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





Ener1,
      Inc.


500
      West
      Cypress Creek Road, Suite 100


Ft.
      Lauderdale, Florida, 33309





August
      14, 2007





Securities
      and Exchange Commission


100
      F
      Street, NE


Washington,
      DC 20549





Re:
      Certification of Principal Executive Officer Pursuant To 18 U.S.C. Sec.
      1350





Dear
      Ladies and Gentlemen:





In
      connection with the accompanying Quarterly Report on Form 10-QSB of Ener1,
      Inc.,
      for the quarter ended June 30, 2007 as filed with the Securities and Exchange
      Commission, I, Dr. Peter Novak, Chief Executive Officer of Ener1, Inc., hereby
      certify pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, as adopted pursuant to Section
      906
      of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that:





1)
            such
                Quarterly Report on Form 10-QSB of Ener1, Inc., for the quarter ended
                June
                30, 2007 fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) or
                15(d) of
                the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 (15 U.S.C. 78m or 78o(d));
                and





2)
            the
                information contained in such Quarterly Report on Form 10-QSB of
                Ener1,
                Inc., for the quarter ended June 30, 2007, fairly presents, in all
                material respects, the financial condition and results of operations
                of
                Ener1, Inc.




/s/
                  Dr. Peter NovakDr.
                  Peter Novak
                Chief
                  Executive Officer
                (Principal
                  Executive Officer andDuly
                  Authorized Officer)




A
      signed
      original of this written statement required by Section 906, or other
      document authenticating, acknowledging or otherwise adopting the signature
      that
      appears in typed form within the electronic version of this written statement
      required by Section 906, has been provided to Ener1, Inc. and will be
      retained by Ener1, Inc. and furnished to the Securities and Exchange Commission
      or its staff upon request.





This
      certification is being “furnished” as Exhibit 32.1 to Ener1, Inc.’s
      quarterly report and shall not be deemed “filed” for purposes of Section 18
      of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 (the “Exchange Act”) or otherwise subject
      to the liabilities of that section, nor shall it be deemed incorporated by
      reference in any filing under the Securities Act of 1933 or the Exchange Act,
      except as expressly set forth by specific reference in such a
      filing.
#### § 136.102 Application.

This part applies to all programs or activities conducted by the Small Business Administration except for programs or activities conducted outside the United States that do not involve individuals with handicaps in the United States.
#### Morris Tableporter, Respondent, v. Schenectady Railway Company, Appellant.

Order affirmed, with ten dollars costs and disbursements. No opinion. Present—Ingraham, P. J., Clarke, Scott, Dowling and Hotchkiss, JJ.
#### Christine Van Buren, Appellant-Respondent, v. Ralph Van Buren, Respondent-Appellant.

Order unanimously modified by increasing alimony to $75 per week and as so modified affirmed, with $20 costs and disbursements to the plaintiff. No opinion. Present — Peck, P. J., Glennon, Dore, Van Voorhis and Shientag, JJ. [See *post,*p. 853.]
SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF NEW YORK

Appellate Division, Fourth Judicial Department

363 

KA 14-00938 

PRESENT: CENTRA, J.P., CARNI, DEJOSEPH, CURRAN, AND SCUDDER, JJ. 

 

THE PEOPLE OF THE STATE OF NEW YORK, RESPONDENT, 

V MEMORANDUM AND ORDER

SAMUEL TILLMAN, DEFENDANT-APPELLANT. 

 

THE LEGAL AID BUREAU OF BUFFALO, INC., BUFFALO (TIMOTHY P. MURPHY OF

COUNSEL), FOR DEFENDANT-APPELLANT. 

FRANK A. SEDITA, III, DISTRICT ATTORNEY, BUFFALO (ASHLEY R. LOWRY OF

COUNSEL), FOR RESPONDENT. 

 

Appeal from a judgment of the Erie County Court (Sheila A.

DiTullio, J.), rendered May 7, 2013. The judgment convicted

defendant, upon his plea of guilty, of assault in the second degree. 

It is hereby ORDERED that the judgment so appealed from is

unanimously affirmed. 

Memorandum: Defendant appeals from a judgment convicting him

upon his plea of guilty of assault in the second degree (Penal Law 

§ 120.05 [2]). Contrary to defendant’s contention, the record

establishes that he knowingly, voluntarily and intelligently waived

the right to appeal (see generally People v Lopez, 6 NY3d 248, 256),

and that valid waiver forecloses any challenge by defendant to the

severity of the sentence (see id. at 255; see generally People v

Lococo, 92 NY2d 825, 827; People v Hidalgo, 91 NY2d 733, 737).

Entered: April 29, 2016 Frances E. Cafarell

Clerk of the Court
Second Department,

December, 1947.

(December 1, 1947.)

#### Willie Cloud, Plaintiff, v. George J. Martin et al., Defendants, and Third Party Plaintiffs-Respondents. Adrian A. Henigson, Third Party Defendant-Appellant.

■ In an action in negligence, the plaintiff was a passenger in defendants’ automobile. His complaint alleges negligent operation by the defendant driver, causing the automobile to strike another vehicle, resulting in personal injuries to plaintiff. Defendants answered and served a third party complaint on the appellant, under section 193-a of the Civil Practice Act, alleging that the appellant had loaded lumber on to the defendants’ automobile in such a way that parts of it projected over the side of the automobile, without the defendant driver’s knowledge; that upon leaving appellant’s lumber yard and on the highway, the projecting lumber struck a parked truck, and as a result plaintiff was injured. It is further alleged that the' defendant driver was operating the car carefully and lawfully; and that if plaintiff recovers from defendants for his injuries, the appellant is liable over to defendants. Appellant answered and moved to dismiss the third party summons and complaint. Order denying the motion reversed on the law, with $10 costs and disbursements, and the motion granted, with $10 costs. Notwithstanding the amendment to the Civil Practice Act by the addition of section 193-a (L. 1946, ch. 971), the basic principle remains that impleader is limited to the prosecution of a “ claim over.” *(Fox*v. *Western New Yorh Motor Lines, Inc.,*257 N. T. 305.) No such claim exists where, as here, the liability of defendants to the plaintiff will not be fixed except upon a finding that the defendant driver was negligent in the operation of the automobile. Hagarty, Acting P. J., Carswell, Johnston, Adel and Sneed, JJ., concur.
Request for Information WM Aerial Innovations (FAA-2015-4843) 

9-AWA-AVS-333Exemptions (FAA) 

Dear Mr. Mendoza: 

This letter is to inform you that the following information is missing from your petition (Docket No. FAA-2015-4843).

This information is necessary for the Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) to process your petition.

z Provide a copy of the Motion Picture and Television Operations Manual (MPTOM) which is required by Order 

8900.1, Volume 3, Chapter 8, Section 1. If you wish for us to proceed without this manual and remove closedset filming from your proposed operation please inform of us of your intention by the requested response date 

listed below.

Please submit the additional information (non-proprietary) to your docket at www.regulations.gov. Once your

information has been submitted, please also send a copy of the requested information (and any proprietary 

information), as well as your comment tracking number from regulations.gov via e-mail to 333exemptions@faa.gov. If

you want us to process your request any further, we must receive the information described above by January 22, 

2016. If we do not receive the information, we will close the docket without notifying you further.

If you have any questions, please feel free to contact me at (202) 267-2999.

FAA Office of Rulemaking

Sent: Friday, January 08, 2016 7:16 AM 

To: wmaerialinnovations@gmail.com
HomeAbout NRCHow We RegulateCRGR Reviews

# CRGR Membership

The Executive Director for Operations (EDO) of the U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC) appoints the chairman and members of the Committee To Review Generic Requirements (CRGR). In addition to the CRGR Chairman, the Committee consists of one representative from each of the following NRC offices:
        - Office of Nuclear Regulatory Research (RES)
        - Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation (NRR)
        - Office of Nuclear Material Safety and Safeguards (NMSS)
        - Office of Nuclear Security and Incident Response (NSIR)
        - Office of the General Counsel (OGC)
        - One of the NRC's four Regional Offices

The CRGR Chairman reports directly to the EDO. The OGC representative is nominated by the NRC's General Counsel, and the regional representative is selected on a rotating basis from one of the NRC's four regional offices. New CRGR members are appointed as the need arises. Currently, the CRGR membership is as follows:
        - Marissa Bailey, Chairman (RES)
        - Craig Erlanger (NSIR)
        - Andrea Kock (NRR)
        - Robert Lewis (NMSS)
        - Mohammed Shuaibi (RIII)
        - Susan Vrahoretis (OGC)

In addition, RES designates one staff member to provide technical and administrative support for the CRGR. Currently, that support is provided by DyLanne Duvigneaud.

For more information, Contact Us About The Committee To Review Generic Requirements (CRGR).

 

Page Last Reviewed/Updated Friday, April 26, 2024

Section Navigation

#### Navigation

          - CRGR Membership
          - Procedures for Requesting a CRGR Review
          - Categories of CRGR Reviews
          - Content Requirements for Packages Submitted for CRGR Review
          - Results of Previous CRGR Reviews
          - Related Information About Backfitting and Regulatory Analysis
          - Contact Us

#### 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

Page Last Reviewed/Updated Friday, April 26, 2024
### [§179A. Repealed. Pub. L. 113–295, div. A, title II, §221(a)(34)(A), Dec. 19, 2014, 128 Stat. 4042]

Section, added Pub. L. 102–486, title XIX, §1913(a)(1), Oct. 24, 1992, 106 Stat. 3016; amended Pub. L. 104–188, title I, §1704(j)(2), Aug. 20, 1996, 110 Stat. 1881; Pub. L. 107–147, title VI, §606(a), Mar. 9, 2002, 116 Stat. 60; Pub. L. 108–311, title III, §319(a), Oct. 4, 2004, 118 Stat. 1182; Pub. L. 109–58, title XIII, §1348, Aug. 8, 2005, 119 Stat. 1056, related to deduction for clean-fuel vehicles and certain refueling property. Repeal was executed to this section, which is in part VI of subchapter B of chapter 1, to reflect the probable intent of Congress, notwithstanding directory language of Pub. L. 113–295, which repealed section 179A in part VI of subchapter A of chapter 1.

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

#### Effective Date of Repeal

Repeal effective Dec. 19, 2014, subject to a savings provision, see section 221(b) of Pub. L. 113–295, set out as an Effective Date of 2014 Amendment note under section 1 of this title.
**EXHIBIT32.1**

**CERTIFICATION OF CHIEF EXECUTIVE OFFICER AND CHIEF FINANCIAL OFFICER PURSUANT TO RULE 13A-14(B) OF THE SECURITIES EXCHANGE ACT, AS AMENDED**

This Certification is beingdelivered pursuant to the requirements of Section 1350 of Chapter 63 (MailFraud) of Title 18 (Crimes and Criminal Procedures) of the United States Codeand shall not be relied on by any person for any other purpose.

The undersigned, who are theChief Executive Officer and Chief Financial Officer, respectively, of InternetCommerce Corporation (the “Company”), hereby each certify that, to theundersigned’s knowledge:

TheQuarterly Report on Form 10-Q of the Company for the three months ended October31, 2006 (the “Report”), which accompanies this Certification, fully complieswith the requirements of Section 13(a) or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Actof 1934, and all information contained in the Report fairly presents, in allmaterial respects, the financial condition and results of operations of theCompany.
| Dated this 14th day of December, 2006. |                                          |
|---------------------------------------------|-----------------------------------------------|
|                                        |                                          |
|                                        |                                          |
|                                        | /s/  Thomas J. Stallings                      |
|                                        | Thomas J.  Stallings, Chief Executive Officer |
|                                        |                                          |
|                                        |                                          |
|                                        | /s/ Glen  E. Shipley                          |
|                                        | Glen E.  Shipley, Chief Financial Officer     |

 

Inaccordance with SEC Release No. 34-47986, this Exhibit is furnished to the SECas an accompanying document and is not deemed “filed” for purposes of Section18 of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 or otherwise subject to theliabilities of that Section, nor shall it be deemed incorporated by referenceinto any filing under the Securities Act of 1933.  A signed original of this written statementrequired by Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002 has been provided tothe registrant and will be retained by the registrant and furnished to theSecurities and Exchange Commission or its staff upon request.

----
U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission

Office of Public Affairs, Region IV

611 Ryan Plaza Drive - Suite 400

Arlington, Texas 76011-8064

RIV: 97-24 FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE

CONTACT: Breck Henderson April 7, 1997

OFFICE: 817/860-8128

STOLEN RADIOGRAPHIC CAMERA COULD POSE SERIOUS HEALTH HAZARD

The Nuclear Regulatory Commission has been informed that a portable radiographic

camera was stolen from Mattingly Testing Services' office in Billings, Montana, sometime during

the past two weeks. NRC officials are concerned because this device contains radioactive

material and could pose a serious health hazard if the radioactive material is removed from its

protective container.

The NRC, which regulates the use of radioactive materials in Montana, is working with the

Yellowstone County Sheriff's department and officials of Mattingly to recover the stolen camera.

The NRC understands that Mattingly has offered a $500-reward for return of the camera.

The camera is a toaster-sized stainless steel box measuring 11 inches in length, four

inches in width, and nine inches in height, with a handle at the top. It was clearly marked as

containing radioactive material, but may have been defaced since being stolen. The camera

weighs 52 pounds.

The radioactive source is normally locked within the shielded camera so that it will not

pose any danger to anyone coming in contact with it. However, if the radioactive source is

removed from the steel container it is extremely hazardous. Although the effects of radiation

would not be noticed immediately, serious radiation burns and tissue damage could appear within

days if the unshielded source was kept in close contact with a person for even a few minutes.

The radioactive source is in a metal capsule attached to the end of a steel wire about eight

inches long and one-eighth inch in diameter. The stolen device may have been discarded along

the roadside or other public area if the thieves had no further use for it.

If anyone should see this device or source lying about unprotected, their immediate action

should be to avoid contact with it and, as quickly as possible, call the Yellowstone County Sheriff's

Office at 406-256-2935, Mattingly Testing Services at 406-248-6375, or call the NRC collect at

301-816-5100.

Do not attempt to pick up the source wire or place it in any type of container. Trained

specialists from Mattingly, the police, or the NRC are available to respond quickly.

The NRC wishes to re-emphasize the urgency of recovering this radiographic device as

quickly as possible and urges the people in Billings and the surrounding areas to be alert for it.
#### In the Matter of the Application of William Robert Koerner for Admission to Practice as an Attorney. (From the State of Minnesota.)

—Application granted. Present — Lewis, P. J., Johnston, Adel, Sneed and Wenzel, JJ.
### §103. Nonenforceability of undertakings in conflict with public policy; "yellow dog" contracts

Any undertaking or promise, such as is described in this section, or any other undertaking or promise in conflict with the public policy declared in section 102 of this title, is declared to be contrary to the public policy of the United States, shall not be enforceable in any court of the United States and shall not afford any basis for the granting of legal or equitable relief by any such court, including specifically the following:

Every undertaking or promise hereafter made, whether written or oral, express or implied, constituting or contained in any contract or agreement of hiring or employment between any individual, firm, company, association, or corporation, and any employee or prospective employee of the same, whereby

(a) Either party to such contract or agreement undertakes or promises not to join, become, or remain a member of any labor organization or of any employer organization; or

(b) Either party to such contract or agreement undertakes or promises that he will withdraw from an employment relation in the event that he joins, becomes, or remains a member of any labor organization or of any employer organization.

(Mar. 23, 1932, ch. 90, §3, 47 Stat. 70.)
NASA LogoNTRSNTRS - NASA Technical Reports ServerSearchmore_vertCollectionsAboutNewsHelpLogin Back to ResultsScreen Cage Ion Plating (SCIP) and scratch testing of polycrystalline aluminum oxideA screen cage ion plating (SCIP) technique was developed to apply silver films on electrically nonconducting aluminum oxide. It is shown that SCIP has remarkable throwing power; surfaces to be coated need not be in direct line of sight with the evaporation source. Scratch tests, employing a diamond stylus with a 200 micro m radius tip, were performed on uncoated and on silver coated alumina. Subsequent surface analysis show that a significant amount of silver remains on the scratched surfaces, even in areas where high stylus load produced severe crack patterns in the ceramic. Friction coefficients were lowered during the scratch tests on the coated alumina indicating that this modification of the ion planting process should be useful for applying lubricating films of soft metals to electrical insulating materials. The very good throwing power of SCIP also strongly suggests general applicability of this process in other areas of technology, e.g., electronics, in addition to tribology.Document ID19920013035Acquisition SourceLegacy CDMSDocument TypeTechnical Memorandum (TM)AuthorsSpalvins, Talivaldis*(NASA Lewis Research Center Cleveland, OH, United States)*Sliney, Harold E.*(NASA Lewis Research Center Cleveland, OH, United States)*Deadmore, Daniel L.*(NASA Lewis Research Center Cleveland, OH, United States)*Date AcquiredSeptember 6, 2013Publication DateFebruary 1, 1992Subject CategoryNonmetallic MaterialsReport/Patent NumberE-6391NAS 1.15:105404NASA-TM-105404Accession Number92N22278Funding Number(s)PROJECT: RTOP 505-63-5ADistribution LimitsPublicCopyrightWork of the US Gov. Public Use Permitted.Available DownloadsNameType19920013035.pdfSTIcloud_downloadcontent_copyvisibilityRelated RecordsThere are no records associated with this record.visibility_offNo Preview Available
 No Fear Act | Freedom of Information Act | Office of the Inspector General | Agency Financial ReportsNASA Web Privacy Policy and Important Notices | NASA Guidelines for Quality of InformationDisclaimers, Copyright, Terms of Use | Accessibility | NASA OCIO | USA.gov | NASA.govContact Us | Site MapSTI LogoNASA Official: JoAnne R. Calhoun Site Curator: STI Compliance and Distribution Services Last Modified: September 12, 2024
Third Department,

April, 1948.

(April 1, 1948.)

#### In the Matter of Rochester Gas and Electric Corporation, Petitioner, and General Public Utilities Corporation, Intervener, Petitioner, against Milo R. Maltbie et al., Constituting the Public Service Commission of the State of New York, et al., Respondents.

Motion denied upon the ground that the decision is final in the opinion of this court. Hill, P. J., Heffeman, Russell and Deyo, JJ., concur; Foster, J, dissents.
IN THE SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF MONTANA

No. DA 20-0330

STATE OF MONTANA,

Plaintiff and Appellee,

v.

BRADLEY MEFFORD,

Defendant and Appellant.

ORDER

Upon consideration of Appellant’s motion for extension of time, 

and good cause appearing,

IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that Appellant is granted an extension 

of time to and including September 29, 2021, within which to prepare, 

file, and serve Appellant’s opening brief on appeal.

Electronically signed by:

Mike McGrath

Chief Justice, Montana Supreme Court

August 24 2021

08/24/2021

Case Number: DA 20-0330
United States Nuclear Regulatory Commission

Office of Public Affairs

Washington, DC 20555

Phone 301-415-8200 Fax 301-415-2234

Internet:opa@nrc.gov

No. 96-157 FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE

(Friday, November 8, 1996)

NRC EXTENDS PUBLIC COMMENT PERIOD ON AGENCY'S

STRATEGIC ASSESSMENT OF REGULATORY ACTIVITIES

The Nuclear Regulatory Commission has extended the period

for public comment on the agency's strategic assessment

initiative until December 2.

The Commission decided to extend the comment period after

receiving several requests for more time to adequately address

the two dozen direction-setting issues resulting from the

assessment. The issue papers were published for comment in midSeptember.

The strategic assessment, initiated a year ago by Chairman

Shirley Ann Jackson, is a critical self-evaluation and

rebaselining intended to provide a sound foundation for the

agency's direction and decision-making for the rest of this

decade and into the next.

Last month, two public meetings were held -- in Washington,

D.C. and Colorado Springs, CO. A third meeting is currently

being held in the outskirts of Chicago, IL.

Detailed information on the strategic assessment,

direction-setting issue papers, and other background documents

are available electronically from the NRC's Home Page on the

World Wide Web at http://www.nrc.gov and FedWorld at 1-800-303-

9672. Paper copies are available by calling NRC's Public

Document Room at 1-800-397-4209.

Comments can be provided by December 2 by mail or

electronically. Send comments by e-mail to Internet:SECY@nrc.gov

or by letter to Mr. John C. Hoyle, Secretary of the Commission,

U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission, ATTN: Chief of Docketing and

Services Branch, Washington, D.C. 20555-0001.

####