alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
Avoid Foreclosure Today! 

Brought to you by 

Your Name Here 

Place your logo and contact 

information here. 
Sometimes life brings unexpected events that 

cause financial hardship. If you’ve been struggling 

to pay your mortgage, or anticipate that there may be 

financial trouble soon, we can help. We can explore 

foreclosure avoidance solutions that may help you 

keep your home, including a modification under the 

federal Home Affordable Modification program. If 

keeping your home is not the best option, we’ll assess 

alternatives to foreclosure that can allow you to give 

up your home without going through the foreclosure 

process. Ultimately, we want to help you and your 

family find a solution that stabilizes your current 

housing and financial situation. 

Use this panel for specific event or 

program information.
Exhibit 32.01

CERTIFICATION OF CHIEF EXECUTIVE OFFICER

PURSUANT TO

18 U.S.C.
SECTION 1350

The undersigned, Philip A. Marineau, Interim Chief Executive Officer and Chairman of the Board of Shutterfly, Inc. (the
Company), pursuant to 18 U.S.C. §1350, hereby certifies that:



| | (i) | the Amendment No. 1 to Annual Report on Form 10-K for the period ended December 31, 2015 of the Company (the Report) fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) or 15(d) of the
Securities Exchange Act of 1934; and
| | --- | ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------



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



|                     |  |     |  |                                                                                                           
|-------------------- |  | --- |  | ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
|Date: April 29, 2016 |  | By: |  | /s/ Philip A. Marineau                                                                                    
|                     |  |     |  | Philip A. Marineau
Chairman of the Board and Interim Chief Executive Officer
(Principal Executive Officer)
EXHIBIT 32.1. SECTION 1350 CERTIFICATION

The undersigned herby certifies, pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley
Act of 2002 and in connection with this Annual Report on Form 10-K, that:

o    the report fully complies with the requirements of Sections 13(a) and 15(d)
     of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended, and

o    the information contained in the report fairly presents, in all material
     respects, the company's financial condition and results of operation.




----------------------------------------
Francis J. Evanitsky, President & CEO



Dated:
       ---------------------------------
##### 



Exhibit 32.2 CERTIFICATION PURSUANT TO
18 U.S.C. SECTION 1350,
SECTION 906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002 
 In connection with the Quarterly Report of Mercer Insurance Group, Inc. (the Company) on
Form 10-Q for the period ending March 31, 2005, as filed with the Securities and Exchange
Commission and amended on the date hereof (the Report), I, David B. Merclean, Senior Vice President and Chief
Financial Officer of the Company, certify, 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 results of operations of the Company. 
 Date:   January 11, 2006
    /s/ David B. MercleanDavid B. MercleanSenior Vice President and
Chief Financial Officer 
 24
No. 63524.

protests 283827-K and 270019-K(A) (New York).

#### M. Felkay Co. *v.*United States,

Opinion by

Ford, J.

In accordance with stipulation of counsel that the merchandise consists of monofilament fishing lines the same in all material respects as those the subject of Abstract 60183, the claim of the plaintiff was sustained.
No. 61730.

#### Richter Bros., Inc. *v.*United States,

protests 307593-K, etc. (New York).

Opinion by

Wilson, J.

In accordance with stipulation of counsel that the items marked *“A”*consist of fried herring similar in all material respects to that the subject of *Richter Bros., Inc.*v. *United States*(44 C. C. P. A. 128, C. A. D. 649), the claim at percent under the provision in paragraph 718 (b), as modified by the Torquay Protocol to the General Agreement on Tariffs and Trade (T. D. 52739), supplemented by Presidential proclamation (T. D. 52782), for herring, prepared or preserved in any manner, packed in airtight containers weighing with their contents not over 15 pounds each, without added oil or oil and other substances, was sustained. The items marked “B,” stipulated to consist of sprats in oil, packed in tins, similar to those the subject of *Arnold Sorensin Co., Inc., et al.*v. *United States*(38 Cust. Ct. 199, C. D. 1862), were held dutiable, as claimed, at 15 percent under the provision in paragraph 718 (a), as modified by the General Agreement on Tariffs and Trade (T. D. 51802), supplemented by Presidential proclamation (T. D. 51954), for sardines, neither skinned nor boned, when packed in oil.
No. 56249.

protests 76352-K, etc. (Los Angeles).

#### The Attorney General as Successor to the Alien Property Custodian *v.*United States,

Opinion by

Ford, J.

The protests were dismissed.
##### 



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 Virage Logic Corporation (the
Company) on Form 10-Q for the period ending June 30, 2004 as filed with the
Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the Report), I, Adam
Kablanian, 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. /s/ Adam A. KablanianAdam A. KablanianPresident and Chief Executive OfficerAugust 13, 2004
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF PENNSYLVANIA

BLUE BELL INN, INC. )

601 Skippack Pike )

Blue Bell, PA 19422, ) 

Plaintiff, )

)

v. )

) 02cv4068 JF

ANDREW KAMARATOS and )

AGGI, L.P., d/b/a BLUE BELL DINER, )

1324 Skippack Pike )

Blue Bell, PA 19422, )

Defendants. )

PLAINTIFF, BLUE BELL INN, INC.’s MOTION FOR PRELIMINARY INJUNCTION 

AGAINST TRADEMARK INFRINGEMENT BY DEFENDANTS 

Plaintiff, Blue Bell Inn, Inc. ("BLUE BELL INN"), by its undersigned attorney, moves this

Court pursuant to its Complaint to enjoin the Defendants, and their officers, agents, servants,

employees, attorneys, and all persons in active concert or participation with them, or any of them,

during the pendency of this action from using the words "Blue Bell", and the symbol of a blue bell

and a ribbon, and any colorable variations thereof, in the rendering, advertising, promotion, and

offering of restaurant services within their current service areas.

As grounds therefore plaintiff alleges that the use by defendants of plaintiff’s Federally

registered incontestable service marks constitutes trademark infringement; that there is not an

adequate remedy at law; that Plaintiff is being irreparably injured by Defendants’ acts; that Plaintiff

is likely to succeed on the merits after trial, in view of its use, promotion and incontestable

registration of the trademarks, which are attached as Exhibits A to C, in relation to restaurant

services; that the injury to Plaintiff outweighs the injury to Defendants; and that the injunction

would not disserve the public interest.

Case 2:02-cv-04068-JF Document 2-2 Filed 08/01/2002 Page 1 of 2
This motion is based on the Complaint, the Exhibits attached thereto, the exhibits attached

hereto, and the accompanying Memorandum of Law including the Declaration of Counsel contained

therein.

The undersigned counsel discussed bringing this motion with the Defendants’ counsel.

No prior requests for the foregoing relief have been made.

A preliminary injunction is proper to prevent the Defendants from persisting in their unlawful

conduct and is supported by applicable case law from the Third Circuit Court of Appeals. Thus, the

Plaintiff's Motion for a Preliminary Injunction should be granted.

A suitable order is attached.

I HEREBY CERTIFY that a true and correct copy of the foregoing has been furnished by

U.S. Mail to defendants' counsel, Joseph T. Piscitello, Esquire, 1735 Market Street, suite 1330,

Philadelphia, PA 19103 this 31st day of July, 2002.

Blue Bell Inn, Inc.

by____________________________

FRANK J. BENASUTTI, ESQUIRE

BENASUTTI, P.C.

Pennsylvania Attorney ID No. 04645

One Boca Commerce Center

551 N.W. 77th Street, Suite 111

Boca Raton, FL 33487

Tel. 561-994-5959

Fax 561-994-5990

email: IPTRIALS@aol.com

Counsel for Plaintiff

Case 2:02-cv-04068-JF Document 2-2 Filed 08/01/2002 Page 2 of 2
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<PAGE>
<ARTICLE> 5
       
<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   3-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          MAR-31-1999
<PERIOD-START>                             APR-01-1998
<PERIOD-END>                               JUN-30-1998
<CASH>                                      12,129,318
<SECURITIES>                                         0
<RECEIVABLES>                                4,843,664
<ALLOWANCES>                                  (83,850)
<INVENTORY>                                  4,407,368
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                            21,558,263
<PP&E>                                         151,932
<DEPRECIATION>                                (16,318)
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                              22,793,877
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                        9,735,415
<BONDS>                                              0
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                    12,273,412
<OTHER-SE>                                     777,165
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                22,793,877
<SALES>                                     18,414,526
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                            18,414,526
<CGS>                                       17,982,616
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                  528,852
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                     0
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                27,000
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                               1,880
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                 49,149
<INCOME-TAX>                                    20,500
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                             28,649
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                    28,649
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                      .00
<EPS-DILUTED>                                      .00
        

</TABLE>
1

Filed 9/25/20 P. v. Woodbury CA3

NOT TO BE PUBLISHED

California Rules of Court, rule 8.1115(a), prohibits courts and parties from citing or relying on opinions not certified for publication or ordered published, except as specified by rule 8.1115(b). This opinion has not been certified for publication or ordered published for purposes of rule 8.1115.

IN THE COURT OF APPEAL OF THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA

THIRD APPELLATE DISTRICT

(Butte)

----

THE PEOPLE,

Plaintiff and Respondent,

v.

STEPHEN WINFIELD WOODBURY IV,

Defendant and Appellant. C090604

(Super. Ct. No. 17CF06242)

Appointed counsel for defendant Stephen Winfield Woodbury IV asked this court

to review the record and determine whether there are any arguable issues on appeal.

( People v. Wende (1979) 25 Cal. 3d 436 ( Wende ).) Finding no arguable error that would

result in a disposition more favorable to defendant, w e will affirm the judgment.

I

Chico Police Officer Derek Ament was at an indoor gun range for target practice

in November 2017 . He noticed defendant at the facility and saw him fire a handgun and

what appeared to be a rifle. Officer Ament believed defendant had a prior narcotics

conviction that would make him ineligible to possess or use firearms. He contacted law

enforcement and c onfirmed defendant had a prior felony conviction for a narcotics

-2

related offense. Defendant also checked a box on a gun rental agreement form at the gun

range disclosing that he had a prior conviction that prohibited him from possessing a

firearm.

The Pe ople charged defendant with being a felon in possession of a firearm

.

(Pen. Code, § 29800, subd. (a)(1)). Following a bench trial, the trial court found

defendant guilty as charged. In September 2019, the trial court suspended imposition of

sentence and placed defendant on probation for three years with various terms and

conditions.

II

Appointed counsel filed an opening brief setting forth the facts of the case and

asking this court to review the record and determine whether there are any arguable

issues on appeal. ( Wende, supra, 25 Cal.3d 436.) Defendant was advised by counsel of

the right to file a supplemental brief within 30 days of the date of filing the opening brief.

More than 30 days elapsed and we received no communication from defendant.

Having undertaken an examination of the entire record, we find no arguable error

that would result in a disposition more favorable to defendant.

DISPOSITION

The judgment is affirmed.

/S/

MAURO, J.

We concur:

/S/

RO BIE, Acting P. J.

/S/

KRAUSE, J.
| 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. |

|                |        |                                                 |
|---------------------|--------|------------------------------------------------------|
|                |   |                                                 |   |
| April      30, 2009 | By:    | /s/ Guy      Nissenson                          |   |
|                |   | Guy      Nissenson                                   |   |
|                |   | President,      Chief Executive Officer and Director |   |
|                |   |                                                 |   |
No. 51581.

#### Protests 952696-G, etc., of Wilfred Schade & Co. et al. (St. Louis, etc.).

Opinion by

Kincheloe, J.

Following the authorities cited in Abstract 15400 the court dismissed the protests.
304(m) CBI REPLACEMENT PAGE

EPA-HQ-OW-2010-0824

DCN CBM00668 

THE FOLLOWING HAS BEEN REMOVED BECAUSE IT

CONTAINS CONFIDENTIAL BUSINESS INFORMATION

(CBI) PER 40 CFR PART 2, SUBPART B.
Exhibit 32.2





CERTIFICATION PURSUANT TO


18 U.S.C. SECTION 1350,


SECTION 906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002





In connection with the Quarterly Report of Mercer Insurance Group, Inc. (the “Group”) on Form 10-Q for the period ending September 30, 2010, as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the “Report”), I, David B. Merclean, Senior Vice President and Chief Financial Officer of the Group, certify, 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 results of operations of the Group.











Date: November 9, 2010/s/ David B. MercleanDavid B. MercleanSenior Vice President of Finance and Chief Financial Officer
No. 57142.

protest 179065-K (San Francisco).

#### E. Hesse *v.*United States,

Opinion by

Oliver, O. J.

An examination of the official papers disclosing nothing to disturb the decision of the collector, which was presumptively correct, •the protest was overruled.
COURT OF APPEALS

EIGHTH DISTRICT OF TEXAS

EL PASO, TEXAS

JUAN CARLOS AGUEROS,

 Appellant,

v.

STATE OF TEXAS,

 State.

'

'

'

'

'

'

No. 08-16-00063-CR

Appeal from the

277th District Court

of Williamson County, Texas 

(TC# 02-940-K277)

O R D E R

The record before us does not contain the trial court’s certification of the defendant’s right 

of appeal. TEX.R.APP.P. 25.2(a)(2), (d). The trial court is ordered to prepare and file with the 

trial court clerk within twenty days from the date of this order a certification of the defendant’s 

right of appeal as required by TEX.R.APP.P. 25.2(a)(2) and 25.2(d). The trial court clerk shall 

prepare a supplemental clerk’s record containing the certification and file it with this Court no later 

than July 3, 2016.

IT IS SO ORDERED this 3

rd day of June, 2016.

PER CURIAM

Before McClure, C.J., Rodriguez and Hughes, JJ.
|   | 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: | July 29, 2008 | By:*/s/ Mark S. Zouvas*            |
|--------|---------------|-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|
|   |          | Mark S. Zouvas                                                                            |
|   |          | Chief Executive Officer                                                                   |
IV 

115TH CONGRESS 

2D SESSION H. RES. 691 

Expressing the sense of the House of Representatives that any infrastructure 

legislation to promote broadband internet access or communications facilities deployment should treat all broadband and communications facilities in a competitively and technologically neutral manner. 

IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES 

JANUARY 11, 2018 

Mr. LATTA submitted the following resolution; which was referred to the 

Committee on Energy and Commerce 

RESOLUTION 

Expressing the sense of the House of Representatives that 

any infrastructure legislation to promote broadband 

internet access or communications facilities deployment 

should treat all broadband and communications facilities 

in a competitively and technologically neutral manner. 

Whereas broadband brings extraordinary opportunities for 

economic growth and investment across multiple platforms and technologies, including wireline, wireless, and 

cable; 

Whereas broadband and related information technology add 

nearly $1 trillion annually to the United States economy; 

Whereas broadband and related communications and technology sectors support roughly 10 million American jobs; 


lotter on DSKBCFDHB2PROD with BILLS
2 

•HRES 691 IH 

Whereas wireline, wireless, and cable broadband providers 

collectively invested $76 billion in 2016, and roughly $1.6 

trillion since 1996; 

Whereas wireline, wireless, and cable broadband providers are 

consistently ranked among the top companies investing 

annually in the United States; 

Whereas broadband traffic over wireline, wireless, and cable 

technologies continues to grow at an exponential rate; 

and 

Whereas world-class communications networks will require a 

complementary mix of wireline, wireless, cable, and any 

other technology capable of transmitting voice, video, or 

data communications services using Internet Protocol or 

any successor protocol-enabled service: Now, therefore, be 

it 

1 Resolved, That it is the sense of the House of Rep2 resentatives that any infrastructure legislation to promote 

3 broadband internet access or communications facilities de4 ployment should treat all broadband and communications 

5 facilities in a competitively and technologically neutral 

6 manner. 

Æ 


lotter on DSKBCFDHB2PROD with BILLS
No. 53873.

Suit 4613.

#### United States *v.*Ignaz Strauss & Co., Inc.

C. D. 1132 affirmed November 7, 1949. C. A. D. 418.
H. J. Res. 62

One Hundred Sixth Congress

of the

United States of America

AT THE FIRST SESSION

Begun and held at the City of Washington on Wednesday,

the sixth day of January, one thousand nine hundred and ninety-nine

Joint Resolution

To grant the consent of Congress to the boundary change between Georgia and

South Carolina.

Resolved by the Senate and House of Representatives of the

United States of America in Congress assembled,

SECTION 1. CONSENT OF THE CONGRESS.

(a) IN GENERAL.—The consent of the Congress is given to

the establishment of the boundary between the States of Georgia

and South Carolina.

(b) NEW BOUNDARY.—The boundary referred to in subsection

(a) is the boundary—

(1) agreed to by the State of Georgia in Act Number 1044

(S.B. No. 572) approved by the Governor on April 5, 1994,

and agreed to by the State of South Carolina in Act Number

375 (S.B. No. 1315) approved by the Governor on May 29,

1996;

(2) agreed to by the State of Georgia in Act Number 1044

(S.B. No. 572) approved by the Governor on April 5, 1994,

and agreed to by the State of South Carolina in an Act approved

by its Governor not later than 5 years after the date of the

enactment of this joint resolution;

(3) agreed to by the State of South Carolina in Act Number

375 (S.B. No. 1315) approved by the Governor on May 29,

1996, and agreed to by the State of Georgia in an Act approved

by its Governor not later than 5 years after the date of the

enactment of this joint resolution; or

(4) agreed to by the States of Georgia and South Carolina

in Acts approved by each of their Governors not later than

5 years after the date of the enactment of this joint resolution.
H. J. Res. 62—2

(c) COMPACT.—The Acts referred to in subsection (b) are recognized by the Congress as an interstate compact pursuant to section

10 of article I of the United States Constitution.

Speaker of the House of Representatives.

Vice President of the United States and

President of the Senate.