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



CERTIFICATION OF PRINCIPAL EXECUTIVE OFFICER PURSUANT TO
18 U.S.C. SECTION 1350

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



I, Woodson Hobbs, President and Chief Executive Officer of Pumatech, Inc. (the
Company), do 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 my knowledge:



| |  | the Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q of the Company for the quarter ended October 31, 2003, as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission (the Report), fully
complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934; and
| | - | ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------



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



Dated: December 15, 2003



|                                                   
|---------------------------------------------------
|/s/ WOODSON HOBBS                                  
|                                                   
|Woodson Hobbs President and
Chief Executive Officer
#### § 711.102 Application.

This regulation (§§ 711.101-711.170) applies to all programs or activities conducted by the agency, except for programs or activities conducted outside the United States that do not involve individuals with handicaps in the United States.
NOT FOR PUBLICATION

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,

Plaintiff

- Appellee,

v.

GARY CASDELL FITE,

Defendant

- Appellant. No. 17

- 16937

D.C. Nos. 4:16

- cv

- 02 895

- PJH

4:13

- cr

- 00212

- PJH

MEMORANDUM *

Appeal from the United States District Court

for the Northern District of California

Phyllis J. Hamilton, Chief Judge, Presiding

Submitted November 27, 2018 **

Before: CANBY, TASHIMA, and FRIEDLAND, Circuit Judges.

Gary Casdell Fite appeals from the district court’s judgment denying his 28

U.S.C. § 2255 motion to vacate. We have jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. § 2253, and

we affirm.

* This disposition is not appropriate for publication and is not precedent

except as provided by Ninth Circuit Rule 36

- 3.

** The panel unanimously concludes this case is suitable for decision

without oral argument. See Fed. R. App. P. 34(a)(2). 

# FILED

DEC 5 2018

MOLLY C. DWYER, CLER K

U.S. COURT OF APPEAL S2 17

- 16937

Fite contends that his armed bank robbery conviction under 18 U.S.C.

§ 2113(a), (d) d oes not qualify as a predicate crime of violence under 18 U.S.C.

§ 924(c). This argument is foreclosed. See United States v. Watson , 881 F.3d 782

(9th Cir.), cert. denied

, 139 S. Ct. 203 (2018)

.

AFFIRMED.
```

[Congressional Bills 109th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[H.R. 2614 Introduced in House (IH)]

109th CONGRESS
  1st Session
                                H. R. 2614

   To suspend temporarily the duty on Propiconazole Technical - Bulk.

_______________________________________________________________________

                    IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

                              May 24, 2005

  Mr. Terry introduced the following bill; which was referred to the 
                      Committee on Ways and Means

_______________________________________________________________________

                                 A BILL

 
   To suspend temporarily the duty on Propiconazole Technical - Bulk.

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

SECTION 1. PROPICONAZOLE TECHNICAL - BULK.

    (a) In General.--Subchapter II of chapter 99 of the Harmonized 
Tariff Schedule of the United States is amended by inserting in 
numerical sequence the following new heading:

``      9902.90.18      Propiconazole       Free         No change        No change        On or before 12/  ''.
                         Technical -                                                        31/2008
                         (Bulk) (220kg
                         Drum) 1-[[2-(2,4-
                         dichlorophenyl)-4-
                         propyl-1,3-
                         dioxolan-2-
                         yl]methyl]-1H-
                         1,2,4-triazole
                         (CAS No. 60207-90-
                         1) (provided for
                         in subheading
                         2934.99.12)......

    (b) Effective Date.--The amendment made by subsection (a) applies 
with respect to goods entered, or withdrawn from warehouse for 
consumption, on or after the 15th day after the date of the enactment 
of this Act.
                                 <all>
```
[PROPOSED] ORDER GRANTING PLAINTIFF’S MOTION TO FILE UNDER SEAL [CASE NO. C 08-04692 MMC] 

 Page 1

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

26

27

28

Daniel Feinberg – CA State Bar No. 135983 

Nina Wasow – CA State Bar No. 242047 

LEWIS, FEINBERG, LEE, RENAKER & JACKSON, P.C.

1330 Broadway, Suite 1800 

Oakland, CA 94612 

Telephone: (510) 839-6824 

Facsimile: (510) 839-7839 

Email: dfeinberg@lewisfeinberg.com 

Email: nwasow@lewisfeinberg.com 

Attorneys for Plaintiff

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 

FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 

SAN FRANCISCO DIVISION 

GORDON ERSPAMER, 

 Plaintiff, 

 vs. 

MORRISON & FOERSTER LLP LONG 

TERM DISABILITY PLAN, 

 Defendant. 

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

Case No. C 08-04692 MMC 

[PROPOSED] ORDER GRANTING 

PLAINTIFF’S MOTION TO FILE 

DOCUMENTS UNDER SEAL

 

Pursuant to Local Rules 7-11 and 79-5(b)-(c), IT IS HEREBY ORDERED THAT 

Plaintiff’s Motion to File Documents Under Seal is GRANTED. The Clerk is directed to file the 

specified portions of Plaintiff’s Supplemental Brief in Support of Motion for Judgment; the 

Second Declaration of Maria DeMartini and Exhibits 1 and 3 thereto; and Exhibits 2, 4, and 14 

to the Second Declaration of Nina Wasow in Support of Plaintiff’s Motion for Judgment under 

seal.

 IT IS SO ORDERED. 

Dated: March 10, 2010 ___________________________

United States District Judge

Case 3:08-cv-04692-MMC Document 66 Filed 03/10/10 Page 1 of 1
```

[Congressional Bills 112th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[H.R. 4347 Introduced in House (IH)]

112th CONGRESS
  2d Session
                                H. R. 4347

   To designate the United States courthouse located at 709 West 9th 
   Street in Juneau, Alaska, as the ``Robert Boochever United States 
                             Courthouse''.

_______________________________________________________________________

                    IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

                             March 30, 2012

 Mr. Young of Alaska introduced the following bill; which was referred 
         to the Committee on Transportation and Infrastructure

_______________________________________________________________________

                                 A BILL

 
   To designate the United States courthouse located at 709 West 9th 
   Street in Juneau, Alaska, as the ``Robert Boochever United States 
                             Courthouse''.

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

SECTION 1. DESIGNATION.

    The United States courthouse located at 709 West 9th Street in 
Juneau, Alaska, shall be known and designated as the ``Robert Boochever 
United States Courthouse''.

SEC. 2. REFERENCES.

    Any reference in a law, map, regulation, document, paper, or other 
record of the United States to the United States courthouse referred to 
in section 1 shall be deemed to be a reference to the ``Robert 
Boochever United States Courthouse''.
                                 <all>
```
IN THE SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF MONTANA

No. DA 22-0434

STATE OF MONTANA,

Plaintiff and Appellee,

v.

SABRINA MARIE SMITH,

Defendant and Appellant. 

ORDER

Upon consideration of Appellant’s motion for extension of time, 

and good cause appearing,

IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that Appellant is granted an extension 

of time to and including March 8, 2023, within which to prepare, file, 

and serve Appellant’s opening brief on appeal.

Electronically signed by:

Mike McGrath

Chief Justice, Montana Supreme Court

January 30 2023

01/30/2023

Case Number: DA 22-0434
#### The People of the State of New York ex rel. Russell Wimberly v Warden.

Application for a writ of habeas corpus denied. (See CPLR 7002, subd [c]; 7003, subd [a].) Concur—Kupferman, J. P., Lupiano, Silver-man and Markewich, JJ.
#### BERGER, Respondent, v. LA GRASSE, Appellant.

(Supreme Court, Appellate Term.

January 26, 1905.)

Appeal from. Municipal Court, Borough of Manhattan, Third District. Action by Bertha Berger against Adelaide La Grasse. From a judgment for plaintiff, defendant appeals. Reversed. Davis & Williams, for appellant. Benjamin Berger, for respondent.

DAVIS, J.

The judgment awarded damages to the plaintiff for a breach of covenant in a lease requiring the defendant to erect a front sidewalk garden within a specified time, and for a failure to restore certain rooms to a habitable condition. The evidence upon which the judgment was based is vague and speculative, and does not support an^ proper rule for estimating the damages, if, indeed, any were sustained. The judgment should be reversed, and a new trial ordered, with costs to appellant to abide the event.

SCOTT, J., concurs.

MacLEAN, J.

Deeming that the plaintiff is entitled to a judgment upon the evidence, I dissent.
```

[Congressional Bills 112th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[H.R. 3992 Referred in Senate (RFS)]

112th CONGRESS
  2d Session
                                H. R. 3992

_______________________________________________________________________

                   IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES

                             March 20, 2012

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

_______________________________________________________________________

                                 AN ACT

 
     To allow otherwise eligible Israeli nationals to receive E-2 
 nonimmigrant visas if similarly situated United States nationals are 
          eligible for similar nonimmigrant status in Israel.

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

SECTION 1. NONIMMIGRANT TRADERS AND INVESTORS FROM ISRAEL.

    Israel shall be deemed to be a foreign state described in section 
101(a)(15)(E) of the Immigration and Nationality Act (8 U.S.C. 
1101(a)(15)(E)) for purposes of clauses (i) and (ii) of such section if 
the Government of Israel provides similar nonimmigrant status to 
nationals of the United States.

            Passed the House of Representatives March 19, 2012.

            Attest:

                                                 KAREN L. HAAS,

                                                                 Clerk.
```
#### SNR Holdings, Inc., et al., Appellants, v Ataka America, Inc., et al., Respondents.

Order, SupremeCourt, New York County, entered September 13, 1976, denying plaintiffs’ motion for a preliminary injunction enjoining certain defendants from participating in bankruptcy proceedings in Newfoundland brought against Provincial Refining Company Limited and Newfoundland Refining Company Limited, unanimously affirmed, with $40 costs and disbursements of this appeal to respondents. Although Special Term in its decision incorrectly observed that the plaintiffs no longer have the legal capacity to maintain this action because a trustee in bankruptcy has been appointed for Newfoundland Refining Company Limited and Provincial Refining Company Limited (see *SNR Holdings*v *Ataka Amer.,*54 AD2d 406), the remaining reasons delineated by that court for denying plaintiffs’ motion for a preliminary injunction are persuasive. We are in accord with those views and further observe that "[a] suit in equity will not lie to restrain the prosecution of another action, where the relief asked for in the equity action may be obtained by a proper defense of the action sought to be enjoined” *(Boston & Maine R. R. v Delaware & Hudson Co.,*268 NY 382, 391). This is an application of the time-honored principle that equity should only act to restrain prosecution of a prior suit where the necessity therefor is clearly established. The allegedly champertous assignment and violation of the forum selection clause were interposed as defenses in the Newfoundland proceeding. Any error claimed in that regard must be rectified in Newfoundland. Concur—Lupiano, J. P., Silverman, Markewich and Yesawich, JJ.
#### The People of the State of New York, Respondent, v. Luigi D’Marino and Others, Appellants.

Order affirmed. All concur, Kruse, P. J., not sitting.
### §3789n. Transferred

#### **Editorial Notes**

#### Codification

Section 3789n was editorially reclassified as section 10237 of Title 34, Crime Control and Law Enforcement.
### §3057a. Sense of Congress

It is the sense of the Congress that older individuals who are Indians, older individuals who are Alaskan Natives, and older individuals who are Native Hawaiians are a vital resource entitled to all benefits and services available and that such services and benefits should be provided in a manner that preserves and restores their respective dignity, self-respect, and cultural identities.

(Pub. L. 89–73, title VI, §602, as added Pub. L. 100–175, title I, §171, Nov. 29, 1987, 101 Stat. 959; amended Pub. L. 102–375, title IX, §904(a)(20), Sept. 30, 1992, 106 Stat. 1309.)

#### **Editorial Notes**

#### Prior Provisions

A prior section 3057a, Pub. L. 89–73, title VI, §602, as added Pub. L. 95–478, title I, §106, Oct. 18, 1978, 92 Stat. 1549; amended Pub. L. 97–115, §3(d), Dec. 29, 1981, 95 Stat. 1597; Pub. L. 98–459, title VI, §601, Oct. 9, 1984, 98 Stat. 1787, related to eligibility of an Indian tribe for assistance and definitions, prior to the general amendment of this subchapter by Pub. L. 100–175. See section 3057c of this title.

#### Amendments

1992—Pub. L. 102–375 substituted "older individuals who are Indians, older individuals who are Alaskan Natives, and older individuals who are Native Hawaiians" for "older Indians, older Alaskan Natives, and older Native Hawaiians".

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

#### Effective Date

Section effective Oct. 1, 1987, except not applicable with respect to any area plan submitted under section 3026(a) of this title or any State plan submitted under section 3027(a) of this title and approved for any fiscal year beginning before Nov. 29, 1987, see section 701(a), (b) of Pub. L. 100–175, set out as an Effective Date of 1987 Amendment note under section 3001 of this title.
I 

109TH CONGRESS 

1ST SESSION H. R. 2458 

To require Congress to specify the source of authority under the United 

States Constitution for the enactment of laws, and for other purposes. 

IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES 

MAY 18, 2005 

Mr. SHADEGG (for himself, Mr. OTTER, Mr. HERGER, Mr. SAM JOHNSON of 

Texas, Mr. KOLBE, Mr. SOUDER, Ms. GINNY BROWN-WAITE of Florida, 

Mr. GARRETT of New Jersey, Mrs. JO ANN DAVIS of Virginia, Mr. BARTLETT of Maryland, Mr. KUHL of New York, Mr. PAUL, Mr. HOEKSTRA, 

Mr. DOOLITTLE, Mr. WELDON of Florida, Mr. BACHUS, Mr. TIAHRT, 

Mr. COX, Mr. MILLER of Florida, Mrs. MUSGRAVE, and Mr. GOODE) introduced the following bill; which was referred to the Committee on the 

Judiciary 

A BILL 

To require Congress to specify the source of authority under 

the United States Constitution for the enactment of laws, 

and for other purposes. 

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 ‘‘Enumerated Powers 

5 Act’’. 
2 

•HR 2458 IH 

1 SEC. 2. SPECIFICATION OF CONSTITUTIONAL AUTHORITY 

2 FOR ENACTMENT OF LAW. 

3 (a) CONSTITUTIONAL AUTHORITY FOR THIS ACT.— 

4 This Act is enacted pursuant to the power granted Con5 gress under article I, section 8, clause 18, of the United 

6 States Constitution and the power granted to each House 

7 of Congress under article I, section 5, clause 2, of the 

8 United States Constitution. 

9 (b) CONSTITUTIONAL AUTHORITY STATEMENT RE10 QUIRED.—Chapter 2 of title 1, United States Code, is 

11 amended by inserting after section 102 the following new 

12 section: 

13 ‘‘§ 102a. Constitutional authority clause 

14 ‘‘Each Act of Congress shall contain a concise and 

15 definite statement of the constitutional authority relied 

16 upon for the enactment of each portion of that Act. The 

17 failure to comply with this section shall give rise to a point 

18 of order in either House of Congress. The availability of 

19 this point of order does not affect any other available re20 lief.’’ 

21 (c) CLERICAL AMENDMENT.—The table of sections 

22 at the beginning of chapter 2 of title 1, United States 

23 Code, is amended by inserting after the item relating to 

24 section 102 the following new item: 

‘‘102a. Constitutional authority clause.’’. 

Æ
Exhibit 10.15

 

 

 

July 8, 2019

 

Rachel Bishop

President, Tableware

 

Dear Rachel: 

 

As we have discussed, a critical component of our ongoing business strategy for Reynolds Consumer Products will be to explore opportunities for the business that could lead to an Initial Public Offering (IPO) of the business or potentially a divestiture of the associated business entities. Your assistance is needed by Reynolds as we work through this process to help prepare the business for a successful transaction.  In light of this, we are offering you a special Transaction Success bonus (“Bonus”) that will become payable if a successful IPO is concluded or if there is a sale of the business by June 30, 2020. 

 

If an IPO transaction is completed, your potential bonus will be $412,000. Fifty percent (50%) of this bonus ($206,000) will be paid to you 30 days after the effective date of an IPO, so long as you do not voluntarily leave your employment with the succeeding entity during that time. You will be paid the remaining fifty percent (50%) of this bonus six (6) months after the effective date of an IPO, so long as you do not voluntarily leave your employment with the succeeding entity during that time. This bonus is a gross amount and is subject to all applicable tax withholding requirements. This bonus will not be treated as compensation for any purpose under any benefit plans or programs, unless statutorily required. 

 

If a sales transaction is completed, your potential bonus will be $618,000. Fifty percent (50%) of this bonus ($309,000) will be paid to you 30 days after the effective closing date of a sale, so long as you do not voluntarily leave your employment with the succeeding entity during that time. You will be paid the remaining fifty percent (50%) of this bonus six (6) months after the closing date, so long as you do not voluntarily leave your employment with the succeeding entity during that time. This bonus is a gross amount and is subject to all applicable tax withholding requirements. This bonus will not be treated as compensation for any purpose under any benefit plans or programs, unless statutorily required. 

 

Because of the significance of this strategic effort, and given that you are one of a select group of employees to be offered this opportunity, it is of utmost importance that you keep this offer and all its terms entirely confidential. 

 

Thank you for your willingness to assist the team during this endeavor and for your help in ensuring the success of this very important process for Reynolds Consumer Products. 

 

Sincerely, 

 

//s// Lance Mitchell

Chief Executive Officer

Reynolds Consumer Products
1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

26

27

28

United States District Court

For the Northern District of California

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

VIOLETTA HOANG, et al.,

Plaintiffs,

 v.

REUNION.COM, INC.,

Defendant

 /

No. C-08-3518 MMC

ORDER AFFORDING PLAINTIFFS

OPPORTUNITY TO FILE RESPONSE TO

DEFENDANT’S APPLICATION TO STAY

DISCOVERY PENDING APPEAL

Before the Court is defendant’s “Ex Parte Application to Stay Discovery Pending

Appeal,” filed April 15, 2009. In its application, defendant seeks an order vacating the Case

Management Conference, currently scheduled for May 28, 2010, and staying discovery,

pending resolution of a motion defendant intends to file, by which motion defendant would

seek an order certifying the Court’s March 31, 2010 order for interlocutory appeal.

Having read and considered the Application, the Court finds the matter is not

appropriate for consideration on an ex parte basis, and hereby affords plaintiffs the

opportunity to file, no later than April 30, 2010, a response to the application, and defendant

the opportunity to file, no later than May 7, 2010, a reply.

//

Case 3:08-cv-03518-MMC Document 111 Filed 04/21/10 Page 1 of 2
1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

26

27

28

2

As of May 7, 2010, or the date on which defendant files a reply, whichever is earlier,

the Court will take the matter under submission.

IT IS SO ORDERED.

Dated: April 21, 2010 

MAXINE M. CHESNEY

United States District Judge

Case 3:08-cv-03518-MMC Document 111 Filed 04/21/10 Page 2 of 2
```

[Congressional Bills 112th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[H.R. 4427 Introduced in House (IH)]

112th CONGRESS
  2d Session
                                H. R. 4427

  To extend the temporary suspension of duty on Phenyl (4,6-dimethoxy-
                       pyrimidin-2-yl) carbamate.

_______________________________________________________________________

                    IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

                             April 19, 2012

  Mr. Carney introduced the following bill; which was referred to the 
                      Committee on Ways and Means

_______________________________________________________________________

                                 A BILL

 
  To extend the temporary suspension of duty on Phenyl (4,6-dimethoxy-
                       pyrimidin-2-yl) carbamate.

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

SECTION 1. PHENYL (4,6-DIMETHOXY-PYRIMIDIN-2-YL) CARBAMATE.

    (a) In General.--Heading 9902.33.59 of the Harmonized Tariff 
Schedule of the United States (relating to Phenyl (4,6-dimethoxy-
pyrimidin-2-yl) carbamate) is amended by striking ``12/31/2012'' and 
inserting ``12/31/2015''.
    (b) Effective Date.--The amendments made by subsection (a) apply 
with respect to goods entered, or withdrawn from warehouse for 
consumption, on or after the 15th day after the date of enactment of 
this Act.
                                 <all>
```