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

Exhibit 32.2

CERTIFICATION OF CHIEF FINANCIAL OFFICER PURSUANT TO 18
U.S.C. SECTION 1350, AS ADOPTED PURSUANT TOSECTION 906 OF THE
SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002

I, Martin Bajic, President, Chief Financial Officer and
Treasurer of Mabcure Inc. (the Company), hereby 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 my knowledge:

| | (a) | the quarterly report on Form 10-Q of the Company, for the
      three month period ended March 31, 2008, and to which this certification
      is attached as Exhibit 32.2 (the Report) fully complies with the
      requirements of Section 13(a) or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of
      1934, as amended; and
| | --- | ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
| |     |                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                             
| | (b) | the information contained in the Report fairly presents,
      in all material respects, the financial condition and results of
      operations of the Company.                                                                                                                                                            

|By:    | /s/ Martin Bajic                            
|------ | --------------------------------------------
|Name:  | Martin Bajic                                
|Title: | Chief Financial Officer and Treasurer       
|       | (Principal Financial and Accounting Officer)
|Date:  | May 20, 2008                                

A signed original of this written statement required by
Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002 has been provided to the
Registrant and will be retained by the Registrant and furnished to the
Securities and Exchange Commission or its staff upon request.

This certification accompanies the Form 10-Q to which it
relates, is not deemed filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission and is
not to be incorporated by reference into any filing of the Registrant under the
Securities Act of 1933 or the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 (whether made
before or after the date of this Form 10-Q), irrespective of any general
incorporation language contained in such filing.

---
#### Ex parte David LAYTON, Relator.

No. 07-96-0274-CV.

Court of Appeals of Texas, Amarillo.

Sept. 5, 1996.

*782David Layton, Kenedy, pro se.

Rebecca King, Potter County District Attorney, Amarillo, for appellee.

. Before DODSON, BOYD and QUINN, JJ.

QUINN, Justice.

David Layton petitioned the court for a “writ of habeas corpus *ad testificandum.”*The relief is sought to enable him to appear at a hearing to “presents [sic] additional and clear facts” and to “demanstrate [sic] the exacte [sic] nature of “who and how5 he was ‘set up’ of the crime of which he was unlawfully convicted.” We dismiss the petition.

Our jurisdiction to issue writs of habeas corpus is quite limited. *Ex parte Hawkins,*885 S.W.2d 586, 587 (Tex.App.—El Paso 1994, no writ). It extends only to those situations wherein a person is restrained of his liberty “by virtue of an order, process, or commitment issued by a court or judge because of the violation of an order, judgment, or decree ... made, rendered, or entered ... in a civil case.” *Tex. Gov.Code Ann.*§ 22.221(d) (Vernon Supp.1996). In effect, the petitioner must be seeking freedom from restraint imposed by an order arising from the violation or enforcement of a previous order. Moreover, the locale at which the restraint exists must be within the territorial district of the appellate court. *Id.; Ex parte Lopez,*668 S.W.2d 826, 827 (Tex.App.—San Antonio 1984, no writ). The pending matter fails to satisfy these jurisdictional prerequisites in at least three ways.

First, Layton does not seek release from restraint as contemplated by § 22.221(d). Rather, he simply wants his temporary freedom to sojourn beyond the confines of prison to testify at some hearing. That falls outside our jurisdictional prerogative. Second, the order under which he is restrained arises from a criminal proceeding. Section 22.221(d) demands that the case be civil. *Ex parte Hawkins, supra.*Third, the petition reveals Layton’s current place of restraint as the Connaily Unit, Kenedy, Texas. Kenedy is located in the county of Karnes, a county outside our appellate district.

Accordingly, we dismiss the petition for want of jurisdiction.
Case 2:09-cv-10808-ADT-VMM ECF No. 1 filed 03/04/09 PageID.1 Page 1 of 16
Case 2:09-cv-10808-ADT-VMM ECF No. 1 filed 03/04/09 PageID.2 Page 2 of 16
Case 2:09-cv-10808-ADT-VMM ECF No. 1 filed 03/04/09 PageID.3 Page 3 of 16
Case 2:09-cv-10808-ADT-VMM ECF No. 1 filed 03/04/09 PageID.4 Page 4 of 16
Case 2:09-cv-10808-ADT-VMM ECF No. 1 filed 03/04/09 PageID.5 Page 5 of 16
Case 2:09-cv-10808-ADT-VMM ECF No. 1 filed 03/04/09 PageID.6 Page 6 of 16
Case 2:09-cv-10808-ADT-VMM ECF No. 1 filed 03/04/09 PageID.7 Page 7 of 16
Case 2:09-cv-10808-ADT-VMM ECF No. 1 filed 03/04/09 PageID.8 Page 8 of 16
Case 2:09-cv-10808-ADT-VMM ECF No. 1 filed 03/04/09 PageID.9 Page 9 of 16
Case 2:09-cv-10808-ADT-VMM ECF No. 1 filed 03/04/09 PageID.10 Page 10 of 16
Case 2:09-cv-10808-ADT-VMM ECF No. 1 filed 03/04/09 PageID.11 Page 11 of 16
Case 2:09-cv-10808-ADT-VMM ECF No. 1 filed 03/04/09 PageID.12 Page 12 of 16
Case 2:09-cv-10808-ADT-VMM ECF No. 1 filed 03/04/09 PageID.13 Page 13 of 16
Case 2:09-cv-10808-ADT-VMM ECF No. 1 filed 03/04/09 PageID.14 Page 14 of 16
Case 2:09-cv-10808-ADT-VMM ECF No. 1 filed 03/04/09 PageID.15 Page 15 of 16
Case 2:09-cv-10808-ADT-VMM ECF No. 1 filed 03/04/09 PageID.16 Page 16 of 16
Fourth Court of Appeals

San Antonio, Texas

JUDGMENT

No. 04-12-00703-CV

Eric WARD,

Appellant

v.

Brooke 

Brooke WARD,

Appellee

From the County Court at Law No 4, Williamson County, Texas

Trial Court No. 11-1851-FC4

The Honorable John B. McMaster, Judge Presiding

BEFORE JUSTICE MARION, JUSTICE MARTINEZ, AND JUSTICE CHAPA

In accordance with this court’s opinion of this date, the trial court’s judgment is 

AFFIRMED. It is ORDERED that appellee Brooke Ward recover her costs of appeal from 

appellant Eric Ward.

SIGNED February 5, 2014.

_____________________________

Sandee Bryan Marion, Justice
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

EASTERN DISTRICT OF MICHIGAN

SOUTHERN DIVISION

Kimberly Snow,

Plaintiff,

v.

Utility Workers Union of America, Local

223,

Defendant.

 /

Case No. 09-10623

Honorable Nancy G. Edmunds

ORDER ACCEPTING AND ADOPTING MAGISTRATE JUDGE'S

REPORT AND RECOMMENDATION

This matter has come before the Court on the Magistrate Judge’s May 17, 2010

Report and Recommendation. [Docket Text # 15.] Being fully advised in the premises and

having reviewed the record and the pleadings, including Plaintiff’s objections if any, the

Court hereby ACCEPTS and ADOPTS the Magistrate Judge’s Report and

Recommendation. It is further ordered that Defendant’s Motion for Summary Judgment

[Docket Text #12] is GRANTED and the case is hereby DISMISSED.

SO ORDERED.

s/Nancy G. Edmunds 

Nancy G. Edmunds

United States District Judge

Dated: December 9, 2010
2

I hereby certify that a copy of the foregoing document was served upon counsel of record

on December 9, 2010, by electronic and/or ordinary mail.

s/Carol A. Hemeyer 

Case Manager
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

EASTERN DISTRICT OF MICHIGAN

NORTHERN DIVISION

ALI SAREINI,

Plaintiff,

Case Number 08-13961-BC

Honorable Thomas L. Ludington

 v.

DAVE BURNETT, RADWAN MARDINI,

Defendants.

_______________________________________/

ORDER ADOPTING REPORT AND RECOMMENDATION, GRANTING IN PART

AND DENYING IN PART DEFENDANTS’ MOTION FOR SUMMARY JUDGMENT,

DISMISSING PLAINTIFF’S CLAIMS AGAINST DEFENDANT MARDINI, AND

DISMISSING PLAINTIFF’S RELIGIOUS SERVICES FREE EXERCISE CLAUSE

CLAIM AGAINST DEFENDANT BURNETT

This matter is before the Court on a report and recommendation [Dkt # 43] issued by

Magistrate Judge Virginia M. Morgan on December 21, 2009. While noting that pro se Plaintiff Ali

Sareini did not file a response to Defendants Dave Burnett and Radwan Mardini’s motion for

summary judgment [Dkt. # 41], the magistrate judge recommends that the Court grant in part and

deny in part Defendants’ motion. The magistrate judge recommends granting summary judgment

to Defendant Mardini because he was not an active participant in any alleged violations of federal

law, and to Defendant Burnett on Plaintiff’s religious services claim under the Free Exercise Clause

of the First Amendment because the challenged policy is reasonably related to a legitimate

penological objective. The magistrate judge recommends denying Defendant Burnett summary

judgment on the remainder of Plaintiff’s claims, which include, inter alia, religious diet, property,

and holiday claims under the Free Exercise Clause, and an Equal Protection claim.

As of today’s date, no party has filed any objections to the magistrate judge’s report and

1:08-cv-13961-TLL-VMM Doc # 45 Filed 01/22/10 Pg 1 of 2 Pg ID 745
-2-

recommendation. A party’s decision not to object to the report and recommendation waives any

further right to appeal. Smith v. Detroit Fed’n of Teachers Local 231, 829 F.2d 1370, 1373 (6th Cir.

1987). Likewise, a party’s decision not to object to the magistrate judge’s report releases the Court

from its duty to independently review the record. Thomas v. Arn, 474 U.S. 140, 149 (1985).

Accordingly, it is ORDERED that the magistrate judge’s report and recommendation [Dkt

# 43] is ADOPTED.

It is further ORDERED that Defendants’ motion for summary judgment [Dkt. # 41] is

GRANTED IN PART AND DENIED IN PART.

It is further ORDERED that Plaintiff’s claims against Defendant Mardini are DISMISSED

WITH PREJUDICE.

It is further ORDERED that Plaintiff’s religious services Free Exercise Clause claim against

Defendant Burnett is DISMISSED WITH PREJUDICE.

s/Thomas L. Ludington 

THOMAS L. LUDINGTON

United States District Judge

Dated: January 22, 2010

PROOF OF SERVICE

The undersigned certifies that a copy of the foregoing order was served

upon each attorney or party of record herein by electronic means or first

class U.S. mail on January 22, 2010.

s/Tracy A. Jacobs 

TRACY A. JACOBS

1:08-cv-13961-TLL-VMM Doc # 45 Filed 01/22/10 Pg 2 of 2 Pg ID 746
_________________________________________ 

 

 

Order Michigan Supreme Court 

Lansing, Michigan 

March 29, 2006 Clifford W. Taylor,

 Chief Justice 

129506 Michael F. Cavanagh 

Elizabeth A. Weaver 

Marilyn Kelly 

Maura D. Corrigan 

PEOPLE OF THE STATE OF MICHIGAN,

Plaintiff-Appellee, 

Robert P. Young, Jr. 

Stephen J. Markman,

 Justices 

v SC: 129506 

 COA: 244066 

Wayne CC: 01-010970

NATHAN JONES,

Defendant-Appellant. 

_________________________________________/ 

On order of the Court, the application for leave to appeal the July 26, 2005 

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. 

CAVANAGH and KELLY, JJ., would grant leave to appeal. 

p0322 

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. 

March 29, 2006 

Clerk
EXHIBIT
32





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 Boatatopia (the “Company”) on Form 10-Q
for the quarter ended September 30, 2008, as filed with the Securities and
Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the “Report”), I, Stephen N. Causey,
President and Principal Accounting 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:





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/Stephen
      N. CauseyStephen
      N. CauseyPresident
      andPrincipal
      Accounting OfficerNovember13,
      2008
VI 

111TH CONGRESS 

1ST SESSION S. 121 

For the relief of Esidronio Arreola-Saucedo, Maria Elna Cobian Arreola, 

Nayely Bibiana Arreola, and Cindy Jael Arreola. 

IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES 

JANUARY 6, 2009 

Mrs. FEINSTEIN introduced the following bill; which was read twice and 

referred to the Committee on the Judiciary 

A BILL 

For the relief of Esidronio Arreola-Saucedo, Maria Elna 

Cobian Arreola, Nayely Bibiana Arreola, and Cindy Jael 

Arreola. 

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

3 SECTION 1. ADJUSTMENT OF STATUS. 

4 (a) IN GENERAL.—Notwithstanding any other provi5 sion of law or any order, for the purposes of the Immigra6 tion and Nationality Act (8 U.S.C. 1101 et seq.), 

7 Esidronio Arreola-Saucedo, Maria Elna Cobian Arreola, 

8 Nayely Bibiana Arreola, and Cindy Jael Arreola shall be 

9 deemed to have been lawfully admitted to, and remained 

10 in, the United States, and shall be eligible for issuance 


wwoods2 on PRODPC68 with BILLS
2 

•S 121 IS

1 of an immigrant visa or for adjustment of status under 

2 section 245 of the Immigration and Nationality Act (8 

3 U.S.C. 1255). 

4 (b) APPLICATION AND PAYMENT OF FEES.—Sub5 section (a) shall apply only if the applications for issuance 

6 of immigrant visas or the applications for adjustment of 

7 status are filed with appropriate fees not later than 2 

8 years after the date of the enactment of this Act. 

9 (c) REDUCTION OF IMMIGRANT VISA NUMBERS.— 

10 Upon the granting of immigrant visas to Esidronio 

11 Arreola-Saucedo, Maria Elna Cobian Arreola, Nayely 

12 Bibiana Arreola, and Cindy Jael Arreola, the Secretary 

13 of State shall instruct the proper officer to reduce by 4, 

14 during the current or subsequent fiscal year, the total 

15 number of immigrant visas that are made available to na16 tives of the country of birth of Esidronio Arreola-Saucedo, 

17 Marina Elna Cobian Arreola, Nayely Bibiana Arreola, and 

18 Cindy Jael Arreola under section 203(a) of the Immigra19 tion and Nationality Act (8 U.S.C. 1153(a)) or, if applica20 ble, the total number of immigrant visas that are made 

21 available to natives of the country of birth of Esidronio 

22 Arreola-Saucedo, Maria Elna Cobian Arreola, Nayely 

23 Bibiana Arreola, and Cindy Jael Arreola under section 

24 202(e) of such Act (8 U.S.C. 1152(c)). 

Æ 


wwoods2 on PRODPC68 with BILLS
**UN PUBLISHED** 

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

**No. 13**  **- 2353** 

JANINE PERRY WEBER , Plaintiff

- Appellee ,

v.

MELISSA SUE DANCY OLIVER , Defendant

– Appellant,

and
LINCOLN NATIONAL LIFE INSURANCE COMPANY, d/b/a Lincoln Financial Group,

Defendant

.

Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Virginia , at Norfolk

. Robert G. Doumar , Senior District Judge. ( 2:13

- cv
- 00031

- RGD

- LRL )

Submitted : May 22, 2014 Decided: June 6, 2014

Before GREGORY and DUNCAN , Circuit Judges , and DAVIS, Senior Circuit Judge

.

Affirmed by un published per curiam opinion

.

Jonathan L. Stone, NORRIS & ST. CLAIR P.C., Virginia Beach, Virginia, Steven G. Owen, COURTHOUSE LAW GROUP, Virginia Beach, Virginia, for Appellant. Samuel W. Meekins, Jr., Cartwright R.2 Reilly, WOLCOTT RIVERS & GATES, Virginia Beach, Virginia, for Appellee.

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.3 PER CURIAM:
Melissa Sue Dancy Oliver appeals from the district

court’s judgment granting Janine Perry Weber ’s motion to dismiss

Oliver’s claim s against Weber . We have reviewed the record and
find no reversible error. Accordingly, we affirm the district

court’s judgment

. Weber v. Oliver , No. 2:13

- cv
- 000 31

- RGD

- LRL
(E.D. Va. Oct. 31, 2013). We dispense with oral argument

because the facts and legal contentions are adequately prese nted
in the materials before this court and argument would not aid
the decisional process.

AFFIRMED
Modification to Terms of Employment for Randall T. Strutz



 Exhibit 10.3 

Modification to Terms of Employment for Randall T. Strutz 

March 27, 2014 
 Dear Randy: 

The following will modify your Employment Agreement dated March 12, 2010, as amended pursuant to a letter agreement dated
December 30, 2012 (the “Employment Agreement”) with Quality Distribution, Inc. (the “Company) effective as of March 3, 2014 (the “Effective Date”). 

 

	 	1.	Section 3.1 is amended by substituting the following for the first sentence thereof: 

 As
compensation for all services to be rendered pursuant to this Agreement, the Company agrees to pay to the Executive during the Term a base salary, payable bi-weekly, at the initial annual rate of $265,000 (the “Base Salary”). 

 

	 	2.	Section 3.2 is amended by substituting the following for the second sentence thereof: 

 At
target, Employee’s annual cash bonus opportunity shall be 50% of Base Salary. 
  

	 	3.	Section 3 is amended by inserting a new Section 3.5 and renumbering the prior Section 3.5 and the remaining sections (and references thereto) accordingly: 


Annual Equity Award. The Executive shall be eligible at the discretion of the Compensation Committee, to receive an annual equity
award, at target, equal to 75% of Executive’s base salary compensation. The Executive’s annual equity award, if any, shall be made at the same time as annual equity awards are normally made to similarly situated employees of the Company,
pursuant to the Quality Distribution, Inc. 2012 Equity Incentive Plan (“Equity Plan”). 
 The Company requests your
signature and your subsequent delivery of this letter agreement to the Company to evidence confirmation of your understanding of, and agreement to, the above-described changes to the terms of your employment as of the Effective Date. Except as set
forth herein, all other terms and provisions of the Employment Agreement remain unchanged and in full force and effect. 
  

			
	QUALITY DISTRIBUTION, INC.
		
	By:	 	 /s/ Gary R. Enzor

		 	Gary R. Enzor
		 	Chief Executive Officer
	
	Agreed to and accepted as of the date first written above.
		
	By:	 	 /s/ Randall T. Strutz

		 	Randall T. Strutz
IV 

111TH CONGRESS 

1ST SESSION H. RES. 90 

Supporting the goals and ideals of National Campus Safety Awareness Month. 

IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES 

JANUARY 26, 2009 

Mr. SESTAK (for himself, Mr. CHANDLER, Mr. DUNCAN, Mr. FOSTER, Mr. 

HINCHEY, Mr. HOLT, Mr. KIRK, Mrs. MALONEY, Mrs. MCCARTHY of 

New York, and Mr. POE of Texas) submitted the following resolution; 

which was referred to the Committee on Education and Labor 

RESOLUTION 

Supporting the goals and ideals of National Campus Safety 

Awareness Month. 

Whereas college and university campuses are not immune 

from the crime problems that face the rest of society in 

the United States; 

Whereas a total of 37 homicides, 8,112 forcible-sex offenses, 

8,923 aggravated assaults, and 3,071 cases of arson were 

reported on college and university campuses from 2004 

to 2006, in accordance with the reporting requirements 

under the Jeanne Clery Disclosure of Campus Security 

Policy and Campus Crime Statistics Act (20 U.S.C. 

1092(f); Public Law 89–329); 

Whereas criminal experts estimate that between 1⁄5 and 1⁄4 of 

female students become the victim of a completed or atVerDate Nov 24 2008 02:12 Jan 27, 2009 Jkt 079200 PO 00000 Frm 00001 Fmt 6652 Sfmt 6300 E:\BILLS\HR90.IH HR90

rfrederick on PROD1PC67 with BILLS
2 

•HRES 90 IH 

tempted rape, usually by someone they know, during 

their college careers, but fewer than 5 percent report the 

assault to law enforcement; 

Whereas each year, 13 percent of female students enrolled in 

an undergraduate program at a college or university will 

be victims of stalking; 

Whereas 1,700 college and university students between the 

ages of 18 and 24 die each year from unintentional alcohol-related injuries, including motor vehicle accidents; 

Whereas Security On Campus, Inc. (hereinafter referred to 

as ‘‘SOC’’), a national nonprofit group dedicated to promoting safety and security on college and university campuses, has designated September as National Campus 

Safety Awareness Month; 

Whereas each September since 2005, SOC has partnered 

with colleges and universities across the United States to 

offer National Campus Safety Awareness Month educational programming on sexual assault, alcohol and 

other drug abuse, hazing, stalking, and other critical 

campus safety issues; and 

Whereas National Campus Safety Awareness Month provides 

an opportunity for entire campus communities to become 

engaged in efforts to improve campus safety: Now, therefore, be it 

1 Resolved, That the House of Representatives— 

2 (1) supports the goals and ideals of National 

3 Campus Safety Awareness Month; and 

4 (2) encourages colleges and universities 

5 throughout the United States to provide campus 


rfrederick on PROD1PC67 with BILLS
3 

•HRES 90 IH 

1 safety and other crime awareness and prevention 

2 programs to all students throughout the year. 

Æ 


rfrederick on PROD1PC67 with BILLS
[Federal Register Volume 61, Number 130 (Friday, July 5, 1996)]
[Notices]
[Pages 35216-35217]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 96-17256]


=======================================================================
-----------------------------------------------------------------------

FEDERAL RETIREMENT THRIFT INVESTMENT BOARD


Sunshine Act Meeting

TIME AND DATE: 10:00 a.m. (EDT), July 15, 1996.

PLACE: 4th Floor, Conference Room, 1250 H Street, N.W., Washington, 
D.C.

STATUS: Open.

[[Page 35217]]

MATTERS TO BE CONSIDERED:

    1. Approval of the minutes of the June 17, 1996, Board meeting.
    2. Thrift Savings Plan activity report by the Executive 
Director.
    3. Discussion of additional or different system developer 
selection criteria, if any.
    4. Review of KPMG Peat Marwick audit reports:
    (a) ``Pension and Welfare Benefits Administration Review of ADP 
Hardware Operations Management of the Thrift Savings Plan at the 
United States Department of Agriculture, National Finance Center''.
    (b) ``Pension and Welfare Benefits Administration Review of the 
Thrift Savings Plan Forfeiture and Forfeiture Restoration Operations 
and Interfund Transfer Process at the United States Department of 
Agriculture, National Finance Center''.
    (c) ``Pension and Welfare Benefits Administration Review of the 
Thrift Savings Plan Loan Operations at the United States Department 
of Agriculture, National Finance Center''.
    (d) ``Pension and Welfare Benefits Administration Review of the 
Thrift Savings Plan System Enhancements and Software Change Controls 
at the United States Department of Agriculture, National Finance 
Center''.

CONTACT PERSON FOR MORE INFORMATION:
Thomas J. Trabucco, Director, Office of External Affairs (202) 942-
1640.

    Dated: July 1, 1996.
Roger W. Mehle,
Executive Director, Federal Retirement Thrift Investment Board.
[FR Doc. 96-17256 Filed 7-2-96; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6760-01-M