alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
<Page>

                                                                     EXHIBIT 32e

        Certification Pursuant to Section 1350 of Chapter 63 of Title 18
                            of the United States Code

     I, E. James Ferland, Chief Executive Officer of PSEG Power LLC, to the best
of my knowledge, certify that (i) the Annual Report of PSEG Power LLC on Form
10-K for the year ended December 31, 2003 (the "Periodic Report") fully complies
with the requirements of Section 13(a) or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act
of 1934 and (ii) the information contained in the Periodic Report fairly
presents, in all material respects, the financial condition and results of
operations of PSEG Power LLC.


                                     /s/ E. James Ferland
                                     -------------------------------------------
                                     E. James Ferland
                                     PSEG Power LLC
                                     Chief Executive Officer
                                     February 25, 2004
# C_2021128EN.01005101.xml

| 12.4.2021 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 128/51 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

12.4.2021

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 128/51

---

Action brought on 22 February 2021 — Cilem Records International v EUIPO — KVZ Music (HALIX RECORDS)

(Case T-118/21)

(2021/C 128/65)

Language in which the application was lodged: German

Parties

Applicant: Cilem Records International UG (Augsburg, Germany) (represented by: E. Hecht, lawyer)

Defendant: European Union Intellectual Property Office (EUIPO)

Other party to the proceedings before the Board of Appeal: KVZ Music Ltd (Sofia, Bulgaria)

Details of the proceedings before EUIPO

Applicant for the trade mark at issue: Other party to the proceedings before the Board of Appeal

Trade mark at issue: Application for registration of EU word mark HALIX RECORDS — Application for registration No 16 288 235

Procedure before EUIPO: Opposition proceedings

Contested decision: Decision of the Fourth Board of Appeal of EUIPO of 28 January 2021 in Case R 1060/2020-4

Form of order sought

The applicant claims that the Court should:

| — | annul the contested decision of 28 January 2021 and EUIPO’s decision of 25 May 2020 concerning EU trade mark No 016288235 and allow the applicant’s opposition to registration of EU trade mark No 16288235 of 17 April 2017; |
| --- | --- |

—

annul the contested decision of 28 January 2021 and EUIPO’s decision of 25 May 2020 concerning EU trade mark No 016288235 and allow the applicant’s opposition to registration of EU trade mark No 16288235 of 17 April 2017;

| — | in the alternative, annul the contested decision of 28 January 2021 and refer the proceedings back to the Board of Appeal for reconsideration; |
| --- | --- |

—

in the alternative, annul the contested decision of 28 January 2021 and refer the proceedings back to the Board of Appeal for reconsideration;

| — | order EUIPO to pay the costs. |
| --- | --- |

—

order EUIPO to pay the costs.

Plea in law

| — | Infringement of Article 8(4) of Regulation (EU) 2017/1001 of the European Parliament and of the Council. |
| --- | --- |

—

Infringement of Article 8(4) of Regulation (EU) 2017/1001 of the European Parliament and of the Council.

---
Fourth Court of Appeals

San Antonio, Texas

July 20, 2022

No. 04-22-00064-CV

ROBSTOWN HARDWARE COMPANY and Deere & Company,

Appellants

v.

Heather J. IDEUS and Arlen Ideus,

Appellees

From the 229th Judicial District Court, Duval County, Texas

Trial Court No. DC-21-175

Honorable Baldemar Garza, Judge Presiding

ORDER

In accordance with this court’s opinion of this date, this case is DISMISSED FOR LACK 

OF JURISDICTION. Costs are assessed against appellants, Robstown Hardware Company and 

Deere & Company. 

It is so ORDERED on July 20, 2022.

_____________________________

Luz Elena D. Chapa, Justice

IN WITNESS WHEREOF, I have hereunto set my hand and affixed the seal of the said 

court on this 20th day of July, 2022.

_____________________________

Michael A. Cruz, Clerk of Court
No. 11-10347.

#### Rucker *v.*Curley, Warden, et al.

C. A. 3d Cir. Certiorari denied.
# C_2022359EN.01004202.xml

| 19.9.2022 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 359/42 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

19.9.2022

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 359/42

---

Request for a preliminary ruling from the Tribunal du travail francophone de Bruxelles (Belgium) lodged on 20 June 2022 — JD v Acerta — Caisse d’assurances sociales ASBL, Institut national d’assurances sociales pour travailleurs indépendants (Inasti), Belgian State

(Case C-415/22)

(2022/C 359/49)

Language of the case: French

Referring court

Tribunal du travail francophone de Bruxelles

Parties to the main proceedings

Applicant: JD

Defendants: Acerta — Caisse d’assurances sociales ASBL, Institut national d’assurances sociales pour travailleurs indépendants (Inasti), Belgian State

Question referred

Does the principle of EU law based on a single social security scheme applicable to workers, whether employed or self-employed, active or retired, preclude a Member State of residence from requiring, as in the present case, a retired official of the European Commission, who pursues an activity as a self-employed person, to be subject to its social security scheme and the payment of purely ‘solidarity’ social security contributions, where the retired official is subject to the compulsory social security scheme of the European Union and does not derive any benefits, be they contributory or non-contributory, from the national scheme to which he or she is subject by force?

---
# C_2022051EN.01003601.xml

| 31.1.2022 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 51/36 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

31.1.2022

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 51/36

---

Action brought on 1 December 2021 — Dorsum v EUIPO — ID Quantique (Clavis)

(Case T-758/21)

(2022/C 51/49)

Language in which the application was lodged: Hungarian

Parties

Applicant: Dorsum Informatikai Fejlesztő és Szolgáltató Zrt. (Budapest, Hungary) (represented by: Gy. Hajdu, lawyer)

Defendant: European Union Intellectual Property Office (EUIPO)

Other party to the proceedings before the Board of Appeal: ID Quantique SA (Carouge, Switzerland)

Details of the proceedings before EUIPO

Applicant for the trade mark at issue: Other party to the proceedings before the Board of Appeal

Trade mark at issue: European Union word mark ‘Clavis’ — registration No 18064876

Procedure before EUIPO: Opposition proceedings

Contested decision: Decision of the First Board of Appeal of EUIPO of 22 September 2021 in Case R 189/2021-1

Form of order sought

The applicant claims that the Court should:

| — | primarily, amend the contested decision and uphold the applicant’s action; |
| --- | --- |

—

primarily, amend the contested decision and uphold the applicant’s action;

| — | alternatively, annul the contested decision with the effects also extending to the decision issued by EUIPO on 27 November 2020; |
| --- | --- |

—

alternatively, annul the contested decision with the effects also extending to the decision issued by EUIPO on 27 November 2020;

| — | order compensation to be paid to the applicant for the costs of the proceedings. |
| --- | --- |

—

order compensation to be paid to the applicant for the costs of the proceedings.

Pleas in law

| — | Infringement of Article 47(1) of Regulation (EU) 2017/1001 of the European Parliament and of the Council; |
| --- | --- |

—

Infringement of Article 47(1) of Regulation (EU) 2017/1001 of the European Parliament and of the Council;

| — | Infringement of Article 107 of Regulation (EU) 2017/1001 of the European Parliament and of the Council; |
| --- | --- |

—

Infringement of Article 107 of Regulation (EU) 2017/1001 of the European Parliament and of the Council;

| — | Infringement of Article 95 of Regulation (EU) 2017/1001 of the European Parliament and of the Council; |
| --- | --- |

—

Infringement of Article 95 of Regulation (EU) 2017/1001 of the European Parliament and of the Council;

| — | Infringement of essential procedural requirements. |
| --- | --- |

—

Infringement of essential procedural requirements.

---
No. 11-10047.

#### Gamble *v.*Thaler, Director, Texas Department of Criminal Justice, Correctional Institutions Division.

C. A. 5th Cir. Certiorari denied.
IN THE SUPREME COURT OF PENNSYLVANIA

MIDDLE DISTRICT

JEFFREY TILLMAN,

Appellant

v.

PENNSYLVANIA DEPARTMENT OF

CORRECTIONS, PENNSYLVANIA

BOARD OF PROBATION AND PAROLE,

COURT OF COMMON PLEAS OF

LEHIGH COUNTY,

Appellees :

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

: No. 30 MAP 2017

ORDER

PER CURIAM

AND NOW , this 19th day of March , 2018, upon consideration of the Motion to

Dismiss for Mootness and the “Suggestion of Mootness

, ” this appeal is DISMISSED.
* Pursuant to 5 TH C IR . 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 5 TH C IR . R. 47.5.4. IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT

No. 96-20921 Conference Calendar

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Plaintiff-Appellee,

versus EDUARDO PENAFIEL-RIVAS, Defendant-Appellant.

- - - - - - - - - - Appeal from the United States District Court for the Southern District of Texas USDC No. H-96-CR-91-1

- - - - - - - - - - August 15, 1997 Before KING, HIGGINBOTHAM, and DUHÉ, Circuit Judges.
PER CURIAM: * Eduardo Francisco Penafiel-Rivas (Rivas) appeals the 46-month sentence imposed by the district court following the acceptance of his guilty plea for various heroin-related offenses. Rivas argues that the district court clearly erred in not finding that he was a minor participant in the drug conspiracy and reducing his offense level accordingly underNo. 96-20921 - 2 - § 3B1.2 of the U.S. Sentencing Guidelines. Because Rivas was responsible for a large quantity of heroin, 579.9 grams, seized from his person, and because he was held responsible for only the amount of drugs that he actually possessed, § 3B1.2 does not require a reduction in his base offense level even though his activity in the overall drug conspiracy may have been minor. See United States v. Buenrostro , 868 F.2d 135, 137-38 (5th Cir. 1990). Further, Rivas was sentenced only for the drugs he actually carried and not those which might be attributed to a larger conspiracy. See United States v. Flucas , 99 F.3d 177, 181 (5th Cir.) cert. denied 117 S. Ct. 1097 (1997).
AFFIRMED.
Exhibit 32.1

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

In connection with the Quarterly Report of CPS Technologies Corporation (the "Company") on Form 10-Q for the three month period ended March 27, 2010 as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the "Report"), I, Grant C. Bennett, President and Treasurer of the Company, certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, as adopted pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that to the best of my knowledge:

1. The Report fully complies with the requirements of section 13(a) or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934; and
2. The information contained in the Report fairly presents, in all material respects, the financial condition and results of operations of the Company.

Date:	May 11, 2010
/s/	Grant C. Bennett
Grant C. Bennett
President and Treasurer
# C_2022037EN.01005501.xml

| 24.1.2022 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 37/55 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

24.1.2022

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 37/55

---

Action brought on 2 December 2021 — Activa — Grillküche v EUIPO — Targa (Grilling apparatus)

(Case T-757/21)

(2022/C 37/72)

Language of the case: English

Parties

Applicant: Activa — Grillküche GmbH (Selb, Germany) (represented by: F. Stangl and M. Würth, lawyers)

Defendant: European Union Intellectual Property Office (EUIPO)

Other party to the proceedings before the Board of Appeal: Targa GmbH (Soest, Germany)

Details of the proceedings before EUIPO

Proprietor of the design at issue: Other party to the proceedings before the Board of Appeal

Design at issue: European Union design No 3 056 449-0001

Contested decision: Decision of the Third Board of Appeal of EUIPO of 4 October 2021 in Case R 1651/2020-3

Form of order sought

The applicant claims that the Court should:

| — | annul the contested decision in its entirety and the decision No. ICD 104479 of the Invalidity Division of EUIPO of 12 June 2020 in its entirety; |
| --- | --- |

—

annul the contested decision in its entirety and the decision No. ICD 104479 of the Invalidity Division of EUIPO of 12 June 2020 in its entirety;

| — | declare the design at issue invalid; and |
| --- | --- |

—

declare the design at issue invalid; and

| — | order EUIPO and the other party to the proceedings before the Board of Appeal to pay the costs. |
| --- | --- |

—

order EUIPO and the other party to the proceedings before the Board of Appeal to pay the costs.

Pleas in law

| — | Infringement of Article 7(2) of Council Regulation (EC) No 6/2002; |
| --- | --- |

—

Infringement of Article 7(2) of Council Regulation (EC) No 6/2002;

| — | Infringement of Article 63(1), first sentence, in conjunction with Article 7(2) of Council Regulation (EC) No 6/2002; |
| --- | --- |

—

Infringement of Article 63(1), first sentence, in conjunction with Article 7(2) of Council Regulation (EC) No 6/2002;

| — | Infringement of Article 63(1), second sentence, of Council Regulation (EC) No 6/2002. |
| --- | --- |

—

Infringement of Article 63(1), second sentence, of Council Regulation (EC) No 6/2002.

---
#### COM. v. WILSON, K.

3537 EDA 2014

Superior Court of Pennsylvania.

09/27/2017

CP-51-CR-0008471-2011

CP-51-CR-0008472-2011

(Philadelphia)

Affirmed
No. 11-10432.

#### Olausen *v.*Nevada.

Sup. Ct. Nev. Certio-rari denied.
No. 11-1387.

#### Mr. S. *v.*United States.

C. A. 1st Cir. Certiorari denied.
Michigan Supreme Court

Lansing, Michigan

Marilyn Kelly,

 Chief Justice

Michael F. Cavanagh

Elizabeth A. Weaver

Maura D. Corrigan

Robert P. Young, Jr.

Stephen J. Markman

Diane M. Hathaway, Justices

I, Corbin R. Davis, Clerk of the Michigan Supreme Court, certify that the 

foregoing is a true and complete copy of the order entered at the direction of the Court. 

 _________________________________________ 

 Clerk

October 21, 2009 

1014 

Order 

 

October 21, 2009 

139224 

PEOPLE OF THE STATE OF MICHIGAN, 

Plaintiff-Appellee, 

v SC: 139224 

 COA: 291052 

Oakland CC: 2006-206416-FH 

SULLIVAN HOWARD GREEN, JR., 

Defendant-Appellant. 

_________________________________________/ 

 On order of the Court, the application for leave to appeal the May 14, 2009 order 

of the Court of Appeals is considered, and it is DENIED, because we are not persuaded 

that the question presented should be reviewed by this Court. 

 KELLY, C.J., and CAVANAGH, J., would grant leave to appeal.
#### Patrick Barry, in his official capacity as Bishop of the Diocese of St. Augustine, v. A. G. Willard, R. B. Huffaker, and M. H. Edwards, doing business as Huffaker & Edwards, Attorneys at Law, and J. A. Johnson, Sheriff of Polk County, Florida.

154 So. 843.

(See 113 Fla. 402, 152 So. 411.)

Order Entered May 3, 1934.

J. *U. Bethell, S. Henry Harris*and *J. E.*Kennedy, for Appellant;

*Huffaker &*Edwards, for Appellees.

Per Curiam.

— Upon application of appellant for a constitutional writ under Section 5 of Article V of the Constitution in the nature of an injunction in this Court in aid of and pending an appeal from an order denying injunctive relief in the court below seeking to restrain the Sheriff of Polk County, Florida, from selling on May 7th, 1934, certain property levied upon and advertised for sale under an execution issued against the appellant, due notice of said application having been given appellees' who have appeared in resistance of the motion, it is ordered that upon the express condition that appellant shall immediately pay all legally assessable costs and expenses incurred in and about the making of said levy and the advertising of said sale sought *801to be enjoined, computed up to the date of sale, and will thereafter on or before June 4, 1934, well and truly pay to the Sheriff of Polk County, Florida, for the benefit of appellee A. G. Willard, to be credited on his judgment, and execution *pro tanto*and paid over to the judgment creditor pending this appeal, the sum of $1,179.00 attorney’s fees and all accrued court costs that have been duly taxed in the common-law suit of A. G. Willard v. Rt. Rev. Patrick Barry, Bishop of the Diocese of St. Augustine, in which suit appellee, A. G. Willard’s judgment was rendered as aforesaid, then the relief moved for on this' application will stand granted as prayed, an appropriate writ to that effect to be issued by the Clerk of this Court. It is further ordered that upon the payment of the legally assessable costs and expenses of sale as heretofore provided, on or before the sale time on May 7, 1934, the appellees shall stand enjoined and restrained from proceeding with said sale on that date or at all, subject to the compliance of appellant with the other condition of this order on or before the following June 4th, 1934, which compliance shall be a condition precedent to the continuance of this constitutional restraining order in effect after that date.

■ Davis, C. J., and Whitfield, Brown and Buford, J. J., concur.
EX-31 Rule13a-14(d)/15d-14(d) Certifications.

 

 

I, Kunal K. Singh,certify that:

 

1. I have reviewedthis report on Form 10-K and all reports on Form 10-D required to be filed inrespect of the period covered by this report on Form 10-K of the JPMBBCommercial Mortgage Securities Trust 2015-C27 (the "Exchange Act periodicreports");

 

2. Based on myknowledge, the Exchange Act periodic reports, taken as a whole, do not containany untrue statement of a material fact or omit to state a material fact necessaryto make the statements made, in light of the circumstances under which suchstatements were made, not misleading with respect to the period covered by thisreport;

 

3. Based on myknowledge, all of the distribution, servicing and other information required tobe provided under Form 10-D for the period covered by this report is includedin the Exchange Act periodic reports;

 

4. Based on myknowledge and the servicer compliance statements required in this report underItem 1123 of Regulation AB, and except as disclosed in the Exchange Actperiodic reports, the servicers have fulfilled their obligations under theservicing agreements in all material respects; and

 

5. All of the reportson assessment of compliance with servicing criteria for asset-backed securitiesand their related attestation reports on assessment of compliance withservicing criteria for asset-backed securities required to be included in thisreport in accordance with Item 1122 of Regulation AB and Exchange Act Rules13a-18 and 15d-18 have been included as an exhibit to this report, except asotherwise disclosed in this report. Any material instances of noncompliancedescribed in such reports have been disclosed in this report on Form 10-K.

 

In giving thecertifications above, I have reasonably relied on information provided to me bythe following unaffiliated parties:

 

Midland LoanServices, a Division of PNC Bank, National Association, as Master Servicer, LNRPartners, LLC, as Special Servicer, Wells Fargo Bank, National Association, asTrustee and Certificate Administrator, Wells Fargo Bank, National Association,as Custodian, Pentalpha Surveillance LLC, as Senior Trust Advisor, Midland LoanServices, a Division of PNC Bank, National Association, as Primary Servicer forThe Outlet Shoppes of the Bluegrass Mortgage Loan, Midland Loan Services, aDivision of PNC Bank, National Association, as Special Servicer for The OutletShoppes of the Bluegrass Mortgage Loan, Wells Fargo Bank, National Association,as Trustee for The Outlet Shoppes of the Bluegrass Mortgage Loan, Wells FargoBank, National Association, as Custodian for The Outlet Shoppes of theBluegrass Mortgage Loan, and Pentalpha Surveillance LLC, as Senior TrustAdvisor for The Outlet Shoppes of the Bluegrass Mortgage Loan.

 

 

 

Dated: March 23, 2020

 

 

/s/ Kunal K. Singh

 

 

President and ChiefExecutive Officer

(seniorofficer in charge of securitization of the depositor)
```

[Congressional Bills 116th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[H.R. 8461 Introduced in House (IH)]

<DOC>

116th CONGRESS
  2d Session
                                H. R. 8461

 To amend the Arms Export Control Act relating to export licenses for 
                           firearm silencers.

_______________________________________________________________________

                    IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

                           September 30, 2020

 Mr. Panetta introduced the following bill; which was referred to the 
                      Committee on Foreign Affairs

_______________________________________________________________________

                                 A BILL

 
 To amend the Arms Export Control Act relating to export licenses for 
                           firearm silencers.

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

SECTION 1. REQUIREMENTS RELATING TO EXPORT LICENSES FOR FIREARM 
              SILENCERS.

    Section 38 of the Arms Export Control Act (22 U.S.C. 2778) is 
amended by adding at the end the following:
    ``(l) Requirements Relating to Export Licenses for Firearm 
Silencers.--
            ``(1) In general.--Notwithstanding any other provision of 
        law, the President may approve or otherwise issue a license for 
        the export of firearm silencers only if the recipient end-user 
        of the firearm silencers is the government of a foreign country 
        or any person acting on behalf of such government.
            ``(2) Firearm silencer defined.--In this subsection, the 
        term `firearm silencer' has the meaning given that term in 
        section 921(a)(24) of title 18, United States Code.''.
                                 <all>
```