alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
Exhibit 32

CERTIFICATION OF CHIEF EXECUTIVE OFFICER  AND CHIEF FINANCIAL OFFICER  PURSUANT TO 18 U.S.C. SECTION 1350

In connection with the quarterly report of Cascade Corporation (the "Company") on Form 10-Q for the period ended July 31, 2004 as filed
with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the "Report"), the undersigned certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. section 1350, as adopted pursuant to section 906 of the
Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that:

|/s/ROBERT C. WARREN, JR.Robert C. Warren, Jr. Chief Executive OfficerSeptember 9, 2004 |  |  | 
|-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- |  |  | 
|/s/RICHARD S. ANDERSONRichard S. Anderson Chief Financial OfficeSeptember 9, 2004      |  |  | 

---



QuickLinks
#### 2415.370 Solicitation provision.

The contracting officer shall insert the provision at 2452.215-72, Evaluation of Small Business Participation, in solicitations for contracts that require the use of the FAR clause in 52.219-9, “Small Business Subcontracting Plan,” that will be awarded using the tradeoff source selection process (see FAR 15.101-1).

[77 FR 73527, Dec. 10, 2012]
III 

115TH CONGRESS 

1ST SESSION S. RES. 337 

Designating November 26, 2017, as ‘‘Drive Safer Sunday’’. 

IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES 

NOVEMBER 16, 2017 

Mr. ISAKSON (for himself, Mr. COONS, and Mr. PERDUE) submitted the 

following resolution; which was considered and agreed to 

RESOLUTION 

Designating November 26, 2017, as ‘‘Drive Safer Sunday’’. 

Whereas motor vehicle travel is the primary means of transportation in the United States; 

Whereas every individual traveling on roads and highways 

should drive in a safe manner so as to reduce deaths and 

injuries that result from motor vehicle accidents; 

Whereas, according to the National Highway Traffic Safety 

Administration, wearing a seat belt saves as many as 

15,000 lives each year; and 

Whereas the Sunday after Thanksgiving is the busiest highway traffic day of the year: Now, therefore, be it 

1 Resolved, That the Senate— 

2 (1) encourages— 


dlhill on DSK3GLQ082PROD with BILLS
2 

•SRES 337 ATS 

1 (A) high schools, colleges, universities, ad2 ministrators, teachers, primary schools, and 

3 secondary schools to launch campus-wide edu4 cational campaigns to urge students to focus on 

5 safety when driving; 

6 (B) national trucking firms— 

7 (i) to alert employee drivers to be es8 pecially focused on driving safely on the 

9 Sunday after Thanksgiving; and 

10 (ii) to publicize the importance of 

11 driving safely on the Sunday after Thanks12 giving on the Citizens Band Radio Service 

13 and at truck stops across the United 

14 States; 

15 (C) clergies to remind congregations to 

16 travel safely when attending services and gath17 erings; 

18 (D) law enforcement personnel to remind 

19 drivers and passengers to drive safely, particu20 larly on the Sunday after Thanksgiving; 

21 (E) motorists to drive safely during the 

22 holiday season and throughout the rest of the 

23 year; and 

24 (F) the people of the United States— 


dlhill on DSK3GLQ082PROD with BILLS
3 

•SRES 337 ATS 

1 (i) to understand the life-saving im2 portance of wearing a seat belt; and 

3 (ii) to educate themselves about high4 way safety; and 

5 (2) designates November 26, 2017, as ‘‘Drive 

6 Safer Sunday’’. 

Æ 


dlhill on DSK3GLQ082PROD with BILLS
* 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 April 24, 2003 Charles R. Fulbruge III Clerk IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT

No. 02-41181 Conference Calendar

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Plaintiff-Appellee,

versus JESUS RAMIREZ-GONZALEZ, Defendant-Appellant.

-------------------- Appeal from the United States District Court for the Southern District of Texas USDC No. B-02-CR-268-1

-------------------- Before DAVIS, BARKSDALE, and STEWART, Circuit Judges.
PER CURIAM: * Jesus Ramirez-Gonzalez appeals his guilty-plea conviction and sentence for illegally reentering the United States after a previous deportation subsequent to a conviction for an aggravated felony in violation of 8 U.S.C. § 1326(a) and (b). Ramirez argues that the district court erred when it increased his offense level by sixteen levels pursuant to U.S.S.G. § 2L1.2(b)(1)(A)(vii) due to his prior conviction for transporting undocumented aliens within the United States, whichNo. 02-41181 -2- he contends is not an alien smuggling offense. He acknowledges that this argument is foreclosed by United States v. SolisCampozano , 312 F.3d 164 (5th Cir. 2002), petition for cert. filed , (U.S. Mar. 6, 2003)(No. 02-9474), but seeks to preserve the issue for possible further review. In Solis-Campozano , 312 F.3d at 167-68, we held that the term “alien smuggling offense,” as used in U.S.S.G. § 2L1.2(b)(1)(A) includes the offense of transporting aliens within the United States. Thus, the 16-level increase to Ramirez’s offense level was not error. Ramirez argues for the first time on appeal that the “felony” and “aggravated felony” provisions of 8 U.S.C. § 1326(b) are unconstitutional because a prior felony conviction is an element of the offense of illegal re-entry, and not merely a sentence enhancement, and should have been charged in the indictment and proven beyond a reasonable doubt. He acknowledges that his argument is foreclosed by the Supreme Court’s decision in Almendarez-Torres v. United States , 523 U.S. 224, 239-47 (1998), but seeks to preserve it for possible further review in light of Apprendi v. New Jersey , 530 U.S. 466, 490 (2000). Apprendi did not overrule Almendarez-Torres

. See Apprendi , 530 U.S. at 489-90. We must follow Almendarez-Torres “unless and until the Supreme Court itself determines to overrule it.” United States v. Dabeit , 231 F.3d 979, 984 (5th Cir. 2000) (internal quotation marks and citation omitted). Accordingly, the judgment of the district court is AFFIRMED.
III 

115TH CONGRESS 

1ST SESSION S. RES. 295 

Designating October 2017 as ‘‘National Employee Ownership Month’’. 

IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES 

OCTOBER 19, 2017 

Ms. BALDWIN (for herself, Mr. ROBERTS, Mr. BROWN, Ms. HASSAN, Mr. 

FRANKEN, Mr. MORAN, Mrs. MURRAY, Mr. SANDERS, Mrs. SHAHEEN, 

Mr. YOUNG, and Mr. KING) submitted the following resolution; which was 

referred to the Committee on the Judiciary 

RESOLUTION 

Designating October 2017 as ‘‘National Employee Ownership 

Month’’. 

Whereas employee-owned companies give workers a voice in 

corporate governance, and that voice helps the long-term 

well-being of the company; 

Whereas employee-owned companies often outperform nonemployee-owned companies and show greater resiliency 

during challenging economic conditions; 

Whereas employee-owned companies face lower staff turnover, 

and workers experience greater job security at those companies; 

Whereas employee-owners feel better prepared to cover the 

expenses of life and retire with a greater sense of financial security; and 


dlhill on DSK3GLQ082PROD with BILLS
2 

•SRES 295 IS 

Whereas employee-owned companies have a rich history in 

communities across the United States: Now, therefore, be 

it 

1 Resolved, That the Senate— 

2 (1) designates October 2017 as ‘‘National Em3 ployee Ownership Month’’; 

4 (2) supports employee-owned businesses; and 

5 (3) acknowledges that employee-owned compa6 nies have a positive impact on workers, businesses, 

7 and communities. 

Æ 


dlhill on DSK3GLQ082PROD with BILLS
FIRST DISTRICT COURT OF APPEAL

STATE OF FLORIDA

_____________________________

No. 1D2022-3268

_____________________________

LUTHER ARTHUR HORN, III,

Appellant,

v.

STATE OF FLORIDA,

Appellee.

_____________________________

On appeal from the Circuit Court for Walton County.

David W. Green, Judge.

June 7, 2024

PER CURIAM.

AFFIRMED. 

LEWIS, ROBERTS, and RAY, JJ., concur.

_____________________________

Not final until disposition of any timely and 

authorized motion under Fla. R. App. P. 9.330 or 

9.331.

_____________________________

Luther Arthur Horn, III, pro se, Appellant.
2

Ashley Moody, Attorney General, and Anne C. Conley, Assistant 

Attorney General, Tallahassee, for Appellee.
#### In the Matter of the Commissioner of Social Services of the City of New York, as Assignee of Denise W., Respondent, v Robert M., Appellant.

In a filiation proceeding, the appeal (by permission) is from an order of the Family Court, Kings County, dated April 10, 1978, which denied appellant’s motion for an examination before trial of the petitioner and her assignor. Order reversed, on the law, and motion granted, without costs or disbursements. The examination shall proceed at a time and place to be fixed in a written notice of not less than 20 days to be given by the appellant, or at such time and place as the parties may agree. Appellant is entitled to an examination before trial as of right without the necessity of showing special circumstances (see *Matter of Maureen E. O’H. v Nicholas C.,*65 AD2d 491). Damiani, J. P., Suozzi, Lazer and Rabin, JJ., concur.
#### William Stephan, Respondent, v. 163-13th Street Realty Corp., Appellant.

In a personal injury action, the defendant appeals from an order of the Supreme Court, Nassau County, dated March 18, 1963, which denied its motion to dismiss the complaint for lack of prosecution. Order reversed, without costs; defendant’s motion granted and complaint dismissed, without costs. Under the circumstances here, it was an improvident exercise of discretion to deny the motion to dismiss the complaint. Kleinfeld, Acting P. J., Brennan, Hill, Rabin and Hopkins, JJ., concur.
#### 28.311-2 Agency solicitation provisions and contract clauses.

Agencies may prescribe their own solicitation provisions and contract clauses to implement the basic policies contained in this subpart 28.3.

[55 FR 52793, Dec. 21, 1990. Redesignated at 61 FR 2639, Jan. 26, 1996]
NOT FOR PUBLICATION IN WEST'S HAWAI I REPORTS AND PACIFIC REPORTER

NO. CAAP-22-0000406

IN THE INTERMEDIATE COURT OF APPEALS OF THE STATE OF HAWAI I
JEFFREY SCOTT GOOLD, Plaintiff-Appellant, v. HAWAIIAN ELECTRIC COMPANY, INC.; HAWAIIAN ELECTRIC INDUSTRIES, INC.; ELIZABETH DEER; SHANA M. BUCO, Defendants-Appellees, and JOHN DOES 1-10; JANE DOES 1-10; DOE CORPORATIONS 1-10; DOE PARTNERSHIPS 1-10; DOE ENTITIES 1-10; and DOE GOVERNMENTAL ENTITIES 1-10, Defendants

APPEAL FROM THE CIRCUIT COURT OF THE FIRST CIRCUIT

(CIVIL NO. 1CCV-21-0000216)

ORDER GRANTING MOTION TO DISMISS APPEAL (By: Wadsworth, Presiding Judge, Nakasone and Chan, JJ.)Upon consideration of self-represented PlaintiffAppellant Jeffrey Scott Goold's (Goold) May 15, 2023 Motion for Reconsideration, the papers in support, and the record, it appears that Goold seeks reconsideration of the May 10, 2023 Order, but Goold fails to demonstrate that the court overlooked or misapprehended any point of law or fact. Hawai i Rules of Appellate Procedure (HRAP) Rule 40(b). Further, Goold states that if the court declines his request for reconsideration, then he requests the court to approve his proposed stipulation to dismiss the appeal with prejudice, attached to the motion for reconsideration, with each party bearing its own attorneys' fees and costs, under HRAP Rule 42(b). Neither Goold nor counsel for Electronically Filed Intermediate Court of Appeals CAAP-22-0000406 24-MAY-2023 08:26 AM Dkt. 162 OGMDNOT FOR PUBLICATION IN WEST'S HAWAI I REPORTS AND PACIFIC REPORTER

any other party in the appeal signed or dated Goold's proposed stipulation. Nonetheless, the court will construe the proposed stipulation as a motion to dismiss the appeal, under HRAP Rule 42(b), and grant the requested relief.

Therefore, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that the motion for reconsideration is denied, and the motion to dismiss the appeal is granted. The appeal is dismissed with prejudice. The parties shall bear their own attorneys' fees and costs on appeal.

DATED: Honolulu, Hawai i, May 24, 2023. /s/ Clyde J. Wadsworth Presiding Judge /s/ Karen T. Nakasone Associate Judge /s/ Derrick H.M. Chan Associate Judge

2
<PAGE>

                  GENWORTH LIFE INSURANCE COMPANY OF NEW YORK
                      OPTIONAL DEATH PROCEEDS ENDORSEMENT
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

This endorsement is effective on the Contract Date. It amends the Death
Provisions section by deleting the Amount Payable When Death Occurs Before
Annuity Commencement Date provision and adding the following:

Amount Payable When Death Occurs Before Annuity Commencement Date

Amount Payable upon the Death of an Owner or Joint Owner Who Is Not Also an
Annuitant: The amount payable is the Contract Value on the first Valuation Day
that we have received Proof of Death.

Death Benefit provisions upon the Death of an Annuitant or Joint Annuitant: The
amount payable (the "Death Benefit") is the greater of (a) and (b), where:

     (a) is Purchase Payments adjusted as stated below for any withdrawals and
         premium tax; and

     (b) is the Contract Value on the first Valuation Day that we have received
         Proof of Death.

Withdrawals reduce the Death Benefit proportionally by the same percentage that
the withdrawal, including any surrender charges and premium taxes, reduces the
Contract Value.

For Genworth Life Insurance Company of New York,

                                                  /s/ David J. Sloane
                                                  ------------------------------
                                                  [David J. Sloane]
                                                  President

                                      1
#### In re CARR. In the matter of the application of Reid L. Carr for admission to the bar.

(Supreme Court, Appellate Division, Second Department.

November 25, 1903.)

No opinion. Application granted.
29.203 Other Federal tax exemptions. ( a ) Pursuant to 26 U.S.C. 4293, the Secretary of the Treasury has exempted the United States from the communications excise tax imposed in 26 U.S.C. 4251, when the supplies and services are for the exclusive use of the United States. (Secretarial Authorization, June 20, 1947, Internal Revenue Cumulative Bulletin, 1947-1, 205.)
( b ) Pursuant to 26 U.S.C. 4483(b), the Secretary of the Treasury has exempted the United States from the federal highway vehicle users tax imposed in 26 U.S.C. 4481. The exemption applies whether the vehicle is owned or leased by the United States. (Secretarial Authorization, Internal Revenue Cumulative Bulletin, 1956-2, 1369.)
[53 FR 662, Jan. 11, 1988]
#### In the Matter of Irene Pierce Weiss, Petitioner.

The petitioner’s application for admission to the Bar of this State had been previously denied by order of this court, dated June 5, 1961, on the ground that she lacked the requisite character and fitness for an attorney and counselor at law. Petitioner now moves for a hearing and determination *de novo*of her said application or, in the alternative, to vacate the prior order on the ground that it was made in violation of her constitutional rights to due process of law as outlined in the recent decision of the Supreme Court of the United States *(Willner*v. *Committee on Character,*373 U. S. 96). Upon the court’s own motion, petitioner’s original application for admission to the Bar is remitted to the Committee on Character and Fitness for the purpose of making a report to this court which shall contain, *inter alia,*appropriate findings, based upon the entire record, reciting the specific reasons for the Committee’s conclusion that the petitioner lacked the requisite character and fitness. Within 10 days after the filing of such report the Committee is directed to serve a copy thereof upon the petitioner’s attorney. Within 20 days thereafter the petitioner may make in this court such motion addressed to the Committee’s report and *964its findings, as petitioner may be advised. Pending the filing of the Committee’s report and the making of any motion addressed thereto, the court will hold in abeyance the petitioner’s present motion. Beldock, P. J., Ughetta, Christ, Rabin and Hopkins, JJ., concur.
Performance Reports

At the end of the project period, grantees must submit a final performance report, including financial information, as directed by the Secretary. The Secretary may also require more frequent performance reports under 34 CFR 75.720(c).

FIPSE Home
# C_2017222EN.01000401.xml

| 11.7.2017 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 222/4 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

11.7.2017

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 222/4

---

Euro exchange rates (1)

1

10 July 2017

(2017/C 222/06)

1 euro =

1 euro =

| | Currency | Exchange rate |
| --- | --- | --- |
| USD | US dollar | 1,1387 |
| JPY | Japanese yen | 129,98 |
| DKK | Danish krone | 7,4366 |
| GBP | Pound sterling | 0,88443 |
| SEK | Swedish krona | 9,6175 |
| CHF | Swiss franc | 1,1007 |
| ISK | Iceland króna | |
| NOK | Norwegian krone | 9,5165 |
| BGN | Bulgarian lev | 1,9558 |
| CZK | Czech koruna | 26,096 |
| HUF | Hungarian forint | 307,99 |
| PLN | Polish zloty | 4,2340 |
| RON | Romanian leu | 4,5698 |
| TRY | Turkish lira | 4,1122 |
| AUD | Australian dollar | 1,4999 |
| CAD | Canadian dollar | 1,4703 |
| HKD | Hong Kong dollar | 8,8973 |
| NZD | New Zealand dollar | 1,5663 |
| SGD | Singapore dollar | 1,5783 |
| KRW | South Korean won | 1 309,36 |
| ZAR | South African rand | 15,2130 |
| CNY | Chinese yuan renminbi | 7,7484 |
| HRK | Croatian kuna | 7,4043 |
| IDR | Indonesian rupiah | 15 257,44 |
| MYR | Malaysian ringgit | 4,8900 |
| PHP | Philippine peso | 57,930 |
| RUB | Russian rouble | 68,8648 |
| THB | Thai baht | 38,852 |
| BRL | Brazilian real | 3,7292 |
| MXN | Mexican peso | 20,4881 |
| INR | Indian rupee | 73,4405 |

Currency

Exchange rate

USD

US dollar

1,1387

JPY

Japanese yen

129,98

DKK

Danish krone

7,4366

GBP

Pound sterling

0,88443

SEK

Swedish krona

9,6175

CHF

Swiss franc

1,1007

ISK

Iceland króna

NOK

Norwegian krone

9,5165

BGN

Bulgarian lev

1,9558

CZK

Czech koruna

26,096

HUF

Hungarian forint

307,99

PLN

Polish zloty

4,2340

RON

Romanian leu

4,5698

TRY

Turkish lira

4,1122

AUD

Australian dollar

1,4999

CAD

Canadian dollar

1,4703

HKD

Hong Kong dollar

8,8973

NZD

New Zealand dollar

1,5663

SGD

Singapore dollar

1,5783

KRW

South Korean won

1 309,36

ZAR

South African rand

15,2130

CNY

Chinese yuan renminbi

7,7484

HRK

Croatian kuna

7,4043

IDR

Indonesian rupiah

15 257,44

MYR

Malaysian ringgit

4,8900

PHP

Philippine peso

57,930

RUB

Russian rouble

68,8648

THB

Thai baht

38,852

BRL

Brazilian real

3,7292

MXN

Mexican peso

20,4881

INR

Indian rupee

73,4405

---

(1)  Source: reference exchange rate published by the ECB.

1

Source

---
# C_2017348EN.01000501.xml

| 17.10.2017 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 348/5 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

17.10.2017

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 348/5

---

Euro exchange rates (1)

1

16 October 2017

(2017/C 348/07)

1 euro =

1 euro =

| | Currency | Exchange rate |
| --- | --- | --- |
| USD | US dollar | 1,1803 |
| JPY | Japanese yen | 131,99 |
| DKK | Danish krone | 7,4439 |
| GBP | Pound sterling | 0,88753 |
| SEK | Swedish krona | 9,5885 |
| CHF | Swiss franc | 1,1514 |
| ISK | Iceland króna | |
| NOK | Norwegian krone | 9,3133 |
| BGN | Bulgarian lev | 1,9558 |
| CZK | Czech koruna | 25,770 |
| HUF | Hungarian forint | 307,53 |
| PLN | Polish zloty | 4,2378 |
| RON | Romanian leu | 4,5838 |
| TRY | Turkish lira | 4,2975 |
| AUD | Australian dollar | 1,4996 |
| CAD | Canadian dollar | 1,4800 |
| HKD | Hong Kong dollar | 9,2170 |
| NZD | New Zealand dollar | 1,6420 |
| SGD | Singapore dollar | 1,5956 |
| KRW | South Korean won | 1 330,09 |
| ZAR | South African rand | 15,7169 |
| CNY | Chinese yuan renminbi | 7,7782 |
| HRK | Croatian kuna | 7,5038 |
| IDR | Indonesian rupiah | 15 913,39 |
| MYR | Malaysian ringgit | 4,9773 |
| PHP | Philippine peso | 60,499 |
| RUB | Russian rouble | 67,4780 |
| THB | Thai baht | 39,021 |
| BRL | Brazilian real | 3,7304 |
| MXN | Mexican peso | 22,4931 |
| INR | Indian rupee | 76,4155 |

Currency

Exchange rate

USD

US dollar

1,1803

JPY

Japanese yen

131,99

DKK

Danish krone

7,4439

GBP

Pound sterling

0,88753

SEK

Swedish krona

9,5885

CHF

Swiss franc

1,1514

ISK

Iceland króna

NOK

Norwegian krone

9,3133

BGN

Bulgarian lev

1,9558

CZK

Czech koruna

25,770

HUF

Hungarian forint

307,53

PLN

Polish zloty

4,2378

RON

Romanian leu

4,5838

TRY

Turkish lira

4,2975

AUD

Australian dollar

1,4996

CAD

Canadian dollar

1,4800

HKD

Hong Kong dollar

9,2170

NZD

New Zealand dollar

1,6420

SGD

Singapore dollar

1,5956

KRW

South Korean won

1 330,09

ZAR

South African rand

15,7169

CNY

Chinese yuan renminbi

7,7782

HRK

Croatian kuna

7,5038

IDR

Indonesian rupiah

15 913,39

MYR

Malaysian ringgit

4,9773

PHP

Philippine peso

60,499

RUB

Russian rouble

67,4780

THB

Thai baht

39,021

BRL

Brazilian real

3,7304

MXN

Mexican peso

22,4931

INR

Indian rupee

76,4155

---

(1)  Source: reference exchange rate published by the ECB.

1

Source

---
Color photo—Small

Color photo—Large

Color photo—Print quality

Black and white photo—Small

Black and white photo—Large

Black and white photo—Print quality
Case: 1:12-cv-02282 Document #: 21 Filed: 08/27/12 Page 1 of 10 PageID #:105
Case: 1:12-cv-02282 Document #: 21 Filed: 08/27/12 Page 2 of 10 PageID #:106
Case: 1:12-cv-02282 Document #: 21 Filed: 08/27/12 Page 3 of 10 PageID #:107
Case: 1:12-cv-02282 Document #: 21 Filed: 08/27/12 Page 4 of 10 PageID #:108
Case: 1:12-cv-02282 Document #: 21 Filed: 08/27/12 Page 5 of 10 PageID #:109
Case: 1:12-cv-02282 Document #: 21 Filed: 08/27/12 Page 6 of 10 PageID #:110
Case: 1:12-cv-02282 Document #: 21 Filed: 08/27/12 Page 7 of 10 PageID #:111
Case: 1:12-cv-02282 Document #: 21 Filed: 08/27/12 Page 8 of 10 PageID #:112
Case: 1:12-cv-02282 Document #: 21 Filed: 08/27/12 Page 9 of 10 PageID #:113
Case: 1:12-cv-02282 Document #: 21 Filed: 08/27/12 Page 10 of 10 PageID #:114