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

** **

** **

**Certification of CEO andCFO**

**Pursuant to 18 U.S.C.Section 1350,**

**AsAdopted Pursuant to**

**Section 906 of theSarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002**

 

 

 

In connection with theAnnual Report on Form 10-K of Consolidated Capital Properties III (the"Partnership"), for the fiscal year ended December 31, 2009 as filed with theSecurities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the "Report"), Steven D.Cordes, as the equivalent of the chief executive officer of the Partnership, andStephen B. Waters, as the equivalent of the chief financial officer of thePartnership, each hereby certifies, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, asadopted pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that, to thebest of his knowledge:

 

(1)   The Reportfully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) or 15(d) of the SecuritiesExchange Act of 1934; and

 

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

 

 

 

 

This certification isfurnished with this Report pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of2002 and shall not be deemed filed by the Partnership for purposes of Section 18of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, asamended.
17.205 Documentation. ( a ) The contracting officer shall justify in writing the quantities or the term under option, the notification period for exercising the option, and any limitation on option price under 17.203(g); and shall include the justification document in the contract file.
( b ) Any justifications and approvals and any determination and findings required by part 6 shall specify both the basic requirement and the increase permitted by the option.
[48 FR 42231, Sept. 19, 1983, as amended at 50 FR 1742, Jan. 11, 1985; 50 FR 52429, Dec. 23, 1985]
#### In the Matter of Agnes M. De Pietto, Petitioner, v Philip L. Toia, as Commissioner of the Department of Social Services, et al., Respondents.

Proceeding pursuant to CPLR article 78 to review a determination of the respondent State Commissioner of Social Services, dated August 4, 1977 and made after a statutory fair hearing, which affirmed a determination of the local agency to discontinue public assistance to petitioner and her children. Petition granted, determination annulled, on the law, without costs or disbursements, and respondents are directed to restore the benefits in question. Petitioner received $4,100 from the sale of her house. The local agency terminated her assistance (in the aid to families with dependent children category) on the ground that those funds represented available resources which petitioner was required to expend in order to reduce her dependence on public assistance (see 18 NYCRR 352.16 [a], 352.23 [a]). At the fair hearing requested by petitioner, the local agency merely produced a statement of its position, a notice of intent to discontinue benefits and the notes of a caseworker who interviewed petitioner. The notes indicate that petitioner took the proceeds from the sale of her house, together with $700 loaned to her by her husband, and repaid a loan to her cousin. Petitioner’s testimony supported this. The petitioner also produced a receipt for a $4,890 bank check payable to her cousin, a letter requesting her to repay the loan, an affidavit from her cousin indicating she received the check, and a letter stating that the cousin refused to return the funds. Nevertheless, the hearing officer determined that these funds were still available to petitioner. The State commissioner adopted that finding and affirmed the decision to terminate petitioner’s benefits. The determination was conclusory and not supported by substantial evidence. Although the strict rules of evidence do not apply to administrative hearings, total reliance on hearsay evidence has been held to be a denial of due process (see *Matter of Martinez v Sugarman,*42 AD2d 553). Although the position of the local agency was not based *entirely*on hearsay, the scant record hardly provides the substantial evidence required to support the decision (compare *Matter of Hagood*v *Berger,*42 NY2d 901, with *Matter of Ford v Dumpson,*47 AD2d 621). Although a hearing officer may reject a petitioner’s testimony as self-serving *(Matter of Donato v Wyman,*32 AD2d 1061), there was no evidence in the local *664agency’s records or the petitioner’s testimony which would undermine her credibility. There is no indication in this record of a lack of need and, therefore, petitioner’s minor children may not be deprived of the assistance they are entitled to receive (see *Matter of Paskoff v Toia,*56 AD2d 631; Matter *of Shook v Lavine,*49 AD2d 238; *Matter of Zabala v Lavine,*48 AD2d 880; *Matter of Ryan v New York State Dept, of Social Servs.,*40 AD2d 867). O’Connor, J. P., Shapiro, Cohalan and Hargett, JJ., concur.
- Skip to main content
- About Us
- Contact Us
- FAQs
-  Language Assistance ****   - English
  - español
  - 中文: 繁體版
  - Việt-ngữ
  - 한국어
  - Tagalog
  - Русский

U.S. Department of Education

U.S. Department of Education

            - Student Loans
            - Grants
            - Laws
            - Data

Laws & GuidanceGENERAL

About FOIA | About the Privacy Act | FOIA Reading Rooms | **Making a Request** | FAQs | Contacts | Links

----

## Privacy Act Statement

If you request information about yourself under the Privacy Act, you will be asked to provide either a notarized statement or a statement signed under penalty of perjury stating that you are the person who you claim to be and that you understand that the knowing and willful request for or acquisition of a record pertaining to an individual under false pretenses is a criminal offense under the Privacy Act subject to a $5,000 fine.

*You may fulfill this requirement by completing the following form*
                - Certification of Identity and Consent  (PDF, 1,142KB)

----

 

 Printable view

## How Do I Find...

          - Student loans, forgiveness
          - College accreditation
          - Every Student Succeeds Act (ESSA)
          - FERPA
          - FAFSA
          - 1098, tax forms

More >

## Information About...

          - Transforming Teaching
          - Family and Community Engagement
          - Early Learning

 

|  |
|--|
|  |
|  | No Related Topics Found |  |
|  |

----

*Our mission*

Student Loans
Repaying LoansDefaulted LoansLoan ForgivenessLoan Servicers

Grants & Programs
Apply for Pell GrantsGrants ForecastApply for a GrantEligibility for Grants

Laws & Guidance
Every Student Succeeds Act (ESSA)FERPACivil RightsNew IDEA Website

Data & Research
Education StatisticsPostsecondary Education DataED Data ExpressNation's Report CardWhat Works Clearinghouse

About Us
Contact UsED OfficesJobsPress ReleasesFAQsRecursos en españolBudget, PerformancePrivacy ProgramSubscribe to E-Mail Updates

----

          - Notices
          - FOIA
          - Privacy Policy
          - Accessibility
          - Security
          - Information quality
          - Inspector General
          - Whitehouse.gov
          - USA.gov
          - Benefits.gov
          - Regulations.gov
### §6010. Investigations and power to subpoena

#### (a) In general

The Secretary may make such investigations as the Secretary determines necessary—

(1) for the effective administration of this chapter; or

(2) to determine whether a person has engaged or is engaging in any act or practice that constitutes a violation of any provision of this chapter, or of any plan, rule, or regulation issued under this chapter.

#### (b) Power to subpoena

#### (1) Investigations

For the purpose of an investigation made under subsection (a), the Secretary is authorized to administer oaths and affirmations and to issue a subpoena to require the production of any records that are relevant to the inquiry. The production of any such records may be required from any place in the United States.

#### (2) Administrative hearings

For the purpose of an administrative hearing held under section 6008 or 6009 of this title, the presiding officer is authorized to administer oaths and affirmations, subpoena witnesses, compel their attendance, take evidence, and require the production of any records that are relevant to the inquiry. Such attendance of witnesses and the production of any such records may be required from any place in the United States.

#### (c) Aid of courts

In case of contumacy by, or refusal to obey a subpoena issued to, any person, the Secretary may invoke the aid of any court of the United States within the jurisdiction of which such investigation or proceeding is carried on, or where such person resides or carries on business, in order to enforce a subpoena issued by the Secretary under subsection (b). The court may issue an order requiring such person to comply with such a subpoena.

#### (d) Contempt

Any failure to obey such order of the court may be punished by such court as a contempt thereof.

#### (e) Process

Process in any such case may be served in the judicial district in which such person resides or conducts business or wherever such person may be found.

#### (f) Hearing site

The site of any hearings held under section 6008 or 6009 of this title shall be within the judicial district where such person resides or has a principal place of business.

(Pub. L. 101–624, title XIX, §1915, Nov. 28, 1990, 104 Stat. 3852; Pub. L. 102–237, title VIII, §802(3), Dec. 13, 1991, 105 Stat. 1882.)

#### **Editorial Notes**

#### Amendments

1991—Subsec. (b)(2). Pub. L. 102–237 struck out "section" after "6008 or".
<TABLE> <S> <C>


<ARTICLE>                     5
<LEGEND>
     This schedule  contains summary  financial  information  extracted from the
consolidated  balance sheet of Bryan Steam  Corporation as of December 31, 1995,
and the related  condensed  consolidated  income  statement for the  three-month
period  then ended,  and is  qualified  in its  entirety  by  reference  to such
financial statements.
</LEGEND>
<CIK>                                       0000014971
<NAME>                         Bryan Steam Corporation
<CURRENCY>                                U.S. Dollars
       
<S>                                                <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                                    6-mos
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          Jun-30-1995
<PERIOD-START>                              Jul-1-1995
<PERIOD-END>                               Dec-31-1995
<EXCHANGE-RATE>                                  1.000
<CASH>                                         841,032
<SECURITIES>                                 1,460,789
<RECEIVABLES>                                4,270,869
<ALLOWANCES>                                   0
<INVENTORY>                                  4,019,750
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                            10,866,085
<PP&E>                                       7,220,077
<DEPRECIATION>                               2,758,663
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                              15,637,591
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                        1,801,932
<BONDS>                                        800,000
<COMMON>                                       810,272
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                          0
<PREFERRED>                                    0
<OTHER-SE>                                     0
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                15,637,591
<SALES>                                     12,170,623
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                            12,170,623
<CGS>                                        7,918,151
<TOTAL-COSTS>                               10,827,328
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                               0
<LOSS-PROVISION>                               0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                              50,356
<INCOME-PRETAX>                              1,292,939
<INCOME-TAX>                                   554,682
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                            738,257
<DISCONTINUED>                                 0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                0
<CHANGES>                                      0
<NET-INCOME>                                   738,257
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                     3.86
<EPS-DILUTED>                                     3.86
        


</TABLE>
UNPUBLISHED

FILED: October 15, 2019

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS 

FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

___________________

No. 18-2488

(8:17-cv-01596-PJM) 

___________________

DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA; STATE OF MARYLAND

 Plaintiffs - Appellees

v.

DONALD J. TRUMP, President of the United States of America, in his official 

capacity and in his individual capacity

 Defendant - Appellant

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

SCHOLAR SETH BARRETT TILLMAN; JUDICIAL EDUCATION PROJECT

 Amici Supporting Appellant

FORMER GOVERNMENT ETHICS OFFICERS; DON FOX; MARILYN 

GLYNN; KAREN KUCIK; LAWRENCE D. REYNOLDS; AMY COMSTOCK 

RICK; TRIP ROTHSCHILD; RICHARD M. THOMAS; HARVEY WILCOX;

LESLIE WILCOX

 Amici Supporting Appellees

ADMINISTRATIVE LAW, CONSTITUTIONAL LAW, AND FEDERAL 

COURTS SCHOLARS

 Amicus Supporting Rehearing Petition
___________________

O R D E R

___________________

A majority of judges in regular active service and not disqualified having 

voted in a requested poll of the court to grant the petition for rehearing en banc,

IT IS ORDERED that rehearing en banc is granted.

The parties and any amici curiae shall file 15 additional paper copies of their 

briefs and appendices previously filed in this case within 10 days.

This case is scheduled for oral argument on Thursday, December 12, 2019, in 

Richmond, Virginia.

For the Court

/s/ Patricia S. Connor, Clerk
Case: 1:12-cv-00244 Document #: 109 Filed: 10/11/13 Page 1 of 26 PageID #:601
Case: 1:12-cv-00244 Document #: 109 Filed: 10/11/13 Page 2 of 26 PageID #:602
Case: 1:12-cv-00244 Document #: 109 Filed: 10/11/13 Page 3 of 26 PageID #:603
Case: 1:12-cv-00244 Document #: 109 Filed: 10/11/13 Page 4 of 26 PageID #:604
Case: 1:12-cv-00244 Document #: 109 Filed: 10/11/13 Page 5 of 26 PageID #:605
Case: 1:12-cv-00244 Document #: 109 Filed: 10/11/13 Page 6 of 26 PageID #:606
Case: 1:12-cv-00244 Document #: 109 Filed: 10/11/13 Page 7 of 26 PageID #:607
Case: 1:12-cv-00244 Document #: 109 Filed: 10/11/13 Page 8 of 26 PageID #:608
Case: 1:12-cv-00244 Document #: 109 Filed: 10/11/13 Page 9 of 26 PageID #:609
Case: 1:12-cv-00244 Document #: 109 Filed: 10/11/13 Page 10 of 26 PageID #:610
Case: 1:12-cv-00244 Document #: 109 Filed: 10/11/13 Page 11 of 26 PageID #:611
Case: 1:12-cv-00244 Document #: 109 Filed: 10/11/13 Page 12 of 26 PageID #:612
Case: 1:12-cv-00244 Document #: 109 Filed: 10/11/13 Page 13 of 26 PageID #:613
Case: 1:12-cv-00244 Document #: 109 Filed: 10/11/13 Page 14 of 26 PageID #:614
Case: 1:12-cv-00244 Document #: 109 Filed: 10/11/13 Page 15 of 26 PageID #:615
Case: 1:12-cv-00244 Document #: 109 Filed: 10/11/13 Page 16 of 26 PageID #:616
Case: 1:12-cv-00244 Document #: 109 Filed: 10/11/13 Page 17 of 26 PageID #:617
Case: 1:12-cv-00244 Document #: 109 Filed: 10/11/13 Page 18 of 26 PageID #:618
Case: 1:12-cv-00244 Document #: 109 Filed: 10/11/13 Page 19 of 26 PageID #:619
Case: 1:12-cv-00244 Document #: 109 Filed: 10/11/13 Page 20 of 26 PageID #:620
Case: 1:12-cv-00244 Document #: 109 Filed: 10/11/13 Page 21 of 26 PageID #:621
Case: 1:12-cv-00244 Document #: 109 Filed: 10/11/13 Page 22 of 26 PageID #:622
Case: 1:12-cv-00244 Document #: 109 Filed: 10/11/13 Page 23 of 26 PageID #:623
Case: 1:12-cv-00244 Document #: 109 Filed: 10/11/13 Page 24 of 26 PageID #:624
Case: 1:12-cv-00244 Document #: 109 Filed: 10/11/13 Page 25 of 26 PageID #:625
Case: 1:12-cv-00244 Document #: 109 Filed: 10/11/13 Page 26 of 26 PageID #:626
Exhibit 12.1



BNSF RAILWAY COMPANY and SUBSIDIARIES

COMPUTATION OF RATIO OF EARNINGS TO FIXED CHARGES

(In Millions, Except Ratio Amounts)

(Unaudited)



|                                                                                            |  |      |       |      |   |      
|------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- |  | ---- | ----- | ---- | - | -----
|Six Months Ended June 30,                                                                   |  | 2005 |       | 2004
|Earnings:                                                                                   |  |      |       |      |   |      
|                                                                                            |  |     
|Income before income taxes and cumulative effect of accounting change                       |  | $    | 1,300 |      | $ | 871  
|Add:                                                                                        |  |      |       |      |   |      
|Interest and fixed charges excluding capitalized interest                                   |  |      | 68    |      |   | 66   
|Portion of rent under long-term operating leases representative of an interest factor       |  |      | 102   |      |   | 95   
|Distributed income of investees accounted for under the equity method                       |  |      | 2     |      |   | 2    
|Amortization of capitalized interest                                                        |  |      | 4     |      |   | 4    
|Less: Undistributed equity in earnings of investments accounted for under the equity method |  |      | 4     |      |   | 7    
|                                                                                            |  |      |       |      |   |      
|Total earnings available for fixed charges                                                  |  | $    | 1,472 |      | $ | 1,031
|                                                                                            |  |      |       |      |   |      
|Fixed charges:                                                                              |  |      |       |      |   |      
|                                                                                            |  |     
|Interest and fixed charges                                                                  |  | $    | 74    |      | $ | 71   
|Portion of rent under long-term operating leases representative of an interest factor       |  |      | 102   |      |   | 95   
|                                                                                            |  |      |       |      |   |      
|Total fixed charges                                                                         |  | $    | 176   |      | $ | 166  
|                                                                                            |  |      |       |      |   |      
|Ratio of earnings to fixed charges                                                          |  |      | 8.36x |      |   | 6.21x
Case: 1:12-cr-00103 Document #: 1 Filed: 02/14/12 Page 1 of 6 PageID #:1

Case: 1:12-cr-00103 Document #: 1 Filed: 02/14/12 Page 2 of 6 PageID #:2

Case: 1:12-cr-00103 Document #: 1 Filed: 02/14/12 Page 3 of 6 PageID #:3

Case: 1:12-cr-00103 Document #: 1 Filed: 02/14/12 Page 4 of 6 PageID #:4

Case: 1:12-cr-00103 Document #: 1 Filed: 02/14/12 Page 5 of 6 PageID #:5

Case: 1:12-cr-00103 Document #: 1 Filed: 02/14/12 Page 6 of 6 PageID #:6
11.604 Solicitation provision and contract clause. ( a ) Contracting officers shall insert the provision at 52.211-14, Notice of Priority Rating for National Defense, Emergency Preparedness, and Energy Program Use, in solicitations when the contract to be awarded will be a rated order.
( b ) Contracting officers shall insert the clause at 52.211-15, Defense Priority and Allocation Requirements, in contracts that are rated orders.
[51 FR 19714, May 30, 1986. Redesignated and amended at 60 FR 48241, Sept. 18, 1995; 73 FR 21785, Apr. 22, 2008]
Exhibit 31.2
 
      a)
    
    Designed such disclosure controls and procedures, or caused such disclosure controls
and procedures to be designed under our supervision, to ensure that material information
relating to the registrant, including its consolidated subsidiaries, is made known to us by
others within those entities, particularly during the period in which this report is being
prepared;b)
    
    [Intentionally omitted];c)
    
    Evaluated the effectiveness of the registrants disclosure controls and procedures and
presented in this report our conclusions about the effectiveness of the disclosure controls
and procedures, as of the end of the period covered by this report based on such
evaluation; andd)
    
    Disclosed in this report any change in the registrants internal control over financial
reporting that occurred during the registrants most recent fiscal quarter (the
registrants fourth fiscal quarter in the case of an annual report) that has materially
affected, or is reasonably likely to materially affect, the registrants internal control
over financial reporting; and
  a)
    
    All significant deficiencies and material weaknesses in the design or operation of
internal control over financial reporting which are reasonably likely to adversely affect
the registrants ability to record, process, summarize and report financial information;
andb)
    
    Any fraud, whether or not material, that involves management or other employees who
have a significant role in the registrants internal control over financial reporting.
 June 11, 2008
    /s/ J. Per BrodinJ. Per BrodinChief Financial Officer
### D ISTRICT 

### C OURT 

### O F 

### A PPEAL 

### O F 

### T HE 

### S TATE 

### O F 

### F LORIDA

F OURTH D ISTRICT

VICTORIA OLEFIR

, Appellant,

v.

KONSTANTIN OLEFIR

, Appellee.

No. 4D 22

- 1071

[ July 28, 2022 ]

Appeal from the Circuit Court for the Seventeenth Judicial Circuit,

Broward County ; Dale C. Cohen , Judge; L.T. Case No. FMCE

- 21

- 015656

.

Bruce Prober of The Law Offices of Bruce Prober, P.A., Fort Lauderdale,

for appellant.

Nancy A. Hass of Nancy A. Hass, P.A., Fort Lauderdale, for appellee.

P ER C URIAM

.

Affirmed.

M AY

, D AMOORGIAN and F ORST

, JJ., concur.

* * *

Not final until disposition of timely filed motion for rehearing.
1 Pursuant to 5 T H C I R . R. 47.5, the Court has determined that

this opinion should not be published and is not precedent except under the limited circumstances set forth in 5 TH C IR . R. 47.5.4. UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS For the Fifth Circuit

No. 97-40694

KENNETH MICHAEL HULSEY, Plaintiff-Appellant,

VERSUS
AMERICAN BRANDS INCORPORATED; ET AL Defendants, BROWN & WILLIAMSON TOBACCO CORP., Individually and as Successor by Merger to the American Tobacco Company; LORILLARD TOBACCO COMPANY; PHILLIP MORRIS INCORPORATED;

R J REYNOLDS TOBACCO COMPANY, Defendants-Appellees.

Appeal from the United States District Court For the Southern District of Texas

(C-97-CV-2) March 2, 1998
Before REYNALDO G. GARZA, DUHE, and STEWART, Circuit Judges.
PER CURIAM: 1 Having thoroughly reviewed the record, and the briefs of counsel, and having had the benefit of spirited argument by counsel for al l parties, we are unable to discern any error committed by the district court. Accordingly, the judgment of the district2

court is
AFFIRMED.
#### 1832.502-4 Contract clauses.
Order Form (01/2005)

United States District Court, Northern District of Illinois

Name of Assigned Judge

or Magistrate Judge Rebecca R. Pallmeyer Sitting Judge if Otherthan Assigned Judge

CASE NUMBER 12 C 775 DATE 3/22/2012

CASE

TITLE

ArrivalStar S.A., et al vs. Datalink Systems Inc., et al

DOCKET ENTRY TEXT

The above cause is voluntarily dismissed with prejudice. Status hearing set for 4/5/2012 is stricken. 

Docketing to mail notices.

 Courtroom Deputy

Initials:

ETV

12C775 ArrivalStar S.A., et al vs. Datalink Systems Inc., et al Page 1 of 1

Case: 1:12-cv-00775 Document #: 11 Filed: 03/22/12 Page 1 of 1 PageID #:184