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



EXHIBIT 32.1 CERTIFICATION OF CHIEF EXECUTIVE OFFICER
PURSUANT TO
SECTION 906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002 I, Richard P. Brown, Chief Executive Officer of Atlantic Coast Entertainment
Holdings, Inc. (the Registrant), certify that to the best of my knowledge, based upon a
review of the quarterly report on Form 10-Q for the period ended March 31, 2005 of the Registrant
(the Report):  (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 Registrant. By:
    
    /s/ Richard P. BrownRichard P. BrownChief Executive Officer ofAtlantic Coast Entertainment Holdings, Inc.Date:
    
    May 10, 2005
 1
* 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this opinion should not be published and is not precedent except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.

United States Court of Appeals

Fifth Circuit

FILED

November 9, 2005

Charles R. Fulbruge III

Clerk

IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT

 

No. 05-40232

Summary Calendar

 

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,

Plaintiff-Appellee,

versus

BENITO AVILA-SALDANA,

Defendant-Appellant.

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

Appeal from the United States District Court

for the Southern District of Texas

USDC No. 2:04-CR-511-ALL

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

Before DAVIS, SMITH, and DENNIS, Circuit Judges. 

PER CURIAM:*

Benito Avila-Saldana appeals his guilty-plea conviction of

illegal reentry into the United States after having been

deported. Avila-Saldana argues that Almendarez-Torres v. United

States, 523 U.S. 224 (1998), has been undercut by later Supreme

Court opinions, particularly Apprendi v. New Jersey, 530 U.S. 466

(2000). Thus, he argues that the “felony” and “aggravated

felony” provisions of 8 U.S.C. § 1326(b) are unconstitutional. 

Avila-Saldana recognizes that relief is foreclosed but states
No. 05-40232

-2-

that he wishes to raise the issue for possible further review in

the Supreme Court. 

Apprendi did not overrule Almendarez-Torres. See Apprendi,

530 U.S. at 489-90. We must follow the precedent set in

Almendarez-Torres “unless and until the Supreme Court itself

determines to overrule it.” United States v. Mancia-Perez, 331

F.3d 464, 470 (5th Cir. 2003) (quotation marks and citation

omitted). Therefore, Avila-Saldana’s argument fails. See id.

The judgment of the district court is AFFIRMED.
##### 



Exhibit 32.2 CERTIFICATION OF CHIEF FINANCIAL
OFFICER REGARDING PERIODIC REPORT CONTAINING
FINANCIAL STATEMENTS I, Michael P. Huseby, the Chief Financial Officer of CCO Holdings, LLC and CCO
Holdings Capital Corp. (collectively, the Company) in compliance with 18
U.S.C. Section 1350, as adopted pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley
Act of 2002, hereby certify that, the Companys Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q
for the period ended June 30, 2004 (the Report) filed with the Securities and
Exchange Commission:  
    
    fully complies with the requirements of Section 15(d)
of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934; and
    
    the information contained in the Report fairly
presents, in all material respects, the financial condition and
results of operations of the Company. /s/ Michael P. HusebyMichael P. HusebyChief Financial Officer(Principal Financial Officer)August 13, 2004
##### Form 10-Q Table of Contents

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 SeaBright Insurance Holdings, Inc. (the
Company) on Form 10-Q for the period ended March 31, 2006, as filed with the
Securities and Exchange Commission (the Report), I, John G. Pasqualetto,
Chairman, President and Chief Executive Officer of the Company, certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. §1350,
as adopted pursuant to §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)  
          The information contained in the Report fairly presents, in all material
          respects, the financial condition and results of operations of the Company.

Dated: May 15, 2006

| |  |  |                                                                                            
| |  |  | -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
| |  |  | /s/ John G. PasquqalettoJohn G. PasquqalettoChairman, President and Chief Executive Officer

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 SeaBright Insurance Holdings, Inc. and will
be retained by SeaBright Inhsurance Holdings, Inc. and furnished to the Securities and Exchange Commission or its staff upon request.

---
STATE OF LOUISIANA

COURT OF APPEAL, FIRST CIRCUIT

STATE OF LOUISIANA

VERSUS

TYLER JUDSON

NO. 2022 KW 0152

MAY 9, 2022

In Re: State of Louisana, applying for supervisory writs, 

19th Judicial District Court, Parish of East Baton

Rouge, No. DC - 20- 02965. 

BEFORE: GUIDRY! HOLDRIDGE, AND CHUTZ, JJ. 

WRIT GRANTED. When a district court finds, even after

sentencing, that a plea of guilty is constitutionally infirm, it

retains the authority to vacate the sentence and set aside the

plea. State v. Allah, 2017- 0785 ( La. 1/ 9/ 18), 232 So. 3d 554

per curiam) ( citing State v. Lewis, 421 So. 2d 224, 226 ( La. 

1982)). A constitutionally infirm guilty plea may be set aside

either by means of an appeal or postconviction relief. State v. 

Dixon, 449 So. 2d 463, 464 ( La. 1984); State v. Young, 2020- 0049

La. App. 1st Cir. 11/ 6/ 20), 315 So. 3d 904, 907, writ denied, 

2020- 01402 ( La. 2/ 9/ 21), 310 So. 3d 177. In order to properly

exercise its discretion and in order for the appellate court to

review the exercise of that discretion, the trial court should

conduct a hearing or inquiry on defendant' s motion to withdraw a

guilty plea. State v. McGarr, 52, 641 ( La. App. 2d Cir. 4/ 10/ 19), 

268 So. 3d 1189, 1197 ( citing Lewis, 421 So. 2d at 225). 

The oral request to withdraw the guilty plea was improperly

granted where the record does not show the district court

received sworn testimony or evidence regarding defendant' s

request to withdraw his guilty plea in this case. Accordingly, 

the district court' s

ruling granting the motion to withdraw the

guilty plea is vacated, and this matter is remanded to the

district court. On remand, the district court should first

ascertain whether defendant — bearing in mind that he may

nonetheless be eligible for expungement in the future — desires

to withdraw his guilty plea. If he so wishes, only then should

the district court hold a

contradictory hearing to determine

whether the plea is constitutionally infirm and decide whether

the plea was induced by what defendant justifiably believed to

be a plea bargain but which, as a matter of law, could not be

kept. Allah, 232 So. 3d at 554; Dixon, 449 So. 2d at 464. 

JMG

GH

WRC

COURT OF APPEAL, FIRST CIRCUIT

DEPUTY CLERK OF COURT

FOR THE COURT
STATE of North Carolina v. Anthony Loan JONES.

No. 18P04.

Supreme Court of North Carolina.

May 6, 2004.

Richard E. Jester, Angier, for Jones.

R. Marcus Lodge, Special Deputy Attorney General, James E. Hardin, Jr., District Attorney, for State.

***ORDER***

Upon consideration of the notice of appeal from the North Carolina Court of Appeals, filed by the Defendant on the 14th day of January 2004 in this matter pursuant to G.S. 7A-30, and the motion to dismiss the appeal for lack of substantial constitutional question filed by the Attorney General, the following order was entered and is hereby certified to the North Carolina Court of Appeals: the motion to dismiss the appeal is

> "Allowed by order of the Court in conference, this the 6th day of May 2004."

Upon consideration of the petition filed on the 14th day of January 2004 by Defendant in this matter for discretionary review of the decision of the North Carolina Court of Appeals pursuant to G.S. 7A-31, the following order was entered and is hereby certified to the North Carolina Court of Appeals:

> "Denied by order of the Court in conference, this the 6th day of May 2004."
Ronnie Eugene MEEKS v. John A. CRAWFORD and Hinson Pulpwood Limited.

No. 617P03.

Supreme Court of North Carolina.

March 4, 2004.

Frank A. Cassiano, Greenville, Ben L. Eagles, Wilson, for Meeks.

Scott C. Hart, New Bern, for Crawford.

Harvey L. Cosper, Adam C. Shearer, Charlotte, for Hinson Pulpwood Limited.

***ORDER***

Upon consideration of the petition filed on the 25th day of November 2003 by Plaintiff in this matter for discretionary review of the decision of the North Carolina Court of Appeals pursuant to G.S. 7A-31, the following order was entered and is hereby certified to the North Carolina Court of Appeals:

> "Denied by order of the Court in conference, this the 4th day of March 2004."
UNPUBLISHED

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

No. 97-6817

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,

Plaintiff - Appellee,

versus

MARIKA LODY RUNNELLS,

Defendant - Appellant.

Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern

District of Virginia, at Norfolk. J. Calvitt Clarke, Jr., Senior

District Judge. (CR-88-53-N, CA-97-461-N)

Submitted: August 13, 1998 Decided: August 28, 1998

Before WIDENER and WILKINS, Circuit Judges, and HALL, Senior

Circuit Judge.

Dismissed by unpublished per curiam opinion.

Marika Lody Runnells, Appellant Pro Se. James Ashford Metcalfe,

Assistant United States Attorney, Karen L. Gore, OFFICE OF THE

UNITED STATES ATTORNEY, Norfolk, Virginia, for Appellee.

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.

See Local Rule 36(c).
2

PER CURIAM:

Appellant seeks to appeal the district court’s order denying

his motion filed under 28 U.S.C.A. § 2255 (West 1994 & Supp. 1998).

We have reviewed the record and the district court’s opinion and

find no reversible error. Accordingly, we deny a certificate of

appealability and dismiss the appeal. As a result of the statute of

limitations embodied in the Antiterrorism and Effective Death

Penalty Act of 1996, Pub. L. No. 104-132, 110 Stat 1214, Appellant

was required to file her § 2255 motion on or before April 23, 1997.

See Brown v. Angelone, ___ F.3d ___, 1998 WL 389030 (4th Cir. July

14, 1998) (Nos. 96-7173, 96-7208). Appellant submitted her motion

to prison officials for filing on April 24, 1997. See Houston v.

Lack, 487 U.S. 266, 270 (1988). We dispense with oral argument

because the facts and legal contentions are adequately presented in

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

DISMISSED
```

[Congressional Bills 113th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[H.R. 1513 Received in Senate (RDS)]

113th CONGRESS
  2d Session
                                H. R. 1513

_______________________________________________________________________

                   IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES

                            January 14, 2014

                                Received

_______________________________________________________________________

                                 AN ACT

 
 To revise the boundaries of the Gettysburg National Military Park to 
include the Gettysburg Train Station and certain land along Plum Run in 
 Cumberland Township, to limit the means by which property within such 
      revised boundaries may be acquired, and for other purposes.

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

SECTION 1. GETTYSBURG NATIONAL MILITARY PARK.

    (a) Boundary Revision.--Section 1 of the Act titled ``An Act to 
revise the boundary of Gettysburg National Military Park in the 
Commonwealth of Pennsylvania, and for other purposes'', approved August 
17, 1990 (16 U.S.C. 430g-4), is amended by adding at the end the 
following new subsection:
    ``(d) Additional Land.--
            ``(1) Covered land; condition.--In addition to the land 
        identified in subsections (a) and (b), the park shall include 
        the following, as depicted on the maps titled `Gettysburg 
        National Military Park Proposed Boundary Addition', numbered 
        305/80,045, and dated January 2010, if the owner of the 
        property has provided written consent to inclusion:
                    ``(A) The land and interests in land commonly known 
                as the `Gettysburg Train Station' and its immediate 
                surroundings in the Borough of Gettysburg.
                    ``(B) The land and interests in land located along 
                Plum Run in Cumberland Township.
            ``(2) Rule of construction.--Nothing in paragraph (1), the 
        acquisition of property within the area described in such 
        paragraph, or the management plan for such acquired property 
        shall be construed to create buffer zones outside of such 
        property. That an activity or use can be seen or heard from 
        within such acquired property shall not preclude the conduct of 
        that activity or use outside such property.''.
    (b) Limited Acquisition Authority.--Section 2(a) of that Act (16 
U.S.C. 430g-5(a)) is amended in the first sentence by inserting before 
the period the following: ``, except that the Secretary is authorized 
to acquire property within the area described in section 1(d) by 
donation only''.

            Passed the House of Representatives January 13, 2014.

            Attest:

                                                 KAREN L. HAAS,

                                                                 Clerk.
```
KALEEL BUILDERS, INC. v. Kent ASHBY, d/b/a Superior Exteriors; Lake Builders, Inc.; LW Corp.; Bob's Heating & Air Conditioning Company, Inc.; and Don Duffy, Architect.

No. 637P03.

Supreme Court of North Carolina.

April 1, 2004.

Lawrence J. Goldman, Charlotte, for Kaleel Builders.

Charles D. Cheney, Charlotte, for Kent Ashby, d/b/a Sup. Exteriors.

Mark D. Boynton, for Lake Builder's Inc.

Daniel C. Marks, for LW Corp.

Marc R. Gordon, Charlotte, for Bob's Htg. & Air Conditioning.

David G. Redding, for Don Duffy.

Prior report: 161 N.C.App. 470, 587 S.E.2d 470.

***ORDER***

Upon consideration of the petition filed on the 9th day of December 2003 by Plaintiff in this matter for discretionary review of the decision of the North Carolina Court of Appeals pursuant to G.S. 7A-31, the following order was entered and is hereby certified to the North Carolina Court of Appeals:

> "Denied by order of the Court in conference, this the 1st day of April 2004."
Independent Auditors' Report


To the Shareholders and Board of Directors of
Smith Barney Investment Funds Inc.:

In planning and performing our audit of the financial statements
of Smith Barney Premier Selections Global Growth Fund of Smith
Barney Investment Funds Inc. ("Fund") for the year ended April
30, 2002, we considered its internal control, including control
activities for safeguarding securities, in order to determine our
auditing procedures for the purpose of expressing our opinion on
the financial statements and to comply with the requirements of
Form N-SAR, not to provide assurance on the internal control.

The management of the Fund is responsible for establishing and
maintaining internal control.  In fulfilling this responsibility,
estimates and judgments by management are required to assess the
expected benefits and related costs of controls.  Generally,
controls that are relevant to an audit pertain to the entity's
objective of preparing financial statements for external purposes
that are fairly presented in conformity with accounting
principles generally accepted in the United States of America.
Those controls include the safeguarding of assets against
unauthorized acquisition, use, or disposition.

Because of inherent limitations in internal control, error or
fraud may occur and not be detected.  Also, projection of any
evaluation of internal control to future periods is subject to
the risk that it may become inadequate because of changes in
conditions or that the effectiveness of the design and operation
may deteriorate.

Our consideration of the internal control would not necessarily
disclose all matters in internal control that might be material
weaknesses under standards established by the American Institute
of Certified Public Accountants.  A material weakness is a
condition in which the design or operation of one or more of the
internal control components does not reduce to a relatively low
level the risk that misstatements caused by error or fraud in
amounts that would be material in relation to the financial
statements being audited may occur and not be detected within a
timely period by employees in the normal course of performing
their assigned functions.  However, we noted no matters involving
the internal control and its operation, including controls for
safeguarding securities that we consider to be material
weaknesses as defined above as of April 30, 2002.

This report is intended solely for the information and use of
management and the Board of Directors of the Fund and the
Securities and Exchange Commission and is not intended to be and
should not be used by anyone other than these specified parties.



New York, New York
June 12, 2002
Maurice GRAYTON, Petitioner, v. CALIFORNIA, et al.

No. 18-9073

Supreme Court of the United States.

October 7, 2019

Petition for writ of certiorari to the United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit denied.
Stephen P. DOWDNEY, Jr., Petitioner, v. WASHINGTON.

No. 19-5234

Supreme Court of the United States.

October 7, 2019

Petition for writ of certiorari to the Court of Appeals of Washington, Division 1 denied.
EXHIBIT
32.1


CERTIFICATION
OF CHIEF EXECUTIVE OFFICER


PURSUANT
TO SECTION 1350,


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





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 filing of the Quarterly
Report on Form 10-Q for the quarter ended March 31, 2009 (the “Report”) by China
Fire & Security Group, Inc. (the “Registrant”), I, Brian Lin, hereby certify
that:





1. To the
best of my knowledge, the Report fully complies with the requirements of Section
13(a) or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934; and





2. To the
best of my knowledge, the information contained in the Report fairly presents,
in all material respects, the financial condition and results of operations of
the Registrant.




Dated:
      May 11, 2009
            By:
            /s/
      Brian LinName: Brian
      LinTitle:  
      Chief Executive Officer
TRAVELERS SERIES FUND INC.
on behalf of the 
Smith Barney High Income Portfolio

Supplement dated September 15, 1997 to 
Prospectus dated February 28, 1997


The following information supplements the information in the Prospectus 
under:  Special Investment Techniques and Risk Considerations - Mortgage-
Backed Securities and Other Asset-Backed Securities:

The Smith Barney High Income Portfolio may invest up to 5% of its net 
assets in mortage-backed and asset-backed securities.

      
	






FD 01326
# L_2008235EN.01S00301.xml

| 2.9.2008 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | L 235/s3 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

2.9.2008

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

L 235/s3

---

NOTE TO THE READER

The institutions have decided no longer to quote in their texts the last amendment to cited acts.

Unless otherwise indicated, references to acts in the texts published here are to the version of those acts currently in force.

---
```

[Congressional Bills 113th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[H.R. 1092 Enrolled Bill (ENR)]

        H.R.1092

                     One Hundred Thirteenth Congress

                                 of the

                        United States of America

                          AT THE FIRST SESSION

          Begun and held at the City of Washington on Thursday,
           the third day of January, two thousand and thirteen

                                 An Act

 
To designate the air route traffic control center located in Nashua, New 
  Hampshire, as the ``Patricia Clark Boston Air Route Traffic Control 
                                Center''.

    Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representatives of the 
United States of America in Congress assembled,
SECTION 1. DESIGNATION OF PATRICIA CLARK BOSTON AIR ROUTE TRAFFIC 
CONTROL CENTER.
    (a) In General.--The air route traffic control center located in 
Nashua, New Hampshire, and any successor air route traffic control 
center at that location, shall be known and designated as the 
``Patricia Clark Boston Air Route Traffic Control Center''.
    (b) References.--Any reference in a law, map, regulation, document, 
paper, or other record of the United States to the air route traffic 
control center referred to in subsection (a) shall be deemed to be a 
reference to the ``Patricia Clark Boston Air Route Traffic Control 
Center''.

                               Speaker of the House of Representatives.

                            Vice President of the United States and    
                                               President of the Senate.
```
| (logo) WELLS

           FARGO | **Commercial  Mortgage Servicing**D1050-084,  8th Floor  401 South Tryon St.  Charlotte, NC 28202  1-800-326-1334

 

  |
|----------------------------------------------------------------------------------|-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|

**ANNUAL STATEMENT OFCOMPLIANCE**

 

 

Reference is hereby made to that certain Poolingand Servicing Agreement dated as of May 1, 2018, by and among UBS COMMERCIALMORTGAGE SECURITIZATION CORP., as Depositor, WELLS FARGO BANK, NATIONALASSOCIATION, as Master Servicer, RIALTO CAPITAL ADVISORS, LLC, as SpecialServicer, WELLS FARGO BANK, NATIONAL ASSOCIATION, as Certificate Administrator,WILMINGTON TRUST, NATIONAL ASSOCIATION, as Trustee, and PARK BRIDGE LENDERSERVICES, LLC, as Operating Advisor and as Asset Representations Reviewer withrespect to Commercial Mortgage Pass-Through Certificates Series 2018-C10 (the"Agreement"). Capitalized terms used herein not otherwise definedshall have the meanings assigned in the Agreement.

 

Pursuant to Section 11.09 of thisAgreement, I, Leslie Hayton, Managing Director of Commercial Mortgage Servicesdo hereby certify that:

 

1.       Areview of the activities of the Master Servicer during the period from May 1,2018 through December 31, 2018 (the “Reporting Period”), and of its performanceper the Agreement during such period has been made under my supervision, and 

 

2.       To thebest of my knowledge, based on such review, the Master Servicer has fulfilledall of its obligations under this Agreement in all material respects throughoutthe Reporting Period.

 

 

IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the undersigned hasexecuted this Certificate as of the 28th day of February 2019.

 

 

/s/Leslie Hayton

LeslieHayton

ManagingDirector 

WellsFargo Bank

 

 

| Wells  Fargo Bank, N.A. | (logo) Together  we’ll go far |
|-------------------------|-------------------------------------|
April TORRES, Petitioner v. UNITED STATES

No. 19-6881

Supreme Court of the United States.

January 13, 2020

Petition for writ of certiorari to the United States Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit denied.