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



CERTIFICATION

PURSUANT TO RULE 13a-14(b) OR RULE 15d-14(b)

OF THE SECURITIES EXCHANGE ACT OF 1934 AND 18 U.S.C. SECTION 1350



In connection with the Quarterly Report of EPL
Intermediate, Inc. (the Company) on Form 10-Q for the quarterly period ended September 28, 2005 as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the Report), I, Steven E. Carley, President 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 result of operations of the Company.
|-- | ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------



|                      
|----------------------
|                      
|/s/ Stephen E. Carley 
|Stephen E. Carley     
|President             
|EPL Intermediate, Inc.
|November 14, 2005     



This certification is made solely for
the purpose of 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, and not for any other purpose. A signed original of this written statement required by Section 906 has been provided to EPL Intermediate, Inc. and will be retained by EPL Intermediate, Inc. and
furnished to the Securities and Exchange Commission or its staff upon request.
* 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this opinion should not be published and is not precedent except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. 97-40721

Summary Calendar

ROMAN PERALES,

Plaintiff-Appellant,

versus

SUPREME COURT OF TEXAS, Chief Justice Thomas R. Phillips,

Justices Raul A. Gonzalez, Nathan I. Hecht, John Cornyn, Craig

Enoch, Rose Spector, Priscilla R. Owen, James A. Baker, Greg

Abbott, in their individual and official capacities; DAN MORALES,

Attorney General of Texas, individually and in his official

capacity; and BOARD OF LAW EXAMINERS OF TEXAS, Rachel Martin,

Executive Director of Texas Board of Law Examiners, Warlick Carr,

Chairman, Texas Board of Law Examiners, individually and in their

official capacities,

Defendant-Appellees.

Appeal from the United States District Court

for the Southern District of Texas

(B-96-CV-226)

March 27, 1998

Before JOHNSON, DeMOSS, and JONES, Circuit Judges.

PER CURIAM:*

Pro se plaintiff Roman Perales appeals the district court’s

dismissal of his complaint. In his complaint, Perales argued that

the grading formula used in the 1991 Texas Bar Examination violated

the Sherman Act. The district court concluded that because
2

Perales’s complaint was “about the way he was treated in the Texas

judicial system[,]” the court did not have subject matter

jurisdiction.

This Court reviews a district court’s dismissal for lack of

jurisdiction de novo. Musselwhite v. State Bar of Texas, 32 F.3d

942, 945 (5th Cir. 1994), cert. denied, 515 U.S. 1103 (1995).

Under the Rooker/Feldman doctrine, federal courts lack jurisdiction

to entertain collateral attacks on state court judgments. Liedtke

v. State Bar of Texas, 18 F.3d 315, 317 (5th Cir.), cert. denied,

513 U.S. 1036 (1994). Stripped to its essentials, Perales’s

complaint is an attack on the judgment of the state court.

Therefore, after a careful review of the record and the controlling

authorities, this Court holds that the district court did not err

in dismissing Perales’s complaint for lack of subject matter

jurisdiction. See Musslewhite, 32 F.3d at 945.

Perales also asserts that his right to access to the courts,

due process and equal protection were violated by the district

court’s dismissal of his complaint. A litigant’s right to access

to the courts is implicated where the ability to file suit is

delayed or blocked all together. Foster v. City of Lake Jackson,

28 F.3d 425, 430 (5th Cir. 1994). The district court’s dismissal

of Perales’s complaint did not abridge his right of access to the

court, his right to due process or his right to equal protection.

This Court does not consider Perales’s argument in support of

mandamus as the issue is moot.
3

Therefore, for the foregoing reasons, the judgment of the

district court is AFFIRMED.
#### STATE of Louisiana v. Scott LINGLE.

No. 87-K-2743.

Supreme Court of Louisiana.

Feb. 26, 1988.

In re Lingle, Scott; applying for writ of certiorari and/or review; to the Court of Appeal, Fourth Circuit, No. KA-6814; Parish of Orleans, Criminal District Court, Div. *“I”,*No. 288-356.

Prior report: La.App., 514 So.2d 171.

Denied.

CALOGERO, J., recused.

DENNÍS and LEMMON, JJ., would grant the writ.
#### STATE of Louisiana v. Wade EAST.

No. 86-K-0811.

Supreme Court of Louisiana.

July 1, 1986.

In re East, Wade; applying for supervisory writ; to the Court of Appeal, First Circuit, No. 85-KA-1333; Parish of East Baton Rouge, 19th Judicial District Court, Div. “J”, No. 10-84-148.

Prior report: La.App., 486 So.2d 902.

Granted. Defendant’s conviction is affirmed. The sentence is amended, however, to delete the restriction “without benefit of suspension of sentence, probation or parole.” When the state has not requested the enhancement, a trial court may not sentence the defendant under La.C.Cr.P. art. 893.1. See *State v. Shows,*488 So.2d 992 (La.1986).
/ / / / /

**TAILS~** / 

## 6<::'

..

**~** )'\"' / / •

/ M ONTEREY !lAY I NA,'ION,.L M AR I NE SANCTUARY • 

# 100



# - 60 SAN FRA N CISCO CLASS B

Oakland Power Station Stack: 300 ' AG L C l ass G , S F C

- 700'AG L C l ass E , 700' AGL- 1 500' MSL C l ass C , 1 500 '- 3000' MSL C l ass B , 3000' MS L-F LT L V L With i n SFO Mode C 30NM San Francisco lnt'l (SFO) C l ass B Radio : CT 120

. 5 , C T A F 122

. 95 Metropolitan Oakland lnt'l (OAK)



## Aj **~~R ---~.**  **~~ f---F~**  **~~ ~L,**  **~~ Ciass**  C

**NOTAI~sJDir·ector. Radio**  **:** CT 1 1 8

. 3 127.2 , CTA F 122.95 Norcal APP (w/in 20 NM) Rad i o : 1 25

. 35
#### Maria N. Villavicencio Wife of/and Edgar I. VILLAVICENCIO v. ALCOHOLIC BEVERAGE CONTROL BOARD, the City of New Orleans and Paul C. Mitchell, Jr., Director Department of Finance.

No. 89-C-1277.

Supreme Court of Louisiana.

June 30, 1989.

In re Garden District Assoc.; — Defendants); applying for writ of certiorari and/or review; to the Court of Appeal, Fourth Circuit, No. 88CA-1568; Parish of Orleans, Civil District Court, Div. “C”, No. 88-3091.

Denied.
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<PAGE>

<ARTICLE> 5

<S>                             <C>                     <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   YEAR                   YEAR
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          DEC-31-1997             DEC-31-1996
<PERIOD-START>                             JAN-01-1997             JAN-01-1996
<PERIOD-END>                               DEC-31-1997             DEC-31-1996
<CASH>                                       4,237,427               1,080,630
<SECURITIES>                                         0                       0
<RECEIVABLES>                                2,321,920               4,289,731
<ALLOWANCES>                                   121,171                  53,093
<INVENTORY>                                    450,837                 466,117
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                             7,792,245               6,205,644
<PP&E>                                       7,031,253               4,176,663
<DEPRECIATION>                               1,028,474                 327,600
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                              14,299,768              10,233,808
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                        3,714,652               3,499,729
<BONDS>                                              0                       0
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0                       0
<PREFERRED>                                          0                       0
<COMMON>                                            34                      33
<OTHER-SE>                                     650,181                 500,182
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                14,299,768              10,233,808
<SALES>                                     25,107,783              11,142,518
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                            25,426,297              11,208,688
<CGS>                                       13,274,757               5,953,971
<TOTAL-COSTS>                               15,180,546               7,061,629
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                             5,915,587               1,879,539
<LOSS-PROVISION>                               107,906                  24,000
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                             380,696                 127,507
<INCOME-PRETAX>                              2,920,994               1,812,413
<INCOME-TAX>                                 1,308,400                 743,140
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                          1,612,594               1,069,273
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0                       0
<CHANGES>                                            0                       0
<NET-INCOME>                                 1,382,110               1,013,209
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                      .45                     .34
<EPS-DILUTED>                                      .44                     .33


</TABLE>
106TH CONGRESS

2D SESSION S. CON. RES. 133

CONCURRENT RESOLUTION

1 Resolved by the Senate (the House of Representatives

2 concurring), That the Secretary of the Senate, in the en3 rollment of the bill (S.1809) to improve service systems

4 for individuals with developmental disabilities, and for

5 other purposes, shall make the following corrections:

6 (1) Strike ‘‘1999’’ each place it appears (other

7 than in section 101(a)(2)) and insert ‘‘2000’’.

8 (2) In section 101(a)(2), strike ‘‘are’’ and in9 sert ‘‘were’’.

10 (3) In section 104(a)—

11 (A) in paragraphs (1), (3)(C), and (4),

12 strike ‘‘2000’’ each place it appears and insert

13 ‘‘2001’’; and

14 (B) in paragraph (4), strike ‘‘fiscal year

15 2001’’ and insert ‘‘fiscal year 2002’.’

16 (4) In section 124(c)(4)(B)(i), strike ‘‘2001’’

17 and insert ‘‘2002’’.

18 (5) In section 125(c)—
2

SCON 133 ES

1 (A) in paragraph (5)(H), strike ‘‘assess’’

2 and insert ‘‘access’’; and

3 (B) in paragraph (7), strike ‘‘2001’’ and

4 insert ‘‘2002’’.

5 (6) In section 129(a)—

6 (A) strike ‘‘fiscal year 2000’’ and insert

7 ‘‘fiscal year 2001’’; and

8 (B) strike ‘‘fiscal years 2001 through

9 2006’’ and insert ‘‘fiscal years 2002 through

10 2007’’.

11 (7) Is section 144(e), strike ‘‘2001’’ and insert

12 ‘‘2002’’.

13 (8) In section 145—

14 (A) strike ‘‘fiscal year 2000’’ and insert

15 ‘‘fiscal year 2001’’; and

16 (B) strike ‘‘fiscal years 2001 through

17 2006’’ and insert ‘‘fiscal years 2002 through

18 2007’’.

19 (9) In section 156—

20 (A) in subsection (a)(1)—

21 (i) strike ‘‘fiscal year 2000’’ and in22 sert ‘‘fiscal year 2001’’; and

23 (ii) strike ‘‘fiscal years 2001 through

24 2006’’ and insert ‘‘fiscal years 2002

25 through 2007’’; and
3

SCON 133 ES

1 (B) in subsection (b), strike ‘‘2000’’ each

2 place it appears and insert ‘‘2001’’.

3 (10) In section 163—

4 (A) strike ‘‘fiscal year 2000’’ and insert

5 ‘‘fiscal year 2001’’; and

6 (B) strike ‘‘fiscal years 2001 through

7 2006’’ and insert ‘‘fiscal years 2002 through

8 2007’’.

9 (11) In section 212, strike ‘‘2000 through

10 2006’’ and insert ‘‘2001 through 2007’’.

11 (12) In section 305—

12 (A) in subsection (a)—

13 (i) strike ‘‘fiscal year 2000’’ and in14 sert ‘‘fiscal year 2001’’; and

15 (ii) strike ‘‘fiscal years 2001 through

16 2006’’ and insert ‘‘fiscal years 2002

17 through 2007’’; and

18 (B) in subsection (b)—

19 (i) strike ‘‘fiscal year 2000’’ and in20 sert ‘‘fiscal year 2001’’; and
4

SCON 133 ES

1 (ii) strike ‘‘fiscal years 2001 and

2 2002’’ and insert ‘‘fiscal years 2002 and

3 2003’’.

Passed the Senate July 27, 2000.

Attest:

Secretary.
106TH CONGRESS

2D SESSION S. CON. RES. 133

CONCURRENT RESOLUTION

To correct the enrollment of S. 1809.
Exhibit 31.1

CERTIFICATIONS

I, David J. Keefe, certify that:

1. I have reviewed this Form 10-Q of Atlantic Broadband Finance, LLC.;

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 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 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)) for the registrant and we 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 registrant, 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 registrant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 registrants internal control over financial reporting that occurred during the registrants most
recent fiscal quarter (the registrants fourth fiscal quarter in the case of an annual report) that has materially affected, or is reasonably likely to materially affect, the registrants internal control over financial reporting; and

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 the registrants board of directors (or persons performing the equivalent function):

a) All significant deficiencies and material weaknesses in the design or operation of internal control over financial reporting which are reasonably likely to adversely affect the registrants ability to record,
process, summarize and report financial information; and

b) Any fraud, whether or not material, that involves management or other employees
who have a significant role in the registrants internal control over financial reporting.

Date: May 15, 2006



|    |  |                                     
|--- |  | ------------------------------------
|By: |  | /s/ David J. Keefe                  
|    |  | David J. Keefe                      
|    |  | Chief Executive Officer and Director



19
Document Headings

                    Document headings vary by document type but may contain                    the following:                  
                -                       the agency or agencies that issued and signed a document                    
                -                       the number of the CFR title and the number of each part                      the document amends, proposes to amend, or is directly                      related to                    
                -                       the agency docket number / agency internal file number                    
                -                       the RIN which identifies each regulatory action listed in                      the Unified Agenda of Federal Regulatory and Deregulatory                      Actions                    

                    See the                                          Document Drafting Handbook                                        for more details.                  

###### Postal Service

# AGENCY:

                        Postal ServiceTM.                    

# ACTION:

Notice.

# SUMMARY:

The Postal Service hereby gives notice of its filing a request with the Postal Regulatory Commission to add Global Plus 1C and 2C Negotiated Service Agreements to the Competitive Products List.

# DATES:

January 18, 2012.

# FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

Margaret M. Falwell, (202) 268-2576.

# SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

                    The United States Postal Service® hereby gives notice that, pursuant to 39 U.S.C. 3642, on December 30, 2011, and January 4, 2012, it filed with the Postal Regulatory Commission, Requests of United States Postal Service to Add Global Plus 1C and 2C Negotiated Service Agreements to the Competitive Products List, and Notices of Filing Two Functionally Equivalent Agreements and Applications for Non-Public Treatment of Materials Filed Under Seal for each filing. Documents are available at                     *http://www.prc.gov,*                     Docket Nos. MC2012-5, MC2012-6, CP2012-10, CP2012-11, CP2012-12 and CP2012-13.                

B. J. Meadows III,

Attorney, Legal Strategy.

[FR Doc. 2012-766 Filed 1-17-12; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 7710-12-P
Document Headings

                    Document headings vary by document type but may contain                    the following:                  
                -                       the agency or agencies that issued and signed a document                    
                -                       the number of the CFR title and the number of each part                      the document amends, proposes to amend, or is directly                      related to                    
                -                       the agency docket number / agency internal file number                    
                -                       the RIN which identifies each regulatory action listed in                      the Unified Agenda of Federal Regulatory and Deregulatory                      Actions                    

                    See the                                          Document Drafting Handbook                                        for more details.                  

###### Department of State

          - [Delegation of Authority: 341]

By virtue of the authority vested in me as Secretary of State, including Section 1 of the State Department Basic Authorities Act, as amended (22 U.S.C. 2651a), and to the extent authorized by law, I hereby delegate to the Under Secretary for Arms Control and International Security the authorities and functions delegated to the Secretary of State pursuant to the Presidential Memorandum of November 2, 2011, specifically:

(1) The authority to make the annual certification specified in section (a)(2)(A) of the Resolution of Advice and Consent to Ratification of the New START Treaty (the Resolution); with the Director of National Intelligence, at the direction of the President, preparing the report specified in that section. The Under Secretary shall submit the certification along with the report prepared by the Director of National Intelligence to the Senate.

(2) The authority to submit the reports specified in section (a)(10) and section (a)(12)(B) of the Resolution to the Committees on Foreign Relations and Armed Services of the Senate.

Any act, executive order, regulation or procedure subject to, or affected by, this delegation shall be deemed to be such act, executive order, regulation or procedure as amended from time to time. Notwithstanding this delegation of authority, the Secretary, the Deputy Secretary, or the Deputy Secretary for Management and Resources may at any time exercise any authority or function delegated by this delegation of authority.

                    This delegation of authority shall be published in the                     **Federal Register**                    .                

Dated: December 14, 2011.

Hillary Rodham Clinton,

Secretary of State.

[FR Doc. 2012-739 Filed 1-13-12; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 4710-35-P
```

[Congressional Bills 106th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[S. Con. Res. 30 Introduced in Senate (IS)]

106th CONGRESS
  1st Session
S. CON. RES. 30

   Recognizing the sacrifice and dedication of members of America's 
      nongovernmental organizations (NGO's) and private volunteer 
  organizations (PVO's) throughout their history and specifically in 
  answer to their courageous response to recent disasters in Central 
                          America and Kosovo.

_______________________________________________________________________

                   IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES

                             April 27, 1999

   Mr. Smith of Oregon (for himself, Mr. Wellstone, Mr. Thomas, Mr. 
    Sarbanes, and Mr. Brownback) submitted the following concurrent 
  resolution; which was referred to the Committee on Foreign Relations

_______________________________________________________________________

                         CONCURRENT RESOLUTION

 
   Recognizing the sacrifice and dedication of members of America's 
      nongovernmental organizations (NGO's) and private volunteer 
  organizations (PVO's) throughout their history and specifically in 
  answer to their courageous response to recent disasters in Central 
                          America and Kosovo.

    Resolved by the Senate (the House of Representatives concurring), 
That the Congress--
            (1) recognizes and commends the sacrifice, dedication, and 
        commitment of those serving with, and those who have served 
        with, American nongovernmental organizations (NGO's) and 
        private volunteer organizations (PVO's) that provide 
        humanitarian relief to millions of the world's poor and 
        displaced;
            (2) urges all Americans to join in commemorating and 
        honoring those serving in, and those who have served in, 
        America's NGO and PVO community for their sacrifice, dedication 
        and commitment; and
            (3) calls upon the people of the United States to 
        appreciate and reflect upon the commitment and dedication of 
        relief workers, that they often serve in harm's way with 
        threats to their own health and safety, and their organizations 
        who have responded to recent tragedies in Central America and 
        Kosovo with great care, skill, and speed, and to make 
        appropriate steps to recognize and encourage awareness of the 
        contributions that these relief workers and their organizations 
        have made in helping ease human suffering.
                                 <all>
```
50434.

#### SAMPSON v. THE STATE.

Quillian, Judge.

The evidence was sufficient to authorize the conviction of the appellant and therefore this appeal is without merit.

*Judgment affirmed.*

*Pannell, P. J., and Clark, J., concur.*

*590Submitted March 11, 1975

Decided April 21, 1975.

*Dan H. Byars,*for appellant.

*E. Mullins Whisnant, District Attorney, J. Gary Conger, Assistant District Attorney,*for appellee. *Thomas M. West,*amicus curiae.