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

[Federal Register Volume 86, Number 128 (Thursday, July 8, 2021)]
[Notices]
[Page 36130]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2021-14588]

[[Page 36130]]

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

DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY

Federal Energy Regulatory Commission

[Docket No. ER21-2270-000]

Jayhawk Wind, LLC; Supplemental Notice That Initial Market-Based 
Rate Filing Includes Request for Blanket Section 204 Authorization

    This is a supplemental notice in the above-referenced proceeding of 
Jayhawk Wind, LLC's application for market-based rate authority, with 
an accompanying rate tariff, noting that such application includes a 
request for blanket authorization, under 18 CFR part 34, of future 
issuances of securities and assumptions of liability.
    Any person desiring to intervene or to protest should file with the 
Federal Energy 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). Anyone 
filing a motion to intervene or protest must serve a copy of that 
document on the Applicant.
    Notice is hereby given that the deadline for filing protests with 
regard to the applicant's request for blanket authorization, under 18 
CFR part 34, of future issuances of securities and assumptions of 
liability, is July 21, 2021.
    The Commission encourages electronic submission of protests and 
interventions in lieu of paper, using the FERC Online links at http://www.ferc.gov. To facilitate electronic service, persons with internet 
access who will eFile a document and/or be listed as a contact for an 
intervenor must create and validate an eRegistration account using the 
eRegistration link. Select the eFiling link to log on and submit the 
intervention or protests.
    Persons unable to file electronically may mail similar pleadings to 
the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission, 888 First Street NE, 
Washington, DC 20426. Hand delivered submissions in docketed 
proceedings should be delivered to Health and Human Services, 12225 
Wilkins Avenue, Rockville, Maryland 20852.
    In addition to publishing the full text of this document in the 
Federal Register, the Commission provides all interested persons an 
opportunity to view and/or print the contents of this document via the 
internet through the Commission's Home Page (http://www.ferc.gov) using 
the ``eLibrary'' link. Enter the docket number excluding the last three 
digits in the docket number field to access the document. At this time, 
the Commission has suspended access to the Commission's Public 
Reference Room, due to the proclamation declaring a National Emergency 
concerning the Novel Coronavirus Disease (COVID-19), issued by the 
President on March 13, 2020. For assistance, contact the Federal Energy 
Regulatory Commission at [email protected] or call toll-free, 
(886) 208-3676 or TYY, (202) 502-8659.

    Dated: July 1, 2021.
Debbie-Anne A. Reese,
Deputy Secretary.
[FR Doc. 2021-14588 Filed 7-7-21; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6717-01-P
```
<PAGE>
                                                                    Exhibit 99.1

                                  CERTIFICATION
                                  -------------


     In connection with the Quarterly Report of Home Director, Inc. (the
"Company") on Form 10-QSB for the quarterly period ended March 31, 2003 (the
"Report") and pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, as adopted in Section 906 of
the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, I, DONALD B. WITMER, the Chairman and Chief
Executive Officer of the Company, certify that to the best of my knowledge:

     1.  The  Report  fully  complies  with the requirements of Section 13(a) of
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.


Dated:  May 15, 2003



                                    /s/ Donald B. Witmer
                                   -----------------------------
                                   Donald B. Witmer,
                                   Chairman and Chief Executive Officer



<PAGE>
#### The People of the State of New York, Respondent, v Charles Wilson, Appellant.

Appeal by defendant from a judgment of the Supreme Court, Kings County (DeLury, J.), rendered April 7, 1982, convicting him of robbery in the first degree and robbery in the second degree, upon a jury verdict, and imposing sentence.

Judgment affirmed.

Defendant argues, *inter alia,*that the lineup procedure was tainted by a remark made by a police officer, three months earlier, indicating that the witness selected the “right person” from a photo array. This claim was fully addressed at a suppression hearing, and was rejected by the hearing court. Although the remark was imprudent, as the People concede, under the circumstances we find there to be more than sufficient evidence to support the hearing court’s finding of no suggestiveness, particularly in light of the lapse of time between the two procedures *{see, People v Chamberlain,*96 AD2d 959), the significant difference in defendant’s appearance in the array photograph and in the lineup *{see, People v Rodriquez,*64 NY2d 738), and the fact that the witness was never told that the person whose picture he selected would be in the lineup. We have examined defendant’s remaining contentions and find them to be without merit. Gibbons, J. P., Thompson, Weinstein and Lawrence, JJ., concur.
Exhibit 3.10

      State of Delaware
     Secretary of State
  Division or Corporations
Delivered 11:47 AM 12/23/2010
  FILED 11:17 AM 12/23/2010
SRV 101228103 - 4917966 FILE

                          CERTIFICATE OF INCORPORATION

     FIRST: The name of this corporation shall be: ENVIRONMENTAL QUALITY
SERVICES, INC.

     SECOND: Its registered office in the State of Delaware is to be located at
2711 Centerville Road, Suite 400, Wilmington, County of New Castle, Delaware,
19808. The name of its registered agent at such address is The Company
Corporation.

     THIRD: The purpose or purposes of the corporation shall be:

     To engage in any lawful act or activity for which corporations may be
organized under the General Corporation Law of Delaware.

     FOURTH: The total number of shares of stock, which this corporation is
authorized to issue is One Thousand Five Hundred (1,500) shares of common stock
without par value.

     FIFTH: The name and address of the incorporator is as follows:

                         The Company Corporation
                         2711 Centerville Road
                         Suite 400
                         Wilmington, Delaware 19808

     SIXTH: The Board of Directors shall have the power to adopt, amend or
repeal the by-laws.

     SEVENTH: No director shall be personally liable to the Corporation or its
stockholders for monetary damages for any breach of fiduciary duty by such
director as a director. Notwithstanding the foregoing sentence, a director shall
be liable to the extent provided by applicable law, (i) for breach of the
director's duty of loyalty to the Corporation or its stockholders, (ii) for acts
or omissions not in good faith or which involve intentional misconduct or a
knowing violation of law, (iii) pursuant to Section 174 of the Delaware General
Corporation Law or (iv) for any transaction from which the director derived an
improper personal benefit. No amendment to or repeal of this Article Seventh
shall apply to or have any effect on the liability or alleged liability of any
director of the Corporation for or with respect to any acts or omissions of such
director occurring prior to such amendment.

     IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the undersigned, being the incorporator herein before
named, has executed signed and acknowledged this certificate of incorporation
this 23rd day of December, 2010.

                                  The Company Corporation, Incorporator


                                  By: /s/ Margaret Rosado
                                     -----------------------------------
                                  Name: Margaret Rosado
                                        Assistant Secretary
Exhibit 23.1

CONSENT OF INDEPENDENT REGISTERED CERTIFIED PUBLIC ACCOUNTING FIRM

We consent to the incorporation by reference in the following Registration Statements of Syniverse Holdings, Inc.:



| | (1) | Registration Statement (Form S-8, No. 333-159452) pertaining to the Syniverse Holdings, Inc. Amended and Restated 2006 Long-Term Equity Incentive Plan,
| | --- | -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------



| | (2) | Registration Statement (Form S-8, No. 333-124866) pertaining to the Syniverse Holdings, Inc. Amended and Restated Founders and Non-Employee Directors Stock
Option Plans,
| | --- | --------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------



| | (3) | Registration Statement (Form S-8, No. 333-134057) pertaining to the Syniverse Holdings, Inc. 2006 Long-term Equity Incentive Plan and 2006 Employee Stock Purchase
Plan, and
| | --- | ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------



| | (4) | Registration Statement (Form S-3, No. 333-143631) of Syniverse Holdings, Inc. and related Prospectus;
| | --- | -----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

of our reports dated February 26, 2010, with respect to the consolidated financial statements and schedule of Syniverse Holdings, Inc. and the
effectiveness of internal control over financial reporting of Syniverse Holdings, Inc. included in this Annual Report (Form 10-K) for the year ended December 31, 2009.



/s/ Ernst & Young LLP Certified Public Accountants


Tampa, Florida

February 26, 2010
**Exhibit 32 (i)**

 

**CERTIFICATIONSECTION 1350**

 

In connection with the Quarterly Report ofPenns Woods Bancorp, Inc. (the “Company”) on Form 10-Q for the period endingJune 30, 2005, as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the datehereof (the “Report”), I, Ronald A. Walko, Chief Executive Officer, certify,pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, as adopted pursuant to Section 906 of theSarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that:

 

(1)           the Report fully complies with the requirements of Section13(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 ofthe Company.

 

 
| /s/ Ronald A. Walko     |   |
|-------------------------|--------|
| Ronald A. Walko         |
| Chief Executive Officer |
|                    |
| August 9, 2005          |

 

----
Exhibit 23.3







March 23, 2011







Delta Oil & Gas Inc.


300, 1055 West Hasting St.


Vancouver, BC


V6E 2E9




ATTENTION:  MR. KULWANT SANDHER







Re:          Delta Oil & Gas Inc. (the “Company”)


Consent Letter





As independent engineering consultants, we hereby consent to the use of our report entitled Reserve Estimation and Economic Evaluation effective December 31, 2010, dated March 2, 2011 and data extracted there from (and all references to our Firm) included in or made a part of this Form 10K Annual Report to be filed on or about March 30, 2011.





Yours very truly





AJM Petroleum Consultants









/s/ Dougas S. Ashton


Dougas S. Ashton, P.Eng.


Vice President Engineering








Calgary, Alberta
#### UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. Kenneth Ky DUONG, aka Seal A, Defendant-Appellant.

No. 07-50537.

United States Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit.

Submitted Dee. 9, 2008.*

Jan. 9, 2009.

Michael J. Raphael, Esq., Jill Therese Feeney, Esq., USLA-Office of the U.S. Attorney Criminal Division, Los Angeles, CA, for Plaintiff-Appellee.

*34Gary Paul Burcham, Law Office of Debra Dilorio, San Diego, CA, for Defendant-Appellant.

Before FARRIS and WARDLAW, Circuit Judges, and SCHWARZER,** District Judge.

*

 The panel unanimously finds this case suitable for decision without oral argument. *See*Fed. R.App. P. 34(a)(2).

**

 The Honorable William W. Schwarzer, Senior United States District Judge for the Northern District of California, sitting by designation.

MEMORANDUM ***

Kenneth Ky Duong appeals his sentence, following his conviction by guilty plea to one count of mail fraud, in violation of 18 U.S.C. § 1341. We have jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. § 1291 and we affirm.

The district court did not err by failing to give sufficient notice of its intent to depart upward from the Guidelines range because the increase was a variance under the 18 U.S.C. § 3553(a) factors not a departure from the United States Sentencing Guidelines (“Guidelines”). *See Irizarry v. United States,*— U.S. -, ---, 128 S.Ct. 2198, 2202-03, 171 L.Ed.2d 28 (2008). The district court imposed a sentence above the Guidelines’ advisory range after a full consideration of the § 3553(a) factors, such as Duong’s failure to take responsibility and make restitution payments, the sophistication employed in his fraudulent scheme, and his inability to sufficiently explain where the stolen money went. *See*18 U.S.C. § 3553(a).

Nor was Duong’s sentence unreasonable. Contrary to Duong’s assertion the court did not impose the higher sentence as a punitive measure for his inability to make restitution. Rather, following four warnings during the plea hearing that efforts to pay back the stolen money would be considered at sentencing, the district court determined that failure to pay even nominal sums demonstrated that Duong had “not taken any responsibility in his life.” Moreover, the court sufficiently considered the relevant 18 U.S.C. § 3553(a) and mitigating factors. *See United States v. Carty,*520 F.3d 984, 992 (9th Cir.2008) (en banc). The sentence was neither procedurally erroneous or substantively unreasonable. *See id.*at 993.

AFFIRMED.

***

 This disposition is not appropriate for publication and is not precedent except as provided by 9 th Cir. R. 36-3.
#### Muwakkil Khaliah ROBY, also known as Frank Andrew Roby, Appellant, v. George WILLIAMS; Cheri Moyer, Appellees.

No. 07-3571.

United States Court of Appeals, Eighth Circuit.

Submitted: Jan. 5, 2009.

Filed: Jan. 16, 2009.

Muwakkil Khaliah Roby, Grandview, MO, for Plaintiff-Appellant.

Ashley Dean, Litigation Counsel, TMC Professional and General Liability Self Insurance Trust, Kansas City, MO, for Defendant-Appellee.

Before MURPHY, BYE, and BENTON, Circuit Judges.

PER CURIAM.

Former detainee Muwakkil Khaliah Roby appeals following the district court’s1 entry of judgment on an adverse jury verdict in his action brought under 42 U.S.C. § 1983 and the Americans with Disabilities Act.2

To the extent Roby has properly raised any issues for our review, *see*Fed. R.App. P. 28(a) (brief requirements), his assertions of error fail. He does not explain how, absent certain purported errors, the jury would have reached a verdict in his favor, *see Primary Care Investors, Seven, Inc. v. PHP Healthcare Corp.,*986 F.2d *311208, 1212 (8th Cir.1993) (noting that unargued assertion of error is no more helpful to appellate court than is unsupported allegation of fact to trial court); some of the identified errors are based merely on speculation; and it is impossible to review some specified issues without a trial transcript, which he failed to order, *see*Fed. R.App. P. 10(b)(1) (discussing appellant’s duty to order transcript within 10 days after filing notice of appeal); *cf. Schmid v. United Bhd. of Carpenters & Joiners,*827 F.2d 384, 385-86 (8th Cir.1987) (per curiam) (where pro se appellant did not order trial transcript, this court could not review claims of judicial bias, or’ challenges to evidentiary rulings or sufficiency of evidence). Further, we find no abuse of discretion in the district court’s denial of Roby’s vague request for appointed counsel. *See Stevens v. Redwing,*146 F.3d 538, 546 (8th Cir.1998) (standard of review; listing factors). The remaining issues Roby identifies warrant no further discussion.

Accordingly, we affirm. *See*8th Cir. R. 47B. We also deny Roby’s motion for appointment of appellate counsel.

1

. The Honorable Ortrie D. Smith, United States District Judge for the Western District of Missouri.

2

. Roby does not challenge the grant of summary judgment to Cheri Moyer. *See Griffith v. City of Des Moines,*387 F.3d 733, 739 (8th Cir.2004) (waiver of claims on appeal).
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 Annual Report of Optigenex Inc. (the "Company") on Form
10-KSB for the fiscal year ended December 31, 2004 (the "Report"), I, Joseph
McSherry, as Principal 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, that:

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

(4)   The information contained in the Report fairly presents, in all material
      respects, the financial condition and results of operations of the
      Company.


                                        /s/ Joseph McSherry
                                        -------------------
                                        Joseph McSherry,
                                        Chief Financial Officer (Principal
                                        Financial Officer)

Dated:  April 14, 2005
Order Entered July 12, 2016

S

In The

Court of Appeals

Fifth District of Texas at Dallas

No. 05-16-00737-CV

IN RE BETTIE PRIESTER AND JOHN PRIESTER, JR., Relators

Original Proceeding from the 429th Judicial District Court

Collin County, Texas

Trial Court Cause No. 429-04751-2014

ORDER

Before Justices Bridges, Myers, and Schenck

Based on the Court’s opinion of this date, we DENY the petition for writ of mandamus.

/s/ DAVID BRIDGES

 JUSTICE
IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT

No. 12-40468

Summary Calendar

JOHN MARK QUAAK,

Plaintiff-Appellant

v.

OFFICER BROWN; OFFICER HOUSTON; OFFICER SMITH; 

OFFICER PUGH SEYOFF; OFFICER FANNING SEGOTT; 

DEFENDANT CRY; DEFENDANT KATRAGRADDA; DEFENDANT 

THOMAS; DEFENDANT BURLESON; DEFENDANT RIVAS,

Defendants-Appellees

Appeal from the United States District Court

for the Southern District of Texas

USDC No. 3:11-CV-356

Before HIGGINBOTHAM, OWEN, and SOUTHWICK, Circuit Judges.

PER CURIAM:*

John Mark Quaak, Texas prisoner # 1436525, appeals the dismissal of his

42 U.S.C. § 1983 lawsuit, alleging that officials with the Terrell Unit of the

Texas Department of Criminal Justice, Correctional Institutions Division, have

violated his constitutional rights. The district court dismissed the lawsuit

without prejudice pursuant to Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 41(b) because

United States Court of Appeals

Fifth Circuit

F I L E D

January 17, 2013

Lyle W. Cayce

Clerk

Pursuant to 5TH CIR. R. 47.5, the court has determined that this opinion should not *

be published and is not precedent except under the limited circumstances set forth in 5TH CIR.

R. 47.5.4.

 Case: 12-40468 Document: 00512116748 Page: 1 Date Filed: 01/17/2013
No. 12-40468

Quaak failed to comply with its order that he submit a properly certified inmate

trust fund data sheet in support of his motion for leave to proceed in forma

pauperis.

A district court may sua sponte dismiss an action for failure to prosecute

or to comply with any court order. FED.R.CIV.P.41(b); McCullough v. Lynaugh,

835 F.2d 1126, 1127 (5th Cir. 1988). Because the dismissal at issue was without

prejudice and the applicable statute of limitations would not currently bar

Quaak’s refiling of the suit, we review for an abuse of discretion. See Berry v.

CIGNA/RSI-CIGNA, 975 F.2d 1188, 1190-91 (5th Cir. 1992); McCullough, 835

F.2d at 1127; see also Wallace v. Kato, 549 U.S. 384, 387 (2007); Cooper v.

Brookshire, 70 F.3d 377, 380 n.20 (5th Cir. 1995); TEX. CIV. PRAC. & REM. CODE

ANN. § 16.003(a).

Quaak conclusionally asserts that the district court judge was prejudiced

against him, made false entries in the docket, and conspired with the defendants

to keep his lawsuit out of court. However, he offers no explanation for his failure

to comply with the district court’s order or for his delay in submitting the

required trust fund data sheet, which he ultimately supplied after the dismissal

of his case. Quaak has thus failed to show that the district court abused its

discretion. See FED. R. CIV.P. 41(b); McCullough, 835 F.2d at 1127. The district

court’s judgment is therefore AFFIRMED. Quaak’s motion for the appointment

of counsel, seeking to have counsel appointed to represent him in unspecified

future civil and criminal matters, is DENIED.

2

 Case: 12-40468 Document: 00512116748 Page: 2 Date Filed: 01/17/2013
**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








The
      undersigned hereby certifies, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, as adopted
      pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that this Annual
      Report on Form 10-KSB for the year ended December 31, 2005 fully complies with
      the requirements of Section 13(a) or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of
      1934, as amended, and the information contained in such report fairly presents,
      in all material respects, the financial condition and results of operations
      of
      Seasons Bancshares, Inc.








This
                20th day of March, 2006./s/
                Nita ElliottNita
                ElliottChief
                Financial Officer