alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
<PAGE>

                                                                    Exhibit 99.1

      Certification Of Chief Executive Officer And Chief Financial Officer
               Pursuant to 18 U.S.C. (S) 1350 adopted pursuant to
                  Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002

I, Alan D. Feldman, hereby certify pursuant to 18 U.S.C. (S) 1350 adopted
pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002 that, to my knowledge:

         (i)   The accompanying Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q for the quarter
               ended March 29, 2003 fully complies with the requirements of
               Section 13(a) or Section 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of
               1934, as amended; and

         (ii)  The information contained in such report fairly presents, in all
               material respects, the financial condition and results of
               operations of Midas, Inc.

/s/  Alan D. Feldman
--------------------
Alan D. Feldman
President and Chief Executive Officer

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

I, William M. Guzik, hereby certify pursuant to 18 U.S.C. (S) 1350 adopted
pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002 that, to my knowledge:

         (i)   The accompanying Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q for the quarter
               ended March 29, 2003 fully complies with the requirements of
               Section 13(a) or Section 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of
               1934, as amended; and

         (ii)  The information contained in such report fairly presents, in all
               material respects, the financial condition and results of
               operations of Midas, Inc.

/s/  William M. Guzik
---------------------
William M. Guzik
Senior Vice President and
Chief Financial Officer

A signed original of this written statement required by Section 906 has been
provided to Midas, Inc. and will be retained by Midas, Inc. and furnished to the
Securities and Exchange Commission or its staff upon request.
NOT FOR PUBLICATION UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT
SANDRA ESPINOZA, Plaintiff - Appellant, And DAVID PERRY, Plaintiff,
v. ALASKA AIR GROUP, INC. And ALASKA AIRLINES, Defendants - Appellees. No. 12-55801 D.C. No. 2:11-cv-01271-MMM-MAN
MEMORANDUM *

Appeal from the United States District Court for the Central District of California Margaret M. Morrow, District Judge, Presiding Argued and Submitted December 3, 2013 Pasadena, California Before: D.W. NELSON, WARDLAW, and RAWLINSON, Circuit Judges. 

# FILED
JAN 07 2014 MOLLY C. DWYER, CLERK

U.S. COURT OF APPEALS

* This disposition is not appropriate for publication and is not precedent except as provided by 9th Cir. R. 36-3.Sandra Espinoza (Espinoza) appeals from the district court’s denial of her motion, pursuant to Rule 60(b)(1) of th e Federal Rules of Civil Procedure (FRCP), to set aside the dismissal of her lawsu it against Appellees Alaska Air Group, Inc. and Alaska Airlines (collectively Alaska Airlines). We review a district court’s decision to deny a motion under Rule 60(b) for abuse of discretion. See Lal v. State of Cal. , 610 F.3d 518, 523 (9th Cir. 2010). In determining if counsel’s conduct constituted excusable neglect under Rule 60(b), the district court considered the factors set forth in Pioneer Investment Services Co. v. Brunswick Assocs. Ltd. P’ship , 507 U.S. 380 (1993), as applied to Rule 60(b) by Briones v. Riviera Hotel & Casino , 116 F.3d 379 (9th Cir. 1997). The district court must consider “the danger of prejudice to the [non-movant], the length of the delay and its potential impacton judicial proceedings, the reason for the delay . . . and whether the movant acted in good faith.” Pioneer , 507 U.S. at 395 (citation and footnote reference omitted). Alaska Airlines will not suffer prejudice if the dismissal is set aside because, as Alaska Airlines conceded at oral argument, it had already interviewed employees who witnessed the underlying in cident. Conversely, Espinoza “would suffer the ‘ultimate’ prejudice absent relie f because the statute of limitations on [her] claim has run.” Lemoge v. United States , 587 F.3d 1188, 1196 (9th Cir. 22009). In addition, the record does not reflect that Espinoza or her counsel acted in bad faith, and the district court did not consider less drastic sanctions. See Leon v. IDX Sys. Corp. , 464 F.3d 951, 958, 960 (9th Cir. 2006). When compared to the neglect we excused in Pincay v. Andrews , 389 F.3d 853 (9th Cir. 2004) (en banc), we conclude that similar relief is warranted in this case. Moreover, counsel adequately expl ained the reasons for the six-month delay, which was not unreasonable under the circumstances. Accordingly, we REVERSE the district court’s denial of Espinoza’s motion for relief pursuant to FRCP 60(b), and REMAND for further proceedings consistent with this disposition. REVERSED and REMANDED.

3
United States Court of Appeals 

for the Federal Circuit ______________________ 

September 12, 2011 

ERRATA 

______________________ 

2006-1634, -1649 

CLASSEN IMMUNOTHERAPIES, INC., 

Plaintiff-Appellant, 

v. 

BIOGEN IDEC, 

Defendant-Appellee, 

and 

GLAXOSMITHKLINE, 

Defendant-Appellee, 

and 

MERCK & CO., INC., 

Defendant-Cross Appellant, 

and 

CHIRON CORPORATION, KAISER-PERMANENTE, 

INC., KAISER PERMANENTE VENTURES, KAISER 

PERMANENTE INTERNATIONAL, KAISER 

PERMANENTE INSURANCE COMPANY, THE 

PERMANENTE FEDERATION, LLC, THE 

PERMANENTE COMPANY, LLC, THE PERMANENTE 

FOUNDATION, THE PERMANENTE MEDICAL 

GROUP, INC., KAISER FOUNDATION HOSPITALS, 

KAISER FOUNDATION ADDED CHOICE HEALTH 

PLAN, INC., and KAISER FOUNDATION HEALTH 

PLAN INC., 

 Defendants. 
______________________ 

Decided August 31, 2011 

Precedential Opinion 

______________________ 

Please make the following change: 

Page 2, the following corrections 

Donald R. Ware, Foley Hoag LLP, of Boston, Massachusetts, for defendant-appellee, Biogen IDEC. With him on 

the brief were Barbara A. Fiacco and Jeremy A. Younkin. 

Of counsel were Joshua M. Hiller, Wilmer Cutler 

Pickering Hale and Dorr LLP, of Boston, Massachusetts, 

and David A. Wilson, of Washington, DC.
Case 1:07-cv-04518-AKH Document 28 Filed 03/17/2008 Page 1 of 2Case 1:07-cv-04518-AKH Document 28 Filed 03/17/2008 Page 2 of 2
Case 1:07-cv-05358-AKH Document 28 Filed 02/06/2008 Page 1 of 3Case 1:07-cv-05358-AKH Document 28 Filed 02/06/2008 Page 2 of 3Case 1:07-cv-05358-AKH Document 28 Filed 02/06/2008 Page 3 of 3
COURT OF APPEALS

EIGHTH DISTRICT OF TEXAS

EL PASO, TEXAS

LAWRENCE E. MEYERS, AS 

MANAGER OF THE RAMON 

BURSTYN IRREVOCABLE TRUST, 

§

§

No. 08-19-00108-CV

Appellant, §

Appeal from the

v. §

345th District Court

8007 BURNET HOLDINGS, LLC, 

JOHN REESE NELSON, ANTONIO 

CALVO, LINDA CALVO, J.M.N. 

ENTERPRISES, LLC, and 8007 

BURNET ROAD, AUSTIN, TEXAS, 

IN REM,

Appellees

§

§

§

§

of Travis County, Texas

(TC# D-1-GN-16-006155)

§

J U D G M E N T

The Court has considered this cause on the record and concludes there was no error in the 

judgment. We therefore affirm the judgment of the court below. We further order that Appellee 

recover from Appellant and its sureties, if any, all costs in this Court, and the conditional attorney’s 

fees found by the trial court for a successful appeal to the court of appeals. See TEX. R. APP. P.

43.5. This decision shall be certified below for observance.

IT IS SO ORDERED THIS 22ND DAY OF JANUARY, 2020.

JEFF ALLEY, Chief Justice

Before Alley, C.J., Rodriguez, and Palafox, JJ.
```

[Congressional Bills 116th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[H.R. 1683 Introduced in House (IH)]

<DOC>

116th CONGRESS
  1st Session
                                H. R. 1683

  To modify the prohibition on recognition by United States courts of 
 certain rights relating to certain marks, trade names, or commercial 
                                 names.

_______________________________________________________________________

                    IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

                             March 12, 2019

  Ms. Wasserman Schultz (for herself, Mr. Rutherford, Mr. Deutch, Mr. 
Diaz-Balart, Mr. Gaetz, Mr. Hastings, Ms. Frankel, Mr. Waltz, Mr. Soto, 
 and Ms. Shalala) introduced the following bill; which was referred to 
                     the Committee on the Judiciary

_______________________________________________________________________

                                 A BILL

 
  To modify the prohibition on recognition by United States courts of 
 certain rights relating to certain marks, trade names, or commercial 
                                 names.

    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 ``No Stolen Trademarks Honored in 
America Act''.

SEC. 2. MODIFICATION OF PROHIBITION.

    Section 211 of the Department of Commerce and Related Agencies 
Appropriations Act, 1999 (as contained in section 101(b) of division A 
of Public Law 105-277; 112 Stat. 2681-88) is amended--
            (1) in subsection (a)(2)--
                    (A) by striking ``by a designated national''; and
                    (B) by inserting before the period ``that was used 
                in connection with a business or assets that were 
                confiscated unless the original owner of the mark, 
                trade name, or commercial name, or the bonafide 
                successor-in-interest has expressly consented'';
            (2) in subsection (b), by striking ``by a designated 
        national or its successor-in-interest'';
            (3) by redesignating subsection (d) as subsection (e);
            (4) by inserting after subsection (c) the following:
    ``(d) Subsections (a)(2) and (b) of this section shall apply only 
if the person or entity asserting the rights knew or had reason to know 
at the time when the person or entity acquired the rights asserted that 
the mark, trade name, or commercial name was the same as or 
substantially similar to a mark, trade name, or commercial name that 
was used in connection with a business or assets that were 
confiscated.''; and
            (5) in subsection (e), as so redesignated, by striking ``In 
        this section:'' and all that follows through ``(2) The term'' 
        and inserting ``In this section, the term''.
                                 <all>
```
Case 1:07-cv-05345-AKH Document 15 Filed 11/08/2007 Page 1 of 1
Case 1:07-cv-05295-AKH Document 56 Filed 01/11/2008 Page 1 of 2
Case 1:07-cv-05295-AKH Document 56 Filed 01/11/2008 Page 2 of 2
· --~. --~ ------ ---~- -~- ~--~.-------- -.-- -- - - ~- - - - -----. - . ---_...- -----­

IUSDS SDN'{ 


DOCUMENT 


EL~~Cn~():nCALLY BLED 

DOL it: ____ 

DATE fILSD: 

Case 7:07-cv-05795-KMK Document 86 Filed 02/28/11 Page 1 of 2
. . m:;,.j 

v 

~M',qt JJ~ . 

. .. 

~lb, ~fv't~~..... 

toj-u, C\ ~iU&. 1).3 U·S,c,. M~ r ~ 

..03 .. :'J~ ~-tkt ~.w.Q ~ 

r1A~t, ~A'D'~'~4' WmM:..~ 

lo~ ...... ~.~wdfI ~ 

•.D. a& ~~ t a.wl. a. -fD ~.~ ~,DA. ~ 

]:'.JL1··· .....,_:...]4 .~.. r rrr-».. ~.J; 

..~.~.~.. \h.U. 1J t.~ "hIL·l-k, ~WI ~ 

.~ om .. .. ~t~!LP~O~ C&\A~ 

r~· ~~Jw.f»".~-\k4¥ 

{ird r .o-A-.~~. .. ~~. ,,-- . _. ~ 

Case 7:07-cv-05795-KMK Document 86 Filed 02/28/11 Page 2 of 2
Case 1:07-cv-05295-AKH Document 9 Filed 08/06/2007 Page 1 of 1
Case 7:07-cv-05783-CLB Document 1 Filed 06/19/2007 Page 1 of 14
Case 7:07-cv-05783-CLB Document 1 Filed 06/19/2007 Page 2 of 14
Case 7:07-cv-05783-CLB Document 1 Filed 06/19/2007 Page 3 of 14
Case 7:07-cv-05783-CLB Document 1 Filed 06/19/2007 Page 4 of 14
Case 7:07-cv-05783-CLB Document 1 Filed 06/19/2007 Page 5 of 14
Case 7:07-cv-05783-CLB Document 1 Filed 06/19/2007 Page 6 of 14
Case 7:07-cv-05783-CLB Document 1 Filed 06/19/2007 Page 7 of 14
Case 7:07-cv-05783-CLB Document 1 Filed 06/19/2007 Page 8 of 14
Case 7:07-cv-05783-CLB Document 1 Filed 06/19/2007 Page 9 of 14
Case 7:07-cv-05783-CLB Document 1 Filed 06/19/2007 Page 10 of 14
Case 7:07-cv-05783-CLB Document 1 Filed 06/19/2007 Page 11 of 14
Case 7:07-cv-05783-CLB Document 1 Filed 06/19/2007 Page 12 of 14
Case 7:07-cv-05783-CLB Document 1 Filed 06/19/2007 Page 13 of 14
Case 7:07-cv-05783-CLB Document 1 Filed 06/19/2007 Page 14 of 14
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF NEW YORK

IN RE WORLD TRADE CENTER 21 MC 102 (AKH)

LOWER MANHATTAN DISASTER

SITE LITIGATION

JULIO HURTADO (AND WIFE, ELDA MONICA 07-CV-5295 (AKH)

MONTES),

NOTICE OF ADOPTION BY

Plaintiffs, ZAR REALTY

MANAGEMENT CORP. OF

-against- ANSWER TO MASTER

COMPLAINT

100 CHURCH LLC, ET AL.,

Defendants.

PLEASE TAKE NOTICE that defendant ZAR REALTY MANAGEMENT CORP.

n/k/a SAPIR REALTY MANAGEMENT CORP. for the building located at 100 Church

Street, (hereinafter Zar/Sapir) as and for its response to the allegations set forth in the

Complaint by Adoption (Check-Off Complaint) related to the Master Complaint filed in the

above-referenced action, herein adopt Zar/Sapir s Answer to Master Complaint, dated August 1,

2007, which was filed in the matter of In re World Trade Center Lower Manhattan Disaster Site

Litigation, 21 MC 102 (AKH).

Case 1:07-cv-05295-AKH Document 22 Filed 09/10/2007 Page 1 of 3
TO:

Paul Napoli, Esq.

Worby Groner Edelman & Napoli Bern LLP

115 Broadway, 12th Floor

New York, New York 10006

Robert A. Grochow, Esq.

Robert A. Grochow, P.C.

233 Broadway, 5th Floor

New York, New York 10279

Gregory J. Cannata, Esq.

Law Offices of Gregory J. Cannata

233 Broadway, 5th Floor

New York, New York 10279

Liaison Counselfor Plaintjff

James B. Tyrrell, Esq.

Joseph Hopkins, Esq.

Patton Boggs LLP

One Riverfront Plaza, 6th Floor

Newark, New Jersey 07102

Thomas Egan, Esq.

Flemming Zulack Williamson Zauderer LLP

One Liberty Plaza

New York, New York 10006

Liaison Counsellor the Defendants

All Other Defense Counsel

Case 1:07-cv-05295-AKH Document 22 Filed 09/10/2007 Page 2 of 3
CERTIFICATION AS TO SERVICE

The undersigned certifies that on September 10, 2007, I caused the following

document to be electronically via the Courts ECF system:

1. Notice of 100 Church LLCs Adoption of Amended Answer to Master

Complaint.

The undersigned further certifies that on September 10, 2007, I caused the aforesaid

documents to be served via First Class Mail upon the following:

Paul Napoli, Esq.

Worby Groner Edelman & Napoli Bern LLP

115 Broadway, 12th Floor

New York, New York 10006

Robert A. Grochow, Esq.

Robert A. Grochow, P.C.

233 Broadway, 5th Floor

New York, New York 10279

Gregory J. Cannata, Esq.

Law Offices of Gregory J. Cannata

233 Broadway, 5th Floor

New York, New York 10279

Liaison Counselfor Plaintiffs

Dated: September 10, 2007

James E. Tyrrell, Esq.

Joseph Hopkins, Esq.

Patton Boggs LLP

One Riverfront Plaza, 6th Floor

Newark, New Jersey 07102

Thomas Egan, Esq.

Flemming Zulack Williamson Zauderer LLP

One Liberty Plaza

New York, New York 10006

Liaison Counselfor the Defendants

/5/

Stanley Goos, Esq. (SG 7062)

Case 1:07-cv-05295-AKH Document 22 Filed 09/10/2007 Page 3 of 3
Case 1:07-cv-05389-AKH Document 25-2 Filed 11/09/2007 Page 1 of 2
Case 1:07-cv-05389-AKH Document 25-2 Filed 11/09/2007 Page 2 of 2
Case 1:07-cv-05294-AKH Document 3 Filed 08/03/2007 Page 1 of 5
Case 1:07-cv-05294-AKH Document 3 Filed 08/03/2007 Page 2 of 5
Case 1:07-cv-05294-AKH Document 3 Filed 08/03/2007 Page 3 of 5
Case 1:07-cv-05294-AKH Document 3 Filed 08/03/2007 Page 4 of 5
Case 1:07-cv-05294-AKH Document 3 Filed 08/03/2007 Page 5 of 5
Case 1:07-cv-05303-AKH Document 15 Filed 09/24/2007 Page 1 of 2
Case 1:07-cv-05303-AKH Document 15 Filed 09/24/2007 Page 2 of 2
Case 1:07-cv-05712-MHD Document 18-6 Filed 03/25/2008 Page 1 of 2
Case 1:07-cv-05712-MHD Document 18-6 Filed 03/25/2008 Page 2 of 2
I 

111TH CONGRESS 

1ST SESSION H. R. 715 

To expand the boundary of Saguaro National Park, to study additional 

land for future adjustments to the boundary of the Park, and for other 

purposes. 

IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES 

JANUARY 27, 2009 

Mr. GRIJALVA introduced the following bill; which was referred to the 

Committee on Natural Resources 

A BILL 

To expand the boundary of Saguaro National Park, to study 

additional land for future adjustments to the boundary 

of the Park, and for other purposes. 

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

3 SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE. 

4 This Act may be cited as the ‘‘Saguaro National Park 

5 Boundary Expansion and Study Act of 2009’’. 

6 SEC. 2. BOUNDARY OF SAGUARO NATIONAL PARK. 

7 Section 4 of the ‘‘Saguaro National Park Establish8 ment Act of 1994’’ (Public Law 103–364, 108 Stat. 

9 3467), is amended— 


wwoods2 on PRODPC68 with BILLS
2 

•HR 715 IH

1 (1) in subsection (a)— 

2 (A) by inserting ‘‘(1)’’ before ‘‘The bound3 aries of the park’’; and 

4 (B) by adding at the end the following: 

5 ‘‘(2) The boundary of the park is further modi6 fied to include approximately 975 acres, as generally 

7 depicted on the map titled ‘Saguaro National Park 

8 Proposed Boundary Adjustment’, numbered 151/ 

9 80,045A, and dated August 2008. The map shall be 

10 on file and available for inspection in the appro11 priate offices of the National Park Service.’’; 

12 (2) by striking subsection (b)(2) and inserting 

13 the following new paragraphs: 

14 ‘‘(2) The Secretary may, with the consent of 

15 the State and in accordance with Federal and State 

16 law, acquire from the State land or interests in land 

17 within the boundary of the park. 

18 ‘‘(3) If the Secretary is unable to acquire the 

19 State land under paragraph (2), the Secretary may 

20 enter into an agreement that would allow the Na21 tional Park Service to manage State land within the 

22 boundary of the park.’’; and 

23 (3) by adding at the end the following new sub24 section: 

25 ‘‘(d) BOUNDARY STUDY.— 


wwoods2 on PRODPC68 with BILLS
3 

•HR 715 IH

1 ‘‘(1) IN GENERAL.—The Secretary shall con2 duct a study to identify lands that would be a part 

3 of any future boundary adjustments for the park. 

4 ‘‘(2) CRITERIA.—The study shall examine the 

5 natural, cultural, recreational, and scenic values and 

6 characters of lands identified under paragraph (1). 

7 ‘‘(3) REPORT.—Not later than 2 years after the 

8 date funds are made available for the study under 

9 this subsection, the Secretary shall submit to the 

10 Committee on Natural Resources of the House of 

11 Representatives and the Committee on Energy and 

12 Natural Resources of the Senate a report on the 

13 findings, conclusions, and recommendations of the 

14 study.’’. 

Æ 


wwoods2 on PRODPC68 with BILLS
```

[Congressional Bills 116th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[H.R. 170 Introduced in House (IH)]

<DOC>

116th CONGRESS
  1st Session
                                H. R. 170

  To amend the Black Lung Benefits Act to provide equity for certain 
              eligible survivors, and for other purposes.

_______________________________________________________________________

                    IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

                            January 3, 2019

 Mr. Griffith introduced the following bill; which was referred to the 
                    Committee on Education and Labor

_______________________________________________________________________

                                 A BILL

 
  To amend the Black Lung Benefits Act to provide equity for certain 
              eligible survivors, and for other purposes.

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

SECTION 1. EQUITY FOR CERTAIN ELIGIBLE SURVIVORS.

    (a) Limitation.--Section 411(c)(4) of the Black Lung Benefits Act 
(30 U.S.C. 921(c)(4)) is amended by striking the last sentence.
    (b) Continuation of Benefits.--Section 422(l) of the Black Lung 
Benefits Act (30 U.S.C. 932(l)) is amended by striking ``, except with 
respect to a claim filed under this part on or after the effective date 
of the Black Lung Benefits Amendments of 1981''.
    (c) Applicability.--The amendments made by this section shall apply 
with respect to claims filed under part B or part C of the Black Lung 
Benefits Act (30 U.S.C. 921 et seq., 931 et seq.) after January 1, 
2005, that were pending on or after March 23, 2010.

SEC. 2. EFFECTIVE DATE.

    The amendments made by this Act shall take effect on the date of 
enactment of any Act that repeals section 1556 of the Patient 
Protection and Affordable Care Act (Public Law 111-148).
                                 <all>
```
Case 1:07-cv-01524-AKH Document 4 Filed 08/07/2007 Page 1 of 4Case 1:07-cv-01524-AKH Document 4 Filed 08/07/2007 Page 2 of 4Case 1:07-cv-01524-AKH Document 4 Filed 08/07/2007 Page 3 of 4Case 1:07-cv-01524-AKH Document 4 Filed 08/07/2007 Page 4 of 4
#### 35-45 May Associates, Respondent, v Mayloc Associates, Appellant, et al., Defendant.

Appeal from an order of the Supreme Court, Westchester County, entered July 25, 1986.

Ordered that the order is affirmed, with costs, for reasons stated by Justice Gurahian in the Supreme Court, Westchester County. Lawrence, J. P., Eiber, Spatt and Sullivan, JJ., concur.
Case 1:07-cv-05358-AKH Document 24 Filed 11/08/2007 Page 1 of 3Case 1:07-cv-05358-AKH Document 24 Filed 11/08/2007 Page 2 of 3Case 1:07-cv-05358-AKH Document 24 Filed 11/08/2007 Page 3 of 3
**EXHIBIT 32.2**

 

**CERTIFICATION PURSUANT TO 18 U.S.C. SECTION 1350,AS ADOPTEDPURSUANT TO SECTION 906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002**

 

Inconnection with the Annual Report of Image Entertainment, Inc. (the “Company”)on Form 10-K for the fiscal year ended March 31, 2005 as filed withthe Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the “Report”), I,Jeff M. Framer, Chief Financial Officer of the Company, certify, pursuant to 18U.S.C. § 1350, as adopted pursuant to § 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Actof 2002, that:

 

(1)           Basedon my knowledge, the Report fully complies with the requirements of section 13(a) or15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934; and

 

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

 

 
| Date:  | June 16, 2005 | /s/ JEFF M. FRAMER      |
|--------|--------------------|-------------------------|
|   |               | Jeff M. Framer          |
|   |               | Chief Financial Officer |

 

 

A signed original of thiswritten statement required by Section 906, or other documentauthenticating, acknowledging, or otherwise adopting the signature that appearsin typed form within the electronic version of this written statement requiredby Section 906, has been provided to the Company and will be retained bythe Company and furnished to the Securities and Exchange Commission or itsstaff upon request.

 

----
_________________________________________ 

 

 

 

Order Michigan Supreme Court

Lansing, Michigan 

November 29, 2007 Clifford W. Taylor,

 Chief Justice 

134871 Michael F. Cavanagh 

Elizabeth A. Weaver 

Marilyn Kelly 

Maura D. Corrigan 

Robert P. Young, Jr. PEOPLE OF THE STATE OF MICHIGAN, Stephen J. Markman, Plaintiff-Appellee, Justices SC: 134871 

v COA: 265064 

Montcalm CC: 04-001213-FC 

AARON WAYNE CHAPMAN,

 Defendant-Appellant. 

_________________________________________/ 

On order of the Court, the application for leave to appeal the July 31, 2007 

judgment of the Court of Appeals is considered, and it is DENIED, because we are not 

persuaded that the questions presented should be reviewed by this Court. 

l1119 

I, Corbin R. Davis, Clerk of the Michigan Supreme Court, certify that the 

foregoing is a true and complete copy of the order entered at the direction of the Court. 

November 29, 2007 

 Clerk