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



CERTIFICATION OF CHIEF EXECUTIVE OFFICER

PURSUANT TO

SECTION 906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT
OF 2002 (18 U.S.C. 1350)



In connection with the Quarterly Report
on Form 10-Q for the period ended March 31, 2013 (the “Report”) of TICC Capital Corp. (the “Registrant”),
as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof, I, Jonathan H. Cohen, the Chief Executive Officer of the
Registrant, hereby certify, to the best of my knowledge, that:



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



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



|/ s / Jonathan
        H. Cohen                  
|-------------------------------------------------
|Name: Jonathan H. Cohen
        Date: May 9, 2013
J-S74014-14

* Retired Senior Judge assigned to the Superior Court.

NON-PRECEDENTIAL DECISION – SEE SUPERIOR COURT I.O.P. 65.37

COMMONWEALTH OF PENNSYLVANIA,

 Appellee

v.

HECTOR AYALA,

 Appellant

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

IN THE SUPERIOR COURT OF

PENNSYLVANIA

 No. 3547 EDA 2013

Appeal from the PCRA Order Entered December 3, 2013

In the Court of Common Pleas of Philadelphia County 

Criminal Division at No(s): CP-51-CR-0013066-2008

BEFORE: BENDER, P.J.E., DONOHUE, and STRASSBURGER,* JJ.

CONCURRING MEMORANDUM BY STRASSBURGER, J.:FILED JANUARY 20, 2015

The PCRA judge and this Court’s Majority have concluded that the 

bolstering testimony (I believe M.R. was raped and do not believe her 

recantation) from the sex crimes police officer, the school counselor, a DHS 

social worker, and her boyfriend’s mother did not prejudice Appellant. As 

the Majority points out (Majority Memorandum at 9), an ineffective 

assistance of counsel claim fails unless a petitioner proves all three 

requirements: (1) the underlying legal issue has arguable merit, (2) 

counsel’s actions lacked an objective reasonable basis, and (3) prejudice.

Because the Majority has found the Appellant has failed to prove 

prejudice, it need not address the other two prongs.

This Concurring Memorandum is written merely to observe that the 

bolstering here was egregious and should have been objected to.
No. 53590.

protest 145932-K (New York).

#### Heemsoth Kerner Corporation *v.*United States,

Opinion by

Cole, J.

The protest was dismissed.
[Federal Register Volume 72, Number 53 (Tuesday, March 20, 2007)]
[Notices]
[Page 13080]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: E7-5079]


-----------------------------------------------------------------------

DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE

Foreign-Trade Zones Board

[Order No. 1505]


Designation of New Grantee for Foreign-Trade Zone 144, Brunswick, 
Georgia, Resolution and Order

    Pursuant to its authority under the Foreign-Trade Zones Act of June 
18, 1934, as amended (19 U.S.C. 81a-81u), and the Foreign-Trade Zones 
Board Regulations (15 CFR Part 400), the Foreign-Trade Zones Board (the 
Board) adopts the following Order:
    The Foreign-Trade Zones (FTZ) Board (the Board) has considered the 
application (filed 6/30/2006) submitted by the Brunswick Foreign Trade 
Zone, Inc., grantee of FTZ 144, Brunswick, Georgia, requesting 
reissuance of the grant of authority for said zone to the Brunswick and 
Glynn County Development Authority, a public corporation, which has 
accepted such reissuance subject to approval by the FTZ Board. Upon 
review, the Board finds that the requirements of the FTZ Act and the 
Board's regulations are satisfied, and that the proposal is in the 
public interest.
    Therefore, the Board approves the application and recognizes the 
Brunswick and Glynn County Development Authority as the new grantee of 
Foreign-Trade Zone 144, subject to the FTZ Act and the Board's 
regulations, including Section 400.28.
    Signed at Washington, DC, this 13\th\ day of March 2007.

David M. Spooner,
Assistant Secretary of Commerce for Import Administration, Alternate 
Chairman Foreign-Trade Zones Board.
    Attest:
Andrew McGilvray,
Executive Secretary.
[FR Doc. E7-5079 Filed 3-19-07; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 3510-DS-S
Exhibit 10.23

 

SUMMARY OF DIRECTOR COMPENSATION

 

We pay our non-employee directors, who consist of all our directors other than our chief executive officer, an annual fee of $75,000 for their services as directors. We pay an annual fee of $25,000 to the chair of our audit committee, $20,000 to the chair of our compensation committee, $10,000 to the chairs of our executive committee and our nominating and corporate governance committee, and $5,000 to each non-employee director who serves as a member, but not the chair, of any committee for service on each committee above one. Our chairman also receives an annual fee of $150,000, as well as office space, support services and healthcare benefits, for his services as chairman of our board of directors. Directors who are employees do not receive separate fees for their services as directors. All of the payments described in this paragraph are made in cash.

 

Under the terms of our 2006 equity incentive plan, each director who is not employed by, and does not provide independent contractor services as a consultant or advisor to, us or our subsidiaries receives automatic restricted stock awards. We refer to these directors as our “outside directors.” Currently, our outside directors are Drs. Rowland Moriarty and Thomas Robertson, Professor Robert Holthausen, Messrs. William Concannon, Ronald Maheu and William Schleyer and Mme. Nancy Hawthorne. Each outside director who is re-elected as one of our directors at, or whose term continues after, our annual meeting of shareholders (or any special meeting in lieu thereof) will, on the date of the meeting, receive a restricted stock award, vesting in four equal annual installments beginning on the first anniversary of the date of grant, valued at $75,000, based on the closing price of our common stock as of that date. Each person who is first elected an outside director at our annual meeting of shareholders (or any special meeting in lieu thereof) will receive, on the date of his or her election, a restricted stock award, vesting in four equal annual installments beginning on the first anniversary of the date of grant, in an amount to be determined by our board of directors.
MUTUAL PARTNERSHIP AGREEMENT


 


On this 20th day of March 2015, in the city of Yangon,
Myanmar, TOA Holdings, Inc., a Delaware Corporation whose address is 1-1-36, Nishiawaji, Higashiyodogawa-ku, Osaka, 553-0031, entered
into a mutual partnership agreement with Best Job Co., Ltd, a Myanmar Corporation, whose address is Room 41, 39th street,
Kyauktada Township, Yangon, Myanmar.


 


TOA Holdings, Inc. is herein for the purposes of this agreement,
and as approved by the Company’s President and CEO Hajime Abe, represented by Ryuich Yasue, the general manager of TOA Holdings,
Inc.


 


Best Job Co. Ltd., is herein for the purposes of this agreement,
and as approved by the Company’s CEO Myo Thant, represented by Ye Lin Aung, the managing director of Best Buy Co. Ltd.


 


Provisions of Agreement


 


TOA Holdings Inc. “TOA Holdings”, and Best Job Co.
Ltd. “Best Job” both mutually agree to work together exclusively on future construction and other related projects.
There is no certainty to the scope of exactly what these projects may be but at this current time, both parties intend to provide
landscaping services, and services related to land development.


 


Both parties agree to working exclusively on all future projects
pertaining to the above services until at such time, in writing both parties agree to the termination of the exclusivity of this
agreement.


 


If in the event there is a project that one of the above parties
intends to begin work on with another third party, which may be considered to be a construction or related project, the other party
herein must be notified and must also provide approval in writing.


 


Potential Projects


- Development of land, construction of physical property


- Home, Garden, landscaping


- Opening of home and garden centers


-employee training centers


 


Duties


All expenses incurred in the above projects will be the responsibility
of TOA Holdings, Inc. and will be paid in a timely manner.


 


Best Job Co. Ltd will be responsible for managing all projects
and ensuring the project is completed in a proper and timely manner.


 


Allocation of Profits


The gross profits resulting from any of the above projects between
the two parties shall be divided as follows:


TOA Holdings: 60%


Best Job 40%.


 


Terms of Agreement


This agreement will become valid at the execution of this agreement
at such date and time. If both parties agree in writing to the termination of this agreement then this agreement will become null
and void.


 


Agreement to Abide Law and Other Fixed Provisions


This mutual partnership agreement is governed by the existing
laws of Myanmar. If agreed by both parties in writing, in the event of any violation of the terms of this agreement, mediation
may be a potential course of action to come to a resolution.


 


Having read and understood the words particulars of above deed
made deed and signed without deceived, persuaded and threatened in the presence of the following witness their own free will.


 


/s/ Ryuich Yasue


Ryuichi Yasue, General Manager


TOA Holdings, Inc.


 


/s/ Ye Lin Aung


Ye Lin Aung, Managing Director


Best Job Co. Ltd.
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<ARTICLE> 5
<CIK> 0001097900
<NAME> BASIC ENERGY, INC.

<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   12-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          JUN-30-2000
<PERIOD-END>                               JUN-30-2000
<CASH>                                               0
<SECURITIES>                                         0
<RECEIVABLES>                                        0
<ALLOWANCES>                                         0
<INVENTORY>                                          0
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                                     0
<PP&E>                                               0
<DEPRECIATION>                                       0
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                       0
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                           38,462
<BONDS>                                              0
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                       644,469
<OTHER-SE>                                   (725,672)
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                         0
<SALES>                                              0
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                                     0
<CGS>                                                0
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                        0
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                              (38,462)
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                     0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                                   0
<INCOME-PRETAX>                               (38,462)
<INCOME-TAX>                                         0
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                           (38,462)
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                  (38,462)
<EPS-BASIC>                                      (.01)
<EPS-DILUTED>                                    (.01)


</TABLE>
<TABLE> <S> <C>


<ARTICLE>                     5

<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   12-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                               SEP-30-2000
<PERIOD-START>                                  OCT-01-1999
<PERIOD-END>                                    SEP-30-2000
<CASH>                                                1,672
<SECURITIES>                                              0
<RECEIVABLES>                                             0
<ALLOWANCES>                                              0
<INVENTORY>                                               0
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                                      1,672
<PP&E>                                                    0
<DEPRECIATION>                                            0
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                            0
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                                59,651
<BONDS>                                                   0
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                     0
<PREFERRED>                                               0
<COMMON>                                              5,175
<OTHER-SE>                                           63,154
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                          1,672
<SALES>                                                   0
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                                          0
<CGS>                                                     0
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                             0
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                     22,747
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                          0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                                        0
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                           0
<INCOME-TAX>                                              0
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                                       0
<DISCONTINUED>                                            0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                           0
<CHANGES>                                                 0
<NET-INCOME>                                              0
<EPS-BASIC>                                         (0.004)
<EPS-DILUTED>                                       (0.004)



</TABLE>
Michigan Supreme Court

Lansing, Michigan

Robert P. Young, Jr., Chief Justice

Michael F. Cavanagh

Stephen J. Markman

Mary Beth Kelly

Brian K. Zahra

Bridget M. McCormack

David F. Viviano, Justices

I, Larry S. Royster, Clerk of the Michigan Supreme Court, certify that the

foregoing is a true and complete copy of the order entered at the direction of the Court.

 January 24, 2014

jam

Order 

Clerk

January 24, 2014

148559 (36)

ELEES JOESPH LANTON, 

Plaintiff-Appellant, 

v SC: 148559

COA: 316817

DEPARTMENT OF CORRECTIONS, 

Defendant-Appellee.

___________________________________

On order of the Chief Justice, the motion to waive fees is considered and it 

is DENIED because MCL 600.2963 requires that a prisoner pursuing a civil action be 

liable for filing fees. 

Within 21 days of the certification of this order, plaintiff shall pay to the 

Clerk of the Court the initial partial filing fee of $27.00, shall submit a copy of this order 

with the payment, and shall refile the copy of the pleadings which is being returned 

with this order. Failure to comply with this order shall result in the appeal not being 

filed in this Court.

If plaintiff timely files the partial fee and refiles the pleadings, monthly 

payments shall be made to the Department of Corrections in an amount of 50 percent of 

the deposits made to plaintiff’s account until the payments equal the balance due of 

$348.00. This amount shall then be remitted to this Court.

Pursuant to MCL 600.2963(8) plaintiff shall not file further appeals in civil 

actions in this Court until the entry fee in this case is paid in full. 

The Clerk of the Court shall furnish two copies of this order to plaintiff and 

return plaintiff’s pleadings with this order.
Michigan Supreme Court

Lansing, Michigan

Robert P. Young, Jr.

, Chief Justice

Michael F. Cavanagh

Stephen J. Markman

Mary Beth Kelly

Brian K. Zahra

Bridget M. McCormack

David F. Viviano

, Justices

I, Larry S. Royster , Clerk of the Michigan Supreme Court, certify that the

foregoing is a true and complete copy of the order entered at the direction of the Court.

May 27, 2014

t0519 

# Order

Clerk May 27, 2014

148508

PEOPLE OF THE STATE OF MICHIGAN,

Pl aintiff

- Appellee,

v SC: 148508

COA: 311239

Saginaw CC: 11

- 035405

- FH

SKYLER MICHAEL HARTUNG, 11

- 035425

- FH

Defendant

- Appellant. 11

- 035416

- FJ

_________________________________________/

On order of the Court, the application for leave to appeal the November 19, 2013

judgment of the Court of Appeals is considered, and it is DENIED, because we are not

persuaded that the questions presented should be reviewed by this Court.
#### **EXHIBIT 21.1**

 

##### **SUBSIDIARIESOF THE REGISTRANT**

 
| **Legal name**                               |   | **Country**        |
|----------------------------------------------|--------|--------------------|
| **Websense UK Limited**                      |   | **United Kingdom** |
| **Websense Japan KK**                        |   | **Japan**          |
| **Websense (Australia) Pty  Limited**        |   | **Australia**      |
| **Websense International Limited**           |   | **Ireland**        |
| **Websense Holdings International  Limited** |   | **Ireland**        |
| **Websense France S.A.R.L.**                 |   | **France**         |
| **Websense Deutschland GmbH**                |   | **Germany**        |

 

1

----
Exhibit 23.1

Consent of Independent Registered Public Accounting Firm

We consent to the incorporation by reference in the Registration Statement (Form S-8 Nos. 333-140952,
333-136935, 333-125893, 333-118488, 333-106167, 333-87088, 333-60354 and 333-33382) pertaining to the 2000 Stock
Incentive Plan, 2000 Employee Stock Purchase Plan, and the 2007 Stock Incentive Assumption Plan of Websense, Inc. of our reports dated February 26, 2008, with respect to the consolidated
financial statements and schedule of Websense, Inc., and the effectiveness of internal control over financial reporting of Websense, Inc., included in this Annual Report
(Form 10-K) for the year ended December 31, 2007.



San
Diego, CA
February 26, 2008

---



QuickLinks
#### The Sterling City G. & S. Mining Co. v. Hughes et al.

An action cannot be maintained upon a bond given pursuant to Eevised Statutes (p. 55) conditioned to pay all such, damages as shall be awarded against the plaintiff in attachment, in any suit or suits which may thereafter be brought for wrongfully suing out the attachment, until judgment has been obtained against the plaintiff in the attachment suit.

*Krror to District Court of Arapahoe County.*

Debt upon au attachment bond, and judgment on demurrer to the declaration, in favor of defendants.

Messrs. Beowne & Putnam, for plaintiff in error.

Messrs. Sayee, Weight & Butlee, for defendants in error.

*230Elbert, J.

In the case of the *Sterling City Mining Co.*v. *Cock,*2 Col. 24, it wa3 held that judgment must first be obtained against the plaintiff in the attachment suit before an action can be maintained upon a bond given pursuant to Revised Statutes, and conditioned to pay all such damages as shall be awarded against the plaintiff in attachment in any suit or suits which may thereafter be brought for wrongfully suing out the attachment. We see no reason to question the correctness of this decision. *Holcomb*v. *Faxworth,*34 Miss. 265; *Sledger*v. *Lee,*19 Ga. 411; *Davis*v. *Gully,*2 Dev. & Bat. 360.

The recovery against Cock, one of the copartners in the plaintiff company, does not satisfy the rule.

Judgment affirmed with costs.

*Affirmed.*
### TEXAS COURT OF APPEALS, THIRD DISTRICT, AT AUSTIN

NO. 03
- 20
- 00572
- CV

R. Stephen McNally , Appellant

v. Krystene Wormley Woodard, in her Capacity as Independent Executor of The Estate of Johnnie Sam Simpson Living Trust; Donna Barnes Ware; Henry Evans ;

and Lois Jean Bradshaw Evans , Appellee s

FROM THE 201ST DISTRICT COURT OF TRAVIS COUNTY NO. D
- 1
- GN
- 94
- 009808 , THE HONORABLE JAN SOIFER , JUDGE PRESIDING

M E M O R A N D U M O P I N I O N

Appellant R. Stephen McNally desires to challenge an order d e nying his Motion
to Retain Cause on Docket . On June 25, 2021, we sent Mc Nally a letter asking him to explain
how this Court ma y exercise jurisdiction ov er his appeal

. McNally timely fi led a response indicating that he had “ made a diligent search for aut h ority that such motion denials would be appealable, but ha [d] found none

. ” Nor are we aware of any authority allowing appellate review
of the disposition of such a motion . Accordingly, we dismiss McNally ’ s appeal for want of jurisdiction. See Tex. Cons t . art. V, § 6(a); Jack B. Anglin Co. v. Tipps , 842 S.W.2d 266, 272 (Tex. 1992) (orig. proceeding) ; Branch L. Firm L.L.P. v. Osbo rn , 532 S.W.3d 1, 10 (Tex. App.

— Houston [14th Dist.] 2016, pet. denied).2 ______________________________________ ____ Edward Smith , Justice
Before Justices Good win, Baker, and Smith
Dismissed for Want of Jurisdiction
Filed: July 22, 2021
No. 54728.

#### Andes Trading Co., Inc. *v.*United States,

protest 146601-K (New York).

Opinion by

Mollison, J.

Following the authorities cited in Abstract 15400 the court dismissed the protests.
No. 99-50957 

-1-

 

* Pursuant to 5TH CIR. 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 5TH CIR.

R. 47.5.4.

IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT

 

No. 99-50957 

Conference Calendar

 

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,

Plaintiff-Appellee,

versus

RENE TERRAZAS-ACOSTA,

Defendant-Appellant.

--------------------

Appeal from the United States District Court

for the Western District of Texas

USDC No. EP-99-CR-713-1-DB

--------------------

April 13, 2000

Before WIENER, DeMOSS, and PARKER, Circuit Judges. 

PER CURIAM:*

Rene Terrazas-Acosta appeals the sentence imposed following

his guilty-plea conviction of illegal reentry into the United

States following deportation in violation of 8 U.S.C. §§ 1326(a)

& (b)(2). He argues that the district court mistakenly believed

that it lacked the authority to depart downward based on his

cultural assimilation into the United States. The record

indicates that the district court recognized its authority to 

depart downward based on cultural assimilation but determined

that a downward departure was not warranted based on the facts of
No. 99-50957 

-2-

the case. Accordingly, this court lacks jurisdiction to review

the district court’s decision. See United States v. Reyes-Nava,

169 F.3d 278, 280 (5th Cir. 1999).

This court notes that in his plea agreement Terrazas-Acosta

agreed to waive the right to appeal his sentence except in

certain circumstances which do not exist here. However, the

Government makes no mention on appeal of this waiver. Nor has

the transcript of the plea hearing been included in the appellate

record, which precludes this court from determining whether or

not the waiver was informed and voluntary. The knowing and

voluntary waiver in a plea agreement of the right to appeal has

been approved by this court. See United States v. Portillo, 18

F.3d 290, 292-93 (5th Cir. 1994); United States v. Melancon, 972

F.2d 566, 567 (5th Cir. 1992). This court is at a loss to

understand why the Government has not raised the issue of waiver

in this case, and why defense counsel did not include a

transcript of the Rule 11 hearing in the record.

APPEAL DISMISSED.