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


I, Robert C. Howell, Chief Financial Officer of Organetix, Inc. (the "Company"),
certify, pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, 18 U.S.C.
Section 1350, that:

(1) the Annual Report on Form 10-KSB of the Company for the year ended December
31, 2005 (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 Company.


Date: April 20, 2006

/s/ Robert C. Howell
----------------------------------
Robert C. Howell
Chief Financial Officer
**OFFICE OF**  **THE ATTORNEY**  **GENERAL OF**  **TEXAS AUSTIN** 

lbnambl8L.A.vood 8Uta 8uporintoadollt of rubllo lMtrwt1oa Awtda, Toxu

**In Uw**  **ouo ooaaldor**  iould rtlll - tvo

Rwton,rouldheYo 0 irsd lzll942. m-8.Ievtm **vu** appolntod **by** thm “E Iluionora* **bourt to**  ill1 thr -y orutod by the bath ot br husband. “Al ths abow wntioMa 0piPlon holdr tbt the vill~pworof the pwplomuatpw8lltozamBononblo L. A. voQd8, Paw 2

m 

## iaambellt

at the next g*no?81 *lootIon, vlll the person rloeted 

## to the pm. of oount7 *uporbttmdent rt the forthoomlag gonon l lootlon *orve for a four-par ponrlod, or vi11 rueh l per- *on **mm until 1942, vhIoh 18 th* tlm tha COUP- - term,

tovtt Ioh

nr.ouyT .

nev tonvu

l18Qted, vi11 WY* rxplnd?a Our opinion Ho. O-1664, **roforred** to In rour lottor, hold8 that one &ppoInted to the offlcr of aounty ruprlntondent tq the coPrmi88Io~rs'oourt tills rush vrcmcy only until the next gene-1 l leotIon. The only question vlth vhloh ve are concerned In thU oplnlon I8 IJ *t&ted above.

~tu Conrtltutionof TO-*, ktlole 16, Section 27, proYlde8

I _- *In all eleotIon* to fill vao8ncler of offloe in thlr 3tbte1 I 8hl.l W to fill the unexpllwd term OnlJ. The Lcglmlature, to give effect to Art1018 

### 16,SOO**ti0n** 

### 27 **0s t.h0**  **c0mtitUtioD, 8~**  **rd?'** emoted Article 20, **Ver** non** Clrll Btatuter,vbioh 8 88 **r0ih8t**

'All eleotloru to fill vrcmcler in otflce *h&l be to fill the unexpired tenu only.'
368. Also see mckm 08. curl, 38 Clr. A&. 445, 86 3v

In vIev of the foregoing ruthorltler, JOU me nrpoctfully rdrI*ed tht lt I8 the **opinion** OS **thlr** department t&t the peruon elrcted to county rchool 8uperIateulsntat the torthoomiag genenl election, **under** the oiroua8tumer art out In your letter, vi11 be l

leot8d to further till the v*ornoy In **0rrm** ometed by the death of Mr. fevton, that **IS,** until the gensnl,

Bononblr L. A. Cods, **Page J** 

l lootlon In 1942, vhon e. Revton's t erm vouid have l

xpirw.l. Trusting that **this** rrtIrf8otorll~ dlrporsr of your inquiry, ve rewin
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 amendment to the Annual Report of Airspan Networks Inc. (the
“Company”) on Form 10-K/A for the period ending December 31, 2008, as filed with
the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the “Report”), I,
David Brant, Chief Financial Officer of the Company, certify, pursuant to 18
U.S.C. § 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.




Date:  April
      30, 2009
            /s/ David BrantDavid
      BrantChief
      Financial Officer
Exhibit D

Case 2:11-cv-01754-BRM-AME Document 621-7 Filed 07/23/20 Page 1 of 19 PageID: 47888
Case 2:11-cv-01754-BRM-AME Document 621-7 Filed 07/23/20 Page 2 of 19 PageID: 47889
Case 2:11-cv-01754-BRM-AME Document 621-7 Filed 07/23/20 Page 3 of 19 PageID: 47890
Case 2:11-cv-01754-BRM-AME Document 621-7 Filed 07/23/20 Page 4 of 19 PageID: 47891
Case 2:11-cv-01754-BRM-AME Document 621-7 Filed 07/23/20 Page 5 of 19 PageID: 47892
Case 2:11-cv-01754-BRM-AME Document 621-7 Filed 07/23/20 Page 6 of 19 PageID: 47893
Case 2:11-cv-01754-BRM-AME Document 621-7 Filed 07/23/20 Page 7 of 19 PageID: 47894
Case 2:11-cv-01754-BRM-AME Document 621-7 Filed 07/23/20 Page 8 of 19 PageID: 47895
Case 2:11-cv-01754-BRM-AME Document 621-7 Filed 07/23/20 Page 9 of 19 PageID: 47896
Case 2:11-cv-01754-BRM-AME Document 621-7 Filed 07/23/20 Page 10 of 19 PageID: 47897
Case 2:11-cv-01754-BRM-AME Document 621-7 Filed 07/23/20 Page 11 of 19 PageID: 47898
Case 2:11-cv-01754-BRM-AME Document 621-7 Filed 07/23/20 Page 12 of 19 PageID: 47899
Case 2:11-cv-01754-BRM-AME Document 621-7 Filed 07/23/20 Page 13 of 19 PageID: 47900
Case 2:11-cv-01754-BRM-AME Document 621-7 Filed 07/23/20 Page 14 of 19 PageID: 47901
Case 2:11-cv-01754-BRM-AME Document 621-7 Filed 07/23/20 Page 15 of 19 PageID: 47902
Case 2:11-cv-01754-BRM-AME Document 621-7 Filed 07/23/20 Page 16 of 19 PageID: 47903
Case 2:11-cv-01754-BRM-AME Document 621-7 Filed 07/23/20 Page 17 of 19 PageID: 47904
Case 2:11-cv-01754-BRM-AME Document 621-7 Filed 07/23/20 Page 18 of 19 PageID: 47905
Case 2:11-cv-01754-BRM-AME Document 621-7 Filed 07/23/20 Page 19 of 19 PageID: 47906
Exhibit 32.2

                    CERTIFICATION OF CHIEF FINANCIAL OFFICER
                       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 DoMar Exotic Furnishings Inc. (the
"Company") on Form 10-Q for the period ending February 29, 2008 as filed with
the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the "Report"), I,
Scott Sieck, Chief Financial Officer of the Company, 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; and

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

IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the undersigned has executed this certification as of the
1st day of April, 2008.


/s/ Scott Sieck
------------------------------
Chief Financial Officer
#### In re: LISTERINE AGENT COOL BLUE PRODUCTS LIABILITY LITIGATION.

MDL No. 2097.

United States Judicial Panel on Multidistrict Litigation.

Oct. 1, 2009.

Before ROBERT L. MILLER, JR. Acting Chairman, JOHN G. HEYBURN II, Chairman*, KATHRYN H. VRATI, DAVID R. HANSEN, W. ROYAL FURGESON, JR. and FRANK C. DAMRELL, JR., Judges of the Panel.

*

 Judge Heyburn did not participate in the disposition of this matter.

ORDER DENYING TRANSFER

ROBERT L. MILLER, JR., Acting Chairman.

Before the entire Panel*: Defendant McNeil-PPC, Inc. (McNeil) has moved, pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1407, for coordinated or consolidated pretrial proceedings of this litigation in the Southern District of California. All plaintiffs oppose centralization.

This litigation currently consists of three actions pending in two districts, two actions in the Southern District of California and one action in the Southern District of Florida.

On the basis of the papers filed and hearing session held, we find that Section 1407 centralization would not necessarily serve the convenience of the parties and witnesses or further the just and efficient conduct of this litigation. With the California actions proceeding on a consolidated basis, there are essentially only two actions pending in two districts, one of which is now an individual action because class certification was denied. Moreover, the California actions are over two years old and discovery is complete. Defendant has failed to persuade us that any remaining common discovery issues are sufficiently complex and/or numerous to justify Section 1407 transfer in this docket at this time. Alternatives to transfer exist that can minimize whatever possibilities may arise of duplicative discovery and/or inconsistent pretrial rulings. *See, e.g., In re Eli Lilly and Company (Cephalexin Monohydrate) Patent Litigation,*446 F.Supp. 242, 244 (J.P.M.L.1978); *see also Manual for Complex Litigation, Fourth,*§ 20.14 (2004).

IT IS THEREFORE ORDERED that the motion, pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1407, for centralization of these actions is denied.

SCHEDULE A

MDL No. 2097 — IN RE: LISTERINE AGENT COOL BLUE PRODUCTS LIABILITY LITIGATION

*Southern District of California*

*Adrian Ortiz-Flores, et al. v. McNeil-PPC, Inc.,*C.A. No. 3:07-678

*Jennifer Pointer, etc. v. McNeil-PPC, Inc.,*C.A. No. 3:08-536

*Southern District of Florida*

*Kayla Hess, et al. v. McNeill-PPC, Inc.,*C.A. No. 9:09-80840
OFFICE OF THE ATTORNEY GENERAL OF TEXAE **AUSTIN**fIonorfMe *o. IT.Shhagpard, Page 2

### Hooonble Qeo.& Shqmrd~ Paw L**at lntoraatloa,**  **nnd ia**  **turn** obtain& ourrio. up

01% a brsle of oht~geerixed or appmwed b;r theaselves ha6 aat made 

### thds cnterprlfm

a *eomeroial* axle. f 

### t ia 

### t&airnethodot 

### sattlng us a alaarine; house or informationconcerningcredit or proposed purahaseraan6 oudtogers,&iOh is nn essential facta in thdr buafnoaa, end they ZUB'X doubt are thun twmetins their aredlt arralrsar effioiratly

and at a~ 15~ **@aat** ;ay tha)r ojluld **bo** athem ooa&ueto& 9isrousrd 3x8 teaha sat z&lee

lfnble r0r tbls taxaIt is our oplafon Chat, andor the faatr, we hwo

bsrore un, ma Me$ionlmd matal Semlaa Buruma ia not liable ror the .groas reaeipta tax 3~0tlded rw in &Mole 7041, Revised Civil Statutesof Texas.

Ceoil 0. Rotmh A88lcIttmt

AppflOVEDF?dB 26, 1940
UNPUBLISHED

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

No. 96-7227

ELWALDO R. JAMES, a/k/a Donald Mitchell, a/k/a

Calvin B. Smith,

Plaintiff - Appellant,

versus

J. THICKENS, Investigator, Rock Hill Police

Department; C. RUSSELL, Police Officer, Rock

Hill Police Department; C. LONG, Chief, Rock

Hill City Police Department Jail; individually

and in their official capacities,

Defendants - Appellees.

Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of

South Carolina, at Charleston. Charles E. Simons, Jr., Senior

District Judge. (CA-94-1114-2-6AJ)

Submitted: December 19, 1996 Decided: January 6, 1997

Before ERVIN and MOTZ, Circuit Judges, and BUTZNER, Senior Circuit

Judge.

Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion.

Elwaldo R. James, Appellant Pro Se. Terry B. Millar, MCKINNEY,

GIVENS & MILLAR, P.A., Rock Hill, South Carolina, for Appellees.

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.

See Local Rule 36(c).
2

PER CURIAM:

Appellant appeals the district court's orders denying relief

on his 42 U.S.C. § 1983 (1994) complaint and denying his motion

filed under Fed. R. Civ. P. 59(e). We have reviewed the record and

the district court's opinion accepting the magistrate judge's

recommendation and find no reversible error in the denial of § 1983

relief. Nor did the district court abuse its discretion in denying

Appellant's Rule 59(e) motion. Accordingly, we affirm on the reasoning of the district court. James v. Thickens, No. CA-94-1114-

2-6AJ (D.S.C. July 2, 1996; July 25, 1996). We also note that

although the district court did not address Appellant's request for

declaratory and injunctive relief, this action is properly construed as a habeas corpus action which requires Appellant to exhaust state court remedies. See Preiser v. Rodriguez, 411 U.S. 475,

489 (1973); Hamlin v. Warren, 664 F.2d 29 (4th Cir. 1981), cert.

denied, 455 U.S. 911 (1982). We dispense with oral argument because

the facts and legal contentions are adequately presented in the materials before the court and argument would not aid the decisional

process.

AFFIRMED
EXHIBIT 99.1


                                 March 25, 2002


U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission
450 Fifth Street, NW
Washington, DC 20549


Dear Sirs,


We hereby state that Arthur Andersen has represented to us that the audit of the
consolidated  financial  statements  of  ClickSoftware  Technologies  Ltd.  (and
subsidiaries)  as of December 31, 2001,  and for the year then ended was subject
to Arthur Andersen's quality control system for the U.S. accounting and auditing
practice to provide  reasonable  assurance  that the engagement was conducted in
compliance  with  professional   standards,   and  that  there  was  appropriate
continuity of Arthur Andersen  personnel  working on the audit,  availability of
national  office  consultation,  and  availability of personnel at affiliates of
Arthur Andersen to conduct the relevant portions of the audit.



Sincerely,



/s/ Shimon M. Rojany
------------------------------------
Shimon M. Rojany
Senior Vice President
And Chief Financial Officer
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

DISTRICT OF NEW JERSEY

CARLOS ALAMO, :

: Civil Action No. 11-1103 (JBS)

Petitioner, :

:

v. : ORDER

: (CLOSED)

ERIC HOLDER, et al., :

:

Respondents. :

IT APPEARING THAT Petitioner has submitted a Petition for a

Writ of Habeas Corpus, pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 2241; and this

Court having reviewed the Petition, and for the reasons set forth

in the Court’s Opinion filed herewith,

IT IS on this 9th day of September, 2011,

ORDERED that the petition for a writ of habeas corpus under

28 U.S.C. § 2241, as asserted by Petitioner, is DENIED WITH

PREJUDICE for lack of merit; and it is further

ORDERED that the motion to void judgment and/or for summary

judgment (Docket entry no. 14) is DENIED as moot; and it is

further

ORDERED that the Clerk shall serve a copy of this Order and

accompanying Opinion upon the Petitioner by regular mail; and it

is finally

ORDERED that the Clerk is directed to close the file in this

matter accordingly.

 s/ Jerome B. Simandle 

JEROME B. SIMANDLE

United State District Judge

Case 1:11-cv-01103-JBS Document 16 Filed 09/09/11 Page 1 of 1 PageID: 69
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

DISTRICT OF NEW JERSEY

CHAMBERS OF

STEVEN C. MANNION

UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE

MARTIN LUTHER KING 

COURTHOUSE

50 WALNUT ST.

ROOM 2064

NEWARK, NJ 07101

973-645-3827

August 26, 2016

LETTER OPINION/ORDER

Re: D.E. 262, Plaintiff’s Motion to Compel Discovery

United States of America ex rel. Bahnsen, et al. v. Boston Scientific

Civil Action No. 11-cv-1210 (JMV)(SCM) 

Dear Counsel: 

Pending before this Court is a discovery dispute raised by Plaintiff/Relators, Wendy Bahnsen 

and Carolina Fuentes (“Relators”) concerning an allegedly deficient production of documents by 

Defendant, Boston Scientific Neuromodulation Corporation (“Boston Scientific”).

1 After review of 

the parties’ joint submission, the Court has the following questions:

1) When were Relators or their counsel initially informed about the “Zirmed” database? 

2) When were Relators or their counsel initially informed about the Medisoft database? 

3) When were Relators or their counsel initially informed about the Dataflo database?

4) Did Defense counsel provide an enclosure letter (or email) or written document 

response for the March 13, 2015 production of the “claims data” spreadsheet? If so, 

provide a copy with your response.

Counsel for the parties shall file their respective written responses (maximum three pages each) to 

these questions no later than 5:00 p.m. on September 9, 2016. For each response, counsel shall 

provide pinpoint citations to the docket or attach a copy of the proofs upon which they rely to support 

their respective client’s position.

 

1

(ECF Docket No. (“D.E.”) 262). 

Case 2:11-cv-01210-JMV-SCM Document 272 Filed 08/26/16 Page 1 of 2 PageID: 4624
2

Counsel shall appear for a status conference with me in Courtroom 2B on September 23, 2016

at 2:00 p.m.

SO ORDERED. 

 

 8/26/2016 2:33:34 PM

Original: Clerk of the Court

Hon. John M. Vasquez, U.S.D.J.

c (via ECF): All Counsel

Case 2:11-cv-01210-JMV-SCM Document 272 Filed 08/26/16 Page 2 of 2 PageID: 4625
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE DISTRICT OF NEW JERSEY

CAMDEN VICINAGE

JENNIFER KASILAG, et al.,

Plaintiffs,

v.

HARTFORD INVESTMENT FINANCIAL 

SERVICES, LLC, et al.,

 Defendants.

Consolidated Civil No. 11-

1083-RMB-KMW

SCHEDULING ORDER FOR FINAL PRE-TRIAL CONFERENCE

This Scheduling Order confirms the directives given to 

counsel during the telephone status conference held on April 13, 

2016; and the Court noting the following appearances: Daniel 

Sweetser, Esquire, Robin F. Zwerling, Esquire, and Andrew 

Robertson, Esquire, appearing on behalf of the plaintiffs; and

Robert C. Hora, Esquire, Sean M. Murphy, Esquire, and Anthony C. 

Valenziano, Esquire, all appearing on behalf of the defendants,

IT IS on this 26th day of April, 2016, hereby ORDERED:

1. The Final Pretrial Conference shall be conducted on 

August 16, 2016 at 10:00 a.m. The form Joint Final Pretrial 

Order, as signed by all counsel, shall be delivered to the Court 

by August 12, 2016. The plaintiff's portion of the proposed order 

shall be prepared and sent to defense counsel not later than

July 22, 2016. Defendant's portion of the proposed order shall 

be prepared and returned to counsel for plaintiff not later than

August 5, 2016.

2. Any application for an extension of time beyond the 

deadlines set herein shall be made in writing to the undersigned 

and served upon all counsel prior to expiration of the period 

sought to be extended, and shall disclose in the application all 

such extensions previously obtained, the precise reasons 

necessitating the application showing good cause under FED. R. 

CIV. P. 16(b), and whether adversary counsel agree with the 

application. The schedule set herein will not be extended unless 

good cause is shown.

Case 1:11-cv-01083-RMB-KMW Document 191 Filed 04/26/16 Page 1 of 2 PageID: 9859
TRIAL COUNSEL MUST APPEAR AT THE FINAL PRETRIAL 

CONFERENCE UNLESS SPECIFICALLY EXCUSED BY THE COURT. FED. R. CIV. 

P. 16(d).

THE FAILURE OF A PARTY OR ATTORNEY TO OBEY THIS ORDER OR 

APPEAR AT THE CONFERENCE MAY RESULT IN IMPOSITION OF SANCTIONS 

UNDER FED. R. CIV. P. 16(f).

s/ Karen M. Williams 

KAREN M. WILLIAMS

United States Magistrate Judge

cc: Hon. Renée M. Bumb

Case 1:11-cv-01083-RMB-KMW Document 191 Filed 04/26/16 Page 2 of 2 PageID: 9860
908 A.2d 179

#### IN THE MATTER OF MARK EUGENE JOHNSTON, AN ATTORNEY AT LAW (ATTORNEY NO. 004951991).

October 18, 2006.

ORDER

The Disciplinary Review Board having filed with the Court its decision in DRB 06-140, concluding that as a matter of reciprocal discipline pursuant to *Rule*1:20-14, MARK EUGENE JOHNSTON of PAOLI, PENNSYLVANIA, who was admitted to the bar of this State in 1991, and whose license to practice law in New Jersey was administratively revoked pursuant to *Rule*1:28-2(c) effective September 25, 2006, should be suspended from the practice of law for a period of three years retroactive to May 13, 2005;

And the basis for said suspension from practice being the three-year suspension from practice imposed on MARK EUGENE JOHNSTON in the Commonwealth of Pennsylvania effective May 13, 2005, for conduct in violation of *RPC*8.4(b) (commission of criminal acts that reflect adversely on the attorney’s honesty, trustworthiness or fitness to practice law), *RPC*8.4(e) (conduct involving dishonesty, fraud, deceit or misrepresentation), and *RPC*8.4(d) (conduct prejudicial to the administration of justice);

And good cause appearing;

It is ORDERED that MARK EUGUENE JOHNSTON is suspended from the practice of law for a period of three years and until the further Order of the Court, retroactive to May 13, 2005; and it is further

ORDERED that this retroactive suspension has no effect on the September 25, 2006, administrative revocation of respondent’s license to practice law in this State; and it is further

*388ORDERED that the entire record of this matter be made a permanent part of respondent’s file as an attorney at law of this State; and it is further

ORDERED that respondent reimburse the Disciplinary Oversight Committee for appropriate administrative costs and actual expenses incurred in the prosecution of this matter, as provided in *Rule*1:20-17.
Exhibit 32.1

        CERTIFICATIONS PURSUANT TO SECTION 906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT
                        OF 2002 (18 U.S.C. SECTION 1350)

In connection with the Quarterly Report of DoMark International, Inc. (the
"Company") on Form 10-Q/A for the period ending February 28, 2009 as filed with
the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the "Report"), I, R.
Thomas Kidd, Chief Executive Officer of the Company, 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 result of operations of
          the Company.


Date: August 28, 2009           By: /s/ R. Thomas Kidd
                                    --------------------------------------------
                                    R. Thomas Kidd
                                    Chief Executive Officer (Principal Executive
                                    Officer, Principal Financial Officer)
**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 Nanosphere, Inc. (the “Company”) on Form 10-K for thefiscal year ended December 31, 2007 as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on thedate hereof (the “Report”), I, William P. Moffitt III, President and Chief Executive Officer of theCompany, certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, as adopted pursuant to Section 906 of theSarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that:1. The Report fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) or 15(d) of the SecuritiesExchange Act of 1934, as amended; and2. The information contained in the Report fairly presents, in all material respects, thefinancial condition and result of operations of the Company.         /s/ William P. Moffitt III   William P. Moffitt III   President and Chief Executive Officer   March 19, 2008
Case 2:11-cr-00165-KSH Document 31 Filed 04/11/11 Page 1 of 8 PageID: 88
Case 2:11-cr-00165-KSH Document 31 Filed 04/11/11 Page 2 of 8 PageID: 89
Case 2:11-cr-00165-KSH Document 31 Filed 04/11/11 Page 3 of 8 PageID: 90
Case 2:11-cr-00165-KSH Document 31 Filed 04/11/11 Page 4 of 8 PageID: 91
Case 2:11-cr-00165-KSH Document 31 Filed 04/11/11 Page 5 of 8 PageID: 92
Case 2:11-cr-00165-KSH Document 31 Filed 04/11/11 Page 6 of 8 PageID: 93
Case 2:11-cr-00165-KSH Document 31 Filed 04/11/11 Page 7 of 8 PageID: 94
Case 2:11-cr-00165-KSH Document 31 Filed 04/11/11 Page 8 of 8 PageID: 95