alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
No. 11-5124.

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

C. A. 6th Cir. Certio-rari denied.
EXHIBIT 31.1
                     Rule 13a-14(a)/15d-14(a) Certification
                     --------------------------------------

I, Frank P. Reilly, certify that:

1. I have reviewed this Quarterly Report on Form 10-QSB for the quarter ended
December 31, 2007 of NuState Energy Holdings, Inc.;

2. Based on my knowledge, this report does not contain any untrue statement of a
material fact or omit to state a material fact necessary to make the statements
made, in light of the circumstances under which such statements were made, not
misleading with respect to the period covered by this report;

3. Based on my knowledge, the financial statements, and other financial
information included in this report, fairly present in all material respects the
financial condition, results of operations and cash flows of the small business
issuer as of, and for, the periods presented in this report;

4. I am responsible for establishing and maintaining disclosure controls and
procedures (as defined in Exchange Act Rules 13a-15(e) and 15-15(e)) for the
small business issuer and have:

(a) Designed such disclosure controls and procedures, or caused such disclosure
controls and procedures to be designed under our supervision, to ensure that
material information relating to the small business issuer, including its
consolidated subsidiaries, is made known to us by others within those entities,
particularly during the period in which this report is being prepared;

(b) Evaluated the effectives of the small business issuer's disclosure controls
and procedures and presented in this report our conclusions about the
effectiveness of the disclosure controls and procedures, as of the end of the
period covered by this report based on such evaluation; and

(c) Disclosed in this report any change in the small business issuer's internal
control over financial reporting that occurred during the small business
issuer's most recent fiscal quarter (the small business issuer's fourth fiscal
quarter in the case of an annual report) that has materially affected, or is
reasonably likely to materially affect, the small business issuer's internal
control over financial reporting; and

5. I have disclosed, based on my most recent evaluation of internal control over
financial reporting, to the small business issuer's auditors and the audit
committee of the issuer's board of directors (or persons performing the
equivalent functions):

(a) All significant deficiencies and material weaknesses in the design or
operation of internal control over financial reporting which are reasonably
likely to adversely affect the small business issuer's ability to record,
process, summarize and report financial information; and

(b) Any fraud, whether or not material, that involves management or other
employees who have a significant role in the small business issuer's internal
control over financial reporting.

                                   /s/ Frank P. Reilly
                                   -------------------------
                                   Frank P. Reilly
                                   Chief Executive Officer

February 19, 2008
126 STAT. 1420 PUBLIC LAW 112–182—OCT. 5, 2012 

Public Law 112–182 

112th Congress 

An Act 

To authorize the exchange of land or interest in land between Lowell National 

Historical Park and the city of Lowell in the Commonwealth of Massachusetts, 

and for other purposes. 

Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representatives of 

the United States of America in Congress assembled, 

SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE. 

This Act may be cited as the ‘‘Lowell National Historical Park 

Land Exchange Act of 2012’’. 

SEC. 2. AMENDMENTS. 

The Act entitled ‘‘An act to provide for the establishment of 

the Lowell National Historical Park in the Commonwealth of 

Massachusetts, and for other purposes’’ approved June 5, 1978 

(Public Law 95–290; 16 U.S.C. 410cc et seq.), is amended in section 

202, by adding at the end the following: 

‘‘(d)(1) The Secretary may exchange any land or interest in 

land within the boundaries of the park for any land or interest 

in land owned by the Commonwealth of Massachusetts, the city 

of Lowell, or the University of Massachusetts Building Authority. 

‘‘(2) Except as provided in paragraph (3), an exchange under 

this subsection shall be subject to the laws, regulations, and policies 

applicable to exchanges of land administered by the National Park 

Service and any other terms and conditions that the Secretary 

determines to be necessary to protect the interests of the United 

States. 

‘‘(3) Where facilities or infrastructure required for the management and operation of the Lowell National Historical Park exists 

on the Federal land to be exchanged, and the non-Federal land 

or interest in land to be exchanged is not of equal value, the 

values shall be equalized by the payment of cash to the Secretary. 

The Secretary shall not be required to equalize the values of any 

exchange conducted under this subsection if the land or interest 

16 USC 

410cc–22. 

Lowell National 

Historical Park 

Land Exchange 

Act of 2012. 

16 USC 410cc 

note. 

Oct. 5, 2012 

[H.R. 2240] 


dkrause on DSKHT7XVN1PROD with PUBLIC LAWS
PUBLIC LAW 112–182—OCT. 5, 2012 126 STAT. 1421 

LEGISLATIVE HISTORY—H.R. 2240: 

HOUSE REPORTS: No. 112–450 (Comm. on Natural Resources). 

CONGRESSIONAL RECORD, Vol. 158 (2012): 

Apr. 24, 26, considered and passed House. 

Sept. 21, considered and passed Senate. 

Æ 

in land received by the Federal Government exceeds the value 

of the Federal land or interest in land exchanged.’’. 

Approved October 5, 2012. 


dkrause on DSKHT7XVN1PROD with PUBLIC LAWS
United States Court of Appeals

For the Eighth Circuit

___________________________

No. 21-2299

___________________________

United States of America

lllllllllllllllllllllPlaintiff - Appellee

v.

Ralph A. Ross, also known as R.A.

lllllllllllllllllllllDefendant - Appellant

 ____________

Appeal from United States District Court 

for the Eastern District of Arkansas - Central

 ____________

 Submitted: March 22, 2022 

Filed: April 5, 2022

[Unpublished]

____________

Before KELLY, STRAS, and KOBES, Circuit Judges. 

____________

PER CURIAM.

Ralph Ross appeals the above-Guidelines sentence the district court imposed

after he pleaded guilty to misprision of a felony. Ross argues that the district court

erroneously relied on disputed allegations in the presentence report (PSR) in

imposing his sentence. We agree.
The district court stated that the allegations were “difficult to get over” prior

to imposing Ross’s sentence, and found the sentence reasonable based on Ross’s

“alleged history.” The court did not provide a basis for overruling Ross’s objection

to the allegations, however, and stated that it did not know whether the disputed

allegations were true before relying on them. See Fed. R. Crim. P. 32(i)(3)(B) (at

sentencing, court must--for any disputed portion of PSR or other controverted

matter--rule on dispute or determine that ruling is unnecessary either because matter

will not affect sentencing, or because court will not consider matter in sentencing);

United States v. Richey, 758 F.3d 999, 1002-03 (8th Cir. 2014) (when defendant

disputes facts in PSR, government must present evidence at sentencing to prove

disputed facts; district court commits procedural error by basing sentence on

unproven, disputed allegations rather than facts); United States v. Camacho, 348 F.3d

696, 700 (8th Cir. 2003) (courts have obligation to make factual finding on disputed

allegations in PSR; PSR is not evidence and not legally sufficient basis for making

findings on contested issues of fact).

Accordingly, we vacate Ross’s sentence and remand for resentencing. Because

the government had sufficient notice of Ross’s objections to the factual allegations,

we direct that resentencing be conducted on the existing record. See United States

v. Thomas, 630 F.3d 1055, 1057 (8th Cir. 2011) (per curiam) (because government

understood its burden of proof at sentencing hearing, it had a full and fair opportunity

to present its evidence and was thus limited to one bite at the apple).

______________________________

-2-
Document Headings

                    Document headings vary by document type but may contain                    the following:                  
                -                       the agency or agencies that issued and signed a document                    
                -                       the number of the CFR title and the number of each part                      the document amends, proposes to amend, or is directly                      related to                    
                -                       the agency docket number / agency internal file number                    
                -                       the RIN which identifies each regulatory action listed in                      the Unified Agenda of Federal Regulatory and Deregulatory                      Actions                    

                    See the                                          Document Drafting Handbook                                        for more details.                  

###### Department of Commerce

###### International Trade Administration 

          - [A-588-703] 

# AGENCY:

Import Administration, International Trade Administration, Department of Commerce. 

# ACTION:

Notice of Correction to Final Results of Expedited Sunset Review and Continuation of Antidumping Order: Internal Combustion Forklift Trucks from Japan. 

# SUMMARY:

                        On August 5, 1999, the Department of Commerce (the “Department”) published in the                         **Federal Register**                         the final results of the expedited sunset review of the antidumping duty order on internal combustion forklift trucks from Japan (64 FR 30962). On June 2, 2000, the Department published the notice of continuation of this order (65 FR 35323). Subsequent to the publication of these notices, we identified an inadvertent error in the “Scope” section of the notices. Therefore, we are correcting and clarifying these inadvertent errors.                     

The error lies in the first sentence of the scope section of each notice: “The merchandise subject to this antidumping duty order is internal combustion industrial forklift trucks, with a lifting capacity of 2,000 to 5,000 pounds, from Japan.” This sentence should be replaced with: “The merchandise subject to this antidumping duty order is internal combustion industrial forklift trucks, with a lifting capacity of 2,000 to 15,000 pounds, from Japan.” 

# Effective Date:

April 17, 2000. 

# FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

Kathryn B. McCormick or James Maeder, Office of Policy for Import Administration, International Trade Administration, U.S. Department of Commerce, 14th Street & Constitution Avenue, NW., Washington, DC 20230: telephone (202) 482-1930 and (202) 482-3330, respectively. 

This correction is issued and published in accordance with sections 751(h) and 777(i) of the Act. 

Dated: June 27, 2000. 

Troy H. Cribb, 

Acting Assistant Secretary for Import Administration. 

[FR Doc. 00-16950 Filed 7-3-00; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 3510-DS-P
# Academic Partner MST Offers Advanced Security Class for iCollege Students/Grads

/ Published May 29, 2015
One of the iCollege's more than 30 academic partner universities, Missouri University of Science and Technology (MST), is offering an online advanced security class for iCollege students and graduates starting this fall.  Please see the below link and information for details.  
Here’s the link:http://dce.mst.edu/Content_Repository/soc/classes/xdis/fs2015/CompSci66001DIS/index.html

CS 6600 - The course presents various vulnerabilities and threats to information in cyberspace and the principles and techniques for preventing and detecting threats, and recovering from attacks. The course deals with various aspects and layers of security with concentration in formal models of application-level security. A course project using model checking will be used to illustrate theoretical concepts on model problems. In particular, we will create a set of “challenge applications” that involve both Cyber and Physical components (A Cyber Physical System) and model the information flow in these systems using formal models.Please direct questions to the iCollege Academic Partner Coordinator at coopersmithp@ndu.edu .
Grad Form v 2017‐06‐20

INSTRUCTIONS 

NDU CIC students who have met the requirements for a certificate program and/or the Government

Information Leadership (GIL) Master of Science Program must complete and return this “Application for

Graduate Program Completion” by email directly to the NDU CIC (as an attachment) to

CICOSS@ndu.edu or by fax to 202-685-4860. 

TRANSCRIPTS 

The NDU Registrar's Office prepares and mails all transcripts for the university. The request form is available at

http://www.ndu.edu/academics/registrar

QUESTIONS? 

If you have any questions regarding the requirements for completion or the Application for Graduate Program

Completion please contact the CIC Academic Advisor at logann@ndu.edu.

COMPLETE THE FOLLOWING: 

Name (Last, First, MI): _______________________________________________________________________

(Please include prefix and suffix, if applicable. Use full legal name.)

Email: _______________________________________________________________ 

Mailing Address: ________________________________________________________________ 

 ________________________________________________________________ 

 ________________________________________________________________ 

Completed Graduate Programs (mark all that apply): 

Place 

X 

Certificate Programs Place 

X 

GIL Master of Science Concentrations 

Chief Financial Officer (CFO) Leadership Certificate Chief Financial Officer (CFO)

Chief Information Officer Certificate (CIO) Chief Information Officer (CIO)

Cyber‐ Leadership Certificate (Cyber‐L) Cyber‐Leadership (Cyber‐L)

NSTISSI 4011 Certificate Cyber‐ Security (Cyber‐S)

CNSS 4012/NSTISSI 4015/CNSSI 4016 Certificate Information Technology Program

Management (ITPM)

Chief Information Security Officer Certificate (CISO) Enterprise Architecture (EA)

Architect Certificate Government Strategic Leader (GSL)

Enterprise Architect Certificate 

Information Technology Program Management Certificate

(ITPM)

 

Government Strategic Leader Certificate (GSL) 

Student Signature: _________________________________________ Date: _____________________________ 

Application for Graduate Program Completion

CICOSS@ndu.edu 

Fax: 202‐685‐4860
§ 17.2 Definitions. ( a ) *Antenna structure.* The term antenna structure means a structure that is constructed or used to transmit radio energy, or that is constructed or used for the primary purpose of supporting antennas to transmit and/or receive radio energy, and any antennas and other appurtenances mounted thereon, from the time construction of the supporting structure begins until such time as the supporting structure is dismantled.
( b ) *Antenna farm area.* A geographical location, with established boundaries, designated by the Federal Communications Commission, in which antenna structures with a common impact on aviation may be grouped.
( c ) *Antenna structure owner.* For the purposes of this part, an antenna structure owner is the individual or entity vested with ownership, equitable ownership, dominion, or title to the antenna structure that is constructed or used to transmit radio energy, or the underlying antenna structure that supports or is intended to support antennas and other appurtenances. Notwithstanding any agreements made between the owner and any entity designated by the owner to maintain the antenna structure, the owner is ultimately responsible for compliance with the requirements of this part.
( d ) *Antenna structure registration number.* A unique number, issued by the Commission during the registration process, which identifies an antenna structure. Once obtained, this number must be used in all filings related to this structure.
[32 FR 8813, June 21, 1967, and 32 FR 11268, Aug. 3, 1967, as amended at 39 FR 26157, July 17, 1974; 61 FR 4362, Feb. 6, 1996; 79 FR 56984, Sept. 24, 2014]
*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.

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

For the Fifth Circuit

No. 01-60570

Summary Calendar

WILLIE WASHINGTON,

Plaintiff-Appellant,

VERSUS

BELLSOUTH TELECOMMUNICATIONS, INC.,

Defendant-Appellee.

Appeal from the United States District Court

For the Southern District of Mississippi

(3:00-CV-14-WS)

December 21, 2001

Before DeMOSS, PARKER, and DENNIS, Circuit Judges.

PER CURIAM:*

Willie Washington (hereinafter plaintiff) sued his employer,

BellSouth Telecommunications, Inc. (hereinafter defendant) in

federal district court alleging that defendant wrongfully denied

him a promotion because of his race. Defendant answered and moved

for summary judgment on the grounds that plaintiff did not receive
2

a promotion on the occasions in which he thinks he should have

because plaintiff had not properly registered his name in the

electronic system used by defendant to notify its employees of job

openings. Once plaintiff registered his name in this system, he

did receive a promotion prior to filing this lawsuit. The district

court granted summary judgment for defendant and plaintiff appeals.

We have carefully reviewed the briefs, the record excerpts,

and relevant portions of the record itself. For the reasons stated

by the district court in its Memorandum Opinion and Order dated

June 12, 2001, we affirm the Final Judgment of the district court

of even date therewith which dismissed all of plaintiff’s claims

with prejudice. 

AFFIRMED.
No. 11-5445.

#### Cobble *v.*Owens, Commissioner, Georgia Department of Corrections, et al.

C. A. 11th Cir. Certiorari denied.
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<ARTICLE> 5
       
<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   9-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          APR-30-1997
<PERIOD-END>                               JAN-31-1997
<CASH>                                         122,755
<SECURITIES>                                         0
<RECEIVABLES>                                        0
<ALLOWANCES>                                         0
<INVENTORY>                                          0
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                                     0
<PP&E>                                         185,000
<DEPRECIATION>                                       0
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                 307,755
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                          312,238
<BONDS>                                              0
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                       214,165
<OTHER-SE>                                   (218,648)
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                   307,755
<SALES>                                              0
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                                     7
<CGS>                                                0
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                        0
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                86,581
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                     0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                                   0
<INCOME-PRETAX>                               (86,581)
<INCOME-TAX>                                         0
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                                  0
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                  (86,574)
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                   (.004)
<EPS-DILUTED>                                        0
        

</TABLE>
## FLORIDA SUPREME COURT

NOTICE OF CORRECTION

DATE: December 28, 2018

CASE OF: IN RE: STANDARD JURY INSTRUCTIONS IN CRIMINAL

CASES

- REPORT 2017

- 11

DOCKET NO.: SC 17

- 2265 OPINION FILED: December 20 , 2018

ATTENTION: ALL PUBLISHERS

THE FOLLOWING CORRECTION HAS BEEN MADE IN THE ABOVE

OPINION:

On p. 11 (Appendix), Instruction 8.16, element #1b

– the word “victim” was

changed to unbolded text.

On p. 12 (Appendix), Instruction 8.16, under the italicized heading “§ 784.08(2),”

the word “defendant” was changed to unbolded text.

SIGNED: OPINION CLERK

The corrected hard copy will follow.
**EXHIBIT        32**

**CERTIFICATION        PURSUANT TO**

**18        U.S.C. SECTION 1350,**

**AS        ADOPTED PURSUANT TO**

**SECTION        906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002**

| Dated:  August                  9, 2007 | By:    | /s/                  Michael J. LaVelle          |
|---------------------------------------------------|--------|--------------------------------------------------|
|                                              |   | Michael                  J. LaVelle              |
|                                              |   | Interim                  Chief Executive Officer |
|                                              |   |                                             |
| Dated:  August                  9, 2007 | By:    | /s/                  David J. Steichen           |
|                                              |   | David                  J. Steichen               |
|                                              |   | Chief                  Financial Officer         |