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

In connection with the quarterly report of Mortons Restaurant Group, Inc. (Mortons) on
Form 10-Q for the quarter ended April 5, 2009, as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the Report), I, Thomas J. Baldwin, the Chief Executive Officer of Mortons, certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C.
§1350, as adopted pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that:

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

(ii) The information contained in
the Report fairly presents, in all material respects, the financial condition and results of operations of Mortons.

Date: May 8, 2009



|                                         
|-----------------------------------------
|                                         
|/s/ THOMAS J. BALDWIN                    
|Thomas J. Baldwin Chief Executive
Officer
**Exhibit
      23.1**








CONSENT
      OF INDEPENDENT REGISTERED PUBLIC ACCOUNTING FIRM








We
        consent to the use in this Registration Statement of Tasker Products Corp.
        on
        Form S-8 (Registration Statement No. 333-135903 and 333-121054) of our report,
        which includes an explanatory paragraph relating to the Company’s ability to
        continue as a going concern dated March 19, 2007, relating to the consolidated
        balance sheets of Tasker Products Corp. and Subsidiaries as of December 31,
        2006
        and 2005, and the related consolidated statements of operations, stockholders’
equity, and cash flows for each of the years in the three-year period ended
        December 31, 2006







/s/
                Rothstein, Kass & Company, P.C.








Roseland,
      New Jersey


April
      27,
      2007
Patricia MOON v. Steve DRAKEFORD

2160286

Court of Civil Appeals of Alabama.

May 19, 2017

**DECISION WITHOUT PUBLISHED OPINION**

Affirmed.
# Initiation Innovation: Navigating Chief Season in the Midst of COVID

## From MC3 Aron Montano, C7F Public Affairs 

Throughout the COVID-19 pandemic, the U.S. Navy has persistently found ways to continue operations while still adhering to mitigation efforts. This persistence is not just shown in operations, but also in traditions.

Master Chief Jason Haka, command master chief of U.S. 7th Fleet, virtually connected with chief selects from over 30 commands in the 7th Fleet area of operations to discuss the importance of becoming a chief petty officer and to prepare them for the responsibility they are soon to assume.

The meetings were conducted using various platforms to allow Haka to reach a wide coverage of units, including those on mainland Japan, Guam, and ships that were underway.

“This allowed everyone to maintain distance and stay safe,” said Haka. “I found it to be very effective. Some connected from their offices, topside of their ships, or at home. We were able to have some great back-and-forth dialogue.”

During their dialogue, Haka reminded the selectees that, even though some in-person aspects of the initiation process were missing, the foundations and standards remained the same.

“The pandemic limited us from having the large group interactions, but it doesn’t take away from what we’ve done for past chief petty officer initiations,” he said. “These chief selects that are going through their capstone event are still being held to the same standard as chiefs in the past. They’re still being trained to the standard of being a chief petty officer.”

Haka expressed his pride in the performance of the fleet-wide chief’s mess ability to adapt to the conditions of the pandemic.

“It’s almost eye-watering to see how the fleet-wide chief’s mess rallied and took on this challenge,” said Haka. “COVID didn’t stop us from taking care of business and doing what we felt was important. These new chief petty officers are going to be ready to rock. I couldn’t be more proud to be a chief petty officer right now.”

Haka also attributed the resiliency shown this chief season to the overall mettle of the Navy.

“You’re not ever going to hold us down as a Navy,” he said. “We’ve been through a lot of adversity. When presented with a challenge, we’re going to rise up to the occasion.”

As the U.S. Navy's largest forward-deployed fleet, 7th Fleet employs 50-70 ships and submarines across the Western Pacific and Indian oceans. U.S. 7th Fleet routinely operates and interacts with 35 maritime nations while conducting missions to preserve and protect a free and open Indo-Pacific Region.

For more information on U.S. 7th Fleet, visit https://www.c7f.navy.mil.
P.O. Box 450

Kake, Alaska 99830

(907) 785-3741

May 29, 2014

Michael Gormas

United States Department of Transportation

Washington D.C.

RE: Kake Essential Air Service Contract

Mr. Gormas: .

The Kake City School Board believes that selection of a carrier for the EAScontract is vitally important to

the City of Kake, and the students of Kake City Schools. The School Board has reviewed the three

proposals for the Essential Air Service Contracts. While Alaska Seaplanes is our current EASprovider, we

are very fortunate to currently also be serviced by Harris Air. The School district and the School Board

feel that both companies provide outstanding service to our students. Besides safety for our students,

the board's top priority for this contract is to have reliable service. Due to the weather conditions of fog

and rain in SEAlaska, we feel that IFRshould be a requirement of whoever receives this bid.

With the goal of having IFRflights, the board had narrowed its choices down to Harris Air and Alaska

Seaplanes. In our discussions with Alaska Seaplanes, it is our understanding that they will have the

availability to provide this service on all flights to Kake that go through Sitka, prior to the contract being

awarded. Harris Air currently has this capability on all their flights.

The board has determined that they would like to support the application of Alaska Seaplanes given

they will be able to fulfill the IFRrequirements prior to August 1

S

\ This selection was made, due to the

size of the fleet and the addition of the larger planes make this option more appealing. However, if the

DOT determines that the IFRrequirements cannot be met by August 1

S

t, then Harris Air would be our

recommendation, as they currently fly IFRon their flights to Kake.

We thank you and we would be happy to answer any questions that you and your committee may have.

Kake City School board

Kevin Shipley

Superintendent of Schools

Kake City School District Is an £quaJ Opportunity £mployer
George E. BAKER, Appellant/Petitioner(s), v. STATE of Florida, Appellee/Respondent(s).

CASE NO.: 2D18-1237

District Court of Appeal of Florida, Second District.

April 12, 2018

BY ORDER OF THE COURT:

As it appears that the petitioner is represented by counsel in the proceeding in the trial court, the petition for writ of habeas corpus is dismissed. See Logan v. State, 846 So. 2d 472 (Fla. 2003).

VILLANTI, KHOUZAM, and BLACK, JJ., Concur.
```

[Congressional Bills 118th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[H.R. 6162 Referred in Senate (RFS)]

<DOC>
118th CONGRESS
  2d Session
                                H. R. 6162

_______________________________________________________________________

                   IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES

                             July 23, 2024

Received; read twice and referred to the Committee on Homeland Security 
                        and Governmental Affairs

_______________________________________________________________________

                                 AN ACT

 
 To designate the facility of the United States Postal Service located 
at 379 North Oates Street in Dothan, Alabama, as the ``LaBruce `Bruce' 
                    Tidwell Post Office Building''.

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

SECTION 1. LABRUCE ``BRUCE'' TIDWELL POST OFFICE BUILDING.

    (a) Designation.--The facility of the United States Postal Service 
located at 379 North Oates Street in Dothan, Alabama, shall be known 
and designated as the ``LaBruce `Bruce' Tidwell Post Office Building''.
    (b) References.--Any reference in a law, map, regulation, document, 
paper, or other record of the United States to the facility referred to 
in subsection (a) shall be deemed to be a reference to the ``LaBruce 
`Bruce' Tidwell Post Office Building''.

            Passed the House of Representatives July 22, 2024.

            Attest:

                                             KEVIN F. MCCUMBER,

                                                                 Clerk.
```
#### UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. Ah-Shay NICHOLSON, Defendant-Appellant.

No. 16-4706

United States Court of Appeals, Fourth Circuit.

Submitted: May 31, 2017

Decided: June 23, 2017

■ Thomas P. McNamara, Federal Public Defender, Stephen C. Gordon, Assistant Federal Public Defender, Raleigh, North Carolina, for Appellant. Jennifer P. May-Parker, Assistant United States Attorney, Raleigh, North Carolina, for Appellee.

Before SHEDD, DUNCAN, and FLOYD, Circuit Judges.

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.

PER CURIAM:

Ah-Shay Nicholson pleaded guilty, pursuant to a written plea agreement, to damaging or destroying, by means of fire or an explosive, a building owned or possessed by an organization receiving federal financial assistance, in violation of 18 U.S.C. § 844(f)(1) (2012). On appeal, Nicholson’s counsel has filed a brief pursuant to *An*
      *150
      *ders v. California,*386 U.S. 738, 87 S.Ct. 1396, 18 L.Ed.2d 493 (1967), questioning the district court’s calculation of the Sentencing Guidelines range. The Government has moved to dismiss on the basis of the appeal waiver contained in Nicholson’s plea agreement. For the reasons that follow, we grant the motion and dismiss the appeal.

We conclude that the appeal waiver contained in Nicholson’s plea agreement is valid, as he entered it knowingly and intelligently. *See United States v. Manigan,*592 F.3d 621, 627 (4th Cir. 2010). An appeal waiver generally is enforceable “if the record establishes that the waiver is valid and that the issue being appealed is within the scope of the waiver.” *United States v. Thornsbury,*670 F.3d 532, 537 (4th Cir. 2012) (internal quotation marks omitted).

Nicholson waived the right to appeal his conviction and any sentence imposed within the Guidelines range established at sentencing. The district court calculated the Guidelines term to be 60 months, the statutory minimum, *see*18 U.S.C. § 844(f)(1), and sentenced Nicholson accordingly. Nicholson’s challenge to the calculation of the Guidelines range is therefore precluded by his valid appeal waiver.

In accordance with *Anders,*we have reviewed the entire record in this case for any potentially meritorious issues that might fall outside the scope of the waiver and have found none. We therefore grant the Government’s motion and dismiss the appeal. This court requires that counsel inform Nicholson, in writing, of the right to petition the Supreme Court of the United States for further review. If Nicholson requests that a petition be filed, but counsel believes that such a petition would be frivolous, then counsel may move in this court for leave to withdraw from representation. Counsel’s motion must state that a copy thereof was served on Nicholson.

We dispense with oral argument because the facts and legal contentions are adequately presented in the materials before this court and argument would not aid the decisional process.

*DISMISSED*
Ronald KOEKOEK, Appellant/Petitioner(s), v. STATE of Florida, Appellee/Respondent(s).

CASE NO.: 2D17-3111

District Court of Appeal of Florida, Second District.

August 15, 2017

**DECISION WITHOUT PUBLISHED OPINION**

Denied.
Marv A. HUBBARD, Appellant, v. The STATE of Florida, Appellee.

No. 3D18-555

District Court of Appeal of Florida, Third District.

Opinion filed May 23, 2018.

Marv A. Hubbard, in proper person.

Pamela Jo Bondi, Attorney General, for appellee.

Before SUAREZ, SALTER, and FERNANDEZ, JJ.

PER CURIAM.

Defendant filed this appeal of the trial court's denial of his petition for writ of Habeas Corpus. As the trial court correctly noted, the petition is actually a motion to vacate judgment, which was denied by the trial court. We treat the petition the same and affirm the trial court's denial.

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

NO. 03-16-00769-CV

R. P., Appellant

v.

Texas Department of Family and Protective Services, Appellee

FROM THE 340TH DISTRICT COURT OF TOM GREEN COUNTY, 

NO. C150047CPS, GARY L. BANKS, JUDGE PRESIDING

O R D E R

PER CURIAM

Appellant R.P. filed his notice of appeal on November 21, 2016. The appellate 

record was complete December 5, 2016, making appellant’s brief due December 27, 2016. 

On December 27, 2016, counsel for appellant filed a motion for extension of time to file

appellant’s brief.

Amendments to the rules of judicial administration accelerate the final disposition 

of appeals from suits for termination of parental rights. See Tex. R. Jud. Admin. 6.2(a) 

(providing 180 days for court’s final disposition). The accelerated schedule constrains this 

Court’s leeway in granting extensions. In this instance, we will grant the motion and order 

counsel to file appellant’s brief no later than January 17, 2017. If the brief is not filed by that 

date, counsel may be required to show cause why she should not be held in contempt of court.

It is ordered on December 29, 2016.

Before Chief Justice Rose, Justices Goodwin and Bourland
EX PARTE Jovawn LOWERY

CR-16-0143

Court of Criminal Appeals of Alabama.

February 1, 2017

**DECISION WITHOUT PUBLISHED OPINION**

Mand. pet. denied.
Anthony Dewayne PECK, Appellant, v. STATE of Florida, Appellee.

No. 1D17-1779

District Court of Appeal of Florida, First District.

May 30, 2018

**DECISION WITHOUT PUBLISHED OPINION**

AFFIRMED.
Mario P. CARDENAS, Appellant/Petitioner(s), v. STATE of Florida, Appellee/Respondent(s).

CASE NO.: 2D18-1288

District Court of Appeal of Florida, Second District.

May 17, 2018

BY ORDER OF THE COURT:

The petition for belated appeal of the denial of petitioner's postconviction motion after evidentiary hearing, order dated October 30, 2017, is granted in circuit court case number 12-CF-8227. This order shall serve as a notice of appeal for purposes of calculating the time standards of the Florida Rules of Appellate Procedure. Within twenty days the trial court shall consider appellant's eligibility for appointment of appellate counsel, provided appellant files within ten days a motion in the circuit court requesting same accompanied by a financial affidavit, and shall enter an order thereupon, with a copy to appellant and a copy to this court. This ten-day time limit shall not limit the trial court's authority to provide counsel to appellant.

The circuit court clerk shall treat this order as a notice of appeal, promptly certify same and return it to this court as with any notice of appeal, and a new appellate case number will be assigned to this appeal and an acknowledgment letter will issue at that time.

BLACK, SALARIO, and ROTHSTEIN-YOUAKIM, JJ., Concur.
#### IN RE: Mustafa MUHAMMAD Petitioner.

No. 17-1764

United States Court of Appeals, Fourth Circuit.

Submitted: August 8, 2017

Decided: August 10, 2017

*213Mustafa Muhammad, Petitioner Pro Se.

Before GREGORY, Chief Judge, and WILKINSON and MOTZ, Circuit Judges.

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.

PER CURIAM:

Mustafa Muhammad petitions for a writ of mandamus, alleging that the district court has unduly delayed in ruling on his motion for new trial. He seeks an order from this court directing the district court to act. We find the present record does not reveal undue delay in the district court. Accordingly, we deny the mandamus petition. We dispense with oral argument because the facts and legal contentions are adequately presented in the materials before this court and argument would not aid the decisional process.

*PETITION DENIED*
NUMBER 13-15-00330-CR

COURT OF APPEALS

THIRTEENTH DISTRICT OF TEXAS

CORPUS CHRISTI - EDINBURG

 

IN RE KRISTIN BOWLING

On Petition for Writ of Mandamus and

Writ of Prohibition.

ORDER

Before Justices Rodriguez, Garza, and Longoria

Order Per Curiam

Relator, Kristin Bowling, filed a petition for writ of mandamus and writ of prohibition 

on July 17, 2015, through which she contends that the trial court lacks jurisdiction to 

intervene in a criminal case that has not been indicted. She seeks to compel the trial 

court to vacate its order denying relator’s plea to the jurisdiction and to retract a warrant 

for relator’s arrest. This original proceeding arises from trial court cause number 14-AC0466 in the 105th District Court of Kleberg County. A separate appeal from that same 
2

trial court cause number has been docketed in our appellate cause number 13-15-00300-

CR. The Court requests the real party in interest, the State of Texas, acting by and 

through the District Attorney for Kleberg County, Texas, to file a response to the petition 

for writ of mandamus on or before the expiration of ten days from today’s date. See TEX.

R. APP. P. 52.8(b). 

IT IS SO ORDERED.

PER CURIAM

Do not publish. TEX. R. APP. P. 47.2(b).

Delivered and filed the 

20th day of July, 2015.
<PAGE>
                                       1


       




                                                                      Exhibit 23



                                     CONSENT OF INDEPENDENT PUBLIC ACCOUNTANTS



As independent  public  accountants,  we hereby consent to the  incorporation by
reference in this Form 10-K and into the Company's previously filed Registration
Statement File No.  33-12034 and 33-31547,  of our report dated January 7, 1999,
included in Argonaut Group, Inc.'s 1998 Annual Report to Shareholders. It should
be noted that we have not audited any consolidated  financial  statements of the
Company  subsequent  to December  31,  1998 or  performed  any audit  procedures
subsequent to the date of our report.



                                                            ARTHUR ANDERSEN LLP


San Francisco, California
March  12, 1999
#### UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. Juan Jesus ARCILA-VILLALPANDO, a.k.a. Juan Jesus Arcila-Villalp, Defendant-Appellant.

No. 15-10612

United States Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit.

Submitted March 8, 2017 *

Filed March 14, 2017

Karla Delord, Assistant U.S. Attorney, USPX—Office of the US Attorney, Phoenix, AZ, for Plaintiff-Appellee

Michael J. Bresnehan, Esquire, Attorney, Michael J. Bresnehan PC, Tempe, AZ, for Defendant-Appellant

• Before: LEAVY, W. FLETCHER, and OWENS, Circuit Judges.

*

 The panel unanimously concludes this case is suitable for decision without oral argument. *See*Fed. R. App. P. 34(a)(2).

MEMORANDUM **

Juan Jesus Arcila-Villalpando appeals from the district court’s judgment and challenges the 33-month sentence imposed following his guilty-plea conviction for reentry of a removed alien, in violation of 8 U.S.C. § 1326. We have jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. § 1291. We dismiss.

*637Arcila-Villalpando challenges the district court’s imposition of a 16-level increase to his offense level under U.S.S.G. § 2L1.2(b)(1)(A)(ii). The government contends that this appeal is barred by a valid appeal waiver. We review de novo whether a defendant has waived his right to appeal. *See United States v. Harris,*628 F.3d 1203, 1205 (9th Cir. 2011). The terms of the appeal waiver in Arcila-Villalpando’s plea agreement unambiguously encompass this sentencing appeal. *See id.*at 1205-06. Contrary to Arcila-Villalpando’s contention, there was no implied agreement between the parties that the district court would not make legal errors in applying the Guidelines. Instead, the agreement explicitly left it to the court to determine the appropriate guideline adjustment, and Ar-eila-Villalpando waived the right to challenge “any aspect” of the resulting sentence, including the manner in which it was determined. Accordingly, we dismiss pursuant to the valid waiver. *See id.*at 1207.

We decline to consider on direct appeal Arcila-Villalpando’s claim that counsel was ineffective for failing to challenge the district court’s characterization of his predicate Colorado burglary conviction. *See United States v. Rahman,*642 F.3d 1257, 1259-60 (9th Cir. 2011).

DISMISSED.

**

 This disposition is not appropriate for publication and is not precedent except as provided by Ninth Circuit Rule 36-3.
### Page 1



### Aerial Advantages LLC

6 Ross St

Nashua NH 03060

EIN: 47

- 4270471

Contact: Brent Forman

Tel. 781

- 820

- 3923 Brent@AerialAdvantages.com



### U. S. Department of Transportation

Docket Management System

1200 New Jersey Ave., SE Washington, DC 20590

RE: Aerial Advantages , LLC Request to Amend Exemption No. 14744 Regulatory Docket No. FAA

- 2015

- 3928

Dear Sir or Madam,

On Feb 10, 201 6 , the Federal Aviation Administration ("FAA") granted to Aerial Advantages , LLC Exemption

No. 14744 Docket No. FAA

- 2015

- 3928 . The Exemption allows Aerial Advantages to operate certain small

unmanned aircraft systems ("UAS") to perform aerial services

. Aerial Advantages hereby respectfully

requests an amendment to t he Exemption to allow Aerial Advantages to operate additional types of small

UAS under the same conditions and limitations set forth in the e xemption.

1. Additional Aircraft

In addition to the two types of small UAS already authorized by the Exemption (i .e., DJI F450 and DJI F550

aircraft), Aerial Advantages wishes to amend the Exemption to also allow Aerial Advantages to operate the

following models listed below. All models listed are small UASs, weighing less than 55 pounds including

payload, with an airspeed capability of less than 87 knots (100 mph).

Manufacturer Model

3D Robotics Solo

Manual http://3drobotics.com/wp

- content/uploads/2015/08/v5_08_21_15.pdf

3D Robotics X8+

Manual http://3drobotic s.com/wp

- content/uploads/2015/04/X8

- Operation

- Manual

- vC.pdf

DJI S1000

Manual http://download.dji

- innovations.com/downloads/s1000/en/S1000_User_Manual_v1.10_en.pdf

DJI S900

Manual http://download.dji

- innovations.com/downloads/s900/en/S900_User_Manual_v1.2_en.pdf

### Page 2

DJI Phantom 3

Manual http://download.dji

innovati ons.com/downloads/phantom_3/en/Phantom_3_Professional_User_Manual_v1.4_en.pdf

DJI Matrice

Manual: http://download.dji

- innovations.com/downloads/dev/Matrice/en/M100_User_Manual_v1.0_en.pdf

Freefly Systems : Alta

Manual http://d27w8s76bjlz9v.cloud front.net/wp

content/uploads/2015/07/28175748/ALTA_Manual_RevB.pdf

2

. Aerial Advantages requests an extension to the Exemption based on the date of the amendment decision.

Respectfully submitted,

Brent Forman

Brent Forman , Owner

Aerial Advantages , LLC