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

Certification of CEO 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 on Form 10-Q of Ambac Financial Group, Inc. (the Company) for the period ended June 30, 2011, as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the Report), Diana N. Adams , as Chief
Executive Officer of the Company, hereby certifies, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. § 1350, as adopted pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that, to the best of his knowledge:

(1) The Report fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934; and

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



|                   |  |                                      
|------------------ |  | -------------------------------------
|/s/ Diana N. Adams
|Name:              |  | Diana N. Adams                       
|Title:             |  | President and Chief Executive Officer
|Date:              |  | August 9, 2011
No. 61013.

#### American Express Co. *v.*United States,

protest 292343-K/8317 (Chicago).

Opinion by

Johnson, J.

In accordance with rule 5 (b) of the rules of this court, as amended, the protest was dismissed for lack of prosecution.
# Delegation of Authority Under Section 404(c) of the Child Soldiers Prevention Act of 2008

# Memorandum for the Secretary of State

                        By the authority vested in me as President by the Constitution and the laws of the United States of America, including section 301 of title 3, United States Code, I hereby delegate to the Secretary of State for Fiscal Year 2024 the authority under section 404(c)(1) of the Child Soldiers Prevention Act of 2008 (22 U.S.C. 2370c-1(c)(1)) (CSPA) to waive the application of the prohibition in section 404(a) of the CSPA with respect to Rwanda, to waive the application of the prohibition in section 404(a) of the CSPA with respect to Turkey to allow for the provision of Foreign Military Financing and Excess Defense Articles, and to make the determination and certification necessary for such waivers. I hereby also delegate to the Secretary of State the authority under section 404(c)(2) of the CSPA to notify the appropriate congressional committees of such waivers and the justification for granting such waivers, and to publish the determination for such waivers in the                         *Federal Register*.                    

                        You are hereby authorized and directed to publish this memorandum in the                         *Federal Register*.                    

[FR Doc. 2023-21372

Billing code 4710-10-P
[PROPOSED} ORDER CONTINUING TRIAL 

No. CR 05-00379 MJP 

Page 1 of 2

Skellenger Bender, PS

1301 - Fifth Avenue, Suite 3401 

Seattle, Washington 98101-2605 

(206) 623-6501 

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

010707 00101 hk179902 

The Honorable Marsha J. Pechman 

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 

WESTERN DISTRICT OF WASHINGTON 

AT SEATTLE 

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, 

Plaintiff, 

 v. 

SCOTT LINFORD STIRKINS, 

Defendant. 

CR 05-00379 MJP 

 ORDER CONTINUING TRIAL DATE 

AND PRETRIAL MOTIONS DEADLINE 

ORDER

THIS MATTER COMES before the Court on the stipulation of the parties requesting 

an Order setting a new trial date. Having considered the stipulation of the parties and all of 

the files and records herein, 

THE COURT FINDS AS FOLLOWS: 

 1. Failure to grant a continuance in this case will deny defense counsel the 

reasonable time necessary for effective preparation for trial and other pretrial proceedings, 

taking into account the exercise of due diligence; and 

 2. The ends of justice served by granting this continuance outweigh the best 

interest of the public and the defendants in a speedier trial; and 

Case 2:05-cr-00379-MJP Document 13 Filed 11/30/05 Page 1 of 2
[PROPOSED} ORDER CONTINUING TRIAL 

No. CR 05-00379 MJP 

Page 2 of 2

Skellenger Bender, PS

1301 - Fifth Avenue, Suite 3401 

Seattle, Washington 98101-2605 

(206) 623-6501 

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

010707 00101 hk179902 

 3. The failure to grant a continuance in the proceeding will likely result in a 

miscarriage of justice; all within the meaning of 18 USC § 3161 (h) (8) (A), (B)(i) and 

(B)(iv). 

THE COURT THEREFORE ORDERS THAT: 

 1. The trial shall be continued from December 27, 2005 to February 6, 2006. 

 2. The Court further orders that all pretrial motions shall be filed on or before 

January 13, 2006. 

 3. The period of time from the current trial date until the new trial date 

encompassed by the continuance shall be excluded from the computation of time under the 

Speedy Trial Act. 

 4. The defendant shall promptly file a speedy trial waiver encompassing the 

excluded time period. 

DATED this 30th day of November, 2005. 

 /S/Marsha J. Pechman 

Hon. Marsha J. Pechman 

 United States District Judge 

Case 2:05-cr-00379-MJP Document 13 Filed 11/30/05 Page 2 of 2
The Honorable Henry Woods, United States District Judge for the Eastern

1

District of Arkansas.

United States Court of Appeals

FOR THE EIGHTH CIRCUIT

___________

No. 97-1300

___________

United States of America, *

*

Appellee, *

* Appeal from the United States

v. * District Court for the 

* Eastern District of Arkansas.

Gary Don Freeman, * [UNPUBLISHED]

*

Appellant. *

___________

Submitted: August 18, 1997

Filed: August 22, 1997

___________

Before FAGG, BOWMAN, and MURPHY, Circuit Judges.

___________

PER CURIAM.

Following multiple drug transactions with an undercover state police

investigator, Gary Don Freeman pleaded guilty to eight counts of distributing cocaine

base and one count of possessing cocaine base with intent to distribute in violation of

21 U.S.C. § 841(a)(1). The district court sentenced him to 124 months imprisonment 1

and 4 years supervised release. On appeal Freeman attacks his sentence and alleges

that the government engaged in sentence manipulation because the undercover 
-2-

investigator, Willie Robinson, entered into repeated transactions with him and

requested powder cocaine be made into crack cocaine. Robinson testified at the

sentencing hearing that he made repeated purchases in an effort to reach Freeman's drug

source, and except for his final purchase, he had always requested and received crack

cocaine from Freeman. Robinson also testified that he succeeded in reaching Freeman's

source, against whom cases were pending. 

After reviewing the record, we find no merit in Freeman's challenge to his

sentence. See United States v. Turner, 93 F.3d 1422, 1423 (8th Cir. 1996) (per

curiam); United States v. Shephard, 4 F.3d 647, 649 (8th Cir. 1993); United States v.

Calva, 979 F.2d 119, 123 (8th Cir. 1992). The judgment of the district court is

affirmed.

A true copy.

Attest:

CLERK, U.S. COURT OF APPEALS, EIGHTH CIRCUIT.
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 ORDER TO SHOW CAUSE - 1

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

WESTERN DISTRICT OF WASHINGTON

AT SEATTLE

THOMAS A. WEBER, 

Plaintiff,

v.

TIME WARNER, INC., et al.,

Defendants.

Case No. C05-1706L

ORDER TO SHOW CAUSE

This matter comes before the Court sua sponte. On December 2, 2005, defendants filed a

response with related documents to plaintiff’s motion for preliminary injunction that, taken as a

whole, exceeds 50 pages in length. (Dkt. #22). As of this date, a courtesy copy of these

documents has not been provided for chambers. 

Defendants are hereby ORDERED to show cause why they should not be sanctioned for

failure to comply with this Court’s Notice of November 10, 2005 requiring courtesy copies of

lengthy filings for chambers. Defendants shall immediately deliver a paper copy of the response

and all supporting documents, with tabs or other organizing aids as necessary and clearly marked

with the words “Courtesy Copy of Electronic Filing for Chambers,” to the Clerk’s Office. 

Case 2:05-cv-01706-RSL Document 26 Filed 12/07/05 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 ORDER TO SHOW CAUSE - 2

Defendants shall respond to this order to show cause no later than five days from the date of this

Order. 

DATED this 7th day of December, 2005.

A

Robert S. Lasnik

United States District Judge

Case 2:05-cv-01706-RSL Document 26 Filed 12/07/05 Page 2 of 2
Case No. 6,490.

#### HILL et al. v. The EMMA PETERSON.

[6 Pa. Law J. 80.]

Circuit Court, E. D. Pennsylvania.

Oct. Term, 1846.

Practice — Appeals—Modification of Decree.

Appeals from the district court to the circuit court on questions of mere fact, or depending on sound discretion, will be discouraged in the circuit court, unless in such cases where reason and. sound policy'require a modification of the decree of the court below.

[Appeal from the district court of the United States for tiie Eastern district of Pennsylvania.

[This was.a libel by Hill and Wheelton against the schooner Emma Peterson, for salvage.]

GRIER, Circuit Justice.

Before proceeding more particularly to notice the merits of this case, I would premise a few remarks indicative of the principles which will hereafter govern this court in cases of appeal from the district court. I am very unwilling to encourage such appeals, and more especially in questions of mere fact, or depending on sound discretion. It would lead to speculation on the temperaments and dispositions of the respective judges, and appeals would be taken on a mere calculation of chances. I have the greater confidence in the cdrrectness of these views, as I find they coincide with, those of the learned Judge Story on the same subject, as expressed by him [Rowe v. The Brig, Case No. 12,093], and which I will adopt in his own words: “Salvage,” says he, “is principally said to rest in the discretion of the court. A discretion, however, which is not to be exercised at the mere arbitrary will of the judge, but as far as possible to be governed by principles of law and sound reason. I confess that I never feel more distressed than when I am called upon to exercise a general and unlimited discretion. In cases of this sort, it can hardly be presumed that different judges, even when possessing equally enlightened and sound judgments, would form precisely the same estimate; and yet it is very desirable to discourage appeals upon slight grounds, or with a view to take the chance of a different opinion. In deciding, therefore, upon the decrees of the district court in cases of salvage, my inquiry^never has been so much whether their allowance was the same as I should originally have made, as whether, under the circumstances of the case, justice and sound policy clearly indicate a different measure; and distrusting my own judgment, I have, on all occasions, to apply the spirit of those decisions which a higher tribunal has recognized and enforced, and to follow in the path of authorities, rather than venture upon new and untried courses of my own.” If this case, therefore, had been one in which the property libelled had clearly been shown to have been derelict and abandoned, I should have affirmed the decree of the district court, even though I had considered the salvage allowed either more or less than I would have originally decreed. But I am constrained to believe, after a careful examination of this case, that justice and sound policy require some modification of the decree of the district court
<TABLE> <S> <C>


<ARTICLE>                     5
<LEGEND>
     (Replace this text with the legend)
</LEGEND>
<CIK>                         0000874971                         
<NAME>                        BERTUCCI'S, INC.
<MULTIPLIER>                                   1000
       
<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   6-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                              DEC-27-1997
<PERIOD-END>                                   JUL-12-1997
<CASH>                                           5,004
<SECURITIES>                                         0
<RECEIVABLES>                                      335
<ALLOWANCES>                                         0
<INVENTORY>                                      1,085
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                                 8,439
<PP&E>                                         124,556
<DEPRECIATION>                                  34,199
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                 101,918
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                           11,553
<BONDS>                                              0
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                            44
<OTHER-SE>                                      69,367
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                   101,918
<SALES>                                         71,980
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                                71,980
<CGS>                                           17,947
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                   17,947
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                46,306
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                     0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                                 614
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                  2,781
<INCOME-TAX>                                     1,015
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                              1,767
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                     1,767
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                     0.20
<EPS-DILUTED>                                     0.20
        


</TABLE>
From: lgossen23@omega1w.net

To: E-OHPSCA2713.EBSA

Subject: Comment: RIN 1210-AB44

Date: Wednesday, September 07, 2011 5:08:29 PM

To Whom It May Concern:

I am writing today to ask in the strongest way possible that you rescind the unjust and coercive

mandate that all "contraceptives" and sterilization procedures be covered by private health insurance

with no co-pay to patients. If you do not reverse course I ask you to expand conscience protections for

any organizations that provide individual and group insurance and have moral or religious objections. I

strongly oppose the government forcing free insurance coverage on Americans especially for drugs and

devices that I oppose because some of these can cause an abortion (such as ella and Plan B).

I also ask you to reconsider your definition of religious employer and offer an authentic conscience

protection for any organization and business that has moral or religious objection to providing such

insurance to their employees. This legal mandate clearly violates the spirit of conscience laws which

prohibit government discrimination against those who object to various health services on moral or

religious grounds. The definition of "religious employer" in the regulation is so narrow as to only include

churches, but will still mean that a host of businesses and organizations that have conscience objections

will be required to choose between either violating their conscience or not being able to offer employees

health insurance.

Please protect the conscience rights of insurers, providers and people like me who object to being

forced by the federal government to offer or subsidize contraceptives and sterilization services, especially

when some of these drugs can take the life of early unborn children. No Americans should be forced by

the federal government to essentially subsidize services they object to. I again urge you in the strongest

way possible to reverse course and remove contraceptives and sterilizations from the list of mandatory

preventive services.

Sincerely,

LeAnn Gossen

Corn, OK 73024
From: galesdorroh@hotmail.com

To: E-OHPSCA2713.EBSA

Subject: Comment: RIN 1210-AB44

Date: Wednesday, September 07, 2011 1:01:12 PM

To Whom It May Concern:

I am writing today to ask in the strongest way possible that you rescind the unjust and coercive

mandate that all "contraceptives" and sterilization procedures be covered by private health insurance

with no co-pay to patients. If you do not reverse course I ask you to expand conscience protections for

any organizations that provide individual and group insurance and have moral or religious objections. I

strongly oppose the government forcing free insurance coverage on Americans especially for drugs and

devices that I oppose because some of these can cause an abortion (such as ella and Plan B).

I also ask you to reconsider your definition of religious employer and offer an authentic conscience

protection for any organization and business that has moral or religious objection to providing such

insurance to their employees. This legal mandate clearly violates the spirit of conscience laws which

prohibit government discrimination against those who object to various health services on moral or

religious grounds. The definition of "religious employer" in the regulation is so narrow as to only include

churches, but will still mean that a host of businesses and organizations that have conscience objections

will be required to choose between either violating their conscience or not being able to offer employees

health insurance.

Please protect the conscience rights of insurers, providers and people like me who object to being

forced by the federal government to offer or subsidize contraceptives and sterilization services, especially

when some of these drugs can take the life of early unborn children. No Americans should be forced by

the federal government to essentially subsidize services they object to. I again urge you in the strongest

way possible to reverse course and remove contraceptives and sterilizations from the list of mandatory

preventive services.

Sincerely,

Gale Dorroh

Grenada, MS 38901
From: dmcmin1@aol.com

To: E-OHPSCA2713.EBSA

Subject: Comment: RIN 1210-AB44

Date: Wednesday, September 07, 2011 4:36:47 PM

To Whom It May Concern:

I am writing today to ask in the strongest way possible that you rescind the unjust and coercive

mandate that all "contraceptives" and sterilization procedures be covered by private health insurance

with no co-pay to patients. If you do not reverse course I ask you to expand conscience protections for

any organizations that provide individual and group insurance and have moral or religious objections. I

strongly oppose the government forcing free insurance coverage on Americans especially for drugs and

devices that I oppose because some of these can cause an abortion (such as ella and Plan B).

I also ask you to reconsider your definition of religious employer and offer an authentic conscience

protection for any organization and business that has moral or religious objection to providing such

insurance to their employees. This legal mandate clearly violates the spirit of conscience laws which

prohibit government discrimination against those who object to various health services on moral or

religious grounds. The definition of "religious employer" in the regulation is so narrow as to only include

churches, but will still mean that a host of businesses and organizations that have conscience objections

will be required to choose between either violating their conscience or not being able to offer employees

health insurance.

Please protect the conscience rights of insurers, providers and people like me who object to being

forced by the federal government to offer or subsidize contraceptives and sterilization services, especially

when some of these drugs can take the life of early unborn children. No Americans should be forced by

the federal government to essentially subsidize services they object to. I again urge you in the strongest

way possible to reverse course and remove contraceptives and sterilizations from the list of mandatory

preventive services.

Sincerely,

Dean Costas

Lewes, DE 19958
From: dssheard@zoominternet.net

To: E-OHPSCA2713.EBSA

Subject: Against RIN 1210-AB44

Date: Wednesday, September 07, 2011 4:39:56 PM

To Whom It May Concern:

I am categorically against paying for other people's abortions. Why should my values be violated by the

government who dumps on me the obligation to pay for someone's abortion.

Nothing is free. Who pays for contraceptives and serializations? Other members of the group's plan.

In other words, everyone pays but the one who wants the procedure. How fair is that?

Dr. Daniel Sheard

Sincerely,

Daniel Sheard

Rising Sun, MD 21911
Larry Greene AIR POLLUTION CONTROL OFFICER

777 12th Street, 3rd Floor * Sacramento, CA 95814-1908 

916/874-4800 * 916/874-4899 fax 

www.airquality.org 

December 5, 2011 

Mr. Michael Guzzetta 

Stationary Source Division 

California Air Resources Board 

PO Box 2815 

Sacramento, CA 95812 

Subject: State Implementation Plan Revision, Negative Declaration for CTG for Coating 

Operations at Aerospace Manufacturing and Rework Operations (U.S. EPA 

Publication No. EPA-453/R-97-004, December 1997) 

Dear Mr. Guzzetta: 

Enclosed is the information necessary for submittal of a revision to the State Implementation 

Plan. On October 27, 2011, the SMAQMD Board of Directors adopted a negative declaration, 

finding that there are no District sources to which the following Control Techniques Guidelines 

document (CTG) applies: 

Guideline Series: Control of Volatile Organic Compound Emissions from Coating 

Operations at Aerospace Manufacturing and Rework Operations. U.S. EPA Publication 

No. EPA-453/R-97-004, December 1997. 

Clean Air Act Section 182(b)(2)(A) requires states/districts to revise their SIPs to include RACT 

for sources of VOC emissions for each category of VOC sources covered by all CTG 

documents issued after November 15, 1990, and prior to the area’s date of attainment. This 

negative declaration is being submitted in lieu of a RACT rule. 

Pursuant to 40 CFR 51.102, a notice was prominently displayed on the District’s web site, 

providing a 30-day period for the public to request a public hearing. The notice procedure is 

consistent with the U.S. EPA Office of Air and Radiation Memo to Regional Administrators, 

“Regional Consistency for the Administrative Requirements of State Implementation Plan 

Submittals and the Use of ‘Letter Notices’,” April 6, 2011. No request for a hearing was 

received during the 30-day period. Therefore, the public hearing was cancelled and the 

negative declaration was adopted. 

Please forward the information for this submittal to U.S. EPA. If you have any comments or 

questions, please contact me at (916) 874-4851. 

Sincerely, 

Kevin J. Williams, Ph.D. 

Program Coordinator 

(sent via e-mail) 

Attachments: 
Mr. Michael Guzzetta 

December 5, 2011 

Page 2 

1. SIP Checklist 

2. Negative Declaration for the Aerospace Coating CTG 

3. Public Notice Evidence 

4. Resolution 

5. Rule Evaluation Form 

6. Staff Report