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



Certification of Chief Financial Officer Pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002
 (18 U.S.C. Section 1350)



In connection with the Quarterly Report of Sector 10, Inc. (fna SKRM Interactive, Inc).; on Form 10-Q for the quarterly period ended December 31, 2008, as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission (the Report), Laurence A. Madison, Chief Financial Officer of the Company, does hereby certify, pursuant to ss. 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002 (18 U.S.C. ss. 1350), that to his 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 result of operations of the Company.





February 12, 2009

| |       |                        
| | ----- | -----------------------
| | By:   | /s/ LAURENCE A. MADISON
| | Name: | Laurence A. Madison    
| |       | Chief Financial Officer
<Page>

                                                                    EXHIBIT 10.5

                                   MEMORANDUM

                        AND AMENDMENT OF PROMISSORY NOTE

DATE:         September 25, 2001

TO:           Kevin P. O'Brien

FROM:         Innoveda, Inc.

RE:           Amendment of the Secured Promissory Note dated August 11, 1999
              in the Principal Amount of $87,853.59 Issued to Viewlogic
              Systems, Inc. (the "Note")



I am writing, on behalf of Innoveda, Inc. ("Innoveda"), to confirm Innoveda's
agreement, and obtain your agreement, that:

1.       All of the rights and obligations of Viewlogic Systems, Inc.
         ("Viewlogic") under the Note were assigned to, and assumed by,
         Innoveda.

2.       All of the rights and obligations of Viewlogic under the Stock Pledge
         Agreement that you executed in connection with the Note were assigned
         to, and assumed by, Innoveda.

3.       The Note is hereby amended by deleting from the Note the provision that
         requires that the Note become due and payable on "The date which is
         eighteen months after the first date, if any, on which the common stock
         of Viewlogic Systems, Inc. (or any security substituted therefor) is
         listed on a national securities exchange or the NASDAQ stock market".

4.       In all other respects the Note remains in full force and effect as
         originally written and as amended as set forth in this memorandum.

Agreed and accepted, and signed as a sealed instrument, by:

Innoveda, Inc.                              Kevin P. O'Brien

By:    /s/ Peter T. Johnson                 /s/ Kevin P. O'Brien

Title: Vice President
EXIBIT 32.1



Certification of Chief Executive Officer Pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002 (18 U.S.C. Section 1350)



In connection with the Quarterly Report of Sector 10, Inc. (fna SKRM Interactive, Inc).; on Form 10-Q/A for the quarterly period ended June 30, 2008, as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission (the Report), Pericles DeAvila, Principal Executive Officer of the Company, does hereby certify, pursuant to ss. 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002 (18 U.S.C. ss. 1350), that to his 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 result of operations of the Company.











By:  /s/ Pericles DeAvila

Name: Pericles DeAvila

Principal Executive Officer



November 11, 2008
AD Economic Evaluation

Docket No. FAA - 2011 - 1158 Directorate ID: 2010 - SW - 018 - AD Helicopter Model: Eurocopter France Model AS350B, B1, B2, B3, BA, C, D, and D1; and AS355E, F, F1, F2, N, and NP Helicopters Number of Heli copters (U.S. Operators): 733 Helicopters in the US Registry. Reason : This superseding AD expands the applicability and is intended to prevent failure of a control rod, loss of tail rotor control, and subsequent loss of control of the helicopter. Costs : Parts per Helicopter $ 1,724 (to replace a control rod per helicopter) Labor per Helicopter ( 1 x $ 8 5 /work- hour for 1 recurring inspection ) (1 x $85/work
- hour for 1 control rod replacement) $ 85 $85 Other (Explain) Total Cost per Helicopter $ 2,659 per year Total US Fleet Cost $ 1,949,047 per year, assuming 10 recurring inspections per year per helicopter and assuming 1 control rod is replaced per year per helicopter Executive Order 12866 : Could the AD be considered a “significant regulatory act ion?” Yes ( ) No (  ) DOT Regulatory Policies and Procedures : Is the AD significant? Yes ( ) Explain Below No (  ) Regulatory Flexibility Act : Will the AD have a significant economic impact on a substantial number of small entities? Yes ( ) No (  ) Project Engineer: Jim

Grigg
S. 437

One Hundred Sixth Congress

of the

United States of America

AT THE FIRST SESSION

Begun and held at the City of Washington on Wednesday,

the sixth day of January, one thousand nine hundred and ninety-nine

An Act

To designate the United States courthouse under construction at 333 Las Vegas

Boulevard South in Las Vegas, Nevada, as the ‘‘Lloyd D. George United States

Courthouse’’.

Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representatives of

the United States of America in Congress assembled,

SECTION 1. DESIGNATION OF LLOYD D. GEORGE UNITED STATES

COURTHOUSE.

The United States courthouse under construction at 333 Las

Vegas Boulevard South in Las Vegas, Nevada, shall be known

and designated as the ‘‘Lloyd D. George United States Courthouse’’.

SEC. 2. REFERENCES.

Any reference in a law, map, regulation, document, paper,

or other record of the United States to the United States courthouse

referred to in section 1 shall be deemed to be a reference to the

‘‘Lloyd D. George United States Courthouse’’.

Speaker of the House of Representatives.

Vice President of the United States and

President of the Senate.
#### State, Plaintiff in error, vs. Reidel, Defendant in error.

*June 16*

June *19, 1944.*

For the plaintiff in error there were briefs by the *Attorney General*and *William A. Platz,*assistant attorney general, and oral argument by *Mr. Plats.*

*480
      *Harlan W. Kelley*of Milwaukee, for the defendant in error.

A brief *amicus curice*was filed by *Robert E. Tehan*and by *Gabel & Dineen*and *James E. McCarty*of counsel, all of Milwaukee.

Barlow, J.

The case of *State v. Potokar, ante,*p. 460, 15 N. W. (2d) 158, and this case were argued together. In the *Potokar Case*the defendant attacked the constitutionality of sec. 66.05 (10) (hm), Stats., which fixes closing hours of Class B malt-beverage licensed premises, and in this case the defendant Reidel attacks the constitutionality of sec. 176.06, fixing closing hours of Class B intoxicating-liquor licensed premises.

The questions involved in this case were fully considered and determined in the case of *State v. Potokar.*For the reasons stated in that case the order sustaining the demurrer must be reversed.

*By the Court.*— Order sustaining the demurrer is reversed.
IN THE SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF NEVADA

SURYA KOTHA, Petitioner,
vs. THE EIGHTH JUDICIAL DISTRICT COURT OF THE STATE OF NEVADA, IN AND FOR THE COUNTY OF CLARK; AND THE HONORABLE WILLIAM D. KEPHART, DISTRICT JUDGE, Respondents, and RAVI MANTENA; RAJU MANTENA; MNR EDUCATIONAL TRUST; DWIBASHYAM MEHAR SUBRAHMANYAM; V.S. RAJU; AND CHANDRASEKHARAM SEKHAR TATAPUDY, Real Parties in Interest.



### ORDER DENYING PETITION FOR WRIT OF MANDAMUS This is an original petition for a writ of mandamus challenging a district court order granting a motion for a continuance and a stay. Having considered the arguments raised in the petition, we are not persuaded that the district court arbitrarily or capriciously abused its discretion in granting the motion so as to warrant our extraordinary and discretionary intervention. NRS 34.160; 

### Int'l Game Tech., Inc. v. Second Judicial Dist. Court, 124 Nev. 193, 197, 179 P.3d 556, 558 (2008); 

### Pan v. Eighth Judicial Din. Court, 120 Nev. 222, 228, 88 P.3d 840, 844 (2004); No. 69303



# FILE
JAN I 4 2016

TRACIE K. UNDEIVAN CLERK OF SUPREME COURT ey OEPU CLERK

SUPREME COURT

Of NEVADA (0) 1947A e> -0 l2S S

### Smith v. Eighth Judicial Dist. Court, 107 Nev. 674, 677, 679, 818 P.2d

849, 851, 853 (1991). Accordingly, we

ORDER the petition DENIED. 

# / fr 

# e

a , s ; Hardesty 

# -2 6 tit e th Saitta 

# P

itlett Pickering

cc: Hon. William D. Kephart, District Judge Muckleroy Lunt, LLC Sabharwal & Finkel LLC Marquis Aurbach Coffing Eighth District Court Clerk

SUPREME COURT OF NEVADA 2 , J.

, J.

(0) L947A em,
---

M I L L A R W E S T E R N F O R E S T P R O D U C T S L T D .

T e l : 7 8 0 . 4 8 6 . 8 2 0
0           F a x : 7 8 0 . 4
8 6 . 8 2 8 2

Exhibit 13.2

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

I, David Anderson, Vice-President, Finance, and Chief Financial
Officer of Millar Western Forest Products Ltd. (the Company), certify,
pursuant to 18 U.S.C. section 1350, as enacted pursuant to section 906 of the
Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that, to the best of my knowledge:

| | (i)  | the Companys annual report on Form 20-F for the fiscal
      year ended December 31, 2014, (the Report) 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 Report fairly presents,
      in all material respects, the financial condition and results of
      operations of the Company.                                                                 

Dated: March 1, 2016

| | /s/ David Anderson                                        
| | ----------------------------------------------------------
| |                                                           
| | David Anderson                                            
| | Vice-President, Finance, and Chief Financial
      Officer

1 6 6 4 0  1 1 1 A v e n u e , E d m o n t o n , A l b e r t a
, C a n a d a T 5 M 2 S 5

---
EXHIBIT 32.2

                      CERTIFICATION PURSUANT TO SECTION 906
                        OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002

In  connection  with  the  filing  by  Fantatech,  Inc.  (the  "Company") of its
Quarterly  Report  on  Form  10-QSB for the quarterly period ended June 30, 2005
(the  "Quarterly  Report")  with the Securities and Exchange Commission, I, Gary
Lui,  the 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  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.

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.


Date:  August  12, 2005                            By: /s/ Gary  Lui
                                                       ------------------
                                                       Gary  Lui
                                                       Chief Financial Officer
1 

### Hanzel, Veronica

From: Keller, Rusty [rkeller@doerun.com]

Sent: Saturday, December 11, 2010 4:43 PM

To: Hanzel, Veronica

Cc: Marucheau, Louis

Subject: RE: Clarification of an emission s ource listed in SIP demonstration

Ms. Hanzel,

Yes, the Dross Plant fugitives were routed to #7 blast fu rnace building baghouse and confirmed with the ventilation study.

Calvin (Rusty) Keller

Environmental Manager – Primary Smelting

From: Hanzel, Veronica [mailto:vahanzel@rti.org]

Sent: Tuesday, December 07, 2010 2:49 PM

To: Keller, Rusty

Cc: Laney, Michael N.; Nizich.Sharon@epamail.epa.gov

Subject: Clarification of an emission source listed in SIP demonstration

Mr. Keller,

I am writing on behalf of Sharon Nizich of USEPA. We are working on the RTR for the primary lead smelting MACT. We

spoke back in October about a source “refinery plant fugitives” #50006 which you investigated for me and reported that

those emissions were now routed to BH#9 and as a 2007 ventilation study confirmed control of the emissions, the

source was removed from the 2008 emission inventory. We have a second source that has come up that might be

similar. The “dross plant fugitives” source #40006. This source was in the SIP demonstration dataset but not in the 2008

EI. Has this source also been removed? If the source still exists, we believe we have erroneous source characteristics for

it.(i.e. would need data such as if it is a volume or point source, and if point source stack height, stack diameter, and

stack flow velocity and rate). Could you please confirm the status of that source?

We very much appreciate your help and cooperation in assuring the validity of our data, and look forward to your

prompt reply.

Veronica "Ronnie" Hanzel

RTI International

Global Climate Change & Environmental Sciences Unit

Environmental Health & Economics Division

Phone: 919

‐ 541

‐ 8851 Fax: 919

‐ 316

‐ 3420



### This message is intended solely for the designated r ecipient and may contain confidential, privileged or

proprietary information. If you have received it in erro r, please notify the sender immediately and delete the

original and any copy or printout. Pl ease note that any views or opinions presented in this e-mail are solely

those of the author and do not necessarily represen t those of The Doe Run Company. Finally, the recipient

should check this message and any attachments for the presence of viruses or malware. The Doe Run Company

accepts no liability for any loss or damage cause d through the transmission of this e-mail.
#### STATE to the use of the BOARD OF EDUCATION v. ALBET C. MOODY, and others.

'(Same syllabus as in *State*to the use of the *Board of Education*v. *Albert G.*Moody, and others *ante*page 73.)

'Cestio-rabi, upon a judgment rendered at Spring Term, 1875, of the Superior Court of Robesok county, his Honor, Judge *Kerr,*presiding.

This is one of three actions against the same parties, and involving the same questions, all of which are fully stated in •the case of *State*to the use of the *Bnrd of Klucixtiun*v. *•Albert C. Moody,*and others, *ante*page 73.

*-Attorney General Hargrove,*for the appellant.

*Wright (& Steadman,*contra.

*77Reade, J.

There are three cases between the same parties involving the same questions, in one of which an opinion is, delivered. The decision in this case is the same.

Pee Cueiam. „ • No error.
Exhibit 31.1  CHIEF EXECUTIVE OFFICER CERTIFICATION  I, Clark M. Mower, certify that:  1. I have reviewed this quarterly report on Form 10-QSB of Flexpoint Sensor Systems, Inc.;  2. Based on my knowledge, this quarterly report does not contain any untrue statement of a material fact or omit to state a material fact necessary to make the statement made, in light of the circumstances under which statements were made, not misleading with respect to the period covered by this quarterly 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 small business issuer as of, and for, the periods presented in this report.  4. The small business issuer’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)) for the small business issuer and have:  (a) Designed such disclosure controls and procedures, or caused such disclosure controls and procedures to be designed under our supervision, to ensure that material information relating to the small business issuer, including its consolidated subsidiaries, is made known to us by others within those entities, particularly during the period in which this report is being prepared;  (b) Evaluated the effectiveness of the small business issuer’s disclosure controls and procedures and presented in this report our conclusions about the effectiveness of the disclosure controls and procedures, as of the end of the period covered by this report based on such evaluation; and  (c) Disclosed in this report any change in the small business issuer’s internal control over financial reporting that occurred during the small business issuer’s most recent fiscal quarter (the small business issuer’s fourth fiscal quarter in the case of an annual report) that has materially affected, or is reasonably likely to materially affect, the small business issuer’s internal control over financial reporting; and  5. The small business issuer’s other certifying officer(s) and I have disclosed, based on our most recent evaluation of internal control over financial reporting, to the small business issuer’s auditors and the audit committee of small business issuer’s board of directors (or persons performing the equivalent function):  (a) All significant deficiencies and material weaknesses in the design or operation of internal control over financial reporting which are reasonably likely to adversely affect the small business issuer’s ability to record, process, summarize and report financial information; and  (b) Any fraud, whether or not material, that involves management or other employees who have a significant role in the small business issuer’s internal control over financial reporting.   Date: November 8, 2006 /s/ Clark M. Mower Clark M. Mower ChiefExecutive Officer
Exhibit 31.1

          CERTIFICATION PURSUANT TO 18 U.S.C. SECTION 1350, AS ADOPTED
            PURSUANT TO SECTION 302 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002

I, Roy Israel, certify that:

1. I have reviewed  this  quarterly  report on Form 10-QSB of  clickNsettle.com,
Inc. (the "Registrant");

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  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)) for the Registrant and have:

a) designed such disclosure  controls and procedures,  or caused such disclosure
controls and  procedures to be designed  under our  supervision,  to ensure that
material  information  relating to the  Registrant,  including its  consolidated
subsidiaries, is made known to us by others within those entities,  particularly
during the period in which this report is being prepared;

b) evaluated  the  effectiveness  of the  Registrant's  disclosure  controls and
procedures and presented in this report our conclusions  about the effectiveness
of the disclosure  controls and procedures,  as of the end of the period covered
by this report based on such evaluation; and

c) disclosed in this report any change in the Registrant's internal control over
financial  reporting that occurred during the Registrant's  first fiscal quarter
that has materially affected,  or is reasonably likely to materially affect, the
Registrant's internal control over financial reporting; and

5. The Registrant's other certifying officer 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):

      a)    All significant  deficiencies in the design or operation of internal
            control over  financial  reporting  which are  reasonably  likely to
            adversely  affect  the  Registrant's  ability  to  record,  process,
            summarize and report financial information; and

      b)    Any fraud,  whether or not  material,  that  involves  management or
            other  employees  who have a  significant  role in the  registrant's
            internal control over financial reporting.


Date:  November 10, 2005

/s/ Roy Israel
-----------------------------------
Roy Israel -- Chairman of the Board, CEO and President


                                       20
2 August 2015

OnPoynt Unmanned Systems LLC, 

5 High Mesa Place

Richardson, TX 75080

U.S. Department of Transportation 

Docket Management System 

1200 New Jersey Ave., SE 

Washington DC 20590 

Re: Docket No. FAA-2015-1931 – Request for Missing Information –Reference 333 

Exemption Request. 

Dear Sir or Madam: 

Pursuant to Section 333 of the FAA Modernization and Reform Act of 2012 (the “Reform 

Act”) and 14 CFR Part 11, OnPoynt Unmanned Systems, dba OnPoynt Aerial Systems,

operator of Small Unmanned aircraft Systems (“sUAS”), submits additional information

requested on 27 July 2015 by the FAA. 

1. As requested: Below is the information on the aircraft OnPoynt intends to use on the 

execution of sUAS aerial operations. 

DJI Phantom

Weight (Battery included) 2.7 pounds 

Hovering Accuracy Vertical: 1.6 feet 

Horizontal: 8.2 feet 

Max Ascent Speed 13 mph

Max Descent Speed 4.5 mph

Max Speed 49 mph

Max Flight Time 25 minutes 

Operating Temperature Range -10° to 40° C 

Dimensions 14x14 inches 

DJI Inspire 

Weight (Battery Included) 6.5 pounds 

Hovering Accuracy Vertical: 1.6 feet 

 Horizontal: 8.2 feet 

Max Ascent Speed 11mph

Max Descent Speed 9 mph

Max Speed 50 mph

Max Flight Time 18 minutes 

Operating Temperature Range -10° to 40° C 

Dimensions 18x18x12 inches 
Flame Wheel F550

Frame Weight 1lbs

Diagonal Wheelbase 550mm

Max Flight Time 20 minutes

Takeoff Weight 6.5lbs

Recommended Propeller 10 × 3.8in ; 8 × 4.5in

Recommended Battery 3S~4S LiPo

Flame Wheel F450

Frame Weight .6lbs

Diagonal Wheelbase 450mm

Takeoff Weight 3.5lbs

Max Flight Time 18 minutes

Recommended Propeller 10 × 3.8in ; 8 × 4.5in

Recommended Battery 3S~4S LiPo

Spreading Wings S900

Takeoff Weight 22lbs

Max speed 35mph

Hovering Time 18min (@ 6.8Kg Takeoff Weight)

Diagonal Wheelbase 900mm

Frame Arm Length 358mm

Center Frame Diameter 272mm

Spectra

Wingspan : 48" 

Max Take off weight 6lbs

Climb rate 740 fpm

Cruse speed 34 mph

Max speed 55 mph

Stall speed 14 mph

Construction: Carbon fiber, Kevlar & fiberglass

RVJET Flying Wing 

Wing span 76.7"

max speed 56 mph

Cruse speed 30 mph

Max Take Off Weight 10lbs

max flight time 60 min

Construction Foam

Vigilant E 

Wing Span 72”

Max Speed 50 mph

Cruse Speed 33 mph

Max Take off Weight 11lbs

max flight time 60 minutes

Construction Foam and Carbon Fiber

Satisfaction of criteria provided in Section 333 of the Reform Act of 2012 provide more 

than adequate justification for the grant of the requested exemptions allowing the 

commercial operation of the applicant’s sUAS. 
Sincerely,

Ronald J Poynter

President

OnPoynt Unmanned Systems LLC