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

 

**CERTIFICATION**

 

Pursuant to the requirement set forth in Rule13a-14(b) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended, and Section 1350of Chapter 63 of Title 18 of the United States Code (18 U.S.C. § 1350, asadopted), Robert P. Akins, Chief Executive Officer of Cymer, Inc., a Nevadacorporation (the “Registrant”), hereby certifies that, to the best of hisknowledge:

 

1.                                       TheRegistrant’s quarterly report on Form 10-Q for the period ended June 30, 2004,to which this certification is attached as Exhibit 32.1 (the “Report”), fullycomplies with the requirements of section 13(a) of the Securities Exchange Actof 1934; and

 

2.                                       Theinformation contained in the Report fairly presents in all material respectsthe financial condition and results of operations of the Registrant.

 

**In Witness Whereof,**the undersigned has set his hand hereto as of the 4th day of August, 2004.

 
| /s/Robert P. Akins                       |   |
|------------------------------------------|--------|
| Robert P. Akins, Chief Executive Officer |

 

This certification accompanies the Form 10-Qto which it relates, is not deemed filed with the Securities and ExchangeCommission and is not to be incorporated by reference into any filing of Cymer,Inc. under the Securities Act of 1933, as amended, or the Securities ExchangeAct of 1934, as amended (whether made before or after the date of the Form10-Q), irrespective of any general incorporation language contained in suchfiling.

 

----
Exhibit  23.1



                           CONSENT OF BDO SEIDMAN, LLP



         We consent to the incorporation by reference in the Registration
Statements of Tag-It Pacific, Inc. on Form S-8 (File No. 333-66356) and on Form
S-8 (File No. 333-84099) of our report dated March 8, 2002 on our audits of the
consolidated balance sheets of Tag-It Pacific, Inc. as of December 31, 2001 and
2000, and the related consolidated statements of income, stockholders' equity
and convertible redeemable preferred stock and cash flows for each of the three
years in the period ended December 31, 2001, which report is incorporated by
reference in this Annual Report on Form 10-K.



                               /s/BDO Seidman, LLP



         Los Angeles, California

         March 8, 2002
§ 2634.413 Public access. ( a ) *Documents subject to public disclosure requirements.* The following qualified trust documents filed by a public filer, nominee, or candidate are subject to the public disclosure requirements of § 2634.603: ( 1 ) The executed trust instrument and any amendments (other than those provisions which relate to the testamentary disposition of the trust assets), and a list of the assets which were transferred to the trust, categorized as to the value of each asset;
( 2 ) The identity of each additional asset (other than cash) transferred to a qualified trust by an interested party during the life of the trust, categorized as to the value of each asset;
( 3 ) The report of the dissolution of the trust and a list of the assets of the trust at the time of the dissolution, categorized as to the value of each asset;
( 4 ) In the case of a blind trust, the lists provided by the independent trustee of initial assets placed in the trust by an interested party which have been sold or whose value is reduced to less than $1,000; and
( 5 ) The Certificates of Independence and Compliance.
( b ) *Documents exempt from public disclosure requirements.* The following documents are exempt from the public disclosure requirements of § 2634.603 and also may not be disclosed to any interested party: ( 1 ) Any document (and the information contained therein) filed under the requirements of § 2634.408(a) and (c); and
( 2 ) Any document (and the information contained therein) inspected under the requirements of § 2634.408(d)(4) (other than a Certificate of Compliance).
### IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT

No. 19

- 50497 Summary Calendar

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA , Plaintiff

- Appellee

v. JOSE ALBERTO ESPARZA

- RODRIGUEZ, also known as Jose Esparza, also known as Jose Rodriguez, also known as Jose Rodriguez

- Esparza, also known as Jose Esparzarodriguez, also known as Jose Esparza

- Rodriguez , Defendant

- Appellant

Appeal from the United States District Court for the Western District of Texas USDC No. 5:18

- CR

- 846

- 1

Before DAVIS, SMITH, and HIGGINSON, Circuit Judges. PER CURIAM: * Appealing his conviction under 8 U.S.C. § 1326(a) and (b)(1) for illegally reentering the United States following removal, Joes Alberto E sparza Rodriguez challen ges the district court’s order declining to dismiss his indictment. He contends that the notice to appear for his original removal proceeding was defective, his prior removals were thus invalid, and they could

* Pursuant to 5 TH C IR

. R. 47.5 , the court has determined that this opinion should not be published and is not precedent except under the limited circumstances set forth in 5 TH C IR

. R. 47.5.4. United States Court of Appeals Fifth Circuit 

### FILED February 19, 2020 Lyle W. Cayce Clerk Case: 19-50497 Document: 00515314761 Page: 1 Date Filed: 02/19/2020No. 19

- 50497

2 not be used to support his illegal reentry co nviction . Additionally, Esparza

Rodriguez contends that he satisfied or is excused from satisfying the § 1326(d) requirements for collaterally attacking his removal order, such as the requirement that he show exhaustion of any administrative remedies . As Esparza

- Rodriguez concedes, his arguments are foreclosed by United States v. Pedroza

- Rocha , 933 F.3d 490 (5th Cir. 2019), petition for cert. filed (U.S. Nov. 6, 2019) (No. 19

- 6588), and Pierre

- Paul v. Barr , 930 F.3d 684 (5th Cir. 2019), petition for cert. filed (U.S. Dec. 16, 2019) (No. 19

- 779 )

. In Pedroza

- Rocha , 933 F.3d at 496

- 98, we held that the notice to appear was not deficient merely because it did not specify a date for the hearing, any such purpor ted deficiency had not deprived the immigration court of jurisdiction, and the appellant could not collaterally attack his notice to appear without first exhausting his administrative remedies. Esparza

- Rodriguez’s arguments are, thus, foreclosed. See id. Accordingly, t he Government’s motion for summary affirmance is GRANTED, see Groendyke Transp., Inc. v. Davis , 406 F.2d 1158, 1162 (5th Cir. 1969), and the judgment of the district court is AFFIRMED. The Government’s alternative motion for an extension o f time to file a brief is DENIED as moot. Case: 19-50497 Document: 00515314761 Page: 2 Date Filed: 02/19/2020
Opinion issued November 21 , 2013.

In The 

## Court of Appeals For The 

## First District of Texas

———————————— NO. 01
- 13
- 00560
- CR

——————————— BRANDON LARUE JACKSO N , Appellant

V. THE STATE OF TEXAS , Appellee

On Appeal from the 248th District Court

Harris County, Texas Trial Court Ca se No. 1323165

MEMORANDUM OPINION
Pursuant to a n agreement with the State , appellant, Brand o n Larue Jackson, pleaded guilty to the offense of murder. 1 The trial court a ccepted the plea

1 See T EX

. P EN

. C ODE A NN . § 19.02 ( West 2011 ).2

agreement , assessed appellant’s punishment at confinement for forty years, and
certified that th is is a plea

- bargain ed case and he has no right of appeal. We dismiss the appeal. In a plea

- bargain ed case , a defendant may appeal only those matters that were raised by written motion and ru led on before trial or after obtaining the trial court’s permission to appeal. T EX
. C ODE C RIM
. P ROC

. A NN . Art 44.02 (West 2006);
T EX
. R. A PP
. P. 25.2(a)(2). An appeal must be dismissed if a certification showing that the defendant has a right of appeal has not been made part of the record. T EX
. R. A PP
. P. 25.2(d)

. Here , the trial court’s certification is included in the record and states that this is a plea

- ba rgained case and appellant has no right of appeal. See T EX
. R. A PP
. P. 25.2(a)(2). The record supports the trial court’s certification. 2 See Dears v. State , 154 S.W.3d 610, 615 (Tex. Crim. App. 2005). Because appellant has no right of appeal, we must dismi ss this appeal. See Chavez v. State , 183 S.W.3d 675, 680 (Tex. Crim. App. 2006) (“A court of appeals, while having jurisdiction to ascertain whether an appellant who plea

- bargained is permitted to appeal by Rule 25.2(a)(2),

2 Although appellant filed written pretrial motion s for psychiatric evaluations to determine competency and sanity , the motion s were granted and , therefore , do not provide a basis for appeal. See Woods v. State , 108 S.W.3d 314, 316 n.6 (Tex. Crim. App. 2003) (distinguishing motion for examination from court determination of competency ). Further, the plea agreement states that appellant waived the right to appeal if the court accepted the plea agreement. A waiver of the right to appeal is valid if made when the defendant knows the sentence he will receive. See Ex parte Delaney , 207 S.W. 3d 794, 798 (Tex. Crim. App. 2006).3

must dismiss a prohibited appeal without further action, regardless of the basis for the appeal.”). Accordingly, we dismiss the appeal for want of jurisdiction. We dismiss a ll pending motions as moot.
PER CURIAM
Panel consists of Justices Jennings, Sharp, and Brown. Do not publish. T EX
. R. A PP
. P. 47.2( b).
NRC NEWS

UNITED STATES NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION

OFFICE OF PUBLIC AFFAIRS, REGION II

61 Forsyth Street SW, Atlanta GA 30303

Web Site: www.nrc.gov

No. II-06-017 April 10, 2006

CONTACT: Ken Clark (404)562-4416 E-mail: OPA2@nrc.gov

Roger Hannah (404)562-4417

NOTE TO EDITORS: CLARIFICATION OF APRIL 7TH NRC NEWS RELEASE

ANNOUNCING SPECIAL INSPECTION AT HATCH NUCLEAR PLANT 

On April 7th, the NRC issued a news release (No. II-06-016) announcing a special inspection at

the Hatch nuclear power plant, operated by Southern Nuclear Operating Company near Baxley, Ga., to

assess the circumstances surrounding an unplanned reactor shutdown at Hatch Unit 2 on April 5. This

news release clarifies some information in that earlier news release.

In the April 7th news release, certain information regarding main turbine "testing" and the

operation of "some automatic equipment" was discussed, including that "some automatic equipment

had not been repaired after the last refueling outage." The NRC currently believes that there was only

one piece of equipment involved and that it was repaired during the refueling outage, but failed

sometime after that outage. Also, that NRC release stated that the shutdown was initiated by a

maintenance error during "testing" on the Unit 2 turbine generator. The maintenance error actually

occurred during calibration of a generator recording instrument. The special inspection team will

develop a more precise understanding of all the issues involved as a part of its efforts.

The two inspectors involved in the special inspection are the NRC Senior Resident Inspector at

the Hatch plant and a Senior Resident Inspector from another plant. The two inspectors are expected

to complete their on-site review this week and the results of the inspection will be issued within 45

days of its completion. 

###
§ 451.202 Payment. ( a ) A Presidential award is paid by the agency(ies) primarily benefiting from the employee contribution.
( b ) A Presidential award may be in addition to an agency award under subpart A of this part.
### IN THE COURT OF APPEALS OF THE STATE OF WASHINGTON

DIVISION II

In the Matter of the No. 53591

- 2

- II

Personal Restraint of

MICHAEL ALLEN HEDGES,

Petitioner.

UNPUBLISHED OPINION

L EE

, A.C. J.

— Michael Hedges seeks relief from personal restraint resulting from his

2016 plea of guilty to second degree assault with sexual motivation, third degree assault, and

residential burglary. 1 Because he was convicted of a sex offense, the trial court imposed a set of

conditions in his judgment and sentence, Appendix H, section (b), including the following:

2) The defendant shall have no contact with minor aged children without prior approval of the Community Corrections Officer and/or treatment provider. 3) The defendant shall hold no position of authority or trust involving minor aged

children.

Resp. to Personal Restraint Pet., App. A, at 18.

1 Because the State concedes that Hedges’s judgment and sentence is facially invalid, his petition is not subject to RCW 10.73.090’s time

- bar. Filed Washington State Court of Appeals

Division Two

January 13, 2020No. 53591

- 2

- II

2

Hedges argues that these conditions should be stricken because they are not crime related

in that the victim of his crimes was an adult woman. The State concedes that he is correct. We

agree with Hedges and accept the State’s concession.

Sen tencing courts may order an offender to comply with crime

- related prohibitions while

they are on community custody. RCW 9.94A.703(3)(f). Here, Hedges was convicted of offenses

against an adult. Therefore, the challenged community custody prohibitions re lating to minors are

not crime related. Accordingly, we grant Hedges’s petition and remand to the trial court to vacate

the above conditions from his judgment and sentence.

A majority of the panel having determined that this opinion will not be printed in the

Washington Appellate Reports, but will be filed for public record in accordance with RCW 2.06.040,

it is so ordered.

LEE, A.C.J.

We concur:

WORSWICK, J.

GLASGOW, J.
```

[106th Congress Public Law 507]
[From the U.S. Government Printing Office]

<DOC>
[DOCID: f:publ507.106]

[[Page 114 STAT. 2359]]

Public Law 106-507
106th Congress

                                 An Act

 
  To provide for the posthumous promotion of William <<NOTE: Nov. 13, 
  2000 -  [H.R. 3621]>> Clark of the Commonwealth of Virginia and the 
 Commonwealth of Kentucky, co-leader of the Lewis and Clark Expedition, 
              to the grade of captain in the Regular Army.

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

SECTION 1. POSTHUMOUS PROMOTION OF WILLIAM CLARK, CO-LEADER OF THE LEWIS 
            AND CLARK EXPEDITION, TO THE GRADE OF CAPTAIN IN THE REGULAR 
            ARMY.

    William Clark, of the Commonwealth of Virginia and the Commonwealth 
of Kentucky, co-leader of the Lewis and Clark Expedition of 1804-1806, 
shall be deemed for all purposes to have held the grade of captain, 
rather than lieutenant, in the Regular Army, effective as of March 26, 
1804, and continuing until his separation from the Army on February 27, 
1807.

SEC. 2. PROHIBITION OF BENEFITS.

    No person is entitled to any bonus, gratuity, pay, or allowance 
because of the provisions of section 1.

    Approved November 13, 2000.

LEGISLATIVE HISTORY--H.R. 3621:
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

CONGRESSIONAL RECORD, Vol. 146 (2000):
            Oct. 10, considered and passed House.
            Oct. 27, considered and passed Senate.

                                  <all>
```
<PAGE>

                                                                  Exhibit 21.1


                                Subsidiaries of the Company


Name                                               Jurisdiction of Incorporation
_______________________________________            _____________________________

eFunds Corporation                                          California
Analytic Research Technologies, Inc.                        Minnesota
eFunds Canada, Inc.                                         Canada
eFunds Government Services, Inc.                            Delaware
Chex Systems, Inc.                                          Minnesota
eFunds Holdings Limited                                     United Kingdom
eFunds International Limited                                United Kingdom
Deposit Payment Protection Services, Inc.                   Delaware
iDLX Corporation                                            Delaware
iDLX International B.V.                                     Netherlands
iDLX Holdings B.V.                                          Netherlands
eFunds IT Solutions Group, Inc.                             Delaware
eFunds International India Private Limited                  India
eFunds Overseas, Inc.                                       Minnesota
Access Cash International LLC                               Delaware
ACI-Canada, Inc.                                            Minnesota
eFunds (Canada) Corporation                                 Nova Scotia
NRC NEWS             U.S. NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION                       Office of Public Affairs              Telephone: 301/415-8200

                              Washington, D.C. 20555-0001       E-mail: opa@nrc.gov  Web Site: http://www.nrc.gov

No.  06-145                                                                                                             November 27, 2006

 NRC ADVISORY COMMITTEE ON REACTOR SAFEGUARDS 

TO MEET DECEMBER 7-9 IN ROCKVILLE, MARYLAND

The Nuclear Regulatory Commission’s Advisory Committee on Reactor Safeguards (ACRS)will hold a public meeting Dec. 7-9  in Rockville, Md., to discuss, among other items, two draft finalregulatory guides. The guides relate to combined license applications for nuclear power plants andevaluating fatigue analyses for new reactors. The committee will also discuss proposed revisionsrelated to emergency preparedness. 

The meeting will be held in Room T-2B3 of the agency’s Two White Flint North building, at11545 Rockville Pike. It will begin at 8:30 a.m. each day and end at 7 p.m. on Thursday and Friday,and 12:30 p.m. on Saturday. A complete agenda will be available on the NRC’s Web site at:http://www.nrc.gov/reading-rm/doc-collections/acrs/agenda/2006/ . 

Anyone with questions or those wishing to make public statements during the meeting shouldcontact Sam Duraiswamy at 301-415-7364. To pursue videoconferencing services, contact TheronBrown, at 301-415-8066.

The ACRS advises the Commission on licensing and operation of nuclear power plants andrelated safety issues.

# # #

News releases are available through a free list serve subscription at the following Web address: http://www.nrc.gov/public-involve/listserver.html .  The NRC homepage at www.nrc.gov also offers a SUBSCRIBE link. E-mail notifications are sent to subscribers when news releases are posted to NRC's Web site.
### §3243. Monitoring

#### (a) In general

The Secretary is authorized to monitor all recipients of financial assistance under this subchapter to determine whether the recipients are complying with the provisions of this subchapter, including the regulations issued under this subchapter.

#### (b) Investigations

The Secretary may investigate any matter the Secretary determines to be necessary to determine the compliance of the recipients with this subchapter, including the regulations issued under this subchapter. The investigations authorized by this subsection may include examining records (including making certified copies of the records), questioning employees, and entering any premises or onto any site in which any part of a program or activity of such a recipient is conducted or in which any of the records of the recipient are kept.

#### (c) Additional requirement

For the purpose of any investigation or hearing conducted under this subchapter by the Secretary, the provisions of section 49 of title 15 (relating to the attendance of witnesses and the production of documents) apply to the Secretary, in the same manner and to the same extent as the provisions apply to the Federal Trade Commission.

(Pub. L. 113–128, title I, §183, July 22, 2014, 128 Stat. 1590.)

#### **Statutory Notes and Related Subsidiaries**

#### Effective Date

Section effective on the first day of the first full program year after July 22, 2014 (July 1, 2015), see section 506 of Pub. L. 113–128, set out as a note under section 3101 of this title.
**Exhibit 31.2**

 

**SARBANES-OXLEYSECTION 302 CERTIFICATION**

 

I, EdwardM. Krell, certify that:

 

1.     I have reviewed thisQuarterly Report on Form 10-Q of Mothers Work, Inc.;

 

2.     Based on my knowledge, thisreport does not contain any untrue statement of a material fact or omit tostate a material fact necessary to make the statements made, in light of thecircumstances under which such statements were made, not misleading withrespect to the period covered by this report;

 

3.     Based on my knowledge, thefinancial statements, and other financial information included in this report,fairly present in all material respects the financial condition, results ofoperations and cash flows of the registrant as of, and for, the periodspresented in this report;

 

4.     The registrant’s othercertifying officer and I are responsible for establishing and maintainingdisclosure controls and procedures (as defined in Exchange Act Rules 13a–15(e) and15d–15(e)) for the registrant and have:

 

a)     designed such disclosurecontrols and procedures, or caused such disclosure controls and procedures tobe designed under our supervision, to ensure that material information relatingto the registrant, including its consolidated subsidiaries, is made known to usby others within those entities, particularly during the period in which thisreport is being prepared;

 

b)    evaluated the effectivenessof the registrant’s disclosure controls and procedures and presented in thisreport our conclusions about the effectiveness of the disclosure controls andprocedures, as of the end of the period covered by this report based on suchevaluation; and

 

c)     disclosed in this reportany change in the registrant’s internal control over financial reporting thatoccurred during the registrant’s most recent fiscal quarter that has materiallyaffected, or is reasonably likely to materially affect, the registrant’sinternal control over financial reporting; and

 

5.     The registrant’s othercertifying officer and I have disclosed, based on our most recent evaluation ofthe internal control over financial reporting, to the registrant’s auditors andthe audit committee of registrant’s board of directors:

 

a)     all significantdeficiencies and material weaknesses in the design or operation of internalcontrol over financial reporting which are reasonably likely to adverselyaffect the registrant’s ability to record, process, summarize and reportfinancial information; and

 

b)    any fraud, whether or notmaterial, that involves management or other employees who have a significantrole in the registrant’s internal control over financial reporting.

 

 
| May 16, 2005 |                                                |     | **/s/ EDWARD M. KRELL** |   |   |
|-------------------|-----------------------------------------------------|----------|-------------------------|--------|--------|
| Date              | Edward M. Krell                                     |     |
| * *          | *Executive Vice  President-Chief Financial Officer* | * * |

 

----