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

. - ·- 1 g;_ -~· . ~ 

• ·- -1--" 

•, 

'-· ... ) ·.. ~ 

. ' -

_."CROSS REFERENCE SHEET 

" ............ 'I' - - • - --

MAIN SUBjECT: Conference TOT Fac1litais 

EUCOM to Heidleber6 

on 14ove CLASSIFICATION NUMBER: Radiograms ASA Europe 

AS-CM-IN 398? OUT 4402 

To:ASA-82 ~ . 

From:ASA E~rope 

.. -..:: ..... .., ..... 

Date of (ommunica.tion_: 19 Mai:-. 1948 

.··.<i;•:'W'~ 

.Date of Basic Document: 18 .Ma!• ~91:? .. - . . . .·. . . . -·- -- ...... ~ 

BRIEF SUMMARY: ~ l ·· • .. -- ;.--:-:·· "'!!'•==! 

Concur1,~n~ly with r-i.ove of m.'.ljor portion of EUCO~Z to H~idl~berg the 

operating group of m.~GUS will :"emain 1n Berlin. Civil af.tairs D~vision 

Dept. of the Army controls opera~ions of OMGUS and office of CINOEUR 

here advised that in comference operations will b~ necessary to have both 

oper1ting and policy groups in on conference • No inoication this time · what effect turmover to State Dept 1 June. will have on this requirement. 

SIGTOT systems pernitting thr~e way zonference operations not available 

\ and have hever been Rroduced. Reco~mend that three point slmuitaneous QOAf 

conference operations be cond~cted u.sing system 709 between war and Berlin 

and systdm 840 between Berlin and H~1dleberg utilizing two TOT ~~sta11aL~ 

installations at Berlin with a two way repeater composed of two - ~wo f 1ve 

five rel~ys to repe~t the deciphsr~d clear text transmission between the 

TOT installations with repeated transmission being reenciphered 1o other 

TOT system. __ -.~.: '·:·~~ittlllll; 

Classifier: .Uiss M-eece 

Typist: 

CROSS REFERENCE NU~BERS;. 

Departmen~~~~§§§§§§§§§§§ 

FILE: Tapes On: Time 

WDGAS Form No.1493 7 Odober 1946 44052 

•• 'l' 

•, 

. Routed to: F ;tle _ - ,..~JI .- • .- -~ -'•t'\._~~ 

-·Date of Classifying~ 23 Mar.. 1948 . . ' . ~- .. , Jtir::«'l'!M 

-

-- - -- '. 

.. ,_ 

r, 

- --\··. :; - -, 

~ 

.. '
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE SIXTH CIRCUIT 

Leonard Green 

Clerk

100 EAST FIFTH STREET, ROOM 540 

POTTER STEWART U.S. COURTHOUSE 

CINCINNATI, OHIO 45202-3988 

Tel. (513) 564-7000 

www.ca6.uscourts.gov

 Filed: August 18, 2011 

 

Mr. Charles M. Denton 

Barnes & Thornburg 

171 Monroe Avenue, N.W. 

Suite 1000 

Grand Rapids, MI 49503 

Steven Johnson 

United States Environmental Protection Agency 

1101A EPA Headquarters 

1200 Pennsylvania Avenue, N.W. 

Ariel Rios Building 

Washington, DC 20460-0000 

Ms. Valerie B. Mullican 

Barnes & Thornburg 

171 Monroe Avenue, N.W. 

Suite 1000 

Grand Rapids, MI 49503 

 Re: Case No. 11-3885, Kaiser Aluminum Fabricated Pro v. EPA

Originating Case No. : AE-17J 

Dear Counsel, 

 This case has been docketed as number 11-3885 with the caption that is enclosed on a 

separate page. Please check the caption for accuracy and notify the Clerk's Office if any 

corrections should be made. 

 Before preparing any documents to be filed, counsel are strongly encouraged to read the Sixth 

Circuit Rules at www.ca6.uscourts.gov. If you have not established a PACER account and 

registered with this court as an ECF filer, you should do so immediately. 

Case: 11-3885 Document: 006111046939 Filed: 08/18/2011 Page: 1
 The following forms should be downloaded from the web site and filed with the Clerk's office 

by September 1, 2011. The filing fee should also be paid by this date if payment did not 

accompany the petition for review. 

 

Petitioner: 

 

Appearance of Counsel 

Disclosure of Corporate Affiliations 

Application for Admission to 6th Circuit Bar (if applicable) 

 Respondent: Appearance of Counsel 

 More specific instructions are printed on each form. These deadlines are important - if the 

initial forms are not timely filed, the case will be dismissed for want of prosecution. If you have 

questions after reviewing the forms and the rules, please contact the Clerk's office for assistance. 

 Sincerely yours, 

 

 

s/Nancy Barnes 

Senior Case Manager 

Direct Dial No. 513-564-7022 

Enclosure 

Case: 11-3885 Document: 006111046939 Filed: 08/18/2011 Page: 2
OFFICIAL COURT OF APPEALS CAPTION FOR 11-3885

 

 

KAISER ALUMINUM FABRICATED PRODUCTS, LLC 

 Petitioner 

v. 

UNITED STATES ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY 

 Respondent 

Case: 11-3885 Document: 006111046939 Filed: 08/18/2011 Page: 3
Exhibit
31.1









SARBANES-OXLEY
SECTION 302 CERTIFICATION









I, Robert
O. Knutson, certify that:




1. I have
reviewed this report on Form 10-Q of Wind Energy America Inc.;




2. Based
on my knowledge, this report does not contain any untrue statement of a material
fact or omit to state a material fact necessary to make the statements made, in
light of the circumstances under which such statements were made, not misleading
with respect to the period covered by this report;




3. Based
on my knowledge, the financial statements, and other financial information
included in this report, fairly present in all material respects the financial
condition, results of operations and cash flows of the small business issuer as
of, and for, the periods presented in this report;




4. I am
responsible for establishing and maintaining disclosure controls and procedures
(as defined in Exchange Act Rules 13a-15(e) and 15d-15(e)) for the small
business issuer and have:




a)
Designed such disclosure controls and procedures, or caused such disclosure
controls and procedures to be designed under my supervision, to ensure that
material information relating to the small business issuer, including its
consolidated subsidiaries, is made known to me by others within those entities,
particularly during the period in which this report is being
prepared;




b)
Evaluated the effectiveness of the small business issuer’s disclosure controls
and procedures as of the end of the period covered by this report based on such
evaluation; and




c)
Disclosed in this report any change in the small business issuer’s internal
control over financial reporting that occurred during the small business
issuer’s most recent fiscal quarter (the small business issuer’s fourth fiscal
quarter in the case of an annual report) that has materially affected, or is
reasonably likely to materially affect, the small business issuer’s internal
control over financial reporting; and




5. I have
disclosed, based on my most recent evaluation of internal control over financial
reporting, to the small business issuer’s auditors and the audit committee of
small business issuer’s board of directors (or persons performing the equivalent
functions):




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 small business issuer’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 small business issuer’s internal control over
financial reporting.







February
      20, 2009Robert
      O. KnutsonPrincipal
      Executive Officer and Principal
              Financial
      Officer
-- ·-- _.... .. • .. • ..... .._.. "r'- - -~:~-1' .. 

REF ID:A63498 

1.-

Dr. Jama Phimiey :Baxter 11 !II 

Ptea14ent 

YU11-Collop 

Williaatovn,. Haaaachusetta 

J)ear nr. !exterr 

~ after ve eeparated after ltm.cbeau at the Cosmos 

Club, I aa chaerined. to i-ecall that I lad iDteMed. to gift 

you 1lf1' ada:tess 'but f'a11ed to do ao at. the last 'lllClllll!tnt. 

:t ,do hope ~~ JOU ~ be able '° t1D\ .. g,t 'the ~iJji6Di!ence 'be~ ~ iJ.'&114fathltr ad Kr•· Gallup, f.Q. ~c1t1oo. lrl.1;h h.u ~U41eJ1 flt • VUl'k Oil the billte~ 

cipberJ w.. 'llClUld be a vel.cc:ne ad41t1on to & cow or tbe 

l&rl.~ 'b~phical •ketch or JOur ~ather. 

It vaa nice to meet you and to have :f'int·hmld iw:rsonal 

obsenat10D8 about JOUr gr&Ddf'atber. 

V1th cord1al greet1111a, I u, 

Bincerel,y I 

@'pp roved for Release by NSA on 06-19-2014 pursuantto E .0. 1352a
REF ID:A65228 

: I 

Establishment of NSA Registry tor Consultants 

Sf ASST (Mr Friednl'J.n PERS 10 June 1954 

RFJohn8on/6o697 

Comment No. 1 

l. Attached i• draf't o'f: a new Regulation propoaed by the Personnel Diviaion 

ror the purpose ot eatabliahing the NSA Registry ror Consultant• which will provide 

tor the centralization of procurement and ettective Agency utilization ot consultants, experts and advisors. Thia regulation has been prepar~d at the direction 

ot the Chief of Staff, and ha.a the tentative concurrenceot both Special Assiatans 

to the Director. 

2. Any recomn•mded revisions or addition• to this Regulation as proposed 

should be in the Personnel D1v1aion by noon, 21 June 1954. 

Incl - Draft of Propoaed NSA 

Regulation 

Incorme.tion copy turniahed 

Chief of Sta.tr 

(•) 

DUNCAN SINCIAIB 

Colonel, USA 

- - ~ • - - • - - • 4 - - ~ - - ~ - - - - - - W - - • ~ - - - M - - -

ros PERS !'RCJ.h s/ ASST (Mr. Fried.an} 

l. Recommend approval or tho proposed. dratt. regulation. 

2. Reconmand that thi• regulation be implemented aa aoon u poeaible. 

WILLIAM F. FRIEUWf 

Special Al•lit&nt 

@'pproved for Release by NSA on 07-18-2014 pursuant to E.O. 1352e
Mr,, Stephen DumJelf . 38 Mobt°Cm> )l¢e;.d 

ia%"Chmcmt; :ttev y~ 

Dear Mr. nunveu: 

RE~ ID:A415B7M 

.,.,. 

'With :reference to t!Je mission of the Sul>cODlaittee 

OD Genet1ll ~ose·Flw1b;te ~ical E'i)li.pNen:t;1 the 

date.!£!-- 4 .. 7, 1951~, ~luai\-e, ball been·~ '!.ar 

the initial revtev ct t~ !#t'Jblm c~tntt t~ !'Zomittee • 

Tbtz meti!llg uiU btt, hel4. •t t~ Nat:l~l Secuitity ~~ney ~ 

Various -..aen ot the Aaeney are contributing consider• 

able etton to not-J.tlg a 4~taile4. pre191'W.t1ml of ~l 

pro1'tlerrl8 ~rti?Jen't to tbe w~k ot the eQ!!Dit~ ~. ~t 1• 

t:o'!?ecl tt-at ~rou ·Cllll ~ tQ .~ ~nt f~ ~· ent1'!!'0 !n!t~l 

cori:reronce. · 

VUl :/OU pl-.e a4Yifle Mt. Wilis.A ., .. l'Jtl~n, ~lt1ve 

. ~cretl.Ar)' ·"4 t~ Ne.~ SeeT.n-tty ~ey Se'-e~M.fic M-erlJsory Ben.~ ~t.~ )'OU vlll be able to f.\.t.t.end· 1~ o!'d~!' t1.».t he ey 

it;sue t:rra.\.-el ~? · . · .. · . 

Since!'ely, 

·, CM~n 

JOmt.c. 

ot the 

~ 

&..\bco.-..ittee 

. . . . . 

@'pp~oved for Rele~se by NSA on 12-01-2014 pursuant to E .0. 1352a
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<ARTICLE> 5
<LEGEND>
THIS SCHEDULE CONTAINS SUMMARY FINANCIAL INFORMATION EXTRACTED FROM XEROX 
CREDIT CORPORATION'S MARCH 31, 1999 FINANCIAL STATEMENTS AND IS QUALIFIED IN 
ITS ENTIRETY BY REFERENCE TO SUCH FINANCIAL STATEMENTS.
<MULTIPLIER> 1,000,000
       
<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   3-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          DEC-31-1999
<PERIOD-END>                               MAR-31-1999
<CASH>                                               0
<SECURITIES>                                         0
<RECEIVABLES>                                    5,239
<ALLOWANCES>                                       134
<INVENTORY>                                          0
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                                     0
<PP&E>                                               0
<DEPRECIATION>                                       0
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                   5,126
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                            3,904
<BONDS>                                          4,417
<COMMON>                                            23
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<OTHER-SE>                                         588
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                     5,126
<SALES>                                              0
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                                   104
<CGS>                                                0
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                        0
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                     3
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                     0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                                  66
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                     35
<INCOME-TAX>                                        14
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                                 21
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                        21
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                        0
<EPS-DILUTED>                                        0


        

</TABLE>
<Page>
                                                                       EXHIBIT 5

[KPMG LOGO]

            KPMG LLP                                 Telephone   (604) 691-3000
            CHARTERED ACCOUNTANTS                    Fax         (604) 691-3031
            PO Box 10426  777 Dunsmuir Street        Internet    www.kpmg.ca
            Vancouver BC  V7K 1K3
            Canada


                   CONSENT OF INDEPENDENT REGISTERED
                        PUBLIC ACCOUNTING FIRM

The Board of Directors
ID Biomedical Corporation


We consent to the use of our auditor's report and our additional comments for
U.S. readers on Canada - U.S. reporting differences related to the change in
accounting principle, both dated February 24, 2005, except for note 23(b),
which is as of March 3, 2005, included in this annual report on Form 40-F.


KPMG LLP (SIGNED)



Chartered Accountants

Vancouver, Canada
March 3, 2005
#### The People of the State of New York, Respondent, v Arthur Pryor, Appellant.

[772 NYS2d 823]

Judgment, Supreme Court, Bronx County (Ruth Sussman, J., on grand jury resubmission application; Denis Boyle, J., on dismissal motion; Troy Webber, J., at jury trial and sentence), rendered April 12, 2001, convicting defendant of robbery in the first and second degrees and criminal possession of a weapon in the fourth degree, and sentencing him, as a second felony offender, to concurrent terms of 12 years, 6 years and 1 year, respectively, unanimously affirmed.

The verdict was not against the weight of the evidence. There is no basis for disturbing the jury’s determinations concerning identification and credibility *(see People v Bleakley,*69 NY2d 490 [1987]). The victim had sufficient opportunity to observe defendant at the time of the crime, gave a detailed and accurate description, and made a reliable lineup identification.

Defendant received a full opportunity to impeach the victim by means of a statement she made to a defense investigator. Defendant questioned the victim extensively about her statement, elicited the alleged inconsistencies between her statement and her trial testimony, and squarely placed these matters before the jury in summation. Accordingly, the trial court’s restrictions on defendant’s use of the statement did not impair his cross-examination or his right to a fair trial *(see People v Rivera,*188 AD2d 322, 323 [1992], *lv denied*81 NY2d 793 [1993]; see *also Delaware v Van Arsdall,*475 US 673, 678-679 [1986]).

*223The court properly exercised its discretion in permitting the People to resubmit the case to a second grand jury panel (see CPL 190.75 [3]). The fact that after the first submission there were insufficient votes to either indict or dismiss was a legitimate reason for a new submission. Accordingly, the motion court properly denied defendant’s motion to dismiss the indictment. Since the People, in fact, obtained leave to resubmit, it is academic whether leave was required *(see e.g. People v Aarons,*305 AD2d 45 [2003], *lv granted*100 NY2d 567 [2003]).

We have considered and rejected defendant’s remaining claims, including those contained in his pro se supplemental brief. Concur—Andrias, J.P., Williams, Lerner, Friedman and Marlow, JJ.
UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 97-6115
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Plaintiff - Appellee, versus EDDIE REMBERT, a/k/a Rem, Defendant - Appellant.Appeal from the United States District Court for the Northern District of West Virginia, at Wheeling. Frederick P. Stamp, Jr., Chief District Judge. (CR-92-180, CA-94-4-5) Submitted: June 19, 1997 Decided: June 30, 1997 Before WILKINS and MICHAEL, Circuit Judges, and BUTZNER, Senior Circuit Judge. Dismissed by unpublished per curiam opinion. Eddie Rembert, Appellant Pro Se. Thomas Oliver Mucklow, Assistant United States Attorney, Wheeling, West Virginia, for Appellee. Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. See Local Rule 36(c).2 PER CURIAM: Appellant seeks to appeal the district court's orders denying relief on his petition filed under 28 U.S.C.A. § 2255 (West 1994 & Supp. 1997) and denying his motion for reconsideration. We have reviewed the record and the district court's opinion accepting the recommendation of the magistrate j udge and find no reversible error. Accord ingly, we deny a certificate of appealability and dismiss the appeal on the reasoning of the district court. United States v. Rembert , Nos. CR-92-180, CA-94-4-5 (N.D.W. Va. Oct. 25 and Nov. 27, 1996). We dispense with oral argument because thefacts and legal contentions are adequately presented in the materials before the court and argument would not aid the decisional process.

DISMISSED
September 18, 2013 CERTIFIED- RETURN RECEIPT REQUESTED Federal Aviation Administration Office ofthe Regional Counsel, AS0-7 Southern Region P. 0. Box 20636 Atlanta, Georgia 30320 Attention: Christopher R. Stevenson Re: Tyler Pennywitt FAA Case No. 2012S0150128 

# RECEIVED SEP 262013**~.~ARtNG** 

# OOCKEt

I cannot afford to hire counsel to represent me in this matter. I should not have a civil penalty imposed since I have already been convicted ofafelony for this exact same action. Sincerely,
Tyler

### J. Pennywitt
cc: Hearing Docket Clerk
# CE2004084EN.01078302.xml

| 3.4.2004 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | CE 84/783 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

3.4.2004

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

CE 84/783

---

(2004/C 84 E/0880)

WRITTEN QUESTION E-0397/04

by Camilo Nogueira Román (Verts/ALE) to the Commission

(16 February 2004)

Subject:   Legalising irregular migrants working in the Union

Subject:

Several million irregular immigrants work in the EU, and to date, the European Institutions have not taken any decisions comparable to those of the President of the USA, who has just forwarded to Congress a proposal for a new policy to give millions of irregular workers legal status. Although the implementation of this decision by the US President may in some respects be open to criticism, there is no doubt that it marks a major step forward in resolving an extremely serious economic and humanitarian problem. Has the Commission planned any similar political initiative to legalise the presence of irregular immigrants in the Union? If so, what type of initiative would it be?

Answer given by Mr Vitorino on behalf of the Commission

(6 April 2004)

(6 April 2004)

In order to implement the Treaty of Amsterdam and the mandate given in Tampere, the Commission has tabled several proposals for directives concerning the admission and the conditions of stay of third-country nationals.

Until now, none of these proposals contained provisions on the regularisation of the legal status of illegal immigrants already within the territory of the European Union and no such proposal is envisaged in the near future.

The Commission has stated in its Communication on immigration, integration and employment (1) that within the context of the common immigration policy the only coherent approach to dealing with illegal residents is to ensure that they return to their country of origin. Some Member States have implemented regularisation measures for illegal residents. Regularisation procedures may be seen as a factor which enables the integration process to develop but also as an encouragement of further illegal immigration.

1

Bearing in mind these potential impacts, the issue of regularisation will be examined in the study on the links between legal and illegal migration that will be released by the Commission during the present Irish Presidency.

---

(1)  COM(2003) 336 final.

1

---
<PAGE>

Exhibit 10.17



September 10th, 2002


Westvaco Brand Security
One High Ridge Park
Stamford, CT 06905
Attn: Jim Reiman

Dear Mr. Reiman:

As discussed with both yourself and Jay Parker, NoCopi is pleased to offer the
following terms for the extension of your license agreement for NoCopi Security
Technologies. With this addendum, both Westvaco Brand Security and NoCopi
Technologies, Inc. agree to the following:

1.  Extend the current agreement through 12/31/2004 (16 months additional time
    after current termination date)

2.  In exchange for this extension of termination date, Westvaco Brand Security
    is to pay NoCopi Technologies, Inc. $35,000 as a prepayment for this
    extension.

3.  Westvaco Brand Security to pay NoCopi Technologies, Inc. an additional
    $35,000 when either of the following occur (which ever occurs first):

     a. Westvaco Brand Security will pay NoCopi Technologies, Inc. an additional
     $35,000 upon payment from customer(s) when NoCopi technology revenue to
     Westvaco Brand Security exceeds $70,000.

     b. If 'a' above has not occurred by 9/1/03, Westvaco Brand Security will
     pay NoCopi Technologies, Inc. the additional $35,000.

Agreed to this date _______________________________




_________________________________             __________________________________
Westvaco Brand Security                        NoCopi Technologies, Inc.
[Federal Register Volume 80, Number 43 (Thursday, March 5, 2015)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Page 11865]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2015-05028]


=======================================================================
-----------------------------------------------------------------------

DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES

Food and Drug Administration

21 CFR Part 895


Banned Devices

CFR Correction

    In Title 21 of the Code of Federal Regulations, Parts 800 to 1299, 
revised as of April 1, 2014, on page 594, in Sec.  895.21, remove the 
undesignated paragraph following paragraph (d)(8).

[FR Doc. 2015-05028 Filed 3-4-15; 08:45 am]
 BILLING CODE 1505-01D
Attachment 005 – USE - TS11FH01 

1 of 1 page

SANITIZED
Court of Appeals of the State of Georgia

Clerk's Office, Atlanta, September 03, 2024.

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, September 03, 2024

The Court of Appeals hereby passes the following order

A25I0016. ROYAL TEXAS, LLC v. CAJUN GLOBAL, LLC, d/b/a CHURCH'S 

CHICKEN et al.

Upon consideration of the Application for Interlocutory Appeal, it is ordered that it be 

hereby GRANTED. The Appellant may file a Notice of Appeal within 10 days of the date of 

this order. The Clerk of Superior Court is directed to include a copy of this order in the record 

transmitted to the Court of Appeals.

LC NUMBERS:

2022CV362893