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

117TH CONGRESS 

1ST SESSION S. 2794 

To amend title 38, United States Code, to increase automatic maximum 

coverage under the Servicemembers’ Group Life Insurance program and 

the Veterans’ Group Life Insurance program, and for other purposes. 

IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES 

SEPTEMBER 22 (legislative day, SEPTEMBER 21), 2021 

Mr. TUBERVILLE (for himself, Mr. CRAMER, Mr. SCOTT of Florida, Mr. 

BRAUN, Mr. BARRASSO, and Ms. LUMMIS) introduced the following bill; 

which was read twice and referred to the Committee on Veterans’ Affairs 

A BILL 

To amend title 38, United States Code, to increase automatic 

maximum coverage under the Servicemembers’ Group 

Life Insurance program and the Veterans’ Group Life 

Insurance program, and for other purposes. 

1 Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representa2 tives of the United States of America in Congress assembled, 

3 SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE. 

4 This Act may be cited as the ‘‘Supporting Families 

5 of the Fallen Act’’. 


pamtmann on DSKBC07HB2PROD with BILLS
2 

•S 2794 IS

1 SEC. 2. INCREASE IN AUTOMATIC MAXIMUM COVERAGE 

2 UNDER SERVICEMEMBERS’ GROUP LIFE IN3 SURANCE AND VETERANS’ GROUP LIFE IN4 SURANCE. 

5 (a) IN GENERAL.—Section 1967(a)(3)(A)(i) of title 

6 38, United States Code, is amended by striking 

7 ‘‘$400,000’’ and inserting ‘‘$500,000’’. 

8 (b) EFFECTIVE DATE.—The amendment made by 

9 subsection (a) shall take effect on the later of— 

10 (1) the date that is 60 days after the date of 

11 the enactment of this Act; or 

12 (2) the date on which the Secretary of Veterans 

13 Affairs determines that— 

14 (A) the amount for which a member will be 

15 insured pursuant to the amendment made by 

16 subsection (a) and the premiums for such 

17 amount are administratively and actuarially 

18 sound for the Servicemembers’ Group Life In19 surance program under subchapter III of chap20 ter 19 of title 38, United States Code, and the 

21 Veterans’ Group Life Insurance program under 

22 section 1977 of such title; and 

23 (B) the increase in such amount carried 

24 out pursuant to the amendment will not result 

25 in such programs operating at a loss. 

Æ 


pamtmann on DSKBC07HB2PROD with BILLS
##### 



Exhibit 13.2


CERTIFICATION PURSUANT TO


18 U.S.C. SECTION 1350,


AS ADOPTED PURSUANT TO


SECTION 906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002


20-F 20-F/




| |                                                                                                                                                                 
| | ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
| | (1) the Report fully complies with the requirements of
    Section 13(a) or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of
    1934; and                               
|
| | (2) the information contained in the Report fairly
    presents, in all material respects, the financial condition and
    results of operations of the Company.



| |                        |                    | 
| | ---------------------- | ------------------ | 
| | /s/ Rinaldi Firmansyah |                   
| |                        |                   
| | Name:                  | Rinaldi Firmansyah | 

| |        |                                                 | 
| | ------ | ----------------------------------------------- | 
| | Title: | Director of Finance and
Chief Financial Officer |
#### Krouse v. South Hills Health System

*680Plaintiff filed a complaint against the original defendants on October 18, 1978. On December 4, 1978, defendant A. J. Brown, M.D., filed a complaint to join as additional defendant, the Ken-nywood Park Corporation, hereinafter referred to as Kennywood. Kennywood entered preliminary objections to the complaint to join additional defendant on December 28, 1978. We agree with the contentions of Kennywood and therefore hold that the preliminary objections are sustained and the complaint to join additional defendant is dismissed.

Plainitff s complaint against the original defendants claimed medical malpractice against them for the manner in which they treated and operated on plaintiffs injured left ankle. Plaintiff sustained the original fracture of this left ankle on the premises of Kennywood, which operates as an amusement park. The complaint to join additional defendant alleges that plaintiff slipped and fell, injuring his ankle on peanut shells negligently and carelessly left on the sidewalk. Defendant Brown thus contends that Kennywood is jointly or severally or solely hable to defendant Brown in the event that plaintiff recovers a verdict against Brown.

The case presented here can be disposed of based on the analogous situation that was present in Gillette v. Redinger, 34 Pa. Commonwealth Ct. 469, 383 A. 2d 1295 (1978). In Gillette, a defendant-doctor who was charged with medical malpractice sought to join as an additional defendant, the brother of the deceased plaintiff who had caused the original injury by hitting his late brother in the head with a snowball. The Commonwealth Court affirmed the decision of the administrator dismissing the complaint to join additional defendant, basing its decision on the intent and purpose of the *681Health Care Services Malpractice Act of October 15, 1975, P.L. 390, as amended, 40 P.S. §1301.101 et seq.

The Commonwealth Court agreed with the administrator’s construction of the term “nonhealth care provider.” The Commonwealth Court stated “[o]ur close examination of the act . . . leads to the inevitable conclusion that the legislature never intended the Arbitration Panels for Health Care to pass upon questions other than that of medical malpractice.” 383 A. 2d at 1298. In the instant case, defendant Brown’s attempt to join the Ken-nywood Amusement Park is improper since Ken-nywood’s activities were not kindred to those of a health care provider. Accordingly, we enter the following

ORDER

And now, February 26, 1979, upon consideration of additional defendant Kennywood Park Corporation’s preliminary objections to the complaint to join additional defendant filed by defendant A. J. Brown, M.D., it is hereby ordered and decreed that the preliminary objections are sustained and the complaint against Kennywood Park Corporation is dismissed.
U.S. DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY

PUBLIC MEETING — ENERGY CONSERVATION STANDARDS

PROPOSED RULEMAKING FOR DISTRIBUTION TRANSFORMERS

U.S. Department of Energy

1000 Independence Avenue, SW

Washington, DC 20585

Thursday, February 23, 2012

Room 8E-089

Purpose

The U.S. Department of Energy (DOE) is holding this public meeting to discuss proposed 

energy conservation standards for distribution transformers. DOE will review the rulemaking 

process, address the analyses that support the proposed efficiency levels, and seek comments, 

data, and information from interested parties. 

Agenda

9:00 am Welcome

Jim Raba

9:05 am Introductions, Agenda Review, Opening Statements

Jim Raba and Doug Brookman, Facilitator

9:30 am Rulemaking History, Schedule, and Scope; Negotiated Rulemaking

Process

Brian Coffey

9:45 am EPCA Factors, Scope, Definitions, Test Procedure, Equipment Classes

Brian Coffey

10:00 am Engineering Analysis

Brian Coffey

10:15 am 15 Minute Break

10:30 am Markups, Loading, Distribution Channels, Life-Cycle Cost and 

Payback Period Analysis, National Impact Analysis, Refurbishments

Christopher Bolduc

11 am Trial Standard Levels and Proposed Standards

Christopher Bolduc

11:15 am Discussion of Proposed Standards

Attendees

12:45 pm Closing Remarks

Jim Raba
Exhibit 32.1 Chief Executive and Financial Officer Certification (Section 906)   CERTIFICATION PURSUANT TO 18U.S.C.,SECTION 1350, AS ADOPTED PURSUANT TO SECTION 906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002    Pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350 (as adopted pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002), I, the undersigned President and Chief Executive and Financial Officer of Global Immune Technologies, Inc., (the Company), herby certify that, to the best of my knowledge, the Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q of the Company for the period ended September 30, 2009 (the Report) fully complies with the requirements of section 13(a) or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 and that information contained in the Report fairly presents, in all material respects, the financial condition and results of operation of the Company.  A signed original of this written statement required by Section 906 has been provided to the registrant and will be retained by it and furnished to the Securities and Exchange Commission or its staff upon request.   Dated November 12, 2010 /s/ Donald Perks CEO and CFO
Exhibit 10.3

 

 

 

 

Summary of 2013 Compensation Package

 

 

 

 

	
Name
    	
Perry Karsen
    	
 
    
	
Job Title
    	
EVP, Chief Operations Officer
    	
 
    
	
Base Salary
    	
$649,000
    	
Effective March 1, 2013
    
	
 
    	
 
    	
 
    
	
Bonus Target
    	
70%
    	
Effective January 1, 2013
    
	
 
    	
 
    	
 
    
	
Annual Equity   Award
    	
Stock Options: 47,300  

Restricted Stock Units: 5,500
    	
Effective April 1, 2013
    
	
 
    	
 
    	
 
    
	
LTIP Target
    	
100% of base salary as of plan cycle   approval (12/12/12), or $630,000
    	
2013-2015 Performance Cycle, commencing   January 1, 2013
    
	
 
    	
 
    	
 
    
	
Severance Benefit
    	
12 months of salary continuation

12 months of bonus

COBRA benefit at active employee rates

Change in control payments would be   reduced to avoid 280G excise tax, if it would be beneficial to you 
    	
In the event of involuntary termination   for reasons other than cause
    
	
Financial   Planning Benefit
    	
Up to $15,000 per year
    	
Reimbursement of reasonable and customary   fees associated with financial planning and/or tax preparation/advice
    


 

 

 

 

	
Acknowledged and   agreed:
    	
On behalf of Celgene Corporation:
    
	
 
    	
 
    	
 
    	
 
    	
 
    	
 
    	
 
    	
 
    	
 
    
	
/s/Perry Karsen
    	
 
    	
25 April, 2013
    	
 
    	
By:
    	
 /s/Robert   J. Hugin
    	
 
    	
April 22, 2013
    	
 
    
	
Perry Karsen
    	
 
    	
 Date
    	
 
    	
 
    	
 Robert   J. Hugin
    	
 
    	
 Date
    	
 
    
	
 
    	
 
    	
 
    	
 
    	
 
    	
 Chairman   and CEO
SAFETY

EFFICIENCY

PERFORMANCE

FOR NEAR EARTH FLIGHT

g5 offers the best combination of weight, cost, 

performance, and capabilities. Modular components 

exist for lidar mapping, multispectral sensing, 

collision avoidance, and photogrammetry. Five 

configurations are available with options for higher 

density and / or more accurate point clouds. 

Features

• Multispectral payload consists of 5 MP color camera, LWIR 

imager, and spectrograph for agriculture and pipeline leak 

monitoring 

• Colorized lidar data for digital elevation maps of pipeline 

surveys and transmission line monitoring

• Optional upgrade for denser point clouds

• Optional upgrade for more accurate post-processed maps

• Coming in 2016: collision avoidance capability for beyond lineof-sight flight

g5 configurable mapping payload

Media inquiries: media@nearearth.aero

All Rights Reserved © 2015 Near Earth Autonomy, Inc.
www.nearearth.aero

All Rights Reserved © 2015 Near Earth Autonomy, Inc.

How to Purchase

Please contact us for any questions about specifications, cost, and delivery.

email: sales@nearearth.aero or call: (412) 621-4300

g5

configurable mapping payload

g5 is an integrated mapping payload 

with options for lidar, multispectral, and 

photogrammetry sensors, customizable for 

payload weight, cost, and performance.

• Collision Avoidance*

• Photogrammetry

D

• Lidar Mapping

• Collision Avoidance*

E

• Lidar Mapping

A

• Lidar Mapping

• Multispectral

B

• Multispectral Data

• Photogrammetry

C

* Collision avoidance available 2016 **Additional narrowband(s) quoted upon request

 10.68” 

 7.31” 

5.50”

Configurations A B C D E

Sensing package VLP-16, 5 MP 

color camera

VLP-16, 5 MP 

color camera, 

LWIR, Spectrograph

5 MP color 

camera, LWIR, 

Spectrograph

VLP-16, 5 MP 

color camera

VLP-16 (x2), 5 

MP color camera

Post-processed position and 

attitude

Position: < 0.05 m, velocity: 0.015 m/s, roll & pitch: 0.025 deg, heading: 0.08 deg

Optional higher accuracy Position: < 0.05 m, velocity: 0.010 m/s, roll & pitch: 0.015 deg, heading: 0.035 deg

Laser range measurement 

rate/Max range/Accuracy/

FOV

300,000 points/s / >100 m / 3 cm / 

360 deg

N / A 300,000 points/s / >100 m / 3 cm / 

360 deg

Optional higher point 

density

 700,000 points/s / 100 m / < 2 cm / 

360 deg

N / A 700,000 points/s / 100 m / < 2 cm / 

360 deg

Multispectral sensitivity 

(nm)

400 - 650 broadband color imaging400 - 650 broadband color imaging, 

7,500 - 13,500 broadband thermal 

imaging, and customer-defined narrowband between 400 - 850** 

400 - 650 broadband color imaging

Onboard computing Dual core i5 processor, 2.5 GHz

Wireless radio link range 5 km

Estimated map accuracy 15 cm 30 cm 15 cm

Weight (lb.) (without 

options)

5 6 4 5 7

Option Weight (lb.) Higher accuracy: 3,

Higher point density: 1

Higher accuracy: 3 Higher accuracy:3, 

Higher point 

density: 1

Weight with all options (lb.) 9 10 7 8 8
UN PUBLISHED
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

No. 21
- 6694

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA , Plaintiff

- Appellee ,

v. MCKINLEY EARL MORANT , Defendant

- Appellant

.

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

. Cameron McGowan Currie, Senior District Judge. ( 3:19

- cr - 00307

- CMC

- 1 )

Submitted : October 19, 2021 Decided: October 22, 2021

Before GREGORY, Chief Judge, AGEE , Circuit Judge , and SHEDD, Senior Circuit Judge.

Affirmed by un published per curiam opinion

. McKinley Earl Morant , Appellant Pro Se.
Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.2 PER CURIAM: McKinley Earl Morant appe als the district court’s order s denying his 18 U.S.C. § 3582(c)(1)(A) motion for compassionate release and denying reconsideration. We review a district court’s order granting or denying a compassionate release motion for
abuse of discretion. United Stat es v. Kibble , 992 F.3d 326, 329 (4th Cir. 2021) , petition for cert. filed , No. 21

- 5624 (U.S. Sept. 8, 2021) . We have reviewed the record and
conclude that the court did not abuse its discretion. The court denied Morant ’s motion after discussing the appli cable 18 U.S.C. § 3553(a) factors and sufficiently explained the reasons
for the denial. See United States v. High , 997 F.3d 181, 188

- 91 (4th Cir. 2021) (discussing
amount of explanation required for denial of straightforward compassionate release motion) . We therefore affirm the district court’s order s . We dispense with oral argument because the facts and legal contentions are adequately presented in the materials before this court and argument would not aid the decisional process.
AFFIRMED
EXHIBIT 32.1
                                                                    ------------

                            CERTIFICATION PURSUANT TO
                             18 U.S.C. SECTION 1350,
                             AS ADOPTED PURSUANT TO
                  SECTION 906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002

In connection with the Quarterly Report of iVoice, Inc. ("the Company") on Form
10-QSB for the period ended June 30, 2006, as filed with the Securities and
Exchange Commission on the date hereof ("the Report"), I, Jerome R Mahoney,
President, Chief Executive Officer and Principal Accounting Officer of the
Company, certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, as adopted pursuant to
Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, to the best of my knowledge and
belief, that:

     1.   The Report fully complies with the requirements of section 13(a) or
          15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934; and

     2.   The information contained in the Report fairly presents, in all
          material respects the financial condition and results of operations of
          the Company.


                                       Date: August 14, 2006

                                       By /s/ Jerome R Mahoney
                                       -----------------------------------------
                                       Jerome R Mahoney
                                       President, Chief Executive Officer and
                                       Principal Accounting Officer
<PAGE>   1
                                                                    EXHIBIT 11
                         STYLING TECHNOLOGY CORPORATION
                STATEMENT RE: COMPUTATION OF PER SHARE EARNINGS

<TABLE>
<CAPTION>
                                                                  FOR THE PERIOD ENDED
                                                                   NOVEMBER 27, 1996
                                                              (COMMENCEMENT OF OPERATIONS)
                                                                  TO DECEMBER 31, 1996
                                                             ------------------------------
<S>                                                                    <C>
Common shares outstanding beginning of period ...........               1,615,702

Effect of Weighting Shares:
 Purchase of treasury stock  ............................                (807,851)
 Issuance of common stock ...............................               2,962,003
                                                                        ---------
Primary .................................................               3,769,854
                                                                        ---------

Common shares outstanding beginning of period ...........               1,615,702

Effect of Weighting Shares:
 Purchase of treasury stock  ............................                (807,851)
 Issuance of common stock ...............................               2,962,003
                                                                        ---------
Fully diluted ...........................................               3,769,854
                                                                        =========
Net loss ................................................              $ (150,965)

NET LOSS PER COMMON AND COMMON EQUIVALENT SHARES:

Net loss per share
 Primary ................................................              $    (0.04)
                                                                        =========
 Fully diluted ..........................................              $    (0.04)
                                                                        =========
                                       
</TABLE>
*

 Pursuant to Local Rule 47.5, the court has determined that this opinion should not be

published and is not precedent except under the limited circumstances set forth in Local Rule

47.5.4.

IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT

__________________

No. 95-60460

Summary Calendar

__________________

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,

 Plaintiff-Appellee,

versus

THOMAS DOWNS,

 Defendant-Appellant.

- - - - - - - - - -

Appeal from the United States District Court

for the Southern District of Mississippi

USDC No. 3:95-CR-11WS

- - - - - - - - - -

February 21, 1996

Before KING, SMITH and BENAVIDES, Circuit Judges.

PER CURIAM:*

Thomas Downs appeals his conviction and sentence for mailing a threatening

communication, in violation of 18 U.S.C. § 876. The district court did not abuse its discretion in

admitting two letters and envelopes. United States v. Jimenez Lopez, 873 F.2d 769, 771 (5th Cir.

1989). The evidence was not insufficient. United States v. Willis, 6 F.3d 

257, 264 (5th Cir. 1993). The prosecutor's statement to the jurors about being free from fear did

not require a mistrial, and the omission of a curative instruction is not plain error. United States

v. Wallace, 32 F.3d 921, 926-27 (5th Cir. 1994); United States v. Calverley, 37 F.3d 160, 162-64

(5th Cir. 1994), cert. denied, 115 S. Ct. 1266 (1995).

AFFIRMED.
Served April 19,2011 

U.S. DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTION 

OFFICE OF HEARINGS 

WASHINGTON, D.C. 

IN THE MATTER OF 

Rushmore Helicopters, Inc. 

FAA DOCKET NO. CP10GL0002 

(Civil Penalty Action) 

DMS No. FAA-2010-0023 

AGENCY'S APPEARANCE 

^BCEW/ED 

APR 2 6 2flW 

HIARING DOCKET 

V 

''-'--, _.Ci 

rrj£gnn 

oQ9 

NOW COMES the Federal Aviation Administration (Agency), by and through 

his undersigned counsel, and hereby designates an additional appearance in this matter as 

follows: 

Briana Martino 

Attorney, Federal Aviation Administration 

Office of the Regional Counsel 

Great Lakes Region 

2300 East Devon Avenue 

DesPlaines,IL 60018 

(T) 847-294-7313 

(F) 847-294-7498 

briana.martino(a),faa.gov 

Resp^t&lly submitted, 

k&. 

Brians Martino 

Attorney 

A. 
CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE 

I hereby certify that I have, this date, served the foregoing Appearance by mailing copies 

to the following addresses as follows: 

Original and One Copy (Facsimilie and Regular Mail) 

Federal Aviation Administration 

800 Independence Avenue, S.W. 

Washington, DC 20591 

Attention: Hearing Docket Clerk, AGC-430 

Wilbur Wright Building, Suite 2W1000 

FAX: 202-493-5141 

One Copy 

Mr. Michael Jacob (Regular Mail) 

Rushmore Helicopters, Inc. 

24564 Highway 16/385 

Custer, SD 57730 

The Honorable Richard C. Goodwin (Facsimilie and Regular Mail) 

Administrative Law Judge 

Office of Hearings, M-20 

1200 New Jersey Avenue, S.E. 

East Building Ground Floor 

Room El2-320 

Washington, DC 20590 

FAX: 202-366-7536 

Dated this 19"^ day of April, 2011 

CV. ^CULhiAJU ^ 

Tammy Gardner 

Legal Technician
# Louisiana Army Guard Aviation Unit Holds Deployment Ceremony

/ Published Jan. 4, 2024

NEW ORLEANS – The Louisiana Army National Guard’s Headquarters and Headquarters Company, 1st Assault Helicopter Battalion, 244th Aviation Regiment, bid farewell to family and friends during a departure ceremony at the Army Aviation Support Facility #1 in Hammond Dec. 2.

“Although you may be apprehensive and nervous, I see a spark in each of you. By the end of this deployment, your knowledge base will have grown, your confidence to make decisions will have grown, and you will be performing at a level above your current rank,” said Lt. Col. Edwin Reliford, battalion commander. “You are the future of the battalion.”

The more than 70 Soldiers with the 1-244th will conduct mobilization training at Fort Cavazos, Texas, to hone skills before deploying to Kosovo to support a NATO-led peacekeeping mission.

“Sergeant Major [Command Sgt. Maj. Reginald Gagnard, senior enlisted leader of the 1-244th Assault Helicopter Battalion] and I have instilled certain values in you; the values of family, teamwork, that we never do anything alone, and to look after one another,” Reliford told the deploying Soldiers. “We instilled these values for a reason. These values will lead you through the long days and cold nights.”

Maj. Gen. Keith Waddell, adjutant general of the Louisiana National Guard, told the Soldiers the key to a successful deployment is teamwork and self-care.

“To the Soldiers that are deploying, thank you for being a part of the 1% of the United States’ population that serves our country who took an oath to support and defend our country against all enemies, foreign and domestic,” Waddell said.

Waddell thanked the families and employers for their dedication and sacrifices they will make while the Soldiers are away.

“You are the backbone of the unit,” said Waddell. “You’re the true unsung heroes of the Louisiana National Guard. Please know that you are always valued and always appreciated.”

The 1-244th Assault Helicopter Battalion has served. on multiple overseas deployments and domestic emergency response missions the past few decades.