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

 

**CERTIFICATIONPURSUANT TO**

**18U.S.C. SECTION 1350,**

**ASADOPTED BY**

**SECTION 906OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002**

 

In connection with the Quarterly Report of Rockwood SpecialtiesGroup, Inc. (the “Company”) on Form 10-Q for the period ended June 30,2008, as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof(the “Report”), I, Robert J. Zatta, Senior Vice President and Chief FinancialOfficer of the Company, certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, asadopted pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that:

 

1.            The Report fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) or15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934; and

 

2.            The information contained in the Report fairly presents, in all materialrespects, the financial condition and results of operations of the Company.

 

 
| Date: August 11, 2008                             |   |
|---------------------------------------------------|--------|
|                                              |   |
| /s/ ROBERT J. ZATTA                          |   |
| Robert J. Zatta                                   |   |
| Senior Vice President and Chief Financial Officer |   |

 

This certification accompanies this Report pursuant to Section 906of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002 and shall not be deemed filed by the Companyfor purposes of Section 18 or any other provision of the SecuritiesExchange Act of 1934, as amended. A signed original of this written statementrequired by Section 906 or other document authenticating, acknowledging orotherwise adopting the signature that appears in typed form within theelectronic version of this written statement required by Section 906, hasbeen provided to the Company and will be retained by the Company and furnishedto the Securities and Exchange Commission or its staff upon request.

 

----
Exhibit 32.1

                    CERTIFICATION OF CHIEF EXECUTIVE OFFICER
                       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 American Home Mortgage Investment
Corp. (the "Registrant") on Form 10-Q for the quarter ended March 31, 2006, as
filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the
"Report"), I, Michael Strauss, Chairman of the Board, Chief Executive Officer
and President of the Registrant, certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, as
adopted pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, to the best
of my knowledge, 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 Registrant.


May 10, 2006
                                    /s/ Michael Strauss
                                 ---------------------------------
                                 Michael Strauss
                                 Chairman, Chief Executive Officer
                                 and President



                                      -53-
***Exhibit 31.2***

* *

Certification of Litigation Trustee Pursuant to

18 U.S.C. Section 1350,

As Adopted Pursuant to

Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002

 

In connection with theQuarterly Report on Form 10-Q of Information Resources, Inc. Litigation ContingentPayment Rights Trust for the quarterly period ended March 31, 2004 as filedwith the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the “Report”),the undersigned hereby certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. § 1350, as adoptedpursuant to § 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that, to the best of theirknowledge:

 

(1)          TheReport fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) or 15(d) of theSecurities Exchange Act of 1934; and

 

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

 

 
| /s/ MONICA  M. WEED |   |
|---------------------|--------|
| Monica M.  Weed     |
| Litigation  Trustee |
| May 24, 2004        |

 

 

This certification accompaniesthe Report pursuant to § 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002 and shall not,except to the extent required by the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, be deemedfiled by the Registrant for purposes of § 18 of the Securities Exchange Act of1934, as amended.

 

1

----
EXHIBIT 32





Section 1350 Certifications







I, Andrew K. Walker, certify that this quarterly report on Form 10-QSB of Allied Bancshares, Inc. for the quarter ended September 30, 2006 containing financial statements fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) and 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 (15 U.S.C. 78m or 78o(d)) and that information contained in this quarterly report fairly presents, in all material respects, the financial condition and results of operations of Allied Bancshares, Inc.







|/s/Andrew K. Walker
President and Chief Executive Officer
|---------------------------------------------------------





|Date:  November 14, 2006
|------------------------



I, Richard E. Bell, certify that this quarterly report on Form 10-QSB of Allied Bancshares, Inc. for the quarter ended September 30, 2006 containing financial statements fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) and 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 (15 U.S.C. 78m or 78o(d)) and that information contained in this quarterly report fairly presents, in all material respects, the financial condition and results of operations of Allied Bancshares, Inc.





|/s/Richard E. Bell
Chief Accounting Officer and Chief Financial Officer
|-----------------------------------------------------------------------



|Date:  November 14, 2006
|------------------------









17
SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF NEW YORK

Appellate Division, Fourth Judicial Department

539 

KA 13-00048 

PRESENT: SCUDDER, P.J., FAHEY, LINDLEY, VALENTINO, AND WHALEN, JJ. 

 

THE PEOPLE OF THE STATE OF NEW YORK, RESPONDENT, 

V MEMORANDUM AND ORDER

GUNNER NORTHRUP, DEFENDANT-APPELLANT.

 

DAVID J. PAJAK, ALDEN, FOR DEFENDANT-APPELLANT. 

DONALD G. O’GEEN, DISTRICT ATTORNEY, WARSAW (MARSHALL A. KELLY OF

COUNSEL), FOR RESPONDENT. 

 

Appeal from a judgment of the Wyoming County Court (Mark H. Dadd,

J.), rendered December 21, 2012. The judgment convicted defendant,

upon his plea of guilty, of robbery in the second degree. 

It is hereby ORDERED that the judgment so appealed from is

unanimously affirmed. 

Memorandum: Defendant appeals from a judgment convicting him

upon his plea of guilty of robbery in the second degree (Penal Law §

160.10 [1]). We conclude that defendant’s waiver of the right to

appeal is valid (see generally People v Bradshaw, 18 NY3d 257, 264;

People v Lopez, 6 NY3d 248, 256), and that it encompasses his

challenge to the amount of restitution ordered because “the exact

amount of restitution was included in the plea agreement” (People v

Thomas, 77 AD3d 1325, 1326, lv denied 16 NY3d 800; see People v

Gordon, 43 AD3d 1330, 1331, lv denied 9 NY3d 1006). In any event,

defendant failed to preserve for our review his challenge to the

amount of restitution inasmuch as he did not object to that amount at

either the plea proceeding or at the time of sentencing, and he did

not request a hearing on that issue (see People v McCarthy, 83 AD3d

1533, 1534, lv denied 17 NY3d 819; People v Sweeney, 79 AD3d 1789,

1789, lv denied 16 NY3d 900; see also People v Horne, 97 NY2d 404, 414

n 3). 

The appeal waiver, however, does not encompass defendant’s

contention concerning the denial of his request for youthful offender

status inasmuch as “[n]o mention of youthful offender status was made

before defendant waived his right to appeal during the plea colloquy”

(People v Anderson, 90 AD3d 1475, 1476, lv denied 18 NY3d 991; see

People v Jones, 107 AD3d 1611, 1611, lv denied 21 NY3d 1043,

reconsideration denied 22 NY3d 956). In any event, “ ‘[h]aving

considered the facts and circumstances of this case,’ ” we reject

defendant’s contention that County Court abused its discretion in
-2- 539 

KA 13-00048 

denying him youthful offender status (People v Guppy, 92 AD3d 1243,

1243, lv denied 19 NY3d 961; see People v Potter, 13 AD3d 1191, 1191,

lv denied 4 NY3d 889; see generally CPL 720.20 [1] [a]), and we

decline to exercise our interest of justice jurisdiction to adjudicate

defendant a youthful offender (see generally People v Shrubsall, 167

AD2d 929, 930-931). Finally, the valid appeal waiver forecloses any

challenge by defendant to the severity of the sentence (see Lopez, 6

NY3d at 255; cf. People v Adams, 94 AD3d 1428, 1429, lv denied 19 NY3d

970; see generally People v Lococo, 92 NY2d 825, 827; People v

Hidalgo, 91 NY2d 733, 737).

Entered: May 2, 2014 Frances E. Cafarell

Clerk of the Court
----

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 

The undersigned, Guoshen Tu, the Chief Executive Officer ofCHINA SECURITY & SURVEILLANCE TECHNOLOGY, INC. (the "Company"), DOES HEREBYCERTIFY that: 

1. 

The Company’sQuarterly Report on Form 10-Q/A for the quarter ended September 30, 2008 (the"Report"), fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) of theSecurities Exchange Act of 1934; and 

2. 

Informationcontained in the Report fairly presents, in all material respects, the financialcondition and results of operation of the Company. 

IN WITNESS WHEREOF, each of the undersigned has executed thisstatement this 5th day of December 2008. 

/s/ Guoshen Tu                                                                    Guoshen Tu Chief Executive Officer (Principal Executive Officer) 

A signed original of this written statement required bySection 906 has been provided to China Security & Surveillance Technology, Inc.and will be retained by China Security & Surveillance Technology, Inc. andfurnished to the Securities and Exchange Commission or its staff upon request.

The forgoing certification is being furnished to theSecurities and Exchange Commission pursuant to § 18 U.S.C. Section 1350. It isnot being filed for purposes of Section 18 of the Securities Exchange Act of1934, as amended, and is not to be incorporated by reference into any filing ofthe Company, whether made before or after the date hereof, regardless of anygeneral incorporation language in such filing. 

 

----
#### UNITED STATES, Appellee v CHARLES E. CULVER, Private, U. S. Marine Corps, Appellant

20 USCMA 217, 43 CMR 57

No. 23,418

December 18, 1970

*Captain Harry N. Lembeck,*USMCR, was on the pleadings for Appellant, Accused.

*Lieutenant Colonel Charles J. Keever,*USMC, and *Commander Michael F. Fasanaro, Jr.,*JAGC, USN, were on the pleadings for Appellee, United States.

Opinion of the Court

Darden, Judge:

Issues concerning the failure of the military judge to assure himself that accused’s pretrial request for trial by military judge alone was understandingly made and his failure to advise the accused of his right to retain appointed military counsel if he elected civilian counsel or military counsel of his own choosing, if reasonably available, were the subject of consideration in our recent cases of United States v Jenkins, 20 USCMA 112, 42 CMR 304 (1970), and United States v Turner, 20 USCMA 167, 43 CMR 7 (1970). The findings and sentence in this case, however, must be overturned because the appellant did not submit before or at the inception of trial his request, in writing, to be tried by military judge alone. United States v Dean, 20 USCMA 212, 43 CMR 52 (1970).

Accordingly, the decision of the United States Navy Court of Military Review is reversed. The findings of guilty and sentence are set aside. The record of trial is returned to the Judge Advocate General of the Navy. Another trial may be ordered.

Judge Ferguson concurs.

Quinn, Chief Judge

(dissenting) :

I would affirm jurisdiction on the basis of my dissent in United States v Dean, 20 USCMA 212, 43 CMR 52 (1970), and uphold the sufficiency of the advice as to counsel on the authority of United States v Turner, 20 USCMA 167, 43 CMR 7 (1970).
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

1

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

KRISTOPHER M. RICHARDSON,

Plaintiff, No. CIV S-04-2625 MCE KJM P

vs.

HIGH DESERT STATE PRISON, et al.,

Defendants. FINDINGS & RECOMMENDATIONS

 /

By an order filed May 3, 2006, this court ordered plaintiff to complete and return

to the court, within thirty days, the USM-285 forms necessary to effect service on defendants. 

That thirty day period has since passed, and plaintiff has not responded in any way to the court’s

order. Accordingly, IT IS HEREBY RECOMMENDED that this action be dismissed without

prejudice. See Fed. R. Civ. P. 41(b).

These findings and recommendations will be submitted to the United States

District Judge assigned to the case, pursuant to the provisions of 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(l). Within

twenty days after being served with these findings and recommendations, plaintiff may file

written objections with the court. The document should be captioned “Objections to Findings

and Recommendations.” Plaintiff is advised that failure to file objections within the specified 

/////

Case 2:04-cv-02625-MCE -KJM Document 27 Filed 07/10/06 Page 1 of 2
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

2

time may waive the right to appeal the District Court’s order. Martinez v. Ylst, 951 F.2d 1153

(9th Cir. 1991).

DATED: July 7, 2006.

______________________________________

UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE

/mp

rich2625.fusm

Case 2:04-cv-02625-MCE -KJM Document 27 Filed 07/10/06 Page 2 of 2
Before the First Division,

December 23, 1940

No. 45041.

#### Protests 611899-G. etc., of Gross & Gross, Inc. (New York).

Opinion by

Brown, J.

It was stipulated that the merchandise is similar to that the subject of *Cohn*v. *United States*(4 Cust. Ct. 166, C. D. 314). The protests were therefore sustained.
|  |
|--|

*ORNL Reporter* is published for the    employees and retirees of Oak Ridge National Laboratory

**Media Releases**
**ORNL Review**
**ORNL Newsroom**
**DOE Pulse**
**Ridgelines Archives**

Number 162, Spring/Summer, 2017 (PDF)

Number 161, Winter, 2017 (PDF)

Number 160, Fall, 2016 (PDF)

Number 159, Summer, 2016    (PDF)

Number 158, Spring, 2016    (PDF)

Number 157, Winter, 2016   (PDF)

Number 156, Fall, 2015   (PDF)

Number 155, Summer, 2015   (PDF)

Number 154, Spring, 2015   (PDF)

Number 153, Winter, 2015 (PDF)

Number 152, Fall, 2014 (PDF)

Number 151, Summer, 2014 (PDF)

Number 150, Spring, 2014 (PDF)

Number 149, Winter, 2014 (PDF)

Number 148, Fall, 2013 (PDF)

Number 147, Summer, 2013 (PDF)

Number 146, April-May, 2013 (PDF)

Number 145, February-March, 2013     (PDF)

Number 144, December, 2012-January, 2013 (PDF)

Number 142,October-November, 2012     (PDF)

Number 142, August-September, 2012   (PDF)

Number 141, June-July, 2012   (PDF)

Number 140, April-May, 2012   (PDF)

Number 139, February-March, 2012   (PDF)

Number 138, December, 2011-January, 2012 (PDF)

Number 137, October-November, 2011   (PDF)

Number 136, September, 2011 (PDF)

Number 135, August, 2011 (PDF)

Number 134, July, 2011 (PDF)

Number 133, June, 2011 (PDF)

Number 132, May, 2011 (PDF)

Number 131, April, 2011 (PDF)

Number 130, March, 2011   (PDF)

Number 129, February, 2011   (PDF)

Number 128, January, 2011 (PDF)
**2010 *Reporter* Archives**
**2009 *Reporter* Archives**
**2008 *Reporter* Archives**
**2007 *Reporter* Archives**
**2006 *Reporter* Archives**
**2005 *Reporter* Archives**
**2004 *Reporter* Archives**
**2003 *Reporter* Archives**
**2002 *Reporter* Archives**
**2001 *Reporter* Archives**
**2000 *Reporter* Archives**
**1999 *Reporter* Archives**

**Bill Cabage**, Editor, ornlreporter@ornl.gov**ORNL Office:** P.O. Box 2008, Oak Ridge, TN 37831-8266, Building 4500-North, MS 6266**DOE Inspector General Hotline:** 1-800-541-1625

    [ ORNL Reporter Home |    ORNL Home | Comments  ]
No. 54691.

#### Olavarria *&*Co., Inc., et al. *v.*United States,

protests 24105-K, etc. (New York).

Opinion by

Ekwall, J.

Following the authorities cited in Abstract 15400 the-court dismissed the protests.
1.
    
    I have reviewed this Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q of GTx, Inc.;
 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;
 3.
    
    Based on my knowledge, the financial statements, and other financial information included in
this report, fairly present in all material respects the financial condition, results of
operations and cash flows of the registrant as of, and for, the periods presented in this
report;
 4.
    
    The registrants other certifying officer(s) and I are responsible for establishing and
maintaining disclosure controls and procedures (as defined in Exchange Act Rules 13a-15(e) and
15d-15(e)) and internal control over financial reporting (as defined in Exchange Act Rules
13a-15(f) and 15d-15(f)) for the registrant and have:
     5.
    
    The registrants other certifying officer(s) and I have disclosed, based on our most recent
evaluation of internal control over financial reporting, to the registrants auditors and the
audit committee of the registrants board of directors (or persons performing the equivalent
functions):
    /s/ Mark E. MostellerMark E. Mosteller, CPAVice President and Chief Financial Officer
USGS HomeContact USGSSearch USGS

The Water Cycle - USGS Water Science School

LinksGlossaryHelp

      - Home
      - Water Basics
      - Water Properties
      - Water Cycle (Adults)
      - Water Cycle (Kids)
      - Surface Water
      - Groundwater
      - Water Quality
      - Water Use
      - Activities
      - Photos
      - Q&A
      - Teachers
      - Contact

 Back to previous page

Dosieroj preseblaj, Bildo:- PDF  (838mm x 610mm - 2 Mb) 
- JPG  (432mm x 279mm - 0.4 Mb) 
- JPG  (poster - 2.5 Mb)
La Ciklo de Akvo por Infanoj
La Usona Geologia Servo (angle U.S. Geological Survey, USGS) kaj la Organizaĵo pri Nutrado kaj Agrikulturo de la Unuiĝintaj Nacioj (angle Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations, FAO) kreis skemon de la akvociklo por infanoj kaj bazlernejoj.

Iri reen al: La ciklo de akvo (English).

Por vidi dosierojn en PDF-formo, uzu Adobe Reader (senpage) aû similan programon.

AccessibilityFOIAPrivacyPolicies and Notices

U.S. Department of the Interior |			U.S. Geological Survey                        	URL: http://water.usgs.gov/edu/watercycle-kids-esperanto.html	Page Contact Information: Howard Perlman	Page Last Modified: Friday, 02-Dec-2016 12:52:43 EST
(Reap. Dec. 10493)

#### Andrew Fisher Cycle Co., Inc. *v.*United States

Entry No. 824195-1/2, etc.

(Decided April 18, 1963)

*Brooks & Brooks*for the plaintiff.

*John W. Douglas,*Assistant Attorney General, for the defendant.

Wilson, Judge:

Counsel for the parties have submitted the appeals for reappraisement enumerated in the attached schedule for decision upon stipulation, on the basis of which I find that export value, as defined in section 402(b), Tariff Act of 1930, as amended by the Customs Simplification Act of 1956, is the proper basis for the determination of the values of the tires and tubes involved, which were imported from Holland.

On the basis of the said stipulation, I find the export value of the said merchandise to be invoiced unit prices as entered.

Judgment will issue accordingly.
**EXHIBIT 32.1**

 

**CERTIFICATION OF**

**DANIEL J. THOMAS**

 

**PURSUANT TO 18 U.S.C.§ 1350**

 

I, Daniel J. Thomas, of Concentra OperatingCorporation (the “Company”), hereby certify that the accompanying report on Form 10-K for the fiscal year ended December 31, 2003, and filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the “Report”), fullycomplies with the requirements of Section 13(a) or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934. 

 

I further certify that the information contained in the Report fairly presents, in all material respects, the financial condition and results ofoperations of the Company. 

 

March 29, 2004
-80 -79 -78 -77 -76 -75 -74

 37

 38

 39

 40

 41

★

▲

▲

▲

▲

★ ▲ ▲ ▲ ▲

 500

 1000

 1500

 100

18 12 06 00

08/17

NOAA HYSPLIT MODEL

 Backward trajectory ending at 2300 UTC 17 Aug 06

 EDAS Meteorological Data

Source

★ at 38.77 N 77.11 W Meters AGL

★

■

■

■

■

★ ■

■ ■

■

★

●

●

●

●

★

● ●

●

●
N OTE : This disposition is nonprecedential. 

# United States **Court of Appeals**  **for the Federal Circuit**

______________________ CARMAZZI GLOBAL SOLUTIONS, INC., Appellant

v.

COMMISSIONER OF SOCIAL SECURITY, Appellee

______________________

2022

- 1231

______________________ Appeal from the Civilian Board of Contract Appeals in No s . 6265, 6273, 6274, 6275, 6276, 6277, 6278, 6280, 6281, 6282, 6283, 6288, 6342, 6343, 6344, Administrative Judge Erica S. Beardsley, Administrative Judge Harold D. Lester Jr., Administrative Judge Joseph A. Vergilio.

______________________

JUDGMENT

______________________

P ATRICK B ERNARD K ERNAN , Whitcomb, Selinsky, PC, Denver, CO, argued for appellant. Also represented by T IMOTHY T URNER

.

B ORISLAV K USHNIR , Commercial Litigation Branch,Civil Division, United States Department of Justice, Washington, DC, argued for appellee. Also represented by B RIAN M. B OYNTON , M ARTIN F. H OCKEY , J R ., P ATRICIA M. Case: 22-1231 Document: 42 Page: 1 Filed: 12/28/2022M C C ARTHY ; B RANDON D ELLAGLIO , D OROTHY M. G UY , T AL K EDEM , A LICE S OMERS , Office of the General Counsel, United States Social Security Administration, Baltimore, MD

.

______________________

T HIS C AUSE ha ving been heard and considered, it is

O RDERED and A DJUDGED :

P ER C URIAM (M OORE , Chief Judge

, L OURIE and P ROST , Circuit Judges ).

AFFIRMED. See Fed . Cir. R. 36.

E NTERED BY O RDER OF THE C OURT

December 28, 2022 Date /s/ Peter R. Marksteiner Peter R. Marksteiner Clerk of Court Case: 22-1231 Document: 42 Page: 2 Filed: 12/28/2022
COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE

FIRST DISTRICT OF TEXAS AT HOUSTON

ORDER

Appellate case name: Terry Smith v. The State of Texas

Appellate case number: 01-12-00661-CR, 01-12-00662-CR, 01-12-00663-CR

Trial court case number: 10-DCR-055807A (Counts I, II, III)

Trial court: 400th District Court of Fort Bend County

Appellant’s brief was first due in the above-referenced appeals on December 3, 2012. 

The Court granted an extension of time to file appellant’s brief through February 1, 2013. On 

February 5, 2013, the Court granted a second extension to file the brief through April 2, 2013, 

stating that, absent extraordinary circumstances, no further extentions would be granted. On 

March 29, 2013, the Court granted a third extension of time to file the brief through May 17, 

2013, once again stating that, absent extraordinary circumstances, no further extentions would be 

granted. On May 9, 2013, appellant filed a fourth motion for extension of time to file appellant’s

brief. The motion is denied. 

Appellant’s brief must be filed no later than May 28, 2013. If appellant’s brief is not 

filed by that date, the Court will abate the appeal for a hearing to determine whether substitute 

counsel should be appointed. See TEX. CODE CRIM. PROC. ANN. art. 26.04(j)(2) (West Supp. 2012); 

TEX. R. APP. P. 38.8(b). 

It is so ORDERED.

Judge’s signature: __/s/_Laura C. Higley______________________________________

 X Acting individually  Acting for the Court

Date: May 22, 2013