumers’ Counsel n Pub. Util. Comm.,*Public Utilities Commission, No. 04-1645-EL-AAM, 2006-0536, *Ohio Consumers’ Counsel v. Pub. Util. Comm.,*Public Utilities Commission, No. 05-844-EL-ATA, and 2006-0600, *Ohio Consumers’ Counsel v. Pub. Util. Comm.,*Public Utilities Commission, No. 04-1932-EL-ATA,

IT IS ORDERED by the court that the motion is denied.
9.404 Exclusions in the System for Award

Management.

(a) The General Services Administration (GSA)—

(1) Operates the web-based System for Award Management (SAM), which contains exclusion

records; and

(2) Provides technical assistance to Federal agencies in the use of SAM.

(b) An exclusion record in SAM contains the—

(1) Names and addresses of the entities debarred, suspended, proposed for debarment, declared

ineligible, or excluded or disqualified under the nonprocurement common rule, with cross-references

when more than one name is involved in a single action;

(2) Name of the agency or other authority taking the action;

(3) Cause for the action (see 9.406-2 and 9.407-2 for causes authorized under this subpart) or other

statutory or regulatory authority;

(4) Effect of the action;

(5) Termination date for each listing;

(6) Unique Entity Identifier;

(7) Social Security Number (SSN), Employer Identification Number (EIN), or other Taxpayer

Identification Number (TIN), if available; and

(8) Name and telephone number of the agency point of contact for the action.

(c) Each agency must—

(1) Identify the individual(s) responsible for entering and updating exclusions data in SAM and

assign the appropriate roles;

(2) Remove the exclusion roles in SAM when the individual leaves the organization or changes

functions;

(3) For each exclusion accomplished by the Agency–

(i) Enter the information required by paragraph (b) of this section within 3 working days after the

action becomes effective;

(ii) Determine whether it is legally permitted to enter the SSN, EIN, or other TIN, under agency

authority to suspend or debar; and

(iii) Update the exclusion record in SAM, generally within 5 working days after modifying or

rescinding an action;
(4) In accordance with internal retention procedures, maintain records relating to each debarment,

suspension, or proposed debarment taken by the agency;

(5) Establish procedures to ensure that the agency does not solicit offers from, award contracts to,

or consent to subcontracts with contractors who have an active exclusion record in SAM, except as

otherwise provided in this subpart;

(6) Direct inquiries concerning listed contractors and other entities to the agency or other authority

that took the action; and

(7) Contact GSA for technical assistance with SAM, via the support e-mail address or on the

technical support phone line.

(d) SAM is available via https://www.sam.gov.

Parent topic: Subpart 9.4 - Debarment, Suspension, and Ineligibility
#### § 370.6 Appeals.

If the request for information made under § 370.5 is denied in whole or in part, the requester may file an appeal pursuant to § 1.3(e) of this title. The appeal should be in writing and should be addressed as follows:

Administrator, Animal and Plant Health Inspection Service (FOIA Appeal), Room 313-E, U.S. Department of Agriculture, Washington, DC 20250.

[44 FR 53490, Sept. 14, 1979]
UNPUBLISHED

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

No. 08-8186

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Plaintiff – Appellee,

v. OKANG KAREEM ROCHELLE, Defendant – Appellant.

Appeal from the United States District Court for the Middle District of North Carolina, at Durham. William L. Osteen, Jr., District Judge. (1:05-cr-00112-UA-1)

Submitted: April 8, 2009 Decided: April 15, 2009

Before MICHAEL, GREGORY, and AGEE, Circuit Judges.

Dismissed by unpublished per curiam opinion.

Okang Kareem Rochelle, Appellant Pro Se. Anand P. Ramaswamy, Assistant United States Attorney, Greensboro, North Carolina, for Appellee.

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.2 PER CURIAM: Okang Kareem Rochelle seeks to appeal the district court’s October 6, 2008 oral order disposing of various motions filed by Rochelle. This court may exercise jurisdiction only over final orders, 28 U.S.C. § 1291 (2006), and certain interlocutory and collateral orders, 28 U.S .C. § 1292 (2006); Fed. R. Civ. P. 54(b); Cohen v. Beneficial Indus. Loan Corp. , 337 U.S. 541 (1949). The order Rochelle seeks to appeal is neither a final order nor an appealable interlocutory or collateral order. Accordingly, we dismiss the appeal for lack of jurisdiction. We dispense with oral argument because the facts and legal contentions are adequately presented in the materials before the court and argument would not aid the decisional process.

DISMISSED
#### § 400.408 Safeguards and storage.

Records must be maintained in secured storage with proper safeguards sufficient to enforce the restricted access provisions of this subpart.

[62 FR 28609, May 27, 1997]
UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 06-7572

In Re: CHRISTOPHER R. WOODBERRY,

Petitioner.
On Petition for Writ of Mandamus. (4:05-cv-01440-TLW) Submitted: December 20, 2006 Decided: January 11, 2007 Before WILLIAMS, KING, and GREGORY, Circuit Judges. Petition denied by unpublished per curiam opinion. Christopher R. Woodberry, Petitioner Pro Se. Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.- 2 - PER CURIAM: Christopher R. Woodberry petitions for a writ of mandamus, alleging the district court has unduly delayed acting on his 28 U.S.C. § 2255 motion and motion for recusal. He seeks an order from this court directing the district court to act. Mandamus relief is available only when the petitioner has a clear and indisputable right to the relief sought and there are no other adequate means for obtaining the relief. Allied Chem. Corp. v. Daiflon, Inc. , 449 U.S. 33, 35 (1980); In re Beard , 811 F.2d 818, 827 (4th Cir. 1987). Further, mandamus is a drastic remedy to be used only in extraordinary circumstances. Kerr v. United States Dist. Court , 426 U.S. 394, 402 (1976). The district court dismissed Woodberry’s § 2255 motion on November 3, 2006 , and Woodberry’s mandamus petition is therefore moot. Moreover, Woodberry does not have a clear or indisputable right to recusal. Accordingly, although we grant leave to proceed in forma pauperis, we deny the petition for writ of mandamus. We deny as moot Woodberry’s motion to expedite. We dispense with oral argument because the facts and legal contentions are adequately presented in the materials before the court and argument would not aid the decisional process.

PETITION DENIED
#### The People of the State of New York, Respondent, v Edward Stahl, Appellant.

Judgment, Supreme Court, New York County, rendered on July 17, 1979, unanimously affirmed. The case is remitted to the Supreme Court, New York County, for further proceedings pursuant to CPL 460.50 (subd 5). No opinion. Concur—Murphy, P. J., Kupferman, Birns, and Silverman, JJ.
Page 1 of 1

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

NORTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA

PANAMA CITY DIVISION

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA

v. CASE NO.: 5:03cr5-MCR/GRJ

HERBERT D. BROWN

___________________________/

O R D E R

This cause comes before the court upon magistrate judge’s Report and

Recommendation dated December 28, 2012. (Doc. 132). The parties have been furnished

a copy of the Order and Report and Recommendation and have been afforded an

opportunity to file objections pursuant to Title 28, United States Code, Section 636(b)(1).

I have made a de novo determination of any timely filed objections. (Doc. 135).

Having considered the Report and Recommendation, and any objections timely filed,

I have determined that the Report and Recommendation should be adopted. Accordingly,

it is now ORDERED as follows:

1. The magistrate judge’s Order and Report and Recommendation (doc. 132)

is adopted and incorporated by reference in this order. 

2. The government’s Motion to Dismiss defendant’s motion to vacate (doc. 129)

is GRANTED. 

3. Defendant’s Second Amended Motion to Vacate (doc. 121) is DISMISSED.

4. Defendant’s request for certificate of appealability (doc. 136) is DENIED.

DONE AND ORDERED this 18th day of June, 2013.

 s/ M. Casey Rodgers 

M. CASEY RODGERS

CHIEF UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE
#### Nellie Lohman, appellee, v. Reinhold Nelson, appellant.

Gen. No. 37,514.

O’Connor, F. J., dissenting.

Opinion filed November 5, 1934.

John A. Bloomingston, for appellant. Wright & Kamin, for appellee; Alfred Kamin, of counsel.

Mr. Justice Matchett

delivered the opinion of the court.
§ 500.5 Nuisances. ( a ) The use of loud, abusive, or otherwise improper language; unwarranted loitering, sleeping, or assembly; the creation of any hazard to persons or things; improper disposal of rubbish; spitting; prurient prying; the commission of any obscene or indecent act, or any other unseemly or disorderly conduct; throwing articles of any kind from a building, and climbing upon any part of a building is prohibited.
( b ) Playing of music or creation of other noises of a decibel level high enough to be heard outside of the USNA is prohibited.
-       - Superintendent of Documents
      - 2023-09-01T22:25:39-0400
      - Government Publishing Office, Washington, DC 20401
      - Government Publishing Office
      - Government Publishing Office attests that this document has not been altered since it was disseminated by Government Publishing Office
# OAR Box 1818 Prepped by Ollie Stewart



### Document

Number: 

# 25 ) ll-C-2 2 Docket Number: 

# A-87-1 1

Printed 11/6/2008 3:12:44

PM Sheet 25of 79 P. 1

### AUG I I 198 7 UNITE D STATE S ENVIRONMENTA L PROTECTIO N AGENC Y AN N ARBOR . MICHIGA N 4810 5 

### A -67-// . P. 2

OFFIC E O F A W AN D RADIATIO N

Mr . Ralph Hitchcoc k Director , Offic e o f Vehicl e Safet yStandard s Nationa l Highwa

yTraffi c Safet yAdministratio n (NRM-10 ) 40 0 7th Street , S W Washington , DC 2059 0 Mt-UlsHiU u '•'NVWdNMtNrALPROTfeCllO N

AGENC Y 

## Ail 

## l 8 

## m eENTHA J wmgT

Dear Mr . Hitchcock : Thank s fo r the tim e an d effor t investe d b yyo u an

d your staf f i n reviewing an d commenting on our draf t rul e for onboar d refuelin

g vapo r controls . Consultatio n wit h NHTSAi s importan t in this , rulemaking t o ensur e tha t vehicl e safet yconcern s ar e identifie d an

d addresse d an

d tha t overal l moto r vehicl e safet y i s no t degrade d wit h th e implementatio n o f onboar d controls . A s yo u ma

yb e aware , a s par t o f our fina l deliberation s o n thi s proposal , EP

Aha s committe d t o a carefu l reviewo f al l safetyissue s an

d a reproposa l o f the rul e t o asses s an y change d circumstance s afte r we receiv e NHTSA' s comment s on th e NPRM . T o assis t i n you r review , enclose d yo u wil l fin d a cop

y o f ou r NPR M an d othe r significan t suppor t document s fo r thi s rulemaking . Som

e comment s fro

mmanufacturer s an d copie s o f our response s t o recen t letter s fro mCongressma n Dingel l on safet y aspect s o f onboar d control s ar e als o enclosed . W e wil l continu e t o provid e yo u copie s o f publi c comment s on ou r proposa l whic h ar e relate d t o moto r vehicl e safety . Hearing s on th e onboar d refueling contro l proposa l ar e bein g planne d for Octobe r i n Washington , bu t the fina l tim e an d dat e have no t ye t bee n set . W e wil l notif yyo u o f the exac t date s an d locatio n o f the hearing s a s soo n a s the yar e finalized .P. 3

Than k yo u fo r you r continue d cooperatio n i n revie wo f the onboar d proposal . Pleas e contac t me a t an ytim e i f yo u hav e an yquestion s o r concern s regarding thi s rulemaking . ncereLte , yours , 

# /L 7A* Charle s II . Gray , Jr . Directo r Emissio n Contro l Technolog yDivisio n Enclosure s
cc : Docke t A-87-1 1
Exhibit 32

SECTION 1350 CERTIFICATIONS OF CHIEF EXECUTIVE OFFICER AND CHIEF FINANCIAL

OFFICER

In connection with the Quarterly Report of Material Sciences Corporation (the Company) on Form 10-Q for the fiscal quarter ended November 30, 2006,
as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the Report), I, Clifford D. Nastas, Chief Executive Officer of the Company, certify pursuant to 18 U.S.C. § 1350, as adopted pursuant to Section 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 result of operations of the Company.
| | --- | ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------



March 19, 2007By:

/s/ Clifford D. NastasClifford D. NastasChief Executive Officer


In connection with the Report, I, James M. Froisland, Senior Vice President, Chief Financial Officer, Chief
Information Officer and Corporate Secretary of the Company, certify pursuant to 18 U.S.C. § 1350, as adopted pursuant to Section 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 result of operations of the Company.
| | --- | ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------



March 19, 2007By:

/s/ James M. FroislandJames M. FroislandSenior Vice President, ChiefFinancial Officer, Chief InformationOfficer and Corporate Secretary