alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
Before the Third Division,

March 14, 1945

No. 50057.

#### Petition 6480-R of Arthur A. Lehmann Co., Inc. (New York).

Opinion by

Cline, j.

The petition having been formally abandoned was dismissed.
II 

118TH CONGRESS 

2D SESSION S. 3897 

To require the Election Assistance Commission to develop voluntary guidelines 

for the administration of elections that address the use and risks of 

artificial intelligence technologies, and for other purposes. 

IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES 

MARCH 11, 2024 

Ms. KLOBUCHAR (for herself and Ms. COLLINS) introduced the following bill; 

which was read twice and referred to the Committee on Rules and Administration 

A BILL 

To require the Election Assistance Commission to develop 

voluntary guidelines for the administration of elections 

that address the use and risks of artificial intelligence 

technologies, and for other purposes. 

1 Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representa2 tives of the United States of America in Congress assembled, 

3 SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE. 

4 This Act may be cited as the ‘‘Preparing Election Ad5 ministrators for AI Act’’. 


ssavage on LAPJG3WLY3PROD with BILLS
2 

•S 3897 IS

1 SEC. 2. VOLUNTARY GUIDELINES FOR ADMINISTRATION OF 

2 ELECTIONS THAT ADDRESS THE USE AND 

3 RISKS OF ARTIFICIAL INTELLIGENCE TECH4 NOLOGIES. 

5 (a) REPORT AND VOLUNTARY GUIDELINES.—Not 

6 later than 60 days after the date of the enactment of this 

7 Act, the Election Assistance Commission shall, in con8 sultation with the National Institute of Standards and 

9 Technology, submit to Congress, issue to State and local 

10 election offices, and make available to the public a report 

11 with voluntary guidelines for election offices that address 

12 the use and risks of artificial intelligence technologies in 

13 the administration of elections. 

14 (b) CONTENTS.—The report submitted and made 

15 available pursuant to subsection (a) shall include vol16 untary guidelines that address— 

17 (1) the risks and benefits associated with using 

18 artificial intelligence technologies to conduct election 

19 administration activities; 

20 (2) the cybersecurity risks of artificial intel21 ligence technologies to election administration; 

22 (3) how information generated and distributed 

23 by artificial intelligence technologies can affect the 

24 sharing of accurate election information and how 

25 election offices should respond; and 


ssavage on LAPJG3WLY3PROD with BILLS
3 

•S 3897 IS

1 (4) how information generated and distributed 

2 by artificial intelligence technologies can affect the 

3 spreading of election disinformation that undermines 

4 public trust and confidence in elections. 

Æ 


ssavage on LAPJG3WLY3PROD with BILLS
1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

26

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

HAROLD ROBERTSON,

Plaintiff, No. CIV S-04-1587 DFL GGH P

vs.

T. GUZMAN, et al.,

Defendants. ORDER

 /

On May 12, 2005, plaintiff filed a request for reconsideration of the magistrate

judge’s order filed April 25, 2005, dismissing plaintiff’s claims challenging the indigent inmate

postage policy and the delay in the processing of his legal mail and granting plaintiff thirty days

to file a second amended complaint. Pursuant to E.D. Local Rule 72-303(f), a magistrate judge’s

orders shall be upheld unless “clearly erroneous or contrary to law.” Upon review of the entire

file, the court finds that it does not appear that the magistrate judge’s ruling was clearly

erroneous or contrary to law.

 Therefore, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that:

1. Upon reconsideration, the order of the magistrate judge filed April 25, 2005, is

affirmed;

/////

Case 2:04-cv-01587-DFL-GGH Document 20 Filed 06/24/05 Page 1 of 2
1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

26

2. Plaintiff’s second amended complaint is due thirty days from the date of this

order.

DATED: 6/23/2005

 /s/ David F. Levi 

UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE

/robe1587.850

Case 2:04-cv-01587-DFL-GGH Document 20 Filed 06/24/05 Page 2 of 2
# STATE OF 

# CONNECTICUT DEPARTMENT OF ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION

In the matter of The State ofConnecticut and Montville Power LLC 

### ) ) ) ) ) Trading Agreement and Order 8183A Modification No.3

Whereas, the Commissioner ofEnvironmental Protection ("Commissioner") and Montville Power LLC (Respondent) having agreed to the terms and conditions set forth in Trading Agreement and Order 8183A and all previous modification thereto, do now, by mutual agreement, further modify said modified Trading Agreement and Order as follows: I. All references to May I, 2009 with respect to the authorization to use emissions reduction credit trading and/or emission reduction credits and NOx allowances to comply with the emissions limits ofSubsections 22a-174-22(d)(I) through 22a-174- 22(d)(2)(A) ofthe Regulations ofConnecticut State Agencies (Regulations) are hereby replaced with May 1,2010. 2. Any references to October Ist with respect to the date by which the Respondents shall estimate and acquire Discrete Emission Reduction Credits (DERCS) and/or allowances for the non-ozone season shall now include October 1,2009. 3. Any references to May 31, 2007 and May 31, 2008 with respect to calculation and retirement ofnon-ozone season DERCs, shall now include May 31, 2009 and May 31, 2010. 4. All references to September I, 2008 with respect to the submission ofFuture Compliance Reports are hereby replaced with September I, 2009. 5. No laterthan May 1,2010, with respect to the emission units identified in Trading Agreement and Order 8183A and/or its subsequent modifications, the Respondent shall comply with the requirements ofSections 22a-174-22(d)(l) and 22a-174-22(d)(2)(A) of the Regulations. 6. All other terms and conditions ofTrading Agreement and Order 8183A, as modified, shall remain in effect.

(Printed on Recycled Paper) 79 Elm Street • Hartford. CT 06106·5127 hup:llwww.ct.gov/dep All Equal OPPOrll/l1ily EmployerMontville Power LLC 2 Trading Agreement and Order 8183A Modification No.3 The Respondent hereby consents to the entry ofthis modification to the Trading Agreement and Order without further notice. Montville Power LLC Signature:

### ':U~**t~. ""~=---'~==""''''-----­**  Name: 

### 'bk.J :,\ j - ")'>e.::'

# e. l",..N-•.5 T

### itle: """"-\- 

### M.""" A.

### ,y... 'C Date: 

## 1..1- 1", -" 

### 'f

Issued as a modification ofa Trading Agreement and Order.

# ~,J 0'+- 2K-.:Lro'j

# girecto~ . Date Engineering and Enforcement Division Bureau ofAir Management
# OAR Box 

# 1828

Prepped by Ollie Stewart



### Document

Number: 

# 213 ) M-K-(I)-2 6 Docket Number: 

# A-83-2 7 p. i

Printed 11/12/200811:12:55 AM Sheet 213 of 325P. 2 

# A n
II-K-(I)-2 6
ANNUAL REPOR T T O CONGRES S 1978 . VOLUM E 1- 3 AND SUPPLEMENT . U.S . Departmen t o f Energy . Ma y 29 , 1979 . THI S INFORMATION

CA N B E FOUND I

N DOCKE T A-79-02 , ITE

M II-K-(I)-2 6
Exhibit 23.1

Consent of Independent Registered Public Accounting Firm

We consent to the incorporation by reference in the Registration Statements (Forms S-8 Nos. 33-00175, 33-16187,
33-00176, 2-76657, 2-91931, 33-16188, 33-38361, 2-40012, 2-87193, 2-61721, 2-89418,
33-38360, 33-38361, 33-52760, 33-52758, 33-52756, 33-52762, 333-16113, 333-56119, 333-56752,
333-62759, 333-68566, 333-100436, 333-104066, 333-104067 and 333-118039 and Forms S-3
Nos. 333-46329 and 333-108626), of Keane, Inc. and in the related Prospectuses of our reports dated March 11, 2005, with respect to the consolidated
financial statements of Keane, Inc., Keane, Inc. management's assessment of the effectiveness of internal control over financial reporting, and the effectiveness of internal control over
financial reporting of Keane, Inc., included in this Annual Report (Form 10-K) for the year ended December 31, 2004.

|                                     |  | /s/ Ernst and Young LLP
|------------------------------------ |  | -----------------------
|Boston, Massachusetts
March 11, 2005 |  |                        

---



QuickLinks
Case 2:04-cv-01711-GEB-DAD Document 17 Filed 04/21/06 Page 1 of 5Case 2:04-cv-01711-GEB-DAD Document 17 Filed 04/21/06 Page 2 of 5Case 2:04-cv-01711-GEB-DAD Document 17 Filed 04/21/06 Page 3 of 5Case 2:04-cv-01711-GEB-DAD Document 17 Filed 04/21/06 Page 4 of 5Case 2:04-cv-01711-GEB-DAD Document 17 Filed 04/21/06 Page 5 of 5
(Reap. Dec. 10398)

Entry No. 32111, etc.

#### Bruce Duncan Co., Inc., a/c Panorama Enterprises, Inc., et al. *v.*United States

(Decided December 13, 1962)

*Stein <& Shostah*for the plaintiffs.

*Joseph D. Q-uilfoyle,*Acting Assistant Attorney General, for the defendant.

Wilson, Judge:

These appeals for reappraisement have been submitted for decision upon the following agreement and stipulation entered into between counsel for the respective parties:

> IT IS HEREBY STIPULATED AND AGREED by and between counsel for the respective parties hereto, subject to the approval of the Court, that the merchandise covered by the appeals for reappraisement enumerated on the attached Schedule, attached hereto and made a part hereof, consists of tape recorders, manufactured by Victor Company of Japan and exported from Japan.

> That all the merchandise covered by the appeal for reappraisement was entered subsequent to February 27,1958.

> IT IS FURTHER STIPULATED AND AGREED that the merchandise the subject of the appeal for reappraisement enumerated in the attached Schedule is not included on the list of articles designated by the Secretary of the Treasury in T.D. 54521, as provided for in Section 6(a) of the Customs Simplification Act of 1956, Public Law 927, 84th Congress, required to be valued in accordance with Section 402(a) of the Tariff Act of 1930 as amended.

> IT IS FURTHER STIPULATED AND AGREED that at the time of exportation of the instant merchandise to the United States, the prices at which such or similar merchandise was freely offered for sale to all purchasers in the principal market of the country from which exported, in the usual wholesale quantities and in the ordinary course of trade, for export to the United States, including the cost of all containers and coverings of whatever nature, and all other costs, charges and expenses incident to placing the merchandise in condition, packed ready for shipment to the United States, were the invoiced unit value, net packed.

> IT IS FURTHER STIPULATED AND AGREED that these appeals for re-appraisement may be deemed submitted for decision on this stipulation.

On the agreed facts, I find and bold export value, as that value is defined in section 402 of the Tariff Act of 1930, as amended by the Customs Simplification Act of 1956, to be the proper basis for the determination of the value of the merchandise here involved and that such value in each case was the invoiced unit value, net, packed.

Judgment will issue accordingly.
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<ARTICLE>                              5
<MULTIPLIER>                           1,000

       
<S>                                    <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                          12-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                      Dec-31-1998
<PERIOD-START>                         Jan-01-1998
<PERIOD-END>                           Dec-31-1998     
<CASH>                                 9,134  
<SECURITIES>                           0      
<RECEIVABLES>                          48,465 
<ALLOWANCES>                           925    
<INVENTORY>                            13,465     
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                       76,754     
<PP&E>                                 432,290    
<DEPRECIATION>                         130,759    
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                         448,045    
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                  71,122     
<BONDS>                                196,958    
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                  0        
<PREFERRED>                            5,792    
<COMMON>                               4,239    
<OTHER-SE>                             77,414   
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>           448,045  
<SALES>                                0        
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                       375,857  
<CGS>                                  121,509  
<TOTAL-COSTS>                          314,545  
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                       0        
<LOSS-PROVISION>                       0        
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                     15,714  
<INCOME-PRETAX>                        44,518  
<INCOME-TAX>                           1,768   
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                    13,576  
<DISCONTINUED>                         0       
<EXTRAORDINARY>                        0       
<CHANGES>                              0       
<NET-INCOME>                           13,576  
<EPS-PRIMARY>                          0.41    
<EPS-DILUTED>                          0.40    
        



</TABLE>
Case 2:04-cv-00819-EJG   Document 2    Filed 11/15/05   Page 1 of 26

Case 2:04-cv-00819-EJG   Document 2    Filed 11/15/05   Page 2 of 26

Case 2:04-cv-00819-EJG   Document 2    Filed 11/15/05   Page 3 of 26

Case 2:04-cv-00819-EJG   Document 2    Filed 11/15/05   Page 4 of 26

Case 2:04-cv-00819-EJG   Document 2    Filed 11/15/05   Page 5 of 26

Case 2:04-cv-00819-EJG   Document 2    Filed 11/15/05   Page 6 of 26

Case 2:04-cv-00819-EJG   Document 2    Filed 11/15/05   Page 7 of 26

Case 2:04-cv-00819-EJG   Document 2    Filed 11/15/05   Page 8 of 26

Case 2:04-cv-00819-EJG   Document 2    Filed 11/15/05   Page 9 of 26

Case 2:04-cv-00819-EJG   Document 2    Filed 11/15/05   Page 10 of 26

Case 2:04-cv-00819-EJG   Document 2    Filed 11/15/05   Page 11 of 26

Case 2:04-cv-00819-EJG   Document 2    Filed 11/15/05   Page 12 of 26

Case 2:04-cv-00819-EJG   Document 2    Filed 11/15/05   Page 13 of 26

Case 2:04-cv-00819-EJG   Document 2    Filed 11/15/05   Page 14 of 26

Case 2:04-cv-00819-EJG   Document 2    Filed 11/15/05   Page 15 of 26

Case 2:04-cv-00819-EJG   Document 2    Filed 11/15/05   Page 16 of 26

Case 2:04-cv-00819-EJG   Document 2    Filed 11/15/05   Page 17 of 26

Case 2:04-cv-00819-EJG   Document 2    Filed 11/15/05   Page 18 of 26

Case 2:04-cv-00819-EJG   Document 2    Filed 11/15/05   Page 19 of 26

Case 2:04-cv-00819-EJG   Document 2    Filed 11/15/05   Page 20 of 26

Case 2:04-cv-00819-EJG   Document 2    Filed 11/15/05   Page 21 of 26

Case 2:04-cv-00819-EJG   Document 2    Filed 11/15/05   Page 22 of 26

Case 2:04-cv-00819-EJG   Document 2    Filed 11/15/05   Page 23 of 26

Case 2:04-cv-00819-EJG   Document 2    Filed 11/15/05   Page 24 of 26

Case 2:04-cv-00819-EJG   Document 2    Filed 11/15/05   Page 25 of 26

Case 2:04-cv-00819-EJG   Document 2    Filed 11/15/05   Page 26 of 26

    -       - Superintendent of Documents
      - 2012-07-26T22:49:50-0400
      - US GPO, Washington, DC 20401
      - Superintendent of Documents
      - GPO attests that this document has not been altered since it was disseminated by GPO
August 9, 1995
                            
Exhibit 10(a)

                              
       SUMMARY OF TERMS OF EMPLOYMENT FOR MILES MARSH

1.   To become President and CEO, and Director on October 1,
     1995 and Chairman January 1, 1996.

2.   Base  salary of $800,000 subject to periodic review  by
     the Board.

3.   Bonus program at a guaranteed rate of $50,000 per month
     through  1996, paid in January of 1996 (3  months)  and
     January, 1997 (12 months).

     Following  this, current Performance Bonus  and  Profit
     Sharing Plans will apply.

4.   Stock Plan to include 250,000 shares of Unrestricted
     Stock Options at market price as of October 1, 1995,
     with shares vesting over three years and 50,000 shares
     of Deferred Stock also vesting over three years.

5.   Change of control would trigger immediate vesting of
     all Unrestricted Options and Deferred Stock Shares.
     Change of control and involuntary termination (not for
     cause) would also cause payment of two years of
     additional salary and target bonus.

6.   Moving costs will be reimbursed for relocation to
     Richmond and extra temporary living expenses in
     Richmond will be paid all according to company policy.
     Closing costs of one of two existing homes will be
     paid.

7.   Life insurance coverage by the Company will include
     either the current $3 million term life insurance
     policy or the coverage provided by the James River Plan
     (up to 3x salary), the CEO to choose.

8.   Retirement plan to include SERP benefits that vest in
     10 years with retirement possible at age 58 without
     reduction of benefits, but actuarially reduced for
     retirement prior to age 58 using the same rate of
     reduction that James River uses for retirement prior to
     65.

9.   Vacation benefits as needed, but not to exceed 5 weeks
     per year.

10.  Other benefits (see book) according to company policy
     including a company car.

     Please initial your approval for submission to the
     James River Board at its special meeting to be held on
     Tuesday, August 15, 1995.


                                             Miles L. Marsh


                              				E-3
Exhibit 32.2


                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 Quarterly Report of m-Wise,  Inc. ("the Company") on Form
10-QSB for the  period  ended June 30,  2005 as filed  with the  Securities  and
Exchange Commission on the date hereof ("the Report"),  I, Gabriel Kabazo, Chief
Financial  Officer,  certify,  pursuant to 18 U.S.C.  Section  1350,  as adopted
pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that to my knowledge:

      (1) the Report  fully  comply 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.

Gabriel Kabazo
---------------------------------------
Gabriel Kabazo, Chief Financial Officer

Dated: August 11, 2005
# EUR-Lex - 52007AP0145 - EN

Important legal notice

*|*

# 52007AP0145

**European Parliament legislative resolution of 25 April 2007 on the amended proposal for a directive of the European Parliament and of the Council on criminal measures aimed at ensuring the enforcement of intellectual property rights (COM(2006)0168 - C6-0233/2005 - 2005/0127(COD)) **

*
Official Journal 074 E , 20/03/2008 P. 0526 - 0526 *

P6_TA(2007)0145

Enforcement of intellectual property rights (criminal measures) ***I

European Parliament legislative resolution of 25 April 2007 on the amended proposal for a directive of the European Parliament and of the Council on criminal measures aimed at ensuring the enforcement of intellectual property rights (COM(2006)0168 — C6-0233/2005 — 2005/0127(COD))

(Codecision procedure: first reading)

The European Parliament,

- having regard to the amended Commission proposal to the European Parliament and the Council (COM(2006)0168) [1],

- having regard to Article 251(2) and Article 95 of the EC Treaty, pursuant to which the Commission submitted the proposal to Parliament (C6-0233/2005),

- having regard to Rule 51 of its Rules of Procedure,

- having regard to the report of the Committee on Legal Affairs and the opinions of the Committee on Industry, Research and Energy and the Committee on Civil Liberties, Justice and Home Affairs (A6-0073/2007);

1. Approves the Commission proposal as amended;

2. Calls on the Commission to refer the matter to Parliament again if it intends to amend the proposal substantially or replace it with another text;

3. Instructs its President to forward its position to the Council and the Commission.

[1] Not yet published in OJ.

--------------------------------------------------
No. 61851.

#### Isaac B. Cohen & Sons Corp. et al. *v.*United States,

protests 275917-K, etc. (New York).

*531Opinion by

Wilson, J.

In accordance with stipulation of counsel that the merchandise consists of shell water flowers the same in all material respects as those the subject of Abstract 61346, except that the merchandise herein is in chief value of shell, the claim of the plaintiffs was sustained.
EXHIBIT 99
                           ==========

        Certification of Chief Financial Officer Pursuant to
Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, 18 U.S.C. Section 1350
----------------------------------------------------------------------

In connection with the quarterly report on Form 10-QSB of Bliss
Essentials Corp. (Registrant), as filed with the Securities and
Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the Report), I, Howard Gelfand,
Chief Financial Officer, hereby certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section
1350, as adopted pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of
2002, that, to the best of my knowledge and belief:

   (1)  the quarterly 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 quarterly report fairly
        presents, in all material respects, the financial condition and
        results of operations of Registrant.



Date: August 10, 2003        /s/ Howard Gelfand
                              ----------------------------------
                              Chief Financial Officer of
                              Bliss Essentials Corp., Registrant
No. 61356.

protest 291177-K.

#### F. L. Kraemer & Co. *v.*United States,

Protest abandoned October 2, 1957. (Not published.) (Initial No. 287512-K.) Plaintiff’s application for rehearing granted.
1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

26

1

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

BRADY ARMSTRONG,

Plaintiff, No. CIV S-04-1269 GEB KJM P

vs.

SILVA GARCIA, et al.,

Defendants. FINDINGS & RECOMMENDATIONS

 /

By order filed May 18, 2005, plaintiff’s complaint was dismissed and thirty days

leave to file an amended complaint was granted. The thirty day period has now expired, and

plaintiff has not filed an amended complaint or otherwise responded to the court’s order.

Accordingly, IT IS HEREBY RECOMMENDED that this action be dismissed

without prejudice. See Local Rule 11-110; Fed. R. Civ. P. 41(b).

These findings and recommendations are submitted to the United States District

Judge assigned to the case, pursuant to the provisions of 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(l). Within twenty

days after being served with these findings and recommendations, plaintiff may file written

objections with the court. The document should be captioned “Objections to Magistrate Judge’s

Findings and Recommendations.” Plaintiff is advised that failure to file objections within the

/////

Case 2:04-cv-01269-GEB -KJM Document 14 Filed 07/26/05 Page 1 of 2
1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

26

2

specified time may waive the right to appeal the District Court’s order. Martinez v. Ylst, 951

F.2d 1153 (9th Cir. 1991).

DATED: July 26, 2005.

______________________________________

UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE

1/bb

arms1269.fta

Case 2:04-cv-01269-GEB -KJM Document 14 Filed 07/26/05 Page 2 of 2
Before the Third Division,

June 25, 1940

No. 44016.

#### Protest 840505-G of Butler Brothers (Portland, Oreg.).

Opinion by

Keefe, J.

In accordance with stipulation of counsel and on the authority of *Butler*v. *United States*(4 Cust. Ct. 120, C. D. 303) the Rockingham-ware in question was held dutiable at 25 percent under paragraph 210 as claimed.