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**

|                                           |                                                                                                                                                                                       |                                         |
|------------------------------------------------|--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|----------------------------------------------|
|                                      |                                                                                                                                                                                  |                                    |
| Date:                    October 25, 2006 | By:                                                                                                                                                                              | /s/                    Nicholas Cirillo, Jr. |
|                                           | Name: Nicholas                  Cirillo, Jr.                                                                                                                                          |
|                                           | Title:                  President                  and Chief Executive Officer          (Principal                    Executive Officer) |

----
Sammy R. PRUETT, Plaintiff v. Joel D. BINGHAM and Jean'S Bus Service, Inc., Defendants and Third-Party Plaintiffs v. Gregory Alan Wiggins, Matthew Brackett and Mountain Home Fire & Rescue Department, Inc., Third-Party Defendants.

No. 34A15.

Supreme Court of North Carolina.

Aug. 20, 2015.

H. Lee Davis, Jr., Winston-Salem, for Bingham, Joel D., et al.

*864W.O. Brazil, III, Asheville, for Mountain Home Fire & Rescue Department, Inc., et al.

Meghann K. Burke, Asheville, for Mountain Home Fire & Rescue Department, Inc., et al.

Katherine Marie Barber-Jones, Winston-Salem, for Bingham, Joel D., et al.

Michael E. Casterline, Asheville, for Brackett, Matthew.

Ann C. Rowe, for Bingham, Winston-Salem, Joel D., et al.

*ORDER*

Upon consideration of the petition for discretionary review, filed by Defendants and Third-Party Plaintiffs on the 20th of January 2015 in this matter pursuant to G.S. 7A-31 and the Appellate Rule 16(b) as to issues in addition to those presented as the basis for the dissenting opinion in the Court of Appeals, the following order was entered and is hereby certified to the North Carolina Court of Appeals: the petition for discretionary review as to additional issues is

> "Denied by order of the Court in conference, this the 20th of August 2015."

Accordingly, only those issues which are the basis of the dissenting opinion in the Court of Appeals shall be presented to this Court in briefs. The Defendants and Third-Party Plaintiffs new brief so limited in scope shall be filed with this Court not more than 30 days from the date of certification of this order.
United States Court of Appeals

for the Fifth Circuit ____________

No. 23-50301

Summary Calendar

____________

United States of America, 

Plaintiff—Appellee,

versus

Senovio Rodriguez-Salas, 

Defendant—Appellant.

______________________________

Appeal from the United States District Court 

for the Western District of Texas

USDC No. 2:22-CR-1541-1

______________________________

Before Smith, Higginson, and Engelhardt, Circuit Judges.

Per Curiam:*

Senovio Rodriguez-Salas appeals his guilty plea conviction and 

sentence for illegal reentry into the United States after having been 

previously removed in violation of 8 U.S.C. § 1326(b)(2). On appeal, 

Rodriguez-Salas raises for the first time that the district court judgment 

_____________________

* This opinion is not designated for publication. See 5th Cir. R. 47.5.

United States Court of Appeals

Fifth Circuit

FILED

March 19, 2024

Lyle W. Cayce

Clerk

Case: 23-50301 Document: 58-1 Page: 1 Date Filed: 03/19/2024
No. 23-50301

2

incorrectly cites only 8 U.S.C. § 1326 instead of citing the appropriate 

statutory subsection under which he was convicted and sentenced.

First, this Court has a duty to examine the basis of its jurisdiction, sua 

sponte if necessary. Mosley v. Cozby, 813 F.2d 659, 660 (5th Cir. 1987). After 

Rodriguez-Salas filed his notice of appeal, the district court entered an 

amended judgment correcting the sentencing date and then entered a second 

amended judgment that corrected a typographical error with respect to 

where Rodriguez-Salas should be incarcerated. The district court, however, 

was without jurisdiction to enter the amended judgments during the 

pendency of this appeal because Rodriguez-Salas’s “notice of 

appeal . . . divested the district court of jurisdiction to act under [Federal 

Rule of Criminal Procedure 36].” United States v. Willis, 76 F.4th 467, 472 

(5th Cir. 2023).

Next, because the original judgment cites only the general statute of 

§ 1326 and does not specify a subsection, we remand for the district court to 

correct the judgment to reflect that Rodriguez-Salas was convicted and 

sentenced under § 1326(b)(2). See United States v. Huerta-Rodriguez, 64 

F.4th 270, 279–80 (5th Cir. 2023); Fed. R. Crim. P. 36.

The district court’s second amended judgment is VACATED for 

lack of jurisdiction, and the case is REMANDED for the limited purpose of 

allowing the district court to correct the original judgment’s clerical errors.

Case: 23-50301 Document: 58-1 Page: 2 Date Filed: 03/19/2024
**Exhibit23.1**

** **

**DAVIS ACCOUNTING GROUP P.C.**

***A CertifiedPublic Accounting Firm***

# **337 South Main Street, Suite 120, Cedar City, Utah84720**

**(435) 865-2808 ****·**** FAX (435) 865-2821**

 

 

 

 

 

 

Mr. Mak Wai Keung Shawn, President and CEO

Centiv, Inc.

P.O. Box 113,

Palos Verdes Estates, California 90274

 

Dear Mr. Mak:

 

## **CONSENT OF INDEPENDENT AUDITORS**

 

We consent to the incorporation in the AnnualReport of Centiv, Inc. (the “Company”) on Form 10-K of our report on thefinancial statements of the Company as its independent auditors dated April 5,2004, except for Note 17 to the Financial Statements, for which the date isApril 28, 2004, as of and for the year ended December 31, 2003.  We further consent to the reference to usunder the headings of Item 9. “Changes in and Disagreements with Accountants onAccounting and Financial Disclosure” and Item 14. “Principal Accountant Feesand Services” in the Annual Report on Form 10-K.

 

Respectfully submitted,

 
| /s/ Davis Accounting Group  P.C.     |
|--------------------------------------|
| Davis Accounting Group  P.C.         |
| *A Certified Public Accounting Firm* |

 

Cedar City, Utah

April 28, 2004

 

----
# C_2023189EN.01001201.xml

| 30.5.2023 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 189/12 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

30.5.2023

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 189/12

---

Request for a preliminary ruling from the Supremo Tribunal Administrativo (Portugal) lodged on 16 February 2023 — Companhia União de Crédito Popular, SARL v Autoridade Tributária e Aduaneira

(Case C-89/23, Companhia União de Crédito Popular)

(2023/C 189/17)

Language of the case: Portuguese

Referring court

Supremo Tribunal Administrativo

Parties to the main proceedings

Appellant: Companhia União de Crédito Popular, SARL

Respondent: Autoridade Tributária e Aduaneira

Question referred

For the purposes of determining whether the 11 % commission which the law (Article 25 of Decree-Law No 365/99 of 17 September 1999) allots to the lender for the sale of pledged goods is eligible for the exemption provided for in Article 135(1)(b) of the VAT Directive (1) (corresponding to Article 9(27)(a) of the Código do Imposto sobre o Valor Acrescentado (Value Added Tax Code)), can the sale of the pledged goods (Article 19 et seq. of Decree-Law No 365/99 of 17 September 1999), where the borrower fails to pay in accordance with the legal conditions, be regarded as an ancillary service to the services provided by the lender (activity of lending secured by a pledge)?

---

(1)  Council Directive 2006/112/EC of 28 November 2006 on the common system of value added tax (OJ 2006 L 347, p. 1).

---
<TABLE> <S> <C>


<ARTICLE>                     5
<LEGEND>
     PLMI Fund I LLC
</LEGEND>
<CIK>          0000928956
<NAME>         Professional Lease Management Income Fund I LLC
<MULTIPLIER>                                   1,000
<CURRENCY>                                     U.S. Dollars

<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   3-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                              DEC-31-1999
<PERIOD-START>                                 JAN-01-1999
<PERIOD-END>                                   MAR-31-1999
<EXCHANGE-RATE>                                1
<CASH>                                         10,622
<SECURITIES>                                   0
<RECEIVABLES>                                  3,202
<ALLOWANCES>                                   (41)
<INVENTORY>                                    0
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                               0
<PP&E>                                         122,500
<DEPRECIATION>                                 (47,823)
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                 99,380
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                          0
<BONDS>                                        25,000
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                          0
<PREFERRED>                                    0
<COMMON>                                       0
<OTHER-SE>                                     64,554
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                   99,380
<SALES>                                        0
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                               6,722
<CGS>                                          0
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                  0
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                               6,212
<LOSS-PROVISION>                               0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                             453
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                2,670
<INCOME-TAX>                                   0
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                            2,802
<DISCONTINUED>                                 0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                0
<CHANGES>                                      132
<NET-INCOME>                                   2,670
<EPS-BASIC>                                  0.47
<EPS-DILUTED>                                  0.47



</TABLE>
<PAGE>   1
                                                                    EXHIBIT 24

                                POWER OF ATTORNEY

                  The undersigned hereby appoints KATHLEEN A. BROWNE, LARRY
ELLBERGER and ROBERT B. LAMM as his/her true and lawful attorneys-in-fact for
the purpose of signing the Annual Report on Form 10-K of GRACE SPECIALTY
CHEMICALS, INC. (to be renamed "W. R. Grace & Co.") for the year ended December
31, 1997, and all amendments thereto, to be filed with the Securities and
Exchange Commission. Each of such attorneys-in-fact is appointed with full power
to act without the other.

                                            /s/ R. H. Beber
                                            /s/ A. J. Costello

Dated:  March 30, 1998


<PAGE>   2







                                POWER OF ATTORNEY
                                -----------------

                  The undersigned hereby appoints KATHLEEN A. BROWNE and ROBERT
B. LAMM as his true and lawful attorneys-in-fact for the purpose of signing the
Annual Report on Form 10-K of GRACE SPECIALTY CHEMICALS, INC. (to be renamed
"W. R. Grace & Co.") for the year ended December 31, 1997, and all amendments
thereto, to be filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission. Each of such
attorneys-in-fact is appointed with full power to act without the other.

                                            /s/ L. Ellberger

Dated:  March 30, 1998


<PAGE>   3







                                POWER OF ATTORNEY
                                -----------------

                  The undersigned hereby appoints LARRY ELLBERGER and ROBERT B.
LAMM as her true and lawful attorneys-in-fact for the purpose of signing the
Annual Report on Form 10-K of GRACE SPECIALTY CHEMICALS, INC. (to be renamed
"W. R. Grace & Co.") for the year ended December 31, 1997, and all amendments
thereto, to be filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission. Each of such
attorneys-in-fact is appointed with full power to act without the other.

                                            /s/ K. A. Browne

Dated:  March 30, 1998
CONSENT
OF INDEPENDENT REGISTERED PUBLIC ACCOUNTING FIRM
 
 We
consent to the incorporation by reference in Registration Statement Nos.
333-151426, 333-39005, and 333-39007 on Form S-8, Registration Statement
Nos. 333-79557, 333-91956, 333-121141 and 333-39003 on Form S-8, as amended by
post-effective Amendment No. 1 to each such registration statement, and
Registration Statement No. 333-67610 on Form S-8, as amended by post-effective
Amendments No. 1 and No. 2 to such registration statement, of our report, dated
February 19, 2010, relating to the consolidated financial statements and the
financial statement schedules of Intermec, Inc. and the effectiveness of
Intermec, Inc.’s internal control over financial reporting, appearing in this
Annual Report on Form 10-K of Intermec, Inc. for the year ended December 31,
2009.









/S/ DELOITTE & TOUCHE LLP





Seattle,
Washington


February
19, 2010
# CE2004088EN.01006101.xml

| 8.4.2004 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | CE 88/61 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

8.4.2004

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

CE 88/61

---

(2004/C 88 E/0066)

WRITTEN QUESTION E-2055/03

by Bartho Pronk (PPE-DE) to the Commission

(20 June 2003)

Subject:   Trade union rights for police officers in Latvia

Subject:

| 1. | Is it true that police officers in Latvia are not entitled to form a trade union? |
| --- | --- |

1.

Is it true that police officers in Latvia are not entitled to form a trade union?

| 2. | Is not that situation in breach of ILO Conventions, the Council of Europe's Social Charter and the EU Charter of Fundamental Rights? |
| --- | --- |

2.

Is not that situation in breach of ILO Conventions, the Council of Europe's Social Charter and the EU Charter of Fundamental Rights?

| 3. | Has the Commission discussed this situation with the Latvian Government? If not, why not? If so, what was the outcome of the discussion? |
| --- | --- |

3.

Has the Commission discussed this situation with the Latvian Government? If not, why not? If so, what was the outcome of the discussion?

| 4. | Why has the Commission not referred to this issue in the annual progress reports? |
| --- | --- |

4.

Why has the Commission not referred to this issue in the annual progress reports?

Answer given by Mr Verheugen on behalf of the Commission

(12 August 2003)

(12 August 2003)

The Latvian Police Law, which was adopted in 1991, does indeed prohibit police officers from forming trade unions.

The Convention for the Protection of Human and Fundamental Rights, and notably in its Article 11 (2), last sentence, provides, however, for lawful restrictions to the freedom of association with respect to the police. Moreover, certain articles of the International Labour Organisation (ILO) Convention also allow for such restrictions.

The Social Charter of the Council of Europe, which was ratified by Latvia in 2002, also allows the contracting parties to determine by national law or regulations the extent to which the right to organise shall apply to the police.

The European Union's Charter of Fundamental Rights which does not contain any such restriction is not yet a legally binding text. Even if it was so, it would not be applicable in areas which are not related to the exercice of Community competences.

Within the limits of its mandate, the Commission continues to follow this issue, as well as other social fundamental and human rights issues throughout the accession process.

---
STATE v. DESPERADOS INC.

No. COA05-1397-2.

Court of Appeals of North Carolina.

Filed January 6, 2009.

Certification Date January 26, 2009.

Appeal from Beaufort (03CRS4693, 03CRS54596, 04CRS44, 04CRS657, 04CRS658, 04CRS659, 04CRS660, 04CRS663, 04CRS664, 04CRS665, 04CRS666, 03CRS3929, 03CRS4452, 04CRS651, 04CRS652, 04CRS653).

Case reported without published opinion. No error.
STATE v. Jacob CRAIN.

No. 251P08-2.

Supreme Court of North Carolina.

December 11, 2008.

Catherine F. Jordan, Assistant Attorney General, Jerry Wilson, District Attorney, for State of NC.

The following order has been entered on the motion filed on the 1st day of December 2008 by Defendant to Dismiss on Grounds of "Excess of Jurisdiction":

"Motion Dismissed by order of the Court in conference this the 11th day of December 2008."
Notation of Guarantee from Forbes Energy Services Ltd




 Exhibit 4.6 
 NOTATION OF GUARANTEE 
 For value received, Forbes Energy Services Ltd. (the
“New Parent”) has unconditionally guaranteed, to the extent set forth in and subject to the provisions of that certain Indenture dated as of February 12, 2008 (the “Indenture”), among Forbes Energy Services LLC, a
Delaware limited liability company, Forbes Energy Capital Inc., a Delaware corporation (collectively, the “Issuers”), the Guarantors party thereto (the “Guarantors”) and Wells Fargo Bank, National Association, as trustee
(the “Trustee”), and that certain Supplemental Indenture dated as of May 29, 2008, among the New Parent, the Issuers, the Guarantors and the Trustee, (a) the due and punctual payment of the principal of, premium, if any,
and interest on, the Notes, whether at maturity, by acceleration, redemption or otherwise, the due and punctual payment of interest on overdue principal of and interest on the Notes, if any, if lawful, and the due and punctual performance of all
other obligations of the Company to the Holders or the Trustee all in accordance with the terms of the Indenture and (b) in case of any extension of time of payment or renewal of any Notes or any of such other obligations, that the same will be
promptly paid in full when due or performed in accordance with the terms of the extension or renewal, whether at stated maturity, by acceleration or otherwise. The obligations of the Guarantors to the Holders of Notes and to the Trustee pursuant to
the Guarantee and the Indenture, and the limitations thereon, are expressly set forth in Article 11 of the Indenture and reference is hereby made to the Indenture for the precise terms of the Guarantee. 

Capitalized terms used but not defined herein have the meanings given to them in the Indenture. 

 

			
	FORBES ENERGY SERVICES LTD., as a Guarantor
		
	By:	 	 /s/ L. Melvin Cooper

	Name:	 	L. Melvin Cooper
	Title:	 	Senior Vice President and Chief Financial Officer
# C_2023314EN.01001301.xml

| 4.9.2023 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 314/13 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

4.9.2023

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 314/13

---

Action brought on 6 July 2023 — Volkskreditbank v SRB

(Case T-374/23)

(2023/C 314/15)

Language of the case: German

Parties

Applicant: Volkskreditbank AG (Linz, Austria) (represented by: G. Eisenberger, A. Brenneis and J. Holzmann, lawyers)

Defendant: Single Resolution Board

Form of order sought

The applicant claims that the Court should:

| — | annul the decision of the Single Resolution Board of 2 May 2023 on the calculation of the 2023 ex-ante contributions to the Single Resolution Fund (SRB/ES/2023/23) together with annexes, at least in so far as it concerns the applicant, and |
| --- | --- |

—

annul the decision of the Single Resolution Board of 2 May 2023 on the calculation of the 2023 ex-ante contributions to the Single Resolution Fund (SRB/ES/2023/23) together with annexes, at least in so far as it concerns the applicant, and

| — | order the Single Resolution Board to pay the costs. |
| --- | --- |

—

order the Single Resolution Board to pay the costs.

Pleas in law and main arguments

In support of the action, the applicant relies on nine pleas in law which are identical to those relied on in Case T-369/23, Hypo Vorarlberg Bank v SRB.

---
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<PAGE>
 
<ARTICLE> 5
       
<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   9-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          DEC-31-1998
<PERIOD-START>                             JAN-01-1998
<PERIOD-END>                               SEP-30-1998
<CASH>                                         332,154
<SECURITIES>                                28,385,527
<RECEIVABLES>                                  650,091
<ALLOWANCES>                                         0
<INVENTORY>                                          0
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                            29,395,456
<PP&E>                                               0
<DEPRECIATION>                                       0
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                              29,395,456
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                          631,486
<BONDS>                                              0
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                             0
<OTHER-SE>                                  28,763,970
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                29,395,456
<SALES>                                              0
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                             1,087,858
<CGS>                                                0
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                   81,748
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                     0
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                     0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                                   0
<INCOME-PRETAX>                              1,006,110
<INCOME-TAX>                                 1,006,110
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                          1,006,110
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                 1,006,110
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                     0.38
<EPS-DILUTED>                                        0
        

</TABLE>