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




**CERTIFICATION
      OF CHIEF EXECUTIVE OFFICER AND**


**ACTING
      CHIEF FINANCIAL OFFICER OF**


**SPRING
      CREEK CAPITAL INC.**


**FORM
      10-QSB FOR THE THREE MONTH PERIOD ENDED MARCH 31, 2007**


**PURSUANT
      TO 18 U.S.C. SECTION 1350, AS ADOPTED**


**PURSUANT
      TO SECTION 906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002**




I,
      Jagjit
      Jay Sidhu, am the Chief Executive Officer and acting Chief Financial Officer
      of
      Spring Creek Capital Inc., a Nevada corporation (the "Company"). I am delivering
      this certificate in connection with the Quarterly Report on Form 10-QSB of
      the
      Company for the three month period ended March 31, 2007 and filed with the
      Securities and Exchange Commission ("Quarterly Report").




Pursuant
      to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, as adopted pursuant to Section 906 of the
      Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, I hereby certify that, to the best of my knowledge,
      the Quarterly Report fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a)
      or
      Section 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 and that the information
      contained in the Quarterly Report fairly presents, in all material respects,
      the
      financial condition and results of operations of the Company.





Date:
                August 3, 2007By:
                */s/ Jagjit Jay Sidhu*
              
              Jagjit
                Jay Sidhu
              Chief
                Executive Officer, President, acting Chief Financial Officer, acting
                Principal Accounting Officer and Director
**UN PUBLISHED** 
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

**No. 13**  **- 7708** 

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA , Plaintiff

- Appellee ,
v. FARES ABULABAN, a/k/a Sameh , Defendant

- Appellant
.

Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Virginia , at Alexandria
. Liam O ’ Grady , District Judge. ( 1: 08

- cr - 00240

- LO

- 1 ; 1:08

- cr - 00101

- JCC

- 1 ; 1:11

- cv - 00674

- LO )

Submitted : May 27, 2014 Decided: June 3, 2014

Before WILKINSON, DUNCAN, and FLOYD , Circuit Judges.

Dismissed by un published per curiam opinion
. John Cady Kiyonaga , LAW OFFICE OF JOHN C. KIYONAGA , Alexandria, V irginia, for Appellant. Lawrence Joseph Leiser, Karen Ledbetter Taylor , Assistant U nited S tat es Attorney s, Stephen Andrew Sola, Special Assistant U nited S tates Attorney , Alexandria, Virginia, for Appellee.
Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.2 PER CURIAM: Fares Abulaban seeks to appeal the district court’s order denying relief on his 28 U.S.C. § 2255 ( 2012 ) motion. The order is not appealable unless a circuit justice or judge issues a certificate of appealability. 28 U.S.C. § 2253(c)(1) (B) (20 12 ). A certificate of app ealability will not issue absent “a substantial showing of the denial of a constitutional right.” 28 U.S.C. § 2253(c)(2) (20 12 ). When the district court denies relief on the merits, a prisoner satisfies this standard by demonstrating that reasonable juri sts would find that the district court’s assessment of the constitutional claims is debatable or wrong. Slack v. McDaniel , 529 U.S. 473, 484 (2000); see Miller

- El v. Cockrell , 537 U.S. 322, 336

- 38 (2003). When the district court denies relief on procedur al grounds, the prisoner must demonstrate both that the dispositive procedural ruling is debatable, and that the motion states a debatable claim of the denial of a constitutional right. Slack , 529 U.S. at 484

- 85. We have independently reviewed the recor d and conclude that Abulaban has not made the requisite showing. Accordingly, we deny a certificate of appealability and dismiss the appeal. We dispense with oral argument because the facts and legal3 contentions are adequately presented in the materials before th is court and argument would not aid the decisional process.

DISMISSED
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<ARTICLE> 5
<LEGEND>
THIS SCHEDULE CONTAINS SUMMARY FINANCIAL INFORMATION EXTRACTED FROM
INTERNATIONAL FAMILY ENTERTAINMENT, INC.'S CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL STATEMENTS AS
OF AND FOR THREE AND NINE MONTHS ENDING SEPTEMBER 30, 1996 AND IS QUALIFIED IN
ITS ENTIRETY BY REFERENCE TO SUCH CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL STATEMENTS INCLUDED IN
THE COMPANY'S FORM 10-Q FOR THE QUARTERLY PERIOD ENDED SEPTEMBER 30, 1996.
</LEGEND>
<MULTIPLIER> 1,000
       
<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   9-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          DEC-31-1996
<PERIOD-START>                             JAN-01-1996
<PERIOD-END>                               SEP-30-1996
<CASH>                                           8,545
<SECURITIES>                                     9,220
<RECEIVABLES>                                  120,701
<ALLOWANCES>                                     7,549
<INVENTORY>                                          0
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                               233,949
<PP&E>                                          91,268
<DEPRECIATION>                                  27,944
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                 532,222
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                           98,918
<BONDS>                                        140,740
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                       152,346
<OTHER-SE>                                      43,000
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                   532,222
<SALES>                                              0
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                               228,626
<CGS>                                                0
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                  184,689
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                     0
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                   400
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                               9,425
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                 46,777
<INCOME-TAX>                                    20,387
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                             26,390
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                    26,390
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                      .56
<EPS-DILUTED>                                      .56
        

</TABLE>
```

[Congressional Bills 108th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[H.R. 765 Introduced in House (IH)]

108th CONGRESS
  1st Session
                                H. R. 765

    To amend title 49, United States Code, to allow cargo pilots to 
        participate in the Federal flight deck officer program.

_______________________________________________________________________

                    IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

                           February 13, 2003

Mr. Mica (for himself, Mr. Young of Alaska, and Mr. DeFazio) introduced 
      the following bill; which was referred to the Committee on 
                   Transportation and Infrastructure

_______________________________________________________________________

                                 A BILL

 
    To amend title 49, United States Code, to allow cargo pilots to 
        participate in the Federal flight deck officer program.

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

SECTION 1. PARTICIPATION OF CARGO PILOTS IN FEDERAL FLIGHT DECK OFFICER 
              PROGRAM.

    Section 44921(a) of title 49, United States Code, is amended by 
striking ``passenger'' each place it appears.
                                 <all>
```
EX-10.39



 Exhibit 10.39 
 AMENDMENT TO EMPLOYMENT AGREEMENT 
 Section 1 of the Employment Agreement
(“Agreement”), by and between the parties to the Agreement (as named below), dated as of May 24, 2007, as amended, is hereby further amended effective as of the 8th day of March, 2013 (“Amendment”), for the purpose of making
the following change: 
 Section 1 (“Term”) is hereby revised to read as follows: 

Section 1.Term. Employer hereby continues the employment of Employee and Employee hereby accepts
continued employment with Employer for a term (“Term”) that shall continue until December 31, 2014; provided, however, that effective January 1, 2014 and each succeeding January 1st thereafter, the Term shall automatically be extended for an
additional year unless either Party has notified the other at least 12 months prior to such January 1st automatic renewal date that such Party has elected not to extend the Term. 
 Except as set forth
above in this Amendment, the Agreement shall remain unchanged and in full force and effect. 
 As evidenced by signature below, the parties to
the Agreement and this Amendment agree to the terms and conditions of this Amendment, both as to form and substance. 
  

			
	EMPLOYEE:
	
	/s/ Glenn D. McDowell
	Glenn D. McDowell
	
	EMPLOYER:
	
	U.S. Physical Therapy, Inc.
		
	By:	 	/s/ Jerald Pullins
	Jerald Pullins
	Chairman of the Board of Directors
EXHIBIT 32.2

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 Sonus Networks, Inc. (the "Company") for the period
ended December 31, 2009 as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the "Report"), the undersigned, Wayne Pastore, Interim Chief Financial Officer of the Company,
hereby certifies, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, as adopted pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that to his knowledge:



Date:
February 25, 2010

/s/ WAYNE PASTOREWayne Pastore Vice President of Finance, Corporate Controller and Chief Accounting Officer (Principal Accounting Officer) and Interim Chief Financial Officer
(Principal Financial Officer)


---
### I N THE UNI TED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FI F TH CI RCUI T

No. 12-51057
JOSE VASQUEZ, As Personal Representative of the Estate of Sergio Vasquez, Deceased; HEATHER LAUREL, also known as Helen Vasquez, Guardian of V.A.V., a minor, Heir of the Estate of Sergio Vasquez; RICK STONE, Plaintiffs - Appellants v. THE BOILER ROOM; FT AVILA & IV ENTERPRISES, INCORPORATED; RL WORTH & ASSOCIATES; DEPUTY ARNOLD MENCHACA; SHERIFF AMADEO ORTIZ; BEXAR COUNTY, Defendants - Appellees

Appeal from the United States District Court for the Western District of Texas USDC No. 5:11-CV-920
Before JONES, SMITH and GARZA, Circuit Judges. PER CURIAM: * The court, havi ng h e ard o ral argument and revi ewed the parti es’ bri efs and the record on appeal , hol ds that there i s no reversibl eerror of fact or l aw. U n i t e d S t a te s C o u rt o f A p p e al s

F i f t h C i rc u i t 

## F I L E D Aug ust 9, 2013 Ly l e W . Cay ce Clerk

* Purs uant to 5 TH C IR
. R. 47.5, the co urt has de te rmine d th a t this o pinio n s ho uld no t b e publis he d and is no t pre ce de nt e x ce pt unde r thelimite d circums tance s s et fo rth in 5 TH C IR . R. 47.5.4. Case: 12-51057 Document: 00512337160 Page: 1 Date Filed: 08/09/2013N o. 12-51057

1. Stone’s cl ai m i s ti me barred because he fi l ed i t after the tw o - y ear statute of l imi tati ons had expi red. The l i mi tati on peri od began to run on the date Stone

w a s s h o t , even though he di d n ot know the true i denti ty o f the wrongdoe r . Childs v. Haussecker, 9 7 4 S .W.2d 31, 36, 40 (Tex. 1998). Stone’s fraudul ent

c o n c e al ment argument i s wai ved because it was not pursued i n the di st r i c t court. LeMarie v. La. Dep’t of T ransp. & Dev. , 480 F.3d 383, 387 (5th C i r. 2007). 2. Menchaca was enti tl ed to qual i fi ed i mmuni ty under wel l -settl ed Ci rcuit precedent. Ontiveros v. City of Rosenberg, T ex. , 564 F.3d 379, 380. Vasquez’ acti ons p osed a seri ous threat to those around hi m, and i t w a s r easonabl e for Menchaca to use deadly force. See Id. at 385. 3. The distri ct court p roperly di smi ssed Vasquez’ premi ses l i abi l i ty and negl i gent hi ri ng, supervi s i on, and trai ni ng c l ai ms agai nst RL Worth because Vasquez di d not poi nt the court to any evi dence supportin g these cl ai ms. 

### The judgment of the district court is AFFIRMED

.

2 Case: 12-51057 Document: 00512337160 Page: 2 Date Filed: 08/09/2013
# Table A

# Table 1

# table 2

# Table 3

# Table 4

# Table 5

# Table 6

# Table 7

# Table 8
## S IXTH 

## D ISTRICT 

## C OURT OF 

## A PPEAL 

## S TATE OF 

## F LORIDA

_____________________________ Case No. 6D2 3

- 3332 Lower Tribunal No. 2022

- DP

- 007

_____________________________ In the Interest of J.L

. , a child

. D.L. , Appellant,

v. D EPARTMENT OF C HILDREN AND F AMILIES and G UARDIAN AD L ITEM , Appellee s
.

_____________________________ Appeal from the Circuit Court for Osceola County

. Laura Shaffer , Judge.

December 6, 2023
PER CURIAM

. AFFIRMED

. NARDELLA, WHITE and GANNAM , JJ., c oncur.

H. Fletcher, of Fletcher Law Firm , Oviedo , for Appellant.
K elley Schaeffer , Appellate Counsel, of Children’s Legal Services , Bradenton , for Appellee , Department of Children and Families

. Beth Kath ry n Roland, of Family First Firm , Winter Park, and Sara Elizabeth Goldfarb, Statewide Director of Appeals, of Statewide Guardian ad Litem Office, Tallahassee, for Appellant , Statewide Guardian ad Litem.
NOT FINAL UNTIL TIME EXPIRES TO FILE MOTION FOR REHEARING AND DISPOSITION THEREOF IF TIMELY FILED
Michigan Supreme Court Lansing, Michigan

Marilyn Kelly, Chief Justice

Michael F. Cavanag h
Elizabeth A. Weave r

Maura D. Corriga n Robert P. Young, Jr. Stephen J. Markma n Diane M. Hathaway,
J ustices

I, Corbin R. Davis, Clerk of the Mi chigan Supreme Cour t, certify that the foregoing is a true and complete copy of the order entered at the direction of the Court.

_______________________________________ __ Clerk July 28, 2009

s0721 

# Order

July 28, 2009

139114

_____________ _______________ _____________ In re ALEXANDER MITCHELL, NATHAN MITCHELL, and NICHOLAS MITCHELL, Minors.

_____________ _______________ _____________ DEPARTMENT OF HUMAN SERVICES, Petitioner-Appellee,

v SC: 139114 COA: 286895 Clinton CC Family Division: 06-019136-NA WILLIAM MITCHELL, Respondent-Appellant.

________________ _______________ __________/

On order of the Court, the applicati on for leave to appeal the March 24, 2009 judgment of the Court of Appeals is cons idered. We DIRECT the Clinton County Prosecuting Attorney to answer the application for leave to appeal within 28 days of the
date of this order.

The application for leave to appeal remains pending.
# 20QRTL5_00
In The 

Court of Appeals 

Seventh District of Texas at Amarillo

No. 07-18-00426-CV 

IN THE INTEREST OF D.L.R., JR., D.R, AND M.R., CHILDREN 

 

On Appeal from the 242nd District Court 

Swisher County, Texas 

Trial Court No. B-11105-07-06, Honorable Kregg Hukill, Presiding 

 

May 8, 2019 

 

MEMORANDUM OPINION 

 

Before CAMPBELL and PIRTLE and PARKER, JJ. 

Appellant R.H., proceeding pro se, filed a notice of appeal from the trial court’s 

order of termination.

1

 The clerk’s record was due on March 11, 2019. That day, the 

district clerk notified the court that R.H. had not paid or made arrangements to pay for the 

clerk’s record. See TEX. R. APP. P. 35.3(a)(2). By letter of March 14, we directed R.H. to 

make acceptable payment arrangements for the clerk’s record by March 25. Failure to 

do so, we admonished, would subject the appeal to dismissal for want of prosecution. 

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

 

1 The underlying suit was not brought by a governmental entity.
2

To date, R.H. has not made payment arrangements for the clerk’s record or made

any response to this court’s letter. Accordingly, the appeal is dismissed for want of 

prosecution and R.H.’s failure to comply with a requirement of the appellate rules and an 

order of the court. TEX. R. APP. P. 37.3(b); 42.3(b), (c).

Per Curiam
# Ages 15-17

# Ages 18-19

# Ages 20-24

# Ages 25-44
# Table 1

# Table 2

# Table 3

# Table 4

# Table 5

# Table 6

# Table 7

# Table 8

# Table 9

# Table 10
Exhibit 32.1

                        CERTIFICATION OF PERIODIC REPORT

Pursuant to 18 U.S.C.  Section 1350,  as adopted  pursuant to Section 906 of the
Sarbanes-Oxley  Act of 2002, each of the  undersigned  officers of Seaway Valley
Capital Corporation (the "Company"), certifies that:

     1.   The Quarterly Report on Form 10-QSB/A (Amendment No. 1) of the Company
          for the Quarter ended September 30, 2007 (the "Report") fully complies
          with the  requirements  of  Section  13(a) or 15(d) of the  Securities
          Exchange Act of 1934 (15 U.S.C. 78m or 78o(d)); 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/      THOMAS SCOZZAFAVA
                                  ------------------------------------
Dated: February 7, 2008                    THOMAS SCOZZAFAVA
                                           Chief Executive Officer,
                                            Chief Financial Officer

This  certification  is made solely for the purpose of 18 U.S.C.  Section  1350,
subject  to the  knowledge  standard  contained  therein,  and not for any other
purpose.
### TEXAS COURT OF APPEALS, THIRD DISTRICT, AT AUSTIN

JUDGMENT RENDERED AP RIL 7, 2017

NO. 03

- 16

- 00004

- CV

City of Austin, Appellant

v.

National Media Corporation and ACME Partnership, L.P., Appellee s

APPEAL FROM THE 345TH DISTRICT COURT OF TRAVIS CO UNTY
BEFORE JUSTICES PURYEAR, PE MBERTON, AND GOODWIN

DISMISSED ON APPELLANT’S MOTION

-- OPINION BY JUSTICE PURYEAR

This is an appeal from the interlocutory order signed by the tr i a l court on December 16, 2015.

Appellant has filed a motion to dismiss the appeal, and having considered the motion, the Court

agrees that the motion should be granted. Therefore, the Cou rt grants the motion and dismisses

the appeal

. A ppellant shall pay all costs relating to this appeal, both in this Court and the court

below.
UNPUBLISHED

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

No. 96-2857

CLARENCE N. FOXWORTH,

Plaintiff - Appellant,

versus

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA; FEDERAL BUREAU OF

INVESTIGATION,

Defendants - Appellees.

Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern

District of Virginia, at Alexandria. James C. Cacheris, Chief

District Judge. (CA-92-1275-A)

No. 97-1192

CLARENCE N. FOXWORTH,

Plaintiff - Appellant,

versus

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA; FEDERAL BUREAU OF

INVESTIGATION; PRINCE GEORGE'S COUNTY, MARYLAND; WAYNE M. CURRY, Executive County of

Prince George's Maryland; COUNTY OF PRINCE

GEORGE'S MARYLAND POLICE DEPARTMENT; ALPHONSO

HAWKINS, Chief of Police, County of Prince
2

George's Maryland Police Department; STATE OF

MARYLAND; PARRIS N. GLENDENING, Governor,

State of Maryland; POLICE DEPARTMENT, State of

Maryland; WASHINGTON MORTGAGE SERVICES,

INCORPORATED,

Defendants - Appellees.

Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of

Maryland, at Baltimore. J. Frederick Motz, Chief District Judge.

(CA-95-1690-JFM)

Submitted: April 17, 1997 Decided: April 25, 1997

Before NIEMEYER and WILLIAMS, Circuit Judges, and BUTZNER, Senior

Circuit Judge.

Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion.

Clarence N. Foxworth, Appellant Pro Se. Dennis Edward Szybala,

Assistant United States Attorney, Alexandria, Virginia, for

Appellees.

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.

See Local Rule 36(c).
3

PER CURIAM:

Appellant appeals the district courts' orders denying his

motions to reinstate his complaints filed under 42 U.S.C. § 1983

(1994). We have reviewed the record and the district courts' opinions and find no reversible error. Accordingly, we affirm on the

reasoning of the district courts. Foxworth v. United States, No.

CA-92-1275-A (E.D. Va. Nov. 26, 1996); No. CA-95-1690-JFM (D. Md.

Jan. 6, 1997). 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
```

[Congressional Bills 108th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[H.R. 549 Introduced in House (IH)]

108th CONGRESS
  1st Session
                                H. R. 549

   To suspend temporarily the duty on certain power weaving textile 
                               machinery.

_______________________________________________________________________

                    IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

                            February 5, 2003

  Mr. DeMint introduced the following bill; which was referred to the 
                      Committee on Ways and Means

_______________________________________________________________________

                                 A BILL

 
   To suspend temporarily the duty on certain power weaving textile 
                               machinery.

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

SECTION 1. CERTAIN POWER WEAVING TEXTILE MACHINERY.

    (a) In General.--Subchapter II of chapter 99 of the Harmonized 
Tariff Schedule of the United States is amended by inserting in 
numerical sequence the following new heading:

      

``    9902.01.89    Power weaving     Free              No change         No change         On or before 12/
                     machines                                                                31/2005          ''
                     (looms),                                                                                  .
                     shuttle type,
                     for weaving
                     fabrics of a
                     width exceeding
                     30 cm but not
                     exceeding 4.9
                     m, entered
                     without off-
                     loom or large
                     loom take-ups,
                     drop wires,
                     heddles, reeds,
                     harness frames,
                     or beams
                     (provided for
                     in subheading
                     8446.21.50)....

    (b) Effective Date.--The amendment made by subsection (a) applies 
with respect to goods entered, or withdrawn from warehouse for 
consumption, on or after the 15th day after the date of the enactment 
of this Act.
                                 <all>
```
Michigan Supreme Court

Lansing, Michigan

Robert P. Young, Jr., Chief Justice

Michael F. Cavanagh

Stephen J. Markman

Mary Beth Kelly

Brian K. Zahra

Bridget M. McCormack

David F. Viviano, Justices

I, Larry S. Royster, Clerk of the Michigan Supreme Court, certify that the

foregoing is a true and complete copy of the order entered at the direction of the Court.

 July 30, 2013

p0722

Order 

Clerk

July 30, 2013

146467 & (27)

PEOPLE OF THE STATE OF MICHIGAN,

Plaintiff-Appellee,

v SC: 146467

COA: 310458

Shiawassee CC: 07-005024-FC

DAVID G. STUCKEY, Defendant-Appellant. 

_________________________________________/

On order of the Court, the application for leave to appeal the November 30, 2012 

order of the Court of Appeals is considered, and it is DENIED, because the defendant has 

failed to meet the burden of establishing entitlement to relief under MCR 6.508(D). The 

motion for appointment of counsel is DENIED.