alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
#### FLORENCE LUDWIG, DONALD LUDWIG, RUSSELL WINTERS AND ELLA WINTERS, PLAINTIFFS, v. FRED J. FRECH, DEFENDANT.

Decided April 16, 1932.

Before Lawrence, Circuit Court judge.

Eor the rule, *McDermott, Enright Carpenter (Carl S. Kuebler,*of counsel).

*Contra, Giordano, Golden & Hurley (Julius Golden,*of counsel).

Lawrence, C. C. J.

This was an automobile accident case in which plaintiffs alleged that they had been injured *561and sought compensation. The jury awarded Mrs. Ludwig $1,500 and her husband, Donald Ludwig, $757.50. The rule to show cause obtained by defendant is directed against these verdicts as excessive, on the ground that the physical condition of Mrs. Ludwig, relied on at the trial as proximately resulting from injuries received in the accident was not due to them, but to a long standing organic difficulty for which she had been frequently treated; that in fact the injuries received in the accident were of a rather minor nature and insufficient to justify the award made to her; while that to her husband was without proper evidential support, as there was no sufficient proof that they were living together and of consequential loss of society or consortium, although there was some evidence of an expenditure made for outside help in the household and of medical expense incurred.

A review of the evidence leads to the conclusion that the verdicts are excessive. If Mrs. Ludwig will consent to accept $750 and her husband $300, the rule to show cause will be discharged, otherwise it will be made absolute and a new trial granted as to damages only.
Case 1:06-cv-15001-AKH Document 1 Filed 12/08/2006 Page 1 of 13
Case 1:06-cv-15001-AKH Document 1 Filed 12/08/2006 Page 2 of 13
Case 1:06-cv-15001-AKH Document 1 Filed 12/08/2006 Page 3 of 13
Case 1:06-cv-15001-AKH Document 1 Filed 12/08/2006 Page 4 of 13
Case 1:06-cv-15001-AKH Document 1 Filed 12/08/2006 Page 5 of 13
Case 1:06-cv-15001-AKH Document 1 Filed 12/08/2006 Page 6 of 13
Case 1:06-cv-15001-AKH Document 1 Filed 12/08/2006 Page 7 of 13
Case 1:06-cv-15001-AKH Document 1 Filed 12/08/2006 Page 8 of 13
Case 1:06-cv-15001-AKH Document 1 Filed 12/08/2006 Page 9 of 13
Case 1:06-cv-15001-AKH Document 1 Filed 12/08/2006 Page 10 of 13
Case 1:06-cv-15001-AKH Document 1 Filed 12/08/2006 Page 11 of 13
Case 1:06-cv-15001-AKH Document 1 Filed 12/08/2006 Page 12 of 13
Case 1:06-cv-15001-AKH Document 1 Filed 12/08/2006 Page 13 of 13
Case 7:07-cv-03324-SCR Document 11-4 Filed 09/21/2007 Page 1 of 10
Case 7:07-cv-03324-SCR Document 11-4 Filed 09/21/2007 Page 2 of 10
Case 7:07-cv-03324-SCR Document 11-4 Filed 09/21/2007 Page 3 of 10
Case 7:07-cv-03324-SCR Document 11-4 Filed 09/21/2007 Page 4 of 10
Case 7:07-cv-03324-SCR Document 11-4 Filed 09/21/2007 Page 5 of 10
Case 7:07-cv-03324-SCR Document 11-4 Filed 09/21/2007 Page 6 of 10
Case 7:07-cv-03324-SCR Document 11-4 Filed 09/21/2007 Page 7 of 10
Case 7:07-cv-03324-SCR Document 11-4 Filed 09/21/2007 Page 8 of 10
Case 7:07-cv-03324-SCR Document 11-4 Filed 09/21/2007 Page 9 of 10
Case 7:07-cv-03324-SCR Document 11-4 Filed 09/21/2007 Page 10 of 10
IIB 

111TH CONGRESS 

2D SESSION H. R. 5604 

IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES 

JULY 21, 2010 

Received; read twice and referred to the Committee on Commerce, Science, 

and Transportation 

AN ACT 

To rescind amounts authorized for certain surface 

transportation programs. 

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


tjames on DSKG8SOYB1PROD with BILLS
2 

HR 5604 RFS 

1 SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE. 

2 This Act may be cited as the ‘‘Surface Transpor3 tation Savings Act of 2010’’. 

4 SEC. 2. SAFETY BELT PERFORMANCE GRANTS. 

5 (a) IN GENERAL.—Subject to subsection (b), of the 

6 amounts authorized for fiscal year 2010 by section 

7 2001(a)(4) of SAFETEA–LU (119 Stat. 1519) to carry 

8 out section 406 of title 23, United States Code, 

9 $80,994,029 is rescinded. 

10 (b) LIMITATION.—The amount rescinded pursuant to 

11 subsection (a) shall be decreased as necessary to ensure 

12 that not less than $28,505,971 is available for fiscal year 

13 2010 to carry out section 406 of title 23, United States 

14 Code. 

15 SEC. 3. ADMINISTRATIVE EXPENSES. 

16 Of the amounts authorized for fiscal year 2010 by 

17 section 2001(a)(11) of SAFETEA–LU (119 Stat. 1520), 

18 $6,547,000 is rescinded. 

19 SEC. 4. NATIONAL DRIVER REGISTER. 

20 Of the amounts authorized for fiscal year 2010 by 

21 section 2001(a)(7) of SAFETEA–LU (119 Stat. 1520) 

22 for the National Driver Register authorized under chapter 

23 303 of title 49, United States Code, $78,000 is rescinded. 


tjames on DSKG8SOYB1PROD with BILLS
3 

HR 5604 RFS 

1 SEC. 5. NATIONAL HIGHWAY TRAFFIC SAFETY ADMINISTRA2 TION OPERATIONS AND RESEARCH. 

3 Of the amounts authorized for fiscal year 2010 by 

4 section 2001(a)(2) of SAFETEA–LU (119 Stat. 1519) to 

5 carry out section 403 of title 23, United States Code, 

6 $1,829,000 is rescinded. 

7 SEC. 6. TRANSIT FORMULA AND BUS GRANTS. 

8 Of the amounts authorized for fiscal year 2010 by 

9 section 5338(b)(1) of title 49, United States Code, to 

10 carry out sections 5305, 5307, 5308, 5309, 5310, 5311, 

11 5316, 5317, 5320, 5335, 5339, and 5340 of title 49, 

12 United States Code, and section 3038 of the Federal 

13 Transit Act of 1998 (112 Stat. 392), $17,394,000 is re14 scinded. 

Passed the House of Representatives July 20, 2010. 

Attest: LORRAINE C. MILLER, 

Clerk. 


tjames on DSKG8SOYB1PROD with BILLS
#### Marine Trust Company, a banking corporation of the State of New Jersey, complainant, *v.*Levi David et al., defendants.

[Decided September 19th, 1932.]

*Messrs. Brenner & Kresch,*for the petitioner Lillie Hasten.

Ingersold, Y. C.

The property described in the bill of complaint was sold by the sheriff to the present petitioner, Lillie Hasten, for the sum of $14,050, the highest bid received therefor. Payment was made by her of the ten per cent, of said bid, or the sum of $1,410, and conditions of sale were signed by her, agreeing to pay the balance of $12,640 upon delivery of the deed at a time fixed therein, subject to the confirmation of the court.

Objections were made to the sale and after a hearing thereon the sale was affirmed and an order made in which it was stated: “It is further ordered that the said sheriff do execute a good and sufficient conveyance in the law to the said purchaser, Lillie Hasten, or her assigns, for the said mortgaged premises so sold.”

*1074An appeal was taken to the court of errors and appeals upon said order and an order entered in this court restraining the sheriff from delivering said deed until the determination of said appeal. The said appeal has been heard and the order of confirmation affirmed.

The purchaser was, at the time fixed in the conditions of sale, and at all times since said date, has been prepared to make payment to the sheriff upon the delivery of the deed. The sheriff now declines to deliver the deed unless the petitioner shall pay to him interest upon the sum of $12,640 to the date of the delivery of the deed. The petitioner has not been in possession of the property nor has she received any of the fruits therefrom, and now prays for an order that the sheriff be directed to deliver said deed upon the payment to him of the amount of $12,640, without interest.

The general rule states that the foreclosure purchaser must complete his purchase at the time stipulated in the terms of sale and is liable for interest on any part of the purchase money unpaid from the time it was due under the terms of the sale, regardless of whether he has possession or not, provided nothing is done to keep him out of possession. *42 C. J. 209, 244.*

It will be noted that the petitioner is in no way responsible for the delay or for the order restraining the sheriff, and also that the amount of the bid, without interest, is sufficient to pay the complainant’s claim, with interest to the present date, and leave a large surplus which would go to the defendants or those claiming under them should the premises have been in the custody of a receiver appointed by this court. .

The equities of this ease appear to be clear that the purchaser would not be compelled to bear the interest accruing by reason of the delay in the delivery of the deed by the sheriff, which delay was caused by an appeal taken by others than the purchaser, and she being without fault for such delay. *Oldenberg & Kelly*v. *Register (Court of Appeals of*Maryland), *118 Md. 394; 85 Atl. Rep. 411.*

An order has heretofore been signed in accordance with these views.
se 7:07-cv-03324-SCR Document 11-5 Filed 09/21/2007 Page 1 of 
ase 7:07-cv-03324-SCR Document 11-5 Filed 09/21/2007 Page 2 of 1
ase 7:07-cv-03324-SCR Document 11-5 Filed 09/21/2007 Page 3 of 1
ase 7:07-cv-03324-SCR Document 11-5 Filed 09/21/2007 Page 4 of 1
ase 7:07-cv-03324-SCR Document 11-5 Filed 09/21/2007 Page 5 of 1
ase 7:07-cv-03324-SCR Document 11-5 Filed 09/21/2007 Page 6 of 1
ase 7:07-cv-03324-SCR Document 11-5 Filed 09/21/2007 Page 7 of 1
ase 7:07-cv-03324-SCR Document 11-5 Filed 09/21/2007 Page 8 of 1
ase 7:07-cv-03324-SCR Document 11-5 Filed 09/21/2007 Page 9 of 
se 7:07-cv-03324-SCR Document 11-5 Filed 09/21/2007 Page 10 of 
se 7:07-cv-03324-SCR Document 11-5 Filed 09/21/2007 Page 11 of 
ase 7:07-cv-03324-SCR Document 11-5 Filed 09/21/2007 Page 12 of 
ase 7:07-cv-03324-SCR Document 11-5 Filed 09/21/2007 Page 13 of 1
ase 7:07-cv-03324-SCR Document 11-5 Filed 09/21/2007 Page 14 of 
ase 7:07-cv-03324-SCR Document 11-5 Filed 09/21/2007 Page 15 of 
ase 7:07-cv-03324-SCR Document 11-5 Filed 09/21/2007 Page 16 of 
se 7:07-cv-03324-SCR Document 11-5 Filed 09/21/2007 Page 17 of 
ase 7:07-cv-03324-SCR Document 11-5 Filed 09/21/2007 Page 18 of 
ase 7:07-cv-03324-SCR Document 11-5 Filed 09/21/2007 Page 19 of
Case 7:04-cv-08928-KMK-LMS Document 31 Filed 02/10/2005 Page 1 of 2
Case 7:04-cv-08928-KMK-LMS Document 31 Filed 02/10/2005 Page 2 of 2
Case 7:07-cv-03311-KMK Document 12 Filed 07/23/2008 Page 1 of 2
Case 7:07-cv-03311-KMK Document 12 Filed 07/23/2008 Page 2 of 2
U.S. Department of Labor Ernployrnent Standards Administration 

Office of Workers' Compensation Programs 

Division of Longshore and 

Harbor Workers' Compensation 

Washington, D.C. 2021 0 

March 7, 1994 

Notice No. 75 

NOTICE TO INSURANCE CARRIERS, SELF-INSURED EMPLOYERS UNDER THE 

LONGSHORE AND HARBOR WORKERS' COMPENSATION ACT, AND OTHER 

INTERESTED PERSONS 

SUBJECT: Mandatory ~iscloaure of Social Security Numbers Under 

the Longshore and Harbor Workers' Compensation Act 

The Office of Workers' Compensation Programs (OWCP) has been 

authorized by Congress (Public Law 103-112) to require persons 

who file notices of injury and/or claims for compensation under 

the Longshore and Harbor Workers' Compensation Act (LHWCA) and 

its extensions1 to disclose certain identifying information, 

including Social Security Number (SSN). 

Consequently, applicable regulations, including 20 CFR 702.202 

concerning the employer's report of an employee's injury or 

death, have been amended to expressly require the reporting of 

the injured worker's SSN. The amended regulations are contained 

in the Federal Register dated December 23, 1993 (58 FR 68031). 

Although the LHWCA notice of injury and claim forms have had a 

place for reporting the injured worker's SSN, the forms indicated 

that disclosure was voluntary. The forms are being revised to 

reflect that disclosure is now mandatory. 

Effective AprZl 1, 1994, the injured worker's SSN will be 

required on all LIIWCA notices of injury submitted to OWCP. 

Effective immediately, all insurance carriers and self-insured 

employers should ensure that the SSN is being included on the 

notice of injury (Form LS-202) . -. 

It should be noted that OWCP intends to eventually use the 

injured worker's SSN ae the case file identifier replacing thecurrent ~equential~numbering system. 

To ensure the widest possible dissemination, it is requested that 

you provide a copy of this notice to all appJicable field 

offices, claims processing offices, service companies,' etc., who 

1 Acts Extending the Longshore Act: 

Outer Continental Shelf Lands Act 

Defense Base Act 

Nonappropriated Fund Instrumentalities Act 

zoom 
are responsible for the actual preparation of notices of injury. 

Questions concerning the mandatory reporting of SSNs should be 

directed to the local. Longshore district office, or to the OWCP 

National Office, Longshore Division, at (202) 219-8721. . - 

,.*n ~iiector , ~ivisiod of , Longshore and Harbor -. 

Workers' Compensation 

08CT f.69 ZOZ XV.4 8!2:!2T 9flflZ/TS!/Cfl
Exhibit 13.1

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 annual report on Form 20-F of ASM International N.V. (the
Company) for the period ended December 31, 2006 as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the Report), we, Arthur H. del Prado, Chief Executive Officer of the Company, and Arnold J.M. van
der Ven, Chief Financial Officer of the Company, each certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. §1350, as adopted pursuant to §906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that to the best of our knowledge:

(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.



|    |  |                            
|--- |  | ---------------------------
|    | 
|By: |  | /s/ Arthur H. del Prado    
|    |  | Arthur H. del Prado        
|    |  | Chief Executive Officer    
|    |  | March 16, 2007             
|    | 
|By: |  | /s/ Arnold J.M. van der Ven
|    |  | Arnold J.M. van der Ven    
|    |  | Chief Financial Officer    
|    |  | March 16, 2007             

A signed original of this written statement required by Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, or
other document authenticating, acknowledging, or otherwise adopting the signature that appears in typed form within the electronic version 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.
Case 1:06-cv-14957-AKH Document 4 Filed 12/08/2006 Page 1 of 1
[Federal Register Volume 70, Number 216 (Wednesday, November 9, 2005)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 67905-67906]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 05-22260]


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

DEPARTMENT OF THE TREASURY

Internal Revenue Service

26 CFR Part 1

[TD 9222]
RIN 1545-BD49


Guidance Under Section 951 for Determining Pro Rata Share; 
Correction

AGENCY: Internal Revenue Service (IRS), Treasury.

ACTION: Correcting amendment.

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

SUMMARY: This document corrects final regulations (TD 9222) that were 
published in the Federal Register on Thursday, August 25, 2005 (70 FR 
49864). The final regulations under section 951(a) of the Internal 
Revenue Code (Code) provide guidance for determining a United States 
shareholder's pro rata share of a controlled foreign corporation's 
(CFC's) subpart F income, previously excluded subpart F income 
withdrawn from investment in less developed countries, and previously 
excluded subpart F income withdrawn from foreign base company shipping 
operations.

DATES: This correction is effective August 25, 2005.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Jeffrey L. Vinnik, (202) 622-3840 (not 
a toll-free number).

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

Background

    The final regulations (TD 9222) that are the subject of this 
correction are under section 951(a) of the Internal Revenue Code.

Need for Correction

    As published, the final regulations (TD 9222) contain errors that 
may prove to be misleading and are in need of clarification.

List of Subjects 26 CFR Part 1

    Income taxes, Reporting and recordkeeping requirements.

[[Page 67906]]

Correction of Publication

0
Accordingly, 26 CFR Part 1 is corrected by making the following 
correcting amendment:

PART 1--INCOME TAXES

0
Paragraph 1. The authority citation for part 1 continues to read in 
part as follows:

    Authority: 26 U.S.C. 7805 * * *


Sec.  1.951-1  [Corrected]

0
1. In Sec.  1.951-1(a), the undesignated paragraph is designated as 
paragraph (a)(3).
0
2. Section 1.951-1(e)(6), paragraph (ii) of Example 5, sixth sentence, 
the language ``common shareholders by reference to the'' is removed and 
the language ``common shares by reference to the'' is added in its 
place.
0
3. Section 1.951-1(e)(6), paragraph (i) of Example 7, sixth sentence, 
the language ``income of United States shareholder under'' is removed 
and the language ``income of a United States shareholder under'' is 
added in its place.
0
4. Section 1.951-1(e)(6), paragraph (i) of Example 8, third sentence, 
the language ``Foreign Individual N, a foreign individual.'' is removed 
and the language ``Individual N, a foreign individual.'' is added in 
its place.

Cynthia E. Grigsby,
Acting Chief, Publications and Regulations Branch, Legal Processing 
Division, Associate Chief Counsel, (Procedure and Administration).
[FR Doc. 05-22260 Filed 11-8-05; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4830-01-P
Case 1:07-cv-03301-SAS Document 3 Filed 05/04/2007 Page 1 of 1
Document Headings

                    Document headings vary by document type but may contain                    the following:                  
                -                       the agency or agencies that issued and signed a document                    
                -                       the number of the CFR title and the number of each part                      the document amends, proposes to amend, or is directly                      related to                    
                -                       the agency docket number / agency internal file number                    
                -                       the RIN which identifies each regulatory action listed in                      the Unified Agenda of Federal Regulatory and Deregulatory                      Actions                    

                    See the                                          Document Drafting Handbook                                        for more details.                  

###### Department of Health and Human Services

###### National Institutes of Health

                    Notice is hereby given of a change in the meeting of the Center for Scientific Review Special Emphasis Panel, October 25, 2005, 1 p.m. to October 25, 2005, 3 p.m., Holiday Inn Select Bethesda, 8120 Wisconsin Ave., Bethesda, MD 20814 which was published in the                     **Federal Register**                     on October 7, 2005, 70 FR 58723-58725.                

The meeting will be held on November 9, 2005, from 12 p.m. to 2 p.m., at the National Institutes of Health, 6701 Rockledge Drive, Bethesda, MD 20882. The meeting is closed to the public.

Dated: October 20, 2005.

Anthony M. Coelho, Jr.,

Acting Director, Office of Federal Advisory Committee Policy.

[FR Doc. 05-21659 Filed 10-31-05; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 4140-01-M
#### STATE v. AVERY

No. 110 PC.

Case below: 18 N.C. App. 321.

Petition for writ of certiorari to North Carolina Court of Appeals denied 12 July 1973.
12/19/07 15:22 FAX 2128050647 MED I4TION 

ELECXXOKICALL~ IJOLED 

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 

SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF NEW YORK 

LUMUMBA BANDELE ET 

Plaintiffs Order Declaring Case Eligible 

or Ineligible for Mediation 

-again6 t - 

THE CITY OF NEW YORK ET AL. 1 07 Civ. 3339 (MGC) 

Defendants1 

To the Clerk of Court: 

1. This case has been determined to be: 

- A. Not eligible for mediation because the case is: 

-- i. Not a case in which money damages only have been sought. - ii. A social security case. 

- iii. A tax matter. 

- iv. A Pro Se case. 

- v. A prisoners' civil rights case. 

-- B. Not eligible for mediation as otherwise determined by the Court. 

/ 

J C. Eligible for mediation subject to the limitations and 

restrictions noted below. 

If the yase has been determined eligible for mediation: 

r' i. All issues are eligible. 

- ii. Only a specific issue (s) is ellgible (cite issuels) 1 

The entire mediation process is confidential. The parties and the 

Mediator may not disclose information regarding the process, including 

settlement terms, to the Court or to third persons unless all parties 

otherwise agree. The identity of the Mediator is not to be disclosed even 

to the Court. However, persons authorized by the Court to administer or 

evaluate the mediation program may have access to information necessary to 

so administer or evaluate the program and parties, counsel and Mediators 

may respond to confidential inquiries or surveys by said persons authorized 

by the Court to administer or evaluate the mediation program. 

Case 1:07-cv-03339-MGC Document 8 Filed 12/21/2007 Page 1 of 2
12/18/07 15:22 FAX 2128050647 

The mediation process shall be treated as a compromise negotiation for 

purposes of the Federal Rules of Evidence and state rules of evidence. The 

Mediator is disqualified as a witness, consultant, attorney, or expert in any 

pending or future action relating to the dispute, including actions between 

persons not parties to the mediation process. 

Any timetable set by the Court'contained in a scheduling order or 

otherwise governing the completion of discovery, motion practice or trial 

date, etc. is to be strictly complied with and is in no way changed by the 

entry of this case into the Court's mediation program. 

SO Ordered. 

1 Dated: lpeLfpA.Lu .~~~::~ 

I 

U.S.D.J. 

Case 1:07-cv-03339-MGC Document 8 Filed 12/21/2007 Page 2 of 2
STAND 

TOGETHER

JOIN THE NATIONAL FIREFIGHTER 

REGISTRY FOR CANCER

NFR.CDC.GOV

Join your brothers and sisters in a 

groundbreaking effort to understand and 

reduce cancer. Together, we can have a 

lasting impact on the fire service.

DHHS (NIOSH) Publication No. 2023-109 (revised 06/2023)

DOI: https://doi.org/10.26616/NIOSHPUB2023109revised062023

June 2023
#### SMITH v. KEATOR

No. 60 PC.

Case below: 21 N.C. App. 102.

Petition for writ of certiorari to North Carolina Court of Appeals denied 2 April 1974.
Exhibit 13.1

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 annual
report on Form 20-F of ASM International N.V. (the Company) for the period ended December 31, 2011 as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the Report), we, Charles D. del Prado, Chief
Executive Officer of the Company, and Peter A.M. van Bommel, Chief Financial Officer of the Company, each certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. §1350, as adopted pursuant to §906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that to the best of our
knowledge:

(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.



|    |  |                            
|--- |  | ---------------------------
|By: |  | /S/    CHARLES D. DEL
PRADO
|    |  | Charles D. del Prado       
|    |  | Chief Executive Officer    
|    |  | March 28, 2012             
|    | 
|By: |  | /S/    PETER VAN
BOMMEL    
|    |  | Peter A.M. van Bommel      
|    |  | Chief Financial Officer    
|    |  | March 28, 2012             

A signed original of this written statement required by Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, or other
document authenticating, acknowledging, or otherwise adopting the signature that appears in typed form within the electronic version 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.