alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
EXHIBIT 21

 

**SUBSIDIARIES OF REGISTRANTS**

 

IDACORP, Inc:

* *

1.      IdahoPower Company, an Idaho Corporation

2.      Ida-WestEnergy Company, an Idaho Corporation

3.      IDACORPServices Co., a Nevada Corporation

 

4.      IDACORPEnergy Services Company, a Nevada Corporation

5.      IDACORPEnergy L.P., a Delaware Limited Partnership

6.      IDACORPTechnologies, Inc., an Idaho Corporation

7.      IDATECH,LLC, an Oregon Limited Liability Company

8.      IdahoSolar Power, LLC., a Washington Limited Liability Company

9.      IDACORPFinancial Services, Inc., an Idaho Corporation

10.  IDACOMM,Inc., an Idaho Corporation

11.  Velocitus,Inc., an Idaho Corporation

 

12.  RMCHolding, Inc., an Idaho Corporation

 

13.  EquigyDevelopment, L.P., a Delaware Limited Partnership

 

 

 

Idaho Power Company

 

1.                   Idaho Energy Resources Company, a Wyoming Corporation

2.                  Pathnet/IdahoPower Equipment, LLC., a Delaware Limited Liability Company
§ 338.1 Execution and issuance of certificate. ( a ) *Issuance.* When an applicant for naturalization has taken and subscribed to the oath of allegiance in accordance with 8 CFR part 337, USCIS will issue a Certificate of Naturalization at the conclusion of the oath administration ceremony.
( b ) *Contents of certificate.* The certificate must be issued to the applicant in accordance with section 338 of the Act in his or her true, full, and correct name as it exists at the time of the administration of the oath of allegiance. The certificate must show, under “country of former nationality,” the name of the applicant's last country of citizenship, as shown in the application and USCIS records, even though the applicant may be stateless at the time of admission to citizenship.
[76 FR 53803, Aug. 29, 2011]
UNITED STATES BANKRUPTCY COURT

EASTERN DISTRICT OF VIRGINIA

RICHMOND DIVISION

RE: Sean Christian Jones Case No. 18-35123

AMENDED DIRECTIVE FOR VOLUNTARY PAYMENTS BY DEBTOR

The debtors having filed a petition under Chapter 13, title 11 U.S.C. or converted this case

from Chapter 7;

IT IS DIRECTED;

That until further Directive from the Trustee, the debtor(s) shall pay to SUZANNE E. WADE,

TRUSTEE, P.O. BOX 983, Memphis Tennessee 38101-0983, $ 3 7 0 . 0 0 M o n t h l y beginning A u g u s t

2021.

THIS DIRECTIVE IS ENTERED PURSUANT TO GENERAL ORDER NO. 04-1 OF THE

UNITED STATES BANKRUPTCY COURT.

Dated: July 22, 2021

/S/Suzanne E. Wade

Suzanne E. Wade, Trustee

Eastern District of Virginia, Richmond Division

The Trustee does hereby certify that a copy of this Directive was mailed to the debtor(s) on

the date above written.

/S/Suzanne E. Wade

Suzanne E. Wade, Trustee

Case 18-35123-KRH Doc 28 Filed 07/22/21 Entered 07/22/21 12:05:29 Desc

Page 1 of 1
|   | 1. | I am the Chief Executive Officer and Chief Financial Officer of Royal Energy Resources, Inc. |
|--------|----|----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|

|   | 2. | Attached to this certification is Form 10-Q for the quarter ended May 31, 2011, a periodic report (the “periodic report”) filed by the issuer with the Securities Exchange Commission pursuant to Section 13(a) or 15(d) of the Securities and Exchange Act of 1934 (the “Exchange Act”), which contains condensed financial statements. |
|--------|----|------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|

|   | 3. | I hereby certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, as adopted pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that |
|--------|----|----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|

|   | · | The periodic report containing the condensed financial statements fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) or 15(d) of the Exchange Act, and |
|--------|--------|-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|

|   | · | The information in the periodic report fairly presents, in all material respects, the consolidated financial condition and results of operations of the issuer for the periods presented. |
|--------|--------|-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|

| July 12, 2011 | /s/ Jacob Roth              |   |
|---------------|-----------------------------|--------|
|          | Jacob Roth                  |
|          | Chief Executive Officer and |
|          | Chief Financial Officer     |

----
DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY ATTENDEES

Terry Logee, Office of Codes and Standards Ed Levy, General Counsel Cyrus Nasseri, Office of Codes and Standards Jim Raba, Office of Codes and Standards Michael McCabe, Office of Codes and Standards Deborah Miller, Office of the Assistant Secretary for Energy Efficiency & Renewable Energy Steve Treado, National Institute of Standards and Technology



### iii i s C
UNPUBLISHED

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

No. 11-6613

ROBERT JOSEPH BLAKE,

 Plaintiff – Appellant,

v.

PAUL PERRY; RUSSELL MATHENY, Captain; JAMES MCCLOUD, 

Captain; ONE FROM MENTAL HEALTH,

 Defendants - Appellees.

Appeal from the United States District Court for the Southern 

District of West Virginia, at Charleston. Thomas E. Johnston, 

District Judge. (2:10-cv-00923)

Submitted: June 16, 2011 Decided: June 21, 2011

Before NIEMEYER and GREGORY, Circuit Judges, and HAMILTON, 

Senior Circuit Judge.

Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion.

Robert Joseph Blake, Appellant Pro Se.

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.
2

PER CURIAM:

Robert Joseph Blake appeals the district court’s order 

denying relief on his 42 U.S.C. § 1983 (2006) complaint. The 

district court referred this case to a magistrate judge pursuant 

to 28 U.S.C.A. § 636(b)(1)(B) (West 2006 & Supp. 2010). The 

magistrate judge recommended that relief be denied and advised 

Blake that failure to file timely objections to this 

recommendation could waive appellate review of a district court 

order based upon the recommendation.

The timely filing of specific objections to a 

magistrate judge’s recommendation is necessary to preserve 

appellate review of the substance of that recommendation when 

the parties have been warned of the consequences of 

noncompliance. Wright v. Collins, 766 F.2d 841, 845-46 (4th 

Cir. 1985); see also Thomas v. Arn, 474 U.S. 140 (1985). Blake

has waived appellate review by failing to file objections after 

receiving proper notice. Accordingly, we affirm the judgment of 

the district court.

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
#### § 244.11 Renewal of application; appeal to the Board of Immigration Appeals.

If a charging document is served on the alien with a notice of denial or withdrawal of Temporary Protected Status, an alien may renew the application for Temporary Protected Status in deportation or exclusion proceedings. The decision of the immigration judge as to eligibility for Temporary Protected Status may be appealed to the Board of Immigration Appeals pursuant to 8 CFR 1003. The provisions of this section do not extend the benefits of Temporary Protected Status beyond the termination of a foreign state's designation pursuant to § 244.19.

[56 FR 619, Jan. 7, 1991, as amended at 56 FR 23497, May 22, 1991. Redesignated at 62 FR 10367, 10382, Mar. 6, 1997, as amended at 63 FR 63596, Nov. 16, 1998; 76 FR 53792, Aug. 29, 2011]
**Exhibit 23**

 

CONSENT OF INDEPENDENT REGISTERED CERTIFIED PUBLIC ACCOUNTING FIRM 

 

We hereby consent to the incorporation by reference in the Registration Statements on Form S-8 (Nos. 333-35059, 333-57977, 333-57979, 333-40666,333-40664, 333-40658, 333-100055, 333-109257, 333-19007, 333-27935 and 333-118558) and S-3 (No. 333-116464), of Hughes Supply, Inc. of our report dated April 12, 2005 relating to the financial statements, financial statement schedule,management’s assessment of the effectiveness of internal control over financial reporting and the effectiveness of internal control over financial reporting, which appears in this Form 10-K. 

 

/s/  PricewaterhouseCoopers LLP 

 

Orlando, Florida 

April 12, 2005
T hi s di s pos i t i on i s notappr opr i a t e f orpubl i c a t i on and i s notpr e c e de nte xc e pt * a s pr ovi de d by9th C i r . R . 36- 3.

T he pa ne l una ni m ous l yc onc l ude s thi s c a s e i s s ui t abl e f orde c i s i on ** w ith o u t o r a l ar g u m e n t. See F ed. R . A pp . P . 34 (a )( 2). NOT F OR P UB L I CAT I ON UN I TE D STATE S C OU RT OF APPE ALS FOR T HE NI NTH CI RC UI T M ARVI N A LE XA ND ERVA LL E, P et i t i on er , v. E R I C H . H O L D E R , J r ., A tto rn e yG e n e r a l, R e s p o n d e n t. N o. 10- 70728 A ge nc yN o. A 088- 347- 486 ME MOR AN DU M *

O n P e t i t i on f

orR e vi e w of

a n O r de rof

the B o a r do f I m m ig r a tio n A p p e a ls S ubm i tt e d Jul y12, 2011 ** B efo re: S C H R O E D E R , A L A R C Ó N , an dL E A V Y , C i rcu i tJu d g es. M arv i n A l ex an d er V al l e, a n at i v e an dci t i zen o f E l S al v ad o r, p et i t i o n s p ro se fo r r ev iew o f th e d ec isio n o f th e B o ar do f I m m ig ra ti o n A p p ea ls, d ism issin g V alle’s 

# FI LED JU L 13 2011 M OLLY C. DW Y ER, CLERK U . S. C O U R T OF APPE ALS10- 70728 2 ap p e a l f r o m th e i mmi g r a t i o n j u d g e ’ s d e n i a l o f h i s ap p l i c a t i o n s f

o ra s y l u m, w i thh ol di ng of re m ov al , and rel i ef un der the C on vent i on A gai nstT orture. V a lle c o n te n d s th a t h e w a s p e r s e c u te db yg an g s b a s e do n h is r e s is tan c e to g a n g r e c ru itm e n t, an da lle g e s th a t h is f a m ilyc o n s titu te s as o c ia l g r o up b e c au s e h is br othe ri s aga ng m e m be r . S ubs t ant i a l e vi de nc e s upport s the B I A ’ s de t e rm i na t i on tha tV a l l e f

a i l e d t o e s t abl i s h tha ta nyha rm he s uf f e r e d, orf e ar s , f r om ga ngs i s on a c c o u n t o f

ap r o te c te dg r o u n d . Se e I N S v . E l i as - Zac ar i as , 502 U . S . 478, 482- 84 ( 1992) ( f or c e d r e c rui tm e ntbype r s e c ut or s s e e ki ng t o f i l l the i rr anks i s not n e c e s s a r ilyp e r s e c u tio n o n a c c o u n t o f p o litic a l o p in io n ) ; B arri os v. H older , 581 F . 3d 849, 855- 56 ( 9th C i r . 2009) ( pe t i t i one rw ho r e s i s t e d gang r e c rui tm e ntdi d not e s tab lis h p e r s e c u tio n o n a c c o u n t o f s o c ia l g r o up o rp o litic a l o p in io n ) ; Sa n to sL em us v. Mukasey , 54 2 F . 3d 73 8, 74 7 (9th C i r. 20 08 ); Mo l i n a - Es tra da v . I NS , 293 F . 3d 10 89 , 10 95 (9th C i r. 20 02 ) ( no com pel l i ng evi dence the appl i cantw as pers ec ut ed on ac coun tof hi s f am i l y m em bers hi p). V a l l e a l l e ge s tha thi s due pr oc e s s r i ght s w e r e vi ol a t e d bythe i m m i gr a t i on j udge , butthe r e c or d de m ons tr a t e s tha tV a l l e r e c e i ve d af ul l a nd f a i rhe ar i ng. See La ta v . I NS , 20 4 F . 3d 12 41 , 12 46 (9th C i r. 20 00 ) ( no du e proces s vi ol at i on w here th e r e is n o s h o w in g o f

p r e ju d ic e .) PETI TI O N FO R R EVI EW D EN I ED .
(No. 75-CC-0314

#### Alice Wightman, Claimant, *v.*State of Illinois, Respondent.

*Opinion filed December 26,1978.*

Poch, J.

On October 15, 1974, a claim was filed by Alice Wightman in which she seeks to recover damages for injuries sustained by reason of tripping or falling over a metal divider which separated the grass from the pavement, at the Abraham Lincoln Tomb State Memorial in Oak Ridge Cemetery, Springfield, Illinois.

The facts of the case are as follows:

On June 24, 1973, Claimant and her husband, Charles W. Wightman, went to Lincoln’s Tomb at about 10:00 a.m. on a clear day to take a picture of the bust of Lincoln. Claimant testified that she could not get the bust focused properly so she stepped back and fell backwards, sustaining injuries to her right wrist and her gums.

Claimant stated that the cause of her fall was a metal rail along the blacktop or concrete.

At the hearing before the Commissioner, the Respondent called two witnesses on its behalf who testified as follows:

*547Eva M. Best, employee of State of Illinois, who was working at Lincoln’s Tomb on the date of the accident, stated that she asked the Claimant “What happened to her” and Claimant answered her by stating “Well, if I had been watching where I was going, I wouldn’t have fell.”

Arlie Harris, employed as a tour guide of Lincoln’s Tomb, who testified that the Claimant, in response to the question as to how the accident occurred, stated, “I tripped and fell.”

This Court has held that the State of Illinois is not an insurer of safety of persons who visit its parks and recreation areas.

Rather, visitors to State parks are invitees to whom the State owes a duty of reasonable care in maintaining the premises. The Court refers to, *Damermuth v. State 25 Ill.Ct.Cl. 353, 356; Kamin v. State 21 Ill.Ct.Cl. 467.*

To recover on her claim, Claimant bears the burden of establishing by a preponderance of the evidence that Respondent breached its duty of reasonable care, that she was free of contributory negligence, and that the negligence of Respondent proximately caused her injury.

The Court finds that Claimant has failed to establish that Respondent was negligent in maintaining the walkway on which she had her accident. Claimant offered no evidence to show that Respondent had actual notice of the condition of the metal divider separating the two paved areas. No grass covered the metal divider.

Nor did the Claimant offer any evidence from which the Court could conclude that the State had *548constructive notice of the condition of the walkway

Respondent may be charged with constructive notice of a dangerous condition when, from all the circumstances in a case, it is determined that Respondent should have been aware of the existence of the condition in the exercise of reasonable care as pointed out in *Joyner v. State 22 Ill.Ct.Cl. 213.*

There being no proof that Respondent was negligent, this claim is hereby denied.
Case 18-13565-KHK Doc 1 Filed 10/23/18 Entered 10/23/18 15:32:59 Desc Main

 Document Page 1 of 10
Case 18-13565-KHK Doc 1 Filed 10/23/18 Entered 10/23/18 15:32:59 Desc Main

 Document Page 2 of 10
Case 18-13565-KHK Doc 1 Filed 10/23/18 Entered 10/23/18 15:32:59 Desc Main

 Document Page 3 of 10
Case 18-13565-KHK Doc 1 Filed 10/23/18 Entered 10/23/18 15:32:59 Desc Main

 Document Page 4 of 10
Case 18-13565-KHK Doc 1 Filed 10/23/18 Entered 10/23/18 15:32:59 Desc Main

 Document Page 5 of 10
Case 18-13565-KHK Doc 1 Filed 10/23/18 Entered 10/23/18 15:32:59 Desc Main

 Document Page 6 of 10
Case 18-13565-KHK Doc 1 Filed 10/23/18 Entered 10/23/18 15:32:59 Desc Main

 Document Page 7 of 10
Case 18-13565-KHK Doc 1 Filed 10/23/18 Entered 10/23/18 15:32:59 Desc Main

 Document Page 8 of 10
Case 18-13565-KHK Doc 1 Filed 10/23/18 Entered 10/23/18 15:32:59 Desc Main

 Document Page 9 of 10
Case 18-13565-KHK Doc 1 Filed 10/23/18 Entered 10/23/18 15:32:59 Desc Main

 Document Page 10 of 10
### §832. Completion and maintenance of project; generation of electricity

For the purpose of improving navigation on the Columbia River, and for other purposes incidental thereto, the dam, locks, power plant, and appurtenant works under construction on August 20, 1937, at Bonneville, Oregon and North Bonneville, Washington (called Bonneville project in this chapter), shall be completed, maintained, and operated under the direction of the Secretary of the Army and the supervision of the Chief of Engineers, subject to the provisions of this chapter relating to the powers and duties of the Bonneville power administrator provided for in section 832a(a) of this title (called the administrator in this chapter) respecting the transmission and sale of electric energy generated at said project. The Secretary of the Army shall provide, construct, operate, maintain, and improve at Bonneville project such machinery, equipment, and facilities for the generation of electric energy as the administrator may deem necessary to develop such electric energy as rapidly as markets may be found therefor. The electric energy thus generated and not required for the operation of the dam and locks at such project and the navigation facilities employed in connection therewith shall be delivered to the administrator, for disposition as provided in this chapter.

(Aug. 20, 1937, ch. 720, §1, 50 Stat. 731; July 26, 1947, ch. 343, title II, §205(a), 61 Stat. 501.)

#### **Statutory Notes and Related Subsidiaries**

#### Change of Name

Department of War designated Department of the Army and title of Secretary of War changed to Secretary of the Army by section 205(a) of act July 26, 1947, ch. 343, title II, 61 Stat. 501. Section 205(a) of act July 26, 1947, was repealed by section 53 of act Aug. 10, 1956, ch. 1041, 70A Stat. 641. Section 1 of act Aug. 10, 1956, enacted "Title 10, Armed Forces" which in sections 3010 to 3013 continued military Department of the Army under administrative supervision of a Secretary of the Army.

#### Short Title

Act Aug. 20, 1937, ch. 720, 50 Stat. 731, which enacted this chapter, is popularly known as the "Bonneville Project Act of 1937".

#### Transfer of Functions

Functions of Secretary of the Interior with respect to Bonneville Power Administration transferred to Secretary of Energy by section 7152(a)(1)(D), (2) of Title 42, The Public Health and Welfare, with Bonneville Power Administration to be preserved as a distinct organizational entity within Department of Energy and headed by an Administrator.
§ 636.119 How does this part apply to a project developed under a public-private partnership? ( a ) In order for a project being developed under a public-private agreement to be eligible for Federal-aid funding (including traditional Federal-aid funds, direct loans, loan guarantees, lines of credit, or some other form of credit assistance), the contracting agency must have awarded the contract to the public-private entity through a competitive process that complies with applicable State and local laws.
( b ) If a contracting agency wishes to utilize traditional Federal-aid funds in a project under a public-private agreement, the applicability of Federal-aid procurement procedures will depend on the nature of the public-private agreement. ( 1 ) If the public-private agreement establishes price, then all subsequent contracts executed by the developer are considered to be subcontracts and are not subject to Federal-aid procurement requirements.
( 2 ) If the public-private agreement does not establish price, the developer is considered to be an agent of the owner, and the developer must follow the appropriate Federal-aid procurement requirements (23 CFR part 172 for engineering service contracts, 23 CFR part 635 for construction contracts and the requirements of this part for design-build contracts) for all prime contracts (not subcontracts).
( c ) The STD must ensure such public-private projects comply with all non-procurement requirements of 23 U. S. Code, regardless of the form of the FHWA funding (traditional Federal-aid funding or credit assistance). This includes compliance with all FHWA policies such as environmental and right-of-way requirements and compliance with such construction contracting requirements as Buy America, Davis-Bacon minimum wage rate requirements, for federally funded construction or design-build contracts under the public-private agreement.
[67 FR 75926, Dec. 10, 2002, as amended at 72 FR 45337, Aug. 14, 2007]
### §497a. Occupancy and use under permit of lands in Alaska for various purposes; period of permit; size of allotment; prohibitions; termination

The Secretary of Agriculture, in conformity with regulations prescribed by him, may permit the use and occupancy of national-forest lands in Alaska for purposes of residence, recreation, public convenience, education, industry, agriculture, and commerce, not incompatible with the best use and management of the national forests, for such periods as may be warranted but not exceeding thirty years and of such areas as may be necessary but not exceeding eighty acres, and after such permits have been issued and so long as they continue in full force and effect the lands therein described shall not be subject to location, entry, or appropriation, under the public land laws or mining laws, or to disposition under the mineral leasing laws: Provided, That nothing contained in this section shall prevent the said Secretary from canceling, revoking, or otherwise terminating a permit so issued upon proof of a breach of its terms and conditions or for other just cause.

(Mar. 30, 1948, ch. 162, 62 Stat. 100.)

#### **Editorial Notes**

#### Codification

Section was formerly classified to section 341 of Title 48, Territories and Insular Possessions.