alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
# Public comments to EPA Pneumatic White Paper

Please see attached info on important comments to n umbered questions listed in the EPA April White Pap er on Pneumatics emissions. Thank you for the consideration to take the comment s into account. From the desk of ...... Charles A. Whitehead (President / CEO) 

### Linear Motion Technologies LP Innovative Results for Actuation and Control Ph : (281)256-7298 Houston Cell: (205)999-7686 Cellular (Call first and leave message)

--------------------------------------------------- ------------ The information transmitted is intended only for th e person or entity to which it is addressed and maycontain confidential and/or privileged material. Any review , retransmission, dissemination or other use of, or taking of any action in reliance upon, this information by person s or entities other than the intended recipient is prohibited. If you received this in error, please contact the send er and delete the material from any computer. 

## cwhite8086@aol.com Mon 6/16/2014 6:49 PM
To: OilandGas.Whitepapers <OilandGas.Whitepapers@epa.go v>; 

###  1 attachment EPA LMT Pneumatic_Controller_WP_Response.docx; 

### Page **1 of**  **1 Public comments to EPA Pneumatic White Paper** 
**- OilandGas.Whitepapers** 

**8/ 26/**  **2014 https://pod51045.outlook.com/owa/OilandGas.Whitepapers@epa.gov/**
exv10w4






Exhibit 10.4




AMENDMENT 2009-1

to the

NORDSTROM SUPPLEMENTAL EXECUTIVE RETIREMENT PLAN

(2008 Restatement)



The Nordstrom Supplemental Executive Retirement Plan (2008 Restatement) (the “Plan”) is hereby
amended to reflect a change in practice with regard to payment of taxes due on benefits payable
under the Plan.



(i)     Section 3.10 Payment of Benefits is amended by replacing subsection (c)
Withholding with the following:




     “(c) Withholding.




     (i) Income Tax and Other Withholding. The Company shall withhold from any
and all benefit payments made under the Plan and this Article III, all federal, state and
local income taxes the Company reasonably determines are required to be withheld in
connection with the benefits hereunder, and any other amounts due, owing and unpaid by the
Participant to the Company, to be determined in the sole discretion of the Company. In the
event the amounts due under this 3.10(c)(i) exceed the amount of benefits currently
payable, the Participant shall be required to contribute to the Company an amount necessary
to meet such obligations.




     (ii) Employment Taxes. At the time of Retirement, the Company shall
calculate the employment taxes (i.e., Social Security and Medicare taxes) due on the
Participant’s benefit under the Plan. Employment taxes shall be remitted to the
appropriate taxing authority in accordance with applicable federal and state tax
regulations. The Company may, but is not required to, pay the Participant’s share of the
employment taxes on behalf of the Participant.”


Approved pursuant to proper authority this 25 day of February, 2009.




	 	 	 	 	 
	 	NORDSTROM, INC.

 	 
	 	By:  	                                         /s/ Delena Sunday
 	 
	 	 	Delena Sunday 	 
	 	Title:  	Executive Vice President
Human Resources and Diversity Affairs
ARMENICA COUNTRY COMMERCIAL GUIDE

----

MARCH 1999
CHAPTER 11:  APPENDIX  E - U.S. AND COUNTRY CONTACTS
U.S. EMBASSY TRADE RELATED OFFICIALS
Country Address:  American Embassy - Commercial Section
|Rank this query?Records: 171
                                                Hits: 0 |                                                                      |                  |                  | Rank this query? | Rank this query? | Records: 171
                                                Hits: 0 | Records: 171
                                                Hits: 0 | Records: 171 | Hits: 0 |  |  |  |  |  |  | 
|------------------------------------------------------------------------------------ | -------------------------------------------------------------------- | ---------------- | ---------------- | ---------------- | ---------------- | -------------------------------------------------------------------- | -------------------------------------------------------------------- | ------------ | ------- |  |  |  |  |  |  | 
|                                                                                     |                                                                      | Rank this query? | Rank this query?
|Rank this query?                                                                    
|Records: 171
                                                Hits: 0                 | Records: 171
                                                Hits: 0 | Records: 171     | Hits: 0          |                  |                  |                                                                      |                                                                      |              |         | 
|Records: 171
                                                Hits: 0                 | Records: 171                                                         | Hits: 0          |                  |                  |                  |                                                                      |                                                                     
|Records: 171                                                                         | Hits: 0
### I N THE UNI TED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FI F TH CI RCUI T

No. 12-31212 Summary Calendar

LOUIS PILLETTE; BERT GRANT, Plaintiffs - Appellants
v. M-I, L.L.C., doing business as MI Swaco Defendant - Appellee

A ppeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Louisiana USDC No. 2:11-CV-2300

Before REAVLEY, JOLLY, and DAVIS, Circuit Judges. PER CURIAM: * The judgment of t he district court is affirmed for the reasons given by that court. We briefly address the claimed errors raised by the plaintiffs. There was no abuse of discretion by the c o urt i n denying another extension of t ime for discovery after t he warning given p l aintiffs for their lack of d iligence in the court’s prior orders. U n i t e d S t a te s C o u r t o f A p p e al s F i f t h C i rc u i t 

### F I L E D May28, 2013 Ly l e W . Cay ce Clerk

* Purs uant to 5 T H C I R

. R. 47. 5, the court has determ ined that this op inion s hould not be p ublis hed and is not p reced ent excep t und er the lim ited circum s tances s et forth in 5 T H C I R

. R. 47. 5. 4. Case: 12-31212 Document: 00512254727 Page: 1 Date Filed: 05/28/2013No. 12-31212

Plaintiffs allege prior incidents t h e y s ay demonstrated race and age discrimination, but the only adverse employment action c laimed in this lawsuit is their termination. That came in the reduction of workforce by defendant as the r esult o f the stop of work due to a hurricane in t he Gulf and m oratorium on drilling. Plaintiffs acknowledge the justification f or that reduction. Then they fail to present any evidence t hat their race or age contribut e d to their termination. T hey declined transfers to other facilities o f defendant, and those employees whom were r e t a i n e d i n t h e s k e l e ton crew included African-Americans and t hose more t han 40 years old. White a nd y ounger people were laid off. No evidence is given that t heir a ge or race affected any job decision about plaintiffs by defendant, other than their own opinion of their s uperior work performance. AFFIRMED.

2 Case: 12-31212 Document: 00512254727 Page: 2 Date Filed: 05/28/2013
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<ARTICLE>                      5
<MULTIPLIER>                   1

<S>                            <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                  OTHER
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>              JUL-31-2000
<PERIOD-START>                 AUG-01-2000
<PERIOD-END>                   OCT-31-2000
<CASH>                           4,184,000
<SECURITIES>                        18,000
<RECEIVABLES>                   17,315,000
<ALLOWANCES>                      (628,000)
<INVENTORY>                              0
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                21,742,000
<PP&E>                           1,781,000
<DEPRECIATION>                  (1,020,000)
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                  32,469,000
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>            3,138,000
<BONDS>                                  0
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                    0
<PREFERRED>                              0
<COMMON>                             6,000
<OTHER-SE>                      29,325,000
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>    32,469,000
<SALES>                         17,518,000
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                17,518,000
<CGS>                                    0
<TOTAL-COSTS>                   16,034,000
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                         0
<LOSS-PROVISION>                         0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                 (37,000)
<INCOME-PRETAX>                  1,521,000
<INCOME-TAX>                       649,000
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                872,000
<DISCONTINUED>                           0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                          0
<CHANGES>                                0
<NET-INCOME>                       872,000
<EPS-BASIC>                            .18
<EPS-DILUTED>                          .17


</TABLE>
* Pursuant to 5 TH C IR . 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 5 TH C IR . R. 47.5.4. United States Court of Appeals

Fifth Circuit 

## FILED July 11, 2007 Charles R. Fulbruge III Clerk IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT

No. 06-51676 Conference Calendar

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Plaintiff-Appellee,

versus ARMANDO BARRAZA-CARDENAS, Defendant-Appellant.

-------------------- Appeal from the United States District Court for the Western District of Texas USDC No. 3:06-CR-1526-ALL

-------------------- Before JOLLY, CLEMENT, and OWEN, Circuit Judges.
PER CURIAM: *Appealing the Judgment in a Criminal Case, Armando BarrazaCardenas raises arguments that are foreclosed by AlmendarezTorres v. United States , 523 U.S. 224, 235 (1998), which held that 8 U.S.C. § 1326(b)(2) is a penalty provision and not a separate criminal offense. The Government’s motion for summary affirmance is GRANTED, and the judgment of the district court is
AFFIRMED.
No. 99-8971.

No. 99-9024.

#### Jemison *v.*United States; and Wilson *v.*United States.

C. A. 4th Cir. Certiorari denied. Reported below: 203 F. 3d 823. 3d 823.
HomeNATO Status Lists...32. Protocol to the North Atlantic Treaty on the Accession of the Slovak Republic, done at Brussels March 26, 2003

# 									32. Protocol to the North Atlantic Treaty on the Accession of the Slovak Republic, done at Brussels March 26, 2003							

Depositary – Treaty Affairs

Office of Treaty Affairs

Entered into force February 27, 2004.

Enters into force when each of the parties to the North Atlantic Treaty has notified the Government of the United States of America of its acceptance of the Protocol.
Download Status List						 [34 KB]

Tags

MultilateralNorth Atlantic Treaty OrganizationTreaties

Back to Top
IN THE SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF MONTANA

No. DA 23-0445

STATE OF MONTANA,

Plaintiff and Appellee,

v.

LESLIE WADE SORLIE,

Defendant and Appellant.

ORDER

Upon consideration of Appellant’s motion for extension of time, 

and good cause appearing,

IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that Appellant is granted an extension 

of time to and including October 2nd, 2024, within which to prepare, 

file, and serve Appellant’s opening brief on appeal.

Electronically signed by:

Mike McGrath

Chief Justice, Montana Supreme Court

August 26 2024

08/26/2024

Case Number: DA 23-0445
EXHIBIT
32.2





CERTIFICATION
PURSUANT TO


SECTION
906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002





In
connection with the Quarterly Report of Communication Intelligence Corporation
(the “Company”) on Form 10-Q for the quarter and six month period ended
June 30, 2009, as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date
hereof (the “Report”), I, Francis V. Dane, Principal Financial Officer, certify,
pursuant to 18 U.S.C. 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 Company.





August 7,
2009





By: /s/Francis V.
Dane


Chief
Financial Officer
#### HEAD V. THE STATE.

(Decided June 7, 1911.)

Appeal from Circuit Court Pike County.

Heard before Hon. H. A. Pearce.

W. E. Griffin, for appellant.

R. C. Brickell, Attorney General, for tbe State.

Walker, P. J.

The cause is reversed generally.
# Science, Technology, and Innovation

109 items

        -    Media Note  		Political Declaration on Responsible Military Use of Artificial Intelligence and Autonomy	  November 13, 2023 
        -    Media Note  		Advancing Technology Governance to Protect Rights and Safety	  November 13, 2023 
        -    Media Note  		Joint Statement on U.S.-Paraguay Cybersecurity and Digital Cooperation	  November 9, 2023 
        -    Remarks  		Deputy Secretary Verma’s Remarks at the Third International Counter Ransomware Summit	  Richard R. VermaNovember 1, 2023Loy Henderson AuditoriumWashington, D.C.  
        -    Fact Sheet  		U.S.-Australia Technology Safeguards Agreement (TSA)	  October 26, 2023 
        -    Media Note  		U.S.-Australia Technology Safeguards Agreement	  October 26, 2023 
        -    FPC Reporting Tour  		New York City’s Tourism Economy	  October 25, 2023Wednesday, October 25, 2023, at 10:00 am Perelman Performing Arts Center, New York City 
        -    Media Note  		 Ambassador at Large Fick’s Travel to Purdue University in West Lafayette, Indiana	  October 17, 2023 
        -    Media Note  		Joint Statement on U.S.-Singapore Space Dialogue	  October 12, 2023 
        -    Remarks  		Secretary Antony J. Blinken’s Remarks Following a Tour of Capital Factory	  Antony J. BlinkenOctober 4, 2023 

previous page12345…11next page

Back to Top
Home2024 Certificates of Competency for Nominees to be Chiefs of Mission...Peterson, Lisa J. – Republic of Burundi – January 2024

# 									Peterson, Lisa J. – Republic of Burundi – January 2024							

Certificate of Competency

January 19, 2024

UNITED STATES SENATE

SUBJECT: Ambassadorial Nomination: Certificate ofDemonstrated Competence — Foreign ServiceAct, Section 304(a)(4)

POST: Republic of Burundi

CANDIDATE: Lisa J. Peterson

Lisa J. Peterson, a career member of the Senior Foreign Service, class of Minister Counselor, recently served as the Principal Deputy Assistant Secretary in the Department of State’s Bureau of Democracy, Human Rights, and Labor. Previously, Ms. Peterson served as the U.S. Ambassador to the Kingdom of Eswatini. Prior to that, she served as the Director, Office of Multilateral and Global Affairs, Bureau of Democracy, Human Rights, and Labor and before that as the Deputy Chief of Mission of the U.S. Embassy in Yaounde, Cameroon. Ms. Peterson’s demonstrated success as a leader in foreign assignments and in Washington, coupled with her extensive experience in African affairs makes her a well-qualified candidate to serve as Ambassador to the Republic of Burundi.

Among her other assignments, Ms. Peterson served as Cultural Affairs Officer at U.S. Embassy Abuja, Nigeria, as Deputy Director of the Department’s Office of Central African Affairs, and as a Political Officer at U.S. Embassies in Nairobi, Kenya, Lusaka, Zambia and Kinshasa, Democratic Republic of Congo. She also was an Analyst in the Department’s Bureau of Intelligence and Research, Vice Consul at the U.S. Consulate General Durban, South Africa, and Vice Consul/Political Officer at U.S. Embassy Bangui, Central African Republic. Before joining the Foreign Service she worked in the University of Rochester’s Department of Chemistry and the University’s Carlson Mathematics and Sciences Library.

Ms. Peterson earned her bachelor’s degree at the University of Rochester, Rochester, New York. She has received numerous Department performance awards and speaks French.

## Related Articles

-  											 									
Read more
 

Back to Top
#### Charles H. Vietor et al., Plaintiffs, *v.*Eli Goodman et al., Defendants.

(Supreme Court, New York Special Term,

March, 1899.)

Judgment creditors’ action — Parties defendant, necessary to a complete determination.

Where, after judgment creditors have brought an action to set aside transfers made by one defendant, their judgment debtor, to another, the transferror dies and appoints his transferee his administratrix, she should be made a party defendant in her representative

*546capacity, as her presence in that capacity is necessary to a complete determination of the controversy, within the meaning of section 4o2 of the Code of Civil Procedure.

Motion for substitution of parties defendant.

A. Blumenstiel, for motion.

A. W. Evarts, opposed.

Gildersleeve, J.

The action is brought to set aside certain transfers made by Eli Goodman to the other defendants, Since the commencement of the action Eli Goodman died, and the defendant Sophia Goodman was appointed administratrix of the property of said Eli Goodman. This motion is for an order substituting said Sophia Goodman, as administratrix as aforesaid, in the place of said Eli Goodman, deceased, as a defendant in the action. All the parties to the action consent to such substitution, except said Sophia Goodman. The objection is based on the ground that section 757 of the Code does not authorize this substitution, as that section applies only to cases where there is only one plaintiff or one defendant, as the case may be. This application, however, is not made under section 757 of the Code, which merely specifies a certain case where a substitution is obligatory. There are other cases where such substitution may be ordered, not specified in that section. This action is a creditor’s action, and Eli Goodman was the judgment debtor. He died while the action was pending, and the action cannot legally proceed to judgment without bringing in this personal representative as a party. See First Nat. Bank v. Shuler, 153 N. Y. 163. The fact that Sophia Goodman is a party defendant in her individual character does not obviate this necessity. She has a separate individual interest in the litigation, which was instituted to avoid transfers made to her by the debtor, and she was a co-defendant "with him in this action during his lifetime. See First Nat. Bank v. Shuler, *supra,*p. 170. Section 452 of the Code provides that where a complete determination of the controversy cannot be had without the presence of other parties the0 court must direct them to be brought in. The motion must be granted, with $10 costs to plaintiffs to abide event.

Motion granted, with $10 costs to plaintiffs to abide event.
Exhibit 4.02



 Exhibit 4.02 
 AGREEMENT TO FURNISH CERTAIN DEBT AGREEMENTS 
 Upon request of the Securities and Exchange Commission we will provide
the following debt agreements not filed herewith. 
 1. Agreement dated October 31, 2008 with SunTrust Bank for a demand note in the
amount of $5.0 million.
NASA LogoNTRSNTRS - NASA Technical Reports ServerSearchmore_vertCollectionsAboutNewsHelpLogin Back to ResultsContact and Bending Durability Calculation for Spiral-Bevel GearsThe objective of this project is to extend the capabilities of the gear contact analysis solver Calyx, and associated packages Transmission3D, HypoidFaceMilled, HypoidFaceHobbed. A calculation process for the surface durability was implemented using the Dowson-Higginson correlation for fluid film thickness. Comparisons to failure data from NASA's Spiral Bevel Gear Fatigue rig were carried out. A bending fatigue calculation has been implemented that allows the use of the stress-life calculation at each individual fillet point. The gears in the NASA test rig did not exhibit any bending fatigue failure, so the bending fatigue calculations are presented in this report by using significantly lowered strength numbers.Document ID20160008393Acquisition SourceGlenn Research CenterDocument TypeContractor Report (CR)AuthorsVijayakar, Sandeep*(Advanced Numerical Solutions Hilliard, OH, United States)*Date AcquiredJuly 1, 2016Publication DateJune 1, 2016Subject CategoryMechanical EngineeringReport/Patent NumberGRC-E-DAA-TN31732E-19235NASA/CR-2016-219112Funding Number(s)WBS: WBS 664817.02.03.02.03.02CONTRACT_GRANT: NNC15QA19PDistribution LimitsPublicCopyrightPublic Use Permitted.Keywordslifedurabilityspiral bevel gearsAvailable DownloadsNameType20160008393.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
Home2003 Treaties and Agreements...Nicaragua (03-904) – Agreement concerning Defense Articles and Provision of Logistic Support Services

# 									Nicaragua (03-904) – Agreement concerning Defense Articles and Provision of Logistic Support Services							

TIAS

Office of Treaty Affairs

September 4, 2003

Defense:  Assistance

Agreement effected by exchange of notes at Managua August 26 and September 4, 2003; entered into force September 4, 2003.
Download Agreement						 [2 MB]

Tags

DefenseDefense ArticlesNicaraguaTreaties and International Agreements

Back to Top
Order f

il ed August 2 8

, 2 0 1 8

I n T h e



### C o u r t of A p p e a l s

F o r The



### F irst D i s tr i ct o f T e x a s

N O. 01

- 1 8

- 00 60 9

- C R

DEMETRIUS DOMONIQUE MITCHELL

,

A ppellant

V.

THE STATE OF TEXAS, Appellee

On A ppe a l from the County C o u r t at Law No. 1

W i tchita Co unt y , Te x a s

Tr i a l C o urt C a u s e N o

. 73108

- E



### O R D E R

T h i s c ou r t h a s d e t er

m in e d

, p u r s u a n t t o T e x a s R ul e o f Ap p e l l a t e P r o c e d u re

34

. 5 (f) a n d 34

. 6 ( g ) ( 2)

, t h a t i t m us t i n s p e c t t h e o r

i g i n a l o f State ’s Exhibit No. 1 8, a

DVD of a dashcam police video, admitted in the t rial h e l d o n June 6 , 2 0 18

.T h e e xh i b i t c l e r k o f th e County C o u rt at Law No. 1 i s d i re c t ed t o d e li v er

t o t h e C l e r

k o f t h i s C o u r t t h e o r i gi n al o f State’s Exhibit State’s Exhibit No. 18, a

DVD of a dashcam police video, admitted in the trial h e l d o n June 6, 2 0 18

, o n o r

be f o r e September 7

, 2 01 8

. T h e C l e r k o f th i s C ou r

t i s d i re c t e d t o r ece i v e, m a in t a i n

,

a n d k e e p s afe this o r ig i n al e x hi b i t ; t o d e li v er i t t o t h e j u s t i ces o f t h i s c ou r t f o r t h e i r

i n s p e c t i on ; a n d

, u po n c o m pl e t io n o f i ns p e c t i on

, t o r e t u rn t h e o r i gi n al o f State ’s

Exhibit No. 18 t o t h e c l e r k o f t h e County C o u rt at Law No. 1

.

P E R C U RI A M

2