alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
Exhibit 32.2

CERTIFICATION PURSUANT TO 
18 U.S.C. SECTION 1350, 
AS ADOPTED PURSUANT TOSECTION 906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002

In connection with the Quarterly Report of Startech Environmental Corporation (the Company) on Form 10-Q/A for the fiscal quarter ended April 30, 2008 as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the Report), I, Peter J. Scanlon, Chief Financial Officer, Treasurer and Secretary of the Company, 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; and                               
|--- | ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
|   
|(2) | The information contained in the Report fairly presents, in all material respects, the financial condition and results of operations of the Company.
|   

By:/s/ Peter J. ScanlonPeter J. ScanlonChief Financial Officer, Treasurer and Secretary 
June 25, 2008

The foregoing certification is being furnished solely pursuant to 18 U.S.C. §1350 and is not being filed as part of the Report or as a separate disclosure document.



---
Exhibit 32




CERTIFICATION PURSUANT TO


18 U.S.C. SECTION 1350,


AS ADOPTED PURSUANT TO


SECTION 906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002





The following certifications are being furnished solely to accompany the Report pursuant to 18 U.S.C. § 1350 and in accordance with SEC Release No. 33-8238. These certifications shall not be deemed “filed” for purposes of Section 18 of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended, nor shall they be incorporated by reference in any filing of the Company under the Securities Act of 1933, as amended, whether made before or after the date hereof, regardless of any general incorporation language in such filing.




Certification of Principal Executive Officer





Pursuant to 18 U.S.C. § 1350, as created by Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, the undersigned officer of Lapolla Industries, Inc., a Delaware corporation (the “Company”), hereby certifies, to his knowledge, that:





(i)
the accompanying Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q of the Company for the period ended June 30, 2010 (the “Report”) fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) or Section 15(d), as applicable, of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended; and





(ii)
the information contained in the Report fairly presents, in all material respects, the financial condition and results of operations of the Company.





Date:       August 12, 2010





LAPOLLA INDUSTRIES, INC.By:
/s/  Douglas J. Kramer, CEODouglas J. KramerPrincipal Executive Officer





A signed original of this written statement required by Section 906 has been provided to Lapolla Industries, Inc. and will be retained by Lapolla Industries, Inc. and furnished to the Securities and Exchange Commission or its staff upon request.





Certification of Principal Financial Officer





Pursuant to 18 U.S.C. § 1350, as created by Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, the undersigned officer of Lapolla Industries, Inc., a Delaware corporation (the “Company”), hereby certifies, to his knowledge, that:





(i)
the accompanying Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q of the Company for the period ended June 30, 2010 (the “Report”) fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) or Section 15(d), as applicable, of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended; and





(ii)
the information contained in the Report fairly presents, in all material respects, the financial condition and results of operations of the Company.





Date:       August 12, 2010





LAPOLLA INDUSTRIES, INC.By:
/s/  Charles Zajaczkowski, CFOCharles ZajaczkowskiPrincipal Financial Officer





A signed original of this written statement required by Section 906 has been provided to Lapolla Industries, Inc. and will be retained by Lapolla Industries, Inc. and furnished to the Securities and Exchange Commission or its staff upon request.
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

MERKLE SIEGEL & FRIEDRICHSEN, P.C. THE HON. JOHN C. COUGHENOUR

Robert J. Siegel

1325 Fourth Ave., Suite 940

Seattle, WA 98101

(206) 624-9392

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

WESTERN DISTRICT OF WASHINGTON, SEATTLE

JAMES S. GORDON, Jr., a married

individual; OMNI INNOVATIONS,

LLC., a Washington limited liability

company,

Plaintiffs,

v.

VIRTUMUNDO, INC, a Delaware

corporation, d/b/a

ADNOWLEDGEMAIL.COM;

ADKNOWLEDGE, INC., a Delaware

corporation, d/b/a

ADKNOWLEDGEMAIL.COM;

SCOTT LYNN, an individual; and

JOHN DOES, I-X,

Defendants.

NO. CV06-0204JCC

DECLARATION OF ROBERT J.

SIEGEL IN RESPONSE TO

DEFEDNANTS' MOTION FOR

SUMMARY JUDGMENT 

[SEALED DOCUMENT]

I Robert J. Siegel state and declare as follows:

1. I am counsel of record for Plaintiffs in this matter. 

DECLARATION OF ROBERT J. SIEGEL IN

RESPONSE TO DEFENDANTS' MOTION FOR

SUMMARY JUDGMENT 

GORDON v. VIRTUMUNDO GROUP, INC.

- 1

 i.Justice Law, P.C.

1325 Fourth Ave., Suite 940

Seattle, WA 98101

Phone: 206-304-5400

Fax: 206-624-0717

Case 2:06-cv-00204-JCC Document 106 Filed 02/12/2007 Page 1 of 2

Gordon v. Virtumundo Inc et al Doc. 106

Dockets.Justia.com
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

2. Attached hereto as Exhibit “A” are true and correct copies of numerous complaints by

recipients of unwanted commercial email from both Defendants Virtumundo and

AdKnowledge, which copies were provided in response to Plaintiff's discovery requests.

These documents were designated as “Confidential” by Defendants, and accordingly are

filed under Seal. (The documents are submitted herewith in accordance with this Court's

Minute Order of 12/19/06.)

I declare under penalty of perjury under the laws of the State of Washington that the foregoing is

true and correct. 

SIGNED this 12th day of February, 2007, at Seattle, Washington.

i.Justice Law, P.C.

/s/ Robert J. Siegel_________________

ROBERT J. SIEGEL, WSBA #17312

Attorney for Plaintiff

CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE

I hereby certify that on this 12th day of February, 2007, I electronically filed the

DECLARATION OF ROBERT J. SIEGEL IN RESPONSE TO DEFENDANTS’ MOTION

FOR SUMMARY JUDGMENT with the Clerk of the Court using the CM/ECF System

which will send notification of such filing to the following: 

Attorneys for Defendants: Derek A. Newman, Newman & Newman .

Robert J. Siegel, WSBA 

WSBA #17312

ATTORNEY FOR PLAINTIFFS

i.Justice Law P.C.

1325 Fourth Ave., Suite 940

Seattle, WA 98101

bob@ijusticelaw.com

DECLARATION OF ROBERT J. SIEGEL IN

RESPONSE TO DEFENDANTS' MOTION FOR

SUMMARY JUDGMENT 

GORDON v. VIRTUMUNDO GROUP, INC.

- 2

 i.Justice Law, P.C.

1325 Fourth Ave., Suite 940

Seattle, WA 98101

Phone: 206-304-5400

Fax: 206-624-0717

Case 2:06-cv-00204-JCC Document 106 Filed 02/12/2007 Page 2 of 2
[Federal Register Volume 88, Number 187 (Thursday, September 28, 2023)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Page 66694]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2023-21520]


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

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY

40 CFR Part 1054


Control of Emissions From New, Small Nonroad Spark-Ignition 
Engines and Equipment

CFR Correction

    This rule is being published by the Office of the Federal Register 
to correct an editorial or technical error that appeared in the most 
recent annual revision of the Code of Federal Regulations.

0
In Title 40 of the Code of Federal Regulations, Parts 1000 to 1059, 
revised as of July 1, 2023, in Sec.  1054.801, remove the second 
definition of ``Equipment manufacturer'' and place the remaining 
definition in alphabetical order, and reinstate the definition of 
``Engine manufacturer'' in alphabetical order to read as follows:


Sec.  1054.801  What definitions apply to this part?

* * * * *
    Engine manufacturer means the manufacturer of the engine. See the 
definition of ``manufacturer'' in this section.
* * * * *
[FR Doc. 2023-21520 Filed 9-27-23; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 0099-10-P
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<ARTICLE> 5
<MULTIPLIER> 1,000
       
<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   6-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          JAN-30-1999
<PERIOD-END>                               AUG-01-1998
<CASH>                                             740
<SECURITIES>                                         0
<RECEIVABLES>                                    6,911
<ALLOWANCES>                                        98
<INVENTORY>                                    117,318
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                               130,885
<PP&E>                                         121,863
<DEPRECIATION>                                  69,925
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                 205,380
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                          104,794
<BONDS>                                         13,054
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                           210
<OTHER-SE>                                      82,641
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                   205,380
<SALES>                                        259,043
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                               259,043
<CGS>                                          196,376
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                  196,376
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                60,816
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                    14
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                               1,513
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                    324
<INCOME-TAX>                                        69
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                                255
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                       255
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                     0.01
<EPS-DILUTED>                                     0.01
        

</TABLE>
From: inman.j@sbcglobal.net

To: E-OHPSCA2713.EBSA

Subject: Comment: RIN 1210-AB44

Date: Wednesday, September 07, 2011 6:04:57 PM

To Whom It May Concern:

I am writing today to ask in the strongest way possible that you rescind the unjust and coercive

mandate that all "contraceptives" and sterilization procedures be covered by private health insurance

with no co-pay to patients. If you do not reverse course I ask you to expand conscience protections for

any organizations that provide individual and group insurance and have moral or religious objections. I

strongly oppose the government forcing free insurance coverage on Americans especially for drugs and

devices that I oppose because some of these can cause an abortion (such as ella and Plan B).

I also ask you to reconsider your definition of religious employer and offer an authentic conscience

protection for any organization and business that has moral or religious objection to providing such

insurance to their employees. This legal mandate clearly violates the spirit of conscience laws which

prohibit government discrimination against those who object to various health services on moral or

religious grounds. The definition of "religious employer" in the regulation is so narrow as to only include

churches, but will still mean that a host of businesses and organizations that have conscience objections

will be required to choose between either violating their conscience or not being able to offer employees

health insurance.

Please protect the conscience rights of insurers, providers and people like me who object to being

forced by the federal government to offer or subsidize contraceptives and sterilization services, especially

when some of these drugs can take the life of early unborn children. No Americans should be forced by

the federal government to essentially subsidize services they object to. I again urge you in the strongest

way possible to reverse course and remove contraceptives and sterilizations from the list of mandatory

preventive services.

You also need to stay out of Americans Personal Lives.

Sincerely,

John Inman

Waterford, CA 95386
H. Res. 640 

In the House of Representatives, U. S., 

October 1, 2007. 

Whereas the passage of the Goldwater-Nichols Department of 

Defense Reorganization Act of 1986 (Public Law 99– 

433) revoked the law prohibiting consolidation of military 

transportation functions, and President Reagan subsequently ordered the establishment of a United States 

Transportation Command; 

Whereas October 1, 2007, marks the 20th anniversary of the 

activation of the Transportation Command at Scott Air 

Force Base, Illinois; 

Whereas the Transportation Command is comprised of the 

Air Mobility Command at Scott Air Force Base, Illinois, 

the Military Sealift Command at Washington, DC, and 

the Military Surface Deployment and Distribution Command at Scott Air Force Base, Illinois; 

Whereas the mission of Transportation Command is to provide air, land, and sea transportation for the Department 

of Defense, both in times of peace and war; 

Whereas Operation Desert Shield and Operation Desert 

Storm first demonstrated the fully operational capability 

of the Transportation Command with the movement of 

approximately 504,000 passengers, 3,700,000 tons of dry 
2 

•HRES 640 EH 

cargo, and 6,100,000 tons of petroleum products in 7 

months; 

Whereas the Transportation Command has continued to serve 

the Nation during many contingency and peacekeeping 

operations around the world, including United Nations 

operations in Iraq, Rwanda, and Somalia, as well as 

North Atlantic Treaty Organization operations in Serbia 

and Kosovo; 

Whereas the Transportation Command has supported many 

humanitarian relief operations transporting relief supplies 

to victims of foreign and domestic natural disasters; 

Whereas after terrorist attacks killed nearly 3,000 people and 

wounded thousands on September 11, 2001, the Transportation Command became a vital asset in the global 

war on terrorism, supporting members of the Armed 

Forces in Operation Enduring Freedom in Afghanistan, 

in Operation Iraqi Freedom, and around the world; 

Whereas from October 2001 to September 2007, the Transportation Command, its components, and its national 

partners have transported approximately 4,000,000 passengers, 9,000,000 short tons of cargo, and over 

4,000,000,000 gallons of fuel in support of the global war 

on terrorism; and 

Whereas the 2005 quadrennial defense review recognized the 

importance of joint mobility and the critical role that it 

plays in global power projection: Now, therefore, be it 

Resolved, That the House of Representatives— 

(1) honors the sacrifices and commitment of the approximately 155,000 men and women who comprise the 

United States Transportation Command, including ac-
3 

•HRES 640 EH 

tive and reserve components, civilian employees, and contractors; 

(2) honors the families of the United States Transportation Command and their sacrifices while their loved 

ones are deployed around the world; 

(3) owes the men, women, and families of the 

Transportation Command a debt of gratitude; and 

(4) honors the achievements of the Transportation 

Command during the global war on terrorism. 

Attest: 

Clerk.
IV 

110TH CONGRESS 

1ST SESSION H. RES. 669 

Recognizing and honoring the lifetime accomplishments of former 

Congressman Charles Vanik. 

IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES 

SEPTEMBER 20, 2007 

Mr. KLEIN of Florida (for himself, Mr. REGULA, Mr. DINGELL, Mr. STARK, 

and Mrs. JONES of Ohio) submitted the following resolution; which was 

referred to the Committee on House Administration 

RESOLUTION 

Recognizing and honoring the lifetime accomplishments of 

former Congressman Charles Vanik. 

Whereas a native of Cleveland and a grandson of Czechoslovakian immigrants, Charles Vanik completed his undergraduate studies and a law degree at Western Reserve 

University; 

Whereas in the 1930s, his first job as a lawyer was working 

to settle Jewish refugees from Nazi Europe; 

Whereas Charles enlisted in the United States Navy in 1942, 

seeing action in both the Atlantic and Pacific theatres; 

Whereas in 1954, Charles Vanik was elected to the United 

States House of Representatives where he represented 

Cleveland until 1981; 

mstockstill on PROD1PC66 with BILLS

2 

•HRES 669 IH 

Whereas in 1968 he vacated his safe Congressional seat so 

that Louis Stokes could become the first black congressman elected from Ohio; 

Whereas Charles eventually became chairman of the House 

Subcommittee on Trade of the House Committee on 

Ways and Means; 

Whereas Charles authored legislation to create satellite offices for Social Security, thereby allowing seniors everywhere to access Social Security services; 

Whereas Charles authored an amendment to the Trade Act 

of 1974 with Senator Henry Jackson, a measure intended to tie the former Soviet Union’s trade status to 

freely allow Jewish emigration; 

Whereas after the amendment was signed into law, the Soviet 

Union was forced to consider loosening the restrictions 

resulting in a great increase in emigration; and 

Whereas Charles Vanik died in Jupiter, Florida, on August 

29, 2007: Now, therefore, be it 

1 Resolved, That the House of Representatives honors 

2 the lifetime accomplishments and legacy of Charles Vanik 

3 for his numerous contributions to human rights and de4 mocracy, and expresses deep condolences to the Vanik 

5 family on their loss. 

Æ 

mstockstill on PROD1PC66 with BILLS
Case 3:05-cv-05731-RJB Document 119 Filed 04/03/07 Page 1 of 2
Case 3:05-cv-05731-RJB Document 119 Filed 04/03/07 Page 2 of 2
Follow Up Questions for GE

Below is a list of follow up questions ERG has compiled after reviewing GE’s responses to the data 

request sent by ERG/EPA on February 17, 2014. These follow up questions are specific to the material 

included in response to the questions in the data request and do not address any questions regarding 

the Wateree Pilot Testing.

Climate and Heat Exchangers

1. The system being installed in Canada and operational by the third quarter of 2014, is the design 

temperature of 5 degrees C an air temperature or a water temperature? If this 5 degrees C is 

specific to water temperature, what is the lowest air temperature in this area of Canada?

2. How much larger (i.e., size and retention time) was the Canadian system designed for because 

of the low temperatures compared to if it was operating at the temperature used for the design 

used as the basis for the ELG cost curves?

Ammonia Generation

1. GE mentioned the potential to re-formulate the nutrient blend in an effort to minimize the 

amount of ammonia ending up in wastewater. What are the costs associated with this reformulation of the nutrient blend? How would performance of the reformulated blend compare 

to the unaltered nutrient?

Performance Data

1. What is the maximum influent selenium concentration in the Mining Pilot Study? We are 

interested in the exact influent concentrations shown on the chart titled “Total Selenium –

Mining Pilot Study.”

2. Is it possible to get the specific data point values for the “Nitrate/Nitrite Results – FGD Pilot 

Study 2” chart?

3. Selenocyanate is Se+2 oxidation state. What data do you have showing the capability of the 

ABMet system to reduce this form of selenium to elemental selenium? 

Increased Costs for Higher Nitrate/Nitrite

1. If it was determined that a denitrification step was desired to address high influent 

nitrate/nitrite concentrations, what type of denitrification step would you recommend 

installing? For example, would GE install a more typical biological process such as a 

sequencing batch reactor or would GE install a two stage bioreactor treatment system with 

the first stage designed only for nitrogen removal?

2. At what concentration would GE consider a denitrification step may be warranted?

3. EPA has sampling data from two plants that consistently had nitrate levels above 100 mg/L. 

Could we provide you with the data from these plants for you to review and suggest an 

appropriate treatment option, as well as system costs?
Capital & O&M Costs

1. ERG and EPA are investigating whether certain cost elements were included in the cost 

curves provided to EPA by GE back in 2011. Please confirm whether the cost curves GE 

provided include the following:

a. Site prep costs,

b. System start-Up and operator training,

c. Insurance,

d. Electrical work, and 

e. Control equipment.

2. For any of the above elements not included in the costs previously provide to EPA, please 

provide an estimate of those costs?
From: Paul@AidtheChildren.com

To: E-OHPSCA2713.EBSA

Subject: Comment: RIN 1210-AB44

Date: Wednesday, September 07, 2011 5:30:26 PM

To Whom It May Concern:

I am writing today to ask in the strongest way possible that you rescind the unjust and coercive

mandate that all "contraceptives" and sterilization procedures be covered by private health insurance

with no co-pay to patients. If you do not reverse course I ask you to expand conscience protections for

any organizations that provide individual and group insurance and have moral or religious objections. I

strongly oppose the government forcing free insurance coverage on Americans especially for drugs and

devices that I oppose because some of these can cause an abortion (such as ella and Plan B).

I also ask you to reconsider your definition of religious employer and offer an authentic conscience

protection for any organization and business that has moral or religious objection to providing such

insurance to their employees. This legal mandate clearly violates the spirit of conscience laws which

prohibit government discrimination against those who object to various health services on moral or

religious grounds. The definition of "religious employer" in the regulation is so narrow as to only include

churches, but will still mean that a host of businesses and organizations that have conscience objections

will be required to choose between either violating their conscience or not being able to offer employees

health insurance.

Please protect the conscience rights of insurers, providers and people like me who object to being

forced by the federal government to offer or subsidize contraceptives and sterilization services, especially

when some of these drugs can take the life of early unborn children. No Americans should be forced by

the federal government to essentially subsidize services they object to. I again urge you in the strongest

way possible to reverse course and remove contraceptives and sterilizations from the list of mandatory

preventive services.

Sincerely,

Paul Schneider

Sharpsburg, GA 30277
No. P69/62.

protest 63/324 (New York).

No. P69/63.

protest 66/627 (New York).

#### Fred Bronner Corp. *v.*United States, Fred Bronner Corp. *v.*United States,

Maletz, J.

In accordance with stipulation of counsel that the merchandise covered by the foregoing protests consists of “Models of Yesteryear” vehicles similar in all material respects to those the subject of *Fred Bronner Corp.*v. *United States*(57 Cust. Ct. 428, C.D. 2832), the claim of the plaintiff was sustained.
| Skip to Content*Release Date: September 25, 2013* |
|---------------------------------------------------|