alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
#### The People of the State of New York, Respondent, v Carl Jenkins, Appellant.

[57 NYS3d 894]

Appeal by the defendant from a judgment of the Supreme Court, Queens County (Schwartz, J.), rendered October 1, 2014, convicting him of burglary in the second degree and criminal mischief in the fourth degree, upon a jury verdict, and imposing sentence.

Ordered that the judgment is affirmed.

The defendant’s challenge to the legal sufficiency of the evidence is partially unpreserved for appellate review *(see*CPL 470.05 [2]). In any event, viewing the evidence in the light most favorable to the prosecution *(see People v Contes,*60 NY2d 620, 621 [1983]), we find that it was legally sufficient to establish the defendant’s guilt beyond a reasonable doubt *(see People v Cahill,*2 NY3d 14, 57 [2003]; *People v Bleakley,*69 NY2d 490, 495 [1987]). Moreover, upon our independent review of the record (see CPL 470.15 [5]; *People v Danielson,*9 NY3d 342, 348-349 [2007]), we are satisfied that the verdict of guilt was not' against the weight of the evidence (see *People v Romero,*7 NY3d 633 [2006]).

The defendant failed to preserve for appellate review his contention that the sentence imposed by the Supreme Court improperly penalized him for exercising his right to a jury trial, because he did not set forth the issue on the record at the time of sentencing *(see People v Busano,*141 AD3d 538, 542 [2016]; *People v Cole,*140 AD3d 1183 [2016]; *People v Brown,*38 AD3d 676 [2007]). In any event, the fact that the sentence imposed after trial was greater than the sentence offered during plea negotiations does not, standing alone, establish that the defendant was punished for exercising his right to trial *(see People v Mujica,*146 AD3d 902 [2017]; *People v Silburn,*145 AD3d 799 [2016], *lv granted*29 NY3d 952 [2017]; *People v Bowers,*144 AD3d 1049 [2016]). Furthermore, the sentence imposed was not excessive *(see People v Suitte,*90 AD2d 80 [1982]).

Leventhal, J.P., Hall, Hinds-Radix and Maltese, JJ., concur.
2017-0690.

#### State ex rel. Byington Builders, Ltd. v. Indus. Comm.

Franklin App. No. 15AP-407, 2017-Ohio-2623.
No. 09-1476.

#### Borough of Duryea, Pennsylvania, et al., Petitioners v. Charles J. Guarnieri.

562 U.S. 960, 131 S. Ct. 456,

178 L. Ed. 2d 285,

2010 U.S. LEXIS 8075.

October 12, 2010.

Petition for writ of certiorari to the United States Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit granted.

*286Same case below, 364 Fed. Appx. 749.
No. 10-134.

#### Guadalupe Morales, Petitioner v. Odyssey Healthcare, Inc., et al.

562 U.S. 895, 131 S. Ct. 319,

178 L. Ed. 2d 145,

2010 U.S. LEXIS 6282.

October 4, 2010.

Petition for writ of certiorari to the Supreme Court of Texas denied.

Same case below, 310 S.W.3d 419.
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 Annual Report on Form 10-K of Dollar Financial Group,
Inc. (the "Company") for the twelve months ended June 30, 2003 as filed with the
Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the "Report"), the
undersigned, in the capacities and on the date indicated below, hereby certifies
pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350 and Rule 13a-14(b) or Rule 15d-14(b) of the
Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as adopted pursuant to Section 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/ Jeffrey A. Weiss
----------------------------------------
Jeffrey A. Weiss
Chairman of the Board of Directors
and Chief Executive Officer
September 29, 2003
EXHIBIT
      32.2*

















Section
      1350 Certification





I,
      Steven
      G. Larson, the chief financial officer of LaserCard Corporation, a Delaware
      corporation (the “Company”), certify pursuant to section 1350 of chapter 63
      of title 18 of the United States Code that, to my knowledge:





(i)  the
      Annual Report of the Company on Form 10-K for the period ending March 31,
      2007 (the “Report”), fully complies with the requirements of section 13(a) or
      15(d), whichever is applicable, of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934,
      and





(ii)  the
      information contained in the Report fairly presents, in all material respects,
      the financial condition and results of operations of the Company.





Date:  June
      12,
      2007








/s/Steven
      G. Larson


Steven
      G.
      Larson





_______________________





*The
      material contained in this Exhibit 32.2 is not deemed “filed” with the SEC and
      is not to be incorporated by reference into any filing of the Company under
      the
      Securities Act of 1933 or the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, whether made
      before or after the date hereof and irrespective of any general incorporation
      language contained in such filing.





87
# #5 ®3

U.S. DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY PUBLIC MEETING ON STANDARDS FOR RESIDENTIAL FURNACES AND BOILERS

U.S. Department of Energy Ronald Reagan Building and International Trade Center Polaris Room 1300 Pennsylvania Avenue, NW Washington, DC 20004 September 29, 2004

Purpose The Department will present its methodology for the Advance Notice of Proposed Rulemaking (ANOPR) analysis and example results. The Department also will explain its plans for the remaining analysis-the analysis to support the Notice of Proposed Rulemaking-and will seek input from stakeholders on its planned methodologies, assumptions, and data sources. 

### Agenda 9:00-9 : 05 am Welcome 9:05-9:15 am Introduction and Agenda Review

Doug Brookman 9:15-9: 30 am Rulemaking Overview

Mohammed Khan This is an overview of the analyses in the rulemaking, the tools DOE uses to generate results for each analysis, and the issues on which DOE would like input during today's meeting. 9:30-10 : 00 am Comments from Participants This is an open forum for participants to make a brief summary statement and/or identify their key issues regarding the ANOPR analyses, methods, and data. 10:00

- 10:30 am Engineering Analysis Graham Stevens and Alex Lekov This is a summary presentation and discussion regarding the approach used and factors considered for the market and technology assessment, screening analysis, and engineering analysis, and a characterization of the results.

# #56 .3
10:30-10:45 am Break 10:45-11:30 am Engineering Analysis Continued 11:30 am-12:00 pm Life-Cycle Cost Analysis Jim Lutz This is a summary presentation and discussion regarding the approach used and factors considered for the life-cycle cost analysis, energy use, markups, and payback period analysis, and a characterization of the results. 12:00-1:00 pm 1:00-1:45 pm 1:45-2:45 pm Lunch (on your own)

Life-Cycle Cost Analysis Continued National Impact Analysis Alex Lekov This is a summary presentation and discussion of issues regarding the approach used and factors considered for the national energy savings, net present value, and shipments analysis, and a characterization of the results. 2:45-3:15 pm Discussion of Other Issues

This is an open forum to discuss any remaining questions or issues identified by participants. 3:15-3:30 pm Break 3:30-4 : 30 pm NOPR Analyses and Next Steps

Jim McMahon, Mike Rivest and Mohammed Khan This is a summary presentation and discussion of issues regarding the planned revisions to the ANOPR analyses, and the planned approach and factors that will be considered for the manufacturer, utility, employment, and regulatory impact analyses, and the environmental assessment. 4:30-5: 00 pm Final Discussions

This is an opportunity to discuss any remaining issues. 5:00 pm Adjourn
No. 10-5224.

#### Terry James, Petitioner v. Richard Lemay, et al.

562 U.S. 910, 131 S. Ct. 260,

178 L. Ed. 2d 173,

2010 U.S. LEXIS 7057.

October 4, 2010.

Petition for writ of certiorari to the United States Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit denied.

Same case below, 378 Fed. Appx. 455.
ELECTRONIC RECORD /yvsv?

COA# 02-12-00638-CR OFFENSE: AGGRAVATED ASSAULT

STYLE: grimaldo, gilbert COUNTY: Tarrant

COA DISPOSITION: AFFIRM TRIAL COURT: 297th District Court

DATE: 9/18/2014 Publish: NO TC CASE #: 1243882D

IN THE COURT OF CRIMINAL APPEALS

STYLE: GRIMALDO, GILBERT v.

P*0 SB Petition

FOR DISCRETIONARY REVIEW IN CCA IS:

CCA Disposition:

DATE:

&/J") ijSS & rfS UtOT/rnei«/ JUDGE:

DATE: ^////<Z0/£ SIGNED: PC:

JUDGE: 'fei^ btsUA^s PUBLISH: DNP:

MOTION FOR

REHEARING IN CCA IS:

JUDGE:

ELECTRONIC RECORD
#### People v Whitaker

1st Dept: 140 AD3d 578

denied*
# DSCR recognizes National Disability Employment Awareness Month with inspirational program

/ Published Oct. 21, 2015
RICHMOND, Virginia, George Dennehy
#### State v. Dennison

DA 16-0036

04/11/17

2017 MT 87N

Affirmed

Dist. 11 (Flathead)
#### Com. v. McBride

09/29/2015

228 EAL (2015)

Denied

Pa.Super., 120 A.3d 1065
#### Com. v. McCants

04/20/2016

676 EAL (2015)

Denied

Pa.Super., 134 A.3d 493
<PAGE>   1

                                                                      EXHIBIT 23


                       CONSENT OF INDEPENDENT ACCOUNTANTS

     We consent to the incorporation by reference in the Registration Statements
(Forms S-8) and related prospectuses of the Digital Equipment Corporation 1985
Restricted Stock Option Plan (No. 33-970), 1990 Equity Plan (No. 33-37631), 1990
Stock Option Plan for Nonemployee Directors (No. 33-37628), 1968 Employee Stock
Purchase Plan (No. 333-17049) and 1981 International Employee Stock Purchase
Plan (No. 333-17049), the 1995 Equity Plan (No. 33-64223), the 1995 Stock Option
Plan for Nonemployee Directors (No. 33-64223), and the Registration Statement on
Form S-3 (No. 33-51987) and related prospectuses, of our reports dated July 24,
1997 on our audits of the consolidated financial statements and financial
statement schedule of Digital Equipment Corporation as of June 28, 1997 and June
29, 1996, and for each of the three fiscal years in the period ended June 28,
1997, which reports are incorporated by reference or included in this Annual
Report on Form 10-K.

                                       /s/Coopers & Lybrand L.L.P.
                                       ----------------------------------------
                                       COOPERS & LYBRAND L.L.P.


Boston, Massachusetts
September 16, 1997
116TH CONGRESS 

1ST SESSION H. R. 2578 

AN ACT 

To reauthorize the National Flood 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, 
2 

•HR 2578 EH

1 SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE. 

2 This Act may be cited as the ‘‘National Flood Insur3 ance Program Extension Act of 2019’’. 

4 SEC. 2. REAUTHORIZATION OF NATIONAL FLOOD INSUR5 ANCE PROGRAM. 

6 (a) FINANCING.—Section 1309(a) of the National 

7 Flood Insurance Act of 1968 (42 U.S.C. 4016(a)) is 

8 amended by striking ‘‘May 31, 2019’’ and inserting ‘‘Sep9 tember 30, 2019’’. 

10 (b) PROGRAM EXPIRATION.—Section 1319 of the Na11 tional Flood Insurance Act of 1968 (42 U.S.C. 4026) is 

12 amended by striking ‘‘May 31, 2019’’ and inserting ‘‘Sep13 tember 30, 2019’’. 

14 (c) RETROACTIVE EFFECTIVE DATE.—If this Act is 

15 enacted after May 31, 2019, the amendments made by 

16 subsections (a) and (b) shall take effect as if enacted on 

17 May 31, 2019. 

Passed the House of Representatives May 14, 2019. 

Attest: 

Clerk. 

116TH CONGRESS 

1ST SESSION H. R. 2578 

AN ACT 

To reauthorize the National Flood Insurance 

Program, and for other purposes.
Detailed Statistics - American FactFinder

http://factfinder.census.gov/...y&-ds_name=EC0762SSSZ7&-NAICS2007=621210&-ib_type=NAICS2007&-industrySel=621210&-geo_id=&-_industry=621210&-_lang=en&-fds_name=EC0700A1[4/25/2011 10:10:50 AM]

Detailed Statistics

You are here: Main Data Sets Select an Economic Data Set Results

This is a filtered view of the selected data set. Use the options on the Filter Rows menu to modify

filters, reset filters, or view current filters

rows 1-5 of 5

2007 Economic Census

Release Date: 12/17/2010

Sector 62: EC0762SSSZ7: Health Care and Social Assistance: Subject Series - Estab & Firm Size: Legal

Form of Organization for the United States: 2007

Includes only establishments of firms with payroll. Data based on the 2007 Economic Census. For method of assignment to categories shown and for

information on confidentiality protection, sampling error, nonsampling error, and definitions, see Survey Methodology. 

2007

NAICS

code

Meaning of 2007

NAICS code

Meaning of Type of

operation or tax status code

Meaning of Legal form of

organization code

Footnote

identifier

Number of

establishments

Receipts/Revenue

($1,000)

Annual

payroll

($1,000)

First-quarter

payroll ($1,000)

Number of paid employees for pay

period including March 12

621210 Offices of

dentists

Establishments subject to

federal income tax

All establishments 127,057 93,930,384 34,324,956 7,759,265 825,447

621210 Offices of

dentists

Establishments subject to

federal income tax

Corporations 76,519 63,331,820 26,745,171 5,945,876 555,048

621210 Offices of

dentists

Establishments subject to

federal income tax

Individual proprietorships 43,913 23,217,033 5,648,479 1,360,036 211,642

621210 Offices of

dentists

Establishments subject to

federal income tax

Partnerships 6,586 7,360,807 1,926,153 452,117 58,591

621210 Offices of

dentists

Establishments subject to

federal income tax

Other legal forms of

organization 39 20,724 5,153 1,236 166

Source: U.S. Census Bureau, 2007 Economic Census

Note: The data in this file are based on the 2007 Economic Census. To maintain confidentiality, the Census Bureau suppresses

data to protect the identity of any business or individual. The census results in this file contain nonsampling error. Data users

who create their own estimates using data from this file should cite the Census Bureau as the source of the original data only.

For the full technical documentation, see Survey Methodology link in above headnote. 

rows 1-5 of 5

Created: April 25, 2011

Main Search Feedback FAQs Glossary Site Map Help

2007

NAICS

code

Meaning of

2007 NAICS

code

Meaning of Type of

operation or tax status

code

Meaning of Legal form of

organization code

Footnote

identifier

Number of

establishments

Receipts/Revenue

($1,000)

Annual payroll

($1,000)

First-quarter

payroll ($1,000)

Number of paid employees

for pay period including

March 12
# DLA professionals participate in annual small business training

/ Published Aug. 23, 2021
FORT BELVOIR, Va., 
Nearly 1,000 registrants took part in the 2021 Small Business Training Week held virtually Aug. 17-19. The annual event is sponsored by the Defense Department Office of Small Business Programs in collaboration with the U.S. Small Business Administration. 

Defense Logistics Agency Office of Small Business Programs Director Dwight Deneal said 52 DLA employees participated in the virtual event that helps federal acquisition and Procurement Technical Assistance Center employees learn about small-business policy updates and how to increase small-business participation.

Event topics included SBA legislative and regulatory updates, subcontracting policy, cybersecurity, industry best practices, innovation in small business and the PTACs’ role, which Deneal facilitated. 

The conference also featured a small-business directors’ town hall and the Vanguard Awards Ceremony, which honors small-business professionals, teams and organizations that influence small-business participation in defense acquisitions. 

DLA policy dictates a fair proportion of prime contract opportunities with small businesses, small disadvantaged businesses, service-disabled veteran-owned small businesses, historically underutilized business zone small businesses and women-owned small businesses. 

Deneal said 80% of companies that do business with DLA on an annual basis are classified as small businesses.

“We really want to highlight the broader agenda that the Defense Department has right now around increasing small business opportunities to drive the industrial base forward,” he said.
No. 10-6437.

#### Anthony Daniel Smith, Petitioner v. United States.

562 U.S. 988, 131 S. Ct. 431,

178 L. Ed. 2d 335,

2010 U.S. LEXIS 8292.

October 18, 2010.

Petition for writ of certiorari to the United States Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit denied.

Same case below, 383 Fed. Appx. 355.
159 A.3d 886

#### STATE OF NEW JERSEY, PLAINTIFF-RESPONDENT, v. SCOTT DUBIN, DEFENDANT-PETITIONER.

February 1, 2017

ON PETITION FOR CERTIFICATION

To the Appellate Division, Superior Court:

A petition for certification of the judgment in [ A-XXXXXX-XX ] having been submitted to this Court, and the Court having considered the same;

It is ORDERED that the petition for certification is denied.
----

|   |                                                           |   |       |                         |
|--------|----------------------------------------------------------------|--------|------------|------------------------------|
| (1)    | U.S.      Subsidiary Wholly Owned by LaserCard Corporation:    |
|   |                                                           |
|   | Name      of Subsidiary                                        |   |       | State      of Incorporation  |
|   |                                                           |   |       |                         |
|   | LaserCard      Corporation                                     |   | California |
|   |                                                           |   |       |                         |
| (2)    | Foreign      Subsidiary Wholly Owned by LaserCard Corporation: |
|   |                                                           |   |       |                         |
|   | Name      of Subsidiary                                        |   |       | Nation      of Incorporation |
|   |                                                           |   |       |                         |
|   | Challenge      Card Design Plastikkarten GmbH                  |   | Germany    |
No. 10-6249.

#### Brian Darnell Henderson, Petitioner v. United States.

562 U.S. 972, 131 S. Ct. 487,

178 L. Ed. 2d 308,

2010 U.S. LEXIS 8038.

October 12, 2010.

Petition for writ of certiorari to the United States Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit denied.

Same case below, 380 Fed. Appx. 295.
#### People v Case

3d Dept: 139 AD3d 1239 (Albany)

denied 8/1/16 (Fahey, J.)
# Agency scrap handler donated for humanitarian assistance

/ Published Sept. 27, 2023
BATTLE CREEK, Mich., 
The agency’s property disposal site in Okinawa, Japan, took a turn as its own excess customer earlier this year when it relinquished a tracked Volvo scrap handler originally worth about half a million dollars.

Defense Logistics Agency Disposition Services Property Disposal Specialist Hunter Higgins said the Okinawa team finally said goodbye to the vehicle after more than a year of non-usage. The handler had “tremendous capabilities,” he said, but between the institution of a robust commercial scrap removal contract covering Japan sites, and the presence of a shearer and a 30k material handler at the field site, there was simply no more need for the machine. 

“Once on record in [Distribution Standard System], we reached out to the Humanitarian Assistance Program,” Higgins said, where HAP contacts were “very excited about the opportunity to have this equipment.”

Hirotatsu Tengan is a heavy equipment mechanic on the Army’s HAP maintenance team based out of Camp Kinser, South Korea. He said that once they complete minor restoration and some factory maintenance, he expects a partner nation to request the scrap handler through the normal embassy or military channels. 

The Defense Security Cooperation Agency is the element of DOD that oversees humanitarian donations for the department, while the U.S. Army maintains property collection points in the U.S., Europe and Asia. Combatant commands are allowed, under DSCA direction, to maintain regional humanitarian assistance programs executed in concert with the efforts of the U.S. Agency for International Development, or USAID. Through both diplomatic and military communication channels, the combatant commands and diplomats funnel the equipment and goods that DLA and other government entities release for donation to needy partners.

DLA routinely donates used and excess property for humanitarian needs; everything from mattresses, school desks, and appliances bound for Eastern European nations, to medical technology and equipment employed in African and Central American health clinics. More than 40,000 items originally worth $7.6 million were donated by DLA Disposition Services to humanitarian assistance efforts during fiscal 2022.
No. 10-5331.

#### Stephen F. Buzzell, et ux, Petitioners v. Town Council of the Town of Kilmarnock, et al.

562 U.S. 915, 131 S. Ct. 278,

2010 U.S. LEXIS 7142.

178 L. Ed. 2d 183,

October 4, 2010.

Petition for writ of certiorari to the Supreme Court of Virginia denied.
# Defense Distribution Center Susquehanna team awarded for security focus

/ Published March 11, 2020
NEW CUMBERLAND, Pa., 
Defense Logistics Agency Distribution provides timely joint storage and distribution services to customers around the globe. In fiscal year 2019, DLA Distribution processed approximately 15.7 million wholesale and 2.8 million retail receipts and issues, supporting customer operations worldwide.

                Col. Callis distributes coins to the DDSP team in acknowledgement of their efforts in maintaining security of classified materials. (Photo by Dawn Bonsell, DLA Distribution Public Affairs)                            Defense Distribution Center Susquehanna team awarded for security focus                            Col. Callis distributes coins to the DDSP team in acknowledgement of their efforts in maintaining security of classified materials. (Photo by Dawn Bonsell, DLA Distribution Public Affairs)            SHARE IMAGE:Download ImageImage DetailsPhoto By: Dawn BonsellVIRIN: 200304-D-KL823-0816

DLA Distribution Susquehanna, Pennsylvania, is one of the 24 distribution centers within DLA and is home to the Eastern Distribution Center, the largest warehouse within the Department of Defense. DDSP occasionally receives erroneous shipments of military equipment and material. When this happens, a team of DLA Installation Management Susquehanna Security and Emergency Services personnel and DDSP personnel spring into action to secure any classified and/or pilferable items that may be contained in the miss-shipment.

In recognition of the team’s stellar security efforts, Army Col. James M. Callis II, commander, DDSP, presented coins to the team March 3 for promptly recognizing a recent miss-shipment and properly securing classified material.

“This is evidence that security is not an oversight,” said Callis. He went on to say that the response of the team is greatly appreciated and is indicative of Defense Distribution Center Susquehanna’ security consciousness and that the efforts of the team positively impact the warfighter every day.