alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
#### § 780.611 Workweek exclusively in agriculture.

In any workweek in which the employee works exclusively in agriculture, performing no duty in respect to livestock auction operations, his exemption for that week is determined by application of sections 13(a)(6) and 13(b)(12) to his activities. (See subparts D and E of this part.)
#### § 779.332 Resale of goods in an altered form or as parts or ingredients of other goods or services.

Sale for resale includes the sale of goods which will be resold in their original form, in an altered form, or as a part or ingredient of another article. A sale of goods which the seller knows, or has reasonable cause to believe, will be resold after processing or manufacture is a sale for resale. Thus, sales of parts with the expectation that they will be incorporated in aircraft and that the aircraft will be sold clearly are sales for resale. (*Arnold* v. *Ben Kanowsky, Inc.,* 361 U.S. 388.) Similarly, the sale of lumber to furniture or box factories, or the sale of textiles to clothing manufacturers, is a sale for resale even though the goods are resold in the form of furniture or clothing. The principle is also illustrated in cases where the article sold becomes a part or an ingredient of another, such as scrap metal in steel, dyes in fabrics, flour in bread and pastries, and salt in food or ice in beverages. (*Mitchell* v. *Douglas Auto Parts Co.,* 11 WH Cases 807, 25 L.C. Par. 68, 119 (N.D. Ill., 1954).) The fact that goods sold will be resold as a part of a service in which they are used or as a part of a building into which they are incorporated does not negate the character of the sale as one “for resale.” (*Mitchell* v. *Furman Beauty Supply,* 300 F. 2d 16 (CA-3); *Mayol* v. *Mitchell,* 280 F. 2d 477 (CA-1), cert. denied 364 U.S. 902; *Goldberg* v. *Kleban Eng. Corp.,* 303 F. 2d 855 (CA-5).)
<PAGE>
                                                                    EXHIBIT 99.1

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


In connection with the Annual Report of Rehabilicare Inc. (the "Company") on
Form 10-K for the year ended June 30, 2002, as filed with the Securities and
Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the "Report"), I, Dan W. Gladney, Chief
Executive Officer of the Company, certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350,
as adopted pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that:

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/ Dan W. Gladney
                                        ----------------------------------------
                                        Dan W. Gladney
                                        Chief Executive Officer
                                        September 26, 2002
Exhibit 24.1





McMoRan Exploration Co.





Secretary’s Certificate





I, Douglas N. Currault II, Assistant Secretary of McMoRan Exploration Co., a corporation organized and existing under the laws of the State of Delaware (the “Corporation”), do hereby certify that the following resolution was duly adopted by the Sole Director of the Corporation by written consent on November 12, 1998, and that such resolution has not been amended, modified or rescinded and is in full force and effect on the date hereof:





RESOLVED, that any report, registration statement or other form filed on behalf of this Corporation pursuant to the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, or any amendment to such report, registration statement or other form, may be signed on behalf of any director or officer of this corporation pursuant to a power of attorney executed by such director or officer.





IN WITNESS WHEREOF, I have hereunto signed my name and affixed the seal of the Corporation on January 12, 2010.

















/s/ Douglas N. Currault II


Douglas N. Currault II


Assistant Secretary


Seal
§ 553.213 Public agency employees engaged in both fire protection and law enforcement activities. ( a ) Some public agencies have employees (often called “public safety officers”) who engage in both fire protection and law enforcement activities, depending on the agency needs at the time. This dual assignment would not defeat either the section 13(b)(20) or 7(k) exemption, provided that each of the activities performed meets the appropriate tests set forth in §§ 553.210 and 553.211. This is so regardless of how the employee's time is divided between the two activities. However, all time spent in nonexempt activities by public safety officers within the work period, whether performed in connection with fire protection or law enforcement functions, or with neither, must be combined for purposes of the 20 percent limitation on nonexempt work discussed in § 553.212.
( b ) As specified in § 553.230, the maximum hours standards under section 7(k) are different for employees engaged in fire protection and for employees engaged in law enforcement. For those employees who perform both fire protection and law enforcement activities, the applicable standard is the one which applies to the activity in which the employee spends the majority of work time during the work period.
§ 516.22 Employees engaged in charter activities of carriers pursuant to section 7(n) of the Act. With respect to each employee employed in charter activities for a street, suburban or interurban electric railway or local trolley or motorbus carrier pursuant to section 7(n) of the Act, the employer shall maintain and preserve records containing all the information and data required by § 516.2(a) and, in addition, the following: ( a ) Hours worked each workweek in charter activities; and
( b ) A copy of the employment agreement or understanding stating that in determining the hours of employment for overtime pay purposes, the hours spent by the employee in charter activities will be excluded and, also, the date this agreement or understanding was entered into.
[Federal Register Volume 65, Number 105 (Wednesday, May 31, 2000)]
[Notices]
[Pages 34785-34786]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 00-13543]


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

DEPARTMENT OF STATE

[Public Notice 3324]


Notice of Open Session of the Cultural Property Advisory 
Committee

    Pursuant to the authority vested in me, under Department of State 
Delegation of Authority No. 236-2, the Cultural Property Advisory 
Committee will meet in open session from approximately 10 am to 12 
noon, on Wednesday, June 28, 2000. The session will be held in the 
Trustees Room, 2nd Floor, The New York Public Library, Fifth Avenue and 
42nd Street, New York, NY.

[[Page 34786]]

    This open session is solely for information exchange between the 
Cultural Property Advisory Committee and persons interested in the work 
of the Committee pursuant to 19 U.S.C. 2601, et seq., the Convention on 
Cultural Property Implementation Act. Information about the Committee, 
the Act, and the 1970 UNESCO Convention on the Means of Prohibiting and 
Preventing the Illicit Import, Export and Transfer of Ownership of 
Cultural Property may be found at http://exchanges.state.gov/education/culprop.
    The Committee will make presentations about its work and about 
implementation of the Act followed by a question and answer period. In 
order to allow the maximum participation possible, individuals will be 
limited to five minutes each for comments/questions.
    Due to the Library's security procedures and limited seating, prior 
notification of attendance is required. Attendees must use the entrance 
on 42nd Street, between Fifth and Sixth Avenues. Interested persons 
should contact the Cultural Property Office at (202) 619-6612 by 5 pm 
(ESDT), June 23.

    Dated: May 25, 2000.
William B. Bader,
Assistant Secretary of State for Educational and Cultural Affairs, 
Department of State.
[FR Doc. 00-13543 Filed 5-30-00; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4710-11-U
Document Headings

                    Document headings vary by document type but may contain                    the following:                  
                -                       the agency or agencies that issued and signed a document                    
                -                       the number of the CFR title and the number of each part                      the document amends, proposes to amend, or is directly                      related to                    
                -                       the agency docket number / agency internal file number                    
                -                       the RIN which identifies each regulatory action listed in                      the Unified Agenda of Federal Regulatory and Deregulatory                      Actions                    

                    See the                                          Document Drafting Handbook                                        for more details.                  

###### Department of Energy

###### Federal Energy Regulatory Commission

          - [Docket No. ER00-2383-000]

Take notice that on May 3, 2000, the California Independent System Operator Corporation (ISO), tendered for filing an correction regarding a proposed amendment (Amendment No. 29), to the ISO Tariff, which had been filed in the above-referenced docket on May 2, 2000. The correction provided tariff sheets containing Tariff sections that were “rolled over” to subsequent pages of the Tariff, as a result of changes and additions made in the Amendment No. 29 filing, and corrected an error in the section numbering on a certain Tariff sheet that was included in the Amendment No. 29 filing.

The ISO states that this filing has been served upon the Public Utilities Commission of California, the California Energy Commission, the California Electricity Oversight Board, and all parties with effective Scheduling Coordinator Service Agreements under the ISO tariff.

Any person desiring to be heard or to protest such filing should file a motion to intervene or protest with the Federal Regulatory Commission, 888 First Street, NE., Washington, DC 20426, in accordance with Rules 211 and 214 of the Commission's Rules of Practice and Procedure (18 CFR 385.211 and 385.214). All such motions and protests should be filed on or before May 30, 2000. Protests will be considered by the Commission to determine the appropriate action to be taken, but will not serve to make protestants parties to the proceedings. Any person wishing to become a party must file a motion to intervene. Copies of this filing are on file with the Commission and are available for public inspection. This filing may also be viewed on the Internet at http://www.ferc.fed.us/​online/​rims.htm (call 202-208-2222 for assistance).

Linwood A. Watson, Jr.,

Acting Secretary.

[FR Doc. 00-13114 Filed 5-24-00; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 6717-01-M
Exhibit 32.1

CERTIFICATIONS PURSUANT TO

18 U.S.C. SECTION 1350,

AS ADOPTED PURSUANT TO

SECTION 906
OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002

In connection with the Annual Report of Lydall, Inc. (the Company) on Form 10-K for the
period ending December 31, 2007 as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the Report), each of the undersigned officers of the Company, certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, as adopted
pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that to our knowledge:



|1. | The Report fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934; and
|-- | ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------



|2. | The information contained in the Report fairly presents, in all material respects, the financial condition and results of operations of the Company.
|-- | ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

The foregoing certifications are accompanying the Form 10-K solely pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002 (subsections
(a) and (b) of Section 1350, chapter 63 of title 18, United States Code) and are not being filed as a part of this Form 10-K or as a separate disclosure document.



|               |  |                                                      
|-------------- |  | -----------------------------------------------------
|March 17, 2008 |  | /s/ Dale G. Barnhart                                 
|               |  | Dale G. Barnhart                                     
|               |  | President and Chief Executive Officer                
|               | 
|March 17, 2008 |  | /s/ Thomas P. Smith                                  
|               |  | Thomas P. Smith                                      
|               |  | Vice President, Chief Financial Officer and Treasurer
[Federal Register Volume 65, Number 106 (Thursday, June 1, 2000)]
[Notices]
[Page 35061]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 00-13625]


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

DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY

Federal Energy Regulatory Commission

[Docket No. RP98-39-022]


Northern Natural Gas Company; Notice of Filing of Annual Report

May 25, 2000.
    Take notice that on May 18, 2000, Northern Natural Gas Company 
(Northern) submitted its annual report pursuant to the Commissioner's 
Order in Public Service Company of Colorado et al., Docket Nos. RP97-
369-000, et al.
    Northern further states that copies of the filing have been mailed 
to each of its affected jurisdictional sales customers.
    Any person desiring to protest said filing should file a protest 
with the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission, 888 First Street, N.E., 
Washington, DC 20426, in accordance with Section 385.211 of the 
Commission's Rules and Regulations. All such protests must be filed on 
or before June 1, 2000. Protests will be considered by the Commission 
in determining the appropriate action to be taken, but will not serve 
to make protestants parties to the proceedings. Copies of this filing 
are on file with the Commission and are available for public inspection 
in the Public Reference Room. This filing may be viewed on the web at 
http://www.ferc.fed.us/online/rims.htm (call 202-208-2222 for 
assistance).

Linwood A. Watson, Jr.,
Acting Secretary.
[FR Doc. 00-13625 Filed 5-31-00; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6717-01-M
UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT
No. 95-2873
LUTHER RUTHER, Plaintiff - Appellant, versus PAINE WEBBER MORTGAGE FINANCE, INCORPORATED, Defendant - Appellee.
Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Virginia, at Alexandria. James C. Cacheris, Chief District Judge. (CA-95-1166-A) Submitted: March 21, 1996 Decided: April 2, 1996 Before NIEMEYER and MICHAEL, Circuit Judges, and BUTZNER, Senior Circuit Judge. Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion. Luther Ruther, Appellant Pro Se. Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. See Local Rule 36(c).2 PER CURIAM: Appellant appeals from the district court's order dismissing his civil action for lack of jurisdiction. We have reviewed the record and the district court's opinion and find no reversible error. Accordingly, we affirm on the reasoning of the district court. Ruther v. Paine Webber Mortgage Fin., Inc. , No. CA-95-1166-A (E.D. Va. Aug. 23, 1995). We dispense with oral argument becausethe facts and legal contentions are adequately presented in the materials before the court and argument would not aid the decisional process.

AFFIRMED
Exhibit 32.1





CERTIFICATION PURSUANT TO

18 U.S.C. §1350,

AS ADOPTED PURSUANT TO

SECTION 906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002







In connection with the Quarterly Report of China Energy Ventures Corp. (the Company) on Form 10-QSB for the period ended September 30, 2004 as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the Report), I, Matthew Heysel, Chief Executive Officer, certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. §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 this Report fairly presents, in all material respects, the financial condition and results of operations of the Company.



|Date:  November 12, 2004 | By: | /s/ Matthew HeyselName:  Matthew Heysel
Title:  Chief Executive Officer (Principal Executive Officer)
|------------------------ | --- | -----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Public Utilities Commission

No. 6756

#### Harry K. Shepard, Inc. v. State of New Hampshire

April 30, 1975

*Devine, Millimet, Stahl*&? *Branch*and *Silas Little III (Mr. Little*orally) for the plaintiff.

*185*Warren B. Rudman,*attorney general, and *John L. Ahlgren,*attorney *(Mr. Ahlgren*orally), for the State of New Hampshire.

*McLane, Graf, Greene & Brown*and *Charles A. DeGrandpre (Mr. DeGrandpre*orally) for the intervenor trucking companies opposing this application.

Per curiam.

The issue in this case on appeal from the public utilities commission (RSA ch. 541) is whether the plaintiff was denied due process of law when it was refused a permit necessary to haul rubbish within the State of New Hampshire.

Harry K. Shepard, Inc., by application originally filed in 1968, requested authority to operate within thirty-four communities bordering the New Hampshire-Vermont boundary. On August 1, 1973, after a hearing, the commission rejected the plaintiff’s application because “the record does not reflect any apparent need for additional refuse carrier service in the areas involved.” Consequently, the commission adds, “the public interest does not require the issuance of a permit. The application is, therefore, denied.” RSA ch. 375-B (Supp. 1973).

The commission has broad discretion to act in the public interest. *Waste Control Systems, Inc. v. State,*114 N.H. 21, 314 A.2d 659 (1974); *Vautier v. State,*112 N.H. 193, 291 A.2d 612 (1972); D’Ambruoso, *The New Hampshire Public Utilities Commission: Functions and Jurisdiction,*15 N.H.B.J. 177 (1974). In this case, there was substantial evidence that granting the application would not only provide needed service but would also provide competition. There was evidence, however, that the “area embraced by application is presently receiving adequate and sufficient service from 17 carriers who specialize in rubbish disposal, and fulfilling the existing needs for service. The record shows that several of these carriers employ modern, sophisticated equipment, including roll-off units, and indications are evident that these carriers are willing to invest in additional equipment contingent upon demands in sufficient volume to support operations. Protestants submit that they are now offering, or are in a position to offer, containerized service of the type applicant is proposing in all areas embraced by the application.” The finding of the commission that Shepard failed to sustain its burden is therefore supported by the record.

As in *Browning-Ferris Industries of New Hampshire, Inc. v. State,*115 N.H. 190, 339 A.2d 1 (1975) decided this date, the absence of one commissioner from the hearing is not a denial of due process.

*186We have also examined the expanded record ordered in *Harry K. Shepard, Inc.*and *Browning-Ferris Industries of New Hampshire, Inc. v. State,*114 N.H. 344, 320 A.2d 110 (1974), and find no such inconsistency as would require a remand.

Accordingly, this appeal is

*Dismissed.*
## Court of Appeals Sixth Appellate District of Texas

J U D G M E N T

Jonathon Lemone Vaughn , Appellant

No. 06

- 20

- 00118

- CR v.

The State of Texas , Appellee Appeal from the 102nd District Court of Bowie County, Texas (Tr. Ct

. No. 19F0770

- 202 ). Memora ndum Opinion delivered by Justice Burgess

, Chief Justice Morriss and Justice Stevens participating

.

As stated in the Court’s opinion of this date, we find that the appeal should be dismissed for want of jurisdiction . Therefore, we dismiss the appeal.

W e note that the appellant, Jonathon Lemone Vaughn , has adequately indicated his inability to pay costs of appeal. Therefore, we waive payment of costs.

RENDERED JANUARY 6, 2021 BY ORDER OF THE COURT JOSH R. MORRISS, III CHIEF JUSTICE

ATTEST: Debra K. Autrey , Clerk
EXHIBIT 32.1

CERTIFICATION PURSUANT TO

18 U.S.C. SECTION 1350,

AS ADOPTED PURSUANT TO

SECTION 906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002

In connection with the Annual Report of Gencor Industries, Inc. (the Company) on Form 10-K for the fiscal year ending September 30, 2007 as filed with
the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the Report), each of the undersigned officers of the Company, certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. 1350, as adopted pursuant to 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 materials respects, the financial condition and results of operations of the Company.
| | --- | -----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------



|                                    
|------------------------------------
|/s/ E.J. Elliott                    
|E.J. Elliott                        
|Chairman and Chief Executive Officer
|December 19, 2007                   
|                                    
|/s/ Scott W. Runkel                 
|Scott W. Runkel                     
|Chief Financial Officer             
|December 19, 2007                   



79