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

                            CERTIFICATION PURSUANT TO
            RULE 13a-14(b) UNDER THE SECURITIES EXCHANGE ACT OF 1934
                           AND 18 U.S.C. SECTION 1350
                             AS ADOPTED PURSUANT TO
                  SECTION 906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002


     In connection  with  Amendment No. 1 to the quarterly  report of Manchester
Technologies, Inc. (the "Company") on Form 10-Q/A for the period ended April 30,
2005, as filed with the  Securities  and Exchange  Commission on the date hereof
(the "Report"),  I, Barry R. Steinberg,  Chief Executive Officer of the Company,
certify,  to the best of my  knowledge,  pursuant  to Rule  13a-14(b)  under the
Securities Exchange Act of 1934 and 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
     respect, the financial condition and results of operations of the Company.



Date:   July 5, 2005                                /S/ Barry R. Steinberg
                                                     -----------------------
                                                     Barry R. Steinberg
                                                     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
required by Section 906, 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.
#### John A. GRIFFITHS, Plaintiff-Appellant, v. UNITED STATES of America, Defendant-Appellee.

No. 03-1058.

United States Court of Appeals, Fourth Circuit.

Submitted July 31, 2003.

Decided Aug. 25, 2003.

John A. Griffiths, Appellant Pro Se. Lawrence Richard Leonard, Assistant United States Attorney, Norfolk, Virginia, for Appellee.

Before MICHAEL and GREGORY, Circuit Judges, and HAMILTON, Senior Circuit Judge.

Affirmed by unpublished PER CURIAM opinion.

PER CURIAM.

John A. Griffiths appeals the district court’s order accepting the recommendation of the magistrate judge to dismiss his *998complaint for lack of subject matter jurisdiction due to his failure to exhaust administrative appeal remedies. We have reviewed the record and find no reversible error. Accordingly, we affirm on the reasoning of the district court. *See Griffiths v. United States,*No. CA-02-27-4 (E.D.Va. Jul. 23, 2002). 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.*
8

A.4. Average Maturity of Non-real-estate Bank Loans Made to FarmersMonths

Size of loan Si

Purpose of loan (thousands of dollars) 

Other Farm 

current machinery 1 10 25 100

All Feeder Other operating and to to to and Sma

Period loans livestock livestock expenses1 equipment Other2 9 24 99 over mid-

1992...... 8.9 6.1 9.5 8.6 20.1 9.4 8.3 9.7 11.1 7.2 1993...... 9.2 7.3 9.6 8.3 30.4 9.4 8.5 10.0 11.1 7.4 1994...... 10.3 7.6 9.8 8.6 36.6 9.4 8.6 11.6 13.5 7.2 1995...... 9.9 8.7 9.9 8.5 26.5 10.0 9.0 10.8 12.1 8.2 1996...... 8.5 7.8 11.3 7.6 29.4 9.2 8.6 10.5 12.1 7.3 1997...... 9.9 9.1 11.0 10.7 30.6 7.4 8.8 11.6 12.4 8.8 1998...... 9.8 8.0 10.3 9.9 27.5 6.8 8.8 11.3 12.5 8.7 1999...... 11.5 8.0 11.0 11.3 20.1 10.5 9.8 11.2 12.4 11.4 2000...... 11.2 8.0 10.8 9.5 22.4 13.2 9.7 11.5 11.1 11.4 2001...... 13.2 8.5 14.0 10.3 24.3 15.3 9.6 11.9 12.5 14.1 2002...... 11.2 8.6 11.5 10.2 23.3 11.7 9.4 10.9 12.5 10.8 2003...... 12.5 8.5 9.4 11.1 26.5 14.4 9.5 11.2 12.7 12.9 2001: Q1... 18.7 8.7 18.6 12.4 30.6 25.9 9.9 13.3 13.5 23.0  Q2... 11.8 8.1 16.9 10.2 14.0 12.8 11.1 11.9 12.5 11.6  Q3... 11.0 6.8 10.7 8.6 32.3 11.3 9.1 11.2 11.8 10.9  Q4... 10.6 9.5 9.8 9.6 31.4 9.9 7.6 11.1 12.1 10.3 2002: Q1... 11.7 9.3 9.7 10.9 29.8 10.8 10.0 12.4 14.6 10.3  Q2... 13.4 11.3 19.6 10.6 27.7 16.8 10.2 12.6 14.2 13.8  Q3... 9.9 6.3 8.0 9.8 12.7 10.6 9.4 9.4 10.6 9.7  Q4... 9.5 7.3 8.8 9.1 32.8 9.3 7.7 8.3 9.7 9.8 2003: Q1... 14.1 8.8 11.3 11.8 35.2 14.2 10.4 11.7 15.5 14.3  Q2... 13.5 6.9 9.0 13.7 21.1 15.0 10.3 12.4 13.3 14.5  Q3... 10.4 8.4 6.4 8.9 21.1 12.4 9.2 10.3 11.1 10.3  Q4... 11.4 9.0 9.9 9.4 24.0 15.7 7.9 10.4 10.6 12.3 2004: Q1... 14.1 7.9 12.4 11.6 28.9 16.8 9.8 12.9 16.0 13.9  Q2... 10.4 8.6 10.5 10.3 18.4 9.2 10.8 11.9 12.2 9.5  Q3... 10.4 7.1 10.6 8.8 27.2 7.0 9.6 12.9 11.7 9.8  Note. Data are estimates from the Federal Reserve System’s Survey of the Terms of Bank Lending to Farmers. Quarterly estimates annual rate and are based on loans made during the first full week of the second month of the quarter. 1. Loans used primarily to finance such items as current crop production expenses and the care and feeding of livestock (including p 2. Typically loans for which the lender does not know the purpose. 3. Portfolios with $25 million or less in farm loans. 4. Portfolios with more than $25 million in farm loans.
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE

DISTRICT OF NEW HAMPSHIRE

Joel L. Smith

v. Civil No. 07-cv-408-SM

NH Department of Corrections,

Commissioner, et al.

O R D E R

Plaintiff’s request to proceed in forma pauperis is granted,

but pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1915, as amended, the filing fee must

be paid as follows: the sum of $40.78 is due no later than

January 20, 2008. In addition, 20% of each preceding month’s

income credited to plaintiff’s account to be remitted by the NH

State Prison for Men when the amount in the account exceeds

$10.00 until the sum of $350.00 has been paid. Failure to pay

the fee as ordered will result in dismissal of the action without

prejudice. In all other respects plaintiff’s request for in

forma pauperis has been granted. 

SO ORDERED.

____________________________________

James R. Muirhead

United States Magistrate Judge

Date: December 20, 2007

cc: Joel L. Smith, pro se

 Bonnie S. Reed, Financial Administrator

 NH State Prison for Men, Inmate Accounts

Case 1:07-cv-00408-SM Document 4 Filed 12/20/07 Page 1 of 1
#### GENCO v. UNION BERRY & TRUCK ASS’N.

No. 1584.

Court of Appeal of Louisiana. First Circuit.

March 23, 1936.

Rownd & Tucker, of Hammond, and Mat J. Allen, of Amite, for appellant.

S. S. Reid, of Amite, for appellee.

OTT, Judge.

The ’suit is to recover $1,200 for salary during the year June 1, 1933, to June 1, 1934, at $100 per month, which plaintiff claims under a quantum meruit. The district court rendered judgment in favor of plaintiff for $1,000, and maintained a sequestration of certain property belonging to defendant.

We find in the record an order of appeal dated September 4, 1935, granting the defendant an appeal returnable to this court *889on or before October 31, 1935, suspensive upon giving "bond in the sum required by law, and devolutive upon giving bond in the sum of $100.

We have searched the record carefully, and fail to find any appeal bond in the record. Attached to the record is a certificate of the clerk of court certifying to its completeness.

Until an appeal bond is filed there is no appeal, and the lower court is not divested of jurisdiction. The filing of an appeal bond is necessary to give the appellate court jurisdiction of the appeal. Daboval v. Daboval, 3 La. 237; Vacuum Oil Co. v. Cockrell, 177 La. 623, 148 So. 898.

An order of appeal and an appeal bond are the very foundation of the appeal, and the absence of either is fatal to the appeal. The failure to file an appeal bond is jurisdictional, and the appellate court, in the absence of such a bond, will dismiss the appeal on its own motion. Louisiana State Bank v. David. N. Barrow et al., 24 La.Ann. 276. See also Gagneaux v. Desonier, 104 La. 648, 29 So. 282.

Section 9 of Act No. 112 of 1916 has no application where there has been no bond at all filed, but only prohibits the dismissal of an appeal on account of a defective or insufficient bond.

For the reasons assigned, it is ordered that the appeal be dismissed at the cost of appellant.
Case 1:07-cv-00159-SM   Document 3   Filed 05/31/07   Page 1 of 1
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 

DISTRICT OF NEBRASKA 

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA 

Plaintiff, 

 vs. 

ANTHONY OMAR BROCKMAN 

Defendant. 

8:23MJ325 

2:23CR4023 

Magistrate Judge Nelson 

 

RULE 5 ORDER 

An Indictment and Warrant (charging document) having been filed in the Western District 

of Missouri, charging the above-named defendant with (Counts 1 - 5) 18 U.S.C. § 1343 FRAUD 

BY WIRE, RADIO, OR TELEVISION, (Counts 6 - 7) 18 U.S.C.§ 215(a)(2) RECEIPT OF 

COMMISSION FOR PROCURING LOANS and (Count 8) 18 U.S.C.§ 1956(a)(1)(B)(i) MONEY 

LAUNDERING - ROBBERY, BANK and the defendant having been arrested in the District of 

Nebraska, proceedings to commit defendant to another district were held in accordance with 

Fed.R.Cr.P. Rule 5. The defendant had an initial appearance here in accordance with 

Fed.R.Cr.P.5 and was informed of the provisions of Fed.R.Cr.P.20. 

Additionally, defendant 

☒ Waived an identity hearing and admitted that he was the person named in the 

aforementioned charging document.

☒ The government did not move for detention.

☒ Was given a detention hearing in this district. 

Accordingly, it is ordered that the defendant is held to answer in the prosecuting district. 

☒ Defendant has been released in accordance with the provisions of the Bail Reform Act 

of 1984, 18 U.S.C. § 3141 et.seq. The defendant is to appear before the district court 

of the prosecuting district at such times and places as may be ordered. All funds, if 

any, deposited on behalf of this defendant with the Clerk of Court pursuant to the Bail 

Reform Act, shall be transferred to the prosecuting district.

IT IS SO ORDERED. 

 DATED: June 2, 2023. 

s/ Michael D. Nelson 

 U.S. Magistrate Judge 

8:23-mj-00325-SMB Doc # 7 Filed: 06/02/23 Page 1 of 1 - Page ID # 21
#### Jimmy Glenn CROCKER, Appellant, v. The STATE of Texas, Appellee.

No. 45141.

Court of Criminal Appeals of Texas.

Oct. 11, 1972.

Clower & Stanford by Ronald L. Clower, Dallas, for appellant.

Jim D. Vollers, State’s Atty., and Robert A. Huttash, Asst. State’s Atty., Austin, for the State.

OPINION

ROBERTS, Judge.

This is an appeal from a conviction for robbery by assault. Appellant entered a *567plea of guilty, waived his right to a jury, and punishment was assessed at twenty years.

Appellant cites two grounds of error, only one of which we need consider. Appellant contends that when he entered his guilty plea, he was not properly admonished of the consequences of such a plea. Art. 26.13, Vernon’s Ann.C.C.P. states:

> “If the defendant pleads guilty, or enters a plea of nolo contendere he shall be admonished by the court of the consequences; and neither of such pleas shall be received unless it plainly appears that he is sane, and is uninfluenced by any consideration of fear, or by any persuasion, or delusive hope of pardon, prompting him to confess his guilt.”

The record in the present case reflects the following:

> “The Court: How do you plead?

> “The Defendant: Guilty.

> The Court: I accept your plea of guilty and tell you that the punishment for robbery by assault in this State is not less than five years or any term of years in the Texas Department of Corrections. Understanding that I must set your punishment in that range in that case, do you still persist in telling me that you’re guilty?

> “The Defendant: Yes.”

This was not a full admonishment as the court did not determine whether any persuasion or delusive hope of pardon prompted appellant to confess his guilt. This Court has repeatedly held that this provision of the statute is *mandatory,*that all requirements must be met as a precedent to the validity of the plea of guilty, and compliance must be manifest of record. Ex parte Chavez, 482 S.W.2d 175 (Tex.Cr.App.1972); Miller v. State, 424 S.W.2d 430 (Tex.Cr.App.1968); Rogers v. State, 479 S.W.2d 42 (Tex.Cr.App.1972); Ex parte Humphrey, 456 S.W.2d 118 (Tex.Cr.App.1970).

At one point in the proceedings, in response to questioning by *defense counsel,*appellant responded:

> “Q Okay. Are you pleading guilty to the offense of robbery at this Safeway store on West Jefferson because you are guilty and for no other reason but that?

> “A Yes, sir.”

However, this cannot qualify as one of the required elements of Art. 26.13, V.A. C.C.P. Ex parte Battenfield, 466 S.W.2d 569 (Tex.Cr.App. 1971).

We need not consider appellant’s second ground of error.

The judgment is reversed and the cause remanded.
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-K of Northwest Oil
& Gas Trading Company, Inc. (the “Company”) for the
fiscal year ended May 31, 2019 as filed with the Securities and
Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the “Report”),
I, Joachim Haas, President and Chief Executive 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
Report fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) or
15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934; and





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





Date:
September 16, 2019


/s/
Joachim HaasJoachim
HaasPresident
and Chief Executive Officer(Principal
Executive Officer)
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE

DISTRICT OF NEW HAMPSHIRE

United States of America

v. Civil No. 08-cv-28-PB

Philip B. Spitz

O R D E R

As ordered on March 26, 2008, the government’s motion for default judgment (document

no. 7) is granted. Judgment is rendered in favor of the plaintiff, United States of America, and

against the defendant, Philip B. Spitz, in the sum of $5,158.91 (principal of $3,448.75 and interest

of $1,710.16 computed through March 18, 2008), plus interest from this date at the legal rate of

7.94% computed daily and compounded annually until paid in full.

SO ORDERED.

April 19, 2008 /s/ Justo Arenas 

Justo Arenas

United States Magistrate Judge

cc: John J. Farley, Esq.

Case 1:08-cv-00028-PB Document 8 Filed 04/19/08 Page 1 of 1
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE

DISTRICT OF NEW HAMPSHIRE

Michael Hall

v. Civil No. 07-cv-330-JM

Town of Salem et at

ORDER OF DISMISSAL

In accordance with the provisions of Local Rule 41 .1, as neither an agreement for

judgment nor a stipulation for dismissal has been filed, this case is herewith dismissed with

prejudice .

SO ORDERED.

June 2, 2009 /s/James R. Muirhead

James R. Muirhead

United States Magistrate Judge

cc: Lawrence A . Vogelman, Esq.

Brian J.S. Cullen, Esq.

Case 1:07-cv-00330-JM Document 10 Filed 06/02/09 Page 1 of 1
Held in custody 

2 U.S. Treasury securities2 ................. 594,094 592,630 678,106 754,469 772,222 788,734 810,572 845,080 869,829 898,244 908,656 

3 Earmarked gold3 ....................... 9,451 9,099 9,045 8,977 8,971 8,971 8,971 8,971 8,971 8,971 8,971 

Note. The data presented in this table are available in the monthly statistical release ‘‘U.S. 2. Marketable U.S. Treasury bills, notes, and bonds and nonmarketable U.S. Treasury 

Reserve Assets; Foreign Official Assets Held at Federal Reserve Banks,’’ on the Board’s web securities, in each case measured at face (not market) value. 

site at: www. federalreserve.gov/releases. 3. Held in foreign and international accounts and valued at $42.22 per fine troy ounce; not 

1. Excludes deposits and U.S. Treasury securities held for international and regional included in the gold stock of the United States. organizations.
**Exhibit 32.2**

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

In connection with the Quarterly Report onForm 10-Q of BPZ Energy, Inc. (the “Company”) for the quarter endedMarch 31, 2006 as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the datehereof (the “Report”), I, Edward G. Caminos, as Chief Financial Officer of theCompany, certify, pursuant to and solely for the purpose of 18 U.S.C.Section 1350, as adopted pursuant to Section 906 of theSarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, to the best of my knowledge and belief, that:

(1)   The Report fully complies with the requirements of sections 13(a) or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended; 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/ Edward G. Caminos* | * * |   |
|-------------------------|----------|--------|
| Edward G. Caminos       |     |
| Chief Financial Officer |     |
| September 26, 2006      |     |

 

1

----
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<ARTICLE> 5

<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   6-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          DEC-31-1998
<PERIOD-START>                             JAN-01-1999
<PERIOD-END>                               JUN-30-1999
<CASH>                                      12,785,000
<SECURITIES>                                         0
<RECEIVABLES>                                1,965,000
<ALLOWANCES>                                    85,000
<INVENTORY>                                    440,000
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                            15,845,000
<PP&E>                                       2,579,000
<DEPRECIATION>                                 912,000
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                              18,070,000
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                        1,388,000
<BONDS>                                              0
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                    27,526,000
<OTHER-SE>                                (11,149,000)
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                18,070,000
<SALES>                                      8,233,000
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                             8,233,000
<CGS>                                        5,016,000
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                5,692,000
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                     0
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                 1,000
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                             113,000
<INCOME-PRETAX>                            (2,362,000)
<INCOME-TAX>                                         0
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                                  0
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                               (2,362,000)
<EPS-BASIC>                                      (.37)
<EPS-DILUTED>                                    (.37)


</TABLE>
# National Farm Safety and Health Week, 2008

Agriculture has always been a vital part of America's economy and culture, and our farmers and ranchers are among the best stewards of our land.  During National Farm Safety and Health Week, we recognize those working in agriculture for their contributions to our Nation's prosperity, security, and health, and we also seek to raise awareness about the occupational hazards of this industry.

Farming and ranching are strenuous occupations, and workers can be exposed to many dangers, including those associated with extreme weather conditions, operating heavy machinery, and working with livestock.  Teaching awareness about potential dangers, implementing preventative measures, and supervising children as they work and play can help mitigate risks and reduce the number of injuries and fatalities on farms and ranches.

Our Nation's farmers and ranchers exemplify the American values of hard work, deep commitment to faith, and love of family.  During National Farm Safety and Health Week, we celebrate these extraordinary men and women who are building a prosperous future for our country.

NOW, THEREFORE, I, GEORGE W. BUSH, President of the United States of America, by virtue of the authority vested in me by the Constitution and the laws of the United States, do hereby proclaim September 21 through September 27, 2008, as National Farm Safety and Health Week.  I call upon the agencies, organizations, and businesses that serve America's agricultural workers to continue to strengthen their commitment to promoting farm safety and health programs.  I also urge all Americans to honor our agricultural heritage and to recognize our farmers and ranchers for their remarkable contributions to our Nation.

IN WITNESS WHEREOF, I have hereunto set my hand this eighteenth day of September, in the year of our Lord two thousand eight, and of the Independence of the United States of America the two hundred and thirty-third.

[FR Doc. E8-22510

Billing code 3195-01-P
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

DISTRICT OF NEW HAMPSHIRE

Drea Weber

PlaIntiff

v. Civil Action No. 1 :06-MC-058-JM

Kurt Sanborn, Play Ball Manchester , LLC, The Sanborn Group, Inc.,

Defendant ( s) Sunburn Associates

WRIT OF ATTACHMENT AND TRUSTEE PROCESS

To the Sheriff of any County or his Deputy, or any other person

We Command You to attach the following goods or estate of Kurt Sanborn, Play Ball Manchester,

LLC, The Sanborn Group, Inc., Sanborn Associates

of in the County of , and State

of New Hampshire, to the value of Eight Million, Five Hundred Thousand

dollars.

($8,500,000.00)

This attachment includes, but is not limited to, any and all property

oined by Kurt Sanborn, Play Ball Manchester, LLC, The Sanborn Group, Inc.

and Sanborn Associates

We Also Command You to attach the money, goods, chattels , rights, and credits of the said

Kurt Sanborn, Play Ball Manchester, LLC, The Sanborn Group,n nc.,dsof

Sanborn Associates

, of , in the

County of , and State of New Hampshire, to the value of

Eight Million, Five Hundred Thousand ($8, 500, 000.00 }ollars, and summons said

if to be found In your precinct , to appear

turt Sanborn P1avv Ball Manchester, LLC, The Sanborn Group, Inc., an orn ssobia e

in said COURT, within fourteen days after service upon said trustee , and show cause , if any , s/he has, why

execution should not issue against him/her for the judgment which may be recovered by said plaintiff against

principal defendant and make return of this writ, with your doings therein.

The attachment ( s) herein is/are to secure any Judgment or Decree the plaintiff may obtain in this action.

Witness, Steven J. McAuliffe, Esquire, the day of , A.D. 20

..Dre. ........... .a..Webe.r,,,,,,,,,,,,,,lndorser

By ......^S^ .........................Attorney

Craig S. Donais, Esq.

3 Executive Park Drive, $9

Bedford, NH ()3110 603-

USDCNH- 83 (4-03)
VT

RETURNS OF SERVICE

Real Estate Attachment

, SS. , 20_

I attached all the lands and tenements In the County of of the w ithin named

defendant to the extent ordered on the reverse side of this w rit, by

leaving at the office of the Register of Deeds of said County a true copy of this writ and of this, my. return,

endorsed thereon , at AM/PM.

Fees:

Deputy Sheriff

Register $

Service

Copy

Travel

Trustee Attachment

, SS. 20_

I attached the money , goods , chattels, •rights , and credits of the wlthing named defendant

In the handsand possession of

to the extent ordered on the reverse side of this writ, and summoned the said trustee to appear as within

commanded by giving in hand to/leaving at the abode of

at Street in . an attested copy of the within

writ at AM/PM.

Fees:

Deputy Sheriff

Register $

Service

Copy

Travel

Completion of Service

, SS. , 20_

I notified thewIthin named of above attachment

by giving in hand to

by leaving at the abode of

at Street In

an attested copy of this w rit , together w ith my return endorsed thereon at AM/PM

Fees:

Deputy Sheriff

Register $

Service

Copy

Travel

USDCNH- 83 (4-03)