alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
<PAGE>

                                                                    EXHIBIT 32.2

                            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 accompanying Annual Report of Back Yard Burgers, Inc.
(the Company) on Form 10-K for the period ending January 3, 2004 as filed with
the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the Report), I,
Michael G. Webb, Chief Financial Officer of the Company, certify, pursuant to 18
U.S.C. Section 1350, as adopted pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley
Act of 2002, to my knowledge, 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.

/s/ Michael G. Webb
-------------------
Michael G. Webb
Chief Financial Officer
April 1, 2004
42602.

#### ROOKS v. JORDAN et al.

Frankum, Presiding Judge.

1. Where the plaintiff sued two defendants for damages in a single action, and each defendant separately demurred to the petition, and where the trial court, in separate orders, sustained the general demurrer of each defendant to the plaintiff’s petition, and where the plaintiff appealed to this court from the judgment sustaining the demurrer of one of the defendants only, enumerating as error that “the trial court erred in sustaining the general demurrer to the plaintiff’s petition,” the appeal presents only the question of whether or not the judgment designated in the notice of appeal was error and presents no question as to the correctness of the other judgment from which no appeal was taken.

2. Where, as in this case, the petition alleged that the plaintiff and the defendant Holloway were riding to and from work as paying passengers in the automobile of the defendant Jordan; that at about 3 p.m., on September 11, 1964, plain*361tiff and defendant Holloway discovered “a flat tire” on one of the wheels of Jordan’s automobile; that Holloway “went and hunted up Mr. Jordan and got the keys for . . . Jordan’s car from him” and “returned to the car of C. M. Jordan,” who had authorized and empowered him as his agent and servant to repair the “flat tire”; that while plaintiff and the defendant Holloway were so engaged, and plaintiff was in the process of mounting the spare wheel, Holloway, through negligence, caused the jack with which the car was being raised to fall, throwing the fender of the automobile against plaintiff’s arm, splintering and breaking it. There is no allegation in the petition that the defendant Jordan authorized the defendant Holloway to procure the assistance of the plaintiff in repairing the “flat tire,” and the petition, insofar as the defendant Jordan (the appellee before this court) was concerned, shows that the plaintiff was merely a volunteer to whom Jordan owed no duty other than not to injure him wilfully, or of using care not to injure him after notice that he was in a position of peril. It is obvious from the allegations of the petition that the defendant Jordan was not present at the time of the injuries complained of. *Early v. Houser & Houser,*28 Ga. App. 24 (2) (109 SE 914); *Hornsby v. Haverty Furniture Co.,*85 Ga. App. 425 (1) (69 SE2d 630); *Atlanta & W. P. R. Co. v. West,*121 Ga. 641, 644 (2) (49 SE 711, 67 LRA 701, 104 ASR 179). The petition fails to set out a cause of action against the defendant Jordan, and the court properly sustained his general demurrer.

*Deen and Quillian, JJ., concur.*

Argued February 8, 1967

Decided March 8, 1967.

*C. C. Perkins,*for appellant.

*Tisinger & Tisinger, David H. Tisinger,*for appellees.

*Judgment affirmed.*
Case:17-03283-LTS Doc#:19894-1 Filed:01/24/22 Entered:01/25/22 16:02:54 Desc:

Exhibit Page 1 of 1
#### § 653.1 Definitions.

The following definitions apply to this part:

*Corporation* means the Federal Agricultural Mortgage Corporation and its affiliates.

*FCA* means the Farm Credit Administration, an independent Federal agency of the executive branch.

*OSMO* means the FCA Office of Secondary Market Oversight, which is responsible for the general supervision of the safe and sound exercise of the Corporation's powers, functions, and duties and compliance with laws and regulations.
**Exhibit21.1**

 
| **Subsidiary**                                          | ** ** | **Jurisdiction of  Incorporation** | ** ** |
|---------------------------------------------------------|------------|------------------------------------|------------|
|                                                    |       |                               |       |
| Aldila Golf  Corp.                                      |       | Delaware,  U.S.                    |       |
|                                                    |       |                               |       |
| Aldila  Materials Technology Corp.                      |       | Delaware,  U.S.                    |       |
|                                                    |       |                               |       |
| Aldila de  Mexico, S.A. de C.V.                         |       | Mexico                             |       |
|                                                    |       |                               |       |
| Aldila  Carbon Fibers Products (Zhuhai) Company Limited |       | People’s  Republic of China   |       |

 

----
§ 330.12 Accounts held by a depository institution as the trustee of an irrevocable trust. ( a ) *Separate insurance coverage.* “Trust funds” (as defined in § 330.1(q)) held by an insured depository institution in its capacity as trustee of an irrevocable trust, whether held in its trust department, held or deposited in any other department of the fiduciary institution, or deposited by the fiduciary institution in another insured depository institution, shall be insured up to the SMDIA for each owner or beneficiary represented. This insurance shall be separate from, and in addition to, the insurance provided for any other deposits of the owners or the beneficiaries.
( b ) *Determination of interests.* The insurance for funds held by an insured depository institution in its capacity as trustee of an irrevocable trust shall be determined in accordance with the following provisions: ( 1 ) *Allocated funds of a trust estate.* If trust funds of a particular “trust estate” (as defined in § 330.1(p)) are allocated by the fiduciary and deposited, the insurance with respect to such trust estate shall be determined by ascertaining the amount of its funds allocated, deposited and remaining to the credit of the claimant as fiduciary at the insured depository institution in default.
( 2 ) *Interest of a trust estate in unallocated trust funds.* If funds of a particular trust estate are commingled with funds of other trust estates and deposited by the fiduciary institution in one or more insured depository institutions to the credit of the depository institution as fiduciary, without allocation of specific amounts from a particular trust estate to an account in such institution(s), the percentage interest of that trust estate in the unallocated deposits in any institution in default is the same as that trust estate's percentage interest in the entire commingled investment pool.
( c ) *Limitation on applicability.* This section shall not apply to deposits of trust funds belonging to a trust which is classified as a corporation under § 330.11(a)(2).
[63 FR 25756, May 11, 1998, as amended at 71 FR 14631, Mar. 23, 2006; 76 FR 41395, July 14, 2011]
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 

DISTRICT OF PUERTO RICO

In re:

THE FINANCIAL OVERSIGHT AND 

MANAGEMENT BOARD FOR PUERTO 

RICO,

As representative of

THE COMMONWEALTH OF PUERTO 

RICO, et. als.

Debtors

PROMESA Title III 

No. 17 BK 3283 (LTS)

(Jointly Administered)

MOTION FOR AN ORDER DIRECTING KROLL RESTRUCTURING 

ADMINISTRATION TO CORRECT ENTRIES AS TO PROOF OF CLAIM NUMBERS 

173742 AND 173732

TO THE HONORABLE COURT:

COMES NOW, Sky High Elevators Corp. (“Sky High Elevators”), through its undersigned 

counsel, and respectfully states and requests: 

1. On April 9, 2020, Sky High Elevators filed Proof of Claim Number 173732 in the 

amount of $1,247,393.46 against Puerto Rico Building Authority (“PRBA”). 

2. On April 17, 2020, Sky High Elevators filed duplicate Proof of Claim Number 

173742 for the same amount against PRBA, which was objected to on June 18, 2021 (Docket No. 

17087) granted by the order of the Court of September 14, 2021, for being a duplicate (the “Order”) 

(Docket No. 18103).

3. Consequently, Claim Number 173732 is still valid as filed. However, Kroll 

Restructuring Administration’s (“Kroll”) records indicate that the Order refers to this claim. 

Case:17-03283-LTS Doc#:22989 Filed:12/06/22 Entered:12/06/22 12:35:19 Desc: Main

Document Page 1 of 2
2

WHEREFORE, it is respectfully requested that an order, in the form attached hereto, be 

entered directing Kroll to correct its records in Order refers to Claim Number 173742, and that 

therefore Claim Number 173732 in the amount of $1,247,393.46 is still pending. 

CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE: I hereby certify that on this same date, I electronically filed 

the foregoing with the Clerk of the Court using the CM/ECF systems which will send notification 

of such filing to all CM/ECF participants. 

San Juan, Puerto Rico, this 6

th day of December 2022

s/CHARLES A. CUPRILL-HERNÁNDEZ

USDC-PR 114312

Charles A. Cuprill, P.S.C. Law Offices Counsel 

for Sucesión Pastor Mandry Mercado 

356 Fortaleza Street, Second Floor

San Juan, PR 00901 

Tel.: 787-977-0515

Fax: 787-977-0518

E-mail: ccuprill@cuprill.com

Case:17-03283-LTS Doc#:22989 Filed:12/06/22 Entered:12/06/22 12:35:19 Desc: Main

Document Page 2 of 2
<PAGE>

                                                                EXHIBIT 10.10(b)

Master Power Purchase and Sale Agreement between Southern Energy Chalk Point,
LLC and Southern Company Energy Marketing L.P. dated as of December 18, 2000
### { { In Archive In Archive In Archive} Re

: McElmo Oil Field project McElmo Oil Field project
Andrew Chew Andrew Chew to: Andrea Weber 03/18/2011 06:09 PM

Archive: This message is being viewed in an archive .

Good Afternoon, Ms. Weber.

Thank you for your inquiries on this permit. My responses are as follows: Our agency has not published a new proposed PSD permit and we have not decided on the public comment period yet. We are still working on the application.

For your reference, our Region 9 Air Permits Office website located at http://www.epa.gov/region9/air/permit/r9-permits-issued.html#pubcomment currently provides the following information: public comment announcements,  instructions on obtaining copies of PSD applications and relevant documents , and  the staff person to whom comments should be forwarded. 

- Andrew

------------------------------------------- Andrew Chew, P.E. T: (415) 947-4197 | F: (415) 947-3579 | chew.andrew@epa.gov U.S. EPA, Region 9, Air Permits Office (AIR-3) | 75 Hawthorne St., San Francisco, CA 94105

Andrea Weber 03/18/2011 04:29:54 PM Good Afternoon Mr Chew.

From: Andrea Weber <aweber@biologicaldiversity.org> To: Andrew Chew/R9/USEPA/US@EPA Date: 03/18/2011 04:29 PM Subject: McElmo Oil Field project

Good Afternoon Mr Chew.

I understand that you are managing the air permit a pplication submitted for the McElmo Oil Field – Mai n flare project, and that there is an open applicatio n for a PSD permit* in relation to greenhouse gas emissions on this project. (*The PSD portion that i s in response to new Tailoring Rule requirements)

Do you know if the EPA has published a new proposed PSD permit and/or when you anticipate there being a public comment period on this? If there is a public comment period coming up, where can we get a copy of the PSD application and relevant documents, and who would we sent our comme nts to?

Thank you very much for your assistance,

Andrea Weber Center for Biological Diversity Climate Law Institute Paralegal Phone (415

) 436-9682 x

311 Fax (415 ) 436-9683 aweber @ biologicaldiversity

. org

### This email may contain material that is confidentia l, privileged and/or attorney work product for

the sole use of the intended recipient. Any review, reliance or distribution by others or forwarding without express permission is strictly p rohibited. If you are not the intended recipient, please contact the sender and delete all copies.
#### § 5.1 Scope.

This part establishes rules, policies and procedures of the Office of the Comptroller of the Currency (OCC) for corporate activities and transactions involving national banks and Federal savings associations. It contains information on rules of general and specific applicability, where and how to file, and requirements and policies applicable to filings. This part also establishes the corporate filing procedures for Federal branches and agencies of foreign banks.

[80 FR 28414, May 18, 2015]
EXHIBIT F 

Schedule of Hours Worked and Aggregate Fees for Each Matter Category 

Matter Total Billed 

Hours Total Fees 

Project Meetings 45.70 $6,473.50

Project Management 146.10 $19,269.00

Website Development and Management 5.50 $522.50

Total 197.30 $26,265.00

Case:17-03283-LTS Doc#:22946-6 Filed:11/30/22 Entered:11/30/22 16:44:02 Desc:

Exhibit F Page 1 of 1
**Exhibit 23.1**

 

**CONSENT OF PETERSON & CO., LLP NDEPENDENTAUDITORS**

 

 

We consent to the incorporationby reference in Registration Statement Nos. 33-70050, 33-80985, 333-32237 and333-57754 of Aldila, Inc. on Form S-8 of our report dated February 13, 2004, appearingin this Annual Report on Form 10-K of Aldila, Inc. for the year ended December31, 2003, with respect to the financial statements, included in this Form 10-K.

 

 
|                   | /s/ Peterson  & Co., LLP |
|------------------------|------------------------------|
|                   | **PETERSON & CO. LLP**   |
|                   |                         |
| San Diego,  California |                         |
| March 30,  2004        |                         |

 

----
### SERVED: MAY 28, 2015

U.S. DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION OFFICE OF HEARINGS

WASHINGTON, DC
IN THE MATTER OF MACH ONE AIR CHARTERS, INC. DOCKETNO. FAA-2015-0643 (Civil Penalty Action)

NOTICE OF ASSIGNMENT OF PROCEEDING Thisproceeding (heretofore designated as Case No. 2014WP210018) has been assigned to Administrative Law Judge Richard C. Goodwin. All future pleadings and other communications regarding this proceeding shall be served onthe Judge, the FAAHearing Docket, andthe otherpersons onthe attached Service List.

Attachment

- Service ListSERVICE LIST -BY U.S. MAIL ORIGINAL & ONE COPY Federal Aviation Administration 800 Independence Avenue, S.W. Washington, DC 20591 Attention: Hearing Docket Clerk, AGC-430 Wilbur Wright Building-Suite2W10001

H. Dan. Hill, CEO Mach One Air Charters, Inc., Respondent 7000 Merrill Avenue, #63 Chino, CA 91710 Steven L. Graff, Respondent's Counsel Steven L. Graff, Inc. 43399 Calle De Velardo Temecula, CA 92592 TEL: 951-303-6400 FAX: 951-303-0723 ·Glenn H. Brown, Complainant's Counsel Office ofthe Regional Counsel Federal AviationAdministration 222 West 7th Avenue #14 Anchorage, AK 99513-7587 TEL: 907-271-5271 FAX: 907-271-2800 ONE COPY

The Honorable Richard C. Goodwin,Administrative Law Judge Office ofHearings, M-20 U.S. Department ofTransportation 1200 NewJersey Avenue, S.E. (E11-310) Washington, DC 20590 TEL: 202-366-5121 StaffAssistant FAX: 202-366-7536 DocketNo. FAA-2015-0643 (Civil Penalty Action)

1 Service was byU.S. Mail. For service in person orby expedited courier, use the following address: Federal Aviation Administration, 600 Independence Avenue, S.W., Wilbur Wright Building-Suite 2Wl000, Washington, DC 20591; Attention: Hearing Docket Clerk, AGC-430. 2
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<ARTICLE> 5
<MULTIPLIER> 1,000
       
<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   3-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          MAR-31-1999
<PERIOD-END>                               JUN-30-1998
<CASH>                                           19238
<SECURITIES>                                         0
<RECEIVABLES>                                     4849
<ALLOWANCES>                                       774
<INVENTORY>                                       1381
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                                 33803
<PP&E>                                          283940
<DEPRECIATION>                                   48861
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                  404914
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                            36262
<BONDS>                                         176500
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                           163
<OTHER-SE>                                      160191
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                    404914
<SALES>                                              0
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                                 81565
<CGS>                                                0
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                    38354
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                 33555
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                     0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                                5701
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                   4000
<INCOME-TAX>                                      1560
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                               2440
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                      2440
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                      .08
<EPS-DILUTED>                                      .08
        

</TABLE>
**Exhibit 32.1**
**Certification**
     Pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, the undersigned officer of ElcomInternational, Inc., a Delaware corporation (the “Company”), does herebycertify, to such officer’s knowledge, that the Company’s Annual Report on Form10-K for the year ended December 31, 2003 (the “Form 10-K”) fully complies withthe requirements of Section 13(a) or 15(d), as applicable, of the SecuritiesExchange Act of 1934, as amended, and that the information contained in theForm 10-K fairly presents, in all material respects, the financial conditionand results of operations of the Company as of, and for, the periods presentedin the Form 10-K.      Dated: May 7, 2004 /s/ Robert J. Crowell   Robert J. CrowellChief Executive Officer(Principal Executive Officer)
     The foregoing Certification is being furnished solely pursuant to 18U.S.C. Section 1350 and is not being filed as part of the Form 10-K or as aseparate disclosure document.
#### Gary W. JUSTICE, Appellant, v. John W. DENNIS, etc., Appellee.

No. 85-1431.

United States Court of Appeals, Fourth Circuit.

Sept. 30, 1986.

The appellee’s petition for rehearing and suggestion for rehearing in banc were submitted to this Court. In a requested poll of the Court, Judges Russell, Widener, Hall, Sprouse, Chapman, Wilkinson, and Wilkins voted to rehear the case in banc; and Judges Winter, Phillips, Murnaghan, and Ervin voted against rehearing the case in banc. A majority of judges having voted to grant rehearing in banc,

IT IS ORDERED that rehearing in banc is granted.

IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that this case shall be calendared for argument at the December 1986 session of Court.
§ 7.2023 National bank reverse stock splits. ( a ) *Authority to engage in reverse stock splits.* A national bank may engage in a reverse stock split if the transaction serves a legitimate corporate purpose and provides adequate dissenting shareholders' rights.
( b ) *Legitimate corporate purpose.* Examples of legitimate corporate purposes include a reverse stock split to: ( 1 ) Reduce the number of shareholders in order to qualify as a Subchapter S corporation; and
( 2 ) Reduce costs associated with shareholder communications and meetings.
[64 FR 60099, Nov. 4, 1999]
§ 611.400 Compensation of bank board members. ( a ) Farm Credit banks are authorized to pay fair and reasonable compensation to directors for services performed in an official capacity at a rate not to exceed the level established in section 4.21 of the Farm Credit Act of 1971, as amended, unless the FCA determines that such a level adversely affects the safety and soundness of the institution.
( b ) The bank director compensation level established in section 4.21 of the Act shall be adjusted to reflect changes in the Consumer Price Index (CPI) for all urban consumers, as published by the Bureau of Labor Statistics, in the following manner: Current year's maximum compensation = Prior year's maximum compensation adjusted by the prior year's annual average percent change in the CPI for all urban consumers. Adjustments will be made to the bank director statutory compensation limit beginning from October 28, 1992 (the date of enactment of the Farm Credit Banks and Associations Safety and Soundness Act of 1992). Additionally, each year the FCA will communicate the CPI adjusted bank director statutory compensation limit.
( c ) ( 1 ) A Farm Credit bank is authorized to pay a director up to 30 percent more than the statutory compensation limit in exceptional circumstances where the director contributes extraordinary time and effort in the service of the bank and its shareholders.
( 2 ) Banks must document the exceptional circumstances justifying additional director compensation. The documentation must describe: ( i ) The exceptional circumstances justifying the additional director compensation, including the extraordinary time and effort the director devoted to bank business; and
( ii ) The amount and the terms and conditions of the additional director compensation.
( d ) Each bank board shall adopt a written policy regarding compensation of bank directors. The policy shall address, at a minimum, the following areas: ( 1 ) The activities or functions for which attendance is necessary and appropriate and may be compensated, except that a Farm Credit bank shall not compensate any director for rendering services on behalf of any other Farm Credit System institution or a cooperative of which the director is a member, or for performing other assignments of a non-official nature;
( 2 ) The methodology for determining each director's rate of compensation; and
( 3 ) The exceptional circumstances under which the board would pay additional compensation for any of its directors as authorized by paragraph (c) of this section.
( e ) Directors may also be reimbursed for reasonable travel, subsistence, and other related expenses in accordance with the bank's policy.
[59 FR 37411, July 22, 1994, as amended at 64 FR 16618, Apr. 6, 1999; 65 FR 8023, Feb. 17, 2000; 77 FR 60596, Oct. 3, 2012]
42636.

#### WALKER, Executor v. STATE HIGHWAY DEPARTMENT.

*Bell, P. J., and Pannell, J., concur.*

Argued March 7, 1967

Decided March 10, 1967

Rehearing denied March 23, 1967.

*Preston L. Holland,*for appellant.

*Arthur K. Bolton, Attorney General, Bichard L. Chambers, Assistant Attorney General, John B. Strother, Jr., Paul M. Hawkins, Special Deputy Assistant Attorneys General, Harold Sheats, George Gillon,*for appellee.

Jordan, Judge.

The record in this case not showing a compliance with the mandatory provisions of §§ 6 and 11 (Ga. L. 1965, pp. 18, 21, 26; *Code Ann.*§§ 6-804, 6-806), the motion to dismiss must be granted. *Davis v. Davis,*222 Ga. 579 (151 SE2d 123); *Benecke v. Boyer,*115 Ga. App. 99 (153 SE2d 668); *Elliott v. Leathers,*115 Ga. App. 352; *Herrington v. Leathers,*115 Ga. App. 282.

*Appeal dismissed.*