alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
SOUTHERN EQUIPMENT CO., INC. v. LAURA & ASSOCIATES, INC.

No. COA04-747.

North Carolina Court of Appeals.

Filed April 5, 2005.

Certification Date April 25, 2005.

Appeal from Wake, (03CVS15377).

Case reported without published opinion. Affirmed.
Exhibit 32.1

QUADRAMED CORPORATION

SECTION 1350 CERTIFICATIONS

In connection with this Annual Report on Form 10-K of QuadraMed Corporation for the period ended December 31, 2005, I, Keith B. Hagen, Chief
Executive Officer of QuadraMed Corporation, hereby certify pursuant to 18 U.S.C. 1350, as adopted pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that to my best knowledge:



|1. | This Annual Report on Form 10-K for the period ended December 31, 2005 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 Annual Report on Form 10-K for the period ended December 31, 2005 fairly presents, in all material respects, the financial condition and
results of operations of QuadraMed Corporation.
|-- | --------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------



|                     |  |                        
|-------------------- |  | -----------------------
|Date: March 16, 2006 |  | /s/ Keith B. Hagen     
|                     |  | Keith B. Hagen         
|                     |  | Chief Executive Officer
I 

110TH CONGRESS 

2D SESSION H. R. 5023 

To extend the temporary suspension of duty on Dinotefuran. 

IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES 

JANUARY 16, 2008 

Mrs. TAUSCHER introduced the following bill; which was referred to the 

Committee on Ways and Means 

A BILL 

To extend the temporary suspension of duty on Dinotefuran. 

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

3 SECTION 1. DINOTEFURAN. 

4 (a) IN GENERAL.—Heading 9902.24.30 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 


smartinez on PRODPC61 with BILLS
- Home
- Facts
- What is air gap?

# **What is air gap?**

## The NOAA Air Gap system is a tool that measures the **vertical clearance** between a defined reference point under a bridge and the surface of the water below.	

It appears that your browser doesn't support HTML5 video.						Here's a direct link to							the video instead.

With an air draft of 181 feet, the *Gunvor Maersk* container ship transits under the Chesapeake Bay Bridge in Maryland at low tide on February 21, 2021. For this transit, NOAA's air gap sensor measured the Bay Bridge clearance (the distance from the water to the underside of the bridge) at 186 feet.

Air gap observations are collected at a high frequency and updated for the public every six minutes to account for changes in water level, vehicular loads on the bridge, air temperature, and other factors. Air gap data and surrounding tides, currents, and meteorological conditions help vessel pilots safely enter and leave many seaports. This information is critical for pilots to safely navigate a ship under a bridge, especially as U.S. seaports grow and vessels continue to increase in size.	

##### More **Information**

Center for Operational Oceanographic Products and Services

Physical Oceanographic Real Time System

NOAA Celebrates 30 Years of PORTS® (Video)							

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

######  						 01/18/24 					

**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
JAMES, et al. v. BARTLETT, et al.

No. 602PA04-2.

Supreme Court of North Carolina.

May 4, 2005.

Michael Crowell, Raleigh, for William James, et al.

Susan K. Nichols, Alexander McC. Peters, Special Deputy Attorney Generals, for Bartlett, et al.

John R. Wallace, Joseph A. Newsome, Raleigh, for Atkinson and Cobb.

Anita S. Earls, for Sumler, et al.

Christopher G. Browning, Jr., Solicitor-General, for State.

Marshall Hurley, Greensboro, W. Wallace Respass, Jr., for Steve Troxler.

The following order has been entered on the motion filed on the 9th day of March 2005 by Plaintiff for Reconsideration:

"Motion Denied by order of the Court in conference this the 4th day of May 2005."

*692Justices PARKER and EDMUNDS recused.
Exhibit 32.1



CERTIFICATION PURSUANT TO

SECTION 906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002

(18 U.S.C. SECTION 1350)



In connection with the Quarterly Report of United Agri Products, Inc. (the
Company) on Form 10-Q for the period ended November 28, 2004, as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission (the Report), L. Kenneth Cordell, President and Chief Executive Officer of the Company, hereby certifies,
pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002 (18 U.S.C. Section 1350), that, to his knowledge:



(1) The Report fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended; 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/    L. KENNETH
CORDELLL. Kenneth Cordell President and Chief Executive OfficerJanuary 12, 2005
STATE v. CALLAHAN.

No. COA05-5.

North Carolina Court of Appeals.

Filed September 6, 2005.

Certification September 26, 2005.

Case reported without published opinion. No error.
STATE of North Carolina v. Ernestor Zuniga BANUELOS, Defendant and Aegis Security Insurance Company, Surety.

No. 254P05.

Supreme Court of North Carolina.

August 18, 2005.

Kenneth P. Andresen, Charlotte, for Aegis Security Insurance Co.

Jill R. Wilson, Greensboro, C. Robin Britt, Jr., for Guilford Co. Bd. of Education.

*ORDER*

Upon consideration of the petition filed on the 10th day of May 2005 by Surety (Aegis Security Insurance Company) in this matter for discretionary review of the decision of the North Carolina Court of Appeals pursuant to G.S. 7A-31, the following order was entered and is hereby certified to the North Carolina Court of Appeals:

"Denied by order of the Court in conference, this the 18th day of August 2005."
STATE v. MICKENS.

No. COA04-960.

Court of Appeals of North Carolina.

Filed June 21, 2005.

Certification Date July 11, 2005.

Appeal from the Johnston (02CRS52867).

Case without published opinion. No error.
EXHIBIT 32.1

CERTIFICATION

In connection with the Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q of Helicos BioSciences Corporation (the "Company") for the
period ended September 30, 2010 as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the "Report"), we, Ivan Trifunovich, the Principal Executive Officer of the Company and
Jeffrey R. Moore, the Principal Financial Officer and Principal Accounting Officer of the Company, hereby certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, as adopted pursuant to Section 906
of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, to our knowledge that:



Dated: November 18, 2010

/s/ IVAN TRIFUNOVICH, PH.D. Ivan Trifunovich, Ph.D. Chairman, President and Chief Executive Officer
(Principal Executive Officer)Dated: November 18, 2010

/s/ JEFFREY R. MOORE Jeffrey R. Moore Senior Vice President and Chief Financial Officer
(Principal Financial Officer and Principal Accounting Officer)


---



QuickLinks
HomeOcean Facts

# How did the Hawaiian Islands form?

## The Hawaiian Islands were formed by volcanic activity.

The Hawaiian Emperor seamount chain is a well-known example of a large   seamount and island chain created by hot-spot volcanism. Each island or   submerged seamount in the chain is successively older toward the   northwest. Near Hawaii, the age progression from island to island can be   used to calculate the motion of the Pacific Oceanic plate toward the   northwest. The youngest seamount of the Hawaiian chain is Loihi, which   presently is erupting from its summit at a depth of 1000 meters. *Image   courtesy of U.S. Geological Survey.*

The Earth’s outer crust is made up of a series of tectonic  plates that move over the surface of the planet. In areas where the plates come  together, sometimes volcanoes will form. Volcanoes can also form in the middle  of a plate, where magma rises upward until it erupts on the seafloor, at what  is called a “hot spot.”

The Hawaiian Islands were formed by such a hot spot  occurring in the middle of the Pacific Plate. While the hot spot itself is  fixed, the plate is moving. So, as the plate moved over the hot spot, the  string of islands that make up the Hawaiian Island chain were formed.

The Hawaiian Islands form an archipelago that extends over a  vast area of the North Pacific Ocean. The archipelago is made up of 132  islands, atolls, reefs, shallow banks, shoals, and seamounts stretching over  1,500 miles from the island of Hawaii in the southeast to  Kure Atoll in the northwest.

###### Get **Social**

###### More **Information**

          - Hawaiian  Archipelago
          - Coral Reef Information System
          - Seamounts  and Hot Spots
          - New  Millennium Observatory

**Last updated:**   01/18/24**Author:** NOAAHow to cite this article

Contact Us

            - Provide Feedback 
            -  Contact Us 
            -  Report an error 

##### Science. Service.Stewardship.

###### 						About NOS 					

            - About Us
            - NOS Program Offices
            - Media Inquiries
            - Website Acknowledgements

###### 						Resources 					

            - Site Index
            - Disclaimer
            - Freedom of Information Act
            - Accessibility

###### 						More Resources 					

            - Information Quality
            - Privacy Policy
            - NOS For Employees
            - USA.gov

          -  National Ocean Service
          -  National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration
          -  Department of Commerce

##### 						Social 					

            - 
            - 
            - 
            - 
            -
An official website of the United States government.								Here's how you know we're official.				

##### dot gov icon**Official websites use .gov**

A **.gov** website belongs to an official government organization in the United States.

##### https icon**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.

National Ocean ServiceNational Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration

              -  Home 
              -  Ocean Facts 
              -  TOPICS ****                  - Explore All Topics
                - Careers
                - Economy
                - Ecosystems
                - Geodesy
                - Hazards
                - Navigation
                - Observations
                - Ocean
                - Recreation
                - Sea Level Rise 
                - Story Maps
                - Tools 
              -  Education 
              -  News 
              -  Podcasts 
              -  Video 
              -  Images 
              -  About Us 

HomeEducationCoralsCoral Diseases

# Black-Band Disease

This large brain coral is being  attacked by black-band disease. This disease is caused by a cyanobacteria, or   blue-green algae, and manifests itself as an expanding black band over the   surface of the coral. This is the only coral disease that can be successfully   treated. 

### Corals Lessons

              - Welcome
              - What are Corals?
              - Zooxanthellae What's That?
              - How Do Stony Corals Grow?
              - How Do Coral Reefs Form?
              - Where Are Coral Reefs Found?
              - How Do Corals Reproduce?
              - Importance of Coral Reefs
              - Natural Threats to Coral Reefs
              - Anthropogenic Threats to Corals
              - Coral Diseases
              - Protecting Coral Reefs
              - References
              - Roadmap to Resources 
              - Subject Review (PDF)

----

National Science Teaching Association (NSTA)

###### **Search** Education

###### Get **Social**

Contact Us

            - Provide Feedback 
            -  Contact Us 
            -  Report an error 

##### Science. Service.Stewardship.

###### 						About NOS 					

            - About Us
            - NOS Program Offices
            - Media Inquiries
            - Website Acknowledgements

###### 						Resources 					

            - Site Index
            - Disclaimer
            - Freedom of Information Act
            - Accessibility

###### 						More Resources 					

            - Information Quality
            - Privacy Policy
            - NOS For Employees
            - USA.gov

          -  National Ocean Service
          -  National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration
          -  Department of Commerce

##### 						Social 					

            - 
            - 
            - 
            - 
            -
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.                  

###### Small Business Administration

          - [License No. 09/09-0496]

Notice is hereby given that HCAP Partners V, L.P., 3636 Nobel Dr., Suite 401, San Diego, CA 92122, a Federal Licensee under the Small Business Investment Act of 1958, as amended (“the Act”), in connection with the financing of a small concerns, has sought an exemption under Section 312 of the Act and Section 107.730, Financings which Constitute Conflict of Interest of the Small Business Administration (“SBA”) Rules and Regulations (13 CFR 107.730). HCAP Partners V, L.P. (“HCAP V”) is proposing to provide financing to Cubex LLC (“Company”) to support the Company's growth.

The proposed transaction is brought within the purview of § 107.730 of the Regulations because HCAP Partners III, L.P. (“HCAP III”), an Associate of HCAP V by virtue of Common Control as defined in § 107.50, holds a 22% of equity interest in the Company. By virtue of HCAP III's equity ownership, the Company and HCAP V are also Associates. HCAP III expects to receive $19.5 million from the proposed transaction.

Therefore, the proposed transaction requires a regulatory exemption pursuant to 13 CFR 107.730. Notice is hereby given that any interested person may submit written comments on the transaction within fifteen days of the date of this publication to Associate Administrator for Investment, U.S. Small Business Administration, 409 Third Street SW, Washington, DC 20416.

Bailey DeVries,

Associate Administrator, Office of Investment and Innovation.

[FR Doc. 2022-13781 Filed 6-27-22; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 8026-09-P
# Introduction

mailto:tara.a.butler4.civ@mail.mil

# Table of Contents

# 1.Contract Spending by State

# 2.Contract Spending by Cnty

# 3.Top Defense Vendors

# 4.Contract Spending by Type

# 5.Contract Spending by Svc

# 6.DoD Personnel Nbrs, by State

# 7.DoD Personnel Nbrs, by Cnty

# 8.DoD Personnel by Type

# 9.DoD Personnel by Service

# 10.DoD Prnl Spending, by State

# 11.DoD Prnl Spending, by Cnty

# 12.Ttl Def. Spending by State

# 13.Def Spending as % State GDP

# 14.Pct of Ttl U.S. Def. Spend

# 15.Def. Spending per Resident

# 16.All Stats, FY2019
Patricia JOHNSON, Doris Laryea, Lovie H. Jones, and Geraldine Collier v. Lynwood LUCAS and Joe Peacock, t/a Triangle Timber Services.

No. 158A05.

Supreme Court of North Carolina.

October 7, 2005.

Appeal pursuant to N.C.G.S. § 7A-30(2) from the decision of a divided panel of the Court of Appeals, 168 N.C.App. 515, 608 S.E.2d 336 (2005), dismissing as interlocutory an appeal from a partial summary judgment entered 9 June 2003 by Judge Howard E. Manning, Jr. in Superior Court, Wake County. Heard in the Supreme Court 13 September 2005.

Hunter, Higgins, Miles, Elam & Benjamin, P.L.L.C., by Robert N. Hunter, Jr., Greensboro, for plaintiff-appellees.

Ligon and Hinton, by George Ligon, Jr., Raleigh, for defendant-appellant Lucas.

PER CURIAM.

AFFIRMED.

Justice EDMUNDS did not participate in the consideration or decision of this case.
MITCHUM v. GASKILL.

No. COA04-977.

Court of Appeal of North Carolina

Filed August 2, 2005.

Certification Date August 22, 2005.

Appeal from the Carteret (02CVS295)

Case reported without published opinion No error.
#### Jewell Soffar FOWLER, Appellant, v. UNITED STATES of America.

No. 14870.

United States Court of Appeals Eighth Circuit.

July 21, 1953.

J. R. Wilson, El Dorado, Ark., for appellant.

J. Edward Williams, Little Rock, Ark., Acting Asst. Atty. Gen., Roger P. Marquis, Attorney, Department of Justice, Edmund B. Clark, Attorney, Department of Justice, Washington, D. C., and James T. Gooch, U. S. Atty., Little Rock, Ark., for appellee.

PER CURIAM.

Appeal from District Court dismissed without taxation of costs in favor of either of parties in this Court, on motion of appellant.
102 Office of Local Defense Community Cooperation — Defense Spending by State, FY 2020

TENNESSEE 

#34 #46 0.6% $497 #34 #28 #33 

$3.4 B SPENT IN 0.9% OF STATE GDP OF TOTAL U.S. PER RESIDENT $2.3 B CONTRACT 27,052 NUMBER OF $1.1 B PERSONNEL 

STATE DEFENSE SPENDING SPENDING PERSONNEL SPENDING 

, DEFENSE CONTRACTS

By Type 

Supplies and Construction: 15%

Equipment: 29%

Research and

Service: 39% Development: 17%

By Service 

Army

29%

Navy/Marines

16%

Air Force

37%

Other Defense

18%

DEFENSE PERSONNEL 

Allocations, By Type

Active Duty: 8%

Reserve: 20%

Civilian: 24%

National 

Guard: 47%

Allocations, By Service 

Army

61%

Navy/Marines

19%

Air Force

17%

Other Defense

2%

Top Defense Contractors 

FedEx

BAE Systems

Bechtel Group

Chemring Group

Boeing

A&K Construction Inc.

Oak Ridge Tool - Engineering Inc.

Jacobs

Harbert International

Integration Innovation Inc.

(M = millions)

$422.3 M

$351.2 M

$285.5 M

$103.4 M

$96.7 M

$56.1 M

$47.5 M

$44.2 M

$37.2 M

$33.5 M

Contract Awards Performed (By Fiscal Year, billions)

$4.1

FY13 FY16 FY18 FY19

$2.3 $2.1 $1.8 $1.6 $1.6 $1.3

FY14 FY15

$1.4

FY17 FY20

$1.1 BILLION 27,052

TOTAL PAYROLL TOTAL PERSONNEL 

Top Defense Personnel Locations

County Active Civilian National

Duty Guard

Shelby 1,453 2,546 1,402

Davidson 414 1,123 2,416

Blount 24 102 1,665

Rutherford 22 117 906

Knox 82 385 194

Hamilton 48 89 394

Montgomery 47 1,221 90

Coffee 55 451 273

Washington 41 32 76

Gibson 0 34 370

Reserve

1,394

1,303

ND 

479

799

886

ND 

ND 

290

0

Total

6,795

5,256

ND 

1,524

1,460

1,417

ND 

ND 

439

404
Office of Local Defense Community Cooperation — Defense Spending by State, FY 2020 103

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

FISCAL YEAR 2018 FISCAL YEAR 2018 TENNESSEE

FISCAL YEAR 2020 

TOP DEFENSE PERSONNEL SPENDING LOCATIONS (M=millions)

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

Shelby

Coffee

Sullivan

Montgomery

Hardeman

Anderson

Knox

Davidson

Greene

Franklin

(M = millions)

$633.3 M 

$409.9 M

$372.4 M

$280.0 M

$103.5 M

$85.3 M

$61.4 M

$60.4 M

$55.9 M

$40.6 M

Shelby

Davidson

Montgomery

Blount

Coffee

Knox

Rutherford

Hamilton

Madison

Gibson

$390.1 M

$223.0 M

$84.8 M 

$62.1 M

$46.8 M 

$46.3 M 

$38.7 M

$34.9 M

$15.9 M

$10.2 M

Montgomery Sullivan

Greene

Davidson Anderson

Knox

Coffee

Shelby Hardeman Franklin

Montgomery

Davidson

Shelby

Coffee

Gibson Knox

Madison

Rutherford

Hamilton

Blount
STATE v. Craig C. WISSINK.

No. 484P05.

Supreme Court of North Carolina.

September 1, 2005.

M. Alexander Charns, Durham, for Craig C. Wissink.

Edward W. Grannis, Jr., District Attorney, for State.

The following order has been entered on the motion filed on the 1st day of September 2005 by Attorney General for Temporary Stay:

"Motion Allowed pending determination of Petition for Discretionary Review by order of the Court in conference this the 1st day of September 2005."
C OURT OF A PPEALS FOR THE
F IRST D ISTRICT OF T EXAS AT H OUSTON

O RDER

Appellate case name: Texas Department of Criminal Justice; Texas Department of Public Safety Director Steven McCraw; and Texas Attorney General Ken

Paxton v. Matthew Bovee

Appellate case number: 01

- 20

- 00311

- CV

Trial court case number: D

- 1

- GN

- 19

- 008849

Trial court: 345th District Court of Travis County

In this interlocutory appeal, Appellants T exas Department of Criminal Justice, Texas Department of Public Safety Director Steven McCraw (in his official capacity only) and Texas Attorney General Ken Paxton(in his official capacity only) appeal from the trial court’s March 6, 2020 orders (1) denyin g their plea to the jurisdiction and (2) granting a temporary injunction enjoining them from requiring appellee to register as a sex offender or participate in sex offender therapy. See T EX

. C IV

. P RAC

. & R EM

. C ODE §§ 51.104(a)(4) (authorizing interlocutory appeal from temporary injunction); 51.104(a)(8) (authorizing interlocutory appeal from denial of plea to jurisdiction). Appellants have filed an emergency motion requesting that this Court stay the temporary injunction during the pendency of their appeal. Appellants’ motion is DENIED

. In response to A ppellants’ motion, A ppellee Matthew Bovee filed a “Motion for Emergency Relief and Petition for Injunction” requesting that this Court (1) enjoin A ppellants from conducting hearings based on the procedures se t out in Texas Administrative Code Title 37, Part 5, Chapter 148 and Board of Pardons and Paroles Directive 148.300; and (2) further enjoin

A ppellants from requiring appellee to register as a sex offender while the appeal is pending. Appellee has also file d an “Emergency Motion to Stay Appellants’ Motion for Emergency Stay.” Appellee’s motions are DENIED.

It is so ORDERED.

Judge’s signature:

____

/s/ Gordon Goodman

____ Acting individually

Date:

_____ May 7, 2020

____