alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
**Exhibit 31.1**

 

**CERTIFICATIONOF PERIODIC REPORT**

 

I, Michael C. Boyd, certify that:

 

1.  Ihave reviewed this annual report on Form 10-KSB for the year ended December 31,2004 of Longport, Inc.

 

2. Based upon my knowledge, this annual report does not contain any untruestatement of a a material fact or omit to state a material fact necessary tomake the statements made, in light of the circumstances under which suchstatements were made, not misleading with respect to the period covered by thisannual report.

 

3. Based upon my knowledge, the financial statements, and other financialinformation included in this annual report, fairly present in all materialrespects the financial condition, results of operations and cash flows of theregistrant as of, and for, the periods presented in this annual report.

 

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

 

(a)                                  designed suchdisclosure controls and procedures to ensure that material information relatingto the registrant, including its consolidated subsidiaries, is made known to usby others within those entities, particularly during the period in which thisannual report is being prepared;

 

(b)                                 evaluated theeffectiveness of the registrant’s disclosure controls and procedures as of adate within 90 days prior to the filing date of this annual report (the “EvaluationDate”); and

 

(c)                                  presented in thisannual report our conclusions about the effectiveness of the disclosurecontrols and procedures based on our evaluation as of the Evaluation Date.

 

5.  Theregistrant’s other certifying officers and I have disclosed, based on our mostrecent evaluation, to the registrant’s auditors and the audit committee of theregistrant’s board of directors (or persons performing the equivalentfunction):

 

(a)                                  all significantdeficiencies to the design or operation of internal controls which couldadversely affect the registrant’s ability to record, process, summarize andreport financial data and have identified for the registrant’s auditors anymaterial weakness in internal controls; and

 

(b)                                 any fraud, whether ornot material, that involves management or other employees who have asignificant role in the registrant’ internal controls; and

 

1

----

 

6.  Theregistrant’s other certifying officers and I have indicated in this annualreport whether or not there were significant changes in internal controls or inother factors that could significantly affect internal controls subsequent tothe date of our most recent evaluation, including any corrective actions withregard to significant deficiencies and material weaknesses.

 

Date: April 15, 2005

 
|   | /s/ Michael C. Boyd     |   |
|--------|-------------------------|--------|
|   | Michael C. Boyd         |
|   | Chief Executive Officer |

 

2

----
```

[Congressional Bills 113th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[H. Con. Res. 71 Engrossed in House (EH)]

113th CONGRESS
  1st Session
H. CON. RES. 71

_______________________________________________________________________

                         CONCURRENT RESOLUTION

    Resolved by the House of Representatives (the Senate concurring), 
That, in the enrollment of the bill H.R. 3304, the Clerk of the House 
of Representatives shall make the following corrections:
            (1) Strike sections 1 and 2.
            (2) Redesignate sections 3, 4, 5, and 6 as sections 1, 2, 
        3, and 4, respectively.
            (3) Strike any matter following the end of the tables in 
        title XLVII.
            (4) Amend the long title so as to read: ``To authorize 
        appropriations for fiscal year 2014 for military activities of 
        the Department of Defense, for military construction, and for 
        defense activities of the Department of Energy, to prescribe 
        military personnel strengths for such fiscal year, and for 
        other purposes.''.

            Passed the House of Representatives December 12, 2013.

            Attest:

                                                                 Clerk.
113th CONGRESS

  1st Session

                            H. CON. RES. 71

_______________________________________________________________________

                         CONCURRENT RESOLUTION

   Providing for corrections to the enrollment of the bill H.R. 3304.
```
THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 

FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF TEXAS 

MARSHALL DIVISION 

HEADWATER RESEARCH LLC, 

Plaintiff, 

v. 

SAMSUNG ELECTRONIC CO., LTD and 

SAMSUNG ELECTRONICS AMERICA, 

INC., 

Defendants. 

Case No. 2:23-CV-00641-JRG-RSP 

NOTICE OF APPEARANCE OF COUNSEL 

Notice is hereby given that Ruffin B. Cordell, of the law firm Fish & Richardson P.C., 

enters his appearance in this matter for Defendants Samsung Electronics Co., Ltd. and Samsung 

Electronics America, Inc. and consents to electronic services of all papers in this action. 

Dated: April 22, 2024 Respectfully submitted, 

FISH & RICHARDSON P.C. 

By: /s/ Ruffin B. Cordell

 Ruffin B. Cordell 

Texas Bar No. 04820550 

FISH & RICHARDSON P.C. 

1000 Maine Ave SW, Suite 1000 

Washington, DC 20024 

Phone: (202) 783-5070 

Fax: (202) 783-2331 

Email: cordell@fr.com 

Attorneys for Defendants 

Samsung Electronics Co., LTD and 

Samsung Electronics America, Inc.

Case 2:23-cv-00641-JRG-RSP Document 29 Filed 04/22/24 Page 1 of 2 PageID #: 892
2 

CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE 

The undersigned hereby certifies that a true and correct copy of the above and foregoing 

document has been served on April 22, 2024 to all counsel of record who are deemed to have 

consented to electronic service via the Court’s CM/ECF system per Local Rule CV-5(a)(3). 

/s/Ruffin B. Cordell 

Ruffin B. Cordell 

Case 2:23-cv-00641-JRG-RSP Document 29 Filed 04/22/24 Page 2 of 2 PageID #: 893
DISTRICT COURT OF APPEAL OF THE STATE OF FLORIDA

FOURTH DISTRICT

DEBORA L. PATZER,

Appellant,

v.

MIA REAL HOLDINGS, LLC, TRANS GLOBAL FINANCIAL, LLC, and

THIRD FEDERAL SAVINGS & LOAN ASSOCIATION OF CLEVELAND,

Appellees.

No. 4D16-4011

[January 25, 2018]

Appeal from the Circuit Court for the Fifteenth Judicial Circuit, Palm 

Beach County; Susan R. Lubitz, Judge; L.T. Case No. 

502011CA016765XXXXMB.

Jeffrey M. Siskind of the Law Office of Jeffrey M. Siskind, West Palm 

Beach, for appellant.

Steven Sarrell of Sarrell, Sarrell & Bender, P.L., Boca Raton, for 

appellees Mia Real Holdings, LLC and Trans Global Financial, LLC.

PER CURIAM.

Affirmed.

WARNER, MAY and DAMOORGIAN, JJ., concur.

* * *

Not final until disposition of timely filed motion for rehearing.
```

[Congressional Bills 113th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[H. Con. Res. 89 Introduced in House (IH)]

113th CONGRESS
  2d Session
H. CON. RES. 89

    Expressing support for designation of October 28, annually, as 
            ``Honoring the Nation's First Responders Day''.

_______________________________________________________________________

                    IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

                             March 5, 2014

 Mr. Meadows submitted the following concurrent resolution; which was 
     referred to the Committee on Transportation and Infrastructure

_______________________________________________________________________

                         CONCURRENT RESOLUTION

 
    Expressing support for designation of October 28, annually, as 
            ``Honoring the Nation's First Responders Day''.

Whereas the term first responders includes all fire, police, EMT, and volunteer 
        first responder workers in the United States;
Whereas there are over 25,300,000 first responders in the United States today, 
        working to keep our communities safe;
Whereas first responders, both professional and volunteer, deserve to be 
        recognized for their commitment to safety, defense, and honor; and
Whereas October 28 would be an appropriate day to establish as ``Honoring the 
        Nation's First Responders Day'': Now, therefore, be it
    Resolved by the House of Representatives (the Senate concurring), 
That Congress--
            (1) supports the designation of ``Honoring the Nation's 
        First Responders Day'';
            (2) honors and recognizes the contributions of volunteer 
        firefighters, policemen, and other service men and women; and
            (3) encourages the people of the United States to observe 
        ``Honoring the Nation's First Responders Day'' with appropriate 
        ceremonies and activities that promote awareness of the 
        contributions of the Nation's First Responders.
                                 <all>
```
# C_2017361EN.01003601.xml

| 25.10.2017 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 361/36 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

25.10.2017

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 361/36

---

Notice to economic operators — New round of requests for the suspension of the autonomous Common Customs Tariff duties on certain industrial and agricultural products

(2017/C 361/05)

Economic operators are informed that the Commission has received requests in accordance with the administrative arrangements foreseen in the Commission Communication concerning autonomous tariff suspensions and quotas (2011/C 363/02) (1) for the July round of 2018.

1

The list of the products for which a duty suspension is requested is now available on the Commission's thematic (Europa) website on the customs union (2).

2

Economic operators are also informed that the deadline for objections against new requests to reach the Commission, via the national administrations, is 12 December 2017 which is the date of the second scheduled meeting of the Economic Tariff Questions Group.

Interested operators are advised to consult the list regularly in order to be informed on the status as the requests.

More information on the autonomous tariff suspension procedure can be found on the Europa website:

http://ec.europa.eu/taxation_customs/customs/customs_duties/tariff_aspects/suspensions/index_en.htm

---

(1)  OJ C 363, 13.12.2011, p. 6.

1

(2)  http://ec.europa.eu/taxation_customs/dds2/susp/susp_home.jsp?Lang=en

2

---
UNPUBLISHED

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

No. 10-7161

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,

Plaintiff - Appellee,

v.

DEVON L. ALEXANDER,

Defendant - Appellant.

Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern 

District of Virginia, at Norfolk. Mark S. Davis, District 

Judge. (4:06-cr-00118-WDK-TEM-1)

Submitted: December 16, 2010 Decided: December 28, 2010

Before GREGORY, DUNCAN, and DAVIS, Circuit Judges.

Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion.

Devon L. Alexander, Appellant Pro Se. Howard Jacob Zlotnick, 

Assistant United States Attorney, Newport News, Virginia, for 

Appellee.

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.
2

PER CURIAM:

Devon L. Alexander appeals the district court’s orders 

denying his motion to dismiss his indictment and motion to 

reconsider. The district court also considered Alexander’s 

motion as one for a new trial under Fed. R. Crim. P. 33. We 

have reviewed the record and find no reversible error. 

Accordingly, we affirm for the reasons stated by the district 

court. United States v. Alexander, No. 4:06-cr-00118-WDK-TEM-1 

(E.D. Va. June 23, 2010 & July 13, 2010). We deny Alexander’s 

motion to compel. 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.

AFFIRMED
Levar BROWN, Petitioner, v. CALIFORNIA

No. 18-9813

Supreme Court of the United States.

October 7, 2019

Petition for writ of certiorari to the Supreme Court of California denied.
Unassociated Document


Exhibit 10.7


 


May 1, 2012







George T. Gamble 1991 Trust


c/o G. Thomas Gamble, Trustee


P.O. Box 128


Oakville, CA 94562







Re:           Termination of ORRI Payment Deferral Side Letter







Dear Tom:







On behalf of Tri-Valley Corporation, a Delaware corporation (“Tri-Valley”), and Tri-Valley Oil & Gas Co., a California corporation (“TVOG”), we hereby acknowledge, confirm and agree that the side letter regarding payment deferral of accrued overriding royalties, dated April 3, 2012, by and among Tri-Valley, TVOG and the George T. Gamble 1991 Trust, is hereby terminated in its entirety effective as of April 3, 2012, and rendered null and void ab initio.


 


 




	  	
Sincerely,


	  	  	  
	  	  	  
	  	
Tri-Valley Oil & Gas Co.


	  	  	  
	  	  	  
	  	
By: /s/ Maston N. Cunningham


	  	  	
Maston N. Cunningham, President


	  	  	
    and Chief Executive Officer


	  	  	  
	  	  	  
	  	
Tri-Valley Corporation


	  	  	  
	  	  	  
	  	
By: /s/ Maston N. Cunningham


	  	  	
Maston N. Cunningham, President


	  	  	
    and Chief Executive Officer
```
 
 
CRUDE OIL, LIGHT SWEET - ICE FUTURES EUROPE                          Code-067411
FUTURES ONLY POSITIONS AS OF 11/19/13                         |
--------------------------------------------------------------| NONREPORTABLE
      NON-COMMERCIAL      |   COMMERCIAL    |      TOTAL      |   POSITIONS
--------------------------|-----------------|-----------------|-----------------
  LONG  | SHORT  |SPREADS |  LONG  | SHORT  |  LONG  | SHORT  |  LONG  | SHORT
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
(CONTRACTS OF 1,000 BARRELS)                         OPEN INTEREST:      569,662
COMMITMENTS
 109,018   22,817  159,444  279,196  361,674  547,658  543,935   22,004   25,727

CHANGES FROM 11/12/13 (CHANGE IN OPEN INTEREST:     -5,081)
  13,761   -6,547   -2,709  -17,373    4,309   -6,321   -4,947    1,240     -134

PERCENT OF OPEN INTEREST FOR EACH CATEGORY OF TRADERS
    19.1      4.0     28.0     49.0     63.5     96.1     95.5      3.9      4.5

NUMBER OF TRADERS IN EACH CATEGORY (TOTAL TRADERS:      147)
      40       34       57       67       56      140      118
```

----

Updated November 22, 2013
# Fourth Court of Appeals
San Antonio, Texas

August 9, 201 8

No. 04

- 16

- 00630

- CR & 04

- 16

- 00631

- CR

Cody Lon SMITH

, Appellant

v.

The STATE of Texas, Appellee

From the 198th Judicial District Court, Kerr County, Texas

Trial Court No. B

- 07

- 057 & B

- 15

- 631 Honorable Rex Emerson, Judge Presiding



### O R D E R

The State’s brief was originally due July 6, 2018; however, the court granted an extension of time to file the brief until August 6, 2018. The State has filed a motion requesting an additional twenty

- one days, until August 27, 2018, to file the brief.

W e grant the motion and order the State’s brief due August 27, 2018 . Counsel is adv ised that no further extensions of time will be granted absent a motion, filed by the date the brief is due, that (1) demonstrates extraordinary circumstances justifying further delay, (2) advises the court of the efforts counsel has expended in preparing the brief, and (3) provides the court reasonable assurance that the brief will be completed and filed by the requested extended deadline. The court does not generally consider a heavy work schedule to be an extraordinary circumstance. If the brief or a co nforming motion is not filed by the date ordered, the court submit the appeal without a State’s brief.

_________________________________ Luz Elena D. Chapa, JusticeIN WITNESS WHEREOF, I have hereunto set my hand and affixed the seal of the said

court on this 9th day of August, 2018

.

___________________________________ K eith E. H ottle Clerk of Court
Charles Thomas YOUNG, Petitioner, v. Andrew M. SAUL, Commissioner of Social Security.

No. 19-7193

Supreme Court of the United States.

February 24, 2020

Petition for writ of certiorari to the United States Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit denied.
Harry Eugene BRISCOE, petitioner, v. LaShann EPPINGER, Warden.

No. 18-8237.

Supreme Court of the United States

July 15, 2019.

Petition for rehearing denied.
AO 440 (Rev. 06/12) Summons in a Civil Action

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

for the

__________ District of __________ 

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

Plaintiff(s)

v. Civil Action No.

Defendant(s)

SUMMONS IN A CIVIL ACTION

To: (Defendant’s name and address)

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:

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

Eastern District of Texas

TOM HUSSEY PHOTOGRAPHY, LLC

4:24-CV-00092

AVENDELLE ASSISTED LIVING LLC and

ASSURGENT, LLC d/b/a FRONTIER MARKETING

ASSURGENT, LLC d/b/a FRONTIER MARKETING

3204 Long Prairie Rd., Suite B

Flower Mound, TX 75022

Daniel DeSouza, Esq.

Copycat Legal PLLC

3111 N. University Drive, Suite 301

Coral Springs, FL 33065

2/1/2024

Case 4:24-cv-00092-ALM Document 5 Filed 02/01/24 Page 1 of 2 PageID #: 45
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) .

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

on (date) ; or

u 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

u 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

u I returned the summons unexecuted because ; or

u 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:

4:24-CV-00092

0.00

Case 4:24-cv-00092-ALM Document 5 Filed 02/01/24 Page 2 of 2 PageID #: 46
Jerome A. CHRISTMON, petitioner, v. B&B AIRPARTS, INC.

No. 18-5712.

Supreme Court of the United States

Oct. 29, 2018.

Petition for writ of certiorari to the United States Court of Appeals for the Tenth Circuit denied.
Claudius L. FINCHER, Petitioner, v. UNITED STATES.

No. 19-6230

Supreme Court of the United States.

March 2, 2020

Petition for writ of certiorari to the United States Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit denied.
Max Edward WEBB, Petitioner, v. Lorie DAVIS, Director, Texas Department of Criminal Justice, Correctional Institutions Division.

No. 18-9646

Supreme Court of the United States.

October 7, 2019

Petition for writ of certiorari to the United States Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit denied.
Gwendolyn GABRIEL, Petitioner, v. MERRY OUTLAW.

No. 19-8007.

Supreme Court of the United States.

May 18, 2020

Petition for writ of certiorari to the Court of Appeals of Texas, Fifth District denied.
No. 6:24-cv-00037

Jonathan Pendelton,

Plaintiff,

v.

FNU Johnson et al.,

Defendants.

ORDER

Plaintiff Jonathan Pendelton, a prisoner proceeding pro se, filed 

this civil suit without paying the filing fee. The case was referred to 

United States Magistrate Judge John D. Love pursuant to 28 U.S.C. 

§ 636(b).

On April 22, 2024, the magistrate judge issued a report recommending that this case be dismissed without prejudice due to plaintiff’s failure to comply with the court’s order to file an amended 

complaint and pay the filing fee or submit an application to proceed 

in forma pauperis. Docs. 4, 6. A copy of the report was mailed to 

plaintiff, who received it on April 29, 2024. Doc. 8. Plaintiff did not 

file written objections.

When no party objects to the magistrate judge’s report and recommendation, the court reviews it only for clear error. See Douglass 

v. United Servs. Auto. Ass’n, 79 F.3d 1415, 1420 (5th Cir. 1996). Having reviewed the magistrate judge’s report, and being satisfied that it 

contains no clear error, the court accepts its findings and recommendation. This case is dismissed without prejudice.

So ordered by the court on June 10, 2024.

J. CAMPBELL BARKER

United States District Judge

Case 6:24-cv-00037-JCB-JDL Document 9 Filed 06/10/24 Page 1 of 1 PageID #: 39
```

```

----

Updated November 29, 2014
- 1 -

No. 6:23-cv-00417

Richard David Peterson,

Plaintiff,

v.

Gregg County Sheriff Office et al.,

Defendants.

ORDER

Plaintiff Richard David Peterson, an inmate of the Gregg 

County Jail proceeding pro se, filed a complaint alleging violations 

of his constitutional rights in jail. The case was referred to United 

States Magistrate Judge K. Nicole Mitchell pursuant to 28 U.S.C. 

§ 636(b). 

All defendants other than Joshua Mason were dismissed by a 

previous order. Doc. 16. On September 10, 2024, the magistrate 

judge issued a report recommending that the remainder of plaintiff’s case be dismissed without prejudice due to his failure to effect timely service of process upon defendant Mason. Doc. 36. 

Plaintiff filed a letter, which the court construes to be written objections to the report. Doc. 37.

The court reviews the objected-to portions of a magistrate 

judge’s report and recommendation de novo. See Fed. R. Civ. P. 

72(b)(3); 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1). The magistrate judge recommended dismissal because plaintiff has not served the remaining 

defendant, and the time to do so expired. Doc. 36. As the court 

previously explained, even when the United States Marshal is ordered to carry out service, it is plaintiff’s responsibility to provide

defendant’s correct address. Doc. 34 at 1–2. The court’s reasonable efforts to obtain defendant Mason’s address failed when the 

last known address provided by the Gregg County Sheriff turned 

out to be no longer valid. See Docs. 22, 26, 28, 33.

Case 6:23-cv-00417-JCB-KNM Document 39 Filed 12/12/24 Page 1 of 2 PageID #:

158
- 2 -

In his objection, plaintiff confirms that he is unable to determine defendant Mason’s address and suggests that the court 

should have the marshals service locate him through “their computer database or Google or FBI files.” Doc. 37 at 1. Plaintiff is 

mistaken in his belief that the marshal has access to any comprehensive database of the current address of everyone in the country, or that a simple Google search with only a name can produce 

a current address for defendant. Neither the court nor the marshal 

has the responsibility or resources to act as plaintiff’s investigator 

in this matter.

Having reviewed the magistrate judge’s report de novo, and 

being satisfied that it contains no error, the court overrules plaintiff’s objections and accepts the report’s findings and recommendation. Plaintiff’s claims against defendant Mason are dismissed 

without prejudice for failure to effect timely service. All pending 

motions are denied as moot.

So ordered by the court on December 12, 2024.

J. CAMPBELL BARKER

United States District Judge

Case 6:23-cv-00417-JCB-KNM Document 39 Filed 12/12/24 Page 2 of 2 PageID #:

159