alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
NASA LogoNTRSNTRS - NASA Technical Reports ServerSearchmore_vertCollectionsAboutNewsHelpLogin Back to ResultsOn the receptivity and non-parallel stability of travelling disturbances in rotating disk flowThe generation and evolution of small amplitude wavelength traveling disturbances in rotating disk flow is discussed. The steady rotational speed of the disk is perturbed so as to introduce high frequency oscillations in the flow field. Secondly, surface imperfections are introduced on the disk such as roughness elements. The interaction of these two disturbances will generate the instability waves whose evolution is governed by parabolic partial differential equations that are solved numerically. For the class of disturbances considered (wavelength on the order of Reynolds number), it is found that eigensolutions exist which decay or grow algebraically in the radial direction. However, these solutions grow only for frequencies larger than 4.58 times the steady rotational speed of the disk. The computed receptivity coefficient shows that there is an optimum size of roughness for which these modes are excited the most. The width of these roughness elements in the radial direction is about .1 r(sub 0) where r(sub 0) is the radial location of the roughness. It is also found that the receptivity coefficient is larger for a negative spanwise wavenumber than for a positive one. Typical wave angles found for these disturbances are about -26 degrees.Document ID19910006683Acquisition SourceLegacy CDMSDocument TypeContractor Report (CR)AuthorsBalakumar, P.*(High Technology Corp. Hampton, VA., United States)*Hall, P.*(Exeter Univ. (England). Hampton, VA., United States)*Malik, M. R.*(High Technology Corp.)*Date AcquiredSeptember 6, 2013Publication DateDecember 1, 1990Subject CategoryAerodynamicsReport/Patent NumberICASE-90-89NAS 1.26:187486AD-A232081NASA-CR-187486Accession Number91N15996Funding Number(s)CONTRACT_GRANT: NAS1-18605Distribution LimitsPublicCopyrightWork of the US Gov. Public Use Permitted.Available DownloadsNameType19910006683.pdfSTIcloud_downloadcontent_copyvisibilityRelated RecordsThere are no records associated with this record.visibility_offNo Preview Available
 No Fear Act | Freedom of Information Act | Office of the Inspector General | Agency Financial ReportsNASA Web Privacy Policy and Important Notices | NASA Guidelines for Quality of InformationDisclaimers, Copyright, Terms of Use | Accessibility | NASA OCIO | USA.gov | NASA.govContact Us | Site MapSTI LogoNASA Official: JoAnne R. Calhoun Site Curator: STI Compliance and Distribution Services Last Modified: September 12, 2024
From: dj_webb7@yahoo.com [mailto:dj_webb7@yahoo.com] 

Sent: Sunday, April 25, 2010 3:27 PM 

To: EBSA, E-OHPSCA - EBSA 

Subject: Comment in support of RIN 1210-AB30 

April 25, 2010 

I am writing to support the interim final rule under the Paul Wellstone 

and Pete Domenici Mental Health Parity and Addiction Equity Act of 2008 

(RIN 1210-AB30). 

I support the strong rule that would forbid insurance companies from 

charging higher copayments, deductibles, and other out-of-pocket 

expenses for mental health treatment than they would for other physical 

health care. Thank you for ensuring that mental health care and 

physical health care coverage are included in a single deductible. 

Sincerely, 

Debra Webb 

18920 Pine Run Lane 

Fort Myers, FL 33967
Exhibit 99

Chyron Corporation
Certification of
Chief Executive Officer and Chief Financial Officer

(Pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, 18 U.S.C. Section 1350)

This certification is provided pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, and accompanies the annual report on Form 10-K (the "Form 10-K") for the year ended December 31, 2002 of Chyron Corporation (the "Issuer").

We, Michael Wellesley-Wesley, Chief Executive Officer, and Jerry Kieliszak, Chief Financial Officer, of Issuer, each individually, certify that:

(i)	the Form 10-K fully complies with the requirements of section 13(a) or section 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 (15 U.S.C. 78m(a) or 78o(d)); and

(ii)	the information contained in the Form 10-K fairly presents, in all material respects, the financial condition and results of operations of the Issuer.

Dated:  March 31, 2003

| | /s/ Michael Wellesley-Wesley
| | ----------------------------
| | Michael Wellesley-Wesley    
| | President and               
| | Chief Executive Officer     
| |                             
| |                             
| | /s/ Jerry Kieliszak         
| | Jerry Kieliszak             
| | Senior Vice President and   
| | Chief Financial Officer
-----Original Message----- 

From: kcaswell@cas.usf.edu [mailto:kcaswell@cas.usf.edu] 

Sent: Monday, April 26, 2010 4:22 PM 

To: EBSA, E-OHPSCA - EBSA 

Subject: Comment in support of RIN 1210-AB30 

April 26, 2010 

I am writing to support the interim final rule under the Paul Wellstone 

and Pete Domenici Mental Health Parity and Addiction Equity Act of 2008 

(RIN 1210-AB30). 

I support the strong rule that would forbid insurance companies from 

charging higher copayments, deductibles, and other out-of-pocket 

expenses for mental health treatment than they would for other physical 

health care. Thank you for ensuring that mental health care and 

physical health care coverage are included in a single deductible. 

Sincerely, 

K.Kenneth Caswell 

12919 Rain Forest Street 

Temple Terrace, FL 33617
-----Original Message----- 

From: sharonbhaimia@comcast.net [mailto:sharonbhaimia@comcast.net] 

Sent: Wednesday, April 28, 2010 9:25 PM 

To: EBSA, E-OHPSCA - EBSA 

Subject: Comment in support of RIN 1210-AB30 

April 28, 2010 

I am writing to support the interim final rule under the Paul Wellstone 

and Pete Domenici Mental Health Parity and Addiction Equity Act of 2008 

(RIN 1210-AB30). 

I support the strong rule that would forbid insurance companies from 

charging higher copayments, deductibles, and other out-of-pocket 

expenses for mental health treatment than they would for other physical 

health care. Thank you for ensuring that mental health care and 

physical health care coverage are included in a single deductible. 

Sincerely, 

sharon bhaimia 

34 surrey drive 

glen ellyn, IL 60137
<TABLE> <S> <C>


<ARTICLE>                     5
                        
<MULTIPLIER>                  1                
<CURRENCY>                    U.S. Dollars               
       
<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   3-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>               DEC-31-1999         
<PERIOD-START>                  JAN-01-1999   
<PERIOD-END>                    APR-03-1999   
<EXCHANGE-RATE>                            1   
<CASH>                               395,467  
<SECURITIES>                               0         
<RECEIVABLES>                        695,450  
<ALLOWANCES>                          30,000        
<INVENTORY>                        1,113,977  
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                   2,277,638  
<PP&E>                             4,891,339  
<DEPRECIATION>                     3,878,872  
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                     3,950,864  
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                859,973  
<BONDS>                                    0  
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                      0  
<PREFERRED>                        1,549,999  
<COMMON>                             155,563  
<OTHER-SE>                         1,385,329  
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>       3,950,864  
<SALES>                            1,359,982  
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                   1,359,982  
<CGS>                                793,989  
<TOTAL-COSTS>                        793,989  
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                   1,297,072  
<LOSS-PROVISION>                           0  
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                         0  
<INCOME-PRETAX>                            0  
<INCOME-TAX>                               0  
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                 (726,460)  
<DISCONTINUED>                             0   
<EXTRAORDINARY>                            0   
<CHANGES>                                  0   
<NET-INCOME>                        (726,460)  
<EPS-PRIMARY>                           (.24) 
<EPS-DILUTED>                           (.24) 
        


</TABLE>
PUBLIC LAW 112–233—DEC. 28, 2012 126 STAT. 1623 

LEGISLATIVE HISTORY—S. 3311: 

CONGRESSIONAL RECORD, Vol. 158 (2012): 

Sept. 21, considered and passed Senate. 

Dec. 19, considered and passed House. 

Æ 

Public Law 112–233 

112th Congress 

An Act 

To designate the United States courthouse located at 2601 2nd Avenue North, 

Billings, Montana, as the ‘‘James F. Battin United States Courthouse’’. 

Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representatives of 

the United States of America in Congress assembled, 

SECTION 1. JAMES F. BATTIN UNITED STATES COURTHOUSE. 

(a) IN GENERAL.— 

(1) DESIGNATION.—The United States courthouse located 

at 2601 2nd Avenue North, Billings, Montana, shall be known 

and designated as the ‘‘James F. Battin United States Courthouse’’. 

(2) TECHNICAL AMENDMENT.—The ‘‘James F. Battin United 

States Courthouse’’ located at 315 North 26th Street, Billings, 

Montana, shall no longer be known and designated as the 

‘‘James F. Battin United States Courthouse’’. 

(b) REFERENCES.—Any reference in a law, map, regulation, 

document, paper, or other record of the United States to the United 

States courthouse referred to in subsection (a)(1) shall be deemed 

to be a reference to the ‘‘James F. Battin United States Courthouse’’. 

Approved December 28, 2012. 

Dec. 28, 2012 

[S. 3311] 


dkrause on DSKHT7XVN1PROD with PUBLIC LAWS
United States Court of Appeals

For the Eighth Circuit

___________________________

No. 19-2398

___________________________

Gwen G. Caranchini

lllllllllllllllllllllPlaintiff - Appellant

v.

Rick Peck, individually

lllllllllllllllllllllDefendant - Appellee

 ____________

Appeal from United States District Court

for the Western District of Missouri - Kansas City

 ____________

Submitted: December 30, 2019

Filed: January 7, 2020 

[Unpublished]

____________

Before LOKEN, SHEPHERD, and ERICKSON, Circuit Judges. 

____________

PER CURIAM.

In this diversity action, GwenCaranchini appealsfollowing the district court’s

1

dismissal of her complaint for failing to state a claim, challenging only the denial of

1The Honorable Greg Kays, United States District Judge for the Western

District of Missouri.
her motions to recuse. After careful review of the record, we conclude that the

district court did not abuse its discretion in denying Caranchini’s motions. See

Jenkins v. Ark. Power & Light Co., 140 F.3d 1161, 1164 (8th Cir. 1998) (denial of

motion to recuse isreviewed for abuse of discretion); cf. United States v. Melton, 738

F.3d 903, 905-06 (8th Cir. 2013) (party seeking recusal bears burden of rebutting

presumption that judge is impartial; judicial rulings rarely establish valid basis for

recusal, and this general rule holds true where party seeking recusal fails to present

evidence demonstrating partiality). Accordingly, we affirm. See 8th Cir. R. 47B.

______________________________

-2-
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<ARTICLE> UT
<LEGEND>
 THIS SCHEDULE CONTAINS SUMMARY FINANCIAL INFORMATION
 EXTRACTED FROM THE STATEMENT OF INCOME, STATEMENT OF
 CASH FLOWS, BALANCE SHEET AND IS QUALIFIED IN ITS
 ENTIRETY BY REFERENCE TO SUCH FINANCIAL STATEMENTS.
</LEGEND>
       
<S>                           <C>
<CIK>                          0000018654
<NAME>                         CIPS
<MULTIPLIER>                        1,000
<PERIOD-TYPE>                  YEAR
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>              DEC-31-1996
<PERIOD-START>                 JAN-01-1996
<PERIOD-END>                   DEC-31-1996
<BOOK-VALUE>                      PER-BOOK
<TOTAL-NET-UTILITY-PLANT>        1,458,124
<OTHER-PROPERTY-AND-INVEST>              0
<TOTAL-CURRENT-ASSETS>             202,952
<TOTAL-DEFERRED-CHARGES>            64,754
<OTHER-ASSETS>                      27,488
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                   1,753,318
<COMMON>                           121,282
<CAPITAL-SURPLUS-PAID-IN>                0
<RETAINED-EARNINGS>                459,942
<TOTAL-COMMON-STOCKHOLDERS-EQ>     581,224
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                    0
<PREFERRED>                         80,000
<LONG-TERM-DEBT-NET>               421,228
<SHORT-TERM-NOTES>                       0
<LONG-TERM-NOTES-PAYABLE>                0
<COMMERCIAL-PAPER-OBLIGATIONS>      57,768
<LONG-TERM-DEBT-CURRENT-PORT>       58,000
<PREFERRED-STOCK-CURRENT>                0
<CAPITAL-LEASE-OBLIGATIONS>              0
<LEASES-CURRENT>                         0
<OTHER-ITEMS-CAPITAL-AND-LIAB>     555,098
<TOT-CAPITALIZATION-AND-LIAB>    1,753,318
<GROSS-OPERATING-REVENUE>          886,186
<INCOME-TAX-EXPENSE>                47,693
<OTHER-OPERATING-EXPENSES>         721,962
<TOTAL-OPERATING-EXPENSES>         769,655<F2>
<OPERATING-INCOME-LOSS>            116,531
<OTHER-INCOME-NET>                  (1,867)
<INCOME-BEFORE-INTEREST-EXPEN>     114,664
<TOTAL-INTEREST-EXPENSE>            37,271
<NET-INCOME>                        73,672
<PREFERRED-STOCK-DIVIDENDS>          3,721
<EARNINGS-AVAILABLE-FOR-COMM>       77,393
<COMMON-STOCK-DIVIDENDS>            62,950
<TOTAL-INTEREST-ON-BONDS>           33,118
<CASH-FLOW-OPERATIONS>             164,524
<EPS-PRIMARY>                            0<F1>
<EPS-DILUTED>                            0<F1>

<FN>
<F1> INFORMATION NOT NORMALLY DISCLOSED IN FINANCIAL STATEMENTS AND NOTES.
<F2> INCLUDES INCOME TAX EXPENSE.
        


</TABLE>
EXHIBIT 33.1

I, Manfred F. Dyck, certify that:
1. I have reviewed this quarterly report on Form 10-QSB of Hydromer, Inc.;

2. Based on my knowledge, this quarterly 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 quarterly report;

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

4. The registrant's other certifying officer, Mr. Robert Y. Lee and I am
responsible for establishing and maintaining disclosure controls and
procedures (as defined in Exchange Act Rules 13a-14 and 15d-14) for the
registrant and have:

   a) designed such disclosure controls and procedures to ensure that material
      information relating to the registrant, including its consolidated
      subsidiaries, is made known to us by others within those entities,
      particularly during the period in which this quarterly report is being
      prepared;
   b) evaluated the effectiveness of the registrant's disclosure controls and
      procedures as of a date within 90 days prior to the filing date of this
      quarterly report (the "Evaluation Date"); and
   c) presented in this quarterly report our conclusions about the
      effectiveness of the disclosure controls and procedures based on our
      evaluation as of the Evaluation Date;

5. The registrant's other certifying officer, Mr. Robert Y. Lee and I have
disclosed, based on our most recent evaluation, to the registrant's auditors
and the audit committee of registrant's board of directors (or persons
performing the equivalent functions):

   a) all significant deficiencies in the design or operation of internal
      controls which could adversely affect the registrant's ability to
      record, process, summarize and report financial data and have identified
      for the registrant's auditors any material weaknesses in internal
      controls; and
   b) any fraud, whether or not material, that involves management or other
      employees who have a significant role in the registrant's internal
      controls; and

6. The registrant's other certifying officer, Mr. Robert Y. Lee and I have
indicated in this quarterly report whether there were significant changes in
internal controls or in other factors that could significantly affect internal
controls subsequent to the date of our most recent evaluation, including any
corrective actions with regard to significant deficiencies and material
weaknesses.

Date: February 11, 2005

                                         /s/ Manfred F. Dyck
                                         -----------------------------------
                                         Manfred F. Dyck, President and CEO
-----Original Message----- 

From: texshelley1964@yahoo.com [mailto:texshelley1964@yahoo.com] 

Sent: Wednesday, April 28, 2010 11:33 AM 

To: EBSA, E-OHPSCA - EBSA 

Subject: Comment in support of RIN 1210-AB30 

April 28, 2010 

I am writing to support the interim final rule under the Paul Wellstone and 

Pete Domenici Mental Health Parity and Addiction Equity Act of 2008 (RIN 

1210-AB30). 

I support the strong rule that would forbid insurance companies from charging 

higher copayments, deductibles, and other out-of-pocket expenses for mental 

health treatment than they would for other physical health care. Thank you 

for ensuring that mental health care and physical health care coverage are 

included in a single deductible. 

Sincerely, 

shelley palmer 

812 cr 298 

whitesboro, TX 76273
November 27, 2001

 

Jim Paul

100 Lucinda Drive

Babylon, New York 11702

Re:	Amendment to Employment Agreement

Dear Mr. Paul:

		This shall confirm the agreement between you and Chyron Corporation (the "Company") pursuant to which you have agreed to reduce your annual base salary from $215,000 to $185,000 effective April 1, 2001 through December 31, 2001 (the "Reduced Amount").  This reduction was done voluntarily for the benefit of the Company and shall not affect the severance due you under the Employment Agreement dated October 1, 1997 and as amended on January 10, 2001 (the "Employment Agreement").  In addition, in the event the Company terminates you "without cause," as defined under the Employment Agreement, then the Reduced Amount shall be due and payable as part of your severance under the Employment Agreement.  All other terms of the Employment Agreement shall remain in full force and effect.  

If the Employment Agreement is no longer in effect and at such time your employment by the Company is terminated without cause, as defined under the Employment Agreement, then you will be entitled to receive the Reduced Amount in addition to any other severance owed to you by the Company.

 Please acknowledge your consent to the above by executing and dating below and returning this letter agreement to me.
# Appendix 1

# Appendix 2
Editorial Note on Part 190
Editorial Note: Nomenclature changes to part 190 appear at 78 FR 58908, Sept. 25, 2013.

§ 190.338 Appeals. ( a ) Any interested person may appeal a denial of the Associate Administrator or the Chief Counsel, issued under § 190.333 or § 190.337, to the Administrator.
( b ) An appeal must be received within 20 days of service of written notice to petitioner of the Associate Administrator's or the Chief Counsel's decision, or within 20 days from the date of publication of the decision in the Federal Register, and should set forth the contested aspects of the decision as well as any new arguments or information.
( c ) Unless the Administrator otherwise provides, the filing of an appeal under this section does not stay the effectiveness of any rule.
[Amdt. 190-8, 61 FR 50909, Sept. 27, 1996. Redesignated and amended by Amdt. 190-16, 78 FR 58914, Sept. 25, 2013]
#### R. C. Roper, appellee, v. Leo E. Pryor, appellant.

Filed November 1, 1918.

No. 20150.

Injunction: Nominal Damages. . An .attorney entered into a contract of employment with a brother attorney, whereby he agreed to refrain from the practice of his profession within a. specified county, for a definite term of years from the termination of such employment. The validity of the contract and the reasonableness of its restrictive terms being unquestioned, *held,*the plaintiff is entitled to an injunction to prevent its violation, even if pnly nominal damages can be proved.

Appeal from the district court for Butler county: George H. Thomas, Judge.

*Affirmed.*

*Hastings & Coufal,*for appellant.

*R. C. Roper, contra.*

Morrissey, O. J.

In October, 1914, plaintiff was engaged in the law practice in Butler county. Defendant had just completed a course in a law college and been admitted to the bar. Plaintiff employed defendant, at a salary not in excess of that paid to an ordinary clerk. Their contract was reduced to writing, and by its terms defendant agreed, “in consideration of this employment contract and the salary herein agreed upon, ’ ’ that upon the termination of the contract he would not, for a term of ten years from such termination, enter into or engage in the practice of his proféssion in Butler county. ■

Defendant remained with plaintiff until August, 1916. Shortly thereafter' he opened an office in David City, the county seat of Butler county. In November following plaintiff brought this action, based upon the contract mentioned, to restrain defendant from following his profession in Butler county. A permanent injunction was granted, and defendant appeals.

*710Actions of this kind are not uncommon in some lines of business, but, after a diligent search, the writer finds no case where, under circumstances such as disclosed by this record, an established lawyer has sought, in a court of equity, to' withhold from a brother practitioner, who has served as his clerk and assistant, the opportunity, of engaging in his- profession. However, we are not asked to pass upon the validity of the contract, of the reasonableness of its restrictive terms. The point presented by defendant is that the breach in this case is a-mere technical one, for-which plaintiff should be left to his remedy at law. While the circumstances in this case áre unusual, in that defendant did not have an opportunity to come in close contact with the clients of plaintiff,- and that, up to the time of suit, none of such clients had gone over, or threatened to go over, to defendant, yet it seems that the extent of the damage is not a subject of inquiry. 14 R. C. L. sec. 94, p. 394. The fact' that there was a continuous breach, and that plaintiff was entitled to recover at least nominal damages, was sufficient for the assumption of jurisdiction and the granting of relief. *Brown v.*Kling, 101 Cal. 295. See, also, *Freudenthal v. Espey,*45 Colo. 488, 26.L. R. A. n. s. 961, and note in 15 Ann. Cas. 696 *(Simms v. Burnette,*55 Fla. 702).

It follows that the decree of the district court should be

Affirmed.