alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
1

The written submission does not identify Ms. Beilharz as an attorney.

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

EASTERN DISTRICT OF MICHIGAN

SOUTHERN DIVISION

Metropolitan Life Insurance,

Plaintiff,

v. Case No. 08-14849

Rose Murdock, et al., Honorable Sean F. Cox

Defendants.

____________________________/

ORDER TO OBTAIN COUNSEL

Plaintiff Metropolitan Life Insurance filed this interpleader action on November 19,

2008. On January 15, 2009, a representative of Defendant American Capital Funding, LLC

(“American Capital”) named Diane Beilharz1

 filed a written response on behalf of American

Capital. (Docket Entry No. 3). As a limited liability company, however, American Capital may

only appear in this action through counsel. See Word v. Pines Window and Siding, 2009 WL

728514 (E.D. Mich. 2009); Century 21 Real Estate, LLC v. Everitt, 2009 WL 187704 (E.D.

Mich. 2009); ICLNDS Notes Acquisitions, LLC, 259 B.R. 289, 294 (Bkrtcy. N.D. Ohio 2001). 

Accordingly, IT IS ORDERED that American Capital shall obtain counsel to represent it in this

action and that counsel must file an appearance in this action no later than April 16, 2009.

IT IS SO ORDERED.

S/Sean F. Cox 

SEAN F. COX

UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE

Dated: April 2, 2009

2:08-cv-14849-SFC-DAS Doc # 9 Filed 04/02/09 Pg 1 of 2 Pg ID 70
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

EASTERN DISTRICT OF MICHIGAN

SOUTHERN DIVISION

Metropolitan Life Insurance,

Plaintiff,

v. Case No. 08-14849

Rose Murdock, et al., Honorable Sean F. Cox

Defendants.

____________________________/

PROOF OF SERVICE

I hereby certify that on April 2, 2009, a copy of the foregoing document was served upon 

counsel of record by electronic means and by First Class Mail upon:

American Capital Funding, LLC

900 39th Street

Newport News, VA 23607

Lisa Tarrant

1601 Cresson Ridge Lane

Brandon, FL 33510

S/ Jennifer Hernandez 

Case Manager

2:08-cv-14849-SFC-DAS Doc # 9 Filed 04/02/09 Pg 2 of 2 Pg ID 71
Exhibit 10.4
  
 Re:
    
    Ninth Amendment to Subscriber Services Agreement, dated as of July 23, 2007 (Agreement)
between Travelport, LP, (Travelport), Travelport Global Distribution System B.V. ( TGDS
and, together with Travelport, collectively, Galileo) and Orbitz Worldwide, LLC
(Subscriber)
    Custom Terms and Conditions Revision
 General
 1




---



##### 



Travelport, LPOrbitz Worldwide, LLC
    
    
    
    By: Travelport Holdings LLC as General PartnerSignature:
    
    /s/ Stephen C. Praven
    
    
    
    Signature:
    
    /s/ Scott HydenName:
    

Stephen
C. Praven
    
    
    
    
    
    Name:
    

Scott
HydenTitle:
    

VP,
Bus Dev
    
    
    
    
    
    Title:
    

VP
SalesDate:
    

9/30/10
    


    
    
    
    Date:
    
    10/1/10Travelport Global Distribution System B.V.Signature:
    
    /s/ Marco van IeperenName:
    

Marco
van IeperenTitle:
    

DirectorDate:
    

30-09-2010
 2
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 

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 

FOR THE DISTRICT OF ARIZONA 

United States of America, 

Plaintiff, 

 

vs. 

James Larkin,

 Defendant. 

Case No. 2:18-cr-00422-PHX-DJH-2 

ORDER RE: 

DEFENDANT LARKIN’S AND 

DEFENDANT SPEAR’S MOTION TO 

CONTINUE TRIAL 

Pursuant to Defendant Larkin’s and Defendant Spear’s Motion to Continue Trial, 

and good cause appearing, 

IT IS ORDERED vacating the current trial date of June 20, 2023 and resetting 

trial to commence on _______________________________________. 

The other dates set forth in the Order Setting Final Pretrial Conference (Doc. 

1524) are vacated and reset as follows: 

1. Final Pretrial Conference: _________________ 

2. Joint Pretrial Memorandum: _______________ 

3. Motions in Limine: ______________________ 

4. Responses to Motions in Limine: ___________ 

5. Case-Related Documents: _________________ 

6. Courtroom Technology: __________________ 

Case 2:18-cr-00422-DJH Document 1526-1 Filed 03/09/23 Page 1 of 1
Order entered November 20, 2019

In The 

## Court of Appeals Fifth District of Texas at Dallas

No. 05
- 19
- 00263
- CR CLEAVEN WADE III, Appellant

V. THE STATE OF TEXAS, Appellee On Appeal from the 219th Judicial District Court

Collin County, Texas Trial Court Cause No. 219
- 83322
- 2015



### O RDER Before the Court is court reporter Indu Bailey’s November 18, 2019 request for additional time to file the reporter’s record. When appellant’s retained counsel final ly informed the Court he had paid or made arrangements to pay for the record , we ordered the reporter’s record filed by September 20, 2019. O n September 10, 2019, we received a letter from Ms. Bailey informing the Court that she was working on this record but would not be able to file it before she left on vacation beginning September 19 until November 11, 2019. We then ordered the reporter’s record filed by November 22, 2019. On November 18, 2019, Ms. Bailey filed another request for extension of time.
We GRANT this final extension of time to file the reporter’s record and ORDER the reporter’s record filed by 5:00 p.m. on December 13, 2019

. If the reporter’s record is not filedby that time, Ms. Bailey will be ordered, without further notice, not to s it until the complete

reporter’s record is filed.
We DIRECT the Clerk to send copies of this order to the Honorable Jennifer Edgeworth, Presiding Judge, 2 19th Judicial District Court; Indu Bailey , official court reporter, 219th Judicial District Court; and to counsel for all parties.

/s/ LANA MYERS JUSTICE
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

3831567.2

BRUNST NOTICE OF CONFLICT WITH TRIAL DATE

Gary S. Lincenberg (admitted pro hac vice)

 glincenberg@birdmarella.com

Ariel A. Neuman (admitted pro hac vice)

 aneuman@birdmarella.com

Gopi K. Panchapakesan (admitted pro hac vice)

 gkp@birdmarella.com

BIRD, MARELLA, BOXER, WOLPERT, NESSIM,

DROOKS, LINCENBERG & RHOW, P.C.

1875 Century Park East, 23rd Floor

Los Angeles, California 90067-2561

Telephone: (310) 201-2100

Facsimile: (310) 201-2110

Attorneys for Defendant John Brunst

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE DISTRICT OF ARIZONA

United States of America,

Plaintiff,

vs.

Michael Lacey, et al.,

Defendants.

CASE NO. 2:18-cr-00422-004-PHX-DJH

DEFENDANT JOHN BRUNST’S 

NOTICE OF CONFLICT WITH 

TRIAL DATE

Assigned to Hon. Diane J. Humetewa

Trial Date: June 20, 2023

Case 2:18-cr-00422-DJH Document 1497 Filed 11/08/22 Page 1 of 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

3831567.2 2

BRUNST NOTICE OF CONFLICT WITH TRIAL DATE

Pursuant to the Court’s November 2, 2022 Order setting a June 20, 2023 trial date, 

counsel for Defendant John Brunst informs the Court of the following conflict:

• Mr. Lincenberg is scheduled to take a pre-planned international vacation 

between September 7 and September 15, 2023. This is an annual trip that 

Mr. Lincenberg takes with 24 individuals. It has been planned a year in 

advance and is partially paid. While this trip falls beyond the dates noted in 

the Court’s trial schedule, we inform the Court of the potential conflict given 

the Court’s indication at the November 2, 2022 hearing that the trial will 

continue through September 2023 if necessary.

Counsel for the government has informed counsel for Mr. Brunst that it has no 

conflicts with the proposed trial schedule.

DATED: November 8, 2022 Respectfully submitted,

Gary S. Lincenberg

Ariel A. Neuman

Gopi K. Panchapakesan

Bird, Marella, Boxer, Wolpert, Nessim,

Drooks, Lincenberg & Rhow, P.C.

By: /s/ Gopi K. Panchapakesan

Gopi K. Panchapakesan

Attorneys for Defendant John Brunst

Case 2:18-cr-00422-DJH Document 1497 Filed 11/08/22 Page 2 of 2
CLEO PATRICE ROBY

,

Appellant,

v.

STATE OF FLORIDA

,

Appellee

. IN THE DISTRICT COURT OF APPEAL

FIRST DISTRICT, STATE OF FLORIDA

NOT FINAL UNTIL TIME EXPIRES TO

FILE MOTION FOR REHEARING AND

DISPOSITION THEREOF IF FILED

CASE NO. 1D 16

- 2158

______ _______________________/

Opinion filed November 7, 2016.

An appeal from an order of the Circuit Court for Escambia County

. John L. Miller , Judge

.

Nancy A. Daniels, Public Defender, and Steven L. Seliger, Assistant Public

Defender, Tallahassee , for Appel lant.

Pamela Jo Bondi, Attorney General, Tallahassee , for Appellee.

PER CURIAM.

AFFIRMED.

ROBERTS, C.J., JAY and WINSOR, JJ., CONCUR.
Exhibit 32.1

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 of Pervasive Software Inc. (the Company) on Form
10-K for the fiscal year ended June 30, 2009, as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the Report), I, John E. Farr, President and Chief Executive Officer of the Company, and I, Randall G. Jonkers,
Chief Financial Officer of the Company, certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, as adopted pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that to the best of our knowledge:

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

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



|                        |  |  |  |                                      
|----------------------- |  |  |  | -------------------------------------
|Date: September 8, 2009 |  |  |  | /s/ John E. Farr                     
|                        |  |  |  | John E. Farr                         
|                        |  |  |  | President and Chief Executive Officer
|                        |  | 
|Date: September 8, 2009 |  |  |  | /s/ Randall G. Jonkers               
|                        |  |  |  | Randall G. Jonkers                   
|                        |  |  |  | Chief Financial Officer              

This certification accompanies this Report on Form 10-K pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act
of 2002 and shall not, except to the extent required by such Act, be deemed filed by the Company for purposes of Section 18 of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended (the Exchange Act). Such certification will not be deemed
to be incorporated by reference into any filing under the Securities Act of 1933, as amended, or the Exchange Act, except to the extent that the Company specifically incorporates it by reference.
**Exhibit      32.1**

**CERTIFICATION      PURSUANT TO**

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

**AS      ADOPTED PURSUANT TO SECTION 906**

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

|  | 1. | The                Report fully complies with the requirements of section 13(a) or 15(d)                of                the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended;                and |
|--|----|-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|

|  | 2. | The                information contained in the Report fairly presents, in all material                respects, the financial condition and result of operations of the                Company. |
|--|----|--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|

|                                                                                                               |   |   |                                  |
|--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|--------|--------|---------------------------------------|
|                                                                                                               |   |   |                                  |
| By:                /s/ Michael Hsu                                                                                 |   |   | Dated:                August 11, 2007 |
| Michael                  HsuChief                  Executive Officer(Principal                  Executive Officer) |   |   |                                       |

----
Fourth Court of Appeals

San Antonio, Texas

June 12, 2019

No. 04-19-00269-CR

Manuel HUIZAR,

Appellant

v.

The STATE of Texas,

Appellee

From the 379th Judicial District Court, Bexar County, Texas

Trial Court No. 2017CR8912

Honorable Laura Parker, Judge Presiding

ORDER

This appeal is DISMISSED. 

It is so ORDERED on June 12, 2019.

_____________________________

Luz Elena D. Chapa, Justice

IN WITNESS WHEREOF, I have hereunto set my hand and affixed the seal of the said 

court on this 12th day of June, 2019.

_____________________________

Keith E. Hottle, Clerk of Court
Case 2:08-cv-14669-SFC-MJH ECF No. 1 filed 11/04/08 PageID.1 Page 1 of 5
Case 2:08-cv-14669-SFC-MJH ECF No. 1 filed 11/04/08 PageID.2 Page 2 of 5
Case 2:08-cv-14669-SFC-MJH ECF No. 1 filed 11/04/08 PageID.3 Page 3 of 5
Case 2:08-cv-14669-SFC-MJH ECF No. 1 filed 11/04/08 PageID.4 Page 4 of 5
Case 2:08-cv-14669-SFC-MJH ECF No. 1 filed 11/04/08 PageID.5 Page 5 of 5
Exhibit 32.1





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 of TRB Systems International, Inc. on Form 10-KSB for the year ended June 30, 2007 as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the "Report"), the undersigned, in the capacities and on the date indicated below, hereby certifies pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, as adopted pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that to the best of his 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 operation of the Company.





/s/ Byung Yim

Byung Yim, CEO & CFO

(Principal Executive Officer and Principal Financial Officer)



Dated: October 22, 2007
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

EASTERN DISTRICT OF MICHIGAN

SOUTHERN DIVISION

ROBERT SILER,

Plaintiff, Case No. 08-CV-15077

v. Honorable Patrick J. Duggan

W. BALDWIN, REBECCA J. ROBINSON,

WHIPPLE, PATRICIA L. CARUSO,

KAREN R. HALLIDAY, C. WASHINGTON,

K. MORGAL, DAVID L. BERGH, J. 

ARMSTRONG, and JOHN DOE, 

Defendants.

_____________________________________/

OPINION AND ORDER

At a session of said Court, held in the U.S.

District Courthouse, Eastern District 

of Michigan, on June 21, 2010.

PRESENT: THE HONORABLE PATRICK J. DUGGAN

U.S. DISTRICT COURT JUDGE

Robert Siler (“Plaintiff”), a former state prisoner, filed this civil action against

defendants pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 1983 on December 9, 2008. In his complaint,

Plaintiff alleges that defendants violated his Eighth Amendment rights when he was

denied medical treatment after he fell out of his bed, hit his head on the concrete floor,

and aggravated a pre-existing spinal injury on July 28, 2008. This Court referred all

pre-trial proceedings in this case to Magistrate Judge Mona K. Majzoub on March 9,

2009. As part of the pre-trial proceedings, Magistrate Judge Majzoub considered a
1

Defendant’s Whipple, Caruso, Halliday, Washington, Morgal, Bergh, and Armstrong

were dismissed without prejudice by order of this Court on October 8, 2009. 

2

motion by Plaintiff to dismiss Defendant John Doe without Prejudice.1

On April 27, 2010, Magistrate Judge Majzoub issued a Report and

Recommendation (“R&R”) recommending that this Court grant Plaintiff’s motion to

dismiss John Doe without prejudice. At the conclusion of the R&R, Magistrate Judge

Majzoub advises the parties that they may object to and seek review of the R&R within

14 days of service upon them. (R&R at 2.) She further specifically advises the parties

that “[f]ailure to file specific objections constitutes a waiver of any further right of

appeal.” ( Id.) No parties filed objections to the R&R.

The Court has carefully reviewed the R&R and concurs with the conclusions

reached by Magistrate Judge Majzoub.

Accordingly, 

IT IS ORDERED that Plaintiff’s Motion to Dismiss John Doe without Prejudice

is GRANTED.

s/PATRICK J. DUGGAN

UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE

Copies To:

Heidi A. Naasko, Esq.

Clifton B. Schneider, Esq.
1

The Federal Rules of Civil Procedure require that “[e]very judgment and

amended judgment must be set forth on a separate document.” Fed. R. Civ.

P. 58(a)(1). This order constitutes a separate document, and no other “judgment” will

issue.

S:\Cleland\JUDGE'S DESK\C2 ORDERS\08-20499.LUKASAVITZ.judgment.ckb.wpd

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF MICHIGAN

SOUTHERN DIVISION

 

UNITED STATES,

Plaintiff,

v.

Case No. 08-CR-20499

 10-CV-12762

PETER LUKASAVITZ, 

Defendant.

 /

ORDER CLOSING CASE IN LIEU OF JUDGMENT

In accord with the “Opinion and Order Denying Defendant’s 28 U.S.C. § 2255

Motion,” 

IT IS ORDERED that the clerk close the case.1

 S/Robert H. Cleland 

ROBERT H. CLELAND

UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE

Dated: April 19, 2013

I hereby certify that a copy of the foregoing document was mailed to counsel of record

on this date, April 19, 2013, by electronic and/or ordinary mail.

 S/Lisa G. Wagner 

Case Manager and Deputy Clerk

(313) 234-5522.

2:08-cr-20499-RHC-DAS Doc # 42 Filed 04/19/13 Pg 1 of 1 Pg ID 323
JUDGMENT SET ASIDE; DISMISSED and Opinion Filed November 14, 2019 

S 

In The 

Court of Appeals 

Fifth District of Texas at Dallas 

No. 05-19-00864-CV 

PAMELA ANDERSON, Appellant 

V. 

KELLY WEED AND KATHY WEED, Appellees 

On Appeal from the County Court at Law No. 4 

Dallas County, Texas 

Trial Court Cause No. CC-19-03066-D 

MEMORANDUM OPINION 

Before Chief Justice Burns, Justice Whitehill, and Justice Nowell 

Opinion by Chief Justice Burns 

After the justice court held a jury trial in a forcible detainer suit and the jury rendered a 

verdict, appellant appealed to the county court. The county court ruled in appellees’ favor, and 

appellant appealed. The record before this Court includes only the jury verdict from the justice 

court and not a judgment from the justice court. By letter dated September 25, 2019, the Dallas 

County Clerk’s Office confirmed that the jury verdict is all there is. Accordingly, the Court 

questioned its jurisdiction over this appeal as it appeared the county court never acquired 

jurisdiction. We instructed appellant to file a letter brief addressing the Court’s concern. 

This Court’s jurisdiction over the merits of a case extends no further than that of the court 

from which the appeal is taken. See Dallas Cty. App’l Dist. v. Funds Recovery, Inc., 887 S.W.2d 

465, 468 (Tex. App.—Dallas 1994, writ denied). A judgment must (1) clearly state the 
 –2– 

determination of the rights of the parties in the case; (2) state who must pay the costs; (3) be signed 

by the judge; and (4) be dated the date of the judge’s signature. See TEX. R. CIV. P. 505.1(c)(1)-

(4). A party may appeal a judgment in an eviction case from the justice court to the county court. 

See id. 510.9(a). Because the justice court did not sign a judgment, there was nothing to appeal to 

the county court and that court never acquired jurisdiction. In this circumstance, this Court only 

has jurisdiction to set the county court’s judgment aside and dismiss the cause. See Funds 

Recovery, 887 S.W.2d at 468. 

Although appellant filed a letter brief as requested, nothing in her brief demonstrates that 

this Court has jurisdiction over the appeal. Accordingly, we set aside the county court’s judgment 

and dismiss the cause. 

190864F.P05 

 

/Robert D. Burns, III/ 

ROBERT D. BURNS, III 

CHIEF JUSTICE 
 –3– 

S 

Court of Appeals 

Fifth District of Texas at Dallas 

JUDGMENT 

PAMELA ANDERSON, Appellant 

No. 05-19-00864-CV V. 

KELLY WEED AND KATHY WEED, 

Appellees 

 On Appeal from the County Court at Law 

No. 4, Dallas County, Texas 

Trial Court Cause No. CC-19-03066-D. 

Opinion delivered by Chief Justice Burns. 

Justices Whitehill and Nowell participating. 

 In accordance with this Court’s opinion of this date, the county court’s July 1, 2019 

judgment is SET ASIDE and this cause is DISMISSED. 

 

Judgment entered November 14, 2019
Exhibit 32.2   CERTIFICATION PURSUANT TO 18 U.S.C. SECTION 1350, AS ADOPTED PURSUANT TO SECTION 906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002  In connection with the Quarterly Report of Endeavor Uranium, Inc. (the "Company") on Form 10-Q for the period ending March 31, 2008 as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the "Report"), I, Terrance Heard, certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. ss. 1350, as adopted pursuant to ss. 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that to my 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.  /s/ Terrance HeardTerrance Heard
Principal Financial Officer
May 20, 2008
IIA

104TH CONGRESS

2D SESSION H. R. 3710

IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES

AUGUST 2, 1996

Received; read twice and referred to the Committee on Environment and

Public Works

AN ACT

To designate the United States courthouse under construction at 611 North Florida Avenue in Tampa, Florida,

as the ‘‘Sam M. Gibbons United States Courthouse’’.

1 Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representa2 tives of the United States of America in Congress assembled,
2

HR 3710 RFS

1 SECTION 1. DESIGNATION.

2 The United States courthouse under construction at

3 611 North Florida Avenue in Tampa, Florida, shall be

4 known and designated as the ‘‘Sam M. Gibbons United

5 States Courthouse’’.

6 SEC. 2. REFERENCES.

7 Any reference in a law, map, regulation, document,

8 paper, or other record of the United States to the United

9 States courthouse referred to in section 1 shall be deemed

10 to be a reference to the ‘‘Sam M. Gibbons United States

11 Courthouse’’.

12 SEC. 3. EFFECTIVE DATE.

13 This Act shall become effective on January 3, 1997.

Passed the House of Representatives August 2,

1996.

Attest: ROBIN H. CARLE,

Clerk.

By LINDA NAVE,

Deputy Clerk.
Exhibit 32.2

CERTIFICATION PURSUANT TO 18 U.S.C. SECTION 1350,

AS ADOPTED PURSUANT TO SECTION 906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002

In connection with the Quarterly Report of PharMerica Corporation (the Corporation) on Form 10-Q for the quarter ended
March 31, 2010 as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the Report), I, Michael J. Culotta, Executive Vice President and Chief Financial Officer of the Corporation, certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. ss.
1350, as adopted pursuant to ss. 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, as amended, and

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



|                                                                                   
|-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------
|/s/    MICHAEL J.
CULOTTA                                                          
|Michael J. Culotta
Executive Vice President and Chief Financial Officer
May 7, 2010