alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
exhibit 32


             FORM OF SECTION 906 CERTIFICATIONS

                  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 Heritage Scholastic
Corporation (the "Company") on Form 10-KSB for the period
ending June 30, 2004, as filed with the Securities and
Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the "Report"), I,
Charles E. Parks, President/CEO, of the Company, certify to
the best of my knowledge, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section
1350, as adopted pursuant to 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) The information contained in the Report fairly
presents, in all material respects, the financial condition
and result of operations of the Company.





/s/ Charles E. Parks
--------------------
Charles E. Parks
President/CEO
September 27, 2004


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 has been provided to the Company and will
be retained by the Company and furnished to the Securities
and Exchange Commission or its staff upon request.


/1/


             FORM OF SECTION 906 CERTIFICATIONS

                  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 Heritage Scholastic
Corporation (the "Company") on Form 10-KSB for the period
ending June 30, 2004, as filed with the Securities and
Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the "Report"), I,
Randall L. Peterson, Treasurer/CFO, of the Company, certify
to the best of my knowledge, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section
1350, as adopted pursuant to 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) The information contained in the Report fairly
presents, in all material respects, the financial condition
and result of operations of the Company.





/s/ Randall L. Peterson
-----------------------
Randall L. Peterson
Treasurer/CFO
September 27, 2004


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 has been provided to the Company and will
be retained by the Company and furnished to the Securities
and Exchange Commission or its staff upon request.


/2/
UN PUBLISHED
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

No. 20
- 2128
In re: JOSE BENJAMIN MANLAPAZ, a/k/a Mr. Ben, a/k/a Ben Manlapaz , Petitioner

.

On Petition for Extraordinary Writ . ( 1:17

- cr - 00115

- AJT

- 1 )

Submitted : February 18, 2021 Decided: February 22, 2021

Before NIEMEYER, KING, and FLOYD , Circuit Judges.

Petition denied by un published per curiam opinion

. Jose Benjamin Manlapaz, Petitioner Pro Se.
Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.2 PER CURIAM: Jose Benjamin Manlapaz has filed with this court a petition for an extraordinary writ of error in which he assigns error to the district court’s June 23, 2020, order denying Manlapaz’s motion for compassion ate release. We deny t he petition.
U nder the All Writs Act (“the Act”) , federal courts “may issue all writs necessary or appropriate in aid of their respective jurisdictions and agreeable to the usages and principles of law.” 28 U.S.C. § 1651(a). The Act “is a residual source of authority to issue writs that are not otherwise covered by statute.” Carlisle v. United States , 517 U.S. 416, 429 (1996) (internal quotation marks omitted). Due to the Act’s residual nature, “[w]here a statute specifically addresses the particular is sue at hand, it is that authority, and not the All Writs Act, that is controlling.” Id. (internal quotation marks omitted). Thus, prisoners may not resort to the Act, or to the common law writs it authorizes, when there is another available remedy. See, e.g. , United States v. Swaby , 855 F.3d 233, 238 (4th Cir. 2017) (“A writ of coram nobis is an exceptional remedy that may be granted only when a fundamental error has occurred and no other available remedy exists.”); United States v. Torres , 282 F.3d 1241 , 1245 (10th Cir. 2002) ( recognizing that a writ of audita querela is unavailable
if the petitioner has other relief available). Because an appeal of the district court’s final order was available to Manlapaz, Manlapaz fails to satisfy the requirements for relief under the Act. We thus deny Manlapaz’s petition for extraordinary writ

. We dispense with oral argument because3 the facts and legal contentions are adequately presented in the materials before this court and argument would not aid the decisiona l process.
PETITION DENIED
#### Larry Joe TRIBBLE, Appellant, v. The STATE of Texas, Appellee.

No. 50331.

Court of Criminal Appeals of Texas.

July 9, 1975.

*30John V. McShane, Dallas, for appellant.

Tim Curry, Dist. Atty., Rufus Adcock, Tom Hill, Roger W. Crampton and Bob Marshall, Asst. Dist. Attys., Forth Worth, Jim D. Vollers, State’s Atty., and David S. McAngus, Asst. State’s Atty., Austin, for the State.

OPINION

GREEN, Commissioner.

Appellant entered a plea of guilty before a jury to the offense of knowingly and intentionally delivering marihuana and it assessed his punishment at three (3) years.

The indictment alleged that the offense was committed on or about January 15, 1974. Consequently, said indictment was drawn under the provisions of Section 4.05, Texas Controlled Substances Act (Article 4476 — 15, Vernon’s Ann.Civ.Stat.).

The indictment, omitting the formal parts, alleges that appellant on or about January 15,1974, “did then and there knowingly and intentionally deliver to D. L. Stallings marihuana, . . . ” Such is fundamentally defective in that it fails to allege the amount of marihuana delivered or that the marihuana was delivered for remuneration, so as to reflect what punishment is involved, whether the offense is a misdemeanor or a felony, or whether the district court has jurisdiction. Medrano v. State, 524 S.W.2d 719 (No. 50,137, June 25) (Tex.Cr.App.1975); Mears v. State, 520 S.W.2d 380 (Tex.Cr.App.1975); Wilson v. State, 520 S.W.2d 377 (Tex.Cr.App.1975); Wirges v. State, 521 S.W.2d 251 (Tex.Cr.App.1975). Cf. Trevino v. State, 523 S.W.2d 718 (Tex.Cr.App.1975).

The judgment is reversed and the prosecution is ordered dismissed.

Opinion approved by the Court.
EX-4.1




 Exhibit 4.1 
  





 








 The following abbreviations, when used in the inscription on the face of this certificate,
shall be construed as though they were written out in full according to applicable laws or regulations: 
  

			
	 TEN COM - as tenants in common

TEN ENT  - as tenants by the entireties
 JT
TEN      - as joint tenants with right of

                     survivorship and 
not as tenants

                     in common
	  	 UNIF GIFT WIN ACT
                        
Custodian                            
                                   
          (Cust)
                                  (Minor)

                         
                           under Uniform Gifts to Minors
                                   
        Act                                
                 

                         
                                       
(State)


 Additional abbreviations may also be used though not in the above list. 

For Value Received,
                                         
    hereby sell, assign and transfer unto 
  

					
	 PLEASE INSERT SOCIAL SECURITY OR OTHER IDENTIFYING NUMBER OF ASSIGNEE

 
	  		  	
	 		
	 	  		  	

  
  

  
  

(PLEASE PRINT OR TYPEWRITE NAME AND ADDRESS INCLUDING POSTAL ZIP CODE OF ASSIGNEE) 

 
  
                                  
                                         
                                         
                                         
                                     Shares of

 the Common Stock represented by the within Certificate, and do hereby irrevocably constitute and
appoint                          
                                  
                                         
                                         
                                         
                                     Attorney to transfer the
said Shares on the books of the within named Corporation with full power of substitution in the premises. 
  

			
	Dated:                            
                                   	 	
		
	x	 	  

		
	x	 	  

	  

                       
                         NOTICE:
	 	  
 THE SIGNATURE(S) TO THIS ASSIGNMENT MUST CORRESPOND WITH THE
NAME(S) AS WRITTEN UPON THE FACE OF THIS CERTIFICATE IN EVERY PARTICULAR, WITHOUT ALTERATION OR ENLARGEMENT OR ANY CHANGE WHATEVER.


  

			
	 Signature(s) Guaranteed

		
	BY:	 	 
		 	THE SIGNATURE(S) SHOULD BE GUARANTEED BY AN ELIGIBLE GUARANTOR INSTITUTION (BANKS, STOCKBROKERS, SAVINGS AND LOAN ASSOCIATIONS AND CREDIT UNIONS WITH MEMBERSHIP IN AN
APPROVED SIGNATURE GUARANTEE MEDALLION PROGRAM). PURSUANT TO S.E.C. RULE 17Ad-15.
EX-10.5



 Exhibit 10.5 

EAGLE MATERIALS INC. 

SPECIAL SITUATION PROGRAM 

FOR FISCAL YEAR 2015 
 1.
The Eagle Materials Inc. Special Situation Program for Fiscal Year 2015 (the “SSP” or the “Plan”) shall be funded by: (i) 0.35% of Eagle Material Inc.’s operating earnings, as determined by the Compensation
Committee of the Board of Directors (“Committee”); (ii) the portions of subsidiary company and corporate annual incentive compensation bonus pools not paid out (not earned); and (iii) the portion of the subsidiary companies
long-term compensation plans not paid out (not earned). All full-time employees of Eagle Materials Inc. (“Eagle” or the “Company”) or a subsidiary company will be eligible to receive an SSP award. 

 

	 	A.	An SSP award is intended to recognize outstanding individual performances during the current fiscal year based on contributions that dramatically improve the Company’s profitability or worth.


  

	 	B.	An SSP award may also be made to individuals at Eagle or at subsidiary companies whose operating profit has been adversely affected by market conditions in order to recognize superior performance of the participants
at those companies. 

  

	 	C.	SSP funds not awarded may be retained by the Company for use in future fiscal years. 


2. SSP awards may be recommended by subsidiary company Presidents, Eagle EVP’s and/or the Eagle Chief Executive Officer
(“CEO”). The approval of the Eagle CEO is required for all SSP awards. For senior executive officers who are required to make disclosures under Section 16 of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended (“Executive
Officers”), an SSP award shall be approved by the Committee. 
 3. The SSP shall be administered by the CEO, who shall have full and
exclusive power to interpret the Plan and to adopt such rules, regulations and guidelines for carrying out this Plan as the CEO may deem necessary or appropriate in the CEO’s sole discretion. All decisions of the CEO shall be binding and
conclusive on the participants. Notwithstanding the foregoing, any matter affecting an SSP award to an Executive Officer (including, without limitation, any interpretation of the Plan or the adoption of any rules, regulations or guidelines affecting
an award to an Executive Officer) shall be approved by the Committee. Any decision by the Committee with respect to an Executive Officer shall be final and binding. 

4. This Plan and all determinations made and actions taken pursuant hereto, shall be governed by and construed in accordance with the laws of
the State of Texas, without reference to any conflicts of law principles thereof that would require the application of the laws of another jurisdiction.
```

[Congressional Bills 113th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[S. 2282 Introduced in Senate (IS)]

113th CONGRESS
  2d Session
                                S. 2282

  To prohibit the provision of performance awards to employees of the 
              Internal Revenue Service who owe back taxes.

_______________________________________________________________________

                   IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES

                              May 1, 2014

    Mr. Roberts (for himself, Mr. Enzi, Mr. Cornyn, Mr. Toomey, Mr. 
    Johanns, Mr. Thune, Mr. Rubio, Mr. McConnell, and Mr. Isakson) 
introduced the following bill; which was read twice and referred to the 
                          Committee on Finance

_______________________________________________________________________

                                 A BILL

 
  To prohibit the provision of performance awards to employees of the 
              Internal Revenue Service who owe back taxes.

    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 ``No Bonuses for Tax-Delinquent IRS 
Employees Act of 2014''.

SEC. 2. PROHIBITION ON PERFORMANCE AWARDS TO IRS EMPLOYEES WHO OWE BACK 
              TAXES.

    (a) In General.--The Commissioner of the Internal Revenue Service 
shall not provide any performance award (including, but not limited to, 
bonuses, step increases, and time off) to an employee of the Internal 
Revenue Service who owes an outstanding Federal tax debt.
    (b) Outstanding Federal Tax Debt.--For purposes of this section, 
the term ``outstanding Federal tax debt'' means any outstanding debt 
under the Internal Revenue Code of 1986 which has not been paid after 
an assessment of a tax, penalty, or interest and which is not subject 
to further appeal or a petition for redetermination under such Code. A 
debt shall not fail to be treated as an outstanding Federal tax debt 
merely because it is the subject of an installment agreement under 
section 6159 of such Code or an offer-in-compromise under section 7121 
of such Code.
                                 <all>
```
#### General Insurance Co. of America *v.*Bowen, Supt. of Ins., et al. The Merchants’ Fire Ins. Co. of Indiana *v.*Bowen, Supt. of Ins.

(Nos. 25423 and 25426

Decided June 26, 1935.)

*Mr. Wilbur E. Benoy*and *Mr. Ralph S. Pierce,*for plaintiff in error, the General Insurance Company of America.

*Messrs. Vorys, Sater, Seymour & Pease; Mr. Howard L. Bevis*and *Mr. Burke G. Slaymaker,*for plaintiff in error, The Merchants’ Fire Insurance Company.

*Mr. John W. Bricker,*attorney general; *Mr. Thomas M. Miller*and *Mr. Paul R. Gingher,*for defendants in error.

By the Court.

These cases are here for review under Section 9592-11, General Code, and the procedure in each seems to have been on principles announced in *Brand*v. *Safford, Supt. of Ins.,*118 Ohio St., 56, 160 N. E., 464.

The Merchants’ Fire Insurance Company has been issuing a fire insurance policy for a term of five years, with a provision therein which enabled the insured to pay the premium yearly and terminate the policy at the end of any year. Under such a five-year policy the policyholder was in effect only insured for one year at a time, but in this way paid a,less rate per year than an insured who took out a one-year contract of insurance. At the same time the insurance company issued policies for a five-year term that had the same rate for five years as the five-year contract referred to above, but the premium for the full term was pay*83able in advance and tbe contract was effective for tbe full term.

The General Insurance Company of America was issuing similar policies but somewhat differently worded.

Some time prior to April 16, 1935, there were “special deviation filings” covering such long-term contracts.

On the date mentioned the Superintendent of Insurance made an order and finding that such filings ‘! result in a different annual rate for the same risk or similar risks in the same class, ’ ’ and that such deviation filings were contrary to the Bureau of Bating Law of Ohio (Section 9592-1 *et seq.,*General Code) and especially in violation of Section. 9592-9, General Code, which provides that any deviation “shall be uniform in its application to all of the risks in the class for which the variation is made”; and all such filings were declared null and void.

Notice of this order was given to each fire insurance company but policies then written were allowed to remain in force until the next anniversary date of their inception.

The court holds that the deviation is not uniform, as required by Section 9592-9, General Code, and the fixing or charging of such rates constitutes a discrimination, within the meaning of Section 9592-8, General Code. The order of the Superintendent of Insurance was therefore strictly according to law.

*Orders affirmed.*

Weygandt, C. J., Stephenson, Williams, Day and Zimmerman, JJ., concur.

Jones, J., not participating.
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<PAGE>
<ARTICLE> 5
<LEGEND>
THIS SCHEDULE CONTAINS SUMMARY FINANCIAL INFORMATION EXTRACTED FROM CONSOLIDATED
FINANCIAL STATEMENTS FOR THE NINE MONTHS ENDED SEPTEMBER 30, 1996 AND 1995 AND
IS QUALIFIED IN ITS ENTIRETY BY REFERENCE TO SUCH FINANCIAL STATEMENTS.
</LEGEND>
       
<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   9-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          DEC-31-1995
<PERIOD-START>                             JAN-01-1996
<PERIOD-END>                               SEP-30-1996
<CASH>                                       7,316,939
<SECURITIES>                                         0
<RECEIVABLES>                                6,298,897
<ALLOWANCES>                                         0
<INVENTORY>                                          0
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                            17,435,727
<PP&E>                                       4,425,312
<DEPRECIATION>                                       0
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                              21,861,039
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                       12,837,767
<BONDS>                                              0
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                         9,247
<OTHER-SE>                                   9,014,025
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                21,861,039
<SALES>                                              0
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                            89,530,135
<CGS>                                                0
<TOTAL-COSTS>                               87,414,781
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                     0
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                     0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                                   0
<INCOME-PRETAX>                              2,115,354
<INCOME-TAX>                                         0
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                          2,115,354
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                 2,115,354
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                     2.40
<EPS-DILUTED>                                        0
        

</TABLE>
EX-4.7.6



 Exhibit 4.7.6 

CERTIFICATE OF CHANGE OF 

ADDRESS OF TRUSTEE 

(Pursuant to Section 12-3807(e) of the Delaware Statutory Trust Act) 

The undersigned, trustee, in order to change the address of the office of the statutory trusts for which it is trustee, does hereby certify
that: 
 1. The name of the trustee is BNY Mellon Trust of Delaware. 

2. The address in the State of Delaware such trustee has maintained for each of the statutory trusts for which it is a trustee is: 100 White
Clay Center, Suite 102, Newark, Delaware 19711. 
 3. The new address in the State of Delaware such trustee is to maintain for each of
the statutory trusts for which it is a trustee is to be changed to Bellevue Corporate Center, 301 Bellevue Parkway, 3rd Floor, Wilmington, Delaware 19809. 

4. This Certificate of Change of Address of Trustee will be effective as of 12:01 a.m., March 10, 2014. 

IN WITNESS WHEREOF, said trustee has caused this Certificate to be executed by its duly authorized officer on this 6th day of March 2014. 
  

					
	BNY MELLON TRUST OF DELAWARE,
	not individually but solely as trustee
		
	By:	 	 /s/ Vincent E. Sampson

		 	Name:	 	Vincent E. Sampson
		 	Title:	 	President
[Federal Register Volume 75, Number 165 (Thursday, August 26, 2010)]
[Notices]
[Pages 52517-52518]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2010-21278]


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

DEPARTMENT OF DEFENSE

Office of the Secretary

[Docket ID DOD-2010-OS-0118]


Privacy Act of 1974; System of Records

AGENCY: Department of Defense (DoD).

ACTION: Notice to delete a system of records.

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

SUMMARY: The Office of the Secretary of Defense proposes to delete a 
system of records notice from its existing inventory of record systems 
subject to the Privacy Act of 1974 (5 U.S.C. 552a), as amended.

[[Page 52518]]


DATES: This proposed action will be effective without further notice on 
September 27, 2010, unless comments are received which result in a 
contrary determination.

ADDRESSES: You may submit comments, identified by docket number and 
title, by any of the following methods:
    * Federal Rulemaking Portal: http://www.regulations.gov. Follow the 
instructions for submitting comments.
    * Mail: Federal Docket Management System Office, Room 3C843 
Pentagon, 1160 Defense Pentagon, Washington, DC 20301-1160.
    Instructions: All submissions received must include the agency name 
and docket number for this Federal Register document. The general 
policy for comments and other submissions from members of the public is 
to make these submissions available for public viewing on the Internet 
at http://www.regulations.gov as they are received without change, 
including any personal identifiers or contact information.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Mrs. Cindy Allard at (703) 588-6830.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The Office of the Secretary of Defense 
systems of records notices subject to the Privacy Act of 1974 (5 U.S.C. 
552a), as amended, have been published in the Federal Register and are 
available from the Privacy Act Officer, Office of Freedom of 
Information, Washington Headquarters Services, 1155 Defense Pentagon, 
Washington, DC 20301-1155.
    The Office of the Secretary of Defense proposes to delete one 
system of records notice from its inventory of record systems subject 
to the Privacy Act of 1974 (5 U.S.C. 552a), as amended. The proposed 
deletion is not within the purview of subsection (r) of the Privacy Act 
of 1974 (5 U.S.C. 552a), as amended, which requires the submission of a 
new or altered system report.

    Dated: August 23, 2010.
Mitchell S. Bryman,
Alternate OSD Federal Register Liaison Officer, Department of Defense.

Deletion:
    DPR 36.

System Name:
    Defense Integrated Military Human Resources System (DIMHRS) Records 
(November 12, 2008; 73 FR 66849).

Reason:
    The DIMHRS System (DPR 36) has been deleted per order from the 
Secretary of Defense, and no records have been entered into the 
database.

[FR Doc. 2010-21278 Filed 8-25-10; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 5001-06-P