alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
EXHIBIT 32.1
 CERTIFICATION OF CHIEF EXECUTIVE
OFFICER PURSUANT TO SECTION 906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002
 In
connection with the Annual Report of American Security Resources Corporation , a
Nevada corporation (the “Company”), on Form 10-KSB for the year ended December
31, 2007, as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission (the “Report”),
Frank Neukomm, President and Chief Executive Officer, does hereby certify,
pursuant to § 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002 (18 U.S.C. § 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 result of operations of the
Company.
  Date:
      April 14, 2008
                By:/s/ Frank
      NeukommName:
      Frank NeukommTitle:
      President and CEO
    A
signed original of this written statement required by Section 906 has been
provided to American Security Resources Corporation and will be retained by the
Company and furnished to the Securities and Exchange Commission or its staff
upon request.
#### Sandra Lee DEMORUELLE; Joseph Louis Demoruelle, Plaintiffs-Appellants, v. Wayne L. PFEFFER; et al., Defendants-Appellees.

No. 15-17093

United States Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit.

Submitted December 14, 2016 *

Filed December 22, 2016

Sandra Lee Demoruelle, Pro Se Joseph Louis Demoruelle, Pro Se

Thomas A. Helper, Assistant U.S. Attorney, DOJ—-Office of the US Attorney, Honolulu, HI, Caroline D. Lopez, Charles W. Scarborough, Esquire, DOJ—U.S. Department of Justice, Washington, DC, for Defendants-Appellees

Before: WALLACE, LEAYY, and FISHER, Circuit Judges.

*

**The panel unanimously concludes this case is suitable for decision without oral argument. *See*Fed. R. App. P. 34(a)(2).

MEMORANDUM **

Sandra Lee Demoruelle and Joseph Louis Demoruelle appeal pro se from the district court’s judgment dismissing their action under *Bivens v. Six Unknown Named Agents of Federal Bureau of Narcotics,*403 U.S. 388, 91 S.Ct. 1999, 29 *1003L.Ed.2d 619 (1971), alleging constitutional claims concerning veterans’ benefits. We have jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. § 1291. We review de novo the existence of subject matter jurisdiction. *Naffe v. Frey,*789 F.3d 1030, 1035 (9th Cir. 2015). We affirm in part, vacate in part, and remand.

The district court properly dismissed the Demoruelles’ action for lack of subject matter jurisdiction because the Demoruuelles’ claims would have required the district court to review a question of fact or law relating to or affecting veterans’ benefits decisions. *See*38 U.S.C. § 511(a); *Veterans for Common Sense v. Shinseki,*678 F.3d 1013, 1022-25 (9th Cir. 2012) (Veterans’ Judicial Review Act precludes district court jurisdiction over claims relating to or affecting veterans’ benefits decisions, “even if the veteran dresses his claim as a constitutional challenge[ ]”); *see also Re-cinto v. U.S. Dep’t of Veterans Affairs,*706 F.3d 1171, 1175-76 (9th Cir. 2013) (the Veterans’ Judicial Review Act bars review of a plaintiffs due process claim because, even viewing it as a systemic challenge, it would necessarily require consideration of individual cases). However, we vacate the judgment to the extent that it dismissed the Demoruelles’ claims with prejudice, and remand for entry of dismissal without prejudice. *See Kelly v. Fleetwood Enters., Inc.,*377 F.3d 1034, 1Q36 (9th Cir. 2004) (dismissals for lack of subject matter jurisdiction should be without prejudice).

The parties shall bear their own costs on appeal.

AFFIRMED in part, VACATED in part, and REMANDED.

**

 This disposition is not appropriate for publication and is not precedent except as provided by Ninth Circuit Rule 36-3.
I 

118TH CONGRESS 

1ST SESSION H. R. 6777 

To prohibit covered entities from requiring consumers to solely use digital 

monthly statements, and for other purposes. 

IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES 

DECEMBER 13, 2023 

Mr. TURNER introduced the following bill; which was referred to the 

Committee on Financial Services 

A BILL 

To prohibit covered entities from requiring consumers to 

solely use digital monthly statements, and for other purposes. 

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 ‘‘Protecting Against 

5 Paperless and Electronic Requirements Act’’ or the 

6 ‘‘PAPER Act’’. 

7 SEC. 2. REQUIREMENT. 

8 (a) IN GENERAL.—Each covered entity shall offer 

9 each consumer of such entity the option of receiving paper 

10 copies of their monthly statements. 


kjohnson on DSK7ZCZBW3PROD with $$_JOB
2 

•HR 6777 IH

1 (b) PROHIBITION.—A covered entity may not condi2 tion the use of any services offered by such entity on the 

3 sole use of digital monthly statements by a consumer. 

4 (c) DEFINITIONS.— 

5 (1) DEPOSITORY INSTITUTION.—The term ‘‘de6 pository institution’’ has the meaning given the term 

7 in section 3 of the Federal Deposit Act. 

8 (2) CREDIT UNION.—The term ‘‘credit union’’ 

9 has the meaning given the term in section 101 of the 

10 Federal Credit Union Act. 

11 (3) COVERED ENTITY.—The term ‘‘covered en12 tity’’ means a depository institution or a credit 

13 union. 

Æ 


kjohnson on DSK7ZCZBW3PROD with $$_JOB
#### Chas. M. Kittredge *et al.,*Resp’ts, v. J. Wesley Van Tassell, App’lt.

*H. H. Hustis,*for resp’ts; *John B. Green,*for app’lt.

Judgment affirmed, with costs. All concur.

Affirming 82 N. Y. State Rep., 76.
UNPUBLISHED

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

No. 17-7204

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,

Plaintiff - Appellee,

v.

DEANTE DRAKE, a/k/a Panama, a/k/a Shawn, a/k/a Papa Bear,

Defendant - Appellant.

Appeal from the United States District Court for the Northern District of West Virginia, 

at Clarksburg. Irene M. Keeley, Senior District Judge. (1:07-cr-00053-IMK-MJA-1)

Submitted: December 13, 2017 Decided: January 2, 2018

Before KING, SHEDD, and HARRIS, Circuit Judges.

Dismissed by unpublished per curiam opinion.

Deante Drake, Appellant Pro Se. Randolph John Bernard, OFFICE OF THE UNITED 

STATES ATTORNEY, Wheeling, West Virginia, for Appellee.

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.
2

PER CURIAM:

On September 5, 2017, Deante Drake filed a notice of appeal from his May 13, 

2008, criminal judgment. Because Drake previously appealed from his 2008 judgment, 

see United States v. Drake, 318 F. App’x 247 (4th Cir. 2009) (No. 08-4589), this Court is 

without jurisdiction to entertain a second appeal from the same judgment. In addition, 

Drake’s notice of appeal is inordinately late. See Fed. R. App. P. 4(b)(1) (providing 30 

days to file a notice of appeal in a criminal case). 

Accordingly, we deny Drake’s motion to show cause and supplemental motion to 

show cause and dismiss the appeal. We dispense with oral argument because the facts 

and legal contentions are adequately presented in the materials before the Court and 

argument would not aid the decisional process.

DISMISSED
|   | 1. | The Report fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934; and |
|--------|----|-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|

|   | 2. | The information contained in the Report fairly presents, in all material respects, the financial condition and results of operations of the Company. |
|--------|----|------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|

| Date:  March 10, 2011 |   | Natural Gas Services Group, Inc.                                                                              |   |
|----------------------------|--------|--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|--------|
|                       | By:    | /s/ Stephen C. Taylor                                                                                         |   |
|                       |   | Stephen C. Taylor                                                                                                  |   |
|                       |   | Chairman of the Board of Directors, President and Chief Executive Officer (Principal  Executive Officer) |   |

----
I 

118TH CONGRESS 

1ST SESSION H. R. 6621 

To provide technical assistance for geographically underserved and distressed 

areas, and for other purposes. 

IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES 

DECEMBER 6, 2023 

Mr. DAVIS of North Carolina (for himself and Mr. TONY GONZALES of Texas) 

introduced the following bill; which was referred to the Committee on Agriculture 

A BILL 

To provide technical assistance for geographically 

underserved and distressed areas, and for other purposes. 

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 ‘‘Rural Uplift and Revi5 talization Assistance Act’’. 

6 SEC. 2. TECHNICAL ASSISTANCE FOR GEOGRAPHICALLY 

7 UNDERSERVED AND DISTRESSED AREAS. 

8 (a) IN GENERAL.—Within 1 year after the date of 

9 the enactment of this section, the Secretary of Agriculture 

10 (in this section referred to as the ‘‘Secretary’’) shall diVerDate Sep 11 2014 01:09 Dec 19, 2023 Jkt 049200 PO 00000 Frm 00001 Fmt 6652 Sfmt 6201 E:\BILLS\H6621.IH H6621

ssavage on DSKBC07HB2PROD with BILLS
2 

•HR 6621 IH

1 rectly, or through cooperative agreements, provide tech2 nical assistance and strengthen local capacity to improve 

3 access to rural development programs administered by the 

4 Secretary for local partners (including local governments, 

5 cooperatives, businesses, healthcare facilities and net6 works, community anchor institutions (as defined in sec7 tion 60302(6) of the Digital Equity Act of 2021), and 

8 nonprofit organizations) in geographically underserved 

9 and distressed areas. 

10 (b) REPORTS.—Beginning 1 year after the date of 

11 the enactment of this section, the Secretary shall annually 

12 publish, make available to the public, and submit to the 

13 Committee on Agriculture of the House of Representatives 

14 and the Committee on Agriculture, Nutrition, and For15 estry of the Senate a report on how the provision of tech16 nical assistance under subsection (a) has affected geo17 graphically underserved and distressed areas in the year 

18 covered by the report. 

19 (c) DEFINITION OF GEOGRAPHICALLY UNDER20 SERVED AND DISTRESSED AREA.—In this section, the 

21 term ‘‘geographically underserved and distressed area’’ 

22 means a rural area (as determined by the Secretary)— 

23 (1) in a socially vulnerable community (as de24 termined by the Secretary); 


ssavage on DSKBC07HB2PROD with BILLS
3 

•HR 6621 IH

1 (2) in a persistent poverty county (as deter2 mined by the Secretary); 

3 (3) in a economically distressed area (as deter4 mined by the Secretary); or 

5 (4) that lacks adequate water services, sewer 

6 services, or decent housing in any region near the 

7 border between the United States and Mexico. 

Æ 


ssavage on DSKBC07HB2PROD with BILLS
```

[Congressional Bills 118th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[H.R. 6593 Introduced in House (IH)]

<DOC>

118th CONGRESS
  1st Session
                                H. R. 6593

  To require that the regulations related to SAVE Plan shall have the 
                    force and effect of enacted law.

_______________________________________________________________________

                    IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

                            December 5, 2023

   Mr. Goldman of New York (for himself, Ms. Jacobs, Ms. Norton, Ms. 
 McCollum, Ms. Crockett, Mr. Khanna, and Ms. Bonamici) introduced the 
 following bill; which was referred to the Committee on Education and 
                             the Workforce

_______________________________________________________________________

                                 A BILL

 
  To require that the regulations related to SAVE Plan shall have the 
                    force and effect of enacted law.

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

SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE.

    This Act may be cited as the ``Codifying SAVE Plan Act''.

SEC. 2. CODIFYING THE SAVE PLAN.

    The provisions of parts 682 and 685 of title 34, Code of Federal 
Regulations, (relating to the SAVE Plan), as amended by the final 
regulations published by the Department of Education in the Federal 
Register on July 10, 2023 (88 Fed. Reg. 43820), shall have the force 
and effect of enacted law.
                                 <all>
```
No. 76-1465.

#### Pacheco *v.*United States.

C. A. 5th Cir. Certiorari denied.
<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

   The undersigned, Eleanor L. Thomas, President (chief executive officer) of
the managing owner, Prudential Securities Futures Management Inc. (the 'Managing
Owner'), of Prudential Securities Strategic Trust (the 'Trust'), hereby
certifies, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. 1350, as adopted pursuant to Section 906 of the
Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that:

   (1) The Trust's Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q for the period ending September
       30, 2003, as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the
       date hereof (the 'Quarterly 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 Quarterly Report fairly presents, in all
       material respects, the financial condition and results of operations of
       the Trust.

/s/ Eleanor L. Thomas
---------------------------------------------------------
Eleanor L. Thomas
President (chief executive officer) of the Managing Owner
November 14, 2003
#### The COASTAL CLUB, INC., Petitioner, v. COMMISSIONER OF INTERNAL REVENUE, Respondent.

No. 23005.

United States Court of Appeals Fifth Circuit.

Nov. 15, 1966.

Rehearing Denied Dec. 15, 1966.

Lee I. Park, Gerald D. Morgan, Arthur Peter, Jr., Washington, D. C., for petitioner.

Richard M. Roberts, Act. Asst. Atty. Gen., Meyer Rothwacks, Lee A. Jackson, C. Moxley Featherston, Gilbert E. Andrews, Thomas Silk, Attys., D. of J., Washington, D. C., for respondent.

Before JONES, WISDOM and GOLDBERG, Circuit Judges.

PER CURIAM:

Before us for review is a decision of the Tax Court of the United States revoking the tax exemption of the petitioner, The Coastal Club, Inc., and holding it liable for income tax upon monies received from oil and gas leases. The Coastal Club, Inc. v. Commissioner of Internal Revenue, 48 T.C. 783. This Court, finding itself in complete agreement with the conclusion which the Tax Court reached and with its opinion, affirms its decision. See United States v. Fort Worth Club, 5 Cir., 348 F.2d 891.

Affirmed.
EXHIBIT 13.1

Certification by the Chief Executive Officer Pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002

In connection with the Annual Report of Home Inns & Hotels Management Inc. (the Company) on Form 20-F for the year ended December 31, 2006 as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof
(the Report), I, David Jian Sun, 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 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.

Date: June 21, 2007



|       |  |                        
|------ |  | -----------------------
|By:    |  | /s/ David Jian Sun     
|Name:  |  | David Jian Sun         
|Title: |  | Chief Executive Officer
United States Court of Appeals

for the Fifth Circuit ____________

No. 23-10417

Summary Calendar

____________

United States of America, 

Plaintiff—Appellee,

versus

Victor Juarez Rodriguez, 

Defendant—Appellant.

______________________________

Appeal from the United States District Court 

for the Northern District of Texas

USDC No. 3:22-CR-184-1

______________________________

Before Smith, Higginson, and Engelhardt, Circuit Judges.

Per Curiam:*

The Federal Public Defender appointed to represent Victor Rodriguez has moved to withdraw and has filed a brief per Anders v. California, 

386 U.S. 738 (1967), and United States v. Flores, 632 F.3d 229 (5th Cir. 2011). 

Rodriguez has not filed a response. We have reviewed counsel’s brief and 

relevant portions of the record. 

_____________________

* This opinion is not designated for publication. See 5th Cir. R. 47.5.

United States Court of Appeals

Fifth Circuit

FILED

October 6, 2023

Lyle W. Cayce

Clerk

Case: 23-10417 Document: 00516923220 Page: 1 Date Filed: 10/06/2023
No. 23-10417

2

We concur with counsel’s assessment that the appeal presents no nonfrivolous issue for appellate review. Accordingly, the motion to withdraw is 

GRANTED, counsel is excused from further responsibilities herein, and 

the appeal is DISMISSED. See 5th Cir. R. 42.2.

Case: 23-10417 Document: 00516923220 Page: 2 Date Filed: 10/06/2023
Letter Agreement, dated May 30, 2012



 Exhibit 10.1 
 [MRMI LETTERHEAD] 
 May 30,
2012                                         
    
 Gregory K. Silvers 

EPT Concord II, LLC 
 c/o Entertainment
Properties Trust 
 909 Walnut Street, Suite 200 
 Kansas City, Missouri 64106 
 Dear Mr. Silvers: 

Reference is made to that certain Option Agreement, dated as of December 21, 2011, between EPT Concord II, LLC (“EPT”), as
owner of the Property described therein, and Monticello Raceway Management, Inc. (“MRMI”; together with EPT, collectively, the “Parties”), as tenant, as amended by that certain letter agreement, dated March 30, 2012, between
EPT and MRMI and by that certain letter agreement, dated April 30, 2012, between EPT and MRMI (collectively the “Letter Agreements”), copies of which are attached hereto as Exhibit A. The term “Option Agreement” as used
herein shall mean the Option Agreement as amended by the Letter Agreements. The Parties hereby agree to amend the Option Agreement to extend the MDA Outside Date (as defined therein) by thirty (30) days, such that the MDA Outside Date shall
mean June 30, 2012. Neither EPT nor MRMI (nor any of their respective permitted successors or assigns) shall have the right to terminate the Option Agreement prior to the MDA Outside Date as extended by this letter agreement. Furthermore, the
Parties agree to amend the Option Agreement to extend the term of the Option Exercise Period (as defined therein) by thirty one (31) days, such that the Option Exercise Period End Date (as defined therein) shall mean September 21, 2012 (as
the same may be extended pursuant to Section 1(b) of the Option Agreement). Except for the extension of the MDA Outside Date and the Option Exercise Period End Date, the Option Agreement is unamended and remains in full force and effect.

 [SIGNATURE PAGE FOLLOWS] 







 If the foregoing accurately sets forth your understanding of our agreement, please indicate
your concurrence by signing in the space provided below and returning one copy of this letter to the undersigned. We look forward to continuing to work with you to complete the master development plan expeditiously. 

 

							
		 		 	 Very truly yours,
  

Monticello Raceway Management, Inc.

				
		 		 	By:	 	/s/ Joseph A. D’Amato
		 		 		 	Name: Joseph A. D’Amato
		 		 		 	Title: Chief Executive Officer

 Accepted and agreed to as of 
 the 30th day
of May, 2012: 
  

			
	EPT Concord II, LLC
		
	By:	 	/s/ Gregory K. Silvers
		 	 Name: Gregory K. Silvers

Title: Vice President


 With notice to: 

EPT Concord II, LLC 
 c/o Entertainment
Properties Trust 
 909 Walnut Street, Suite 200 
 Kansas City, Missouri 64106 
 Attention: Asset Manager 

And copies to: 
 Entertainment Properties Trust

 909 Walnut Street, Suite 200 
 Kansas
City, Missouri 64106 
 Attention: General Counsel 
 and 
 Fried, Frank, Harris, Shriver & Jacobson LLP 

One New York Plaza 
 New York, New York 10004

 Attention: Harry R. Silvera, Esq.
#### Vincent U. SOLOMON, Plaintiff-Appellant, v. M. CARRASCO; M. Dailo, Defendants-Appellees.

No. 16-15436

United States Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit.

Submitted April 11, 2017 *

Filed April 19, 2017

*437Vincent U. Solomon, Pro Se

Neah Huynh, Deputy Attorney General, AGCA — Office of the California Attorney General, San Francisco, CA, for Defendants-Appellees

Before: GOULD, CLIFTON, and HURWITZ, Circuit Judges.

*

 The panel unanimously concludes this case is suitable for decision without oral argument. *See*Fed. R. App. P. 34(a)(2).

MEMORANDUM **

California state prisoner Vincent U. Solomon appeals pro se from the district court’s judgment dismissing for failure to comply with court orders his 42 U.S. § 1983 action alleging constitutional violations. We have jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. § 1291. We review for an abuse of discretion, *Pagtalunan v. Galaza,*291 F.3d 639, 640 (9th Cir. 2002), and we affirm.

The district court did not abuse its discretion in dismissing Solomon’s action after Solomon failed to comply with court orders or meet deadlines, despite being warned that failure to comply would result in dismissal. *See id.*at 642-43 (setting forth the factors to consider before dismissing for failure to comply with a court order).

We reject as unsupported by the record Solomon’s contention that the district court judge was biased.

AFFIRMED.

**

 This disposition is not appropriate for publication and is not precedent except as provided by Ninth Circuit Rule 36-3.
11TH COURT OF APPEALS

EASTLAND, TEXAS

JUDGMENT

In the interest of R.I.C., M.E.C., * From the 446th District Court

and M.A.C., children, of Ector County,

 Trial Court No. E-19-03-0453-FM.

No. 11-23-00203-CV * November 16, 2023

* Memorandum Opinion by Williams, J.

 (Panel consists of: Bailey, C.J.,

Trotter, J., and Williams, J.)

This court has inspected the record in this cause and concludes that the appeal 

should be dismissed for want of jurisdiction. Therefore, in accordance with this 

court’s opinion, the appeal is dismissed.