alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
# SCALE About

SCALE is a comprehensive modeling and simulation suite for nuclear safety analysis and design developed and maintained by Oak Ridge National Laboratory under contract with the U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission, U.S. Department of Energy, and the National Nuclear Security Administration to perform reactor physics, criticality safety, radiation shielding, and spent fuel characterization for nuclear facilities and transportation/storage package designs.

The **8th SCALE Users’ Group Workshop** (hybrid event) will be held June 5-7, 2024. Register here.

The SCALE 6.2.4 validation report four-volume set is now available on OSTI:
                              - SCALE 6.2.4: Validation Overview
                              - SCALE 6.2.4 Validation: Nuclear Criticality Safety
                              - SCALE 6.2.4 Validation: Reactor Physics
                              - SCALE 6.2.4 Validation: Radiation Shielding

The SCALE 6.3.0 validation reports will be released in 2023 with an additional volume specifically for spent fuel inventory and decay heat (Spent Fuel Applications) and additional Polaris and PARCS LWR validation in the Reactor Physics volume.

The SCALE 6.3 Online Manual is now available.

The SCALE 2024 Calendar is now available.

The **8th SCALE Users’ Group Workshop** (hybrid event) will be held June 5-7, 2024. Register here.

The SCALE website contains the following major sections:
                              - Overview : additional details on SCALE capabilities.
                              - Releases : details on SCALE releases.
                              - Training : information on our upcoming training courses.
                              - References : links to downloadable scientific journal articles and reports with bibtex for easy citing of SCALE references. 
                              - Support : how to get help with SCALE, including presentations, annual reports, newsletters, and QA documents.  

Please direct any inquiries to scalehelp@ornl.gov. 

For general SCALE references, please cite the latest manual.

W. A. Wieselquist, R. A. Lefebvre, Eds., *SCALE 6.3.1 User Manual*, ORNL/TM-SCALE-6.3.1, UT-Battelle, LLC, Oak Ridge National Laboratory, Oak Ridge, TN (2023). 

For more specific references see https://www.ornl.gov/scale/references.

 

### Contact

WilliamA Wieselquist

wieselquiswa@ornl.gov

Get SCALE
**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 Annual Report of Power3 Medical Products, Inc (the
“Company”) on Form 10-KSB for the period ended  December
      31, 2007 as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof
      (the “Report”), I, Marin J. McCormick, Chief Accounting Officer of the Company,
      certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. section  1350
      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 SecuritiesExchange
              Act of 1934; and
|--- | ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------




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



April
                14, 2008
            By:
            /s/   Marion
                McCormickMarion
                J. McCormick
              Chief
                Accounting Officer
#### Mossak, Appellant, vs. Pfost, by Guardian *ad litem,*Respondent.

*November 8*—

December *5, 1950.*

*75For the appellant there was a brief by *Wilbershide & Baumblatt*of Racine, and oral argument by *Leonard P. Baumblatt.*

*Vilas H. Whaley*of Racine, for the respondent.

Gehl, J.

The plaintiff contends (1) that the jury’s finding that defendant acted in self-defense is not sustained by the evidence; (2) that there was error in the instructions in that the court improperly placed the burden of proof that the defendant did not act in self-defense upon the plaintiff; and ( 3 ) that the jury’s finding that plaintiff suffered no damages renders the verdict perverse.

(1). We have set forth enough of the conflicting testimony of the parties to demonstrate that it made an issue for the jury. Obviously, the jury believed defendant’s testimony, corroborated by that of a neighbor, that he made no assault upon plaintiff until she had hit him over the back with a club. The familiar rule, often declared by this court, that *76where there is credible evidence to support a finding of a jury we may not disturb it, needs no citation of authorities.

(2) The instruction was erroneous. But we may not consider the error; it was not specifically pointed out by the plaintiff in her motions for a new trial as a ground therefor. *Norton v. State,*129 Wis. 659, 109 N. W. 531.

(3) We cannot say that the jury’s findings that the defendant acted in self-defense and that he used no more force than was reasonably necessary to defend himself were not the result of honest judgment. Therefore, its finding as to damages has no weight in the consideration of a claim of perverseness. *Schuster v. Bridgeman,*225 Wis. 547, 275 N. W. 440. In the consideration of that question some weight must also be given to the trial judge’s opinion. *Olsen v. Brown,*186 Wis. 179, 202 N. W. 167. He found no evidence of perversity; nor do we.

Obviously the jury refused to accept plaintiff’s testimony concerning her alleged injury. Although she claimed to have been treated by several doctors, none of them was called to testify. Nor did she offer any other corroboration of her claim.

*By the Court.*— Judgment affirmed.
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 Report fully complies with the requirements of
Section 13(a) or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of
1934, as amended; and(2)
    
    The information contained in the Form 10-Q fairly
presents, in all material respects, the financial
condition and results of operations of the Company.
 /s/ Rao UppaluriRao UppaluriAugust 12, 2009
    Treasurer (Principal Financial Officer and Principal Accounting Officer) 27
```

[Congressional Bills 106th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[S. 3028 Introduced in Senate (IS)]

106th CONGRESS
  2d Session
                                S. 3028

     To amend title XVIII of the Social Security Act to provide a 
 transitional adjustment for certain sole community hospitals in order 
 to limit any decline in payment under the prospective payment system 
              for hospital outpatient department services.

_______________________________________________________________________

                   IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES

                           September 12, 2000

 Mr. Abraham (for himself, Mr. Bingaman, Mr. Jeffords, and Mr. Levin) 
introduced the following bill; which was read twice and referred to the 
                          Committee on Finance

_______________________________________________________________________

                                 A BILL

 
     To amend title XVIII of the Social Security Act to provide a 
 transitional adjustment for certain sole community hospitals in order 
 to limit any decline in payment under the prospective payment system 
              for hospital outpatient department services.

    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 ``Rural Hospital and Health Network 
Preservation Act of 2000''.

SEC. 2. TEMPORARY TREATMENT OF CERTAIN SOLE COMMUNITY HOSPITALS TO 
              LIMIT DECLINE IN PAYMENT UNDER THE OPD PPS.

    (a) Hold Harmless Provision.--Section 1833(t)(7)(D)(i) of the 
Social Security Act (42 U.S.C. 1395l(t)(7)(D)(i)) is amended by 
inserting ``(or not more than 400 beds if such hospital is a sole 
community hospital (as defined in section 1886(d)(5)(D)(iii)) and is 
classified as a rural referral center under section 1886(d)(5)(C))'' 
after ``100 beds''.
    (b) Effective Date.--The amendment made by subsection (a) shall 
take effect as if included in the amendments made by section 202(a) of 
the Medicare, Medicaid, and SCHIP Balanced Budget Refinement Act of 
1999 (113 Stat. 1501A-342), as enacted into law by section 1000(a)(6) 
of Public Law 106-113.
                                 <all>
```
NOT FOR PUBLICATION IN WEST'S HAWAI I REPORTS AND PACIFIC REPORTER

Electronically Filed 

Intermediate Court of Appeals 

CAAP-23-0000477 

21-MAR-2024 

07:46 AM 

Dkt. 35 OAWST 

NO. CAAP-23-0000477

IN THE INTERMEDIATE COURT OF APPEALS

OF THE STATE OF HAWAI I

KOOB FAMILY LIMITED PARTNERSHIP II,

a Hawaii limited liability company,

Plaintiff/Counterclaim Defendant-Appellee, v.

KALANI HONUA, INC., a Hawaii non-profit corporation,

Defendant/Counterclaimant/Cross-Claimant-Appellant, and

ELIZABETH L. KOOB, as Special Administrator of the Estate of

Hilary John Koob, aka Hillary John Koob and H.J. Koob,

and as Special Administrator of the Estate of Loretta Ann Koob,

aka Loretta A. Koob,

Defendants/Cross-Claim Defendants-Appellees, and

KOOB HAWAII ENTERPRISE; RICHARD KOOB,

Counterclaim Defendants-Appellees, and

JOHN DOES 1-10; JANE DOES 1-20; DOE PARTNERSHIPS 1-20;

DOE CORPORATIONS 1-20; DOE ENTITIES 3-10;

DOE GOVERNMENTAL UNITS 1-20;

DOE ADDITIONAL COUNTERCLAIM DEFENDANTS 2-10;

DOE ADDITIONAL CROSS-CLAIM DEFENDANTS 1-10, Defendants

APPEAL FROM THE CIRCUIT COURT OF THE THIRD CIRCUIT

(CASE NO. 3CC191000267)

ORDER APPROVING STIPULATION TO DISMISS APPEAL

(By: Leonard, Acting Chief Judge, Wadsworth and Guidry, JJ.)

Upon consideration of the Stipulation to Dismiss Appeal

(Stipulation), filed March 13, 2024, by Defendant/

Counterclaimant/Cross-Claimant-Appellant Kalani Honua, Inc., the

papers in support, and the record, it appears that (1) the appeal

has been docketed; (2) under Hawai i Rules of Appellate Procedure

Rule 42(b), the parties stipulate to dismiss the appeal and bear

their own attorneys' fees and costs on appeal; and (3) the

Stipulation is dated and signed by counsel for all parties

appearing in the appeal.
 

 

 

 

 

 

NOT FOR PUBLICATION IN WEST'S HAWAI I REPORTS AND PACIFIC REPORTER

Therefore, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that the Stipulation is

approved and the appeal is dismissed. The parties shall bear

their own attorneys' fees and costs on appeal.

DATED: Honolulu, Hawai i, March 21, 2024.

/s/ Katherine G. Leonard

Acting Chief Judge

/s/ Clyde J. Wadsworth

Associate Judge

/s/ Kimberly T. Guidry

Associate Judge

2
**NOTE
      (“the Note”)**





Power3
      Medical Products, Inc., a New York corporation (the “Company”) for value
      received hereby promises to pay **Steven
      B. Rash** (“Payee”) on or before July 19, 2006, (“Maturity Date”); the principal amount
      of **forty thousand five hundred fifteen dollars ($40,515.00)** (“Principal”).





Should
      the Principal not be repaid as of July 19, 2006 interest of 6 % per year on
      any
      unpaid Principal amount will be earned by the Payee until such time as all
      of
      the Principal amount is repaid. This Note may be repaid at any time prior to
      July 19, 2006 without interest or penalty.





I n
      no
      event shall interest contracted for, charged or received hereunder, plus any
      other charges in connection herewith which constitute interest, exceed the
      maximum interest permitted by applicable law. The amounts of such interest
      or
      other charges previously paid to the holder of the Note, if any, in excess
      of
      the amounts permitted by applicable law shall be applied by the holder of the
      Note to reduce the principal of the indebtedness evidenced by the Note, or,
      at
      the option of the holder of the Note, be refunded. To the extent permitted
      by
      applicable law, determination of the legal maximum amount of interest shall
      at
      all times be made by amortizing, prorating, allocating and spreading in equal
      parts during the period of the full stated term of the loan and indebtedness,
      all interest at any time contracted for, charged or received from the Maker
      hereof in connection with the loan and indebtedness evidenced hereby, so that
      the actual rate of interest on account of such indebtedness is uniform
      throughout the term hereof.





Notices,
      payments, requests, and other communications to the respective parties hereunder
      shall be in writing, and shall be deemed received when delivered personally,
      by
      facsimile, or first class certified mail, return receipt requested and postage
      prepaid, as follows:





If
      to the
      lender:





Steven
      B.
      Rash


3400
      Research Forest Parkway


Woodlands,
      Texas 77381





If
      to the
      Company:





Power3
      Medical Products, Inc.


3400
      Research Forest Parkway


Woodlands,
      Texas 77381





This
      Note
      is governed by and is to be construed in accordance with the law of the State
      of
      Texas.




Payee
            
            Power3
              Medical Products, Inc.
            
            Date/s/ Steven B. RashSteven B. Rash
            
            /s/ John P. Burton 

              By:
              John P. Burton
            
            January
              20, 2006Its:
                CFO
HD GHG Certification 

EPA/NHTSA-Industry Meetin

Discussion Slides

May 11, 2011

Chrysler, Ford, GM
Background

• On January 7, 2011, industry presented a 

proposal to EPA for the Class 2b-3 HD Gcertification process.

• EPA acknowledged industry concerns wit

testing burden associated with the NPRMexpressed concerns with the proposal for unlimited Analytically Derived CO2 usage a base/level test group

• The following proposal includes a simplifi

base level/configuration/sub-configuration structure as well as restrictions on the usanalytically derived CO2 values.
Base level, configurations, a

sub-configurations

Emissions Certification Category

Engine Trans Type Calibration FDR ALVW class TR

Example 6.2L Auto or Manual Federal or California 3.73 9000 

VEHICLE CONFIGURATION

VEHICLE SUB-CONFIGURATION

BASE LEVEL 

 Test Group

Note: Engine = Basic Engine per LD CAFE 

Trans Type = Trans class minus 2WD/4WD
Rules for use of Analytical

Derived CO2/Fuel Consump

• To make the testing burden per numb

engine/transmission combinations comparable to that for light duty truckCAFE, industry proposes the followinmodified rules for use of AD CO2

– 10 Max AD CO2 points from a single da– Max 40% of tested sub-configs. represe

ADFE

– Max downward adjustment of 40%
Rules for use of Analytically Der

CO2/Fuel Consumption (continu

• Industry also proposes the following rule 

modifications to ease testing burden:

– Allow up to 12.4k miles on a test vehicle

• Frequently a single truck will cover multiple axle/weight 

configurations.

• Allowing only 6.2k miles will result in a need for multiple 

test vehicles 

• 6.2k limit seems low considering extended useful lives o

trucks

– Adjustments for Fuels

• If EPA and/or California go a different direction on 

R-Factor adjustment should be allowed to prevent testing. 

• This would be analogous to the CO2 emission rat

adjustments employed for vocational engine test re
Third Amendment to


Executive Corporate Event Agreement


This Third Amendment (the "Amendment") to the Executive Corporate Event Agreement (the "Agreement") is made by and between [Shirley Yin/Peter Lee/River Gong/Stephen Welles] ("Executive") and Oplink Communications, Inc., a Delaware corporation (the "Company") as of August 13, 2014.


Whereas, the Company and Executive previously entered into the Agreement, dated September 15, 2008, which Agreement was amended by the First Amendment dated December 15, 2010 (to amend certain terms for conformity with Section 409A of the Internal Revenue Code) and the Second Amendment dated August 29, 2011; and


Whereas, the term of the Agreement was originally set at three years, and was amended by the Second Amendment to extend the term by an additional three years; and


Whereas, on August 13, 2014, the Compensation Committee of the Company's Board of Directors approved an amendment to extend the term of the Agreement by an additional three years;


Now, Therefore, for good and valuable consideration, Executive and the Company agree to amend the Agreement, as follows:


1.    The first clause of Section 1 of the Agreement, as amended, which currently reads as follows:


 


"This Agreement will have a term of six (6) years commencing on the effective date of this Agreement and ending on the sixth anniversary of such effective date (the "Stated Expiration Date");"


is hereby amended and restated to read as follows:


"This Agreement will have a term commencing on the effective date of this Agreement and ending on September 15, 2017 (the "Stated Expiration Date");"


2.    Jurisdiction and venue in any action to interpret or enforce the terms of this Amendment shall be in the State of California and in the County of Santa Clara of the State of California.  This Amendment shall be governed by the laws of the State of California.


 


In Witness Whereof, each of the parties has executed this Amendment as of the day and year set forth above.


 



	
COMPANY

	
 

	
OPLINK COMMUNICATIONS, INC.


	
 

	
 

	
By: 


Name: Joseph Y. Liu


Title: Chairman and Chief Executive Officer









	
EXECUTIVE

	
 

	
[NAME]


	
 

	
 

	
 


 


 







 




 







                                                                                                                                                                        




--
Exhibit 32.1








CERTIFICATION
PURSUANT TO


18 U.S.C.
§ 1350


AS
ADOPTED PURSUANT TO


SECTION
906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002














In
connection with the Quarterly Report of Pacific Asia Petroleum, Inc. (the
“Company”) on Form 10-Q for the period ended September 30, 2009, as filed with
the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the “Report”),
I, Frank C. Ingriselli, President and Chief Executive Officer of the Company,
certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. § 1350, as adopted pursuant to Section 906 of the
Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that, to my knowledge:





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 results of operations of the
      Company.








/s/
Frank C.
Ingriselli


Frank C.
Ingriselli


President
and Chief Executive Officer


November
9, 2009
**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 Annual Report of Silver Bay Realty Trust Corp. (the “Company”) on Form 10-K for the year ended December 31, 2012 as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the “Report”), I, Christine Battist, Chief Financial 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 results of operations of the Company.

 

 
| March   1, 2013 | /s/   Christine Battist                   |
|-----------------|-------------------------------------------|
|            | Christine   Battist                       |
| * *        | *Chief   Financial Officer and Treasurer* |

 

----
Exhibit 32.1
 CERTIFICATION PURSUANT TO
18 U.S.C. SECTION 1350,
AS ADOPTED PURSUANT TO
SECTION 906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002
  (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 results of operations
of the Company.
 /s/ John M. CurtisNovember 15, 2010
    
    John M. CurtisPresident and Chief Executive Officer
 A signed original of this written statement has been provided to Vangent and will be retained
by Vangent and furnished to the SEC or its staff upon request.
[Cite as State v. Leonard, 124 Ohio St.3d 470, 2010-Ohio-717.]

T HE S TATE OF O HIO , A PPELLEE , v . L EONARD , A PPELLANT . [Cite as State v. Leonard, 124 Ohio St.3d 470, 2010-Ohio-717.] Court of appeals’ judgment reversed in par t on the authority of State v. Singleton. (No. 2007-0866

— Submitted January 13, 2010

— Decided March 4, 2010.) A PPEAL from the Court of Appeals for Ashtabula County, No. 2006-A-0064, 2007-Ohio-1545.

__________________ {¶ 1} The judgment of the court of appeals is reversed on the authority of State v. Singleton , 124 Ohio St.3d 173, 2009-Ohio-6434, 920 N.E.2d 958, to the extent that the court of appeals held th at R.C. 2929.191 could be applied in this

case
. R.C. 2929.191 may not be applied to a sentence entered prior to July 11, 2006. M OYER , C.J., and P FEIFER , O’C ONNOR , O’D ONNELL , and C UPP , JJ.,

concur. L UNDBERG S TRATTON and L ANZINGER , JJ., dissent for the reasons stated in the dissenting opinion of L ANZINGER , J., in State v. Singleton

.

__________________ Thomas L. Sartini, Ashtabula Count y Prosecuting Attorney, and Shelley M. Pratt, Assistant Prosecuting Attorney, for appellee. Ashtabula County Public Defender Office, Inc., and Marie Lane, for appellant.

______________________
Order entered October 31, 2018

In The

Court of Appeals 

Fifth District of Texas at Dallas 

No. 05-18-01071-CR

ALFREDO SERRATO, Appellant

V.

THE STATE OF TEXAS, Appellee

On Appeal from the 292nd Judicial District Court

Dallas County, Texas

Trial Court Cause No. F17-31349-V

ORDER

Before the Court is appellant’s October 29, 2018 motion to extend the time to file his 

brief. We GRANT the motion to the extent appellant’s brief shall be due THIRTY DAYS from 

the date of this order.

/s/ CRAIG STODDART 

JUSTICE