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

The undersigned, Evan Williams, Chief Executive Officer of Border Management,
Inc., hereby certifies, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, as adopted
pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that:

(1)the Annual Report on Form 10-K of Border Management, Inc. for the
twelve month period ended December 31, 2009 (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 Border
Management, Inc.

Dated: March 29, 2010

/s/ Evan Williams
------------------
Evan Williams
Chief Executive Officer,
Border Management, Inc.

A signed original of this written statement required by Section 906, or other
document authenticating, acknowledging, or otherwise adopting the signature
that appears in typed form within the electronic version of this written
statement required by Section 906, has been provided to Border Management,
Inc. and will be retained by Border Management, Inc. and furnished to the
Securities and Exchange Commission or its staff upon request.
#### Leonard STELMASZEK Plaintiff-Appellant v. OMAHA WORLD HERALD CO. Defendant-Appellee Federal Bureau of Investigation Defendant Rick Whiteley Defendant-Appellee

No. 16-3693

United States Court of Appeals, Eighth Circuit.

Submitted: May 31, 2017

Filed: June 2, 2017

Leonard Stelmaszek, Pro Se

Christopher R. Hedican, Sara A. McCue, Baird *&*Holm, Omaha, NE, for Defendants-Appellees

Before WOLLMAN, BOWMAN, and RILEY, Circuit Judges.

PER CURIAM.

Leonard Stelmaszek appeals the district court’s1 adverse grant of summary judgment in his action claiming employment-related discrimination and retaliation. Having reviewed the record and the parties’ arguments on appeal, we agree with the district court’s reasoning and conclude that summary judgment was properly granted, see Peterson v. Kopp, 754 F.3d 594, 598 (8th Cir. 2014) (de novo review); and that the district court did not abuse its discretion in denying the motion for a new trial, see United States v. Metro. St. Louis Sewer Dist., 440 F.3d 930, 933 (8th Cir. 2006) (standard of review). Accordingly, we affirm. See 8th Cir. R. 47B.

1

. The Honorable John M, Gerrard, United States District Judge for the District of Nebraska.
# Gazzetta ufficiale C 11A/2014

| | ISSN 1977-0944
  doi:10.3000/19770944.CA2014.011.ita |
| --- | --- |
| Gazzetta ufficiale
  dell'Unione europea | C 11A |
| | |
| Edizione in lingua italiana | Comunicazioni e informazioni | 57o anno15 gennaio 2014 |

ISSN 1977-0944

doi:10.3000/19770944.CA2014.011.ita

Gazzetta ufficiale

dell'Unione europea

C 11A

Edizione in lingua italiana

Comunicazioni e informazioni

57o anno15 gennaio 2014

---

| Numero d'informazione | Sommario | pagina |
| --- | --- | --- |
| | Rettifiche |
| 2014/C 011A/01 | Rettifica dell'avviso di posto vacante per il posto di direttore esecutivo dell'Agenzia ferroviaria europea (ERA), in Francia (Agente temporaneo — grado AD 14) — COM/2014/10345 (GU C 6 A del 10.1.2014) | 1 |

Numero d'informazione

Sommario

pagina

Rettifiche

2014/C 011A/01

Rettifica dell'avviso di posto vacante per il posto di direttore esecutivo dell'Agenzia ferroviaria europea (ERA), in Francia (Agente temporaneo — grado AD 14) — COM/2014/10345 (GU C 6 A del 10.1.2014)

(GU C 6 A del 10.1.2014)

1

CRONISTORIA DELLE GU C A CONCORSI

Si riporta qui di seguito l'elenco delle GU C A pubblicate nell'anno in corso.

Salvo indicazione contraria, le GU sono pubblicate in tutte le versioni linguistiche.

| 5 | |
| --- | --- |
| 6 | |
| 11 | |

5

6

11

| IT | |
| --- | --- |

IT

---

Rettifiche

| 15.1.2014 | IT | Gazzetta ufficiale dell'Unione europea | CA 11/1 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

15.1.2014

IT

Gazzetta ufficiale dell'Unione europea

CA 11/1

---

Rettifica dell'avviso di posto vacante per il posto di direttore esecutivo dell'Agenzia ferroviaria europea (ERA), in Francia

(Agente temporaneo — grado AD 14)

COM/2014/10345

(

  Gazzetta ufficiale dell'Unione europea C 6 A del 10 gennaio 2014
  )

(2014/C 11 A/01)

A pagina 4, nelle «Modalità di presentazione della candidatura», al terzo capoverso, il link va letto come segue:

«https://ec.europa.eu/dgs/human-resources/seniormanagementvacancies/».

---
#### IN RE: John Lee CHRISTAKIS, Debtor. John Lee Christakis, Plaintiff-Appellant, v. U.S. Bank NA, Defendant-Appellee.

No. 16-15346

United States Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit.

Submitted April 11, 2017 *

Filed April 21, 2017

John Lee Christakis, Pro Se

Philip J. Giles, Attorney, Pite Duncan, LLP, San Diego, CA, Michael Curran, Maynard Cronin Erickson Curran & Reiter, PLC, Phoenix, AZ, for Defendant-Ap-pellee

Before: GOULD, CLIFTON, and HURWITZ, Circuit Judges.

*

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

MEMORANDUM**

John Lee Christakis appeals pro se from the district court’s order denying Christak-is’s appeal of a bankruptcy court order denying his motion for relief-under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 60(b).

We dismiss this appeal for lack of jurisdiction because the bankruptcy court’s order denying Christakis’s Rule 60(b) motion was not a final, appealable order. *See Defenders of Wildlife v. Bernal,*204 F.3d 920, 930 (9th Cir. 2000) (order declining to entertain or grant a Rule 60(b) motion is a procedural ruling and not a final determination on the merits); *see also Silver Sage**524*Partners, Ltd. v. City of Desert Hot Springs (In re City of Desert Hot Springs),*339 F.3d 782, 787-88 (9th Cir. 2003) (court of appeals does not have jurisdiction to hear interlocutory appeals in bankruptcy cases).

Contrary to Christakis’s argument, his prior notice of appeal divested the bankruptcy court of jurisdiction to entertain his Rule 60(b) motion, because both the appeal and the Rule 60 motion concerned the claim of U.S. Bank N.A. against a specific parcel of real property. *See Stein v. Wood,*127 F.3d 1187, 1189 (9th Cir. 1997) (filing of a notice of appeal divests court of jurisdiction over those aspects of the case involved in the appeal).

DISMISSED.

**

 This disposition is not appropriate for publication and is not precedent except as provided by Ninth Circuit Rule 36-3.
#### In the Matter of the Probate of the Will of Bessie Millens, Deceased. Max Millens et al., Appellants; Sarah Kramer et al., Respondents.

Submitted June 18, 1943;

decided July 20, 1943.

*614
      *Chris J. Flanagan*for appellants.

*Kenneth 8. MacAjfer*and *Carl 0. Olson*for respondents.

Order affirmed, with costs to respondents payable out of the estate. No opinion.

Concur: Lehman, Ch. J., Loughran, Rippey, Lewis, Conway, Desmond and Thacher, JJ.
EX-34 (e)
(logo) PRICEWATERHOUSECOOPERS

PricewaterhouseCoopers LLP
300 Madison Avenue
New York NY 10017
Telephone (646) 471-3000
www.pwc.com


Report of Independent Registered Public Accounting Firm

To the Board of Directors of Residential Capital, LLC:

We have examined management's assertion, included in the accompanying
Management's Assertion Concerning Compliance with Regulation AB Item 1122
Servicing Criteria, that GMAC Mortgage, LLC (the "Company"), a subsidiary
of Residential Capital, LLC, complied with the servicing criteria set forth in
Item 1122(d) of the Securities and Exchange Commission's Regulation AB for the
GMACM Private Platform (the "Platform") as of and for the year then ended
December 31, 2006, excluding criteria 1122(d)(1)(iii); 1122(d)(2)(iv);
1122(d)(3)(i),(ii) and 1122(d)(4)(i),(ii), which the Company has determined are
not applicable to the servicing activities performed by it with respect to the
Platform. Appendix A to management's assertion identifies the individual asset-
backed transactions and securities defined by management as constituting the
Platform.  Management is responsible for the Company's compliance with the
servicing criteria. Our responsibility is to express an opinion on management's
assertion based on our examination.

Our examination was conducted in accordance with standards of the Public Company
Accounting Oversight Board (United States) and, accordingly, included examining,
on a test basis, evidence about the Company's compliance with the applicable
servicing criteria and performing such other procedures as we considered
necessary in the circumstances. Our examination included testing of selected
asset-backed transactions and securities that comprise the Platform, testing of
selected servicing activities related to the Platform, and determining whether
the Company processed those selected transactions and performed those selected
activities in compliance with the applicable servicing criteria. Our procedures
were limited to the selected transactions and servicing activities performed by
the Company during the period covered by this report. Our procedures were not
designed to detect noncompliance arising from errors that may have occurred
prior to or subsequent to our tests that may have affected the balances or
amounts calculated or reported by the Company during the period covered by this
report. We believe that our examination provides a reasonable basis for our
opinion. Our examination does not provide a legal determination on the Company's
compliance with the servicing criteria.


In our opinion, management's assertion that the Company complied with the
aforementioned applicable servicing criteria as of and for the year ended
December 31, 2006, for the GMACM Private Platform is fairly stated, in all
material respects.



/s/ PricewaterhouseCoopers LLP

New York, New York
March 6, 2007
Document headings vary by document type but may contain
                    the following: the agency or agencies that issued and signed a document
the number of the CFR title and the number of each part
                      the document amends, proposes to amend, or is directly
                      related to
the agency docket number / agency internal file number
the RIN which identifies each regulatory action listed in
                      the Unified Agenda of Federal Regulatory and Deregulatory
                      Actions See the
                    Document Drafting Handbook
                    for more details.
 Federal Communications Commission [FR ID 73457]
 The following item has been adopted by the Commission and deleted from the list of items scheduled for consideration at the Friday, February 18, 2022, Open Meeting. This item was previously listed in the Commission's Sunshine Notice on Friday, February 11, 2022. 3
MEDIA
*Title:*
                             Updating Technical Rules for Radio Broadcasters (MB Docket No. 21-263).*Summary:*
                             The Commission will consider a Report and Order to eliminate or amend outmoded or unnecessary broadcast technical rules.
 Federal Communications Commission. Marlene Dortch, Secretary.


[FR Doc. 2022-04150 Filed 2-25-22; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 6712-01-P
#### UNITED STATES of America Plaintiff-Appellee v. Aaron BYRD Defendant-Appellant

No. 16-3731

United States Court of Appeals, Eighth Circuit.

Submitted: May 17, 2017

Filed: June 2, 2017

Adam Caine, Special Assistant U.S. Attorney, Brent B. Venneman, U.S. Attorney’s Office, Kansas City, MO, for Plaintiff-Appellee

*463Aaron Byrd, Pro Se

Before LOKEN, MURPHY, and BENTON, Circuit Judges.

PER CURIAM.

Aaron Byrd directly appeals the within-Sentencing Guidelines sentence imposed by the district court1 after he pleaded guilty to a drug conspiracy offense, pursuant to a written plea agreement that contained a waiver of the right to appeal his conviction and sentence except on enumerated grounds. Byrd’s counsel has moved to withdraw, and in a brief filed under Anders v. California, 386 U.S. 738, 87 S.Ct. 1396, 18 L.Ed.2d 493 (1967), counsel challenges the sentence as substantively unreasonable and contests the application of certain Guidelines enhancements.

We will enforce the appeal waiver in this case, because our review of the record demonstrates that Byrd entered into the plea agreement and the appeal waiver knowingly and voluntarily; the arguments presented fall within the scope of the appeal waiver; and no miscarriage of justice would result from enforcing the waiver. See United States v. Andis, 333 F.3d 886, 889-92 (8th Cir. 2003) (en banc). Having independently reviewed the record under Penson v. Ohio, 488 U.S. 75, 109 S.Ct. 346, 102 L.Ed.2d 300 (1988), we find no nonfriv-olous issues for appeal falling outside the scope of the appeal waiver.

Accordingly, we grant counsel’s motion to withdraw, and we dismiss this appeal.

1

. The Honorable Gary A. Fenner, United States District Judge for the Western District of Missouri.
1 In The



### Court of Appeals

Ninth District of Texas at Beaumont

____________________

NO

. 09

- 1 8

- 00 243

- C R



### ____________________

MARRON DOUGLAS RITCHEY JR.

, Appellant

V.

THE STATE OF TEXAS , Appellee

________________________________________ _______________ ______________

On A ppeal from the 411th District Court

San Jacinto County, Texas

Trial Cause No

. 10,496

________________________________________ ________________ _____________

MEMORANDUM OPINION

Appellant, Marron Douglas Ritchey Jr.

, attempts to appeal the trial court’s

failure to rule on Ritchey’s post

- conviction motion for DNA testing. On July 18,

2018, we notified the parties that the appeal would be dismissed unless by August 2,

2018, we received a response that establishes that a n appealable order has been

signed. The deadline has passed without any party having demonstrated that an

appealable order has been signed. Accordingly, we dismiss the appeal for lack of

jurisdiction. See Tex. R. App. P. 43.2(f).2

APPEAL DISMISSE D.

________________________________ LEANNE JOHNSON

Justice

Submitted on August 2 8 , 2018

Opinion Delivered August 29 , 2018

Do Not Publish

Before McKeithen, C.J., Kreger and Johnson, JJ.
<PAGE>
                                                                    EXHIBIT 23.1

            CONSENT OF INDEPENDENT REGISTERED PUBLIC ACCOUNTING FIRM



The Board of Directors
Nextel Partners, Inc. and Subsidiaries:

We consent to the incorporation by reference in the registration statements
(Nos. 333-10998 and 333-106352) on Form S-3 and (Nos. 333-34724, 333-99017, and
333-117015) on Form S-8 of Nextel Partners, Inc. and subsidiaries of our reports
dated March 13, 2006, with respect to the consolidated balance sheets of Nextel
Partners, Inc. and subsidiaries as of December 31, 2005 and 2004, and the
related consolidated statements of operations, changes in stockholders' equity
and comprehensive income, and cash flows for each of the years in the three-year
period ended December 31, 2005, management's assessment of the effectiveness of
internal control over financial reporting as of December 31, 2005 and the
effectiveness of internal control over financial reporting as of December 31,
2005, which reports appear in the December 31, 2005 annual report on Form 10-K
of Nextel Partners, Inc. and subsidiaries.

/s/ KPMG LLP


Seattle, Washington
MARCH 13, 2006
Exhibit 32.2

Written Statement of Chief Financial Officer

Pursuant to Section 906

of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002 (18 U.S.C. Section 1350)

The undersigned, the Chief Financial Officer of the Mohegan Tribal Gaming Authority (the Authority), hereby certifies that, to his knowledge, on the date hereof:

(a) the Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q of the Authority for the quarter ended December 31, 2007 filed on the date hereof with the
Securities and Exchange Commission (the Report) fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934; and

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



/s/    LEO M.
CHUPASKALeo M. Chupaska Chief Financial Officer, Mohegan Tribal Gaming Authority February 14, 2008


A signed original of this written statement required by Section 906 has been provided
to the Authority and will be retained by the Authority and furnished to the Securities and Exchange Commission or its staff upon request.
Exhibit 32.2

Written Statement of Chief Financial Officer

Pursuant to Section 906

of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002 (18 U.S.C. Section 1350)

The undersigned, the Chief Financial Officer of the Mohegan Tribal Gaming Authority (the Authority), hereby certifies that, to his knowledge, on the date hereof:

(a) the Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q of the Authority for the quarter ended June 30, 2006 filed on the date hereof with the
Securities and Exchange Commission (the Report) fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934; and

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



/s/    LEO M. CHUPASKALeo M. ChupaskaChief Financial Officer,Mohegan Tribal Gaming AuthorityAugust 9, 2006


A signed original of this written statement required by Section 906 has been provided
to the Authority and will be retained by the Authority and furnished to the Securities and Exchange Commission or its staff upon request.
#### UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff-Appellee v. Jose Alfredo ARAGUZ-RAMIREZ, Defendant-Appellant

No. 16-40377 Conference Calendar

United States Court of Appeals, Fifth Circuit.

Date Filed: 12/20/2016

*920Renata Ann Gowie, Assistant U.S. Attorney, U.S. Attorney’s Office, Southern District of Texas, Houston, TX, for Plaintiff-Appellee

Jose Alfredo Araguz-Ramirez, Pro Se

Before DENNIS, PRADO, and OWEN, Circuit Judges.

PER CURIAM: *

The Federal Public Defender appointed to represent Jose Alfredo Araguz-Ramirez has moved for leave to withdraw and has filed a brief in accordance with *Anders v. California,*386 U.S. 738, 87 S.Ct. 1396, 18 L.Ed.2d 493 (1967), and *United States v. Flores,*632 F.3d 229 (5th Cir. 2011). Araguz-Ramirez has not filed a response. We have reviewed counsel’s brief and the relevant portions of the record reflected therein. We concur with counsel’s assessment that the appeal presents no nonfrivolous issue for appellate review. Accordingly, counsel’s motion for leave to withdraw is GRANTED, counsel is excused from further responsibilities herein, and the APPEAL IS DISMISSED. *See*5th Cir. R. 42.2.

*

 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 Matter of Avon Western Corporation, Appellant, against Daniel P. Woolley, as Commissioner of Public Markets of the City of New York, et al., Respondents.

Submitted January 3, 1944;

decided January 13, 1944.

Motion to amend remittitur granted. Return of remittitur requested and when returned it will be amended by adding thereto the following: The petitioner appellant contended that section B36-83.0 of the Administrative, Code of the City of New York (L. 1937, eh. 929) violates the provisions of the Fourteenth Amendment to the Constitution of the United States. This court held that the aforesaid provisions of the Administrative Code of the City of New York do not violate the Fourteenth Amendment to the Constitution of the United States. (See 291 N. Y. 687.)
SERVED: March 7, 2013 

U.S. DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION 

OFFICE OF HEARINGS 

WASHINGTON~ DC 

In The Matter Of: 

NORTHEASTERN 

AVIATION, CORP. 

Respondent 

' ) 

) 

) 

) 

) 

) 

D9cket No. FAA-2012-1264 

Case No. 2012EA110030 

ORDER RESETTING RULE 16 LITIGATION SCHEDULING CONFERENCE AND 

DEADLINE FOR RULE 26(t) SUBMISSION 

On March 1, 2013, an Order Setting Rule 16 Litigation Scheduling Conference and 

Directing Rule 26(t) Planning and Submission was filed. Among other things, this Order set the 

Rule 16 Litigation Scheduling Conference for Wednesday, May 15, 2013, at 10:00 a.m. Eastern 

time and ordered the parties to file a Ru1e 26(f), proposed scheduling/discovery plan on or before 

May 8, 2013. 

On March 5, 2013, Complainant's Counsel contacted Office of Hearings (OH) attorney 

staft'to point out that he had previously notified OH ofhis unavailability on certain dates 

including May 15, 2013. Complainant's Counsel provided alternate dates for consideration. OH 

attorney staff contacted Respondent's Counsel to check his availability on the. alternate date. 

Respondent's Counsel had no objection. to the change in date. 

IT IS HEREBY ORDERED: 

1. The Rule 16 Litigation Scheduling Conference previously set for May 15, 2013, at 

10:00 a.m. Eastern time is reset to Monday, May 20,2013, at 11:00 a.m. 

2. The deadline for the parties to file their Ru1e 26(t), proposedschedu1ing/discovery 

plan previously set for May 8, 2013 is reset to Monday, May 13, 2013. 

Attachment: Service List 
SERVICE LIST- BY U.S. MAIL 

ORIGINAL & ONE COPY 

Federal Aviation Administration 

800 Independence Avenue, S.W. 

Washington, DC 20591 

Attention: Hearing Docket Clerk, AGC-430 

Wilbur Wright Building-Suite 2W1 0001 

Mr. Zachary M. Berman, Esq. 

Complainant's Counsel 

Office of the Regional Cmmsel 

Eastern Region 

Federal Aviation Administration 

1 Aviation Plaza 

Jamaica, NY 11434 

TEL: 718-553-3258 

FAX: 718-995-5699 

ONE COPY 

Mr. James Ehrig, Esq. 

Respondent's Counsel 

. Eckert Seamans Cherin & Mellot, LLC 

1717 Pennsylvania Avenue, NW, 12th Floor 

Washington, DC 20006-4604 

TEL: 202-659-6672 

FAX: 202-659-6699 

jehrig@eckertseamans.corn 

JudgeJ.E. Sullivan, 

US. Administrative Law Judge 

Office of Hearings, M-20 

U.S. Department of Transportation 

1200 New Jersey Avenue, S.E. (Ell-310) 

Washington, DC 20590 

TEL: 202-366-2132 

FAX: 202-366-7536 

FDMS No. FAA-2012-1264 

(Civil Penalty Action) 

1 Service was by U.S. Mail. For service in person or by expedited courier, use the following address: Federal 

Aviation Administration, 600 Independence Avenue, S.W., Wilbur Wright Building-Suite 2Wl000, Washington, 

DC 20591; Attention: Hearing Docket Clerk, AGC-430.