alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
## SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF NEW YORK 

## Appellate Division, Fourth Judicial Department

1053 CAF 15-00376 PRESENT: CARNI, J.P., DEJOSEPH, NEMOYER, TROUTMAN, AND SCUDDER, JJ.

IN THE MATTER OF TRINITY E.

------------------------------------------- MONROE COUNTY DEPARTMENT OF HUMAN SERVICES, MEMORANDUM AND ORDER PETITIONER-RESPONDENT;

ROBERT E., RESPONDENT-APPELLANT.

TIMOTHY P. DONAHER, PUBLIC DEFENDER, ROCHESTER (KIMBERLY F. DUGUAY OF COUNSEL), FOR RESPONDENT-APPELLANT.

MICHAEL E. DAVIS, COUNTY ATTORNEY, ROCHESTER (CAROL L. EISENMAN OF COUNSEL), FOR PETITIONER-RESPONDENT.

PAUL B. WATKINS, ATTORNEY FOR THE CHILD, FAIRPORT.

Appeal from an order of the Family Court, Monroe County (Patricia E. Gallaher, J.), entered February 4, 2015 in a proceeding pursuant to Social Services Law § 384-b. The order terminated the parental rights of respondent.

It is hereby ORDERED that the order of disposition so appealed from is unanimously vacated on the law without costs, the motion for recusal is granted, and the matter is remitted to Family Court, Monroe County, for a new dispositional hearing in accordance with the following memorandum: In this proceeding pursuant to Social Services Law § 384-b, respondent father appeals from an order of disposition terminating his parental rights with respect to the subject child. At the conclusion of the fact-finding hearing, Family Court made a finding of permanent neglect and thereafter issued an order finding permanent neglect and scheduling a dispositional hearing. The day after the finding of permanent neglect, the father made a death threat directed toward the court, the Attorney for the Child, the caseworker, and the police. The father was charged with making a terroristic threat (Penal Law § 490.20), and an order of protection was issued against the father in favor of the court. The father now contends that the court abused its discretion in denying his subsequent recusal motion following the finding of permanent neglect and in presiding over the dispositional hearing. We agree. It is well settled that, “[a]bsent a legal disqualification under Judiciary Law § 14, a . . . Judge is the sole arbiter of recusal” ( People v Moreno , 70 NY2d 403, 405), and the decision whether to recuse is committed to his or her discretion ( see id. at 406; Matter of McLaughlin v McLaughlin , 104 AD3d 1315, 1316, rearg denied 112 AD3d 1385). Under these circumstances, and particularly in view of the order of protection, we-2- 1053 CAF 15-00376
conclude that the court abused its discretion in refusing to recuse itself ( see generally People v Warren , 100 AD3d 1399, 1400). We therefore vacate the dispositional order, grant the recusal motion ( see generally Matter of James V. , 302 AD2d 916, 918), and remit the matter to Family Court for a new dispositional hearing before a different judge ( see Matter of Jasmine H. , 270 AD2d 950, 951).

Entered: November 18, 2016 Frances E. Cafarell Clerk of the Court
# EUR-Lex - 12007L/AFI/DCL/03 - EN

Important legal notice

*|*

# 12007L/AFI/DCL/03

**Treaty of Lisbon amending the Treaty on European Union and the Treaty establishing the European Community, signed at Lisbon, 13 December 2007 - A. Declarations concerning provisions of the Treaties - 3. Declaration on Article 7a of the Treaty on European Union **

*
Official Journal 306 , 17/12/2007 P. 0249 - 0249 *

3. Declaration on Article 7a of the Treaty on European Union

The Union will take into account the particular situation of small-sized countries which maintain specific relations of proximity with it.

--------------------------------------------------
Exhibit
32


Section
1350 Certifications





STATEMENT
FURNISHED PURSUANT TO


SECTION
906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002





The
undersigned is the Chief Executive Officer and Treasurer or Principal Accounting
Officer of Lightbridge Corporation. This Certification is made pursuant to
Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002.  This Certification
accompanies the Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q of Lightbridge Corporation for the
three months ended September 30, 2009.





The
undersigned certifies that such 10-Q Report fully complies with the requirements
of Section 13(a) or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 and that the
information contained in such 10-Q Report fairly presents, in all material
respects, the financial condition and results of operations of Lightbridge
Corporation as of September 30, 2009.





This
Certification is executed as of November 19, 2009.





By:
      /s/ Seth GraeName:
      Seth GraeTitle:
      President, Chief Executive Officer and
      Director(Principal
      Executive Officer)By:
      /s/ James GuerraName:
      James GuerraTitle:
      Chief Operating Officer and Chief Financial
  Officer(Principal Financial Officer and Principal Accounting Officer)





A signed
original of this written statement required by Section 906 has been provided to
Lightbridge Corporation and will be retained by Lightbridge Corporation and
furnished to the Securities and Exchange Commission or its staff upon
request.





The
forgoing certification is being furnished to the Securities and Exchange
Commission pursuant to § 18 U.S.C. Section 1350. It is not being filed for
purposes of Section 18 of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended, and
is not to be incorporated by reference into any filing of the Company, whether
made before or after the date hereof, regardless of any general incorporation
language in such filing.
EXHIBIT 32.1

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


         In connection with the Quarterly Report on Form 10-QSB of Elephant Talk
Communications, Inc. (the "Company") for the period ended June 30, 2005 as filed
with the Securities and Exchange  Commission on the date hereof (the  "Report"),
the  undersigned,  Russelle  Choi,  President & Chief  Executive  Officer of the
Company,  and Manu Ohri,  Chief  Financial  Officer of the Company,  each hereby
certifies, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, 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/ Russelle Choi
                                    ------------------------------------
Dated: August 19, 2005              Russelle Choi
                                    President & Chief Executive Officer


                                    /s/ Manu Ohri
                                    ------------------------------------
Dated: August 19, 2005              Manu Ohri
                                    Chief Financial Officer



























                                    32.1-1
NOTICE: NOT FOR OFFICIAL PUBLICATION.

UNDER ARIZONA RULE OF THE SUPREME COURT 111(c), THIS DECISION IS NOT PRECEDENTIAL

AND MAY BE CITED ONLY AS AUTHORIZED BY RULE.

IN THE

ARIZONA COURT OF APPEALS

DIVISION ONE

STATE OF ARIZONA, Respondent,

v.

GARY EUGENE ISABEL, Petitioner.

No. 1 CA-CR 19-0176 PRPC

Petition for Review from the Superior Court in Maricopa County

No. CR2002-007229

The Honorable George H. Foster Jr., Judge

REVIEW GRANTED; RELIEF DENIED

COUNSEL

Maricopa County Attorney’s Office, Phoenix

By Andrea L. Kever

Counsel for Respondent

Gary Eugene Isabel, Florence

Petitioner

MEMORANDUM DECISION

Presiding Judge Kenton D. Jones, Judge James B. Morse Jr., and Judge Diane 

M. Johnsen delivered the decision of the Court.

FILED 10-31-2019
STATE v. ISABEL

Decision of the Court

2

P E R C U R I A M:

¶1 Gary Isabel seeks review of the superior court’s order 

dismissing his petition for post-conviction relief, filed pursuant to Arizona 

Rule of Criminal Procedure 32.1. This is the latest of at least six successive 

petitions.

¶2 Absent an abuse of discretion or error of law, this Court will 

not disturb a superior court’s ruling on a petition for post-conviction relief. 

State v. Gutierrez, 229 Ariz. 573, 576-77, ¶ 19 (2012). It is the petitioner’s 

burden to show that the superior court abused its discretion in denying the 

petition. See State v. Poblete, 227 Ariz. 537, 538, ¶ 1 (App. 2011).

¶3 We have reviewed the record in this matter, the superior 

court’s order denying the petition for post-conviction relief, and the petition 

for review. We find that the petitioner has not shown any abuse of 

discretion. 

¶4 Accordingly, we grant review and deny relief.
##### 



EXHIBIT 32.2 CERTIFICATION PURSUANT TO
18 U.S.C. SECTION 1350 In connection with the Quarterly Report of EUPA International Corporation (the
Corporation) on Form 10-QSB for the period ended June 30, 2004 as filed
with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the
Report), I, Kun-Chieh Huang, Chief Financial Officer of the Corporation,
certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, as adopted pursuant to Section 906
of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that to the best of my 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 Corporation. /s/ Kun-Chieh HuangKung-Chieh HuangChief Financial Officer August 15, 2004
#### § 293.4 Maintenance of records.

The Chief, Forest Service, in accordance with section 3(a)(2) of the Wilderness Act, shall establish uniform procedures and standards for the maintenance and availability to the public of records pertaining to National Forest Wilderness, including maps and legal descriptions; copies of regulations governing Wilderness; and copies of public notices and reports submitted to Congress regarding pending additions, eliminations, or modifications. Copies of such information pertaining to National Forest Wilderness within their respective jurisdictions shall be available to the public in the appropriate offices of the Regional Foresters, Forest Supervisors, and Forest Rangers.
Docket No: FAA-2015-1421 Dir ID: 2014-NM-177-AD
#### § 3.9 May I operate my personal watercraft (PWC) in park waters?

(a) A person may operate a PWC only in park areas where authorized by special regulation. Special regulations may only be promulgated in the 21 parks listed in the following table:

| Name | Water type | State |
| --- | --- | --- |
| Amistad National Recreation Area | Impounded Lake | TX |
| Assateague Island National Seashore | Open Ocean/Bay | MD/VA |
| Bighorn Canyon National Recreation Area | Impounded Lake | MT |
| Big Thicket National Preserve | River | TX |
| Cape Cod National Seashore | Open Ocean/Bay | MA |
| Cape Lookout National Seashore | Open Ocean/Bay | NC |
| Chickasaw National Recreation Area | Impounded Lake | OK |
| Cumberland Island National Seashore | Open Ocean/Bay | GA |
| Curecanti National Recreation Area | Impounded Lake | CO |
| Delaware Water Gap | River | PA/NJ |
| Fire Island National Seashore | Open Ocean/Bay | NY |
| Gateway National Recreation Area | Open Ocean/Bay | NY |
| Glen Canyon National Recreation Area | Impounded Lake | AZ/UT |
| Gulf Islands National Seashore | Open Ocean/Bay | FL/MS |
| Indiana Dunes National Lakeshore | Natural Lake | IN |
| Lake Mead National Recreation Area | Impounded Lake | AZ/NV |
| Lake Meredith National Recreation Area | Impounded Lake | TX |
| Lake Roosevelt National Recreation Area | Impounded Lake | WA |
| Padre Island National Seashore | Open Ocean/Bay | TX |
| Pictured Rocks National Lakeshore | Natural Lake | MI |
| Whiskeytown-Shasta-Trinity National Recreation Area | Impounded Lake | CA |

(b) Where authorized, operation of a PWC on park waters is subject to the following conditions:

(1) No person may operate a PWC unless each person aboard is wearing a Type I, II, III, or V PFD approved by the United States Coast Guard.

(2) A person operating a PWC equipped by the manufacturer with a lanyard-type engine cut-off switch must attach such lanyard to his person, clothing, or PFD, as appropriate for the specific vessel.

(3) No person may operate a PWC anytime between sunset and sunrise.

(4) No person may operate a PWC by jumping the wake, becoming partially airborne or completely leaving the water while crossing the wake of another vessel within 100 feet of the vessel creating the wake.

(5) If a park area is located within a State that has more restrictive regulations for the operation of PWC, then applicable State law applies in lieu of paragraphs (b)(1) through (b)(4) of this section.
##### 



Exhibit 32.1
 Section 1350 Certification
 (Chief Executive Officer and Chief Financial Officer)
 CERTIFICATION PURSUANT TO
18 U.S.C. SECTION 1350,
AS ADOPTED PURSUANT TO
SECTION 906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002
  (i)
    
    The Report fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) or 15(d) of
the Securities Exchange Act of 1934; and(ii)
    
    The information contained in the Report fairly presents, in all material
respects, the financial condition and results of operations of the Company.
 Date:  September 23, 2005
    /s/ J.S.B. JenkinsJ.S.B. JenkinsChief Executive Officer/s/ Mark J. FlahertyMark J. FlahertyChief Financial Officer
MUR819000007
Exhibit
32.1




ELEPHANT TALK COMMUNICATIONS,
INC.




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 Quarterly Report of Elephant Talk Communications, Inc. (the
“Company”) on Form 10-Q for the period ending March 31, 2010 as filed with the
Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the “Report”), I, Steven
van der Velden, President and 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 to my 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 result of operations of the Company.




/s/
      Steven van der VeldenSteven
      van der Velden
              President
      and Chief Executive Officer
              May
      17, 2010
<PAGE>





                                                                    EXHIBIT 99.4


                CERTIFICATION PURSUANT TO 18 U.S.C. SECTION 1350

        In connection with the September 30, 2002 Form 10-QSB/A of Intrepid
Technology & Resources, Inc., (the "Company") as filed with the Securities and
Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the "Report"), I Dr. Jacob D. Dustin,
certify that the Report fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) or
15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, and that the information contained
in the Report fairly presents, in all material respects the financial condition
and results of operations of the Company.

        This certificate is being furnished solely for purposes of Section 906
and is not being filed as part of the Periodic Report.

        A signed original of this written statement required by Section 906 has
been provided to Intrepid Technology & Resources, Inc., and will be retained by
Intrepid Technology & Resources, Inc., and furnished to the Securities and
Exchange Commission or its staff upon request.

Dated: June 13, 2003


/s/ Dr. Jacob D. Dustin





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


Jacob D. Dustin

Vice President, Secretary, and Treasurer



                                       23
Case 16-26159 Doc 10 Filed 08/18/16 Entered 08/19/16 09:09:13 Desc Main

 Document Page 1 of 1
§ 242.20 Request for reconsideration. ( a ) Regulations in subparts C and D of this part published in the Federal Register are subject to requests for reconsideration.
( b ) Any aggrieved person may file a request for reconsideration with the Board.
( c ) To file a request for reconsideration, you must notify the Board in writing within sixty (60) days of the effective date or date of publication of the notice, whichever is earlier, for which reconsideration is requested.
( d ) It is your responsibility to provide the Board with sufficient narrative evidence and argument to show why the action by the Board should be reconsidered. The Board will accept a request for reconsideration only if it is based upon information not previously considered by the Board, demonstrates that the existing information used by the Board is incorrect, or demonstrates that the Board's interpretation of information, applicable law, or regulation is in error or contrary to existing law. You must include the following information in your request for reconsideration: ( 1 ) Your name, and mailing address;
( 2 ) The action which you request be reconsidered and the date of Federal Register publication of that action;
( 3 ) A detailed statement of how you are adversely affected by the action;
( 4 ) A detailed statement of the facts of the dispute, the issues raised by the request, and specific references to any law, regulation, or policy that you believe to be violated and your reason for such allegation;
( 5 ) A statement of how you would like the action changed.
( e ) Upon receipt of a request for reconsideration, the Board shall transmit a copy of such request to any appropriate Regional Council and the Alaska Department of Fish and Game (ADFG) for review and recommendation. The Board shall consider any Regional Council and ADFG recommendations in making a final decision.
( f ) If the request is justified, the Board shall implement a final decision on a request for reconsideration after compliance with 5 U.S.C. 551-559 (APA).
( g ) If the request is denied, the decision of the Board represents the final administrative action.
p. 1 of 1

From: Hakos, Matthew [mailto:mhakos@rti.org]
Sent: Wednesday, March 25, 2015 4:14 PM
To: sean.alteri@ky.gov
Cc: Green, David A.; Putney, David
Subject: Questions Regarding Your Comments on Suppl emental Proposal for Subpart LL
Mr. Sean Alteri,
I have been tasked with following up with you regar ding comments on the Supplemental proposal for Subpart LL (Primary A luminum Reduction Plants). Specifically, I was hoping that the Kentu cky DAQ could provide more information regarding your comment on the current testing frequency for TF. Currently, Subpart LL on ly requires monthly testing of TF for the Century Sebree and Ha wesville facilities. Based on the comments received, it app ears that Kentucky DAQ opposes decreasing this testing frequency.

Could you please provide information regarding the exceedances mentioned in the comment letter, Specifically, cou ld you please answer the following:

Can you please provide the specific dates, tested v alues for TF, and other pertinent information for any exceedance over the past four years at each facility (Century Sebree and Hawesvil le)?
Can you please elaborate on the specific issues tha t have led to these exceedances in the last four years?

Thank you in advance for your help,

Matt

Matt Hakos RTI International 3040 Cornwallis Road Research Triangle Park, NC 27709 (919) 541-6608 (919) 541-7155 (fax)
#### § 9.191 How does the NPS process my request for reconsideration?

The Regional Director will review his or her original decision and, within 90 days after receipt of your appeal, provide you with a written statement reversing, affirming, or modifying that decision, unless the Regional Director notifies you that he or she needs additional time to review the original decision. When issued, that written statement constitutes the Regional Director's final decision on the matter.
MUR812900001
MUR812900002
MUR812900003
MUR812900004
MUR812900005
MUR812900006
MUR812900007
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 Quarterly Report on Form 10-QSB of Novastar Resources Ltd.
(the "Company"), for the quarterly period ended March 31, 2005, as filed with
the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the "Report"), I,
Paul G. Carter, Principal Executive Officer and Principal Financial Officer of
the Company, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Sec. 1350, as adopted pursuant to Section 906
of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, do hereby certify, 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 15 U.S.C. 78m (a) or 780(d)); 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/ Paul
G. Carter
 
 Paul G.
Carter
 Principal
Executive Officer
 Principal
Financial Officer
 
 Dated:  May 16,
2005
 
 A signed
original of this written statement required by Section 906 has been provided to
Novastar Resources Ltd. and will be retained by Novastar Resources Ltd. and
furnished to the Securities and Exchange Commission or its staff upon
request.
<PAGE>


               AMENDMENT TO EMPLOYMENT AGREEMENT DATED DECEMBER 1, 1995
                                    BY AND BETWEEN
                              RURAL CELLULAR CORPORATION
                                         AND
                                 RICHARD P. EKSTRAND


    THIS AMENDMENT entered into this 18th day of December, 1996, by and between
Rural Cellular Corporation ("RCC" or "Company") and Richard P. Ekstrand (the
"Employee").

    WHEREAS, RCC and the Employee entered into a written Employment Agreement
on December 1, 1995;

    WHEREAS, under the current provisions in the Employment Agreement, the
Employee's employment term ends December 31, 1998;

    WHEREAS, pursuant to Sections 5 and 14 of the Employment Agreement, RCC and
the Employee desire to extend the term of the Employee's Employment Agreement by
one year;

    NOW, THEREFORE, it is AGREED as follows:

    1. The Employee's term of employment, as stated in Section 5 of the 
Employment Agreement, is hereby extended by one year, so that said term now 
ends on December 31, 1999.

    2. All other terms, conditions and provisions of the Employment Agreement 
remain in full force and effect.

                                              RURAL CELLULAR CORPORATION

                                                /s/   Don C. Swenson
                                             ---------------------------------
                                              By:  Don C. Swenson
                                                   Secretary

         
         
                                               /s/ Richard P. Eckstrand
                                             ---------------------------------
                                              Richard P. Eckstrand
# EUR-Lex - 12007L/AFI/DCL/20 - EN

Important legal notice

*|*

# 12007L/AFI/DCL/20

**Treaty of Lisbon amending the Treaty on European Union and the Treaty establishing the European Community, signed at Lisbon, 13 December 2007 - A. Declarations concerning provisions of the Treaties - 20. Declaration on Article 16 B of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union **

*
Official Journal 306 , 17/12/2007 P. 0257 - 0257 *

20. Declaration on Article 16 B of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union

The Conference declares that, whenever rules on protection of personal data to be adopted on the basis of Article 15a could have direct implications for national security, due account will have to be taken of the specific characteristics of the matter. It recalls that the legislation presently applicable (see in particular Directive 95/46/EC) includes specific derogations in this regard.

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