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

**CERTIFICATION PURSUANT TO**

**18 U.S.C. SECTION 1350,**

**AS ADOPTED PURSUANT TO**

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

In connection with the Quarterly Report of VAALCO Energy, Inc. (the “**Company**”) onForm 10-Q for the quarterly period ended September 30, 2006, as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the “**Report**”), I, Robert L. Gerry, III, Chief Executive Officer of the Company, certify,pursuant to 18 U.S.C. § 1350, as adopted pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that to my knowledge: 

(1) TheReport fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) or 15(d) of the Securities and Exchange Act of 1934, as amended; and 

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

Dated: November 9, 2006
## MANDATORY SERVICE BULLETIN SB 14-09

Quest Aircraft Company, LLC

1200 Turbine Drive Sandpoint, ID 83864 Page 1 of 1 

## KODIAK

EFFECTIVITY:

Elevator Serial Numbers 0001 thru 0149

SUMMARY: Quest Aircraft received one report of cracks forming in the trailing edge skin of the elevator on the lower inboard corner, near the leading edge skin and torque tube. QUEST ® has determined that the area must be inspected on every aircraft as speci fi ed below, and doublers installed. The attached Field Service Instruction provides procedures for inspecting for cracking of the inboard upper and lower skins of the elevator and installation of doublers to repair existing cracking or prevent cracks from occurring.

COMPLIANCE: This Service Bulletin must be complied with prior to the elevator Time In Service (TIS) reaching 1500 hours or within the next 25 hours TIS, whichever occurs later. Elevator assemblies that have previously complied with revision 00 need not comply with revision 01 of this bulletin.

ATTACHED DOCUMENTS:

Document #: Document Title:

FSI-106 Elevator Doubler Installation

FAA APPROVAL STATUS: The resultant alteration to the affected aircraft described in the instructions attached has been shown to comply with the applicable Federal Aviation Regulations and is approved by the Federal Aviation Administration.

SPECIAL INSTRUCTIONS: Any deviations from the Service Bulletin or the accompanying Field Service Instructions must be coordinated with Quest Aircraft and approved by the FAA. The FAA is considering issuing an Airworthiness Directive to address this

issue.

CREDIT AND WARRANTY INFORMATION:
QUEST ® will supply one Service Kit FSI-106 per aircraft at no cost to owner, and for aircraft under factory warranty, reimburse up to 4 hours of labor costs associated with FSI-106. Contact QUEST Customer Service to order Kit,

and refer to the QUEST ® website for information on submitting invoices for labor reimbursement.

Quest Customer Service

Service Bulletin SB14-09 Phone: (208)263-1111 Toll Free: 1(866)263-1112

Email: Customerservice@questaircraft.com 

### NUMBER: SB 14-09

REVISION: 01

DATE: 12/11/2014

SUBJECT: ELEVATOR DOUBLER INSTALLATION 

# * M A N D A T O R Y ANDATORY S E R V I C E B U L L E T I N * SERVICE BULLETIN*

QUEST ® and KODIAK ® are registered trademarks of Quest Aircraft Design, LLC*MANDATORY SERVICE BULLETIN**MANDATORY SERVICE BULLETIN* EF FE CT IV IT Y 

### SU BJ EC T: E LE VA TO R DO UB LE R IN ST AL LA TI ON DA TE : 12 /1 1/ 20 14

SU BJ EC T E LE VA TO R DO UB LE R IN ST AL LA TI ON
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 Quarterly  Report of 24Holdings  Inc. (the "Company") on
Form 10-Q for the period ended June 30, 2002, as filed with the  Securities  and
Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the "Report"), I, Roger Woodward,  Chief
Financial Officer of the Company,  certify,  pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350,
as adopted pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that:

       (1)    The Report fully complies with the  requirements  of Section 13(a)
              or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934; and

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


                                                     /s/ Roger Woodward
                                                     ---------------------------
                                                     Roger Woodward
                                                     Chief Financial Officer

Dated:  August 15, 2002
[Federal Register Volume 69, Number 192 (Tuesday, October 5, 2004)]
[Notices]
[Pages 59584-59585]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 04-22357]


=======================================================================
-----------------------------------------------------------------------

DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY


Computer Software Available for License

AGENCY: Office of General Counsel, Department of Energy.

ACTION: Notice of computer software available for license.

-----------------------------------------------------------------------

SUMMARY: The U.S. Department of Energy announces that the following 
computer software is available for license: ``MASTER'' (Mathematical 
Software for Teaching, Education, and Research).

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: John T. Lucas, Office of the Assistant 
General Counsel for Technology Transfer and Intellectual Property, U.S. 
Department of Energy, 1000 Independence Ave., SW., Washington, DC 
20585; Telephone (202) 586-2802.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The above-captioned computer software was 
developed under the International Science and Technology Center (ISTC) 
project <greek-i> 1478.2. The software is used to solve physical 
problems by means of computer simulation. It is capable of simulating 
the following non-stationary processes in one-dimensional 
approximation: gas, fluid, and solid matter movement under gradients of

[[Page 59585]]

pressure, temperature, or energy release; propagation of shock, 
detonation, and sound waves in continuous and porous substances; 
destruction and spallation; heat transfer; and magneto hydrodynamics. 
The software is meant for undergraduates, post graduates, teachers, and 
researchers. It can be a supplement to courses on continuum mechanics 
and condensed matter physics. It can exhibit examples of classical 
problems, illustrate features of physical process, conduct qualitative 
and quantitative assessments of a phenomenon under study, and solve 
applied tasks.
    The software currently may be in need of revision, and the 
Department is looking for one or more private-sector parties who will 
revise and maintain the software at their own expense. The private 
sector party or parties will have the right to market the software to 
non-Government parties. The Government will retain an unlimited, 
royalty free, non-exclusive license in the original version of the 
software for Govern mental purposes.
    Parties will be given 45 calendar days from the date of this Notice 
to contact the Department. After the period for response has elapsed, 
respondents will be sent a series of questions on their plans for 
revising, maintaining, and commercializing the software and under what 
terms they would make it available to the Government. DOE will then 
decide which party or parties to select.

    Issued in Washington, DC, on September 29, 2004.
Paul A. Gottlieb,
Assistant General Counsel for Technology Transfer and Intellectual 
Property.
[FR Doc. 04-22357 Filed 10-4-04; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6450-01-P
#### § 3505.15 Is there an acreage limit for my application?

The acreage in your application must not exceed the maximum allowed for the permit. See § 3503.37 of this part for the acreage limits applicable for the different minerals. BLM will not issue a permit if it causes you to exceed the limits shown in the table in that section.
.9

(All Programs)

Any notice, demand, or request authorized or required by this contract shall

be deemed to have been given, on behalf of the Contractor, when mailed, postage

prepaid, or delivered to the Regional Director, Mid-Pacific Region, Bureau of

Reclamation, 2800 Cottage Way, Sacramento, California 95825-1898, and on behalf of

the United States, when mailed, postage prepaid, or delivered to the Board of Directors

of the _______________ ________________________________________________. The

designation of the addressee or the address may be changed by notice given in the same

manner as provided in this article for other notices.

Approved 7/14/76: Reviewed 11/84

Note: Other Reclamation officials may be designated when appropriate. Minor

editorial changes to accommodate the name and address of the contracting

entity are also acceptable.

All contracts

M.23
UIC Booklet 23Jan2002.p65 51
UIC Booklet 23Jan2002.p65 52
UIC Booklet 23Jan2002.p65 53
UIC Booklet 23Jan2002.p65 54
UIC Booklet 23Jan2002.p65 55
UIC Booklet 23Jan2002.p65 56
UIC Booklet 23Jan2002.p65 57
UIC Booklet 23Jan2002.p65 58
UIC Booklet 23Jan2002.p65 59
UIC Booklet 23Jan2002.p65 510
UIC Booklet 23Jan2002.p65 511
 e

v

wel

ns f

app

g an

o

w

ctio

on z

nfi

 to 

ust 

r

con

luid

UIC Booklet 23Jan2002.p65 512
UIC Booklet 23Jan2002.p65 513
UIC Booklet 23Jan2002.p65 514
UIC Booklet 23Jan2002.p65 515
UIC Booklet 23Jan2002.p65 516
UIC Booklet 23Jan2002.p65 517
UIC Booklet 23Jan2002.p65 518
UIC Booklet 23Jan2002.p65 519
UIC Booklet 23Jan2002.p65 520
UIC Booklet 23Jan2002.p65 521
UIC Booklet 23Jan2002.p65 522
UIC Booklet 23Jan2002.p65 523
UIC Booklet 23Jan2002.p65 524
UIC Booklet 23Jan2002.p65 525
UIC Booklet 23Jan2002.p65 526
UIC Booklet 23Jan2002.p65 527
UIC Booklet 23Jan2002.p65 528
UIC Booklet 23Jan2002.p65 529
UIC Booklet 23Jan2002.p65 530
UIC Booklet 23Jan2002.p65 531
UIC Booklet 23Jan2002.p65 532
UIC Booklet 23Jan2002.p65 533
UIC Booklet 23Jan2002.p65 534
UIC Booklet 23Jan2002.p65 535
UIC Booklet 23Jan2002.p65 536
UIC Booklet 23Jan2002.p65 537
UIC Booklet 23Jan2002.p65 538
UIC Booklet 23Jan2002.p65 539
UIC Booklet 23Jan2002.p65 540
### §1772b. Omitted

#### **Editorial Notes**

#### Codification

Section, Pub. L. 100–228, §4, Dec. 31, 1987, 101 Stat. 1557, which set forth provisions relating to the effective date of section 1772c of this title, including the making of certain findings by the Secretary of the Interior, was omitted from the Code as being of special and not general application.
UNPUBLISHED

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

No. 09-1530

GETSIE KIRUBA DIAMOND,

Plaintiff - Appellant,

v.

BON SECOURS HOSPITAL,

Defendant - Appellee.

Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of 

Maryland, at Baltimore. William D. Quarles, Jr., District 

Judge. (1:07-cv-02901-WDQ)

Submitted: February 22, 2010 Decided: March 9, 2010

Before WILKINSON, SHEDD, and DUNCAN, Circuit Judges.

Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion.

Getsie Kiruba Diamond, Appellant Pro Se. Darren M. Creasy, 

Sidney R. Steinberg, POST & SCHELL, PC, Philadelphia, 

Pennsylvania, for Appellee.

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.
2

PER CURIAM:

Getsie Kiruba Diamond appeals the district court’s 

order granting summary judgment in favor of her former employer 

in this employment discrimination action. We have reviewed the 

record and find no reversible error. Accordingly, we affirm for 

the reasons stated by the district court. Diamond v. Bon 

Secours Hosp., No. 1:07-cv-02901-WDQ (D. Md. Apr. 14, 2009). 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
#### Carmelo Bruno, Respondent, v. George W. Linch, as Receiver of the Second Avenue Railroad Company, Appellant.

Judgment and order affirmed, with costs. Ho opinion. Present — Ingraham, P. J., Laughlin, Clarke, Scott and Dowling, JJ.
## United States Court of Appeals FOR THE EIGHTH CIRCUIT

_____________ No. 98-1541NE

_____________ United States of America, * * Appellee, * Appeal from the United States

* District Court for the District v. * of Nebraska. * Mark W. Hamilton, * [UNPUBLISHED] * Appellant. *

_____________ Submitted: June 9, 1998

Filed: June 15, 1998

_____________ Before FAGG, BRIGHT, and BEAM, Circuit Judges.

_____________ PER CURIAM. Mark W. Hamilton appeals the district court's order adopting the magistrat e judge's recommendation and denying Hamilton's mot ion for dismissal of the indictment on double jeopardy grounds. Having considered the parties' submissions, we ar e satisfied th e district court committed no error of law and the motion to dismiss wa s correctly denied. Hamilton's arguments are foreclosed by this court's decision i n Walkerv . Rushing , 898 F.2d 672 (8th Cir. 1990). We thus affirm the district court
. See 8th Cir. R. 47B.-2-

A true copy. Attest: CLERK, U.S. COURT OF APPEALS, EIGHTH CIRCUIT.
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

31

DAY HIGH

 483

 487

 486

 483

 490

 496

 509

 525

 522

 519

 492

 495

 500

 488

 484

 494

 496

 502

 530

 504

 509

 505

 501

 514

 487

 496

 510

 516

 488

 512

 504

 459

 467

 471

 472

 474

 473

 476

 484

 488

 483

 481

 464

 449

 445

 446

 440

 436

 435

 431

 435

 437

 435

 434

 432

 435

 438

 442

 439

 434

 429

 422

 473

 476

 476

 477

 481

 487

 489

 497

 497

 493

 485

 473

 464

 456

 457

 455

 452

 452

 452

 450

 448

 451

 449

 446

 448

 450

 452

 452

 448

 445

 441

LOW MEAN

UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR

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

JANUARY 2007 WATER QUALITY REPORT RUN DATE: February 2, 2007

ELECTRICAL CONDUCTIVITY, UMHOS 

Comments:

0 reading indicates that the station was out of service.

VICTORIA CANAL ON THE MIDDLE RIVER
Minnesota's comments on the Draft PGP

Doucette, Elise (MPCA) 

to: 

Jack Faulk 

01/25/2010 06:46 PM 

Cc: 

"Flood, Rebecca (MPCA)", "Hora, Marvin (MPCA)", "Spitzmueller, Joseph (MDA)", "Zachmann, 

Joseph (MDA)", "Hirsch, Steve A (DNR)", "Martin, Joe (MDA)" 

Show Details 

Jack: 

 

Thanks for the opportunity to comment. Attached are our comments. We look forward to reviewing the Fact Sheet and other 

supporting documents. 

 

Thanks! 

Elise Doucette 

Minnesota Pollution Control Agency 

Page 1 of 1

file://C:\Documents and Settings\jfaulk\Local Settings\Temp\notesFCBCEE\~web7733.htm 5/11/2010
FIRST DISTRICT COURT OF APPEAL

STATE OF FLORIDA

_____________________________

No. 1D16-4960

_____________________________

SAMUEL C. GOLDEN,

Appellant,

v.

ESTATE OF HANS G. TANZLER,

JR.,

Appellee.

_____________________________

On appeal from the Circuit Court for Duval County.

Peter L. Dearing, Judge.

December 10, 2018

PER CURIAM.

In Burdoo v. Plympton, this court held that “[a] court 

reversibly errs when a prisoner requests to appear telephonically[] 

and the court fails to issue an order directed to the Department of 

Corrections requiring the prisoner to appear telephonically.” 219 

So. 3d 170, 171 (Fla. 1st DCA 2017); accord Havenner v. 

Hutchinson, 162 So. 3d 1113, 1114 (Fla. 1st DCA 2015). In this 

case, that is what happened. 

REVERSED. 

ROBERTS, RAY, and WINSOR, JJ., concur.
2

_____________________________

Not final until disposition of any timely and 

authorized motion under Fla. R. App. P. 9.330 or 

9.331.

_____________________________

Samuel C. Golden, pro se, Appellant. 

Hans G. Tanzler, III, as Personal Representative of the Estate of 

Hans G. Tanzler, Jr., pro se, Appellee.
### **CHAPTER 51—DISTILLED SPIRITS, WINES, AND BEER**

Subchapter
Sec. 1
A.
Gallonage and occupational taxes
5001

B.
Qualification requirements for distilled spirits plants
5171
C.
Operation of distilled spirits plants
5201
D.
Industrial use of distilled spirits
5271
E.
General provisions relating to distilled spirits
5291
F.
Bonded and taxpaid wine premises
5351
G.
Breweries
5401
H.
Miscellaneous plants and warehouses
5501
I.
Miscellaneous general provisions
5551
J.
Penalties, seizures, and forfeitures relating to liquors
5601

#### **Editorial Notes**

#### Prior Provisions

The provisions of a prior chapter 51, Distilled Spirits, Wines, and Beer, were set out as:

Subchapter A, Gallonage and occupational taxes, comprising sections 5001 to 5012, 5021 to 5028, 5041 to 5045, 5051 to 5057, 5061 to 5065, 5081 to 5084, 5091 to 5093, 5101 to 5106, 5111 to 5116, 5121 to 5124, 5131 to 5134, and 5141 to 5149.

Subchapter B, Distilleries, comprising sections 5171 to 5180, 5191 to 5197, and 5211 to 5217.

Subchapter C, Internal Revenue bonded warehouses, comprising sections 5231 to 5233 and 5241 to 5252.

Subchapter D, Rectifying plants, comprising sections 5271 to 5275 and 5281 to 5285.

Subchapter E, Industrial alcohol plants, bonded warehouses, denaturing plants, and denaturation, comprising sections 5301 to 5320 and 5331 to 5334.

Subchapter F, Bonded and taxpaid wine premises, comprising sections 5351 to 5357, 5361 to 5373, 5381 to 5388, 5391, and 5392.

Subchapter G, Breweries, comprising sections 5401 to 5403 and 5411 to 5416.

Subchapter H, Miscellaneous plants and warehouses, comprising sections 5501, 5502, 5511, 5512, and 5521 to 5523.

Subchapter I, Miscellaneous general provisions, comprising sections 5551 to 5557.

Subchapter J, Penalties, seizures, and forfeitures relating to liquors, comprising sections 5601 to 5650, 5661 to 5663, 5671 to 5676, 5681 to 5690, and 5691 to 5693.

1  Section numbers editorially supplied.
NOT FOR PUBLICATION

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT

LEWIS A. HARRY, Jr., 

Plaintiff-Appellant, 

 v. 

DIANE BOHUSZEWICZ, CO IV East Unit; 

Z. YOUNG, Sgt. East Unit, 

Defendants-Appellees, 

and 

STATE OF ARIZONA; et al., 

Defendants.

No. 20-16657 

D.C. No. 2:19-cv-02234-DLR-JFM 

MEMORANDUM*

Appeal from the United States District Court

for the District of Arizona

Douglas L. Rayes, District Judge, Presiding

Submitted March 16, 2021**

Before: GRABER, R. NELSON, and HUNSAKER, Circuit Judges. 

Arizona state prisoner Lewis A. Harry, Jr. appeals pro se from the district 

* This disposition is not appropriate for publication and is not precedent 

except as provided by Ninth Circuit Rule 36-3.

** The panel unanimously concludes this case is suitable for decision 

without oral argument. See Fed. R. App. P. 34(a)(2).

FILED

MAR 24 2021

MOLLY C. DWYER, CLERK

U.S. COURT OF APPEALS
2 20-16657 

court’s order denying his motions for preliminary injunctions in his 42 U.S.C. 

§ 1983. We have jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. § 1292(a)(1). We review for an 

abuse of discretion. Jackson v. City & County of San Francisco, 746 F.3d 953, 

958 (9th Cir. 2014). We affirm.

The district court did not abuse its discretion by denying Harry’s motions for 

preliminary injunctions because the district court lacked authority to grant the 

injunctive relief requested. See Pac. Radiation Oncology, LLC v. Queen’s Med. 

Ctr., 810 F.3d 631, 636 (9th Cir. 2015) (when a plaintiff seeks injunctive relief, 

“there must be a relationship between the injury claimed in the motion for 

injunctive relief and the conduct asserted in the underlying complaint”);

Diamontiney v. Borg, 918 F.2d 793, 796 (9th Cir. 1990) (holding that in the 

absence of any other relationship between the injury claimed in the motion for 

injunctive relief and the conduct asserted in the underlying complaint, a plaintiff 

must demonstrate the challenged practices affect the plaintiff’s ability to litigate 

the action). 

We lack jurisdiction over the district court’s orders regarding discovery and 

order denying Harry’s motion for appointment of counsel. See Nat’l Wildlife 

Fed’n v. Nat’l Marine Fisheries Serv., 886 F.3d 803, 825 (9th Cir. 2018) (“Orders 

relating to discovery . . . are orders that regulate the conduct of litigation and are 

not appealable under § 1292(a)(1).”); Kuster v. Block, 773 F.2d 1048, 1049 (9th 
3 20-16657 

Cir. 1985) (order denying appointment of counsel is not a final appealable order).

Harry’s request for appointment of counsel, set forth in his opening brief, is 

denied.

AFFIRMED.
IN THE SUPREME COURT OF PENNSYLVANIA

MIDDLE DISTRICT

COMMONWEALTH OF PENNSYLVANIA,

Respondent

v.

JEFFREY ALAN GLOSSNER,

Petitioner :

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

: No. 834 MAL 2017

Petition for Allowance of Appeal from

the Order of the Superior Court

ORDER

PER CURIAM

AND NOW , this 30th day of May, 2018

, the Petition for Allowance of Appeal is

DENIED

.
### §57. Omitted

#### **Editorial Notes**

#### Codification

Section, act Mar. 3, 1925, ch. 462, 43 Stat. 1147, which authorized the Secretary of the Interior to allow employees in the Indian Service heat and light for quarters without charge, was not repeated in subsequent appropriation acts.
### §851. Repealed. Pub. L. 95–281, §1(b)(3), May 15, 1978, 92 Stat. 246

Section, act Aug. 3, 1956, ch. 909, §11, 70 Stat. 965, provided for nonabrogation by termination of supervision of tribal or individual water rights.
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 Agriculture

###### Natural Resources Conservation Service

# AGENCY:

Natural Resources Conservation Service.

# ACTION:

Notice of availability of record of decision.

# SUMMARY:

James W. Ford, responsible Federal official for projects administered under the provisions of Public Law 83-566, 16 U.S.C. 1001-1008, in the State of Tennessee, is hereby providing notification that a record of decision to proceed with the installation of the Cane Creek Watershed Remedial project is available. Single copies of this record of decision may be obtained from James W. Ford at the address shown below.

# FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

James W. Ford, State Conservationist, Natural Resources Conservation Service, 675 U. S. Courthouse, 801 Broadway, Nashville, Tennessee 37203, telephone (615) 277-2531.

(This activity is listed in the Catalog of Federal Domestic Assistance under No. 10.904, Watershed Protection and Flood Prevention, and is subject to the provisions of Executive Order 12372, which requires intergovernmental consultation with State and local officials)

Dated: September 23, 2004.

James W. Ford,

State Conservationist.

[FR Doc. 04-22030 Filed 9-30-04; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 3410-16-P