alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
**EXHIBIT 32.1**

 

**CAMBER ENERGY, 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 Camber Energy, Inc. (the Company) on Form 10-Q for the quarterly period ended March 31, 2022, as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the Report), I, James Doris, Principal Executive Officer of the Company, certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. ss. 1350, as adopted pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that:

 

|  | (1) | The Report fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934; and                                |
|--|-----|------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|
|  |     |                                                                                                                                                      |
|  | (2) | The information contained in the Report fairly presents, in all material respects, the financial condition and results of operations of the Company. |

 

| Date: May 20, 2022 |   | */s/ James Doris*                        |   |
|--------------------|--------|------------------------------------------|--------|
|               |   | James Doris

Principal Executive Officer |   |
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 JayHawk Energy, Inc. a Colorado corporation (the "Company") on Form 10-Q for the period ending March 31, 2011, as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the "Report"), Lindsay E. Gorrill, Chief Executive Officer of the Company, certifies to the best of his knowledge, 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 material respects, the financial condition and result of operations of the Company.  A signed original of this written statement required by Section 906 has been provided to JayHawk Energy, Inc., and will be retained by JayHawk Energy, Inc. and furnished to the Securities and Exchange Commission or its staff upon request.  /s/ Lindsay GorrillLindsay Gorrill
Chief Executive Officer
May 16, 2011
[Federal Register Volume 60, Number 69 (Tuesday, April 11, 1995)]
[Notices]
[Page 18396]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 95-8775]



=======================================================================
-----------------------------------------------------------------------

DEPARTMENT OF DEFENSE

Office of the Secretary


Defense Intelligence Agency, Scientific Advisory Board Panel 
Closed Meeting

AGENCY: Department of Defense, Intelligence Agency.

ACTION: Notice.

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

SUMMARY: Pursuant to the provisions of Subsection (d) of Section 10 of 
Public Law 92-463, as amended by Section 5 of Public Law 94-409, notice 
is hereby given that a closed meeting of the DIA Scientific Advisory 
Board has been scheduled as follows.

DATE: April 25-26, 1995 (830 to 400).

ADDRESSES: The Defense Intelligence Agency, Bolling AFB, Washington, DC 
20340-5100.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
Dr. W.S. Williamson, Executive Secretary, DIA Scientific Advisory 
Board, Washington, DC 20340-1328 (202) 373-4930.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The entire meeting is devoted to the 
discussion of classified information as defined in Section 552b(c)(I), 
Title 5 of the U.S. Code and therefore will be closed to the public. 
The Board will receive briefings on and discuss several current 
critical intelligence issues and advise the Director, DIA, on related 
scientific and technical matters.

    Dated: April 5, 1995.
Patricia L. Toppings,
Alternate OSD Federal Register Liaison Officer, Department of Defense.
[FR Doc. 95-8775 Filed 4-10-95; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 5000-04-M
Exhibit 10.2


 


AMENDMENT NO. 1 TO STOCK PURCHASE AGREEMENT


BETWEEN DOUGLAS R. LEBDA AND TREE.COM, INC.


 


May 10, 2010


 


This
Amendment No. 1 to that certain Stock Purchase Agreement, dated as of February 8,
2009 between Douglas R. Lebda (“Employee”) and
Tree.com, Inc. (the “Company”), is
effective as of February 25, 2010 (the “Agreement”)
unless otherwise indicated.  All
capitalized terms used herein without definition shall have the meanings given
to them in the Agreement.


 


WHEREAS, subject to the terms and conditions set forth
herein, Employee and the Company wish to make certain amendments to the
Agreement.


 


NOW, THEREFORE, for good and valuable consideration, the
receipt and sufficiency of which is hereby acknowledged, the parties hereby
agree as follows:


 


1.             Article 5 of the
Agreement is hereby amended by adding a new Section 5.8 to the end
thereof:


 


“Section 5.8           Termination of Repurchase
Option.  Notwithstanding anything in
this Article 5 to the contrary, the Repurchase Option shall automatically
expire effective February 25, 2010 and shall have no force or effect
thereafter.”


 


2.             Except as explicitly set
forth herein, the remaining provisions of the Agreement will remain in full
force and effect.


 


IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the parties have executed
this Amendment No. 1 as of the date first set forth above.


 


 


	
   

  	
  TREE.COM,
  INC.

  
	
   

  	
   

  
	
   

  	
   

  
	
   

  	
  /s/
  Claudette Hampton

  
	
   

  	
  By:
  Claudette Hampton

  
	
   

  	
  Senior
  Vice President — Human Resources

  
	
   

  	
   

  
	
   

  	
   

  
	
   

  	
  EMPLOYEE

  
	
   

  	
   

   

  
	
   

  	
  /s/
  Douglas R. Lebda

  
	
   

  	
  Douglas
  R. Lebda
#### Alfred NUERNBERG, Petitioner, v. TEXAS EMPLOYMENT COMMISSION and Milchem Incorporated Ind. and d/b/a Milpark Drilling Fluids, Respondents.

No. D-3326.

Supreme Court of Texas.

June 16, 1993.

Rehearing Overruled Sept. 10, 1993.

*365Bruce A. Coane and Joyce A. Keating, Houston, for petitioner.

J. Alfred Southerland, Houston, Anthony Aterno and Dan Morales, Austin, for respondents.

PER CURIAM.

Alfred Nuernberg appealed a decision of the Texas Employment Commission (TEC) denying him unemployment compensation. In the trial court, the TEC moved for summary judgment. With its motion, the TEC filed neither affidavits nor discovery materials but only the agency record. Relying solely on that record, the trial court granted the TEC’s motion. The court of appeals affirmed. 846 S.W.2d 41.

The court of appeals’ judgment conflicts with our decision in *Mercer v. Ross,*701 S.W.2d 830, 831 (Tex.1986). The hybrid, de novo — substantial evidence standard of review for appeals from the TEC, outlined in *Mercer,*prohibits the trial court from reviewing the agency record itself. Individual items within the agency record may be introduced at trial, but they must be introduced independently and pursuant to the Texas Rules of Civil Evidence. Because the TEC presented the agency record in its entirety to the trial court, there was no competent evidence on which to base a summary judgment. Accordingly, pursuant to Texas Rule of Appellate Procedure 170, without hearing oral argument, a majority of the court grants the application for writ of error, reverses the judgment of the court of appeals, and remands the case to the trial court for further proceedings consistent with this opinion.
[Federal Register Volume 60, Number 75 (Wednesday, April 19, 1995)]
[Notices]
[Page 19594]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 95-9660]



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


FEDERAL EMERGENCY MANAGEMENT AGENCY

Public Information Collection Requirements Submitted to OMB for 
Review

ACTION: Notice.

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

SUMMARY: The Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA) has submitted 
to the Office of Management and Budget the following public information 
collection requirements for review and clearance in accordance with the 
Paperwork Reduction Act of 1980, 44 U.S.C. chapter 35.

DATES: Comments on this information collection must be submitted on or 
before June 19, 1995.

ADDRESSES: Direct comments regarding the burden estimate or any aspect 
of this information collection, including suggestions for reducing this 
burden, to: the FEMA Information Collections Clearance Officer at the 
address below; and to Donald Arbuckle, Office of Management and Budget, 
3235 New Executive Office Building, Washington, DC 20503, (202) 395-
7340, within 60 days of this notice.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
Copies of the above information collection request and supporting 
documentation can be obtained by calling or writing Muriel B. Anderson, 
FEMA Information Collections Clearance Officer, Federal Emergency 
Management Agency, 500 C Street SW., Washington, DC 20472, (202) 646-
2624.

Type: Extension of OMB Control Number 3067-0233.
Title: National Fire Academy Field Course Evaluation Form.
Abstract: The National Fire Academy Field Course Evaluation Form (FEMA 
Form 95-45) is used in all field deliveries of NFA courses. The form is 
primarily used to assess the effectiveness of the course materials and 
instructor delivery. The demographic information is used in developing 
needs assessments and identifying the student population's 
representation.
Type of Respondents: Individuals.
Estimate of Total Annual Reporting and Recordkeeping.
Burden: 5,000.
Number of Respondents: 20,000.
Estimated Average Burden Time per Response: 15 minutes.
Frequency of Response: One-time. One evaluation form per course 
completed.

    Dated: April 10, 1995.
Wesley C. Moore,
Director, Program Services Division, Operations Support Directorate.
[FR Doc. 95-9660 Filed 4-18-95; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6718-01-M
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<ARTICLE> 5
<LEGEND>
                                                                 Exhibit 27
                                                                 ----------

                               CONRAIL INC.
                          FINANCIAL DATA SCHEDULE
                     ($ In Millions Except Per Share)
<CAPTION>

THIS SCHEDULE CONTAINS SUMMARY INFORMATION EXTRACTED FROM FORM 10-K AND IS
QUALIFIED IN ITS ENTIRETY BY REFERENCE TO SUCH FORM 10-K.

       
<S>                                    <C>

<MULTIPLIER>                        1,000,000

<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                 DEC-31-1996
<PERIOD-START>                    JAN-01-1996
<PERIOD-END>                      DEC-31-1996
<PERIOD-TYPE>                          12-MOS
<CASH>                                     30
<SECURITIES>                                0
<RECEIVABLES>                             630
<ALLOWANCES>                                0
<INVENTORY>                               139
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                        1,117
<PP&E>                                  6,590
<DEPRECIATION>                              0
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                          8,402
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                   1,092
<BONDS>                                 1,876
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                       0
<PREFERRED>                               211
<COMMON>                                   88
<OTHER-SE>                              2,808
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>            8,402
<SALES>                                     0
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                        3,714
<CGS>                                       0
<TOTAL-COSTS>                           3,113
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                            0
<LOSS-PROVISION>                            0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                        182
<INCOME-PRETAX>                           531
<INCOME-TAX>                              189
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                       342
<DISCONTINUED>                              0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                             0
<CHANGES>                                   0
<NET-INCOME>                              342
<EPS-PRIMARY>                            4.25
<EPS-DILUTED>                            3.89

        
<PAGE>


</TABLE>
[Federal Register Volume 60, Number 71 (Thursday, April 13, 1995)]
[Notices]
[Pages 18856-18857]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 95-9114]



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


DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE

Notice Pursuant to the National Cooperative Research and 
Production Act of 1993--Electronics Industries Foundation

    Notice is hereby given that, on October 25, 1994, pursuant to 
Section 6(a) of the National Cooperative Research and Production Act of 
1993, 15 U.S.C. 4301 et seq. (``the Act''), Electronics Industries 
Foundation (``EIF'') has filed written notifications simultaneously 
with the Attorney General and the Federal Trade Commission disclosing 
(1) the identities of the parties and (2) the nature and objectives of 
the venture. The notifications were filed for the purpose of invoking 
the Act's provisions limiting the recovery of antitrust plaintiffs to 
actual damages under specified circumstances. Pursuant to Section 6(b) 

[[Page 18857]]
of the Act, the identities of the parties are: The Boeing Company, 
Seattle, WA; Hughes Aircraft Company, Newport Beach, CA; nCHIP Inc., 
San Jose, CA; MicroModule Systems Inc., Cupertino, CA; and Texas 
Instruments Inc., Dallas, TX.
    The purpose of this venture is to develop, characterize, and 
validate high-throughput, reliable and low-cost large format equipment 
for the manufacture, assembly and test of deposited multichip modules.
Constance K. Robinson,
Director of Operations, Antitrust Division.
[FR Doc. 95-9114 Filed 4-12-95; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4410-01-M
FIFTH DISTRICT COURT OF APPEAL

STATE OF FLORIDA

_____________________________

Case No. 5D23-713

LT Case No. 2019-102854-CFDL

_____________________________

BERNARD LEONARD THOMAS,

Appellant,

v.

STATE OF FLORIDA,

Appellee.

_____________________________

On appeal from the Circuit Court for Volusia County.

Leah R. Case, Judge.

Matthew J. Metz, Public Defender, and Andrew Mich, Assistant 

Public Defender, Daytona Beach, for Appellant. 

No Appearance for Appellee.

February 13, 2024

PER CURIAM.

AFFIRMED.

JAY, SOUD, and MACIVER, JJ., concur.
2

_____________________________

Not final until disposition of any timely and 

authorized motion under Fla. R. App. P. 9.330 or 

9.331.

_____________________________
UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT
No. 05-5197

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Plaintiff - Appellee,
versus MIKE ANTHONY BROWN, a/k/a Michael Anthony Brown, Defendant - Appellant. Appeal from the United States District Court for the Western District of North Carolina, at Asheville. Lacy H. Thornburg, District Judge. (CR-04-93) Submitted: August 31, 2006 Decided: September 5, 2006 Before MICHAEL, MOTZ, and GREGORY, Circuit Judges. Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion. Claire J. Rauscher, FEDERAL DEFENDERS OF WESTERN NORTH CAROLINA, INC., Charlotte, North Carolina, for Appellant. Gretchen C.F. Shappert, United States Attorney, Charlotte, North Carolina, Amy E. Ray, Assistant United States Attorney, Asheville, North Carolina, for Appellee. Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. See Local Rule 36(c).- 2 - PER CURIAM: Mike Anthony Brown pled guilty to conspiracy to possess with intent to distribute at least fifty grams of a mixture or substance containing a detectable amount of cocaine base, in violation of 21 U.S.C. §§ 841, 846 (2000). The district court sentenced Brown to 210 months’ imprisonment, five years of supervised release, and ordered payment of a $100 statutory assessment. Brown has appealed, challenging the district court’s denial of his motion for new counsel. We find no abuse of the district court’s discretion. SeeUnited States v. Gallop , 838 F.2d 105, 108 (4th Cir. 1988). The district court conducted an adequate inquiry into Brown’s complaint and properly determined that: (1) counsel was diligent in his efforts to represent Brown; (2) Brown’s motion for substitute counsel was not timely filed; (3) there was not a total lack of communication between Brown and his attorney; (4) Brown’s own behavior created the conflict that was present; and (5) Brown put forth no valid reason why new counsel should be appointed. Id. Accordingly, we affirm Brown’s conviction and sentence. We dispense with oral argument because the facts and legal contentions are adequately presented in the materials before the court and argument would not aid the decisional process.

AFFIRMED
#### Dorothy Cancienne JOFFRION, Independent Executrix of the Estate of Olin Joffrion, Deceased v. TEXAS BANK OF TATUM; from Rusk County.

No. C-9421.

Supreme Court of Texas.

June 27, 1990.

Joint motion for dismissal pursuant to settlement of the parties filed herein on June 22, 1990 is granted. The opinion and judgment of the court of appeals is vacated, and the cause is remanded to the trial court for entry of judgment in accordance with the settlement agreement of the parties. Rule 59, Tex.R.App.P.
EXECUTIVE OFFICE OF THE PRESIDENT

OFFICE OF THE UNITED STATES TRADE REPRESENTATIVE

WASHINGTON, D.C. 20508

November 13, 2018

RE: Product Exclusion Request Number: USTR-2018-0025-3739

Omega Environmental Technologies, Inc:

The purpose of this letter is to inform you that the product exclusion request referenced 

above has been denied. As you are aware, USTR published a Federal Register notice (83 FR 

28710) on June 20, 2018, that announced the Trade Representative’s determination to impose an 

additional duty of 25 percent on certain products from China. On July 11, 2018, the Trade 

Representative published a Federal Register notice (83 FR 32181) which announced that a 

process had been established under which interested persons could request that products falling 

within a covered HTSUS subheading be excluded from the additional duties announced on June 

20. 

Your request was reviewed in accordance with the factors and procedures set forth in 

Section B(1) of the July 11 notice. Based on that review, and after careful consideration, your 

request was denied because the request concerns a product strategically important or related to 

‘‘Made in China 2025’’ or other Chinese industrial programs.

Because USTR will grant exclusion requests on a product specific basis, you may still 

benefit from a product exclusion if a similar product is granted an exclusion. Products for which 

an exclusion has been granted will be periodically announced on the USTR website. Product 

exclusions will become legally effective once published in the Federal Register. 

Sincerely,

Stephen P. Vaughn
EXECUTIVE OFFICE OF THE PRESIDENT

OFFICE OF THE UNITED STATES TRADE REPRESENTATIVE

WASHINGTON, D.C. 20508

May 7, 2019

RE: Product Exclusion Request Number: USTR-2018-0025-7063

United Scope LLC: 

I am pleased to notify you that the United States Trade Representative has determined to 

grant the above-referenced exclusion request submitted pursuant to the notice published at 83 FR 

32181 (‘July 11 notice’). The exclusion determination is set out in a formal notice which has 

been submitted to Office of the Federal Register for publication (‘the exclusion notice’). A prepublication version of the exclusion notice has been posted on the USTR website, at 

https://ustr.gov/sites/default/files/enforcement/301Investigations/Notice_of_Product_Exclusions

_05.09.19.pdf. 

The scope of the exclusion is governed by the formal HTSUS language in the annex to 

the product exclusion notice, and not by the product descriptions set out in any particular request 

for exclusion. An exclusion in response to your request has been granted by excluding from the 

additional tariffs products covered by a specially drafted description contained in the annex to 

the product exclusion notice. 

In accordance with the July 11 notice, the exclusion applies as of the July 6, 2018 

effective date of the tariff action, and will extend for one year after the exclusion notice is 

published in the Federal Register. As stated in the exclusion notice, U.S. Customs and Border 

Protection will issue additional instructions on entry guidance and implementation

Sincerely,

Joseph Barloon

General Counsel
EXECUTIVE OFFICE OF THE PRESIDENT

OFFICE OF THE UNITED STATES TRADE REPRESENTATIVE

WASHINGTON, D.C. 20508

January 23, 2019

RE: Product Exclusion Request Number: USTR-2018-0025-4266

Tianhai Electric North America:

The purpose of this letter is to inform you that the product exclusion request referenced 

above has been denied. As you are aware, USTR published a Federal Register notice (83 FR 

28710) on June 20, 2018, that announced the Trade Representative’s determination to impose an 

additional duty of 25 percent on certain products from China. On July 11, 2018, the Trade 

Representative published a Federal Register notice (83 FR 32181) which announced that a 

process had been established under which interested persons could request that products falling 

within a covered HTSUS subheading be excluded from the additional duties announced on June 

20. 

Your request was reviewed in accordance with the factors and procedures set forth in 

Section B(1) of the July 11 notice. Based on that review, and after careful consideration, your 

request was denied because the request concerns a product strategically important or related to 

‘‘Made in China 2025’’ or other Chinese industrial programs.

Because USTR will grant exclusion requests on a product specific basis, you may still 

benefit from a product exclusion if a similar product is granted an exclusion. Products for which 

an exclusion has been granted will be periodically announced on the USTR website. Product 

exclusions will become legally effective once published in the Federal Register. 

Sincerely,

Stephen P. Vaughn

General Counsel
**EXHIBIT 32.01**

 

**Section 1350 Certification**

 

**In connection with this quarterlyreport of ML Winton FuturesAccess LLC (the “Company”) on Form 10-Q for theperiod ended September 30, 2009 as filed with the Securities and ExchangeCommission on the date hereof (this “Report”), I, Justin C. Ferri, ChiefExecutive Officer, President and Manager of the Company, certify, pursuant to18 U.S.C. Section 1350, as adopted pursuant of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of2002, that:**

 

1. This Report fullycomplies with the requirements of Section 13(a) or 15(d) of theSecurities Exchange Act of 1934; and

 

2. The informationcontained in this Report fairly presents, in all material respects, thefinancial condition and results of operations of the Company.

 

 
| Date:  November 12, 2009                   |                 |
|-------------------------------------------------|----------------------|
|                                            |                 |
| By                                              | /s/  JUSTIN C. FERRI |   |
| Justin  C. Ferri                                |                 |
| Chief  Executive Officer, President and Manager |                 |
| (Principal  Executive Officer)                  |                 |
|                                                 |                      |  |

 

1

----