alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
#### Rounsavell vs. Wolf and another, imp.

Bond: Sureties: Evidence. *What constitutes an affirmance by sureties of their liability as such.*

In an action on a bond, where the sureties defended on the ground that the instrument actually signed by them was essentially different from that which they promised to execute and believed themselves to be executing, it was error to admit evidence for the plaintiff that the principal obligor had turned over property to one of said defendants as security against the liability; the taking of such security not being an affirmance by the sureties of their liability on the bond in suit.

APPEAL from'the Circuit Court for *Jefferson*County.

This action was brought against one Hollabush as principal, and *Wolf*and *Payne*as sureties, upon a bond. Erom a judgment against all the defendants, *Wolf*and *Payne*appealed-.

*Geo. W. Burchard,*for appellants.

For the respondent, there was a brief by *1. W. & G. W.*Bird, and oral argument by *G. W. Bird.*

ByaN, O. J.

The appellants claim, amongst other things, that they signed the bond in suit as sureties for their code-fendant, as presented by the respondent’s agent, without reading it, and that it is essentially different from the obligation which they had agreed to assume and believed that they were executing.

The court below admitted evidence, against their objection,, that their principal turned out property to one of them as-security against the liability. In every aspect of the case this evidence was inadmissible. The appellants had a right to take indemnity against the liability which they admit they had assumed, and indeed, against their possible liability on the bond as written; and the evidence was not only incompetent, but was well calculated to pass with the jury, as it was probably intended, for an affirmance by the appellants of the bond in suit, and a recognition of their liability upon it.

*354The principal debtor makes no defense; and, if the appellants should be able to establish their defense, the respondent could have little difficulty in reaching the property turned out by his debtor to one of them.

*By the Court.*— The judgment is reversed, and the cause remanded to the court below for a new trial. ■
Exhibit
32.2





CERTIFICATION
OF CHIEF FINANCIAL OFFICER





Pursuant
to § 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002 (18 U.S.C. § 1350)





I, Harold E. Antonson, as the Executive
Vice President and Chief Financial Officer of US 1 Industries, Inc., certify
that, to the best of my knowledge and belief,  the Quarterly Report on
Form 10-Q for the period ended September 30, 2010, which accompanies this
certification fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) of the
Securities Exchange Act of 1934 and the information contained in the periodic
report fairly presents, in all material respects, the financial condition and
results of operations of US 1 Industries, Inc. at the dates and for the periods
indicated.  The foregoing certification is made pursuant to § 906 of
the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002 (18 U.S.C. § 1350) and shall not be relied upon
for any other purpose.  The undersigned expressly disclaims any
obligation to update the foregoing certification except as required by
law.





Dated
      this 15th day of November 2010./s/ Harold E. AntonsonHarold
      E. AntonsonChief
      Financial
Officer





A signed
original of this written statement required by Section 906, or other document
authenticating, acknowledging, or otherwise adopting the signature that appears
in typed form within the electronic version of this written statement required
by Section 906, has been provided to US 1 Industries, Inc. and will be retained
by US 1 Industries, Inc. and furnished to the Securities and Exchange Commission
or its staff upon request.
.. 

b 

REF ID:A67764 

ttr. Jt1obard v. ~o 

lhd.vRSiv ot Oklaho:M 

loiman, Okl.ahQDa 

.,. t1ee.r 1".r. Anr.lreo• 

tour tao artJ.al.a !n ncett ieeuo:s or ·~ 

.. i~tica" ml "Tho t'..athematics Teacher" maest.. 

that. 7'JU 11"1' bave a auttident. 1nl«G4t. m tbo ti.td 

ot ~t-ology to 1d.ah to ctor it prates~. It 

JG11 bavo,, I wlll be &la! to and 1Cft1 f1R>l.1cation 

~ llibieh, up:at CCIDpl.ot.ion1 1C" ma:, Nt.um t.o • 

tor 4*l81da.r&Uon • 

ccs AG 

C/S 

CONS 

Mr. W. F. Friedman, 6049.31 CONS 

@'pp roved for Release by NSA on 08-18-2014 pursuantto E .0. 1352a
REF ID:A11795 

DISPOSITION FORM SECRET 

FILE NO I SUBJECT 

Categortea ~ BSA Speci&l.t.1.n 

- TO All Otticea and 

8t.att D1 TialOM 

FROM PERS DATE22 Dee 53 COMMENT NO 1 

j...'5 ::.-/ 

. ; 

capt .. Scheat.opol/60: 82/ Jmr 

1. OD 15 Dacember, PIRS CODdueted a conterence to deteraill!! tbe var1ooa 

categorlea into Vhteb <IUr qeclaltln could be brotea dam. '.l'be purpoee c'lt 

t.hi• breU4<Ml la ultbat.ely t.o provide ls..tt! ot JMlople (GS-10 a'Od above) who 

cou.14 be croa-detailed. to replace caamal ties in eveat o£ emergeooy. 

2. Dtcl.ORd are t.tae pntllmlnaey categoriea upon Vb1ch ~asaent vas reecbed. 

Only t.boee ~1t.J..ea deat.gmt.ecl by R<mml a.trai. vtll aeccae list.a. All ot •r 

" tttlea cower groups ot two or aore categories. We ~14 J.llm ycu to diaaua 

tbeae categori•• with your e&90C1atea and -.a any ree~Ddat1cme ;IOU thl.Dlt 

proper tor ad41t1caa, cbangea, or 4elet1oaa. 

3. tt pou!ble, we voul4 11.ke to ba-re your cameata by 15 ea.nuary J954. 

~ TIE CBtEF 1 PBRSc:amL DIVISI011: 

Incl: 

Categortea or EA Spec:lal:tiea 

DimRDm'IOR I 

~~(j~ 

'lBtllAS p. 0' BRD.11 

Chtet, PertlCllJDltl 

Pl.aml111S Group 

SECRET 

U S GOYlllNMI:lfT PJUftTINlil Of'P'ICI!
```

[Congressional Bills 114th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[S. 1746 Introduced in Senate (IS)]

114th CONGRESS
  1st Session
                                S. 1746

To require the Office of Personnel Management to provide complimentary, 
  comprehensive identity protection coverage to all individuals whose 
personally identifiable information was compromised during recent data 
                     breaches at Federal agencies.

_______________________________________________________________________

                   IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES

                              July 9, 2015

   Mr. Cardin (for himself, Ms. Mikulski, Mr. Warner, and Mr. Kaine) 
introduced the following bill; which was read twice and referred to the 
        Committee on Homeland Security and Governmental Affairs

_______________________________________________________________________

                                 A BILL

 
To require the Office of Personnel Management to provide complimentary, 
  comprehensive identity protection coverage to all individuals whose 
personally identifiable information was compromised during recent data 
                     breaches at Federal agencies.

    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 ``Reducing the Effects of the 
Cyberattack on OPM Victims Emergency Response Act of 2015'' or the 
``RECOVER Act''.

SEC. 2. IDENTITY PROTECTION COVERAGE FOR INDIVIDUALS AFFECTED BY 
              FEDERAL AGENCY DATA BREACHES.

    (a) Definition.--In this section, the term ``affected individual'' 
means any individual whose personally identifiable information was 
compromised during--
            (1) the data breach of personnel records of current and 
        former Federal employees, at a network maintained by the 
        Department of the Interior, that was announced by the Office of 
        Personnel Management on June 4, 2015; or
            (2) the data breach of systems of the Office of Personnel 
        Management containing information related to the background 
        investigations of current, former, and prospective Federal 
        employees, and of other individuals.
    (b) Identity Protection Coverage.--The Office of Personnel 
Management shall provide to each affected individual complimentary 
identity protection coverage that--
            (1) is not less comprehensive than the complimentary 
        identify protection coverage that the Office provided to 
        affected individuals before the date of enactment of this Act;
            (2) is effective for the remainder of the life of the 
        individual; and
            (3) includes not less than $5,000,000 in identity theft 
        insurance.
                                 <all>
```
• REF ID:A67618 6 

WAR DEPARTMENT ONfHl\E~ ·1 ·~1111~ TRA1'SMITTAL SHEET 

ARMY SERVICE FORCES£ ' U Ir 

(!;up 

TO 

(BnacJI or IUll&) 

SubJect· Authentioa:Ung Dniaea ot William F, J'r1edmn 

1'111 No. 

12 July 19.44 

l'B.O~ Lepl. D1'9'1a:lcm 4D 333 

(Nenlee dlYIBlon or or,.nl•llon) (Location) Tele eatealllDa 

l. Forwarded herewith is an application tor a patent aompris1Dg a Petition, 

Spec1t1caticm, Oath, Assipnmrt and L1oenae entitled •Authellt1-tillg Derioe• u 

reqU8ated 1n pa.ragraph two of Actiml le 

2. It JOU haft auae•tiom or OC1111181lts, it 18 desired that JOU return this 

applioaticm dull' ueouted, tGptber with a separate letter setting tort;h 8UOh 

ccmnu.1;s and sugpationa. 

3. baouticm ot the application ccmaiata 1n 1lmmtor signing h1a mm 

(firat name 1n fUll) at the places ind~aatecl bJ' the attached red tabs. It 18 

requaated that the aecuted appliaaticm be :returned to th1a ott1oa. 

l Incl 

Inol 1 le 2 w/d 

Added 

Incl 3- Origiml Patent 

Application tor 

Bmcmt1on 

/a/ DOHW> K, LIPPIBCO'l'! 

Dcmalcl x. Lipp1ncott Lieutenant Colonel, S:lpal Corpe 

Patame le Inventiona Comael, Legal D1v1aicm 

SPSLG-3a Ezt, 3702 

19 Juq 1944 

!Declassified and approved for release by NSA on 09-06-2013 pursuant to E. 0. 1352§ 

VI D , 4 a 0 l'orm J!l'o 0100 

Mardi 27, llN3 

2 .. -20956 

f":u,, '' 11 u11'"._, 

~ ~ (' J .I w -n• ' u 
~- -~-

• REF ID:A67618 

,.. CONtWHTIAL 

Ott.lee ot ti. Cld.r SSpl om... J.o\:tt.m l 

l.tlpl Dl"fima 4D 33J 

Lt. Col. D. r.:. Ltpp!alon 

•J.11thmttca~ n.irso..• ot Yf1lll• P. Jrlel • 

l.. IN10•1&l ue tm eopiM ot a draft of an applic&tS.ca tor pat.a\ flt 

wtJUn r. ~ ta ·.A~ Dllf!Alle•. tcptber with tbl Ol'Sci•' ud 

om pbo"°9t&t.te ODP.r ot tbe ftlilld Ott1oa dnm!IW· 

•twr 

2. 

at 

It 

the 

18 

draft 

1'10Clwted 

am draw'ing. 

tbat an appUea:tSon be JftpaNCI ~ t.ba ~ 

3. '1.'ba -- 18 CID!2'~ ol.udfte4 ·~· .a 1111Dul4 • ....,...., be trr.W. Jll ..... ,,,.. 'td.tb ~ 211. t4 1' I: • 4&W ~ h'bruaz7 190,. 

·~-· •l'nRtat.toJas OrJcimt4111 in •• s. Br •• ' ,.. .. Leaa1 D1"1daa ... Sipal s.nrii;J l&uch. 

Par tba C~f', .&nv CozwnnicnttoDs Serv.k:et 

2 Imla. 

IDo1 1. ~ ot .&nm (2) 

Inel 2. J>ftadlC (2) 

GOPY I. '.! ·iTIAL
TEXAS COURT OF APPEALS, THIRD DISTRICT, AT AUSTIN

NO. 03-16-00722-CV

In re Louis Confer

ORIGINAL PROCEEDING FROM CALDWELL COUNTY

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

Relator Louis Confer, an inmate in the Texas Department of Criminal Justice, has

filed a pro se petition for writ of mandamus seeking credit for jail time. See Tex. Gov’t

Code § 22.221; see also Tex. R. App. P. 52.1. We deny the petition. See Tex. R. App. P. 52.8.

__________________________________________

Melissa Goodwin, Justice

Before Chief Justice Rose, Justices Goodwin and Bourland

Filed: November 18, 2016
----

mma OF m PIPDi MDl"DG !JP m 

MTIORAL SB:mm ~ 'l~ JOtmlAL 

:m:m>RIAL P.DIJCY :eaAB1> 

· 20 APR 1955 . 

21Apr1955 

The meeting n.s opemd at CJ90C) •. . Preaent were: 

HZ". Pruleis A. Raven. 

Dr .. H. JI .. Campa1pe 

Col. Geol.•t;e E. C-bell 

Dr. liarolil. J.. Stuluey 

Dr. ~e B. Sh1D ~.~lU.flmA.Jones . Mr. James A. Croma, :~t1 Advisor 

Abuent: 

.......... ,,..,-rs= 

Mr. Willia:n r. J'riedmsa 

Mr. lambrca D.. Calliulilhoe 

PROD 

. R/D 

AG 

CQMSIC . 

P/P 

LD 

SE 

S/A 

'fim 

l. the meetlng cc~idered the au appliea:tiau tor the Job r4 Etitor, 

RSA Tecbnical JCNl'Dal, tiled as a result of intel'llliJ. advertisement of the 

pomitloa. Ap,plieat1cna end 201 Files had been made avail.able to ea.ell Bee.rd 

member prior to the meettns.. · 

a.. Mro ·Jami Monlq1 nov GD duty with JSA.Bm~ vu "4!1.e:cted fl."Gll . 

the ajtplJ.euts u the one C&lll41d&te to be :m-.nevea. 

b.. SUbsequent to til!IW.a&ion ~the &ppi'--af)!'iatenes11 ~ 

applicat1m by Dr. ~)? J'&irtNIDks, PBOD, tbe Board voted 

to im'ite him to appJ.¥ tor cona1derat1cm. 

e. ·Col. ·Campbell vu &teiplt.ted to clear v:ttb U:S/A a request to 

EAEOR tar the return of Hi-. Riordan ·on TD! for 1Dterri.ev on 

appronma:tC!lJ 5 liq .. · 

4. Mro 

toa~. 

:Rave.u YU c1Hipated · ·to extencl &D .inV1tat:lcm. to Di-. ~ 

e. Jlr. Jme.s vu ciestpated. to 1n:f"orm PERS of the Boa.rd'• &ecieim 

on aP,Plieatlms. . 

t. · nie date of the next meeting vu tentative~ eet tor 5 or 6 Yay 55. 

Dlstrtb&at·lm: 

Bemben 

P&lS (Mr .. Soog1u) 

~ --- -._. · ~-~ O-Nlill}~ NT I AL 

Declassified and approved for rele~se _by f':'JSA on 05-29-2014 pursuant to E .0. 1352a
Exhibit 23



Consent of Independent Registered Public Accounting Firm



The Board of Directors

LightPath Technologies, Inc.



We consent to incorporation by reference in the registration statements (Nos.
333-41705, 333-92017, 333-121389, 333-121385, 333-96083, 333-50976 and 333-50974) on Form S-8 and (Nos. 333-113814, 333-37443, 333-39641, 333-93179, 333-37622, 333-47992, 333-51474 and 333-127053) on Form S-3 of LightPath Technologies, Inc. of our
report dated August 29, 2005, relating to the consolidated balance sheets of LightPath Technologies, Inc. and subsidiaries as of June 30, 2005 and 2004, and the related consolidated statements of operations, stockholders equity and cash flows
for each of the years in the three year period ended June 30, 2005, which report appears in the June 30, 2005, annual report on Form 10-K of LightPath Technologies, Inc.



|                  
|------------------
|/s/ KPMG LLP      
|                  
|Orlando, Florida  
|September 21, 2005
iEPLY 

'ERTO 

-· 

REF ID:A39686 

WAR DEPARTMENT 

OFFICE OF THE CHIEF SIGNAL OFFICER 

WASHINGTON 

' ' ~ -... ::; ..... ;::iv- . I 

; '' -

Septm::tber 21, 1939. 

f!ie~~ " ndum ~,or Mr. ~;1111am F. ~i edman and 

Ur. Frank B. Ro~lett, 

Intelligence Section, Jer Plans and Training Division, 

Office ot the Chief Signal Officer. 

Subject: Patent Application, Ser. No. 70,412, 

Improvement in Cryptographs 

l. To complete your file record, copies are trens.mitted 

h0 rewith of amendatory paper of April 28, 1939; letter from the 

Secretary of' t!ar dated .. fa.pril 24, 1939; letter from Commiesioner of 

Patents dated. I.~ay 3, 1939, end o:f':!'icial letter f'rom the Patent haminer 

dated July 27, 1939. 

2. The official letter of Tuiay 3, 1939 end that of JUly 27 • 

19391 should be read together, and it will be noted that this case 

remains under the provisionsof' Section 4894 knovm as the Three Year Rule 

f'or a further period of three years running f'rom JUly 27, 19Z9. 

For your information, no changes have act~ally been made in the claims 

ir. this case which are thirty-three in number and remain in the rorm as 

originally filed. 

Charles A. Rowe, 

Patents Section, Signal Corps 

pproved for Release by NSA on 09-27-2013 pursuant to E. 0. 

13526 

'· •
Exhibit 23.1


                         Independent Auditors' Consent
   


The Board of Directors of Stockholders
Hungarian Telephone and Cable Corp.:

We consent to incorporation  by reference in the registration  statement on Form
S-8 of Hungarian  Telephone  and Cable Corp. of our report dated March 21, 1997,
relating to the  consolidated  balance  sheets of Hungarian  Telephone and Cable
Corp.  and  subsidiaries  as of  December  31,  1996 and  1995  and the  related
consolidated  statements of operations,  stockholders' (deficit) equity and cash
flows for each of the years then ended,  which  appears in the December 31, 1996
annual report on Form 10-K of Hungarian Telephone and Cable Corp.

                                                          KPMG Peat Marwick LLP

New York, New York
March 21, 1997
<TABLE> <S> <C>

        <S> <C>
<ARTICLE> 5
<LEGEND>
THIS SCHEDULE CONTAINS SUMMARY FINANCIAL INFORMATION EXTRACTED FROM THE
CONSOLIDATED BALANCE SHEET AND THE CONSOLIDATED STATEMENT OF INCOME OF
PRESIDENT CASINOS INC. FILED AS A PART OF THE ANNUAL REPORT ON FORM 10-K AND
IS QUALIFIED IN ITS ENTIRETY BY REFERENCE TO SUCH ANNUAL REPORT ON FORM 10-K.
</LEGEND>
<MULTIPLIER> 1000

<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   12-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          FEB-28-1999
<PERIOD-END>                               FEB-28-1999
<CASH>                                           20205
<SECURITIES>                                       275
<RECEIVABLES>                                     2945
<ALLOWANCES>                                       357
<INVENTORY>                                       1848
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                                 27413
<PP&E>                                          205727
<DEPRECIATION>                                   62987
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                  172858
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                            27223
<BONDS>                                         100556
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                           302
<OTHER-SE>                                      (6510)
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                    172858
<SALES>                                              0
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                                205512
<CGS>                                                0
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                   199655
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                  1486
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                     0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                               19263
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                (14892)
<INCOME-TAX>                                         0
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                            (14892)
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                   (14892)
<EPS-BASIC>                                   (2.96)
<EPS-DILUTED>                                   (2.96)



</TABLE>
TEXAS COURT OF APPEALS, THIRD DISTRICT, AT AUSTIN

NO. 03-16-00652-CV

Stephan Ricks, Appellant

v.

Veronica Dorsey, Appellee

FROM THE DISTRICT COURT OF TRAVIS COUNTY, 419TH JUDICIAL DISTRICT

NO. D-1-GN-16-004197, HONORABLE GUS J. STRAUSS JR., JUDGE PRESIDING

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

Appellant Stephan Ricks filed a notice of appeal challenging the district court’s denial

of his petition for writ of mandamus. However, the district court clerk informed this Court that

no order was signed, and Ricks has not provided any order reflecting the district court’s ruling.

Without a final judgment or otherwise appealable order, we may not exercise appellate jurisdiction.

See Tex. Civ. Prac. & Rem. Code § 51.014; Lehmann v. Har-Con Corp., 39 S.W.3d 191, 195

(Tex. 2001).

On November 2, 2016, this Court requested that Ricks file a response demonstrating

our jurisdiction over his appeal. Ricks’s response states that he filed a motion for reconsideration

of the mandamus ruling and that a different district court judge denied the motion to reconsider

on October 13, 2016. Ricks attached a copy of an order signed on October 13, 2016 directing a
court reporter to provide Ricks with a copy of an audio recording of a hearing. But Ricks has 1

not provided the written order from which he appeals. See Tex. Civ. Prac. & Rem. Code § 51.014;

see also McIntyre v. Lexis Nexis, No. 05-11-00809-CV, 2011 Tex. App. LEXIS 8402, at *2-3

(Tex. App.—Dallas Oct. 21, 2011, no pet.) (mem. op.) (dismissing appeal for want of jurisdiction

because appellant failed to provide written order reflecting court’s ruling and “[a] record of the

court’s ruling by the court reporter is not an acceptable substitute for a written order”).

We dismiss this appeal for want of jurisdiction. See Tex. R. App. P. 42.3(a).

__________________________________________

Jeff Rose, Chief Justice

Before Chief Justice Rose, Justices Goodwin and Bourland

Dismissed for Want of Jurisdiction

Filed: November 18, 2016

Presumably, this is a recording from the hearing on Ricks’s motion to reconsider, but the 1

order does not specify what the recording contains or when it was to be delivered to Ricks.

2
IN THE SUPREME COURT OF PENNSYLVANIA

IN RE:

ORDER AMENDING RULE 1920.72 OF 

THE PENNSYLVANIA RULES OF CIVIL

PROCEDURE

:

:

:

:

:

:

NO. 654

CIVIL PROCEDURAL RULES 

DOCKET 

ORDER

PER CURIAM

AND NOW, this 18

th day of November, 2016, upon the recommendation of the 

Domestic Relations Procedural Rules Committee; the proposal having been submitted 

without publication pursuant to Pa.R.J.A. No. 103(a)(3) in the interest of efficient 

administration:

IT IS ORDERED pursuant to Article V, Section 10 of the Constitution of 

Pennsylvania that Rule 1920.72 of the Pennsylvania Rules of Civil Procedure is

amended in the attached form.

This ORDER shall be processed in accordance with Pa.R.J.A. No. 103(b), and 

shall be effective on December 5, 2016.

Additions to the rule are shown in bold and are underlined.

Deletions from the rule are shown in bold and brackets.
**UN PUBLISHED** 

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

**No. 15** 
**- 6**  **5 32** 

KEVIN LEON SMITH ,

P laintiff

- Appellant ,

v.
PARCELL, Deputy Sargent of Chesapeake City Jail; WOLF, Deputy Officer of Chesapeake City Jail ,
Defendant s
- Appellee s
.

Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Virginia , at R ichmond

. James R. Spencer , Senior District Judge. ( 3 :1 3

- c v
- 0 05 6 4

- JRS

- RCY )

Submitted : June 25, 2015 Decided: June 30, 2015

Before GREGORY, FLOYD, and THACKER , Circuit Judges.

Affirm ed by un published per curiam opinion

.

Kevin Leon Smith , Appellant Pro Se.

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.2 PER CURIAM:

Kevin Leon Smith appeals the district court ’ s order denying

relief on his 42 U.S.C. § 1983 (20 12 ) complaint. We have reviewed
the record and find no reversible error. Accordingly, we affirm
for the reasons stated by the district court. Smith v. Parcell ,
No. 3:13

- cv
- 005 6 4

- JRS

- RCY (E.D. Va. Mar. 24 , 2015) . We dispense
with oral argument because the facts and legal contentions are
adequately presented in the materials before th is court and
argument would not aid the decisional process.

AFFIRMED
-

/ 

~---

; 

' 

1. Ml-62 JS-IS 24 Feb 4'1 Tool• and Dlee < 

1. It la requaW that tile tool• ad a. ...... ill Qe mmata&tue ot tle 

teelw ...,.., oadtr pupa, aepareUng._gape, •tal pup cttl!M, cl1ltcll-clri~ 

par• ad ~•Sac pare, wldcll •ere purc)Ja•cl on Coavaet 12'11 Pld1a 46, 

lie 4ellnred to 'II• Cafeteria Bl .... '\ tor atorap \w la!DtaDDce ll'pcdl. 

2. I\ le ~- nqrae.W tut Ir. 1• 1- naUtild on lrt.ala 247 •• 

to tbe date ud tille ot 4ell'Ytll',f, IO that. anutg_.ta can 'be m4e to aw t)ae 

norage space opened. 

I. DBI Cb1~, Jlaint.uance Bnncb 

Extension 247 

1 

@'pproved for Release by NSA on 06-03-2014 pursuantto E.O. 1352~ 11 ,

- - ( ~c/~-, 7 _,,,._,,, -- - -- - - .. - - "' --- ---- .. ------- ... - - ---