alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
Exhibit 31.1

I,  Michael Schaffer, certify that:

1. I have reviewed this Annual report on Form 10-KSB/A of Case Financial, Inc.;

2. Based on my  knowledge,  this  annual  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 quarterly
report;

3.  Based  on my  knowledge,  the  financial  statements,  and  other  financial
information  included in this quarterly  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 quarterly 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-14 and 15d-14) for the registrant and have:

(a) Designed such disclosure controls and procedures,  or caused such disclosure
controls and  procedures to be designed  under our  supervision,  to ensure that
material  information  relating  to  the  company,  including  its  consolidated
subsidiaries, is made known to us by others within those entities,  particularly
during the period in which this report is being prepared;

(b)  Evaluated  the  effectiveness  of the  company's  disclosure  controls  and
procedures and presented in this report our conclusions  about the effectiveness
of the disclosure  controls and procedures,  as of the end of the period covered
by this report based on such evaluation; and

(c) Disclosed in this report any change in the company's  internal  control over
financial reporting that occurred during the period covered by the annual report
that has materially affected,  or is reasonably likely to materially affect, the
company's internal control over financial reporting; and

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

a) all significant  deficiencies in the design or operation of internal controls
which  could  adversely  affect the  registrant's  ability  to record,  process,
summarize and report  financial data and have  identified  for the  registrant's
auditors any material weaknesses in internal controls; and

b) any  fraud,  whether  or not  material,  that  involves  management  or other
employees who have a significant role in the registrant's internal controls; and

6. I have  indicated in this  quarterly  report  whether there were  significant
changes in internal controls or in other factors that could significantly affect
internal  controls  subsequent  to the  date  of  our  most  recent  evaluation,
including any  corrective  actions with regard to significant  deficiencies  and
material weaknesses.

/s/ Michael Schaffer
-----------------------
Michael Schaffer,
Chief Executive Officer
October 24, 2005
DISTRICT COURT OF APPEAL OF THE STATE OF FLORIDA

FOURTH DISTRICT

A.M., the Mother,

Appellant,

v.

DEPARTMENT OF CHILDREN AND FAMILIES and GUARDIAN AD 

LITEM PROGRAM,

Appellees.

No. 4D2023-2782

[April 15, 2024]

Appeal from the Circuit Court for the Seventeenth Judicial Circuit, 

Broward County; Jose Izquierdo, Judge; L.T. Case No. 2023-1384-CJ-DP. 

Sean Conway, Deland, and Linda E. Singer, Hollywood, for appellant.

Sara Elizabeth Goldfarb and Sarah Todd Weitz, Statewide Directors of 

Appeals, Statewide Guardian ad Litem Office, Tallahassee, for appellee

Guardian ad Litem. 

Carolyn Schwarz, Children’s Legal Services, Fort Lauderdale, for 

appellee Department of Children and Families.

PER CURIAM.

Affirmed.

KLINGENSMITH, C.J., CIKLIN and FORST, JJ., concur.

* * *

Not final until disposition of timely filed motion for rehearing.
EXHIBIT 32.1

                           CERTIFICATIONS 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 AMP Productions, Ltd. on Form 10-QSB
for  the  quarter  ended June 30, 2005 as filed with the Securities and Exchange
Commission  on the date hereof (the Report), I, Thomas E. Mills, Chief Executive
Officer,  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,  as  amended;  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:  August  15,  2005     By  /s/  Thomas  E.  Mills
                                 Thomas  E.  Mills
                                 President  &  Chief  Financial  Officer
JOHNNY WELCH,

Appellant,

v.

STATE OF FLORIDA,

Appellee.

IN THE DISTRICT COURT OF APPEAL

FIRST DISTRICT, STATE OF FLORIDA

NOT FINAL UNTIL TIME EXPIRES TO 

FILE MOTION FOR REHEARING AND 

DISPOSITION THEREOF IF FILED

CASE NO. 1D14-2156

_____________________________/

Opinion filed August 18, 2014.

An appeal from the Circuit Court for Levy County.

Mark W. Moseley, Judge.

Johnny Welch, pro se, Appellant.

Pamela Jo Bondi, Attorney General, Tallahassee, for Appellee.

PER CURIAM.

AFFIRMED.

VAN NORTWICK, WETHERELL, and MAKAR, JJ., CONCUR.
No. 63033.

#### Star Jewelry Co., Inc. *v.*United States,

protest 313099-K (New York).

Opinion by

Oliver, C. J.

In accordance with stipulation of counsel that the merchandise consists of chalkwhite stones the same in all material respects as those the subject of Abstract 59105, except that said stones are not faceted, the claim of the plaintiff was sustained.
Regional Airport 

Air Service for the Fourstates 

August 4, 2010 

Mr. Dennis DeVany 

Chief, EAS 7 Domestic Analysis 

Office of Aviation Analysis 

U.S. Department of Transportation 

West Building 

1200 New Jersey Ave SE 

Washington, D.C. 20590 

Reference: DOT-OST-2006-23932 

Dear Dennis, 

{}()~ S. [\!ain Sf fPi'I 

,[oplin, l\IO I):tHO I 

.j ! 7 -1;2;I-02(;~ 

Fa:>; 117 -li2i)··l7 f·1 

E ·mal I: ",;-;jo('kanll" joplin f1]( wrg 

The community of Joplin has reviewed the two proposals to provide Joplin essential air service, that 

of American Eagle and Air Choice One. 

The Joplin City Council unanimously endorses the bid of American Eagle to provide two nonstop 

round-trip flights per day with ATR-72 equipment to Dallas/Ft Worth (DFW) for $2,778,756 per year 

for two years from the first day of service. 

The Joplin parties also acknowledge that American Eagle has asked Joplin to waive its right to hold in 

and allow American Eagle to exit the Joplin market on 120 days' notice at any time during the two 

year service contract. 

The Joplin parties do waive the right to hold in American Eagle as outlined by American Eagle in their 

Joplin essential air service bid document. 

The Joplin parties urge the Department to select American Eagle for Joplin service and issue an 

order to that effect as promptly as possible so as to allow for American Eagle service to begin at 

Joplin as the earliest possible date. 

Best regards, 

Steve Stockam 

Airport Manager 

Joplin Regional Airport 

-
```

[111th Congress Public Law 298]
[From the U.S. Government Printing Office]

[[Page 124 STAT. 3268]]

Public Law 111-298
111th Congress

                                 An Act

 
 To designate the Federal building and United States courthouse located 
at 515 9th Street in Rapid City, South Dakota, as the ``Andrew W. Bogue 
   Federal Building and United States Courthouse''. <<NOTE: Dec. 14, 
                         2010 -  [H.R. 5651]>> 

    Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representatives of the 
United States of America in Congress assembled,
SECTION 1. ANDREW W. BOGUE FEDERAL BUILDING AND UNITED STATES 
                              COURTHOUSE.

    (a) Designation.--The Federal building and United States courthouse 
located at 515 9th Street in Rapid City, South Dakota, shall be known 
and designated as the ``Andrew W. Bogue Federal Building and United 
States Courthouse''.
    (b) References.--Any reference in a law, map, regulation, document, 
paper, or other record of the United States to the Federal building and 
United States courthouse referred to in subsection (a) shall be deemed 
to be a reference to the ``Andrew W. Bogue Federal Building and United 
States Courthouse''.

    Approved December 14, 2010.

LEGISLATIVE HISTORY--H.R. 5651:
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

HOUSE REPORTS: No. 111-590 (Comm. on Transportation and Infrastructure).
CONGRESSIONAL RECORD, Vol. 156 (2010):
            Sept. 15, considered and passed House.
            Dec. 1, considered and passed Senate.

                                  <all>
```
Order entered February 13, 2015

In The

Court of Appeals 

Fifth District of Texas at Dallas 

No. 05-14-00977-CR

GERARDO GOMEZ-MACIEL, Appellant

V.

THE STATE OF TEXAS, Appellee

On Appeal from the 194th Judicial District Court

Dallas County, Texas

Trial Court Cause No. F13-32880-M

ORDER

On January 30, 2015, this Court ordered court reporter Sharina Fowler to file aa corrected 

Volume 7 of the reporter’s record that contains clear copies of the photograph exhibits by 4:00 

p.m. on February 5, 2015. We warned Ms. Fowler that failure to comply would result in this 

Court ordered that she not sit as a court reporter until the corrected volume is filed. To date, Ms. 

Fowler has neither filed the corrected volume containing clear copies of the photographic 

exhibits nor communicated with the Court regarding the status of the record.

Accordingly, we ORDER court reporter Sharina Fowler to file by 4:00 p.m. on 

TUESDAY, FEBRUARY 17, 2015, a corrected volume 7 that contains clear copies of the 

photographs. We further order that Sharina Fowler not sit as a court reporter until she has filed a 

corrected Volume 7 in this appeal.
We DIRECT the Clerk to send copies of this order, by electronic transmission, to the 

Honorable Ernest White, Presiding Judge, 194th Judicial District Court; Sharina Fowler, deputy 

official court reporter, 194th Judicial District Court; the Dallas County Auditor; and to counsel 

for all parties.

/s/ ADA BROWN

JUSTICE
Case *No.*6,747.

#### In re HOW.

[18 N. B. R. 565; 1 11 Chi. Leg. News, 141.]

District Court, D. Massachusetts.

Jan. 6, 1879.

Bankruptcy — Power op Court — Orders op.

The bankrupt court has power to order a bankrupt to pay over to the assignee sums which, apparently, are in his hands.

[Cited in Re McKenna, 9 Fed. 29.]

In bankruptcy.

LOWELL, District Judge.

This was a petition by the assignees in bankruptcy of Calvin How and Frank G. How, alleging that they have in their possession at the present time certain promissory notes and certain sums of money, which were part of their assets, and should have been paid over to the petitioners, and praying relief. The petition was referred to Mr. Sherman, the register having charge of the case, who has reported that the notes mentioned in the petition have been collected by Calvin How, and, upon the whole evidence, he finds in the hands of said Calvin, unaccounted for, the sum of four thousand nine hundred and ninety-five dollars and eighty-six cents, and in the hands of Frank G. How, in like manner, the sum of nine hundred dollars.

Upon a review of the evidence, I agree with the register that those sums are severally chargeable to the bankrupts as reported. It was agreed by both parties, as I understood, that the question whether the bankrupts had, in fact, lost or spent the money or • part of it, since they received it, or since the bankruptcy, if received before, was not fully *622•examined or intended to be examined by the register. And the argument before me did mot touch the point of the power of the •court to punish a bankrupt, actually poor; •or- how such power, if possessed, should be exercised; and whether anything like a poor •debtor’s oath could be administered to them. All that is asked at this time is an order on the bankrupts, severally, to pay over the sums which, apparently, are in their hands.

I have no doubt of the power of the court to pass such an order. A debtor who becomes bankrupt submits himself, or is by law submitted, to the summary jurisdiction •of the court. It is not necessary that the ¡assignee should sue him in order to obtain the assets. His position is somewhat like that of an attorney, or other officer of the •court, or of an accountant of the court. The cases on this point are, I believe, entirely uniform. In re Dresser [Case No. 4,077]; In re Speyer [Id. 13,239]; In re Kempner [Id. 7,689]; In re Peltasohn [Id. 10,912]. The case of In re Salkey [Case Nos. 12,253 and 12,254] is also somewhat analogous to, though not identical with this, because that was a question of the disclosure required of a bankrupt.

I shall pass the order that the bankrupts pay to the assignees the sums found by the register to be due from them, respectively, in thirty days from this 6th January, 1879.
No. 61341.

protest 296016-K (New York).

#### William H. Katzenberg, Inc. *v.*United States,

*490Opinion by

Ford, J.

In accordance with stipulation of counsel that the merchandise consists of veils or veilings similar in all material respects to those the subject of *Elvic Import Corp.*v. *United States*(38 Cust. Ct. 13, C. D. 1837), the claim of the plaintiff was sustained.
(Reap. Dec. 10440)

#### Dessy Enterprises, Inc. *v.*United States

Entry No. 11216, etc.

(Decided February 5, 1963)

*Stein & Shostalc (Marjorie M. Shostalc*of counsel) for the plaintiff.

*Joseph D. Guilfoyle,*Acting Assistant Attorney General *(Morris Braverman,*trial attorney), for the defendant.

Johnson, Judge:

When this appeal for reappraisement was called for trial, it was submitted upon the following stipulation of counsel for the respective parties:

> Miss Shostak : * * *

> Plaintiff offers to stipulate that all of the merchandise covered by all of the entries the subject of this appeal for reappraisement were freely offered for sale to all purchasers in the usual wholesale quantity, in the country of exportation, for home consumption at the time of exportation involved herein, at invoice unit values, plus 4 per cent; and that the export values were no higher.

> Mr. Braverman : From information obtained from Assistant Appraiser Fer-ran, who is personally in Court, the Government so stipulates.

On the agreed facts, I find that foreign value, as that value is defined in section 402(c) of the Tariff Act of 1930, as amended by the Customs Administrative Act of 1938, is the proper basis for the determination of the value of the merchandise involved herein and that such value is represented by the invoice unit values, plus 4 per centum.

Judgment will be rendered accordingly.
No. 52288.

protests 124066-K, etc. (Indianapolis).

#### The Old Quaker Co. et al. *v.*United States,

Opinion by

Johnson, J.

It was stipulated that the merchandise and issues herein are similar in all material respects to those involved in *United States*v. *Somerset*(33 C. C. P. A. 138, C. A. D. 328), and that a quantity of liquor amounting to 10 percent or more of the total contents of the various barrels, casks, packages, etc., was lost in transit from the port of exportation to the port of destination due to breakage, leakage, or damage. In accordance therewith it was held that an allowance should have been made for the loss appearing upon the gaugers’ returns as verified by the affidavits of the importers. The protests were sustained to this extent.
# EUR-Lex - 52007BP0118(01) - EN

Important legal notice

*|*

# 52007BP0118(01)

**1. European Parliament decision of 24 April 2007 on the discharge for the implementation of the budget of the European Agency for Safety and Health at Work for the financial year 2005 (C6-0392/2006 - 2006/2159(DEC)) **

*
Official Journal 074 E , 20/03/2008 P. 0214 - 0215 *

1.

European Parliament decision of 24 April 2007 on the discharge for the implementation of the budget of the European Agency for Safety and Health at Work for the financial year 2005 (C6-0392/2006 — 2006/2159(DEC))

The European Parliament,

- having regard to the final annual accounts of the European Agency for Safety and Health at Work for the financial year 2005 [1],

- having regard to the Court of Auditors' report on the final annual accounts of the European Agency for Safety and Health at Work for the financial year 2005, together with the Agency's replies [2],

- having regard to the Council's recommendation of 27 February 2007 (5711/2007 — C6-0080/2007),

- having regard to the EC Treaty, and in particular Article 276 thereof,

- having regard to Council Regulation (EC, Euratom) No 1605/2002 of 25 June 2002 on the Financial Regulation applicable to the general budget of the European Communities [3], and in particular Article 185 thereof,

- having regard to Council Regulation (EC) No 2062/94 of 18 July 1994 establishing a European Agency for Safety and Health at Work [4], and in particular Article 14 thereof,

- having regard to Commission Regulation (EC, Euratom) No 2343/2002 of 19 November 2002 on the framework Financial Regulation for the bodies referred to in Article 185 of Council Regulation (EC, Euratom) No 1605/2002 [5], and in particular Article 94 thereof,

- having regard to Rule 71 of and Annex V to its Rules of Procedure,

- having regard to the Report of the Committee on Budgetary Control and the opinion of the Committee on Employment and Social Affairs (A6-0105/2007),

1. Grants the director of the European Agency for Safety and Health at Work discharge for the implementation of the Agency's budget for the financial year 2005;

2. Sets out its observations in the resolution below;

3. Instructs its President to forward this decision and the resolution that forms an integral part of it to the director of the European Agency for Safety and Health at Work, the Council, the Commission and the Court of Auditors, and to arrange for their publication in the Official Journal of the European Union (L series).

[1] OJ C 266, 31.10.2006, p. 19.

[2] OJ C 312, 19.12.2006, p. 24.

[3] OJ L 248, 16.9.2002, p. 1. Regulation as amended by Regulation (EC, Euratom) No 1995/2006 (OJ L 390, 30.12.2006, p. 1).

[4] OJ L 216, 20.8.1994, p. 1. Regulation as last amended by Regulation (EC) No 1112/2005 (OJ L 184, 15.7.2005, p. 5).

[5] OJ L 357, 31.12.2002, p. 72.

--------------------------------------------------
1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

26

1

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

GREGORY ANDREW HALL, 

Plaintiff, No. CIV-S-04-1957 FCD KJM P 

vs.

D.L. RUNNELS, et al.,

Defendants. ORDER FOR PAYMENT

 / OF INMATE FILING FEE

To: The Director of the California Department of Corrections and Rehabilitation, 1515 S Street,

Sacramento, California 95814:

Plaintiff, a state prisoner proceeding pro se and in forma pauperis, is obligated to

pay the statutory filing fee of $150.00 in effect at the time of filing of this action. Plaintiff has

been assessed an initial partial filing fee of $0.87 for this action pursuant to 28 U.S.C. 

§ 1915(b)(1). Upon payment of that initial partial filing fee, plaintiff will be obligated to make

monthly payments in the amount of twenty percent of the preceding month’s income credited to

plaintiff’s trust account. The California Department of Corrections and Rehabilitation is required

to send to the Clerk of the Court the initial partial filing fee and thereafter payments from

plaintiff’s prison trust account each time the amount in the account exceeds $10.00, until the

statutory filing fee of $150.00 is paid in full. 28 U.S.C. § 1915(b)(2).

Case 2:04-cv-01957-FCD-KJM Document 15 Filed 05/22/06 Page 1 of 2
1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

26

2

Good cause appearing therefore, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that:

1. The Director of the California Department of Corrections and Rehabilitation or

a designee shall collect from plaintiff’s prison trust account an initial partial filing fee in the

amount of $0.87 and shall forward the amount to the Clerk of the Court. Said payment shall be

clearly identified by the name and number assigned to this action.

2. Thereafter, the Director of the California Department of Corrections and

Rehabilitation or a designee shall collect from plaintiff's prison trust account the $149.13 balance

of the filing fee by collecting monthly payments from plaintiff's prison trust account in an amount

equal to twenty percent (20%) of the preceding month's income credited to the prisoner's trust

account and forwarding payments to the Clerk of the Court each time the amount in the account

exceeds $10.00 in accordance with 28 U.S.C. § 1915(b)(2). The payments shall be clearly

identified by the name and number assigned to this action. 

3. The Clerk of the Court is directed to serve a copy of this order and a copy of

plaintiff's signed in forma pauperis affidavit on Director, California Department of Corrections

and Rehabilitation, 1515 S Street, Sacramento, California 95814.

4. The Clerk of the Court is directed to serve a copy of this order on the Financial

Department of the court.

DATED: May 17, 2006.

______________________________________

UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE

1

hall1957.cdc

Case 2:04-cv-01957-FCD-KJM Document 15 Filed 05/22/06 Page 2 of 2
1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

26

1

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

PATRICK RONALD HOLLEY, No. 2:04-cv-2006-MCE-PAN-P

Plaintiff, 

v. ORDER

CALIFORNIA DEPARTMENT OF

CORRECTIONS, et al.,

Defendants.

 /

Plaintiff, a state prisoner proceeding pro se, has filed this civil rights action seeking relief

under 42 U.S.C. § 1983. The matter was referred to a United States Magistrate Judge pursuant to

28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1)(B) and Local General Order No. 262.

On February 24, 2006, the magistrate judge filed findings and recommendations herein

which were served on all parties and which contained notice to all parties that any objections to

the findings and recommendations were to be filed within fourteen days. Plaintiff has filed

objections to the findings and recommendations.

In accordance with the provisions of 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1)(C) and Local Rule 72-304,

this court has conducted a de novo review of this case. 

///

Case 2:04-cv-02006-MCE -EFB Document 53 Filed 03/30/06 Page 1 of 2
1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

26

2

Having carefully reviewed the entire file, the court finds the findings and recommendations to be

supported by the record and by proper analysis.

Accordingly, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that:

1. The findings and recommendations filed February 24, 2006, are adopted in full; and

2. Plaintiff’s March 21, 2005, September 26, 2005, October 14, 2005, November 3, 2005,

and December 28, 2005, motions for temporary restraining order and/or preliminary injunction

are denied (Docket Nos. 10-1, 10-2, 22, 24, 31 & 38.). 

DATED: March 30, 2006

___________________________________

MORRISON C. ENGLAND, JR

UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE

Case 2:04-cv-02006-MCE -EFB Document 53 Filed 03/30/06 Page 2 of 2