alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 01-2219

LAUNEIL SANDERS, Plaintiff - Appellant, versus THE UNITED STATES ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY; SOUTH CAROLINA DEPARTMENT OF HEALTHAND ENVIRONMENTAL CONTROL; BOWATER INCORPORATED; INTERNATIONAL PAPER COMPANY, Defendants - Appellees. Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of South Carolina, at Spartanburg. G. Ross Anderson, Jr., District Judge. (CA-01-1973-7-13AK) Submitted: February 14, 2002 Decided: February 21, 2002 Before WIDENER, LUTTIG, and GREGORY, Circuit Judges. Affirmed by unpublished by per curiam opinion. Launeil Sanders, Appellant Pro Se. Stephanie Tai, Greer Susan Goldman, UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE, Washington, D.C.; Samuel Leon Finklea, III, SOUTH CAROLINA DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH & ENVIRONMENTAL CONTROL, Columbia, South Carolina; Lewis Walter Tollison, III, Elizabeth M. McMillan, NELSON, MULLINS, RILEY & SCARBOROUGH, Greenville, South Carolina; Elizabeth Bartlett Partlow, OGLETREE, DEAKINS, NASH, SMOAK & STEWART, Columbia, South Carolina; Lemuel Gray Geddie, Jr., Nancy W. Monts, OGLETREE,2 DEAKINS, NASH, SMOAK & STEWART, Greenville, South Carolina, for Appellees. Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. See Local Rule 36(c).

PER CURIAM: Launeil Sanders appeals the district court’s order denying relief on his complaint. We have reviewed the record and the district court’s opinion accepting the recommendation of the magistrate judge and find no reversible error. Accordingly, we affirm on the reasoning of the district court. Sanders v. EPA , No. CA-01-1973-7-13AK (D.S.C. Sept. 21, 2001). 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
§ 73.26 Regional channels; Class B and Class D stations. ( a ) The following frequencies are designated as regional channels and are assigned for use by Class B and Class D stations: 550, 560, 570, 580, 590, 600, 610, 620, 630, 790, 910, 920, 930, 950, 960, 970, 980, 1150, 1250, 1260, 1270, 1280, 1290, 1300, 1310, 1320, 1330, 1350, 1360, 1370, 1380, 1390, 1410, 1420, 1430, 1440, 1460, 1470, 1480, 1590, 1600, 1610, 1620, 1630, 1640, 1650, 1660, 1670, 1680, 1690, and 1700 kHz.
( b ) Additionally, in Alaska, Hawaii, Puerto Rico, and the U.S. Virgin Islands the frequencies 1230, 1240, 1340, 1400, 1450, and 1490 kHz are designated as Regional channels, and are assigned for use by Class B stations. Stations formerly licensed to these channels in those locations as Class C stations are redesignated as Class B stations.
[56 FR 64857, Dec. 12, 1991]
**Exhibit 10.22**

 

**AMENDMENT TO THE TOYS “R” US, INC.**

**SUPPLEMENTAL EXECUTIVE RETIREMENT PLAN**

**as Amended and Restated throughDecember 3, 2003**

 

WHEREAS, Toys “R” Us, Inc. (the“Company”) maintains the Toys “R” Us, Inc. Supplemental Executive Retirement Plan, as amended and restated through December 3, 2003 (the “Plan”), for the benefit of a select group of management and highly compensatedemployees; and 

 

WHEREAS, Article XI of the Plan provides thatthe Plan may be amended by Compensation and Organizational Development Committee of the Board of Directors of the Company (the “COD Committee”); and 

 

WHEREAS, on March 16, 2005, the COD Committee approved an amendment to the Plan to clarify that upon the termination of the Plan, the distribution toparticipants shall be an amount equal to their account balances adjusted to the date of Plan termination; 

 

NOW, THEREFORE, the Plan is amended as effective as of March 16, 2005 as follows: 

 

The last sentence of Article XI of the Plan is deleted and replaced with the following: 

 

“Notwithstanding the foregoing, the Compensation Committee may, in itssole discretion, terminate the Plan as of any date and distribute to Participants as soon as practicable thereafter an amount equal to their Account balances adjusted to the date of Plan termination pursuant to the provisions of Article V, and forthis purpose, the final short Plan Year shall end on the date of Plan termination.” 

 

IN WITNESS WHEREOF, this amendment has been adopted as of March 16, 2005.
449P11-13

#### State v. Charles Everette Hinton

1. Petitioner’s *Pro Se*Motion to Take Judicial Notice of Adjudicative Facts

1. Dismissed

2. Petitioner’s *Pro Se*Motion for Necessary Joinder of Parties

2. Dismissed

3. Petitioner’s *Pro Se*Motion for Joinder of Claims and Remedies

3. Dismissed

4. Petitioner’s *Pro Se*Motion for Evidentiary Oral Hearing and Findings and Conclusions by the Court

4. Dismissed

5. Petitioner’s *Pro Se*Motion for Inquiry into Restraints on Liberty; Petition for *Writ of Habeas Coitus;*Relief from Judgments

5. Denied 02/19/2016

6. Petitioner’s *Pro Se*Motion for Calendaring Cause

6. Dismissed

Ervin, J.,

recused
{"version":"1.0","provider_name":"U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit","provider_url":"https:\/\/cafc.uscourts.gov","author_name":"25005pwpadmin","author_url":"https:\/\/cafc.uscourts.gov\/author\/25005pwpadmin\/","title":"23-1154: In Re CARACOL TELEVISION S.A. [ORDER], Nonprecedential - U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit","type":"rich","width":600,"height":338,"html":"<blockquote class=\"wp-embedded-content\" data-secret=\"JHRQMWICCA\"><a href=\"https:\/\/cafc.uscourts.gov\/03-13-2023-23-1154-in-re-caracol-television-sa-order-23-1154-order-3-13-2023_2093717\/\">23-1154: In Re CARACOL TELEVISION S.A. [ORDER], Nonprecedential<\/a><\/blockquote><iframe sandbox=\"allow-scripts\" security=\"restricted\" src=\"https:\/\/cafc.uscourts.gov\/03-13-2023-23-1154-in-re-caracol-television-sa-order-23-1154-order-3-13-2023_2093717\/embed\/#?secret=JHRQMWICCA\" width=\"600\" height=\"338\" title=\"“23-1154: In Re CARACOL TELEVISION S.A. [ORDER], Nonprecedential” — U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit\" data-secret=\"JHRQMWICCA\" frameborder=\"0\" marginwidth=\"0\" marginheight=\"0\" scrolling=\"no\" class=\"wp-embedded-content\"><\/iframe><script>\n\/*! This file is auto-generated *\/\n!function(d,l){\"use strict\";l.querySelector&&d.addEventListener&&\"undefined\"!=typeof URL&&(d.wp=d.wp||{},d.wp.receiveEmbedMessage||(d.wp.receiveEmbedMessage=function(e){var t=e.data;if((t||t.secret||t.message||t.value)&&!\/[^a-zA-Z0-9]\/.test(t.secret)){for(var s,r,n,a=l.querySelectorAll('iframe[data-secret=\"'+t.secret+'\"]'),o=l.querySelectorAll('blockquote[data-secret=\"'+t.secret+'\"]'),c=new RegExp(\"^https?:$\",\"i\"),i=0;i<o.length;i++)o[i].style.display=\"none\";for(i=0;i<a.length;i++)s=a[i],e.source===s.contentWindow&&(s.removeAttribute(\"style\"),\"height\"===t.message?(1e3<(r=parseInt(t.value,10))?r=1e3:~~r<200&&(r=200),s.height=r):\"link\"===t.message&&(r=new URL(s.getAttribute(\"src\")),n=new URL(t.value),c.test(n.protocol))&&n.host===r.host&&l.activeElement===s&&(d.top.location.href=t.value))}},d.addEventListener(\"message\",d.wp.receiveEmbedMessage,!1),l.addEventListener(\"DOMContentLoaded\",function(){for(var e,t,s=l.querySelectorAll(\"iframe.wp-embedded-content\"),r=0;r<s.length;r++)(t=(e=s[r]).getAttribute(\"data-secret\"))||(t=Math.random().toString(36).substring(2,12),e.src+=\"#?secret=\"+t,e.setAttribute(\"data-secret\",t)),e.contentWindow.postMessage({message:\"ready\",secret:t},\"*\")},!1)))}(window,document);\n<\/script>\n","description":"ORDER Posted: In Re CARACOL TELEVISION S.A. [ORDER](pdf) Appeal Number: 23-1154 Origin: PTO Nonprecedential To see more opinions and orders, follow this link: Opinions and Orders."}
§ 32.4350 Net noncurrent deferred nonoperating income taxes. ( a ) This account shall include the balance of income tax expense (Federal, state, and local) that has been deferred to later periods as a result of comprehensive interperiod allocation related to nonoperating differences.
( b ) This account shall be credited or debited, as appropriate, and Account 7400, Nonoperating Taxes, shall reflect the offset for the tax effect of revenues from other operations and extraordinary items and nonoperating expenses which have been included in the determination of taxable income, but which will not be included in the determination of book income or for the tax effect of nonoperating expenses and extraordinary items and nonoperating income which have been included in the determination of book income prior to the inclusion in the determination of taxable income.
( c ) As other assets or liabilities which generated the prepaid income tax or deferred income tax are reclassified from long-term or non-current status to current status, the appropriate deferred income tax shall be reclassified from this account to account 4110, Net Current Deferred Nonoperating Income Taxes.
( d ) This account shall also include the balance of the income tax effect (Federal, State and local) related to noncurrent extraordinary items which have been included in the determination of taxable income in a period different from when it is included in the determination of book income, that is, more than one year.
( e ) This account shall be charged or credited with the contra amount recorded to Account 7600, Extraordinary items, in accordance with § 32.22.
( f ) As the extraordinary item which generated the deferred income tax becomes current, the appropriate deferred income tax shall be reclassified from this account to Account 4110, Net Current Deferred Nonoperating Income Taxes.
( g ) The classification of deferred income taxes as current or noncurrent shall follow the classification of the asset or liability that gave rise to the deferred income tax. If there is no related asset or liability, classification shall be based on the expected turnaround of the temporary difference.
( h ) Subsidiary record categories shall be maintained in order that the company may separately report the amounts contained herein that are property related and those that are nonproperty related. Such subsidiary record categories shall be reported as required by part 43 of this Commission's Rules and Regulations.
[51 FR 43499, Dec. 2, 1986, as amended at 59 FR 9419, Feb. 28, 1994; 67 FR 5690, Feb. 6, 2002]
No. 11-9946.

#### Moser *v.*United States.

C. A. 10th Cir. Cer-tiorari denied.
KPMG
 	
             
 	
             
 	
             
 
	
             
 	
            KPMG LLP
 	
            Telephone
 	
            617 988 1000
 
	
             
 	
            99 High Street
 	
            Fax
 	
            617 507 8321
 
	
             
 	
            Boston, MA 02110-2371
 	
            Internet
 	
            www.us.kpmg.com
 



 


 


 


March 12, 2007


Securities and Exchange Commission


Washington, D.C. 20549


 


Ladies and Gentlemen:


 


We were previously principal accountants for Capital Crossing Preferred Corporation (the “Company”) and, under the date of January 30, 2007, we reported on the financial statements of The Company as of and for years ended December 31, 2006 and 2005.  On March 8, 2007, we were dismissed.  We have read Capital Crossing Preferred Corporation’s statements included under Item 4/01 of its Form 8-K dated March 12, 2007, and we agree with such statements, except we are not in a position to agree or disagree with the Company’s statements in the first paragraph of item 4.01.


 


Very truly yours,


 


/s/ KPMG LLP


 


KPMG LLP
No. 11-9777.

#### Boyd *v.*United States.

C. A. 6th Cir. Certio-rari denied.
Michigan Supreme Court

Lansing, Michigan

Robert P. Young, Jr., Chief Justice

Stephen J. Markman

Brian K. Zahra

Bridget M. McCormack

David F. Viviano 

Richard H. Bernstein

Joan L. Larsen, Justices

I, Larry S. Royster, Clerk of the Michigan Supreme Court, certify that the

foregoing is a true and complete copy of the order entered at the direction of the Court.

 October 26, 2016

d1017

Order 

Clerk

October 26, 2016

151448(33)

PEOPLE OF THE STATE OF MICHIGAN,

Plaintiff-Appellee,

v SC: 151448

COA: 323458

Washtenaw CC: 75-009781-FC

HOWARD HUGHES, III,

Defendant-Appellant. 

____________________________________/

On order of the Court, the motion for reconsideration of this Court’s December 22, 

2015 order is considered, and it is DENIED, because it does not appear that the order was 

entered erroneously.
No. 11-9131.

#### Offill *v.*United States.

C. A. 4th Cir. Cer-tiorari denied.
No. 11-9481.

#### Foye *v.*Warren, Administrator, New Jersey State Prison, et al.

C. A. 3d Cir. Certiorari denied.
**EXHIBIT
      32.1**








CERTIFICATION
      OF DISCLOSURE PURSUANT TO


18
      U.S.C.
      SECTION 1350,


AS
      ADOPTED PURSUANT TO


SECTION
      906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002








I,
        Angela
        Du, Chief Executive Officer of China Mobility Solutions, Inc., certify
        pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350 as enacted by Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley
        Act of 2002, that:
 
 (1)
        the
        Quarterly Report on Form 10-QSB/A for the quarterly period ended March
        31,
        2006 (the "Periodic Report") which this statement accompanies fully complies
        with the requirements of Section 13(a) or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange
        Act of 1934; and
 
 (2)
        information contained in the Periodic Report fairly presents, in all material
        respects, the financial condition and results of operations of China Mobility
        Solutions, Inc.













Dated: July
              24,
              2006
            /s/
              Xiao-qing DuXiao-qing
                Du,
              Chief
                Executive Officer













A
      signed
      original of this written statement required by Section 906, or other document
      authenticating, acknowledging or otherwise adopting the signature that appears
      in typed form within the electronic version of this written statement required
      by Section 906, has been provided to China Mobility Solutions, Inc. and will
      be
      retained by China Mobility Solutions, Inc. and furnished to the Securities
      and
      Exchange Commission or its staff upon request.
§ 54.2009 Audits, inspections, and investigations. ( a ) *Audits.* Schools and Libraries Cybersecurity Pilot Program participants and service providers shall be subject to audits and other investigations to evaluate their compliance with the statutory and regulatory requirements in this chapter of the Schools and Libraries Cybersecurity Pilot Program, including those requirements pertaining to what services and equipment are purchased, what services and equipment are delivered, and how services and equipment are being used.
( b ) *Inspections and investigations.* Schools and Libraries Cybersecurity Pilot Program participants and service providers shall permit any representative (including any auditor) appointed by a state education department, the Administrator, the Commission, its Office of Inspector General, or any local, state, or Federal agency with jurisdiction over the entity to enter their premises to conduct inspections for compliance with the statutory and regulatory requirements in this subpart of the Schools and Libraries Cybersecurity Pilot Program.
Michigan Supreme Court

Lansing, Michigan

Bridget M. McCormack

, Chief Justice

Brian K. Zahra

David F. Viviano

Richard H. Bernstein

Elizabeth T. Clement

Megan K. Cavanagh

Elizabeth M. Welch,

Justices

I, Larry S. Royster, Clerk of the Michigan Supreme Court, certify that the

foregoing is a true and complete copy of the order entered at the direction of the Court.

April 27, 2021

s0419 

# Order

Clerk April 27, 2021

161751

VE NESSA DAVIS, JOHN DAVIS, RONALD

W. RADATZ, NEIL J. HAMANN, JACQUELINE

A. H AMANN, DENNIS J. HAMANN, JOSEPH

SHARPE, JR., MICHELLE SHARPE, JOHN A.

ESCHENBERG, II, LEAH ESCHENBERG,

TERRY MERCHANT, TERESA MERCHANT,

CHARLES COGGINS, II, KIMBERLY

COGGINS, and CHARLES COGGINS, III,

Plaintiffs

- Appellees,

v SC: 161751

COA: 346729

St. Clair CC: 16

- 001197

- CE

SUNOCO PIPELINE LIMITED PARTNERSHIP

and SUNOCO LOGISTICS PARTNERS

OPERATIONS GP, LLC,

Defendants

- Appellants,

and

ENBRID GE ENERGY LIMITED

PARTNERSHIP, ENBRIDGE PIPELINES

LAKEHEAD, LLC, ENBRIDGE PIPELINES

TOLEDO, INC., GREAT LAKES PETROLEUM

CORPORATION, GREAT LAKE PETROLEUM

COMPANY, and GREAT LAKES PET ROLEUM

TRANSPORTATION, LLC,

Defendants

- Appellees.

_________________________________________/

On ord er of the Court, the application for leave to appeal the June 18, 2020

judgment of the Court of Appeals is considered, and it is DENIED, because we are not

persuaded that the questions presented should be reviewed by this Court.
Skip to main content (Press Enter).
 Toggle navigation
            
            College of Information and Cyberspace
                    National Defense University
                CIC
        Search
                    Search CIC:
                        Search
                Search CIC:
                    Search
    Home

    About 
        Mission & Vision

    Faculty & Staff

    Fact Sheet

    Alumni

    Internships

    FAQ

    Admissions 
        Eligibility Requirements

    Admissions Calendar

    Application Instructions

    Apply Online

    International Students

    Academics 
        Graduate Catalog

    M.S. in Strategic Information and Cyberspace Studies
        
        JPME Master's Degree

    Cyber Workforce Master's Degree (Part Time)

    Leadership Development Programs

    Graduate Certificates

    Academic Partners

    Current Students 
        JPME II  Incoming Students

    LDP Incoming Students

    Student Registration

    Bring Your Own Device

    IA Compliance

    Completion Procedures / Order Transcripts

    Student Services and Resources

    Events
    
        Cyber Beacon

    Cyber PME Colloquium

    Hopper Award

    Lecture Series

    CYBERCOM Symposium

    NEWS

    UC2
    
        About

    Events

    Work With Us

    Center for Cybersecurity
    
        About

    Cybersecurity Center POC

    Cybersecurity Supporting Faculty

    CAE-CDE CISO Certificate Program

    Cybersecurity Trending News

    Cyber Labs
        
        Ethical Hacking

    Critical Infrastructure - SCADA

    Cyber Exercises
        
        Tabletop Exercise

    Cyber Competitions

    Cyber Resources and Awareness

    Stakeholder / Industry Advisory Council

    Contact 
        Contact Us

    Directions

    Access to Ft. McNair

    Map of Ft. McNair  Home
  NEWS
  News & Announcements
 News & Announcements News
 Capitol  Technology University
 Paper Info
 SHARE
 PRINT
 National Defense University


College of Information and Cyberspace

300 Fifth Ave., Bldg. 62
Fort Lesley J. McNair
Washington, DC 20319-5066

202-685-6300
                    Stay Connected
                
                
                DOD Privacy & Security
 DOD Links Disclaimer
 DOD Social Media Policy
 DOD Web Policy
 FOIA
 NDU System of Records Notice
 NDU Privacy & Security Notice
 No FEAR Act
 Open GOV
 Plain Writing Act
 Section 508
 Small Business Act
 USA.gov
            

Hosted by Defense Media Activity - WEB.mil
Colleges and Universities Accepting CIC Credits

CIC maintains academic partnerships with regionally accredited universities whose degrees align well 

with our academic vision and educational programming. Graduates from our certificate programs can 

apply to several partner institutions for completion of a master’s or doctoral degree program.

Academic partners generally accept 9-12 graduate semester credits dependent on the certificate 

program, and the number of courses completed with CIC. Students enrolled in CIC programs prior to 

mid-2014 may receive up to 15 transfer credits, depending on the certificate program. 

We currently have 29 partner institutions. Many partners provide full-time, part-time, and/or online 

learning opportunities. Several CIC partner universities updated their agreements over the previous year 

to include new degrees and acceptance of additional NDU CIC certificates. Please check our website for 

an updated list: https://cic.ndu.edu/catalog/partners/.

Questions about CIC’s Academic Partners, or the Academic Partner Program more broadly, should be 

directed to Joe Billingsley, Director of Strategic Engagement (+1.202.685.2020). 

Auburn (AL) Cal State San Bernardino (CA)

Capitol Technology University (MD) Central Michigan University (MI)

East Carolina University (NC) Florida Institute of Technology (FL)

Fort Hayes State University (KS) George Mason University (VA)

Global IA Certification (GIAC) SANS Illinois Institute of Technology (IL)

James Madison University (VA) Johns Hopkins University (MD)

Missouri Univ. of Science and Technology (MO) New Jersey City University (MJ)

New Mexico Tech (NM) Northeastern University (MA)

Nova Southeastern University (FL) Pace University (NY)

Regis University (CO) San Diego State University (CA)

Southern Methodist University (TX) Syracuse University (NY and DC)

University of Arkansas at Little Rock (AR) University of Detroit Mercy (MI)

University of Illinois at Springfield (IL) University of MD Baltimore County (MD)

University of MD Global Campus (MD) University of Nebraska at Omaha (NE)

University of North Carolina at Charlotte (NC) University of Texas at San Antonio (TX)

University of Tulsa (OK) University of Washington (WA)

Walsh College (MI)

(As of September, 2021)

Academic Collaboration

In addition to the academic partners that accept CIC graduate credit, there are an array of educational 

and academic institutions that collaborate with our school and its people on a regular basis. Some of our 

team members, and the institutions they lead interactions with, include Gary Brown and the 

Massachusetts Institute of Technology (MIT) through the Roundtable on Military Cyber Stability (RMCS), 

Jonathan Henick and the Foreign Service Institute (FSI), Dr. Gwyneth Sutherlin and the North Atlantic 

Treaty Organization (NATO) Strategic Communications Center of Excellence, Harry Wingo and the US