alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
NRO APP OVEO FOR 1 . 

RELEASE 1 JULY 2015 

i 

e • 

ntrol 

Q.) 

4,14.0RANDUli FOR THE DLRECTOR,_ IOL 

SUBJECT: Final Report on the Role of Han in the..11. 

- . • 

Forwarded herewith is the Final Report on the Role o 

 nIn in the 1.1014 resulting from the study which you directed 

undertaken on 17 January 1966 (Attachment 1). This 

▪ report differs in some respects, though not substantively 

A rom the preliminary version furnished you on 21.April /966. 

Tho_ text has been clarified to e_considerable extent, and ..- 

cd,..titional data with, respect to operational growth, Itariat 

cgtzisition , sensor, pointing and tracking, and visual 

reconnaissance is new included. 

I am in ,eneral agreement with the. conclusions-:of the 

ro-Dort. with regard to the recommendations, the-first tyli:qe,' 

▪ E and C refer to cost-e.ffectiveness studies.'of optimum': . 

rn-rined versus optimum unmanned versions of }TOL to cost.; 

effectiveness =tidies of advanced resolution 

3L octr.fiv.;.rations,-and to parametric studios of Past space 

vshiole performance data. These recommendations also .appeared 

it the preliminary version of the report, and were put in.- the. 

.form of a policy guidance paper at your direction as a result;:.: 

of our discussions on the West. Coast on 25 April 1966. 

GEnera.1 Berg is currently actively pursuing the studies, 

rz.ssponsivo to this guidance document. Recommendation D, 

rezarding development of a D(..VIAN.Target Model is also under7 

ay, largely by the East Coast Office, but .with West CoaSt:: 

Less well defined activity is under.way some othe 

:areas identified in the 

_ 

I am furnishing General Bergcopies for his-comment. 

rurthe'r distribution other than to those who maybe involv. 

in comranting on the report, and the study grout) itself 

not. been made. 

A modified version of the report suitable for

, 

 transmittal 

to the. secretary of the Air Force is being furnished you under 

oorrospondenee. This modified version is essentially • 

I•101111•■=1111 

BYE-21135/66 

Do:(rAnicann 

Handle Via 

Systems :Jointly 

EXCLUDED FROM AUTOMATIC REGRADING; 

DOD DIR. 5200.10 DOES NOT APPLY 

O 
NRO APF OVED FOR 

RELEAS Jun, 2015 

the same as the attached Report, except that text direct17 

concerning internal program matters not appropriate for 

external dis-tribution$ and the entire recommendations section 

have been deleted. 

I would appreciate your comment, together. with. an 

indication of further action you may desire with regard 

the report itself* and its recommendations.' 

1 Atdh 

Rsport on:the Role 

'of an in the HOT, 

(w 211,6-66) 

1,-011,14.14O.AIMIT 

EXCLUDED , nom AUTOMATIC REGRADING;-- DOD DIR. - 5200.10 DOES NOT APPLY 

-Tau. :T.n-ruola 

Control Systems Jointly
UN PUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

No. 17
- 7570

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA , Plaintiff

- Appellee ,

v. CLESHON JOAQUIN MACK , Defendant

- Appellant

.

Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of South Carolina , at Florence

. Terry L. Wooten, Chief District Judge. ( 4:04

- cr - 00582

- TLW

- 1 ; 4:16

- cv 01818

- TLW )

Submitted : April 17, 2018 Decided: April 19, 2018

Before WILKINSON and KEENAN , Circuit Judges , and HAMILTON, Senior Circuit Judge

.

Dismissed by un published per curiam opinion

. Cleshon Joaquin Mack , Appellant Pro Se.
Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.2 PER CURIAM: Cleshon Joaquin Mack seeks to appeal the district court’s order denying relief on his 28 U.S.C. § 2255 (2012) motion. The order is not appealable unless a circuit justice or judge issues a certificate of appealability. 28 U.S.C. § 2253(c)(1)(B) (2012). 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) (2012). When the district court denies relief on the merits, a prisoner satisfies this standard by demonstrating that reasonable jurists would find that the district court’s assessment of the constitutional claims is debatable or wrong. Slack v. McDaniel , 529 U.S. 473, 484 (2000); see Miller

- El v. Cockrell , 537 U.S. 322, 336

- 38 (2003). When the district court denies relief on procedural grounds, the prisoner must demonstrate both that the dis positive procedural ruling is debatable, and that the motion states a debatable claim of the denial of a constitutional right. Slack , 529 U.S. at 484

- 85. We have independently reviewed the record and conclude that Mack has not made the requisite showing . Accordingly, we deny a certificate of appealability and dismiss the appeal. We dispense with oral argument because the facts and legal contentions are adequately presented in the materials before this court and argument would not aid the decisional pro cess. DISMISSED
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 Quarterly Report of Amerex Group, Inc. (the “Company”) on
Form 10-Q for the period ended June 30, 2008, as filed with the Securities and
Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the “Report”), I, Stephen K. Onody,
Chief Executive 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
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.







Date:  August
      14, 2008
            By:
            /s/Stephen K.
      OnodyStephen
      K. Onody
              Interim
      Chief Executive
Officer
An official website of the United States government         Here's how you know         
**Official websites use .gov**
A **.gov** website belongs to an official government organization in the United States.
**Secure .gov websites use HTTPS**
 A **lock (lock )** or **https://** means you’ve safely connected to the .gov website. Share sensitive information only on official, secure websites.

Skip to main content (Press Enter).

National Security Agency/Central Security Service

Search
Search

Search

-  About    -  Leadership             
  -  Mission & Combat Support             
  -  Cybersecurity             
  -  Signals Intelligence             
  -  Central Security Service             
  -  Locations             
  -  Research             
  -  Diversity, Equity, Inclusion & Accessibility             
  -  Cybersecurity Collaboration Center      -  Collaborative Partnerships             
    -  Enduring Security Framework             
    -  DIB Cybersecurity Services             
    -  Standards and Certifications             
    -  Artificial Intelligence Security Center 
-  Press Room    -  Press Releases & Statements             
  -  News & Highlights             
  -  Declassification & Transparency Initiatives             
  -  Cybersecurity Advisories & Guidance             
  -  Telework and Mobile Security Guidance             
  -  DoD Microelectronics Guidance             
  -  Research Publications 
-  Careers    -  Unique Pathways             
  -  Innovation 
-  History    -  National Cryptologic Museum             
  -  Cryptologic History             
  -  National Cryptologic Memorial 

# Cryptologic Machines Image Gallery

HomeHistoryNational Cryptologic MuseumExhibits & ArtifactsCryptologic MuseumMachines

Search

Search

                              - All Images 
                              - Design Elements 
                              - NSA Historical Photographs 
                              - Other 

                              - Upload Date
                              - Photo Date
                              - Title

----

Download Image: Full Size (0.61 MB)

Tags:machines

Photo by:VIRIN: 

Photo Gallery
#### Reif, by guardian, Respondent, vs. Klurfeld and another, Appellants: Wallman, Defendant.

For the appellants: *Robert R.*Freeman, attorney, and *Ronold A. Drechsler*of counsel, both of Milwaukee.

For the respondent: *A. L. Skolnik*of Milwaukee.

For the defendant Wallman: *Bloodgsood, Stebbim & Bloodgood,*attorneys, and *Albert K. Stebbins*of counsel, all of Milwaukee.

*By the Court.*

Judgment affirmed.
OFFICE OF THE ATTORNEY GENE&L OF TEXAS AUSTIN

### WV 3 I



### fdwill b6 54tod that%hofees alimml a~6 'for 644il Or the . , . r666bt8 i6666d by Qurmoat to #6id la?m.*
#### The State ex rel. Garrett, Appellant, *v.*Industrial Commission of Ohio, Appellee.

[Cite as *State ex rel. Garrett v. Indus. Comm.*(1999), 86 Ohio St.3d 587.]

(No. 98-2483

Submitted July 28, 1999

Decided September 22, 1999.)

*Law Office of Thomas Tootle*and *Thomas Tootle,*for appellant.

*Betty D. Montgomery,*Attorney General, and *Angela D. Marinakis,*Assistant Attorney General, for appellee.

The judgment of the court of appeals is reversed. The cause is returned to the Industrial Commission for relief consistent with *State ex rel. Gay v. Mihm*(1994), 68 Ohio St.3d 315, 626 N.E.2d 666.

Moyer, C.J., Douglas, Resnick, F.E. Sweeney, Pfeifer and Lundberg Stratton, JJ., concur.

Cook, J., dissents.
#### The State ex rel. Forsyth, Appellant, *v.*Brigner, Judge, Appellee.

[Cite as *State ex rel. Forsyth v. Brigner*(1999), 86 Ohio St.3d 299.]

(No. 99-598

Submitted June 22, 1999

Decided September 1, 1999.)

*300
      *M. Wayne Forsyth, pro se.*

*Mathias H. Heck, Jr.,*Montgomery County Prosecuting Attorney, and *John F. Krumholtz,*Assistant Prosecuting Attorney, for appellee.

*Per Curiam.*

Forsyth asserts that the court of appeals erred in dismissing his mandamus action. For the reasons that follow, Forsyth’s claims are meritless.

Although mandamus and procedendo will issue in cases of a court’s undue delay in entering judgment, *State ex rel. Dehler v. Sutula*(1995), 74 Ohio St.3d 33, 35, 656 N.E.2d 332, 333, it is evident here that even assuming no express ruling on the pretrial motion, the trial court overruled Forsyth’s motion to have depositions filed when it entered its divorce decree. See *State ex rel. The V Cos. v. Marshall*(1998), 81 Ohio St.3d 467, 469, 692 N.E.2d 198, 201 (“[W]hen a trial court fails to rule on a pretrial motion [and proceeds to judgment in the case], it may ordinarily be presumed that the court overruled it”). Forsyth is not entitled to a writ of mandamus to compel Judge Brigner to do an act that has already been performed. *State ex rel. Eads v. Callahan*(1998), 82 Ohio St.3d 405, 406, 696 N.E.2d 581, 582.

In addition, to the extent that Forsyth challenged Judge Brigner’s ruling on the pretrial motion, he had an adequate legal remedy by raising this challenge in his appeal from the divorce decree. *Forsyth v. Forsyth*(June 14, 1996), Montgomery App. No. 15487, unreported, 1996 WL 325507. A plain and adequate remedy in the ordinary course of law precludes extraordinary relief in mandamus. *State ex rel. Natl. Electrical Contrs. Assn. v. Ohio Bur. of Emp. Serv.*(1998), 83 Ohio St.3d 179, 183, 699 N.E.2d 64, 67.

*301Finally, Forsyth erroneously submits evidence that is not part of the court of appeals’ record to support his contentions. We cannot add matter to the record before us and decide this appeal based upon that new matter. *State ex rel. Cotton v. Ghee*(1998), 84 Ohio St.3d 54, 55-56, 701 N.E.2d 989, 990.

Based on the foregoing, we affirm the judgment of the court of appeals.

*Judgment affirmed.*

Moyer, C.J., Douglas, Resnick, F.E. Sweeney, Pfeifer, Cook and Lundberg Stratton, JJ., concur.
----

            COMMISSION REGULATION (EC) No 891/2006

of 16 June 2006         

fixing the maximum buying-in price for butter for the first individual invitation to tender under the standing invitation to tender opened by Regulation (EC) No 796/2006

THE COMMISSION OF THE EUROPEAN COMMUNITIES,

Having regard to the Treaty establishing the European Community,

Having regard to Council Regulation (EC) No 1255/1999 of 17 May 1999 on the common organisation of the market in milk and milk products (1), and in particular Article 10 thereof,

Whereas:

HAS ADOPTED THIS REGULATION:

Article 1

For the first individual invitation to tender under the standing invitation to tender opened by Regulation (EC) No 796/2006, in respect of which the time limit for the submission of tenders expired on 13 June 2006, the maximum buying-in price for butter is fixed at 246,19 EUR/100 kg.

Article 2

This Regulation shall enter into force on 17 June 2006.

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

Done at Brussels, 16 June 2006.

For the Commission

J. L. DEMARTY            

Director-General for Agriculture and Rural Development

----

(1)OJ L 160, 26.6.1999, p. 48. Regulation as last amended by Regulation (EC) No 1913/2005 (OJ L 307, 25.11.2005, p. 2).

(2)OJ L 333, 24.12.1999, p. 11. Regulation as last amended by Regulation (EC) No 2107/2005 (OJ L 337, 22.12.2005, p. 20).

(3)OJ L 142, 30.5.2006, p. 4.

----
```

[Congressional Bills 114th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[S. 1395 Introduced in Senate (IS)]

114th CONGRESS
  1st Session
                                S. 1395

       To reinstate certain mining claims in the State of Alaska.

_______________________________________________________________________

                   IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES

                              May 20, 2015

 Ms. Murkowski introduced the following bill; which was read twice and 
       referred to the Committee on Energy and Natural Resources

_______________________________________________________________________

                                 A BILL

 
       To reinstate certain mining claims in the State of Alaska.

    Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representatives of the 
United States of America in Congress assembled,

SECTION 1. SMALL MINER CLAIMS.

    (a) Definition of Covered Claimholder.--The term ``covered 
claimholder'' means each of--
            (1) the claimholder of claims in the State of Alaska 
        numbered AA023149, AA023163, AA47913, AA047914, AA047915, 
        AA047916, AA047917, AA047918, and AA047919 (as of December 29, 
        2004); and
            (2) the claimholder of the claim in the State of Alaska 
        numbered ADL: FF-0593215 (as of December 29, 2004).
    (b) Reinstatment; Opportunity To Cure Defects.--The covered 
claimholders shall--
            (1) be considered to qualify for relief under paragraph (3) 
        of section 10101(d) of the Omnibus Budget Reconciliation Act of 
        1993 (30 U.S.C. 28f(d)); and
            (2) have the opportunity under that paragraph to cure 
        defects with respect to the applicable claim for any prior 
        period during which--
                    (A) 1 or more defects existed; or
                    (B) there was a failure to pay claim maintenance 
                fees.
                                 <all>
```
#### Cashman, Respondent, vs. Rock County Sugar Company, Appellant.

For the appellant: *Jeffris, Mouat,*Oestreich/ *Avery & Wood*of Janesville.

For the respondent: *Allan V. Class on*of Oconto.

*By the Court.*

Judgment affirmed.
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<PAGE>
<ARTICLE> 5

<S>                             <C>                     <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   6-MOS                   6-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          DEC-31-1999             DEC-31-1998
<PERIOD-START>                             JAN-01-1999             JAN-01-1998
<PERIOD-END>                               JUN-30-1999             JUN-30-1998
<CASH>                                           5,570                  11,289
<SECURITIES>                                         0                       0
<RECEIVABLES>                                    5,060                   2,820
<ALLOWANCES>                                       636                   1,678
<INVENTORY>                                         91                     125
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                                11,941                  14,984
<PP&E>                                           1,545                   1,715
<DEPRECIATION>                                   2,758                   2,950
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                  13,877                  17,550
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                            8,469                   7,707
<BONDS>                                              0                       0
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0                       0
<PREFERRED>                                          0                       0
<COMMON>                                           125                     123
<OTHER-SE>                                       5,283                   9,720
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                    13,877                  17,550
<SALES>                                         11,084                   6,891
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                                14,249                   9,185
<CGS>                                            2,374                   1,929
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                   14,071                  11,272
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                 (203)                 (6,518)
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                     0                       0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                                 120                     121
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                (1,873)                   2,623
<INCOME-TAX>                                         0                    (22)
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                            (1,873)                   2,623
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0                       0
<CHANGES>                                            0                       0
<NET-INCOME>                                   (1,873)                   2,601
<EPS-BASIC>                                     (0.15)                     .21<F1>
<EPS-DILUTED>                                   (0.15)                     .21<F1>
<FN>
<F1> Basic and diluted EPS information has been prepared in accordance with SFAS
No 128, and basic and diluted have been entered in place of primary and diluted
EPS, respectively.
</FN>


</TABLE>
----

            COMMISSION DECISION         

of 28 April 2006         

amending Decision 2003/526/EC as regards the prolongation of the application of protection measures relating to classical swine fever in certain Member States

(notified under document number C(2006) 1719)

(Text with EEA relevance)

(2006/327/EC)

THE COMMISSION OF THE EUROPEAN COMMUNITIES,

Having regard to the Treaty establishing the European Community,

Having regard to Council Directive 90/425/EEC of 26 June 1990 concerning veterinary and zootechnical checks applicable in intra-Community trade in certain live animals and products with a view to the completion of the internal market (1), and in particular Article 10(4) thereof,

Whereas:

HAS ADOPTED THIS DECISION:

Article 1

In Article 11 of Decision 2003/526/EC ‘30 April 2006’ is replaced by ‘30 April 2007’.

Article 2

This Decision is addressed to the Member States.

Done at Brussels, 28 April 2006.

For the Commission

Markos KYPRIANOU            

Member of the Commission

----

(1)OJ L 224, 18.8.1990, p. 29. Directive as last amended by Directive 2002/33/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council (OJ L 315, 19.11.2002, p. 14).

(2)OJ L 183, 22.7.2003, p. 46. Decision as last amended by Decision 2006/284/EC (OJ L 104, 13.4.2006, p. 48).

----
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 the Interior

###### U.S. Geological Survey

          - [GX.15.AE60.00C10.00.]

# AGENCY:

U.S. Geological Survey, Department of the Interior.

# ACTION:

Notice of intent to grant an exclusive license.

# SUMMARY:

The Notice is hereby given that the U.S. Geological Survey intends to grant to Alpha Mach, Inc., 101-2205 Bombardier, Ste-Julie, Qc, Canada, J3E 2J9, an exclusive license to practice the following: A device for monitoring subsurface temperatures.

# DATES:

Comments must be received fifteen (15) days from the effective date of this notice.

# FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

Benjamin Henry, Technology Enterprise Specialist, Office of Policy & Analysis, U.S. Geological Survey, 12201 Sunrise Valley Dr, MS 153, Reston, VA 20192, 703-648-4344.

# SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

It is in the public interest to license this invention, as Alpha Mach, Inc., submitted a complete and sufficient application for a license. The prospective exclusive license will be royalty-bearing and will comply with the terms and conditions of 35 U.S.C. 209 and 37 CFR 404.7. The prospective exclusive license may be granted unless, within fifteen (15) days from the date of this published Notice, the U.S. Geological Survey Office of Policy & Analysis receives written evidence and argument which establishes that the grant of the license would not be consistent with the requirements of 35 U.S.C. 209 and 37 CFR 404.7.

Katherine McCulloch,

Deputy Associate Director for Administration.

[FR Doc. 2015-03339 Filed 2-18-15; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 4311-AM-P