alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
NRO APPROVE&FOR 

RELeE,-1--lULY 2015 

DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVY 

OFFICE OF THE SECRETARY 

WASHINGTON 25, ID. C. 

2 4 DEC 1984 

Ser 0663' 

MEMORANDUM FOR THE ASSISTANT SECRETARY OF THE AIR FORCE 

(RESEARCH & DEVELOPMENT) 

Subj: Manned Orbiting Laboratory (MOL) Program Funding (U) 

In accordance with OSD directives assigning the Department of the Air Force as executive agency for the DOD MOL 

Program, I would like to advise you of a requirement for 

additional funds for Navy participation in that program. 

The additional requirement is a direct result of delays in 

the decision to proceed with Phase I. 

fl 

By the DDR&E memo to the. Assistant Secretary of the 

Navy (Research & Development) (ASN R&D) of 20 August, the Navy 

was advised that all funding requirements for its participation 

would be included in the Air Torce MOL Program Element. By 

that same memorandum $.6 million was released to support Navy 

Pre-Phase I activities, which in accordance with Air Force 

plans, were scheduled to bo completed early in November, 1864. 

It is understood that the decision to proceed with 

Phase I has been postponed and that release of Fiscal Year 1965 

funds in support of that phase may not be forthcoming until 

February, 1965. In order to complete the Pre-Phase I analysis 

and documentation required by the MOI. Special Projects:Office 

(SPO), the following additional funds are required for Navy

participation: 

January i965 ' 174,200 

February and subsequent 

until Phase I commences 183,300/month 

These funds are primarily in support of in-house labdratO 

efforts at Naval Air Development Center, Johnsville, Pa., 

Research Laboratory, Washington o .D.X., Naval Ordnance Tee 

Station, China Lake, and. Navy_MOL'Office.at Space Systems 

Division, Los Angeles, California, in direct support of 

Pre-Phase I activities:.: 

Copy to 

BUWEPS 

DDR&E 

ROBERT Mr.1MG 

Assistant Secretary of the Na 

(Research and CE,":1;;GRADED AT 3-YEAR ISITERVALS 

CLASS:110 AFTER 12 YEARS 

Cf.'D 5:00 le ASN (R&.D) Con 

'
D a te : 

### 8 

## /eX. f ( 

## rlol'-/ cJ_ 

### 5 3Df1Y1
. -L 4-. A 

# 61

**vr,en,mc:~tttt** 

## f 'o e fc.nK 

# -ftv?d Mee tm g :

**r'Ylc~** t.N'-"tfYl r r(e...- Rul e(s) D isc u sse d : 

# ex 'IUC( 5 Writte n Mate ria ls ? Yes/N o Name 

# ' y>e:tu

**~ \~**  

# ( fi;u t:i I 

# CtJ.f60/1 J/

**~~-\ 5J\~S**  ...._) 

## :-

**rc ~4-**  **~c)......),....,*'l""'** Organ izatio n 

# EVF ('!J/:- 

# l70P

ElJ F 

# v l <- \......:. Q 

# r .....tL , 

# e \) r I Ph one Number 

# 303- j'j(p . 

## D/07 

# 9;?- c((jj-f/vtJ

fTci<T

**~_:sOb-** 

### ,??vQ-. 

# I I 

# l I I
UNPUBLISHED

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

No. 14-6146

JAMES EDWARD BRANDON, JR.,

 Petitioner – Appellant,

v.

ERIC WILSON, Warden,

 Respondent - Appellee.

Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern 

District of Virginia, at Alexandria. Claude M. Hilton, Senior

District Judge. (1:13-cv-01324-CMH-JFA)

Submitted: May 29, 2014 Decided: June 3, 2014

Before SHEDD, WYNN, and THACKER, Circuit Judges.

Dismissed by unpublished per curiam opinion.

James Edward Brandon, Jr., Appellant Pro Se. 

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.
2

PER CURIAM:

James Edward Brandon, Jr., seeks to appeal the 

district court’s order construing his filing as a successive 28 

U.S.C. § 2255 (2012) motion and dismissing it. 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 dispositive 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 Brandon has not made the requisite showing. Accordingly, 

we deny a certificate of appealability, deny leave to proceed in 

forma pauperis, and dismiss the appeal. We dispense with oral 

argument because the facts and legal contentions are adequately 
3

presented in the materials before this court and argument would 

not aid the decisional process.

DISMISSED
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 

# Year in Review

HomeCybersecurityYear in Review

Search

Search

                              - Upload Date
                              - Document Date
                              - Title

Share

----

Download Image: Full Size (0.43 MB)

Tags:NSA Historical Photographs, HIST-002-002

Photo by:VIRIN: 

Photo Gallery
AFS

- 1 3

- 425

- E July 24, 2013

Exemption No. 6853 F

Regulatory Docket No. FAA

- 20 00

- 8153

Mr. William Cavitt

Vice President

American Airlines

P.O. Box 582809

Tulsa, O K 74159

Dea r Mr. Cavitt :

This letter is to inform you that we have granted your petition to extend Exemption No. 6853

, as amended. It explains the basis for our decision, describes its effect, and lists the conditions

and limitations.

The Basis for Our Decision

By letter dated June 18, 2013 , you petitioned the Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) on

behalf of American Airlines, Inc. (American) for an extension of Exemption No. 6853 , as

amended. That exemption from § 121.317(a) of Title 14, Code of Federal Regulati ons allows

American to operate its Boeing 737 and 777 aircraft with “No Smoking” signs that are always

illuminated

.

In your petition, you indicate that there has been no change in the conditions and reasons

relative to public interest and safety that were the basis for granting the original exemption.

The FAA has determined that good cause exists for not publishing a summary of the petition

in the Federal Register because the requested extension of the exemption would not set a

precedent, and any delay in acting on this petition would be detrimental to American

.2

Our Decision

The FAA has determined that the justification for the issuance of Exemption No. 6853, as

amended, remains valid with respect to this exemption and is in the public interest.

Therefo re, under the authority provided by 49 U.S.C. 40113 and 44701, which the FAA

Administrator has delegated to me, I grant your petition.

The Effect of Our Decision

Our decision extends the termination date of Exemption No. 6853 , as amended, to

August 31, 20 1 5 unless sooner superseded or rescinded.

Sincerely,

/s/

Michael J. Zenkovick

Acting Deputy Director, Fli ght Standards

Service
```

[Congressional Bills 114th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[S. 1644 Introduced in Senate (IS)]

114th CONGRESS
  1st Session
                                S. 1644

  To permanently extend the private mortgage insurance tax deduction.

_______________________________________________________________________

                   IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES

                             June 23, 2015

Mr. Crapo (for himself and Ms. Stabenow) introduced the following bill; 
     which was read twice and referred to the Committee on Finance

_______________________________________________________________________

                                 A BILL

 
  To permanently extend the private mortgage insurance tax deduction.

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

SECTION 1. PERMANENT EXTENSION OF DEDUCTION FOR MORTGAGE INSURANCE 
              PREMIUMS.

    (a) In General.--Subparagraph (E) of section 163(h)(3) of the 
Internal Revenue Code of 1986 is amended by striking clause (iv).
    (b) Effective Date.--The amendment made by this section shall apply 
to amounts paid or accrued after December 31, 2014, and to amounts 
properly allocable to periods after such date.
                                 <all>
```
EXHIBIT 23

                              ACCOUNTANTS' CONSENT





     The Board of Directors and Stockholders
     The Netplex Group, Inc.:


     We consent to incorporation  by reference in the registration  statement of
     The  Netplex  Group,  Inc.  on Form S-8 (No.  333-19115)  and Form S-3 (No.
     333-16423)  of our  report  dated  April  10,  1998,  with  respect  to the
     consolidated  balance sheets of The Netplex Group, Inc. and subsidiaries as
     of December 31, 1997 and 1996 and the related  consolidated  statements  of
     operations,  stockholders'  equity, and cash flows for each of the years in
     the two-year  period ended  December 31, 1997,  which report appears in the
     December 31, 1997, Annual Report on Form 10-KSB of The Netplex Group, Inc.


                                                           KPMG Peat Marwick LLP

     McLean, VA
     April 15, 1998
CERTIFICATIONS
      a)
    
    Designed such disclosure controls and procedures, or caused such disclosure controls
and procedures to be designed under our supervision, to ensure that material information
relating to the registrant, including its consolidated subsidiaries, is made known to us by
others within those entities, particularly during the period in which this report is being
prepared;
 b)
    
    Designed such internal control over financial reporting, or caused such internal
control over financial reporting to be designed under our supervision, to provide
reasonable assurance regarding the reliability of financial reporting and the preparation
of financial statements for external purposes in accordance with generally accepted
accounting principles;
 c)
    
    Evaluated the effectiveness of the registrants disclosure controls and procedures and
presented in this report our conclusions about the effectiveness of the disclosure controls
and procedures, as of the end of the period covered by this report based on such
evaluation; and
 d)
    
    Disclosed in this report any change in the registrants internal control over financial
reporting that occurred during the registrants most recent fiscal quarter that has
materially affected, or is reasonably likely to materially affect, the registrants
internal control over financial reporting; and
  a)
    
    All significant deficiencies and material weaknesses in the design or operation of
internal control over financial reporting which are reasonably likely to adversely affect
the registrants ability to record, process, summarize and report financial information;
and
 b)
    
    Any fraud, whether or not material, that involves management or other employees who
have a significant role in the registrants internal controls over financial reporting.
  /s/ Michael J. RockenbachMichael J. RockenbachExecutive Vice President and Chief Financial Officer
(Principal Financial Officer)
REF ID:A72020 

• • I'OR INFORMATION OF ______ ------ __ _ 

Ha.tlon?l Secur1t:r f~gency 

W~ahtn~ton 25 ~.c. 

Uecember 5, 1952 

OJ:f ttention D~. 02~1gne 

Dea.r Houie: 

Not .!1..:-v!ng ny files at ru nd I on 

writing to 1ncu1re ?~ to how mu t1ms.ted for 

SPlar!eR and trPvel expenses 1953 ~ 01,a~to 

other t.h.a.n Koken, me and a vha ai~ to be n logn from their- emp1oyPrs. Al I '1l!t nderlns a.bout the 

amounts eat1mated ror tat1o • In the latter 

connection, I teel l're ould a ow tor e cert.?1n .!lU1.rg1n 

or a&fety since there l 1e1g Q.IC.8..68 done if money is 

left over tor le ter U9E" 11' t:e run short dttring the program. 

al.most all of' e~ xp1ora.tory letters to 

listed 1n a recent eonfi--

you shouid n~ve received 

If' any matters occur to you Yhich I may have neglec ed or on ~.mich you Yish to oQmrient I hope 

you will let me know~ 

Yours sincerely, 

S. a. Calrna 

Relld of' the ;Jepartment 

CC-Hr. 14. F. Fried.fJ&ll ,,,.--

Proreasor Lowell Paige 

P.R. I reel th:lt Pot less than $50,000 should be transferred 

though perha:;"S more might be desirable. Does th1s agree with 

your 1mpres~1on? 

@'pp roved for Release by NSA on 02-12-2014 pursuantto E .0. 1352a
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 Justice

###### Antitrust Division

                    Notice is hereby given that, on January 23, 2015, pursuant to Section 6(a) of the National Cooperative Research and Production Act of 1993, 15 U.S.C. 4301*et seq.*                     (“the Act”), National Shipbuilding Research Program (“NSRP”) has filed written notifications simultaneously with the Attorney General and the Federal Trade Commission disclosing changes in its membership. The notifications were filed for the purpose of extending the Act's provisions limiting the recovery of antitrust plaintiffs to actual damages under specified circumstances. Specifically, Bollinger Shipyards, Inc., has changed its name to Bollinger Shipyards, L.L.C., Lockport, LA.                

No other changes have been made in either the membership or planned activity of the group research project. Membership in this group research project remains open, and NSRP intends to file additional written notifications disclosing all changes in membership.

                    On March 13, 1998, NSRP filed its original notification pursuant to Section 6(a) of the Act. The Department of Justice published a notice in the                     **Federal Register**                     pursuant to Section 6(b) of the Act on January 29, 1999 (64 FR 4708).                

                    The last notification was filed with the Department on November 5, 2014. A notice was published in the                     **Federal Register**                     pursuant to Section 6(b) of the Act on December 16, 2014 (79 FR 74767).                

Patricia A. Brink,

Director of Civil Enforcement, Antitrust Division.

[FR Doc. 2015-04100 Filed 2-26-15; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE P
TEXAS COURT OF APPEALS, THIRD DISTRICT, AT AUSTIN

NO. 03-05-00568-CV

Office Leasing Advisors, Inc., Appellant

v.

Texas.Net, Inc., Appellee

FROM THE DISTRICT COURT OF TRAVIS COUNTY, 201ST JUDICIAL DISTRICT

NO. GN403892, HONORABLE PETER M. LOWRY, JUDGE PRESIDING

M E M O R A N D U M O P I N I O N

Appellant Office Leasing Advisors, Inc. has filed a motion to dismiss the appeal.

We grant the motion and dismiss the appeal. Tex. R. App. P. 42.1(a).

__________________________________________

David Puryear, Justice

Before Chief Justice Law, Justices B. A. Smith and Puryear

Dismissed on Appellant’s Motion

Filed: November 7, 2005
Exhibit 31.2
CERTIFICATION
I, Karen M. Caughey, certify that:
1. I have reviewed this Form 10-Q of Delphax Technologies Inc.; 2. Based on my knowledge, this report does not contain any untrue statementof a material fact or omit to state a material fact necessary to make thestatements made, in light of the circumstances under which such statementswere made, not misleading with respect to the period covered by thisreport; 3. Based on my knowledge, the financial statements, and other financialinformation included in this report, fairly present in all materialrespects the financial condition, results of operations and cash flows ofthe registrant as of, and for, the periods presented in this report; 4. The registrant’s other certifying officer and I are responsible forestablishing and maintaining disclosure controls and procedures (asdefined in Exchange Act Rules 13a-15(e) and 15d-15(e)) for the registrantand have:
a) Designed such disclosure controls and procedures, or causedsuch disclosure controls and procedures to be designed under oursupervision, to ensure that material information relating to theregistrant, including its consolidated subsidiaries, is made knownto us by others within those entities, particularly during theperiod in which this report is being prepared; b) Evaluated the effectiveness of the registrant’s disclosurecontrols and procedures and presented in this report our conclusionsabout the effectiveness of the disclosure controls and procedures,as of the end of the period covered by this report based on suchevaluation; and c) Disclosed in this report any change in the registrant’sinternal control over financial reporting that occurred during theregistrant’s most recent fiscal quarter (the registrant’s fourthfiscal quarter in the case of an annual report) that has materiallyaffected, or is reasonably likely to materially affect, theregistrant’s internal control over financial reporting; and
5. The registrant’s other certifying officer and I have disclosed, based onour most recent evaluation of internal control over financial reporting,to the registrant’s auditors and the audit committee of registrant’s boardof directors (or persons performing the equivalent function):
a) All significant deficiencies and material weaknesses in thedesign or operation of internal control over financial reportingwhich are reasonably likely to adversely affect the registrant’sability to record, process, summarize and report financialinformation; and b) Any fraud, whether or not material, that involves managementor other employees who have a significant role in the registrant’sinternal controls over financial reporting.   Date: May 11, 2004 /s/ Karen M. Caughey   Karen M. Caughey Controller
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.                  

###### Securities and Exchange Commission

          - [File No. 500-1]

It appears to the Securities and Exchange Commission that there is a lack of current and accurate information concerning the securities of China Yili Petroleum Company because it has not filed any periodic reports since the period ended June 30, 2012.

The Commission is of the opinion that the public interest and the protection of investors require a suspension of trading in the securities of the above-listed company. Therefore, it is ordered, pursuant to Section 12(k) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, that trading in the securities of the above-listed company is suspended for the period from 9:30 a.m. EST on February 25, 2015, through 11:59 p.m. EDT on March 10, 2015.

By the Commission.

Jill M. Peterson,

Assistant Secretary.

[FR Doc. 2015-04229 Filed 2-25-15; 4:15 pm]

BILLING CODE 8011-01-P