alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
**EXHIBIT 32.1****(1)**

**STATEMENTOF CHIEF EXECUTIVE OFFICER UNDER 18 U.S.C. § 1350**

I, Joshua Pickus, thechief executive officer of SupportSoft, Inc. (the “Company”), certify for thepurposes of section 1350 of chapter 63 of title 18 of the United States Codethat, to the best of my knowledge,

(i)                        the Quarterly Report of the Company onForm 10-Q for the quarter ended September 30, 2006 (the “Report”), fullycomplies with the requirements of section 13(a) of the Securities Exchange Actof 1934, and

 

(ii)                     the information contained in the Reportfairly presents, in all material respects, the financial condition and resultsof operations of the Company.

 

Date: November 2,2006
|        | /s/ JOSHUA  PICKUS                         |
|--------|--------------------------------------------|
|   | **Joshua  Pickus**                         |
|   | **President  and Chief Executive Officer** |

 

A signed original of thiswritten statement required by 18 U.S.C. § 1350 has been provided toSupportSoft, Inc. and will be retained by SupportSoft, Inc. and furnished tothe Securities and Exchange Commission or its staff upon request.

----

(1)         The material contained in this Exhibit 32.1 is not deemed “filed” withthe SEC and is not to be incorporated by reference into any filing of theCompany under the Securities Act of 1933 or the Securities Exchange Act of1934, whether made before or after the date hereof and irrespective of anygeneral incorporation language contained in such filing, except to the extentthat the registrant specifically incorporates it by reference.

----
Exhibit 32.1  Certification  Pursuant to Section 1350 of Title 18 of the United States Code, the undersigned hereby certifies that:  (1) I have reviewed the Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q of Inland Land Appreciation Fund II, L.P. (the "Report") to which this statement is an Exhibit;  (2) The Report fully complies with the requirements of section 13(a) or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934; and  (3) The information contained in the Report fairly represents, in all material respects, the financial condition and results of operations of Inland Land Appreciation Fund II, L.P.  By:Inland Real Estate Investment CorporationGeneral PartnerBy:/s/ Brenda G. GujralName:Brenda G. GujralTitle:President of the General Partner andprincipal executive officer of Inland Land Appreciation Fund II, L.P.Date:July 28, 2009
<PAGE>

Exhibit 32

                    CERTIFICATION OF CHIEF EXECUTIVE OFFICER
                    AND CHIEF FINANCIAL OFFICER PURSUANT TO
                  RULE 13A-14(A) OF THE SECURITIES EXCHANGE ACT
                                     OF 1934


    The undersigned hereby certifies, for the purposes of Section 1350 of
Chapter 63 of Title 18 of the United States Code, as adopted pursuant to Section
906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, in his capacity as an officer of EduLink,
Inc. ("EduLink"), that, to his knowledge, the Annual Report of EduLink on Form
10-K for the period ended December 31, 2006, fully complies with the
requirements of Section 13(a) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 and that
the information contained in such report fairly presents, in all material
respects, the financial condition and results of operation of EduLink. This
written statement is being furnished to the Securities and Exchange Commission
as an exhibit to such Form 10-K. A signed original of this statement has been
provided to EduLink and will be retained by EduLink and furnished to the
Securities and Exchange Commission or its staff upon request.


   Date: June 4, 2008             By: /s/ Ian Rescigno
                                      --------------------------
                                      IAN RESCIGNO
                                      Chief Executive Officer and
                                      Chief Financial Officer
# C_2014187EN.01000101.xml

| 19.6.2014 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 187/1 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

19.6.2014

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 187/1

---

Non-opposition to a notified concentration

(Case M.7251 — Blackstone/ Gates)

(Text with EEA relevance)

2014/C 187/01

On 12 June 2014, the Commission decided not to oppose the above notified concentration and to declare it compatible with the internal market. This decision is based on Article 6(1)(b) of Council Regulation (EC) No 139/2004 (1). The full text of the decision is available only in English language and will be made public after it is cleared of any business secrets it may contain. It will be available:

1

| — | in the merger section of the Competition website of the Commission (http://ec.europa.eu/competition/mergers/cases/). This website provides various facilities to help locate individual merger decisions, including company, case number, date and sectoral indexes, |
| --- | --- |

—

in the merger section of the Competition website of the Commission (http://ec.europa.eu/competition/mergers/cases/). This website provides various facilities to help locate individual merger decisions, including company, case number, date and sectoral indexes,

| — | in electronic form on the EUR-Lex website (http://eur-lex.europa.eu/homepage.html?locale=en) under document number 32014M7251. EUR-Lex is the online access to the European law. |
| --- | --- |

—

in electronic form on the EUR-Lex website (http://eur-lex.europa.eu/homepage.html?locale=en) under document number 32014M7251. EUR-Lex is the online access to the European law.

---

(1)  OJ L 24, 29.1.2004, p. 1.

1

---
IN THE COURT OF CRIMINAL APPEALS

OF TEXAS

NO. WR-85,526-01

EX PARTE LEWIS MICHAEL WALL, Applicant

ON APPLICATION FOR A WRIT OF HABEAS CORPUS

CAUSE NO. W219-80388-2011-HC IN THE 219 DISTRICT COURT TH

FROM COLLIN COUNTY

Per curiam.

O P I N I O N

Pursuant to the provisions of Article 11.07 of the Texas Code of Criminal Procedure, the

clerk of the trial court transmitted to this Court this application for a writ of habeas corpus. Ex parte

Young, 418 S.W.2d 824, 826 (Tex. Crim. App. 1967). Applicant was convicted of two counts of

prohibited sexual conduct and sentenced to twenty years’ imprisonment for each count. The Fifth

Court of Appeals affirmed his conviction. Wall v. State, No. 05-13-00127-CR (Tex. App.—Dallas

Aug. 11, 2014) (not designated for publication). 

Applicant contends that his trial counsel rendered ineffective assistance because he did not

object to the submission of an improper range of punishment. Applicant raises twenty other grounds,
2

including ineffective assistance of trial and appellate counsel, prosecutorial misconduct, and actual

innocence. 

Reviewing Applicant’s claims challenging the validity of the conviction, the habeas court

entered extensive findings recommending relief be denied. After an independent review of the

record, we agree with the trial court’s proposed findings of fact and conclusions of law. Relief on

Applicant’s claims challenging the validity of the conviction is denied. 

The trial court determined that trial counsel’s performance at the punishment phase was

deficient in that counsel did not object to submission of the incorrect range of punishment to the jury.

The court determined that such deficient performance prejudiced Applicant. We agree. Relief is

granted. The sentences in Cause No. W219-80388-2011-HC in the 219 District Court of Collin

th

County are set aside, and Applicant is remanded to the custody of the Sheriff of Collin County for

a new punishment hearing. The trial court shall issue any necessary bench warrant within 10 days

after the mandate of this Court issues.

Copies of this opinion shall be sent to the Texas Department of Criminal Justice-Correctional

Institutions Division and Pardons and Paroles Division.

Delivered: December 7, 2016

Do not publish
EXHIBIT 32.1



CERTIFICATION PURSUANT TO 18 U.S.C. (S) 1350



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



In connection with the periodic report of Dynegy Holdings Inc. (the Company) on
Form 10-Q for the period ended March 31, 2005 as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the Report), I, Bruce A. Williamson, President and Chief Executive Officer of the Company, hereby certify as of the
date hereof, solely for the purposes of Title 18, Chapter 63, Section 1350 of the United States Code, that to the best of my knowledge:



|(1) | the Report fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) or 15(d), as applicable, 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 at the dates and for the periods
indicated.
|--- | -----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------



|                   |  |     |  |                                                          
|------------------ |  | --- |  | ---------------------------------------------------------
|Date: May 11, 2005 |  | By: |  | /s/ BRUCE A. WILLIAMSON                                  
|                   |  |     |  | Bruce A. Williamson President and Chief Executive Officer



A signed original of this written
statement required by Section 906 has been provided to Dynegy Holdings Inc. and will be retained by Dynegy Holdings Inc. and furnished to the Securities and Exchange Commission or its staff upon request.
#### Strong vs. Catlin.

1. Summons— Seal.— A summons issued and served without being sealed is not void, but is amendable and the defect is cured by verdict.

2. Pbactice — Interlooutoby Judgment. — It is error in case of default in an action of assumpsit to assess damages and enter final judgment without interlocutory judgmenthaving been first- entered.

(3 Chand., 130.)

*122EEEOE to the Circuit Court for *Dane*County.

Action of assumpsit 'brought by *Albert Catlin*against *Moses M. Strong.*

The summons by which the action was commenced was not sealed with the seal of the court. It was served personally on the defendant. He did not appear, and being in default, the court in term time, without interlocutory judgment having been entered, ordered the clerk to assess the plaintiff’s damages, and he reported that he had assessed them at $293.95, and upon his report judgment was given for the plaintiff and against the defendant for that sum and costs, and the defendant brought this writ of error.

*M. M. Strong in pro. per.*

contended that the summons was void for want of a seal, and that damages could not be assessed without interlocutory judgment being first entered, citing Graham’s Prac., 121 and 123 ; 1 Wend., 16 ; 4 Cow., 550; 5 id., 15 ; 4 id., 504; 15 Wend., 617; 4 Cow., 548; 1 id., 38; 4 Johns., 309 ; 1 Cow., 41; 8 id., 27 ; 12 Johns., 178; 3 id., 257.

Gatlin, *Abbott £ Clark,*for defendant in errror,

cited Graham’s Prac., 121; 4 Cow., 250; 1 Wend., 16; claiming that a writ without seal is only voidable and not void.

Larrabee, J.

The summons by which this action was commenced had no seal; but this was clearly one of those defects provided for in the statute of amendments, and was cured by verdict.

Where the defendant suffers a default to be entered against him in an action of assumpsit, the judgment in the first instance is only interlocutory; and this must be entered before the plaintiff can proceed to have his damages assessed, or to complete his final judgment in the case.

No interlocutory judgment was entered, but a final one, of which complaint is now made. This must be reversed, and the plaintiff can proceed to enter his interlocutory judgment at the next term of the circuit court.

Judgment reversed.
April 15, 2011 

Mr. Mark Kappes 

Chief Pilot 

FL Air Corp 

9 Airport Road 

Morristown, NJ 07960 

Dear Mr. Kappes: 

This letter is to inform you that we are unable to process your request for an exemption. It 

explains why we cannot process your request and tells you what you should do in the next 30 

days. 

Why We Cannot Process Your Request 

We entered your April 5, 2011, exemption request into the public docket (No. FAA-2011-

0352), but we are unable to process your request any further. The information you sent does 

not comply with the requirements of 14 CFR 11.81 (copy enclosed). For us to consider the 

request any further, you must send us all of the following: 

 The specific section or sections of 14 CFR from which you seek relief, the extent of the 

relief you seek, and the reason you seek relief. 

 The reasons why granting the request would be in the public interest; that is, how it would 

benefit the public as a whole. 

 The reasons why the exemption would not adversely affect safety or how the exemption 

would provide a level of safety at least equal to that provided by the rule from which you 

seek an exemption. 

 Any additional information, views, or arguments available to support your request. 
2 

What You Should Do 

If you want us to process your request any further, you must send the information described 

earlier to reach us within 30 days. We will consider the docket on your request open until we 

receive this required information from you. Please note that 14 CFR 11.63(d) requires you to 

send your petition for exemption at least 120 days before the proposed effective date of the 

exemption. 

If We Do not Hear From You 

If we do not hear from you within 30 days, we will close the docket without notifying you 

further. If you have any questions or require additional time, you may call (202) 267-9677. 

Sincerely, 

/s/ 

Ida M. Klepper 

Manager, Airmen and 

 Airspace Rules Division

Enclosure
WAYLAND H. SULLIVAN,

Appellant,

v.

STATE OF FLORIDA,

Appellee.

IN THE DISTRICT COURT OF APPEAL

FIRST DISTRICT, STATE OF FLORIDA

NOT FINAL UNTIL TIME EXPIRES TO 

FILE MOTION FOR REHEARING AND 

DISPOSITION THEREOF IF FILED

CASE NO. 1D16-1251

_____________________________/

Opinion filed December 6, 2016.

An appeal from the Circuit Court for Gilchrist County.

David P. Kreider, Judge.

Nancy A. Daniels, Public Defender, and Joel Arnold, Assistant Public Defender, 

Tallahassee, for Appellant.

Pamela Jo Bondi, Attorney General, and David Llanes, Assistant Attorney 

General, Tallahassee, for Appellee.

PER CURIAM.

AFFIRMED.

WOLF, RAY, and MAKAR, JJ., CONCUR.
Exhibit 4.61

 

TAL Advantage III LLC

c/o TAL International Container Corporation

100 Manhattanville Road

Purchase, New York 10577-2135

 

Via PDF

 

March 14, 2013

 

Re: TAL Advantage III LLC Series 2009-1 Floating Rate Secured Notes

 

To All TAL Advantage III LLC Series 2009-1 Noteholders and Wells Fargo Securities LLC as Administrative Agent:

 

In accordance with Section 2.3(a) of the Amended and Restated Note Purchase Agreement dated August 12, 2011, TAL Advantage III LLC (the “Issuer”) notifies you that effective as of thirty (30) days from the date of this letter the Issuer is reducing the Series 2009-1 Existing Commitment by $50,000,000 from $600,000,000 to $550,000,000 which will result in a pro-rata partial reduction in the Unused Existing Commitment of each Series 2009-1 Noteholder.

 

	
Sincerely,
    
	
 
    
	
TAL Advantage III, LLC
    
	
 
    
	
By: TAL International Container Corporation, its   manager
    
	
 
    
	
By:
    	
 
    	
 
    
	
 
    
	
Jeffrey M. Casucci, Vice President and Treasurer
    


 

cc: Wells Fargo Bank, National Association, as Indenture Trustee

 











 

Addressees

 

Bank of America william.heskett@baml.com

 

Bank of America branden.avishar@baml.com

 

Wells Fargo Bank, N. A. jerri.kallam@wellsfargo.com

 

Royal Bank of Canada kevin.wilson@rbccm.com

 

Nomura Corporate Funding Americas, LLC Jack.kattan@nomura.com

 

Three Pillars Funding LLC Jason.Meyer@SunTrust.com

 

ABN AMRO Capital USA LLC renzo.hoefnagels@abnamro.com; paul.wiener@abnamro.com

 

Wells Fargo Securities LLC jerri.kallam@wellsfargo.com

 

Wells Fargo Bank, N. A., as Indenture Trustee kristi.l.puttin@wellsfargo.com
II 

117TH CONGRESS 

1ST SESSION S. 3168 

To amend the White Mountain Apache Tribe Water Rights Quantification 

Act of 2010 to modify the enforceability date for certain provisions, 

and for other purposes. 

IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES 

NOVEMBER 4, 2021 

Mr. KELLY (for himself and Ms. SINEMA) introduced the following bill; which 

was read twice and referred to the Committee on Indian Affairs 

A BILL 

To amend the White Mountain Apache Tribe Water Rights 

Quantification Act of 2010 to modify the enforceability 

date for certain provisions, 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. WHITE MOUNTAIN APACHE TRIBE RURAL 

4 WATER SYSTEM. 

5 (a) ENFORCEABILITY DATE.— 

6 (1) IN GENERAL.—Section 309(d)(2) of the 

7 White Mountain Apache Tribe Water Rights Quan8 tification Act of 2010 (Public Law 111–291; 124 


kjohnson on DSK79L0C42PROD with BILLS
2 

•S 3168 IS

1 Stat. 3088; 133 Stat. 2669) is amended by striking 

2 ‘‘2023’’ each place it appears and inserting ‘‘2025’’. 

3 (2) CONFORMING AMENDMENT.—Section 

4 3(b)(2) of the White Mountain Apache Tribe Rural 

5 Water System Loan Authorization Act (Public Law 

6 110–390; 122 Stat. 4191; 124 Stat. 3092; 133 Stat. 

7 2669) is amended by striking ‘‘beginning on’’ and all 

8 that follows through the period at the end and in9 serting ‘‘beginning on May 1, 2025.’’. 

10 (b) FUNDING.—Section 312(e)(2)(B) of the White 

11 Mountain Apache Tribe Water Rights Quantification Act 

12 of 2010 (Public Law 111–291; 124 Stat. 3095) is amend13 ed by striking ‘‘$11,000,000’’ and inserting 

14 ‘‘$261,000,000’’. 

Æ 


kjohnson on DSK79L0C42PROD with BILLS
##### 



Exhibit 13.1

CERTIFICATION 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 Annual Report on
Form 20-F of Perusahaan Perseroan (Persero)
PT Telekomunikasi Indonesia, Tbk. (the Company)
for the yearly period ended December 31, 2003 as filed with
the Securities Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the
Report), I, Kristiono, President Director of
the Company, certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. §1350, as
adopted pursuant to §906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002,
that, to the best of my 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/ Kristiono




Name: Kristiono


Title:   President Director


Date:  June 29, 2004
Exhibit
      32.1





**CERTIFICATION
      PURSUANT TO**


**18
      U.S.C. SECTION 1350**


**AS
      ADOPTED PURSUANT TO**


**SECTION
      906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002**





The
      undersigned, David Campbell, Chief Executive Officer, President, and Director
      of
      Bloodhound Search Technologies, Inc. (the “Company”), and Robert Horn, Chief
      Financial Officer and Secretary of BSTI, certify, under the standards set forth
      and solely for the purposes of 18 U.S.C. 1350, as adopted pursuant to Section
      906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that, to his knowledge, the Quarterly
      Report on Form 10-QSB of BSTI for the fiscal quarter ended June 30, 2006 fully
      complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) or 15(d) of the Securities
      Exchange Act of 1934 and information contained in that Form 10-QSB fairly
      presents, in all material respects, the financial condition and results of
      operations of BSTI.





Dated:
      August __, 2006





By:
            /s/ David CampbellName:
            David CampbellTitle:
            Chief
              Executive Officer, President, and Director(Principal Executive Officer)By:
            /s/ Robert HornName:
            Robert HornTitle:
            Chief Financial Officer and
              Secretary(Principal Financial and Accounting
              Officer)





A
      signed
      original of this written statement required by Section 906 has been provided
      to
      BSTI and will be retained by BSTI and furnished to the Securities and Exchange
      Commission or its staff upon request.
# Exposure Report
PMN Number: P-11-0110

Assessor : Cinalli/SD Ratings

N on-Occupational 

### : N R Environmental: N R Drop Criteria: EAB Drop Criteria Reasoning: N o releases in engineering report Exposure Based 

### Assessment: Exposure-Based ( N on-Occupational): Exposure-Based (Environmental):
Exposure Parameter Exposure-Based Persistent/Bioaccum Exposure Value Surface DW: Fish Ingestion: Ground DW: Inhalation: Water Releases: Total Releases: Consumer Exposure: 

### Recommended Fate Tests: Consumer Use expected? Consumer Use remarks:Scenario Comment Sites Location 1. Scenario -- Medium: (Engineering) ; 2. Scenario -- Medium: (Engineering) ; 3. Scenario -- Medium: (Engineering) ;



### **Environmental Release Information for Those Releases Which Went to the Model (Release Identifier Number)

1