alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
NASA LogoNTRSNTRS - NASA Technical Reports ServerSearchmore_vertCollectionsAboutNewsHelpLogin Back to ResultsOptical communication with semiconductor laser diodeThis interim report describes the progress in the construction of a 220 Mbps Q=4 PPM optical communication system that uses a semiconductor laser as the optical transmitter and an avalanche photodiode (APD) as the photodetector. The transmitter electronics have been completed and contain both GaAs and ECL III IC's. The circuit was able to operate at a source binary data rate from 75 Mbps to 290 Mbps with pulse rise and fall times of 400 ps. The pulse shapes of the laser diode and the response from the APD/preamplifier module were also measured.Document ID19900004454Acquisition SourceLegacy CDMSDocument TypeContractor Report (CR)AuthorsDavidson, Frederic*(Johns Hopkins Univ. Baltimore, MD, United States)*Sun, X.*(Johns Hopkins Univ. Baltimore, MD, United States)*Date AcquiredSeptember 6, 2013Publication DateSeptember 1, 1989Subject CategoryLasers And MasersReport/Patent NumberNAS 1.26:185886NASA-CR-185886Accession Number90N13770Funding Number(s)CONTRACT_GRANT: NAG5-356Distribution LimitsPublicCopyrightWork of the US Gov. Public Use Permitted.Available DownloadsNameType19900004454.pdfSTIcloud_downloadcontent_copyvisibilityRelated RecordsThere are no records associated with this record.visibility_offNo Preview Available
 No Fear Act | Freedom of Information Act | Office of the Inspector General | Agency Financial ReportsNASA Web Privacy Policy and Important Notices | NASA Guidelines for Quality of InformationDisclaimers, Copyright, Terms of Use | Accessibility | NASA OCIO | USA.gov | NASA.govContact Us | Site MapSTI LogoNASA Official: JoAnne R. Calhoun Site Curator: STI Compliance and Distribution Services Last Modified: September 12, 2024
§ 1709.113 Limitations on grant awards. ( a ) The Administrator may establish minimum or maximum amount of funds that may be awarded in a single grant application within in any grant cycle in order to distribute available grant funds as broadly as possible. If the Administrator elects to impose a minimum or maximum grant amount, the limitations will be published in the grant announcement.
( b ) The Administrator may restrict eligible applicants to a single award of grant funds or to a monetary cap on grant awards within a grant cycle in order to assure that the available grant funds are distributed as broadly as possible. If the Administrator elects to impose a limit or cap on grant awards, the terms will be established in the grant announcement.
<PAGE>
 
                                                                    Exhibit 17.1



                                                              September 26, 1996


Bruce E. Mathias
Secretary
Jack Carl/312-Futures, Inc.
200 West Adams Street
Suite 1500
Chicago, IL  60606


Dear Mr. Mathias,

     This letter will re-confirm that I have resigned as an officer and director
of Jack Carl/312-Futures, Inc. any and all of its subsidiaries and/or any and
all of its affiliates as of the close of business July 1, 1996.


Sincerely,

/S/ BURTON J. MEYER


Burton J. Meyer

                                     -163-
Searched for **https://www.ssa.gov/ssi/spotlights/spot-property-self-support.htm**

 

19961997199819992000200120022003200420052006200720082009201020112012201320142015201620172018201920202021202220232024

*Note:* This calendar view maps the number of captures of **https://www.ssa.gov/ssi/spotlights/spot-property-self-support.htm**, *not* how many times the site was actually updated.

Look Up URL in general Internet Archive web collection.
§ 1709.102 Policy. ( a ) All high energy cost grants will be awarded competitively subject to the limited exceptions in 2 CFR 415.1(d).
( b ) RUS may give priority consideration to projects that benefit smaller rural communities, communities experiencing economic hardship, projects that extend service to households that lack reliable centralized or commercial energy services, and projects that correct imminent hazards to public safety, welfare, the environment or critical community energy facilities. RUS may also give priority to projects that are coordinated with State rural development initiatives or that serve a Federally-identified Empowerment Zone or Enterprise Community (EZ/EC) or a USDA-identified “Champion Community.” Priority consideration will be provided through the award of additional points under the project selection criteria as specified in the grant announcement.
[70 FR 5351, Feb. 2, 2005, as amended at 79 FR 76002, Dec. 19, 2014]
Featured Grant OpportunitySchool Emergency Response to Violence (Project SERV) (Funding Opportunity) 

Featured Grant OpportunityShare with Youth: NOAA Student Opportunities Database

Featured Grant OpportunityShort Courses in Social Determinants of Health for Research Education in Nursing Research (Funding...

Featured Grant OpportunityComprehensive Partnerships to Advance Cancer Health Equity (CPACHE) Program (Funding Opportunity)

Featured Grant OpportunityRisk and Protective Factors of Family Health and Family Level Interventions (Funding Opportunity)

Featured Grant OpportunityPersonnel Development to Improve Services and Results for Children with Disabilities--Doctoral...

Featured Grant OpportunityStanding Announcement for Tribal Title IV-E Plan Development Grants (Funding Opportunity)

Featured Grant OpportunityProviding Research Education Experiences to Enhance Inclusivity for a Diverse Substance Use and...

Featured Grant OpportunityFY 2024 Research on School-Based Hate Crimes (Funding Opportunity)

Featured Grant OpportunityChallenge America (Funding Opportunity)

Featured Grant OpportunityResearch and Evaluation on Firearm Violence and Mass Shootings (Funding Opportunity)

Featured Grant OpportunityNational Juvenile Court Data Archive (Funding Opportunity)

Featured Grant OpportunityGraduate Research Fellowship (Funding Opportunity)

Featured Grant OpportunityCommunity Programs for Outreach and Intervention with Youth and Young Adults at Clinical High Risk...

Featured Grant OpportunityPrint and Disseminate Child Victims and Witnesses Support Materials (Funding Opportunity)

## Breadcrumb

            -  Announcements 
            -           Resource: ED's COVID-19 Guidance and Resources      

# Resource: ED's COVID-19 Guidance and Resources

The Department of Education has created a webpage to house COVID-19 ("Coronavirus") information and resources for schools and school personnel. Through collaboration and coordination with State and local health departments, State and local educational agencies, other education officials, and elected officials, schools can disseminate critical information about the disease and its potential transmission to students, families, staff, and community. **Learn more.**
NASA LogoNTRSNTRS - NASA Technical Reports ServerSearchmore_vertCollectionsAboutNewsHelpLogin Back to ResultsQualification of improved joint heatersQualification testing of the Redesigned Solid Rocket Motor improved igniter-to-case joint and field joint heaters was conducted on the fired TEM-04 static test motor and was completed on 7 Sep. 1989. The purpose of the test was to certify the installation and performance of the improved joint heaters for use on flight motors. The changes incorporated in the improved heaters improve durability and should reduce handling damage. The igniter-to-case joint and field joint primary heater circuits were subjected to five 20-hr ON cycles. The heater redundant circuits were then subjected to one 20-hr ON cycle. Voltage, current, and temperature set point values were maintained within the specified limits for both heaters during each ON cycle. When testing was complete, both heaters were removed and inspected. No discolorations or any other anomalies were found on either of the heaters. Based on the successful completion of this test, it is recommended that the improved igniter-to-case joint and field joint heaters be used on future flight motors.Document ID19900004278Acquisition SourceLegacy CDMSDocument TypeContractor Report (CR)AuthorsCook, M.*(Thiokol Corp. Brigham City, UT, United States)*Date AcquiredSeptember 6, 2013Publication DateSeptember 14, 1989Subject CategorySpacecraft Propulsion And PowerReport/Patent NumberNAS 1.26:183827TWR-19899NASA-CR-183827Accession Number90N13594Funding Number(s)CONTRACT_GRANT: NAS8-30490Distribution LimitsPublicCopyrightWork of the US Gov. Public Use Permitted.Available DownloadsNameType19900004278.pdfSTIcloud_downloadcontent_copyvisibilityRelated RecordsThere are no records associated with this record.visibility_offNo Preview Available
 No Fear Act | Freedom of Information Act | Office of the Inspector General | Agency Financial ReportsNASA Web Privacy Policy and Important Notices | NASA Guidelines for Quality of InformationDisclaimers, Copyright, Terms of Use | Accessibility | NASA OCIO | USA.gov | NASA.govContact Us | Site MapSTI LogoNASA Official: JoAnne R. Calhoun Site Curator: STI Compliance and Distribution Services Last Modified: September 12, 2024
# In the United States Court of Federal Claims

OFFICE OF SPECIAL MASTERS

No. 15-283V Filed: June 1, 2015 Unpublished

* * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * RITA GLYNN, *

* Petitioner, * Ruling on Entitlement; Concession; * Tetanus-Diphtheria-acellular Pertussis * (“Tdap”) Vacci ne; Shoulder Injury

SECRETARY OF HEALTH * Relat ed to Vaccine Administration AND HUMAN SERVICES, * (“SIRVA”); Special Processing Unit Respondent. * (“SPU”)

*

* * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * Randall G. Knutson, Knutson & Casey Law Firm, Mankato, MN, for petitioner. Jennifer Reynaud, U.S. Department of Ju stice, Washington, DC, for respondent.

RULING ON ENTITLEMENT 1

Vowell , Chief Special Master:

On March 19, 2015, Rita Glynn filed a petition for compensation under the National Vaccine Injury Compensat ion Program, 42 U.S.C. §300aa-10, et seq.

, 2 [the “Vaccine Act” or “Progr am”]. Petitioner alleges that as a result of a tetanus-diphtheriaacellular pertussis vaccination on April 30, 2012, she suffered brachial neuritis, an impingement syndrome, and frozen shoulder. Peti tion at 1. The case was assigned to the Special Processing Unit of the Office of Special Masters.

On May 29, 2015, respondent filed her Rule 4(c) report in which she concedes that petitioner is entitled to compensation in this case. Respondent’s Rule 4(c) Report

at 1. Specifically, respondent indi cates that “petitioner’s alle ged injury is consistent with a shoulder injury related to vaccine admin istration (‘SIRVA’)” and “satisfies the Althen requirements and that her alleged injury was caused-in-fact by a vaccination.” Id. at 3. Respondent further indicates that no other cause has been i dentified for petitioner’s

1 Because this unpublished ruling contains a reasoned explanation for the action in this case, I intend to post it on the United States Court of Federal Claims' website, in accordance with the E-Government Act of 2002, Pub. L. No. 107-347, § 205, 116 Stat. 2899, 2913 (codified as amended at 44 U.S.C. § 3501 note (2006)). In accordance with Vaccine Rule 18(b), petitioner has 14 days to identify and move to redact medical or other information, the disclosure of which would constitute an unwarranted invasion of privacy. If, upon review, I agree that the identified mate rial fits within this definition, I will redact such material from public access.

2 National Childhood Vaccine Injury Act of 1986, Pub. L. No. 99-660, 100 Stat. 3755. Hereinafter, for ease of citation, all “§” references to the Vaccine Ac t will be to the pertinent subparagraph of 42 U.S.C. § 300aa (2006).2 condition, and petitioner has suffered “the residua l effects of her condi tion for more than

six months.” Id.

In view of respondent’s concession a nd the evidence before me, I find that petitioner is entitled to compensation.

s/Denise K. Vowell

Denise K. Vowell Chief Special Master
UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR
GEOLOGICAL SURVEY BULLETIN 1028 PLATE 36
8° 14'00" 178°16'30" 178°19'00" 178° 21'30" 178°24'00" 178°25'00"
_ — —_—_— 7 52°02'00"

EXPLANATION

Composite volcanic material
The most intensely altered rock is shown
by the blue line overprint

QUATERNARY

0
Strike and dip of beds

®
Horizontal beds

Rock, bare or awash

i

Area with thick growth of kelp

52°00'00"

51°57'30" ‘61°57'30"

51 eB ge Vat 178°16'30" ; Fe Pine INTERIOR GEOLOGICAL SURVEY, WASHINGTON. D.C. MR 4906 er bee0 ae
Topography from U. S. Coast and Geodetic Survey topographic Geology by W. H. Nelson, R. Q. Lewis,
manuscript T-8099. Universal Transverse Mercator projection D.P. Cox,and E. C. Stoever
zone 60. 1927 North American datum. Submarine contours by
W. H. Nelson from soundings by U. S. Coast and Geodetic Survey

GEOLOGIC MAP OF DAVIDOF AND KHVOSTOF ISLANDS AND VICINITY, ALEUTIAN ISLANDS, ALASKA

Scale 1:25 000

ie)

1000 0 1000-2000: 8000_—« 4000 ~—-5000___—~6000__ 7000 Feet
[0S SS Se ee |

Subareal and submarine contour interval 50 feet
Supplementary contour interval 25 feet
Datum is mean sea level
#### Lillian Caplow, Appellee, v. Sam Caplow, Appellant.

Gen. No. 33,461.

Opinion filed January 2, 1930.

Frankel & Bloom, for appellant.

Frank P. McGinn, for appellee.

Mr. Justice Ryner

delivered the opinion of the court.

On August 18, 1928, the complainant filed her bill for divorce in the superior court of Cook county, charging the defendant with cruelty. The defendant answered, denying the allegations of the bill.

On December 12,1928, the cause was set for trial for January 18,1929, upon motion of the complainant. On December 18, 1928, the cause was reset for trial for December 21,1928, upon motion of the complainant.

On December 20, 1928, a petition for a change of venue, based upon the prejudice of the trial judge and *390in the usual form, was presented by the defendant and denied. On December 21, 1928, the cause came on for trial. The motion for a change of venue was renewed and denied. The defendant then before the taking of any evidence, made an oral motion for a jury trial, which was likewise denied.

The court then proceeded to hear evidence and, at the conclusion of the hearing, granted the complainant a decree of divorce. We have examined the evidence and think it sufficient to support the decree and that the only questions for our consideration are whether the court erred in denying the petition for a change of venue and the motion for a jury trial.

The petition for a change of venue was made upon the eve of trial. Whether the petition came too late or whether reasonable notice of the presentment of the petition wad given, were questions calling for the exercise of discretion on the part of the trial court. *Hutson v. Wood,*263 Ill. 376.

The right to a trial by jury in a divorce case is statutory. The statute, Cahill’s St. ch. 40, 8, provides that, “When the defendant appears and denies the charges in the complainant’s bill for a divorce, either party shall have the right to have the cause tried by a jury.” _ ' .

_ The motion need not be in writing and is not too late if made when the cause is called for trial. *Van Vlissingen v. Van Vlissingen,*173 Ill. App. 124.

The motion of the defendant for a jury trial should have been granted.

The judgment of the superior court of Cook county is accordingly reversed and the cause is remanded.

*Judgment reversed and cause remanded.*

Wilson, P. J., and Holdom, J., concur.
**Exhibit 11.1**

 

**ML Macadamia Orchards, L.P.**

**Computation of Net Income (Loss) per Class A Unit**

(in thousands, except per unit data)

 

 

| ** **                                              | ** ** | **2007**   | ** ** | **2006**   | ** ** | **2005**   | ** ** |
|---------------------------------------------------------|------------|------------|------------|------------|------------|------------|------------|
| ** **                                              | ** ** | ** ** | ** ** | ** ** | ** ** | ** ** | ** ** |
| Net income (loss)                                       |       | $          | (3,965     | )          | $          | 804        |       | $ | 771 |   |
|                                                    |       |       |       |       |       |       |       |   |   |   |
| Class A Unitholders (ownership percentage)         |       | x          | 100        | %          | x          | 100        | %          | X | 100 | % |
|                                                    |       |       |       |       |       |       |       |   |   |   |
| Net income (loss) allocable to Class A Unitholders |       | $          | (3,965     | )          | $          | 804        |       | $ | 771 |   |
|                                                    |       |       |       |       |       |       |       |   |   |   |
| Class A Units outstanding                          |       |       | 7,500      |       |       | 7,500      |       |   | 7,500 |   |
|                                                    |       |       |       |       |       |       |       |   |   |   |
| Net income (loss) per Class A Unit                 |       | $          | (0.53      | )          | $          | 0.11       |       | $ | 0.10 |   |

 

----
Featured Grant OpportunitySchool Emergency Response to Violence (Project SERV) (Funding Opportunity) 

Featured Grant OpportunityShare with Youth: NOAA Student Opportunities Database

Featured Grant OpportunityShort Courses in Social Determinants of Health for Research Education in Nursing Research (Funding...

Featured Grant OpportunityComprehensive Partnerships to Advance Cancer Health Equity (CPACHE) Program (Funding Opportunity)

Featured Grant OpportunityRisk and Protective Factors of Family Health and Family Level Interventions (Funding Opportunity)

Featured Grant OpportunityPersonnel Development to Improve Services and Results for Children with Disabilities--Doctoral...

Featured Grant OpportunityStanding Announcement for Tribal Title IV-E Plan Development Grants (Funding Opportunity)

Featured Grant OpportunityProviding Research Education Experiences to Enhance Inclusivity for a Diverse Substance Use and...

Featured Grant OpportunityFY 2024 Research on School-Based Hate Crimes (Funding Opportunity)

Featured Grant OpportunityChallenge America (Funding Opportunity)

Featured Grant OpportunityResearch and Evaluation on Firearm Violence and Mass Shootings (Funding Opportunity)

Featured Grant OpportunityNational Juvenile Court Data Archive (Funding Opportunity)

Featured Grant OpportunityGraduate Research Fellowship (Funding Opportunity)

Featured Grant OpportunityCommunity Programs for Outreach and Intervention with Youth and Young Adults at Clinical High Risk...

Featured Grant OpportunityPrint and Disseminate Child Victims and Witnesses Support Materials (Funding Opportunity)

## Breadcrumb

            -           Report: 2014 BRFSS Data      

# Report: 2014 BRFSS Data

CDC released the 2014 Behavior Risk Factor Surveillance Survey (BRFSS) data. The BRFSS is a state-based surveillance system that uses survey phone calls to collect information on risk behaviors, clinical preventive health practices, and health care access for adults 18 and older. 

http://www.cdc.gov/brfss/annual_data/annual_2014.html?utm_source=youth.gov&utm_medium=federal-links&utm_campaign=reports-and-resources
4.905 Solicitation provision. The contracting officer shall insert the provision at 52.204-3, Taxpayer Identification, in solicitations that— ( a ) Do not include the provision at 52.204-7, System for Award Management; and
( b ) Are not conducted under the procedures of part 12.
[68 FR 56672, Oct. 1, 2003, as amended at 77 FR 69718, Nov. 20, 2012; 78 FR 37678, June 21, 2013; 80 FR 26427, May 7, 2015]
IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT

 

No. 97-50915

USDC No. EP-97-CV-200-F

 

SANTIAGO DELGADO MEDRANO,

Petitioner-Appellant,

versus

GARY L. JOHNSON, DIRECTOR,

TEXAS DEPARTMENT OF CRIMINAL JUSTICE,

INSTITUTIONAL DIVISION,

Respondent-Appellee.

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

Appeal from the United States District Court

for the Western District of Texas

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

March 2, 1998

Before KING, HIGGINBOTHAM and DAVIS, Circuit Judges.

BY THE COURT:

Santiago Delgado Medrano seeks a certificate of

appealability (COA) from the denial of his petition filed

pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 2254. COA is GRANTED and the case is

VACATED AND REMANDED for further proceedings. Clark v. Williams,

693 F.2d 381, 382 (5th Cir. 1982).

The district court erred in determining that Medrano had

failed to exhaust his state remedies on his claims that he was

denied a speedy trial and the right to be present at a critical

stage of trial given that he presented them on direct review to
O R D E R

No. 97-50915

-2-

the Texas Court of Criminal Appeals. See Richardson v.

Procunier, 762 F.2d 427, 429, 431-32 (5th Cir. 1982). On remand,

the district court should afford Medrano the opportunity to file

an amended petition deleting his remaining two unexhausted

claims. See Rose v. Lundy, 455 U.S. 509, 520 (1982); McGruder v.

Phelps, 608 F.2d 1023, 1025 (5th Cir. 1979). 

COA GRANTED; VACATED AND REMANDED.
**EXHIBIT 23.1**

 

CONSENT OF INDEPENDENT REGISTERED PUBLIC ACCOUNTING FIRM

 

We consent to the incorporation by reference in the Registration Statement (Form S-8 No. 333-116893) pertaining to the 2004 Equity Incentive Plan and the 2004 Employee Stock Purchase Plan of Senomyx, Inc. of our report dated February 14, 2005, included in the Annual Report (Form 10-K) for the year ended December 31, 2004.

 

 
|                  | /S/ ERNST & YOUNG LLP |
|-----------------------|--------------------------------|
| San Diego, California |                           |
| March 8, 2005    |                           |

 

----
* 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.

IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT

No. 09-10389

JOHN WILEY PRICE,

Plaintiff-Appellee

v.

EDDIE BERNICE JOHNSON,

Defendant-Appellant

Petition for Writ of Mandamus to the United States 

District Court for the Northern District of Texas

USDC No. 3:09-CV-476

Before REAVLEY, DAVIS, and STEWART, Circuit Judges.

PER CURIAM:*

Appellant Eddie Bernice Johnson seeks a writ of mandamus vacating the

district court’s remand order and directing the court to consider and resolve her

motion to dismiss. For the reasons given in our decision dismissing for lack of

jurisdiction Johnson’s direct appeal from the remand order, we are also without

jurisdiction to consider the remand by a petition for writ of mandamus. See In

re Weaver, 610 F.2d 335, 337 (5th Cir. 1980). Accordingly, IT IS ORDERED that

the petition for writ of mandamus is DENIED.

United States Court of Appeals

Fifth Circuit

F I L E D

March 11, 2010

Charles R. Fulbruge III

Clerk
**Exhibit32.1**

 

CERTIFICATIONPURSUANT TO

18 U.S.C. SECTION1350,

AS ADOPTEDPURSUANT TO

SECTION 906 OF THESARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002

 

In connection with theAnnual Report of M.L. Macadamia Orchards, L.P. (the “Company”) on Form 10-K/A(Amendment No. 2) for the period ended December 31, 2006 as filed with theSecurities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the “Report”), we, theundersigned management of the Company, certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section1350, as adopted pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002,that,

 

(1)          The Report fullycomplies with the requirements of section 13 (a) or 15 (d) of the SecuritiesExchange Act of 1934; and

 

(2)          The informationcontained in the Report fairly presents, in all material respects, the financialcondition and results of operations of the Company.

 
| /s/ Dennis J. Simonis                  |   |
|----------------------------------------|--------|
|                                   |
| Dennis J. Simonis                      |
| President and Chief  Executive Officer |
| November 13, 2007                      |

 

----