alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
**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 Annual Report of The Houston Exploration Company(the “Company”) on Form 10-K for the period ended December 31, 2003 as filedwith the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the “Report”),I, John H. Karnes, Chief Financial Officer of the Company, certify, pursuant to18 U.S.C. §1350, as adopted pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Actof 2002, that:
1. The Report fully complies with the requirements of section 13(a) or15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934; and 2. The information contained in the Report fairly presents, in allmaterial respects, the financial condition and result of operations ofthe Company.
/s/ John H. Karnes
# C_2005069EN.01002101.xml

| 19.3.2005 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 69/21 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

19.3.2005

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 69/21

---

Action brought on 14 December 2004 by Aktieselskabet af 21. November 2001 against the Office for Harmonisation in the Internal Market (Trade Marks and Designs)

(Case T-477/04)

(2005/C 69/38)

Language in which the application was lodged: English

An action against the Office for Harmonisation in the Internal Market (Trade Marks and Designs) was brought before the Court of First Instance of the European Communities on 14 December 2004 by Aktieselskabet af 21. November 2001, established in Brande (Denmark), represented by C. Barrett Christiansen, lawyer.

TDK Kabushiki Kaisha (TDK Corporation), established in Tokyo (Japan), was also a party to the proceedings before the Board of Appeal.

The applicant claims that the Court should:

| — | Annul Decision R 364/2003-1 of 7 October 2004 of the First Board of Appeal of the Office for Harmonisation in the Internal Market |
| --- | --- |

—

Annul Decision R 364/2003-1 of 7 October 2004 of the First Board of Appeal of the Office for Harmonisation in the Internal Market

Pleas in law and main arguments:

| Applicant for Community trade mark: | The applicant |
| --- | --- |
| Community trade mark concerned: | Word mark TDK for goods in class 25 (clothing, footwear, headgear) — application number 1214675 |
| Proprietor of mark or sign cited in the opposition proceedings: | TDK Kabushiki Kaisha |
| Trade mark or sign cited in opposition: | Community and national word and figurative marks TDK for goods in Class 9 (apparatus for recording etc.) |
| Decision of the Opposition Division: | Registration denied |
| Decision of the Board of Appeal: | Appeal dismissed |
| Pleas in law: | Article 8 paragraph 5 of Council Regulation No 40/94 does not apply in this case. |

Applicant for Community trade mark:

The applicant

Community trade mark concerned:

Word mark TDK for goods in class 25 (clothing, footwear, headgear) — application number 1214675

Proprietor of mark or sign cited in the opposition proceedings:

TDK Kabushiki Kaisha

Trade mark or sign cited in opposition:

Community and national word and figurative marks TDK for goods in Class 9 (apparatus for recording etc.)

Decision of the Opposition Division:

Registration denied

Decision of the Board of Appeal:

Appeal dismissed

Pleas in law:

Article 8 paragraph 5 of Council Regulation No 40/94 does not apply in this case.

---
#### Anonymous.

s *Holmes*had obtained a judgment in the County Court, and *Butler*having stated in an affidavit some causes of com plaint against the judgment, had procured a *certiorari’*to issue returnable to this term, only two terms having first intervened.

*-Per cuñam*

When a *certiorari*issues, the adverse party has noticé to appear on the return day of the certiorari, and if the writ is not then returned, nor any proceedings *485had to continue it in court, it is like other writs tinued, and a *procedendo*ought to issue. Here is clearly a discontinuance, therefore let a discontinuance be entered, and a *procedendo*issue to the court below.
**

|   | **KPMG LLP** | Telephone | (514) 840-2100 |
|--------|--------------|-----------|----------------|

|   | **Chartered Accountants** | Fax | (514) 840-2187 |
|--------|---------------------------|-----|----------------|

|   | 600 de Maisonneuve Blvd. West | Internet | www.kpmg.ca |
|--------|-------------------------------|----------|-------------|

|   | Suite 1500 |
|--------|------------|

|   | Montréal, Québec  H3A 0A3 |
|--------|-------------------------------------|

 

 

 

**REPORT OF INDEPENDENT REGISTERED PUBLIC**

**ACCOUNTING FIRM**

 

**The Board of Directors**

**Optimal Group Inc.**

 

We consent to incorporation by reference in the registration statements of Optimal Group Inc. on Form S-8 (File No. 333-115408), effective May 12, 2004, on Form S-8 (File No. 333-115050), effective April 30, 2004, on Form S-8 (File No. 333-65530), effective July 20, 2001 and on Form   S-8/F-3 (File No. 333-08794), effective May 21, 1998 of our report dated March 13, 2008, relating to the consolidated balance sheets of Optimal Group Inc. as of December 31, 2007 and 2006 and the related consolidated statements of operations and comprehensive (loss) income, shareholders’ equity and cash flows for each of the years in the three-year period ended December 31, 2007, and of our report dated March 13, 2008 on the Company’s internal control over financial reporting as of December 31, 2007, which reports appear in the December 31, 2007 annual report on Form 10-K of Optimal Group Inc.

 

 

(signed) KPMG LLP

 

Chartered Accountants

 

 

March 13, 2008

Montreal, Canada 

 

 

|   | KPMG LLP, a Canadian limited liability partnership is the Canadian

member firm of KPMG International, a Swiss cooperative. |
|--------|-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|
#### Cincinnati Bar Association *v.*Deardorff.

[Cite as *Cincinnati Bar Assn. v. Deardorff*(1999), 86 Ohio St.3d 1204.]

(No. 98-377

Submitted and decided June 29, 1999.)

For earlier case, see *Cincinnati Bar Assn. v. Deardorff*(1998), 84 Ohio St.3d 85, 702 N.E.2d 59.

Moyer, C.J., Douglas, Resnick, F.E. Sweeney, Pfeifer, Cook and Lundberg Stratton, JJ., concur.
<PAGE>
 
                                                                    EXHIBIT 21




                                 LEAPNET, INC.




                         SUBSIDIARIES OF THE REGISTRANT

THE LEAP PARTNERSHIP, INC., an Illinois corporation and a wholly-owned
subsidiary of the Registrant.

LILYPAD SERVICES, INC., an Illinois corporation and a wholly-owned subsidiary of
the Registrant.

TADPOLE PRODUCTIONS, INC., an Illinois corporation and a wholly-owned subsidiary
of the Registrant.

QUANTUM LEAP COMMUNICATIONS, INC., a Delaware corporation and a wholly-owned
subsidiary of the Registrant.

BAR TV, INC., a Delaware corporation and a wholly-owned subsidiary of the
Registrant.

YAR COMMUNICATIONS, INC., a Delaware corporation and wholly-owned subsidiary of
the Registrant.

LEAP GLOBAL COMMUNICATIONS, INC. (formerly known as One World Communications,
Inc.), a Delaware corporation and wholly-owned subsidiary of the Registrant.
**Conservation Practice Effects**

**Commonly Associated Practices:**Contour Farming, Cover Crop, Grassed Waterway, Integrated Pest Management, Nutrient Management, Residue and Tillage Management, Mulch Till, Residue and Tillage Management, No Till/Strip Till/Direct Seed, Residue and Tillage Management, Ridge Till, Residue Management, Seasonal, Underground Outlet

**Note:**This worksheet contains general talking points for the conservation planner to discuss with the land user.  It is the first step towards an economic or financial analysis.  The second step would include identifying a specific site for analysis at the farm or field level, editing the template for local conditions, adding units and quantities of farm inputs and outputs.  The third step in the economic analysis is to place a dollar value on as many variables as possible, put all units in the same time frame, using amortization ($/Acres/Year) or net present value ($/Acre), so benefits and costs can be compared.  The fourth and final step would be to combine several conservation practices into a conservation system, which is how most conservation practices are applied at the field level. Data for the worksheet comes from the land user, conservation planner, technical specialist and local agricultural supply vendors and contractors.  See Economics Technical Note: TN 200-ECN-1, Basic Economic Analysis Using T-Charts (August 2013) for more information.
**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 Annual Report of The Houston Exploration Company (the “Company”) on Form10-K for the period ended December 31, 2004 as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission onthe date hereof (the “Report”), I, William G. Hargett, Chief Executive Officer of the Company,certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. §1350, as adopted pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Actof 2002, that:
 1.  The Report fully complies with the requirements of section 13(a) or 15(d) of theSecurities Exchange Act of 1934; and  2.  The information contained in the Report fairly presents, in all material respects, thefinancial condition and result of operations of the Company.           /s/    William G. Hargett   Name:  William G. Hargett   Title:  Chairman, President and Chief Executive Officer
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<ARTICLE> 5
<LEGEND>
THIS SCHEDULE CONTAINS SUMMARY FINANCIAL INFORMATION EXTRACTED FROM THE
UNAUDITED CONDENSED CONSOLIDATED BALANCE SHEET AT SEPTEMBER 30, 1997 AND THE
UNAUDITED CONDENSED CONSOLIDATED STATEMENT OF OPERATIONS FOR THE NINE MONTHS
THEN ENDED AND IS QUALIFIED IN ITS ENTIRETY BY REFERENCE TO SUCH FINANCIAL
STATEMENTS.
</LEGEND>
<CIK> 0001004317
<NAME> IRON MOUNTAIN INCORPORATED
<MULTIPLIER> 1,000
<CURRENCY> U.S. DOLLARS
       
<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   9-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          DEC-31-1997
<PERIOD-START>                             JAN-01-1997
<PERIOD-END>                               SEP-30-1997
<EXCHANGE-RATE>                                  1.000
<CASH>                                           2,242
<SECURITIES>                                         0
<RECEIVABLES>                                   36,704
<ALLOWANCES>                                   (1,332)
<INVENTORY>                                        989
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                                50,836
<PP&E>                                         207,617
<DEPRECIATION>                                (56,996)
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                 451,099
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                           44,175
<BONDS>                                        274,368
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                           122
<OTHER-SE>                                     113,823
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                   451,099
<SALES>                                        143,394
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                               143,394
<CGS>                                           73,742
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                  127,919
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                     0
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                     0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                              17,631
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                (2,156)
<INCOME-TAX>                                     (346)
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                            (1,810)
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                   (1,810)
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                   (0.17)
<EPS-DILUTED>                                   (0.17)
        

</TABLE>
CERTIFICATION OF CEO PURSUANT TO THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT

18 U.S.C. SECTION 1350

AS ADOPTED PURSUANT TO SECTION 906

OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002





I, Duane Poliquin, President and Chief Executive Officer of Almaden Minerals Ltd. (the Company) do 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.

This Annual Report on Form 20-F of the Company for the period ended December 31, 2005, as filed with

the Securities and Exchange Commission (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.



Date: March 28, 2006





Signed:  /s/Duane Poliquin
### JUDGMENT 

## Court of Appeals First District of Texas

NO. 01

- 15

- 00454

- CV

THE CITY OF FRIENDSW OOD , Appellant

V.

WIGHT REALTY INTERES TS, LTD. , Appellee
Appeal from the 212th District Court of Galveston County. (Tr. Ct. No. 09

- CV

- 2123 ).

After due consideration, the Court grants appellant The City of Friendswood’s motion to dismiss the appeal. Accordingly, the Court dismisses the appeal.

C osts are taxed against the party incurring same.

The Court orders that this decision be certified below for observance.

Judgment rendered July 23 , 2015.

Per curiam opinion delivered by panel consisting of Justices Jennings, Bland, and Brown.
( 

..... 

NRO APPROVED FOR RELEASE 

DECLASSIFIED BY: C/IART 

DECLASSIFIED ON: 25 JULY 2012 

OPTICAL TECHNOLOGY DIVISION 

OPTO-MECHANICAL DESIGN ENGINEERING 

Memorandum ME 80 

FROM: L.B. Molaskey / TO: Distribution DATE: 

SUBJECT: Trip Report -- Recovery ofRV #3 

( 

January 31, 1.972 

In response to HQ's message 8209 and a telecon 

Honol ul u on Saturday 1 15 January 1972. At that time the recovery 

area was improving and it was anticipated that Trieste ~uldbe laun~hed in 

preparalMthe next recovery attempt on the following day. The plan was 

to have and me tt:avel out to the White Sands aboard the "contingency 

tug" Quapaw. s it turned out the weatheMecovery area did not improve 

as expected and Trieste wasn.ot launched.' and I, therefore, remained 

.in Honolulu while maintaining periodic con ac w t the I.O.U. (Integrated 

Operating Unit) through LCDR. Ron Doyle who is Operations ·Off:l.cer for Sub-Dev. 

Group I in Honolulu. 

We remained in Honolulu waiting for the weather' in the recovery area 

to clear hoping to join the' operation o~ce Trieste was launched. 

While in· Honolulu we visited col. Quinn and Major Tweede of the 6594th 

Test Group at Hickam Field. They are the group responsible for aerial and/or at 

sea recovery of the RV's. I gave Maj." Tweede several pictures of the-range ships 

"Longview" and "Sunnyvale" which I had taken .on my first trip to the area .' 

The launch of SV2 occurred while we were in the area so we were invited 

into the Recovery Control Center (RC~~to listen to the launch over the network. 

When the first attempt was postponed'twere invited and again returned to the RCC 

to hear the actual launch. ~ 

Major Tweede also escorted us on a tour through one of the recovery 

aircraft. 

After checking with Fleet Weather Central and the Air Force weather 

people and with .their long range (10-day) predictions for continued heavy seas 

and storms in the recove.t was decided to return home. Arrangements 

have been made to notify when and if Trieste has been launched. At 

that point we will again go ou to Honolulu where we will be flown out to the 

White Sands via helicopter.. . 

The latest word is that the Navy plans to remain at the recovery site 

until about 7 February 72. If unable to dive by that time they will consider 

returning to San Diego prior to resuming the ope tion sometime later in the 

spring or early summer. 

LBM/cj 

cc: 

. .' 

~. ~ ::: j .. ~ .~., , : ~.~ .f 

\( f ,'" .... 

i, I. 

M.F. Magu 

J. Braddon 

" .. Ii:, ~"'-.~: j"i:qY 

.. _ ... 0/0--- L. 

R.W. Jones, C. Karatzas, P. Petty, R. Roylance,
# C_2005093EN.01000202.xml

| 16.4.2005 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 93/2 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

16.4.2005

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 93/2

---

JUDGMENT OF THE COURT

JUDGMENT OF THE COURT

(Fifth Chamber)

of 24 February 2005

in Case C-320/04 Commission of the European Communities v Grand Duchy of Luxembourg (1)

1

(Failure of a Member State to fulfil obligations - Directive 2000/43/EC - Failure to transpose within the prescribed period)

(2005/C 93/04)

Language of the case: French

In Case C-320/04 Commission of the European Communities (Agent: D. Martin) v Grand Duchy of Luxembourg (Agent: S. Schreiner) – action for failure to fulfil obligations under Article 226 EC, brought on 27 July 2004 – the Court (Fifth Chamber), composed of R. Silva de Lapuerta, President of the Chamber, J. Makarczyk and J. Klučka (Rapporteur), Judges; P. Léger, Advocate General; R. Grass, Registrar, gave a judgment on 24 February 2005, in which it:

Commission of the European Communities

Grand Duchy of Luxembourg

| 1. | Declares that by failing to adopt the laws, regulations and administrative provisions necessary to comply with Council Directive 2000/43/EC of 29 June 2000 implementing the principle of equal treatment between persons irrespective of racial or ethnic origin, the Grand Duchy of Luxembourg has failed to fulfil its obligations under that directive; |
| --- | --- |

1.

Declares that by failing to adopt the laws, regulations and administrative provisions necessary to comply with Council Directive 2000/43/EC of 29 June 2000 implementing the principle of equal treatment between persons irrespective of racial or ethnic origin, the Grand Duchy of Luxembourg has failed to fulfil its obligations under that directive;

| 2. | Orders the Grand Duchy of Luxembourg to pay the costs. |
| --- | --- |

2.

Orders the Grand Duchy of Luxembourg to pay the costs.

---

(1)  OJ C 228 of 11. 9. 2004.

1

---
Exhibit 32.1



SECTION 906 CERTIFICATIONCEO



In connection with the Quarterly Report of Plains Resources Inc. (the Company) on Form 10-Q for the period ending March 31, 2004 as filed with the Securities and
Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the Report), I, John T. Raymond, Chief Executive 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, after reasonable investigation:



| | (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.
| | --- |  | ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------



|                    |  |                                        
|------------------- |  | ---------------------------------------
|                    | 
|Dated: May 6, 2004. |  | /s/    John T. Raymond                 
|                    |  |                                        
|                    |  | John T. Raymond Chief Executive Officer



The foregoing certification is being furnished
solely pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002 and is not being filed as part of the Report or as a separate disclosure document.



A signed original of this written statement required by Section 906, or other document authenticating, acknowledging, or otherwise adopting the signature that appears in typed form
within the electronic version 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 Actes dont la publication est une condition de leur applicabilité

----

RÈGLEMENT (CE) No 728/2006 DU CONSEIL

du 15 mai 2006

portant suspension et abrogation sous certaines conditions du règlement (CE) no 2193/2003 instituant des droits de douane supplémentaires sur les importations de certains produits originaires des États-Unis d'Amérique

LE CONSEIL DE L’UNION EUROPÉENNE,

vu le traité instituant la Communauté européenne, et notamment son article 133,

vu la proposition de la Commission,

considérant ce qui suit:

A ARRÊTÉ LE PRÉSENT RÈGLEMENT:

Article premier

1.   La suspension de l'application de droits de douanes supplémentaires instituée par les articles 1 et 2 du règlement (CE) no 171/2005 est prorogée jusqu'au 29 mai 2006.

2.   Si le Président des États-Unis signe la loi adoptée par le Congrès des États-Unis abrogeant les clauses de sauvegarde de la législation FSC-ETI et du JOBS Act le 26 mai 2006 ou avant cette date, le règlement (CE) no 2193/2003 est abrogé avec effet au 29 mai 2006.

3.   Une fois que la signature susmentionnée a eu lieu, la Commission publie promptement un avis au Journal officiel de l'Union européenne indiquant que la signature a eu lieu et que l'abrogation du règlement (CE) no 2193/2003 prend effet le 29 mai 2006.

4.   Si la signature susmentionnée n'a pas lieu avant le 26 mai 2006, la Commission publie promptement un avis au Journal officiel de l'Union européenne indiquant que cette signature n'a pas eu lieu et que les mesures de rétorsion instituées par le règlement (CE) no 2193/2003 redeviennent applicables avec effet au 30 mai 2006.

Article 2

Le présent règlement entre en vigueur le jour de sa publication au Journal officiel de l'Union européenne.

Le présent règlement est obligatoire dans tous ses éléments et directement applicable dans tout État membre.

Fait à Bruxelles, le 15 mai 2006.

Par le Conseil

La présidente

U. PLASSNIK

----

(1)JO L 328 du 17.12.2003, p. 3. Règlement modifié par le règlement (CE) no 171/2005 (JO L 28 du 1.2.2005, p. 31).

----
**Final Listing of Questionnaire Files for Steam Electric Rulemaking Record**

**Plant ID 02317**  **Removed from Public**  **(Non-CBI) Docket** **1 Copyright** 

**Flag 2**  **File Name Description**  x 02317\02317_Checklist.xls EPA Technical Review Checklist Workbook

02317\02317_Completeness_Checklist.xls EPA Completeness Review Checklist 02317\02317_HardcopyLog.doc EPA log of hardcopy documents submitted x 02317\02317_Part A.xls Plant submitted survey file x 02317\02317_Part B.xls Plant submitted survey file x 02317\02317_Part C.xls Plant submitted survey file x 02317\02317_Part D.xls Plant submitted survey file x 02317\02317_Part E.xls Plant submitted survey file x 02317\02317_Part F.xls Plant submitted survey file x 02317\02317_Part G.xls Plant submitted survey file x 02317\02317_Part H.xls Plant submitted survey file

02317\Certification Statement Plant ID 02317.pdf Plant certification statement 

### x 02317\Supplemental Documents\02317_D-1.pdf Plant submitted supplemental files to the survey 

### x 02317\Supplemental Documents\02317_D-2.pdf Plant submitted supplemental files to the survey 

### x 02317\Supplemental Documents\02317_Part F Well Map.pdf Plant submitted supplemental files to the survey 

### x 02317\Supplemental Documents\02317_RGS Map 1.pdf Plant submitted supplemental files to the survey 

### x 02317\Supplemental Documents\02317_WB-1.pdf Plant submitted supplemental files to the survey 

### x 02317\Supplemental Documents\02317_WB-2.pdf Plant submitted supplemental files to the survey

02317\Supplemental Documents\02317_ICR CoverLetter.pdf Plant submitted supplemental files to the survey

2Copyright documents are available from the docket. 1Final reviewed survey responses are located in the Steam Electric Technical Questionnaire Database

.