alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<PAGE>
 
<ARTICLE> 9
       
<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   3-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          MAR-31-1999
<PERIOD-START>                             JAN-01-1999
<PERIOD-END>                               MAR-31-1999
<CASH>                                          19,750
<INT-BEARING-DEPOSITS>                               0
<FED-FUNDS-SOLD>                                 1,915
<TRADING-ASSETS>                                     0
<INVESTMENTS-HELD-FOR-SALE>                    242,608
<INVESTMENTS-CARRYING>                          78,389
<INVESTMENTS-MARKET>                            78,787
<LOANS>                                        691,492
<ALLOWANCE>                                   (11,854)
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                               1,076,596
<DEPOSITS>                                     689,429
<SHORT-TERM>                                   104,000
<LIABILITIES-OTHER>                             10,128
<LONG-TERM>                                    183,225
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                            53
<OTHER-SE>                                      89,761
<TOTAL-LIABILITIES-AND-EQUITY>               1,076,596
<INTEREST-LOAN>                                 12,738
<INTEREST-INVEST>                                4,618
<INTEREST-OTHER>                                   326
<INTEREST-TOTAL>                                17,682
<INTEREST-DEPOSIT>                               5,616
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                               8,858
<INTEREST-INCOME-NET>                            8,824
<LOAN-LOSSES>                                        0
<SECURITIES-GAINS>                                   5
<EXPENSE-OTHER>                                  5,978
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                  6,898
<INCOME-PRE-EXTRAORDINARY>                       4,581
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                  (435)
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                     4,416
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                     0.81
<EPS-DILUTED>                                     0.79
<YIELD-ACTUAL>                                    7.33
<LOANS-NON>                                      2,209
<LOANS-PAST>                                         0
<LOANS-TROUBLED>                                   674
<LOANS-PROBLEM>                                 20,395
<ALLOWANCE-OPEN>                                12,301
<CHARGE-OFFS>                                      624
<RECOVERIES>                                       177
<ALLOWANCE-CLOSE>                               11,854
<ALLOWANCE-DOMESTIC>                             6,366
<ALLOWANCE-FOREIGN>                                  0
<ALLOWANCE-UNALLOCATED>                          5,488
        

</TABLE>
English

Notice to Borrowers about Language

Your mortgage loan transaction is likely to be conducted in English. The information you receive and 

the official documents you will sign will likely be in English. 

We want you to understand the transaction. Translations may be available to complement the 

English language documents. These documents are to help you understand the transaction. Your 

lender or servicer may not be able to provide you with translation services or translated documents. 

Language assistance and resources may also be available through housing counseling agencies 

approved by the U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD). You can find a list of HUDapproved housing counseling agencies at www.hud.gov/counseling. 

1. Select “housing counseling agency” near you, then select your state. 

2. To locate housing counseling agencies in your area that speak your language, select “Click here 

to narrow your search” and select a language. 

3. Or, call HUD at 800-569-4287 for help in finding a counselor. 

Information about housing counselors is also available at www.consumerfinance.gov/find-a-housingcounselor.
Case No. 6,636.

#### HOLMES v. BUSSARD.

[2 Cranch, C. C. 401.] 1

Circuit Court, District of Columbia.

April Term, 1823.

Practice — Supersedeas.

A supersedeas judgment must recite the original judgment correctly.

[Cited in Chesapeake & O. Canal Co. v. Bar-croft, Case No. 2,644.]

Motion by Mr. Taney and Mr. Redin, for defendant, to quash a supersedeas, and an execution issued upon the supersedeas, because it stated the original judgment to be for $700 and costs, whereas the original judgment was for $1,500, to be released on the. payment of $700 and costs.

Mr. Marbury, for plaintiff.

THE COURT

(THRUSTON, Circuit Judge, absent)

quashed the execution and the super-sedeas.
```

[Congressional Bills 115th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[H. Res. 710 Engrossed in House (EH)]

<DOC>
H. Res. 710

                In the House of Representatives, U. S.,

                                                      January 22, 2018.
    Resolved, That the following named Member be, and is hereby, elected to the 
following standing committee of the House of Representatives:
     Committee on Ethics: Mr. Ratcliffe.
            Attest:

                                                                          Clerk.
```
Before the First Division,

May 20, 1963

No. 67732.

#### Esso Export Corp. et al. *v.*United States,

protests 181632-K, etc. (Baltimore, Philadelphia, Boston, Bridgeport, Charleston, Norfolk, Portland, Maine; Providence, Savannah, Tampa, Wilmington, and New York).

Oliver, Chief Judge:

The protests enumerated in schedule “A,” hereto attached and made a part hereof, relate to various shipments of fuel oil derived from petroleum, that is a product of the Kingdom of the Netherlands, including its overseas territories.

On the ground that annual quota amounts, which included crude petroleum, topped crude petroleum, and fuel oil derived from petroleum, allocated by virtue of the Presidential proclamation relating to the trade agreement with Venezuela, T.D. 50015, 75 Treas. Dec. 165, to the Kingdom of the Netherlands, including its overseas territories, had been exhausted at the times of importation of the shipments here in question, the collectors of customs at the various ports, where the *306shipments involved herein were entered, took import tax at the rate of % cent per gallon on the said importations under section 3422 of the Internal Revenue Code of 1939,, as modified by the Presidential proclamation relating to the General Agreement on Tariffs and Trade, T.D. 51802, 82 Treas. Dec. 305.

Plaintiffs claim that the customs authorities erred in interpreting the applicable law in that, at the times of the importations at bar, the quota amounts did not include fuel oil, but only crude petroleum, and that the quotas so calculated had not been exhausted. Consequently, plaintiffs contend the fuel oil should have been assessed with duty at the rate of *4 cent per gallon under said section 3422, as modified by the said T.D. 51802.

In a stipulation of submission, counsel for the respective parties limited the said protests “to 30 per centum of the quantity of merchandise imported on each of the entries involved” and abandoned the protests “as to the remainder of the merchandise.”

Substantially the same merchandise, involving the same issue as that presented herein, was the subject of this court’s decision in *Esso Standard Oil Company*v. *United States,*48 Cust. Ct. 54, C.D. 2314, the record in which case was incorporated herein by consent.

Following the statutory construction invoked in the *Esso Standard Oil Company*case, *supra,*we hold the commodity in question, in the amount of 30 per centum of the quantity of merchandise imported on each of the entries involved herein, to be properly dutiable at % cent per gallon under section 3422 of the Internal Revenue Code of 1939, as modified by T.D. 51802, as claimed by plaintiffs. As to the remainder of the merchandise, the protests are dismissed.

Judgment will be rendered accordingly.
Before the Third Division,

September 4, 1947

No. 51889.

#### Chinatown Emporium, Inc., et al. v. United States,

protests 985189-G, etc. (New York).

Opinion by

Cline, J.

It was stipulated that the merchandise consists of kumquats similar in all material respects to those the subject of *United States*v. *Fung Chong Co.*(34 C. C. P. A. 40, C. A. D. 342). In accordance therewith the claim at 1 cent per pound under paragraph 743 was sustained.
No. 52471.

protests 58230-K, etc. (New York).

#### R. H. Macy & Co., Inc. *v.*United States,

*183Opinion by

Ekwall, J.

In accordance with stipulation of counsel the court found that the facts herein agreed upon were such as to bring the case within the holding in *John Barr*v. *United States*(11 Cust. Ct. 88, C. D. 801), which record was incorporated herein. (See *John Barr*v. *United States,*324 U. S. 83.) In accordance therewith it was held that the currency of the invoices should be converted at the buying rate in the New York market at noon on the day of exportation (the “free” rate of exchange for pounds sterling), as certified by the Federal Reserve bank and set forth by the collector- on each of the entries involved. The protests were sustained to this extent.
<PAGE>
                                                                    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 Bayou City Exploration, Inc. (the
"Company") on Form 10-QSB for the period ended June 30, 2005 as filed with the
Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the "Report"), I, Morris
T. Hewitt, Chief Executive 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 to the best of 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.


/s/ Morris T. Hewitt
-------------------------------------
Morris T. Hewitt
President and Chief Executive Officer
August 12, 2005
No. 65383.

#### Pacific Import Co., Inc., and Reliance Merchandise Co., Inc. *v.*United States,

protests 60/21403 and 60/21347 (New York).

Opinion by

Johnson, J.

In accordance with stipulation of counsel that the merchandise consists of wall plaques similar in all material respects to those the subject of *Ross Products, Inc.*v. *United States*(43 Cust. Ct. 74, C.D. 2106), the claim of the plaintiffs was sustained.
No. 64027.

protests 58/20672, 58/25887, and 59/4250 (Pembina).

#### R. C. Mackay *v.*United States,

Opinion by

Donlon, J.

In accordance with stipulation of counsel that the merchandise consists of prepared or preserved pork similar in all material respects to that the subject of *C. J. Tower & Sons*v. *United States*(43 Cust. Ct. 36, C.D. 2100), the claim of the plaintiff was sustained.
* Pursuant to Local Rule 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 Local Rule

47.5.4. IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT

No. 96-20276

(Summary Calendar)

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,

Plaintiff-Appellee,

versus

VICTOR C. AMADI,

Defendant-Appellant.

- - - - - - - - - - Appeal from the United States District Court

for the Southern District of Texas

(USDC No. CR-H-95-8-6)

- - - - - - - - - - December 24, 1996

Before HIGGINBOTHAM, DAVIS and WIENER, Circuit Judges.

PER CURIAM: *

Victor Amadi appeals his sentence following his plea of guilty

to conspiracy to defraud the Government and for aiding and abetting

in making false claims to a government agency, in violation of 18

U.S.C. §§ 2, 286, and 287. Amadi contends that: (1) there was

insufficient evidence to establish that his offenses involved more

than minimal planning or that he played an managerial role in the

offenses; (2) the district court erred by enhancing his offense2

level both for more than minimal planning and for his aggravated

role in the offense; and 3) the district court erred in determining

the amount of the loss for which Amadi was responsible. Our review

of the record and of the arguments and authorities convinces us

that no reversible error was committed.

Amadi has not met his burden of demonstrating that the

district court’s factual findings were clearly erroneou s that

Amadi’s offenses involved more than minimal planning under U.S.S.G.

§ 2F1.1(b)(2) and that Amadi played an aggravated role under §

3B1.1. See United States v. Barreto , 871 F.2d 511, 512 (5th Cir.

1989). Additionally, because neither § 3B1.1 nor § 2F1.1 forbid

“double-count ing” with each other, increases under both of those

sections are permitted. S ee United States v. Godfrey

, 25 F.3d 263,

264 (5th Cir.), cert. denied

, 115 S. Ct. 429 (1994). Finally,

Amadi’s conduct in the sixteen substantive counts to which he

pleaded guilty falls within § 1B1.3(a)(1)(A). Amadi fails to show

that the district court’s calculation of the loss attributable to

his conduct was clearly erroneous. S ee United States v. Tedder

, 81

F.3d 549, 550 (5th Cir. 1996).

AFFIRMED.
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<ARTICLE>               9
<MULTIPLIER>            1,000
       
<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   3-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          SEP-30-1997
<PERIOD-END>                               DEC-31-1997
<CASH>                                             628
<INT-BEARING-DEPOSITS>                           3,498
<FED-FUNDS-SOLD>                                     0
<TRADING-ASSETS>                                     0
<INVESTMENTS-HELD-FOR-SALE>                          0
<INVESTMENTS-CARRYING>                          32,691
<INVESTMENTS-MARKET>                            32,725
<LOANS>                                         61,361
<ALLOWANCE>                                        300
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                 102,999
<DEPOSITS>                                      89,455
<SHORT-TERM>                                         0
<LIABILITIES-OTHER>                                 62
<LONG-TERM>                                          0
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                             0
<OTHER-SE>                                      13,142
<TOTAL-LIABILITIES-AND-EQUITY>                 102,999
<INTEREST-LOAN>                                  1,348
<INTEREST-INVEST>                                  248
<INTEREST-OTHER>                                    57
<INTEREST-TOTAL>                                 1,932
<INTEREST-DEPOSIT>                               1,098
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                               1,098
<INTEREST-INCOME-NET>                              834
<LOAN-LOSSES>                                       74
<SECURITIES-GAINS>                                   0
<EXPENSE-OTHER>                                    707
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                     80
<INCOME-PRE-EXTRAORDINARY>                          80
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                        53
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                        0
<EPS-DILUTED>                                        0
<YIELD-ACTUAL>                                    3.34
<LOANS-NON>                                          0
<LOANS-PAST>                                         0
<LOANS-TROUBLED>                                     0
<LOANS-PROBLEM>                                      0
<ALLOWANCE-OPEN>                                   300
<CHARGE-OFFS>                                       74
<RECOVERIES>                                         0
<ALLOWANCE-CLOSE>                                  300
<ALLOWANCE-DOMESTIC>                               300
<ALLOWANCE-FOREIGN>                                  0
<ALLOWANCE-UNALLOCATED>                              0
        

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

NO. 03-24-00526-CV

In re Nathaniel Lee Thompson and Nate L. Thompson, Inc. d/b/a 

Triumphant Transition Partners

ORIGINAL PROCEEDING FROM TRAVIS COUNTY

M E M O R A N D U M O P I N I O N

Relators Nathaniel Lee Thompson and Nate L. Thompson, Inc. d/b/a Triumphant 

Transition Partners have filed a petition for writ of mandamus and emergency motion for 

temporary stay. See Tex. R. App. P. 52.1, 52.10(a). The petition for writ of mandamus and 

emergency motion for stay are denied. See Tex. R. App. P. 52.8(a).

__________________________________________

Edward Smith, Justice

Before Chief Justice Byrne, Justices Smith and Theofanis

Filed: August 16, 2024
---

Exhibit 32.2

CERTIFICATION PURSUANT TO 18 U.S.C. SECTION 1350 AS
ADOPTED PURSUANT TOSECTION 906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002

In connection with the Annual Report of Alternet Systems, Inc.
  (the "Company") on Form 10-KSB for the year ended December 31, 2005 as filed
  with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the "Report"),
  each of the undersigned, in the capacities and on the dates indicated below,
  hereby certifies pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, as adopted pursuant to
  Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that to their 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 operation
      of the Company.

|Dated: January 3, 2007 | By: | /s/
      Griffin Jones                     
|---------------------- | --- | --------------------------------------------
|                       |     | Griffin Jones                               
|                       |     | Treasurer, Principal Accounting Officer, CEO
|                       |     | Secretary & Director                        

---
IN THE SUPREME COURT OF PENNSYLVANIA MIDDLE DISTRICT COMMONWEALTH OF PENNSYLVANIA, Respondent

v. ANTHONY BRIGHTWELL, Petitioner : : : : : : : : : : : No. 840 MAL 2014 Petition for Allowance of Appeal from the Order of the Superior Court

ORDER PER CURIAM AND NOW , this 11th day of February, 2015, the Petition for Allowance of Appeal is DENIED
.
Exhibit 31.1

CERTIFICATION OF PRINCIPAL EXECUTIVE OFFICER PURSUANT  TO SECTION 302 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002

I,
Lee-Lean Shu, certify that:

1.     I
have reviewed this annual report on Form 10K of GSI Technology, Inc.;

2.     Based
on my knowledge, this report does not contain any untrue statement of a material fact or omit to state a material fact necessary to make the statements made, in
light of the circumstances under which such statements were made, not misleading with respect to the period covered by this report;

3.     Based
on my knowledge, the financial statements, and other financial information included in this report, fairly present in all material respects the financial condition,
results of operations, and cash flows of the registrant as of, and for, the periods presented in this report;

4.     The
registrant's other certifying officer and I are responsible for establishing and maintaining disclosure controls and procedures (as defined in Exchange Act
Rules 13a-15(e) and 15d-15(e)) and internal control over financial reporting (as defined in Exchange Act Rules 13a-15(f) and 15d-15(f)) for the registrant and
have:



5.     The
registrant's other certifying officer and I have disclosed, based on our most recent evaluation of internal control over financial reporting, to the registrant's
auditors and the audit committee of registrant's board of directors (or persons performing the equivalent functions):



Date:
June 17, 2008

|/s/LEE-LEAN SHULee-Lean Shu President and Chief Executive
Officer |  | 
|----------------------------------------------------------------- |  | 

---



QuickLinks
No. A-360.

#### Radda *v.*Acito et al.

App. Div., Sup. Ct. N. Y., 3d Jud. Dept. Application for stay, presented to Mr. Justice Powell, and by him referred to the Court, denied.
|   | 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. |
|--------|----|----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|

| March              30 , 2006 |   | **XFONE,                INC.**BY: /S/ Guy Nissenson                ——————————————Guy Nissenson President,CEO and                Director |
|------------------------------|--------|-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|
No. 56931.

#### Bergdorf Goodman Co. et al. *v.*United States,

protests 180459-K, etc. (New York).

Opinion by

Ford, J.

In accordance with stipulation of counsel that certain items of the merchandise consist of beaded bags the same in all material respects as those the classification of which was involved in Abstract 56124, the claim of the plaintiffs was sustained.
Exhibit 32.2

CERTIFICATION OF CHIEF EXECUTIVE OFFICER  PURSUANT TO 18 U.S.C. SECTION 1350

In connection with the accompanying Annual Report on Form 10-KSB of QRS Music Technologies, Inc. for the year ended June 30,
2003, I, Thomas A. Dolan, President and Chief Executive Officer of QRS Music Technologies, Inc., hereby certify pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, as adopted pursuant to
Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, to the best of my knowledge and belief, that:

(1)   such
Annual Report on Form 10-KSB for the year ended June 30, 2003, fully complies with the requirements of Sections 13(a) or
15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934; and

(2)   the
information contained in such Annual Report on Form 10-KSB for the year ended June 30, 2003, fairly presents, in all material respects, the
financial condition and results of operations of QRS Music Technologies, Inc.

| |  | /s/THOMAS A. DOLANThomas A. Dolan President, Chief Executive Officer
| |  | --------------------------------------------------------------------

September 26,
2003

A
signed original of this written statement required by Section 906, or other document authenticating, acknowledging, or otherwise adopting the signature that appears in typed form within the
electronic version of this written statement required by Section 906, has been provided to QRS Music Technologies, Inc. and will be retained by QRS Music Technologies, Inc. and
furnished to the Securities and Exchange Commission or its staff upon request.

33

---

QuickLinks