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

CERTIFICATION OF PERIODIC REPORT

The undersigned Chief Executive Officer and President and Executive Vice President and Chief Financial Officer of Marquee
Holdings Inc. (the "Company"), each hereby certifies, pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, that:



Dated: May 21, 2009/s/ GERARDO I. LOPEZ Gerardo I. Lopez Chief Executive Officer, Director and President/s/ CRAIG R. RAMSEY Craig R. Ramsey Executive Vice President and
Chief Financial Officer


[A
signed original of this written statement required by Section 906 has been provided to Marquee Holdings Inc. and will be retained by Marquee
Holdings Inc. and furnished to the Securities and Exchange Commission or its staff upon request.]

55

---
```

[Congressional Bills 119th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[S. Res. 41 Agreed to Senate (ATS)]

<DOC>

119th CONGRESS
  1st Session
S. RES. 41

   Authorizing the Sergeant at Arms and Doorkeeper of the Senate to 
   conduct quarterly blood donation drives during the 119th Congress.

_______________________________________________________________________

                   IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES

                            January 27, 2025

  Mr. McConnell (for himself and Mr. Padilla) submitted the following 
             resolution; which was considered and agreed to

_______________________________________________________________________

                               RESOLUTION

 
   Authorizing the Sergeant at Arms and Doorkeeper of the Senate to 
   conduct quarterly blood donation drives during the 119th Congress.

    Resolved,

SECTION 1. QUARTERLY SENATE BLOOD DONATION DRIVES.

    (a) Authorization.--
            (1) In general.--During the 119th Congress, the Sergeant at 
        Arms and Doorkeeper of the Senate (referred to in this 
        resolution as the ``Sergeant at Arms'') is authorized to 
        conduct a blood donation drive once every quarter of a calendar 
        year, in accordance with paragraphs (2) and (3).
            (2) Date selection.--The Sergeant at Arms shall, in 
        consultation with the Committee on Rules and Administration of 
        the Senate, select the date for each drive conducted under 
        paragraph (1).
            (3) Selection of locations and partnering blood donation 
        organizations.--
                    (A) In general.--The Sergeant at Arms shall 
                identify and, with the approval of the Committee on 
                Rules and Administration of the Senate, select a 
                location and a partnering blood donation organization 
                for each drive conducted under paragraph (1).
                    (B) Member requests.--In identifying appropriate 
                partnering blood donation organizations under 
                subparagraph (A), the Sergeant at Arms may consider a 
                request from a Senator for a specific blood donation 
                organization.
    (b) Implementation.--Physical preparations for the conduct of, and 
the implementation of, each drive authorized under subsection (a)(1) 
shall be carried out in accordance with such conditions as the Sergeant 
at Arms, in consultation with the Committee on Rules and Administration 
of the Senate, may prescribe.
                                 <all>
```
Michigan Supreme Court

Lansing, Michigan

Bridget M. McCormack, Chief Justice

David F. Viviano,

Chief Justice Pro Tem

Stephen J. Markman

Brian K. Zahra

Richard H. Bernstein

Elizabeth T. Clement

Megan K. Cavanagh,

Justices

Order 

May 1, 2020

159660-1(91)

MAEGAN TURNER, by WALTER SAKOWSKI,

Conservator,

Plaintiff,

and

RIVERVIEW MACOMB HOME &

ATTENDANT CARE, LLC,

Intervening Plaintiff,

SC: 159660

v COA: 339624

Wayne CC: 16-002031-NF

FARMERS INSURANCE EXCHANGE,

Defendant/Cross-Plaintiff/

Cross-Defendant-Appellee,

and

ENTERPRISE LEASING CORPORATION OF

DETROIT, LLC and EAN HOLDINGS, LLC,

Defendants/Cross-Defendants- Appellants,

and

ESTATE OF JASON PUCKETT, by GARY

DUANE RUPP, Personal Representative,

Defendant/Cross-Plaintiff,

and

PATSY VILLNEFF and TAMERA HARPER,

Defendants/Cross-Defendants. 

_________________________________________/
I, Larry S. Royster, 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.

 Ma y 1, 2020

2

Clerk

JONTE EVERSON,

Plaintiff,

SC: 159661

v COA: 339815

Washtenaw CC: 16-000359-NF

FARMERS INSURANCE EXCHANGE,

Defendant/Third-Party

Plaintiff-Appellee,

and

ENTERPRISE LEASING COMPANY,

Third-Party Defendant-Appellant. 

_________________________________________/

On order of the Chief Justice, the motion of PV Holding Corp. and Avis Budget 

Group, Inc. to file a brief amicus curiae consistent with MCR 7.312(H)(3) and (4) is 

GRANTED.
June 30, 2018 December 31, 2017

Assets

Cash and Cash Equivalents 815,840 $ 1,613,124 $ 

Investments in U.S. Treasury Obligations 4,545,490,545 B 4,454,235,266 A

Accrued Interest Receivable 23,311,571 21,893,987 

Premium Receivable 106,773,000 340,565,000 

Other Receivables 134,855,761 B 30,011,417 A

Prepaid Expenses - - 

General Property, Equipment, and Software, Net 68,748 77,914 

Total Assets 4,811,315,465 $ 4,848,396,708 $ 

Liabilities and Insurance Fund

Accounts Payable and Accrued Expenses 431,837 $ 678,547 $ 

Farm Credit Insurance Fund

 Unallocated Insurance Fund Balance 4,810,883,628 4,671,886,526

Allocated Insurance Fund Balance 0 175,831,635

Total Insurance Fund 4,810,883,628 $ 4,847,718,161 $ 

Total Liabilities and Insurance Fund 4,811,315,465 $ 4,848,396,708 $ 

June 30, 2018 and December 31, 2017

Farm Credit System Insurance Corporation

Comparative Statement of Financial Condition

(Unaudited)

A - Reflects a reclassification entry debiting Other Receivables and crediting Investments in U.S. 

Treasury Obligations for $30,011,417.39 due to maturity of an investment security at 12/31/2017 

which fell on a weekend. The settlement date was not until January 2018.

B - Reflects a reclassification entry debiting Other Receivables and crediting Investments in U.S. 

Treasury Obligations for $134,855,761.04 due to maturity of an investment security at 06/30/2018 

which fell on a weekend. The settlement date was not until July 2018.
Calendar Year to Date Calendar Year to Date

June 30, 2018 June 30, 2017

Income

Premiums 106,773,000 $ 172,320,999 $ 

Interest Income on Investments 34,210,856 27,855,876 

Total Income 140,983,856 $ 200,176,875 $ 

Expenses

Administrative Operating Expenses 1,986,754 $ 1,879,686 $ 

$ 1,879,686 1,986,754 $ 

Net Income 138,997,102 $ 198,297,189 $ 

Balance at January 1, 2018 $ 4,847,718,161

Payment to AIRAs Accountholders (175,831,635)

Net Income 138,997,102 

Balance at June 30, 2018 4,810,883,628 $ 

(Unaudited)

Farm Credit System Insurance Corporation

Comparative Statement of Revenue and Expense

Period Ended June 30, 2018 and June 30, 2017

Statement of Changes in Insurance Fund

Period Ended June 30, 2018

(Unaudited)
LE ROYAL, LLC f/k/a Le Royal, Inc., Adil R. Elias, Aida A. Elias, Gardens at Millenia Boulevard, LLC, MaryQueen, LLC, Pierre's Resort, LC, Le Royal International Development, LLC, et al., Appellants, v. FAIRWINDS CREDIT UNION, Appellee.

Case No. 5D18-1107

District Court of Appeal of Florida, Fifth District.

Decision filed March 26, 2019 Rehearing Denied May 02, 2019

**DECISION WITHOUT PUBLISHED OPINION**

AFFIRMED.
Order entered October 28, 2014

In The 

## Court of Appeals **Fifth District of Texas at Dallas**
No. 05
- 14
- 00798
- CV DAVID FLORES, Appellant
V. BLANCA FLORES, Appellee On Appeal from the 330th Judicial District Court Dallas County, Texas Trial Court Cause No. DF
- 13
- 17367 

### O RDER Before the Court is appellant’s October 23, 2014 “Motion to Extend Time to File Appellate Brief and to File Court Reporter’s Record.” The reporter’s record is past due. On September 15, 2014, the Court received a letter from Franc heska Duffey, Official Court Reporter for the 330th Judicial District Court of Dallas County, Texas, informing us that appellant had not made any arrangements for payment of the reporter’s record. Accordingly, we GRANT appellant’s motion to the extent tha t we ORDER appellant to file, by NOVEMBER 4, 2014 , (1) written verification that appellant has requested the reporter’s record; and (2) written verification that appellant has paid or made arrangements to pay the reporter’s fee or written documentation tha t appellant has been found to be entitled to proceed without advance payment of costs. If the Court does not receive the requested documentation by November 4, 2014, theCourt may order the appeal submitted without the reporter’s record. See T EX
. R. A PP
. P. 37.3(c). Appellant’s brief will be due thirty days after the reporter’s record is filed. See T EX
. R.
A PP
. P. 38.6(a).
/s/ ELIZABETH LANG

- MIERS JUSTICE
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 Swinging Pig Productions, Inc. a Florida corporation (the "Company") on Form 10-Q for the period ending March 31, 2011, as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the "Report"), Michael Davis, Principal Executive and Financial Officer of the Company, certifies to the best of her knowledge, 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.





A signed original of this written statement required by Section 906 has been provided to Swinging Pig Productions, Inc., and will be retained by Swinging Pig Productions, Inc. and furnished to the Securities and Exchange Commission or its staff upon request.





Date: May 20, 2011/s/ Michael DavisMichael Davis

Principal Executive and Financial Officer
Ken Edward HUSE, DOC #U23123, Appellant, v. STATE of Florida, Appellee.

Case No. 2D18-4747

District Court of Appeal of Florida, Second District.

Opinion filed April 24, 2019

PER CURIAM.

Affirmed.

SILBERMAN, SALARIO, and ROTHSTEIN-YOUAKIM, JJ., Concur.
Case 3:00-cv-02377-N Document 25 Filed 07/12/01 Page 1 of 2 PageID 69
Case 3:00-cv-02377-N Document 25 Filed 07/12/01 Page 2 of 2 PageID 70
[Cite as Strongsville v. Feliciano, 194 Ohio App.3d 476, 2011-Ohio-3266.] 

Court of Appeals of Ohio

EIGHTH APPELLATE DISTRICT 

COUNTY OF CUYAHOGA

JOURNAL ENTRY AND OPINION 

No. 96294 

CITY OF STRONGSVILLE,

APPELLEE,

v.

FELICIANO,

APPELLANT.

JUDGMENT: 

DISMISSED

Criminal Appeal from the 

Berea Municipal Court 

Case No. 10 CRB 00688 
2

BEFORE: Rocco, J., Blackmon, P.J., and E. Gallagher, J. 

RELEASED AND JOURNALIZED: June 30, 2011 

George F. Lonjak, Strongsville City Prosecuting Attorney, for appellee. 

Tiaon Michele Lynch, for appellant. 

KENNETH A. ROCCO, Judge. 

{¶ 1} Defendant-appellant, Alnardo Feliciano, was charged in Berea 

Municipal Court with domestic violence in violation of R.C. 2919.25(A) and 

eventually entered a plea of guilty to a charge of disorderly conduct. After 

the trial court imposed sentence, Feliciano paid his fine but filed a notice of 

appeal and requested the trial court to stay execution of the remainder of his 

sentence. 

{¶ 2} Feliciano now seeks to appeal from his conviction; however, this 

court cannot consider this case and must dismiss this appeal because the trial 

court did not enter a final order. 

{¶ 3} “A judgment of conviction is a final appealable order under R.C. 

2505.02 when it sets forth (1) the guilty plea, the jury verdict, or the finding 

of the court upon which the conviction is based; (2) the sentence; (3) the 

signature of the judge; and (4) [the time stamp showing journalization] by the 
3

clerk of court.” (Emphasis added.) State v. Baker, 119 Ohio St.3d 197, 

2008-Ohio-3330, 893 N.E.2d 163, syllabus, explaining Crim. R. 32(C). 

{¶ 4} A trial judge’s handwritten notations made on a case file are 

insufficient to serve as a judgment entry unless those notations have been 

time-stamped by the court’s clerk. State v. Charlton, Summit App. No. 

24035, 2008-Ohio-3771; Cuyahoga Falls v. Foster, Summit App. No. 21820, 

2004-Ohio-2662, ¶ 5, citing State ex rel. White v. Junkin (1997), 80 Ohio St.3d 

335, 337, 686 N.E.2d 267. 

{¶ 5} The record submitted in this case demonstrates that the Berea 

municipal court’s clerk has time-stamped some of the court’s docket entries. 

The “journal entry” from which Feliciano has attempted to appeal, however, 

is simply a part of a preprinted file folder. The entire file folder contains 

many handwritten notes, apparently added at different times during the 

proceedings. 

{¶ 6} Handwritten marks on the case file folder indicate that Feliciano 

was found guilty of “Dis. Conduct (M4)” and received a sentence for that 

conviction, but the “journal entry” does not bear a time-stamp showing 

journalization by the clerk of court. Moreover, although Feliciano submitted 

with his notice of appeal a “copy” of the judgment entry, it, too, bears neither 
4

the judge’s signature nor the court clerk’s time-stamp. Therefore, the 

judgment does not comply with Baker requirements. 

Appeal dismissed. 

BLACKMON, P.J., and E. GALLAGHER, concur.
A.G., a juvenile, Appellant, v. The STATE of Florida, Appellee.

No. 3D18-0514

District Court of Appeal of Florida, Third District.

Opinion filed March 20, 2019

Carlos J. Martinez, Public Defender, and James A. Odell, Assistant Public Defender, for appellant.

Ashley Moody, Attorney General, and David Llanes, Assistant Attorney General, for appellee.

Before EMAS, C.J., and SALTER and LINDSEY, JJ.

PER CURIAM.

Affirmed. *See**Merchan v. State*, 495 So.2d 855, 856 (Fla. 4th DCA 1986).
```

[Congressional Bills 117th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[S. 960 Introduced in Senate (IS)]

<DOC>

117th CONGRESS
  1st Session
                                 S. 960

 To provide for proper treatment of Taiwan government representatives.

_______________________________________________________________________

                   IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES

                             March 24, 2021

Mr. Cruz (for himself, Mr. Scott of Florida, Mr. Hawley, Mr. Sasse, Mr. 
     Cornyn, Mr. Braun, Mr. Cotton, Mrs. Blackburn, and Mr. Rubio) 
introduced the following bill; which was read twice and referred to the 
                     Committee on Foreign Relations

_______________________________________________________________________

                                 A BILL

 
 To provide for proper treatment of Taiwan government representatives.

    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 ``Reassurance On Commitments Act of 
2021'' or the ``ROC Act''.

SEC. 2. PROPER TREATMENT OF TAIWAN GOVERNMENT REPRESENTATIVES.

    (a) In General.--Notwithstanding any other provision of law, none 
of the funds appropriated or otherwise made available for the 
Department of State for fiscal year 2022 may be used to prepare, 
propose, draft, review, or promulgate any regulation, guidance, or 
executive order, or to otherwise implement, administer, or enforce any 
policy that restricts the ability of members of the armed forces and 
government representatives from the Republic of China (Taiwan) or the 
Taipei Economic and Cultural Representative Office (TECRO) to display 
for official purposes symbols of Republic of China sovereignty, 
including--
            (1) the flag of the Republic of China (Taiwan); and
            (2) the corresponding emblems or insignia of military 
        units.
    (b) Official Purposes Defined.--In this section, the term 
``official purposes'' means--
            (1) the wearing of official uniforms;
            (2) conducting government-hosted ceremonies or functions; 
        and
            (3) appearances on Department of State social media 
        accounts promoting engagements with Taiwan.
                                 <all>
```
<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

      In connection with the Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q of Benjamin Franklin
Bancorp, Inc. (the "Company") for the Three Months Ended March 31, 2005, as
filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the
"Report"), the undersigned Chief Executive Officer of the Company, certifies, to
the best knowledge and belief of the signatory, 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; and

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

/s/ Thomas R. Venables
------------------------------------
Thomas R. Venables
Chief Executive Officer

A. Date: May 16, 2005
# C_2017318EN.01000501.xml

| 25.9.2017 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 318/5 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

25.9.2017

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 318/5

---

Request for a preliminary ruling from the Amtsgericht Hamburg (Germany) lodged on 14 June 2017 — Jörg Scharnweber and Henning Kuhlmann v Société Air France SA

(Case C-366/17)

(2017/C 318/07)

Language of the case: German

Referring court

Referring court

Amtsgericht Hamburg

Parties to the main proceedings

Parties to the main proceedings

Applicant: Jörg Scharnweber and Henning Kuhlmann

Applicant:

Defendant: Société Air France SA

Defendant:

The case was removed from the Register of the Court of Justice by order of the Court of 19 July 2017.

---
Case 2:05-cv-00186-J Document 18 Filed 06/05/07 Page 1 of 1 PageID 85
AO 440 (Rev. 06/12) Summons in a Civil Action

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

for the

District of Northern California

On Behalf of PARKRIDGE LIMITED, a Hong Kong 

corporation, by Mabel Mak, and MABEL MAK, an 

individual, 

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

Plaintiff(s)

v. Civil Action No. 3:16-cv-07387

INDYZEN, INC., a California corporation, and 

PRAVEEN NARRA KUMAR, an individual, 

 Defendants. 

Defendant(s)

SUMMONS IN A CIVIL ACTION

To: (Defendant’s name and address)

Praveen Narra Kumar

2107 Ashley Ridge Court, San Jose, 

California 95138, United States of America

A lawsuit has been filed against you.

Within 21 days after service of this summons on you (not counting the day you received it) — or 60 days if you 

are the United States or a United States agency, or an officer or employee of the United States described in Fed. R. Civ. 

P. 12 (a)(2) or (3) — you must serve on the plaintiff an answer to the attached complaint or a motion under Rule 12 of 

the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure. The answer or motion must be served on the plaintiff or plaintiff’s attorney, 

whose name and address are:

David Alan Makman

Law Offices of David A. Makman

655 Mariners Island Blvd, Suite 306

San Mateo, CA 94404

If you fail to respond, judgment by default will be entered against you for the relief demanded in the complaint. 

You also must file your answer or motion with the court.

CLERK OF COURT

Date:

Signature of Clerk or Deputy Clerk

Case 4:16-cv-07387-KAW Document 3 Filed 12/29/16 Page 1 of 2
AO 440 (Rev. 06/12) Summons in a Civil Action (Page 2)

Civil Action No.

PROOF OF SERVICE

(This section should not be filed with the court unless required by Fed. R. Civ. P. 4 (l))

This summons for (name of individual and title, if any)

was received by me on (date) .

I personally served the summons on the individual at (place)

on (date) ; or

I left the summons at the individual’s residence or usual place of abode with (name)

, a person of suitable age and discretion who resides there,

on (date) , and mailed a copy to the individual’s last known address; or

I served the summons on (name of individual) , who is

designated by law to accept service of process on behalf of (name of organization)

on (date) ; or

I returned the summons unexecuted because ; or

Other (specify):

.

My fees are $ for travel and $ for services, for a total of $ .

I declare under penalty of perjury that this information is true.

Date:

Server’s signature

Printed name and title

Server’s address

Additional information regarding attempted service, etc:

Case 4:16-cv-07387-KAW Document 3 Filed 12/29/16 Page 2 of 2
#### Jean Francois LAUSLEGA, Plaintiff-Appellant, v. UNITED STATES, Defendant-Appellee.

No. 04-5068.

United States Court of Appeals, Federal Circuit.

April 23, 2004.

Jean Francois Lauslega, Principal Attorney, Pensacola, FL, for Plaintiff-Appellant.

Carolyn J. Craig, Principal Attorney, Kathryn A. Bleecker, David M. Cohen, of Counsel, Department of Justice, Washington, DC, for Defendant-Appellee.

Before SCHALL, GAJARSA, and PROST, Circuit Judges.

ON MOTION

SCHALL, Circuit Judge.

*ORDER*

Jean Francois Lauslega submits various documents of an unintelligible nature. The court considers, sua sponte, whether the United States Court of Federal Claims’ December 23, 2003 judgment dismissing Lauslega’s case for failure to state a claim should be summarily affirmed.

Lauslega filed a document with the trial court entitled “Complaint in International Law ad Normas Statutorum for Apology in Damages to Loss of Citizenship Rights in Contracts Consortia.” Based on its review of Lauslega’s complaint and several subsequently filed documents, the trial court held:

> Examined from all directions, this Court can find no way, even if restated articulately, that plaintiff could state a claim for items like: “intermediary residual amparo replevin due on the Claim for Apology in quotents of U.S. seisins found in excess by supercedeas bioethical indulgences respecting the acknowledgment due in federal liability conceived in the U.S. Judiciary Branch extended throughout the U.S. Executive Branch full equity of obligation to respond on the matter of seizure of subject matter jurisdiction[s] in U.S. District Courts suggesting bioethical seisins in both property and in freehold accounted thus to the risk of life re*714ferred uncontestable and conjugately reliant in full U.S. liability for jurisdictional misuse under F.R.C.P. Rule 63 and 28 U.S.C. 455[a][b][1] but not therein limited constructing bioethical risk at seisin of unethical replevin unavailable for Declaratory Relief in 42 U.S.C.1983,”

Summary affirmance of a case “is appropriate, *inter alia,*when the position of one party is so clearly correct as a matter of law that no substantial question regarding the outcome of the appeal exists.” *Joshua v. United States,*17 F.3d 378, 380 (Fed. Cir.1994) (summarily affirming the Court of Federal Claims’ dismissal of a complaint). The trial court was correct in concluding that Lauslega failed to state a claim in any of his pleadings and submissions and appropriately dismissed his case. Thus, because no substantial question exists regarding the outcome of Lauslega’s appeal, the court summarily affirms the judgment of the Court of Federal Claims dismissing Lauslega’s ease.

Accordingly,

IT IS ORDERED THAT:

(1) The Court of Federal Claims’ order is- summarily affirmed.

(2) All pending motions are moot.

(3) Each side shall bear its own costs.
Heather Lynn MACDOUGALL, Appellant, v. William Todd JENSEN, Appellee.

No. 4D18-2833

District Court of Appeal of Florida, Fourth District.

[March 7, 2019]

Heather L. MacDougall, Jupiter, pro se.

Jason R. Marks and Ashley P. Frankel of Kluger, Kaplan, Silverman, Katzen & Levine, P.L., Miami, for appellee.

Per Curiam.

*Affirmed.*

Gerber, C.J., Gross and May, JJ., concur.