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

CSCAS"'73 • 

SUBCOMMI'r'I'EE lllPOBT #25 

MltK>mAOOM FOB THE ARMY SECURITY AODCY 'l'ECBNICAI. COMMITTEE 

SUBJECT: Review ot Intercept and D/F Research and Development Pro3ects 

l. BD'E!tDCES: 

a. DS elated 16 Februar7 1~9 :from Sac.tetary ASATO, to Cbairman, 

Intercept and Direction Finding Subcommittee, subject: :Review ot :Research and 

Development Pro~ectso 

b. Extract frm IiS dated 25 November lqla-7 from AS-24, to AS ... 70, 

aubJeot: JAB Report1ns S19tem fur Research and D811elopment Activities, AS-71 

file number 37.6, RDB General Correspondence. . 

c. War Department Cμocular 126, Research and Development0 and Claseifi ... caticm ot Material, Seet1rm Ill Paragraph 13. 

d. War Depal-tment Circular 71, Section VI, dated 18 Nirch 1947. 

2.. mscmsIOI: 

a. ~iee Concerned 

. (1) Directing Agenc7: Arm'3 Security Agency 

(2) Other Intereewd Agencies: 1'8.1'7, USAF, Sigoal Cmope 

b. Purpose 

To insure conformity with the Department ot the Army RiHaftArch 

. 8.1)(1. Development; Pr~, to eliminate duplicating and unproductiwe activities, to 

1uure records on all FO.'Jeets are mpt current, and to insure prompt action on 

all completed pro3acts. · 

3o RmCO~IOE: · 

The SU.bccmmittee recommends tbat: 

. ra.. · The follateing Pl"03&cts be ccmtinued &Del the sssigned priorities 

remain the ea.me as·inciicatecl. 

DA Project Ho. 

29 ... 32-003 

29 .. 32-004 

29 ... 32.005 

29.32 ... 006 

29-32-007 

29 .. 32 ... 010 

Title ·~orit.l_ 

Impulse.Recorder Beporducer, IBM 10 1-C 

Interim Preo1sionBeccrder11 ASAm 11 1-C 

Special Oscilloscopes · 2-B 

High Precision Recorder Repcrducer, .PS.Ail 9 . 1-0 

Antenna Matchms Transformer · 2 ... B 

Tepe Feea.-Ou:t Counter 0 /ISAN la. l...C 

Col~f iDENT !AL 

eclassifi ed and a roved for release b NSA on 08-07-2013 ursuantto E .0. 1352 
b.. The f'ollwing 

• 

project be! continusd and. the assigned priority changed 

as indicated: i 

BA Pr!l.teot ~· ~t1!, 

29 .. 32 .. 001 lligb Frequency l-hlticouplers and 

Antennas 

Ncoe 

d. The f'ollD!ling proJeots be cancelied ~ 

None 

4. ll!XllBITS : 

5. COOIU>INATION: 

Coordination was accomplish.ea vith the f6llCN1iDS agencies~ 

None. 

CONf !Df:N T iAt 

~:My· R. C .. Bll 

om.t::.-:~..:, Intercept &. 

DoF. Subcommittee
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<PAGE>
 
<ARTICLE> 5
<LEGEND>
THIS SCHEDULE CONTAINS SUMMARY FINANCIAL INFORMATION EXTRACTED FROM BALANCE
SHEET AND STATEMENT OF OPERATIONS AT OR FOR THE 9 MONTHS ENDED JUNE 30, 1998 AND
IS QUALIFIED IN ITS ENTIRETY BY REFERENCE TO SUCH FINANCIAL STATEMENTS.
</LEGEND>
       
<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   9-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          SEP-30-1998
<PERIOD-START>                             OCT-01-1997
<PERIOD-END>                               JUN-30-1998
<CASH>                                          89,701
<SECURITIES>                                10,111,047
<RECEIVABLES>                               12,683,917
<ALLOWANCES>                               (1,096,329)
<INVENTORY>                                          0
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                                     0
<PP&E>                                         667,863
<DEPRECIATION>                                       0
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                              24,543,687
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                                0
<BONDS>                                              0
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                     14,313
<COMMON>                                        82,955
<OTHER-SE>                                 (8,712,031)
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                24,543,687
<SALES>                                              0
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                             9,907,875
<CGS>                                                0
<TOTAL-COSTS>                               33,070,954
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                     0
<LOSS-PROVISION>                             1,971,329
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                           2,204,919
<INCOME-PRETAX>                           (23,163,079)
<INCOME-TAX>                               (2,308,909)
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                                  0
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                              (20,854,170)
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                     2.55
<EPS-DILUTED>                                     2.55
        

</TABLE>
B

YE37568/65 

1 Atch 

a/s 

DORIAN 

.,..; • ••• 

—.01r 

ClaNTRiii. SYSTEM 

Page 1 of 1 page 

Copy:LApf 4 copies 

SAPSL BYE 37568-65 

• 5V PZi Zs yr 

FXC' ' 

LCD ::',3ES !XX f,PIY, 

kNr-mrir 

NRO APPROVED FOR 

aSieELEASR-..1.:11.1LY.20:15._ 

OFFICE OF THE SECRETARY 

_ 27 DEC 3:6=o,1 -

MEMORANDUM FOR DR. BROWN 

SUBJECT: Disposition of General Electric (MSD) as an MOL 

Contractor 

Please refer to Attachment 1, my memo to you of 

November 21, 1965, which addresses the above subject and 

indicates my intent to conduct an immediate and comprehensive 

investigation of a potentially unsatisfactory situation at 

GE (.'ASD). 

I have since discussed this matter further with • 

Generals Berg and Martin. In view of their recommendations, 

and in light of existing uncertainties in MOL funding, I 

now conclude that the investigation envisioned in Attachment 

1 is not appropriate at this time. I therefore intend to 

defer any formal survey of GE (MSD) until after completion of 

MOL Phase I, at which time the requirement for such an 

investigation will be re-examined. 

This determination does not change my previous 

recommendation that no action be taken at present to discontinue GE (MSD) as an MOL contractor. 

B. A. SCHRIEVER 

General, USAF 

Director, MOL Program 

/11/5-6-71.--""I 

DEPARTMENT OF THE Allq FORCE 

WASHINGTON 

INIMMIN.111111••••••
EXHIBIT 13.2
 
 SECTION 906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT
 CFO CERTIFICATION
 
 In connection with the annual report of Almaden Minerals Ltd. (the “Company”) on Form 20-F for the fiscal year ending December 31, 2013 as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the “Report”), I, Korm Trieu, Chief Financial Officer of the Company, certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 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, as amended; 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/”Korm Trieu”
 
 Name: Korm Trieu
 Title: Chief Financial Officer
 March 28, 2014
IN THE SUPREME COURT OF PENNSYLVANIA

MIDDLE DISTRICT

**COMMONWEALTH OF PENNSYLVANIA,**

**Respondent**

**v.**

**JOEL GAMBLE,**

**Petitioner :** 

**:**

**:**

**:**

**:**

**:**

**:**

**:**

**:**

**:**

**: No. 58 MM 2015** 

ORDER

PER CURIAM

AND NOW **, this 12th day of May, 2015, the Petition for Leave to File Petition for** 

**Allowance of Appeal** Nunc Pro Tunc **is** GRANTED **. Although counsel was negligent,**

**Petitioner is entitled to a counsel-filed Petition fo r Allowance of Appeal.**  See

**Pa.R.Crim.P. 122(B). Counsel is** DIRECTED **to file a Petition for Allowance of Appeal**

**within 15 days.**
Conservation Stewardship Program - Grassland Conservation Initiative Fiscal Year 2024 United States Department of Agriculture

Natural Resources Conservation Service

Code Practice Component Units Unit Cost

E300GCI Grassland Conservation Initiative Grassland Conservation Initiative Activity AC $18.00

CSP-Grassland Conservation Itiative Page 1 of 1 Texas - Fiscal Year 2024
----

            COMMISSION REGULATION (EC) No 945/2006

of 26 June 2006         

amending Regulation (EC) No 1342/2003 laying down special detailed rules for the application of the system of import and export licences for cereals and rice

THE COMMISSION OF THE EUROPEAN COMMUNITIES,

Having regard to the Treaty establishing the European Community,

Having regard to Council Regulation (EC) No 1785/2003 of 29 September 2003 on the common organisation of the market in rice (1), and in particular Article 10(2) thereof,

Whereas:

HAS ADOPTED THIS REGULATION:

Article 1

In Article 12 of Regulation (EC) No 1342/2003, the following point (a)a is inserted:

Article 2

This Regulation shall enter into force on the third day following its publication in the Official Journal of the European Union.

It shall apply from 1 July 2006.

This Regulation shall be binding in its entirety and directly applicable in all Member States.

Done at Brussels, 26 June 2006.

For the Commission

Mariann FISCHER BOEL            

Member of the Commission

----

(1)OJ L 270, 21.10.2003, p. 96. Regulation as amended by Regulation (EC) No 796/2006 (OJ L 144, 31.5.2006, p. 1).

(2)OJ L 189, 29.7.2003, p. 12. Regulation as last amended by Regulation (EC) No 830/2006 (OJ L 150, 3.6.2006, p. 3).

----
114TH CONGRESS 

1ST SESSION S. 1461 

AN ACT 

To provide for the extension of the enforcement instruction 

on supervision requirements for outpatient therapeutic 

services in critical access and small rural hospitals 

through 2015. 

1 Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representa2 tives of the United States of America in Congress assembled, 
2 

†S 1461 ES

1 SECTION 1. EXTENSION OF ENFORCEMENT INSTRUCTION 

2 ON SUPERVISION REQUIREMENTS FOR OUT3 PATIENT THERAPEUTIC SERVICES IN CRIT4 ICAL ACCESS AND SMALL RURAL HOSPITALS 

5 THROUGH 2015. 

6 Section 1 of Public Law 113–198 is amended— 

7 (1) in the section heading, by inserting ‘‘AND

8 2015’’ after ‘‘2014’’; and 

9 (2) by striking ‘‘calendar year 2014’’ and in10 serting ‘‘calendar years 2014 and 2015’’. 

Passed the Senate September 10, 2015. 

Attest: 

Secretary. 

114TH CONGRESS 

1ST SESSION S. 1461 

AN ACT 

To provide for the extension of the enforcement insmall rural hospitals through 2015. patient therapeutic services in critical access and struction on supervision requirements for out-
#### Sobush, Administrator, Respondent, vs. Town of Ringle and another, Appellants.

*May 15*

June *12, 1917.*

*Trebowoski v. Ringle, ante,*p. 637, followed.

Appeals from an order of the circuit court for Marathon county: A. H. Reid, Circuit Judge.

*Affirmed.*

The appeals are from an order overruling demurrers to the complaint for insufficiency and misjoinder qf defendants.

For the appellants there was a brief by *Brown, Pradt é G-enrich*of Wausau, attorneys for *Town of PiTce Bake,*and *M. E. Sweet*of Wausau, attorney for *Town of Ringle,*and the cause was argued orally by *Mr. Sweet*and *Mr. L. A. Pradt.*

For the respondent the cause was submitted on the brief of *Regner*<£- *Ringle*of Wausau.

Marshall, J.

The questions raised on the two appeals are the same as those decided in *Trebowoski v. Ringle, ante,*p. 637, 163 N. W. -, and are ruled in favor of respondent by the result in that case.

*By the Oourt.*— The order is affirmed, respondent in each appeal to recover for costs in this court, attorneys’ fees and clerk’s fees; but no costs for printing.
# C_2005069EN.01001401.xml

| 19.3.2005 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 69/14 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

19.3.2005

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 69/14

---

JUDGMENT OF THE COURT OF FIRST INSTANCE

JUDGMENT OF THE COURT OF FIRST INSTANCE

of 12 January 2005

in Joined Cases T-367/02 to T-369/02: Wieland-Werke AG v Office for Harmonisation in the Internal Market (Trade Marks and Designs) (OHIM) (1)

1

(Community trade mark - Word marks SnTEM, SnPUR and SnMIX - Absolute grounds for refusal - Descriptive nature - Article 7(1)(c) of Regulation (EC) No 40/94)

(2005/C 69/26)

Language of the case: German

In Joined Cases T-367/02 to T-369/02: Wieland-Werke AG, established at Ulm (Germany), represented by S. Gruber and F. Graf von Stosch, lawyers, against Office for Harmonisation in the Internal Market (Trade Marks and Designs) (OHIM) (Agents: T.L. Eichenberg and G. Schneider) — applications for annulment of three decisions of the First Board of Appeal of the OHIM of 25 September 2002 (Cases R 338/2001-1, R 337/2001-1 and R 335/2001-1), concerning applications for registration of word marks SnTEM, SnPUR and SnMIX as Community trade marks — the Court of First Instance (Fourth Chamber), composed of H. Legal, President, V. Tiili and M. Vilaras, Judges; D. Christensen, Administrator, for the Registrar, has given a judgment on 12 January 2005, in which it:

Wieland-Werke AG,

Office for Harmonisation in the Internal Market (Trade Marks and Designs) (OHIM)

| 1. | Dismisses the actions in their entirety; |
| --- | --- |

1.

Dismisses the actions in their entirety;

| 2. | Orders the applicant to pay the costs. |
| --- | --- |

2.

Orders the applicant to pay the costs.

---

(1)  OJ C 55 of 8.3.2003.

1

---
```

[Congressional Bills 114th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[S. 1369 Introduced in Senate (IS)]

114th CONGRESS
  1st Session
                                S. 1369

To allow funds under title II of the Elementary and Secondary Education 
    Act of 1965 to be used to provide training to school personnel 
             regarding how to recognize child sexual abuse.

_______________________________________________________________________

                   IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES

                              May 19, 2015

  Mrs. Feinstein (for herself and Mr. Blunt) introduced the following 
  bill; which was read twice and referred to the Committee on Health, 
                     Education, Labor, and Pensions

_______________________________________________________________________

                                 A BILL

 
To allow funds under title II of the Elementary and Secondary Education 
    Act of 1965 to be used to provide training to school personnel 
             regarding how to recognize child sexual abuse.

    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 ``Helping Schools Protect Our Children 
Act of 2015''.

SEC. 2. TRAINING TEACHERS TO RECOGNIZE CHILD SEXUAL ABUSE.

    (a) State Activities.--Section 2113(c) of the Elementary and 
Secondary Education Act of 1965 (20 U.S.C. 6613(c)) is amended by 
adding at the end the following:
            ``(19) Providing training for all school personnel, 
        including teachers, principals, specialized instructional 
        support personnel, and paraprofessionals, regarding how to 
        recognize child sexual abuse.''.
    (b) Local Educational Agency Activities.--Section 2123(a) of the 
Elementary and Secondary Education Act of 1965 (20 U.S.C. 6623(a)) is 
amended by inserting after paragraph (8) the following:
            ``(9) Providing training for all school personnel, 
        including teachers, principals, specialized instructional 
        support personnel, and paraprofessionals, regarding how to 
        recognize child sexual abuse.''.
    (c) Eligible Partnership Activities.--Section 2134(a) of the 
Elementary and Secondary Education Act of 1965 (20 U.S.C. 6634(a)) is 
amended--
            (1) in paragraph (1)(B), by striking ``and'' after the 
        semicolon;
            (2) in paragraph (2)(C), by striking the period at the end 
        and inserting ``; and''; and
            (3) by adding at the end the following:
            ``(3) providing training for school personnel, including 
        teachers, principals, specialized instructional support 
        personnel, and paraprofessionals, regarding how to recognize 
        child sexual abuse.''.
                                 <all>
```
#### Herring, Respondent, vs. E. I. Du Pont de Nemours Powder Company, Appellant.

*February 23*

March *14, 1911.*

*New trial: Discretion: Presumption: Appeal from order: Dismissal.*

1. A new trial granted without specifying any reason therefor, but upon condition of the payment of the costs of trial, will be presumed to have been granted in the discretion of the court because it was dissatisfied with the verdict.

2. An appeal from a discretionary order will be dismissed if there was no abuse of discretion.

Appeal from an order of tbe circuit court for Bayfield county: E. ,W. Helks, Judge.

*Dismissed..*

Eor tbe appellant there was a brief by *J. P. Lajfey*and *A.*W. *McLeod,*and oral argument by *Mr. McLeod.*

For tbe respondent there was a brief by *E. 0. Ahord*and *Sanborn, Lcmcreux •& Pray,*and oral argument by *A. W. Sanborn.*

*522WiNSLow, 0. T.

This case was once here on an appeal from a judgment of nonsuit (139 Wis. 412, 121 N. W. 170), and it was held upon that appeal that the nonsuit was wrongly granted and a new trial was ordered. A new trial has been had and a special verdict rendered, consisting of eight questions and answers which it is unnecessary- to set forth. The defendant moved to change the answers to certain of the questions, for judgment on the verdict, and for judgment notwithstanding the verdict. The plaintiff moved to change the answers to certain of the questions, and in default thereof to set aside the verdict and grant a new trial, because the verdict is contrary to law and not supported by the evidence and because of inconsistency in the answers in the special verdict. The defendant’s motions were all denied, and the plaintiff’s motion to change the answers was denied, but the plaintiff’s motion to set aside the verdict and for a new trial was granted on condition that the plaintiff pay the costs of the trial. Erom this order the defendant appeals.

The new trial having been granted upon condition of the payment of the costs -of the trial and specifying no reason therefor must be presumed to have been granted in the exercise of the discretion of the court, because for some reason it was dissatisfied with the verdict and deemed that the ends of justice would be best subserved by a new trial. *Giese v. Milwaukee E. R. & L. Co.*116 Wis. 66, 92 N. W. 356; *Frost v.*Meyer, 137 Wis. 255, 118 N. W. 811. No abuse of discretion is claimed, nor does it appear that any such claim could be successfully made. Under such circumstances the rule is well settled that the appeal must be dismissed. *Sly v. Kilbourn City,*144 Wis. 203, 128 N. W. 872.

*By the Court.*— It is so ordered.
---

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

In connection with the Annual Report UltraGuard Water Systems Corp.. (the "Company") on Form 10-KSB for the year ended December 31, 2003 as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the "Report"), I, Kenneth Fielding, the
President and Chief Executive Officer of the Company, certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. section 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 result of operations of the Company.

|Date: October 27, 2004 |                                                          
|---------------------- | ---------------------------------------------------------
|                       | /s/ Ken Fielding                                         
|                       | Ken Fielding 
      President and Chief Executive Officer

---
WASHINGTON M. D. C. 1,10121"

o SEA 1911

ZUCMORANDU31 FOR TEE SZCRSTART OF TIC ARMY

THE SECIUCTART OF THE HATT

THE SICRITABT OF THE MB ICBM

THZ DIRZCTOS OF DUMB MUIZARCH AND

ammantanal

THE maw OF TEE raw CHIEPE OF STAFF

CiENZBAL COMM

SUBJECT: Assistant !or itemmadoence

Rodermoce the attached Agreemed between the Secretary d

Debase ad the Director d the Cembral letelligenee Agway edified

"Manegaseet et the Wallowa Reeeesdassms Program."

The Vidor Secretary et the Air Force is ham* desigaded

Assiatad ter Recan akommee, and is delimited tall authority for

memegemest et tide program la lids regard, he will act as wry direct

reproweitative both winds aid add& the Departomet et Wass% Is

will be Were my awe that be requires Moe mead staff elements, • although those staff 010111•11111 will sot parlicipute is prepays miters

so cep! as he specitically reqamts. He will, banns, keep pertinent ;.4/ key officials Wormed ea a regular basis 4111 the statue at this. programs. 

Became at the mss seadtbrity et the proiseb involved he

the Natimal Reaemaisarace Program, particular can mg be takes

to protect Ott seem* et the argasgemesta described beivila. The

eninteace et the retereased Agreemeett its sostads, mid the erodes.

Meat implemedsUes employed ter its enocutios are all elamitied TOP -

SECRET. This intormattes will a be dieclesed to wale to whom

such dionkasure is set msadstory Is order to carry out adieus required

by the terms at the rd seed Agree:we or by my Assistant for

Recamaissonee is carrying est Ms reoponslhilitles is the Natimed

t•

•••

Copy U et 12 cys.

Page 1 cd 2 Mow

•

•

Recommismace Program. .1. •

AU Depestmeat at Datums satellite or ovedight phetegrashie

reccamdeseac•, mapping, geodesy, Ind electrode siva eollesthm %-

programs mut be houlled ia ancerdenow with the ratereaced Aprewsid,
Top_sEettEt_

-.

e.111.;

I a

aad =loft pejo* airdirmuta W be bowed bit* godsend!, ad mac* direethea ‘111 be sedaed at Ile eartiot date tint web adios

erns be tads idtb plaaelble overt elpeeemea.

• maw poblie edam pelley lee Mate Imam wIti be

anemed as a emirate melba to addadae ledoerebility et tbeee ~am.

1 Att.

Agreement

filipashs s

Rebut fte 211eltmara

Page 2 et 2 pa.

C list 12 eya.

-TOP-SECRET-
#### The People of the State of New York, Respondent, v Thomas Gonzalez, Appellant.

[771 NYS2d 893]

Appeal from judg ment, Supreme Court, New York County (Arlene Silverman, J.), rendered December 19, 2001, convicting defendant, after a nonjury trial, of criminal sale of a controlled substance in the third degree and criminal possession of a controlled substance in the third degree, and sentencing him, as a second felony offender, to *41⁄2*to 9 years, held in abeyance, and the matter remanded to Supreme Court, New York County, for determination of defendant’s speedy trial motion.

The People correctly concede that the court should not have summarily rejected defendant’s speedy trial motion, which, although brought on the eve of trial, was timely *(People v Gaillard,*252 AD2d 357 [1998]). The present state of the record does not permit this Court to determine the merits of the motion. Concur—Tom, J.P., Andrias, Sullivan and Friedman, JJ.