alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
Exhibit
      32.1
 
 Section
      1350 Certification
 
 In connection with the quarterly report
of China Industrial Waste Management, Inc. (the "Company") on Form 10-Q for the
period ended September 30, 2009 as filed with the Securities and Exchange
Commission (the "Report"), I, Dong Jinqing, Chief Executive Officer of the
Company, certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. SS. 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
result of operations of the Company.
  November
      12, 2009
                  
                  /s/ Dong
      JinqingDong
      JinqingChief
      Executive 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 has been
provided to the Company and will be retained by the Company and furnished to the
Securities and Exchange Commission or its staff upon request.
#### Bank of America, N.A., USA, Respondent, v Resa R. Friedman, Appellant.

Submitted November 26, 2007;

decided January 10, 2008

Reported below, 44 AD3d 696.

Motion for leave to appeal dismissed upon the ground that the order sought to be appealed from does not finally determine the action within the meaning of the Constitution.
NOT FOR PUBLICATION

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT

CRISTOBAL CERVANTES,

Petitioner

- Appellant,

v.

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,

Respondent

- Appellee. No. 21

- 55266

D.C. No. 5:20

- cv

- 01180

- CJC

- JC

MEMORANDUM *

Appeal from the United States District Court

for the Central District of California

Cormac J. Carney, District Judge, Presiding

Submitted March 16, 2022 * *

Before: SILVERMAN, MILLER, and BUMATAY, Circuit Judges.

Federal prisoner Cristobal Cervantes appeals pro se from the district court’s

judgment dismissing his 28 U.S.C. § 2241 habeas corpus petition and order

denying reconsideration . We have jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. § 1291. We

rev iew the dismissal of the § 2241 petition de novo, see Alaimalo v. United States

,

* 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 25 2022

MOLLY C. DWYER, CLERK

U.S. COURT OF APPEALS2 21

- 55266

645 F.3d 1042, 1047 (9th Cir. 2011), and t he denial of reconsideration for abuse of

discretion, see Smith v. Clark C n ty. Sch. Dist. , 727 F.3d 950, 954 (9th Cir. 2013)

.

W e affirm.

Cervantes contends that the district court erred by concluding that he could

not raise his claims challenging his conviction and sentence in a § 2241 petition

.

T his court previously denied a certificate of appealability as to those claims

.

Insofar as Cervantes’s opening brief seeks reconsideration of that decision, the

request is denied

. Furthermore, Cervantes waived any challenge to the district

court’s dismissal of his claims concerning the Bureau of Prisons’ execution of his

sentence and institutional COVID

- 19 safety protocols by failing to raise any

arguments in support of those claims in his opening brief

. See Leer v. Murphy , 844

F.2d 628, 634 (9th Cir. 1988)

.

Cervantes’s motion for appointment of counsel is denied.

AFFIRME D.
-79 -78 -77 -76 -75 -74

37 38 39 

### ★ ▲ ▲ ▲ ▲



### ★ ▲ ▲ ▲ ▲ 500 1000 1500 100 18 12 06 00 05/30 

### NOAA HYSPLIT MODEL 

## Backward trajectory ending at 2300 UTC 30 May 07

EDAS Meteorological DataSource★at 38.86 N 77.06 WMeters AGL
###### Editorial Note on Part 1045

#### Editorial Notes:Nomenclature changes to part 1045 appear at 88 FR 41294, June 26, 2023, and 88 FR 82238, Nov. 24, 2023.

§ 1045.155 How is matter marked as containing RD, FRD, or TFNI declassified?

Editorial Notes:

Nomenclature changes to part 1045 appear at 88 FR 41294, June 26, 2023, and 88 FR 82238, Nov. 24, 2023.

(a) *Declassification of matter containing RD, FRD, or TFNI.* RD, FRD, and TFNI are never automatically declassified. No date or event for automatic declassification ever applies to RD, FRD, or TFNI, even when commingled with NSI. It takes positive action by an authorized person to declassify matter potentially containing or marked as containing RD, FRD, or TFNI.

(b) *Authority to declassify matter containing RD, FRD, or TFNI.* Only authorized persons within DOE may declassify matter marked as RD or TFNI and only authorized persons within DOE or DoD may declassify matter marked as FRD. Only these same persons may identify the portions of classified matter that contain RD, FRD, or TFNI that must be redacted prior to public release.

(c) *Declassification of matter containing RD or TFNI.* Except as allowed under paragraph (b) of this section, only designated persons in DOE may declassify matter marked as containing RD or TFNI or identify the RD or TFNI portions of matter that must be removed from the matter prior to public release. Such determinations must be based on classification guides.

(d) *Declassification of matter containing FRD.* Except as allowed under paragraph (b) of this section, only designated persons in DOE or appropriate persons in DoD (as specified in DoD Instruction 5210.02 or subsequent instructions) may declassify matter marked as containing FRD or determine the FRD portions of matter that must be removed prior to public release. Such determinations must be based on classification guides.

(e) *Delegation of declassification authority.* The Director, Office of Classification, may delegate declassification authority for matter containing RD and TFNI to other agencies Federal and contractor personnel. The Director, Office of Classification, or an appropriate person in DoD (as specified in DoD Instruction 5210.02 or subsequent instructions) may delegate declassification authority for matter containing FRD to qualified Federal or contractor personnel in other agencies.
2836.602-5 Short selection process for

contracts not to exceed the simplified

acquisition threshold.

(a) The short selection process, described in FAR 36.602-5, is authorized for use in DOJ contracts not

expected to exceed the simplified acquisition threshold.

(b) The HCA or designee is the agency head for purposes of FAR 36.602-5(b)(2).

Parent topic: Subpart 2836.6 - Architect-Engineer Services
<PAGE>

Exhibit 99(b)

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

         Pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002 and in
connection with the Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q of Encore Computer Corporation
(the "Company") for the period ended June 30, 2002, as filed with the Securities
and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the "Report"), the undersigned, the
Treasurer of the Company, certifies 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/ Thomas N. Rich
------------------------------
Thomas N. Rich

Treasurer

August 13, 2002
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

M IDDLE DISTRICT OF ALABA M A

OFFICE OF THE CLERK

POST OFFICE BOX 711

MONTGOMERY, ALABAMA 36101-0711

DEBRA P. HACKETT, CLERK

TELEPHONE (334) 954-3600

NOTICE OF REASSIGNMENT

Re: May's Distributing Company, Inc. v. Total Containment, Inc., et al.

 Civil Action No. 2:06-cv-702-DRB

The above-styled case has been reassigned to District Judge Mark E.

Fuller.

Please note that the case number is now 2:06-cv-702-MEF. This new case

number should be used on all future correspondence and pleadings in this

action.

 

Case 2:06-cv-00702-MEF-TFM Document 9 Filed 08/16/2006 Page 1 of 1
§ 110.9a List of nuclear equipment and material under NRC import licensing authority. ( a ) Production and utilization facilities.
( b ) Special nuclear material.
( c ) Source material.
( d ) Byproduct material.
[49 FR 47198, Dec. 3, 1984. Redesignated at 55 FR 30450, July 26, 1990, and amended at 57 FR 18393, Apr. 30, 1992; 58 FR 13003, Mar. 9, 1993]
Case 1:06-cv-00737-WKW-SRW Document 69 Filed 05/08/2007 Page 1 of 1
IV 

109TH CONGRESS 

1ST SESSION H. RES. 223

Expressing the sense of the House of Representatives that a postage stamp 

should be issued in commemoration of Diwali, a festival celebrated by 

people of Indian origin. 

IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES 

APRIL 20, 2005

Mr. PALLONE submitted the following resolution; which was referred to the 

Committee on Government Reform 

RESOLUTION

Expressing the sense of the House of Representatives that 

a postage stamp should be issued in commemoration 

of Diwali, a festival celebrated by people of Indian origin.

1 Resolved, That it is the sense of the House of Rep2 resentatives that—

3 (1) a postage stamp should be issued by the 

4 United States Postal Service in commemoration of 

5 Diwali, a festival celebrated by people of Indian ori6 gin; and 

7 (2) the Citizens’ Stamp Advisory Committee of 

8 the United States Postal Service should recommend 
2

•HRES 223 IH 

1 to the Postmaster General that such a stamp be 

2 issued.

Æ
Exhibit 31.2

CERTIFICATION PURSUANT TO SECTION 302 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002

I, Michael D.
Hershberger, certify that:

1. I have reviewed this annual report on Form 10-K of Health Insurance Innovations, Inc.;

2. Based on my knowledge, this report does not contain any untrue statement of a material fact or omit to state a material
fact necessary to make the statements made, in light of the circumstances under which such statements were made, not misleading with respect to the period covered by this report;

3. Based on my knowledge, the financial statements and other financial information included in this report, fairly present in all
material respects the financial condition, results of operations and cash flows of the registrant as of, and for, the periods presented in this report;

4. The registrants other certifying officer and I are responsible for establishing and maintaining disclosure controls and procedures (as defined in Exchange Act Rules 13a-15(e) and 15d-15(e)) for
the registrant and have:

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) 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; and

c) 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

5. The registrants other certifying officer and I have disclosed, based on our most
recent evaluation of internal control over financial reporting, to the registrants auditors and the audit committee of the registrants board of directors (or persons performing the equivalent functions):

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; and

b) 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.

Date: April 1, 2013



|                                                
|------------------------------------------------
|/s/ Michael D. Hershberger                      
|MICHAEL D. HERSHBERGER                          
|CHIEF FINANCIAL OFFICER, TREASURER AND SECRETARY
|(Principal Financial Officer)
#### DENVER & R. G. R. CO. v. OGDEN MILLS.

(Circuit Court of Appeals, Eighth Circuit.

September 27, 1912.)

No. 3,816.

Appeal from the District Court of the United States for the District of Colorado.

E. N. Clark and R. G. Lucas, both of Denver, Colo., for appellant.

John Horne Chiles, Arthur C. Bartels, and Harry S. Silverstein, all of Denver, Colo., for appellee.

PER CURIAM.

Temporary injunction (198 Fed. 137) suspended pendente lite, and cause remanded, with directions for further proceedings.
August 14, 2015

Mr. Brian D. Fiske III

32238 Renoir Road

Winchester, CA 92596

Dear Mr. Fiske:

This letter is to inform you that we are unable to process your request for an exemption from 

§§ 91.7(a), 91.119(c), 91.121, 91.151(a), 91.405(a), 91.407(a)(l), 91.409(a)(l) and (2), and 

91.417(a) and (b) of Title 14, Code of Federal Regulations (14 CFR). It explains why we 

cannot process your request and what you should do in the next 30 days.

Why We Cannot Process Your Request

We entered your May 18, 2015, exemption request into the public docket 

(No. FAA−2015−1964), but we are unable to process your request any further. The 

information you sent does not comply with the requirements of § 11.81 (copy enclosed). For 

us to consider the request any further, you must send us all of the following:

 The reasons why granting the request would be in the public interest; that is, how it would 

benefit the public as a whole.

 Any additional information, views, or arguments available to support your request.

For more detailed information relating to submitting petitions for exemption, please visit 

http://aes.faa.gov/petition/index.html. This website helps the petitioner to meet Federal 

Aviation Administration (FAA) requirements outlines in § 11.81 and helps answer any 

questions you may have.

What You Should Do

If you want us to process your request any further, you must submit the requested information 

within 30 days. Please note that § 11.63(d) requires you to send your petition for exemption 

at least 120 days before the proposed effective date of the exemption. 
2

If We Do Not Hear From You

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

If you have any questions you may call the 333 Information Line (202) 267-2999.

Sincerely,

/s/

Brittany Newton

Program Analyst, Airmen and

 Airspace Rules Division

Enclosure
3
H. Res. 264

In the House of Representatives, U.S.,

May 5, 2005.

Resolved, That the following named Member be, and is

hereby, elected to the following standing committee of the

House of Representatives:

COMMITTEE ON WAYS AND MEANS: Mr. Nunes.

Attest:

Clerk.
§ 996.73 Verification of reports. ( a ) For the purpose of checking and verifying reports kept by handlers and importers and the operation of handlers and importers under the provisions of this Part, the officers, employees or duly authorized agents of USDA shall have access to any premises where peanuts may be held at any time during reasonable business hours and shall be permitted to inspect any peanuts that meet outgoing quality regulations, so held by such handler or importer and any and all records of such handler with respect to the acquisition, holding, or disposition of all peanuts meeting outgoing quality regulations, which may be held or which may have been disposed by handler.
( b ) Reports shall be maintained by the handler for nonconforming products to assure traceability throughout the supply chain. The traceability system must include documented records, which enable a full product history to be produced in a timely manner and must ensure product can be traced forward (raw material to distribution) and backwards from distribution to the warehouse feeding the shelling plant, and ensure that all associated tests and all relevant records have been completed. The traceability system shall include identification of all raw materials, process parameters (for specific lot), packaging and final disposition. The handler shall be able to identify the warehouse in which the peanuts were stored immediately prior to shelling. Traceability must be maintained throughout production runs with specific lot codes, and there shall be complete linkage from raw material receipt through final disposition.
[81 FR 50290, Aug. 1, 2016]
#### § 984.5 Grower.

*Grower* is synonymous with *producer* and means any person engaged in a proprietary capacity in the commercial production of walnuts.
###### Editorial Note on Part 10

#### Editorial Note:

Nomenclature changes to part 10 appear at 70 FR 30897, May 31, 2005; 77 FR 39904, July 6, 2012; 81 FR 86909, Dec. 2, 2016.

#### § 10.3 [Reserved]
# C o u rt o f

A p p ea ls

o f t h e S t a te o f

G eo rg ia

ATLANTA,_

_ _ __ _ _ __ _ __ _ _ _ _ _ __ _

Th e Co u rt

o f Ap p ea l s h er eb y p a s s es t h e f

o ll owi n g o r der :

A2 1 A0 49 4 . ADRI AN ANTHONY J OHNSON v . THE STATE.

In 2 0 1 9

, Ad ri a n A n t h o n y J oh n s o n was arres t ed an d ch arg ed wi t h cru el t y to

ch i l d ren

. In M ay 2 0 20

, J o h n s o n fi led a p ro s e m o t i o n t o d i s m i s s t h e in di ct m en t

, wh i ch

t h e t ri al co urt d en ied an d d is m i s s ed o n t he g ro u n d t h at J o h n s on was rep res en t ed b y

co u ns el

. In J u n e 2 0 2 0

, J o h n s o n , ag ai n ap p eari n g p ro s e, f i l ed a “ M o t i o n fo r

Im m ed i at e Rel eas e By an d T h ro u g h St at e o f Em erg en cy .” T h e t ri al co u rt d en i ed h i s

req u es t

, an d J o h n so n fi led h i s p ro s e n o t i ce o f ap p eal

. W e, h o wev er, lack ju ri s d i ct i o n.

“ A cri m i n al d efen d an t i n Geo rg i a d o es no t h av e th e ri g ht t o rep res en t h i m s el f

an d al s o b e rep res en t ed b y an at t o rn ey , an d pro s e fi li ng s b y rep res en ted p art i es are

t h erefo re u n au t h o ri zed an d wi t h o u t effect .” To l b er t v. To o l e , 2 9 6 Ga. 3 5 7

, 3 6 3 (3 )
(7 6 7 SE2 d 2 4 ) (2 0 1 4) (p un ct u at i o n o m i t t ed ). Here, J o hn s on is r e pr e se n te d by c ou n s el

. Th ere i s n o t h i ng in t h e reco rd i n d i cat i n g t h at t h e at t o rn ey ei t h er wi t h d rew o r was

rel i ev ed fro m rep res en t at io n. 1 U n d er t h es e ci rcu m s t an ces , J oh n s o n ’ s p ro s e n o t i ce o f

ap p eal i s a n u l l i t y

. See S o b er a n i s v. S t a te

, 34 5 Ga. Ap p

. 4 0 3

, 4 0 5 (8 1 2 SE2 d 8 0 0 )
(2 0 1 8). Fo r t h i s reas o n , t h e ap p eal i s DISM ISSED. See i d

.

1 J o h n s o n has s in ce fi l ed a m o t i o n t o recu s e h i s at t o rn ey , b u t n o t h i n g i n t h e

reco rd o n ap p eal i n d i cat es t hat t h e at t o rn ey h as b een rel i ev ed fro m rep res en t i n g J o h n so n

. November 12, 2020Th e Cl erk o f Co u rt i s DIRECTED to s en d a co p y o f t h i s o rd er t o J oh n s o n an d

t o h i s at to rn ey , an d t h e l at t er al s o i s DIRECTED t o s en d a co p y t o J o h n s o n

.

C o u r t o f A p p e a l s o f t h e S t a t e o

f G e o r g ia

C le r k ’ s O f f i c e
, A t la n t a
,

_

_ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ I c e r ti fy t h a t t h e a b o v e i s a t r u e e x t r a c t f r o m

t h e m i n u t e s o

f t h e C o u r t o

f A p p e a l s o f G e o r g i a

. W i tn e s s m y s i g n a t u r e a n d th e s e a l o

f s a i d c o u r t

h e r e t o a f f i x e d t h e d a y a n d y e a r l a s t a b o v e w r i t t e n

.

, C l e r k

. 11/12/2020
Case 2:06-cr-00206-MHT-CSC Document 50 Filed 10/23/2006 Page 1 of 11
Case 2:06-cr-00206-MHT-CSC Document 50 Filed 10/23/2006 Page 2 of 11
Case 2:06-cr-00206-MHT-CSC Document 50 Filed 10/23/2006 Page 3 of 11
Case 2:06-cr-00206-MHT-CSC Document 50 Filed 10/23/2006 Page 4 of 11
Case 2:06-cr-00206-MHT-CSC Document 50 Filed 10/23/2006 Page 5 of 11
Case 2:06-cr-00206-MHT-CSC Document 50 Filed 10/23/2006 Page 6 of 11
Case 2:06-cr-00206-MHT-CSC Document 50 Filed 10/23/2006 Page 7 of 11
Case 2:06-cr-00206-MHT-CSC Document 50 Filed 10/23/2006 Page 8 of 11
Case 2:06-cr-00206-MHT-CSC Document 50 Filed 10/23/2006 Page 9 of 11
Case 2:06-cr-00206-MHT-CSC Document 50 Filed 10/23/2006 Page 10 of 11
Case 2:06-cr-00206-MHT-CSC Document 50 Filed 10/23/2006 Page 11 of 11
### Regulatory Eva luation
Docket No. 

### FAA - Directorat e Identifier: 

### -AD 

### ;Jdt! the work hours. ports**~.-·ost,** 

### and number c!f' U.S. re}{,istered products to the Wblc! he/ow. Whc!n you or£'

. /iuished. dick on the '·U pdate Fields., bull on to (llt/Oma lically.fl/1 iu the Iota is. 

### U

pdat e Fields 

# I

Estimated Costs: Action Costs per Product (e.g., aircraft, e ngi ne, (e.g., Inspection , prop elle r , ap pliance) Work-hours Labor P a 1

1 s Cost Total Costs Numb e r of Total Cost rep lacement) (include cost (labor+ 

## u.s. for U.S. Fleet Do not include onco ndition costs here acce ss, t esti ng , (@$85/ h parts) Re g ister e d and close-u p) our) Pr o duct s**ln-..p~c.:tinn. r~pair.** **d~.** 

### 8 

### 0 ' I



### , ,

I

T h e kn own number of produc ts in compliance: '\. Lllll 

### b1.. I Tota l Cos t s of compliance for 

### U
. S
. fleet: $ 0 Cos t s covered under warranty 

### (if known) $unknown On -C ondition Costs:

# ~ Action Work-hours Labor cost Parts Cost Cost per Product (e.g., I ns pe ction, (include access, (@$85/ ho ur) repla cemen t) testing , and closeup ) In s pection 

### 8 In s tallation 

### 8 688

### Spec ial considerations for Eco nomic Analysis (Use this field to explain anything in the Estimated Costs table that was assumed or might not be obvious. This.field can also be used to explain warranty cos ts): 

### Exec utive Order 12866: Could the AD be considered a "significant regulatory act i on " ?- YES* 

### 0 NO 

### 181 *Explanation: 

### DOT Regulatory Policies and Procedures: Is t he AD significant?

# ~ YES* 

### D NO 181 *Explanation: 

### Regulatory Flexibility Act: Will the AD ha ve a significant economic impact on a s ub stan tial number of sma ll entities? Explain for e ither a Yes or No answer. 

# Q , YES 

### 0 NO 

### 181 Explanation: 

### Intrastate Aviation in Alaska: Th i s AD could affect intrastate aviation in Alaska. Is it appropriate to include specific requirements for aircra ft operated in Alaska where aviation might be t he only mode oftranspo1tation? 

# G YES* 

### D NO 

### 181 *Explanation: