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

CERTIFICATION OF CHIEF EXECUTIVE OFFICER OF

UNION SECURITY INSURANCE COMPANY

PURSUANT TO 18 U.S.C. SECTION 1350,

AS ADOPTED PURSUANT TO

§ 906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002

In connection with the quarterly report of Union Security Insurance Company (the Company) on Form 10-Q for the period ended June 30,
2006 as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the Report), I, P. Bruce Camacho, 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, based on my knowledge:



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



| | 2. | The information contained in the Report fairly presents, in all material respects, the financial condition and results of operations of the Company.
| | -- | ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Date: November 20, 2006



/s/ P. Bruce CamachoP. Bruce CamachoPresident and Chief Executive Officer
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 Health and Human Services

###### National Institutes of Health

Pursuant to section 10(d) of the Federal Advisory Committee Act, as amended (5 U.S.C. App.), notice is hereby given of the following meeting.

The meeting will be closed to the public in accordance with the provisions set forth in sections 552b(c)(4) and 552b(c)(6), Title 5 U.S.C., as amended. The grant applications and the discussions could disclose confidential trade secrets or commercial property such as patentable material, and personal information concerning individuals associated with the grant applications, the disclosure of which would constitute a clearly unwarranted invasion of personal privacy.

*Name of Committee:*                         National Institute of Child Health and Human Development Special Emphasis Panel; Pain, Morphine and the Developing Brain: School Age Outcomes.                    

*Date:*                         July 2, 2009.                    

*Time:*                         12 p.m. to 4 p.m.                    

*Agenda:*                         To review and evaluate contract proposals.                     

*Place:*                         National Institutes of Health, 6100 Executive Boulevard, Room 5B01, Rockville, MD 20852, Telephone Conference Call).                    

*Contact Person:*                         Peter Zelazowski, PhD, Scientific Review Officer, Division of Scientific Review, Eunice Kennedy Shriver                               ( print page 27161)                            National Institute of Child Health and Human Development, NIH, 6100 Executive Boulevard, Rm. 5B01, Bethesda, MD 20892-7510, 301-435-6902,                         *peter.zelazowski@nih.gov.*

(Catalogue of Federal Domestic Assistance Program Nos. 93.864, Population Research; 93.865, Research for Mothers and Children; 93.929, Center for Medical Rehabilitation Research; 93.209, Contraception and Infertility Loan Repayment Program, National Institutes of Health, HHS)

Dated: June 1, 2009.

Jennifer Spaeth,

Director, Office of Federal Advisory Committee Policy.

[FR Doc. E9-13286 Filed 6-5-09; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 4140-01-P
Ernest L . S tensgar, Chairman 

Coeur d' Alene Tribe 

Route 1 

Plummer, Idaho 83 85 1 

Re: National Indian Lottery 

Dear Chairman S tensgar: 

The Coeur dYAlene Tribe (Tribe) is presently involved in litigation in the 9th Circuit Court 

of Appeals with respect to whether the National Indian Lottery m), an internet gambling 

enterprise of the Tribe's, is legal. It has come to our attention thaf in the course of this litigation, 

the Tribe has argued that the National Indian Gaming Commission (NIGC), by approval of the 

Tribe's management contract and a subsequent amendment, implicitly authorized the offnw 

resexvation features of the NIL. It is the view of the NIGC that the Indian Gaming Regulatory 

Act (IGRA) does not authorize off-reservation gaming and, moreover, that the NIGC did not 

authorize such gaming when it approved the Tnibe's management contract and amendment. 

In a press release issued in March of 1995, less than two months after our approval of the 

management contract, we stated: 

The National Indian Gaming Commission did not approve a nationwide 

Indian lottery. The Commission did approve a management contract 

between the Coeur dYAlene Indian Tribe and Unistar. The Tribe is weu 

aware that there may be legal obstacles to its proposed lottery and that it 

must deal with other tribes md states on an individual basis." 

Accordingly, we did not intend by our approval of the contract to expressly or implicitly state that 

the off-reservation gambling contemplated by the NIL was authorized by IGRA or legal under 

other applicable federal or state laws. The ME'S review of the management contract simply 

found that the contract complied with the management contract requirements of the IGRA and 

NIGC regulations. 

It is the position of the MGC that the tribal gaming actions of the NIL to the extent they 

involve off reservation gaming are not authorized by IGRA. Further, such actions may be subject 

to other federal or state laws. iyc~ 
Mamie R Deer .-< = $ -:-qzvzns --%Z*&s -*4
**EXHIBIT      32.1**

**CERTIFICATION**

|   | (1) | The                Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q for the quarter ended March 31, 2006                (the                “Form 10-Q”) of the Company 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 Form 10-Q fairly presents, in all materials                respects, the financial condition and results of operations of the                Company. |
|--------|-----|-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|

|                                                  |                                                                                  |                                                    |
|-------------------------------------------------------|---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|---------------------------------------------------------|
| Date: May                12,                2006 | By:                                                                         | /s/ Frank                B.                Manning |
|                                                  | Frank                B. ManningPresident                  and Chief Executive Officer |
|                                                  |                                                                                  |

----
FIRST DISTRICT COURT OF APPEAL

STATE OF FLORIDA

_____________________________

No. 1D2023-0879

_____________________________

JUAN CARLOS GARCIA,

Appellant,

v.

FLORIDA COMMISSION ON 

OFFENDER REVIEW, et al.,

Appellees.

_____________________________

On appeal from the Circuit Court for Leon County.

J. Lee Marsh, Judge.

April 30, 2024

PER CURIAM.

AFFIRMED.

B.L. THOMAS, ROBERTS, and ROWE, JJ., concur.

_____________________________

Not final until disposition of any timely and 

authorized motion under Fla. R. App. P. 9.330 or 

9.331.

_____________________________
2

Juan Carlos Garcia, pro se, Appellant.

Rana M. Wallace, General Counsel, and Mark J. Hiers, Deputy 

General Counsel, Tallahassee, for Appellees.
<TABLE> <S> <C>


<ARTICLE>  5
<LEGEND>
THIS SCHEDULE CONTAINS SUMMARY FINANCIAL INFORMATION EXTRACTED FROM THE
CONDENSED CONSOLIDATED BALANCE SHEET AND CONDENSED CONSOLIDATED STATEMENTS OF
OPERATIONS FOUND ON PAGES 3 AND 4 OF THE COMPANY'S FORM 10-QSB FOR THE QUARTER
ENDED MARCH 30, 1997, AND IS QUALIFIED IN ITS ENTIRETY BY REFERENCE TO SUCH
FINANCIAL STATEMENTS.
</LEGEND>

       
<S>                         <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                      9-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>            JUN-29-1997
<PERIOD-END>                 MAR-30-1997
<CASH>                            15,603
<SECURITIES>                           0
<RECEIVABLES>                          0
<ALLOWANCES>                           0
<INVENTORY>                            0
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                  57,480
<PP&E>                             3,614
<DEPRECIATION>                      (136)
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                    60,958
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>            421,288
<BONDS>                                0
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                  0
<PREFERRED>                        2,394
<COMMON>                           9,325
<OTHER-SE>                      (452,049)
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>      60,958
<SALES>                        2,457,846
<TOTAL-REVENUES>               2,457,846
<CGS>                          1,602,663
<TOTAL-COSTS>                  1,602,663
<OTHER-EXPENSES>               2,109,635
<LOSS-PROVISION>                       0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                   100
<INCOME-PRETAX>               (1,254,552)
<INCOME-TAX>                           0
<INCOME-CONTINUING>           (1,254,552)
<DISCONTINUED>                         0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                        0
<CHANGES>                              0
<NET-INCOME>                  (1,254,552)
<EPS-PRIMARY>                       (.14)
<EPS-DILUTED>                       (.14)

        

</TABLE>
TEXAS COURT OF APPEALS, THIRD DISTRICT, AT AUSTIN

NO. 03-10-00147-CV

Carolyn Barnes, Appellant

v.

University Federal Credit Union and

Government Employees Insurance Company/GEICO Insurance, Appellees

FROM THE DISTRICT COURT OF TRAVIS COUNTY, 201ST JUDICIAL DISTRICT

NO. D-1-GN-05-003010, HONORABLE GUS J. STRAUSS, JR., JUDGE PRESIDING

S U P P L E M E N T A L O P I N I O N

In response to our opinion issued in this appeal on April 18, 2013, UniversityFederal

Credit Union (UFCU) has filed with the district court a remittitur reducing its award of attorneys’

fees for this appeal to $15,000. In accordance with our prior opinion, we reform the district court’s

judgment to award UFCU $15,000 in attorneys’ fees for this appeal instead of $25,000. In our

opinion issued on April 8, 2013, we overruled appellant Carolyn Barnes’s remaining issues on

appeal. Accordingly, we affirm, as reformed herein, the trial court’s judgment.

__________________________________________

Scott K. Field

Before Chief Justice Jones, Justices Pemberton and Field 

Reformed and, as Reformed, Affirmed

Filed: July 2, 2013
#### Ronald Mizrahi, Respondent, v Ezra Cohen, Appellant.

Submitted April 29, 2013;

decided June 11, 2013

Motion for leave to appeal dismissed upon the ground that the order sought to be appealed from does not finally determine the action within the meaning of the Constitution.
* 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.

IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT

 

No. 97-20419

Summary Calendar

 

KELJER KING,

Petitioner-Appellant,

versus

GARY L. JOHNSON, DIRECTOR,

TEXAS DEPARTMENT OF CRIMINAL

JUSTICE, INSTITUTIONAL DIVISION,

Respondent-Appellee.

- - - - - - - - - -

Appeal from the United States District Court

for the Southern District of Texas

USDC No. H-95-CV-3904

- - - - - - - - - -

February 19, 1998

Before DUHE’, DeMOSS and DENNIS, Circuit Judges.

PER CURIAM:*

Keljer King, prisoner #628021, appeals the district court’s

denial of his petition for habeas relief pursuant to 28 U.S.C.

§ 2254. He argues that counsel’s advice to him that he could be

convicted of robbery under Texas law amounted to ineffective

assistance which rendered his nolo contendre plea involuntary. 
No. 97-20419

-2-

King has not presented “strong evidence” to overcome the

presumption that the Texas Court of Criminal Appeals accepted the

trial court’s legal conclusion that King could have been

convicted of robbery under Texas law. See Ylst v. Nunnemaker,

501 U.S. 797, 803 (1991). To establish ineffective assistance of

counsel in the context of a nolo contendre plea, King must

satisfy the two-prong test announced in Strickland v. Washington,

466 U.S. 668 (1984). Hill v. Lockhart, 474 U.S. 52, 57 (1985)

(guilty plea). King must show that counsel’s performance was

deficient or that he was prejudiced as a result of the alleged

deficiency. Strickland, 466 U.S. at 687. Since counsel’s advice

was a correct statement of Texas law, King cannot demonstrate

deficient performance. The district court did not err in

refusing to grant federal habeas relief on King’s claim of

ineffective assistance of counsel. 

AFFIRMED.
97-404.

#### State ex rel. Giles v. Ohio General Assembly.

In Mandamus. On motion for judgment on pleadings and on motion for class certification. *Sua sponte,*cause dismissed.

Moyer, C.J., Douglas, Resnick, F.E. Sweeney, Pfeifer, Cook and Lundberg Stratton, JJ., concur.
#### Rahsaan D. IVEY, Petitioner—Appellant, v. WARDEN, Broad River Correctional Institution; Henry McMaster, Attorney General of the State of South Carolina, Respondents-Appellees.

No. 08-8527.

United States Court of Appeals, Fourth Circuit.

Submitted: April 22, 2009.

Decided: May 11, 2009.

Rahsaan D. Ivey, Appellant Pro Se. Donald John Zelenka, Deputy Attorney General, Derrick K. McFarland, Office of the Attorney General of South Carolina, Columbia, South Carolina, for Appellees.

Before TRAXLER, KING, and AGEE, Circuit Judges.

Dismissed by unpublished PER CURIAM opinion.

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.

PER CURIAM:

Rahsaan D. Ivey seeks to appeal the district court’s order accepting the recommendation of the magistrate judge and denying relief on his 28 U.S.C. § 2254 (2006) petition. The order is not appeal-able unless a circuit justice or judge issues a certificate of appealability. 28 U.S.C. § 2253(c)(1) (2006). A certificate of ap-pealability will not issue absent “a substantial showing of the denial of a constitutional right.” 28 U.S.C. § 2253(c)(2) (2006). A prisoner satisfies this standard by demonstrating that reasonable jurists would find that any assessment of the constitutional claims by the district court is debatable or wrong and that any dispositive procedural ruling by the district court is likewise debatable. *Miller-El v. Cockrell,*537 U.S. 322, 336-38, 123 S.Ct. 1029, 154 L.Ed.2d 931 (2003); *Slack v. McDaniel,*529 U.S. 473, 484, 120 S.Ct. 1595, 146 L.Ed.2d 542 (2000); *Rose v. Lee,*252 F.3d 676, 683-84 (4th Cir.2001). We have independently reviewed the record and conclude that Ivey has not made the requisite showing as to the first two issues raised in his informal brief.

Concerning the third and fourth issues raised in Ivey’s informal brief, the magistrate judge recommended that relief be denied as to these issues and advised Ivey that failure to file timely objections to this recommendation could waive appellate review of a district court order based upon the recommendation. Despite this warning, Ivey failed to object to the magistrate judge’s recommended disposition of these issues.

“[T]o preserve for appeal an issue in a magistrate judge’s report, a party must *200object to the finding or recommendation on that issue with sufficient specificity so as reasonably to alert the district court of the true grounds for the objection.” *United States v. Midgette,*478 F.3d 616, 622 (4th Cir.2007). Ivey has waived appellate review of these issues by failing to timely file specific objections after receiving proper notice of the need to do so.

Accordingly, we deny a certificate of appealability and dismiss the appeal. 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.*
NATIONAL INDIAN GAMING COMMISSION

CHAIR’S NOTICE – Chairman E. Sequoyah Simermeyer

Visit www.NIGC.gov to learn more about the NIGC 3 For 35 Project— a 

year-long project emphasizing the importance of conversations among 

the tribal gaming regulatory community about workforce preparedness.

Date: October 20, 2022

Re: Global Gaming Expo, Digital Wallets, meetings with Indian 

Gaming stakeholders

I was grateful for the opportunity to meet with federal, tribal 

and state colleagues while in the Las Vegas, NV this week, the 

week of October 10. Informal meetings and public presentations 

affirmed the importance of collaboration around technology 

trends and financial tools in the regulatory and law enforcement 

community. 

I am especially thankful for the perspectives of Jay Song, 

FinCEN Director of the Office of Compliance and Chickasaw Nation 

Regulatory Compliance Manager, Crystal Houston, for presenting

with the NIGC Team at the Global Gaming Expo. Mr. Song and Ms. 

Houston joined Steve Brewer, NIGC Training Manager, and Tim 

Cotton, NIGC IT Audit Manager, on the panel “The Federal 

Perspective on Digital Wallets.” As this new technology evolves 

in the Indian gaming community, collaboration across the federal 

family will be beneficial to providing both the certainty and 

flexibility needed for healthy industry innovation. A news 

article on the presentation can be found HERE

This week in Las Vegas was also one of the largest national 

gatherings of the anti-financial crimes community, the 

Association of Certified Anti-Money Laundering Specialists 

(ACAMS). The ACAMS event provided the opportunity to meet 

informally with local and federal experts. The discussions and 

information sharing brought attention to anti-financial crime 

policy trends with potential relevance to Indian gaming’s 

regulatory community. 

New technology being considered by the Indian gaming community 

provides an opportunity to assess the adequacy of best practices 

and requirements for mitigating risk. Tribal gaming regulators 

are playing an important role in this assessment and are 

ensuring compliance with federal and tribal requirements.

I was grateful to continue learning more this week from FinCEN

on the important topics related to anti-financial crime efforts 

and new technology. Relevant to the Indian gaining community are 

forthcoming on regulations to implement Corporate Transparency 

Act provisions, specifically requirements for entities 
NATIONAL INDIAN GAMING COMMISSION

CHAIR’S NOTICE – Chairman E. Sequoyah Simermeyer

Visit www.NIGC.gov to learn more about the NIGC 3 For 35 Project— a 

year-long project emphasizing the importance of conversations among 

the tribal gaming regulatory community about workforce preparedness.

doing business in the United States to report information about 

their beneficial owners. Here are the details:

 FinCEN’s regulatory effort

 FinCEN Director Das’remarks

###
NATIONAL HEADQUARTERS 1849 C Street NW, Mail Stop #1621 Washington, DC 20240 Tel: 202.632.7003 Fax: 202.632.7066 WWW.NIGC.GOV

REGIONAL OFFICES Portland, OR; Sacramento, CA; Phoenix, AZ; St. Paul, MN; Tulsa, OK; Oklahoma City, OK

June 24, 2021

VIA E-MAIL

Dan Courtney, Chairman 

Cow Creek Band of Umpqua Tribe of Indians

2731 NE Stephens St. Ste. #100

Roseburg, Oregon 97495

Re: Cow Creek Band of Umpqua Tribe of Indians’ Gaming Ordinance Amendment

Dear Chairman Courtney:

This letter responds to your May 17, 2021 request on behalf of the Cow Creek Band of 

Umpqua Tribe of Indians for the National Indian Gaming Commission to review and approve the 

Tribe’s amendments to its gaming ordinance.

The amendments were adopted by the Tribal Board of Directors, Resolution #2021-33, 

on May 16, 2021, and reflect comprehensive review and revision. Most notably, the amendments 

update the definitions, per-capita distributions, policies for establishing a tribal gaming 

commission, auditing procedures, and background and licensing procedures that are now 

consistent with Parts 556 and 558.

Thank you for bringing the amended gaming ordinance to our attention and for providing 

us with a copy. The amended ordinance is approved as it is consistent with the Indian Gaming 

Regulatory Act and NIGC regulations. If you have any questions, please contact Sharon M. 

Avery, Associate General Counsel at (202) 632-7003.

Sincerely,

E. Sequoyah Simermeyer

Chairman

cc: Dirk Doyle, Tribal Attorney, Cow Creek Band of Umpqua Tribe of Indians (via e-mail)
<PAGE>
 
                         ARTICLES OF AMENDMENT TO THE
                      ARTICLES OF INCORPORATION (CHARTER)
                                      OF
                           ATLANTA GAS LIGHT COMPANY

                                      I.

                                CORPORATE NAME

     The name of the corporation is: Atlanta Gas Light Company.

                                      II.

                                   AMENDMENT

     Effective the date hereof, the Articles of Incorporation (Charter) of
Atlanta Gas Light Company (the "Company") hereby are amended by deleting Section
6.01(a) of the Charter in its entirety and substituting in lieu therof the
following:

     "Section 6.01(a). Board of Directors. The business and property of the 
Company shall be conducted and managed by a Board of Directors, which shall
consist of such number of Directors as shall be fixed from time to time
exclusively pursuant to a resolution adopted by the Board of Directors and
otherwise in compliance with the Company's By-Laws."

     All other provisions of the Charter remain unchanged.

                                     III.

                             ADOPTION OF AMENDMENT

     This Amendment was duly adopted on August 5, 1996, having been approved on
such date by the Company's shareholders, as required by Section 14-2-1003 of the
Georgia Business Corporation Code.

     IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the Company has caused these Articles of Amendment to
the Articles of Incorporation (Charter) to be duly executed by its authorized
officer as of the 3rd day of October 1996.

                                       ATLANTA GAS LIGHT COMPANY


                                       By: /s/ Melanie M. Platt
                                           ----------------------------------
                                           Melanie M. Platt, 
                                           Corporate Secretary