alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
U.S. flag An official website of the United States government.
				Here's how you know we're official. **Official websites use .gov** A **.gov** website belongs to an official government organization in the United States.
 **Secure websites use HTTPS** A small lock or **https://** means you’ve safely connected to a .gov website. Share sensitive information only on official, secure websites.


Toggle navigation Toggle search National Ocean Service National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration
 Search
					Search National Ocean Service


Home
				Ocean Facts

				Topics
					Explore All Topics 
                        Arctic 
                        Careers 
                        Economy 
                        Ecosystems 
                        Geodesy 
                        Hazards 
                        International
                        Navigation 
                        Observations 
                        Ocean 
                        Recreation 
                         Sea Level Rise 
                        Story Maps 
                        Tools
                
                			Education

				
				News
				Podcasts
				Video
				Images
				About Us


1. Home
2. About
3. NOAA's National Ocean Service Acknowledgements

**Acknowledgements**   **Production** Team **Troy Kitch:** NOS Website Managing Editor and Developer, Writer, Graphic Design, Audio and Video Production **Marissa Anderson:** Writer, Editor, Audio Production **Anna Gillis:** Writer, Editor **Holly Kuzmitski:** Writer, Editor
  **Education Content** Team **Bruce Moravchik:** Educator, Writer **Symone Barkley:** Educator, Writer, Audio Production
  **Technical Consultation** Team **Jennifer Coletta:**Technical Support **Georgia Shao:**Developer **Torie Ketcham:**Developer
 National Ocean Service
 National Ocean Service Introduction (PDF)  NOS Annual Accomplishments & Science Reports Explore the Breadth of Diversity in Our Work and Mission About NOS Education NOS Disaster Response Support NOS Environmental Compliance NOS Grants NOS Organization Chart NOS Program Offices NOS Roadmap NOS Science Seminars
 NOAA
 NOAA.gov NOAA Organizational Structure, Mission and Statutory Authority NOAA Office of Inclusion and Civil Rights NOAA No FEAR Act Information
 Department of Commerce
 U.S. Department of Commerce DOC Strategic Plan and Annual Performance Plans DOC Office of Business Liaison
  **Last updated:** 11/27/23 Contact Us


Feedback Provide Feedback
							Contact Us
							Report an error
 Social Instagram Logo/a>


*Science. Service.Stewardship.*
 About NOS About Us
							NOS Program Offices
							Media Inquiries
							Website Acknowledgements
                            Site Index
							Disclaimer
 More Resources Freedom of Information Act
							Accessibility
							Information Quality
							Privacy Policy
							NOS For Employees
							USA.gov
 Department of Commerce
									National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA)
									National Ocean Service
To the Shareholders and Board of Directors of
Managed Municipals Portfolio II Inc.:

In planning and performing our audit of the financial statements
of Managed Municipals Portfolio II Inc. (the "Fund") for the year
ended August 31, 1997, we considered its internal control
structure, including procedures for safeguarding securities, in
order to determine our auditing procedures for the purpose of
expressing our opinion on the financial statements and to comply
with the requirements of Form N-SAR, not to provide assurance on
the internal control structure.

The management of the Fund is responsible for establishing and
maintaining an internal control structure.  In fulfilling this
responsibility, estimates and judgments by management are
required to assess the expected benefits and related costs of
internal control structure policies and procedures.  Two of the
objectives of an internal control structure are to provide
management with reasonable, but not absolute, assurance that
assets are safeguarded against loss from unauthorized use or
disposition and that transactions are executed in accordance with
management's authorization and recorded properly to permit
preparation of financial statements in conformity with generally
accepted accounting principles.

Because of inherent limitations in any internal control
structure, errors or irregularities may occur and not be
detected.  Also, projection of any evaluation of the structure to
future periods is subject to the risk that it may become
inadequate because of changes in conditions or that the
effectiveness of the design and operation may deteriorate.

Our consideration of the internal control structure would not
necessarily disclose all matters in the internal control
structure that might be material weaknesses under standards
established by the American Institute of Certified Public
Accountants.  A material weakness is a condition in which the
design or operation of the specific internal control structure
elements does not reduce to a relatively low level the risk that
errors or irregularities in amounts that would be material in
relation to the financial statements being audited may occur and
not be detected within a timely period by employees in the normal
course of performing their assigned functions.  However, we noted
no matters involving the internal control structure, including
procedures for safeguarding securities, which we consider to be
material weaknesses as defined above as of August 31, 1997.

This report is intended solely for the information and use of
management and the Securities and Exchange Commission.




October 15, 1997
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 Green Mt.  Labs.,  Inc.(the
"Company")  on Form 10-QSB for the period  ending March 31, 2005,  as filed with
the Securities  and Exchange  Commission on the date hereof (the  "Report"),  I,
Geoff Williams, Chief Executive Officer of the Company,  certify, pursuant to 18
U.S.C. Sec. 1350, as adopted pursuant to Sec. 906 of the  Sarbanes-Oxley  Act of
2002, that, to the best of my knowledge and belief:

     (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/ Geoff Williams
------------------------------
Geoff Williams
Chief Executive Officer
May 11, 2005

     A signed  original of this  written  statement  required by Section 906, or
     other document  authenticating,  acknowledging,  or otherwise  adopting the
     signature that appears in typed form within the electronic  version of this
     written  statement has been provided to the Company and will be retained by
     the Company and furnished to the Securities and Exchange  Commission or its
     staff upon  request.  The foregoing  certifications  are  accompanying  the
     Company's Form 10-QSB solely 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) and is not being filed as part of the Form 10-QSB
     or as a separate disclosure document.
#### UNITED STATES ex rel. KALAN v. MARTIN, Warden.

No. 256, Docket 22673.

United States Court of Appeals Second Circuit.

Argued May 15, 1953.

Decided June 23, 1953.

Bert E. Kalan, relator-appellant, per se.

Nathaniel L. Goldstein, Atty. Gen., of New York, for respondent. Wendell P. Brown, Sol. Gen., Albany, Samuel A. Hirshowitz, and Vincent A. Marsicano, Asst. Attys. Gen., of counsel.

Before CHASE, CLARK and FRANK, Circuit Judges.

PER CURIAM.

The relator-appellant was found guilty by a jury of the crime of grand larceny, second degree, in the County Court of Queens County, New York, and was sentenced to a term of from five to ten years imprisonment in the Attica Prison at Attica, New York, which he is presently serving.

The basis of his petition for this writ is his contention that his acquittal on one count of the indictment charging the issuance of a post-dated check prevented his lawful conviction on other counts charging larceny of money obtained in the transaction involving the check; and that he was denied due process because the Appellate Division of the New York Supreme Court, Second Department, after he had filed a notice of appeal from the judgment against him, denied his application for leave to prosecute his appeal without printing the record and his brief, and dismissed his appeal.

Presumably the denial of his application was because the appellant failed to show just cause for granting the special relief he sought. Nothing to the contrary now appearing, the denial but required him to perfect his appeal in the usual manner and he has failed to carry his burden to *515prove that he was denied due process of law. Schechtman v. Foster, 2 Cir., 172 F. 2d 339.

Furthermore, his bare assertion in' what is entitled a supplemental memorandum that he was refused permission by the state court to appeal from the dismissal of a subsequent writ of error *coram nobis*“as a poor person” is, for the same reason, insufficient to show any denial of due process and to discharge his burden to prove that he has been deprived of a constitutional right.

Since he did not by appeal exhaust his state remedies, the denial of his petition for this writ was without error. United States ex rel. White v. Martin, 2 Cir., 197 F.2d 147; United States ex rel. Steele v. Jackson, 2 Cir., 171 F.2d 432.

Order affirmed.
Independent Auditors' Report


To the Shareholders and Board of Directors of
Travelers Series Fund Inc.:

In planning and performing our audits of the financial statements
of the Smith Barney Aggressive Growth and Smith Barney Mid Cap
Core Portfolios of Travelers Series Fund Inc. ("Fund") for the
year ended October 31, 2002, we considered their internal
control, including control activities for safeguarding
securities, in order to determine our auditing procedures for the
purpose of expressing our opinion on the financial statements and
to comply with the requirements of Form N-SAR, not to provide
assurance on internal control.

The management of the Fund is responsible for establishing and
maintaining internal control.  In fulfilling this responsibility,
estimates and judgments by management are required to assess the
expected benefits and related costs of controls.  Generally,
controls that are relevant to an audit pertain to the entity's
objective of preparing financial statements for external purposes
that are fairly presented in conformity with accounting
principles generally accepted in the United States of America.
Those controls include the safeguarding of assets against
unauthorized acquisition, use, or disposition.

Because of inherent limitations in internal control, error or
fraud may occur and not be detected.  Also, projection of any
evaluation of internal control to future periods is subject to
the risk that it may become inadequate because of changes in
conditions or that the effectiveness of the design and operation
may deteriorate.

Our consideration of internal control would not necessarily
disclose all matters in internal control that might be material
weaknesses under standards established by the American Institute
of Certified Public Accountants.  A material weakness is a
condition in which the design or operation of one or more of the
internal control components does not reduce to a relatively low
level the risk that errors or fraud in amounts that would be
material in relation to the financial statements being audited
may occur and not be detected within a timely period by employees
in the normal course of performing their assigned functions.
However, we noted no matters involving internal control and its
operation, including controls for safeguarding securities that we
consider to be material weaknesses as defined above as of October
31, 2002.

This report is intended solely for the information and use of
management and the Board of Directors of the Fund and the
Securities and Exchange Commission and is not intended to be and
should not be used by anyone other than these specified parties.


                                                  KPMG LLP

New York, New York
December 11, 2002
EXHIBIT 32.1





Certification of the Chief Executive Officer


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 K-Fed Bancorp (the “Company”) on Form 10-Q for the period ended March 31, 2010 as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the “Report”), I, Kay M. Hoveland, Chief Executive 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 and in connection with this quarterly report on Form 10-Q that:





1.
The Report fully complies with the requirements of sections 13(a) or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended, and2.
The information contained in the report fairly presents, in all material respects, the company’s financial condition and results of operations.











Date: May 13, 2010
/s/ K. M. HovelandK. M. HovelandPresident and Chief Executive Officer
Jeffrey Wills LUSK, Individually and as Executor of the Estate of Dorothy Jean Ross Lusk, Deceased, Petitioner v. CROWN POINTE CARE CENTER, et al.

No. 19-543

Supreme Court of the United States.

January 13, 2020

Petition for writ of certiorari to the Court of Appeals of Ohio, Franklin County denied.
I 

110TH CONGRESS 

1ST SESSION H. R. 4862 

To extend the temporary suspension of duty on 2,4-Disulfobenzaldehyde. 

IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES 

DECEMBER 19, 2007 

Mr. CLAY introduced the following bill; which was referred to the Committee 

on Ways and Means 

A BILL 

To extend the temporary suspension of duty on 2,4- 

Disulfobenzaldehyde. 

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

3 SECTION 1. 2,4-DISULFOBENZALDEHYDE. 

4 (a) IN GENERAL.—Heading 9902.01.66 of the Har5 monized Tariff Schedule of the United States is amended 

6 by striking ‘‘12/31/2009’’ and inserting ‘‘12/31/2011’’. 

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

8 subsection (a) applies with respect to goods entered, or 

9 withdrawn from warehouse for consumption, on or after 

10 the 15th day after the date of the enactment of this Act. 

Æ 


HMOORE on PRODPC68 with HMBILLS
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

Pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002 and in connection with the Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q of Paladin Realty Income Properties, Inc. (the Company) for the period ended September 30, 2006, as
filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the Report), the undersigned, the President, Chief Executive Officer and Director of the Board of Directors of the Company, certifies 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/ James R. Worms                             
|James R. Worms                                 
|President, Chief Executive Officer and Director
|(Principal Executive Officer)                  
|November 13, 2006
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 Physicians Formula Holdings, Inc.
(the “Company”) on Form 10-Q for the quarter ended September 30,
2008, as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission (the “Report”), I,
Joseph J. Jaeger, Chief Financial Officer of the Company, 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.




The
foregoing certification is being furnished solely pursuant to 18 U.S.C. §1350
and is not being filed as part of the Report or as a separate disclosure
document.




Date:
November 3, 2008




By:
              /s/
      Joseph J. JaegerName:
              Joseph
      J. JaegerTitle:
              Chief
      Financial Officer




A signed
original of this written statement required by Section 906, or other
document authenticating, acknowledging, or otherwise adopting the signature that
appears in typed form within the electronic version of this written statement
required by Section 906, has been provided to Physicians Formula
Holdings, Inc. and will be retained by Physicians Formula
Holdings, Inc. and furnished to the Securities and Exchange Commission or
its staff upon request.
Gail ROSIER, Petitioner v. Jeffrey STROBEL

No. 19-561

Supreme Court of the United States.

January 13, 2020

Petition for writ of certiorari to the Court of Appeals of Arizona, Division One denied.
Keith Y. ARAKAKI, Petitioner, v. Megan J. BRENNAN, Postmaster General, et al.

No. 19-724

Supreme Court of the United States.

January 27, 2020

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

San Antonio, Texas

JUDGMENT

No. 04-21-00405-CV

SAN ANTONIO INDEPENDENT SCHOOL District and Pedro Martinez,

in his official capacity,

Appellants

v.

The STATE of Texas,

Appellee

From the 45th Judicial District Court, Bexar County, Texas

Trial Court No. 2021-CI-19115

Honorable Angelica Jimenez, Judge Presiding

BEFORE JUSTICE CHAPA, JUSTICE RIOS, AND JUSTICE WATKINS

In accordance with this court’s opinion of this date, this appeal is DISMISSED without 

prejudice. 

All costs of this appeal are ORDERED assessed against the party who incurred them. 

The Clerk of this court is ORDERED to issue the mandate immediately. 

SIGNED September 29, 2021.

_________________________________

Luz Elena D. Chapa, Justice
No. 85-6695.

#### Remington *v.*United States.

C. A. 5th Cir. Certiorari denied.
Marilis Yaneth VELASQUEZ PEREZ, Petitioner v. Jose Candido DIAZ PALENCIA

No. 19M56

Supreme Court of the United States.

October 21, 2019

Motion for leave to file a petition for writ of certiorari with supplemental appendix under seal granted.
TRADING TECHNOLOGIES INTERNATIONAL, INC., Petitioner, v. IBG LLC, et al.

No. 19-522

Supreme Court of the United States.

January 27, 2020

Petition for writ of certiorari to the United States Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit denied.
**Exhibit 23.1**

**Consent of Independent Auditors**

**The Board of Directors  Carrier Access Corporation**: 

We consent to incorporation by reference in the registration statements (Nos. 333- 71209, 333-44904, and333-65374) on Form S-8 of Carrier Access Corporation of our report dated January 20, 2003, relating to the consolidated balance sheets of Carrier Access Corporation and subsidiaries as of December 31, 2001 and 2002, and the related consolidatedstatements of operations, stockholders’ equity and comprehensive income (loss) and cash flows for each of the years in the three-year period ended December 31, 2002,  which report appears in the Annual Report on Form 10-K for the yearended December 31, 2002 of Carrier Access Corporation. 

KPMG LLP

Boulder, Colorado  March 28, 2003
LITTLE RIVER SOIL FARM, Plaintiff, v. DANNY L. HILL AND WIFE, MARJORIE P. HILL; DALLAS J. SASSER, TRUSTEE; GEORGE N. HAMRICK, TRUSTEE; DANNY R. GORDON; VICKY G. MARTIN; RICHARD O. GAMBLE, TRUSTEE; G. HENRY TEMPLE, TRUSTEE; RIVEREDGE ACRES, INC., AKA RIVER EDGE ACRES; FERD L. DAVIS, TRUSTEE, AND ERDYNE H. YATES, Defendants.

No. COA03-607

North Carolina Court of Appeals

Filed July 6, 2004

This case not for publication

Wake County No. 00 CVS 13543.

*J. Michael Weeks, for plaintiff-appellee.*

*Smith, Debnam, Narron, Wyche, Saintsing & Myers, LLP, by W. Thurston Debnam and R.L. Pressley, for defendant-appellants.*

MARTIN, Chief Judge.

Defendants Vicky Gordon Martin and Danny R. Gordon appeal from a judgment granting plaintiff Little River Soil Farm an easement across their real property.

Plaintiff filed a declaratory judgment action seeking definition of the scope and location of an access easement it held across four parcels of real property. After hearing evidence, the trial court entered judgment finding facts and concluding plaintiffdid have an access easement by prescription. The judgment determined that the easement was generally located where plaintiff's evidence placed it, and that the right of way was approximately 30 feet wide. The judgment continued: "The Court appoints Williams-Pearce, Professional Land Surveyors, to survey the boundaries of the Access Easement as located and defined by this Judgment and to submit a map of the survey, in such form as may be filed for recordation in the Wake County Register of Deeds Office, for review and approval of this Court." Defendants Martin and Gordon appealed, while the other landowners whose property is encumbered by this easement have not appealed or otherwise contested the trial court's order in this matter.

The dispositive issue in this appeal is whether defendants' appeal from the judgment was premature. "Where, as here, an order entered by the trial court does not dispose of the entire controversy between all parties, it is interlocutory." *Hudson-Cole Dev. Corp. v. Beemer,*132 N.C. App. 341, 344, 511 S.E.2d 309, 311 (1999)(citation omitted). The trial court did not certify this judgment as being immediately appealable according to Rule 54(b), *see* N.C. Gen. Stat. § 1A-1, Rule 54(b), nor did defendants argue that the judgment affected any of their substantial rights. The appellant bears the burden of demonstrating that an interlocutory order is immediately appealable. *See Jeffreys v. Raleigh Oaks Joint Venture,*115 N.C. App. 377, 444 S.E.2d 252 (1994). The judgment here determined only the existence and the size of the easement at issue, but left the location of the easement upon theground to be decided at a later time. Because the judgment does not dispose of the entire controversy, and appellants have failed to state grounds justifying immediate appellate review of this interlocutory order, the appeal is dismissed.

Appeal dismissed.

Judges TIMMONS-GOODSON and HUNTER concur.

Report per Rule 30(e).