alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
Exhibit 32.1

            CERTIFICATION OF PRINCIPAL FINANCIAL OFFICER PURSUANT TO
                  SECTION 906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002

     In connection with the Form 10-K of American TonerServ Corp., a company
duly formed under the laws of Delaware (the "Company"), for the year ended
December 31, 2008, as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the
date hereof (the "Report"), Chuck Mache, Principal Executive Officer of the
Company, hereby certifies, pursuant to ss.906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002,
to the best of his/her knowledge, that:

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

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



March 31, 2009                        /s/ Chuck Mache
                                      Chuck Mache
                                      Principal Executive Officer


This certification accompanies this 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 American TonerServ Corp. and will be retained by American TonerServ
Corp. and furnished to the Securities and Exchange Commission or its staff upon
request.
Exhibit 10.2



 Exhibit 10.2 
 FORM OF WAIVER 
 In consideration for the benefits I will receive as a result of my employer’s
participation in the United States Department of the Treasury’s TARP Capital Purchase Program, I hereby voluntarily waive any claim against the United States or any state or territory thereof or my employer or any of its directors, officers,
employees and agents for any changes to my compensation or benefits that are required in order to comply with Section 111 of the Emergency Economic Stabilization Act of 2008, as amended (“EESA”), and rules, regulations,
guidance or other requirements issued thereunder (collectively, the “EESA Restrictions”). 
 I acknowledge that the EESA Restrictions may
require modification of the employment, compensation, bonus, incentive, severance, retention and other benefit plans, arrangements, policies and agreements (including so-called “golden parachute” agreements), whether or not in writing,
that I have with my employer or in which I participate as they relate to the period the United States holds any equity or debt securities of my employer acquired through the TARP Capital Purchase Program and I hereby consent to all such
modifications. I further acknowledge and agree that if my employer notifies me in writing that I have received payments in violation of the EESA Restrictions, I shall repay the aggregate amount of such payments to my employer no later than fifteen
business days following my receipt of such notice. 
 This waiver includes all claims I may have under the laws of the United States or any other
jurisdiction related to the requirements imposed by the EESA Restrictions (including without limitation, any claim for any compensation or other payments or benefits I would otherwise receive absent the EESA Restrictions, any challenge to the
process by which the EESA Restrictions were adopted and any tort or constitutional claim about the effect of the foregoing on my employment relationship) and I hereby agree that I will not at any time initiate, or cause or permit to be initiated on
my behalf, any such claim against the United States, my employer or its directors, officers, employees or agents in or before any local, state, federal or other agency, court or body. 
 In witness whereof, I execute this waiver on my own behalf, thereby communicating my acceptance and acknowledgement to the provisions herein. 
  

	
	Respectfully,
	
	  

	Name:
	Title:
	Date:


  

 UST No. 970
ITEM 1. N/A

Item 2.        Disposition of Assets

On January 22nd,2001 , REII Incorporated (the "Company")
disposed of Two (2) rental properties owned by the its subsidiary Ricketts
Enterprises Of Naples Inc.

        Two (2) Residential Rental Properties        $  300,000
                                                     -----------
                Net Reduction                        $  300,000

These Transactions also reduces the Company's Debt by $ 300,000

 A description of the properties and related reduction in mortgages are
 as follows.
         Property                                   Purchase        Note
                                                     Price         Value
         ---------                                  --------     ----------
Property Description and Financing Arrangement

1)     2620 Santa Barbara Blvd. Naples, Florida-
       Three residential rental units                $150,000
       Mortgage with Washington Mutual Bank
       in the amount of $105,000, payable in
       monthly payments of $523 including
       principal and interest at the bank's
       index plus 2.85% (effective rate of
       7.818% at March 15, 2000), due February 2030.
       Mortgage will be recasted annually on
       March 1st to reflect the new interest rate.                $105,000

       Mortgage with Garfield Ricketts, a 62%
       stockholder, in the amount of $45,000,
       payable in monthly payments of $315
       including principal and interest at 7.5%,
       due February 2030.                                           45,000

2)
        2700 Santa Barbara Blvd. Naples, Florida -
        Three residential rental units                  150,000
        Mortgage with Washington Mutual Bank
        in the amount of $78,400, payable in
        monthly payments of $390 including
        principal and interest at the bank's
        index plus 2.85% (effective rate of
        7.818% at March 15, 2000) due February
        2030. Mortgage will be recasted annually
        on March 1st to reflect the new interest rate.             105,000

        Mortgage with Garfield Ricketts, a 62%
        stockholder, in the amount of $33,600,
        payable in monthly payments of $235
        including principal and interest at 7.5%,
        due February 2030.                                          45,000


                                                   ____________    ________

               Totals                              300,000        $ 300,000

Rental Income and expenses for the period of acquisition are as follows:

                            March 2000 to  October 2000
                            --------------------------
       Rental Income                     $35,807
       Expenses                          $44,860
                                        ---------
      Net Income (Loss)                  $(9,054)



The expenses includes depreciation, taxes and debt service for the period,

REII plans to liquidate all of the properties owned by its subsidiary
Ricketts Enterprises Of Naples to reduce the Company's debts in order to
improve the Company's profit margin.
EXHIBIT 32.1

                           SECTION 1350 CERTIFICATIONS

      In connection with the Annual Report of Target Logistics, Inc. (the
"Company") on Form 10-K for the fiscal year ended June 30, 2004 as filed with
the Securities and Exchange Commission and to which this Certification is an
exhibit (the "Report"), the undersigned hereby certify, pursuant to Section 906
of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that:

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

            (2)   The information contained in the Report fairly presents, in
                  all material respects, the financial condition and result of
                  operations of the Company for the periods reflected therein.


Date: September 20, 2004                   /s/ Stuart Hettleman
                                       -----------------------------------------
                                       Stuart Hettleman
                                       Chief Executive Officer


                                           /s/ Philip J. Dubato
                                       -----------------------------------------
                                       Philip J. Dubato
                                       Chief Financial Officer
Exhibit 10.2


 





 


June 1,
2009


 


Mr. Jay
N. Levine


[redacted]


 


Dear
Jay:


 


As you are aware, in connection with your employment
with Capmark Financial Group Inc. (the “Company”) you entered into a letter
agreement, dated December 18, 2008 (the “Letter Agreement”), which sets
forth the terms and conditions of such employment, including the right to
receive a base salary at an annual rate equal to $5,000,000, so long as you are
employed pursuant to the terms of the Letter Agreement.


 


Section 7(b) of the Letter Agreement
provides that the Letter Agreement may only be amended or modified by a written
agreement executed by you and the Company.


 


As per your request, this letter serves as an
amendment to the Letter Agreement to provide that, commencing effective June 1,
2009, your base salary shall be reduced to an annual rate equal to $4,000,000
and that such reduced base salary amount shall serve as “Compensation” for all
purposes under the Letter Agreement.  You
hereby acknowledge and agree that this reduction in base salary does not
constitute “Good Reason” for purposes of your Letter Agreement.


 


Except as expressly set
forth above, the Letter Agreement shall remain in full force and effect.


 


This letter and any dispute hereunder shall be
construed, interpreted and governed in accordance with the laws of the State of
New York without reference to rules relating to conflicts of law.


 


This letter may be executed by fax or pdf and in any
number of counterparts, all of which, when taken together, shall constitute one
and the same instrument.


 


If
the foregoing terms and conditions are acceptable and agreed to by you, please
sign on the line provided below to signify such acceptance and agreement and
return the executed copy to the undersigned.


 


	
   

  	
  Capmark
  Financial Group Inc.

  
	
   

  	
   

  	
   

  
	
   

  	
  By:
  

  	
  /s/
  Scott C. Nuttal

  
	
   

  	
  Name:

  	
  Scott
  C. Nuttall

  
	
   

  	
  Title:

  	
  Chairman,
  Executive Development

  
	
   

  	
   

  	
  and
  Compensation Committee

  
	
   

  	
   

  	
  of
  the Board of Directors

  
	
  Accepted
  and Agreed

  	
   

  	
   

  
	
  Jay
  N. Levine

  	
   

  	
   

  
	
  Jay
  N. Levine
II

106TH CONGRESS

2D SESSION S. 2188

To suspend temporarily the duty on Pigment Yellow 191.1.

IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES

MARCH 7, 2000

Mr. EDWARDS (for himself and Mr. HELMS) introduced the following bill;

which was read twice and referred to the Committee on Finance

A BILL

To suspend temporarily the duty on Pigment Yellow 191.1.

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

3 SECTION 1. TEMPORARY SUSPENSION OF DUTY ON PIG4 MENT YELLOW 191.1.

5 (a) IN GENERAL.—Subchapter II of chapter 99 of

6 the Harmonized Tariff Schedule of the United States is

7 amended by inserting in numerical sequence the following

8 new heading:

‘‘ 9902.32.00 Pigment Yellow

191.1 (CAS No.

154946–66–4)

(provided for in

subheading

3204.17.60) ....... Free No change No change On or before

12/31/2002 ’’.
2

•S 2188 IS

1 (b) EFFECTIVE DATE.—The amendment made by

2 subsection (a) applies to goods entered, or withdrawn from

3 warehouse for consumption, on or after the 15th day after

4 the date of the enactment of this Act.

Æ
ARMED SERVICES BOARD OF CONTRACT APPEALS 

Appeal of -- ) 

) 

VSE Corporation ) 

) 

Under Contract No. W56HZV-l 5-D-ERI 8 ) 

APPEARANCES FOR THE APPELLANT: 

APPEARANCES FOR THE GOVERNMENT: 

ASBCA No. 61369 

John S. Pachter, Esq. 

Armani Vadiee, Esq. 

Todd M. Garland, Esq. 

Smith Pachter McWhorter PLC 

Tysons Comer, VA 

Raymond M. Saunders, Esq. 

Army Chief Trial Attorney 

Robert B. Neill. Esq. 

Trial Attorney 

ORDER OF DISMISSAL 

The dispute has been settled. The appeal is dismissed with prejudice. 

Dated: March 11, 2019 

DONALD E. KimiER 

Administrative Judge 

Armed Services Board 

of Contract Appeals 

I certify that the foregoing is a true copy of the Order of Dismissal of the Armed 

Services Board of Contract Appeals in ASBCA No. 61369, Appeal ofVSE Corporation, 

rendered in conformance with the Board's Charter. 

Dated: 

JEFFREY D. GARDIN 

Recorder, Armed Services 

Board of Contract Appeals
#### FRARY, Appellant, *v.*DWYER, Respondent.

(No. 1,446.)

*Os*Mottos' to Disarms Appeals.

(Submitted April 14, 1902.

Decided April 15, 1902.)

*Undertaking on Appeal.*

An undertaking on appeal from a judgment and from an order denying a motion for a new trial approved. (Following *Watkins*v. *Morris,*14 Montana 334.)

*Aiipeal from District Court, Cascade County; J. B. Leslie Judge.*

Action- by W. S. Frary against William R. Dwyer. From a judgment in favor of defendant, and from an order denying, a motion for a new trial, plaintiff appeals. Motion by defendant to dismiss the appeals.

Motion denied.

*Mr. F. A. Merrill,*for Appellant

*Mr. T. E. Brady,*for Respondent.

*415ME. CHIEF JUSTICE BBANTLY

delivered the opinion of the court.

Tlie defendant, and respondent, lias submitted a motion to dismiss the appeals herein on the ground that the undertaking filed with the clerk of the district court does not conform to the requirements of the statute.

The appeals are from a judgment and an order denying plaintiffs motion for a new trial, and the undertaking’ is the same in form and substance as those approved in *Watkins*v. *Morris,*14 Mont. 354, 36 Pac. 452, and in the following eases; *Ramsey*v. *Burns,*24 Mont. 234, 61 Pac. 129; *Nolan*v. *Montana Central Railway Company, Id.*327, 61 Pac. 880; *Livingston Smelting and Reduction Company*v. *Lynch et al., Id.*241, 61 Pac. 1134; *Mahoney*v. *Butte Hardware Company, Id.*242, 61 Pac. 1134; *Boucher*v. *Barsalou, Id.*242, 61 Pac. 1134; *Teague*v. *John Caplice Company, Id.*242, 61 Pac. 1134. The respondent relies upon the case of *Baker*v. *Butte City Water Company,*24 Mont. 31, 113, 60 Pac. 488, 817 ¡ of this case it was said in *Ramsey*v. *Burns', supra,*that it if “based upon correct reasoning, reaches a correct result, and is approved.” But a clear distinction is pointed out, between tint form of the undertaking examined in *Baker*v. *Butte City*Water *Company*and of those examined and approved in *Wat-Icins*v. *Morris*and the other cases cited *supra. Baker*v. *Butte City Water Company*is not in point. The motion is denied.

*Denied.*

Mu. Justice Pigott, having been of counsel during the pendency of this cause in the district court, takes no part in this decision.
No. 3,184.

#### In Re CARRIE MAY CARROLL.

Application for order to settle and certify bill of exceptions.

Decided May 2, 1912.

PER CURIAM.

It being made to appear by the affidavit of Carrie May Carroll, this day presented to the court, that Jeremiah J. Lynch, the judge of the Second Judicial District who *609tried the cause of *Mary Jenkins*v. *Celia Davis et al.,*now pending on motion for a new trial in the court of said district, the said Carrie May Carroll being a party thereto, has refused to settle certain bills of exceptions on behalf of said Carrie May Carroll to be used on the motion for a new trial, and that such refusal is based upon his alleged disqualification in the premises by reason of a disqualifying affidavit filed therein since the trial of said cause, it is ordered that the said Lynch, judge as aforesaid, proceed to settle and certify said bills as a part of the record in said cause, notwithstanding his said alleged disqualification.

*Messrs. Charles O’Donnell,*and *W. E. Carroll,*for Petitioner.
II

106TH CONGRESS

1ST SESSION S. 1807

To provide for increased access to airports in the United Kingdom by United

States air carriers, and for other purposes.

IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES

OCTOBER 27, 1999

Mr. SANTORUM (for himself and Mr. SPECTER) introduced the following bill;

which was read twice and referred to the Committee on Commerce,

Science, and Transportation

A BILL

To provide for increased access to airports in the United

Kingdom by United States air carriers, 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. ACCESS TO UNITED KINGDOM AIRPORTS.

4 (a) IN GENERAL.—If the Governments of the United

5 Kingdom and the United States have not signed an agree6 ment, by the date that is 180 days after the date of enact7 ment of this Act, that—

8 (1) provides for approval of all applications for

9 air routes from the United States to the United
2

•S 1807 IS

1 Kingdom that have been submitted to the Secretary

2 of Transportation by United States air carriers and

3 are pending on October 14, 1999; and

4 (2) provides slots at Heathrow International

5 Airport to United States air carriers that do not

6 have any slots at such airport on such date of enact7 ment, without affecting any slots held by other

8 United States air carriers at such airport on such

9 date of enactment,

10 the Secretary of Transportation shall immediately revoke

11 all slots and exemptions to the slot rule held by British

12 air carriers at O’Hare International Airport and John F.

13 Kennedy International Airport and, after the date of such

14 revocation, shall not grant any slot or exemption to the

15 slot rule to a British air carrier at either of such airports

16 until such an agreement is signed.

17 (b) DEFINITIONS.—In this section, the following defi18 nitions apply:

19 (1) BRITISH AIR CARRIER.—The term ‘‘British

20 air carrier’’ means a citizen of Great Britain under21 taking by any means, directly or indirectly, to pro22 vide foreign air transportation (as defined in section

23 40102(a) of title 49, United States Code).
3

•S 1807 IS

1 (2) SLOT RULE.—The term ‘‘slot rule’’ means

2 the requirements contained in subparts K and S of

3 part 93 of title 14, Code of Federal Regulations.

4 (3) UNITED STATES AIR CARRIER.—The term

5 ‘‘United States air carrier’’ has the meaning given

6 to the term ‘‘air carrier’’ by section 40102(a) of title

7 49, United States Code.

8 SEC. 2. OPEN SKIES AGREEMENT.

9 If the Governments of the United Kingdom and the

10 United States have not signed an open skies agreement,

11 as defined in Department of Transportation Order 92–8–

12 13, by December 31, 2000, the Secretary of State shall

13 immediately file a notice to terminate the Agreement Be14 tween the United States of America and the Government

15 of the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ire16 land Concerning Air Services, in accordance with the pro17 visions of the Agreement.

Æ
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.                  

###### Federal Trade Commission

# AGENCY:

Federal Trade Commission (“FTC” or “Commission”).

# ACTION:

Notice; correction.

# SUMMARY:

                        The Federal Trade Commission published a document in the                         **Federal Register**                         of April 15, 2010, seeking public comments on its proposal to extend through May 31, 2013, the current Paperwork Reduction Act clearance for information collection requirements associated with the Contact Lens Rule (the Rule), 16 CFR part 315. The document contained an incorrect OMB Control No. for the pre-existing clearance. The correct number is 3084-0127.                    

# FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

                        Requests for additional information or copies of the proposed information requirements should be addressed to Karen Jagielski, Attorney, Division of Advertising Practices, Bureau of Consumer Protection, Federal Trade Commission, 600 Pennsylvania Avenue, NW., NJ- 3212, Washington, DC 20580, (202) 326-2509. Correction In the                         **Federal Register**                         of April 15, 2010, in FR Doc. 2010-8647, on page 19647, in the third column, under                         **Supplementary Information: Background**                        , correct the second paragraph, third sentence, to read: “Pursuant to the OMB regulations, 5 CFR Part 1320, that implement the PRA, the FTC is providing this second opportunity for public comment while seeking OMB approval to renew the pre-existing clearance for the Rule (OMB Control No. 3084-0127).”                    

By direction of the Commission.

Donald S. Clark

Secretary.

[FR Doc. 2010-11501 Filed 5-12-10; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE: 6750-01-S