alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
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 Science Dynamics Corporation
(the "Company") on Form 10-QSB for the period ended June 30, 2004 as filed
with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the
"Report"), I, Alan C. Bashforth, Chief Executive Officer, President and
Acting Chief Financial Officer of the Company, certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C.
section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that:

          (1)  The Report fully complies with the requirements of section
13(a) or 15(d) of the Securities and 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.

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


Dated: August 23, 2004



                             /s/ Alan C. Bashforth
                             -------------------------
                             Name: Alan C. Bashforth
                             Title: Chief Executive Officer and
                             Acting Chief Financial Officer
**Exhibit32.1**

**CERTIFICATIONOF CHIEF EXECUTIVE OFFICER**

**PURSUANTTO SECTION 906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002**

Pursuant toSection 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002 (subsections (a) and (b) ofSection 1350, Chapter 63 of Title 18, United States Code), each of theundersigned officers of Supreme Industries, Inc. (the “Company”), does herebycertify, to such officer’s knowledge, that:

The QuarterlyReport on Form 10-Q for the quarter ended June 30, 2007 (the “Form 10-Q”) ofthe Company fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) of 15(d), asapplicable, of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 and the informationcontained in the Form 10-Q fairly presents, in all material respects, thefinancial condition and results of operations of the Company as of, and for,the periods presented in the Form 10-Q.
| DATE: August 14, 2007 |   | /s/ Herbert M. Gardner  |
|-----------------------|--------|-------------------------|
|                  |   | Herbert M. Gardner      |
|                  |   | Chief Executive Officer |

 

The foregoing certification is being furnished as anexhibit to the Form 10-Q pursuant to Item 601(b)(32) of Regulation S-K andSection 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002 (subsections (a) and (b) ofSection 1350, Chapter 63 of Title 18, United States Code) and, accordingly, isnot being filed as part of the Form 10-Q for purposes of Section 18 of theSecurities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended, and is not incorporated byreference into any filing of the Company, whether made before or after the datehereof, regardless of any general incorporation language in such filing.

----
<PAGE>
                                                                    Exhibit 21.1


LIST OF SUBSIDIARIES


Bio-Detek, Incorporated, incorporated in Massachusetts
ZMI France, S.A.R.L., incorporated in France
ZMD Corporation, incorporated in Delaware
ZOLL International, Inc., incorporated in U.S. Virgin Islands
ZOLL Medical (U.K.) Ltd, incorporated in United Kingdom
Westech Mobile Solutions. Inc., incorporated in Vancouver, B.C., Canada
ZOLL Medical Deutchland (GmbH), incorporated in Germany
ZOLL Medical Canada, incorporated in Canada.
Pinpoint Technologies, Inc., incorporated in Delaware.
ZOLL Medical France S.A., incorporated in France
ZOLL Medical Australia Pty Limited, incorporated in Australia
ZOLL International Holding BV, incorporated in the Netherlands


                                  Page 33 of 34
,. 

REF ID:A67899 

·· ·op SECRET 

Serial: 

JIDtQIARIDl FOR TD UICUftY& smmAn. tJSCD 

~ ooe:sos S 

18 NOV 195! 

SUBJIC'l: 'lentatift Mllmtea for tlle l07Ua JfHtiq fd USCII 

l.. lt 1a re~ that the tollow1ag chaQ8Jla be m4e 

1a the •Je4t lt1nt.u: 

•• Page l, \lllder u.so PiWiiti, oppoa1 te !!! : • U4 

ltr. Williaa F. J'riedman. 

2. SUbjecrt.tottie 1Ju:lu1oa o1' these dwlpa, tbere ia 

no obJeetto:Jltothe Dd.autea. 

PL 86-36/50 USC 3605 

EO 3 . 3 ( h) ( 2 ) 

cc: NJ 

C/S 

~ e/' 0.M. AGNEW 

D. M. AGSIW ~.os•V7 

BM •111Nr, USCUla! 

m/s s/APm (Mr. Friectman)dk P/P -

M/R: Prepared in accordanee vithinatru.ctiona trm S/ASIB (Mr. Frieclman 

MIR preJUed 12 Bov 54. 

-...; ~1 ""~, :-

___ ~ -~ -~ -~::.~- _:~~~--. .:.;~J}?-~~1L~"- eclassifi ed and a roved for release b NSA on 11-20-2014 ursuant to E .0. 1352 
·~ -..... • 

GONFil>EN'Uila Y. • S. Ei¥E8 ONLY 

ONE HUNDRED SEVDlTH (SPECIAL) MEETING. 

OF THE 

UNITED STATES COMMUNICATIONS INTEI.J..IGENCE BOARD 

Mr. Allen W. Dulles, Chainnan 

PR.liSENT: 

DEFENSE: 

STATE: 

ARMY: 

NAVY: 

-

AIR FORCE: 

EXECUTIVE SECREI'ARY: 

SECRETARIAT: 

ALSO PRESENT: 

STATE: 

NSA: 

CIA: 

Mr. Wm. H. Godel 

(for General G. B. Erskine, USMC (Ret.)) 

Mr. W. Park Armstrong, Jr. 

Lt. General Ralph J. Canine, USA 

Mr. Victor P. Keay 

(for Mr. L. V. Boardman) 

Mr. Frank B. Rowlett 

(for Mr. H. D. Sheldon) 

Major General Robert A. Schow 

(for Major General Arthur G. Trudeau) 

RADM Carl F. Espe . 

Major General John A. Samford 

Captain Rufus L. Taylor, USN 

· Mr. H. D. Jones 

Mrs. D. O. Tucker 

Mr. T. Achilles Polyzoides 

~I\· t.J,,h._--. f: f'<\4.A.""""•"-' /'7~r. Louis W. Tordella 

Dr. Lawrence E. Shinn 

Mr. Francis A. Raven 

Mr. James Angleton 

The 107th (Special) Meeting of the United States Communications 

Intelligence Board was held in the Projection Room, Administration 

Building, Central Intelligence Agency, at 15.'.30, Tuesday, 5 October 1954. 

CC»..'FIQEHTIAI:. 
EO 3 . 3 ( h) ( 2 ) 

REF ID:A67899 PL 86-36/50 USC 360
**Final Listing of Questionnaire Files for Steam Electric Rulemaking Record**

**Plant ID 06279**  **Removed from Public**  **(Non-CBI) Docket** **1 Copyright** 

**Flag 2**  **File Name Description**  x 

### 06279\06279_Checklist.xls EPA Technical Review Checklist Workbook



### 06279\06279_Completeness_Checklist.xls EPA Completeness Review Checklist 

### 06279\06279_HardcopyLog.doc EPA log of hardcopy documents submitted x 

### 06279\06279_Part A.xls Plant submitted survey file x 

### 06279\06279_Part B.xls Plant submitted survey file x 

### 06279\06279_Part C.xls Plant submitted survey file x 

### 06279\06279_Part D.xls Plant submitted survey file x 

### 06279\06279_Part H.xls Plant submitted survey file



### 06279\Certification Statement Plant ID 06279.pdf Plant certification statement x 

### 06279\Supplemental Documents\06279_GAF ICR Flow Schematic Source Diagram August 2010.pptx Plant submitted supplemental files to the survey x 

### 06279\Supplemental Documents\06279_GAF Part D Block Diagrams.xls Plant submitted supplemental files to the survey x 

### 06279\Supplemental Documents\06279_GAF Part D Block Diagrams.xlsx Plant submitted supplemental files to the survey



### 06279\Supplemental Documents\06279_Gallatin_Dual Fuel Conversion Project.pdf Plant submitted supplemental files to the survey 

### 06279\Supplemental Documents\06279_Gallatin_Proposed Coal Unloading Terminal_1996.pdf Plant submitted supplemental files to the survey 

### 06279\Supplemental Documents\06279_Gallatin_Rail Coal Unloading and Blending Facility_FEA.pdf Plant submitted supplemental files to the survey 

### 06279\Supplemental Documents\06279_Gallatin_Rail Coal Unloading and Blending Facility_FONSI.pdf Plant submitted supplemental files to the survey 

### 06279\Supplemental Documents\06279_Gallatin_SO2 Compliance_FEA.pdf Plant submitted supplemental files to the survey 

### x 06279\Supplemental Documents\GAF ICR Flow Schematic Source Diagram August 2010.pptx Plant submitted supplemental files to the survey 

### x 06279\Supplemental Documents\GAF.pdf Plant submitted supplemental files to the survey

1Final reviewed survey responses are located in the Steam Electric Technical Questionnaire Database

. 2Copyright documents are available from the docket.
*Tuesday, June 15, 1999*

MISCELLANEOUS DISMISSALS

99-578.

#### Litton Sys., Inc. v. Tracy.

Board of Tax'Appeals, No. 95-A-1001. This cause is pending before the court as an appeal from the Board of Tax Appeals. It appears from the records of this court that appellant has not filed a merit brief, due June 7,1999, in compliance with the Rules of Practice of the Supreme Court and therefore has failed to prosecute this cause with the requisite diligence. Upon consideration thereof,

IT IS ORDERED by the court that this cause be, and hereby is, dismissed *sua sponte.*
HALIFAX,

OCTOBER TERM, 1796.

#### Parker and Wife *v.*Phillips.

Where a father, upon the marriage of his daughter, sends negroes or or other property with her in marriage, it is *prima facie,*a gift.

Trover for a negro, which the father of the Plaintiff’s wife (and also of Phillips, who claims under a subsequent gift,) sent with Iter on her marriage, to her husband’s house. About a year afterwards, in occasional conversation, he mentioned to his daughter, that he had not intended ever to take the negro away from her, when he sent her to her husband’s house. There was other cvi-deuce, hut upon this, Stone, Justice, ruled according to the former decisions in ¡he cases of *Perry*& *Farrell, Garter*& *Rutland,*and *Whitmell*v. *Moore,*decided at Eden-ton, prior to the two others — where a father, upon ¡he marriage of his daughter, sends negroes or other property wiih her upon her marriage, to her husband’s house, thrt it is a gift, unless the contrary he ¡troven : which in the present case not Staving been done, there was a verdict and judgment for the Plaintiff.

*Note.*— Vide *Farrell*v. *Perry,*and the note thereto, *ante*2.
--40P—SECIEF

10-NATIONAL RECONNAISSANCE OFFICE

WASHINGTON. D.C. suramitirma

OFFICE OF THE.DIRECTOR

July 24, 1973

MEMORANDUM FOR MR. W. E. COLBY, CIA

SUBJECT: Objectives for the Intelligence Community

This is in response to your memorandum of June 29, 1973

(DCl/IC-73-0299/15).

I support fully the objectives and actions outlined in your

draft memorandum to the President. I have no changes to recant-

.

mend, but offer the following comments for consideration in

implementation of your plans. As you are aware, the National

Reconnaissance Program has been one. of the largest single

1

intelligence programs for over a decade. It has evolved to

1

the point where today it has been said to be the single most

important intelligence collection program. In conjunction with

implementing your intelligence community objectives, I would

like to look at ways in which the NRP can better contribute to

the overall intelligence mission.

One way I believe we can contribute is through a strong

voice in resources allocation. NRO membership on the USIB and

its committees has given us a forum in the past, and I believe

we should continue to sit there. But I believe we can make a

valuable contribution through membership on the Intelligence

Resources Advisory Committee. Your plans for the IRAC strengthen

my convictions. I suggest that the DNRO be a member of the IRAC,

with additional representation in IRAC activities as appropriate.

For example, membership on the proposed R&D Advisory Council of

IRAC is a place where I feel we have potential for significant

input.

Involvement on the IRAC would permit a more meaningful

analysis of the NRP inputs to the National Intelligence Program

Budget. As a major program director, I believe the DNRO must

be vitally concerned with the NRP elements in the NIPB.

C

CLAIONSO • 41.115.MN OINION. I OP 40111—SECREIFix wows am

c IOW NO DICLAISIF, ON 011, um
Tactical intelligence inputs are another area where the

NRP can contribute significantly. We already have taken some

steps in the area of making the products of NRP collectors

more readily available for tactical applications. More must

be done.

Finally, because of changes which have occurred and those

which will result from carrying out your objectives, I believe

we must update the management structure within which the

National Reconnaissance Program operates. I will be pleased to

discuss these thoughts in more detail with you and your staff.

. ............... .

4otrr OWL. 111129857 CLANINNO041111116ZON

•

oansam. azateunva awn sins exassmou CAMorletlfeffi— CIF ts SONO OSOLAINNII ON sr art c° PAGPIrE —2—or 7r PAGES
# CE2004078EN.01066101.xml

| 27.3.2004 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | CE 78/661 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

27.3.2004

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

CE 78/661

---

(2004/C 78 E/0704)

WRITTEN QUESTION P-3861/03

by Heide Rühle (Verts/ALE) to the Commission

(8 December 2003)

Subject:   Export guarantee by the German Federal Government for Finnish nuclear reactor

Subject:

Following the decision of the Finnish Government to build a fifth nuclear reactor in Finland, at Olkiluoto, a decision is to be taken before the end of 2003 as to which firms apart from the Finnish TVO consortium (Teollisuuden Voima) are to be involved in building the reactor. In order to guarantee the possible involvement of the German Siemens group in Olkiluoto, the German Federal Government intends to approve an application by Siemens for a ‘Hermes guarantee’. A State guarantee of this kind — which is generally only available for the promotion of exports outside the EU — would substantially reduce the commercial risk borne by Siemens in connection with this project and would above all make it possible for Siemens to borrow money for its participation in the building of the Finnish reactor at significantly lower interest rates. The French group Framatome is also bidding to build the reactor.

Does this State guarantee for Siemens' proposed export transaction within the EU violate the relevant European provisions on State aid, particularly Article 87(1) of the EC Treaty, pursuant to which ‘any aid granted by a Member State or through State resources in any form whatsoever’ is incompatible with the common market? Does the Commission know, furthermore, whether the French Government is likewise supporting the commercial plans of Framatome in Olkiluoto by means of an export guarantee? If so, is this compatible with EC law on State aid? Have the Commission or the Court of Justice of the EC in the past issued any rulings on similar cases (relating to export guarantees)?

Answer given by Mr Monti on behalf of the Commission

(26 January 2004)

(26 January 2004)

As for the first part of the question, Siemens has announced that it will not apply for the State guarantee referred to by the Honourable Member.

The Commission is not aware of any support by the French Government in favour of Framatome by means of a similar export guarantee.

Neither the Commission, nor the Court of Justice have ever taken position on export guarantees in the nuclear field. Under the EC Treaty the Commission has always considered export aid within the Union incompatible with the State aid rules and other fundamental principles (e.g. Article 10 of the EC Treaty) as it is considered as one of the most distortive types of aid (see, e.g. the Communication of the Commission to the Member States pursuant to Article 93(1) of the EC Treaty applying Articles 92 and 93 of the Treaty to short-term export-credit insurance (1)). As for the Euratom Treaty, it does not foresee specific provisions on export aid.

1

---

(1)  OJ C 281, 17.9.1997, as amended in 2001, OJ C 217, 2.8.2001.

1

---
<TABLE> <S> <C>


<ARTICLE> 5
<LEGEND>
The schedule contains summary financial information extracted from Winthrop
Partners 81 Limited Partnership and is qualified in its entirety by reference to
such financial statements.
</LEGEND>
<MULTIPLIER>      1
       
<S>                         <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                     9-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>           DEC-31-1997
<PERIOD-START>              JAN-01-1997
<PERIOD-END>                SEP-30-1997
<CASH>                          511,000
<SECURITIES>                          0
<RECEIVABLES>                         0
<ALLOWANCES>                          0
<INVENTORY>                           0
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                      0
<PP&E>                        2,416,000
<DEPRECIATION>                 (894,000)
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                2,033,000
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                 0
<BONDS>                               0
<COMMON>                              0
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                 0
<PREFERRED>                           0
<OTHER-SE>                    2,017,000
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>  2,033,000
<SALES>                               0
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                129,000
<CGS>                                 0
<TOTAL-COSTS>                    38,000
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                      0
<LOSS-PROVISION>                      0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                    0
<INCOME-PRETAX>                  55,000
<INCOME-TAX>                          0
<INCOME-CONTINUING>              55,000
<DISCONTINUED>                        0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                       0
<CHANGES>                             0
<NET-INCOME>                     55,000
<EPS-PRIMARY>                      2.03
<EPS-DILUTED>                      2.03
        


</TABLE>
# CE2004084EN.01010401.xml

| 3.4.2004 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | CE 84/104 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

3.4.2004

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

CE 84/104

---

(2004/C 84 E/0141)

WRITTEN QUESTION E-3828/03

by Camilo Nogueira Román (Verts/ALE) to the Commission

(12 December 2003)

Subject:   The Izar de Fene shipyard and the possibility of regaining authorisation to build merchant ships

Subject:

The Commission recently took steps designed to allow certain forms of aid for the European ship-building industry in order to withstand unfair competition from South Korean shipyards. The European Parliament has adopted a report on the ‘Prestige’ disaster, which included a resolution calling for the building of oil tankers in regions such as Galicia which have been seriously affected by disasters at sea.

In this context what reason can there be for banning the Izar de Fene shipyard in Galicia from building merchant ships? Has Spain requested that Izar de Fene (formerly Astano) should be allowed to build ships of this kind once again? What is the Commission's position, bearing in mind that the Ferrol district, in which Izar de Fene is located, lost thousands of jobs as a consequence of the ban imposed on the shipyard, which has had to confine itself to building off-shore platforms?

Answer given by Mr Monti on behalf of the Commission

(5 February 2004)

(5 February 2004)

The Commission, in 1997, approved (1) EUR 1 377 million of restructuring aid for the public Spanish shipyards. In this decision, it was stated that, in order to minimize the possible market distorting effects of the aid, the annual production for the Spanish yards should not exceed 210 000 cgt for a period of 10 years. Furthermore, the decision stated that the Astano [now called Fene] yard should not reopen for shipbuilding. (It was already closed to shipbuilding due to previously approved aid to Spanish shipbuilding).

1

The decision to keep Fene (ex-Astano) closed was in order to ensure the restriction on Spanish shipbuilding production and, therefore, a counterpart for the approved restructuring aid authorised in 1997. Furthermore, the Council requested, in its Regulation (EC) No 1013/97 of 2 June 1997, on aid to certain shipyards under restructuring (2) on which the Commission decision mentioned above was based, that Fene should be kept closed for shipbuilding.

2

The Commission is not able to prejudge what its position would be on the issue of allowing Fene to restart with shipbuilding.

---

(1)  OJ C 354, 21.11.1997.

1

(2)  OJ L 148, 6.6.1997.

2

---
Exhibit 32B






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 AutoInfo, Inc. (the “Company”) on Form 10-Q for the quarter ended June 30, 2010 as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC) on the date hereof (the “Report”), I, William Wunderlich, Chief Financial Officer of the Company, certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. § 1350, as adopted pursuant to § 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that:




(1)         The Report fully complies with the requirements of section 13(a) or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended; and




(2)         The information contained in the Report fairly presents, in all material respects, the financial condition and result of operations of the Company.




A signed original of this written statement has been provided to the Company and will be retained by the Company and furnished to the SEC or its staff upon request.




Date:    August 10, 2010






/s/ William Wunderlich


William Wunderlich


Chief Financial Officer


(Principal Financial Officer)
Exhibit 11

                         AUTOINFO, INC. AND SUBSIDIARIES
                        Calculation of Earnings Per Share

<TABLE>
<CAPTION>
                                                             Nine Months Ended                      Three Months Ended
                                                    September 30,        August 31,         September 30,          August 31, 
                                                        1996                1995                1996                  1995
                                                  -----------------     ----------------  -----------------     -----------------
<S>                                                   <C>                  <C>                  <C>                 <C>            
Primarily and fully diluted earnings (loss):
Earnings (loss) from operations applicable to
common stock
     From continuing operations                       $(3,632,822)         $(1,807,380)         $(3,095,320)         $  131,081
     From discontinued operations                            --              9,709,095                 --               228,935
                                                      -----------          -----------          -----------          ----------
     Net income                                       $(3,632,822)         $ 7,901,715          $(3,095,320)         $  360,016
                                                      -----------          -----------          -----------          ----------

Shares:
     Weighted average number of
     common shares outstanding                          7,918,329            7,492,691            8,000,615           7,757,736
     Add shares issuable from assumed
     exercise of options and warrants                        --                 68,786                 --                 6,309
                                                      -----------          -----------          -----------          ----------
   Weighted average number of common
     shares as adjusted                                 7,918,329            7,561,477            8,000,615           7,764,045
                                                      -----------          -----------          -----------          ----------

Primary and fully diluted earnings per
common share:
     From continuing operations                       $      (.46)         $      (.24)         $      (.39)         $      .02
     From discontinued operations                            --                   1.28                 --                   .03
                                                      -----------          -----------          -----------          ----------
     Net income
                                                      $      (.46)         $      1.04          $      (.39)         $      .05
                                                      -----------          -----------          -----------          ----------
</TABLE>