alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
Exhibit 32.1





CERTIFICATION




Each of
the undersigned officers of Cyalume Technologies Holdings, Inc. (the
"Company") hereby certifies that, to his knowledge, the Company's Quarterly
Report on Form 10-Q/A to which this certification is attached (the
"Report"), as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date
hereof, fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) or 15(d), as
applicable, of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended (the "Exchange
Act"), and that the information contained in the Report fairly presents, in all
material respects, the financial condition and results of operations of the
Company.




Date:
      December 1, 2009
            
            /s/  DEREK
      DUNAWAYDerek
      Dunaway, Chief Executive Officer
              (the
      Principal Executive Officer)  Date:
      December 1, 2009
              
              /s/  MICHAEL
      BIELONKOMichael
      Bielonko, Chief Financial Officer
                  (the
      Principal Financial Officer)




This
certification is being furnished and not filed, and shall not be incorporated
into any document for any purpose, under the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 or
the Securities Act of 1933.
Exhibit 23

                         CONSENT OF INDEPENDENT AUDITORS

We consent to the incorporation by reference in the Registration Statements on
Form S-8 (Nos. 333-74018, 333-74020 and 333-86512) of Indian River Banking
Company, of our report, dated January 27, 2003, relating to the consolidated
balance sheets of Indian River Banking Company as of December 31, 2002 and 2001,
and the related consolidated statements of operations, changes in stockholders'
equity and cash flows for each of the years ended December 31, 2002, 2001 and
2000.


/s/ McGladrey & Pullen, LLP




Fort Lauderdale, Florida
March 5, 2003
#### Maudrey PETERSON and Edwin Hollier v. STATE FARM AUTOMOBILE INSURANCE COMPANY, Cindy Lou Coffell and Allstate Insurance Company.

No. 89-C-1325.

Supreme Court of Louisiana.

June 30, 1989.

In re State Farm Auto. Ins. Co.; Coffell, Cindy Lou; Allstate Insurance Co.; — Defendants); applying for writ of certiorari and/or review; to the Court of Appeal, Third Circuit, No. CR88-0127; Parish of Lafayette, 15th Judicial District Court, Div. “F”, No. 85-2894-F.

Denied.
#### Ramon BRITO, Appellant, v. The STATE of Florida, Appellee.

No. 86-770.

District Court of Appeal of Florida, Third District.

March 24, 1987.

Bennett H. Brummer, Public Defender, and Howard K. Blumberg, Asst. Public Defender, for appellant.

Robert A. Butterworth, Atty. Gen., and Michele L. Crawford, Asst. Atty. Gen., for appellee.

Before NESBITT, DANIEL S. PEARSON and JORGENSON, JJ.

PER CURIAM.

Affirmed. *Breedlove v. State,*413 So.2d 1 (Fla.), *cert. denied,*459 U.S. 882, 103 S.Ct. 184, 74 L.Ed.2d 149 (1982).
Court of Appeals of the State of Georgia Clerk's Office, Atlanta, April 03, 2018. I certify that the above is a true extract from the minutes of the Court of Appeals of Georgia. Witness my signature and the seal of said court hereto affixed the day and year last above written. , Clerk. 

# Court of Appeals of the State of Georgia
ATLANTA, April 03, 2018 The Court of Appeals hereby passes the following order A18D0353. JOHN W. OXENDINE et al. v. GOVERNMENT TRANSPARENCY & CAMPAIGN FINANCE COMMISSION. Upon consideration of the Application for Discretionary Appeal, it is ordered that it be hereby DENIED.
LC NUMBERS: 2017CV294672
* 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.

IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT

No. 07-60892

DAVID D TURNER, By and Through Natural Mother and Next Friend, Joyce

Turner; QUANELLIA TURNER, By and Through Natural Mother and Next

Friend, Joyce Turner; IZEAR FARMER, JR, By and Through Natural Mother

and Next Friend, Joyce Turner; JOYCE TURNER, Individually;

IZEAR FARMER, Individually

Plaintiffs - Appellees

v.

NORTH PANOLA SCHOOL DISTRICT

Defendant - Appellant

Appeal from the United States District Court

for the Northern District of Mississippi

USDC No. 2:06-CV-98

Before REAVLEY, CLEMENT, and PRADO, Circuit Judges.

PER CURIAM:*

The plaintiffs sued the North Panola School District because a school bus

driver repeatedly and arbitrarily suspended the three minor children from riding

the bus only because the children allegedly had a bad odor. The magistrate

judge found for two of the minor children, David and Quanellia, in a bench trial

United States Court of Appeals

Fifth Circuit

F I L E D

November 7, 2008

Charles R. Fulbruge III

Clerk
No. 07-60892

2

and awarded damages under the Mississippi Tort Claims Act. The school

district appeals. We affirm for the reasons assigned in the magistrate judge’s

able opinion. The magistrate judge believed the testimony at trial that the bus

driver trapped David’s hand in the school bus door while driving off, that

Quanellia was sprayed directly with deodorizer, and that the bus driver

arbitrarily suspended the children from bus privileges. Because the evidence

supports the court’s finding that the bus driver acted preemptively and

offensively rather than to control or discipline the children,the court applied the

correct negligence standard. See Pigford v. Jackson Pub. Sch. Dist., 910 So. 2d

575, 579 (Miss. Ct. App. 2005). The evidence also supported the finding that the

children suffered some damage, and we decline to disturb the court’s award. See

Purina Mills, Inc. v. Moak, 575 So. 2d 993, 998 (Miss. 1990); Merritt v. Dueitt,

455 So. 2d 792, 793 (Miss. 1984). The judgment is not against the overwhelming

weight of the evidence.

AFFIRMED.
Skip to main content (Press Enter).
 Toggle navigation
            
            
            
            U.S. Air Force
                    U.S. Air Force
        Search
                    Search AF.mil:
                        Search
                Search AF.mil:
                    Search
    Home





    News
    
        Commentaries

    Features

    Photos

    Art

    Air Force TV

    Radio

    Week in Photos

    Coronavirus Disease 2019





    About Us
    
        Air Force Senior Leaders    
        SECAF

    CSAF

    CMSAF

    Biographies

    Adjunct Professors

    Fact Sheets

    Commander's Call Topics    
        CCT Archive

    CSAF Reading List    
        2018 CSAF Reading List

    2017 CSAF Reading List

    2016 CSAF Reading List

    2015 CSAF Reading List

    2014 CSAF Reading List

    2013 CSAF Reading List

    2012 CSAF Reading List

    2011 CSAF Reading List

    2010 CSAF Reading List

    2009 CSAF Reading List

    2008 CSAF Reading List

    2007 CSAF Reading List

    2006 CSAF Reading List

    50 Years of the CMSAF

    The Book

    Speeches Archive    
        Former AF Top 3 Viewpoints and Speeches

    Air Force Warrior Games 2019

    Air Force Strategic Documents

    Desert Storm 25th Anniversary

    DoD Warrior Games

    Portraits in Courage    
        Portraits In Courage Vol. I

    Portraits In Courage Vol. II

    Portraits In Courage Vol. III

    Portraits In Courage Vol. IV

    Portraits In Courage Vol. V

    Portraits In Courage Vol. VI

    Portraits In Courage Vol. VII

    Portraits In Courage Vol. VIII

    Portraits In Courage Vol. IX

    Portraits In Courage Vol. X

    Chapman MoH

    The Air Force We Need

    Events 2020

    Focus on Priorities





    AF Sites
    
        Social Media Sites

    Site Registration





    AF Content Management





    Careers





    Contact Us  
 Home
  News
  Photos
 Air Force Photos Search
 Search
 Upload Date Upload DatePhoto DateTitle
  Full Size (0.54 MB)
 
 kc-46 C-17
 Photo Gallery
 Quick Links
                            Join the Air ForceSite MapQuestionsContact UsRSSFOIAIGAF SitesAccessibilityEEOLink DisclaimerStrategic APRSuicide PreventionSAPRUSA.govNo FEAR Act
                    Connect
                    Official United States Air Force Website
                        Subscribe to USAF News and Information
          Submit
UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 05-7207

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Plaintiff - Appellee, versus MARIO SALAS, Defendant - Appellant. Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Virginia, at Richmond. James R. Spencer, Chief District Judge. (CR-98-166) Submitted: November 17, 2005 Decided: November 29, 2005 Before WILKINSON, LUTTIG, and WILLIAMS, Circuit Judges. Dismissed by unpublished per curiam opinion. Mario Salas, Appellant Pro Se. Stephen David Schiller, OFFICE OF THE UNITED STATES ATTORNEY, Richmond, Virginia, for Appellee. Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. See Local Rule 36(c).- 2 - PER CURIAM: Mario Salas seeks to appeal the district court’s order denying relief on his motions filed under Fed. R. Civ. P. 59(e) & 60(b). To appeal these orders in a post-conviction proceeding, Salas must establish his entitlement to a certificate of appealability. Reid v. Angelone , 369 F.3d 363, 369 (4th Cir. 2004). A certificate of appealability will not issue absent “a substantial showing of the denial of a constitutional right.” 28 U.S.C. § 2253(c)(2) (2000). A prisoner satisfies this standard by demonstrating that reasonable jurists would find that the district court’s assessment of his constitutional claims is debatable and that any dispositive procedural rulings by the district court are also debatable or wrong. SeeMiller-El v. Cockrell , 537 U.S. 322, 336 (2003); Slack v. McDaniel , 529 U.S. 473, 484 (2000); Rose v. Lee , 252 F.3d 676, 683 (4th Cir. 2001). We have independently reviewed the record and conclude that Salas has not made the requisite showing. Accordingly, we deny a certificate of appealability and dismiss the appeal. Additionally, we construe Salas’ notice of appeal and informal brief as an application to file a second or successive motion under 28 U.S.C. § 2255 (2000). United States v. Winestock , 340 F.3d 200, 208 (4th Cir. 2003). In order to obtain authorization to file a successive § 2255 motion, a movant must assert a claim based on either: (1) a new rule of constitutional- 3 - law or (2) newly discovered evidence. 28 U.S.C. § 2255. Salas’ claim does not satisfy either of these standards. Therefore, we decline to authorize a successive § 2255 motion. 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.

DISMISSED
```

[Federal Register Volume 77, Number 24 (Monday, February 6, 2012)]
[Notices]
[Page 5868]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Printing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2012-2566]

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

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

Public Availability of the Department of Transportation FY 2011 
Service Contract Inventory

AGENCY: Department of Transportation.

ACTION: Notice of Public Availability of FY 2011 Service Contract 
Inventories.

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

SUMMARY: In accordance with Section 743 of Division C of the 
Consolidated Appropriations Act of 2010 (Pub. L. 111-117), Department 
of Transportation is publishing this notice to advise the public of the 
availability of the FY 2011 Service Contract Inventory. This inventory 
provides information on service contract actions over $25,000 that were 
made in FY 2011. The information is organized by function to show how 
contracted resources are distributed throughout the agency. The 
inventory has been developed in accordance with guidance issued on 
November 5, 2010 by the Office of Management and Budget's Office of 
Federal Procurement Policy (OFPP). OFPP's guidance is available at 
http://www.whitehouse.gov/sites/default/files/omb/procurement/memo/service-contract-inventories-guidance-11052010.pdf. Department of 
Transportation has posted its inventory and a summary of the inventory 
and the Service Contract Inventory Analysis Report on the Department of 
Transportation's homepage at the following link: http://www.dot.gov/ost/m60/serv_contract_inv_2011.htm.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Questions regarding the service 
contract inventory should be directed to Ames Owens in the Senior 
Procurement Executive office at (202) 366-9614 or ames.owens@dot.gov.

     Dated: January 31, 2012.
Ames Owens,
Associate Director of Commercial Services Management.
[FR Doc. 2012-2566 Filed 2-3-12; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4910-9x-P
```
#### Alton Lee JACKSON, Appellant, v. STATE of Florida, Appellee.

No. 85-2321.

District Court of Appeal of Florida, Second District.

May 1, 1987.

James Marion Moorman, Public Defender, and Paul C. Helm, Asst. Public Defender, Bartow, for appellant.

Robert A. Butterworth, Atty. Gen., Tallahassee, and Erica M. Raffel, Asst. Atty. Gen., Tampa, for appellee.

PER CURIAM.

Affirmed.

LEHAN, A.C.J., and SANDERLIN, J., concur.

HALL, J., dissents with opinion.

HALL, Judge,

dissenting.

I would affirm the conviction but find that the imposition of costs under section 27.3455, Florida Statutes, violated the ex post facto provisions of the United States and Florida Constitutions. *Bowman v. State,*495 So.2d 868 (Fla. 2d DCA 1986). Accordingly, I would vacate that portion of the judgment in this case imposing court costs pursuant to section 27.3455, Florida Statutes (1985). I would also certify the *1009question set out in *Bowman*to the Florida Supreme Court as a question of great public importance.
Document Headings

                    Document headings vary by document type but may contain                    the following:                  
                -                       the agency or agencies that issued and signed a document                    
                -                       the number of the CFR title and the number of each part                      the document amends, proposes to amend, or is directly                      related to                    
                -                       the agency docket number / agency internal file number                    
                -                       the RIN which identifies each regulatory action listed in                      the Unified Agenda of Federal Regulatory and Deregulatory                      Actions                    

                    See the                                          Document Drafting Handbook                                        for more details.                  

###### Department of Transportation

###### Office of the Secretary

                    The following Applications for Certificates of Public Convenience and Necessity and Foreign Air Carrier Permits were filed under Subpart B (formerly Subpart Q) of the Department of Transportation's Procedural Regulations (See 14 CFR 301.201*et seq.*). The due date for Answers, Conforming Applications, or Motions to Modify Scope are set forth below for each application. Following the Answer period DOT may process the application by expedited procedures. Such procedures may consist of the adoption of a show-cause order, a tentative order, or in appropriate cases a final order without further proceedings.                

*Docket Number:*                     DOT-OST-2011-0232.                

*Date Filed:*                     December 20, 2011.                

*Due Date for Answers, Conforming Applications, or Motion to Modify Scope:*                     January 10, 2012.                

## Description

Application of Atlantic Southeast Airlines, Inc. notifying the Department, pursuant to the requirements of 14 CFR 215.4, of a change in the carrier's name to “ExpressJet Airlines, Inc.” and requesting the reissuance of its certificates of public convenience and necessity and other economic authorities and requests that the trade names “ASA,” “Atlantic Southeast,” and “Atlantic Southeast Airlines, Inc.” be registered for use in its operations.

Renee V. Wright,

 Program Manager, Docket Operations, Federal Register Liaison.

[FR Doc. 2012-683 Filed 1-13-12; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 4910-9X-P
#### STATE ex rel. Larry CLOUATRE v. Jack F. DONNELLY, Warden.

No. 86-KH-2551.

Supreme Court of Louisiana.

Sept. 25, 1987.

In re Clouatre, Larry; applying for writ óf certiorari and/or review; Parish of Orleans, Criminal District Court, Div. “F”, No. 304-286; to the Court of Appeal, Fourth Circuit, No. K-6553.

Denied.
1 The Honorable James M. Rosenbaum, United States District Judge for the District of Minnesota. ___________ No. 95-2008

___________ Richard W. Miller, * * Appellant, * * Appeal from the United States v. * District Court for the * District of Minnesota. United States of America, * [UNPUBLISHED] * Appellee. *

___________ Submitted: January 18, 1996 Filed: January 24, 1996

___________ Before McMILLIAN, WOLLMAN, and MURPHY, Circuit Judges.

___________ PER CURIAM.
Richard W. Miller appeals the district court's 1denial of his 28 U.S.C. § 2255 motion. We decline to address the arguments Miller raises for the first time on appeal. See United States v. Dixon , 51 F.3d 1376, 1383 (8th Cir. 1995). We conclude that the district court did not abuse its discretion in deciding that an evidentiary hearing was not warranted. See Engelen v. United States , 68 F.3d 238, 240 (8th Cir. 1995). As to Miller's claims presented to the district court, we conclude that no error of law appears in the district court's order. Accordingly, we affirm. See 8th Cir. R. 47B.

A true copy.

Attest:

CLERK, U. S. COURT OF APPEALS, EIGHTH CIRCUIT.
#### Roosevelt CUNNY v. STATE.

CR-91-1629.

Court of Criminal Appeals of Alabama.

Sept. 30, 1993.

Joan Singleton, Bessemer, for appellant.

James H. Evans, Atty. Gen., and Anita Young, Asst. Atty. Gen., for appellee.

*ON RETURN TO REMAND*

TAYLOR, Judge.

The appellant, Roosevelt Cunny, was convicted of distributing a controlled substance, cocaine, in violation of § 13A-12-211, Code of Alabama 1975. He was sentenced as a habitual felony offender to 10 years in prison, and his sentence was enhanced with an additional 5 years’ imprisonment under § 13A-12 250, Code of Alabama 1975. We remanded this cause to the Circuit Court for Jefferson County so that a new sentencing hearing could be held. *Cunny v. State,*629 So.2d 693 (Ala.Cr.App.1993). While the cause was pending on remand the appellant filed a petition for a writ of certiorari with the Alabama Supreme Court. On June 25, 1993, the Alabama Supreme Court denied certiorari review without opinion. 629 So.2d 693 (1993).

The trial court has complied with our directions and has held a new sentencing hearing. The circuit court filed a return order with this court and this cause was resubmitted to this court on August 16,1993. At the hearing, the appellant admitted to one prior felony conviction. The appellant also stipulated that the sale of the controlled substance occurred within 3 miles of a school. The court sentenced the appellant as a habitual felon to 10 ye^rs in the penitentiary. The court further enhanced his sentence an additional 5 years pursuant to the schoolyard statute, § 13A-12-250, Code of Alabama 1975. The appellant’s conviction and sentence are now due to be affirmed.

AFFIRMED.

All the Judges concur.
Exhibit 10.10


                                 October 9, 1992



Mr. Dennis Hiller
The Akro Corporation
1212 Seventh Street, S.W.
Canton, Ohio  44707

Dear Dennis:

         This is to advise you that in the event your employment with Collins &
Aikman Corporation (the "Company") is terminated by the Company or any successor
company (other than for "Cause") at any time within three months prior to or one
year following a "change in control" of the Company, then in lieu of any
severance that may be available to you under any severance pay policy or
practices of the Company or any of its subsidiaries or under any employment
agreement, you shall receive an amount equal to two times your annual base
salary as in effect at the time of such termination. Such amount shall be paid,
at the sole discretion of the Company, either in a lump sum promptly after your
termination or on a periodic basis for the two-year period following your
termination in accordance with the Company's normal pay practice. For purposes
hereof, a "change of control" shall mean the sale or transfer, whether in one
transaction or several, of more than 50% of the voting common stock of the
Company to any person or persons other than Collins & Aikman Group, Inc. or any
subsidiary or affiliate of Collins & Aikman Group, Inc. For purposes thereof,
"Cause" shall mean (i) fraud or misappropriation with respect to any business of
the Company or an affiliate of the Company or intentional, material damage to
any property or business of the Company or an affiliate of the Company, (ii)
willful failure by you to perform your duties and responsibilities and to carry
out your authority, (iii) willful malfeasance or misfeasance or breach of
fiduciary duty or representation to the Company or an affiliate of the Company,
(iv) willful failure to act in accordance with any specific lawful instructions
of a majority of the Board of Directors of the Company or an affiliate of the
Company or (v) conviction of you of a felony.
         This letter agreement shall not create an employment agreement and
shall not affect the right of the Company to terminate your employment at any
time without notice. The Company may terminate this letter agreement, if, prior
to the date that is three months prior to a change of control of the Company,
you cease to hold your current position or a higher executive position with the
Company.

                                          Very truly yours


                                          /s/  James R. Birle
                                          James R. Birle
                                          Co-Chairman of the Board

Accepted:


/s/  Dennis Hiller