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



Certification of

Chief Financial Officer

of Mannatech, Incorporated



This certification is provided pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002 and accompanies the annual report on Form 10-K (the
Form 10-K) for the year ended December 31, 2003 of Mannatech, Incorporated (the Issuer).



I, Stephen D. Fenstermacher, the Chief Financial Officer of the Issuer certify that to the best of my knowledge:



| | (i) | the Form 10-K fully complies with the requirements of section 13(a) or section 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 (15 U.S.C. 78m(a) or 78o(d)); and
| | --- | -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------



| | (ii) | the information contained in the Form 10-K fairly presents, in all material respects, the financial condition and results of operations of the Issuer.
| | ---- | ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------



Dated: March 15, 2004



/s/     Stephen D. FenstermacherStephen D. Fenstermacher Chief Financial
Officer




Subscribed and sworn to before me

This 15thday of March, 2004



|                           |  |                              
|-------------------------- |  | -----------------------------
|                          
|/s/     Christina Meissner
|Name:                      |  | Christina Meissner           
|Title:                     |  | Notary Public, State of Texas



My
commission expires: March 19, 2006



A signed original of this
written statement required by Section 906 has been provided to Mannatech,

Incorporated and furnished to the Securities and Exchange
Commission or its staff upon request.
Amendment No. 1 to Windstream Performance Incentive Compensation Plan



 Exhibit 10.4 
 AMENDMENT NO. 1 TO 
 WINDSTREAM PERFORMANCE 
 INCENTIVE COMPENSATION PLAN 
 The
Windstream Performance Incentive Compensation Plan (the “Plan”) is amended, effective January 1, 2008, as follows: 
 1.
Article VII of the Plan is hereby superseded and replaced in its entirety as set forth below: 
 “VII. PAYMENT OF AWARDS

 Subject to Section VI hereof, Awards for any Plan Year shall be paid after the end of that Plan Year, but in no event later than
March 15 of the calendar year immediately following the end of that Plan Year.” 
 2. Except as explicitly set forth herein, the
Plan will remain in full force and effect. 
  

			
	WINDSTREAM CORPORATION
		
	By:	 	 /s/ Jeffery R. Gardner

		
	Its:	 	 President and Chief Executive Officer
S,,\~IOD sr~r

!;' ...... ~<l'.

S -- ""u UNITED STATES ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY ~~~W "'1- .,	 REGION IX 

r'i( PR01,1f;..C,'\.fJ 

75 Hawthorne Street
 

San Francisco, CA 94105·3901
 

March 11, 2010 

OFFICE OF THE 

REGIONAL ADMINISTRATOR 

Mary D. Nichols, Chairman
 

California Air Resources Board
 

1001 I Street
 

P.O. Box 2815
 

Sacramento, CA 95812
 

RE:	 Exceptional event requests regarding exceedances ofthe PM25 NAAQS in Shasta County,
 

CA and Plumas County, CA
 

Dear Ms. Nichols: 

This letter responds to ARB's submittal regarding the July 8, 2007 PM25 National
 

Ambient Air Quality Standard (NAAQS) exceedance at the Portola monitor in Plumas County,
 

and ARB's submittal regarding PM2.5exceedances in Plumas and Shasta Counties on June 23,
 

June 26, July 11, July 19, and July 23, 2008. ARB has requested that EPA exclude these
 

exceedances from consideration when making decisions related to Shasta County's and Plumas
 

County's attainment status.
 

Our response to ARB's request is governed by the "Treatment of Data Influenced by
 

Exceptional Events" rule (72 FR 13560, March 22, 2007). After careful consideration of the
 

information provided, we are concurring with ARB's request to flag these exceedances as
 

exceptional events. The basis for our decision is set forth in the enclosed document.
 

If you have any questions or wish to discuss this matter further, please have your staff
 

contact Deborah Jordan, Director ofthe Air Division at (415) 947-8715.
 

Sincerely, 

J¥ed Blumenfc v 

egional Administrator 

Printed on Recycled Paper 
Enclosures 

cc:	 James Goldstene, Executive Officer, California Air Resources Board 

Lynn Terry, Deputy Executive Officer, California Air Resources Board 

Karen Magliano, Chief, Air Quality Data Branch, Planning and Technical Support 

Division, California Air Resources Board 

Gretchen Bennitt, Northern Sierra Air Quality Management District 

Russ Mull, Shasta County Air Quality Management District 

Christa Stewart, Maidu Indians 

Sophia Villaruel, Pitt River Indians
II 

112TH CONGRESS 

1ST SESSION S. 1521 

To provide assistance for agricultural producers adversely affected by 

damaging weather and other conditions relating to Hurricane Irene. 

IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES 

SEPTEMBER 7, 2011 

Mrs. GILLIBRAND (for herself and Mr. SCHUMER) introduced the following 

bill; which was read twice and referred to the Committee on Agriculture, 

Nutrition, and Forestry 

A BILL 

To provide assistance for agricultural producers adversely 

affected by damaging weather and other conditions relating to Hurricane Irene. 

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

3 SECTION 1. AGRICULTURAL ASSISTANCE. 

4 (a) DEFINITIONS.—In this section: 

5 (1) DISASTER COUNTY.—The term ‘‘disaster 

6 county’’ means— 

7 (A) a county included in the geographical 

8 area covered by a qualifying natural disaster 

9 declaration; and 


smartinez on DSK6TPTVN1PROD with BILLS
2 

•S 1521 IS

1 (B) each county contiguous to a county de2 scribed in subparagraph (A). 

3 (2) QUALIFYING NATURAL DISASTER DECLARA4 TION.—The term ‘‘qualifying natural disaster dec5 laration’’ means— 

6 (A) a natural disaster declared by the Sec7 retary in 2011 due to damaging weather and 

8 other conditions relating to Hurricane Irene 

9 under section 321(a) of the Consolidated Farm 

10 and Rural Development Act (7 U.S.C. 

11 1961(a)); or 

12 (B) a major disaster or emergency des13 ignated by the President in 2011 due to dam14 aging weather and other conditions relating to 

15 Hurricane Irene under the Robert T. Stafford 

16 Disaster Relief and Emergency Assistance Act 

17 (42 U.S.C. 5121 et seq.). 

18 (3) SECRETARY.—The term ‘‘Secretary’’ means 

19 the Secretary of Agriculture. 

20 (b) ASSISTANCE.—Of the funds of the Commodity 

21 Credit Corporation, the Secretary shall use $10,000,000 

22 to provide assistance to agricultural producers in disaster 

23 counties through— 


smartinez on DSK6TPTVN1PROD with BILLS
3 

•S 1521 IS

1 (1) the emergency conservation program estab2 lished under title IV of the Agricultural Credit Act 

3 of 1978 (16 U.S.C. 2201 et seq.); and 

4 (2) the emergency watershed protection pro5 gram established under section 403 of that Act (16 

6 U.S.C. 2203). 

Æ 


smartinez on DSK6TPTVN1PROD with BILLS
Exhibit 10.1




Exhibit 10.1


 


January 7, 2008


 


To:       Patrick Johnson


 


Per the Pro-Dex Board of Director’s compensation committee’s
approval on December 4, 2007, your employment agreement of October 16, 2006 is amended
by increasing the bi-weekly salary to $8,076.92, which equals $210,000 per year
as of the first payroll period in 2008, to be paid on or about January 17,
2008.


 


 


/s/ Mark Murphy           


Mark Murphy


Chief Executive Officer 


Pro-Dex
#### Smith *vs.*Ralston.

*Error to Eesmoines.*

On notes and inland bills of exchange, it is not necessary that the presentation and notice of non payment should be made by a Notary, in order to charge the endorser.

Where several promissory notes are declared on, in different counts of the same declaration, it is no ground of error that the jury rendered a general verdict, without specifying on which of the counts it was rendered.

The statement of the facts of this case is sufficiently set forth in the bpinion of the court.

Bbowning, for plaintiff ¡n error.

Roeeb, for defendant.

By the Cohet,

Mason, Chief Justice.

This was an action brought by the defendant against the plaintiff in error, on three promissory notes, on which the said plaintiff was sued as endorser. The principal error complained of however, as designated in 1 he bill of exceptions, relates to but one of Ihese notes. This was drawn at Miiwau-kie, where the drawer resides, and endorsed by Smith to Ralston. To the introduction of this note, the counsel for the defendant below objected, because there was no notarial protest for non payment introduced to the jury. This objection was overruled by the court, on the ground that no protest or notarial certificate of presentment and non payment Was necessary in cases of promissory notes, but that these might be presented by any person other than a Notary Public, and due notice of the non payment thereof would be sufficient to charge the endorser, and that these facts might be proved by ordinary witnesses. From an examination of ail the authorities referred to by the counsel for the plaintiff *88
      *ia*error, which could conveniently be consulted, we find nothing to convince us of any error in this respect in the court below. On the contrary, one of those authorities, 3 Pickering 415, is a direct sanction to the decision below. It was decided in that case that the agency of a Notary Public in the presentment of promissory notes, and givingn otice of non payment, was unnecessary.

On notes and inland bills of exchange, it is only necessary (in order to charge the endorser) that they should be presented for payment, and notice for non payment duly given, Chitty on Bills, 465. This is the evident dictate of reason and expediency, for otherwise as the law has heretofore been, the endorsee oí a note, however small in amount, must relinquish all claim upon the endorser or else call in the assistance of a Notary Public, however distant, to perform an act which could be equally well performed by himself, in presence of his next neighbor.

The only other error assigned is, that the jury rendered a general verdict upon the declaration without stating upon which of the several counts said verdict was rendered. As no authorities have been cited on this point, we shall only say that the want of such specification does not render the proceedings erroneous.

Judgment affirmed.
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<ARTICLE> 5
<CIK> 0000104218
<NAME> B.B. WALKER COMPANY
<MULTIPLIER> 1,000
       
<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   3-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          NOV-02-1996
<PERIOD-END>                               FEB-03-1996
<CASH>                                               1
<SECURITIES>                                         0
<RECEIVABLES>                                   10,851
<ALLOWANCES>                                       628
<INVENTORY>                                     14,640
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                                26,753
<PP&E>                                           8,385
<DEPRECIATION>                                   5,574
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                  30,050
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                           17,821
<BONDS>                                              0
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                         83
<COMMON>                                         1,727
<OTHER-SE>                                       6,297
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                    30,050
<SALES>                                         10,020
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                                10,026
<CGS>                                            7,578
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                   10,693
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                     1
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                   113
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                                 440
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                  (668)
<INCOME-TAX>                                     (219)
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                              (449)
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                     (449)
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                    (.26)
<EPS-DILUTED>                                    (.26)
        

</TABLE>
#### In the Matter of Anthony M., a Child Alleged to be Permanently Neglected. Erie County Department of Social Services, Respondent; Mark M., Appellant.

(Appeal No. 5.)

[700 NYS2d 880]

—Order unanimously affirmed without costs. Same Memorandum as in *Matter of Mark M.*(267 AD2d 1045 [decided herewith]). (Appeal from Order of Erie County Family *1048Court, Mix, J. — Terminate Parental Rights.) Present — Pine, J. P., Lawton, Wisner, Hurlbutt and Balio, JJ.
No. 55556.

#### C. A. Haynes & Co. *v.*United States,

protest 159278-K (New York).

Opinion by

Cline, J.

Following the authorities cited in Abstract 15400 the court dismissed the protest.
UNITED STATES ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY 

RESEARCH TRIANGLE PARK, NC 27711 

JUN 2 S 2010 

Mr. Michael L. Pel an, Regional Environmental Manager 

Lafarge North America - Cement Division 

12950 Worldgate Drive, Suite 500 

Herndon, Virginia 20170 

OFFICE OF 

AIR QUALITY PLANNING 

AND STANDARDS 

Re: Standards of Performance for New Stationary Sources and Emission Guidelines for 

Existing Sources; Commercial and Industrial Solid Waste Incineration (CIS WI) Units; 

Proposed Rule - Request to Extend the Public Comment Period 

Dear Mr. Pelan: 

Thank you for your June 15,2010, letter requesting that the U.S. Environmental 

Protection Agency (EPA) extend the public comment period an additional 30 days for the 

proposed CISWI rule. Your letter states this request is. based on the need to facilitate a 

comprehensive review of the proposal and to allow adequate time to develop a valuable 

response. The published comment period began on June 4, 2010, although the proposed rule was 

available on EPA's website on April 30, 2010. EPA extended the deadline for written comments 

by 15 days (75 FR 32683) to August 3,2010. While EPA understands your concerns and 

appreciates your intent to provide substantive comments, we believe it is in the overall best 

interest to retain the existing comment period. In particular, EPA notes that it must take final 

action on the proposed CISWI rule by December 16, 2010, pursuant to a court order issued by 

the U.S. District Court for the District of Columbia. 

The comment period will close as scheduled on August 3, 2010. Written comments must 

be postmarked no later than August 3, 2010. All interested people are encouraged to participate 

in the rule making process during the comment period. All comments submitted during the 

comment period will be carefully considered. EPA welcomes the opportunity to continue 

working with the Lafarge North America - Cement Division to improve the public involvement 

process. 

.Ie: Toni Wyche Jones, OAQPS 

u;cer Jy 

. 

/J}/)/f/-( ;;~ Charlene Spells 

Natural Resources and Commerce G1'oup 

Sector Policies and Programs Division 

Internet Address (URL) • http://www.epa.gov 

RecycledIRecyclable • Printed wnh Vegetable 011 Based Inks on Recycled Paper (Minimum 25% Postconsumer)
**Summary of EPA Meeting with INDA, Association of Nonwoven Fabrics Industry**  September 1 , 2011
On Thursday , September 1 , 2011, members from the Office of Resource Conservation and Recovery (ORCR) met with members of INDA to answer their questions on the Solvent

- Contaminated Industrial Wipes rulemaking. INDA asked whether and how the 2011 Definition of Solid Waste proposed rule (published July 22, 2011) would impact the wipes final rulemaking. EPA stated that the two rulemakings are separate and that the DSW final rulemaking was not expected to impact the schedule for the wipes final rule.
Attendees : Suzanne Rudzinski, EPA/ORCR Betsy Devlin, EPA/ORCR Charlotte Mooney, EPA/ORCR Amanda Geldard, EPA/ORCR Tracy Atagi, EPA/ORCR Mark Baldwin, EPA/ORCR Jess ica Franken, INDA Karl Bourdeau, Beveridge & Diamond
<PAGE>
                                                                      EXHIBIT 99


     Certification Pursuant to Section 1350 of Chapter 63 of Title 18 of the
                               United States Code

I, Clyde Harrison, the chief executive officer of Rogers International Raw
Materials Fund L.P. certify that (i) the Form 10Q fully complies with the
requirements of Section 13(a) or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934
and (ii) the information contained in the Form 10Q fairly presents, in all
material respects, the financial condition and results of operations of Rogers
International Raw Materials Fund L.P.

                                      /s/ Clyde Harrison
                                   Chief Executive Officer
                                        April 22, 2003


     Certification Pursuant to Section 1350 of Chapter 63 of Title 18 of the
                               United States Code


I, Richard Chambers, the chief financial officer of Rogers International Raw
Materials Fund L.P. certify that (i) the Form 10Q fully complies with the
requirements of Section 13(a) or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934
and (ii) the information contained in the Form 10Q fairly presents, in all
material respects, the financial condition and results of operations of Rogers
International Raw Materials Fund L.P.

                                     /s/ Richard Chambers
                                   Chief Financial Officer
                                        April 22, 2003
Exhibit 32

Certification Pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002

            Pursuant to section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002
            (subsection (a) and (b) of section 1350, chapter 63 of title 18,
            United States Code), each of the undersigned officers of Canal
            Capital Corporation and Subsidiaries, a Delaware corporation (the
            "Company"), does hereby certify that:

            The Quarterly Report of Form 10-Q for the six months ended April 30,
            2004 (the "Form 10-Q") of the Company fully complies with the
            requirements of section 13(a) or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange
            Act of 1934 and information contained in the Form 10-Q fairly
            presents, in all material respects, the financial condition and
            results of operations of the Company.


Date: June 14, 2004                     /S/ Michael E. Schultz
                                        -----------------------
                                        Chief Executive Officer


Date: June 14, 2004                     /S/ Reginald Schauder
                                        -----------------------
                                        Chief Financial Officer


                                       43
No. 49477.

#### Protests 42948-K, etc., of Aoki Taiseido Book Co. (San Francisco).

Opinion by

Kincheloe, J.

It was stipulated that certain of the books in question are the same in all material respects as those passed upon in *Aoki Taiseido*v. *United States*(10 Cust. Ct. 217, C. D. 757). The protests were therefore sustained to’ this extent.
No. 6261.

#### HERCULES REALTY COMPANY, LIMITED, vs. STREETLY & CHADWICK, ET AL.

Syllabus.

1. A judgment, even though confessed, is *prima facie*evidence of the debt and privilege recognized therein.

*1562. A cause of action cannot be set forth by stating merely a proposition of law, but the' facts, must be stated from which such conclusion of law is drawn.

Appeal from the 'Civil District Court for the Parish of Orleans, Division “D,” No. 108,576. Honorable Porter Parker, Judge.

Buck, Walshe & Buck, for plaintiff and appellee.

Dinkelspiel, Hart & Davey, for appellant.

Streetly & 'Chadwick, in propria persona.

His Honor, JOHN ST. PAUL,

rendered the opinion and decree of the Court, as follows:

The first issue arising in this case cannot be more clearly stated and disposed of than by the following extract taken from our opinion in Marfese vs. Nelson, No. 5869 of our docket.

> “It is contended that the landlord # * # has failed to establish as against opponents, his claim, for rent and the privilege securing same. The record shows that on the trial of the rule the landlord introduced in evidence over the objection res inter alios acta interposed by opponents, the record in the main proceedings and the final judgment therein recognizing' his claim for rent as well as his privilege and right of pledge upon the tenant’s property. The objection to this evidence was properly overruled. While such a judgment may not in all cases be binding upon opponents, it was certainly admissible as 'evidence as furnishing at least prima facie proof of the existence of the claims and privileges asserted. ’ ’

See also: 5 An., 401; 4 An., 135; 1 La., 379; 8 N. S., 403, 459.

*157Opinion and decree, December 21st, 1914.

Rehearing refused February 1, 1915.

Writ denied, April 13, 1915.

Nor does the fact that the judgment was confessed deprive it of the character and withhold from it the effect of -any other final judgment.

Hewit vs. Nolan, 11 An., 101; Greenwood vs. New Orleans, 12 An., 431.

The only other question presented is whether or not the following averments of the rule state a cause of action, and permit the opponents to bring forward proof in support thereof; to-wit: that the relations of landlord and tenant do not exist between plaintiff and defendant “because if any lease was made herein, it was made in violation of a prohibitory law of this State, and is therefore null and void.

As the above states a mere proposition of law without stating any facts whatever from which such conclusion may be drawn, it fails to state .a cause of action, and the evidence tendered thereunder was properly excluded.

Seghers vs. Lemattre, 5 An., 263; Sammis vs. Wightman, 12 Sou. Rep., 532 (see Syllabus 7, p. 527).

It is therefore ordered that the judgment appealed from be affirmed.

Judgment affirmed.
No. 74-5933.

#### In re Troy.

C. A. 1st Cir. Certio-rari denied.