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

[64 NYS3d 520]

Judgment, Supreme Court, New York County (Arlene D. Goldberg, J.), rendered November 2, 2015, convicting defendant, upon his plea of guilty, of attempted assault in the second degree, and sentencing him, as a second felony offender, to a term of IV2 to 3 years, unanimously affirmed.

The record demonstrates that defendant’s guilty plea was knowing, intelligent, and voluntary *(see People v Fiumefreddo,*82 NY2d 536, 543 [1993]), and that the court providently exercised its discretion in denying defendant’s plea withdrawal motion. At the plea colloquy, the court gave defendant all the information he needed to “knowingly, voluntarily and intelligently choose among alternative courses of action” *(People v*
      *434
      *Catu,*4 NY3d 242, 245 [2005]; *see also Hill v Lockhart,*474 US 52, 56 [1985]). In particular, the court explained that the promised sentence of IV2 to 3 years would run consecutively to any undischarged term of imprisonment, referring specifically to defendant’s prior unrelated sentence of 16 years to life, upon which he had been released on parole. Defendant expressly acknowledged that he understood.

At sentencing, defendant appeared to express confusion over whether his aggregate sentence would be limited to the instant sentence, or whether it would also include whatever portion of the preexisting life sentence that the parole authorities might choose to add. This was not a basis for withdrawal of the plea, given the court’s clear statements to defendant at the plea colloquy. The knowing and intelligent nature of the plea is further supported by defendant’s considerable familiarity with the criminal justice system, which includes numerous prior convictions resulting from guilty pleas.

We have considered and rejected defendant’s pro se claims.

Concur—Richter, J.R, Manzanet-Daniels, Andrias, Kern and Singh, JJ.
Exhibit 32.1

                CERTIFICATION OF THE PRINCIPAL EXECUTIVE OFFICER

     Pursuant to 18 U.S.C. ss. 1350, as created by Section 906 of the
Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, the undersigned officer of GPS Industries, Inc. (the
"Company") hereby certifies that, to his knowledge:

(i)      The Annual Report on Form 10-KSB of the Company for the fiscal year
         ended December 31, 2006 (the "Report") fully complies with the
         requirements of Section 13(a) or Section 15(d), as applicable, of the
         Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended; 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:  April 16, 2007                   By:    /s/ Robert C. Silzer, Sr.
                                           Robert C. Silzer, Sr.
                                           President and Chief Executive Officer
NO. SEMS ID DATE AUTHOR RECIPIENT TITLE/DESCRIPTION PAGES

1 140791-

140794

1/16/88 - 

7/14/88

U.S. EPA Public Administrative Record Site 

Index for the Remeidal Action 

at the Belvidere Municipal 

Landfill- Original - Update 2 

(Documents on this index are 

included by reference into this 

deletion docket )

-

2 140790 6/7/90 U.S. EPA Public Administrative Record Site 

Index for the Removal Action 

at the Belvidere Municipal 

Landfill - Original (Documents 

on this index are included by 

reference into this deletion 

docket )

3

3 465045 5/8/10 IL Dept. of Public 

Health

None Water Well Sealing Form 1

4 465046 11/4/11 IL EPA None Laboratory Results - Fish 

Contamination at Deppit Pond

3

5 465047 11/29/11 IL EPA None Laboratory Results - Soil 

Contamination at Deppit Pond

6

6 468093 3/31/14 Bonnet, L., IEPA Karl, R., U.S. 

EPA

IEPA Letter re: Concurrence 

with the Final Close-Out 

Report at the Belvidere 

Municipal Landfill Site

1

Belvidere, Boone County, Illinois

June 23, 2014

SEMS ID: 913781

Belvidere Municipal Landfill

U.S. Environmental Protection Agency

Remedial Action

Deletion Docket

For
# Book Review: The Mind of the Leader

/ Published March 16, 2024

**Editor's Note: March is National Reading Month. Everyday reading increases knowledge and develops personal and professional skills. Throughout the month, DLA Disposition Services Pathways to Career Excellence program participants are sharing insights from books* they recently finished.**

********No official Defense Department endorsement implied*****.**                Book 4                            book cover            SHARE IMAGE:Download ImageImage DetailsPhoto By: jeff LandenbergerVIRIN: 240226-D-DO441-0004

*The Mind of the Leader: Insight from Neuroscience for a New Kind of Leadership*, by Rasmus Hougaard and Jacqueline Carter, is a thought-provoking exploration of leadership through the lens of neuroscience. The book delves into the intricate workings of the leader’s mind, examining how self-awareness, mindfulness, and emotional intelligence contribute to effective leadership. 

One key theme in the book is the importance of self-awareness. Leaders who understand their own strengths, weaknesses, and emotional triggers are better equipped to navigate the complexities of leadership. The authors argue that self-awareness forms the foundation for authentic leadership, fostering genuine connections with others and promoting a positive organizational culture.

Mindfulness is another critical aspect discussed in the book. The authors advocate for leaders to cultivate a mindful approach, emphasizing the benefits of being present in the moment. Mindful leaders are better able to make thoughtful decisions, manage stress, and foster a culture of innovation within their teams.

The book also explores the concept of empathy and its impact on leadership. Leaders who can empathize with their team members build trust and rapport, creating a conducive environment for collaboration and creativity. The authors draw on neuroscience research to highlight the neural mechanisms behind empathy and how leaders can leverage this understanding for more effective leadership.  

Moreover, the book emphasizes the importance of a growth mindset. Leaders who view challenges as opportunities for learning and growth create a resilient and adaptive organizational culture. The book encourages leaders to embrace change, seek feedback, and continuously develop their skills.

*The Mind of the Leader* provides a compelling perspective on leadership, integrating insights from neuroscience to illuminate the inner workings of effective leaders. By focusing on self-awareness, mindfulness, empathy, and a growth mindset, the book offers a roadmap for leaders to cultivate a positive and impactful leadership style.
Exhibit 32.2



CERTIFICATION REQUIRED BY RULE 13a-14(b) OR RULE 15d-14(b) AND SECTION 906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002, 18 U.S.C. SECTION 1350



Pursuant to section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002 (subsections (a) and (b) of section 1350, chapter 63 of title 18, United States Code), the undersigned officer of Mines Management, Inc., an Idaho Corporation, (the Company) hereby certifies to such officers knowledge that:



1.

This quarterly report on Form 10-QSB of Mines Management, Inc. 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 this quarterly report fairly presents, in all material respects, the financial condition and results of operations of Mines Management, Inc.



Date:  August 14, 2003

/s/ Roy G. Franklin

________________________________

Roy G. Franklin,

Principal Financial Officer
<PAGE>

                                                                    EXHIBIT 31.3

                     Rule 13a-14(a)/15d-14(a) Certification

      I, Steven G. Larson, certify that:

      1.  I have reviewed this Amendment No.1 on Form 10-K/A to the Annual
Report on Form 10-K for the fiscal year ended March 31, 2003 (this "Amendment")
of Drexler Technology Corporation, a Delaware corporation ("registrant");

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

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

Dated: September 29, 2003


By:   /s/ Steven G.  Larson
      ------------------------------------
      Steven G. Larson
      Vice President Finance & Chief Financial Officer
      (Principal Financial Officer)

                                       65
June 10, 2015

Mr. James Robesky

710 N. 1850 th Avenue Quincy, IL 62305

Dear Mr. Robesky:

This letter is to inform you that we are unable to process your request for an exemption. It explains why we can not process your request and what you should do in the next 30 days.

Why We Can Not Process Your Request

We entered your May 19, 2015, exemption request into the public docket (No. FAA-2015- 1787), but we are unable to process your request any further. The information you sent does not comply with the requirements of § 11.81 (copy enclosed). For us to consider the request any further, you must send us all of the following:

 The specific section or sections of 14 CFR from which you seek relief, the extent of the relief you seek, and the reason you seek relief.

 The reasons why granting the request would be in the public interest; that is, how it would benefit the public as a whole.

 The reasons why the exemption would not adversely affect safety or how the exemption would provide a level of safety at least equal to that provided by the rule from which you seek an exemption.

 Any additional information, views, or arguments available to support your request.

What You Should Do

If you want us to process your request any further, you must send the information described earlier to reach us within 30 days. Please note that § 11.63(d) requires you to send your petition for exemption at least 120 days before the proposed effective date of the exemption.2

If We Do Not Hear From You

If we do not hear from you within 30 days, we will close the docket without notifying you further. If you have any questions or require additional time, you may call (202) 267-9677.

Sincerely,

/s/

Brenda Robeson Program Analyst, Airmen and Airspace Rules Division

Enclosure
No. 10-6708.

#### William M. Adams, Petitioner v. United States.

562 U.S. 1018, 131 S. Ct. 543,

178 L. Ed. 2d 398,

2010 U.S. LEXIS 8402.

November 1, 2010.

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

Same case below, 385 Fed. Appx. 114.
#### The People of the State of New York, Respondent, v David Mendoza, Appellant.

[64 NYS3d 54]

Appeal by the defendant from a judgment of the Supreme Court, Kings County (Mondo, J.), rendered January 14, 2016, convicting him of burglary in the second degree (two counts) and petit larceny (two counts), upon a jury verdict, and imposing sentence.

Ordered that the judgment is affirmed.

In fulfilling our responsibility to conduct an independent review of the weight of the evidence *(see*CPL 470.15 [5]; *People v Danielson,*9 NY3d 342, 348-349 [2007]), we nevertheless accord great deference to the jury’s opportunity to view the witnesses, hear the testimony, and observe demeanor *(see People v Mateo,*2 NY3d 383, 410 [2004]; *People v Bleakley,*69 NY2d 490, 495 [1987]). Upon reviewing the record here, we are satisfied that the verdict of guilt with respect to the two counts of burglary in the second degree was not against the weight of the evidence *(see People v Romero,*7 NY3d 633 [2006]).

The defendant’s contention that he was deprived of the effective assistance of counsel is without merit. “[W]hen reviewing claims of ineffective assistance of counsel, care must be taken to avoid confusing true ineffectiveness with mere losing tactics. The performance of counsel must be viewed without the benefit of hindsight and if counsel provided meaningful representation in the context of the evidence, the law, and the circumstances of the particular case, the constitutional requirement will have been met” *(People v Ramirez,*146 AD3d 987, 987 [2017] [internal quotation marks omitted]; *see People v Satterfield,*66 NY2d 796, 798-799 [1985]; *People v Baldi,*54 NY2d 137, 147 [1981]). “[I]t is incumbent on defendant to demonstrate the absence of strategic or other legitimate explanations for counsel’s alleged shortcomings. ... As long as the defense reflects a reasonable and legitimate strategy under the circumstances and evidence presented, even if unsuccessful, it will *653not fall to the level of ineffective assistance” *(People v Benevento,*91 NY2d 708, 712-713 [1998] [citations and internal quotation marks omitted]). Here, defense counsel pursued a reasonable strategy and provided meaningful representation *(see People v Taylor,*1 NY3d 174 [2003]; *People v Benevento,*91 NY2d at 714).

The defendant contends that certain remarks made by the prosecutor during summation deprived him of a fair trial. This contention is largely unpreserved for appellate review *(see*CPL 470.05 [2]; *People v Barcero,*116 AD3d 1060, 1061 [2014]). In any event, this contention is without merit, as the prosecutor’s remarks were permissible rhetorical comment, responsive to defense counsel’s summation, or fair comment on the evidence *(see People v Collins,*135 AD3d 783, 783 [2016]; *People v Willis,*122 AD3d 950, 950-951 [2014]; *People v Barcero,*116 AD3d at 1061).

Mastro, J.P., Hall, Austin and Sgroi, JJ., concur.
# DSCR celebrates Army Birthday

/ Published June 15, 2016
RICHMOND, Va., 
Defense Supply Center Richmond, Virginia, employees gathered in the Center Restaurant June 15 to celebrate the Army’s 241st Birthday. This year’s theme is “The American Soldier – Always Ready, Always Leading.” Defense Logistics Agency Aviation’s Customer Operations Directorate hosted the celebration.

The event started with posting of the colors by U.S. Army, Fort Lee, Virginia, Color Guard led by Sgt. First Class Floyd Phifer, the playing of the national anthem by Fort Lee’s 392nd Army Band brass quintet led by Army Sgt. First Class William Baez, followed by an invocation given by Felicia Barwell, a Customer Operations Directorate weapons system program manager and retired Army lieutenant colonel.

The audience heard congratulatory Army birthday messages from Army Chief of Staff Gen. Mark Milley; Under Secretary of the Army Patrick Murphy; and Sgt. Maj. of the Army Daniel Dailey. 

Milley’s message praised today’s Soldiers as ‘disciplined, fit and prepared to meet any challenge, any time.”

Murphy, an Iraq war veteran, thanked today’s Soldiers and spoke of how fitting this year’s theme is as America’s Soldiers continue to show their “grit.” 

Dailey spoke of the Army’s history, saying the Army is one year older than the nation itself. The Army’s official birthday is June 14, 1775.  Dailey said not much has changed from then to today. 

It is still leadership’s role to inspire trust, to discipline and take care of our Soldiers, he said.

Following the birthday messages, Paul Hughes, deputy director for Customer Operations, took the stage as the event guest speaker. Hughes is prior military himself, having served in both the Air Force and the Army.  He retired from the Army as a chief warrant officer 3 in 1999 and began working for DLA Aviation as a weapons system support manager in 2000.

“While our environment [DLA Aviation’s] isn’t as difficult or dangerous as that of the battlefield, our mission is married to the Army’s and is just as important,” said Hughes. “It is incumbent upon us to be well trained, resilient and confident in performing our mission. ...”

Hughes also spoke about this year’s Army theme telling the audience that one of his definitions of leading is “the ability to see a problem and be the solution.”

He said today’s battlefield, enemy and fight are different from any other time in our past, but today as always, leadership and sound decision-making remain critical to success. 

He said tactical situations change and the unexpected happens on the battlefield and around DLA, new challenges require new ideas, innovating thinking and the willingness to take risk. 

Hughes said he asks himself, “Did I make the right decision, or the easy one?  Did my actions improve readiness, or did I go after the good enough solution, so I can leave on time today?  Did I help the warfighter or myself?”

DLA’s number one strategic goal is Warfighter First, and as such Hughes said both the Army and DLA share a willingness to recognize problems, and develop and deliver solutions.
#### The People of the State of New York, Respondent, v Jason Daley, Appellant.

[56 NYS3d 472]

Application by the appellant for a writ of error coram nobis to vacate, on the ground *787of ineffective assistance of appellate counsel, a decision and order of this Court dated April 22, 2008 *(People v Daley,*50 AD3d 1051 [2008]), affirming a judgment of the Supreme Court, Kings County, rendered May 15, 2006.

Ordered that the application is denied.

The appellant has failed to establish that he was denied the effective assistance of appellate counsel *(see Jones v Barnes,*463 US 745 [1983]; *People v Stultz,*2 NY3d 277 [2004]).

Eng, P.J., Leventhal, Cohen and LaSalle, JJ., concur.
[Federal Register Volume 63, Number 123 (Friday, June 26, 1998)]
[Notices]
[Page 34909]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 98-17006]


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

DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES

National Institutes of Health


National Institute of Nursing Research; Notice of Closed Meeting

    Pursuant to section 10(d) of the Federal Advisory Committee Act, as 
amended (5 U.S.C. Appendix 2), 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 Institute of Nursing Research 
Special Emphasis Panel, NINR Career Transition Award Applicaitons.
    Date: July 27, 1998.
    Time: 2:00 pm to 4:00 pm.
    Agenda: To review and evaluate grant applications.
    Place: National Institutes of Health, Natcher Building 45, Room 
3AN-18B, Bethesda, MD 20892, (Telephone Conference Call).
    Contact Person: Mary J. Stephens-Frazier, PhD, Scientific Review 
Administrator, Natcher Building, Room 3AN-18B, National Institute of 
Nursing Research, Bethesda, MD 20892, 301-594-5971.

(Catalogue of Federal Domestic Assistance Program Nos. 93.361, 
Nursing Research, National Institutes of Health, HHS)

    Dated: June 19, 1998.
LaVerne Y. Stringfield,
Committee Management Officer, NIH.
[FR Doc. 98-17006 Filed 6-25-98; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4140-01-M
No. 10-5932.

#### Victor White, Petitioner v. United States.

562 U.S. 941, 131 S. Ct. 360,

178 L. Ed. 2d 232,

2010 U.S. LEXIS 7423.

October 4, 2010.

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

Same case below, 307 Fed. Appx. 764.
# C_2013336EN.01001002.xml

| 16.11.2013 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 336/10 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

16.11.2013

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 336/10

---

Request for a preliminary ruling from the Bundesgerichtshof (Germany) lodged on 3 September 2013 — Thi Ly Pham

(Case C-474/13)

2013/C 336/21

Language of the case: German

Referring court

Referring court

Bundesgerichtshof

Parties to the main proceedings

Parties to the main proceedings

Appellant: Thi Ly Pham

Appellant:

Authority involved: Stadt Schweinfurt, Amt für Meldewesen und Statistik

Authority involved:

Question referred

Question referred

Is it consistent with Article 16(1) of Directive 2008/115/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council of 16 December 2008 on common standards and procedures in Member States for returning illegally staying third-country nationals (1) to place a pre-deportation detainee in accommodation together with prisoners if he consents to such accommodation?

1

---

(1)  OJ 2008 L 348, p. 98.

1

---
No. 10-6473.

#### Oliver Price, Petitioner v. Frank Shewalter, Warden.

562 U.S. 1032, 131 S. Ct. 574,

2010 U.S. LEXIS 8754.

178 L. Ed. 2d 419,

November 8, 2010.

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

*420Same case below, 126 Ohio St. 3d 1510, 930 N.E.2d 329.
Exhibit 32.2


                            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 Scottish Re Group Limited (the
"Company") on Form 10-Q/A for the quarterly period ended June 30, 2004 as filed
with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the "Report"),
I, Elizabeth A. Murphy, Chief Financial Officer of the Company, certify,
pursuant to 18 U.S.C. ss. 1350, as adopted pursuant to ss. 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 result of
               operations of the Company.

/s/  Elizabeth A. Murphy
------------------------

Elizabeth A. Murphy
Chief Financial Officer
January 31, 2005

     A signed original of this written statement required by Section 906 has
been provided to Scottish Re Group Limited and will be retained by Scottish Re
Group Limited and furnished to the Securities and Exchange Commission or its
staff upon request.
No. 10-6810.

#### Bruce White, Petitioner v. United States.

562 U.S. 1021, 131 S. Ct. 550,

178 L. Ed. 2d 403,

2010 U.S. LEXIS 8394.

November 1, 2010.

Petition for writ of certiorari to the United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit denied.
### EPA Attendees on AZ

‐ Only Exceptional Events Listening Session

November 20, 2013

First Name Last Name EPA Office

Janet McCabe Office of Air and Radiation

Tom Powers Office of Air and Radiation

Kevin Bailey Office of Congressional Affairs

Mike Koerber Office of Air Quality Planning and Standards

Phil Lorang Office of Air Quality Planning and Standards

Rhea Jones Office of Air Quality Planning and Standards

Martha Keating Office of Air Quality Planning and Standards

Beth Palma Office of Air Quality Planning and Standards

Tom Rosendahl Office of Air Quality Planning and Standards

Sara Terry Office of Air Quality Planning and Standards

Colleen McKaughan US EPA Region 9

Michael Flagg US EPA Region 9

Meredith Kurpius US EPA Region 9

Brent Maier US EPA Region 9

Gwen Yoshimura US EPA Region 9
2017-0283.

#### State v. King.

Muskingum App. No. CT2016-0058.