alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
United States District Court

For the Northern District of California

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

26

27

28

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

WAYMO LLC,

Plaintiff,

 v.

UBER TECHNOLOGIES, INC.;

OTTOMOTTO LLC; and OTTO

TRUCKING LLC,

Defendants. /

No. C 17-00939 WHA

ORDER AFTER HEARING

As stated on the record during the hearing yesterday, plaintiff Waymo LLC’s motions

for order to show cause (Dkt. Nos. 677, 847) are HELD IN ABEYANCE, except that defendant

Otto Trucking LLC shall fully comply with the expedited discovery and provisional relief

orders (Dkt. Nos. 61, 433) by TOMORROW AT NOON. Additionally, Waymo may propose jury

instructions according to the guidelines discussed at the hearing. Defendants’ motions to strike

damages (Dkt. Nos. 797, 942) are also HELD IN ABEYANCE. Their motion to strike trade secret

claims (Dkt. No. 1108) is DENIED IN PART and otherwise HELD IN ABEYANCE. Any party that

wishes to move for summary judgment must request permission to do so by filing a précis

pursuant to Paragraph 9 of the case management order (Dkt. No. 563) by AUGUST 22 AT NOON.

IT IS SO ORDERED.

Dated: August 17, 2017. WILLIAM ALSUP

UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE

Case 3:17-cv-00939-WHA Document 1247 Filed 08/17/17 Page 1 of 1
ex10-6.htm


    Exhibit
10.6

     

     

    
       

       

      EXERCISE
OF OPTION TO EXTEND AND

      AMENDMENT
NO. 1

      TO

      CHARTER
PARTY

      (THE
“CHARTERPARTY”)

      DATED
OCTOBER 6, 2005

      BETWEEN

      REBECCA
TANKER CORPORATION (THE “OWNERS”)

      AND

      DHT
REBECCA AFRAMAX CORP. (THE “CHARTERERS”)

      FOR THE
VESSEL

      OVERSEAS
REBECCA

       

      Pursuant
to clause 99 of the Charterparty, the Charterers hereby declare, as of November
26, 2008, the exercise of the first 18 months of the option period which shall
commence on October 17, 2010 at 0001 hours GMT and end on April 16, 2012 at 2400
hours GMT (the “Option
Period”).

       

      For that
portion of the Option Period commencing on October 17, 2010 at 0001 hours GMT
and ending on October 16, 2011 at 2400 hours GMT, the rate shall be usd 19,400 per day.

       

      For that
portion of the Option Period commencing on October 17, 2011 at 0001 hours GMT
and ending on April 16, 2012 at 2400 hours GMT, the rate shall be usd 19,700 per day.

       

      As of the
date of this agreement, the Owners and the Charterers hereby amend the terms of
the Charterparty as follows:

       

      (1)          Notwithstanding
clause 99, for the balance of the period subject to options, the Charterers are
hereby granted the option to select periods equal to: (a) 12 months, 24 months
or 36 months; or (b) on one occasion only, a single period equal to 6 months, 18
months, 30 months or 42 months.

       

      (2)          Except
as expressly amended by this agreement, including the declaration of the Option
Period by the Charterers and its acceptance by the Owners, the terms and
conditions of the Charterparty remain unchanged and in full force and effect
including, without limitation, the profit sharing arrangement between the Owners
and the Charterers.

       

      
         

        
          January
15, 2009

           

          
            
              
                	For Rebecca
      Tanker Corporation	 	 	For
      DHT Rebecca Aframax Corp.	 
	 	 	 	 	 
	
                        By: 
      /s/ Ole Jacob Diesen

                      	 	 	
                        By: 
      /s/ Mats Berglund

                      	 
	
                        Name: 
      Ole Jacob Diesen

                      	 	 	
                        Name: 
      Mats Berglund

                      	 
	
                        Title:   
      Vice President

                      	 	 	
                        Title:   
      President
Marcus Donte MIDDLEBROOK, petitioner, v. Robert NAPEL, Warden.

No. 12-1309.

Supreme Court of the United States

June 10, 2013.

Petition for writ of certiorari to the United States Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit denied.
このドキュメントは、FDAの婦人健康部(

OWH)と全米ドラッグチェーンストア協会(

NACDS)が、協力して作りました。

薬を使用する人の約30%から50%は、薬

を指示通りに使用していません。このた

めに、医師の診察を受けなければならな

い回数が増えたり、入院日数が長くなっ

たり、賃金収入が減ったり、処方箋の変

更が必要になったりします。これらにより

、毎年アメリカ市民に1,000億ドル以上の

余分な費用負担がかかります。

大人は自分自身だけでなく、家族全員の

薬の管理をすることがあります。したがっ

て、ラベルを読み、問題を避け、質問をし

、記録を保存する必要があります。

1. ラベルを読む

薬を飲む前に、ラベルを良く読んでくださ

い。ラベルには次の情報が含まれていま

す:

成分リスト - 薬の成分にアレルギーがあ

る場合は、使用しないでください。医師ま

たは薬剤師に別の薬を頼んでください。

警告 - この部分は、注意して読んでくだ

さい。

有効期限 - ボトルに書いてある日付け

以降は、薬を使用しないでください。

本来の効果が出ないかもしれません。

薬の詳細については、薬剤師にお問い

合わせください。

2. 問題を避ける

薬は、眠気、嘔吐、出血、頭痛、発疹など

の問題や副作用を引き起こす可能性があ

ります。あなたが服用している薬の副作用

について、尋ねてください。医師、薬剤師、

または看護師に、相談してください。

薬を整理しましょう。

薬の服用をスキップしないでください。

薬を他の人と共有しないでください。

暗いところで薬を服用しないでください。 

薬を賢く使いましょう

あなたの為に...あなたを必要とする人の為に

薬の管理に注意しましょう

婦人健康部

www.fda.gov/womens

薬の管理に注意しましょう

あなたの為に...あなたを必要とする人の為に

私の薬
3. 質問をする

• 薬の名前は、何ですか?

• ジェネリック薬は、ありますか?

• なぜこの薬を服用するのですか?

• いつ、服用すればいいですか?

• 空腹時に服用すべきですか?それとも食

べ物と一緒に服用すべきですか?

• お酒と一緒に服用しても大丈夫ですか?

• 服用を忘れた時は、どうすれば良いです

か?

• どれだけの量を服用すれば良いですか?

• どのくらいの期間、服用するのですか?

• どのような問題に注意する必要がありま

すか?

妊娠中または授乳中の場合は、薬や栄養

サプリメントを服用する前に、医療専門家

のアドバイスを求めてください。医師、薬剤

師、または看護師に相談してください。彼ら

は喜んであなたを助けてくれるでしょう。

薬物アレルギー

担当医師

電話番号

4. 常用する薬の記録を書き込ん

で、保存する

服用する薬にチェックしてください:

アスピリンまたは他の痛み止め

/頭痛薬/解熱剤

アレルギー薬

制酸剤・胃腸薬

風邪薬

咳止め

ダイエット薬/サプリ 

下剤

睡眠薬 

ビタミン剤

ミネラル

ハーブ

その他

名前: 

あなたの処方薬のリスト

年月日 薬の名前 服用量 服用する時刻 適応症 リフィル

例 XXXX 1錠

400 mg

1日3回、

食後 関節炎 2

これをご自分の財布またはポケットに入れておき、あなたの医師、薬剤師、または看護師に見せてください。

薬による深刻な問題が発生したら、医師、薬剤師、または看護師に、FDA(1-800-FDA-1088)

に報告してもらってください。
Calvin P. MOORE, Appellant, v. The STATE of Florida, Appellee.

No. 3D19-667

District Court of Appeal of Florida, Third District.

Opinion filed June 12, 2019

**DECISION WITHOUT PUBLISHED OPINION**

Affirmed.
#### Rickey TOWNSEND, Appellant, v. UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE; John Ashcroft, individually and in his official capacity as the present Attorney General of the United States of America; Janet Reno, individually and in her official capacity as the former Attorney General of the United States of America; Bureau of Prisons, sued as the Federal Bureau of Prisons; Kathy Hawk, individually and in her official capacity as the Director of the Bureau of Prisons; Christopher Erlewine, individually and in his official capacity as Assis*437tant Director of the General Counsel for the Bureau of Prisons; R.L. Stiff, individually and in his official capacity as Warden of the Federal Correctional Institution, Oxford, WI; Theador Edgecomb, individually and in his official capacity as a Senior Officer EEO, Black Affairs, Counselor at the Federal Correctional Institution, Oxford, WI; Viki Borkz, individually and in her official capacity as EEO Counselor at the Federal Correctional Institution, Oxford, WI; Angela Crosby, individually and in her official capacity as a EEO Specialist; Caroline Sapla, individually and in her official capacity as a general counsel attorney for the Bureau of Prisons; Sarah Nagy, individually and in her official capacity as a private attorney; Robert Tomlinson, individually and in his official capacity as a private attorney, Appellees.

No. 03-3241.

United States Court of Appeals, Eighth Circuit.

Submitted May 4, 2004.

Decided May 7, 2004.

Rickey Townsend, Wisconsin Rapids, WI, pro se.

Friedrich Anson Paul Siekert, U.S. Attorney’s Office, Gary Warren Hoch, Meagher & Geer, Minneapolis, MN, Debra Lynn Weiss, Dudley & Smith, St. Paul, MN, for Defendants-Appellees.

Before BYE, MCMILLIAN, and RILEY, Circuit Judges.

PER CURIAM.

Rickey Townsend appeals the district court’s1 dismissal of his civil rights action. After de novo review, we agree with the district court that the federal-agency defendants were entitled to sovereign immunity, that the court lacked personal jurisdiction over the remaining defendants who raised the defense, and that the claims against Robert Tomlinson failed on their merits.

Accordingly, we affirm. *See*8th Cir. R. 47B.

1

. The Honorable Donovan W. Frank, United States District Judge for the District of Minnesota, adopting the report and recommendations of the Honorable Susan Richard Nelson, United States Magistrate Judge for the District of Minnesota.
Case 3:17-cv-00152-VC   Document 49   Filed 05/24/17   Page 1 of 2

Case 3:17-cv-00152-VC   Document 49   Filed 05/24/17   Page 2 of 2
**UN PUBLISHED** 
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

**No. 15**  **- 6497** 

GREG L. HAMMER , Plaintiff

- Appellant ,

v. WENDY HOBBS, Sued in their individual and officials capacities; J. KEELING, Sued in their individual and officials capacities; M. MEYERS, Sued in their individual and officials capacities , Defendants

– Appellees , and KEELING, Warden, Defendant
.

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

. James C. Cacheris , Senior District Judge. ( 1:14

- cv - 00008

- JCC

- MSN )

Submitted : August 20, 2015 Decided: August 24, 2015

Before DUNCAN, KEENAN, and WYNN , Circuit Judges.

Affirmed by un published per curiam opinion

.
Greg L. Hammer, Appellant Pro Se. Richard Carson Vorhis, Senior Assistant Attorney General, Richmond, Virginia, for Appellee s . Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.2 PER CURIAM: Greg L. Hammer appeals the district court ’ s order denying relief on his 42 U.S.C. § 1983 (2012) civil rights complaint in which Hammer alleged violations of the First and Fourteenth Amendment s and the Religious Land Use and Institutionalized Persons Act, see 42 U.S.C. §§ 2000cc to 2000cc

- 5 (2012)
. We have reviewed the re cord and find no reversible error. Accordingly, we affirm for the reasons stated by the district
court. See Hammer v. Hobbs , No. 1:14

- cv - 00008

- JCC

- MSN (E.D. Va. Mar. 3, 2015) . We dispense with oral argument because the facts and legal contentions are ad equately presented in the materials before th is court and argument would not aid the decisional
process.

AFFIRMED
# C_2018031EN.01000401.xml

| 27.1.2018 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 31/4 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

27.1.2018

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 31/4

---

COUNCIL DECISION

of 23 January 2018

appointing members and alternate members of the Advisory Committee on Freedom of Movement for Workers for Italy

(2018/C 31/04)

THE COUNCIL OF THE EUROPEAN UNION,

Having regard to the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union,

Having regard to Regulation (EU) No 492/2011 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 5 April 2011 on freedom of movement for workers within the Union (1), and in particular Articles 23 and 24 thereof,

1

Having regard to the lists of candidates submitted to the Council by the Governments of the Member States,

Whereas:

| (1) | By its Decision of 20 September 2016 (2), the Council appointed the members and alternate members of the Advisory Committee on Freedom of Movement for Workers (the ‘Committee’) for the period from 25 September 2016 to 24 September 2018. |
| --- | --- |

(1)

By its Decision of 20 September 2016 (2), the Council appointed the members and alternate members of the Advisory Committee on Freedom of Movement for Workers (the ‘Committee’) for the period from 25 September 2016 to 24 September 2018.

2

| (2) | The government of Italy has submitted nominations for several posts to be filled, |
| --- | --- |

(2)

The government of Italy has submitted nominations for several posts to be filled,

HAS ADOPTED THIS DECISION:

Article 1

The following are appointed members and alternate members of the Advisory Committee on Freedom of Movement for Workers for the period ending on 24 September 2018:

I.   TRADE UNION REPRESENTATIVES

| Country | Members | Alternate members |
| --- | --- | --- |
| Italy | Mr Salvatore MARRA
  Mr Giuseppe CASUCCI | Ms Ilaria FONTANIN |

Country

Members

Alternate members

Italy

Mr Salvatore MARRA

Mr Giuseppe CASUCCI

Ms Ilaria FONTANIN

II.   EMPLOYERS' ASSOCIATIONS REPRESENTATIVES

| Country | Members | Alternate members |
| --- | --- | --- |
| Italy | Ms Paola ASTORRI
  Mr Fabio ANTONILLI | Ms Serena FACELLO |

Country

Members

Alternate members

Italy

Ms Paola ASTORRI

Mr Fabio ANTONILLI

Ms Serena FACELLO

Article 2

The Council shall appoint members and alternate members not yet nominated at a later date.

Article 3

This Decision shall enter into force on the date of its adoption.

Done at Brussels, 23 January 2018.

For the Council

The President

V. GORANOV

---

(1)  OJ L 141, 27.5.2011, p. 1.

1

(2)  Council Decision of 20 September 2016 appointing the members and alternate members of the Advisory Committee on Freedom of Movement for Workers (OJ C 348, 23.9.2016, p. 3).

2

---
Dana Lydell SMITH, petitioner, v. IDAHO.

No. 12-9369.

Supreme Court of the United States

May 28, 2013.

Petition for writ of certiorari to the Supreme Court of Idaho denied.
Kenneth Arthur HALL, Jr., Appellant, v. STATE of Florida, Appellee.

No. 4D19-791

District Court of Appeal of Florida, Fourth District.

[June 27, 2019]

**DECISION WITHOUT PUBLISHED OPINION**

Affirmed.
**UN PUBLISHED** 
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

**No. 14**  **- 7727** 

BRANDON L. ROBERTSON , Plaintiff

– Appellant ,
v. MATTHEW ROBERTS, Correctional Officer (K

- 9 Unit); BRETT HUGHES, Supervising Officer (Sergeant) , Defendants

- Appellees
.

Appeal from the United States District Court for the Western District of Virginia , at Roanoke
. Michael F. Urbanski , District Judge. ( 7:13

- cv - 00560

- MFU

- RSB )

Submitted : March 13, 2015 Decided: March 19, 2015

Before NIEMEYER and AGEE , Circuit Judges, and HAMILTON, Senior Circuit Judge.

Affirmed by un published per curiam opinion
. Brandon L. Robertson, Appellant Pro Se. John Michael Parsons, Assistant Attorney General, Richmond, Virginia, for Appellees.
Unpublished opinions are not bindin g precedent in this circuit.2 PER CURIAM: Brandon L. Robertson appeals the district court ’ s order denying relief on his 42 U.S.C. § 1983 (20 12 ) complaint. We have reviewed the record and find no reversible error. Accordingly, we affirm for the reasons s tated by the district
court. Robertson v. Roberts , No. 7:13

- cv - 00560

- MFU

- RSB (W.D. Va. July 7, 2014) . We dispense with oral argument because the facts and legal contentions are adequately presented in the materials before th is court and argument would no t aid the decisional process.
AFFIRMED
Jason D. ALLEN, Appellant, v. STATE of Florida, Appellee.

No. 4D19-803

District Court of Appeal of Florida, Fourth District.

[May 30, 2019]

**DECISION WITHOUT PUBLISHED OPINION**

Affirmed.
Cornelius Curezz REESE v. STATE

CR-16-1040

Court of Criminal Appeals of Alabama.

March 9, 2018

**DECISION WITHOUT PUBLISHED OPINION**

Affirmed.
[Federal Register Volume 60, Number 88 (Monday, May 8, 1995)]
[Notices]
[Page 22569]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 95-11172]



=======================================================================
-----------------------------------------------------------------------

COMMODITY FUTURES TRADING COMMISSION


Notice of Delegation of Authority

SUMMARY: Notice is hereby given that the Commodity Futures Trading 
Commission has delegated, on an interim basis, certain authority to the 
Program Coordinator of the Division of Enforcement.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:Susan R. Cornell, Attorney, Division of 
Enforcement, Commodity Futures Trading Commission, 2033 K Street NW., 
Washington, D.C. 20581. Telephone: (202) 254-7424.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Notice is hereby given that the Commodity 
Futures Trading Commission has delegated to the Program Coordinator of 
the Division of Enforcement all of the authority which has been 
delegated to the Director of the Division of Enforcement, including but 
not limited to the authority to conduct investigations as set forth in 
Part 11--Rules Relating to Investigations, 17 CFR part 11, and all 
other delegations set forth in that Part, and the authority set forth 
in Part 140--Organization, Functions and Procedures of the Commission, 
17 CFR part 140. This delegation shall be in effect only until such 
time as a Director of the Division of Enforcement is appointed and 
assumes office. (7 U.S.C. 4a, 9, 15, 12, and 12a(5)).

    Issued in Washington, D.C. on May 2, 1995, by the Commission.
Jean A. Webb,
Secretary of the Commission.
[FR Doc. 95-11172 Filed 5-5-95; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6351-01-M
**
**EXHIBIT 35.1**

**Servicer Compliance Certificate**

FIFTH THIRD AUTO TRUST 2015-1

 

 

The undersigned, a duly authorized officer of Fifth Third Bank (“Fifth Third”), an Ohio banking corporation, as servicer (insuch capacity, the “Servicer”) under the Servicing Agreement, dated as of November 5, 2015 (as amended and supplemented, or otherwise modified and in effect from time to time, the “Servicing Agreement”), by andamong Fifth Third Auto Trust 2015-1, the Servicer and Deutsche Bank Trust Company Americas, as Indenture Trustee, does hereby certify that: 

 
 1.
A review of the activities of the Servicer during the period from January 1, 2018 throughDecember 31, 2018 (the “Reporting Period”), and of its performance under the Servicing Agreement has been made under my supervision; and 

 
 2.
To the best of my knowledge, based on such review, the Servicer has fulfilled all of its obligations underthe Servicing Agreement in all material respects throughout the Reporting Period. 

[Signature Page Follows] 
**

IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the undersigned has duly executed this Certificate on behalf of theServicer this 28th day of March, 2019. 

 

**FIFTH THIRD BANK**

 
 
                

By:
 
/s/ Nathan Steuber
 
Name: Nathan Steuber
 
Title: Vice President
 
*Servicer Compliance Certificate*

*(FTAT 2015-1)*
Donald Keith NEWBURY, petitioner, v. Rick THALER, Director, Texas Department of Criminal Justice, Correctional Institutions Division.

No. 12-7657.

Supreme Court of the United States

June 3, 2013.

On petition for writ of certiorari to the United States Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit. Motion of petitioner for leave to proceed *in forma pauperis* and petition for writ of certiorari granted. Judgment vacated, and case remanded to the United States Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit for further consideration in light of *Trevino v. Thaler,* 569 U.S. ----, 133 S.Ct. 1747, 185 L.Ed.2d 783 (2013).
Case 3:17-cv-00223-RS Document 150 Filed 05/30/17 Page 1 of 1
[Federal Register Volume 60, Number 86 (Thursday, May 4, 1995)]
[Notices]
[Pages 22061-22062]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 95-10996]



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

DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY
[Docket No. RP95-252-000]


Texas Eastern Transmission Corp. Notice of Proposed Changes in 
FERC Gas Tariff

April 28, 1995.
    Take notice that on April 25, 1995, pursuant to and in compliance 
with the Commission's Final Rule (Order No. 577) issued March 29, 1995 
in Docket No. RM95-5-000, Texas Eastern Transmission Corporation (Texas 
Eastern) tendered for filing as part of its FERC Gas Tariff, Sixth 
Revised Volume No. 1, the following tariff sheets:

First Revised Sheet No. 464
First Revised Sheet No. 465
First Revised Sheet No. 467

    Texas Eastern states that the tariff sheets submitted herewith 
reflect the revisions in the term and character of capacity releases 
that are exempt from advance posting and bidding requirements and which 
reduce the restriction period for re-releasing such capacity to the 
same pre-arranged customer.
    Texas Eastern requests waiver of the notice requirement of Section 
154.22 of the Regulations to permit the tendered tariff sheets to 
become effective on May 4, 1995, which is the date Order No. 577 will 
become effective.
    Texas Eastern states that copies of the filing were served on firm 
customers of [[Page 22062]] Texas Eastern and interested state 
commissions.
    Any person desiring to be heard or to protest said filing should 
file a motion to intervene or protest with the Federal Energy 
Regulatory Commission, 825 North Capitol Street, NE., Washington, DC 
20426, in accordance with Sections 385.214 and 385.211 of the 
Commission's Rules and Regulations. All such motions or protests should 
be filed on or before May 5, 1995. Protests will be considered by the 
Commission in determining the appropriate action to be taken, but will 
not serve to make protestants parties to the proceeding. Any person 
wishing to become a party must file a motion to intervene. Copies of 
this filing are on file with the Commission and are available for 
public inspection in the Public Reference Room.
Lois D. Cashell,
Secretary.
[FR Doc. 95-10996 Filed 5-3-95; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6717-01-M
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 Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q of Inland American Real Estate Trust, Inc. (the Company) for the fiscal quarter ended March 31, 2010, as filed with the Securities and
Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the Report), Lori J. Foust, treasurer and principal financial officer of the Company, certifies, 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 her knowledge:



| | (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 results of operations of the Company.
| | --- | ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------



|                   |  |        |  |                                          
|------------------ |  | ------ |  | -----------------------------------------
|Date: May 13, 2011 |  | By:    |  | /s/ Lori J. Foust                        
|                   |  | Name:  |  | Lori J. Foust                            
|                   |  | Title: |  | Treasurer and principal financial officer

This
certification accompanies the Report pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002 and shall not, except to the extent required by the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, be deemed filed by the Company for purposes of Section 18 of the
Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended. 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.