alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
--T6P-SBRET-

-(St NATIONAL RECONNAISSANCE OFFICE

WASHINGTON, D.C. audiavirams

OFFICE OF THE DIRECTOR

21 May 1973

MEMORANDUM FOR DR. HALL

I had proposed to answer Lew Allen as shown

in the attached. Suggest you forward my memorandum

along with yours . or alternatively that you include

the gist of it in your memorandum.

111111111ta

Attachment

1111111111E7 SIDWOMACW TOP-SECRET IV! ORDER IOSPTION CATE.

GORY IN =Assort ON IW LIM
--TOPSECRET

.

-19t NATIONAL RECONNAISSANCE OFFICE

WASHINGTON. D.0 .

May 21, 1973

OF FILE OF THE DIRECTOR

MEMORANDUM FOR GENERAL ALIEN

SUBJECT: OMB Staff Report

I appreciated the opportunity to read theiiiiilaff

Report forwarded by your letter of May 8, 1973 10227/73).

While I find that we might question some of the results

and conclusions in the OMB Study, I think that overall it

represents a thorough and thought-provoking study. Your plan

of action seems to be a step in the right direction toward

attacking some of the problems that have been identified

either previously or in the OMB Study.

I think it is appropriate that the NRO be a fully participating member in intelligence community efforts to carry out

your plan to rectify identified problems. Because of the interplay between conventional and overhead collectors and to insure

that capabilities are accurately reflected, I believe that NRO

participation should be extended into the cross budget resource

analysis area. I have asked Colonel John E. Kulpa, Jr. to be

the NRO contact point for further discussions on NRO participation in this area.

We look forward to fully and directly supporting the

Intelligence Community Staff in this endeavor.

i" CLASSIFIED SY ~I EXEMPT FROM

GENERAL DECLASSIFICATION SCHEDULE OF

IA

-TOILSECREF"

• EXECUTIVE ORDER 11162 EXEMPTION CATE. 7111 411LMITFGORY SII2 DECLASSIFY ON IMP DEE

11.11

WW,
## In the

Court of Appeals

Second Appellate District of Texas

at Fort Worth

No. 02

- 22

- 00283

- CR

C HARLES B ITTICK

, Appellant

V

.

T HE S TATE OF T EXAS §

§

§

§

§ On Appeal from the 297th District

Court

of Tarrant County ( 1601392D )

November 16, 2023

Opinion by Chief Justice Sudderth

(p)

JUDGMENT

This court has considered the record on appeal in this case and holds that there

was no error in the trial cou rt’s judgment s . It is ordered that the judgment s of the

trial court are affirmed.

SECOND DISTRICT COURT OF APPEALS

By /s/ Bonnie Sudderth

Chief Justice Bonnie Sudderth
--HP-SECRET-

_of NATIONAL RECONNAISSANCE OFFICE

WASHINGTON. D.C.

THE NRO STAFF July 15, 1974

MEMORANDUM FOR MR. PLUIVER

SUBJECT: Meeting with PFIAB Panel

At the right is an information copy of the Memorandum

to Dr. Hall which establishes meeting times for you and the

other principals to discuss positions to be offered to the

PFIAB. We believe that this procedure is at variance with

the desires of the PFIAB Panel since it has been clearly

requested that individual and not institutional positions

be presented. It is recommended that you play your position

"close to the vest" until such time as you can determine if

an institutional position vis-a-vis the NRP is being created.

/C24.P

62Aeda C.41161G., 1:14 oalroran n••••e°00b46414q

•

-Amor.

n• 0,04,1 4.4"

AaCti gageos,04 a4144.4x14140000..

nAriliev•soc.

4•01re iros-4.0 .1nn•%, al<4

11,:oud4e,ous:sac-' (crwe47....e,a.00/40.404". to.4

DECLAIMS .73

COPIES

PAGES

II

is

ii
011..dii.Diptgb.b

Ceeemily

The Hgnorable Albert C. 1141

Assistant Secretary of Defense

for Intelligence

Washington, D. C. 20301

lib 120074

Ally 1974

Copy

Is •6, •-fr• ilD• n••••• •

111.

iii:,--DIRECTOR OF CENTRAL INTEW..-NCE

WANIIIIDION. D.C. 103011

Dear Al.

This will confirm arrangements made with your

Secr to meet at 1:40 p.m., just prior to

g on the 17th of July, for the

to be taken with the PFIAB In

appearances before the Technical Panel on 23 July 1974.

Since Dr. Potter will be another witness, it may be that he

should also join you in your meeting with the Director.

Following th suggest you and

Secretary Plumme s 'rector to discuss

extended coverage with the PFLAB re the NRP, also scheduled

for 23 July 1974.

Sincerely,

John M. Clarke

Associate Deputy to the DCI for

the Intelligence Community

bc: Dr. Plummer

Mr. Zelliner

Mr. Stevens (DD/S&T)

VIUDIS C9PY

COMM Coln", lianas vi
<TABLE> <S> <C>


<ARTICLE>                          5
<LEGEND>
              This schedule  contains summary  financial  information  extracted
              from SunGlobe  Fiber System  Corporation  June 30, 2000  financial
              statements  and is  qualified in its entirety by reference to such
              financial statements.
</LEGEND>

<CIK>                           0000350133
<NAME>                          SunGlobe Fiber Systems Corporation
<CURRENCY>                      US


<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   6-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>               DEC-31-2000
<PERIOD-END>                    JUN-30-2000
<EXCHANGE-RATE>                 1.00

<CASH>                                      1,550,148
<SECURITIES>                                0
<RECEIVABLES>                               200,000
<ALLOWANCES>                                0
<INVENTORY>                                 0
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                            1,750,148
<PP&E>                                      0
<DEPRECIATION>                              0
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                              1,750,148
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                       0
<BONDS>                                     0
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                       0
<PREFERRED>                                 0
<COMMON>                                    826
<OTHER-SE>                                  1,749,322
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                1,750,148
<SALES>                                     0
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                            75,725
<CGS>                                       0
<TOTAL-COSTS>                               270,731
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                            0
<LOSS-PROVISION>                            0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                          0
<INCOME-PRETAX>                             (195,006)
<INCOME-TAX>                                0
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                         (195,006)
<DISCONTINUED>                              0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                             0
<CHANGES>                                   0
<NET-INCOME>                                (195,006)
<EPS-BASIC>                                 (.02)
<EPS-DILUTED>                               (.02)



</TABLE>
|   | **KPMG LLP**              | Telephone    | (604) 691-3000 |
|--------|---------------------------|-----------------------------|----------------|
|   | **Chartered Accountants** | Fax          | (604) 691-3031 |  
 

PO Box 10426  777 Dunsmuir Street

Internet  

www.kpmg.ca

 
Vancouver  BC  V7Y 1K3

Canada

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

**CONSENT OF INDEPENDENT REGISTERED PUBLIC ACCOUNTING FIRM**

 

 

The Board of Directors 

Braintech, Inc.

 

We consent to the incorporation by reference in the registration statements (No. 333-64872 and 333-92253 and 333-126190) on Form S-8 of Braintech, Inc. of our report dated February 7, 2005, with respect to the consolidated balance sheet of Braintech, Inc. as of December 31, 2004 and the related consolidated statements of operations, stockholders’ equity (deficit) and cash flows for each of the years in the two-year period ended December 31, 2004, which report appears in the December 31, 2005, annual report on Form 10-KSB of Braintech, Inc.  Our report dated February 7, 2005 contains an explanatory paragraph that states that the Company has incurred recurring losses from operations which raise substantial doubt about its ability to continue as a going concern.  The consolidated financial statements do not include any adjustments that might result from the outcome of that uncertainty.

 

 

**KPMG LLP (signed)**

 

Chartered Accountants

 

Vancouver, Canada

March 29, 2006

 

 

KPMG LLP, a Canadian limited liability partnership is the Canadian

member firm of KPMG International, a Swiss cooperative.

 

 

  |
EXHIBIT 32.2

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

AS ADOPTED PURSUANT TO SECTION 906 OF THE

SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002

In
connection with the Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q of Unified Grocers, Inc. (the Company) for the fiscal quarter ended June 27, 2009, as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the Report),
I, Richard J. Martin, Executive Vice President, Finance and Administration and Chief Financial Officer of the Company, hereby certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C Section 1350 as adopted pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002,
that to the best of my knowledge:



|(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 as of and for the
periods presented in the Report.
|--- |  | ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Date: August 11, 2009



/s/    RICHARD J.
MARTINRichard J. MartinExecutive Vice President, Finance and Administration and Chief Financial Officer(Principal Financial and Accounting Officer)


A signed original of this written statement required by Section 906 has been provided to the
Company and will be furnished to the Securities and Exchange Commission or its staff upon request.
Exhibit 23





                         Independent Auditors' Consent


The Board of Directors
HumaScan Inc.:

We consent to incorporation by reference in the registration statement (No.
333-40655) on Form S-8 of HumaScan Inc. of our report dated January 23, 1998,
relating to the balance sheets of HumaScan Inc. as of December 31, 1997 and
1996, and the related statements of operations, stockholders' equity (deficit),
and cash flows for the period from December 27, 1994 (date of inception) to
December 31, 1997 the years ended December 31, 1997 and 1996 and the period from
December 27, 1994 (date of inception) to December 31, 1995, which report appears
in the December 31, 1997 annual report on Form 10-KSB of HumaScan Inc.


                                             KPMG Peat Marwick LLP


Short Hills, New Jersey
March 27, 1998
### NUMBER 13

- 1 2

- 00 453

- C R



## COURT OF APPEALS

THIRTEENTH DISTRICT OF TEXAS

CORPUS CHRISTI

– EDINBURG

LARRY WHATLEY, Appellant,

v.

THE STATE OF TEXAS

, Appellee.

On appeal from the 213 th District Court

of Tarrant County, Texas

.



## MEMORANDUM OPINION

Before Chief Justice Valdez and Justices Garza and Perkes

Memorandum Opinion by Justice Garza

A jury found appellant, Larry Whatley, guilty of aggravated assault with a deadly

weapon, repeat offender, a second

- degree felony. See T EX

. P ENAL C ODE A NN

. §

22.02 (a)(2), (b) (West 2011). Appellant pleaded “true” to an enhancement paragraph,

and the trial court sentenced him to twenty

- five years’ imprisonment. By a single issue,

appellant contends the trial court violated his Sixth Amendment right to confrontation by2

improperly limiting the scope of his cross

- examination of a witness. See U.S. C ONST

.

amend. VI. We affirm.

I. B ACKGROUND 1

Appellant was convicted of violently assaulting Brooke Butler, his live

- in girlfriend.

After the assault, Butler went to the home of her friend, Mandi Moore, who called 911 to

request treatment of Butler’s injuries. At trial, Moore testified for the State. On cross

examination, defense counsel asked Moore if Butler was involved with anyone else at

the time of the assault. The prosecutor objected on relevance grounds. Outside the

presence of the jury, defense counsel was permitted to ask Moore whether Butler was

involved in any other relationships at the time of the assault. Moore answered that she

did not know. The prosecut or said that the question was “a fishing expedition” and

improper character evidence. The trial court sustained the State’s objection. The jury

returned; defense counsel stated he had no other questions, and Moore was dismissed.

II. D ISCUSSION

The Sta te argues that appellant failed to preserve his issue for review. We

agree.

To preserve a complaint for appellate review, the record must show that a

specific and timely complaint was made to the trial judge and that the trial judge ruled

on the complaint. T EX

. R. A PP

. P. 33.1; see Lovill v. State , 319 S.W.3d 687, 691 (Tex.

Crim. App. 2009). It is well established that even constitutional and statutory rights may

be waived by failure to object. Wright v. State , 28 S.W.3d 526, 536 (Tex. Crim. App.

1 This case is before the Court on transfer from the Second Court of Appeals in Fort Worth, Texas

pursuant to an order issued by the Supreme Court of Texas. See T EX

. G OV ’ T C ODE A NN

. § 73.001 (W est

2005).3

2000) ( “ Because he did not object to error under the Confrontation Clause, appellan t

waives this argument on appeal”).

By failing to object to the trial court’s ruling, appellant failed to preserve any error.

See T EX

. R. A PP

. P. 33.1; Lovill, 319 S.W.3d at 691; Wright , 28 S.W.3d at 536. We

overrule appellant’s sole issue.

III. C ONCLUSION

We affirm the trial court’s judgment.

________________________ DORI CONTRERAS GARZA

Justice

Do not p ublish.

T EX

. R. A PP

. P. 47.2(b)

.

Delivered and filed the

15th day of August

, 201 3

.
DiP

WDC 21 May 1958

MEMORANDUM FOR RECORD

SUBJECT: Additional FY 1958 Funds for WS-315A and WS-117L

The following is a synopsis of a telephone call incoming

from Mr. Lou Meyer, AFABF, to Colonel Summers, WDC.

References are TWX WDCB-5-5-E and TWX WDP-5-2-E. These

messages stated additional urgent FY 1958 requirements for Weapon

Systems 315A and 117L.

3. Mr. Meyer stated:

Hq USAF TWX 51056 was dispatched on 20 May which

essentially gave a "go ahead" on coverage of the price increases

stated in the referenced messages. This TUX has not yet been

received.

Hq. USAF will issue Procurement Authorizations this

date to Hq AMC for subsequent issuance to AFBMD.

HALAMC will be instructed to allot required funds for

both programs.

The level of FY 1958 plus FY 1959 fund programs has

not been increased, therefore this addition of FY 1958 funds has

the effect of reducing the current USAF stated FY 1959 ceilings for

these two programs.

4. Comments. Appropriate action will be taken upon receipt

of the USAF message. It is probable that AFBMD will be unable to

actually commit and Obligate funds prior to receipt of specific

authorization from Kg, AMC. It is anticipated, however, that the

TWX will contain sufficient authorization to prevent any delay on

the part of the contractor.

Cys Furnished: PAUL W.

3 iDGV Colonel, USAF

WDCB Comptroller

WDP

f
Court of Appeals of the State of Georgia

Clerk's Office, Atlanta, October 11, 2016.

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, October 11, 2016

The Court of Appeals hereby passes the following order

A17A0313. IN RE: ESTATE OF: JAMES LYNN HILL.

Upon consideration of the APPELLANT'S motion FOR PERMISSION TO WITHDRAW 

THE APPEAL in the above styled case, it is ordered that the motion is hereby GRANTED.
# C_2005115EN.01000602.xml

| 14.5.2005 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 115/6 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

14.5.2005

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 115/6

---

JUDGMENT OF THE COURT

JUDGMENT OF THE COURT

(First Chamber)

of 10 March 2005

in Case C-491/03 Reference for a preliminary ruling from the Hessischer Verwaltungsgerichtshof: Ottmar Hermann v Stadt Frankfurt am Main (1)

1

(Indirect tax - Directive 92/12/EEC - Local tax on the supply of alcoholic beverages for immediate consumption on the premises)

(2005/C 115/12)

Language of the case: German

In Case C-491/03: reference for a preliminary ruling under Article 234 EC from the Hessischer Verwaltungsgerichtshof (Germany), made by decision of 1 October 2003, received at the Court on 20 November 2003, in the proceedings pending before that court between Ottmar Hermann (in his capacity as liquidator of Volkswirt Weinschänken GmbH) and Stadt Frankfurt am Main — the Court (First Chamber), composed of P. Jann, President of the Chamber, K. Lenaerts (Rapporteur), N. Colneric, K. Schiemann and E. Juhász, Judges; D. Ruiz-Jarabo Colomer, Advocate General, H. von Holstein, Deputy Registrar, for the Registrar, gave a judgment on 10 March 2005, the operative part of which is as follows:

Ottmar Hermann

Stadt Frankfurt am Main

| 1. | A tax which is levied, in a catering context, on the supply for consideration of alcoholic beverages for immediate consumption on the premises must be considered to be a tax on the supply of services relating to products subject to excise duty which cannot be characterised as a turnover tax for the purposes of the second subparagraph of Article 3(3) of Council Directive 92/12/EEC of 25 February 1992 on the general arrangements for products subject to excise duty and on the holding, movement and monitoring of such products. |
| --- | --- |

1.

A tax which is levied, in a catering context, on the supply for consideration of alcoholic beverages for immediate consumption on the premises must be considered to be a tax on the supply of services relating to products subject to excise duty which cannot be characterised as a turnover tax for the purposes of the second subparagraph of Article 3(3) of Council Directive 92/12/EEC of 25 February 1992 on the general arrangements for products subject to excise duty and on the holding, movement and monitoring of such products.

| 2. | The ‘same proviso’ to which taxes falling within the scope of the second subparagraph of Article 3(3) of Directive 92/12 are subject refers only to the condition set out in the first subparagraph of that paragraph, namely that such ‘taxes do not give rise to border-crossing formalities in trade between Member States’. |
| --- | --- |

2.

The ‘same proviso’ to which taxes falling within the scope of the second subparagraph of Article 3(3) of Directive 92/12 are subject refers only to the condition set out in the first subparagraph of that paragraph, namely that such ‘taxes do not give rise to border-crossing formalities in trade between Member States’.

---

(1)  OJ C 47 of 21.02.2004.

1

---
• .:r• •

•

•

•

•

I

_La; r"*.a. ••

ativieheinnommi c.ratvit

•• •J

. -

. •

5 Aft linf • • • .46711Flig442.4

-1:14:1314 ,.. •

•I

•••.• . -* •.>

-•.•e.&.-: ••• • .

. :•••k•

•

ke artier %a 'bristle am aszsermass, IS Is rogarted rum. seasilves GC SOW della be ballast et toi prosostir wood to Molaketistin olorosio so 011os Imam =Wm awl Mromettwos

b. soopiotolg ouratoolist tollmos goo vmpootivo 'Mao&

.44.

**.:47.1r

J

moseasca =mut MINIM as=

mach

Piegran

itletbilbsse 1111111611maimm O&M

amirommee 

osomolosy Us Ms Pores 

mop to peeimm roxims4110 

ma 

SO 1111111111.1masi %IMO

pear WA* Mb imps%

got SlaCdi to too olotalotatMeo posolloroo s bodkin Ile MING =is onal prover •

mamma ta. boorteesr7

As Gems& far tar pomp000, all Mgr maid bo ommuds1 tIo Mr rem ant for stem for MUNN. dieterlbestims to asselipactses MC oat 17•11111.

•

Cort•ia setter L our•ssio with la IT SO Ilatoolot nos ass tZ $ eumedm

,961 Beatipet Sietbobee wore lishis 1♦ yew glassammo arm %•‘'t.: eatial

 rd lbs A/4/e. err ottelob

Uses Ord artier tbe Alfa So Lotomosto. art gaidiell ererms

sz.imrstaerzios at Ws Mast aid tie COUR fit Os Mffootor • ezr

• •#: Airease Apsempek est INigimmertsg-

/./ amps v. mac

Asolotsat Ilhototogy

Ihsomoli i Impisin at
# C_2005115EN.01001401.xml

| 14.5.2005 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 115/14 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

14.5.2005

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 115/14

---

Reference for a preliminary ruling from the Conseil d'État (France), acting in its judicial capacity, by order of that court of 10 January 2005 in Ministre de l'Économie, des Finances and de l'Industrie v Gillan Beach

(Case C-114/05)

(2005/C 115/25)

Language of the case: French

Reference has been made to the Court of Justice of the European Communities by order of the Conseil d'Etat (France), acting in its judicial capacity, of 10 January 2005, received at the Court Registry on 8 March 2005, for a preliminary ruling in the proceedings between Ministre de l'Economie, des Finances and de l'Industrie and Gillan Beach, a company, on the following question:

Whether an overall service provided by an organiser to exhibitors at a fair or in an exhibition hall falls within the scope of the first indent of Article 9(2)(c) of the Sixth Council Directive 77/388 of 17 May 1977 (1), Article 9(2)(a) of that directive or within any other of the categories of supply of services referred to in Article 9(2) of the directive.

1

---

(1)  OJ L 145 of 13.6.1977, p. 1.

1

---
EXHIBIT
32(a)





MICROS
SYSTEMS, INC.





Certification
of Principal Executive Officer


Pursuant
to Rule 13a-14(b) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 and 18 U.S.C.
1350





In
connection with the quarterly report of MICROS Systems, Inc. (the “Company”) on
Form 10-Q (Form 10-Q”) for the three months ended December 31, 2008 as filed
with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof, I, A.L.
Giannopoulos, Chairman, President and Chief Executive Officer of the Company,
certify that to the best of my knowledge:




(1)   The
Form 10-Q fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) 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.




Date:
      February 5, 2009
                /s/
                A.L. GiannopoulosA.L.
      Giannopoulos
co)

100

comma IA

cop....je_oll minim

-TOP-SECRET

111.1111111Pm

-16+- NATIONAL. RECONNAISSANCE OFFICE

WASH IN GTON D.C.

••'" HART November 14, 1972

NOTE FOR COLONEL VON INS/JCS(ACSAN) •

Sir:

Attached is a package which relates to a NASA proposal

for the Apollo 17 earth orbital contingency mission. NASA

is proposing that they be allowed to take 10 meter satellite

photos of earth areas including "denied areas" in the event

of a contingency. NASA's proposal in fact poses a broad

political question for which there is no established U.S.

policy. This question deals with the U.S. policy in the event

a second or third country objects to being photographed without permission. Ten meter photos could be considered intrusive

on national sovereignty if overtly acquired, then publicly

released by NASA.

Admiral Moorer will be asked to make a judgement on the

NASA proposal. Dr. NcLucas' letter to Mr. Rush is included

in the attached package along with the NASA draft proposal and

the NRO response. We believe that Admiral Moorer should be

made aware of the situation prior to his 40 Committee participation. It is recommended that Admiral Moorer advocate a continuation of previous 40 Committee approvals for Apollo missions

so that only U.S. areas are authorized to be photographed.

or,

Assistant Deputy Director

for Plans and Policy

1 Attachment

ifor Mr. Rush

13199-72)

INTELL AND

METHODS INVOL

wow aAssifiED By 1111111110 WOW FROM

Gomm

BECOME ORM WM EXEMPTION CAMA,•• SCHEOUlt OF OP

. • GORYSMI MASSIF! ON IMP rat

NOTICE — SENSMVE