alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
NASA LogoNTRSNTRS - NASA Technical Reports ServerSearchmore_vertCollectionsAboutNewsHelpLogin Back to ResultsHigh pressure oxygen turbopump bearing cage stability analysesThe low service life of the high pressure oxygen turbopump (HPOTP) bearings used in the space shuttle main engine was examined by use of the Battelle "BASDAP' bearing computer stability model. The dynamic instability of the bearing cage resulted in excessive wear and eventual failure of the unit. By maintaining a cage/race clearance of no more than 0.25 millimeters (0.010 inches), ball/pocket clearance of no less than 0.54 millimeters (0.025 inches), dynamic balancing of the cages, and maintaining adequate lubricant films between the balls and races, cage instability and subsequent bearing degradation can be reduced.Document ID19840011747Acquisition SourceLegacy CDMSDocument TypeContractor Report (CR)AuthorsMerriman, T. L.*(Battelle Columbus Labs. OH, United States)*Kannel, J. W.*(Battelle Columbus Labs. OH, United States)*Date AcquiredSeptember 4, 2013Publication DateMarch 8, 1984Subject CategoryMechanical EngineeringReport/Patent NumberNASA-CR-170991NAS 1.26:170991Accession Number84N19815Funding Number(s)CONTRACT_GRANT: NAS8-34908Distribution LimitsPublicCopyrightWork of the US Gov. Public Use Permitted.Available DownloadsNameType19840011747.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
```

[Congressional Bills 109th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[S. 1924 Introduced in Senate (IS)]

109th CONGRESS
  1st Session
                                S. 1924

  To strengthen civil-military relationships by permitting State and 
  local governments to enter into lease purchase agreements with the 
                      United States Armed Forces.

_______________________________________________________________________

                   IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES

                            October 26, 2005

  Mr. Durbin introduced the following bill; which was read twice and 
              referred to the Committee on Armed Services

_______________________________________________________________________

                                 A BILL

 
  To strengthen civil-military relationships by permitting State and 
  local governments to enter into lease purchase agreements with the 
                      United States Armed Forces.

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

SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE.

    This Act may be cited as ``The Military Installation and Community 
Lease-Purchase Expansion Act of 2005''.

SEC. 2. EXPANDED AUTHORITY TO ENTER INTO LEASE-PURCHASE AGREEMENTS.

    Section 2812 of title 10, United States Code, is amended--
            (1) in subsection (a)(1)--
                    (A) by striking ``a private contractor'' and 
                inserting ``an eligible entity''; and
                    (B) by striking ``the contractor'' and inserting 
                ``the eligible entity'';
            (2) in subsection (c)--
                    (A) by striking ``(c)(1)'' and inserting ``(c)'';
                    (B) by striking paragraph (2); and
                    (C) by redesignating subparagraphs (A) and (B) as 
                paragraphs (1) and (2); and
            (3) by adding at the end the following new subsection:
    ``(e) In this section, the term `eligible entity' means any private 
person, corporation, firm, partnership, company, or State or local 
government.''.
                                 <all>
```
#### The FIRST NATIONAL BANK OF BELLEAIR BLUFFS, Appellant, v. MARICOPA CORPORATION, Appellee.

No. 69-287.

District Court of Appeal of Florida. Second District.

Jan. 14, 1970.

Rehearing Denied Feb. 5, 1970.

Carleton L. Weidemeyer, of Wightman, Rowe & Weidemeyer, Clearwater, for appellant.

A. T. Cooper, Jr., of Cooper, Rives & Baskin, Clearwater, for appellee.

MANN, Judge.

The late John Reid Topping had a talent for spending which topped his ancestors’ capacity to accumulate. When his mother died in 1947 she left a trust fund of which he and Bankers Trust Company were co-trustees, with the proviso that in case of disagreement Topping’s voice was decisive. There was no right to anything but income, however, the principal to be distributed at his death to his children. Following domestic difficulties Topping and his wife separated, whereupon Topping assigned his interest irrevocably to her. To provide a home for her it was arranged that the trust would purchase all of the shares in Maricopa Corporation, formed for the purpose of buying a lot and building a home to be leased to Mrs. Topping. Appellant bank was to be escrow agent, and its vice president signed an agreement setting forth the manner in which $55,000 of the trust’s money was to be disbursed and requiring signature of A. T. Cooper, as well as Topping’s.

Topping presented a signature card purporting to authorize the bank to honor checks drawn on Maricopa Corporation’s account signed by Topping alone. He then proceeded to spend the money freely, finally withdrawing the balance of the $55,000 in the form of a cashier’s check for $15,-000 and several thousand dollars in cash. The cashier’s check was retrieved in time, and considering sums actually expended toward the purpose for which the funds were placed in escrow, resulted in Topping’s applying to his own use $26,077.38, for which the perceptive trial judge entered summary judgment against the bank.

Now the bank says that the escrow agreement was “never finalized,” and that *192a jury should decide whether the bank acted properly in allowing Topping the use of this money. There is nothing for a jury to decide. Topping’s mother clearly forbade him the use of principal. Topping had clearly assigned the income, so there is no defense on the ground that he would be unjustly enriched by returning these funds to the corporation owned by the trust. The case is a simple one of a bank’s receipt of funds with knowledge of and agreement to the terms of an escrow and the subsequent violation of those terms. It should be remarked that there is no suggestion that the bank’s able counsel were consulted at any stage prior to the bank’s honoring Topping’s checks.

Affirmed.

LILES, Acting C. J., and McNULTY, J., concur.
#### B. Newton GILMORE, Appellant, v. METROPOLITAN DADE COUNTY, a political subdivision, Frank C. Palmer, Pinecrest Civic Association, non-profit Florida corporation, and John R. Shallcross and Gertrude Shallcross, his wife, Appellees.

No. 69-339.

District Court of Appeal of Florida. Third District.

Sept. 17, 1969.

Rehearing Denied Oct. 13, 1969.

PER CURIAM.

Appeal dismissed.
**Exhibit 23.1**

**Consentof Independent Registered Public Accounting Firm**

We consent to theincorporation by reference in the following Registration Statements; (Form S-8No. 33-96192) ,(Form S-3 No. 333-28209), (Form S-8 No. 333-85245), (Form S-8333-44984), (Form S-3 No. 333-66628), (Form S-8 No. 333-75824), and (Form S-8No. 333-125415), of our report dated March 28, 2006, which includes anexplanatory paragraph for the effects of a restatement for prior years incometax disclosures with respect to the consolidated financial statements andschedule of Ezenia! Inc. appearing in this Annual Report on Form 10-K ofEzenia! Inc. for the year ended December 31, 2006.

     /s/  Brown & Brown, LLP

Boston, MassachusettsMarch 30, 2007

----
```

[Federal Register: August 30, 2010 (Volume 75, Number 167)]
[Notices]               
[Page 52924-52925]
From the Federal Register Online via GPO Access [wais.access.gpo.gov]
[DOCID:fr30au10-27]                         

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

DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE

Agricultural Research Service

 
Notice of Intent To Grant Exclusive License

AGENCY: Agricultural Research Service, USDA.

ACTION: Notice of intent.

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

SUMMARY: Notice is hereby given that the U.S. Department of 
Agriculture, Agricultural Research Service, intends to grant to 
Horticultural Research Institute, Inc. of Washington, DC, an exclusive 
license to U.S. Patent No. 7,066,995, ``Compositions and Films 
Comprised of Avian Feather Keratin,'' issued on June 27, 2006.

DATES: Comments must be received on or before September 29, 2010.

ADDRESSES: Send comments to: USDA, ARS, Office of Technology Transfer, 
5601 Sunnyside Avenue, Rm. 4-1174, Beltsville, Maryland 20705-5131.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: June Blalock of the Office of 
Technology

[[Page 52925]]

Transfer at the Beltsville address given above; telephone: 301-504-
5989.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The Federal Government's patent rights in 
this invention are assigned to the United States of America, as 
represented by the Secretary of Agriculture. It is in the public 
interest to so license this invention as Horticultural Research 
Institute, Inc. of Washington, DC has submitted a complete and 
sufficient application for a license. The prospective exclusive license 
will be royalty-bearing and will comply with the terms and conditions 
of 35 U.S.C. 209 and 37 CFR 404.7. The prospective exclusive license 
may be granted unless, within thirty (30) days from the date of this 
published Notice, the Agricultural Research Service receives written 
evidence and argument which establishes that the grant of the license 
would not be consistent with the requirements of 35 U.S.C. 209 and 37 
CFR 404.7.

Richard J. Brenner,
Assistant Administrator.
[FR Doc. 2010-21491 Filed 8-27-10; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 3410-03-P
```
**EXHIBIT 13.02**

 

Report of IndependentAuditors

 

To the Unitholders of

The Millburn World Resource Trust

 

We have audited the accompanying statements of financial condition ofThe Millburn World Resource Trust (the “Trust”), as of December 31, 2003 and2002, including the condensed schedules of investments, and the relatedstatements of operations, changes in trust capital and financial highlights forthe years then ended. These financial statements and financial highlights arethe responsibility of the Trust’s management. Our responsibility is to expressan opinion on these financial statements and financial highlights based on ouraudits. The financial statements for the year ended December 31, 2001 wereaudited by other auditors whose report dated February 21, 2002 expressedan unqualified opinion on those statements.

 

We conducted our audits in accordance with auditing standards generallyaccepted in the United States. Those standards require that we plan and performthe audit to obtain reasonable assurance about whether the financial statementsand financial highlights are free of material misstatement. An audit includesexamining, on a test basis, evidence supporting the amounts and disclosures inthe financial statements and financial highlights. An audit also includesassessing the accounting principles used and significant estimates made bymanagement, as well as evaluating the overall financial statement presentation.We believe that our audit provides a reasonable basis for our opinion.

 

In our opinion, the financial statements and financial highlightsreferred to above present fairly, in all material respects, the financialposition of The Millburn World Resource Trust at December 31, 2003 and 2002,and the results of its operations, changes in trust capital and financialhighlights for the years then ended in conformity with accounting principlesgenerally accepted in the United States.

 

Ernst & Young LLP

New York, New York

 

February 17, 2004

 

----
**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**

| (1) | the                Quarterly Report on Form 10-QSB of the Company for the fiscal quarter                ended April 30, 2007 (the “Report”) fully complies with the requirements                of Section 13 (a) or 15 (d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934                (15                U.S.C. 78m or 78o(d)); and |
|-----|---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|

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

|                              |                                                                          |                              |
|-----------------------------------|-------------------------------------------------------------------------------|-----------------------------------|
|                              |                                                                          |
|                         |                                                                     |                         |
| Dated:              June 14, 2007 | By:                                                                 | /s/ Alex              Werber |
|                              | Name:                Alex WerberTitle:                Chief Financial Officer |
|                              |                                                                               |

----
# Úřední věstník C 104I/2021

| | ISSN 1977-0863 |
| --- | --- |
| Úřední věstník
  Evropské unie | C 104I |
| | |
| České vydání | Informace a oznámení | Ročník 6426. března 2021 |

ISSN 1977-0863

Úřední věstník

Evropské unie

C 104I

České vydání

Informace a oznámení

Ročník 6426. března 2021

---

| Obsah | Strana |
| --- | --- |
| | IV   Informace |
| | INFORMACE ORGÁNŮ, INSTITUCÍ A JINÝCH SUBJEKTŮ EVROPSKÉ UNIE |
| | Evropská komise |
| 2021/C 104 I/01 | Vysvětlivky ke kombinované nomenklatuře Evropské unie | 1 |

Obsah

Strana

IV   Informace

INFORMACE ORGÁNŮ, INSTITUCÍ A JINÝCH SUBJEKTŮ EVROPSKÉ UNIE

Evropská komise

2021/C 104 I/01

Vysvětlivky ke kombinované nomenklatuře Evropské unie

1

---

| CS | |
| --- | --- |

CS

---

IV Informace

INFORMACE ORGÁNŮ, INSTITUCÍ A JINÝCH SUBJEKTŮ EVROPSKÉ UNIE

Evropská komise

| 26.3.2021 | CS | Úřední věstník Evropské unie | CI 104/1 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

26.3.2021

CS

Úřední věstník Evropské unie

CI 104/1

---

Vysvětlivky ke kombinované nomenklatuře Evropské unie

(2021/C 104 I/01)

Podle čl. 9 odst. 1 písm. a) nařízení Rady (EHS) č. 2658/87 (1) se Vysvětlivky ke kombinované nomenklatuře Evropské unie (2) mění takto:

Na straně 369

ve vysvětlivce k podpoložce 8543 70 90 se zrušuje druhý pododstavec.

Na straně 416

ve vysvětlivce k podpoložce 9506 69 90 se druhý a třetí pododstavec zrušují a nahrazují tímto:

„Do této podpoložky však nepatří takzvané „antistresové míčky“, které mají tvar koule a mohou být různými způsoby zdobeny. Obvykle jsou vyrobeny z plastu nebo pryže a jsou určeny k opakovanému stlačení v ruce jako antistresové cvičení. „Antistresové míčky“ a podobné „antistresové předměty“ různých tvarů a vzorů se zařazují do čísla 9503.

---

(1)  Nařízení Rady (EHS) č. 2658/87 ze dne 23. července 1987 o celní a statistické nomenklatuře a o společném celním sazebníku (Úř. věst. L 256, 7.9.1987, s. 1).

(2)  Úř. věst. C 119, 29.3.2019, s. 1.

---
#### CITY MOBILE HOMES, INC. v. UNIFIRST FEDERAL SAVINGS AND LOAN ASSOCIATION and Walter Michael Burge et ux.

No. 50117.

Supreme Court of Mississippi.

Sept. 28, 1977.

*301J. B. Van Slyke, Jr., Hattiesburg, for appellant.

Brunini, Grantham, Grower & Hewes, George P. Hewes, III, W. David Watkins, Jackson, M. M. Roberts, Roberts & Easter-ling, Hattiesburg, William E. Andrews, Jr., Kent F. Hudson, Michael R. Eubanks, Pur-vis, for appellees.

Before PATTERSON, C. J., and SUGG and WALKER, JJ.

AFFIRMED.
#### Roy E. BROWN, Appellant, v. STATE of Florida, Appellee.

No. 70-94.

District Court of Appeal of Florida, Second District.

March 11, 1970.

Appeal dismissed.
U.S. Department Q^^ ^ QJ j^^g Q^J^J counsel 800 Independence Ave., SW. 

of Transportation Washington, DC 20591 

Federal Aviation 

Administration ., 

January 5, 2011 i;;: 

FIRST CLASS MAIL - P?,^ ^ 

Federal Aviation Administration , pr Q O 

600 Independence Avenue, S.W. o ^ 

Wilbur Wright Building - Suite 2W1000 r^ 

Washington, D.C. 20591 

Attn: Hearing Docket Clerk, AGC-430 

RE: DOT Docket No. TBA, FAA case no. 2009SW910268 r ^ C iCst^OJ^ 

To Whom It May Concern, 

Please be advised that Charles Raley is assuming responsibility for the above referenced matter 

on behalf of the Complainant. Please direct all communications for the Complainant to Charles 

Raley, Attorney, Enforcement Division/AGC-3 00, Office of the Chief Counsel, Federal Aviation 

Administration, 800 Independence Avenue, S.W., Washington, D.C. 20591, (202) 267-3357, 

facsimile (202) 267-5106. 

Sincerely, 

Peter J. Lynch 

Assistant Chief Counsel 

for Enforcement 

By: 

Charles Raley, Attorney 

Enforcement Division/AGC-3 00 

Office of the Chief Counsel 

Telephone: (202) 267-3357 

Facsimile: (202)267-5106 

Cc: Donald Mark, Jr. 

Fafinski Mark & Johnson, P.A. 

775 Prairie Center Drive, Suite 400 

Eden Prairie, MN 55344
<Page>

                                                                    EXHIBIT 99.1

                            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 Quarterly Report of dELiA*s Corp. on Form 10-Q for the
period ending November 2, 2002 as filed with the Securities and Exchange
Commission on the date hereof (the "Report"), I, Stephen I. Kahn, Chief
Executive Officer of the Company, certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. 1350, as
adopted pursuant to 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that:

        (1) The Report fully complies with the requirements of section 13(a) or
         15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934; and

        (2) The information contained in the Report fairly presents, in all
         material respects, the financial condition and result of operations of
         the Company.
                               By: /s/ Stephen I. Kahn
                                   --------------------
                                       Stephen I. Kahn
                                       Chief Executive Officer
                                       December 13, 2002
#### Robert Johnson WARREN v. STATE of Florida.

No. 39160.

Supreme Court of Florida.

Dec. 1969.

Certiorari denied without opinion. 227 So.2d 213.
#### George SHULER, Appellant, v. STATE of Florida, Appellee.

No. 69-213.

District Court of Appeal of Florida. Second District.

Nov. 26, 1969.

Robert W. Rawlins, Public Defender, H. Guy Smith, Jr., Asst. Public Defender, Tampa, for appellant.

Earl Faircloth, Atty. Gen., Tallahassee, and Morton J. Hanlon, Asst. Atty. Gen., Lakeland, for appellee.

PER CURIAM.

Appellant was found guilty of robbery and sentenced. He later moved for a complete trial transcript which can be afforded only for the purpose of a direct appeal. As the time had expired for the taking of a direct appeal, his motion for trial transcript was considered as having been made pursuant to CrPR 1.850, 33 F.S.A. and was denied as it did not ask for any relief provided for by 1.850.

The order appealed from is hereby affirmed.

HOBSON, C. J., and LILES and PIERCE, JJ., concur.
From: Christopher Bolduc [mailto:cabolduc@lbl.gov]

Sent: Sunday, November 06, 2011 8:53 AM

To: Richard Parker

Cc: rick.anderson@faypwc.com; tballo@earthjustice.org; ScottB@lvmetals.com;

john.caskey@nema.org; jerry.corkran@cooperindustries.com; john.cymbalsky@ee.doe.gov;

adelaski@standardsasap.org; Teckman@nwcouncil.org; gbf1@pge.com; carlos.gaytan@ge.com;

rgreeson@federalpacific.com; bruce.r.hirsch@bge.com; jhodge@howard.com; mhyland@appanet.org;

dave.millure@metglas.com; snadel@aceee.org; wes.patterson@us.abb.com;

Eric.Petersen@aksteel.com; Raymond.Polinski@atimetals.com; artrosenfeld@gmail.com;

srosenstock@eei.org; rroy@nrdc.org; robert.saint@nreca.coop; chuck.simmons@pgnmail.com;

BermanEconomics@gmail.com; Daniel.Cohen@hq.doe.gov; greg.coulter405@gmail.com;

Jim.creevy@nema.org; ahofmann@publicpower.org; pkumar@publicpower.org;

jmauer@standardsasap.org; Aaron.Meyers@cooperindustries.com; jrossetti@mlgw.org;

Paul.Ryan@hitmet.com; jerry.schoen@aksteel.com; bsmith@federalpacific.com; mwal tner@nrdc.org;

kwinder@mleainc.com; cabolduc@lbl.gov; Brian Coffey; kcoughlin@lbl.gov;

brenda.edwards@ee.doe.gov; jeremiah.freeman@ee.doe.gov; Caitlin Johnson; Zhimei Luo;

emily.marchetti@ee.doe.gov; Michael Rivest; gjrosenquist@lbl.gov; charlied@uus.org;

phopkinson@hvolt.com; James.Lass@cleco.com; maheshsampat@bellsouth.net; DYoung@energy

‐

solution.com; chad.kennedy@us.schneider

‐ electric.com; eduardorobles@eaton.com;

vijay.tendulkar@onyxpower.com; thomas.patzner@us.schneider

‐ electric.com;

carlosgsiqueiros@eaton.com; Raba, Jim

Subject: Re: MV Liquid

‐ Immersed LCC and NIA Results: ZDMH Exclusion Scenario

Results attached. I apologize for the delay.

Sincere ly,

‐ Chris

On Sat, Nov 5, 2011 at 10:06 AM, Christopher Bolduc < cabolduc@lbl.gov > wrote:

> Dear Committee Members,

>

> Please find the draft LCC and NIA results for liquid

‐ immersed

> transformers (design lines 1

‐ 5) with ZDMH as a core material

> excluded from the analysis.>

> Thank you,

> ‐‐ Chris

>

> ‐‐‐‐

> Chris Bolduc

> Energy Efficiency Standards Group

> Environmental Energy Technologies Division Lawrence Berkeley National

> Laboratory t. 416

‐ 535

‐ 7546 c. 647

‐ 832

‐ 4021

>

‐‐

‐‐‐‐

Chris Bolduc

Energy Efficiency Standards Group

Environmental Energy Technologies Division Lawrence Berkeley National Laboratory t. 416

‐ 53 5

‐ 7546 c.

647

‐ 832

‐ 4021
#### Michael TIMKO, Petitioner, v. NATIONAL PLASTERING COMPANY, Inc., Bituminous Casualty Corporation, and the Florida Industrial Commission, Respondents.

No. 38165.

Supreme Court of Florida.

Oct. 8, 1969.

George V. Lanza, of Cornell & Lanza, Miami, for petitioner.

Eugene E. Williams, of Williams & Ja-bara, Miami, Patrick H. Mears and J. Franklin Garner, Tallahassee, for respondents.

CARLTON, Justice.

Our consideration of the record, briefs and arguments in this cause leads us to the conclusion that the order of the Judge of Industrial Claims is supported by competent substantial evidence and comports with the essential requirements of law. U. S. Casualty Co. v. Maryland Casualty Co., 55 So.2d 741 (Fla.1951). The Industrial Commission, therefore, was in error when it reversed the order. Hence the ruling of the Industrial Commission is quashed with directions to reinstate the order of the Judge of Industrial Claims dated January 4, 1968.

It is so ordered.

ERVIN, C. J., and THORNAL, ADKINS and BOYD, JJ., concur.