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

CERTIFICATION PURSUANT TO

18 U.S.C.§1350,

AS ADOPTED PURSUANT TO

SECTION 906
OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002

In connection with the Quarterly Report of The Frontier Fund on Form 10-Q for the period ended June 30, 2008,
as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the Report), each of the undersigned hereby certifies, to the best of his 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 Frontier Fund.
| | --- | ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------



|                                                                                                              
|--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
|/s/ Robert J. Enck                                                                                            
|Robert J. Enck                                                                                                
|President and Chief Executive Officer of Equinox Fund Management, LLC, the Managing Owner of The Frontier Fund



|                                                                                                
|------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
|/s/ Brent Bales                                                                                 
|Brent Bales                                                                                     
|Chief Financial Officer of Equinox Fund Management, LLC, the Managing Owner of The Frontier Fund

Date: November 26, 2008
Before the Third Division,

March 1, 1944

No. 49237.

#### Protests 991813-G, etc., of Gruyere Cheese Corp. et al. (New York).

'Opinion by

Cline, J.

It was stipulated that the portions of cheese in question, except those described as “Tilsit,” are similar in all material respects to cheese the subject of *Gruyere Cheese Corp.*v. *United States*(7 Cust. Ct. 171, C. D. 562) and *Kraft Phenix Cheese Corp.*v. *United States*(10 id. 271, C. D. 767), and that these records be incorporated herein. In accordance therewith the protests were sustained to this extent.
EXHIBIT32.1

CERTIFICATION OF PRINCIPAL EXECUTIVE OFFICEROFUNIVERSAL CITY DEVELOPMENT PARTNERS, LTD.PURSUANT TO 18U.S.C. SECTION 1350

In connection with the quarterly report ofUniversal City Development Partners, Ltd. (the"Company") and UCDP Finance, Inc. on Form10-Q for the period ending March 27, 2004 filed with the Securities andExchange Commission on the date hereof (the"Report"), I, Robert K. Gault, certifypursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, as adopted pursuant to Section 906of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that:

|          |                                                                                                                     |
|----------|---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|
| 1)  | the Report fully complies with therequirements of Section 13(a) or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Actof 1934; and |

|          |                                                                                                                                                    |
|----------|----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|
| 2)  | the information contained inthe Report fairly presents, in all material respects, the financialcondition and results of operations of the Company. |

Dated: May 5, 2004

|  | By: /s/ RobertK. GaultJr.                                            Robert K. Gault Jr.        Principal ExecutiveOfficer |
|--|------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|

----
Exhibit 31.4


CERTIFICATION


I, Michael Randolfi, certify that:


1. I have reviewed this Amendment No. 1 to the Annual Report on Form 10-K of Groupon, Inc. for the year ended December 31, 2017;


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 statement made, in light of the circumstances under which such statements were made, not misleading, with respect to the period covered by this report; and


3. Based on my knowledge, the financial statements, and other financial information included in this report, fairly represent 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.


Date:  March 23, 2018 /s/ Michael Randolfi


Michael Randolfi


Chief Financial Officer


(Principal Financial Officer)
**Final Analysis of Public Comment for the Eastside and Upper Columbia River BasinDraft Environmental Impact Statements**
****
**October 1998**
** **
***Lead Agencies:***
**United States Department of Agriculture Forest Service: Intermountain,Northern, and Pacific Northwest RegionsUnited States Department of the Interior Bureau of Land Management: Idaho,Montana, Nevada, Oregon, Utah, Washington, and Wyoming**

Instructions for Viewing and/or DownloadingThe*Final Analysis of Public Comment for the Eastside and Upper ColumbiaRiver Basin Draft Environmental Impact Statements* (357 pages, 1.5 MB)is available for public viewing and downloading as an Adobe Acrobat PDF(portable document format) file. The*Executive Summary* (124 pages,154 KB) is included in the document or is also available for viewing anddownloading separately. In order to view the document, you *must*have the Adobe Acrobat Reader software installed on your PC. If you donot have Adobe Acrobat Reader v3.0 installed on your computer, this softwareis available free of charge from the Adobe Home Page which can be accessedby clicking on the icon below.DownloadAcrobat Reader
**Note about Adobe Acrobat Reader:** Acrobat Reader allows you to*view* documents on the web through a browser. It also allows youto view documents without connecting to the Internet once you have *downloaded*a PDF file, to your personal computer.
To ***view*** the full document, click on the appropriate iconbelow:
Viewfull document ViewExecutive SummaryTo ***download*** the full document or the Executive Summaryto your personal computer without displaying on screen, click on the apprpriate (above)with your ***right***mouse button. A pull-up menu will then appearto ask you to ***save*** the file in a directory on your computer.Depending on the type of browser used, the menu will have a different *save*command according to the list below:- For Microsoft Internet Explorer browser:  **Select** Save target as.
- For Netscape Navigator browser:  **Select** Save link as.
- For Mosaic 3.0 browser:  **Select** Load Anchor to Disk
**Note:** For Macintosh users, press and hold down your mouse buttonfor the dialog box to appear, then ***select** Save As*. 
**RETURN TO**ublic "-//W3C//DTD HTML 4.0 Transitional//EN">Untitled
Home|What's New|Environmental Impact Statement|ImplementationScience|Spatial Data| List of AcronymsRead our Privacy Policy.
[PUBLISH]

IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE ELEVENTH CIRCUIT

________________________

No. 16-17296

________________________

D.C. Docket No. 2:15-cv-00497-MHT-TFM

WEST ALABAMA WOMEN’S CENTER, 

on behalf of themselves and their patients, 

WILLIAM J. PARKER, 

M.D., on behalf of himself and his patients, 

ALABAMA WOMEN’S CENTER, 

YASHICA ROBINSON WHITE, 

 Plaintiffs-Appellees,

versus

DONALD E. WILLIAMSON,

in his official capacity as State Health Officer, et al.,

 Defendant,

THOMAS M. MILLER, 

Dr., in his official capacity as State Health Officer, 

LUTHER J. STRANGE, III, in his official capacity as 

Alabama Attorney General, 

LYN HEAD, 

in her official capacity as District Attorney for 

Tuscaloosa County, 

ROBERT L. BROUSSARD, 

in his official capacity as District Attorney for Madison County, 

 Defendants-Appellants.
________________________

Appeal from the United States District Court

for the Middle District of Alabama

________________________

Before ED CARNES, Chief Judge, DUBINA, Circuit Judge, and ABRAMS,*

District Judge.

PER CURIAM: 

This is an appeal from the grant of a preliminary injunction that was issued 

on October 27, 2016 and was last amended on November 22, 2016. W. Ala.

Women’s Ctr. v. Miller, 217 F. Supp. 3d 1313 (M.D. Ala. 2016). The appeal was 

scheduled to be orally argued before this Court at 9:00 a.m. on Friday morning, 

October 27, 2017. At approximately 12:30 p.m. on Thursday afternoon, October 

26, 2017, the district court issued a permanent injunction, accompanied by a 148-

page opinion, and it entered final judgment in the case. As a result, this appeal is 

moot. See Grupo Mexicano de Desarrollo S.A. v. Alliance Bond Fund, Inc., 527 

U.S. 308, 315, 119 S. Ct. 1961, 1966 (1999) (“Generally, an appeal from the grant 

of a preliminary injunction becomes moot when the trial court enters a permanent 

injunction, because the former merges into the latter.”); Cone Corp. v. 

Hillsborough Cty., 908 F.2d 908, 912 n.5 (11th Cir. 1990) (collecting cases) (“The 

County’s challenge to the issuance of the preliminary injunction is moot regardless 

 

* Honorable Leslie Joyce Abrams, United States District Judge for the Middle District of 

Georgia, sitting by designation.
of our disposition of this case on its merits because a permanent injunction has 

issued.”).

APPEAL DISMISSED AS MOOT.
I 

118TH CONGRESS 

2D SESSION H. R. 8605 

To amend the Internal Revenue Code of 1986 to modify the rules governing 

the State administration of self-employment assistance programs. 

IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES 

JUNE 4, 2024 

Mr. CAREY (for himself and Mr. LANDSMAN) introduced the following bill; 

which was referred to the Committee on Ways and Means 

A BILL 

To amend the Internal Revenue Code of 1986 to modify 

the rules governing the State administration of self-employment assistance programs. 

1 Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representa2 tives of the United States of America in Congress assembled, 

3 SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE. 

4 This Act may be cited as the ‘‘New Opportunities for 

5 Business Ownership and Self-Sufficiency Act’’. 

6 SEC. 2. MODIFICATION OF RULES GOVERNING STATE AD7 MINISTRATION OF SELF-EMPLOYMENT AS8 SISTANCE PROGRAMS. 

9 (a) ELIMINATION OF REQUIREMENT THAT PARTICI10 PANTS ARE LIKELY TO EXHAUST REGULAR UNEMPLOYVerDate Sep 11 2014 20:11 Jul 19, 2024 Jkt 049200 PO 00000 Frm 00001 Fmt 6652 Sfmt 6201 E:\BILLS\H8605.IH H8605

ssavage on LAPJG3WLY3PROD with BILLS
2 

•HR 8605 IH

1 MENT COMPENSATION.—Section 3306(t)(3) of the Inter2 nal Revenue Code of 1986 is amended by striking sub3 paragraph (B) and by redesignating subparagraphs (C) 

4 and (D) as subparagraphs (B) and (C), respectively. 

5 (b) MODIFICATION OF REQUIREMENT TO PARTICI6 PATE IN SELF-EMPLOYMENT ASSISTANCE ACTIVITIES.— 

7 Section 3306(t)(3)(B) of such Code, as redesignated by 

8 subsection (a), is amended to read as follows: 

9 ‘‘(B) are participating in self-employment 

10 assistance activities which are approved by the 

11 State agency and either— 

12 ‘‘(i) include entrepreneurial training, 

13 business counseling, and technical assist14 ance; or 

15 ‘‘(ii) are performed pursuant to a 

16 business plan and market feasibility study 

17 submitted by the individual and approved 

18 by the State or an agency designated by 

19 the State.’’. 

20 (c) WEEKLY CERTIFICATION REQUIREMENT.—Sec21 tion 3306(t)(3)(C) of such Code, as redesignated by sub22 section (a), is amended by inserting ‘‘and are certifying 

23 such activities on at least a weekly basis to an agency des24 ignated by the State’’ before the semicolon at the end. 


ssavage on LAPJG3WLY3PROD with BILLS
3 

•HR 8605 IH

1 (d) ADJUSTMENT OF LIMITATION ON NUMBER OF

2 INDIVIDUALS PARTICIPATING.—Section 3306(t)(4) of 

3 such Code is amended by striking ‘‘5’’ and inserting ‘‘10’’. 

4 (e) EFFECTIVE DATE.—The amendments made by 

5 this section shall apply beginning on the date that is 2 

6 years after the date of enactment of this Act, except that 

7 nothing in this section shall be interpreted to prevent a 

8 State from amending its law before the end of the 2-year 

9 period beginning on the date of the enactment of this Act. 

10 (f) ISSUANCE OF REGULATIONS.—The Secretary of 

11 Labor shall, after public notice and comment and subject 

12 to approval by the Office of Management and Budget, 

13 adopt regulations to administer this Act. 

Æ 


ssavage on LAPJG3WLY3PROD with BILLS
*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. 97-50114

Summary Calendar

 

NELSON CASTELLANOS,

Plaintiff-Appellant,

versus

K. LOVE, Dr., Boyd Unit; WAYNE SCOTT, DIRECTOR,

TEXAS DEPARTMENT OF CRIMINAL JUSTICE, 

INSTITUTIONAL DIVISION,

Defendants-Appellees.

 

Appeal from the United States District Court for the

Western District of Texas

(W-95-CV-333)

 

November 20, 1997

Before GARWOOD, JONES and STEWART, Circuit Judges.*

PER CURIAM:

Plaintiff-appellant Nelson Castellanos (Castellanos), an

inmate in the Boyd Unit of the Texas Department of Criminal Justice

(TDCJ), proceeding pro se, filed this suit against defendantsappellees Dr. Kenneth C. Love (Love), a doctor with the TDCJ, and
2

Wayne Scott (Scott), Director of the TDCJ. In his complaint,

Castellanos alleged several state and federal claims against the

defendants arising from a minor surgery to Castellanos’s finger.

Specifically, Castellanos alleged that Love and Scott denied him

proper medical care in violation of his Eighth Amendment rights,

that defendants retaliated against him by removing his four-hour

work restriction, and that they committed the state-law torts of

civil conspiracy, intentional infliction of emotional distress, and

medical negligence. 

Scott moved to have Castellanos’s suit dismissed for failure

to state a claim, under Fed. R. Civ. P. 12(b)(6), on the grounds

that respondeat superior was insufficient to incur liability under

42 U.S.C. § 1983. Both Scott and Love moved for summary judgment,

arguing that the Eleventh Amendment barred a suit against them in

their official capacity, they were qualifiedly immune, and they

were not deliberately indifferent. The district court, in its

memorandum order, Castellanos v. Love, No. W-95-CA-333 (W.D. Tex.

Jan. 24, 1997), granted Scott’s motion to dismiss and Love’s motion

for summary judgment. 

We detect no error in the district court’s judgment and affirm

the granting of Scott’s motion to dismiss and Love’s motion for

summary judgment. Since the district court, in its discretion,

declined to exercise supplemental jurisdiction over Castellanos’s

state-law tort claims, those state claims are dismissed without
3

prejudice under 28 U.S.C. § 1367(c) (1993), and the judgment below

as to the state law claims is hereby modified to so reflect. In

all other respects, the judgment is affirmed without modification.

AFFIRMED AS MODIFIED
(Reap. Dec. 9562)

#### Olson Radio Warehouse, Inc. v. United States

Entry No. 878853.

(Decided December 16, 1959)

Plaintiff not represented by counsel.

*George Cochran Doiib,*Assistant Attorney General, for tbe defendant.

*577Laweence, Judge:

There was no appearance on behalf of plaintiff when the above-enumerated appeal for a reappraisement was called for hearing and the case was ordered submitted by the court.

Rule 5(a) of the rules of the court provides that—

> The submission for decision of any case shall be made in open court by the parties thereto or their attorneys, or by stipulation, or by written request to the court, or by the court on its own motion. Where the plaintiff, petitioner, or appellant, or his attorney, in a case does not appear when the same is called, and after the opposite party has had opportunity to present evidence on the issues, it may be deemed submitted and may be decided by the court on the record as it appears therein.

Accordingly, I have examined the record in the appeal before the court and find nothing therein which tends in any way to overcome the presumption of correctness which attaches to the decision of the appraiser. I find and hold, therefore, that the proper value of the merchandise is the value returned by the appraiser.

Judgment will be entered accordingly.
EX-32
   SECTION 1350 CERTIFICATION OF JOHN FLEMING AND ARTHUR DE JOYA

                       SECTION 1350 CERTIFICATION

In connection with the annual report of GameZnFlix, Inc.
("Company") on Form 10-KSB for the year ended December 31, 2006 as
filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission ("Report"), the
undersigned, in the capacity and on the date indicated below, hereby
certifies pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002
(18 U.S.C. Section 1350) that to his 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.


Dated: March 26, 2007                  By: /s/  John Fleming
                                       John Fleming,
                                       Chief Executive Officer


Dated: March 26, 2007                  By: /s/  Arthur De Joya
                                       Arthur De Joya,
                                       Chief Financial Officer
(Reap. Dec. 8869)

Entry No. 17114.

#### Maurice A. Machris *v.*United States

(Decided June 25, 1957)

*Stein & Shostak*for the plaintiff.

*George Cochran Doub,*Assistant Attorney General, for the defendant.

Olivee, Chief Judge:

This appeal for reappraisement relates to an automobile that was exported from London, England, and entered at the port of Los Angeles, Calif.

Stipulated facts, upon which the case was submitted, establish that the proper basis for appraisement of the merchandise in question is cost of production, and that such statutory value for the automobile, including extras, is £ 5,038.12.6, less 15'per centum, plus £ 6, and I so hold. Judgment will be rendered accordingly.
#### Ellis China Co., Inc. (Meadows Wye & Co., Inc.) et al. *v.*United States

No. 6323.

Entry No. 713744, etc.

Invoices dated Stoke on Trent, England, September 1942, etc.

Certified September 1942, etc.

Entered at New York, N. Y., December 10, 1942, etc.

(Decided August 21, 1946)

*Benjamin A. Levett*for the plaintiffs.

*Paul P, Rao,*Assistant Attorney General, for the defendant.

Keefe, Judge:

The appeals for reappraisement listed in schedule A, hereto attached and made a part hereof, have been submitted for decision upon the following stipulation of counsel for the parties hereto:

> It is hereby stipulated and agreed, subject to the approval of the court, that the merchandise consisting of earthenware and chinaware and the issues in the appeals for reappraisement listed in the attached schedule are the same in all *286material respects as the merchandise and issues decided in *United States*v. *Wm. S. Pitcairn Corp.,*Suit No. 4513, C. A. D. 334, and that the record in said case may be incorporated herein.

> It is further stipulated and agreed that the appraised value of the merchandise consisting of earthenware and chinaware involved in each of the cases enumerated in the attached schedule, less the additions made by the importer on entry because of advances by the appraiser in similar cases, is equal to the price, at the time of exportation of such merchandise to the United States, at which such or similar merchandise is freely offered for sale to all purchasers in the principal markets of the country from which exported, in the usual wholesale quantities in the ordinary course of trade, for exportation to the United States, and that the foreign value of such or similar merchandise is no higher.

> It is further stipulated and agreed that these cases may be submitted on the foregoing stipulation.

On the agreed facts I find the export value, as that value is defined in section 402 (d) of the Tariff Act of 1930, to be the proper basis for the determination of the value of the earthenware and chinaware here. involved, and that such values are the appraised values, less the additions made by the importer on entry because of advances by the appraiser in similar cases. Insofar as the appeals relate to all other merchandise they are hereby dismissed.

Judgment will be rendered accordingly.
Before the Third Division,

December 22, 1960

No. 64978.

#### “21” Brands, Inc. *v.*United States,

protest 60/18322 (New York).

*396Opinion by

Johnson, J.

It was stipulated that the facts and issues herein are similar in all material respects to those involved in *United States*v. *Browne Vintners Co., Inc.*(34 C.C.P.A. 112, C.A.D. 351) and that the quantities reported by the inspector as manifested, not found, were not in fact received by the importer. In accordance with stipulation of counsel and following the decision cited, it was held that duty and internal revenue tax are not assessable upon such portions of the merchandise as were reported by the inspector as manifested, not found. The protest was sustained to this extent.