alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
Citigroup Mortgage Loan Trust Inc.
Asset-Backed Pass-Through Certificates, Series 2006-HE1

Schedule of Year-To-Date Principal and Interest
Distributions to Certificateholders for 2006

Class      Interest            Principal            Realized           Ending
          Distribution            Paid               Losses            Balance

Al        8,638,673.43      210,887,655.21           0.00       110,302,344.79
A2        3,112,964.96                0.00           0.00        77,535,000.00
A3        2,939,580.88                0.00           0.00        72,402,000.00
A4        2,146,225.21                0.00           0.00        51,994,000.00
CE        9,682,506.59              584.44           0.00        14,896,823.42
M1        1,185,465.61                0.00           0.00        28,408,000.00
M10         522,993.89                0.00           0.00         9,007,000.00
M11         422,424.85                0.00           0.00         7,275,000.00
M2        1,100,690.92                0.00           0.00        26,329,000.00
M3          668,608.02                0.00           0.00        15,936,000.00
M4          607,702.24                0.00           0.00        14,204,000.00
M5          581,104.23                0.00           0.00        13,511,000.00
M6          499,432.23                0.00           0.00        11,432,000.00
M7          522,704.81                0.00           0.00        11,086,000.00
M8          455,123.98                0.00           0.00         9,354,000.00
M9          464,034.68                0.00           0.00         8,315,000.00
P         3,655,434.45                0.00           0.00               100.00
R                 0.00                0.00           0.00                 0.00
RX                0.00                0.00           0.00                 0.00
#### Alex WELCH v. Newman H. DE BRITTON.*

No. 1253.

Court of Appeal of Louisiana. First Circuit.

Dec. 4, 1933.

Jos. A. Loret and J. D. Womack, both of Baton Rouge, for appellant.

Taylor, Porter & Brooks, of Baton Rouge, for appellee.

LE BLANC, Judge.

This is a companion case to that of Mrs. Estelle Garrison Warner v. Newman DeBritton, 151 So. 239, in which an opinion and decree were this day handed down by the court. It was consolidated with that case and that of Brooks Welch v. Newman DeBritton, 151 So. 241, for the purpose of trial in the lower court and for argument in this court.

For the reasons stated in the opinion in the case of Mrs. Estelle Garrison Warner v. Newman DeBritton, it is ordered, that the judgment appealed from in this ease be and the isame is hereby affirmed at the appellant’s costs.
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 Annual Report of China Tel Group, Inc. ("Company") on Form
10-K/A for the year ended December 31, 2009, as filed with the Securities and
Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the "Report"), I, George Alvarez, Chief
Executive Officer of the Company, hereby certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. §. 1350,
as adopted pursuant to § 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002,
that:




(i) the
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 this Report fairly presents, in all material respects,
the financial condition and result of operations of the Company.







Date: June
      28, 2010
            By:
            /s/ George
      AlvarezGeorge
      Alvarez, Chief Executive Officer





A signed
original of this written statement required by Section 906, or other document
authenticating, acknowledging, or otherwise adopting the signature that appears
in typed form within the electronic version of this written statement has been
provided to the Company and will be retained by the Company and furnished to the
Securities and Exchange Commission or its staff upon
request.
#### ABP PATENT HOLDINGS, LLC, Plaintiff-Appellant, v. CONVERGENT LABEL TECHNOLOGY, INC., Defendant-Appellee, and Moore North America, Inc., Defendant.

No. 02-1268.

United States Court of Appeals, Federal Circuit.

Nov. 13, 2002.

*992Before PAULINE NEWMAN, RADER, and PROST, Circuit Judges.

JUDGMENT

PER CURIAM.

This CAUSE having been heard and considered, it is ORDERED and ADJUDGED: *AFFIRMED. See*Fed. Cir. R. 36
176 La. 639

#### FUTCH v. FUTCH.

No. 31864.

Supreme Court of Louisiana.

Jan. 30, 1933.

Rehearing Denied Feb. 27, 1933.

Reid & Reid, of Hammond, for appellant.

W. B. Kemp and Shelby Reid, both of Amite, for appellee.

LAND, Justice.

Plaintiff brought the present suit for separation from bed and board because of repeated beatings inflicted upon her by defendant, and numerous threats to kill her made by him.

She claims alimony for herself and minor child, aged 7, in the sum of $150 per month, and also seeks to recover $5,500 as her separate funds used by the community.

She prays for the permanent custody of hex-minor child, and for a partition of the property belonging to the community existing between her and her husband.

The answer filed by defendant denies all of the allegations of the petition, except the marriage and the birth of the child, which are admitted.

At the eleventh hour, on the morning of the *319trial, defendant filed a supplemental answer in which he pleaded condonation.

The trial judge rendered judgment in favor of plaintiff, awarding her a separation, the permanent custody of her minor child, alimony in the sum of $80 per month, commencing with the date of the filing of this suit, January 14,1932, $2,500 as separate funds belonging to her, which were used by the community, and decreeing a partition by licitation of all of the property belonging to the community.

From this judgment defendant has appealed.

It developed, on the trial of the case, that plaintiff had received only $2,500 from the succession of her father, instead of $5,500, as alleged in her petition; the remainder of $3,000 having been received by plaintiff as dividends on stock owned by her. The court ruled out all testimony as to dividends and allowed only the $2,500. Another suit has been filed by plaintiff for the dividends, and therefore the question of the $2,500 only is before this court. The evidence satisfies us that this amount was received by the husband.

We do not find any good reason to change the amount of the alimony per month allowed to plaintiff and her minor child, as the same does not seem to be escessive.

Defendant’s plea of condonation was properly overruled, as the evidence fails to show any resumption or renewal of the former marriage relation after plaintiff separated from the defendant. Martin v. Martin, 151 La. 530, 92 So. 46.

The alleged cruel treatment of plaintiff by defendant, although denied by him, is proved, in our opinion, by a fair preponderance of the evidence in the case.

Defendant has filed no brief and has made no appearance in this court to contest the correctness of the judgment rendered against him in any particular.

Judgment affirmed.
#### NICHOLAS CAMARATA, Inc., Plaintiff and Appellee, v. Charles JUAN, Defendant and Appellant.

No. 14277.

Court of Appeal of Louisiana. Orleans.

Nov. 28, 1932.

Walter M. Barnett, Jr., of New Orleans, for appellee.

JANVIER, J.

Plaintiff company sues for $198.31, alleged to be the balance due for merchandise sold and delivered to defendant, who admits that the amount claimed represents the correct unpaid balance, 'but asserts that plaintiff, through its president, agreed to accept settlement at the rate of $50 per month. The evidence shows that an agreement was made under which defendant was to pay $50 each fifteen days, but it also shows that the said agreement has not been complied with.

The entire balance is, therefore, due and the judgment rendered below is correct

Plaintiff, in answer to the appeal, has prayed for damages at 10 per cent, of the amount of the- judgment, claiming that the appeal was frivolous and was taken solely for the purpose of securing additional delay.

There is nothing in the record to warrant the faintest hope that a reversal of the judgment mighf be secured on appeal, and it is very evident that the appeal was taken solely to delay final payment and the damages asked should be allowed.

The judgment appealed from is amended by the allowance to plaintiff and appellee of 10 per cent, damages for frivolous appeal, and as thus amended,’ it is affirmed.

Amended and affirmed.
## I N T H E C O U R T O F C R I M I N A L A P P E A L S O F T E X A S NO. WR-91,859-01

EX P ARTE JAMES FLORES, Appl icant

ON AP P LICATION FOR A WRIT OF HABEAS CORP US CAUSE NO. 2018-415,113-A IN THE 137TH DIST RICT COURT

F ROM LUBBOCK COUN TY

Per curiam . O R D E R Applicant was convicted of failure to reg ister as a sex off ender with a prior conviction and sentenc ed to f

our y ear s’ imprisonment. Applicant did not file a direc t appea l. Applicant filed this application for a writ of habea s corpus in the county of conviction, and the district cler k forwa rded it to thi s Court. See T E X . C O D E C R I M . P R O C . art. 11.07. Applicant alleg es t h at his offe nse was a state-jail felony and not a second- deg ree felony , resulting in his four- y ear sentenc e being outside the applica ble punishment rang e. The trial court, with the State’s ag ree ment, recommends g ranting habea s relief

. But the trial court has made contra dictory finding s reg arding Applicant’s previous convictions. Ba sed on the rec ord, it appea rs that Applicant does in fac t ha ve a previous conviction for failure to r eg ister, which would indicate2

that his offe nse wa s a third-de g ree felony at the mi nimum. Ex parte Parrot , 396 S.W .3d 531, 539 (Tex. Crim. App. 2013). Acc ording ly , the rec ord should be develope d. The t ri al court is the appropr iate for

um for finding s of fact. T E X . C O D E C R I M . P R O C . art. 11.07, § 3(d). The trial court

s h al l order trial counsel to respond to Applicant’s claim. I n developing the rec ord, the trial court may use any means set out in Article 11.07, § 3(d). I f the trial court elec ts to hold a hear ing, it shall deter mine whether Applicant is indige nt. I f Applicant is indige nt and want s t o be repr esente d by counsel, the trial court shall appoint counsel to re prese nt [ him/her] at the hear ing. See T E X . C O D E C R I M . P R O C . art. 26.04. I f counsel is appointed or reta ined, the trial court shall immediately notify this Court of counsel’s name

. The trial court shall make findings o f fa ct and conclusions of l aw as to whether Applicant had a previous conviction for failure to reg ister prior to this offe nse date. The trial court shall make finding s of fac t a

nd conclusions of law as to w hether , if he does in f act have a previous conviction for failure to reg ister, he can show harm in the sentenc e he rec eived in this case . The trial court may make any other finding s and conclusions that it deems appropr iate in response to Applicant’s claims. The trial court shall make findings of fac t and co n clusions of l aw within ninety day s from the date of this order

. The district cler k shall then immediately forwa rd to this Court the trial court’s finding s and conclusions and the rec ord develope d on rema nd, including, among other things, aff idavits, motions, objections, proposed finding s and conclusions, order s, and transcr ipts from hear ings and depositions. See T E X . R. A P P . P. 73.4(b)( 4). Any extensions of time must be reque sted by the trial cour

t and obtained f

rom this Court. Filed: Mar ch 31, 2021 Do not publish
EXHIBIT 99.5



REPORT ON FORM 8K





UNITED STATES

SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION

Washington, D.C. 20549





FORM 8-K





CURRENT REPORT

Pursuant to Section 13 OR 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934





Date of report (Date of earliest event reported) September 2, 2006

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

HIGH END VENTURES, INC.

(Name of Small Business issuer in its charter)





COLORAD0133-13391620-343739 1

(State or other jurisdiction of            (Commission File No.)    (IRS Employer

incorporation or organization)                                                 Identification No.)





|400-7015 MacLeod Trail, South                           
|--------------------------------------------------------
|Calgary, Alberta                                        
|Canada                                           T2H 2K6

(Address of principal executive offices)



(403) 461-7283

(Registrants telephone number)

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









Item 8 01. Other Events



On  September 2, 2006 the Board of Directors of the registrant passed unanimously a resolution authorizing a forward split of the issued and outstanding shares on a five to one (5 - 1) basis bringing the total common shares issued and outstanding to 15,850,000.



In another resolution passed at the same meeting, Mr. Nadir Walji was appointed to the Board of Directors to serve until the next annual meeting of the Registrant and was elected by the Board to serve as Secretary Treasurer and Chief Accounting Officer.



A copy of the minutes of the meeting is including in this document as Exhibit 99.1



ITEM 9.01. FINANCIAL STATEMENTS AND EXHIBITS.





EXHIBITS



99.1

Board Minutes  September 2, 2006.





SIGNATURES



Pursuant to the requirements of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, the registrant has duly caused this report to be signed on its behalf by the undersigned hereunto duly authorized.



September 2, 2006



High End Ventures, Inc.



/s/ Thomas Forzani



Thomas Forzani, President



/s/Nadir Walji

Nadir Walji, Secretary/Treasurer
Exhibit 15





PRICEWATERHOUSECOOPERS LLP



Securities and Exchange Commission
450 Fifth Street, N.W.
Washington, D.C.  20549


Ladies and Gentlemen:

We are aware that Phelps Dodge  Corporation  has  incorporated  by reference our
report dated October 12, 1998 (issued pursuant to the provisions of Statement on
Auditing  Standards  No.  71)  appearing  on  page 7 of the  Form  10-Q  for the
quarterly period ended September 30, 1998 in the Prospectus constituting part of
its Registration Statement and Post-Effective  Amendment No. 1 on Form S-3 (Nos.
33-44380 and  333-36415)  and in the  Registration  Statements on Form S-8 (Nos.
33-26442, 33-6141, 33-26443,  33-29144,  33-19012, 2-67317, 33-34363,  33-34362,
33-62648,  333-42231 and 333-52175).  We are also aware of our  responsibilities
under the Securities Act of 1933.


Yours very truly,




PricewaterhouseCoopers LLP
Phoenix, Arizona
November 9, 1998
EXHIBIT 32.1
                            CERTIFICATION PURSUANT TO
                                 18 U.S.C. 1350,
                             AS ADOPTED PURSUANT TO
                  SECTION 906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002


In connection with the Annual Report of ONLINE  ORIGINALS,  INC. (the "Company")
on Form  10-KSB  for the  period  ended  November  30,  2007,  as filed with the
Securities and Exchange  Commission on the date hereof (the  "Report"),  I, Gaye
Adams,  Chief Executive Officer of the Company,  certify,  pursuant to 18 U.S.C.
1350,  as adopted  pursuant  to Section 906 of the  Sarbanes-Oxley  Act of 2002,
that:

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

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



Date: March 13, 2008


By:       /s/ Gaye Adams
         -----------------------------
         Gaye Adams
         Chief Executive Officer, principal executive officer
Fourth Court of Appeals

San Antonio, Texas

December 29, 2022

No. 04-22-00703-CV

Terrick L. ALSBROOKS,

Appellant

v.

CHERISH REALTY SOLUTIONS LLC ET AL,

Appellees

From the County Court at Law No. 3, Bexar County, Texas

Trial Court No. 2022CV02415

Honorable David J. Rodriguez, Judge Presiding

O R D E R

On December 22, 2022, the trial court clerk notified this court that the clerk’s record was 

not filed when it was originally due because appellant had failed to pay or make arrangements to 

pay the clerk’s fee for preparing the record and that appellant was not entitled to appeal without 

paying the fee.

It is therefore ORDERED that appellant provide written proof to this court within ten

(10) days of the date of this order that appellant has filed a designation of clerk’s record with the

trial court clerk and that either (1) the clerk’s fee has been paid or arrangements have been made

to pay the clerk’s fee, or (2) appellant is entitled to appeal without paying the clerk’s fee. If

appellant fails to respond within the time provided, this appeal will be dismissed for want of

prosecution. See TEX. R. APP. P. 37.3(b).

_________________________________

Rebeca C. Martinez, Chief Justice
IN WITNESS WHEREOF, I have hereunto set my hand and affixed the seal of the said 

court on this 29th day of December, 2022.

___________________________________

MICHAEL A. CRUZ, Clerk of Court
## IN THE COUR T OF CRIM INA L A PPEA LS
OF TEXA S

N O

. P D

- 0 2 1 3

- 2 1

S C O T T H U D D L E S T O N
, A p p e l l a n t

v

.

T H E S T A T E O F T E X A S

O N S T A T E ’ S P E T I T I O N F O R D I S C R E T I O N A R Y R E V I E W

F R O M T H E E L E V E N T H C O U R T O F A P P E A L S

J O N E S C O U N T Y

P e r C u r i a m

.

O R D E R

T h e S t a t e h a s f

i l e d a p e t i t i o n f

o r d i s c r e t i o n a r y r e v i e w i n t h i s c a s e

. T o d a y , w e g r a n t

t h e S t a t e ’ s p e t i t i o n a n d w e d e t e r m i n e t h a t t h i s c a s e s h a l l p r o c e e d o n a n e x p e d i t e d b r i e f i n g

s c h e d u l e

. A c c o r d i n g l y , t h e S t a t e ’ s b r i e f s h a l l b e f i l e d o n o r b e f

o r e t e n d a y s f

r o m t h e d a t e

o f t h i s o r d e r

. A p p e l l a n t ’ s b r i e f s h a l l b e f i l e d o n o r b e f

o r e t e n d a y s a f

t e r t h e S t a t e ’ s b r i e f

.

N o e x t e n s i o n s w i l l b e g r a n t e d

.

D e l i v e r e d M a y 1 9

, 2 0 2 1

P u b l i s h
|   | **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 Annual Report on Form 10-KSB for the period ended December 31, 2007            of PlasmaTech, Inc., a Nevada corporation (the “Company”), as filed with            the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the “Annual            Report”), I, Christopher J. Brough, Chairman, President and Chief Financial            Officer of the Company certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350 as adopted pursuant            to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that:

 

1.            The Annual Report fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) or15(d) of the            Securities and Exchange Act of 1934, as amended; and

 

2.            The information contained in this Annual Report fairly presents, in all material            respects, the financial condition and results of operation of the Company.

 

Date: March 18, 2008

 

/s/ David A. Saltrelli

David A. Saltrelli

President, Secretary Treasurer, Principal Executive Officer,

Principal Financial Officer and Director
I 

117TH CONGRESS 

1ST SESSION H. R. 6199 

To revise the boundary of the Ste. Genevieve National Historical Park in 

the State of Missouri, and for other purposes. 

IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES 

DECEMBER 8, 2021 

Mr. SMITH of Missouri introduced the following bill; which was referred to the 

Committee on Natural Resources 

A BILL 

To revise the boundary of the Ste. Genevieve National Historical Park in the State of Missouri, and for other 

purposes. 

1 Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representa2 tives of the United States of America in Congress assembled, 

3 SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE. 

4 This Act may be cited as the ‘‘Ste. Genevieve Na5 tional Historical Park Boundary Revision Act’’. 

6 SEC. 2. STE. GENEVIEVE NATIONAL HISTORICAL PARK 

7 BOUNDARY REVISION. 

8 (a) MAP.—Section 7134(a)(3) of appendix C of the 

9 Consolidated Appropriations Act, 2018 (16 U.S.C. 

10 410xxx(a)(3)), is amended by striking ‘‘numbered 571/ 


pbinns on DSKJLVW7X2PROD with BILLS
2 

•HR 6199 IH

1 149,942, and dated December 2018’’ and inserting ‘‘num2 bered 571/177,464, and dated September 2021’’. 

3 (b) AUTHORITY TO CORRECT ERRORS IN MAP.—Sec4 tion 7134(d) of appendix C of the Consolidated Appropria5 tions Act, 2018 (16 U.S.C. 410xxx(d)), is amended— 

6 (1) by striking ‘‘The Map’’ and inserting the 

7 following: 

8 ‘‘(1) IN GENERAL.—The Map’’; and 

9 (2) by adding at the end the following: 

10 ‘‘(2) AUTHORITY TO CORRECT ERRORS.—The 

11 Secretary may correct any clerical or typographical 

12 errors in the Map.’’. 

13 (c) VISITOR CENTER.—Section 7134(e) of appendix 

14 C of the Consolidated Appropriations Act, 2018 (16 

15 U.S.C. 410xxx(e)), is amended by adding at the end the 

16 following: 

17 ‘‘(3) VISITOR CENTER.—The Secretary— 

18 ‘‘(A) may acquire, by donation, the land 

19 (including any improvements to the land) 

20 owned by the city of Ste. Genevieve, Missouri, 

21 and used as the visitor center for the Historical 

22 Park, as generally depicted on the Map as ‘Pro23 posed Boundary Addition’; and 

24 ‘‘(B) on acquisition of the land described 

25 in subparagraph (A), shall revise the boundary 


pbinns on DSKJLVW7X2PROD with BILLS
3 

•HR 6199 IH

1 of the Historical Park to include the acquired 

2 land.’’. 

Æ 


pbinns on DSKJLVW7X2PROD with BILLS
#### Stephen G. POWERS, Petitioner, v. DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVY, Respondent.

No. 03-3017.

United States Court of Appeals, Federal Circuit.

Aug. 8, 2003.

Before LOURIE, RADER, and BRYSON, Circuit Judges.

*JUDGMENT*

PER CURIAM.

This CAUSE having been heard and considered, it is ORDERED and ADJUDGED:

*68
      *AFFIRMED. See*Fed. Cir. R. 36.