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


                             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  of  Mortgage  Assistance  Center
Corporation  (the  "Company")  on Form 10-KSB for the period ended  December 31,
2006, as filed with the  Securities  and Exchange  Commission on the date hereof
(the "Report"),  I Ron Johnson,  Chief Executive Officer of the Company,  hereby
certify,  pursuant to 18 U.S.C.  ss. 1350, as adopted pursuant to ss. 906 of the
Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that to 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  operation of the
Company.



Date: April 17, 2007            By:      /s/ Ron Johnson
                                   ---------------------------------------------
                                     Ron Johnson,
                                     President and Chief Executive Officer
2017-0023.

#### State v. Shank.

Medina App. No. 14CA0090-M, 2016-Ohio-7819.

DeWine, J., dissents and would accept the cause on proposition of law No. IV.
DLA Distribution Yokosuka, Japan’s Master Labor Contract employees presented Length-of-Service Awards by the Japanese Government
 
  By Tomo Masuyoshi, DLA Distribution Yokosuka, Japan
  The Japanese government presented length of service awards to Defense Logistics Agency Distribution Yokosuka, Japan employees Oct. 18 at the Yokosuka City Cultural Hall. Twenty DLA DDYJ personnel, known as master labor contractors, received 10-year, 20-year and 30-year service awards that reflect their dedication to the United States Navy mission in Japan and the strong bonds forged between the U.S. and Japan. Of those receiving commendations, 13 MLC’s attended the ceremony along with hundreds of other MLC’s working at various commands onboard U.S. Naval Base Yokosuka. In his opening remarks, Isao Koba, director general, Japan's South Kanto Defense Bureau, congratulated and encouraged MLC employees to continue their duties to further support and strengthen the ties between the nations of Japan and United States of America. According to Koba, "All of you are engaged in important duties for the smooth and effective operation of installations of the U.S. Forces in Japan. I hope you will succeed in your future duties by making full use of your rich knowledge and experience and further contribute as a bridge between Japan and the U.S. through your daily work at your workplace." DDYJ Commander, Navy Cmdr. Allen “AJ” Rivera, commented that, “Our Japanese employees account for over 70% of our DDYJ workforce. They proudly represent Defense Logistics Agency and the Government of Japan with their continued commitment to the warfighter and the mission in support of the homeland defense of Japan.”
DEPARTMENTOFHEALTH&.HUMANSERVICESOfficeoftheSecretaryJackE.Housenger,DirectorOfficeofPesticideProgramsU.S.EnvironmentalProtectionAgencyWashington,DC20460DearMr.Housenger:WashingtonDC20201ThankyoufornotifyingtheU.S.DepartmentofHealthandHumanServices(HHS)ofthedraftfinalruleentitled,HPesticides;RevisionstoMinimumRiskExemption."HHSwaivesreviewofthefinalrule.HHSappreciatestheopportunitytoreviewthefinalrule,andifyouhaveadditionalquestionsconcerningthismatterpleasecontactJamarHawkinsofmystaff.HecanbereachedatJamar.Hawkins@hhs.govor202.205.6380.Sincerely,V}lflt(tt#uullti{uk({2!Zt{c_MadhuraC.ValverdeExecutiveSecretarytotheDepartment
CAAP-12-0000036

#### U.S. Bank Nat. Ass’n v. Association of Apartment Owners of Makaha Valley Plantation

Vacated and Remanded
# Central Ohio, DSCC honor Veterans

/ Published Nov. 25, 2019
COLUMBUS, Ohio, 
Defense Supply Center Columbus associates took part in the annual Central Ohio Veterans Day Parade Nov. 8 to kick off a weekend of festivities honoring our nation’s veterans. The theme of this year’s celebration, The Greatest Generation, recognized World War II veterans and included several World War II-era floats and displays.

The annual event draws representatives together from military and government entities across the region to show support for the nation’s military. Navy Capt. Jeffrey Schmidt joined guests on the reviewing stand as the senior Defense Supply Center Columbus representative. Schmidt oversees the Maritime Supplier Operations directorate at DSCC’s Defense Logistics Agency Land and Maritime headquarters. In this capacity, he leads a team of 650 associates responsible for 1.7 million items that support the operating forces of the U.S. military.

Parade highlights included performances and displays from local school bands, law enforcement, military units, Reserve Officer Training Corps units, community groups and veterans organizations. The 179th Air Wing from Mansfield, Ohio, kicked off the parade with a C-130 flyover. Military vehicles and patriotic floats were on full display, including an operational 1945 Sherman Tank that served as lead vehicle in front of the parade’s Grand Marshalls – a busload of World War II veterans. The tank was provided by the Allen County

Museum and Historical Society along with support from the Liberty Aviation Museum and several Ohio Veterans of Foreign Wars charities.

The free, public parade was sponsored by the Military/Veterans Educational Foundation – commonly known as MilVets. As is tradition, the final float to conclude the parade was hosted by the U.S. Marines collecting donations toward Toys for Tots.
**EXHIBIT 32.1**

 

**CERTIFICATION PURSUANT TO18 U.S.C. SECTION 1350,AS ADOPTED PURSUANT TOSECTION 906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002**

 

In connection with theQuarterly Report of Mines Management, Inc. (the “Company”) on Form 10-Qfor the quarter ended September 30, 2010, as filed with the Securities andExchange Commission on the date hereof (the “Report”), the undersigned herebycertifies, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. §1350, as adopted pursuant to §906 of theSarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that:

 

(1) The Report fullycomplies with the requirements of section 13(a) or 15(d) of theSecurities Exchange Act of 1934; and

 

(2) The informationcontained in the Report fairly presents, in all material respects, thefinancial condition and result of operations of the Company.

 

 
| \s\ Glenn M. Dobbs                     |   |
|----------------------------------------|--------|
| Glenn M. Dobbs                         |   |
| President and Chief  Executive Officer |   |
| November 15, 2010                 |   |

 

A signed original of thiswritten statement required by Section 906 has been provided to MinesManagement, Inc. and will be retained by Mines Management, Inc andfurnished to the Securities and Exchange Commission or its staff upon request.

 

----
|                                                                             
|-----------------------------------------------------------------------------
|                                                                             
|View History:  Monthly  Annual Download Data (XLS File)                     
|View History:  Monthly  Annual                                               
|View History:  Monthly  Annual                                               
|View History:                                                                
|                                                                             
|Port Huron, MI Natural Gas Pipeline Imports From Canada  (Million Cubic Feet)
|                                                                             
|                                                                             
|Port Huron, MI Natural Gas Pipeline Imports From Canada  (Million Cubic Feet)
|                                                                             

|Decade                                                                                                                            | Year-0 | Year-1 | Year-2 | Year-3 | Year-4 | Year-5 | Year-6 | Year-7 | Year-8 | Year-9
|--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- | ------ | ------ | ------ | ------ | ------ | ------ | ------ | ------ | ------ | ------
|2010's                                                                                                                            |        |        |        |        |        | 0      | 779    | 2,755  | 1,104  | 498   
|2020's                                                                                                                            | 0      | 0      | 0      |        |        |        |        |        |        |       
|- = No Data Reported;  -- = Not Applicable;  NA = Not Available;  W = Withheld to avoid disclosure of individual company data.
|                                                                                                                                 
|Release Date: 5/31/2024                                                                                                          
|Next Release Date: 6/28/2024
II

103D CONGRESS

2D SESSION S. 2081

To amend the Internal Revenue Code of 1986 to treat recycling facilities

as exempt facilities under the tax-exempt bond rules, and for other purposes.

IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES

MAY 5 (legislative day, MAY 2), 1994

Mr. GREGG introduced the following bill; which was read twice and referred

to the Committee on Finance

A BILL

To amend the Internal Revenue Code of 1986 to treat recycling facilities as exempt facilities under the tax-exempt

bond rules, 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. SHORT TITLE.

4 This Act may be cited as the ‘‘Environmental Infra5 structure Financing Act of 1994’’.

6 SEC. 2. RECYCLING FACILITIES TREATED AS EXEMPT

7 FACILITIES.

8 (a) TREATMENT AS EXEMPT FACILITY BOND.—Sub9 section (a) of section 142 of the Internal Revenue Code

10 of 1986 (defining exempt facility bond) is amended by
2

•S 2081 IS

1 striking ‘‘or’’ at the end of paragraph (11), by striking

2 the period at the end of paragraph (12) and inserting ‘‘,

3 or’’, and by adding at the end the following new para4 graph:

5 ‘‘(13) qualified recycling facilities.’’

6 (b) QUALIFIED RECYCLING FACILITIES DEFINED.—

7 Section 142 of the Internal Revenue Code of 1986 (defin8 ing exempt facility bond) is amended by adding at the end

9 the following new subsection:

10 ‘‘(k) QUALIFIED RECYCLING FACILITIES.—

11 ‘‘(1) IN GENERAL.—For purposes of subsection

12 (a)(13), the term ‘qualified recycling facilities’

13 means any facility used exclusively—

14 ‘‘(A) to sort and prepare municipal, indus15 trial, and commercial refuse for recycling, or

16 ‘‘(B) in the recycling of qualified refuse.

17 ‘‘(2) QUALIFIED REFUSE.—For purposes of

18 paragraph (1), the term ‘qualified refuse’ means—

19 ‘‘(A) yard waste,

20 ‘‘(B) food waste,

21 ‘‘(C) waste paper and paperboard,

22 ‘‘(D) plastic scrap,

23 ‘‘(E) rubber scrap,

24 ‘‘(F) ferrous and nonferrous scrap metal,

25 ‘‘(G) waste glass,
3

•S 2081 IS

1 ‘‘(H) construction and demolition waste,

2 and

3 ‘‘(I) biosolids (sewage sludge).

4 ‘‘(3) RECYCLING.—For purposes of this sub5 section, the term ‘recycling’ includes either—

6 ‘‘(A) processing (including composting)

7 qualified refuse to a point at which such refuse

8 has commercial value; or

9 ‘‘(B) manufacturing products from quali10 fied refuse when such refuse constitutes at least

11 40 percent, by weight or volume, of the total

12 materials introduced into the manufacturing

13 process.

14 ‘‘(4) SPECIAL RULE.—Refuse shall not fail to

15 be treated as waste merely because such refuse has

16 a market value at the place such refuse is located

17 only by reason of the value of such refuse for

18 recycling.’’

19 (c) EFFECTIVE DATE.—The amendments made by

20 this section shall apply to bonds issued after the date of

21 the enactment of this Act.

Æ
```

[Congressional Bills 103th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[S. 2021 Introduced in Senate (IS)]

103d CONGRESS
  2d Session
                                S. 2021

   To clarify the statute of limitations for actions brought by the 
    Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation and the Resolution Trust 
                Corporation as conservator or receiver.

_______________________________________________________________________

                   IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES

               April 14 (legislative day, April 11), 1994

 Mr. Riegle (for himself, Mr. D'Amato, Mr. Kerry, and Mr. Metzenbaum) 
 (by request) introduced the following bill; which was read twice and 
    referred to the Committee on Banking, Housing, and Urban Affairs

_______________________________________________________________________

                                 A BILL

 
   To clarify the statute of limitations for actions brought by the 
    Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation and the Resolution Trust 
                Corporation as conservator or receiver.

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

SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE.

    This Act may be cited as the ``Bank and Thrift Statute of 
Limitations Clarification Act of 1994''.

SEC. 2. AMENDMENTS TO FEDERAL DEPOSIT INSURANCE ACT.

    Section 11(d)(14)(B)(i) of the Federal Deposit Insurance Act (12 
U.S.C. 1821(d)(14)(B)(i)) is amended by inserting after ``receiver'' 
the following: ``, regardless of whether the claim may have been barred 
under any otherwise applicable statute of limitation at the date of 
such appointment, unless such claim was barred more than 5 years before 
the date of such appointment''.

SEC. 3. APPLICABILITY.

    The provisions of this Act shall apply to all actions pending or 
brought by the Corporation as conservator or receiver on or after 
August 9, 1989.

                                 <all>
```
**UN PUBLISHED** 

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

**No. 15**  **- 7854** 

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA , Plaintiff

- Appellee ,

v.

DAVID LEE WILLIAMS , Defendant

- Appellant

.

Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of South Carolina , at Florence

. R. Bryan Harwell , District Judge. ( 4:13

- cr
- 01009

- RBH

- 1 )

Submitted : January 14, 2016 Decided: January 20, 2016

Before AGEE , WYNN, and FLOYD, Circuit Judges.

Affirmed by un published per curiam opinion

.

David Lee Williams , Appellant Pro Se. Alfred William Walker Bethea, Jr., Assistant United States Attorney, Florence , South Carolina, for Appellee.

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.2 PER CURIAM:
David Lee Williams appeals the district court’s order
denying his 18 U.S.C. § 3582(c)(2) (2012) motion for reduction

of sentence . We have reviewed the record and find no reversible
error. Accordingly, we affirm for the reasons stated by the

district court. Unite d States v. Williams , No. 4:13

- cr
- 01009

-

RBH

- 1 (D.S.C. Nov. 6, 2015)

. We dispense with oral argument
because the facts and legal contentions are adequately presented

in the materials before th is court and argument would not aid
the decisional process.

AFFIRMED
2016-1334.

#### State ex rel. Gwiazda v. Indus. Comm.

Franklin App. No. 15AP-882, 2016-Ohio-5153. On joint application for dismissal. Application granted. Cause dismissed.
|                                                                                       
|---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
|                                                                                       
|View History: Annual Download Data (XLS File)                                         
|View History: Annual                                                                   
|View History: Annual                                                                   
|View History:                                                                          
|                                                                                       
|Missouri Natural Gas Number of Industrial Consumers - Transported  (Number of Elements)
|                                                                                       
|                                                                                       
|Missouri Natural Gas Number of Industrial Consumers - Transported  (Number of Elements)
|                                                                                       

|Decade                                                                                                                            | Year-0 | Year-1 | Year-2 | Year-3 | Year-4 | Year-5 | Year-6 | Year-7 | Year-8 | Year-9
|--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- | ------ | ------ | ------ | ------ | ------ | ------ | ------ | ------ | ------ | ------
|1990's                                                                                                                            |        |        |        |        |        |        |        |        | 418    | 417   
|2000's                                                                                                                            | 465    | 510    | 515    | 534    | 565    | 551    | 594    |        |        |       
|2010's                                                                                                                            | 536    | 517    | 861    | 557    | 648    | 752    | 735    | 736    | 747    | 762   
|2020's                                                                                                                            | 762    | 752    | 744    |        |        |        |        |        |        |       
|- = No Data Reported;  -- = Not Applicable;  NA = Not Available;  W = Withheld to avoid disclosure of individual company data.
|                                                                                                                                 
|Release Date: 7/31/2024                                                                                                          
|Next Release Date: 8/30/2024
NOTICE: NOT FOR OFFICIAL PUBLICATION.

UNDER ARIZONA RULE OF THE SUPREME COURT 111(c), THIS DECISION IS NOT PRECEDENTIAL

AND MAY BE CITED ONLY AS AUTHORIZED BY RULE.

IN THE

ARIZONA COURT OF APPEALS

DIVISION ONE

STATE OF ARIZONA, Respondent,

v.

LENROY TONY JOHNSON, Petitioner.

No. 1 CA-CR 19-0403 PRPC

Petition for Review from the Superior Court in Maricopa County

No. CR 1994-003264

The Honorable Michael J. Herrod, Judge

AFFIRMED

APPEARANCES

Maricopa County Attorney’s Office, Phoenix

By Daniel Strange

Counsel for Respondent

Lenroy Tony Johnson, Globe

Petitioner

FILED 3-26-2020
STATE v. JOHNSON

Decision of the Court

2

MEMORANDUM DECISION

Presiding Judge Michael J. Brown delivered the decision of the Court, in 

which Judge Kenton D. Jones and Judge D. Steven Williams joined.

B R O W N, Judge:

¶1 Petitioner Lenroy Tony Johnson seeks review of the superior 

court’s order denying his petition for post-conviction relief, filed pursuant 

to Arizona Rule of Criminal Procedure 32.1. This is petitioner’s eighth 

successive petition.

¶2 Absent an abuse of discretion or error of law, this court will 

not disturb a superior court’s ruling on a petition for post-conviction relief. 

State v. Gutierrez, 229 Ariz. 573, 577, ¶ 19 (2012). It is petitioner’s burden to 

show that the superior court abused its discretion by denying the petition 

for post-conviction relief. See State v. Poblete, 227 Ariz. 537, ¶ 1 (App. 2011) 

(petitioner has burden of establishing abuse of discretion on review).

¶3 We have reviewed the record in this matter, the superior 

court’s order denying the petition for post-conviction relief, and the petition 

for review. We find that petitioner has not established an abuse of 

discretion. 

¶4 For the foregoing reasons, we grant review and deny relief.
# L_2011338EN.01005501.xml

| 21.12.2011 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | L 338/55 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

21.12.2011

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

L 338/55

---

COUNCIL DECISION 2011/859/CFSP

of 19 December 2011

amending Decision 2010/232/CFSP renewing restrictive measures against Burma/Myanmar

THE COUNCIL OF THE EUROPEAN UNION,

Having regard to the Treaty on the European Union, and in particular Article 29 thereof,

Having regard to Council Decision 2010/232/CFSP of 26 April 2010 renewing restrictive measures against Burma/Myanmar (1), and in particular Article 14 thereof,

Whereas:

| (1) | On 26 April 2010, the Council adopted Decision 2010/232/CFSP renewing restrictive measures against Burma/Myanmar. |
| --- | --- |

(1)

On 26 April 2010, the Council adopted Decision 2010/232/CFSP renewing restrictive measures against Burma/Myanmar.

| (2) | The information relating to one entity on the list in Annex I to Decision 2010/232/CFSP should be updated. |
| --- | --- |

(2)

The information relating to one entity on the list in Annex I to Decision 2010/232/CFSP should be updated.

| (3) | Annex I to Decision 2010/232/CFSP should be amended accordingly, |
| --- | --- |

(3)

Annex I to Decision 2010/232/CFSP should be amended accordingly,

HAS ADOPTED THIS DECISION:

Article 1

In Annex I to Decision 2010/232/CFSP, the entry for Mayar (H.K) Ltd shall be replaced by the following:

| ‘Mayar India Ltd (Yangon Branch) |
| --- |
| 37, Rm (703/4), Level (7), Alanpya Pagoda Rd, La Pyayt Wun Plaza, Dagon, Yangon.’ |

‘Mayar India Ltd (Yangon Branch)

37, Rm (703/4), Level (7), Alanpya Pagoda Rd, La Pyayt Wun Plaza, Dagon, Yangon.’

Article 2

This Decision shall enter into force on the date of its adoption.

Done at Brussels, 19 December 2011.

For the Council

The President

M. KOROLEC

---

(1)  
  OJ L 105, 27.4.2010, p. 22.

1

---
#### Com. v. Fulmore 8

03/23/2016

622 EAL (2015)

8

. Justice WECHT did not participate in the consideration or decision of this matter.

Denied

Pa.Super., 131 A.3d 83