alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
This opinion is subject to administrative correction before final disposition.

Before 

STEPHENS, STARITA, DEERWESTER

Appellate Military Judges

_________________________

UNITED STATES

Appellee

v.

Steven C. DOSSETT

Cryptological Technician (Interpretive) Second Class (E-5), 

U.S. Navy

Appellant

No. 202000271

Decided: 17 May 2021

Appeal from the United States Navy-Marine Corps Trial Judiciary 

Military Judge: 

Melanie J. Mann

Sentence adjudged 7 October 2020 by a general court-martial convened at Joint Base Pearl Harbor-Hickam, Hawaii, consisting of a 

military judge sitting alone. Sentence in the Entry of Judgment:

reduction to E-1, confinement for 24 months, forfeiture of all pay and 

allowances, and a dishonorable discharge.

For Appellant: 

Captain Jeremiah J. Sullivan, JAGC, USN

For Appellee:

Brian K. Keller, Esq.
United States v. Dossett, NMCCA No. 202000271

Opinion of the Court

2

_________________________

This opinion does not serve as binding precedent under 

NMCCA Rule of Appellate Procedure 30.2(a).

_________________________

PER CURIAM:

After careful consideration of the record, submitted without assignment of 

error, we have determined that the findings and sentence are correct in law 

and fact and that no error materially prejudicial to Appellant’s substantial 

rights occurred. Uniform Code of Military Justice arts. 59, 66, 10 U.S.C. 

§§ 859, 866.

The findings and sentence are AFFIRMED.

FOR THE COURT:

RODGER A. DREW, JR.
1 In The 

### Court of Appeals
Ninth District of Texas at Beaumont

_________________
NO. 09

- 12

- 00 3 5 9

- C R



### _________________

A N T H O N Y D E N A R D M A Y O , Appellant

V.

THE STATE OF TEXAS , Appellee

________________________________________________________________________

On Appeal from the 252nd District Court Jefferson County, Texas Trial Cause No. 0 6

- 9 9 0 1 9

________________________________________________________________________
ORDER

On November 3 0 , 20 12 , appellant’s appointed counsel filed a motion to withdraw

and a brief which urges this Court to review this appeal pursuant to Anders v. California

,
386 U.S. 738, 87 S.Ct. 1396, 18 L.Ed.2d 493 (1967). See In re Schulman , 252 S.W.3d

403 , 408

- 09 (Tex. Crim. App. 2008). Counsel certified service of the motion to withdra w

and the brief on the appellant. Counsel states that he provided appellant with a copy of

the reporter’s record and notified appellant of his right to review the record and file a pro

se brief.2

It is, therefore, ORDERED that appellant, A n t h o n y D e n a r d M a y o , be given 60

days from the date hereof to file a pro se brief. It is, further, ORDERED that the State

may file a reply brief, due 30 days from the date appellant files his brief, or if no brief is

filed by appellant, 70 days from the date hereof.

It is further ORDERED that counsel for appellant advis e appellant of his right to

seek discretionary review under Texas Rule of Appellate Procedure 68. See Tex. R. App.

P. 48.4; see also Tex. R. App. P. 68.

ORDER ENTERED D ecember 6, 2012

.

PER CURIAM

Before McKeithen, C.J., Gaultney and Horton, JJ.
Status of Upcoming 

Special Exposure Cohort (SEC) Petitions

LaVon B. Rutherford, CHP

National Institute for Occupational Safety and Health

Division of Compensation Analysis and Support

July 2013

Idaho Falls, ID 
Purpose

 Provide an update to the Advisory Board on the 

current number of qualified petitions under 

evaluation and sites being evaluated through the 

83.14 process

 Provide SEC information to the Advisory Board in 

support of its preparations for future Work Group 

sessions and Advisory Board meetings
SEC Summary Table

(as of July 5, 2013)

 Petitions received 213

 Petitions in qualification process 2 

 Petitions qualified for evaluation 129

• NIOSH evaluation in progress 1

• NIOSH evaluation completed 128

– SEC Evaluation Reports 

 with the Advisory Board 

 for recommendation 8 

 Petitions not qualifying for evaluation 82

Note: Petitions not qualifying include five petitions received prior to the 

rule becoming final and Petition 34 where the site was de-listed. 
SEC Petition Currently under Advisory 

Board Review

 Petition Evaluations the Advisory Board has taken 

action on, but are under continued evaluation:

• Feed Materials Production Center (Fernald)

• Hanford

• Pantex Plant

• Los Alamos National Laboratory (LANL)

• Savannah River Site

• Brookhaven National Laboratory

• Baker Brothers

• Joslyn Manufacturing and Supply Co.
SEC Petition Currently under Advisory 

Board Review—cont. 

 Petition Evaluations with the Advisory Board for 

initial action:

• Rocky Flats Plant
Potential SEC Petitions (83.14)

 Sandia National Laboratory – Livermore

 Sandia National Laboratory – Albuquerque (1945-

1948)

 General Atomics (modify existing class definition)

 Dayton Project Monsanto (modify based on change 

in facility designation)

• Modify based on change in facility designation to a DOE 

facility

• Modify to add the 9 month period when operations were 

being shifted from “The Dayton Project” to Mound
SEC Petitions in 

Qualification/Evaluation

Qualification Process

 K-25 – 1993-1997

 LANL – Will not qualify

Evaluation Process

 Kansas City Plant – 1949 – 1993
```

[Congressional Bills 115th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[H.R. 5792 Referred in Senate (RFS)]

<DOC>
115th CONGRESS
  2d Session
                                H. R. 5792

_______________________________________________________________________

                   IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES

            October 1 (legislative day, September 28), 2018

Received; read twice and referred to the Committee on Homeland Security 
                        and Governmental Affairs

_______________________________________________________________________

                                 AN ACT

 
 To designate the facility of the United States Postal Service located 
at 90 North 4th Avenue in Brighton, Colorado, as the ``Detective Heath 
                      McDonald Gumm Post Office''.

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

SECTION 1. DETECTIVE HEATH MCDONALD GUMM POST OFFICE.

    (a) Designation.--The facility of the United States Postal Service 
located at 90 North 4th Avenue in Brighton, Colorado, shall be known 
and designated as the ``Detective Heath McDonald Gumm Post Office''.
    (b) References.--Any reference in a law, map, regulation, document, 
paper, or other record of the United States to the facility referred to 
in subsection (a) shall be deemed to be a reference to the ``Detective 
Heath McDonald Gumm Post Office''.

            Passed the House of Representatives September 28, 2018.

            Attest:

                                                 KAREN L. HAAS,

                                                                 Clerk.
```
IN THE MISSOURI COURT OF APPEALS

HANDDOWN LIST OF JANUARY 12, 2016

WESTERN DISTRICT

THE FOLLOWING CASES WERE AFFIRMED PURSUANT TO RULE 84.16(b)

AND ISSUED PER CURIAM

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

WD78431 Keith Drone vs. Missouri Department of Corrections, et al

THE FOLLOWING CASES WERE AFFIRMED PURSUANT TO RULE 30.25(b)

AND ISSUED PER CURIAM

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

None
Exhibit 32.1

CERTIFICATION PURSUANT TO18 U.S.C. Section 1350,AS ADOPTED PURSUANT TOSECTION 906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002

In connection with the Quarterly Report of Dong Fang Minerals, Inc. (the "Company") on Form 10-Q for the period ended July 31, 2008, as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date here of (the "report"), I, Jian Hong Liu, Chief Executive Officer and Chief Financial 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, 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 this Report fairly presents, in all material respects, the financial condition and results of operations of the Company.
|   
|    | Dated this 10thday of September, 2008.                                                                                                               
|   

JIAN HONG LIUJian Hong Liu, President, Principal Executive Officer,Principal Financial Officer, Principal Accounting Officerand Treasurer.














---
<TABLE>
                                                                 Exhibit 12

                       ENRON CORP. AND SUBSIDIARIES
                    Computation of Ratio of Earnings to
                               Fixed Charges
                                (Unaudited)

<CAPTION>
(In Millions)                                 Year Ended December 31,
                                       1997    1996    1995    1994    1993

<S>                                    <C>   <C>     <C>     <C>      <C>
Earnings available for fixed charges
  Income from continuing operations    $105  $  584  $  520  $  453   $333
  Less:
     Undistributed earnings and
      losses of less than 50% owned
      affiliates                        (89)    (39)    (14)     (9)   (20)
     Capitalized interest of
      nonregulated companies            (16)    (10)     (8)     (9)   (26)
  Add:
     Fixed charges(a)                   674     454     436     487    471
     Minority interest                   80      75      27      30     28
     Income tax expense                 (65)    297     310     190    148

       Total                           $689  $1,361  $1,271  $1,142   $934

Fixed charges
  Interest expense(a)                  $624  $  404  $  386  $  445   $436
  Rental expense representative of
   interest factor                       50      50      50      42     35

     Total                             $674  $  454  $  436  $  487   $471

Ratio of earnings to fixed charges     1.02     3.00    2.92   2.34    1.98

<FN>
(a) Amounts exclude costs incurred on sales of accounts receivable.
</TABLE>
# 16-527

McNab v. The State of New York

3-9-17

201.0763
[Federal Register Volume 73, Number 35 (Thursday, February 21, 2008)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Page 9454]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 08-733]


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

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

Federal Aviation Administration

14 CFR Part 71

[Docket No. FAA-2008-027; Airspace Docket No. 08-ASW-3]


Establishment of Class E5 Airspace; Eagle Pass, TX

AGENCY: Federal Aviation Administration (FAA), DOT.

ACTION: Direct final rule; request for comments; correction.

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

SUMMARY: This action corrects a direct final rule published in the 
Federal Register January 22, 2008 (73 FR 3625), Airspace Docket No. 08-
ASW-3, FAA Docket No. FAA-2008-027. In that rule, an error was made in 
the geographic coordinates of the legal description for Maverick County 
Memorial International. This action also deletes that portion of the 
legal description referencing Notice to Airmen effective date and 
times.

DATES: Effective Dates: 0901 UTC April 10, 2008. The Director of the 
Federal Register approves this incorporation by reference action under 
Title 1, Code of Federal Regulations, part 51, subject to the annual 
revision of FAA Order 7400.9 and publication of conforming amendments.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Joe Yadouga, Central Service Center, 
System Support Group, Federal Aviation Administration, Southwest 
Region, Ft. Worth, Texas 76193-0530; telephone (817) 222-5597.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

History

    On January 22, 2008, a direct final rule for Airspace Docket No. 
08-ASW-3, FAA Docket No. FAA-2008-027, was published in the Federal 
Register (73 FR 3625), establishing Class E airspace at Maverick County 
Memorial International Airport, Eagle Pass, TX. The geographic 
coordinates of the legal description for the airport were incorrect. 
The coordinates should read lat. 28[deg]51'26'' N., long. 
100[deg]30'48'' W. This action corrects that error, and also removes 
the sentences referencing Notice to Airmen effective date and times.

Correction to Direct Final Rule

0
Accordingly, pursuant to the authority delegated to me, the legal 
description, as published in the Federal Register January 22, 2008 (73 
FR 3625), Airspace Docket No. 08-ASW-3, FAA Docket No. FAA-2008-027, 
and incorporated by reference in 14 CFR 71.1, is corrected as follows:


Sec. 71.1  Amended

0
On page 3626, column 3, line 25, correct the geographic coordinates for 
Maverick County Memorial International Airport to read:

ASW TX CLASS E5 Eagle Pass, TX [Corrected]

Maverick County Memorial International Airport
    (Lat. 28[deg]51'26'' N., long. 100[deg]30'48'' W.)

    That airspace extending upward from 700 feet above the surface 
within a 6.5-mile radius of Maverick County Memorial International 
Airport to exclude the international boundaries of Mexican airspace.

    Issued in Fort Worth, TX, on February 8, 2008.
Donald R. Smith,
Manager, System Support Group, ATO Central Service Center.
[FR Doc. 08-733 Filed 2-20-08; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4910-13-M
DISTRICT COURT OF APPEAL OF THE STATE OF FLORIDA

FOURTH DISTRICT

FABIANA T. LAZCANO,

Appellant,

v.

DYCK-O'NEAL, INC.,

Appellee.

No. 4D17-3632 

[March 29, 2018]

Appeal of a non-final order from the Circuit Court for the Seventeenth 

Judicial Circuit, Broward County; Michael Robinson, Judge; L.T. Case No. 

14-11315 (13).

Mark D. Kaufman of the Law Offices of Mark D. Kaufman, P.A., 

Plantation, for appellant. 

David M. Snyder of David M. Snyder, P.A., Tampa, Susan B. Morrison 

of the Law Offices of Susan B. Morrison, P.A., Tampa, and Joshua D. 

Moore of the Law Offices of Daniel C. Consuegra, Tampa, for appellees. 

PER CURIAM.

Affirmed.

DAMOORGIAN, LEVINE and KLINGENSMITH, JJ., concur. 

* * *

Not final until disposition of timely filed motion for rehearing.
Summary – ORAUT-OTIB-0008, Rev. 00 1 SC&A – January 20, 2011

Overview of

STANDARD COMPLEX-WIDE CONVERSION FACTOR FOR OVERESTIMATING 

EXTERNAL DOSES MEASURED WITH THERMOLUMINESCENT DOSIMETER

(ORAUT-OTIB-0008, Rev. 0) 

Workers have the potential to receive a radiation dose to their bodies from external sources at 

many Department of Energy (DOE) and Atomic Weapons Employer facilities. A particular

method of estimating the dose received is based upon available actual measurements of external 

dose taken at the time of worker exposure. One popular type of small radiation detector, known 

as a thermoluminescent dosimeter or TLD, was worn by workers on their clothing. Since the late 

1980s, DOE has required that personnel dosimetry programs be accredited under the DOE 

Laboratory Accreditation Program, or under the National Voluntary Laboratory Accreditation 

Program. That requirement improves confidence in the accuracy of the dosimeter readings taken 

during and following that period. 

This Technical Information Bulletin (TIB), Standard Complex-wide Conversion Factor for 

Overestimating External Doses Measured with Thermoluminescent Dosimeter (ORAUT-OTIB0008), provides guidance on how to apply reasonable, overestimating, and complex-wide

assumptions for interpreting recorded doses of monitored workers during the time period when 

the DOE laboratory accreditation program applied. The TIB analysis selects a reasonable 

overestimate of external radiation dose for cases which, based on the information contained in 

the claim, are not likely to be compensated. The procedure provides an efficient method for

expediting a claim by quickly determining when even highly claimant-favorable calculations will 

not result in compensation. 

SUMMARY OF FINDINGS RESULTING FROM THE TECHNICAL REVIEW

The technical contractor for the Advisory Board on Radiation and Worker Health (the Board) 

reviewed the TIB and produced the four findings summarized below: 

Finding #1: The TIB lacks clarity and can be misinterpreted by personnel performing dose 

reconstructions. 

Finding #2: The TIB contains excessive amounts of upfront background information and does 

not provide dose reconstructors with any guidance for its implementation until well into the text. 

Finding #3: The procedure neither identifies its hierarchical position among other related

procedures nor does it clarify whether the dose reconstructor has the option to use either this TIB

or Attachment D-2 of other guidance, External Dose Reconstruction (ORAUT-PROC-0006). 

Finding #4: The TIB fails to clarify that the use of the standard correction factor eliminates the 

need for uncertainty analysis. 
Summary – ORAUT-OTIB-0008, Rev. 00 2 SC&A – January 20, 2011

RESOLUTION OF FINDINGS

In response to the findings identified above, the National Institute for Occupational Safety and 

Health (NIOSH) agreed that the TIB, and, as appropriate, ORAUT-PROC-0006, need to be 

revised to address the findings. These documents were subsequently revised and reviewed by 

the Board’s technical contractor.

All issues were resolved to the satisfaction of the Board.
I 

115TH CONGRESS 

2D SESSION H. R. 5772 

To designate the J. Marvin Jones Federal Building and Courthouse in Amarillo, Texas, as the ‘‘J. Marvin Jones Federal Building and Mary Lou 

Robinson United States Courthouse’’. 

IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES 

MAY 10, 2018 

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

Committee on Transportation and Infrastructure 

A BILL 

To designate the J. Marvin Jones Federal Building and 

Courthouse in Amarillo, Texas, as the ‘‘J. Marvin Jones 

Federal Building and Mary Lou Robinson United States 

Courthouse’’. 

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

3 SECTION 1. DESIGNATION. 

4 The J. Marvin Jones Federal Building and Court5 house located at 205 SE 5th Ave., Amarillo, Texas, shall 

6 be known and designated as the ‘‘J. Marvin Jones Federal 

7 Building and Mary Lou Robinson United States Court8 house’’. 


pamtmann on DSKBFK8HB2PROD with BILLS
2 

•HR 5772 IH

1 SEC. 2. REFERENCES. 

2 Any reference in a law, map, regulation, document, 

3 paper, or other record of the United States to the Federal 

4 building and United States courthouse referred to in sec5 tion 1 shall be deemed to be a reference to the ‘‘J. Marvin 

6 Jones Federal Building and Mary Lou Robinson United 

7 States Courthouse’’. 

Æ 


pamtmann on DSKBFK8HB2PROD with BILLS
BIZCOM U.S.A., INC.
                        2003 ANNUAL REPORT ON FORM 10-KSB
                                  EXHIBIT 14.0


CODE OF ETHICS
--------------

The Company has adopted the following Code of Ethics that applies to the
Company's principal executive officer, principal financial officer, principal
accounting officer or controller, or persons performing similar functions (the
"Responsible Executives"):

     1)   The Responsible Executives will at all times conduct themselves
          honestly and ethically, and ethically handle actual or apparent
          conflicts of interests between personal and professional
          relationships. The Company will maintain internal procedures so that
          all executives and employees conduct themselves in a similar fashion.

     2)   The Responsible Executives will ensure that all reports and documents
          filed with the U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission and other
          public communications made by the Company will contain full, fair,
          timely and understandable disclosures.

     3)   The Responsible Executives will comply with all applicable
          governmental laws, rules and regulations. The Company insists that all
          executives and employees conduct themselves in a similar fashion.

     4)   The Company will maintain a system so that employees will promptly
          report internal violations of the Code of Ethics to a Responsible
          Executive.

     5)   The Board of Directors will hold Responsible Executives accountable
          for adherence to the Code of Ethics, and the Responsible Executives
          will hold all other executives and employees accountable to the Code
          of Ethics.
EXHIBIT 23.1
                                                                    ------------


            CONSENT OF INDEPENDENT REGISTERED PUBLIC ACCOUNTING FIRM


We have issued our report dated February 11, 2005 accompanying the consolidated
financial statements included in the Annual Report of Decatur First Bank Group,
Inc. on Form 10-KSB for the year ended December 31, 2004.  We hereby consent to
the incorporation by reference of said report in the Registration Statement of
Decatur First Bank Group, Inc. on Form S-8, effective August 11, 2000 (file no.
33-43590).

                                         /S/ PORTER KEADLE MOORE, LLP



Atlanta, Georgia
March 28, 2005
Exhibit 13.2





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 Annual Report of Eltek Ltd. (the “Company”) on Form 20-F for the period ending December 31, 2012 as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the “Report”), I, Amnon Shemer, 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.





/s/ Amnon Shemer*


Amnon Shemer


Vice President, Finance


and Chief Financial Officer





April 29, 2013





*           The originally executed copy of this Certification will be maintained at the Company’s offices and will be made available for inspection upon request.





This Certification accompanies this Annual Report on Form 20-F pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002 and shall not be deemed filed by the Company for purposes of Section 18 of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended (the “Exchange Act”).  This Certification will not be deemed to be incorporated by reference into any filing under the Securities Act of 1933, as amended, or the Exchange Act, except to the extent that the Company specifically incorporates it by reference.
#### State *ex rel.*Top Rock Bottling Company, *A Corporation v.*Hereford, Judge, Circuit Court, Putnam County, *et al.*

(No. 12090)

Submitted January 11, 1961.

Decided January 31, 1961.

*Palmer*& *Elkins, J. Campbell Palmer, III,*for relator.

*Cletus B. Hanley,*for respondents.

Browning, Judge:

In this original proceeding in prohibition petitioner seeks to prohibit the respondent judge from proceeding further in the civil actions of Holbrook v. Top Rock Bottling Company, a Corporation, which cases were removed to the Circuit Court of Putnam County by the Judge of the Common Pleas Court of Kanawha County under the purported authority of Code, 56-9-1, as amended. That section provides for the removal of a case for good cause shown “if pending in a circuit *79court, to any other circuit court, and if pending in any court of limited jurisdiction heretofore mentioned to the circuit court of that county: * *

Under this statute the only court to which these cases could have been removed is the Circuit Court of Ka-nawha County. The writ must be awarded.

*Writ awarded.*