alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
IV

House Calendar No. 96

105TH CONGRESS

1ST SESSION H. RES. 242

[Report No. 105–267]

Waiving points of order against the conference report to accompany the

bill (H.R. 2266) making appropriations for the Department of Defense

for the fiscal year ending September 30, 1998, and for other purposes.

IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

SEPTEMBER 24, 1997

Mr. GOSS, from the Committee on Rules, reported the following resolution;

which was referred to the House Calendar and ordered to be printed

RESOLUTION

Waiving points of order against the conference report to

accompany the bill (H.R. 2266) making appropriations

for the Department of Defense for the fiscal year ending

September 30, 1998, and for other purposes.

1 Resolved, That upon adoption of this resolution it

2 shall be in order to consider the conference report to ac3 company the bill (H.R. 2266) making appropriations for

4 the Department of Defense for the fiscal year ending Sep5 tember 30, 1998, and for other purposes. All points of

6 order against the conference report and against its consid-
2

HRES 242 RH

1 eration are waived. The conference report shall be consid2 ered as read.

House Calendar No. 96

105TH CONGRESS

1ST SESSION H. RES. 242

[Report No. 105–267]

RESOLUTION

Waiving points of order against the conference refor other purposes. the fiscal year ending September 30, 1998, and appropriations for the Department of Defense for port to accompany the bill (H.R. 2266) making

SEPTEMBER 24, 1997

Referred to the House Calendar and ordered to be

printed
EXHIBIT 13.2



Certification of Chief Financial 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 Annual Report of Logan Resources Ltd., a company organized under the Business Corporation Act (British Columbia)(the Company) on Form 20-F as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the Report), the undersigned, Judith T. Mazvihwa, CFO/Director of the Company, certifies, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. (S) 1350, as adopted pursuant to (S) 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that:



(1)  The Report fully complies with the requirements of section 13(a) or

15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934; and



(2)  The information contained in the Report fairly presents, in all

material respects, the financial condition and result of operations

of the Company.



/s/ Judith T. Mazvihwa

Judith T. Mazvihwa, CFO/Director



Date: October 17, 2006
* Pursuant to Local Rule 47.5, the court has determined

that this opinion should not be published and is not precedent

except under the limited circumstances set forth in Local Rule

47.5.4.

IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT

 

No. 95-41009

Summary Calendar

 

LEE ANTHONY JOHNSON,

Plaintiff-Appellant,

versus

ANN RICHARDS, Governor of Texas, ET AL.,

Defendants,

C. RAINE ET AL.

 Defendants-Appellees.

- - - - - - - - - -

Appeal from the United States District Court

for the Eastern District of Texas

USDC No. 6:94-cv-197

- - - - - - - - - -

April 25, 1997

Before JONES, DeMOSS and PARKER, Circuit Judges.

PER CURIAM:*

 Texas prisoner Lee Anthony Johnson, No. 290961, moves this

court for leave to proceed in forma pauperis (IFP) on appeal from

the dismissal of his civil rights complaint. On January 15,

1997, Johnson was ordered to file an application to proceed IFP

on appeal which complied with the requirements of the Prison
No. 95-41009

- 2 -

Litigation Reform Act of 1995 (PLRA). The order held Johnson’s

appeal in abeyance for 30 days pending payment of the $105 filing

fee or submission of the required documents pursuant to the PLRA. 

Johnson timely responded; however, the documentation submitted by

Johnson does not comply with the requirements imposed by the PLRA

because he did not submit information regarding his prison trust

account for the period required. See § 1915(a), (b). 

Accordingly, Johnson’s motion for leave to proceed IFP on appeal

is DENIED, and his appeal is dismissed for want of prosecution. 

See 5th Cir. R. 42.3. Should Johnson wish to reinstate his

appeal, he is instructed to pay the $105 filing fee to the clerk

of the district court within 30 days from the date of this order. 

 MOTION DENIED. APPEAL DISMISSED.
<TABLE> <S> <C>


<ARTICLE> 7
<CIK> 0001049537
<NAME> GE FINANCIAL ASSURANCE HOLDINGS, INC.
<MULTIPLIER> 1,000
       
<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   3-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          DEC-31-1999
<PERIOD-START>                             JAN-01-1999
<PERIOD-END>                               MAR-27-1999
<DEBT-HELD-FOR-SALE>                            36,567
<DEBT-CARRYING-VALUE>                                0
<DEBT-MARKET-VALUE>                                  0
<EQUITIES>                                         343
<MORTGAGE>                                       3,146
<REAL-ESTATE>                                        0
<TOTAL-INVEST>                                  42,161
<CASH>                                             156
<RECOVER-REINSURE>                               1,545
<DEFERRED-ACQUISITION>                           1,491
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                  56,965
<POLICY-LOSSES>                                 36,851
<UNEARNED-PREMIUMS>                                891
<POLICY-OTHER>                                   1,797
<POLICY-HOLDER-FUNDS>                              527
<NOTES-PAYABLE>                                    697
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                             0
<OTHER-SE>                                       7,265
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                    56,965
<PREMIUMS>                                         839
<INVESTMENT-INCOME>                                748
<INVESTMENT-GAINS>                                  16
<OTHER-INCOME>                                     120
<BENEFITS>                                       1,163
<UNDERWRITING-AMORTIZATION>                         64
<UNDERWRITING-OTHER>                               307
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                    189
<INCOME-TAX>                                        72
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                                117
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                           25
<NET-INCOME>                                       142
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                        0
<EPS-DILUTED>                                        0
<RESERVE-OPEN>                                       0
<PROVISION-CURRENT>                                  0
<PROVISION-PRIOR>                                    0
<PAYMENTS-CURRENT>                                   0
<PAYMENTS-PRIOR>                                     0
<RESERVE-CLOSE>                                      0
<CUMULATIVE-DEFICIENCY>                              0
        


</TABLE>
H. Res. 458

In the House of Representatives, U.S.,

June 18, 1998.

Resolved, That during further consideration of the bill

(H.R. 2183) to amend the Federal Election Campaign Act of

1971 to reform the financing of campaigns for elections for

Federal office, and for other purposes, in the Committee of

the Whole House on the state of the Union pursuant to

House Resolution 442, all points of order against each

amendment printed in the report of the Committee on Rules

accompanying this resolution are waived if the amendment is

offered by a Member designated in the report. An amendment

so offered shall be considered as read.

Attest:

Clerk.
IV

105TH CONGRESS

2D SESSION H. RES. 540

Designating minority membership on certain standing committees of the

House.

IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

SEPTEMBER 16, 1998

Mr. PALLONE submitted the following resolution; which was considered and

agreed to

RESOLUTION

Designating minority membership on certain standing

committees of the House.

1 Resolved, That the following named Member be, and

2 is hereby, elected to the following standing committee of

3 the House of Representatives:

4 COMMITTEE ON SCIENCE: Mr. Sherman.

Æ
#### HELBEIN v. SOUTHERN METALS CO.

No. 264P97

Case below: 126 N.C.App. 224

Petition by plaintiff for discretionary review pursuant to G.S. 7A-31 denied 23 July 1997.
##### 



1.
    
    I have reviewed this annual report on Form 10-K of AMH Holdings, Inc.;
 2.
    
    Based on my knowledge, this report does not contain any untrue statement of a material fact
or omit to state a material fact necessary to make the statements made, in light of the
circumstances under which such statements were made, not misleading with respect to the period
covered by this report;
 3.
    
    Based on my knowledge, the financial statements, and other financial information included in
this report, fairly present in all material respects the financial condition, results of
operations and cash flows of the registrant as of, and for, the periods presented in this
report;
 4.
    
    The registrants other certifying officer and I are responsible for establishing and
maintaining disclosure controls and procedures (as defined in Exchange Act Rules 13a-15(e) and
15d-15(e)) for the registrant and have:
 a)
    
    Designed such disclosure controls and procedures, or caused such disclosure controls
and procedures to be designed under our supervision, to ensure that material information
relating to the registrant, including its consolidated subsidiaries, is made known to us by
others within those entities, particularly during the period in which this report is being
prepared;
 b)
    
    Evaluated the effectiveness of the registrants disclosure controls and procedures and
presented in this report our conclusions about the effectiveness of the disclosure controls
and procedures, as of the end of the period covered by this report based on such
evaluation; and
 c)
    
    Disclosed in this report any change in the registrants internal control over financial
reporting that occurred during the registrants most recent fiscal quarter (the
registrants fourth fiscal quarter in the case of an annual report) that has materially
affected, or is reasonably likely to materially affect, the registrants internal control
over financial reporting; and
 5.
    
    The registrants other certifying officer and I have disclosed, based on our most recent
evaluation of internal control over financial reporting, to the registrants auditors and the
audit committee of the registrants board of directors (or persons performing the equivalent
functions):
 a)
    
    All significant deficiencies and material weaknesses in the design or operation of
internal control over financial reporting, which are reasonably likely to adversely affect
the registrants ability to record, process, summarize and report financial information;
and
 b)
    
    Any fraud, whether or not material, that involves management or other employees who
have a significant role in the registrants internal control over financial reporting.
 Date: March 23, 2007
    By:
    /s/ Thomas N. ChieffeThomas N. ChieffePresident and Chief Executive Officer
(Principal Executive Officer)
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE Northern District of Illinois − CM/ECF LIVE, Ver 6.3.3

Eastern Division

John Doe

Plaintiff,

v. Case No.:

1:20−cv−04518

Honorable John

J. Tharp Jr.

The Individuals, Corporations, Limited Liability

Companies, Partnerships, and Unincorporated

Associations Identified on Schedule A Hereto, et al.

Defendant.

NOTIFICATION OF DOCKET ENTRY

This docket entry was made by the Clerk on Tuesday, December 1, 2020:

 MINUTE entry before the Honorable John J. Tharp, Jr: Plaintiff's motion for

default judgment [37] refers to an attached Amended Schedule A, which is not attached to

the document. Plaintiff is directed to file the Amended Schedule A on the docket,

reflecting the defendants who have been granted an extension to respond to the complaint

[43]. Mailed notice(air, )

ATTENTION: This notice is being sent pursuant to Rule 77(d) of the Federal Rules of

Civil Procedure or Rule 49(c) of the Federal Rules of Criminal Procedure. It was

generated by CM/ECF, the automated docketing system used to maintain the civil and

criminal dockets of this District. If a minute order or other document is enclosed, please

refer to it for additional information.

For scheduled events, motion practices, recent opinions and other information, visit our

web site at www.ilnd.uscourts.gov.

Case: 1:20-cv-04518 Document #: 44 Filed: 12/01/20 Page 1 of 1 PageID #:2051
#### Aram ASTVATSATRYAN; et al., Petitioners, v. John ASHCROFT, Attorney General, Respondent.

No. 03-73797.

Agency Nos. [ AXX-XXX-XXX ], [ AXX-XXX-XXX ].

United States Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit.

Submitted Dec. 6, 2004.*

Decided Dec. 15, 2004.

James L. Rosenberg, Law Offices of James L. Rosenberg, Los Angeles, CA, for Petitioners.

Regional Counsel, Western Region Immigration & Naturalization Service, Laguna Niguel, CA, Ronald E. Lefevre, Chief Legal Officer, Office of the District Counsel, San Francisco, CA, David V. Bernal, Attorney, Jamie M. Dowd, U.S. Department of Justice, Civil Div./Office of Immigration Lit., Washington, DC, for Respondent.

Before GOODWIN, ALARCÓN and TROTT, Circuit Judges.

*

 The panel unanimously finds this case suitable for decision without oral argument. *See*Fed. R.App. P. 34(a)(2).

MEMORANDUM**

Aram Astvatsatryan and Gayane Avagyan, natives and citizens of Armenia, petition for review of the Board of Immigration Appeals (“BIA”) decision affirming an immigration judge’s (“IJ”) denial of their application for asylum. We have jurisdiction under 8 U.S.C. § 1252. We review for substantial evidence the denial of asylum, *Cordonr-Garcia v. INS,*204 F.3d 985, 990 (9th Cir.2000), and we deny the petition for review.

We accept Astvatsatryan’s testimony as true because neither the IJ nor the BIA made an explicit adverse credibility finding. *See Kalubi v. Ashcroft,*364 F.3d 1134, 1137 (9th Cir.2004). Substantial evidence, however, supports the BIA’s determination that Astvatsatryan failed to prove his eligibility for asylum. The record contains no evidence that compels the conclusion that Astvatsatryan either suffered past persecution, *see Prasad v. INS,*101 F.3d 614, 617 (9th Cir.1996), or that any mistreatment he may have suffered was on account of a protected ground, *see Sangha v. INS,*103 F.3d, 1482, 1486 (9th Cir.1997).

PETITION FOR REVIEW DENIED.

**

 This disposition is not appropriate for publication and may not be cited to or by the courts of this circuit except as provided by Ninth Circuit Rule 36-3.
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 Amendment No. 1 to Annual Report of SmartPros Ltd. (the “Company”) on Form 10-K/A for the fiscal year ended December 31, 2013, as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC) on the date hereof (Report), I, Stanley P. Wirtheim, 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, 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.

A signed original of this written statement has been provided to the Company and will be retained by the Company and furnished to the SEC or its staff upon request.








Date:April 29, 2014/s/ Stanley P. WirtheimStanley P. WirtheimChief Financial Officer(Principal Financial Officer)
As of: 8/17/21 3:54 PM 

Received: August 16, 2021 PUBLIC SUBMISSION Status: Pending_Post 

Tracking No. kse-ym9d-hlum 

Comments Due: August 19, 2021 

Submission Type: Web 

Docket: NIST-2021-0004 

Artificial Intelligence Risk Management Framework 

Comment On: NIST-2021-0004-0001 

Artificial Intelligence Risk Management Framework 

Document: NIST-2021-0004-DRAFT-0006 

Comment on FR Doc # 2021-1617 6 

Submitter Information 

Email: Karimom 

Organization: NCI, INC 

General Comment 

8. How organizations take into account benefits and issues related to inclusiveness in AI design, 

development, use and evaluation - and how AI design and development may be carried out in a way that 

reduces or manages the risk of potential negative impact on individuals, groups, and society.

Answer: Organizations should provide continuous investment in the growth and maturation of AI

engineering by engaging the broader AI research community through academic partnerships, providing 

specific opportunities for early-career researchers, and safely and responsibly integrating AI technology 

into larger, complex engineered system. They should establish a program for training and education that is 

relevant to the respective Al-related skills and knowledge required of personnel who develop, use, or 

manage AI solutions. Various AI training programs tailored to the specific roles and responsibilities 

should be made widely available. Communities of Practice (CoPs) should be established to promote 

engagement and information exchange, as well as to ensure that wide range of practitioners understand 

the potential adversary impact AI may have on tasks, individuals, groups, or society as a whole and 

monitor and reduce the associated risks. 

11. How the Framework could be developed to advance the recruitment, hiring, development, and 

retention of a knowledgeable and skilled workforce necessary to perform AI-related functions within

organizations.

Answer: Organizations should consider relying on innovative companies and academic partnerships to 

develop cutting edge AI methods, since they are better positioned to retain R&D talent. In addition, there 

is a need for specific guidance and tools for project managers to balance explainability, accuracy, 

repeatability, potential biases and their tradeoffs and make the appropriate decision for a project. Areas 

for increased focus should include AI competitive and escalatory dynamics and avoiding "black box" 

problem with AL Organizations should provide training to the employees at the appropriate levels to 

create understanding of the technology, development processes, and operational methods of its AI,

including transparent and auditable methodologies, data sources, design procedure, and documentation.
**EXHIBIT32.2**

 

**CERTIFICATIONSPURSUANT TO**

**18 U.S.C. SECTION1350,**

**AS ADOPTEDPURSUANT TO**

**SECTION 906 OF THESARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002**

 

In connection with the AnnualReport of U.S. Premium Beef, LLC (the Company) on Form 10-K for the periodended August 30, 2008 as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission onthe date hereof (the Report), I, Scott J. Miller, Chief Reporting andCompliance 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) TheReport fully complies with the requirements of section 13(a) or 15(d) of theSecurities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended; and 

 

(2) Theinformation contained in the Report fairly presents, in all material respects,the financial condition and results of operations of the Company. 

 

|   |   |                                                                   |
|--------|--------|------------------------------------------------------------------------|
| By:    |   |  /s/ Scott J. Miller                                              |
|   |   |  Scott J. Miller

* Chief Reporting and  Compliance Officer* |

 

Date: November24, 2008
From: Cindy Chen 

Sent: Saturday, August 27, 2022 9:26:33 PM (UTC-05:00) Eastern Time (US & Canada)

To: aiframework <aiframework@nist.gov>

Subject: Feedback on the Definition of "Fairness"

Hi NIST,

Thank you for all the hard work in creating this draft of the "AI Risk Management Framework"! I wanted 

to give feedback on your definition and acknowledgement of the subjective meaning of fairness, 

because the mention on page 14 was very vague.

While the definition of fairness is context-specific, something worth noting is how organizations must 

balance both "within-group" fairness (such as equality between outcomes for women vs men) as well as 

equality between false negatives and false positives. Often, it is impossible to balance both aspects and 

it is indeed specific to the use-case. I bring this up because it would be ideal to offer an example (like 

what I mentioned) of what subjective fairness might look like.

My thoughts on giving an example of defining what fairness looks like stems from this research paper: 

https://dl.acm.org/doi/10.1145/3531146.3533245

All the best,

Cindy Chen
**Exhibit 32.1**

 

**CERTIFICATIONFURNISHED PURSUANT TO**

**18 U.S.C. SECTION 1350**

**AS ADOPTEDPURSUANT TO**

**SECTION 906OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002**

 

In connection with theQuarterly Report of Pliant Corporation (the “Company”) on Form 10-Q forthe fiscal quarter ended June 30, 2005, as filed with the Securities andExchange Commission on the date hereof (the “Report”), I, Harold C. Bevis,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, thatto the best of my knowledge:

 

(1)                                  TheReport fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) or 15(d) ofthe Securities Exchange Act of 1934; and

 

(2)                                  Theinformation contained in the Report fairly presents, in all material respects,the financial condition and results of operations of the Company for and as ofthe end of the periods covered in this Report.

 
| /s/ Harold C. Bevis     |   |
|-------------------------|--------|
| Harold C. Bevis         |
| Chief Executive Officer |
| August 9, 2005     |

 

----
Continuing Education Units 

VERIFICATION OF ATTENDANCE FORM 

Certification Number:________________ 

attended the following professional educational activity. 

(NAME) 

Title: National Initiative for Cybersecurity Education (NICE) Webinar: What’s New - Revisions to the NICE 

Framework 

Date(s): July 15, 2020 CEU Hours Earned: 1 hr 

Sponsor(s): National Institute of Standards and Technology (NIST) 

Explanation of Event: This webinar will provide attendees with the inside scoop on proposed changes to the NICE 

Framework and provide instructions on how to provide feedback and suggested edits before the official revision is released 

in November. Webinar attendees will hear presentations from: 

• Matthew Smith, Strategic Advisor, Huntington Ingalls Industries 

• Pam Frugoli, O*NET and Competency Model Team Lead, U.S. Department of Labor 

• Matt Isnor, Program Lead, Cyberspace Workforce Development, U.S. Department of Defense 

• Lisa Dorr, Senior Talent Management Strategist, Office of the Chief Human Capital Officer, Department of 

Homeland Security 

• Ken Vrooman, Senior Advisor, Cyber Defense Education and Training, CISA 

Location: Virtual Webinar; www.nist.gov/nice/webinars 

Name of Meeting Host: Rodney Petersen, Director of the National Initiative for Cybersecurity Education (NICE) 

Contact Information: 

nist.gov/nice 

nist.nice@nist.gov 

The Continuing Education Units form is provided as a courtesy. It is the responsibility of the 

attendee to complete and submit with their certifying authority.