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

G

Case 2:11-cv-04487-KSH-PS Document 1-7 Filed 08/02/11 Page 1 of 25 PageID: 76
FNA0000057

Case 2:11-cv-04487-KSH-PS Document 1-7 Filed 08/02/11 Page 2 of 25 PageID: 77
FNA0000058

Case 2:11-cv-04487-KSH-PS Document 1-7 Filed 08/02/11 Page 3 of 25 PageID: 78
FNA0000059

Case 2:11-cv-04487-KSH-PS Document 1-7 Filed 08/02/11 Page 4 of 25 PageID: 79
FNA0000060

Case 2:11-cv-04487-KSH-PS Document 1-7 Filed 08/02/11 Page 5 of 25 PageID: 80
FNA0000061

Case 2:11-cv-04487-KSH-PS Document 1-7 Filed 08/02/11 Page 6 of 25 PageID: 81
FNA0000062

Case 2:11-cv-04487-KSH-PS Document 1-7 Filed 08/02/11 Page 7 of 25 PageID: 82
FNA0000063

Case 2:11-cv-04487-KSH-PS Document 1-7 Filed 08/02/11 Page 8 of 25 PageID: 83
FNA0000064

Case 2:11-cv-04487-KSH-PS Document 1-7 Filed 08/02/11 Page 9 of 25 PageID: 84
FNA0000065

Case 2:11-cv-04487-KSH-PS Document 1-7 Filed 08/02/11 Page 10 of 25 PageID: 85
FNA0000066

Case 2:11-cv-04487-KSH-PS Document 1-7 Filed 08/02/11 Page 11 of 25 PageID: 86
FNA0000067

Case 2:11-cv-04487-KSH-PS Document 1-7 Filed 08/02/11 Page 12 of 25 PageID: 87
FNA0000068

Case 2:11-cv-04487-KSH-PS Document 1-7 Filed 08/02/11 Page 13 of 25 PageID: 88
FNA0000069

Case 2:11-cv-04487-KSH-PS Document 1-7 Filed 08/02/11 Page 14 of 25 PageID: 89
FNA0000070

Case 2:11-cv-04487-KSH-PS Document 1-7 Filed 08/02/11 Page 15 of 25 PageID: 90
FNA0000071

Case 2:11-cv-04487-KSH-PS Document 1-7 Filed 08/02/11 Page 16 of 25 PageID: 91
FNA0000072

Case 2:11-cv-04487-KSH-PS Document 1-7 Filed 08/02/11 Page 17 of 25 PageID: 92
FNA0000073

Case 2:11-cv-04487-KSH-PS Document 1-7 Filed 08/02/11 Page 18 of 25 PageID: 93
FNA0000074

Case 2:11-cv-04487-KSH-PS Document 1-7 Filed 08/02/11 Page 19 of 25 PageID: 94
FNA0000075

Case 2:11-cv-04487-KSH-PS Document 1-7 Filed 08/02/11 Page 20 of 25 PageID: 95
FNA0000076

Case 2:11-cv-04487-KSH-PS Document 1-7 Filed 08/02/11 Page 21 of 25 PageID: 96
FNA0000077

Case 2:11-cv-04487-KSH-PS Document 1-7 Filed 08/02/11 Page 22 of 25 PageID: 97
FNA0000078

Case 2:11-cv-04487-KSH-PS Document 1-7 Filed 08/02/11 Page 23 of 25 PageID: 98
FNA0000079

Case 2:11-cv-04487-KSH-PS Document 1-7 Filed 08/02/11 Page 24 of 25 PageID: 99
FNA0000080

Case 2:11-cv-04487-KSH-PS Document 1-7 Filed 08/02/11 Page 25 of 25 PageID: 100
**EXHIBIT
      32.1**





CERTIFICATION
      OF CHIEF EXECUTIVE AND 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 US Uranium Inc. (the “Company”) on Form
      10-Q for the period ended July 31, 2008 as filed with the Securities and
      Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the “Report”), I, James D. Davidson,
      Chief Executive Officer and 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 September
      __, 2008.





/s/
                James D. Davidson


James
      D.
      Davidson


Chief
      Executive Officer and


Chief
      Financial Officer
HOUSEHOLD DATA

ANNUAL AVERAGES

34. Unemployed jobseekers by sex, reason for unemployment, and active jobsearch methods used

[Numbers in thousands]

Sex and reason

2014

Unemployed Percent of jobseekers using method

Average

number of

methods

used

Total Jobseekers

Contacted

employer

directly

Sent out

resumes

or filled

out

applications

Placed

or

answered

ads

Contacted

friends

or

relatives

Public

employment

agency

Private

employment

agency

Other

Total unemployed. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9,617 8,609 50.1 57.1 16.0 27.8 18.3 8.8 15.1 1.9

Job losers and persons who completed

temporary jobs1

. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4,878 3,871 52.7 56.8 18.6 32.3 23.2 11.3 16.0 2.1

Job leavers. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 824 824 50.5 60.2 15.8 23.4 15.3 7.6 14.8 1.9

Reentrants. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2,829 2,829 47.4 55.7 13.9 24.3 15.2 6.9 15.0 1.8

New entrants. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1,086 1,086 48.0 59.8 12.4 24.3 11.1 5.6 11.9 1.7

Men. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5,190 4,572 50.9 54.6 16.1 29.6 18.5 9.0 15.3 1.9

Job losers and persons who completed

temporary jobs1

. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2,926 2,308 53.5 54.0 18.1 33.7 22.9 11.1 16.6 2.1

Job leavers. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 416 416 51.6 59.6 16.1 25.7 14.3 7.9 14.7 1.9

Reentrants. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1,279 1,279 47.3 52.5 14.5 25.3 15.3 6.8 14.9 1.8

New entrants. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 569 569 47.9 58.0 11.9 25.4 11.1 6.0 11.6 1.7

Women. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4,426 4,037 49.3 60.0 15.9 25.8 18.0 8.5 14.8 1.9

Job losers and persons who completed

temporary jobs1

. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1,952 1,563 51.4 60.9 19.4 30.2 23.5 11.5 15.2 2.1

Job leavers. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 408 408 49.3 60.9 15.5 21.1 16.4 7.4 15.0 1.9

Reentrants. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1,550 1,550 47.4 58.4 13.3 23.5 15.2 7.0 15.1 1.8

New entrants. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 517 517 48.2 61.7 12.9 23.2 11.0 5.2 12.2 1.8

1 Data on the number of jobseekers and the jobsearch methods used exclude persons on temporary layoff.

NOTE: The jobseekers total is less than the total unemployed because it does not include persons on temporary layoff. The percent using each method will always total

more than 100 because many jobseekers use more than one method. Updated population controls are introduced annually with the release of January data.

1
#### Ezzard *v.*Estes, administratrix

Where the trial of an action involving the question whether or not-certain security deeds from the defendant to the plaintiff were void because of usury in the debts they had been given to secure, resulted in a judgment which necessarily adjudicated in the plaintiff’s favor that these deeds were free from usury and were yalid and binding upon the defendant, the latter’s wife, upon whose application a homestead in the land covered by the deeds had been set apart after they were executed, was estopped from attacking-the deeds on the ground- of the alleged usury.

April 1,1895.

Brought forward from the last term. Code, §4271(a-cj.

Levy and claim. Before George R. Brown, judge *prohao vice.*Forsyth superior court. February term, 1894..

G. L. Bell and H. H. Perry, for plaintiff' in error

H. L. Patterson, *contra.*

Lumpkin, Justice.

The facts are somewhat complicated and the motion *713for a new trial contains numerous grounds, but the case turns upon two questions only; the first being whether or not certain security deeds from Ezzard, the defendant in execution, to Estes, the plaintiff in execution, were-void because of usury; and the second, whether or not the claimant, who was the wife of Ezzard, was estopped from attacking these deeds on the ground of the alleged usury.

It appears from the record, that in certain litigation' between Estes and Ezzard, the question whether or not-these deeds were infected with usury was directly involved and passed upon. That litigation resulted in a judgment which necessarily adjudicated in favor of Estes-that the deeds were free from usury, and were valid and binding upon Ezzard. This is all that need be said as to the first question.

It further appears that after the execution of these deeds, Mrs. Ezzard applied for and had set apart a homestead in the lands which they embraced, as the property of her husband; and in the present case, she relied upon the homestead title in support of her claim, insisting that the deeds were void because of usury in the debts-they were given to secure, and that for this reason the title remained in the husband even after the execution of these deeds, and consequently the homestead was good as against his creditors.

In view of the adjudication above mentioned, we-think Mrs. Ezzard was estopped from attacking the deeds on the ground of the alleged usury. The cases of *Hightower*v. *Beall, Spears & Co.,*66 *Ga.*102, *Stewart*v. *Stisher,*83 *Ga.*297, and *Barfield et al.*v. *Jefferson,*84 *Ga.*609, are very- much in point, and sustain the ruling now made. *Judgment affirmed.*
# United **States Court**  **of Appeals** 

**for the Fifth Circuit**

No. 22

- 40043

**Feds for Medical Freedom; Local 918, American**

**Federation of Government Employees; Highland**

**Engineering, Incorporated;**  **Raymond A.**  **Beebe, Jr.;**  **John**

**Armbrust; et al.,**

Plaintiffs

— Appellees

,

versus

**Joseph R. Biden, Jr.** , in his official capacity as President of the United

States **; The United States of America; Pete Buttigieg,** in

his official capacity as Secretary of Transportation **; Department of**

**Transportation; Janet**  **Yellen,** in her official capacity as Secretary

of Treasu ry **; et al.,**

Defendants

— Appellants

.

Appeal from the United States District Court

for the Southern District of Texas

USDC No. 3:21

- CV

- 356

**ON PETITION**  **FOR REHEARING**  **EN BANC** 

(Opinion April 7, 2022, **5 Cir.,**  **2022**

**, 30**  **F.4** th **503** ) United States Court of Appeals

Fifth Circuit 

### FILED

June 27, 2022

Lyle W. Cayce

ClerkNo. 22

- 40043

Before **Richman,** Chief Judge

**,** and **Jones, Smith, Stewart,**

**Dennis, Elrod,**  **Southwick, Haynes,**  **Graves, Higginson,** 

**Costa, Willett, Ho, D uncan, Engelhardt, Oldham,**  and

**Wilson,** Circuit Judges

**.**

**Per Curiam:** 

A member of the court having requested a poll on the petition for

rehearing en banc, and a majority of the circuit judges in regular active service

and not disqualified having voted in favor,

**IT IS ORDERED** that this cause shall be reheard by the court en

banc with oral argument on a date hereafter to be fixed. The Clerk will

specify a briefing schedule for the filing of supplemental briefs. Pu rsuant to

5th Circuit Rule 41.3, the panel opinion dated April 7, 2022, is VACATED.

2
#### Harry BURNETT, Petitioner, v. DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE, Respondent.

No. 2012-3102.

United States Court of Appeals, Federal Circuit.

March 14, 2013.

Lloyd Edward Tooks, Attorney at Law, of San Diego, CA, argued for petitioner.

Jane W. Vanneman, Senior Trial Counsel, Commercial Litigation Branch, Civil Division, United States Department of Justice, of Washington, DC, argued for respondent. With her on the brief were Stuart F. Delery, Acting Assistant Attorney General, Jeanne E. Davidson, Director, and Todd M. Hughes, Deputy Director.

RADER, Chief Judge, MAYER, and PROST, Circuit Judges.

*951JUDGMENT

PER CURIAM.

This Cause having been heard and considered, it ÍS ORDERED AND ADJUDGED:

AFFIRMED. *See*Fed. Cir. R. 36.
Exhibit 99.1
                            CERTIFICATION PURSUANT TO
                               18 U.S.C. ss. 1350,
                             AS ADOPTED PURSUANT TO
                  SECTION 906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002

In connection with the Annual Report of RDC International,  Inc. (the "Company")
on Form  10-KSB for the period  ending  September  30,  2002,  as filed with the
Securities and Exchange  Commission on the date hereof (the  "Report"),  I, John
Harkola, Chief Executive Officer of the Company,  certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C.
ss. 1350, as adopted pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes- Oxley Act of 2002,
that, to the best of my knowledge and belief:

(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.



/s/ John Harkola
----------------------------
John Harkola
Chief Executive Officer
January 13, 2003
I 

108TH CONGRESS 

1ST SESSION H. R. 641

To amend the Stevenson-Wydler Technology Innovation Act of 1980 to permit 

Federal laboratories to aid surrounding communities in improving their 

efforts in science education. 

IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES 

FEBRUARY 5, 2003

Mr. UDALL of Colorado (for himself and Mr. BEAUPREZ) introduced the 

following bill; which was referred to the Committee on Science 

A BILL

To amend the Stevenson-Wydler Technology Innovation Act 

of 1980 to permit Federal laboratories to aid surrounding communities in improving their efforts in 

science education.

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

3 SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE. 

4 This Act may be cited as the ‘‘Federal Laboratory 

5 Educational Partners Act of 2003’’. 

6 SEC. 2. FINDINGS. 

7 The Congress finds that—
2

•HR 641 IH 

1 (1) Federal laboratories, especially the Depart2 ment of Energy’s national laboratories, with their 

3 high concentrations of scientists and engineers, are 

4 uniquely positioned to aid surrounding communities 

5 in improving the learning experience of their stu6 dents; 

7 (2) Federal laboratories’ science, mathematics, 

8 and engineering education programs prepare stu9 dents for laboratory research internships and fellow10 ships, make researchers available as science mentors, 

11 sponsor competitions and awards programs, and 

12 hold special events to provide hands-on learning ex13 periences for students at all educational levels; 

14 (3) Federal laboratories also provide for teacher 

15 research participation and leadership and instruc16 tional development, as well as curricula enrichment 

17 and alignment with State and national standards; 

18 (4) the royalty streams from the licensing of 

19 Federal laboratory inventions arising from federally 

20 funded research and research done under coopera21 tive research and development agreements are sub22 stantial and growing; and 

23 (5) permitting a portion of those royalty 

24 streams to be spent on efforts by laboratory employ-
3

•HR 641 IH 

1 ees related to science education is an appropriate 

2 and worthwhile use of that money. 

3 SEC. 3. DISTRIBUTION OF ROYALTIES RECEIVED BY FED4 ERAL AGENCIES. 

5 Section 14(a)(1)(B)(v) of the Stevenson-Wydler 

6 Technology Innovation Act of 1980 (15 U.S.C. 

7 3710c(a)(1)(B)(v)), is amended to read as follows: 

8 ‘‘(v) for scientific research and develop9 ment and for educational assistance and other 

10 purposes consistent with the missions and ob11 jectives of the Department of Energy and the 

12 laboratory.’’. 

13 SEC. 4. COOPERATIVE RESEARCH AND DEVELOPMENT 

14 AGREEMENTS. 

15 Section 12(b)(5)(C) of the Stevenson-Wydler Tech16 nology Innovation Act of 1980 (15 U.S.C. 

17 3710a(b)(5)(C)) is amended to read as follows: 

18 ‘‘(C) for scientific research and development 

19 and for educational assistance consistent with the 

20 missions and objectives of the Department of Energy 

21 and the laboratory.’’.

Æ
#### In the Matter of the John Doe petition: State of Wisconsin ex rel. Adrian T. Hipp, Petitioner, v. The Honorable Marshall B. Murray, presiding, Respondent-Petitioner.

Supreme Court

*No. 2007AP230-W.*

*Decided September 24, 2008.*

2008 WI 118

(Also reported in 756 N.W.2d 34.)

*68PER CURIAM.

¶ 1. Adrian T. Hipp moves the court for modification or reconsideration of its decision dated June 20, 2008. *State ex rel. Hipp v. Murray,*2008 WI 67, 310 Wis. 2d 342, 750 N.W.2d 873. Hipp's motion asks the court to remove the following sentence from ¶ 49 of the court's opinion:

> If the judge conducting this proceeding on remand determines that the crimes alleged in Hipp's John Doe petition are beyond the applicable statute of limitations, the judge may deny the petition without subpoenaing and examining the designated witnesses.

¶ 2. Hipp's motion also asks the court to correct the first name of a person mentioned in ¶ 5, from "Lisa" Coleman to "Leslie" Coleman.

¶ 3. The motion to reconsider the decision is denied, without costs.

Without objection, the court directs the Clerk of the Supreme Court to modify ¶ 5 of the court's June 20, 2008, decision so that the name "Lisa Coleman" reads "Leslie Coleman."

¶ 4. CHIEF JUSTICE SHIRLEY S. ABRAHAM-SON and JUSTICE MICHAEL J. GABLEMAN did not participate.
Exhibit 32(i)

Certification of the Principal Executive Officer Pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002

The
undersigned hereby certifies that, to his knowledge, (i) the Form 10-K filed by American Community Bancshares, Inc. (the Issuer) for the year ended December 31, 2006, 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 that report fairly presents, in all material respects, the financial condition and results of operations of the Issuer on the dates
and for the periods presented therein.



|                     |  |                                     |  |                                    
|-------------------- |  | ----------------------------------- |  | -----------------------------------
|                     |  | American Community Bancshares, Inc.
|                     |  |                                    
|Date: March 22, 2007 |  | By:                                 |  | /s/ Randy P. Helton                
|                     |  |                                     |  | Randy P. Helton                    
|                     |  |                                     |  | President & Chief Executive Officer
Order filed July 21, 2015 

In The

Fourteenth Court of Appeals

____________

NO. 14-15-00532-CV

____________

APARTMENT EXPRESS LLC, Appellant

V.

SOUTHCHASE NORTH APARTMENTS, Appellee

On Appeal from the Co Civil Ct at Law No 3

Harris County, Texas

Trial Court Cause No. 1062291

O R D E R

The notice of appeal in this case was filed June 16, 2015. To date, the filing 

fee of $195.00 has not been paid. No evidence that appellant is excused by statute 

from paying the filing fee has been filed. See See Tex. R. App. P. 5 (requiring 

payment of fees in civil cases unless party is excused by statute or by appellate 

rules from paying costs. Tex. Gov’t Code Ann. § 51.207. Therefore, the court 

issues the following order. 
Appellant is ordered to pay the filing fee in the amount of $195.00 to the 

clerk of this court on or before August 5, 2015. See Tex. R. App. P. 5. If appellant 

fails to timely pay the filing fee in accordance with this order, the appeal will be 

dismissed.

PER CURIAM
HOUSEHOLD DATA

ANNUAL AVERAGES

19. Persons at work in agriculture and nonagricultural industries by hours of work

[Numbers in thousands]

Hours of work

2012

Persons at work Percent distribution

All

industries

Agriculture

and related

industries

Nonagricultural

industries

All

industries

Agriculture

and related

industries

Nonagricultural

industries

Total, persons at work. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 137,337 2,102 135,235 100.0 100.0 100.0

1 to 34 hours. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 34,425 573 33,852 25.1 27.3 25.0

1 to 4 hours. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1,481 49 1,432 1.1 2.3 1.1

5 to 14 hours. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5,369 133 5,236 3.9 6.3 3.9

15 to 29 hours. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 17,128 265 16,863 12.5 12.6 12.5

30 to 34 hours. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 10,448 126 10,322 7.6 6.0 7.6

35 hours and over. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 102,912 1,529 101,383 74.9 72.7 75.0

35 to 39 hours. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9,747 95 9,651 7.1 4.5 7.1

40 hours. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 58,778 608 58,169 42.8 28.9 43.0

41 hours and over. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 34,388 825 33,562 25.0 39.3 24.8

41 to 48 hours. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 11,859 135 11,724 8.6 6.4 8.7

49 to 59 hours. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 13,251 240 13,012 9.6 11.4 9.6

60 hours and over. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9,277 451 8,826 6.8 21.4 6.5

Average hours, total at work. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 38.5 42.3 38.4 – – –

Average hours, persons who usually work full time. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 42.5 48.5 42.4 – – –

NOTE: Updated population controls are introduced annually with the release of January data. Dash indicates no data or data that do not meet publication criteria (values not

shown where base is less than 35,000).

1
**Exhibit 32.2**

 

**CERTIFICATION PURSUANT TO18 U.S.C. SECTION 1350AS ADOPTED PURSUANT TOSECTION 906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002**

 

Pursuantto 18 U.S.C. § 1350, the undersigned officer of Shermen WSC Acquisition Corp.(the “Company”) hereby certifies that the Company’s Quarterly Report on Form 10-Qfor the quarter ended June 30, 2008 (the “Report”) fully complies with therequirements of Section 13(a) or 15(d), as applicable, of theSecurities Exchange Act of 1934 and that the information contained in theReport fairly presents, in all material respects, the financial condition andresults of operations of the Company.

 
|                               |                            |                               |
|------------------------------------|---------------------------------|------------------------------------|
|                               | /s/ John E.  Toffolon, Jr. |
|                               |   Name:               | John E.  Toffolon, Jr.        |
|                               |   Title:              | Chief Financial Officer  and       |
|                               |                            | Director (Principal  Financial and |
|                               |                            | Accounting Officer)                |
|                               |                            |                               |
| Dated:   August 13, 2008 |                            |                               |

 

----