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

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

| In connection with the Quarterly Report of ALL Fuels & Energy      Company (the “Company”) on Form 10-Q for the period ended September 30,      2008, as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission (the “Report”),      I, Dean E. Sukowatey, President and Chief Executive Officer of the      Company, certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, as enacted 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: November 19, 2008. | ALL FUELS & ENERGY COMPANY |   |
|--------------------------|--------------------------------|--------|

| By: | /s/ DEAN E. SUKOWATEY |   |
|-----|-----------------------|--------|

|   | Dean E. Sukowatey, President and Chief Executive  Officer |
|--------|-----------------------------------------------------------|

|   |
|--------|

| A signed original of this written statement required by Section 906      has been provided to ALL Fuels & Energy Company and will be retained      by ALL Fuels & Energy Company and furnished to the Securities and      Exchange Commission or its staff uponrequest. |
|---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|
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

29

30

DAY HIGH

 5,600

 5,595

 6,070

 6,776

 7,179

 6,909

 5,723

 4,983

 5,343

 5,844

 6,571

 7,809

 6,448

 7,078

 6,791

 7,239

 7,005

 6,121

 6,247

 5,556

 6,204

 5,744

 3,968

 5,728

 3,897

 2,929

 1,978

 2,789

 2,854

 3,439

 624

 426

 540

 564

 588

 644

 572

 501

 525

 628

 1,373

 1,134

 634

 930

 490

 416

 351

 369

 550

 447

 477

 721

 318

 888

 468

 461

 368

 388

 483

 431

 2,567

 2,770

 2,913

 3,137

 3,391

 3,638

 2,816

 2,598

 2,762

 3,110

 3,693

 4,038

 3,701

 3,293

 3,243

 3,261

 3,060

 2,798

 3,113

 2,897

 3,123

 3,031

 1,795

 2,929

 1,781

 947

 626

 807

 1,087

 972

LOW MEAN

UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR

U.S. BUREAU OF RECLAMATION-CENTRAL VALLEY PROJECT-CALIFORNIA

NOVEMBER 2001 WATER QUALITY REPORT RUN DATE: December 18, 2001

ELECTRICAL CONDUCTIVITY, UMHOS 

14 DAY

ACCUM

MEAN

14 DAY

AVG

MEAN

 39,082

 38,731

 38,120

 37,562

 37,691

 38,866

 39,662

 40,055

 40,283

 40,448

 41,479

 43,020

 43,848

 44,427

 45,103

 45,594

 45,741

 45,402

 45,124

 44,383

 44,690

 45,123

 44,156

 43,975

 42,063

 38,972

 35,897

 33,411

 31,255

 28,966

 2,792

 2,767

 2,723

 2,683

 2,692

 2,776

 2,833

 2,861

 2,877

 2,889

 2,963

 3,073

 3,132

 3,173

 3,222

 3,257

 3,267

 3,243

 3,223

 3,170

 3,192

 3,223

 3,154

 3,141

 3,005

 2,784

 2,564

 2,387

 2,233

 2,069

Comments:

0 reading indicates that the station was out of service.

EMMATON TOP ON THE SACRAMENTO RIVER
No. 12,244.

#### People ex rel. Ernst v. Eldred, County Judge, et al.

Decided June 10, 1929.

Rehearing denied July 1, 1929.

Mr. W. R. Ramsey, for plaintiff in error.

Messrs. Smith & Brock, Mr. John P. Akolt, for defendants in error.

*En Banc.*

Mr. Justice Adams

delivered the opinion of the court.

This is a civil action brought on the relation of Ada Ernst, against Eldred, a public officer, and his bondsman, to recover damages for alleged official misconduct. The case was brought in Denver. It was removed to *175Fremont county for trial, on motion of defendants. Plaintiff thereafter moved to change it back to Denver.. Her motion was denied and she assigns error.

The writ of error will be dismissed because there is no final order or judgment to which the writ will lie. Sections 84 and 425, 1921 Code.

Writ dismissed.
#### § 76.128 What is a consolidated grant?

###### Cross Reference

Link to an amendment published at 89 FR 70335, Aug. 29, 2024.

A consolidated grant is a grant to an Insular Area for any two or more of the programs listed in § 76.125(c). The amount of the consolidated grant is the sum of the allocations the Insular Area receives under each of the programs included in the consolidated grant if there had been no consolidation.

# Example.

Assume the Virgin Islands applies for a consolidated grant that includes programs under the Adult Education Act, Vocational Education Act, and Chapter 1 of the Education Consolidation and Improvement Act. If the Virgin Islands' allocation under the formula for each of these three programs is $150,000; the total consolidated grant to the Virgin Islands would be $450,000.

(Authority: 48 U.S.C. 1469a)

[47 FR 17421, Apr. 22, 1982]
#### ELKHORN & JELLICO COAL COMPANY, Movant, v. Sabina HALE, Opposed.

Court of Appeals of Kentucky.

May 26, 1942.

Stephen Combs, Jr. for movant.

Astor Hogg, opposed.

PER CURIAM.

Appeal denied; judgment affirmed.
UNITED STATES BANKRUPTCY COURT 

EASTERN DISTRICT OF VIRGINIA

Richmond Division

IN RE:

LeClairRyan PLLC Case No.: 19-34574-KRH

Chapter 11

Debtor in Possession

OBJECTION OF SUPER-SERVER, LLC 

TO MOTION TO USE CASH COLLATERAL

COMES NOW Super-Server, LLC d/b/a Proxios, by counsel (“Proxios”), and objects 

to the Debtor’s Motion to Use Cash Collateral [Docket #13]. Proxios has reviewed the Interim 

Order entered by the Court as Docket # 41 and does not object to the form of the order. 

However, Proxios has requested but has not received a detailed budget reflecting the Debtor’s 

proposed use of cash past September 27, 2017. Without an updated budget, no creditor or 

party in interest can evaluate the relief sought by the Debtor. 

In addition, Proxios supports the Motion filed by the U.S. Trustee to convert the case 

to Chapter 7 and for the Chapter 7 Trustee to evaluate and propose a liquidation budget going 

forward in this case. 

Karen M. Crowley (VSB # 35881)

Joseph T. Liberatore (VSB #32302)

CROWLEY LIBERATORE P.C.

150 Boush Street, Suite 300

Norfolk, VA 23510

Telephone (757) 333-4500

kcrowley@clrbfirm.com

Counsel for Super Server, LLC

Case 19-34574-KRH Doc 89 Filed 09/19/19 Entered 09/19/19 15:25:56 Desc Main

 Document Page 1 of 2
1

WHEREFORE, for the reasons set forth above, Super-Server, LLC d/b/a Proxios 

requests that the Court deny the Motion to Use Cash Collateral absent circulation and approval 

of a proposed detailed budget to the creditors and parties in interest, and grant it such other 

and further relief as is just. 

Date: September 19, 2019 Respectfully Submitted,

SUPER-SERVER, LLC

/s/ Karen M. Crowley

Of Counsel

Karen M. Crowley (VSB # 35881)

Joseph T. Liberatore (VSB #32302)

CROWLEY LIBERATORE P.C.

150 Boush Street, Suite 300

Norfolk, VA 23510

Telephone (757) 333-4500

kcrowley@clrbfirm.com

Counsel for Super Server, LLC

CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE

I hereby certify that a copy of the foregoing Objection was served on September 19, 

2019, by electronic mail, to those listed on the attached Core Service List with an e-mail 

address and by first class mail upon those listed on the attached Core Service List without an 

e-mail address. 

/s/ Karen M. Crowley

Case 19-34574-KRH Doc 89 Filed 09/19/19 Entered 09/19/19 15:25:56 Desc Main

 Document Page 2 of 2
Document Headings

                    Document headings vary by document type but may contain                    the following:                  
                -                       the agency or agencies that issued and signed a document                    
                -                       the number of the CFR title and the number of each part                      the document amends, proposes to amend, or is directly                      related to                    
                -                       the agency docket number / agency internal file number                    
                -                       the RIN which identifies each regulatory action listed in                      the Unified Agenda of Federal Regulatory and Deregulatory                      Actions                    

                    See the                                          Document Drafting Handbook                                        for more details.                  

###### Department of Transportation

###### Federal Railroad Administration

          - [Docket Number FRA-2011-0026]

Although not required, the Federal Railroad Administration (FRA) is providing notice that it has received a petition for approval of a Railroad Safety Program Plan (RSPP) submitted pursuant to Title 49 Code of Federal Regulations (CFR) Part 236, Subpart H. The petition is listed below, including the party seeking approval, and the requisite docket number. FRA is not accepting comments on this RSPP.

## Long Island Rail Road

The Long Island Railroad (LIRR) submitted a petition for approval of an RSPP. The petition, RSPP and any related documents have been placed in the requisite docket (FRA-2011-0026) and are available for public inspection.

                    Interested parties are invited to review the RSPP and associated documents at the Department of Transportation's (DOT) Docket Management Facility during regular business hours (9 a.m.-5 p.m.) at 1200 New Jersey Avenue, SE., Room W12-140, Washington, DC 20590. All documents in the public docket are also available for inspection and copying on the Internet at                     *http://www.regulations.gov*.                

                    Anyone is able to search the electronic form of any written communications received into any of our dockets by the name of the individual submitting the document (or signing the document, if submitted on behalf of an association, business, labor union, etc.). You may review DOT's complete Privacy Act Statement in the                     **Federal Register**                     published on April 11, 2000 (Volume 65, Number 70; Page 19477) or at                     *http://www.dot.gov/​privacy.html*.                

Issued in Washington, DC on March 28, 2010.

Robert C. Lauby,

Deputy Associate Administrator for Regulatory and Legislative Operations.

[FR Doc. 2011-7840 Filed 4-1-11; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 4910-06-P
(No. 77-CC-0667

#### Phyllis Liddell, Claimant, *v.*State of Illinois, Respondent.

*Opinion filed April 28, 1978.*

*210Per Curiam.

Claimant, Phyllis Liddell, seeks from the Respondent a sum of $1,289.34 in damages as a result of the refusal of the State of Illinois to hire the Claimant as a corrections officer , at Jubilee Lodge, a male correctional institution located near Peoria, Illinois, for the sole reason, as determined by the Fair Employment Practices Commission (F.E.P.C.), that she was a female. The F.E.P.C. found that the State was not justified in hiring males exclusively inasmuch as there were openings whose functions could be fulfilled by female correctional officers as well as male correctional officers, even though the institution was one housing males exclusively. The F.E.P.C. found in fact that there was discrimination based upon the sex of the applicant and subsequently approved a settlement as attached to the stipulation of the parties as Exhibit “D”. The settlement reached, included interest at six percent compounded annually over a period of four years. Inasmuch as the State of Illinois is not liable for interest penalties unless specifically authorized by statute, . this Court has consistently refused to grant claims awarding interest penalties. It is the position of this Court that the determination of an unfair employment practice as determined by the F.E.P.C. will not be reviewed by this Court. A finding of unfair employment practices by the F.E.P.C. stands as unrefuted prima facie evidence of such violation before this Court and we are here only concerned with the amount of the damages to be awarded and the question of mit*211igation. We have reviewed the damages as submitted by the parties and find that the Claimant would have earned a total of $3,834.50 for the period of time from June 19, 1972, until September 15, 1972, the period for which claim is made herein, and that the Claimant’s actual earnings for that period of time amounted to $2,545.16 leaving unmitigated damages of $1,289.34.

Having reviewed the findings of the F.E.P.C. along with the terms of settlement and agreement and the interrogatories to Claimant and supplemental interrogatories to Claimant it is the opinion of this Court that the Claimant made a reasonable effort to mitigate her losses and that she is entitled to and is hereby awarded the sum of $1,289.34.
(No. 6664

#### John E. Reid and Associates, Claimant, *vs.*State of Illinois, Secretary of State, Respondent.

*Opinion filed May 3, 1973.*

John E. Reid and Associates, Claimant, pro se.

William J. Scott, Attorney General; Saul R. Wexler, Assistant Attorney General, for Respondent.

Per Curiam.
Tavenner & Beran, PLC

ATTORNEYS AT LAW

DAVID N. TABAKIN

DTABAKIN@TB-LAWFIRM.COM

20 NORTH EIGHTH STREET, 2ND FLOOR

RICHMOND, VIRGINIA 23219

TELEPHONE: (804) 783-8300

FACSIMILE: (804) 783-0178

FILE NUMBER: 02202-067

June 17, 2020

VIA ELECTRONIC DELIVERY

William C. Redden, Clerk of Court

United States Bankruptcy Court

701 East Broad Street, Suite 4000

Richmond, Virginia 23219

Re: Tavenner v. HMR Funding, Inc.

Lead Bankruptcy Case No. 19-34574-KRH

Adversary Case No. 20-03052-KRH

Dear Mr. Redden:

I am writing to request that you issue an alias summons in relation to the complaint in the 

above-referenced adversary case.

Should you have any questions or concerns, please do not hesitate to call me. Thank you 

for your assistance in this regard.

Very truly yours,

/s/ David N. Tabakin

David N. Tabakin

cc: LLT

Case 20-03052-KRH Doc 4 Filed 06/17/20 Entered 06/17/20 15:55:07 Desc Main

Document Page 1 of 1
§ 75.234 The conditions of the grant. Cross Reference
Link to an amendment published at 89 FR 70328 , Aug. 29, 2024.
( a ) The Secretary makes a grant to an applicant only after determining— ( 1 ) The approved costs; and
( 2 ) Any special conditions.
( b ) In awarding a cooperative agreement, the Secretary includes conditions that state the explicit character and extent of anticipated collaboration between the Department and the recipient.
(Authority: 20 U.S.C. 1221e-3 and 3474)
[57 FR 30338, July 8, 1992]
```

[Congressional Bills 116th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[S. Res. 301 Agreed to Senate (ATS)]

<DOC>

116th CONGRESS
  1st Session
S. RES. 301

 Honoring the 50\th\ anniversary of the return of the Indiana Rangers.

_______________________________________________________________________

                   IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES

                             July 31, 2019

     Mr. Braun (for himself and Mr. Young) submitted the following 
             resolution; which was considered and agreed to

_______________________________________________________________________

                               RESOLUTION

 
 Honoring the 50\th\ anniversary of the return of the Indiana Rangers.

Whereas the lineage of the 151\st\ Infantry Regiment of the Indiana National 
        Guard dates back to the formation of the 2\nd\ Regiment of Indiana 
        Volunteers in June 1846;
Whereas in 1968, Company D of the 151\st\ Infantry Regiment of the Indiana 
        National Guard was activated in preparation for deployment to Vietnam;
Whereas Company D of the 151\st\ Infantry Regiment was commonly referred to as 
        the ``Indiana Rangers'';
Whereas in December of 1968, the Indiana Rangers were deployed to Vietnam;
Whereas the Indiana Rangers were the only Army National Guard ground maneuver 
        unit to serve in Southeast Asia;
Whereas the Indiana Rangers served in Vietnam from December of 1968 to November 
        of 1969;
Whereas the Indiana Rangers earned more decorations during their year of service 
        in Vietnam than any other Army infantry company during any 1-year period 
        in the Vietnam War; and
Whereas in November of 1969, the Indiana Rangers returned to Indiana: Now, 
        therefore, be it
    Resolved, That it is the sense of the Senate that--
            (1) the Indiana Rangers that served in the Vietnam War 
        fought for the United States with bravery and honor;
            (2) the Indiana Rangers and all members of the armed forces 
        who served in the Vietnam War continue to be held in the 
        highest possible regard by their community and the United 
        States;
            (3) we honor the service of this unit on the 50\th\ 
        anniversary of the return of the Indiana Rangers; and
            (4) for the many that were willing to sacrifice for the 
        United States, and the many that did not return home, the 
        United States was preserved and will continue to prosper.
                                 <all>
```
Michigan Supreme Court

Lansing, Michigan

Stephen J. Markman

, Chief Justice

Brian K. Zahra

Bridget M. McCormack

David F. Viviano

Richard H. Bernstein

Joan L. Larsen

Kurtis T. Wilder,

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.

October 31, 2017

p1023 

# Order

Clerk October 31, 2017

153709

PEOPLE OF THE STATE OF MICHIGAN,

Plaintiff

- Appellee,

v SC: 153709

COA: 331788

Hillsdale CC: 15

- 393642

- FH

BRETT ANTHONY BOWDITCH,

Defendant

- Appellant.

_________________________________________/

By order of November 30, 2016, the application for leave to appeal the April 5,

2016 order of the Court of Appeals was held in abeyance pending the decisions in People

v Steanhouse (Docket No. 152849) and People v Masroor (Docket Nos. 152946

- 8). On

order of the Court, the cases having been decided on July 24, 2017, 500 Mich 453 (2017),

the application is again considered, and it is DENIED , because we are not persuaded that

the question presented should be reviewed by this Court.
§ 19.126 General rules for amending an operating permit. ( a ) *When and how to amend.* If there is a change in any of the information that the proprietor provided as part of the current approved application for an operating permit, the proprietor must amend the operating permit by submitting written documentation in accordance with this section to the appropriate TTB officer in writing within 30 days of the change unless another time period is specified in this subpart. ( 1 ) *TTB F 5110.25.* Except when a letterhead application or letterhead notice procedure is allowed under this subpart, the proprietor must amend the operating permit by submitting an amended form TTB F 5110.25, Application for Operating Permit Under 26 U.S.C. 5171(d). If the changes only affect parts or pages of the application for an operating permit the proprietor only needs to submit the necessary pages or information that will make the permit file current.
( 2 ) *Letterhead applications.* For certain changes specified in this subpart, the proprietor may submit a letterhead application instead of an amended TTB F 5110.25. The letterhead application must identify the distilled spirits plant for which the application applies. The letterhead application change is subject to TTB approval. The appropriate TTB officer may, at any time, require that the proprietor submit an amended application on TTB F 5110.25 if administrative difficulties occur as a result of the letterhead application.
( 3 ) *Letterhead notices.* For certain changes noted in this subpart only a letterhead notice is required. A letterhead notice does not require approval by TTB. The appropriate TTB officer may, at any time, require that the proprietor submit amended application on TTB F 5110.25 if administrative difficulties occur as a result of the letterhead notice.
( b ) *FAA Act permits.* If there are changes that affect a basic permit issued under the Federal Alcohol Administration Act, the proprietor must amend the basic permit in accordance with the procedures set forth in part 1 of this chapter.
(26 U.S.C. 5171, 5172)
#### Charles F. H. Johnson, Appellant, v. Lewis M. Isaacs and Others, Respondents.

Order affirmed, with ten dollars costs and disbursements. No opinion. Present — Ingraham, P. J., Clarke, Scott, Dowling and Hotchkiss, J J.
#### Harry Marra, Plaintiff, v. The New York Central and Hudson River Railroad Company, Defendant.

Motion for leave to appeal to the Court of Appeals denied. Present— Jenks, P. J., Thomas, Rich and Stapleton, JJ.; Burr, J., not voting.
| | EXHIBIT 32.1 | 
| | ------------ | 

|
|

| | CERTIFICATION OF CHIEF EXECUTIVE OFFICER PURSUANT TO 18 U.S.C. SECTION 1350 | 
| | --------------------------------------------------------------------------- | 

|In connection with the Quarterly Report of ICrystal, Inc. (the "Company") on Form 10-QSB/A for the period ending June 30, 2004, as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the "Report"), I, David Loflin, President of the Company, certify, pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002 (subsections (a) and (b) of Section 1350, Chapter 63 of Title 18, United States Code), 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 result of operations of the Company.

|
|

|Dated: August 23, 2004. | /s/ DAVID LOFLIN | 
|----------------------- | ---------------- | 

| | David Loflin President | 
| | ---------------------- |
No. 15,819.

#### In re Estate of Holland. Thompson et al. *v.*Thompson.

(193 P. [2d] 290)

Decided May 3, 1948.

Mr. Allyn Cole, Messrs. Groves & Banks, for plaintiffs in error.

Mr. R. H. Walker, Mr. Frank Delaney, for defendant in error.

Per Curiam.

The judgment is affirmed en banc without written opinion.