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


**CERTIFICATION
      PURSUANT TO**


**18
      U.S.C. 1350,**


**AS
      ADOPTED PURSUANT TO**


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





In
      connection with the Report of SOLAR ENERTECH CORP. (the “Company”) on Form 10-Q
      for the quarter ended December 31, 2007, as filed with the Securities and
      Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the “Report”), I, Ming Wai Anthea Chung,
      Chief Financial Officer of the Company, certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. 1350,
      as
      adopted pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002,
      that:





The
      Report fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) or 15(d) of the
      Securities Exchange Act of 1934; and





The
      information contained in the Report fairly presents, in all material respects,
      the financial condition and results of operations of the Company.





Date:
                February 7, 2008
            By:
                */s/ Ming Wai Anthea Chung*Ming
                Wai Anthea ChungChief
                Financial Officer
George MARTORANO, petitioner, v. UNITED STATES.

No. 12-10048.

Supreme Court of the United States

Aug. 12, 2013.

Petition for rehearing denied.
1

Case No. 5:17-cv-00459-LHK

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

DAVID R. SOCHER 

ATTORNEY AT

LAW, PC

3443

GOLDEN 

GATE 

WAY, SUITE 

F

LAFAYETTE, CALIFORNIA 94549

David R. Socher, Esq. (SBN 158023)

DAVID R. SOCHER ATTORNEY AT LAW, PC

3443 Golden Gate Way, Suite F

Lafayette, California 94549

Telephone: (925) 962-9191

Facsimile: (925) 962-9199

Email: david@drsocher.com

Attorney for Defendant GREENSKY, LLC

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

(SAN JOSE)

Glen Bertulfo,

Plaintiff,

v.

GreenSky, LLC,

Defendant.

Case No.: 5:17-cv-00459-LHK

STIPULATION TO ARBITRATION

Pursuant to the binding arbitration provision in the Loan Agreement between Plaintiff Glen 

Bertulfo and Defendant GreenSky, LLC, entered into on or about August 30, 2015, IT IS HEREBY 

STIPULATED AS FOLLOWS:

This action in the United States District Court for the Northern District of California at San 

Jose shall be dismissed and arbitration initiated with the American Arbitration Association or JAMS, 

for binding arbitration before a single, neutral arbitrator pursuant to administration by either the 

American Arbitration Association or JAMS, as the parties may agree. 

(Continued on next page)

Case 5:17-cv-00459-LHK Document 24 Filed 06/30/17 Page 1 of 2
2

Case No. 5:17-cv-00459-LHK

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

DAVID R. SOCHER 

ATTORNEY AT

LAW, PC

3443

GOLDEN 

GATE 

WAY, SUITE 

F

LAFAYETTE, CALIFORNIA 94549

Dated: June 30, 2017 David R. Socher Attorney at Law, PC

By: /s/ David R. Socher

David R. Socher

Attorney for Defendant GREENSKY, LLC

Dated: June 30, 2017

By: /s/ Taylor Tieman

Taylor M. Tieman

Attorney for Plaintiff GLEN BERTULFO

Case 5:17-cv-00459-LHK Document 24 Filed 06/30/17 Page 2 of 2
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

NORTHERN DISTRICT OF INDIANA

SOUTH BEND DIVISION

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA )

)

vs. ) Case No. 3:13-CR-57 RLM

)

NICKY L. SMITH )

ORDER

No objections have been filed to the magistrate judge’s findings and

recommendation upon a plea of guilty issued on June 25, 2013 [Doc. No. 13].

Accordingly, the court now ADOPTS those findings and the recommendation,

ACCEPTS defendant Nicky Smith’s plea of guilty, and FINDS the defendant guilty

of Count 1 of the Information, in violation of 18 U.S.C. § 641.

SO ORDERED.

ENTERED: July 15, 2013 

 /s/ Robert L. Miller, Jr. 

Judge

United States District Court
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

NORTHERN DISTRICT OF INDIANA

FORT WAYNE DIVISION

STEVEN EARNHART, )

)

Plaintiff, )

)

v. ) CAUSE NO. 1:13-CV-129

)

CARGILL, INCORPORATED and )

SUNGLO FEEDS, )

)

Defendants. )

OPINION AND ORDER

This matter is before the Court on Plaintiff’s Motion for Leave to Amend Complaint, in

which Plaintiff seeks to add Provimi North America, Inc., as a Defendant and dismiss Cargill,

Incorporated and Sunglo Feeds as Defendants. (Docket # 18.) The proposed amended

complaint, however, alleges that “[u]pon information and belief,” Defendant Provimi North

America, Inc., is a corporation organized and existing under the laws of the State of Delaware

with its principal place of business in Ohio. (Docket # 18-1 at ¶ 2.) 

But it is well-settled that “[a]llegations of federal subject matter jurisdiction may not be

made on the basis of information and belief, only personal knowledge.” Yount v. Shashek, No.

Civ. 06-753-GPM, 2006 WL 4017975, at *10 n.1 (S.D. Ill. Dec. 7, 2006) (citing Am.’s Best Inns,

Inc. v. Best Inns of Abilene, L.P., 980 F.2d 1072, 1074 (7th Cir. 1992)); Ferolie Corp. v.

Advantage Sales & Mktg., LLC, No. 04 C 5425, 2004 WL 2433114, at *1 (N.D. Ill. Oct. 28,

2004); Hayes v. Bass Pro Outdoor World, LLC, No. 02 C 9106, 2003 WL 187411, at *2 (N.D.

Ill. Jan. 21, 2003); Multi-M Int’l, Inc. v. Paige Med. Supply Co., 142 F.R.D. 150, 152 (N.D. Ill.

1992). Consequently, Plaintiff’s Motion for Leave to Amend Complaint (Docket # 18) is

1
DENIED WITHOUT PREJUDICE to Plaintiff properly reasserting the citizenship of Provimi

North America, Inc., on personal knowledge rather than information and belief. 

SO ORDERED.

Enter for this 14th day of May, 2013.

/S/ Roger B. Cosbey 

Roger B. Cosbey,

United States Magistrate Judge

2
Mark E. PHILLIPS, petitioner, v. UNITED STATES.

No. 12-9890.

Supreme Court of the United States

Aug. 12, 2013.

Petition for rehearing denied.

Justice KAGAN took no part in the consideration or decision of this petition.
<PAGE>

                                                                EXHIBIT 31.2

                    CERTIFICATION OF CHIEF FINANCIAL OFFICER

            PURSUANT TO SECTION 302 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002

I, James J. Polakiewicz, certify that:

1. I have reviewed this report on Form 10-Q/A-1 of Alpha Technologies Group,
Inc.;

2. Based on my knowledge, this report does not contain any untrue statement of a
material fact or omit to state a material fact necessary to make the statements
made, in light of the circumstances under which such statements were made, not
misleading with respect to the period covered by this report;

3. Based on my knowledge, the financial statements, and other financial
information included in this report, fairly present in all material respects the
financial condition, results of operations and cash flows of the registrant as
of, and for, the periods presented in this report;



/s/ James J. Polakiewicz
------------------------
James J. Polakiewicz
Chief Financial Officer
July 28, 2004
<TABLE> <S> <C>


<ARTICLE>                     5
<LEGEND>
The  schedule  contains  summary  financial   information   extracted  from  the
registrant's  financial  statements  as of and for the nine month  period  ended
December  26,  1998,  and is  qualified  in its  entirety by  reference  to such
financial statements:
</LEGEND>
       
<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   9-MOS          
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                       APR-3-1999
<PERIOD-END>                           DEC-26-1998
<CASH>                                   1,576,469
<SECURITIES>                                     0
<RECEIVABLES>                                    0
<ALLOWANCES>                                     0
<INVENTORY>                              2,821,832
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                         4,661,879
<PP&E>                                   3,447,877
<DEPRECIATION>                           2,102,319
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                           6,191,806
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                    4,546,846
<BONDS>                                    488,625
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                            0
<PREFERRED>                                500,000
<COMMON>                                   397,813
<OTHER-SE>                                (216,855)
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>             6,191,806
<SALES>                                 13,126,196
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                        13,126,196
<CGS>                                    7,796,882
<TOTAL-COSTS>                            7,796,882
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                         5,261,294
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                 0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                         109,574
<INCOME-PRETAX>                            (34,465)
<INCOME-TAX>                                     0
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                        (34,465)
<DISCONTINUED>                                   0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                  0
<CHANGES>                                        0
<NET-INCOME>                               (34,465)
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                   (0)
<EPS-DILUTED>                                   (0)
                                


</TABLE>
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

NORTHERN DISTRICT OF INDIANA

HAMMOND DIVISION

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, )

)

Plaintiff, )

)

v. ) Cause No. 2:13-CR-54-PPS-JEM

)

DIAMOND TONEY, )

)

Defendant. )

ORDER

This matter is before me on the findings and recommendation of Magistrate 

Judge John E. Martin relating to defendant Diamond Toney’s agreement to enter a plea 

of guilty to Count 1 of the indictment, pursuant to Rule 11 of the Federal Rules of 

Criminal Procedure. [DE 233.] Following a hearing on the record on April 12, 2021 [DE 

238], Judge Martin found that defendant understands the charges, the defendant’s

rights, and the maximum penalties; that defendant is competent to plead guilty; that 

there is a factual basis for defendant’s plea; that the defendant knowingly and 

voluntarily entered into an agreement to enter a plea of guilty; and that defendant's 

change of plea hearing could not be delayed without serious harm to the interests of 

justice. Judge Martin recommends that the Court accept defendant’s plea of guilty and 

proceed to impose sentence. Neither party has filed a timely objection to Judge Martin’s 

findings and recommendation. 

ACCORDINGLY:

USDC IN/ND case 2:13-cr-00054-PPS-JEM document 244 filed 04/27/21 page 1 of 2
Having reviewed the Magistrate Judge’s findings and recommendation 

concerning Defendant Diamond Toney’s plea of guilty, to which no objection has been 

filed, the Court hereby ADOPTS the findings and recommendation [DE 238] in their 

entirety.

Defendant Raymond Diamond Toney is adjudged GUILTY of Count 1 of the 

indictment.

The sentencing hearing is set for August 5, 2021 at 10:00 a.m. Hammond/Central 

time.

SO ORDERED.

ENTERED: April 27, 2021.

/s/ Philip P. Simon 

PHILIP P. SIMON, JUDGE

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

USDC IN/ND case 2:13-cr-00054-PPS-JEM document 244 filed 04/27/21 page 2 of 2
R.G., petitioner, v. FLORIDA DEPARTMENT OF CHILDREN AND FAMILIES.

No. 12-8940.

Supreme Court of the United States

April 29, 2013.

Petition for writ of certiorari to the District Court of Appeal of Florida, Third District, denied.
Tequilla FIELDS, petitioner, v. Nancy A. GIROUX, Superintendent, State Correctional Institution at Muncy, et al.

No. 12-9569.

Supreme Court of the United States

May 20, 2013.

Petition for writ of certiorari to the United States Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit denied.
Exhibit 31
**CERTIFICATION**
I, Ted L. Hall, certify that:
     1. I have reviewed this quarterly report on Form 10-Q of Kiewit Royalty Trust, for which U.S.Bank National Association acts as Trustee;
     2. Based on my knowledge, this quarterly report does not contain any untrue statement of amaterial fact or omit to state a material fact necessary to make the statements made, in light ofthe circumstances under which such statements were made, not misleading with respect to the periodcovered by this quarterly report;
     3. Based on my knowledge, the financial statements, and other financial information includedin this quarterly report, fairly present in all material respects the financial condition,distributable income and changes in trust corpus of the registrant as of, and for, the periodspresented in this quarterly report;
     4. I am responsible for establishing and maintaining disclosure controls and procedures (asdefined in Exchange Act Rules 13a-15(e) and 15d-15(e)), or for causing such procedures to beestablished and maintained, for the registrant and I have:
     a) designed such disclosure controls and procedures, or caused such controls and procedures tobe designed under my supervision, to ensure that material information relating to the registrant ismade known to me by others within the registrant, particularly during the period in which thisquarterly report is being prepared;
     b) evaluated the effectiveness of the registrant’s disclosure controls and procedures andpresented in this report my conclusions about the effectiveness of the disclosure controls andprocedures as of the end of the period covered by this report, based on my evaluation; and
     c) disclosed in this report any change in the registrant’s internal control over financialreporting that occurred during the registrant’s most recent fiscal quarter that has materiallyaffected, or is reasonably likely to materially affect, the registrant’s internal control overfinancial reporting; and
     5. I have disclosed, based on my most recent evaluation, to the registrant’s auditors:
     a) all significant deficiencies and material weaknesses in the design or operation of internalcontrol over financial reporting which are reasonably likely to adversely affect the registrant’sability to record, process, summarize and report financial information; and
     b) any fraud, whether or not material, that involves management or other employees who have asignificant role in the registrant’s internal control over financial reporting.
     In giving the certifications in paragraphs 4 and 5 above, I have relied to the extent Iconsider reasonable on information provided to me by Amber Brewster, Bank of Oklahoma.
Date: May 20, 2005
/s/ Ted L. Hall
NOTICE OF SETTLEMENT

-1-

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

L. Paul Mankin, IV (SBN 264038)

THE LAW OFFICE OF PAUL MANKIN

4655 Cass Street, Suite 112

San Diego, CA 92109

800-219-3577

Fax: 323-207-3885

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

LAWRENCE MJOROGE,

Plaintiff,

vs.

SYNCHRONY BANK, and DOES 1 

through 10, inclusive,

Defendant.

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

Case No. 17-cv-00791-JSC

NOTICE OF SETTLEMENT

 

NOW COMES THE PLAINTIFF by and through her attorney to 

respectfully notify this Honorable Court that this case has settled. Plaintiff 

requests that this Honorable Court allow sixty (60) days with which to file 

dispositive documentation. A Dismissal will be forthcoming. This Court shall 

retain jurisdiction over this matter until fully resolved. 

Case 3:17-cv-00791-JSC Document 14 Filed 05/10/17 Page 1 of 3
NOTICE OF SETTLEMENT

-2-

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

Respectfully submitted this 10th day of May 2017,

By: /s/L. Paul Mankin

 L. Paul Mankin

 The Law Office of L. Paul Mankin IV

 Attorney for Plaintiff 

Case 3:17-cv-00791-JSC Document 14 Filed 05/10/17 Page 2 of 3
NOTICE OF SETTLEMENT

-3-

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

Filed electronically on this 10th day of May 2017, with:

United States District Court CM/ECF system

Notification sent electronically via the Court’s ECF system to:

Honorable Jacqueline Scott Corley

United States District Court

Northern District District of California

Adam P. Knor

Reed Smith LLP

20 Stanwix Street, Suite 1200

Pittsburgh, PA 15222

Attorney for Defendant

This 10th day of May 2017,

/s/L. Paul Mankin

L. Paul Mankin

Case 3:17-cv-00791-JSC Document 14 Filed 05/10/17 Page 3 of 3
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

NORTHERN DISTRICT OF INDIANA

SOUTH BEND DIVISION

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA )

)

v. ) Case No. 3:13-CR-020 JD

)

TERRY WAYNE SMITH )

ORDER

No objections have been filed to the magistrate judge’s findings and recommendation upon

a plea of guilty issued on March 21, 2013 [DE 15]. Accordingly, the court now ADOPTS those

findings and recommendations, ACCEPTS defendant Terry Wayne Smith’s plea of guilty, and

FINDS the defendant guilty of Count 1 of the Information, in violation of 18 U.S.C. § 641.

SO ORDERED.

ENTERED: May 1, 2013 

 /s/ JON E. DEGUILIO 

Judge

United States District Court
## In the Court of Appeals Second Appellate District of Texas

at Fort Worth

___________________________ No. 02

- 19

- 002 97

- C V

___________________________

On Appeal f

rom the 297th Dis tric t Court Tarrant County, Texas Trial Cou rt No. 108 0543D

Before Gabriel, Kerr, and Birdwell, JJ. Memorandum Opinion by Justice Gabriel 

### C HAR LES 

### C LEVELAND 

### N OWDEN 

### , Appellant

V



### . T HE 

### S TATE OF 

### T EXAS 

### , Appellee2 MEMORANDUM OPINION Appellan t Charles Cleveland Nowden attempts to appeal from the trial court ’ s fai lure to act on his April 2019 “ nunc pro tunc ” motion seeking the retur n of proper ty seized pursuant to a 2007 search warrant. See Tex. Code Crim . Proc. Ann. art. 47.01a.
This is No wden ’ s second attempt to appeal from the trial court ’ s fa ilure to rule on a

mo tion seeking the re turn of the propert y seized in 2007. S ee Nowde n v. State , No. 02

- 17

- 00094

- CR, 2017 WL 2979830, at *1

– 2 (Tex. App.

— Fort Worth July 13, 2017, no pet.) (mem. op., no t de signa t ed for publication ). As in that appeal, we informed
Nowden by letter that it app eared he was not appe alin g from a final judgment or from

an othe rwise appeala ble order and notified him that we would dismiss his appeal for want of jurisdiction unless he sho wed grounds for continuing it. Se e id. at *1 ; see also Tex. R. App. P. 26. 1 , 42.3, 4 4.3

. Nowden has not responded.
Ab sent a fin al judgmen t or an ot herwise appealable order, we have no ju ris diction over Now den ’ s attempted appeal. See, e.g. , Bison Bldg. Materials, Ltd. v. Aldridge , 422 S.W.3d 582, 585 (Tex. 2012); Nowden , 2017 WL 2979830, at *1

– 2

. Even though Nowden ’ s mo tion impli cated h is attempt s to recover seized property, which is
appe al a ble by statute , such an appeal requires a n order to invoke our jurisdiction

. See
Tex. Code Crim. P r oc. Ann. art s . 47.01a, 47 .12 ; Nowden , 2017 WL 2 979830, at *2.
The trial court has not signed an order or otherwise act ed on Nowden ’ s motion ; thus,

w e dismiss Nowd en ’ s attempt ed ap peal for want of jurisdiction

. See Tex. R. App. P. 43.2(f).3 /s/Lee Gabr iel
Lee Gabriel Justice
Delivered : August 15, 2019
UNPUBLISHED

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

No. 21-7445

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,

Plaintiff - Appellee,

v.

RICKY VINCENT PENDLETON,

Defendant - Appellant.

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

Martinsburg. John Preston Bailey, District Judge. (3:96-cr-00001-JPB-JPM-1)

Submitted: March 24, 2022 Decided: March 29, 2022

Before MOTZ, WYNN, and RICHARDSON, Circuit Judges.

Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion.

Ricky Vincent Pendleton, Appellant Pro Se. 

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.
2

PER CURIAM:

Ricky Vincent Pendleton appeals the district court’s orders dismissing his writ of 

error coram nobis and denying reconsideration. We have reviewed the record and find no 

reversible error. Accordingly, we affirm the district court’s orders. United States v. 

Pendleton, No. 3:96-cr-00001-JPB-JPM-1 (N.D.W. Va. filed July 15, 2021 & entered July 

17, 2021; Aug. 31, 2021). 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
Florentino MARQUEZ-LOBOS, petitioner, v. UNITED STATES.

No. 12-7874.

Supreme Court of the United States

April 29, 2013.

Petition for writ of certiorari to the United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit denied.
Vincent Maurice SAPP, petitioner, v. UNITED STATES.

No. 12-882.

Supreme Court of the United States

May 20, 2013.

Petition for writ of certiorari to the United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit denied.
Eric SCHUSTER, petitioner, v. UNITED STATES.

No. 12-10166.

Supreme Court of the United States

June 10, 2013.

Petition for writ of certiorari to the United States Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit denied.
[Federal Register Volume 60, Number 84 (Tuesday, May 2, 1995)]
[Notices]
[Page 21556]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 95-10732]



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

NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION
[Docket No. 50-293]


Boston Edison Company; Pilgrim Nuclear Power Station; Receipt of 
Petition for Director's Decision Under 10 CFR 2.206

    Notice is hereby given that by letter dated March 10, 1995, Mary 
Elizabeth Lampert and 62 other persons request that the U.S. Nuclear 
Regulatory Commission (NRC) take action with regard to the Pilgrim 
Nuclear Power Station operated by the Boston Edison Company (the 
licensee).
    Petitioners request that during the March 25, 1995, refueling 
outage and In-Vessel Visual Inspection conducted by the licensee, 
certain technical concerns be addressed, and that before Pilgrim goes 
back on-line, appropriate repairs be made or corrective action be 
taken, and that the NRC discuss the status of such repairs and 
corrective actions with the public in Plymouth, Massachusetts. 
Petitioners also request that the NRC terminate its policy of issuing 
Notices of Enforcement Discretion (NOED) and commence enforcing NRC 
regulations again. Finally, Petitioners request that the letter be 
treated as a Petition pursuant to 10 CFR 2.206.
    As the bases for their requests, Petitioners identify three groups 
of technical concerns: (1) Age-related deterioration of 25 safety 
related reactor internals; (2) parts and components ``known to be a 
problem at Pilgrim,'' including the core shroud, water level 
indicators, QA for fuel pool cooling system during loss-of-coolant 
accident/loss-of-coolant protection, coolant protection, motor-operated 
valves, containment integrity, drywell liner corrosion vulnerability, 
station blackout vulnerability, and Rosemount transmitters; and (3) 
parts and components ``potentially a problem at Pilgrim,'' including 
potential fuel rod corrosion and substandard and/or counterfeit parts. 
Additionally, Petitioners contend that allowing a reactor to operate 
under an NOED cannot pose less risk to the public health and safety 
than keeping the reactor shut down until NRC regulations are met.
    The Petition is being evaluated pursuant to 10 CFR 2.206 of the 
Commission's regulations. The Petition has been referred to the 
Director of the Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation. As provided by 
Section 2.206, appropriate action will be taken on this Petition within 
a reasonable time.
    A copy of the Petition is available for inspection at the 
Commission's Public Document Room at 2120 L Street, NW., Washington, DC 
20001.

    Dated at Rockville, Maryland, this 19th day of April 1995.

    For the Nuclear Regulatory Commission.
William T. Russell,
Director, Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation.
[FR Doc. 95-10732 Filed 5-1-95; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 7590-01-M