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

 499.90

 499.31

 498.74

 499.54

 500.64

 500.04

 499.57

 500.12

 499.63

 499.06

 498.46

 499.49

 499.70

 499.50

 499.80

 499.20

 498.59

 499.47

 499.33

 498.72

 500.22

 500.82

 501.00

 500.48

 499.93

 499.38

 500.86

 500.35

 499.80

 499.29

 55,196

 54,567

 53,963

 54,812

 55,997

 55,346

 54,844

 55,433

 54,908

 54,300

 53,668

 54,759

 54,983

 54,770

 55,090

 54,449

 53,805

 54,737

 54,588

 53,942

 55,541

 56,192

 56,387

 55,823

 55,228

 54,641

 56,235

 55,682

 55,090

 54,545

STORAGE

-226

-629

-604

+849

+1,185

-651

-502

+589

-525

-608

-632

+1,091

+224

-213

+320

-641

-644

+932

-149

-646

+1,599

+651

+195

-564

-595

-587

+1,594

-553

-592

-545

CHANGE

197

-8

2

740

909

-19

68

614

54

12

1

880

439

217

485

-2

-2

789

246

-7

1,126

650

418

36

20

26

1,120

35

20

42

INFLOW

 304

 304

 304

 306

 307

 303

 316

 314

 319

 317

 319

 307

 325

 323

 323

 317

 321

 317

 318

 317

 318

 317

 318

 318

 318

 319

 315

 313

 314

 314

POWER

 0

 0

 0

 0

 0

 0

 0

 0

 0

 0

 0

 0

 0

 0

 0

 0

 0

 0

 0

 0

 0

 0

 0

 0

 0

 0

 0

 0

 0

 0

SPILL

 0

 0

 0

 0

 0

 0

 0

 0

 0

 0

 0

 22

 0

 0

 0

 0

 0

 0

 0

 0

 0

 0

 0

 0

 0

 0

 0

 0

 0

 0

OUTLET

 7

 5

 3

 6

 5

 6

 5

 3

 0

 2

 1

 1

 1

 1

 1

 4

 2

 2

 3

 2

 2

 5

 2

 2

 2

 3

 1

 1

 4

 3

C.F.S.

UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR

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

NOVEMBER 2002 TULLOCH RESERVOIR DAILY OPERATIONS RUN DATE: 12/19/2002

RES.

EVAP

C.F.S.

COMPUTED*

ACRE-FEET

RELEASE - C.F.S. 

TOTALS -877 9,108 9,445 0 22 85

ACRE-FEET -877 18,066 18,734 0 44 169

SUMMARY

RELEASE (ACRE-FEET)

POWER 18,734

SPILL 0 18,778

 55,422

OUTLET 44

TOTAL 

NEW

MELONES

RELEASE (1)

 289

 41

 69

 835

 1,020

 54

 55

 459

 41

 55

 55

 904

 514

 277

 551

 55

 55

 859

 505

 14

 1,030

 615

 393

 14

 14

 14

 1,077

 14

 14

 14

 9,906

 19,649

*COMPUTED INFLOW IS SUM OF CHANGE IN STORAGE, RELEASES, AND

EVAPORATION.
Exhibit 32.1


                            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 of In Veritas  Medical  Diagnostics,  Inc.
(the  "Company")  on Form  10-KSB for the year ended July 31, 2006 as filed with
the Securities  and Exchange  Commission on the date hereof (the  "Report"),  I,
Graham Cooper, Chief Executive Officer of the Company,  certify,  pursuant to 18
U.S.C. 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 and 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.

A signed  original of this  written  statement  required by Section 906 has been
provided  to In Veritas  Medical  Diagnostics,  Inc.  and will be retained by In
Veritas Medical  Diagnostics,  Inc. and furnished to the Securities and Exchange
Commission or its staff upon request.

December 1, 2006





/s/ Graham Cooper
----------------
Graham Cooper
President and Chief Executive Officer
Editorial Note on Part 120
Editorial Note: Nomenclature changes to part 120 appear at 72 FR 50039, Aug. 30, 2007.

§ 120.643 Requirements before the FTA issues Individual Certificates. ( a ) *FTA issuance of initial Certificate.* Before the FTA can issue the Individual Certificate for a guaranteed portion of a loan, the original seller must provide the following documents to the FTA: ( 1 ) An executed SPGA;
( 2 ) A copy of the note representing the guaranteed loan; and
( 3 ) Any other documentation which SBA may require.
( b ) Review of documentation. SBA may review or require the FTA to review any documentation before the FTA issues a Certificate.
Exhibit 31.1
**CERTIFICATION OF CHIEF EXECUTIVE OFFICER**
     I, John M. Meyer, certify that:
     1. I have reviewed this annual report on Form 10-K of Premium Standard Farms, Inc.;
     2. Based on my knowledge, this report does not contain any untrue statement of a material factor omit to state a material fact necessary to make the statements made, in light of thecircumstances under which such statements were made, not misleading with respect to the periodcovered by this report;
     3. Based on my knowledge, the financial statements, and other financial information includedin this report, fairly present in all material respects the financial condition, results ofoperations and cash flows of the registrant as of, and for, the periods presented in this report;
     4. The registrant’s other certifying officer(s) and I are responsible for establishing andmaintaining disclosure controls and procedures (as defined in Exchange Act Rules 13a-15(e) and15d-15(e)) and have:
     a) designed such disclosure controls and procedures, or caused such disclosure controlsand procedures to be designed under our supervision, to ensure that material informationrelating to the registrant, including its consolidated subsidiaries, is made known to us byothers within those entities, particularly during the period in which this report is beingprepared;
     b) evaluated the effectiveness of the registrant’s disclosure controls and proceduresand presented in this report our conclusions about the effectiveness of the disclosurecontrols and procedures, as of the end of the period covered by this report based on suchevaluation: and
     c) disclosed in this report any change in the registrants internal control overfinancial reporting that occurred during the registrants most recent fiscal quarter (theregistrant’s fourth fiscal quarter in the case of an annual report) that has materiallyaffected, or is reasonably likely to materially affect, the registrant’s internal controlover financial reporting; and
     5. The registrant’s other certifying officer(s) and I have disclosed, based on our most recentevaluation, of internal control over financial reporting, to the registrant’s auditors and theaudit committee of registrant’s board of directors (or persons performing the equivalentfunctions):
     a) all significant deficiencies and material weaknesses in the design or operation ofinternal control over financial reporting which are reasonably likely to adversely affectthe registrant’s ability to record, process, summarize and report financial information; and
     b) any fraud, whether or not material, that involves management or other employees whohave a significant role in the registrant’s internal control over financial reporting.
Date: May 10, 2005    /s/ John M. Meyer   John M. Meyer Chief Executive Officer (Principal Executive Officer)
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA

CASE NO. 20-CV-22279-ALTONAGA

ANDRES REY,

Plaintiff,

v.

CHAD F. WOLF, ACTING SECRETARY

UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF

HOMELAND SECURITY,

Defendant.

______________________________/

CERTIFICATE OF INTERESTED PARTIES

Defendant, Chad F. Wolf, Acting Secretary, Department of Homeland Security, hereby files

the following list of persons (not including Plaintiff and his counsel), associated persons, firms, 

partnerships, or corporations that have a financial interest in the outcome of this case, including 

affiliates, parent corporations, and other identifiable legal entities related to it:

1. None

Dated: August 12, 2020 Respectfully submitted,

ARIANA FAJARDO ORSHAN

UNITED STATES ATTORNEY

By: /s/ Carlos Raurell

Assistant United States Attorney

Fla. Bar No. 529893

Email: Carlos.Raurell@usdoj.gov

United States Attorney=s Office

99 NE 4th Street, Third Floor

Case 1:20-cv-22279-CMA Document 15 Entered on FLSD Docket 08/12/2020 Page 1 of 2
Miami, Florida 33132

Tel: (305) 609-1469

Attorney for Defendant 

CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE

On this date, I filed the foregoing document with the Clerk of Court using CM/ECF.

/s/ Carlos Raurell

Assistant United States Attorney

Case 1:20-cv-22279-CMA Document 15 Entered on FLSD Docket 08/12/2020 Page 2 of 2
§ 109.330 ILP Relending Fund. ( a ) *General.* The ILP Intermediary must establish and maintain an ILP Relending Fund for as long as it has an outstanding balance owed to SBA under this program. The ILP Relending Fund must be in an account separate and distinct from the ILP Intermediary's other assets and financial activities.
( b ) *Contents of the ILP Relending Fund.* All ILP Loan proceeds disbursed from SBA to the ILP Intermediary must be deposited into the ILP Relending Fund. All payments received by the ILP Intermediary on loans made to Eligible Small Business Concerns must also be deposited into the ILP Relending Fund. The ILP Intermediary must not commingle funds from any other public programs (including other SBA programs) in this account.
( c ) *Interest earned.* The ILP Intermediary is not required to retain the interest portion of payments received on loans made to Eligible Small Business Concerns in the ILP Relending Fund or to retain the interest earned on the ILP Relending Fund in the ILP Relending Fund.
( d ) *Allowable uses of the ILP Relending Fund.* The ILP Intermediary must use the ILP Relending Fund to disburse loans made to Eligible Small Business Concerns under this program and to make payments to SBA on its ILP Loan; it may not use the ILP Relending Fund for any other purposes.
§ 113.115 Assurance required. ( a ) *General.* Either at the application stage or the award stage, Federal agencies must ensure that applications for Federal financial assistance or awards of Federal financial assistance contain, be accompanied by, or be covered by a specifically identified assurance from the applicant or recipient, satisfactory to the designated agency official, that each education program or activity operated by the applicant or recipient and to which these Title IX regulations apply will be operated in compliance with these Title IX regulations. An assurance of compliance with these Title IX regulations shall not be satisfactory to the designated agency official if the applicant or recipient to whom such assurance applies fails to commit itself to take whatever remedial action is necessary in accordance with § 113.110(a) to eliminate existing discrimination on the basis of sex or to eliminate the effects of past discrimination whether occurring prior to or subsequent to the submission to the designated agency official of such assurance.
( b ) *Duration of obligation.* ( 1 ) In the case of Federal financial assistance extended to provide real property or structures thereon, such assurance shall obligate the recipient or, in the case of a subsequent transfer, the transferee, for the period during which the real property or structures are used to provide an education program or activity.
( 2 ) In the case of Federal financial assistance extended to provide personal property, such assurance shall obligate the recipient for the period during which it retains ownership or possession of the property.
( 3 ) In all other cases such assurance shall obligate the recipient for the period during which Federal financial assistance is extended.
( c ) *Form.* ( 1 ) The assurances required by paragraph (a) of this section, which may be included as part of a document that addresses other assurances or obligations, shall include that the applicant or recipient will comply with all applicable Federal statutes relating to nondiscrimination. These include but are not limited to: Title IX of the Education Amendments of 1972, as amended (20 U.S.C. 1681-1683, 1685-1688).
( 2 ) The designated agency official will specify the extent to which such assurances will be required of the applicant's or recipient's subgrantees, contractors, subcontractors, transferees, or successors in interest.
1

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA

Case No. 20-cv-22168-COOKE/GOODMAN

ADAN ALEJO ALEA,

and other similarly situated individuals,

Plaintiffs,

vs.

AEROWAYS STAFFING 

SERVICES, INC., et al.,

Defendants.

____________________________________/

ORDER ADOPTING REPORT AND RECOMMENDATION

THIS MATTER is before me upon the Report and Recommendation (“R&R”) on 

FLSA Settlement of the Honorable Jonathan Goodman, U.S. Magistrate Judge, ECF No. 

30. The R&R concerns the parties’ joint motion for settlement approval, ECF No. 24.

Judge Goodman recommends I find the parties’ settlement agreement to be fair and 

reasonable and approve the settlement. Judge Goodman also recommends the action be 

dismissed with prejudice and this Court retain jurisdiction to enforce the terms of the 

Parties’ settlement. Neither party objected to Judge Goodman’s R&R and the time to do so 

has passed. After reviewing the parties’ motion, Judge Goodman’s R&R, and the Settlement

Agreement in accordance with Lynn’s Food Stores, Inc. v. United States, 679 F.2d 1350 (11th 

Cir. 1982), I find Judge Goodman’s Report clear, cogent, and compelling. 

Accordingly, Judge Goodman’s R&R is AFFIRMED and ADOPTED as Order of 

this Court. It is hereby ORDERED and ADJUDGED as follows:

1. The parties’ joint motion to approve settlement agreement, ECF No. 24, is 

GRANTED.

2. The parties’ settlement agreement is APPROVED. 

3. This case is DISMISSED with prejudice. 

4. This Court shall retain jurisdiction to enforce the terms of the settlement agreement.

5. The Court DENIES all pending motions as moot.

Case 1:20-cv-22168-MGC Document 31 Entered on FLSD Docket 05/19/2021 Page 1 of 2
2

6. The Clerk shall ADMINISTRATIVELY CLOSE this case.

DONE and ORDERED in chambers, at Miami, Florida, this 19

th day of May 2021.

Copies furnished to:

Jonathan Goodman, U.S. Magistrate Judge

Counsel of record

Case 1:20-cv-22168-MGC Document 31 Entered on FLSD Docket 05/19/2021 Page 2 of 2
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA

CASE NO.: 1:20-cv-22077-GAYLES

MARTIN L. MCCRAY,

Petitioner,

v.

STATE OF FLORIDA,

HARVEY RUVIN, and

CLERK OF COURT,

Respondents.

/

ORDER DENYING MOTION FOR LEAVE TO APPEAL IFP

THIS CAUSE comes before the Court on Petitioner Martin L. McCray’s Motion for Leave 

to Appeal in forma pauperis (“IFP”) [ECF No. 20] (“Motion”). The Court has reviewed the Motion

and the record and is otherwise fully advised. For the reasons stated below, the Motion is denied. 

Title 28 U.S.C. § 1915(a)(3) and Federal Rule of Appellate Procedure 24(a) govern 

applications to proceed with an appeal IFP. Even when a party has been permitted to proceed IFP

in the district court, the party may not take an appeal IFP in the appellate court if the district court 

“certifies in writing that it is not taken in good faith.” 28 U.S.C. § 1915(a)(3); see also Fed. R.

App. P. 24(a) (providing that a party may not proceed on appeal IFP if “the district court—before

or after the notice of appeal is filed—certifies that the appeal is not taken in good faith . . .”). An 

appeal is taken in good faith under § 1915(a)(3) if a litigant seeks appellate review of any issue 

that is not frivolous. Coppedge v. United States, 369 U.S. 438, 445 (1962). “Good faith” within 

the meaning of § 1915(a)(3) must be judged by an objective, not a subjective, standard. Id.

Case 1:20-cv-22077-DPG Document 21 Entered on FLSD Docket 10/07/2021 Page 1 of 2
2

Here, Petitioner’s appeal is frivolous and not taken in good faith. In dismissing the Petition, 

this Court explained (and later reiterated) that Petitioner cannot use Rule 60(b) to void a state court 

judgment. See [ECF No. 7 at 2]; [ECF No. 18 at 2]. The Court also denied a certificate of 

appealability because no reasonable jurists would have found the denial of Petitioner’s claim 

debatable or wrong. [ECF No. 7 at 4]. In his Motion for Leave to Appeal IFP, Petitioner presents 

no grounds for appeal. Rather, he incorrectly submits his request on the form to proceed IFP in 

district court and does not indicate which order he seeks to appeal.

Accordingly, it is ORDERED AND ADJUDGED that Petitioner’s Motion for Leave to 

Appeal IFP [ECF No. 20] is DENIED.

DONE AND ORDERED in Chambers at Miami, Florida, this 7th day of October, 2021.

________________________________

DARRIN P. GAYLES

UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE

cc: All Counsel of Record; and

Martin L. McCray, pro se

403163

Northwest Florida Reception Center

Inmate Mail/Parcels

4455 Sam Mitchell Drive

Chipley, FL 32428

Case 1:20-cv-22077-DPG Document 21 Entered on FLSD Docket 10/07/2021 Page 2 of 2
#### § 402.6 Price.

The price of land sold under this subpart shall be not less than that fixed by independent appraisal approved by the Commissioner.
HomeAbout NRC

# Fire Protection

Fire protection maintains safety and reduces hazards associated with fires. Fire protection studies the behavior, suppression, and investigation of fire and related emergencies, as well as the research and development, production, testing, and application of systems to detect and prevent fires and mitigate their consequences.

Consistent with the mission of the U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC), the following are the major areas in which the NRC is enhancing safety through fire protection.

Page Last Reviewed/Updated Friday, January 06, 2023

Section Navigation

#### Navigation

          - The Commission
          - Organization & Functions
          - Governing Legislation
          - Plans, Budgets, & Performance
          - Locations
          - History
          - Values
          - Commission Direction-Setting and Policymaking Activities
          - Radiation Protection
          - Fire Protection
          - Safety Culture
          - How We Regulate
          - Emergency Preparedness & Response
          - Counterfeit, Fraudulent, and Suspect Items
          - Public Affairs
          - Congressional Affairs
          - International Programs
          - State & Tribal Programs
          - Alternative Dispute Resolution Programs
          - Privacy Program
          - EEO/Civil Rights Program
          - About the NRC & Your Community
          - Contact Us
          - Career Opportunities
          - Contracting Opportunities
          - Grant Opportunities
          - Generic Schedules
          - NRC at a Glance

#### Spotlight

#### Choose a Section

                - The Commission
                - License Renewal Generic Environmental Review
                - Job Openings
                - Palisades Restart
                - Environmental Justice 
                - Pilgrim Water Releases
                - Monticello Tritium Issue
                - International Strategy 2021-2025
                - Tribal Liaison Program
                - MAP-X
                - Transformation at the NRC - Updated
                - OIG Hotline
                - Rulemaking Activity
                - Commission Documents
                - Advanced Reactors
                - Nuclear Security
                - Strategic Plan

#### Key Topics

            - Browns Ferry Fire
            - Baltimore Tunnel Fire
            - Fire Protection Fact Sheet
            - Fire Protection Exemption Database
            - Closing Fire Protection Issues
            - GAO Report

#### Related Information

            - Fire Protection Program for Operating Reactors

Frequently Asked Questions

Page Last Reviewed/Updated Friday, January 06, 2023
#### § 4170.2 Penal provisions.
EXHIBIT
32





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 Chancellor Group, Inc. (the "Company")
on Form 10-Q for the quarter ended March 31, 2009 as filed with the Securities
and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the "Report"), I, Maxwell Grant,
Chief Executive Officer and Principal 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 to the best of my knowledge: (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.




/s/
      Maxwell GrantMaxwell
      GrantChief
      Executive Officer
                and Principal Financial Officer


May 20,
2009
#### § 4.704 Decisions on appeals.

The Director, or an Ad Hoc Appeals Board appointed by the Director to consider and decide the particular appeal, will review the record and take such action as the circumstances call for. The Director or the Ad Hoc Appeals Board may direct a hearing on the entire matter or specified portions thereof, may decide the appeal forthwith upon the record already made, or may make other disposition of the case. Upon request and for good cause shown, the Director or an Ad Hoc Appeals Board may grant an opportunity for oral argument. Any hearing on such appeals shall be conducted by the Ad Hoc Appeals Board or a member or members thereof, or by an administrative law judge of the Office of Hearings and Appeals and shall be governed insofar as practicable by the regulations applicable to other hearings under this part.

[36 FR 7186, Apr. 15, 1971, as amended at 39 FR 2366, Jan. 21, 1974]
### §5663. Cross reference

**For penalties of common application pertaining to liquors, including wines, see part IV.**

(Added Pub. L. 85–859, title II, §201, Sept. 2, 1958, 72 Stat. 1407; amended Pub. L. 96–39, title VIII, §807(a)(57), July 26, 1979, 93 Stat. 289.)

#### **Editorial Notes**

#### Prior Provisions

A prior section 5663, act Aug. 16, 1954, ch. 736, 68A Stat. 695, consisted of provisions similar to those comprising this section, prior to the general revision of this chapter by Pub. L. 85–859.

#### Amendments

1979—Pub. L. 96–39 struck out reference to penalties for rectified products under part I of this subchapter.

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

#### Effective Date of 1979 Amendment

Amendment by Pub. L. 96–39 effective Jan. 1, 1980, see section 810 of Pub. L. 96–39, set out as a note under section 5001 of this title.
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE

SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA

Miami Division

Case Number: 20-22366-CIV-MORENO

WINDY LUCIUS, 

Plaintiff,

vs.

BATTERIES PLUS, LLC,

Defendant.

_________________________________________/

FINAL ORDER OF DISMISSAL AND ORDER

DENYING ALL PENDING MOTIONS AS MOOT

THIS CAUSE came before the Court upon Notice of Voluntary Dismissal with prejudice

(D.E. 10), filed on August 10, 2020. 

THE COURT has considered the notice and the pertinent portions of the record, and is 

otherwise fully advised in the premises. Defendant has neither answered the complaint nor moved 

for summary judgment. It is 

ADJUDGED that this Cause is DISMISSED with prejudice, with each party bearing its 

own fees and costs. See Fed. R. Civ. P. 41(a)(1)(A)(i). Further, all pending motions are DENIED 

as MOOT with leave to renew if appropriate. 

DONE AND ORDERED in Chambers at Miami, Florida, this 12th of August 2020.

______________________________________

FEDERICO A. MORENO

UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE

Case 1:20-cv-22366-FAM Document 11 Entered on FLSD Docket 08/12/2020 Page 1 of 2
Copies furnished to:

Counsel of Record

Case 1:20-cv-22366-FAM Document 11 Entered on FLSD Docket 08/12/2020 Page 2 of 2
Draw Yourself as a Park Ranger 

Whether we’re in a national park 

or at home, what can we do to protect 

special places like Yosemite? 

Yosemite National Park 2020 

USNPS