alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
slee_ex1002.htm

EXHIBIT 10.02
   
   
  
   
  	 
	1

	  

	 

   
   
     
    	 
	2

	  

	 



   
  Sales and Purchase Contract
   
  Vendor: Jieyang Hai Yang Trading Co., Ltd.                            Contract Number: CG20140218
   
  Buyer: Guangzhou Yuewin Trading Co., Ltd.                            Date: 2014-02-18
   
  Both sides of the contractors agreed with the following:
   
  1. Product information:
   
    	  Model (CM)
	  Product Name
	  Quantity
	  Unit
	  Unit Price (Tax Included)
	  Total
	  Comment

	  Standard
	  Pillows
	  860
	  Piece
	  RMB 182.00
	  RMB 156,520.00
	
	  Standard
	  Bedding Covers
	  290
	  Set
	  RMB 299.85
	  RMB 86,956.50
	  Cotton

	  Standard
	  Mattresses
	  16
	  Piece
	  RMB 2,200.00
	  RMB 35,200.00
	
	  Standard
	  Foam Pillows
	  1693
	  Piece
	  RMB 194.86
	  RMB 329,903.00
	
	  203*152
	  Bedding Covers
	  91
	  Set
	  RMB 502.50
	  RMB 45,727.50
	
	  200*180
	  Mattresses
	  60
	  Piece
	  RMB 914.56
	  RMB 54,873.60
	  A478

	  200*180
	  Mattresses
	  77
	  Piece
	  RMB 785.44
	  RMB 60,478.88
	  A478

	  190*150
	  Mattresses
	  70
	  Piece
	  RMB 762.98
	  RMB 53,408.60
	  A478

	  190*120
	  Mattresses
	  90
	  Piece
	  RMB 874.68
	  RMB 78,721.20
	  D23

	  190*150
	  Mattresses
	  82
	  Piece
	  RMB 936.01
	  RMB 76,752.82
	  A61

	  190*150
	  Mattresses
	  95
	  Piece
	  RMB 1,162.02
	  RMB 110,391.90
	  A77

	  200*180
	  Mattresses
	  76
	  Piece
	  RMB 1,402.25
	  RMB 106,571.00
	  A77

	  190*150
	  Mattresses
	  22
	  Piece
	  RMB 1,907.34
	  RMB 41,961.60
	  Yalan

	  203*152
	  Bedding Covers
	  92
	  Set
	  RMB 602.50
	  RMB 55,430.00
	
	  200*180
	  Mattresses
	  20
	  Piece
	  RMB 1,955.17
	  RMB 39,103.40
	
	  197*175
	  Mattresses
	  80
	  Piece
	  RMB 2,100.00
	  RMB 168,000.00
	
	  Total:  1,500,000.00

	  Total: ONE MILLION FIVE HUNDRED THOUSAND ONLY


  
 
  2. Product quality: national standard. 
  3. Shipping location: Guangzhou. 
  4. Shipping method and shipping fee: buyer will pay for the shipping fee. 
  5. Packing standard: standard. 
   
    	 
	3

	  

	 


   
  6. Paying method: pay after the products are delivered. 
  7. Invoice: standard tax included invoice. 
  8. If buy needs guarantee, then both of the contractors will sign another guarantee agreement, and attach it to this contract. 
  9. Contract violation solution: both of the contractors will come up with an agreement. 
  10. When disagreement comes up with this contract, both of the contractors will make a new agreement. 
  11. Other: this contract is valid since February 2, 2014 to May 30, 2014. 
  12. This contract valid since the date both parties sign and stamp. This contract shall be provided in two copies, with each party holding one copy, the two copies and fax copies having the same legal validity.
   
  Vendor: Jieyang Hai Yang Trading Co., Ltd 
  Contact: Bin Yu 
  Address: Lingnan Building, North Huan Cheng Road, Jieyang 
  TEL: 0663-8665587
   
  Buyer: Guangzhou Yuewin Trading Co., Ltd. 
  Contact: Xuezhen Pan 
  Address: 3/F, Hezhan Multifunction Industrial Part, Panyu District, Guangzhou 
  TEL: 020-34783636
   
   
  4
UNPUBLISHED

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

No. 23-6406

EUGENE PETER SCHULER,

Petitioner - Appellant,

v.

CHADWICK DOTSON, Director, VDOC,

Respondent - Appellee.

Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Virginia, at 

Alexandria. Leonie M. Brinkema, District Judge. (1:16-cv-01151-LMB-JFA)

Submitted: April 18, 2024 Decided: April 19, 2024

Before WILKINSON, NIEMEYER, and THACKER, Circuit Judges.

Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion.

Eugene Peter Schuler, Appellant Pro Se.

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.

USCA4 Appeal: 23-6406 Doc: 7 Filed: 04/19/2024 Pg: 1 of 2
2

PER CURIAM:

Eugene Peter Schuler appeals the district court’s order construing his motion for 

rehearing as an unauthorized, successive 28 U.S.C. § 2254 petition and dismissing it on 

that basis.*

 Our review of the record confirms that the district court properly construed 

Schuler’s motion for rehearing as a successive § 2254 petition over which it lacked 

jurisdiction because he failed to obtain prefiling authorization from this court. See 28 

U.S.C. § 2244(b)(3)(A). Accordingly, we affirm the district court’s order.

We dispense with oral argument because the facts and legal contentions are 

adequately presented in the materials before this court and argument would not aid the 

decisional process.

AFFIRMED

* To the extent that Schuler seeks to appeal the district court’s February 24, 2023, 

order construing Schuler’s Fed. R. Civ. P. 60(b) motion as an unauthorized, successive 

§ 2254 petition and dismissing it on that basis, Schuler’s notice of appeal is untimely as to 

that order. See Fed. R. App. P. 4(a)(1).

USCA4 Appeal: 23-6406 Doc: 7 Filed: 04/19/2024 Pg: 2 of 2
AO 450 (Rev. 11/11) Judgment in a Civil Action

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

for the

__________ District of __________

)

)

)

)

)

Plaintiff

v. Civil Action No.

Defendant

JUDGMENT IN A CIVIL ACTION

The court has ordered that (check one):

u the plaintiff (name) recover from the

defendant (name) the amount of

dollars ($ ), which includes prejudgment

interest at the rate of %, plus post judgment interest at the rate of % per annum, along with costs.

u the plaintiff recover nothing, the action be dismissed on the merits, and the defendant (name)

recover costs from the plaintiff (name)

.

u other:

.

This action was (check one):

u tried by a jury with Judge presiding, and the jury has

rendered a verdict.

u tried by Judge without a jury and the above decision

was reached.

u decided by Judge on a motion for

.

Date: CLERK OF COURT

Signature of Clerk or Deputy Clerk

4/9/2019

 Southern District of Ohio

Jeffrey Lower

3:17-cv-412

Commissioner of Social Security

✔ REVERSING THE ALJ’S NON-DISABILITY FINDING AS UNSUPPORTED BY SUBSTANTIAL EVIDENCE;

REMANDING THIS CASE TO THE COMMISSIONER UNDER THE FOURTH SENTENCE OF 42 U.S.C. §

405(g) FOR FURTHER PROCEEDINGS; TERMINATING THIS CASE ON THE COURT’S DOCKET.

✔ Michael J. Newman
Exhibit






EXHIBIT 10.2


John L. Cordani
C/O Platform Specialty Products Corporation
245 Freight Street
Waterbury, CT. 06702
October 9, 2015
Re: Severance Agreement


Dear John,


I write to you concerning the severance agreement between you and MacDermid, Incorporated (“MacDermid”) dated July 22, 2002, which was subsequently assigned to Platform Specialty Products Corporation (“Platform”) as of January 1, 2015 (the “Severance Agreement”).  In consideration of your continued employment with Platform and in recognition of the additional responsibilities that we have requested that you assume, Platform and MacDermid hereby agree to modify the Severance Agreement as follows:


		
	1.
	The current reference in the first sentence to, “or within two (2) years after a Change of Control (as defined herein)”, is hereby modified to read, “or within four (4) years after a Change of Control (as defined herein)”. 


		
	2.
	The current reference in the third sentence to, “within two (2) years after a Change of Control”, is hereby modified to read, “within four (4) years after a Change of Control”.


		
	3.
	References to “MacDermid” in the Severance Agreement shall be considered references to “MacDermid and/or Platform”, jointly and severally.




The Severance Agreement shall remain in full force and effect in accordance with its terms as modified herein. Platform, MacDermid and Cordani agree that each that will strictly adhere to the terms of the Severance Agreement and recognize that a Change of Control, as defined in the Severance Agreement, occurred on October 31, 2013 when Platform acquired MacDermid. This modification to the Severance Agreement is being made in order to extend the current Change of Control period, and the protection provided thereby, to October 31, 2017. 


Please indicate your acceptance of this modification to the Severance Agreement by countersigning and returning this letter to me.


Thank you


/s/ Sanjiv Khattri
Sanjiv Khattri
Chief Financial Officer


Accepted and Agreed


/s/ John L. Cordani
John L. Cordani
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 

SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF OHIO 

WESTERN DIVISION 

CIVIL ACTION NO. 1:18-cv-111(WOB-KLL) 

KIMBERLY KHAMISI PETITIONER 

VS. JUDGMENT 

STATE OF OHIO, ET AL RESPONDENTS

 This matter is before the Court on the Report and 

Recommendation of the United States Magistrate Judge (Doc. 2), 

and no objections having been filed thereto, and the Court being 

sufficiently advised, 

IT IS ORDERED that the Report and Recommendation of the 

Magistrate Judge (Doc. 2) be, and it hereby is, adopted as the 

findings of fact and conclusions of law of this Court; 

petitioner’s Petition for a Writ of Habeas Corpus pursuant to 28 

U.S.C. § 2254 (Doc. 1), is DISMISSED WITHOUT PREJUDICE to 

refiling after petitioner has exhausted all available state 

court remedies. A certificate of appealability shall not issue 

with respect to the claims alleged in the petition. Pursuant to 

28 U.S.C. § 1915(a)(3), any application by petitioner to proceed 

on appeal in forma pauperis would be not be taken in “good 

faith.” 

Case: 1:18-cv-00111-WOB-KLL Doc #: 3 Filed: 04/06/18 Page: 1 of 2 PAGEID #: 55
 This 6th day of April, 2018. 

Case: 1:18-cv-00111-WOB-KLL Doc #: 3 Filed: 04/06/18 Page: 2 of 2 PAGEID #: 56
[Federal Register Volume 87, Number 12 (Wednesday, January 19, 2022)]
[Notices]
[Pages 2876-2877]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2022-00898]


-----------------------------------------------------------------------

DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES

National Institutes of Health


National Institute on Minority Health and Health Disparities; 
Notice of Closed Meetings

    Pursuant to section 10(d) of the Federal Advisory Committee Act, as 
amended, notice is hereby given of the following meetings.
    The meetings will be closed to the public in accordance with the 
provisions set forth in sections 552b(c)(4) and 552b(c)(6), Title 5 
U.S.C., as amended. The grant applications and the discussions could 
disclose confidential trade secrets or commercial property such as 
patentable material, and personal information concerning individuals 
associated with the grant applications, the disclosure of which would 
constitute a clearly unwarranted invasion of personal privacy.


[[Page 2877]]


    Name of Committee: National Institute on Minority Health and 
Health Disparities Special Emphasis Panel; NIMHD Support for 
Conferences and Scientific Meetings (R13).
    Date: February 23, 2022.
    Time: 11:00 a.m. to 1:00 p.m.
    Agenda: To review and evaluate grant applications.
    Place: National Institutes of Health, Gateway Plaza, 7201 
Wisconsin Avenue, Bethesda, MD 20892 (Virtual Meeting).
    Contact Person: Karen Nieves-Lugo, M.P.H., Ph.D., Scientific 
Review Officer, Office of Extramural Research Activities, National 
Institute on Minority Health and Health Disparities, National 
Institutes of Health, Gateway Building, 7201 Wisconsin Avenue, 
Bethesda, MD 20892, (301) 480-4727, <a href="/cdn-cgi/l/email-protection#b4dfd5c6d1da9adaddd1c2d1c7d8c1d3dbf4dadddc9ad3dbc2"><span class="__cf_email__" data-cfemail="a8c3c9dacdc686c6c1cddecddbc4ddcfc7e8c6c1c086cfc7de">[email protected]</span></a>.

    Name of Committee: National Institute on Minority Health and 
Health Disparities Special Emphasis Panel; NIMHD Mentored Career and 
Research Development Awards (Ks).
    Date: February 24-25, 2022.
    Time: 12:00 p.m. to 6:00 p.m.
    Agenda: To review and evaluate grant applications.
    Place: National Institutes of Health, Gateway Plaza, 7201 
Wisconsin Ave., Bethesda, MD 20892 (Virtual Meeting).
    Contact Person: Deborah Ismond, Ph.D., Scientific Review 
Officer, Office of Extramural Research Administration, National 
Institute on Minority Health and Health Disparities, National 
Institutes of Health, Gateway Building, 7201 Wisconsin Avenue, 
Bethesda, MD 20892, 301-402-1366, <a href="/cdn-cgi/l/email-protection#157c66787a7b7171675578747c793b7b7c7d3b727a63"><span class="__cf_email__" data-cfemail="8ae3f9e7e5e4eeeef8cae7ebe3e6a4e4e3e2a4ede5fc">[email protected]</span></a>.


    Dated: January 12, 2022.
David W. Freeman,
Program Analyst, Office of Federal Advisory Committee Policy.
[FR Doc. 2022-00898 Filed 1-18-22; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4140-01-P


</pre><script data-cfasync="false" src="/cdn-cgi/scripts/5c5dd728/cloudflare-static/email-decode.min.js"></script></body>
</html>
**EXHIBIT
      32.1**




**CERTIFICATION
      BY THE CHIEF EXECUTIVE OFFICER**


**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 on Form 10-QSB of Syndication, Inc. (the
      "Company") for the period ended September 30, 2007 as filed with the Securities
      and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the "Report"), the undersigned,
      Brian Sorrentino, President and Chief Executive Officer of the Company, hereby
      certifies, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, that:




(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:
                November 18, 2007
            /s/
                Brian Sorrentino
              Brian
                Sorrentino
              Chief
                Executive Officer
```

[Congressional Bills 111th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[H.R. 430 Introduced in House (IH)]

111th CONGRESS
  1st Session
                                H. R. 430

 To amend title 18, United States Code, to provide criminal penalties 
   for the destruction of memorials, headstones, markers, and graves 
 commemorating persons serving in the Armed Forces on private property.

_______________________________________________________________________

                    IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

                            January 9, 2009

Mr. Poe of Texas (for himself, Mr. Brown of South Carolina, Mr. Burton 
of Indiana, Mr. Hall of Texas, Mr. Edwards of Texas, Mr. McCotter, Mr. 
 Sensenbrenner, Mr. McHenry, Mr. LoBiondo, Ms. Fallin, Mr. Carter, Mr. 
 Ryan of Wisconsin, Mr. Jones, Mr. Brady of Pennsylvania, Mr. Putnam, 
   Mr. Marchant, Mr. Mario Diaz-Balart of Florida, Mr. Buchanan, Mr. 
   Pitts, Mrs. Miller of Michigan, and Mr. Gallegly) introduced the 
  following bill; which was referred to the Committee on the Judiciary

_______________________________________________________________________

                                 A BILL

 
 To amend title 18, United States Code, to provide criminal penalties 
   for the destruction of memorials, headstones, markers, and graves 
 commemorating persons serving in the Armed Forces on private property.

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

SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE.

    This Act may be cited as the ``Lance Corporal Jeremy Burris Act''.

SEC. 2. CRIMINAL PENALTIES FOR THE DESTRUCTION OF MEMORIALS, 
              HEADSTONES, MARKERS, AND GRAVES COMMEMORATING PERSONS 
              SERVING IN THE ARMED FORCES ON PRIVATE PROPERTY.

    Section 1369 of title 18, United States Code, is amended--
            (1) in the heading by inserting ``, headstones, and 
        graves'' after ``memorials'';
            (2) in subsection (a)--
                    (A) by striking ``willfully'' and inserting 
                ``knowingly'';
                    (B) by striking ``on public property'';
                    (C) by striking ``armed forces'' and inserting 
                ``Armed Forces''; and
                    (D) by inserting ``, or any grave or headstone or 
                marker marking the grave of any such person,'' after 
                ``United States'';
            (3) in subsection (b)(2) by inserting ``grave, headstone, 
        marker,'' after ``statue,''; and
            (4) by adding at the end the following new subsection:
    ``(c) For the purposes of this section, the term `grave' includes 
any object placed on such grave to commemorate the veteran or member of 
the Armed Forces of the United States buried in such grave.''.
                                 <all>
```
#### McNutt *v.*State.

4184

144 S. W. 2d 1094

Opinion delivered November 11, 1940.

*314
      *Sam Robinson,*for appellant.

*Jack Ilolt,*Attorney General, and *Jno. P. Streepey,*Assistant Attorney General, for appellee.

GrieeiN Smith, C. J.

In consequence of embezzle-ments aggregating more than twenty thousand dollars which occurred in the office of Sheriff and Collector L. B. Branch, Edgar Collins and Charles McNutt, deputies, were indicted. Collins was convicted on five counts. On appeal the judgments were affirmed. *Collins*v. *State,*200 Ark. 1027, 143 S. W. 2d 1. McNutt was convicted on three counts and sentenced on each to serve five years in the penitentiary, the sentences to run concurrently.

The appeal questions sufficiency of the evidence. It also alleges that reversible error was committed in denying the defendant the right to examine an audit report compiled by Joe Bond, certified public accountant. This is the same report that featured in the Collins Case. It was there said that the court was mistaken when it ruled that the report was not a public document ; but it was further held that the error was waived.

In the case at bar there was no waiver, and appellant should have had access to the report. However, there is this stipulation:

> “At the commencement of the trial all books and records of the sheriff and collector’s office are present and exhibited in open court for the inspection of the defendant and his counsel.”

Prior to the trial the Bond audit report had been in possession of the prosecuting attorney for some time, *315and the defendant unsuccessfully moved to require its surrender for inspection purposes.

In response to defendant’s motion the state filed a hill of particulars.

While in this case, as in the Collins Case, we are of the opinion that the court erred in not permitting the defendant to have access to the audit report when the accountant was being cross-examined, it is difficult to see how prejudice resulted, in view of the fact that all original records from which the audit was compiled were before the court, accessible alike to the state and to the defendant. There are hundreds of exhibits in the hill of exceptions, including cancelled checks, bank deposit slips, bank statements, departmental reports, the original claim filed with the county by Collins for $144.05 in favor of the sheriff covering' “expense of returning prisoners, as per receipts attached,” and other primary matters — all of which constituted a part of the original record. That use was made of them is attested by their presence in the record. They substantiate the state’s contention. This being true, the defendant was not prejudiced.

We think the evidence was substantial, and therefore the question whether appellant was guilty was for the jury.

Affirmed.
I 

111TH CONGRESS 

2D SESSION H. R. 4556 

To prohibit the use of Department of Justice funds for the prosecution 

in Article III courts of the United States of individuals involved in 

the September 11, 2001, terrorist attacks. 

IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES 

FEBRUARY 2, 2010 

Mr. WOLF (for himself, Mr. ROGERS of Kentucky, Mr. SHIMKUS, Mr. LEWIS

of California, Mr. CALVERT, Mrs. MYRICK, Mr. BURTON of Indiana, Mr. 

CAO, Mr. POSEY, Mr. GARRETT of New Jersey, Mr. BOREN, Mr. DAVIS

of Kentucky, Mr. CULBERSON, Mr. WITTMAN, Mr. PAULSEN, Mr. WILSON of South Carolina, Mr. BOEHNER, Mr. POE of Texas, Mr. SHUSTER, 

Mrs. BLACKBURN, Mr. BRIGHT, Mr. SAM JOHNSON of Texas, Mr. 

CONAWAY, Mr. ALEXANDER, Mr. GRIFFITH, Mr. MCHENRY, Mrs. 

CAPITO, Mr. ALTMIRE, Mr. LAMBORN, Mrs. SCHMIDT, Mr. PITTS, Mr. 

SULLIVAN, Mr. MANZULLO, Mr. MCCLINTOCK, Mr. COFFMAN of Colorado, Mr. BOOZMAN, Mr. KING of New York, Mr. SMITH of New Jersey, 

and Mr. LANCE) introduced the following bill; which was referred to the 

Committee on the Judiciary 

A BILL 

To prohibit the use of Department of Justice funds for 

the prosecution in Article III courts of the United States 

of individuals involved in the September 11, 2001, terrorist attacks. 

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


smartinez on DSKB9S0YB1PROD with BILLS
2 

•HR 4556 IH

1 SECTION 1. PROHIBITION ON USE OF DEPARTMENT OF 

2 JUSTICE FUNDS FOR PROSECUTION IN ARTI3 CLE III COURTS OF INDIVIDUALS INVOLVED 

4 IN THE SEPTEMBER 11, 2001, TERRORIST AT5 TACKS. 

6 (a) PROHIBITION ON USE OF FUNDS FOR PROSECU7 TION OF 9/11 TERRORISTS IN ARTICLE III COURTS.— 

8 None of the funds appropriated or otherwise made avail9 able for the Department of Justice may be obligated or 

10 expended to commence or continue the prosecution in an 

11 Article III court of the United States of an individual de12 scribed in subsection (b) for any offense that may be pros13 ecuted by military commission under chapter 47A of title 

14 10, United States Code (as amended by the Military Com15 missions Act of 2009 (title XVIII of Public Law 111–84)). 

16 (b) COVERED INDIVIDUALS.—An individual described 

17 in this subsection is an individual suspected of planning, 

18 authorizing, organizing, committing, or aiding the attacks 

19 on the United States and its citizens that occurred on Sep20 tember 11, 2001, who— 

21 (1) is not a citizen of the United States; and 

22 (2) is subject to jurisdiction under chapter 47A 

23 of title 10, United States Code (as amended by the 

24 Military Commissions Act of 2009). 

25 (c) ARTICLE III COURT OF THE UNITED STATES DE26 FINED.—In this section, the term ‘‘Article III court of the 


smartinez on DSKB9S0YB1PROD with BILLS
3 

•HR 4556 IH

1 United States’’ means a court of the United States estab2 lished under Article III of the Constitution of the United 

3 States. 

Æ 


smartinez on DSKB9S0YB1PROD with BILLS
Court of Appeals of the State of Georgia

Clerk's Office, Atlanta, October 22, 2014.

I certify that the above is a true extract from the minutes of

the Court of Appeals of Georgia.

Witness my signature and the seal of said court hereto

affixed the day and year last above written.

, Clerk.

Court of Appeals 

of the State of Georgia

ATLANTA, October 22, 2014

The Court of Appeals hereby passes the following order

A15A0178. ABN AMRO MORTGAGE GROUP, INC. v. WELLS FARGO BANK, NA.

Upon consideration of the APPELLANT'S motion FOR PERMISSION TO WITHDRAW

THE APPEAL in the above styled case, it is ordered that the motion is hereby GRANTED.
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 Form 10-Q of Microtune, Inc. (the
Company) for the quarter ended June 30, 2004 as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the Report), I, James A. Fontaine, 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:



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



|                       
|-----------------------
|/s/ JAMES A. FONTAINE  
|James A. Fontaine      
|Chief Executive Officer
|Date: August 4, 2004