alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
```

[Federal Register Volume 77, Number 97 (Friday, May 18, 2012)]
[Notices]
[Page 29749]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Printing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2012-12100]

-----------------------------------------------------------------------

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

Federal Aviation Administration

Twelfth Meeting: RTCA Special Committee 217, Joint with EUROCAE 
WG-44, Terrain and Airport Mapping Databases

AGENCY: Federal Aviation Administration (FAA), U.S. Department of 
Transportation (DOT).

ACTION: Meeting Notice of RTCA Special Committee 217, Joint with 
EUROCAE WG-44, Terrain and Airport Mapping Databases.

-----------------------------------------------------------------------

SUMMARY: The FAA is issuing this notice to advise the public of the 
twelfth meeting, RTCA Special Committee 217, Joint with EUROCAE WG-44, 
Terrain and Airport Mapping Databases.

DATES: The meeting will be held June 18-22, 2012, from 9:00 a.m.-5:00 
p.m.

ADDRESSES: The meeting will be held at RTCA, Inc., 1150 18th Street 
NW., Suite 910, Washington, DC 20036.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: The RTCA Secretariat, 1150 18th Street 
NW., Suite 910, Washington, DC 20036, or by telephone at (202) 833-
9339, fax at (202) 833-9434, or Web site at http://www.rtca.org.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Pursuant to section 10(a)(2) of the Federal 
Advisory Committee Act (Pub. L. 92-463, 5 U.S.C., App.), notice is 
hereby given for a meeting of Special Committee 217. The agenda will 
include the following:

June 18-22, 2012

 Chairmen's remarks and introductions
 Housekeeping
 Approve minutes from previous meeting
 Review and approve meeting agenda
 Schedule for this week
 Provide comment resolution to Revised DO-276A/ED-98A
 Consider/Approve FRAC Draft for PMC Consideration--Revised DO-
276A/ED-98A, User Requirements for Terrain and Obstacle Data
 Work items for V & V Document
 Review results of ToR presentation to PMC of June 13th
 Review results of Guidance Material Presentation
 Update work program
 Action Item Review
 Resolve Secretary
 Closing Plenary
 Plenary Adjourns

    Attendance is open to the interested public but limited to space 
availability. With the approval of the chairman, members of the public 
may present oral statements at the meeting. Persons wishing to present 
statements or obtain information should contact the person listed in 
the FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT section. Members of the public may 
present a written statement to the committee at any time.

    Issued in Washington, DC, on May 9, 2012.
John Raper,
Manager, Business Operations Branch, Federal Aviation Administration.
[FR Doc. 2012-12100 Filed 5-17-12; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4910-13-P
```
_________________________________________ 

 

 

Order Michigan Supreme Court 

Lansing, Michigan 

November 9, 2005 Clifford W. Taylor,

 Chief Justice 

128778 Michael F. Cavanagh 

Elizabeth A. Weaver 

Marilyn Kelly 

Maura D. Corrigan 

PEOPLE OF THE STATE OF MICHIGAN,

Plaintiff-Appellee, 

Robert P. Young, Jr. 

Stephen J. Markman,

 Justices 

v SC: 128778 

 COA: 254640 

Wayne CC: 03-009003-01 

RONALD DAVID JACKSON, 

Defendant-Appellant. 

_________________________________________/ 

On order of the Court, the application for leave to appeal the April 21, 2005 

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

persuaded that the questions presented should be reviewed by this Court. 

KELLY, J., would hold this case in abeyance for People v Drohan, lv gtd 472 Mich 

881 (2005). 

s1102 

I, Corbin R. Davis, Clerk of the Michigan Supreme Court, certify that the 

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

November 9, 2005 

Clerk
No. 66139.

#### J. C. De Jong & Co., Inc., et al. *v.*United States,

protests 59/11296, etc. (New York).

Opinion by

Lawrence, J.

In accordance with stipulation of counsel that the merchandise consists of brass pole rings similar in all material respects to those the subject of *Kroder Reubel Co., Inc., et al.*v. *United States*(44 Cust. Ct. 274, C.D. 2186), the claim of the plaintiffs was sustained.
No. 64689.

#### Morganite, Inc. *v.*United States,

protests 59/32654 and 60/2909 (New York).

Opinion by

Johnson, J.

In accordance with stipulation of counsel that the merchandise consists of carbon powder similar in all material respects to that the subject of *Morganite, Inc.*v. *United States*(29 Cust. Ct. 76, C.D. 1448), the claim of the plaintiff was sustained.
```

[Congressional Bills 106th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[H. Con. Res. 266 Introduced in House (IH)]

106th CONGRESS
  2d Session
H. CON. RES. 266

 Expressing the sense of the Congress regarding the benefits of music 
                               education.

_______________________________________________________________________

                    IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

                             March 6, 2000

Mr. McIntosh (for himself, Mr. Clement, Mr. Hilleary, Mr. Kucinich, and 
Mrs. Roukema) submitted the following concurrent resolution; which was 
        referred to the Committee on Education and the Workforce

_______________________________________________________________________

                         CONCURRENT RESOLUTION

 
 Expressing the sense of the Congress regarding the benefits of music 
                               education.

Whereas there is a growing body of scientific research demonstrating that 
        children who receive music instruction perform better on spatial-
        temporal reasoning tests and proportional math problems;
Whereas music education grounded in rigorous instruction is an important 
        component of a well-rounded academic program;
Whereas opportunities in music and the arts have enabled children with 
        disabilities to participate more fully in school and community 
        activities;
Whereas music and the arts can motivate at-risk students to stay in school and 
        become active participants in the educational process;
Whereas according to the College Board, college-bound high school seniors in 
        1998 who received music instruction scored 53 points higher on the 
        verbal portion of the Scholastic Aptitude Test and 39 points higher on 
        the math portion of the test than college-bound high school seniors with 
        no music or arts instruction;
Whereas a 1999 report by the Texas Commission on Drug and Alcohol Abuse states 
        that individuals who participated in band or orchestra reported the 
        lowest levels of current and lifelong use of alcohol, tobacco, and 
        illicit drugs; and
Whereas comprehensive, sequential music instruction enhances early brain 
        development and improves cognitive and communicative skills, self-
        discipline, and creativity: Now, therefore, be it
    Resolved by the House of Representatives (the Senate concurring), 
That it is the sense of the Congress that--
            (1) music education enhances intellectual development and 
        enriches the academic environment for children of all ages; and
            (2) music educators greatly contribute to the artistic, 
        intellectual, and social development of American children, and 
        play a key role in helping children to succeed in school.
                                 <all>
```
## Section Menu

Web PagesOnline ServicesPublicationsMapsTweetsJobsOpen DataCountiesNews

## Searching Publications within Maryland Military Department matching "national guard annual report"

Can't find what you're looking for? Search all of Maryland.gov.
IV

106TH CONGRESS

2D SESSION H. CON. RES. 405

To correct the enrollment of H.R. 4919.

IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

SEPTEMBER 21, 2000

Mr. GILMAN submitted the following concurrent resolution; which was

considered and agreed to

CONCURRENT RESOLUTION

To correct the enrollment of H.R. 4919.

1 Resolved by the House of Representatives (the Senate

2 concurring), That the Clerk of the House of Representa3 tives, in the enrollment of the bill (H.R. 4919) to amend

4 the Foreign Assistance Act of 1961 and the Arms Export

5 Control Act to make improvements to certain defense and

6 security assistance provisions under those Acts, to author7 ize the transfer of naval vessels to certain foreign coun8 tries, and for other purposes, shall make the following cor9 rections:

10 (1) On page 34, line 1, insert ‘‘on a grant

11 basis’’ after ‘‘available’’.
2

HCON 405 ATH

1 (2) On page 34, line 11, strike ‘‘paragraph (1)’’

2 and insert ‘‘subsection (b)(1) and paragraph (1) of

3 this subsection’’.

4 (3) On page 36, line 19, insert ‘‘on a grant

5 basis’’ after ‘‘available’’.

Æ
QuickLinks
 -- Click here to rapidly navigate through this document

Exhibit 10.1  


 
 

CONSENT OF INDEPENDENT AUDITORS    
    


        We consent to the incorporation by reference in the Registration Statements (Form S-8 Nos. 333-13388 and 333-13390) of
Bookham Technology plc of the reference to our firm in Item 3 under the caption "Selected Consolidated Financial Data" and of our report dated March 18, 2003 with respect to the consolidated
financial statements of Bookham Technology plc, all included in this Amendment No. 1 to the Annual Report (Form 20-F/A) for the year ended December 31, 2002. 



	

 	
 	

 	

/s/  ERNST & YOUNG LLP    

Ernst & Young LLP





Reading,
England

September 9, 2003 









QuickLinks


CONSENT OF INDEPENDENT AUDITORS
No. 57848.

protests 136926-K/12967, etc. (New Orleans).

#### Van Waters & Rogers, Inc., et al. *v.*United States,

Opinion by

Rao, J.

In accordance with stipulation of counsel that the merchandise is the same in all material respects as that the subject of *United States*v. *Geo. Wm. Rueff, Inc.*(41 C. C. P. A. 95, C. A. D. 535), the claim of the plaintiffs was sustained.
##### 



THE GREENBRIER COMPANIES, INC.
LIST OF SUBSIDIARIES
 Names UnderState of
    
    Which DoesName
    
    Incorporation
    
    Business3048389 Nova Scotia Limited
    
    Nova Scotia, Canada
    
    N/AAutostack LLC
    
    OR
    
    N/AGreenbrier-Concarril LLC
    
    DE
    
    N/AGreenbrier de Mexico, S.R.L. de C.V.
    
    Mexico
    
    N/AGreenbrier Europe B.V.
    
    Netherlands
    
    N/AGreenbrier Germany GmbH
    
    Germany
    
    N/AGreenbrier Leasing Company LLC
    
    OR
    
    Greenbrier IntermodalGreenbrier Leasing Limited
    
    Nova Scotia, Canada
    
    N/AGreenbrier Leasing Limited Partner, LLC
    
    DE
    
    N/AGreenbrier Management Services, LLC
    
    DE
    
    N/AGreenbrier Leasing, L.P.
    
    DE
    
    N/AGreenbrier Logistics, Inc.
    
    OR
    
    N/AGreenbrier Railcar LLC.
    
    OR
    
    N/AGreenbrier U.K. Limited
    
    United Kingdom
    
    N/AGunderson-Concarril, S.A. de C.V.
    
    Mexico
    
    N/AGunderson LLC
    
    OR
    
    N/AGunderson Marine LLC
    
    OR
    
    N/AGunderson Rail Services, LLC
    
    OR
    
    N/AInterAmerican Logistics Inc.
    
    Ontario, Canada
    
    N/ASuperior Transportation Systems, Inc.
    
    OR
    
    N/ATolan ONeal Transportation & Logistics, Inc.
    
    WA
    
    N/ATrentonWorks Limited
    
    Nova Scotia, Canada
    
    N/AWagonySwidnica S.A.
    
    Poland
    
    N/AGunderson Specialty Products, LLC
    
    DE
    
    N/AOhio Castings Company, LLC
    
    DE
    
    N/AChicago Castings Company, LLC
    
    DE
    
    N/AAlliance Castings Company, LLC
    
    DE
    
    N/A
December 27, 1945

No. 50787.

Suit 4502.

#### United *States*v. *Good Neighbor Imports, Inc.*

C. D. 892 reversed. C. A. D. 321.
No. 63959.

protests 282025-K, etc. (Los Angeles).

#### S. H. Kress Co. v. United States,

Opinion by

Oliver, C. J.

In accordance with stipulation of counsel that the merchandise consists of beads the same in all material respects as those the subject of *United States*v. S. *H. Kress & Co.*(46 C.C.P.A. 135, C.A.D. 716), the claim of the plaintiff was sustained.
```

[Congressional Bills 106th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[H. Con. Res. 347 Introduced in House (IH)]

106th CONGRESS
  2d Session
H. CON. RES. 347

    Expressing the sense of the Congress regarding the need to pass 
   legislation to increase penalties on perpetrators of hate crimes.

_______________________________________________________________________

                    IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

                              June 7, 2000

  Ms. Jackson-Lee of Texas (for herself, Mr. Conyers, Ms. Carson, Mr. 
 Cummings, Mr. Davis of Illinois, Ms. Eddie Bernice Johnson of Texas, 
 Mr. Hastings of Florida, Mr. Wynn, Ms. Lee, Ms. McKinney, Mr. Towns, 
   Mr. Jefferson, Mr. Jackson of Illinois, Mr. Lampson, Mrs. Mink of 
Hawaii, Mr. Rothman, Ms. Baldwin, Mr. Clyburn, Mr. Gilman, Mr. Dingell, 
    Ms. Berkley, and Mr. Bonior) submitted the following concurrent 
    resolution; which was referred to the Committee on the Judiciary

_______________________________________________________________________

                         CONCURRENT RESOLUTION

 
    Expressing the sense of the Congress regarding the need to pass 
   legislation to increase penalties on perpetrators of hate crimes.

Whereas diversity and tolerance are essential principles of an open and free 
        society;
Whereas all people deserve to be safe within their communities, free to live, 
        work, and worship without fear of violence and bigotry;
Whereas crimes motivated by hatred against persons because of their race, color, 
        religion, national origin, gender, sexual orientation, or disability 
        undermine the fundamental values of our Nation;
Whereas hate crimes tear at the fabric of American society, leave scars on 
        victims and their families, and weaken our sense of community and 
        purpose; and
Whereas individuals who commit crimes based on hate and bigotry must be held 
        responsible for their actions and must be stopped from spreading 
        violence: Now, therefore, be it
    Resolved by the House of Representatives (the Senate concurring), 
That it is the sense of the Congress that the Congress--
            (1) needs to pass legislation that amends the Federal 
        criminal code to set penalties for persons who commit acts of 
        violence against other persons because of the actual or 
        perceived race, color, religion, national origin, gender, 
        sexual orientation, or disability of any person;
            (2) condemns the culture of hate and the hate groups that 
        foster such violent acts;
            (3) commends the communities throughout our Nation that are 
        united in condemning such acts of hate in their neighborhoods;
            (4) commends the efforts of Federal, State, and local law 
        enforcement officials; and
            (5) reaffirms its commitment to a society that fully 
        respects and protects all people, regardless of race, color, 
        religion, national origin, gender, sexual orientation, or 
        disability.
                                 <all>
```
Michigan Supreme Court Lansing, Michigan

Stephen J. Markman,
Chief Justice

Brian K. Zahr a Bridget M. McCormac k

David F. Viviano

Richard H. Bernstei n Kurtis T. Wilde r Elizabeth T. Clement,

J ustices

I, Larry S. Royster, Clerk of the Michigan Supreme Court, certify that the foregoing is a true and complete copy of the order entered at t he direction of the Court.

May 16, 2018

s0509 

# Order

Clerk May 16, 2018

156926

PEOPLE OF THE STATE OF MICHIGAN, Plaintiff-Appellee,

v SC: 15 6926 COA: 337933 Oakland CC: 2017-261675-FH NICHOLAS LOUIS STAPELS, Defendant-Appellant.

________________ _______________ __________/

On order of the Court, the application for leave to appeal the October 24, 2017 judgment of the Court of Appeals is considered, and it is DENIE D, because we are not persuaded that the questions pre sented should be reviewed by th is Court.
The Honorable Catherine D. Perry, United States District Judge for the Eastern 1

District of Missouri.

United States Court of Appeals

FOR THE EIGHTH CIRCUIT

___________

No. 97-1071

___________

United States of America, *

 *

Appellee, *

 *

v. *

Appeal from the United States

 *

District Court for the

Dwite Valentine Hall, *

Eastern District of Missouri.

 *

Appellant. *

[Unpublished]

__________

 Submitted: July 29, 1997

 Filed: August 7, 1997

__________

Before WOLLMAN, LOKEN, and HANSEN, Circuit Judges.

__________

PER CURIAM.

Dwite Hall challenges the 135-month sentence imposed

by the district court following his guilty plea to

1

attempting to possess cocaine base and marijuana with

intent to distribute, in violation of 21 U.S.C.

§§ 841(a)(1) and 846. We affirm.
-2-

Hall argues that the district court improperly

sentenced him for possessing cocaine base, because the

government failed to prove the cocaine base seized from

Hall
-3-

at the time of his arrest was crack cocaine. See U.S.

Sentencing Guidelines Manual § 2D1.1(c), (n.(D)) (1995)

(defining “cocaine base” as “crack,” which in turn is

defined as “the street name for a form of cocaine base,

usually prepared by processing cocaine hydrochloride and

sodium bicarbonate, and usually appearing in a lumpy,

rocklike form”); U.S. Sentencing Guidelines Manual App.

C. amend. 487 (Nov. 1, 1993) (stating that “forms of

cocaine base other than crack (e.g., coca paste . .) will

be treated as cocaine”).

We find the district court did not clearly err in

determining the government had proved by a preponderance

of the evidence that the drug at issue was crack. See

United States v. Williams, 97 F.3d 240, 243 (8th Cir.

1996) (standard of review). An experienced narcotics

officer testified that the lumpy, rocklike substance

admitted as evidence was crack; an expert criminalist who

had tested the substance testified that the drugs were

cocaine base or crack; and Hall did not introduce

evidence to the contrary. See United States v. Wilson,

103 F.3d 1402, 1407 (8th Cir. 1997) (rejecting argument

that evidence was insufficient to permit district court

to conclude form of cocaine involved was crack; forensic

chemist testified substance was cocaine base and

conclusion was not contradicted by other evidence);

United States v. Williams, 982 F.2d 1209, 1212 (8th Cir.

1992) (identity of controlled substance may be proven

through circumstantial evidence and opinion testimony;

experienced narcotics detective opined substance was

crack cocaine).

Accordingly, we affirm the judgment of the district
-4-

court.

A true copy.

Attest:

 CLERK, U. S. COURT OF APPEALS, EIGHTH

CIRCUIT.
EXHIBIT 32.2

Section 906 Certification

In connection with the annual report on Form 10-K of NCI, Inc. (the
Company) for the fiscal year ended December 31, 2006, as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the Report), the undersigned Senior Vice President and Chief Financial Officer of the Company
certifies, to the best of her knowledge and belief pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, as adopted pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that:

(1) The Report fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) or 1(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 results of operations of the Company.



|                    |  |  |  |                                                                                                   
|------------------- |  |  |  | --------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
|                    |  | 
|Date: March 9, 2007 |  |  |  | /s/    JUDITH L. BJORNAAS                                                                         
|                    |  |  |  | Judith L. Bjornaas Senior Vice President
and Chief Financial Officer (Principal Financial
Officer)

A signed original of the written statement required by Section 906 has been provided to NCI,
Inc. and will be retained by NCI, Inc. and furnished to the Securities and Exchange Commission or its staff upon request.
* 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

FIFTH CIRCUIT

____________

No. 96-50855

____________

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,

Plaintiff-Appellee,

versus

CESAR ISLAS-ALVAREZ, XOCHITL ROCHA-FLORES, and

NICHOLAS EMEY PARGAZ,

Defendants - Appellants.

Appeal from the United States District Court

for the Western District of Texas

(96-CR-189)

November 10, 1997

Before EMILIO M. GARZA, STEWART, and DENNIS, Circuit Judges.

PER CURIAM:*

Cesar Islas-Alvarez, Xochitl Rocha-Flores and Nicholas Emey

Pargaz (collectively “defendants”) appeal their convictions for

conspiracy to distribute marijuana (in violation of 21 U.S.C. §

846), conspiracy to possess with intent to distribute marijuana,

and possession with intent to distribute marijuana (both in

violation of 21 U.S.C. § 841(a)(1)), alleging that errors committed

by the district court prevented them from receiving a fair trial.
We find defendants’ claims regarding the allegedly prejudicial

conduct of the trial judge during the cross-examination of

Government witness Richard Austin unsupported by any case law and

directly contradicted by Rule 611 of the Federal Rules of Evidence.

See FED. R. EVID. 611(a) (providing that the court should “exercise

reasonable control” over the questioning of witnesses in order to

aid in the “ascertainment of truth,” avoid “needless consumption of

time,” and “protect witnesses from harassment or undue

embarrassment”). Likewise, we find each of the district court’s

allegedly erroneous evidentiary rulings to be well within the

bounds of discretion provided by United States v. Anderson, 933

F.2d 1261, 1267-1268 (5th Cir. 1991) (applying a “highly

deferential” abuse-of-discretion standard to the trial court’s

evidentiary rulings, but noting that review of such rulings in

criminal trials is “necessarily heightened”). Islas-Alvarez’s

remaining claim of error))that the district court improperly

sentenced him for larger amounts of marijuana than it was proved he

was involved with at trial))merits little discussion in light of

Nichols v. United States, 511 U.S. 738, 748, 114 S.Ct. 1921, 1928,

128 L.Ed.2d 745 (1994) (state need only prove conduct for

sentencing purposes by a “preponderance of the evidence”) (citing

McMillan v. Pennsylvania, 477 U.S. 79, 91, 106 S.Ct. 2411, 2418-

2419, 91 L.Ed.2d 67 (1986)). 

AFFIRMED.