alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
**EXHIBIT 99.5** **INSTRUCTIONS TO REGISTERED    HOLDER****OR DTC PARTICIPANT****FROM BENEFICIAL OWNER****FOR****5.95%****SENIOR NOTES DUE 2012****AND****6.35%****SENIOR NOTES DUE 2017****AND****6.80%****SENIOR NOTES DUE 2037****OF****WEATHERFORD INTERNATIONAL,    INC.**     The undersigned hereby acknowledges receipt of the Prospectus    dated    [          ],    2007 (the “Prospectus”) of Weatherford    International, Inc., a Delaware corporation (the    “Company”), and the accompanying Letter of    Transmittal (the “Letter of Transmittal”) that    together constitute the Company’s offer (the    “Exchange Offer”) to exchange an aggregate    principal amount of up to $600,000,000 of its 5.95% Senior    Notes due 2012 (the “2012 Exchange Notes”), an    aggregate principal amount of up to $600,000,000 of its    6.35% Senior Notes due 2017 (the “2017 Exchange    Notes”) and an aggregate principal amount of up to    $300,000,000 of its 6.80% Senior Notes due 2037 (the    “2037 Exchange Notes,” and collectively with    the 2012 Exchange Notes and the 2017 Exchange Notes, the    “Exchange Notes”) registered under the    Securities Act of 1933, as amended (the “Securities    Act”), for like principal amounts of its outstanding    unregistered 5.95% Senior Notes due 2012 (the “2012    Outstanding Notes”), 6.35% Senior Notes due 2017    (the “2017 Outstanding Notes”) and    6.80% Senior Notes due 2037 (the “2037 Outstanding    Notes,” and collectively with the 2012 Outstanding    Notes and the 2017 Outstanding Notes, the “Outstanding    Notes”), respectively. Capitalized terms used but not    defined herein have the meanings assigned to them in the    Prospectus and the Letter of Transmittal.     This will instruct you, the registered holder, as to the action    to be taken by you relating to the Exchange Offer with respect    to the Outstanding Notes held by you for the account of the    undersigned, on the terms and subject to the conditions in the    Prospectus and Letter of Transmittal.     1. The principal amount of the 2012 Outstanding Notes held    by you for the account of the undersigned is (fill in the    amount):     $              (principal amount of 2012 Outstanding Notes).     With respect to the Exchange Offer, the undersigned hereby    instructs you (check appropriate box):  o     To TENDER ALL of the 2012 Outstanding Notes held by you for the    account of the undersigned.  o     To TENDER the following 2012 Outstanding Notes held by you for    the account of the undersigned
Exhibit 31.6

CERTIFICATION OF THE CORPORATE CONTROLLER AND TREASURER

I, Chris J. Robertson, certify that:

| 1. | I have reviewed this Annual Report on Form 10-K/A of Agilysys, 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; |
|----|------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|

Dated: July 29, 2020

 

| By:    |   | /s/ Chris J. Robertson             |
|--------|--------|------------------------------------|
|   |   | Chris J. Robertson                 |
|   |   | Corporate Controller and Treasurer |
|   |   | (Principal Accounting Officer)     |
##### 



EXHIBIT 99.2
 NOTICE OF GUARANTEED
    DELIVERY
    BRIGHAM EXPLORATION COMPANY
  For Tender of
    Any And All Outstanding
    95/8% Senior
    Notes Due 2014
    In Exchange For
    95/8% Senior
    Notes Due 2014
    Which Have Been Registered Under The Securities Act of 1933
    Pursuant to the Prospectus
    Dated          ,
    2007
  5 8
  THE EXCHANGE OFFER AND
    WITHDRAWAL RIGHTS WILL EXPIRE AT 5:00 P.M., NEW YORK CITY
    TIME,
    ON          ,
    2007 UNLESS THE OFFER IS EXTENDED. TENDERS MAY BE WITHDRAWN
    PRIOR TO 5:00 P.M., NEW YORK CITY TIME, ON THE EXPIRATION
    DATE.
  The Exchange Agent for the
    Exchange Offer is:
 WELLS FARGO BANK, N.A.
  Delivery by Registered
    or Certified Mail:

Facsimile Transmissions:
    (Eligible Institutions Only)

Overnight Delivery
    or Regular Mail:WELLS FARGO BANK, N.A.
    Corporate Trust Operations
    MAC
    N9303-121
    P.O. Box 1517
    Minneapolis, MN
    55480-1517

(612) 667-6282To Confirm by Telephone
    or for Information Call:(800) 344-5128

WELLS FARGO BANK, N.A.
    Corporate Trust Operations
    MAC
    N9303-121
    Sixth and Marquette
    Minneapolis, MN 55479   In Person or by Hand Only:




---



##### 



Ladies
    and Gentlemen:
    Aggregate Principal Amount

Name(s) of Registered holder(s):Amount Tendered:
    $ _
    _
    *Certificate No(s) (if available):$ _
    _   (TOTAL
    PRINCIPAL AMOUNT REPRESENTED BY NOTES CERTIFICATE(S))
          *
    
    Must be in integral multiples of $1,000.   2




---



##### 



PLEASE
    SIGN HERE
  X
    _
    _XX
    _
    _X Signature(s) of Owner(s) or
    Authorized
    Signatory                         Date
    attorney-in-fact,
  PLEASE
    PRINT NAME(S) AND ADDRESS(ES)
  Name(s):  Capacity:  Address(es):  GUARANTEE
    OF DELIVERY
    (NOT TO BE USED FOR SIGNATURE GUARANTEE)
  Rule 17Ad-15
    Name of Firm

Authorized SignatureAddress

TitleZip Code

(Please Type or Print)   Area Code and Telephone Number:  Date:  NOTE:
    DO NOT SEND CERTIFICATES FOR NOTES WITH THIS FORM. CERTIFICATES
    FOR NOTES SHOULD ONLY BE SENT WITH YOUR LETTER OF TRANSMITTAL.
  3
#### DAVIS v. STATE.

No. 18230.

Court of Criminal Appeals of Texas.

May 27, 1936.

Rehearing Denied June 24, 1936.

T. R. Mears, of Gatesville, for appellant.

Lloyd W. Davidson, State’s Atty., of Austin, for the State.

CHRISTIAN, Judge.

The offense is burglary; the punishment, confinement in the penitentiary for two years.

On the 10th of June, 1935, some one burglarized a school building in Hamilton, Tex. Several typewriters were taken from the building. One of said machines was traced to the possession of appellant. E. C. Densman, a witness for the state, testified that he bought a typewriter from appellant shortly after the burglary. He sold said typewriter to M. A. Walker, who returned it to the school authorities. It was positively identified as the property of the school. Appellant introduced witnesses whose testimony raised the issue that he purchased the typewriter from some person whose name was unknown to them. Appellant did not testify.

Appellant brings forward several bills of exception in which he complains of the action'of the court in permitting witnesses to testify as to the serial number on the stolen typewriter. We think said testimony was admissible! At all events, the typewriter was positively identified as the property of the school.

Appellant objected to the charge on his affirmative defense on the ground that it was too restrictive. We quote said charge as follows: . “If you have a reasonable doubt as to whether or not he (the defendant) purchased the typewriter in question, you will give the defendant the benefit of such doubt and acquit him and say by your verdict ‘not guilty.’ ”

We think the charge adequately presented appellant’s affirmative defense.

The judgment is affirmed.

*391PER CURIAM.

The foregoing opinion of the Commission of Appeals has been examined by the judges of the Court of Criminal Appeals and approved by the court.

On Motion for Rehearing.

HAWKINS, Judge.

Appellant again insists that the defensive charge on purchase was calculated to mislead the jury into believing that appellant would not be entitled to acquittal of the burglary charge unless he purchased the typewriter from the true owner. We fail to perceive any basis for such a position. The state had proven beyond a reasonable doubt that the true owner lost the typewriter by burglary and theft. If the evidence had suggested that appellant bought the property with knowledge that it had been stolen, then his guilty connection as a “receiver” might have called for an instruction more comprehensive than the one given, but under the facts here presented we ^remain of the opinion that the charge given was sufficient.

The motion for rehearing is overruled.
### BIG PINEPAIUTE TRIBE OF THE OWENS 

### VALLEY Big Pine Paiute lndian Reservation January 6,2011

Jared Blumenfeld, RegionalAdministrator U. S. Environmental Protection Agency, Region IX 

### 75 Hawthorne Street San Francisco, CA 94105-3901 Subiect: Comments on Revised NAAQS for NO, Dear Mr. Blumenfeld: Thank you for notifying the Big Pine Paiute Tribe ofthe Owens Valley (Tribe) of the opportunity to comment prior to US EPA's designating lands as "attainment," "nonattainment," or "unclassifiable" with regardtostrengthened NationalAmbient Air Quality Standards for Nitrogen Dioxide. US Highway 395 bisectsthe Big Pine lndian Reservation, so the Tribe has some concern about NO2levels. Currently, however, NO2is not monitoredon our Reservation. Therefore, the Tribe recommendsthe Big Pine lndian Reservation be designated as "unclassifiable." The Tribe looks forward to results of EPA's planned near-roadway monitoring network. Please keep us informedof any proposed changes for our region.
Sincerely,
Virgil Moose Tribal Chairperson

Big Pine Tribal Office P.O.Box 700 825 South Main Street s Big Pine, CA 93513 Phone: 760-938-2003 Fax: 760-938-2942
#### In the Matter of the Accounting of Richard T. Baylis, as Administrator of the Estate of Edmund P. Meade, Deceased.

Surrogate’s Court, Nassau County,

January 27, 1958.

*Brennan Gibson & Korshin*for petitioner.

*Smith $ Carroad*for Boyal Indemnity Co., creditor.

*Mona Kirsch Oppenheim*for Nassau-McGowan Paint & Hardware Inc., objectant.

*Harold Green,*as special guardian.

*Roland A. Crowe*for creditors-subcontractors.

*Luke A. Mercadante*for L. Martone & Sons, creditor.

*John R. Hawthorne*for North Shore Boofing Co.

*Louis J. Lefkowits, Attorney-General,*for Workmen’s Compensation Board.

John D. Bennett, S.

The objections of Nassau-McGowan Paint & Hardware, Inc., are dismissed for failure to prosecute.

*35The Boyal Indemnity Company seeks a preference in the payment of its claim of $1,291.76, pursuant to the provisions of section 130 of the Workmen’s Compensation Law and section 212 of the Surrogate’s Court Act. The sum represents premiums due on a workmen’s compensation policy and an employees’ disability benefits policy.

A preference for these claims representing workmen’s compensation and employees’ disability benefits premiums is denied *(Matter of O’Brien,*194 Misc. 44). Although there is some authority to the contrary *(Matter of Epstein,*154 Misc. 776; *Matter of Goodwin,*163 Misc. 273; *Matter of Ricciardi,*189 Misc. 174), the better rule seems to be that set forth in *Matter of O’Brien (supra).*(See *Matter of Cawley,*207 Misc. 534; *Matter of Nifeneger,*177 Misc. 198; *Matter of Rowland,*169 Misc. 303; *Matter of Phillips,*169 Misc. 86.)

The incidental relief requested in the petition is granted.

As to the fees for the attorneys representing the accountant, said attorneys are directed to file an affidavit of their services and give notice to all interested parties by mailing that such affidavit has been filed. Any objection to the fees requested in said affidavit should be received by this court not later than 15 days following the date of service of the notice.

The settlement of the account will be held in abeyance pending determination of the attorneys’ fees.
NOTE:Thisprocessflowdiagramisanexampleandisforillustrativepurposesonly.Donotcopythisflowdiagramforuseincompletingthesurvey.Submitcopiesofprocessflowdiagramsthatarecurrentlyavailablefortheprocessunit.Donotsubmit“blockflowdiagrams.”Ifprocessflowdiagramsarenotavailable,thensubmitcopiesofpipingandinstrumentationdiagrams(P&IDs).Thisprocessflowdiagramdoesnotintendtoimplythatequipment,streams,oremissionpointsnotshownherearetobeexcludedfromtheflowdiagramsubmittedwithyourresponsetothissurvey.Process Unit ID: P-1PVC Section 114 Example Process Flow Diagram08/14/2009INITIATORSTORAGETANK/TOTEU-1ADDITIVESTORAGETANK/TOTEU-2VCUNLOADINGREACTORU-8SLURRYBLENDTANKU-10ADDITIVECHARGETANKU-7INITIATORCHARGETANKU-6VCCHARGETANKU-5VCHOLDINGTANKU-4VCSTORAGEU-3STRIPPERU-9KNOCK‐OUTPOTU-18CONDENSERU-20WASTEWATERCOLLECTIONTANKU-19WWSTRIPPERU-21INCINERATORC-1SCRUBBERC-2CENTRIFUGEU-11DRYERU-12SCREENU-13STORAGESILO2U-15STORAGESILO1U-14SCRUBBERC-3RESINBAGGINGU-16GASHOLDERU-17PUMPSEALWATEREP-7W-3EP-9W-8EP-8HEATEXCHANGERWATERFROMHEATEXCHANGERSCOOLINGTOWERU-22W-5WATERTOHEATEXCHANGERSWATERFROMCOOLINGTOWERWATERTOCOOLINGTOWEREP-10W-6EP-1W-4S-2S-1EP-2W-7W-1W-2W-9S-3EP-3EP-4S-7S-4EP-5EP-6S-8S-6S-5OVERSIZE
Exhibit 32

CERTIFICATION OF CEO AND CFO 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 GT Solar International, Inc. (the "Company") on Form 10-Q for the
three months ended October 2, 2010, as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the "Report"), each of the undersigned Chief Executive Officer and Chief Financial
Officer of the Company, certify pursuant to 18 U.S.C. §1350, as adopted pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that to the best of his
knowledge:

Date:
November 10, 2010

/s/ THOMAS GUTIERREZ Thomas Gutierrez President and Chief Executive OfficerDate: November 10, 2010/s/ RICHARD J. GAYNOR Richard J. Gaynor Vice President and Chief Financial Officer


---



QuickLinks
<PAGE>


                                                                      EXHIBIT 23


                          INDEPENDENT AUDITORS' CONSENT

The Board of Directors of
J. C. Penney Funding Corporation:


We consent to incorporation by reference in the Registration Statements on Form
S-8 (Nos. 33-28390, 33-66070, 33-66072, 333-33343, 333-27329, 333-45536,
333-62066, 333-73140) and Form S-3 (No. 333-57019, 333-74122) of J. C. Penney
Company, Inc. of our report dated February 20, 2003, relating to the balance
sheets of J. C. Penney Funding Corporation as of January 25, 2003 and January
26, 2002, and the related statements of income, reinvested earnings, and cash
flows for each of the years in the three-year period ended January 25, 2003,
which report appears in the Annual Report on Form 10-K of J. C. Penney Funding
Corporation for the year ended January 25, 2003.



                                               /s/ KPMG LLP


Dallas, Texas
April 10, 2003
# Official Journal L 276/26 A

| | ISSN 1725-2555 |
| --- | --- |
| Official Journal
  of the European Union | L 276 |
| | |
| English edition | Legislation | Volume 4726 August 2004 |

ISSN 1725-2555

Official Journal

of the European Union

L 276

English edition

Legislation

Volume 4726 August 2004

---

| Contents | | I   Acts whose publication is obligatory | page |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |
| | | Commission Regulation (EC) No 1505/2004 of 25 August 2004 establishing the standard import values for determining the entry price of certain fruit and vegetables | 1 |
| | * | Commission Regulation (EC) No 1506/2004 of 24 August 2004 establishing unit values for the determination of the customs value of certain perishable goods | 3 |
| | * | Commission Regulation (EC) No 1507/2004 of 25 August 2004 prohibiting fishing for cod by vessels flying the flag of Sweden | 9 |
| | * | Commission Regulation (EC) No 1508/2004 of 25 August 2004 prohibiting fishing for common sole by vessels flying the flag of Belgium | 10 |
| | * | Commission Regulation (EC) No 1509/2004 of 25 August 2004 prohibiting fishing for cod by vessels flying the flag of Spain | 11 |
| | | Commission Regulation (EC) No 1510/2004 of 25 August 2004 determining the world market price for unginned cotton | 12 |
| | | Commission Regulation (EC) No 1511/2004 of 25 August 2004 fixing the import duties in the rice sector | 13 |

Contents

I   Acts whose publication is obligatory

page

Commission Regulation (EC) No 1505/2004 of 25 August 2004 establishing the standard import values for determining the entry price of certain fruit and vegetables

1

*

Commission Regulation (EC) No 1506/2004 of 24 August 2004 establishing unit values for the determination of the customs value of certain perishable goods

3

*

Commission Regulation (EC) No 1507/2004 of 25 August 2004 prohibiting fishing for cod by vessels flying the flag of Sweden

9

*

Commission Regulation (EC) No 1508/2004 of 25 August 2004 prohibiting fishing for common sole by vessels flying the flag of Belgium

10

*

Commission Regulation (EC) No 1509/2004 of 25 August 2004 prohibiting fishing for cod by vessels flying the flag of Spain

11

Commission Regulation (EC) No 1510/2004 of 25 August 2004 determining the world market price for unginned cotton

12

Commission Regulation (EC) No 1511/2004 of 25 August 2004 fixing the import duties in the rice sector

13

| EN | Acts whose titles are printed in light type are those relating to day-to-day management of agricultural matters, and are generally valid for a limited period.
  The titles of all other Acts are printed in bold type and preceded by an asterisk. |
| --- | --- |

EN

Acts whose titles are printed in light type are those relating to day-to-day management of agricultural matters, and are generally valid for a limited period.

The titles of all other Acts are printed in bold type and preceded by an asterisk.
**REGULATORY EVALUATION**

**Directorate Identifier: 2012** 

**- NM** 
**- 098** 

**- AD** 

**Executive Order 12866:** Could the AD be considered a “significant regulatory action”? YES ( ) explain NO (X) **DOT Regulatory Policies and Procedures:** Is the AD significant? YES ( ) explain NO (X) **Regulatory Flexibility Act:** Will the AD have a significant economic impact on a substantial number of small entities? YES ( ) explain NO (X) **Intrastate Aviation in Alaska:** This AD could affect intrastate aviation in Alaska. I s it appropriate t o include specific requirements for aircraft operated in Alaska, where aviation might be the only mode of transportation? YES ( ) explain NO (X)
##### 



Exhibit 10.37
 US $300,000.00
    
    October 31, 2007
 
 Maker Holder
 Interest
 Payments Maturity Date
 Guaranty. Guaranty Guarantor Guaranteed Obligations
   Prepayment
 Default Event of
Default




---



##### 



Collection Costs
 Waiver
 Transfer
 Governing Law
 Representations and Warranties of Maker
   Representations and Warranties of Guarantor
     2




---



##### 



5
 Holders Address
    
    
    
    Maker:REMOTE KNOWLEDGE, INC.,a Delaware CorporationBy:
    
    /s/ Henry HoustonName:
    
    Henry Houston CFOGuarantor:
    
    Randy S Bayne/s/ Randy S. Bayne
 3
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 Annual Report of Sears Canada Inc. (the “Company”) on Form 40-F for the 52-week period ended January 31, 2015, as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the “Report”), I, E.J. Bird, Chief Financial Officer of the Company, certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. section 1350, as adopted pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that to the best of 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.




Dated:  March 13, 2015


/s/ E.J. BirdE.J. BirdChief Financial Officer(Principal Financial Officer)
July 29, 2011 

Mr. Robert A. Stenevik 

Commemorative Air Force, Inc. 

109 San Medina Lane 

Joshua, TX 76058 

Dear Mr. Stenevik: 

This is in response to your December 28, 2010 request (FAA Docket No. FAA-2002-11285) 

petitioning the Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) on behalf of Commemorative Air 

Force, Inc. to revise conditions and limitations associated with exemption 6802I and further 

amend the exemption by adding Harvard II and MK IV aircraft. 

On March 23, 2011, the FAA issued a moratorium on the issuance of Living History Flight 

Experience (LHFE) exemptions. A copy of the Federal Register notice is enclosed for your 

information. 

This moratorium provides the FAA a needed opportunity to reevaluate the LHFE policy and 

the conditions of issuance of these exemptions. During this moratorium, industry will be 

given an opportunity to provide input to shape the agency’s revised LHFE policy. The FAA 

plans to seek industry input on the evolution of LHFE operations in the private sector, which 

have raised public safety and policy concerns. The FAA plans to hold a public meeting, 

which will be announced in the Federal Register, to give industry a venue to provide input 

that will be considered as the agency reevaluates and revises the LHFE policy. 

Current LHFE exemption holders can continue to operate under their current exemption. If 

the exemption is due to expire during the moratorium, the FAA will accept and process 

petitions to extend current exemptions in accordance with the established regulatory 

exemption process. If a change is required (i.e., removal of an aircraft) the FAA will accept 

these changes in accordance with the regulatory process. Additionally, during the 

moratorium, as petitioners request extensions to their LHFE exemption, the FAA will add the 

following clarifying limitations to all LHFE exemptions to ensure consistent application of 

current LHFE policy: 

1. Passengers are prohibited from manipulating the aircraft flight controls when the 

aircraft is operated under the LHFE exemption; and 
2

2. No aerobatics may be performed in the aircraft while operating under the LHFE 

exemption. 

Finally, the FAA will begin its evaluation of the current LHFE exemption policies and 

practices, to include evaluation of safety to the paying members of the public who have an 

expectation of aircraft safety and who may not understand the inherent risks associated with 

such flight. The FAA expects to publish a new proposed LHFE policy for comment on or 

before September 30, 2012. 

No new LHFE exemptions will be issued during this moratorium nor will any aircraft be 

added to existing exemptions. Accordingly, no further action will be taken on your petition. 

Sincerely, 

/s/ 

John W. McGraw 

Acting Director, Flight Standards 

 Service 

Enclosure