alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
<PAGE>
 
                                                                    Exhibit 23.2
 
                       CONSENT OF INDEPENDENT ACCOUNTANTS
 
   We hereby consent to the use in this Registration Statement on Form S-1 of
our report dated March 5, 1999, except for Note 17 for which the date is April
23, 1999, relating to the consolidated financial statements of Voyager.net,
Inc., and our reports dated April 28, 1999 on our audits of Freeway, Inc.,
EXEC-PC, Inc. and Netlink Systems, L.L.C. which appear in such Registration
Statement. We also consent to the use of our report dated March 5, 1999 on the
Financial Statement Schedule for the three years ended December 31, 1998 listed
under Item 16(b) of this Registration Statement when such schedule is read in
conjunction with the financial statements referred to in our report. We also
consent to the references to us under the heading "Experts" in such
Registration Statement.
 
                                               PricewaterhouseCoopers LLP
 
Grand Rapids, Michigan
May 6, 1999
#### The State ex rel. Jackson, Appellant, *v.*Callahan, Judge, Appellee.

[Cite as *State ex rel. Jackson v. Callahan*(1999), 86 Ohio St.3d 73.]

(No. 98-2625

Submitted May 4, 1999

Decided July 7, 1999.)

*Gregory Jackson, pro se.*

*William D. Mason,*Cuyahoga County Prosecuting Attorney, and *L. Christopher Frey,*Assistant Prosecuting Attorney, for appellee.

*Per Curiam.*

Jackson asserts in his propositions of law that the court of appeals erred in denying the writ of prohibition. For the following reasons, Jackson’s assertions lack merit.

Habeas corpus is the appropriate remedy for persons claiming entitlement to release from prison. *State ex rel. Dix v. McAllister*(1998), 81 Ohio St.3d 107, 108, 689 N.E.2d 561, 563. Therefore, Jackson is not entitled to a writ of prohibition to achieve the same result. “ ‘A contrary holding would permit inmates seeking immediate release from prison to employ [prohibition or] mandamus to circumvent the statutory pleading requirements for instituting a habeas corpus action, *i.e.,*attachment of commitment papers and verification.’ ” *74
      *State ex rel. Smith v. Yost*(1998), 81 Ohio St.3d 111, 112, 689 N.E.2d 565, 566, quoting *State ex rel. Lemmon v. Ohio Adult Parole Auth.*(1997), 78 Ohio St.3d 186, 188, 677 N.E.2d 347, 349.

In addition, prohibition is not available to challenge the validity or sufficiency of indictments because such a challenge is nonjurisdictional and can be raised on direct appeal. Cf. *State ex rel. Wilcox v. Seidner*(1996), 76 Ohio St.3d 412, 415, 667 N.E.2d 1220, 1222.

Finally, contrary to Jackson’s assertions, Judge Callahan’s summary judgment evidence established that all three counts of Jackson’s indictment were filed in his criminal case.

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.
[Federal Register Volume 80, Number 38 (Thursday, February 26, 2015)]
[Notices]
[Page 10497]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2015-03939]


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

DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES

National Institutes of Health


National Institute of General Medical Sciences; Notice of Closed 
Meeting

    Pursuant to section 10(d) of the Federal Advisory Committee Act, as 
amended (5 U.S.C. App.), notice is hereby given of the following 
meeting.
    The meeting will be closed to the public in accordance with the 
provisions set forth in sections 552b(c)(4) and 552b(c)(6), Title 5 
U.S.C., as amended. The grant applications and the discussions could 
disclose confidential trade secrets or commercial property such as 
patentable material, and personal information concerning individuals 
associated with the grant applications, the disclosure of which would 
constitute a clearly unwarranted invasion of personal privacy.

    Name of Committee: National Institute of General Medical 
Sciences Special Emphasis Panel Large-Scale Collaborative Project 
Awards (R24/U54).
    Date: March 26-27, 2015.
    Time: 8:30 a.m. to 12:00 p.m.
    Agenda: To review and evaluate grant applications.
    Place: Residence Inn Bethesda, 7335 Wisconsin Avenue, Bethesda, 
MD 20814.
    Contact Person: Margaret J. Weidman, Ph.D., Scientific Review 
Officer, Office of Scientific Review, National Institute of General 
Medical Sciences, National Institutes of Health, 45 Center Drive, 
Room 3An.12N, Bethesda, MD 20892, 301-594-3663, 
<a href="/cdn-cgi/l/email-protection#99eefcf0fdf4f8f7f4f8d9f7f0fef4eab7f7f0f1b7fef6ef"><span class="__cf_email__" data-cfemail="5423313d3039353a3935143a3d3339277a3a3d3c7a333b22">[email protected]</span></a>.

(Catalogue of Federal Domestic Assistance Program Nos. 93.375, 
Minority Biomedical Research Support; 93.821, Cell Biology and 
Biophysics Research; 93.859, Pharmacology, Physiology, and 
Biological Chemistry Research; 93.862, Genetics and Developmental 
Biology Research; 93.88, Minority Access to Research Careers; 93.96, 
Special Minority Initiatives, National Institutes of Health, HHS)


    Dated: February 20, 2015.
Melanie J. Gray,
Program Analyst, Office of Federal Advisory Committee Policy.
[FR Doc. 2015-03939 Filed 2-25-15; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4140-01-P


</pre><script data-cfasync="false" src="/cdn-cgi/scripts/5c5dd728/cloudflare-static/email-decode.min.js"></script></body>
</html>
SUBJECT NUMBER 

USCIB: 9.2/3 

Subject: 

FINAL 

Item A (Not on Agenda) tor the lOOth Meeting of USCIB, 

held on 11 February 1954. 

The Potentialities or COMINT !or Strategic Warning 

(Report of Special Study Group NSASAB) (Robertson 

Report). 

GENERAL CANINE recalled that he had forwarded the so-called 

Robertson Report on limited distribution to USCIB members last 

October. He explained that this report, dealing primarily with the 

Early Warning Problem, had been prepared at his request by Dr. H. P. 

Robertson, who had come up with a list of recom.end.ations tor 

improvement in various COMINT-producing practices and procedures. 

He reviewed briefly the major recom.endations of the report and 

outlined actions already taken, and those contemplated, in implementation of these reconunendations. He in.formed the members that a detailed 

report on the subject will be distributed in the near future, adding 

that he merely wished, at this juncture, to notify all concerned that 

the matter is receiving attention. 

The members noted the information presented by the Director, NSA. 

There being no further business the meeting adjourned at 16o5, at 

which time the members remained for an Ex:ecutive Session, called at the 

request of the Director, NSA. 

USCIB: 9.2/3 - 8·-

Declassified and approved for release by NSA on 03-24-2014 pursuant to E. 0. 1352B 

TOP SECRET
-------- 

• ~477 • 

mcm: 29.23/2 

5 August 1955 

!ep SieBllf 

MEIQANDUM FOR THE J:IMBERS OF mcm: 

Subject: Burmese Arm;y Request to Purchase U.S. Radio D/F 

:Equipment. 

Reference: U3CIB 29.23/1 dated 18 July 1955 

Vote sheet replies to the reference indicate approval by all 

M9mbers -with a recommendation by the State Department !Jbmber as 

follovs: 

"I agree that Army should be authorized to provide this 

equipment and to suggest that the Burmese provide in 

return the information which is specified. However, 

this suggestion should not be pressed and the provision 

of this equipment should not be ma.de contingent upon 

Burmese acceptance of it." 

tBCIB 

tBCIB: 29.23/2 

24 

Declassified and approved for release by NSA on 01-22-2014 pursuantto E.O. 1352a 

TOP SECRET
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 

HomeHistoryCryptologic HistoryHistorical FiguresHistorical Figures View

# NSA Historical Figures

                Download            

                Download            

                Download            

# Clifford Cocks, James Ellis, and Malcolm Williamson

##                 2021 Hall of Honor Inductees            

**                    SHARE                

**                    PRINT                

2021
.. 

USCIB: 5.3/28 APPENDED DUCOIVJmT~ 66N'l'A:IN 

G9BEi WORB M::lc!EMA:L 

24 March 1954 

'i'OP 5Fi0Rl!fl' = l:J. S. Ei¥Ei6 ONIX 

MTMORAND'lM FOR THE MEMBERS OF USCIBEC: 

Subject: Tentative Minutes. 

1. Forwarded herewith is a copy of the Tentative Minutes of 

the Twelfth Meeting or USCIBEC. Please advise the Secretary if any 

changes are desired. 

2. In the event there is no objection to these Minutes on 1:.he 

part or USCIBEC members by 8 April 1954 they will be considered. 

approved. 

Enclosure 

1 copy of Tentative Minutes, 

Twelfth Meeting of USCIBEC. 

REPRODUCTION OF THIS DOCUM]liJT IN WHOLE OR 

PART IS PROHIBITED EXCEPT WITH PERMISSION 

OF THE ISSUING OFFICE. 

USCIB: 5.3/28 

TlJPSBCRB'I' 

7 lvi 'fAt HJ~ 

::i:t~\AA I I "3, S'/1-1~ 

.l. s, 7 /t, 

3 P'i/./1 ~ 

APPEtlBEiB B66f:JME!ff8 OeNT1t!N 

Declassified and approved for release by NSA on 11-06 2014 pursuant to E .0. 1352f3 
REF ID:A57630 e COPifiBENTML e. 

00N¥IBEN'l'IAfi - e.a. ffi!R3 6MLY 

MINUTES OF THE TWELFTH MEETING 

OF THE 

USCIB EXECUTIVE COMMI'ITEE 

Captain Rufus L. Taylor, USN, Chairman 

PRESENT: 

DEFENSE: 

STATE: 

FBI: 

NSA: 

Q!!: 

ARMY: 

NAVY: 

-

AIR FORCE: 

SECRETARIAT: 

ALSO PRESENT: 

DEFENSE: 

STATE: 

FBI: 

NSA: 

CIA: 

Mr. Randolph V. Zander 

(for Mr. William H. Godel) 

Mr. Robert F. Packard . (for Mr. T. Achilles Polyzoides) 

Mr. Victor P. Keay 

Captain Dwight M. Agnew, USN 

(for Mr. Huntington D. Sheldon) 

Lt. Colonel Glen C. Long 

Captain William M. McCormick 

Colonel Charles M. Townsend 

Mr. H. D. Jones 

Mrs. D. O. Tucker 

Mr. Milton s. Zaslow 

Mr. Robert G. Walker 

Mr. S. Drake Ellis 

Mr. Benson K. Buffham 

Mr. Cecil C. Corry 

Mr. Philip J. Patton 

COHFltJENffAL 

OGA 
REF ID:A57630 

CONFiDfNiiAL 

CONPIBEM'fl:Afl - l::J.S. EiiliS ONI.¥ 

ARMY: 

-

Am FORCE: 

COMMITrEE CHAIRMAN: 

Lt. Colonel Richard Leffers 

Lt. Colonel Edward E. McBride 

Major Amie Millican 

Captain Allen T. Miller 

Lt. Colonel Henry C. Simmons, USAF 

(Intelligence) 

Major William R. Culmer, USA {Security) 

The Twelfth Meeting of the United States Communications Intelligence 

Board Executive Conunittee was held at 1400, on 4 March 1954, in Room 2054, 

Que Building, CIA. 

(NOI'E BY THE SECRErARY: This was an additional meeting to consider 

those items on the agenda for the Eleventh Meeting which, due to time 

limitations, could not be considered on 26 February 1954.) 

- 2 -

COH/!IDS'4Tli4L
United States Court of Appeals

For the Eighth Circuit

___________________________

No. 20-2979

___________________________

United States of America

lllllllllllllllllllllPlaintiff - Appellee

v.

Kenton Burton, Jr.

lllllllllllllllllllllDefendant - Appellant

___________________________

No. 20-2983

___________________________

United States of America

lllllllllllllllllllllPlaintiff - Appellee

v.

Kenton Burton, Jr.

lllllllllllllllllllllDefendant - Appellant

____________

Appeals from United States District Court 

for the Eastern District of Missouri - St. Louis

____________

Submitted: May 6, 2021

Filed: May 11, 2021

[Unpublished]

____________
Before SHEPHERD, GRASZ, and KOBES, Circuit Judges. 

____________

PER CURIAM.

In these consolidated appeals, Kenton Burton appeals the sentence the district

court1

 imposed at his consolidated sentencing after he pleaded guilty to bank robbery

and his supervised release was revoked. His counsel has moved for leave to

withdraw, and has filed a brief under Anders v. California, 386 U.S. 738 (1967),

challenging the sentence. 

Upon careful review, we conclude that the appeal waiver is valid, enforceable,

and applicable to the issues counsel raises challenging the brandishing enhancement

and the substantive reasonableness of the bank robbery sentence. See United States

v. Scott, 627 F.3d 702, 704 (8th Cir. 2010) (validity and applicability of an appeal

waiver is reviewed de novo); United States v. Andis, 333 F.3d 886, 889-92 (8th Cir.

2003) (en banc) (appeal waiver will be enforced if the appeal falls within the scope

of the waiver, the defendant knowingly and voluntarily entered into the plea

agreement and the waiver, and enforcing the waiver would not result in a miscarriage

of justice).

To the extent Burton challenges the calculation of his criminal history, we

conclude that the district court’s calculation was correct. See United States v. Turner,

781 F.3d 374, 393 (8th Cir. 2015) (construction and application of Guidelines are

reviewed de novo). To the extent he challenges the reasonableness of his supervised

release revocation sentence, we conclude it was not substantively unreasonable. See

United States v. Miller, 557 F.3d 910, 915-18 (8th Cir. 2009) (substantive

1The Honorable Catherine D. Perry, United States District Judge for the Eastern

District of Missouri.

-2-
reasonableness of revocation sentence is reviewed under deferential abuse-ofdiscretion standard).

We have also independently reviewed the record under Penson v. Ohio, 488

U.S. 75 (1988), and have found no non-frivolous issues for appeal falling outside the

scope of the waiver. Accordingly, we dismiss this appeal in part based on the appeal

waiver, otherwise affirm, and we grant counsel’s motion to withdraw.

______________________________

-3-
<PAGE>
 
                                                                      EXHIBIT 11

              CAMBRIDGE TECHNOLOGY PARTNERS (MASSACHUSETTS), INC.
            STATEMENTS REGARDING COMPUTATION OF EARNINGS PER SHARE
                     (in thousands, except per share data)

<TABLE> 
<CAPTION> 
                                                                           Years Ended December 31,
                                                                  ------------------------------------------
                                                                      1998          1997           1996
                                                                  -------------  ------------   ------------
<S>                                                               <C>            <C>            <C> 
Net income                                                            $ 51,940      $ 33,782       $ 23,992
                                                                  =============  ============   ============
                                                                  
Basic:                                                            
      Weighted average number of common shares outstanding              58,079        54,632         52,054
                                                                  =============  ============   ============
      Net income per common share                                     $    .90      $    .62       $    .46
                                                                  =============  ============   ============
                                                                  
Diluted:                                                          
      Weighted average number of common shares outstanding              58,079        54,632         52,054
      Dilutive effects of stock options and warrants                     5,222         6,143          7,519
                                                                  -------------  ------------   ------------
                                                                  
      Weighted average common and common equivalent               
         shares outstanding                                             63,301        60,775         59,573
                                                                  =============  ============   ============
                                                                  
      Net income per common and common equivalent share               $    .83      $    .55       $    .40
                                                                  =============  ============   ============
</TABLE>
# CE2004078EN.01094601.xml

| 27.3.2004 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | CE 78/946 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

27.3.2004

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

CE 78/946

---

(2004/C 78 E/1001)

WRITTEN QUESTION E-0249/04

by Christopher Heaton-Harris (PPE-DE) to the Commission

(3 February 2004)

Subject:   Private Eye

Subject:

A recent edition of the UK satirical publication, Private Eye, contained an apology to Commissioner Kinnock for a story it had printed. The publication also claimed it had paid Commissioner Kinnock substantial damages.

Could the Commission state how much money Commissioner Kinnock received in damages from Private Eye?

Could the Commission verify that Commissioner Kinnock is taking legal action against another publication, The Sprout, concerning the same article? If so has the Commissioner received any damages from The Sprout?

Answer given by Mr Kinnock on behalf of the Commission

(17 February 2004)

(17 February 2004)

Private Eye and Sprout published allegations which were seriously defamatory and, consequently, Mr Kinnock, Vice-President of the Commission, sued both publications seeking a public apology, damages and costs. After legal representations, both publications printed apologies saying that they ‘accept unreservedly that there is and was no basis for allegations against Mr Kinnock’ and ‘Without exception we withdraw the allegations and criticisms of Mr Kinnock and apologise to him’.

They also said that ‘In recognition of the seriousness of the allegations against Mr Kinnock and the complete absence of any justification for them, we have agreed to make a substantial payment in damages to Mr Kinnock’.

Payment for damages and costs has been received from both publications.

It is Mr Kinnock's custom to use damages paid for defamation for payments to charities of his choice and, naturally, is continuing in this case. It is not his custom to publicise the sums received or the names of those charities although, sometimes, the charity payment has been publicised by others.

---
USCIB: 5/452 

Date ot Initial 

Consideration 

10 July 1953 

10 July 1953 

uscm: 5/452 

REF ID:A68065 m"'"" n ..... ~,.,. ,...'T'f 1 Ul O::CtlCZU 

S~tJftlT"! INFORMA I ION • 24 

FINAL 

7 July 195.3 

UNITED STA'l'ES CCMMQNICATIONS INTE1LIGENCE BOARD 

AGENDA FOR 

Eighty-eighth Meeting at l430, on Fridey, 

10 July 195.3, in the Projection Room, 

Administration Building, CIA, Washington, D.C. 

Subject 

Numbers 

5/ 

Mr. Allen W9 Dulles, CMiman 

Subject 

1. Approval or the Final Minutes 

ot the 85th ;ff ~ Hee:t1 •• 

Submitted. by 

Secretary 

}_ 

23/ 2. Final Report and Papers of the 

U.K.-U.S. Conference on the 

Communications Seaurity of • 

NATO Countries (USCIB 23/65). 

Chairman, U.S. 

Delegation 

!/ff(~ Deputy Executive Secretary, USCIB 

TO·P SECRET 

roved for re ease b NSA o 0 -09-201 ursuant to E. 0. 1352
<PAGE>

                                                                   Exhibit 23.05



The Board of Directors
Tri-City Electrical Contractors, Inc.:


We consent to incorporation by reference of our report dated February 16, 1998
with respect to the consolidated balance sheets of Tri-City Electrical
Contractors, Inc. as of December 31, 1996 and 1997, and the related consolidated
statements of operations, stockholders' equity and cash flows for each of the
years in the three-year period ended December 31, 1997 and to reference our firm
under the heading "Experts" in the Form S-4 of Building One Services Corporation
dated June 25, 1999.


                                                /s/ KPMG LLP
                                                --------------
-----------------

Orlando, Florida
June 25, 1999
ICATION UI 1111r) 

DISPOSITION FORM 

FILE NO. I SUBJECT 

TO Chiefs, 

Staff Divisions and 

Of ficos 

FROM 

Technical ~nagement Board 

Chairman, TMB ' DATE 21 ,June 1954 COMMENT NO. 1 

Strat ton/602'J2/mdc 

1. It i~ proposed to hold the fifth meeting of the principal members of the 

NSA Technical Management Board during the m.td.d.le of September. While nineteen 

working groups have been fol'Jlled and have studied specific probl~ms, liais?n among 

the principal members of the Board has been conducted by correspondence, and there 

has not been a meeting of the principal members since November 1953. 

2. In accordance with the provisions of paragraph VI-a•(l), NSA Circular 

112-2, each member agency may reconunend items for inclusion on the agenda, which 

will be submitted to the Director for approval. In addition each member agency 

has been.invited to submit suggestions for specific problems to be studied by workinr, ~roups. 'Dle Director, on JO December 1953, in a memorandum to Chiefs of Staff 

Divisions and Offices, subject: Projects for Technical Management Board, outlined 

the purpose or the '!MB and requested submission or suggested items for.consideration. 

3. It is therefore requested that the following information be.furnished the 

Executive Secretauy, TMB, by 13 AU.gust 1954 in order that suggestions from the 

major components within NSA ms.y be presented to the Director along with those bein 

obtained from the other three member agencies: 

a. Any items,. such as policy or procedural matters relating to 'lMB opera 

tions, for inclusion in the proposed agenda. 

b. Recommendations !or specific problems for eubsequent study by TMB 

worldng groups• Rec.onmendations should be presented w.l. th support.ing data which wi 

ident!f)' tho problem, clearly delineate its scope, and contain an estimate of the 

time required for a working group to study the problem. Negative reports are requested. ibis information is exempt from provisions or NSA Reports Coordination 

Program. 

4. Any further information or assistance in preparing recommendation~ tor 

specific projects can be obtained from the Executive Secretary, Room 19322, Naval 

Security Station, extension 60242. 

. r lr4 ci~. • /.. ~- • __ A -) . ~ 1'7.JoNEs s I IJ ~.fr l ~ . .,~ coic;mel, QSAF 

. Chairman, Technical Management Board 

D D FORM 9 6 REPLACES NME FORN 96. I OCT 41, WHICH NAY BE USED. 1•-••11111-a * u. o. CIOVHH<•r ••••Tl•• OPFICI I FEB 50 

@'pproved for Release by NSA on 02-06-2014 pursuantto E.O. 1352a