alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
{"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":"Administrative Orders - U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit","type":"rich","width":600,"height":338,"html":"<blockquote class=\"wp-embedded-content\" data-secret=\"nUQRZWJYLO\"><a href=\"https:\/\/cafc.uscourts.gov\/home\/the-court\/administrative-orders\/\">Administrative Orders<\/a><\/blockquote><iframe sandbox=\"allow-scripts\" security=\"restricted\" src=\"https:\/\/cafc.uscourts.gov\/home\/the-court\/administrative-orders\/embed\/#?secret=nUQRZWJYLO\" width=\"600\" height=\"338\" title=\"“Administrative Orders” — U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit\" data-secret=\"nUQRZWJYLO\" 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":"Pursuant to Fed. Cir. R. 47(c), the court may adopt administrative orders “as necessary to implement [its] rules or otherwise provide for practice before this court.” The following administrative orders are currently in effect. Order 2022-07: Updated National Courts Building Protocols [November 9, 2022] Order 2022-05: Resuming Court Operations\u00a0[September 9, 2022] Order 2021-11: Advisory Council […]"}
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<PAGE>

<ARTICLE> 9
<LEGEND>
THIS SCHEDULE CONTAINS SUMMARY FINANCIAL INFORMATION EXTRACTED FROM THE 1997
10-K AND IS QUALIFIED IN ITS ENTIRETY BY REFERENCE TO SUCH FINANCIAL STATEMENTS.
</LEGEND>
<MULTIPLIER> 1,000

<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   12-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          DEC-31-1997
<PERIOD-END>                               DEC-31-1997
<CASH>                                           6,951
<INT-BEARING-DEPOSITS>                           3,291
<FED-FUNDS-SOLD>                                 2,500
<TRADING-ASSETS>                                     0
<INVESTMENTS-HELD-FOR-SALE>                    435,426
<INVESTMENTS-CARRYING>                               0
<INVESTMENTS-MARKET>                                 0
<LOANS>                                        307,849
<ALLOWANCE>                                      1,322
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                 783,948
<DEPOSITS>                                     462,154
<SHORT-TERM>                                   137,237
<LIABILITIES-OTHER>                              7,431
<LONG-TERM>                                     61,000
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                            89
<OTHER-SE>                                     116,037
<TOTAL-LIABILITIES-AND-EQUITY>                 783,948
<INTEREST-LOAN>                                 22,310
<INTEREST-INVEST>                               30,370
<INTEREST-OTHER>                                     0
<INTEREST-TOTAL>                                52,680
<INTEREST-DEPOSIT>                              18,442
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                              27,233
<INTEREST-INCOME-NET>                           25,447
<LOAN-LOSSES>                                      300
<SECURITIES-GAINS>                                 518
<EXPENSE-OTHER>                                 14,752
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                 13,043
<INCOME-PRE-EXTRAORDINARY>                      13,043
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                     8,317
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                     1.18
<EPS-DILUTED>                                     1.15
<YIELD-ACTUAL>                                    7.48
<LOANS-NON>                                      1,733
<LOANS-PAST>                                         0
<LOANS-TROUBLED>                                     0
<LOANS-PROBLEM>                                      0
<ALLOWANCE-OPEN>                                 1,031
<CHARGE-OFFS>                                       78
<RECOVERIES>                                        69
<ALLOWANCE-CLOSE>                                1,322
<ALLOWANCE-DOMESTIC>                             1,322
<ALLOWANCE-FOREIGN>                                  0
<ALLOWANCE-UNALLOCATED>                              0


</TABLE>
§ 54.715 Administrative expenses of the Administrator. ( a ) The annual administrative expenses of the Administrator should be commensurate with the administrative expenses of programs of similar size, with the exception of the salary levels for officers and employees of the Administrator described in paragraph (b) of this section. The annual administrative expenses may include, but are not limited to, salaries of officers and operations personnel, the costs of borrowing funds, equipment costs, operating expenses, directors' expenses, and costs associated with auditing contributors of support recipients.
( b ) All officers and employees of the Administrator may be compensated at an annual rate of pay, including any non-regular payments, bonuses, or other compensation, in an amount not to exceed the rate of basic pay in effect for Level I of the Executive Schedule under 5 U.S.C. 5312. Note to paragraph ( b
):
The compensation to be included when calculating whether an employee's rate of pay exceeds Level I of the Executive Schedule does not include life insurance benefits, retirement benefits (including payments to 401(k) plans), health insurance benefits, or other similar benefits, provided that any such benefits are reasonably comparable to benefits that are provided to employees of the federal government.
( c ) The Administrator shall submit to the Commission projected quarterly budgets at least sixty (60) days prior to the start of every quarter. The Commission must approve the projected quarterly budgets before the Administrator disburses funds under the federal universal service support mechanisms. The administrative expenses incurred by the Administrator in connection with the schools and libraries support mechanism, the rural health care support mechanism, the high-cost support mechanism, and the low income support mechanism shall be deducted from the annual funding of each respective support mechanism. The expenses deducted from the annual funding for each support mechanism also shall include the Administrator's joint and common costs allocated to each support mechanism pursuant to the cost allocation manual filed by the Administrator under § 64.903 of this chapter.
[63 FR 70576, Dec. 21, 1998, as amended at 65 FR 38690, June 21, 2000; 65 FR 57739, Sept. 26, 2000; 66 FR 59728, Nov. 30, 2001; 69 FR 5719, Feb. 6, 2004; 76 FR 73877, Nov. 29, 2011]
##### 



Exhibit 32.2
 CERTIFICATION OF CFO PURSUANT TO 18 U.S.C. SECTION 1350, AS ADOPTED PURSUANT TO
SECTION 906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002
  (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.
 /s/ Leonard DiSalvo
Leonard DiSalvo
Vice President  Finance and Chief Financial
Officer 
May 8, 2007
  18
2760 

2761 

2762 

2763 

2764 

2765 

2766 

2767 

2768 

2769 

2770 

2771 

2772 

2773 

2774 

2775 

2776 

2777 

2778 

2779 

2780 

2781 

2782 

2783 

2784 

2785 

2786 

2787 

2788 

2789 

2790 

2791 

2792 

2793 

2794 

2795 

2796 

2797 

2798 

2799 

2800 

2801 

2802 

2803 

2804 

2805 

2806 

2807 

2808 

2809 

2810 

2811 

2812 

2813 

2814 

2815 

2816 

2817 

2818 

2819 

2820 

2821 

2822 

2823 

2824 

2825 

2826 

2827 

2828 

2829 

2830 

2831 

2832 

2833 

2834 

2835 

2836 

2837 

2838 

2839 

2840 

2841 

2842 

2843 

2844 

2845 

2846 

2847 

2848 

2849 

2850 

2851 

2852 

2853 

2854 

2855 

2856 

2857 

2858 

2859 

2860 

2861 

2862 

2863 

2864 

2865 

2866 

2867 

2868 

2869 

2870 

    -       - Superintendent of Documents
      - 2010-12-23T16:22:51-0500
      - US GPO, Washington, DC 20401
      - Superintendent of Documents
      - GPO attests that this document has not been altered since it was disseminated by GPO
# CYBER BEACON IV

/ Published Sept. 26, 2017

Cyber Beacon IV kicks off September 27th.  The two day event brings together a select group of senior decision makers and thought leaders from across the government, the private sector, and academia to challenge current thinking on critical issues associated with national security in cyberspace.  Participants will collaborate to provide actionable recommendations intended to shape national security policy.  The theme for this year's Cyber Beacon is "Charting a Course In and Beyond Cyberspace."  The panels and discussions will focus on these topics:
      - National Policy : Do we have the right national cyberspace strategy or do we need a cyber 'Project Solarium"?
      - Risk and Resiliency : How do we do more rapidly deploy resilient systems such as AI, Cloud, and IoT/IoE to meet the challenges presented by our increasingly vulnerable critical infrastructures?
      - Strategic Innovation : How do we maximize our ability to avoid strategic surprise and leverage innovation to maintain superiority in cyberspace?
      - Educating Strategic Cyber Leaders:  What best practices in strategic leader education should be embraced, and what new approaches are worth piloting?
Exhibit 32.2



CERTIFICATION PURSUANT TO

18 U.S.C. SECTION 1350,

AS ADDED BY

SECTION 906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002



In connection with the Quarterly Report of First Community Bank Corporation of America (the Company) on Form 10-QSB for the period ended September 30, 2005 as filed with the Securities and Exchange
Commission (the Report), I, John A. Stewart, Jr., Senior Vice President and Chief Financial Officer of the Company, certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C.§ 1350, as added by § 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. | To my knowledge, the information contained in the Report fairly presents, in all material respects, the financial condition and results of operations of the Company as of and for
the period covered by the report.
|-- | --------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------



|                       |  |     |  |                                                                        
|---------------------- |  | --- |  | -----------------------------------------------------------------------
|Date: November 1, 2005 |  | By: |  | /s/ John A. Stewart, Jr.                                               
|                       |  |     |  | John A. Stewart, Jr., Senior Vice President and Chief
Financial Officer
§ 73.21 Classes of AM broadcast channels and stations. ( a ) *Clear channel.* A clear channel is one on which stations are assigned to serve wide areas. These stations are protected from objectionable interference within their primary service areas and, depending on the class of station, their secondary service areas. Stations operating on these channels are classified as follows: ( 1 ) *Class A station.* A Class A station is an unlimited time station that operates on a clear channel and is designed to render primary and secondary service over an extended area and at relatively long distances from its transmitter. Its primary service area is protected from objectionable interference from other stations on the same and adjacent channels, and its secondary service area is protected from interference from other stations on the same channel. (See § 73.182). The operating power shall not be less than 10 kW nor more than 50 kW. (Also see § 73.25(a)).
( 2 ) *Class B station.* Class B stations are authorized to operate with a minimum power of 0.25 kW (or, if less than 0.25 kW, an equivalent RMS antenna field of at least 107.5 mV/m at 1 kilometer) and a maximum power of 50 kW, or 10 kW for stations that are authorized to operate in the 1605-1705 kHz band.
( 3 ) *Class D station.* A Class D station operates either daytime, limited time or unlimited time with nighttime power less than 0.25 kW and an equivalent RMS antenna field of less than 107.5 mV/m at 1 kilometer. Class D stations shall operate with daytime powers not less than 0.25 kW nor more than 50 kW. Nighttime operations of Class D stations are not afforded protection and must protect all Class A and Class B operations during nighttime hours. New Class D stations that had not been previously licensed as Class B will not be authorized.
( b ) *Regional Channel.* A regional channel is one on which Class B and Class D stations may operate and serve primarily a principal center of population and the rural area contiguous thereto. Note:
Until the North American Regional Broadcasting Agreement (NARBA) is terminated with respect to the Bahama Islands and the Dominican Republic, radiation toward those countries from a Class B station may not exceed the level that would be produced by an omnidirectional antenna with a transmitted power of 5 kW, or such lower level as will comply with NARBA requirements for protection of stations in the Bahama Islands and the Dominican Republic against objectionable interference.
( c ) *Local channel.* A local channel is one on which stations operate unlimited time and serve primarily a community and the suburban and rural areas immediately contiguous thereto. ( 1 ) *Class C station.* A Class C station is a station operating on a local channel and is designed to render service only over a primary service area that may be reduced as a consequence of interference in accordance with § 73.182. The power shall not be less than 0.25 kW, nor more than 1 kW. Class C stations that are licensed to operate with 0.1 kW may continue to do so.
[56 FR 64856, Dec. 12, 1991, as amended at 81 FR 2759, Jan. 19, 2016]
# Michele Markoff, Department of State, is our 2023 Rear Admiral Grace Hopper Award Recipient 

/ Published Feb. 6, 2023

Michele Markoff is the former acting Deputy Assistant Secretary for International Cyberspace Security in the Bureau of Cyberspace and Digital Policy.  Since 1998 Michele has been the senior State Department subject matter expert overseeing the development and implementation of foreign policy initiatives on cyberspace issues. She helps to coordinate United States policy on the spectrum of cyber-related policy issues across the Department, develops diplomatic strategies to encourage states to join the United States in taking steps to protect their critical networks and to cooperate internationally to enhance and preserve global cyber stability. She implements those strategies through negotiations in a wide variety of venues. Her initiative led to the successful completion of the first ever bilateral agreement on confidence-building in cyber space between the United State and the Russian Federation, announced in June, 2013. Michele also has been the United States Government Expert on five Groups of UN Government Experts (2005, 2010, 2013, 2015, 2016) devoted to international security cyber issues. The last three GGEs led to landmark consensus reports regarding norms for state activity in cyberspace. Ms. Markoff is also the architect of two agreements on cyber confidence-building measures in the Organization of Security Cooperation in Europe, and a similar initiative in the ASEAN Regional Forum.

Ms. Markoff was trained as an expert in Russian and Chinese military affairs and decision-making and spent the first half of her career in a variety of strategic nuclear arms control-related posts, among them as State Department Advisor and then Executive Secretary to the START I Talks; later as Senior Policy Advisor and Director of the U.S. Arms Control and Disarmament Agency’s Policy Planning Group.

Ms. Markoff has a B.A. in International Relations from Reed College, an M.A. in International Relations and an M.Phil.in Political Science from Yale University, and a M.Sc. in National Security Strategy from the National War College of the United States. She also attended high school in the former Soviet Union and attended the Chinese University of Hong Kong. Read more of her biography and about the award HERE
Cheshire

No. 81-356

#### Kevin Woods v. Robert P. Secord

April 2, 1982

*Arthur Olson P.A.,*of Keene *(Edward J. Burke*on the brief and orally), for the plaintiff.

*William H. Kennedy,*of Keene *(Lawrence G. Brann*on the brief and orally), for the defendant.

Memorandum Opinion

In this contract action, the defendant appeals from a verdict in the amount of $600 awarded the plaintiff by the Superior Court *{Contas,*J.) upon recommendation of the Master *{Mayland H. Morse, Jr.,*Esq.).

The dispute between the parties arose out of the plaintiffs purchase of a 1965 Pontiac GTO. The sale took place at the defendant’s residence in West Swanzey on November 9, 1979, for $1,300. Immediately after the sale, and even before the automobile reached the Massachusetts border, the plaintiff experienced difficulties with it. On the evidence before him, the master concluded that the automobile was not fit for its intended use at the time of the sale, and that the plaintiff had effectively rejected it or revoked his acceptance of it under RSA 382-A:2-608, and had reasonably recovered the sum of $600 by selling the auto for salvage after the defendant refused the opportunity extended him to cure the non-conformity of the tendered goods.

*324The defendant argues that because the brief and informal purchase and sale agreement between the parties stated that the plaintiff purchased the automobile in “as is” condition without guarantee, the plaintiff cannot prevail. The master, however, specifically found that “[t]he purchase of the vehicle in an ‘as is’ condition based upon *representation*that the car was in good condition and ran properly was fundamental to the consideration on which the sale was predicated.” (Emphasis added.)

Because the evidence below supports the decision of the master, and we find no other error, we affirm. *See*RSA 382-A: 1-203; *McCarthy v. Barrows,*118 N.H. 173, 175-76, 384 A.2d 787, 788 (1978).

*Affirmed.*
From: Miller, William [ mailto:wmiller@McCarter.com ]

Sent: Monday, December 01, 2014 8:49 AM
To: Cohen, Daniel
Cc: Cymbalsky, John Subject: DOE Posting Practices

Dan: it has come to our attention that DOE is revising posted materials with no notice to the public either that a change has been made or what the change is. This practice, an example of which is provided below, is extremely prejudicial and harmful to th ose trying to understand the basis for DOE actions and needs to be corrected as soon as possible. DOE provided notice on September 22, 2014, that it was posting its preliminary draft life cycle spreadsheet in the remanded furnace proceeding at the
followi ng site: http://www.regulations.gov/#!documentDetail;D=EERE

- 2014

- BT

- STD

- 0031

- 0002

. Needless to say, interested parties like APGA have dedicated a lot of man

- hour s attempting to analyze and understand this spreadsheet. However, it turns out that sometime after September 22, DOE posted another (amended) spreadsheet at that site (see attached example pages), and it did so with no notice to the public that this was o ccurring or what the change or changes were. Thus, analysis of the original spreadsheet performed after the new spreadsheet was posted (whenever that was) focused on the wrong spreadsheet and potentially resulted in a work product that cannot be used beca use it is no longer accurate. We learned of this no

- notice switch by pure happenstance, and while we now know that some “Summary Switching” data from the original spreadsheet has changed, we have no idea either why or what other data may have changed. T rying to make that determination could take countless hours (which could then be overtaken by yet another unannounced posting). You may recall that APGA ran into this practice of re

- posting with no notice during the DFR proceeding (see APGA Jan.
13, 2014 Initial Br. at 13

- 14), but we failed to appreciate that this was standard operating procedure for

DOE. This practice is intolerable from the standpoint of interested members of the public attempting to understand what and why DOE is proposing to do or not do something. We respectfully request that DOE immediately amend its practice such that whenever a revised document is posted, the public be given timely notice of the revised posting and informed as to what the revisions are. APGA appreciates

your prom pt consideration of this request as well as a response indicating whether DOE intends to heed this request. Bud

William T. Miller | Partner McCARTER & ENGLISH, LLP

1015 15th Street, NW, 12th Floor | Washington DC, 20005 T: 202

- 753

- 3420 F: 202

- 354

- 4658 wmiller@mccarter.com | www.mccarter.com

BOSTON | HARTFORD | STAMFORD | NEW YORK | NEWARK EAST BRUNSWICK | PHILADELPHIA | WILMINGTON | WASHINGTON, DC



### This email message from the law firm of McCarter & English, LLP is for the sole use of the intended recipient(s) and may contain confidential and privileged information. Any unauthorized review, use, disclosure or distribution is prohibited. If you are not the intended recipient, please
contact the sender by reply email and destroy all copies of the original message.
#### § 73.3561 Staff consideration of applications requiring Commission action.

Upon acceptance of an application, the complete file is reviewed by the staff and, except where the application is acted upon by the staff pursuant to delegation of authority, a report containing the recommendations of the staff and any other documents required is prepared and placed on the Commission's agenda.

[44 FR 38499, July 2, 1979]