alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
{"version":"1.0","provider_name":"NASA","provider_url":"https:\/\/www.nasa.gov","author_name":"Jim Banke","author_url":"https:\/\/www.nasa.gov\/author\/jim-bankenasa-gov\/","title":"NASA Invites You to X-59 Rollout Watch Party","type":"rich","width":600,"height":338,"html":"<blockquote class=\"wp-embedded-content\" data-secret=\"SkM8MHaACB\"><a href=\"https:\/\/www.nasa.gov\/aeronautics\/x-59-rollout-watch-party\/\">NASA Invites You to X-59 Rollout Watch Party<\/a><\/blockquote><iframe sandbox=\"allow-scripts\" security=\"restricted\" src=\"https:\/\/www.nasa.gov\/aeronautics\/x-59-rollout-watch-party\/embed\/#?secret=SkM8MHaACB\" width=\"600\" height=\"338\" title=\"“NASA Invites You to X-59 Rollout Watch Party” — NASA\" data-secret=\"SkM8MHaACB\" frameborder=\"0\" marginwidth=\"0\" marginheight=\"0\" scrolling=\"no\" class=\"wp-embedded-content\"><\/iframe><script>\n\/*! This file is auto-generated *\/\n!function(d,l){\"use strict\";l.querySelector&&d.addEventListener&&\"undefined\"!=typeof URL&&(d.wp=d.wp||{},d.wp.receiveEmbedMessage||(d.wp.receiveEmbedMessage=function(e){var t=e.data;if((t||t.secret||t.message||t.value)&&!\/[^a-zA-Z0-9]\/.test(t.secret)){for(var s,r,n,a=l.querySelectorAll('iframe[data-secret=\"'+t.secret+'\"]'),o=l.querySelectorAll('blockquote[data-secret=\"'+t.secret+'\"]'),c=new RegExp(\"^https?:$\",\"i\"),i=0;i<o.length;i++)o[i].style.display=\"none\";for(i=0;i<a.length;i++)s=a[i],e.source===s.contentWindow&&(s.removeAttribute(\"style\"),\"height\"===t.message?(1e3<(r=parseInt(t.value,10))?r=1e3:~~r<200&&(r=200),s.height=r):\"link\"===t.message&&(r=new URL(s.getAttribute(\"src\")),n=new URL(t.value),c.test(n.protocol))&&n.host===r.host&&l.activeElement===s&&(d.top.location.href=t.value))}},d.addEventListener(\"message\",d.wp.receiveEmbedMessage,!1),l.addEventListener(\"DOMContentLoaded\",function(){for(var e,t,s=l.querySelectorAll(\"iframe.wp-embedded-content\"),r=0;r<s.length;r++)(t=(e=s[r]).getAttribute(\"data-secret\"))||(t=Math.random().toString(36).substring(2,12),e.src+=\"#?secret=\"+t,e.setAttribute(\"data-secret\",t)),e.contentWindow.postMessage({message:\"ready\",secret:t},\"*\")},!1)))}(window,document);\n<\/script>\n","thumbnail_url":"https:\/\/www.nasa.gov\/wp-content\/uploads\/2022\/05\/quesst_mark_reveal_hangar_short_850.gif?w=600","thumbnail_width":600,"thumbnail_height":337}
{"version":"1.0","provider_name":"NASA","provider_url":"https:\/\/www.nasa.gov","author_name":"Ryan M. Henderson","author_url":"https:\/\/www.nasa.gov\/author\/rmhende2\/","title":"DC-8 Lift Off","type":"rich","width":600,"height":338,"html":"<blockquote class=\"wp-embedded-content\" data-secret=\"9B2omULX6Q\"><a href=\"https:\/\/www.nasa.gov\/image-detail\/dc-8-lift-off\/\">DC-8 Lift Off<\/a><\/blockquote><iframe sandbox=\"allow-scripts\" security=\"restricted\" src=\"https:\/\/www.nasa.gov\/image-detail\/dc-8-lift-off\/embed\/#?secret=9B2omULX6Q\" width=\"600\" height=\"338\" title=\"“DC-8 Lift Off” — NASA\" data-secret=\"9B2omULX6Q\" frameborder=\"0\" marginwidth=\"0\" marginheight=\"0\" scrolling=\"no\" class=\"wp-embedded-content\"><\/iframe><script>\n\/*! This file is auto-generated *\/\n!function(d,l){\"use strict\";l.querySelector&&d.addEventListener&&\"undefined\"!=typeof URL&&(d.wp=d.wp||{},d.wp.receiveEmbedMessage||(d.wp.receiveEmbedMessage=function(e){var t=e.data;if((t||t.secret||t.message||t.value)&&!\/[^a-zA-Z0-9]\/.test(t.secret)){for(var s,r,n,a=l.querySelectorAll('iframe[data-secret=\"'+t.secret+'\"]'),o=l.querySelectorAll('blockquote[data-secret=\"'+t.secret+'\"]'),c=new RegExp(\"^https?:$\",\"i\"),i=0;i<o.length;i++)o[i].style.display=\"none\";for(i=0;i<a.length;i++)s=a[i],e.source===s.contentWindow&&(s.removeAttribute(\"style\"),\"height\"===t.message?(1e3<(r=parseInt(t.value,10))?r=1e3:~~r<200&&(r=200),s.height=r):\"link\"===t.message&&(r=new URL(s.getAttribute(\"src\")),n=new URL(t.value),c.test(n.protocol))&&n.host===r.host&&l.activeElement===s&&(d.top.location.href=t.value))}},d.addEventListener(\"message\",d.wp.receiveEmbedMessage,!1),l.addEventListener(\"DOMContentLoaded\",function(){for(var e,t,s=l.querySelectorAll(\"iframe.wp-embedded-content\"),r=0;r<s.length;r++)(t=(e=s[r]).getAttribute(\"data-secret\"))||(t=Math.random().toString(36).substring(2,12),e.src+=\"#?secret=\"+t,e.setAttribute(\"data-secret\",t)),e.contentWindow.postMessage({message:\"ready\",secret:t},\"*\")},!1)))}(window,document);\n<\/script>\n","thumbnail_url":"https:\/\/www.nasa.gov\/wp-content\/uploads\/2023\/07\/afrc2021-0003-07orig.jpg?w=600","thumbnail_width":600,"thumbnail_height":400}
II 

108TH CONGRESS 

2D SESSION S. 2765

To amend the Exchange Rates and International Economic Policy Coordination Act of 1988 to clarify the conditions under which the Secretary 

should enter into negotiations to correct currency manipulations by other 

countries. 

IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES 

JULY 22, 2004

Ms. SNOWE (for herself, Mr. VOINOVICH, and Mrs. DOLE) introduced the following bill; which was read twice and referred to the Committee on Banking, Housing, and Urban Affairs 

A BILL

To amend the Exchange Rates and International Economic 

Policy Coordination Act of 1988 to clarify the conditions 

under which the Secretary should enter into negotiations 

to correct currency manipulations by other countries.

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

3 SECTION 1. AMENDMENTS RELATING TO INTERNATIONAL 

4 FINANCIAL POLICY. 

5 (a) BILATERAL NEGOTIATIONS.—Section 3004(b) of 

6 the Exchange Rates and International Economic Policy 

7 Coordination Act of 1988 (22 U.S.C. 5304(b)) is amended 
2

•S 2765 IS 

1 in the second sentence by striking ‘‘(1) have material glob2 al account surpluses; and (2)’’. 

3 (b) REPORT.—Section 3005(b) of the Exchange 

4 Rates and International Economic Policy Coordination 

5 Act of 1988 (22 U.S.C. 5305(b)) is amended—

6 (1) by striking ‘‘and’’ at the end of paragraph 

7 (7); 

8 (2) by striking the period at the end of para9 graph (8) and inserting ‘‘; and’’; and 

10 (3) by adding at the end the following: 

11 ‘‘(9) a detailed explanation of the test the Sec12 retary uses to determine if a country is manipulating 

13 the rate of exchange between that country’s currency 

14 and the dollar for purposes of preventing effective 

15 balance of payments adjustments or gaining an un16 fair advantage in international trade.’’.

Æ
1 

2 

3 

4 

5 

6 

7 

8 

9 

10 

I 11 

12 

13 

14 

15 

16 

17 

18 

19 

20 

21 

22 

23 ' 

24 

25 

26 

27 

28 

WO 

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 

FOR THE DISTRICT OF ARIZONA 

United States of America, 

Plaintiff, 

v. 

Edward Allan Comish, 

Defendant. 

No. CR-15-50138-001-PHX-NVW 

ORDER 

The defendant appeared in court with counsel. The defendant's probable cause 

hearing was waived and the detention hearing was submitted on the record. The Court 

finds probable cause to believe the defendant violated the terms of his supervised release 

as alleged in the petition. The Court further finds, pursuant to Rule 32.l(a)(6), that 

defendant has failed to show by clear and convincing evidence that he is not a flight risk 

or a danger. 

IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that the defendant shall be bound over for further 

proceedings on the petition to revoke his supervised release. 

IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that the defendant is detained as a flight risk and a 

danger, pending further revocation proceedings. 

Dated this 16th day ofNovember, 2017. 

~yl;- United States Magistrate Judge
1 

2 

3 

4 

5 

6 

7 

8 

9 

10 

11 

12 

13 

14 

15 

16 

17 

18 

19 

20 

21 

22 

23 

24 

25 

26 

27 

28 

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 

FOR THE DISTRICT OF ARIZONA

 

 Petitioner Martin Recio has filed a Second Amended Petition for Writ of Habeas 

Corpus pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 2254 (Doc. 11). The Honorable John Z. Boyle, United 

States Magistrate Judge, issued a Report and Recommendation (“R&R”) (Doc. 25), 

recommending that the Court deny the Petition. Judge Boyle advised the parties that they 

had fourteen (14) days to file objections to the R&R and that failure to file timely 

objections could be considered a waiver of the right to obtain review of the R&R. (Id.); 

28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1); Fed. R. Civ. P. 6, 72; United States v. Reyna-Tapia, 328 F.3d 

1114, 1121 (9th Cir. 2003). 

 The parties did not file objections, which relieves the Court of its obligation to 

review the R&R. See Reyna-Tapia, 328 F.3d at 1121; Thomas v. Arn, 474 U.S. 140, 149 

(1985) (“[Section 636(b)(1)] does not . . . require any review at all . . . of any issue that is 

not the subject of an objection.”); Fed. R. Civ. P. 72(b)(3) (“The district judge must 

determine de novo any part of the magistrate judge’s disposition that has been properly 

objected to.”). The Court has nonetheless reviewed the R&R and finds that it is wellMartin Recio, 

 

Petitioner, 

vs. 

Unknown Party, et al., 

Respondents. 

)

) 

) 

) 

) 

) 

) 

) 

) 

) 

) 

)

No. CV-15-01689-PHX-SPL

ORDER 

Case 2:15-cv-01689-SPL Document 26 Filed 11/08/16 Page 1 of 2
2 

1 

2 

3 

4 

5 

6 

7 

8 

9 

10 

11 

12 

13 

14 

15 

16 

17 

18 

19 

20 

21 

22 

23 

24 

25 

26 

27 

28 

taken. The Court will adopt the R&R and deny the Petition. See 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1) 

(stating that the district court “may accept, reject, or modify, in whole or in part, the 

findings or recommendations made by the magistrate”); Fed. R. Civ. P. 72(b)(3) (“The 

district judge may accept, reject, or modify the recommended disposition; receive further 

evidence; or return the matter to the magistrate judge with instructions.”). Accordingly, 

IT IS ORDERED:

1. That Magistrate Judge John Z. Boyle’s Report and Recommendation (Doc. 

25) is accepted and adopted by the Court; 

2. That the Second Amended Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus pursuant to 

28 U.S.C. § 2254 (Doc. 11) is denied and this action is dismissed with prejudice; 

3. That a certificate of appealability and leave to proceed in forma pauperis on 

appeal are denied; and 

4. That the Clerk of Court shall terminate this action. 

 Dated this 8th day of November, 2016.

Honorable Steven P. Logan

United States District Judge

Case 2:15-cv-01689-SPL Document 26 Filed 11/08/16 Page 2 of 2
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<ARTICLE> 5
<LEGEND>
THIS SCHEDULE CONTAINS SUMMARY FINANCIAL INFORMATION EXTRACTED FROM THE
FINANCIAL STATEMENTS CONTAINED IN THE BODY OF THE ACCOMPANYING FORM 10-Q AND IS
QUALIFIED IN ITS ENTIRETY BY REFERENCE TO SUCH FINANCIAL STATEMENTS.
</LEGEND>
<MULTIPLIER> 1,000
       
<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   3-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          DEC-31-1997
<PERIOD-END>                               MAR-31-1998
<CASH>                                           5,233
<SECURITIES>                                     1,829
<RECEIVABLES>                                   12,531
<ALLOWANCES>                                       617
<INVENTORY>                                        479
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                                23,232
<PP&E>                                          76,690
<DEPRECIATION>                                  37,005
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                  63,308
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                           11,325
<BONDS>                                              0
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                        12,101
<OTHER-SE>                                           0
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                    63,308
<SALES>                                         25,588
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                                25,588
<CGS>                                                0
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                        0
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                24,123
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                     3
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                                  75
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                  1,438
<INCOME-TAX>                                       549
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                                889
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                       889
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                      .13
<EPS-DILUTED>                                      .13
        

</TABLE>
#### Hewey Frans et al *v.*W. A. Jenkins, Admr., et al.

Pleading — Process—Agreed Interpleading of a Defendant.

An agreement by plaintiff in an action, that a wife be permitted to interplead, on the ground of abandonment, and she was made a defendant, that her interest may be adjudged. Held not to be such service on the original defendant as to sustain a judgment in favor of the wife.

APPEAL FROM MEADE CIRCUIT COURT.

November 17, 1869.

Opinion of the Court by

Judge Hardin:

Lemauds and Barrett, and Jenkins, administrator, brought separate suits in equity against Nathaniel Collins, and Henry Frans, seeking to subject to their claims against Collins; a debt which they allege Frans owed Collins of $900 secured by a mortgage on a tract of land in Meade county.

These suits were consolidated, and Sarah Collins, the wife of said N. Collins, complaining of abandonment, and asserting a claim for maintenance against her husband, was permitted to file in the cases, a petition, and by consent of the plaintiffs she was thereupon made a defendant, her petition being taken as an answer, etc.

The claim of Lemands and Barrett was founded on their alleged liability for N. Collins as his sureties in a judgment in favor of Andrew Bars, which they had replevied, in the court of common pleas for Crawford county, Indiana, and the claim of Jenkins, *478administrator, was for money alleged to be due from Collins. on an account.

*Coale & Johnson, for appellants.*

There was no proof of the suretyship of Lemands and Barrett, nor of the account sued on by the other plaintiff, nor of the statements of the petition of Mrs. Collins, and although an attorney was appointed to defend for Collins, no bonds for restitution were given. These were all required by the Civil Code (sections 439-440). Moreover, the consent order, as to the petition of Mrs. Collins, did not in our opinion have the effect to bring either N. Collins or Brans before the court as antagonistic parties to her.

Therefore, the judgment which was rendered on this defective preparation in favor of all of the original plaintiffs and Mrs. Collins, is deemed erroneous, in each branch of the case.

Wherefore, the judgment is reversed, and the cause remanded for further proceedings not inconsistent with this opinion.
{"version":"1.0","provider_name":"NASA","provider_url":"https:\/\/www.nasa.gov","author_name":"NASA","author_url":"https:\/\/www.nasa.gov\/author\/nasamigrate\/","title":"Sagan and Viking","type":"rich","width":600,"height":338,"html":"<blockquote class=\"wp-embedded-content\" data-secret=\"VKBuiNrJR6\"><a href=\"https:\/\/www.nasa.gov\/image-detail\/sagan-viking\/\">Sagan and Viking<\/a><\/blockquote><iframe sandbox=\"allow-scripts\" security=\"restricted\" src=\"https:\/\/www.nasa.gov\/image-detail\/sagan-viking\/embed\/#?secret=VKBuiNrJR6\" width=\"600\" height=\"338\" title=\"“Sagan and Viking” — NASA\" data-secret=\"VKBuiNrJR6\" frameborder=\"0\" marginwidth=\"0\" marginheight=\"0\" scrolling=\"no\" class=\"wp-embedded-content\"><\/iframe><script>\n\/*! This file is auto-generated *\/\n!function(d,l){\"use strict\";l.querySelector&&d.addEventListener&&\"undefined\"!=typeof URL&&(d.wp=d.wp||{},d.wp.receiveEmbedMessage||(d.wp.receiveEmbedMessage=function(e){var t=e.data;if((t||t.secret||t.message||t.value)&&!\/[^a-zA-Z0-9]\/.test(t.secret)){for(var s,r,n,a=l.querySelectorAll('iframe[data-secret=\"'+t.secret+'\"]'),o=l.querySelectorAll('blockquote[data-secret=\"'+t.secret+'\"]'),c=new RegExp(\"^https?:$\",\"i\"),i=0;i<o.length;i++)o[i].style.display=\"none\";for(i=0;i<a.length;i++)s=a[i],e.source===s.contentWindow&&(s.removeAttribute(\"style\"),\"height\"===t.message?(1e3<(r=parseInt(t.value,10))?r=1e3:~~r<200&&(r=200),s.height=r):\"link\"===t.message&&(r=new URL(s.getAttribute(\"src\")),n=new URL(t.value),c.test(n.protocol))&&n.host===r.host&&l.activeElement===s&&(d.top.location.href=t.value))}},d.addEventListener(\"message\",d.wp.receiveEmbedMessage,!1),l.addEventListener(\"DOMContentLoaded\",function(){for(var e,t,s=l.querySelectorAll(\"iframe.wp-embedded-content\"),r=0;r<s.length;r++)(t=(e=s[r]).getAttribute(\"data-secret\"))||(t=Math.random().toString(36).substring(2,12),e.src+=\"#?secret=\"+t,e.setAttribute(\"data-secret\",t)),e.contentWindow.postMessage({message:\"ready\",secret:t},\"*\")},!1)))}(window,document);\n<\/script>\n","thumbnail_url":"https:\/\/www.nasa.gov\/wp-content\/uploads\/2023\/03\/151106main_image_feature_599_ys_full.jpg?w=600","thumbnail_width":600,"thumbnail_height":403}
AO 458 (Rev. 06/09) Appearance of Counsel

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

for the

__________ District of __________

)

)

)

)

)

Plaintiff

v. Case No.

Defendant

APPEARANCE OF COUNSEL

To: The clerk of court and all parties of record

I am admitted or otherwise authorized to practice in this court, and I appear in this case as counsel for:

.

Date:

Attorney’s signature

Printed name and bar number

Address

E-mail address

Telephone number

FAX number

Case 2:15-md-02641-DGC Document 9402 Filed 12/18/17 Page 1 of 1
#### STATE OF NEW JERSEY v. RONNIE MCALLISTER.

June 27, 1989.

Petition for certification denied.
Case 2:15-cr-50163-GMS Document 1 Filed 10/08/15 Page 1 of 1
#### DEVCORP v. TOWNSHIP OF VOORHEES, ET AL.

May 30, 1989.

Petition for certification denied.
#### STATE OF NEW JERSEY v. JOSEPH BETHUNE.

May 30, 1989.

Petition for certification granted, limited to the “fresh complaint” issues raised in defendant’s letter petition for certification.
1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

IN THE SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF MONTANA

Supreme Court Cause No. DA 20-0594

TOWN OF EKALAKA

Plaintiff/Appellee,

v.

EKALAKA VOLUNTEER FIRE

DEPARTMENT, INC.

Defendant/Appellant.

ORDER ON

MOTION TO CONTINUE

DEADLINE FOR FILING

OPENING BRIEF

UPON REVIEW of the Motion and good cause appearing therein the time

for the Appellant's Opening Brief is extended to May 15', 2021.

DATED this day of 2021.

Justice, Montana Supreme Court

Electronically signed by:

Mike McGrath

Chief Justice, Montana Supreme Court

March 29 2021

03/29/2021

Case Number: DA 20-0594
{"version":"1.0","provider_name":"NASA","provider_url":"https:\/\/www.nasa.gov","author_name":"Elizabeth E. Keller","author_url":"https:\/\/www.nasa.gov\/author\/eekeller\/","title":"Division Awards & Recognition","type":"rich","width":600,"height":338,"html":"<blockquote class=\"wp-embedded-content\" data-secret=\"zPhd1FIHNZ\"><a href=\"https:\/\/www.nasa.gov\/centers-and-facilities\/ames\/ames-science\/ames-space-biosciences\/sc-division-awards-recognition\/\">Division Awards & Recognition<\/a><\/blockquote><iframe sandbox=\"allow-scripts\" security=\"restricted\" src=\"https:\/\/www.nasa.gov\/centers-and-facilities\/ames\/ames-science\/ames-space-biosciences\/sc-division-awards-recognition\/embed\/#?secret=zPhd1FIHNZ\" width=\"600\" height=\"338\" title=\"“Division Awards & Recognition” — NASA\" data-secret=\"zPhd1FIHNZ\" frameborder=\"0\" marginwidth=\"0\" marginheight=\"0\" scrolling=\"no\" class=\"wp-embedded-content\"><\/iframe><script>\n\/*! This file is auto-generated *\/\n!function(d,l){\"use strict\";l.querySelector&&d.addEventListener&&\"undefined\"!=typeof URL&&(d.wp=d.wp||{},d.wp.receiveEmbedMessage||(d.wp.receiveEmbedMessage=function(e){var t=e.data;if((t||t.secret||t.message||t.value)&&!\/[^a-zA-Z0-9]\/.test(t.secret)){for(var s,r,n,a=l.querySelectorAll('iframe[data-secret=\"'+t.secret+'\"]'),o=l.querySelectorAll('blockquote[data-secret=\"'+t.secret+'\"]'),c=new RegExp(\"^https?:$\",\"i\"),i=0;i<o.length;i++)o[i].style.display=\"none\";for(i=0;i<a.length;i++)s=a[i],e.source===s.contentWindow&&(s.removeAttribute(\"style\"),\"height\"===t.message?(1e3<(r=parseInt(t.value,10))?r=1e3:~~r<200&&(r=200),s.height=r):\"link\"===t.message&&(r=new URL(s.getAttribute(\"src\")),n=new URL(t.value),c.test(n.protocol))&&n.host===r.host&&l.activeElement===s&&(d.top.location.href=t.value))}},d.addEventListener(\"message\",d.wp.receiveEmbedMessage,!1),l.addEventListener(\"DOMContentLoaded\",function(){for(var e,t,s=l.querySelectorAll(\"iframe.wp-embedded-content\"),r=0;r<s.length;r++)(t=(e=s[r]).getAttribute(\"data-secret\"))||(t=Math.random().toString(36).substring(2,12),e.src+=\"#?secret=\"+t,e.setAttribute(\"data-secret\",t)),e.contentWindow.postMessage({message:\"ready\",secret:t},\"*\")},!1)))}(window,document);\n<\/script>\n","thumbnail_url":"https:\/\/www.nasa.gov\/wp-content\/uploads\/2024\/04\/acd16-0147-033.jpg?w=600","thumbnail_width":600,"thumbnail_height":429}
Case 2:15-md-02641-DGC Document 9620 Filed 01/12/18 Page 1 of 2
Case 2:15-md-02641-DGC Document 9620 Filed 01/12/18 Page 2 of 2
No. 87-6564.

#### Sisco *v.*County of Los Angeles et al.

Ct. App. Cal., 2d App. Dist. Certiorari denied.
```

                                 CERTIFICATION

                                                                    EXHIBIT 99.1

                           CERTIFICATIONS 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 Geoworks  Corporation (the "Company") on
Form 10-K for the year ended  March 31,  2003 as filed with the  Securities  and
Exchange  Commission  on the date hereof  (the  "Report"),  I, Mark E.  Schwarz,
Principal  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:

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.

/s/  Mark E. Schwarz
--------------------
Mark E. Schwarz
Principal Executive Officer
June 30, 2003
```
Case 2:15-cv-01769-SPL Document 57 Filed 06/21/17 Page 1 of 1