alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
-82 -80 -78 -76 -74

 36

 38

 40

★

▲

▲

▲

▲

★ ▲ ▲ ▲ ▲

 500

 1000

 1500

 100

18 12 06 00

06/22

NOAA HYSPLIT MODEL

 Backward trajectory ending at 2300 UTC 22 Jun 06

 EDAS Meteorological Data

Source

★ at 38.90 N 76.65 W Meters AGL

★

■

■

■

■

★

■ ■

■ ■

★

●

●

●

●

★

●

●

●

●
----

Exh

**Certification        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 operating results of the                  Company. |
|--------|----|-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|

| /s/                  George M. Lee       |   |
|------------------------------------------|--------|
| George                  M. Lee           |   |
| Chief                  Executive Officer |   |

----
Exhibit 10.7

                              INFINITE GROUP, INC.
                                 2364 Post Road
                           Warwick, Rhode Island 02886

                                  June 30, 2000


Mr. Clifford G. Brockmyre II
Infinite Group, Inc.
2364 Post Road
Warwick, RI 02886

Dear Mr. Brockmyre:

      Reference is made to a certain Employment Agreement dated July 1, 1996
(the "Employment Agreement") between Infinite Group, Inc. (the "Company") and
you (the "Executive"). This letter will confirm the following agreements:

      1. The Employment Agreement is hereby extended for a term of three (3)
years ending June 30, 2003.

      2. Notwithstanding anything to the contrary contained in the Employment
Agreement, the Company agrees to obtain and maintain at the Company's expense
insurance on the Executive's life in the amount of $1,000,000 throughout the
term of the Employment Agreement, as extended by this letter, which insurance
shall be payable to the Executive's estate or as he may otherwise direct. Such
insurance shall be in addition to all other insurance to which the Executive is
entitled under the Employment Agreement.

      3. The Agreement, as modified by the terms hereof, is hereby confirmed.

      Please confirm the foregoing by signing in the space below.

                               Sincerely,

                               INFINITE GROUP, INC.


                               By: /s/ Bruce J. Garreau
                                       ----------------
                                       Bruce J. Garreau
                                       Chief Financial Officer
                                       As directed by the Compensation Committee
                                       Board of Directors
                                       Infinite Group, Inc.

Confirmed:

/s/ Clifford G. Brockmyre II
----------------------------
Clifford G. Brockmyre II
Affirmed as Modified and Memorandum Opinion filed July 11 , 2019

In The 

## Fourteenth Court of Appeals

NO. 14

- 18

- 00284

- CR

CHARLES HARDAWAY , Appellant
V.
THE STATE OF TEXAS , Appellee
On Appeal from the 403rd District Court Travis County, Texas Trial Court Cause No. D -1- DC

- 15

- 203546

MEMORANDUM OPINION Charles Hardaway appeals the judgment revoking his community supervision. See Tex. Code Crim. Proc. Ann. art. 42A.755(e). Appellant’s appointed counsel filed a brief in which he concludes the appeal is frivolous and without merit. The brief meets the requirements of Anders v. California , 386 U.S. 738 (1967), by presenting a professional evaluation of the record and demo nstrating why there are no arguable grounds to be advanced. See High v. State , 573 S.W.2d 807, 811

– 13 (Tex. Crim. App. 1978).2 A copy of counsel’s brief was delivered to appellant. Appellant was advised of his right to inspect the appellate record and f ile a pro se response to the brief. See Stafford v. State , 813 S.W.2d 503, 512 (Tex. Crim. App. 1991). As of this date, more than 60 days have passed and no pro se response has been filed. We have carefully reviewed the record and counsel’s brief and agree the appeal is frivolous and without merit. Further, we find no reversible error in the record . We are not to address the merits of each claim raised in an Anders brief when we have determined there are no arguable grounds for review. See Bledsoe v. State , 178 S.W.3d 824, 827

– 28 (Tex. Crim. App. 2005). However, the judgment revoking community supervision, signed February 22, 2018, contains a clerical error. That judgment incorrectly states appellant pleaded “true” to the mo tion to revoke. The record reflects appellant pleaded “not true” to the motion to revoke. We are not required to abate an Anders appeal for appointment of new counsel if the judgment can be modified. See Ferguson v. State , 435 S.W.3d 291, 295 (Tex. App.

— Wa co 2014, no pet.); Bray v. State , 179 S.W.3d 725, 730 (Tex. App.

— Fort Worth 2005, no pet.). Therefore, we modify the judgment as follows: the “Plea to Motion to Revoke ” is “NOT TRUE

. ” The trial court’s judgment is affirmed as modified.

PER CURIAM

Panel consists of Justices Wise, Jewell, and Hassan

. Do Not Publish — Tex. R. App. P. 47.2(b).
§ 223.162 Limitations on timber harvested from all other states. Unprocessed timber from National Forest System lands west of the 100th Meridian in the contiguous 48 States may not: ( a ) Be exported from the United States;
( b ) Be used in substitution for unprocessed timber from private lands which is exported by the purchaser; or
( c ) Be sold, traded, exchanged, or otherwise given to any person who does not agree to manufacture it to meet the processing requirements of this section and/or require such a processing agreement in any subsequent resale or other transaction. This limitation on export or substitution does not apply to species of timber previously found to be surplus to domestic needs or to any additional species, grades, or quantities of timber which may be found by the Secretary to be surplus to domestic needs.
(Sec. 14, Pub. L. 95-588, 90 Stat. 2958, as amended (16 U.S.C. 472a); sec. 301, Pub. L. 96-126, 93 Stat. 979; sec. 1, 30 Stat. 35, as amended (16 U.S.C. 55.1); sec. 301, 90 Stat. 1063, Pub. L. 94-373; sec. 1, 30 Stat. 35, as amended (16 U.S.C. 551))
[45 FR 80528, Dec. 5, 1980, as amended at 46 FR 2611, Jan. 12, 1981; 47 FR 746, Jan. 7, 1982. Redesignated at 49 FR 2761, Jan. 23, 1984]
**Exhibit 32.1**

CERTIFICATION PURSUANT TO

18 U.S.C. SECTION 1350,

AS ADOPTED PURSUANT TO

SECTION 906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002

In connection with the annual report of R&R Acquisition VIII, Inc. (the “Company”) on Form 10-KSB for the period ending June 30, 2008 as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the “Report”), I, Arnold P. Kling, President of the Company, certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. ss. 1350, as adopted pursuant to ss. 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, as amended; and

(2) The information contained in the Report fairly presents, in all material respects, the financial condition and result of operations of the Company.

Dated: September 11, 2008

 

| /s/ Arnold P. Kling                                   |   |   |   |
|-------------------------------------------------------|--------|--------|--------|
|                                                       |   |   |   |
| Arnold P. KlingPresident(Principal Executive Officer) |   |   |   |

A signed original of this certification has been provided to the Company and will be retained by the Company and furnished to the Securities and Exchange Commission or its staff upon request. 

 

 

----
#### § 2523.110 Can Federal agencies submit multiple applications?

No. The Corporation will only consider one application from a Federal agency for each AmeriCorps competition. The application may propose more than one program, however, and the Corporation may choose to fund any or all of those programs.
**Exhibit
      32.1**








**CERTIFICATION
      PURSUANT TO RULE 13a-14(b) OF THE SECURITIES EXCHANGE ACT OF 1934, AS
      AMENDED**





Pursuant
      to the requirement set forth in Rule 13a-14(b) of the Securities Exchange Act
      of
      1934, as amended (the "Exchange Act") and Section 1350 of Chapter 63 of Title
      18
      of the United States Code (18 U.S.C. §1350), James Chu, Chairman of the Board of
      Directors and Chief Executive Officer of ViewSonic Corporation (the "Company"),
      and Theodore R. Sanders, Chief Financial Officer of the Company, each hereby
      certifies that, to the best of his knowledge:





1.     
      The Company’s Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q for the three-month period ended
      September 30, 2007, to which this Certification is attached as Exhibit 32.1
      (the
      "Periodic Report"), fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) or
      Section 15(d) of the Exchange Act; and





2.    
       The information contained in the Periodic Report fairly presents, in all
      material respects, the financial condition and results of operations of the
      Company






Date:  November
        14, 2007







/s/
                James Chu
            
            /s/
                Theodore R. SandersJames
                Chu
            
            Theodore
                R. SandersChairman
                of the Board of Directors and Chief Executive Officer
            
            Chief
                Financial Officer









This
      certification accompanies the Form 10-Q to which it relates, is not deemed
      filed
      with the Securities and Exchange Commission and is not to be incorporated by
      reference into any filing of the Company under the Securities Act of 1933,
      as
      amended, or the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended (whether made before
      or after the date of the Form 10-Q), irrespective of any general incorporation
      language contained in such filing.
§ 2105.54 When may you file an appeal? ( a ) You may file an appeal when: ( 1 ) The Agency withholds records, or parts of records;
( 2 ) The Agency informs you that your request has not adequately described the records sought;
( 3 ) The Agency informs you that it does not possess or cannot locate responsive records and you have reason to believe this is incorrect or that the search was inadequate;
( 4 ) The Agency did not address all aspects of the request for records;
( 5 ) You believe there is a procedural deficiency (for example, fees are improperly calculated or you have been placed in the wrong fee category);
( 6 ) The Agency denied your request for a fee waiver;
( 7 ) The Agency did not make a decision within the time limits in § 2105.15 or, if applicable, § 2105.16; or
( 8 ) The Agency denied, or was late in responding to, a request for expedited processing filed under the procedures in § 2105.18.
( b ) An appeal under paragraph (a)(8) of this section relates only to the request for expedited processing and does not constitute an appeal of the underlying request for records. Special procedures apply to requests for expedited processing of an appeal (*see* § 2105.60).
( c ) Before filing an appeal, you may wish to communicate with the contact person listed in the FOIA response, the Agency's FOIA Officer, and/or the FOIA Public Liaison to see if the issue can be resolved informally. However, appeals must be received by the FOIA Appeals Officer within the time limits in § 2105.55 or they will not be processed.
#### Margaret Gleason, as Administratrix of the Estate of Dennis Gleason, Deceased, Respondent, *v.*The Delaware, Lackawanna and Western Railroad Company, Appellant.

*Gleason*v. *Delaware, L. & W.*R. R. *Co.,*115 App. Div. 896, affirmed.

(Argued November 25, 1907;

decided December 10, 1907.)

Appeal from a judgment of the Appellate Division of the Supreme Court in the fourth judicial department, entered October 23, 1906, affirming a judgment in favor of plaintiff entered upon a verdict and an order denying a motion for a new trial in an action to recover for the death of plaintiff’s intestate alleged to have been caused by defendant’s negligence.

*William 8. Jenney*for appellant.

*George W. Driscoll*for respondent.

Judgment affirmed, with costs; “no opinion.

Concur: Cullen, Ch. J., Gray, O’Brien, Vann, Willard Bartlett and Chase, JJ. Dissenting: Werner, J.
#### § 1149.68 What judicial review is available?

Section 3805 of title 31, United States Code, authorizes Judicial review by the appropriate United States District Court of any final NEA decision by the authority head imposing penalties or assessments under this part. To obtain judicial review, you must file a petition with the appropriate court in a timely manner. (See paragraphs (a) through (e) of 31 U.S.C. 3805 for a description of how judicial review is authorized.)
§ 156.947 The record. ( a ) Any testimony that is taken in-person, by telephone, or by video teleconference is recorded and transcribed. The ALJ may order that other proceedings in a case, such as a prehearing conference or oral argument of a motion, be recorded and transcribed.
( b ) The transcript of any testimony, exhibits and other evidence that is admitted, and all pleadings and other documents that are filed in the case constitute the record for purposes of an ALJ decision.
( c ) For good cause, the ALJ may order appropriate redactions made to the record.
[78 FR 65101, Oct. 30, 2013, as amended at 86 FR 24293, May 5, 2021]
#### § 16.14 How Board review is limited.

The Board shall be bound by all applicable laws and regulations.
49–008 

109TH CONGRESS REPORT " ! HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES 2d Session 109–602 

WAIVING A REQUIREMENT OF CLAUSE 6(a) OF RULE XIII 

WITH RESPECT TO THE SAME DAY CONSIDERATION OF 

CERTAIN RESOLUTIONS REPORTED BY THE RULES 

COMMITTEE 

JULY 26, 2006.—Referred to the House Calendar and ordered to be printed 

Mr. BISHOP of Utah, from the Committee on Rules, 

submitted the following 

R E P O R T 

[To accompany H. Res. 951] 

The Committee on Rules, having had under consideration House 

Resolution 951, by a nonrecord vote, report the same to the House 

with the recommendation that the resolution be adopted. 

SUMMARY OF PROVISIONS OF THE RESOLUTION

The resolution waives clause 6(a) of rule XIII (requiring a twothirds vote to consider a rule on the same day it is reported from 

the Rules Committee) against certain resolutions reported from the 

Rules Committee. The rule applies the waiver to any special rule 

reported on the legislative day of July 27, 2006, providing for consideration or disposition of any of the following measures: 

(1) A conference report to accompany the bill (H.R. 2830) to 

amend the Employee Retirement Income Security Act of 1974 

and the Internal Revenue Code of 1986 to reform the pension 

funding rules, and for other purposes. 

(2) A bill to amend the Internal Revenue Code of 1986 to increase the unified credit against the estate tax to an exclusion 

equivalent of $5,000,000, to repeal the sunset provision for the 

estate and generation-skipping taxes, and to extend expiring 

provisions, and for other purposes. 

Æ 


bajohnson on PROD1PC77 with REPORTS
*This order and judgment is not binding precedent, except under the

doctrines of law of the case, res judicata and collateral estoppel. The court

generally disfavors the citation of orders and judgments; nevertheless, an order

and judgment may be cited under the terms and conditions of 10th Cir. R. 36.3.

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

Filed 1/22/97

TENTH CIRCUIT

LARRY D. MAYNARD,

Petitioner-Appellant, 

v.

BOBBY BOONE, Warden,

Respondent-Appellee. 

No. 96-5153

(Dist. N. Dist. of Oklahoma)

(D.C. No. 95-CV-952-B)

ORDER AND JUDGMENT*

Before ANDERSON, LOGAN, and MURPHY, Circuit Judges. 

This matter is before the court on Petitioner Larry D. Maynard’s application

for a certificate of appealability to appeal the district court’s dismissal of his 28

U.S.C. § 2254 petition for a writ of habeas corpus. We have reviewed the district

court’s order, Petitioner’s application for a certificate of appealability, and the

record before us. For the reasons set forth in the district court’s order of June
13, 1996, we conclude that Petitioner has failed to make “a substantial showing of

a the denial of a constitutional right.” See Antiterrorist and Effective Death

Penalty Act of 1996, Pub. L. No. 104-132, tit. 1, §§ 102-03, 110 Stat. 1214 (1996)

(to be codified at 28 U.S.C. § 2253(c)(2)). Accordingly, we DENY Petitioner’s

application for a certificate of appealability and DISMISS the appeal. 

ENTERED FOR THE COURT

Michael R. Murphy

Circuit Judge
§ 2508.13 What are the procedures for acquiring access to Corporation records by an individual about whom a record is maintained? ( a ) Any request for access to records from any individual about whom a record is maintained will be addressed to the Corporation for National and Community Service, Office of the General Counsel, Attn: Privacy Act Officer, 250 E Street SW., Washington, DC 20525, or delivered in person during regular business hours, whereupon access to his or her record, or to any information contained therein, if determined to be releasable, shall be provided.
( b ) If the request is made in person, such individual may, upon his or her request, be accompanied by a person of his or her choosing to review the record and shall be provided an opportunity to have a copy made of any record about such individual.
( c ) A record may be disclosed to a representative chosen by the individual as to whom a record is maintained upon the proper written consent of such individual.
( d ) A request made in person will be promptly complied with if the records sought are in the immediate custody of the Corporation. Mailed requests or personal requests for documents in storage or otherwise not immediately available, will be acknowledged within 10 working days, and the information requested will be promptly provided thereafter.
( e ) With regard to any request for disclosure of a record, the following procedures shall apply: ( 1 ) Medical or psychological records shall be disclosed to an individual unless, in the judgment of the Corporation, access to such records might have an adverse effect upon such individual. When such determination has been made, the Corporation may require that the information be disclosed only to a physician chosen by the requesting individual. Such physician shall have full authority to disclose all or any portion of such record to the requesting individual in the exercise of his or her professional judgment.
( 2 ) Test material and copies of certificates or other lists of eligibles or any other listing, the disclosure of which would violate the privacy of any other individual, or be otherwise exempted by the provisions of the Privacy Act, shall be removed from the record before disclosure to any individual to whom the record pertains.
[64 FR 19294, Apr. 20, 1999, as amended at 81 FR 12600, Mar. 10, 2016]
§ 213.22 Authority of presiding officer. ( a ) The presiding officer shall have the duty to conduct a fair hearing, to avoid delay, maintain order, and make a record of the proceedings. He shall have all powers necessary to accomplish these ends, including, but not limited to, the power to: ( 1 ) Change the date, time, and place of the hearing, upon due notice to the parties. This includes the power to continue the hearing in whole or in part. In hearings pursuant to section 1116(a)(2) of the Social Security Act (see § 201.4 of this chapter), changes of time are subject to the requirements of the statute.
( 2 ) Hold conferences to settle or simplify the issues in a proceeding, or to consider other matters that may aid in the expeditious disposition of the proceeding.
( 3 ) Regulate participation of parties and amici curiae and require parties and amici curiae to state their position with respect to the various issues in the proceeding.
( 4 ) Administer oaths and affirmations.
( 5 ) Rule on motions and other procedural items on matters pending before him including issuance of protective orders or other relief to a party against whom discovery is sought.
( 6 ) Regulate the course of the hearing and conduct of counsel therein.
( 7 ) Examine witnesses.
( 8 ) Receive, rule on, exclude or limit evidence or discovery.
( 9 ) Fix the time for filing motions, petitions, briefs, or other items in matters pending before him.
( 10 ) If the presiding officer is the Administrator, make a final decision.
( 11 ) If the presiding officer is a hearing examiner, certify the entire record including his recommended findings and proposed decision to the Administrator.
( 12 ) Take any action authorized by the rules in this part or in conformance with the provisions of 5 U.S.C. 551 through 559.
( b ) The presiding officer does not have authority to compel by subpoena the production of witnesses, papers, or other evidence.
( c ) If the presiding officer is a hearing examiner, his authority pertains to the issues of compliance by a State with Federal requirements which are to be considered at the hearing, and does not extend to the question of whether, in case of any noncompliance, Federal payments will not be made in respect to the entire State plan or will be limited to categories under or parts of the State plan affected by such noncompliance.
[40 FR 50272, Oct. 29, 1975]
Affirmed as Modified and Memorandum Opinion filed July 11, 2019

In The

Fourteenth Court of Appeals

NO. 14-18-00284-CR

CHARLES HARDAWAY, Appellant

V.

THE STATE OF TEXAS, Appellee

On Appeal from the 403rd District Court

Travis County, Texas

Trial Court Cause No. D-1-DC-15-203546

MEMORANDUM OPINION

Charles Hardaway appealsthe judgment revoking his community supervision. 

See Tex. Code Crim. Proc. Ann. art. 42A.755(e). Appellant’s appointed counsel filed 

a brief in which he concludes the appeal is frivolous and without merit. The brief 

meets the requirements of Anders v. California, 386 U.S. 738 (1967), by presenting 

a professional evaluation of the record and demonstrating why there are no arguable 

grounds to be advanced. See High v. State, 573 S.W.2d 807, 811–13 (Tex. Crim. 

App. 1978).
2 

A copy of counsel’s brief was delivered to appellant. Appellant was advised 

of his right to inspect the appellate record and file a pro se response to the brief. See 

Stafford v. State, 813 S.W.2d 503, 512 (Tex. Crim. App. 1991). As of this date, more 

than 60 days have passed and no pro se response has been filed.

We have carefully reviewed the record and counsel’s brief and agree the 

appeal is frivolous and without merit. Further, we find no reversible error in the 

record. We are not to address the merits of each claim raised in an Anders brief when 

we have determined there are no arguable grounds for review. See Bledsoe v. State, 

178 S.W.3d 824, 827–28 (Tex. Crim. App. 2005).

However, the judgment revoking community supervision, signed February 22, 

2018, contains a clerical error. That judgment incorrectly states appellant pleaded 

“true” to the motion to revoke. The record reflects appellant pleaded “not true” to 

the motion to revoke. We are not required to abate an Anders appeal for appointment 

of new counsel if the judgment can be modified. See Ferguson v. State, 435 S.W.3d 

291, 295 (Tex. App.—Waco 2014, no pet.); Bray v. State, 179 S.W.3d 725, 730 

(Tex. App.—Fort Worth 2005, no pet.).

Therefore, we modify the judgment as follows: the “Plea to Motion to 

Revoke” is “NOT TRUE.” 

The trial court’s judgment is affirmed as modified.

PER CURIAM

Panel consists of Justices Wise, Jewell, and Hassan. 

Do Not Publish — Tex. R. App. P. 47.2(b).