alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
[Federal Register Volume 87, Number 24 (Friday, February 4, 2022)]
[Notices]
[Page 6551]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2022-02380]


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

DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES

Centers for Disease Control and Prevention


Notice of Closed Meeting

    Pursuant to section 10(d) of the Federal Advisory Committee Act, as 
amended, notice is hereby given of the following meeting.
    The meeting will be closed to the public in accordance with the 
provisions set forth in sections 552b(c)(4) and 552b(c)(6), title 5 
U.S.C., as amended, and the Determination of the Director, Strategic 
Business Initiatives Unit, Office of the Chief Operating Officer, CDC, 
pursuant to Public Law 92-463. The grant applications and the 
discussions could disclose confidential trade secrets or commercial 
property such as patentable material, and personal information 
concerning individuals associated with the grant applications, the 
disclosure of which would constitute a clearly unwarranted invasion of 
personal privacy.
    Name of Committee: Disease, Disability, and Injury Prevention and 
Control Special Emphasis Panel (SEP)-- RFA-CE-22-013: Rigorous 
Evaluation of Community-Centered Approaches for the Prevention of 
Community Violence.
    Date: June 28-29, 2022.
    Time: 8:30 a.m.-5:30 p.m., EDT.
    Place: Videoconference.
    Agenda: To review and evaluate grant applications.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Mikel Walters, Ph.D., Scientific 
Review Official, National Center for Injury Prevention and Control, 
CDC, 4770 Buford Highway NE, Mailstop F-63, Atlanta, Georgia 30341, 
Telephone (404) 639-0913, <a href="/cdn-cgi/l/email-protection#6e23390f021a0b1c1d2e0d0a0d40090118"><span class="__cf_email__" data-cfemail="551802343921302726153631367b323a23">[email protected]</span></a>.
    The Director, Strategic Business Initiatives Unit, Office of the 
Chief Operating Officer, Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, 
has been delegated the authority to sign Federal Register notices 
pertaining to announcements of meetings and other committee management 
activities, for both the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention and 
the Agency for Toxic Substances and Disease Registry.

Kalwant Smagh,
Director, Strategic Business Initiatives Unit, Office of the Chief 
Operating Officer, Centers for Disease Control and Prevention.
[FR Doc. 2022-02380 Filed 2-3-22; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4163-18-P


</pre><script data-cfasync="false" src="/cdn-cgi/scripts/5c5dd728/cloudflare-static/email-decode.min.js"></script></body>
</html>
#### UNITED STATES of America, PlaintiffAppellee, v. Tony Lee JONES, Jr., a/k/a Pac-Man, Defendant-Appellant.

No. 16-7779

United States Court of Appeals, Fourth Circuit.

Submitted: July 31, 2017

Decided: August 15, 2017

Tony Lee Jones, Jr., Appellant Pro Se. Angela Mastandrea-Miller, Assistant United States Attorney, Richmond, Virginia, for Appellee.

Before KING and WYNN, Circuit Judges, and HAMILTON, Senior Circuit Judge.

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.

PER CURIAM:

Tony Lee Jones, Jr., seeks to appeal the district court’s order denying relief on his 28 U.S.C. § 2255 (2012) motion. 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 *59reasonable 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, 120 S.Ct. 1595, 146 L.Ed.2d 542 (2000); *see Miller-El v. Cockrell,*537 U.S. 322, 336-38, 123 S.Ct. 1029, 154 L.Ed.2d 931 (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, 120 S.Ct. 1595.

We have independently reviewed the record and conclude that Jones has not made the requisite showing. Accordingly, although we grant Jones’ motion to amend, we deny a certificate of appealability and dismiss the appeal. 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.

*DISMISSED*
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<ARTICLE>                    5
<LEGEND>
This schedule contains summary financial information extracted from the
Consolidated Financial Statements of The BISYS Group, Inc. and Subsidiaries for
the quarter ended September 30, 1996 and is qualified in its entirety by
reference to such financial statements.
</LEGEND>
<MULTIPLIER>                                               1,000
       
<S>                                                          <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                                              3-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                                    JUN-30-1997
<PERIOD-START>                                       JUL-01-1996
<PERIOD-END>                                         SEP-30-1996
<CASH>                                                    42,678
<SECURITIES>                                               3,000
<RECEIVABLES>                                             55,374
<ALLOWANCES>                                               2,255
<INVENTORY>                                                    0
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                                         116,540
<PP&E>                                                    51,394
<DEPRECIATION>                                            24,555
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                           226,946
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                                     67,899
<BONDS>                                                    1,642
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                          0
<PREFERRED>                                                    0
<COMMON>                                                     500
<OTHER-SE>                                               152,153
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                             226,946
<SALES>                                                        0
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                                          72,395
<CGS>                                                          0
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                             40,015
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                           3,544
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                             279
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                                            23
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                           12,778
<INCOME-TAX>                                               5,112
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                                        7,666
<DISCONTINUED>                                                 0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                                0
<CHANGES>                                                      0
<NET-INCOME>                                               7,666
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                               0.29
<EPS-DILUTED>                                               0.29
        


</TABLE>
Order entered August 21, 2013

In The

Court of Appeals 

Fifth District of Texas at Dallas 

No. 05-13-00524-CV

BRIAN CAYCE BERTRAND, Appellant

V.

JOHN DAVID BERTRAND, ET AL., Appellees

On Appeal from the 191st Judicial District Court

Dallas County, Texas

Trial Court Cause No. 11-15646

ORDER

We GRANT appellant’s August 19, 2013 motion for an extension of time to file a brief. 

Appellant shall file his brief on or before Monday, August 26, 2013.

We DENY appellant’s August 19, 2013 motion to exceed the page limit of his brief.

/s/ DAVID LEWIS 

JUSTICE
TEXAS COURT OF APPEALS, THIRD DISTRICT, AT AUSTIN

NO. 03-21-00016-CV

Revolution Insurance Technologies, Inc., Appellant

v.

John Warren, Appellee

FROM THE 261ST DISTRICT COURT OF TRAVIS COUNTY

NO. D-1-GN-20-004409, THE HONORABLE CATHERINE MAUZY, JUDGE PRESIDING

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

Appellant Revolution Insurance Technologies, Inc. has filed an unopposed motion 

to dismiss this appeal. We grant appellant’s motion and dismiss the appeal. See Tex. R. App. 

P. 42.1(a).

__________________________________________

Darlene Byrne, Chief Justice

Before Chief Justice Byrne, Justices Baker and Smith

Dismissed on Appellant’s Motion

Filed: April 28, 2021
1

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 

FOR THE SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF OHIO 

WESTERN DIVISION AT DAYTON

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,

Plaintiff, : Case No. 3:18-cr-53 

- vs - District Judge Walter H. Rice 

Magistrate Judge Michael R. Merz 

THURSTON LEWIS GOODJOHN, : 

Defendant.

RECOMMITTAL ORDER 

This case is before the Court on Defendant’s Objections (ECF No. 28) to the Magistrate 

Judge’s Report and Recommendations (ECF No. 27). 

The District Judge has preliminarily considered the Objections and believes they will be 

more appropriately resolved after further analysis by the Magistrate Judge. Accordingly, pursuant 

to Fed. R. Civ. P. 72(b)(3), this matter is hereby returned to the Magistrate Judge with instructions 

to file a supplemental report analyzing the Objections and making recommendations based on that 

analysis.

June ____, 2020. 

Walter H. Rice

United States District Judge

WSSHU-XGJH5LFHDXWKRUL]DWLRQDIWHUKLV

UHYLHZ



Case: 3:18-cr-00053-WHR-MRM Doc #: 29 Filed: 06/23/20 Page: 1 of 1 PAGEID #: 84
All data has been removed from this file as a result of CBI sanitization. All data provided as a part of the

FGD wastewater forwarding pump proposal is considered CBI or CBI deducible.
1011/2015 Matrice 100-Fiight Test- DJI Wiki 

Matrice 100-Flight Test 

FromDJIWiki 

Takeoff I Landing Procedures 

1. Place the aircraft on an open, flat ground with the battery indicator facing you. 

2. Power on the remote controller and your mobile device, and then the Intelligent Flight Battery. 

3. Launch the DJI Pilot app and enter Camera View. 

4. Wait until the Aircraft Status Indicator flashes green. This means the Home Point is recorded and it is 

safe to fly. If it flashes yellow, the Home Point has not been recorded and you should not take off. 

5. Push the throttle stick up slowly to take off or use Auto Takeoff. 

6. To land, hover over a level surface and gently pull down on the throttle stick to descend slowly. 

7. After landing, execute the CSC command or push the throttle stick down for 3 seconds until the motors 

come to a stop. 

8. Turn off the Intelligent Flight Battery, followed by the remote controller. 

Note: 

• When the Aircraft Status Indicator flashes yellow rapidly during flight, the aircraft has entered the 

Failsafe mode. 

• The Aircraft Status Indicator will flash red slowly for a Low Battery Level warning, and flash red 

rapidly for a Critically Low Battery Level warning during flight. 

Retrieved from "http:/ /wiki.dji.com/enlindex.php?title=Matrice _1 00-Flight_ Test&oldid=23283" 

• This page was last modified on 21 July 2015, at 05:23. 

• This page has been accessed 196 times. 

http://wiki.dji.oom/en/inclex.phptMatrice_100-Fiight_Test 1/1
**EXHIBIT 32**

**CERTIFICATIONOF CHIEF EXECUTIVE OFFICER AND CHIEF FINANCIAL OFFICER**

**PURSUANTTO**

**18U.S.C. SECTION 1350,**

**ASADOPTED PURSUANT TO**

**SECTION 906OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002**

I, E. Thomas Hart, certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C.Section 1350, as adopted pursuant to Section 906 of theSarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that the Quarterly Report of QuickLogic Corporationon Form 10-Q for the quarter ended July 1, 2007 fully complies withthe requirements of Section 13(a) or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Actof 1934 and that information contained in such Quarterly Report onForm 10-Q fairly presents in all material respects the financial conditionand results of operations of QuickLogic Corporation.
|   | By:    | /s/ E. Thomas Hart        |
|--------|--------|---------------------------|
|   | Date:  | August 10, 2007           |
|   | Name:  | E. Thomas Hart            |
|   | Title: | *Chief Executive Officer* |

 

I, Carl M. Mills, certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C.Section 1350, as adopted pursuant to Section 906 of theSarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that the Quarterly Report of QuickLogic Corporationon Form 10-Q for the quarter ended July 1, 2007, fully complies withthe requirements of Section 13(a) or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Actof 1934 and that information contained in such Quarterly Report onForm 10-Q fairly presents in all material respects the financial conditionand results of operations of QuickLogic Corporation.
|   | By:    | /s/ Carl M. Mills         |
|--------|--------|---------------------------|
|   | Date:  | August 10, 2007           |
|   | Name:  | Carl M. Mills             |
|   | Title: | *Chief Financial Officer* |

 

----
EXHIBIT 99.1

                        REPORT OF INDEPENDENT AUDITORS

To the Board of Directors and Shareholders
    of Premark International, Inc.:

In our opinion, the consolidated financial statements as of and for each 
of the two years in the period ended December 28, 1996 (listed in the 
financial table of contents appearing on page 35 of this Form 10-K Annual 
Report under the heading "Financial Statements") present fairly, in all 
material respects, the financial position, results of operations and cash 
flows of Premark International, Inc. and its subsidiaries as of and for 
each of the two years in the period ended December 28, 1996, in conformity 
with generally accepted accounting principles.  These financial statements
are the responsibility of the Company's management; our responsibility is
to express an opinion on these financial statements based on our audits.  
We conducted our audits of these statements in accordance with generally 
accepted auditing standards which require that we plan and perform the 
audit to obtain reasonable assurance about whether the financial statements 
are free of material misstatement.  An audit includes examining, on a test 
basis, evidence supporting the amounts and disclosures in the financial 
statements, assessing the accounting principles used and significant 
estimates made by management, and evaluating the overall financial statement
presentation.  We believe that our audits provide a reasonable basis for 
the opinion expressed above.  We have not audited the consolidated financial 
statements of Premark International, Inc. for any period subsequent to 
December 28, 1996.


PRICE WATERHOUSE LLP

Chicago, Illinois
February 14, 1997
Exhibit






Exhibit 10.10
AMENDMENT TO EMPLOYMENT AGREEMENT


This Amendment to Employment Agreement ("Third Amendment ") amends the Employment Agreement (the "Agreement"), entered into as of July 25, 2008 (the "Agreement"), by and between DaVita Inc. (now called DaVita HealthCare Partners Inc. and referred to in this Amendment "Employer") and Kent J. Thiry ("Employee" ).  Specifically, effective December 31, 2014, the parties agree to amend the Agreement as follows:


		
	1.
	A new Section 2.1 is hereby added to the Agreement as follows:




"Possible Recoupment of Certain Compensation.  Notwithstanding any other provision in this Agreement to the contrary, Employee shall be subject to the written policies of the Board of Directors as well as laws and regulations applicable to executives of the Employer, including without limitation the DaVita HealthCare Partners Inc. Incentive Compensation Clawback Policy approved by the Board of Directors on December 4, 2014 and rules adopted pursuant to the Dodd-Frank Act, and any other Board policy, law or regulation relating to recoupment or "clawback" of compensation that may exist from time to time during the Employee's employment by the Employer and thereafter."


In all other respects, and with the exception of any all previous amendments, the Agreement remains unchanged and in full force and effect.


EMPLOYER / DAVITA HEALTHCARE             EMPLOYEE/
PARTNERS INC.




By /s/ Laura Mildenberger                /s/ Kent Thiry                    
Laura Mildenberger                    Kent J. Thiry 
Chief People Officer






Approved as to Form






/s/ Michael Freimann                
Michael A. Freimann
Assistant General Counsel – Labor & Employment
EXHIBIT 32.2



CERTIFICATION OF THE CHIEF FINANCIAL OFFICER OF

CRESCENT BANKING COMPANY

PURSUANT TO 18 U.S.C. SECTION 1350,

AS ADOPTED PURSUANT TO

§ 906
OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002



In connection with the
Quarterly Report of Crescent Banking Company (the Company) on Form 10-Q for the period ended March 31, 2005, as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the Report), I, Leland W. Brantley, Jr.,
Chief Financial Officer of the Company, do hereby certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. § 1350, as adopted pursuant to § 906 of The Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, 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.
| | -- | ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------



|                                                            
|------------------------------------------------------------
|/s/ LELAND W. BRANTLEY, JR.                                 
|Leland W. Brantley, Jr. Chief Financial Officer May 13, 2005
Pursuant to 5TH CIR. R. 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 5TH CIR.

R. 47.5.4.

IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT

No. 08-50909

Conference Calendar

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,

Plaintiff-Appellee

v.

DELORES MARTIN,

Defendant-Appellant

Appeal from the United States District Court

for the Western District of Texas

USDC No. 3:08-CR-1316-ALL

Before HIGGINBOTHAM, DAVIS, and CLEMENT, Circuit Judges.

PER CURIAM:*

The attorney appointed to represent Delores Martin has moved for leave

to withdraw and has filed a brief in accordance with Anders v. California, 386

U.S. 738 (1967). Martin has not filed a response. Our independent review of the

record and counsel’s brief discloses no nonfrivolous issue for appeal.

Accordingly, counsel’s motion for leave to withdraw is GRANTED, counsel is

excused from further responsibilities herein, and the APPEAL IS DISMISSED.

See 5TH CIR. R. 42.2.

United States Court of Appeals

Fifth Circuit

F I L E D

August 18, 2009

Charles R. Fulbruge III

Clerk
John BINNS, Assignee of ACMB Ent., Appellant, v. NASTAR ROOFING SERVICES, Frank Kraft, and Janet Kraft, Appellees.

Case No. 2D17-1764

District Court of Appeal of Florida, Second District.

Opinion filed March 21, 2018

**DECISION WITHOUT PUBLISHED OPINION**

Affirmed.
[Federal Register Volume 87, Number 26 (Tuesday, February 8, 2022)]
[Notices]
[Page 7195]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2022-02532]


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

DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES

National Institutes of Health


National Center for Advancing Translational Sciences; Notice of 
Closed Meeting

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

    Name of Committee: National Center for Advancing Translational 
Sciences Special Emphasis Panel; Rare Disease Review.
    Date: March 2, 2022.
    Time: 10:00 a.m. to 4:00 p.m.
    Agenda: To review and evaluate grant applications.
    Place: National Center for Advancing Translational Sciences, 
National Institutes of Health, 6701 Democracy Boulevard, Room 1037, 
Bethesda, MD 20892 (Virtual Meeting).
    Contact Person: Jing Chen, Ph.D., Scientific Review Officer, 
Office of Scientific Review, National Center for Advancing 
Translational Sciences, National Institutes of Health, 6701 
Democracy Boulevard, Room 1037, Bethesda, MD 20892, (301) 827-3268, 
<a href="/cdn-cgi/l/email-protection#03606b666d696a6d64436e626a6f2d6d6a6b2d646c75"><span class="__cf_email__" data-cfemail="f99a919c979390979eb994989095d7979091d79e968f">[email protected]</span></a>.

(Catalogue of Federal Domestic Assistance Program Nos. 93.859, 
Pharmacology, Physiology, and Biological Chemistry Research; 93.350, 
B--Cooperative Agreements; 93.859, Biomedical Research and Research 
Training, National Institutes of Health, HHS)

    Dated: February 2, 2022.
Miguelina Perez,
Program Analyst, Office of Federal Advisory Committee Policy.
[FR Doc. 2022-02532 Filed 2-7-22; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4140-01-P


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

<ARTICLE> 5
<MULTIPLIER> 1,000
       
<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   6-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          DEC-31-1997
<PERIOD-START>                             JAN-01-1997
<PERIOD-END>                               JUN-30-1997
<CASH>                                          35,219
<SECURITIES>                                         0
<RECEIVABLES>                                    8,263
<ALLOWANCES>                                         0
<INVENTORY>                                      3,712
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                                48,642
<PP&E>                                           2,291
<DEPRECIATION>                                       0
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                  72,196
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                            4,659
<BONDS>                                              0
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                            14
<OTHER-SE>                                      67,523
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                    72,196
<SALES>                                         13,464
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                                13,464
<CGS>                                            7,238
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                    5,548
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                     0
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                     0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                                   0
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                  1,256
<INCOME-TAX>                                         0
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                              1,256
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                     1,256
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                     0.08
<EPS-DILUTED>                                     0.08
        

</TABLE>
STATE of Florida, Appellant, v. Angela Nicole FLOWERS, Appellee.

Case No. 2D16-3677

District Court of Appeal of Florida, Second District.

Opinion filed March 28, 2018

**DECISION WITHOUT PUBLISHED OPINION**

Affirmed.