alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
EXHIBIT 1

                         MANAGEMENT CERTIFICATION

I, Pamela Lindquist, certify that:

1. I have reviewed this annual report on Form 10-KSB of DOLPHIN
PRODUCTIONS, INC.;

2. Based on my knowledge, this annual 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
statement were made, not misleading with respect to the period covered by
this annual report;

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

4. The registrant's other certifying officers and I are responsible for
establishing and maintaining disclosure controls and procedures (as
defined in Exchange Act Rules 13a-14 and 15d-14) for the registrant and
have:

a) designed such disclosure controls and procedures 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 annual report is
being prepared;

b) evaluated the effectiveness of the registrant's disclosure controls and
procedures as of a date within 90 days prior to the filing date of this
annual report (the"Evaluation Date"); and

c) presented in this annual report our conclusions about the effectiveness
of the disclosure controls and procedures based on our evaluation as of
the Evaluation Date;

5. The registrant's other certifying officers and I have disclosed, based
on our most recent evaluation to the registrant's auditors and the audit
committee of registrant's board of directors (or persons performing the
equivalent functions):

a) all significant deficiencies in the design or operation of internal
controls which could adversely affect the registrant's ability to record,
process, summarize and report financial data and have identified for the
registrant's auditors any material weaknesses in internal controls; and

b) any fraud, whether or not material, that involves management or other
employees who have a significant role in the registrant's internal
controls; and the registrant's other certifying officers and I have
indicated in this annual report whether there were significant changes in
internal controls or in other factors that could significantly affect
internal controls subsequent to the date of our most recent evaluation,
including any corrective actions with regard to significant deficiencies
and material weaknesses.



                         DOLPHIN PRODUCTIONS, INC.


Date: February 6, 2006                         /s/ Pamela Lindquist


                                              --------------------------------
                                              Pamela Lindquist, Vice President
                                              and Principal Financial Officer
Harry WILCOXSON, petitioner, v. UNITED STATES.

No. 17-669.

Supreme Court of the United States

March 19, 2018.

Petition for writ of certiorari to the United States Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit denied.
RECREATIONAL DATA SERVICES, INC., petitioner, v. TRIMBLE NAVIGATION LIMITED.

No. 17-1082.

Supreme Court of the United States

March 5, 2018.

Petition for writ of certiorari to the Supreme Court of Alaska denied.
II-Oll80

From:

Sent:

To:

Subject:

Yolanda Gerritsen <yolanda.gerritsen@gmail.com>

Wednesday, December 1, 2010 6:48 PM

dfadefinitions <dfadefinitions@CFTC.gov>

Re: No loopholes in Dodd-Frank

1) Securities and Exchange Commission/Commodities Futures Trading Commission, Re: Commercial Risk (CFTC RIN

3235-AK65, SEC File Number $7-12-10)

Dear Commissioners Shapiro and Gensler: Don’t let the American Bankers Association (ABA) redefine important terms like

"commercial risk" to keep banks that engage in risky derivatives trading from complying with transparency and business

conduct requirements. Commercial risk should not be expanded to include financial risk. Accepting the ABA argument

would open the door for exemptions for risky hedge funds and insurance companies.

2) Commodities Futures Trading Commission, Re: Position Limits (RIN 3038-AD 17 )

Dear Commissioner Gensler: The CFTC needs to set strong position limits to crack down on the energy and food commodity

speculation that serves no productive purpose. I urge the Commission to define limits that will address not only manipulation,

but also excessive speculation, which will require a stricter approach.

3) U.S. Department of the Treasury, Re: FX Swaps (75 FR 66426 Document Number 2010-27274)

Dear Secretary Geithner: Just say "no" to foreign exchange traders who want to exempt foreign currency derivatives from the

clearing and transparency requirements of the

Dodd-Frank Act. $4 trillion dollars a day is traded in these highly-leveraged swaps and this number may increase to over $10

trillion in a decade. As the head of the Financial

Stability Oversight Board your job is to decrease risk in the system, not encourage off-book trading and opaque markets.

Yolanda Gerritsen

618A 3rs Street

Brooklyn, NY 11215
Nicholas MANGINO, petitioner, v. Vicki McKENNEY, Individually and as Next Friend of Stephen McKenney, and as Personal Representative of the Estate of Stephen McKenney.

No. 17-1147.

Supreme Court of the United States

March 19, 2018.

Petition for writ of certiorari to the United States Court of Appeals for the First Circuit denied.
<TABLE> <S> <C>


<ARTICLE>               5
<LEGEND>
     See accompanying notes.
</LEGEND>
       
<S>                       <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   3-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          DEC-31-1998
<PERIOD-END>                               SEP-30-1998
<CASH>                                          562393
<SECURITIES>                                    162154
<RECEIVABLES>                                   734634
<ALLOWANCES>                                   (26407)
<INVENTORY>                                     551568
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                               2051533
<PP&E>                                          143212
<DEPRECIATION>                                 (89022)
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                 2125221
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                           773509
<BONDS>                                        1112841
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                           809
<OTHER-SE>                                      333561
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                   2125221
<SALES>                                        2113825
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                               2113825
<CGS>                                          1413814
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                  1413814
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                825332
<LOSS-PROVISION>                              (149253)
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                               31303
<INCOME-PRETAX>                               (149253)
<INCOME-TAX>                                         0
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                           (149253)
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                  (149253)
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                    (.06)
<EPS-DILUTED>                                    (.06)
# C_2011055EN.01002203.xml

| 19.2.2011 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 55/22 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

19.2.2011

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 55/22

---

Order of the General Court of 14 December 2010 — General Bearing v OHIM (GENERAL BEARING CORPORATION)

(Case T-394/09) (1)

1

(Community trade mark - Application for Community word mark GENERAL BEARING CORPORATION - Absolute ground for refusal - Lack of distinctive character - Article 7(1)(b) of Regulation (EC) No 207/2009)

2011/C 55/40

Language of the case: English

Parties

Parties

Applicant: General Bearing Corp. (West Nyack, New York, United States) (represented by: A. Dellmeier-Beschorner, lawyer)

Applicant:

Defendant: Office for Harmonisation in the Internal Market (Trade Marks and Designs) (represented by: R. Manea, Agent)

Defendant:

Re:

Re:

Action brought against the decision of the First Board of Appeal of OHIM of 16 July 2009 (Case R 73/2009-1), concerning an application for registration of the word sign GENERAL BEARING CORPORATION as a Community trade mark.

Operative part of the order

Operative part of the order

| 1. | The action is dismissed as manifestly inadmissible; |
| --- | --- |

1.

The action is dismissed as manifestly inadmissible;

| 2. | General Bearing Corp. is to pay the costs. |
| --- | --- |

2.

General Bearing Corp. is to pay the costs.

---

(1)  OJ C 297, 5.12.2009.

1

---
### IN THE TENTH COURT OF APPEALS No. 10
- 20
- 00007
- CV IN THE INTEREST OF S .S., E.F., AND R.C., CHILDREN

From the 66th District Court Hill County, Texas Trial Court No. CV099
- 19CCL

MEMORANDUM OPINION
On January 3, 2020, appellant, Christopher Barnett, filed his notice of appeal in the trial court in this case. In his notice of appeal, appellant indicated that he is appealing from the trial court’s December 5, 2019 order terminating his parental rights and that this
case is accelerated. By a letter dated January 14, 2020, we informed appellant that it appeared that his notice of appeal in this case was untimely. Specifically, we referred to Texas Rule of Appellate Procedure 26.1(b), which provides th at the notice of appeal in accelerated cases must be filed within twenty days after the judgment or order is signed, and noted that because more than twenty days elapsed between December 5, 2019 and January 3, 2020,In re S.S., E.F., and R.C., children Page 2

it appeared that appellant’s notice of a ppeal was untimely. See T EX
. R. A PP
. P. 26.1(b); see also In re K.A.F. , 160 S.W.3d 923, 927 (Tex. 2005) (“[I]n an accelerated appeal, absent a rule 26.3 motion, the deadline for filing a notice of appeal is strictly set at twenty days after the judgment i s signed, with no exceptions.”). As such, we requested that appellant file a response, within ten days of January 14, 2020, showing grounds for continuing this appeal. More than ten days have passed, and appellant has not responded to our January 14, 2020 letter. Accordingly, we hereby dismiss this appeal. See T EX
. R. A PP
. P. 42.3(c).

JOHN E. NEILL Justice Before Chief Justice Gray, Justice Davis, and Justice Neill Appeal dismissed Opinion delivered and filed February 12, 2020 [CV06]
[Federal Register Volume 66, Number 123 (Tuesday, June 26, 2001)]
[Notices]
[Page 33977]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 01-15957]


=======================================================================
-----------------------------------------------------------------------

DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE

Office of Juvenile Justice and Delinquency Prevention

[OJP(OJJDP)-1323]


Meeting of the Coordinating Council on Juvenile Justice and 
Delinquency Prevention

AGENCY: Office of Juvenile Justice and Delinquency Prevention (OJJDP), 
Office of Justice Programs, Justice.

ACTION: Notice of meeting.

-----------------------------------------------------------------------

SUMMARY: Announcement of the Coordinating Council on Juvenile Justice 
and Delinquency Prevention meeting.

DATES: A meeting of this advisory committee, chartered as the 
Coordinating Council on Juvenile Justice and Delinquency Prevention, 
will take place in the District of Columbia on Tuesday, July 24, 2001, 
beginning at 10 a.m. and ending at noon, ET.

ADDRESSES: The meeting will take place at the U.S. Department of 
Justice, Office of Justice Programs, Main Conference Room, 3rd Floor, 
810 Seventh Street, NW., Washington, DC 20531.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Bob Altman, Program Manager, Juvenile 
Justice Resource Center, at 301-519-5721. [This is not a toll-free 
number.]

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The Coordinating Council, established 
pursuant to section 3(2)A of the Federal Advisory Committee Act (5 
U.S.C. App. 2), will meet to carry out its advisory functions under 
section 206 of the Juvenile Justice and Delinquency Prevention Act of 
1974, as amended (42 U.S.C. 5601 et seq.). The topic of this meeting is 
Today's Youth Gangs. This meeting will be open to the public. Members 
of the public who wish to attend the meeting should notify the Juvenile 
Justice Resource Center at the number listed above by 5 p.m., et, on 
Tuesday, July 17, 2001. For security purposes, picture identification 
will be required.

    Dated: June 20, 2001.
John J. Wilson,
Acting Administrator, Office of Juvenile Justice and Delinquency 
Prevention.
[FR Doc. 01-15957 Filed 6-25-01; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4410-18-P
EXHIBIT 32.2





WRITTEN STATEMENT PURSUANT TO 18 USC. SECTION 1350





In connection with the Annual Report of China 3C Group and its subsidiaries (the “Company”) on Form 10-K for the period ended December 31, 2010 as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the “Report”), the undersigned, Jian Zhang, Chief Financial Officer of the Company certifies, pursuant to 18 USC. 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 13a-14(b) or 15d-14(b) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934; and





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





Dated: May 18, 2011
By:
/s/ Jian ZhangName:
Jian ZhangTitle:
Chief Financial Officer (Principal

Accounting and Financial Officer)
II-00608

From:

Sent:

To:

Subject:

Martha Eberle <wildwoodsoftexas@texas-skies.com>

Thursday, December 2, 2010 1:34 PM

dfadefinitions <dfadefinitions@CFTC.gov>

Re: No loopholes in Dodd-Frank

1) Securities and Exchange Commission/Commodities Futures Trading Commission, Re: Commercial Risk (CFTC PIN

3235-AK65, SEC File Number $7-12-10)

Dear Commissioners Shapiro and Gensler: Don’t let the American Bankers Association (ABA) redefine important terms like

"commercial risk" to keep banks that engage in risky derivatives trading from complying with transparency and business

conduct requirements. Commercial risk should not be expanded to include financial risk. Accepting the ABA argument

would open the door for exemptions for risky hedge funds and insurance companies.

2) Commodities Futures Trading Commission, Re: Position Limits (PIN 3038-AD 17 )

Dear Commissioner Gensler: The CFTC needs to set strong position limits to crack down on the energy and food commodity

speculation that serves no productive purpose. I urge the Commission to define limits that will address not only manipulation,

but also excessive speculation, which will require a stricter approach.

3) U.S. Department of the Treasury, Re: FX Swaps (75 FR 66426 Document Number 2010-27274)

Dear Secretary Geithner: Just say "no" to foreign exchange traders who want to exempt foreign currency derivatives from the

clearing and transparency requirements of the

Dodd-Frank Act. $4 trillion dollars a day is traded in these highly-leveraged swaps and this number may increase to over $10

trillion in a decade. As the head of the Financial

Stability Oversight Board your job is to decrease risk in the system, not encourage off-book trading and opaque markets.

Martha Eberle

2525 mcgregor lane

Dripping Springs, TX 78620
Russell Percy DUNHAM, petitioner, v. Sherry BURT, Warden.

No. 16-9464.

Supreme Court of the United States

Oct. 2, 2017.

Petition for writ of certiorari to the United States Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit denied.
Dax HAWKINS, petitioner, v. Jeffrey WOODS, Warden.

No. 16-257.

Supreme Court of the United States

Jan. 23, 2017.

Petition for writ of certiorari to the United States Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit denied.
In the Matter of DISBARMENT OF Rodney Howard POWELL.

No. D-3011.

Supreme Court of the United States

Feb. 20, 2018.

Disbarment order entered.
II-00048

From:

Sent:

To:

Subject:

Shirley Wooden <s.wooden@comcast.net>

Wednesday, December 8, 2010 6:52 PM

dfadefinitions <dfadefinitions@CFTC.gov>

Re: No loopholes in Dodd-Frank

1) Securities and Exchange Commission/Commodities Futures Trading Commission, Re: Commercial Risk (CFTC RIN

3235-AK65, SEC File Number $7-12-10)

Dear Commissioners Shapiro and Gensler: Don’t let the American Bankers Association (ABA) redefine important terms like

"commercial risk" to keep banks that engage in risky derivatives trading from complying with transparency and business

conduct requirements. Commercial risk should not be expanded to include financial risk. Accepting the ABA argument

would open the door for exemptions for risky hedge funds and insurance companies.

2) Commodities Futures Trading Commission, Re: Position Limits (RIN 3038-AD 17 )

Dear Commissioner Gensler: The CFTC needs to set strong position limits to crack down on the energy and food commodity

speculation that serves no productive purpose. I urge the Commission to define limits that will address not only manipulation,

but also excessive speculation, which will require a stricter approach.

3) U.S. Department of the Treasury, Re: FX Swaps (75 FR 66426 Document Number 2010-27274)

Dear Secretary Geithner: Just say "no" to foreign exchange traders who want to exempt foreign currency derivatives from the

clearing and transparency requirements of the

Dodd-Frank Act. $4 trillion dollars a day is traded in these highly-leveraged swaps and this number may increase to over $10

trillion in a decade. As the head of the Financial

Stability Oversight Board your job is to decrease risk in the system, not encourage off-book trading and opaque markets.

Shirley Wooden

470 Wildflower Dr

Belvidere, IL 61008
Mary WEATHERSBY, petitioner, v. ILLINOIS COMMERCE COMMISSION, et al.

No. 16-8992.

Supreme Court of the United States

Feb. 20, 2018.

Petition for rehearing denied.
Ronald Jerome LEE, petitioner, v. FLORIDA.

No. 16-9268.

Supreme Court of the United States

Oct. 2, 2017.

Petition for writ of certiorari to the District Court of Appeal of Florida, Third District denied.
# C_2012243EN.01001503.xml

| 11.8.2012 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 243/15 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

11.8.2012

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 243/15

---

Judgment of the General Court of 29 June 2012 — E.ON Ruhrgas and E.ON v Commission

(Case T-360/09) (1)

1

(Competition - Agreements, decisions and concerted practices - German and French markets for natural gas - Decision finding an infringement of Article 81 EC - Market sharing - Duration of the infringement - Fines)

2012/C 243/28

Language of the case: German

Parties

Parties

Applicants: E.ON Ruhrgas AG (Essen, Germany), and E.ON AG (Düsseldorf, Germany) (represented by: G. Wiedemann and T. Klose, lawyers)

Applicants:

Defendant: European Commission (represented by: V. Di Bucci, A. Bouquet and R. Sauer, acting as Agents, assisted by M. Buntscheck, lawyer)

Defendant:

Re:

Re:

Application for annulment of Commission Decision C(2009) 5355 final of 8 July 2009 relating to a proceeding under Article 81 [EC] (Case COMP/39.401 — E.ON/GDF), and, in the alternative, for a reduction in the amount of the fine imposed on the applicants

Operative part of the judgment

Operative part of the judgment

The Court:

| 1. | Annuls Article 1 of Commission Decision C(2009) 5355 final of 8 July 2009 relating to a proceeding under Article 81 [EC] (Case COMP/39.401 — E.ON/GDF), first, inasmuch as it found that the duration of the infringement was from 1 January 1980 until at least 24 April 1998 as regards the infringement committed in Germany and, secondly, inasmuch as it found that an infringement was committed in France from 13 August 2004 to 30 September 2005; |
| --- | --- |

1.

Annuls Article 1 of Commission Decision C(2009) 5355 final of 8 July 2009 relating to a proceeding under Article 81 [EC] (Case COMP/39.401 — E.ON/GDF), first, inasmuch as it found that the duration of the infringement was from 1 January 1980 until at least 24 April 1998 as regards the infringement committed in Germany and, secondly, inasmuch as it found that an infringement was committed in France from 13 August 2004 to 30 September 2005;

| 2. | Sets the amount of the fine imposed on E.ON Ruhrgas AG and E.ON AG in Article 2(a) of Decision C(2009) 5355 final at EUR 320 million; |
| --- | --- |

2.

Sets the amount of the fine imposed on E.ON Ruhrgas AG and E.ON AG in Article 2(a) of Decision C(2009) 5355 final at EUR 320 million;

| 3. | Dismisses the action as to the remainder; |
| --- | --- |

3.

Dismisses the action as to the remainder;

| 4. | Orders each party to bear its own costs. |
| --- | --- |

4.

Orders each party to bear its own costs.

---

(1)  OJ C 282, 21.11.2009.

1

---
William French ANDERSON, petitioner, v. Dean BORDERS, Warden.

No. 17-1217.

Supreme Court of the United States

April 2, 2018.

Petition for writ of certiorari to the United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit denied.
1365.

#### JACKSON *v.*THE STATE.

This case is controlled by *Gole*v. State, 2 *Ga. App.*734 (59 S. E. 24) j *Walker*v. *State,*117 *Ga.*323 (43 S. E. 737).

Indictment for assault and battery, from Mclntosb' superior court — Judge Seabrook. July 18, 1908.

Submitted October 8,

Decided October 12, 1908.

*Kenan & Crawford,*for plaintiff in error.

*N. J. Norman, solicitor-general,*contra.

Powell, J.

We do not care to recite the facts. The defendant sought to justify the battery, on one of those natural grounds which appeal to all honorable men, but which the law does not recognize as a defense. If we had pardoning power, instead of judicial authority only, we would incline to a different judgment; but in the light of the law as it is, the judgment is *Affirmed.*
Brian E. MAHONEY, petitioner, v. UNITED STATES.

No. 16-9391.

Supreme Court of the United States

Oct. 2, 2017.

Petition for writ of certiorari to the United States Court of Appeals for the First Circuit denied.
Natalia Leshchenko WILSON, petitioner, v. Eric ALDRIDGE, Warden.

No. 17-853.

Supreme Court of the United States

Feb. 20, 2018.

Petition for writ of certiorari to the United States Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit denied.