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

                    CERTIFICATION OF CHIEF EXECUTIVE OFFICER
                                   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 BonusAmerica Worldwide Corp on
Form 10-QSB for the three-month period ended June 30, 2005 as filed with the
Securities and Exchange Commission (the "Report"), I, Michael Mak, Chief
Executive Officer and a director of BonusAmerica Worldwide Corp., certify,
pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, as added by Section 906 of the
Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that:

      1.    The Report fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) or
            15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934; and

      2.    To my knowledge, the information contained in the Report fairly
            presents, in all material respects, the financial condition and
            results of operations of the Company as of and for the period
            covered by the Report.


August 22, 2005                         /s/ Michael Mak
                                        -----------------------
                                        Michael Mak
                                        Chief Executive Officer
Exhibit 32

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 of Territorial Bancorp Inc. (the Company) on Form 10-K/A for the year ended December 31, 2010 as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission (the Report), the undersigned, Allan S. Kitagawa, Chairman of the
Board, President and Chief Executive Officer of the Company, and Melvin M. Miyamoto, Senior Vice President and Treasurer, each certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, as adopted pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of
2002, that to best of his 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/ Allan S. Kitagawa                                        |  |  |  | Date: March 24, 2011
|Allan S. Kitagawa                                            |  |  |  |                     
|Chairman of the Board, President and Chief Executive Officer |  |  |  |                     
|                                                             |  | 
|/s/ Melvin M. Miyamoto                                       |  |  |  | Date: March 24, 2011
|Melvin M. Miyamoto                                           |  |  |  |                     
|Senior Vice President and Treasurer                          |  |  |  |                     

A signed original of this written statement required by Section 906 has been provided to Territorial Bancorp
Inc. and will be retained by Territorial Bancorp Inc. and furnished to the Securities and Exchange Commission or its staff upon request.
EX PARTE Christopher Lee CRAWFORD, Applicant

NO. WR-89,600-01

Court of Criminal Appeals of Texas.

FILED: March 20, 2019

**DISSENTING OPINION**

Today, the Court once again grants relief on the basis that the statute the applicant was convicted under- TEX. PEN. CODE § 33.021(b) -was held to be facially unconstitutional in *Ex parte Lo,*424 S.W.3d 10 (Tex. Crim. App. 2013). Applicant was charged by indictment for the offense of online solicitation of a minor. Specifically, the indictment stated that Applicant sent sexually explicit electronic messages to a minor with the intent to arouse or gratify the sexual desires of any person. Applicant pled guilty to the offense of online solicitation of a minor in 2010. He was sentenced to confinement in prison for a period of five years and he did not appeal his conviction. Applicant has discharged his sentence, but he claims that he is suffering collateral consequences, namely that the conviction is "preventing an accurate determination of [Applicant's] criminal history" in a federal prosecution of Applicant for online enticement of a minor and travel with intent to engage in illicit sexual conduct with a minor. 18 U.S.C. § 2422(b) & 18 U.S.C. § 2423(b).

I dissent to the Court's order granting Applicant post-conviction relief in this case for the reasons stated in my dissenting opinions in *Ex parte Fournier* and *Ex parte Mitcham* . *See**Ex parte Fournier* , 473 S.W.3d 789, 800-05 (Tex. Crim. App. 2015) (Yeary, J., dissenting) ("The windfall that inevitably flows from judicially declaring an overbroad penal provision to be facially unconstitutional need not extend so far as to apply retroactively to grant habeas corpus relief to applicants who have *714suffered no First Amendment infraction themselves."); *Ex parte Mitcham* , 542 S.W.3d 561, 562-67 (Tex. Crim. App. 2018) (Yeary, J., dissenting) ("The Court in [*Ex parte* ] *Lo* seems to have discounted to an important degree, the language in Section 33.021(b) which focused on the intentional involvement of minors in the 'arous[al] or gratif[ication] of sexual desires' by way of the delivery to them of sexually explicit materials, and chose to focus instead simply on the content of the speech at issue.").
Exhibit 10.28
 AMENDMENT NUMBER 2
TO THE
WILLBROS GROUP, INC.
AMENDED AND RESTATED
2006 DIRECTOR RESTRICTED STOCK PLAN
 Introduction .
 Purpose .
 Amendments .
 (a)
    
    The following new definitions shall be inserted in their respective
alphabetically appropriate places in Section 2 (Definitions) of the Amended and
Restated Plan:
   (b)
    
    Section 6(b) of the Amended and Restated Plan shall be amended to read in its
entirety as follows:
 Annual Awards




---



##### 



No Change .
 Effective Date .
  ATTEST:
    
    
    
    WILLBROS GROUP, INC./s/ Lori Pinder
    
    
    
    By:
    
    /s/ Robert R. HarlLori Pinder
    
    
    
    
    
    Robert R. HarlDeputy Corporate Secretary
    
    
    
    
    
    President and Chief Executive Officer
   2
```

[Federal Register Volume 78, Number 49 (Wednesday, March 13, 2013)]
[Notices]
[Page 16029]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Printing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2013-05795]

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

DEPARTMENT OF STATE

[Public Notice 8230]

Waiver of Restriction on Assistance to the Central Government of 
Angola

    Pursuant to Section 7031(b)(3) of the Department of State, Foreign 
Operations, and Related Programs Appropriations Act, 2012 (Div. I, Pub. 
L. 112-74) (``the Act''), and Department of State Delegation of 
Authority Number 245-1, I hereby determine that it is important to the 
national interest of the United States to waive the requirements of 
Section 7031(b)(1) of the Act with respect to Angola and I hereby waive 
this restriction.
    This determination and the accompanying Memorandum of Justification 
shall be reported to the Congress, and the determination shall be 
published in the Federal Register.

    Dated: June 13, 2012.
Thomas R. Nides,
Deputy Secretary for Management and Resources.

    Editorial Note:  This document was received in the Office of the 
Federal Register on March 8, 2013.

[FR Doc. 2013-05795 Filed 3-12-13; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4710-26-P
```
Donniest KENNEDY, Appellant/Petitioner(s), v. Grady C. JUDD, Sheriff, et al., Appellee/Respondent(s).

CASE NO.: 2D17-1044

District Court of Appeal of Florida, Second District.

March 28, 2017

**DECISION WITHOUT PUBLISHED OPINION**

Granted.
----

Notice concerning the anti-dumping duty in force in respect of imports into the Community of certain hot-rolled flat products of non-alloy steel originating, inter alia, in Romania: change of the name of a company subject to an individual anti-dumping duty rate

(2005/C 159/03)

Imports of certain hot-rolled flat products of non-alloy steel originating, inter alia, in Romania are subject to a definitive anti-dumping duty, imposed by Commission Decision No 1758/2000/ECSC (1) (‘the Decision’), as last amended by Decision No 979/2002/ECSC (2).

It is recalled that in view of the expiry of the Treaty establishing the European Coal and Steel Community on 23 July 2002, the Council, by Regulation (EC) No 963/2002 (3), decided that anti-dumping proceedings initiated pursuant to Commission Decision No 2277/96/ECSC (4) and still in force on that date shall be continued and be governed by the provisions of Regulation (EC) No 384/96 (5) (‘the basic Regulation’) with effect from 24 July 2002. Likewise, any anti-dumping measures resulting from pending anti-dumping investigations are governed by the provisions of the basic Regulation from 24 July 2002.

Sidex S.A., a company located in Romania, whose exports to the Community of certain hot-rolled flat products of non-alloy steel were subject to an individual anti-dumping duty rate of 5,7 % by the Decision changed its name to Ispat Sidex S.A. in 2002. By a notice published in the Official Journal in 2002 (6), it was concluded that the change of name in no way affected the findings of the Decision and that the reference to Sidex S.A. should be read as Ispat Sidex S.A. in Article 1(2) of the Decision. Ispat Sidex S.A. has now informed the Commission that it has changed its name to Mittal Steel Galati S.A. The name change applies as of 7 February 2005, i.e. the date when the name change was registered in the official register of Romania. The company has argued that the change of name does not affect the right of the company to benefit from the individual duty rate applied to the company under its previous name of Ispat Sidex S.A.

The Commission has examined the information supplied and concluded that the change of name in no way affects the findings of Decision No 1758/2000/ECSC as last amended by Decision No 979/2002/ECSC. Therefore, the reference to Sidex S.A. should be read as Mittal Steel Galati S.A. in Article 1(2) of Decision No 1758/2000/ECSC.

The Taric additional code A069 previously attributed to Ispat Sidex S.A. shall apply to Mittal Steel Galati S.A.

----

(1)OJ L 202, 10.8.2000, p. 21.

(2)OJ L 150, 8.6.2002, p. 36.

(3)OJ L 149, 7.6.2002, p. 3. Regulation as last amended by Regulation (EC) No 1310/2002 (OJ L 192, 20.7.2002, p. 9).

(4)OJ L 308, 29.11.1996, p. 11.

(5)OJ L 56, 6.3.1996, p. 1. Regulation as last amended by Regulation (EC) No 461/2004 (OJ L 77, 13.3.2004, p. 12).

(6)OJ C 227, 24.9.2002, p. 8.

----
Arizona Helicopter Adventures, LLC

235 Air Terminal Drive

Sedona, AZ 86336

Ph: 928.282.0904

Fax: 928.282.1045

GRANT OF EXEMPTION

By letter dated December 7, 2011, Arizona Helicopter Adventures, LLC. 235 Air Terminal Dr. 

Sedona, AZ 86336 petitioned the Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) for an exemption from 

part 121, appendices I and J of title 14, Code of Federal Regulations (14 CFR). The proposed 

exemption, if granted, would permit Arizona Helicopter Adventures which is operating under 

separate parts of the regulations, to cover its safety-sensitive employees under one testing 

program.

Requesting relief from the following regulation:

Part 121, appendices I and J of Title 14, prescribes, in pertinent part, that the drug and alcohol 

testing program is designed to prevent accidents and injuries that result from the use of 

prohibited drugs and the misuse of alcohol by any employee who performs safety sensitive 

functions for a part 119 certificate holder with authority to operate under parts 121 and/or 135 or 

an operator as defined in 91.147.

Supporting material:

Arizona Helicopter Adventures is petitioning the FAA for an exemption from the regulatory

requirements to implement two drug and alcohol testing programs for its part 135 air carrier 

operations and part 91 air tour operations under the same name. Under the current situation, 

pilots and mechanics have the possibility of being randomly tested for both operations at the 

same time. Arizona Helicopter Adventures contends that the requirement to implement duplicate 

programs increases the cost of operations and is a financial hardship to a company of its size. 

Arizona Helicopter Adventures claims it can adequately manage all personnel under one drug 

and alcohol testing program and still meet an equivalent level of safety with no adverse effects.

Arizona Helicopter Adventures also contends that combining two testing programs into one will 

be in the public interest by reducing the cost of operations and the regulatory burden created by

requiring duplicate drug and alcohol programs.

Summary

Arizona Helicopter Adventures, LLC. is seeking an exemption from part 121, appendices I and J 

of title 14, Code of Federal Regulations (14 CFR). The proposed exemption, if granted, would 

permit Arizona Helicopter Adventures which is operating under separate parts of the regulations, 

to cover its safety-sensitive employees under one testing program with no adverse effects on the 

safety of operations. By doing so it would eliminate the additional financial and regulatory 
Arizona Helicopter Adventures, LLC

235 Air Terminal Drive

Sedona, AZ 86336

Ph: 928.282.0904

Fax: 928.282.1045

burdens created by requiring duplicate programs, which in turn would be beneficial and in the 

public’s interest by reducing the costs of operations.

Best Regards,

Rod Green

Director of Operations

Arizona Helicopter Adventures, LLC.
EXHIBIT 23


                       CONSENT OF INDEPENDENT ACCOUNTANTS




         We  consent  to the  incorporation  by  reference  in the  Registration
         Statement of FMS Financial  Corporation on Form S-8 (File No. 33-24340)
         of our report dated February 16, 1999 on our audits of the consolidated
         financial statements of FMS Financial  Corporation and Subsidiary as of
         December  31,  1998 and 1997  and for  each of the  three  years in the
         period  ended  December  31,  1998,  which  report is  incorporated  by
         reference in this Annual Report on Form 10-K.


         /s/ PricewaterhouseCoopers LLP
         --------------------------------------------
         PRICEWATERHOUSECOOPERS LLP





         2400 Eleven Penn Center
         Philadelphia, Pennsylvania
         March 26, 1999
Tyler R. PARKER, Movant/Appellant, v. STATE of Missouri, Respondent.

No. ED 106871

Missouri Court of Appeals, Eastern District, DIVISION TWO.

FILED: March 5, 2019

ATTORNEY FOR APPELLANT: Susan Alexander DeGeorge, Office of the State Public Defender, 1010 Market Street, Suite 1100, St. Louis, MO 63101.

ATTORNEY FOR RESPONDENT: Eric Schmitt, Attorney General, Shaun J. Mackelprang, Assistant Attorney General, P.O. Box 899, Jefferson City, MO 65102.

Before Philip M. Hess, P.J., Robert G. Dowd, Jr., J., and Mary K. Hoff, J.

*ORDER*

PER CURIAM

Tyler R. Parker ("Movant") appeals from the judgment denying his amended Rule 24.035 motion, arguing that the five-year sentence of imprisonment he received for stealing over $500 was not permitted under *State v. Bazell*, 497 S.W.3d 263 (Mo. banc 2016), which held that stealing over $500 was a misdemeanor offense, not a felony. *Bazell*, however, was handed down after Movant was sentenced, and as the State argued to the motion court, *Bazell* applies only prospectively, and not retrospectively, except to cases pending on direct appeal, pursuant to *State ex rel. Windeknecht v. Mesmer*, 530 S.W.3d 500, 503 (Mo. banc 2017). The motion court did not clearly err by denying Movant's amended Rule 24.035 motion on the basis that *Bazell* does not apply retrospectively to his case. The same has been held in *Watson v. State*, 545 S.W.3d 909, 915 (Mo. App. W.D. 2018), *Abrams v. State*, 550 S.W.3d 557, 558 (Mo. App. S.D. 2018), *Bosworth v. State*, 559 S.W.3d 5, 10 (Mo. App. E.D. 2018), *Whittley v. State*, 559 S.W.3d 401, 403-04 (Mo. App. E.D. 2018), and *Harris v. State*, 562 S.W.3d 363, 365 (Mo. App. S.D. 2018). An opinion would have no precedential value or serve any jurisprudential *821purpose. We affirm the Judgment pursuant to Rule 84.16(b).
Michael COLEMAN, Appellant, v. STATE of Florida, Appellee.

CASE NO. 1D17-2812

District Court of Appeal of Florida, First District.

Opinion filed November 14, 2017

**DECISION WITHOUT PUBLISHED OPINION**

AFFIRMED.
----

JUDGMENT OF THE COURT OF FIRST INSTANCE

of 14 April 2005

in Case T-260/03 Celltech R&D Ltd v Office for Harmonisation in the Internal Market (Trade Marks and Designs) (OHIM) (1)

(Community trade mark - Word mark CELLTECH - Absolute grounds for refusal - Distinctive character - Article 7(1)(b) of Regulation (EC) No 40/94)

(2005/C 155/31)

Language of the case: English

In Case T-260/03: Celltech R&D Ltd, established in Slough, Berkshire (United Kingdom), represented by D. Alexander, barrister, and N. Jenkins, solicitor, against the Office for Harmonisation in the Internal Market (Trade Marks and Designs) (OHIM) (Agents: I. de Medrano Caballero and A. Folliard-Monguiral) — action brought against the decision of the Second Board of Appeal of OHIM of 19 May 2003 (Case R 659/2002-2) concerning an application for registration as a Community trade mark of the word mark CELLTECH, — the Court of First Instance (Third Chamber), composed of M. Jaeger, President, V. Tiili and O. Czúcz, Judges; C. Kristensen, Administrator, for the Registrar, gave a judgment on 14 April 2005, in which it:

----

(1)OJ C 239 of 4.10.2003.

----
Sylvester PRUITT, Appellant, v. STATE of Missouri, Respondent.

No. ED 106702

Missouri Court of Appeals, Eastern District, DIVISION ONE.

Filed: April 23, 2019

FOR APPELLANT: Alexandria Shah, Assistant Public Defender, Office B/Area 68, 1010 Market St., Ste. 1100, St. Louis, MO 63101.

FOR RESPONDENT: Eric S. Schmitt, Attorney General, Dora A. Fichter, Asst. Atty. Gen., P.O. Box 899, Jefferson City, MO 65102.

Before Roy L. Richter, P.J., Robert M. Clayton III, J., and Angela T. Quigless, J.

*ORDER*

PER CURIAM.

Sylvester Pruitt appeals the judgment denying his Rule 24.035 motion for post-conviction relief without an evidentiary hearing. We find that the motion court's findings of fact and conclusions of law are not clearly erroneous.

No jurisprudential purpose would be served by a written opinion. We have, however, provided the parties a memorandum setting forth the reasons for our decision. The judgment of the motion court is affirmed under Rule 84.16(b).
Document Headings

                    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.                  

###### Department of the Interior

###### Bureau of Land Management 

          - [AA-8103-5 AK-964-1410-KC-P] 

# AGENCY:

Bureau of Land Management, Interior. 

# ACTION:

Notice of decision approving lands for conveyance.

# SUMMARY:

As required by 43 CFR 2650.7(d), notice is hereby given that an appealable decision approving the surface and subsurface estates in certain lands for conveyance pursuant to the Alaska Native Claims Settlement Act will be issued to Doyon, Limited. The lands are in the vicinity of Anvik, Alaska, and are located in: 

## Seward Meridian, Alaska 

T. 31 N., R. 57 W.,

Sec. 19. 

Containing 440.18 acres. 

T. 28 N., R. 58 W.,

Secs. 5, 8, and 17;

Secs. 20 and 29;

Secs. 30, 31, and 32. 

Containing 4,207.24 acres. 

Aggregating 4,647.42 acres.

Notice of the decision will also be published four times in the Fairbanks Daily News-Miner. 

# DATES:

The time limits for filing an appeal are: 

1. Any party claiming a property interest which is adversely affected by the decision shall have until April 23, 2009 to file an appeal. 

2. Parties receiving service of the decision by certified mail shall have 30 days from the date of receipt to file an appeal. 

Parties who do not file an appeal in accordance with the requirements of 43 CFR Part 4, Subpart E, shall be deemed to have waived their rights. 

      ( print page 12375)    

# ADDRESSES:

A copy of the decision may be obtained from: Bureau of Land Management, Alaska State Office, 222 West Seventh Avenue, #13, Anchorage, Alaska 99513-7504. 

# FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

                        The Bureau of Land Management by phone at 907-271-5960, or by e-mail at                         *ak.blm.conveyance@ak.blm.gov*. Persons who use a telecommunication device (TTD) may call the Federal Information Relay Service (FIRS) at 1-800-877-8330, 24 hours a day, seven days a week, to contact the Bureau of Land Management.                     

Robert L. Lloyd, 

Chief, Land Transfer Adjudication I.

[FR Doc. E9-6384 Filed 3-23-09; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 4310-JA-P
IV 

118TH CONGRESS 

1ST SESSION H. RES. 424 

Recognizing and commemorating the 100th anniversary of the birth of His 

Holiness Pramukh Swami Maharaj, the spiritual leader of the BAPS 

Swaminarayan Sanstha. 

IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES 

MAY 18, 2023 

Mr. LALOTA (for himself and Mr. GARBARINO) submitted the following resolution; which was referred to the Committee on Oversight and Accountability 

RESOLUTION 

Recognizing and commemorating the 100th anniversary of 

the birth of His Holiness Pramukh Swami Maharaj, 

the spiritual leader of the BAPS Swaminarayan Sanstha. 

Whereas, born on December 7, 1921, in the village of 

Chansad, Gujarat, India, Pramukh Swami Maharaj followed a spiritual path from an early age, seeking purity, 

renouncing material possessions, and possessing a striking humility, saintliness, and selfless desire to help all; 

Whereas His Holiness Pramukh Swami Maharaj was the fifth 

spiritual successor and guru of the BAPS Swaminarayan 

Sanstha (BAPS), a worldwide Hindu organization dedicated to promoting harmony between individuals, within 

families, and amongst diverse communities; 


kjohnson on DSK79L0C42PROD with BILLS
2 

•HRES 424 IH 

Whereas his unique combination of spirituality and leadership 

has grown BAPS globally, encompassing more than 

1,100 mandirs worldwide and 150 centers in North 

America, and created grand stone mandirs in Houston, 

Chicago, Toronto, Atlanta, Los Angeles, and 

Robbinsville; 

Whereas these mandirs offer a welcoming and spiritual space 

for thousands of families, as well as worship, fellowship, 

communal meals, education, and activities for young and 

old, creating a true home for the faithful; 

Whereas a rare soul, His Holiness Pramukh Swami Maharaj 

always lived for others; 

Whereas His Holiness Pramukh Swami Maharaj’s unique 

message to the world is ‘‘In the joy of others, lies our 

own’’, and his words were thoughtful, meaningful, and 

consoling, coming from the depth of profound experience 

and deep compassion; and 

Whereas His Holiness Pramukh Swami Maharaj always gave 

enlightenment, guidance, and wisdom to the many entrusted to his care and administered abundantly and 

unstintingly to the spiritual and corporal needs of all: 

Now, therefore, be it 

1 Resolved, That the House of Representatives recog2 nizes and commemorates the 100th anniversary of the 

3 birth of His Holiness Pramukh Swami Maharaj, the spir4 itual leader of the BAPS Swaminarayan Sanstha. 

Æ 


kjohnson on DSK79L0C42PROD with BILLS