alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
<PAGE>

                                                                    Exhibit 32.1

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

     The undersigned officer of Stratagene Corporation ("Stratagene" or the
"Company") hereby certifies that:

     (i) the accompanying quarterly report on Form 10-Q of the Company for the
quarter ended June 30, 2004 (the "Report") fully complies with the requirements
of Section 13(a) or 15(d), as applicable, of the Securities Exchange Act of
1934, as amended (the "Exchange Act"); 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 16, 2004                  By: /s/ Joseph A. Sorge
                                           -------------------------------------
                                           Joseph A. Sorge, M.D.
                                           Chairman, Chief Executive Officer and
                                           President

This certification is provided solely pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350 and
Item 601(b)(32) of Regulation S-K ("Item 601(b)(32)") promulgated under the
Securities Act of 1933, as amended (the "Securities Act"), and the Exchange Act.
In accordance with clause (ii) of Item 601(b)(32), this certification (A) shall
not be deemed "filed" for purposes of Section 18 of the Exchange Act or
otherwise subject to the liability of that section and (B) shall not be deemed
to be incorporated by reference into any filing under the Securities Act or the
Exchange Act, except to the extent that the Company specifically incorporates it
by reference.

A signed original of this written statement required by Section 906 has been
provided to Stratagene and will be retained by Stratagene and furnished to the
Securities and Exchange Commission or its staff upon request.
<PAGE>

                                                                    EXHIBIT 32.2


                            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 uWink, Inc. (the "Company") on Form
10-QSB/A for the quarter ending June 30, 2004 as filed with the Securities and
Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the "Report"), I, Peter F. Wilkniss,
Chief Financial Officer and Chief Accounting Officer of the Company, hereby
certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 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 results of operations of
         the Company.


November 29, 2006                                  By:  /s/ PETER F. WILKNISS
                                                        ------------------------
                                                        Peter F. Wilkniss
                                                        Chief Financial Officer
                                                        Chief Accounting Officer
EXHIBIT 32.2



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



Pursuant to 18 U.S.C. §1350, as adopted pursuant to §906 of the
Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, I, the undersigned Vice President, Chief Financial Officer and Treasurer of First Republic Preferred Capital Corporation (the Company), hereby certify that the Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q of the Company for
the quarterly period ended September 30, 2003 (the Report) fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended, and that information contained in the Report fairly presents,
in all material respects, the financial condition and results of operations of the Company.



Date: November 12, 2003



/s/ WILLIS H. NEWTON, JR.Name: Willis H. Newton, Jr.Title: Vice President, Chief Financial Officer, Treasurer and Director(Principal Financial Officer)
#### Chester MARTIN, Appellant, v. COMMONWEALTH of Kentucky, Appellee.

Court of Appeals of Kentucky.

April 24, 1959.

Robert C. Carter, Glasgow, for appellant.

Jo M. Ferguson, Atty. Gen., Wm. F. Simpson, Asst. Atty. Gen., for appellee.

PER CURIAM.

The appellant, Chester Martin, was convicted of having intoxicating liquor in his possession for sale in local option territory in Barren County, and was sentenced to serve sixty days in jail and fined $100.

Upon examination of the record and the points raised in seeking a reversal of the judgment, we conclude that the trial conformed to established practice and we find no prejudicial error was committed. Cr. Code Prac. § 348.

The motion for an appeal is dismissed
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 Waytronx, Inc. (the "Company"), on Form
10-Q of the quarter ended September 30, 2010, I hereby certify solely for the
purpose of complying with 18 U.S.C.  Section 1350, as adopted to
Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that to the best of my
knowledge:





(1) The
quarterly 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 quarterly report fairly presents, in all material
respects, the financial condition and results of operations of the
Company.





Waytronx,
Inc.





By:
            /s/ William J.
Clough
            
            Dated
      this 15th day of November 2010.William
      J. Clough,Chief
      Executive Officer/President
<PAGE>

EXHIBIT 11 - COMPUTATION OF EARNINGS (LOSS) PER COMMON SHARE

                                                     YEAR ENDED JUNE 30,
                                                  --------------------------

                                                      1997          1996
                                                      ----          ----
PRIMARY INCOME (LOSS) PER COMMON SHARE:

Net income (loss) before extraordinary item       $    836,000   $(3,729,000)
Preferred dividend requirement                       (126,000)      (174,000)
                                                  ------------    -----------
Net income (loss) before extraordinary item 
  applicable to common shareholders               $    710,000   $(3,903,000)
                                                  ------------    -----------
                                                  ------------    -----------
Net income (loss)                                 $    836,000   $(3,613,000)

Preferred dividend requirement                       (126,000)      (174,000)
                                                  ------------    -----------
Net income (loss) applicable to common 
  shareholders                                    $    710,000   $(3,787,000)
                                                  ------------    -----------
                                                  ------------    -----------
Weighted average number of shares outstanding 
     Common stock                                    7,848,000      4,147,000
     5% convertible preferred stock                     24,000
     Convertible notes payable                          64,000
     Common stock purchase options and warrants      3,588,000
     Assumed repurchase of common stock            (1,751,000)
                                                  ------------    -----------

Weighted average number of shares outstanding        9,773,000      4,147,000
                                                  ------------    -----------
                                                  ------------    -----------
Primary income (loss) per common share before 
  extraordinary item                              $       0.07   $     (0.94)
                                                  ------------    -----------
                                                  ------------    -----------
Primary income (loss) per common share            $       0.07   $     (0.91)
                                                  ------------    -----------
                                                  ------------    -----------


                                          38
#### Claire DODSON et al., Appellants, v. Ollie B. LEACHMAN, a Widow, et al., Appellees.

Court of Appeals of Kentucky.

March 29, 1957.

Robt. E. Humphreys, Jr., and John W. Beard of Humphreys, Jones, Beard & Con-nor, Owensboro, for appellants.

Leo King, of King & Craig, Henderson, J. H. Thomas, Calhoun, Robt. T. Sweeney, of Thacker, Sweeney & Lovett, Owens-boro, for appellees.

STANLEY, Commissioner.

This case is the companion of Jones v. Sun Oil Company, Ky., 300 S.W.2d 584. As stated in that opinion, a suit was filed in January, 1951, on behalf of Claire Dodson, Hazel Jones and others pursuant to the provisions of KRS 353.300 et seq., for the purpose of having declared a trust in the minerals underlying certain land in order that it could be leased for oil and gas development. It was alleged in that suit that Mrs. Jones’ interest in the property was that of a defeasible fee; indeed, it was that title that required, or seemed to require, the *587proceeding. Infant defendants who it was alleged had future contingent or ultimate interests in the land because of the de-feasance were represented by a guardian ad litem who recommended that a trustee be appointed and the land leased as prayed in the petition. Judgment was rendered in accordance with the plea and the purpose of the suit on March 19, 1951.

On June 25, 1954, Mrs. Jones filed a motion in the case stating that she had not been before the court in the action and moved the court to drop her name as party-plaintiff; to strike her name and all mention thereof from the pleadings, orders and judgments entered therein; and to strike all mention of her property in all the pleadings, judgments and orders because she did not bring or authorize any other person to bring this action and had not sought any adjudication of her rights in the property described in the complaint. Because her name was used as a party-plaintiff without authority or right, she prayed the court to declare as void ab initio all the orders and judgments entered therein as the same may affect or apply to this her property. This motion was supported by the affidavits of Hazel Jones and Claire Dodson. The motion was overruled, and the appeal is prosecuted for a reversal of that final order.

With the decision affirming the judgment in the suit later brought to accomplish the same end because of the finding that the attorney for the plaintiffs had been authorized to represent Mrs. Jones in the case, it necessarily follows that the order in the present appeal is proper.

We may add for the comfort of the appellant (if any comfort there is) arid the embarrassed attorney in the original proceeding that we think the adjudication of the character of the title in the tract was the proper construction of the will of Mrs. Jones’ mother.

The judgment is affirmed.
### Page 1 of 3 Disposition Comments

Docket No: 

### FAA-2011-0456 These comments are in

Directorate ID: 

### 2011-NE-15-AD response to an SNPRM

Originating Office Tracking No.: 

### SP3201EN-E

Next Step: FRAN SNPRM



### No Comments/Only Supportive Comments Received – If this box is checked, no signatures are

required.

No 

### Has the referenced service information been re vised since the NPRM was issued? If yes,

list latest revision and attach a copy. Note that changes beyond the scope of the previously

published NPRM will require a new notice. Contact the Directorate focal point for guidance.

Instructions: Summarize all comments by issue (not by commenter) and provide your recommended resolution of

each issue. All comments relating to the same i ssue should be discussed together. Do not list all of the issues

from one commenter together. If changes to the AD are required based on the comments received, explain why and

describe in detail what change(s) you recommend. Reference FAA-IR-M-8040.1C Chapter 9.

ISSUE 1: Select one of the following:

If other, explain:

Commenter(s):

What change to the AD action is requested?

Why is the change requested or ho w is it justified?

Do we agree?

If YES, we agree because Make the fo llowing changes to the AD:

If PARTIALLY AGREE , we agree with because We disagree with because

Make the following changes to the AD:

If NO , we don’t agree because

ISSUE 2: Select one of the following:

If other, explain:

Commenter(s):

What change to the AD action is requested?

Why is the change requested or ho w is it justified?

Do we agree?

If YES, we agree because Make the fo llowing changes to the AD:

If PARTIALLY AGREE , we agree with because We disagree with because

Make the following changes to the AD:

### Page 2 of 3 If NO , we don’t agree because

For additional issues, double-click here

### Page 3 of 3 S ignature Section

Signature indicates concurrence with this action.

Originating Office Tracking No.: 

### SP3201EN-E

ASE Printed Name : 

### Alan Strom 8/24/11 Date

Branch Manager Date
Exhibit 10.38

                              XYNERGY CORPORATION

                                  [Letterhead]

VIA FACSIMILE

June 3, 2004

Elliott Weinberg
Richard Hawkins, II
Weinberg & Company, PA
6100 Glades Road, Suite 314
Boca Raton, Florida 33434

Re:  Termination of Audit Services

Dear Elliott:

Since you remain non-responsive to our recent communications (letter & telephone
messages),  we no longer have a good faith  belief that your firm will  complete
our audit.  Therefore,  we want to terminate our relationship with your firm and
get a refund plus damages to cover the costs for  accounting  and legal fees for
this  transaction  which will  entail more than  initiating  another  audit.  To
proceed with this transaction amicably, we require the following:

Refund of $XXXX
Damages in the amount of $XXXXX

If you prefer that we communicate  with your legal  counsel,  please have him or
her call me or Ed Rose directly. In the event that we do not hear from you on or
before Tuesday,  June 8, we will commence proceedings against your firm with the
California  CPA  Board,  PCAOB,  SEC and  continue  with the  filing  of a civil
complaint.

Our desire is to resolve this  situation as quickly and  efficiently as possible
to prevent  further  damages to our company.  A prompt response from you or your
counsel would be in your best interests.

Sincerely,

/s/ Raquel Zepeda
-------------------------
Raquel Zepeda
President

cc:  Edward A. Rose, Jr., Esq.
11 TH COURT OF APPEALS
EASTLAND , TEXAS
JUDGMENT

Steve Orlando Van Horne
, * From the County Court at Law No. 2 of Taylor County, Trial Court No. 2

- 199

- 22

.

Vs. No. 11

- 2 3

- 00 002

- CR * September 12 , 20 2 4

The State of Texas
, * Memorand um Opinion by Williams , J. (P anel consists of: Bailey , C.J., Trotter , J. , and W illiams, J. )

This court has inspected the record in this cause and concludes that there is no error in the judgment below. Therefore, in accordance with this court ’ s opi nion, the judgment of the trial court is in all things affirmed.
HEALTHWATCH, INC.

               EXHIBIT 11 - COMPUTATION OF INCOME (LOSS) PER SHARE

                             JUNE 30, 1997 AND 1996

<TABLE>
<CAPTION>
                                                                1997            1996
                                                            -----------     -----------
<S>                                                        <C>             <C>         
Loss from continuing operations                             $(2,189,260)    $(1,976,713)
Extraordinary item                                                 --             7,974
                                                            -----------     -----------

    Net loss                                                $(2,189,260)    $(1,968,739)
                                                            ===========     ===========

Weighted average shares outstanding before
  exercise of stock options and warrants and repurchases      2,331,960       1,075,666

Increase in weighted average shares outstanding due
  to exercise of stock options and warrants                     108,610          99,768

Decrease in weighted average shares outstanding due
  to repurchase under treasury stock method                        --              --
                                                            -----------     -----------

    Total weighted average shares outstanding                 2,440,570       1,175,434
                                                            ===========     ===========

Income (loss) per share:
      Continuing operations                                 $      (.90)    $     (1.68)
      Extraordinary items                                          --               .01
                                                            -----------     -----------

          Net loss per share                                $      (.90)    $     (1.67)
                                                            ===========     ===========
</TABLE>


*  Not included in calculation as effect would be anti-dilutive.
##### 



Exhibit 32.2 IMPRESO, INC. CERTIFICATE PURSUANT TO SECTION 906
OF SARBANES  OXLEY ACT OF 2002 The undersigned, Susan M. Atkins, Chief Financial Officer of IMPRESO, INC. (the
Company), DOES HEREBY CERTIFY that:  1.
    
    The Companys Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q for the
quarter ended May 31, 2005 (the Report) fully
complies with the requirements of section 13(a) or
15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as
amended; and2.
    
    Information contained in the Report fairly presents,
in all material respects, the financial condition and
results of operation of the Company.3.
    
    Item 4 Controls and Procedures in the Companys Form 10-Q is incorporated herein by
reference. 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. IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the undersigned has caused this instrument to be executed July 15,
2005. /s/ Susan M. AtkinsName:
    
    Susan M. AtkinsTitle:
    
    Chief Financial Officer
 *A signed original of this written statement required by Section 906 has been provided to
the Company and will be retained by the Company and furnished to the Securities and Exchange
Commission or its staff upon request.
I 

112TH CONGRESS 

1ST SESSION H. R. 1236 

To amend the Internal Revenue Code of 1986 to provide a reduced rate 

of excise tax on beer produced domestically by certain small producers. 

IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES 

MARCH 29, 2011 

Mr. GERLACH (for himself, Mr. NEAL, Mr. PAULSEN, Mr. BLUMENAUER, Mr. 

HUNTER, and Mr. DEFAZIO) introduced the following bill; which was referred to the Committee on Ways and Means 

A BILL 

To amend the Internal Revenue Code of 1986 to provide 

a reduced rate of excise tax on beer produced domestically by certain small producers. 

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

3 SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE. 

4 This Act may be cited as the ‘‘Small Brewer Rein5 vestment and Expanding Workforce Act’’ or as the ‘‘Small 

6 BREW Act’’. 


rfrederick on DSKD9S0YB1PROD with BILLS
2 

•HR 1236 IH

1 SEC. 2. REDUCED RATE OF EXCISE TAX ON BEER PRO2 DUCED DOMESTICALLY BY CERTAIN SMALL 

3 PRODUCERS. 

4 (a) IN GENERAL.—Paragraph (2) of section 5051(a) 

5 of the Internal Revenue Code of 1986 is amended— 

6 (1) by redesignating subparagraphs (B) and 

7 (C) as subparagraphs (C) and (D), respectively, and 

8 (2) by striking subparagraph (A) and inserting 

9 the following new subparagraphs: 

10 ‘‘(A) IN GENERAL.—In the case of a brew11 er who produces not more than 6,000,000 bar12 rels of beer during the calendar year, the per 

13 barrel rate of tax imposed by this section shall 

14 be— 

15 ‘‘(i) $3.50 on the first 60,000 quali16 fied barrels of production, and 

17 ‘‘(ii) $16 on the first 1,940,000 quali18 fied barrels of production to which clause 

19 (i) does not apply. 

20 ‘‘(B) QUALIFIED BARRELS OF PRODUC21 TION.—For purposes of this paragraph, the 

22 term ‘qualified barrels of production’ means, 

23 with respect to any brewer for any calendar 

24 year, the number of barrels of beer which are 

25 removed in such year for consumption or sale 

26 and which have been brewed or produced by 


rfrederick on DSKD9S0YB1PROD with BILLS
3 

•HR 1236 IH

1 such brewer at qualified breweries in the United 

2 States.’’. 

3 (b) CONFORMING AMENDMENTS.— 

4 (1) Subparagraph (C) of section 5051(a)(2) of 

5 such Code, as redesignated by this section, is 

6 amended— 

7 (A) by striking ‘‘2,000,000 barrel quan8 tity’’ and inserting ‘‘6,000,000 barrel quantity’’, 

9 and 

10 (B) by striking ‘‘60,000 barrel quantity’’ 

11 and inserting ‘‘60,000 and 1,940,000 barrel 

12 quantities’’. 

13 (2) Subparagraph (D) of such section, as so re14 designated, is amended by striking ‘‘2,000,000 bar15 rels’’ and inserting ‘‘6,000,000 barrels’’. 

16 (c) EFFECTIVE DATE.—The amendments made by 

17 this section shall apply to beer removed during calendar 

18 years beginning after the date of the enactment of this 

19 Act. 

Æ 


rfrederick on DSKD9S0YB1PROD with BILLS
1

Ogulei, David

From: Damico, Genevieve

Sent: Wednesday, January 21, 2015 10:52 AM

To: Czerniak, George; Furey, Eileen; Woolums, Jane; Ogulei, David; Mooney, John

Subject: Call with Veolia

I just spoke with Doug Harris about our counter proposal of carbon injection, enhanced FAP, and fenceline 

monitoring. The result of the call was quite positive. Doug seemed in favor of this approach and that fenceline 

monitoring in particular would be doable. Of course Doug needs to check in with his colleagues and will let me know 

Monday if we are still on for our meeting on the 11th. I did impress upon him the sense of urgency we have for resolving 

this issue and the details of any further negotiations very quickly.
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 OnScreen Technologies, Inc. (the
"Company"), on Form 10-QSB of the quarter ended September 30, 2005, I hereby
certify solely for the purpose of complying with 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, as
adopted to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that to the best of my
knowledge:

(1)  The quarterly 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 quarterly report fairly presents, in all
     material respects, the financial condition and results of operations of the
     Company

OnScreen Technologies, Inc.


By: /s/ Charles R. Baker                     Dated this 9th day of November 2005
    -------------------------------------
    Charles R. Baker
    Chief Executive Officer/Director