alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
[Federal Register Volume 83, Number 130 (Friday, July 6, 2018)]
[Notices]
[Pages 31571-31572]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2018-14484]


=======================================================================
-----------------------------------------------------------------------

NATIONAL SCIENCE FOUNDATION


Committee Management Renewals

    The National Science Foundation (NSF) management officials having 
responsibility for the advisory committees listed below have determined 
that renewing these groups for another two years is necessary and in 
the public interest in connection with the performance of duties 
imposed upon the Director, National Science Foundation (NSF), by 42 
U.S.C. 1861 et seq. This determination follows consultation with the 
Committee Management Secretariat, General Services Administration.

Committees

Advisory Committee for Computer and Information Science and Engineering 
#1115
Advisory Committee for Mathematical and Physical Sciences #66
Advisory Committee for Social, Behavioral, and Economic Sciences #1171
Business and Operations Advisory Committee #9556
Committee on Equal Opportunities in Sciences and Engineering #1173
Proposal Review Panel for Astronomical Sciences #1186
Proposal Review Panel for Chemical, Bioengineering, Environmental, and 
Transport Systems #1189
Proposal Review Panel for Chemistry #1191
Proposal Review Panel for Civil, Mechanical, and Manufacturing 
Innovation #1194
Proposal Review Panel for Computer and Network Systems #1207
Proposal Review Panel for Computing & Communication Foundations #1192
Proposal Review Panel for Cyberinfrastructure #1185
Proposal Review Panel for Electrical, Communications, and Cyber Systems 
#1196
Proposal Review Panel for Engineering Education and Centers #173
Proposal Review Panel for Graduate Education #57
Proposal Review Panel for Human Resource Development #1199
Proposal Review Panel for Information and Intelligent Systems #1200
Proposal Review Panel for Materials Research #1203
Proposal Review Panel for Mathematical Sciences #1204

[[Page 31572]]

Proposal Review Panel for Physics #1208
Proposal Review Panel for Polar Programs #1209
Proposal Review Panel for Undergraduate Education #1214

    Effective date for renewal is June 29, 2018. For more information, 
please contact Crystal Robinson, NSF, at (703) 292-8687.

    Dated: June 29, 2018.
Crystal Robinson,
Committee Management Officer.
[FR Doc. 2018-14484 Filed 7-5-18; 8:45 am]
 BILLING CODE 7555-01-P
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<ARTICLE> 5
<LEGEND>
This schedule contains summary financial information extracted from the
Consolidated Balance Sheet and Statement of Earnings of Gerber Scientific, Inc.
as of and for the three-month period ended July 31, 1997 and is qualified in its
entirety by reference to such financial statements.
</LEGEND>
       
<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   3-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          APR-30-1998
<PERIOD-END>                               JUL-31-1997
<CASH>                                          16,204
<SECURITIES>                                         0
<RECEIVABLES>                                   92,552
<ALLOWANCES>                                         0
<INVENTORY>                                     64,671
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                               186,007
<PP&E>                                         123,790
<DEPRECIATION>                                  60,179
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                 332,279
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                           63,730
<BONDS>                                              0
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                        23,347
<OTHER-SE>                                     226,833
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                   332,279
<SALES>                                         98,961
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                                98,961
<CGS>                                           55,905
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                   94,436
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                               (2,340)
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                     0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                                  94
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                  6,771
<INCOME-TAX>                                     2,200
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                              4,571
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                     4,571
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                      .19
<EPS-DILUTED>                                      .19
        

</TABLE>
IV

103D CONGRESS

1ST SESSION H. RES. 78

Providing amounts from the contingent fund of the House for expenses

of investigations and studies by the Committee on Public Works and

Transportation in the first session of the One Hundred Third Congress.

IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

FEBRUARY 4, 1993

Mr. MINETA submitted the following resolution; which was referred to the

Committee on House Administration

RESOLUTION

Providing amounts from the contingent fund of the House

for expenses of investigations and studies by the Committee on Public Works and Transportation in the first

session of the One Hundred Third Congress.

1 Resolved, That (a) for expenses of investigations and

2 studies by the Committee on Public Works and Transpor3 tation (hereinafter in this resolution referred to as the

4 ‘‘Committee’’), including expenses for—

5 (1) procurement of consultant services under

6 section 202(i) of the Legislative Reorganization Act

7 of 1946; and
2

HRES 78 IH

1 (2) provision of assistance for members of pro2 fessional staff in obtaining specialized training under

3 section 202(j) of such Act;

4 there shall be paid out of the contingent fund of the House

5 not more than $3,103,247.

6 (b) Not more than $50,000 of the amount specified

7 in subsection (a) may be used for consultant services re8 ferred to in paragraph (1) of such subsection and not more

9 than $30,000 of such amount may be used for specialized

10 training referred to in paragraph (2) of such subsection.

11 SEC. 2. Payments under this resolution shall be made

12 on vouchers authorized by the Committee, signed by the

13 Chairman of the Committee, and approved by the Commit14 tee on House Administration.

15 SEC. 3. Amounts shall be available under this resolu16 tion for investigations and studies carried out during the

17 period beginning at noon on January 3, 1993, and ending

18 immediately before noon on January 3, 1994.

19 SEC. 4. Amounts made available under this resolution

20 shall be expended in accordance with regulations pre21 scribed by the Committee on House Administration.

Æ
[No. 366-3.

Division Three.

December 13, 1971.]

#### Daniel C. McDougald *et al., Respondents,*v. Edward N. Getoor *&*Associates, Inc., *Appellant.*

Appeal from a judgment of the Superior Court for Spokane County, No. 197174, Raymond F. Kelly, J., entered September 4, 1970. *Affirmed*by unpublished opinion pursuant to RCW 2.06.040.
#### SEABOARD COAST LINE RAILROAD COMPANY, a railroad corporation, Appellant, v. Nathan D. FORD, Jr., Appellee. SEABOARD COAST LINE RAILROAD COMPANY, a railroad corporation, Appellant, v. W. R. BRITT, Appellee.

Nos. N-41, N-42.

District Court of Appeal of Florida, First District.

May 14, 1970.

J. Edwin Gay, of Rogers, Towers, Bailey, Jones & Gay, Jacksonville, for appellant.

Alan R. Schwartz, of Horton & Schwartz, and Green & Hastings, Miami, for appellees.

PER CURIAM.

Interlocutory appeal dismissed on authority of Shaw v. Seaboard Coast Line Railroad Company, 229 So.2d 275 (Fla.App.1970), cert. denied March 24, 1970, 237 So.2d 540 (Fla.), and Adams v. Seaboard Coast Line Railroad Company, 224 So.2d 797 (Fla.App.1969).

JOHNSON, C. J., and WIGGINTON and SPECTOR, JJ., concur.
EXHIBIT 32.2

WRITTEN STATEMENT OF CHIEF FINANCIAL OFFICER
 PURSUANT TO RULE 13a-14(b) UNDER THE
SECURITIES EXCHANGE ACT OF 1934
AND 18 U.S.C. SECTION 1350

The undersigned, the Chief Financial Officer of Gerber Scientific, Inc. (the "Company"), hereby certifies that, on the date hereof:

(i)	the Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q of the Company for the fiscal quarter ended October  31, 2004 filed on the date hereof with the Securities and Exchange Commission (the "Report") fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934; and

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

Dated:  December 10, 2004



| | /s/  Marc T. Giles                    | 
| | ------------------------------------- | 
| | Marc T. Giles
Chief Financial Officer | 



The foregoing certification is being furnished solely pursuant to Rule 13a-14(b) under the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 (the "Exchange Act") and 18 U.S.C. Section 1350 and is not being filed as part of the Report or as a separate disclosure document.  This certification shall not be deemed "filed" for purposes of Section 18 of the Exchange Act or otherwise subject to liability under that section.  This certification shall not be deemed to be incorporated by reference into any filing under the Securities Act of 1933 or the Exchange Act except to the extent this Exhibit 32 is expressly and specifically incorporated by reference in any such filing.
No. 10643.

#### W. H. Kiblinger & Co. *v.*Drought.

Decided January 19, 1909.

Error to Circuit Court of Ashtabula county.

*Mr. Allen M.*Cox, for plaintiff in error.

*Mr. A. J. Trunkey,*for defendant in error.

Judgment of circuit court reversed and judgment of court of common pleas affirmed.

Spear, Davis, Sitaucic and Price, JJ., concur.
Exhibit 32-1

CERTIFICATION PURSUANT TO

SECTION 906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002

18 U.S.C. SECTION 1350

In connection with the Quarterly Report of The Goldfield Corporation (the Company) on Form 10-Q for the nine months ended
September 30, 2010 as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the Report), I, John H. Sottile, Chairman of the Board of Directors, President and 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.
| | --- | ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

A signed original of this written statement required by Section 906 has been provided to The Goldfield Corporation and
will be retained by The Goldfield Corporation and furnished to the Securities and Exchange Commission or its staff upon request.



/s/    John H.
SottileJohn H. SottileChairman of the Board, President and Chief Executive Officer (Principal Executive Officer)November 12, 2010




30
EXHIBIT 32.2



CERTIFICATION PURSUANT TO 18 U.S.C. SECTION 1350,

AS ADOPTED PURSUANT TO SECTION 906 OF THE

SARBANES-OXLEY ACT HAVE 2002



Pursuant to Section 906 of the
Sarbanes-Oxely Act of 2002 (subsections (a) and (b) of Section 1350, Chapter 63 of Title 18, United States Code), the undersigned officer of GIANT GROUP, LTD. (the Company), does hereby certify, to such officers knowledge, that the
Companys Annual Report on Form 10-K for the year ended December 31, 2003 (Form 10-K) fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended and the information contained in
the Form 10-K fairly presents, in all material respects, the financial condition and result of the Company.



/s/    PASQUALE A.
AMBROGIOPasquale A. AmbrogioChief Financial OfficerMarch 29, 2004




A signed original of this
written statement required by Section 906 has been provided to the Company and will be retained by the Company and furnished to the Securities and Exchange Commission or its staff upon request.
#### Robert James WITTECK, Appellant, v. STATE of Florida, Appellee.

No. 70-27.

District Court of Appeal of Florida, Third District.

Aug. 25, 1970.

Robert James Witteck, in pro. per.

Earl Faircloth, Atty. Gen., for appellee.

Before PEARSON, C. J., and CHARLES CARROLL and BARKDULL, JJ.

PER CURIAM.

This court, proceeding in the manner outlined and recommended by the Supreme Court of the United States in Anders v. California, 386 U.S. 738, 744, 87 S.Ct. 1396, 18 L.Ed.2d 493, having deferred ruling on a motion of the public defender to withdraw as counsel for the indigent defendant-appellant, and having furnished appellant with a copy of the public defender’s memorandum brief, and having allowed the appellant a reasonable specified time within which to raise any points that he chose in support of his appeal, the appellant having failed to respond thereto, on consideration thereof upon full examination of the proceedings we conclude that the appeal is wholly frivolous. Whereupon, the public defender’s said motion to withdraw is granted, and the order or judgment appealed is hereby affirmed.
UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT
No. 97-1828
DONALD J. STRABLE, Plaintiff - Appellant, versus SOUTH CAROLINA DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE, Defendant - Appellee. Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of South Carolina, at Gree nville. G. Ross Anderson, Jr., District Judge. (CA-97-1141-6-13AK) Submitted: August 14, 1997 Decided: August 21, 1997 Before NIEMEYER, Circuit Judge, and BUTZNER and PHILLIPS, Senior Circuit Judges. Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion. Donald J. Strable, Appellant Pro Se. Ronald Keith Wray II, GIBBES, GALLIVAN, WHITE & BOYD, P.A., Greenville, South Carolina, for Appellee. Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. See Local Rule 36(c).2 PER CURIAM: Appellant appeals the district court's order dismissing his civil action. We have reviewed the record and the district court's opinion accepting the recommendation of the magistrate judge and find no reversible error. Accordingly, we affirm on the reasoning of the district court. Strable v. South Carolina Dep't of Justice , No. CA-97-1141-6-13AK (D.S.C. June 12, 1997). We dispense with oral argument because the facts and legal contentions are adequately presented in the materials before the court and argument would not aid the decisional process.

AFFIRMED
_______________________________________ __ Michigan Supreme Court 

# Order

Lansing, Michigan



### May 29, 2008 Clifford W. Taylor, Chief Justice


### 135540 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: 135540 COA: 271656 Allegan CC: 05-014553-FC LARRY EUGENE KAHLEY, Defendant-Appellant.

________________ _______________ __________/

On order of the Court, the application fo r leave to appeal the November 13, 2007 judgment of the Court of Appeals is consid ered, and it is DENIED, because we are not persuaded that the questions presented should be reviewed by this Court.

s0521 I, Corbin R. Davis, Clerk of the Mi chigan Supreme Cour t, certify that the foregoing is a true and complete copy of the order entered at the direction of the Court.

May 29, 2008

Clerk
**Exhibit 23.2**

**CONSENT OF INDEPENDENT AUDITORS**

Weconsent to the incorporation by reference in the Registration Statements(Form S-8 Nos. 33-44012, 33-44599, 33-64032, 333-2676, 333-70057 and333-57130) pertaining to the Stock Option Plan and the Non-employee DirectorStock Option Plan of our report dated April 14, 2004, with respect to theconsolidated financial statements and schedule of Fischer Imaging Corp.included in the Annual Report (Form 10-K) for the year endedDecember 31, 2004.

ERNST &YOUNG LLP

Denver,ColoradoMarch 30, 2005

----
IV

103D CONGRESS

2D SESSION H. RES. 473

To raise awareness about domestic violence against women in the United

States.

IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

JUNE 30, 1994

Mr. MANTON (for himself, Mr. PALLONE, Ms. ROYBAL-ALLARD, Mr. OWENS,

and Mr. MEEHAN) submitted the following resolution; which was referred

to the Committee on Education and Labor

RESOLUTION

To raise awareness about domestic violence against women

in the United States.

Whereas men must start talking to men about ending the violence against women, and start teaching their sons that

the physical, sexual, emotional, or financial abuse of

women will not be tolerated by our society;

Whereas corporate America must speak up and use its vast

resources to increase awareness about domestic violence,

as they have done successfully through national campaigns against substance abuse and child abuse;

Whereas the Center for Disease Control reports that domestic

violence is the leading cause of injury for women between

the ages of 15 and 44, more than car accidents, rapes,

and muggings combined;
2

•HRES 473 IH

Whereas approximately 29 percent of all female murder victims in 1992 were killed by their husbands or boyfriends;

Whereas 25 percent of women treated in hospital emergency

rooms are there as a result of domestic violence;

Whereas 2,500,000 women are victimized each year, and 1

out of every 3 women killed dies as a result of domestic

battery;

Whereas the American Medical Association estimates that 25

percent of all women in the United States will be abused

by a current or former partner some time during their

lives;

Whereas every 15 seconds a woman is battered in a domestic

dispute; and

Whereas every 6 hours a woman dies in the United States

as a result of domestic violence: Now, therefore, be it

1 Resolved, That it is the sense of the House of Rep2 resentatives that there is a need for a national campaign

3 to heighten awareness about domestic battery, and to end

4 the silence that surrounds this type of violence.

Æ
#### Mary R. BROOME and Her Husband, James P. Broome, Petitioners, v. Brigida TEJON and Victor Castro, Respondents.

No. 42433.

Supreme Court of Florida.

July 17, 1972.

Certiorari dismissed. 261 So.2d 197.

ERVIN, Acting C. J., and CARLTON, ADKINS, BOYD and McCAIN, JJ., concur.
IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT

No. 13-10942

Summary Calendar

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,

Plaintiff-Appellee

v.

FEDERICO DIAZ-NAVARRO,

Defendant-Appellant

Appeal from the United States District Court

for the Northern District of Texas

USDC No. 4:13-CR-44-1

Before STEWART, Chief Judge, and JOLLY and SOUTHWICK, Circuit 

Judges.

PER CURIAM:*

Federico Diaz-Navarro (Diaz) appeals the 36-month above-range 

sentence imposed following his guilty plea conviction for reentering the United 

States illegally after removal. We affirm.

Diaz contends that the district court abused its discretion by 

misapplying departure provisions of the Sentencing Guidelines. The 

* 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

FILED

May 8, 2014

Lyle W. Cayce

Clerk

 

 Case: 13-10942 Document: 00512623645 Page: 1 Date Filed: 05/08/2014
No. 13-10942

Government argues that the sentence is not a departure from the guidelines 

sentencing range but is instead a variance above that range. Given that Diaz’s 

“sentence was not unreasonable,” as explained below, we need not decide 

whether it was authorized by the Guidelines or was a “non-Guidelines 

sentence.” United States v. Jones, 444 F.3d 430, 441 (5th Cir. 2006). 

The characterization of a sentence is irrelevant “if the sentence imposed 

was reasonable under the totality of the relevant statutory factors.” United 

States v. Brantley, 537 F.3d 347, 349 (5th Cir. 2008) (quoting Jones, 444 F.3d 

at 441). The district court considered the advisory guideline range and all the 

factors mentioned in 18 U.S.C. § 3553(a). The court was of the opinion that a 

sentence above the guidelines range was warranted based on the following: 

Diaz’s history and characteristics and the nature and circumstances of the 

offense; the need for the sentence to reflect the offense’s seriousness, promote 

respect for the law, and provide just punishment; and the need to protect the 

public from recidivism by Diaz. “The record . . . demonstrates the 

reasonableness of the district court’s conclusions.” Brantley, 537 F.3d at 349. 

The offense of conviction was the type that Diaz had committed before and for 

which he had been punished briefly before without apparent deterrent effect,

and his history of other crimes supported a conclusion that there was a risk of 

recidivism. Diaz thus exhibited personal characteristics indicating “that a long 

incarceration period was required to provide just punishment, to ensure 

adequate deterrence, and to protect the public.” Brantley, 537 F.3d at 350. 

AFFIRMED.

2

 Case: 13-10942 Document: 00512623645 Page: 2 Date Filed: 05/08/2014
#### Gwendolyn A. HODGE, Appellant, v. OLD REPUBLIC INSURANCE COMPANY, a corporation authorized to do business in the State of Florida, and Ernest O. Hodge, Jr., Appellees.

No. 70-45.

District Court of Appeal of Florida, Fourth District.

July 8, 1970.

PER CURIAM.

Affirmed.
# C_2023112EN.01000902.xml

| 27.3.2023 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 112/9 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

27.3.2023

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 112/9

---

Judgment of the Court (Seventh Chamber) of 9 February 2023 (request for a preliminary ruling from the Bundesfinanzhof — Germany) — A v Finanzamt X

(Case C-713/21, (1) Finanzamt X (Supplies of the owner of a stable))

(Reference for a preliminary ruling - Common system of value added tax (VAT) - Directive 2006/112/EC - Article 2(1)(c) - Concept of ‘supplies of services for consideration’ - Single supply consisting in the stabling and training of horses as well as their participation in competitions - Remuneration by assigning half of the claim to prize money corresponding to the prizes won by horses in competitions)

(2023/C 112/12)

Language of the case: German

Referring court

Bundesfinanzhof

Parties to the main proceedings

Applicant: A

Defendant: Finanzamt X

Operative part of the judgment

Article 2(1)(c) of Council Directive 2006/112/EC of 28 November 2006 on the common system of value added tax

must be interpreted as meaning that:

a single supply provided by the owner of a competition horse training stable, consisting in the stabling and training of horses and the participation of horses in competitions constitutes a supply of services for consideration, within the meaning of that provision, where the horse owner remunerates that supply by assigning half of the claim to prize money to which he or she is entitled in the event of successful participation in a competition.

---

(1)  OJ C 119, 14.3.2022.

---
#### Richard Vernon WHITE, Appellant, v. STATE of Florida, Appellee.

No. H-447.

District Court of Appeal of Florida. First District.

Jan. 23, 1968.

William W. Judge, Daytona Beach, for appellant.

Earl Faircloth, Atty. Gen., and George R. Georgieff, Asst. Atty. Gen., for ap-pellee.

PER CURIAM.

Affirmed on the authority of Cirack v. State, 201 So.2d 706 (Fla.1967).

CARROLL, DONALD’K., Acting Chief Judge, and RAWLS and JOHNSON, JJ., concur.