alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA 

#23 #10 1.3% $10,690 #23 #30 #18

$7.6 B SPENT IN 5.2% OF STATE GDP OF TOTAL U.S. PER RESIDENT $5.1 B CONTRACT 25,786 NUMBER OF $2.5 B PERSONNEL 

STATE DEFENSE SPENDING SPENDING PERSONNEL SPENDING 

, DEFENSE CONTRACTS

By Type Construction: 5%

Supplies and Research and

ent: 9% Development:

Service: 79%

 6 Equipm % 

By Service 

Army

11%

Navy/Marines

46%

Air Force

10%

Other Defense

32%

DEFENSE PERSONNEL 

Allocations, By Type

Reserve: 6%

National 

 10% Acti

Civilian: 53%

Guard: ve Duty: 31%

Allocations, By Service 

Army

18%

Navy/Marines

63%

Air Force

15%

Other Defense

3%

Top Defense Contractors (M = millions)

Booz Allen Hamilton $314.6 M

Ernst & Young $190.5 M

Deloitte $164.8 M

Advantaged Solutions $149.5 M

Alion Science & Technology $116.6 M

Sodexo $114.3 M

CACI $96.5 M

Dell $93.4 M

Leidos $87.6 M

Government of the United States $86.6 M

Contract Awards Performed (By Fiscal Year, billions)

$5.0 $5.1

$4.3 $4.3 $4.3

FY13 FY14 FY18

$4.3 $4.1 $3.8

FY15 FY16 FY17 FY19 FY20

$2.5 BILLION 25,786

TOTAL PAYROLL TOTAL PERSONNEL 

Top Defense Personnel Locations

County Active

Duty

Civilian National

Guard

Reserve Total

District of Columbia 7,978 13,727 2,569 1,512 25,786

34 Office of Local Defense Community Cooperation — Defense Spending by State, FY 2020
 

(M=millions)

DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA FISCAL YEAR 2018 FISCAL YEAR 2018

FISCAL YEAR 2020 

TOP DEFENSE PERSONNEL SPENDING LOCATIONS 

District of Columbia

TOP DEFENSE CONTRACT SPENDING LOCATIONS B = billions)

District of Columbia

(B = billions)

$5.1 B

District of Columbia

$2.5 B

District of Columbia

Office of Local Defense Community Cooperation — Defense Spending by State, FY 2020 35

AF Active AF Guard AF Reserve Army Active Army Guard Army Reserve MC Active Navy Active WHS
Nona Davis YOUNG (LINDQUIST), Plaintiff v. Steven Paul YOUNG, Defendant, and Alvin Young and Sharon Young, Defendant-Intervenors.

No. 213A05.

Supreme Court of North Carolina.

November 4, 2005.

Appeal pursuant to N.C.G.S. § 7A-30(2) from the decision of a divided panel of the Court of Appeals, 169 N.C.App. 31, 609 S.E.2d 795 (2005), affirming in part and vacating in part an order signed on 8 October 2003 by Judge Dougald N. Clark, Jr. in District Court, Cumberland County. Heard in the Supreme Court 17 October 2005.

Law Offices of Dale S. Morrison, by Dale S. Morrison, Charlotte, for plaintiff-appellee.

Mitchell, Brewer, Richardson, Adams, Burge & Boughman, by Ronnie M. Mitchell, Fayetteville, for defendant-appellant.

PER CURIAM.

The decision of the Court of Appeals is vacated, and the appeal is dismissed as moot.

DISMISSED.

Justices MARTIN and BRADY did not participate in the consideration or decision of this case.
IN RE K.J.H.

No. COA05-567.

North Carolina Court of Appeals.

Filed December 20, 2005.

Certification Date January 9, 2006.

Appeal from Wayne (03J51)

Case without published opinion. Affirmed.
Exhibit 4.2



9F INC. Class A   Ordinary Shares Number Incorporated under the laws of the Cayman Islands   Share capital is US$50,000 divided into (i) 4,600,000,000 Class A Ordinary   Shares of a par value of US$0.00001 each (ii) 200,000,000 Class 8 Ordinary   Shares of a par value of US$0.00001 each and (iii) 200,000,000 shares of a   par value of US$0.00001 each of such class or classes (however designated) as   the board of directors may determine in accordance with Article 9 of the   Articles. is the registered holder of THIS IS TO CERTIFY THAT Class A   Ordinary Shares in the above-named Company subject to the Memorandum and   Articles of Association thereof. 2019 by: day of EXECUTED on behalf of the   said Company on the DIRECTOR OGOES 740 All Rights Reserved LITHO. IN U.S.A.
I 

110TH CONGRESS 

2D SESSION H. R. 5027 

To suspend temporarily the duty on integral flow controllers, certified by 

the importer exclusively for installation in semiconductor wafer fabrication machines. 

IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES 

JANUARY 16, 2008 

Mr. WEXLER introduced the following bill; which was referred to the 

Committee on Ways and Means 

A BILL 

To suspend temporarily the duty on integral flow controllers, 

certified by the importer exclusively for installation in 

semiconductor wafer fabrication machines. 

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

3 SECTION 1. INTEGRAL FLOW CONTROLLERS, CERTIFIED BY 

4 THE IMPORTER EXCLUSIVELY FOR INSTAL5 LATION IN SEMICONDUCTOR WAFER FAB6 RICATION MACHINES. 

7 (a) IN GENERAL.—Subchapter II of chapter 99 of 

8 the Harmonized Tariff Schedule of the United States is 


smartinez on PRODPC61 with BILLS
2 

•HR 5027 IH

1 amended by inserting in numerical sequence the following 

2 new heading: 

‘‘ 9902.01.00 Integral flow controllers, certified by the importer exclusively for installation in 

semiconductor wafer fabrication machines (provided for 

in subheading 9032.89.60) .. Free No change No change On or before 

12/31/2011 ’’. 

3 (b) EFFECTIVE DATE.— 

4 (1) IN GENERAL.—The amendment made by 

5 subsection (a) applies to articles entered, or with6 drawn from warehouse for consumption, on or after 

7 January 1, 2007. 

8 (2) RETROACTIVE APPLICATION.—Notwith9 standing section 514 of the Tariff Act of 1930 (19 

10 U.S.C. 1514) or any other provision of law, upon 

11 proper request filed with U.S. Customs and Border 

12 Protection before the 90th day after the date of the 

13 enactment of this Act, any entry, or withdrawal 

14 from warehouse for consumption, of an article— 

15 (A) that was made on or after January 1, 

16 2007, and before the date of the enactment of 

17 this Act, and 

18 (B) with respect to which there would have 

19 been no duty if the amendment made by sub20 section (a) applied to such entry or withdrawal, 


smartinez on PRODPC61 with BILLS
3 

•HR 5027 IH

1 shall be liquidated or reliquidated as if such amend2 ment applied to such entry or withdrawal. 

Æ 


smartinez on PRODPC61 with BILLS
**Exhibit 32.1**

 

PHARMACOPEIA DRUG DISCOVERY, INC.

 

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 theQuarterly Report of Pharmacopeia Drug Discovery, Inc. (the “Company”) on Form10-Q for the period ended March 31, 2004, as filed with the Securities andExchange Commission on the date hereof (the “Report”), I, Joseph A. Mollica,Ph.D., Chairman of the Board, President and Chief Executive Officer of theCompany, hereby certify pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, as adopted pursuantto 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 allmaterial respects, the financial condition and results of operations of theCompany.

 

 
| /s/ Joseph  A. Mollica, Ph.D.                             |   |
|----------------------------------------------------------------|--------|
| Joseph A.  Mollica, Ph.D.                                      |
| Chairman of  the Board, President  and Chief Executive Officer |
|                                                           |
| June 2, 2004                                                   |

 

----
70 Office of Local Defense Community Cooperation — Defense Spending by Territory, FY 2022

, DEFENSE CONTRACTS

DEFENSE PERSONNEL

By Type

By Service

Top Defense Contractors (M = millions) 

S&K Aerospace $34.3 M

Confederated Salish and Kootenai Tribes $13.8 M

Corbett Technology Solutions, Inc. $11.1 M

REEL COH, Inc. $11.0 M

TNL Sales, LLC $9.6 M

Northrop Grumman $6.1 M

James Talcott Construction, Inc. $5.8 M

South Texas Lighthouse for Blind, Inc. $5.5 M

Wadsworth Builders Co., Inc. $4.8 M

Montana University System $4.0 M

Contract Awards Performed (By Fiscal Year, billions)

MONTANA

Allocations, By Type

Allocations, By Service

$416.2 MILLION

TOTAL PAYROLL

8,708

TOTAL PERSONNEL

Top Defense Personnel Locations

County Active 

Duty

Civilian National 

Guard

Reserve Total

Cascade 3,160 840 928 53 4,981

Lewis and Clark ND 380 983 280 ND

Yellowstone 19 20 310 252 601

Missoula 11 25 176 153 365

Gallatin 16 15 181 ND ND

Flathead ND 11 150 12 ND

Silver Bow 11 25 60 51 147

Phillips 0 0 86 0 86

Lincoln 0 44 34 0 78

Park 0 0 65 0 65

Construction: 8% Research and

Development: 5%

Service: 46%

Supplies and

Equipment: 41%

Active Duty: 37%

Civilian: 16%

National 

Guard: 37%

Reserve: 9%

Army

Navy/Marines

Air Force

Other Defense

18%

3%

61%

18%

Army

Navy/Marines

Air Force

Other Defense

41%

2%

56%

1%

$0.1

$0.2

$0.1

$0.2

$0.3 $0.3

$0.2 $0.2

FY15 FY16 FY17 FY18 FY19 FY20 FY21 FY22

#48 #41 0.1% $592 #50 #31 #48 #45

$0.7 B SPENT 

IN STATE

1.0% OF 

STATE GDP

OF TOTAL U.S. 

DEFENSE SPENDING

PER 

RESIDENT

$0.2 B CONTRACT 

SPENDING

8,708 NUMBER 

OF PERSONNEL

$0.4 B PERSONNEL 

SPENDING

$80.0 M GRANT 

SPENDING
Office of Local Defense Community Cooperation — Defense Spending by State, FY 2022 71

AF Active AF Guard AF Reserve Army Active Army Guard Army Reserve MC Active Navy Active WHS

FISCAL YEAR 2018

TOP DEFENSE PERSONNEL SPENDING LOCATIONS

FISCAL YEAR 2018 MONTANA

TOP DEFENSE CONTRACT SPENDING LOCATIONS (M = millions) (M=millions) (M=millions)

FISCAL YEAR 2022

Cascade

Lake

Flathead

Lincoln

Gallatin

Missoula

Lewis and Clark

Blaine

Yellowstone

Ravalli

(M = millions)

$67.8 M

$48.6 M

$14.0 M

$11.1 M

$6.2 M

$6.1 M

$5.8 M

$2.8 M

$2.1 M

$1.1 M

Cascade

Yellowstone

Gallatin

Missoula

Flathead

Silver Bow

Lincoln

Valley

Park

$267.9 M

Lewis and Clark

$69.4 M

$20.2 M

$12.2 M

$12.0 M

$5.7 M

$5.6 M

$5.6 M

$4.0 M

$2.6 M

Flathead

Flathead

Lewis and Clark

Lewis and Clark

Lincoln

Lincoln

Ravalli

Missoula

Lake

Missoula

Silver Bow

Gallatin

Gallatin

Cascade

Cascade

Yellowstone

Yellowstone

Blaine

Valley

Park
Document Headings

                    Document headings vary by document type but may contain                    the following:                  
                -                       the agency or agencies that issued and signed a document                    
                -                       the number of the CFR title and the number of each part                      the document amends, proposes to amend, or is directly                      related to                    
                -                       the agency docket number / agency internal file number                    
                -                       the RIN which identifies each regulatory action listed in                      the Unified Agenda of Federal Regulatory and Deregulatory                      Actions                    

                    See the                                          Document Drafting Handbook                                        for more details.                  

###### International Trade Commission

          - [Investigation Nos. 701-TA-318 and 731-TA-538 and 561 (Fifth Review)]

# AGENCY:

United States International Trade Commission.

# ACTION:

Notice.

# SUMMARY:

The Commission instituted the subject five-year reviews on April 1, 2022 (87 FR 19131) to determine whether revocation of the antidumping duty orders on sulfanilic acid from China and India, and the countervailing duty order on imports of sulfanilic acid from India would be likely to lead to continuation or recurrence of material injury. On June 14, 2022, the Department of Commerce published notice (87 FR 35968) that it was revoking the orders effective May 9, 2022, because no domestic interested party filed a timely notice of intent to participate. Accordingly, the subject reviews are terminated.

# DATES:

May 9, 2022 (applicable date of revocation of the order).

# FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

                        Nayana Kollanthara (202-205-2043), Office of Investigations, U.S. International Trade Commission, 500 E Street SW, Washington, DC 20436. Hearing-impaired individuals are advised that information on this matter can be obtained by contacting the Commission's TDD terminal on 202-205-1810. Persons with mobility impairments who will need special assistance in gaining access to the Commission should contact the Office of the Secretary at 202-205-2000. General information concerning the Commission may also be obtained by accessing its internet server (                        *https://www.usitc.gov*).                    

*Authority:*                         These reviews are being terminated under authority of title VII of the Tariff Act of 1930 and pursuant to section 751(c) of the Tariff Act of 1930 (19 U.S.C. 1675(c)). This notice is published pursuant to § 207.69 of the Commission's rules (19 CFR 207.69).                    

By order of the Commission.

Issued: June 28, 2022.

Lisa Barton,

Secretary to the Commission.

[FR Doc. 2022-14111 Filed 6-30-22; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 7020-02-P
STATE v. John Frank BOWEN.

No. 342P05.

Supreme Court of North Carolina.

October 6, 2005.

Anne M. Middleton, Assistant Attorney General, for State of NC.

The following order has been entered on the motion filed on the 25th day of July 2005 *881by Defendant Bowen for "Discretionary Review Under G.S. 7A-31":

"Motion Denied by order of the Court in conference this the 6th day of October 2005."
110TH CONGRESS 

2D SESSION H. R. 5135 

AN ACT 

To designate the facility of the United States Postal Service 

located at 201 West Greenway Street in Derby, Kansas, 

as the ‘‘Sergeant Jamie O. Maugans Post Office Building’’. 

1 Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representa2 tives of the United States of America in Congress assembled, 
2 

•HR 5135 EH

1 SECTION 1. SERGEANT JAMIE O. MAUGANS POST OFFICE 

2 BUILDING. 

3 (a) DESIGNATION.—The facility of the United States 

4 Postal Service located at 201 West Greenway Street in 

5 Derby, Kansas, shall be known and designated as the 

6 ‘‘Sergeant Jamie O. Maugans Post Office Building’’. 

7 (b) REFERENCES.—Any reference in a law, map, reg8 ulation, document, paper, or other record of the United 

9 States to the facility referred to in subsection (a) shall 

10 be deemed to be a reference to the ‘‘Sergeant Jamie O. 

11 Maugans Post Office Building’’. 

Passed the House of Representatives February 12, 

2008. 

Attest: 

Clerk. 

110TH CONGRESS 

2D SESSION H. R. 5135 

AN ACT 

To designate the facility of the United States PostMaugans Post Office Building’’. in Derby, Kansas, as the ‘‘Sergeant Jamie O. al Service located at 201 West Greenway Street
<PAGE>
 
                                                                    EXHIBIT 23.2

                        CONSENT OF INDEPENDENT AUDITORS

We consent to the incorporation by reference in the Registration Statements,
(Form S-8, No. 333-33051) pertaining to Primex Technologies, Inc. Retirement
Investment Management Experience Plan; (Form S-8, No. 333-18297) pertaining to
Primex Technologies, Inc. Stock Plan for Non-employees Directors; (Form S-8, No.
333-18299) pertaining to 1996 Long Term Incentive Plan of Primex Technologies,
Inc., of our report dated January 26, 1998, with respect to the consolidated
financial statements of Primex Technologies, Inc. included in the Annual Report
(Form 10-K) for the year ended December 31, 1997.

                                                           Ernst & Young LLP

                                                           /s/ Ernst & Young LLP
                                                           ---------------------

Tampa, Florida
March 16, 1998
STATE v. SINCLAIR.

No. COA05-483.

Court of Appeals of North Carolina.

Filed December 6, 2005.

Certification Date December 27, 2005.

Case reported without published opinion. No error.
STATE of North Carolina v. Henry Ford ADKINS.

No. 55P02-3.

Supreme Court of North Carolina.

June 30, 2005.

Henry Ford Adkins, Pro Se.

Christopher W. Brooks, Assistant Attorney General, Belinda J. Foster, District Attorney, for State of NC.

*ORDER*

Upon consideration of the petition filed by Defendant on the 9th day of May 2005 in this matter for a writ of certiorari to review the order of the North Carolina Court of Appeals, the following order was entered and is hereby certified to the North Carolina Court of Appeals:

"Dismissed by order of the Court in conference, this the 30th day of June 2005."
- Home
- Facts
- What are the doldrums?

# **What are the doldrums?**

## The "doldrums" is a popular nautical term that refers to the belt around the Earth **near the equator** where sailing ships sometimes get stuck on **windless waters**. 

*This NASA satellite image shows the Inter-Tropical Convergence Zone, known to sailors around the world as the doldrums.*

Known to sailors around the world as the doldrums, the Inter-Tropical Convergence Zone, (ITCZ, pronounced  and sometimes referred to as the “*itch*”), is a belt around the Earth extending  approximately five degrees north and south of the equator. Here, the prevailing trade winds of the northern hemisphere blow to the southwest and collide with the southern hemisphere’s driving northwest trade winds. 

Due to intense solar heating near the equator, the warm, moist air  is forced up into the atmosphere like a hot air balloon. As the air rises, it  cools, causing persistent bands of showers and storms around the Earth’s  midsection. The rising air mass finally subsides in what is known as the horse latitudes, where the air moves  downward toward Earth’s surface.

Because the air circulates in an upward direction, there is often little  surface wind in the ITCZ. That is why sailors well know that the area can becalm sailing ships for weeks. And that’s why they call it the doldrums. 

 

##### **Did you know?**

*Due to Earth’s rotation, the ITCZ shifts from season to season, causing both dry and rainy seasons in the northern and southern hemispheres.*

*Coral bleaching is prevalent in the ITCZ due to surface warming. NOAA’s Coral Reef Conservation Program monitors environmental conditions in coral reefs to identify areas at risk for bleaching.*

##### More **Information**

 What are the trade winds? 

 What are the horse latitudes? 

##### **Last updated:**

###### 						 10/04/23					

**Author:** NOAA

How to cite this article

Contact Us

##### 					Feedback

                  -  Provide Feedback 
                  -  Contact Us
                  -  Report an error

##### 					Social

                  - 
                  - 
                  - 
*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
STATE v. Jan Gray HINSHAW, Jr.

No. 374P05.

Supreme Court of North Carolina.

October 6, 2005.

Kathleen U. Baldwin, Assistant Attorney General, Garland N. Yates, District Attorney, for State.

The following order has been entered on the motion filed on the 5th day of July 2005 by Defendant for "Notice of Appeal Pursuant to N.C.G.S. 7A-30":

"Motion Dismissed ex mero motu by order of the Court in conference this the 6th day of October 2005."
**Exhibit 32.3**

 

**CERTIFICATION PURSUANT TO****18 U.S.C. SECTION1350,****AS ADOPTED PURSUANTTO****SECTION 906 OF THESARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002**

 

In connection with theAnnual Report of BIO-key International, Inc. (the “Company”) onForm 10-KSB for the period ending December 31, 2005, as filed withthe Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the “Report”), I,Francis J. Cusick, Chief Financial Officer of the Company, certify, pursuant to18 U.S.C. Section 1350, as adopted pursuant to Section 906 of The Sarbanes-OxleyAct of 2002, that:

 

(1)                     The Report fully complies with therequirements of Section 13(a) or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of1934; and

 

(2)                     The information contained in the Reportfairly presents, in all material respects, the financial condition and resultof operations of the Company.

 

 
| BIO-KEY  INTERNATIONAL, INC. |                    |
|-----------------------------------|-------------------------|
| By:                               | /s/ FRANCIS J. CUSICK   |   |
|                              | Francis  J. Cusick      |   |
|                              | Chief Financial Officer |   |
| Date: April 11, 2006              |                    |

 

----
STATE v. Eddie CAPLE.

No. 437P05.

Supreme Court of North Carolina.

August 17, 2005.

Paul F. Herzog, Fayetteville, for Eddie Caple.

L. Johnson Britt, III, District Attorney, for State.

The following order has been entered on the motion filed on the 16th day of August 2005 by Attorney General for Temporary Stay:

"Motion Allowed by order of the Court in conference this the 17th day of August 2005."
STATE v. James Edward WILLIAMS.

No. 125P05-2.

Supreme Court of North Carolina.

July 19, 2005.

Christine A. Goebel, Assistant Attorney General, Ben David, District Attorney, for State of NC.

The following order has been entered on the motion filed on the 6th day of July 2005 by Defendant for Leave to Proceed in Forma Pauperis:

"Motion Allowed by order of the Court in conference this the 19th day of July 2005."
STATE v. SCOTT.

No. COA04-396.

North Carolina Court of Appeals.

Filed September 6, 2005.

Certification September 26, 2005.

Case reported without published opinion. Remanded for resentencing.
```

[Congressional Bills 110th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[H.R. 4866 Introduced in House (IH)]

110th CONGRESS
  1st Session
                                H. R. 4866

To extend the temporary suspension of duty on Synthetic indigo powder, 
 (3H-indol-3-one, 2-(1,3-dihydro-3-oxo-2H-indol-2-ylidene)-1,2-dihydro-
                                   ).

_______________________________________________________________________

                    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 Synthetic indigo powder, 
 (3H-indol-3-one, 2-(1,3-dihydro-3-oxo-2H-indol-2-ylidene)-1,2-dihydro-
                                   ).

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

SECTION 1. SYNTHETIC INDIGO POWDER, (3H-INDOL-3-ONE, 2-(1,3-DIHYDRO-3-
              OXO-2H-INDOL-2-YLIDENE)-1,2-DIHYDRO-).

    (a) In General.--Heading 9902.23.66 of the Harmonized Tariff 
Schedule of the United States is amended by striking ``12/31/2009'' and 
inserting ``12/31/2011''.
    (b) Effective Date.--The amendment made by subsection (a) applies 
with respect to goods entered, or withdrawn from warehouse for 
consumption, on or after the 15th day after the date of the enactment 
of this Act.
                                 <all>
```
NGO v. PARK.

No. COA04-847.

North Carolina Court of Appeals.

Filed January 3, 2006.

Certification Date January 23, 2006.

Appeal from Wake (00CVS14722).

Case without published opinion. Affirmed.