alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
ARMED SERVICES BOARD OF CONTRACT APPEALS 

Appeals of --

Watts-Granite, A Joint Venture 

Under Contract No. N44255-10-C-8004 

APPEARANCES FOR THE APPELLANT: 

) 

) 

) 

) 

) 

) 

APPEARANCES FOR THE GOVERNMENT: 

ASBCA Nos. 59714, 59715, 59716 

59773,59775,59976 

Peter N. Ralston, Esq. 

Alix K. Town, Esq. 

Meghan A. Douris, Esq. 

Shaun C. Kennedy, Esq. 

Oles Morrison Rinker & Baker, LLP 

Seattle, WA 

Ronald J. Borro, Esq. 

Navy Chief Trial Attorney 

Anthony K. Hicks, Esq. 

Matthew S. Hawkins, Esq. 

Trial Attorneys 

ORDER OF DISMISSAL 

The dispute has been settled. The appeals are dismissed with prejudice. 

Dated: 23 August 2016 

Administrative udge 

Armed Services Board 

of Contract Appeals 
I certify that the foregoing is a true copy of the Order of Dismissal of the Armed 

Services Board of Contract Appeals in ASBCA Nos. 59714, 59715, 59716, 59773, 

59975, 59976, Appeals of Watts-Granite, A Joint Venture, rendered in conformance with 

the Board's Charter. 

Dated: 

2 

JEFFREY D. GARDIN 

Recorder, Armed Services 

Board of Contract Appeals
<TABLE> <S> <C>


<ARTICLE>                     5
<MULTIPLIER>                                   1,000

<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   6-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                              APR-28-2000
<PERIOD-END>                                   OCT-29-1999
<CASH>                                         118,620
<SECURITIES>                                   0
<RECEIVABLES>                                  9,463,333
<ALLOWANCES>                                   401,641
<INVENTORY>                                    0
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                               17,692,422
<PP&E>                                         4,903,443
<DEPRECIATION>                                 2,433,992
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                 29,406,316
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                          16,436,672
<BONDS>                                        0
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                          0
<PREFERRED>                                    0
<COMMON>                                       2,355
<OTHER-SE>                                     9,506,300
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                   29,406,316
<SALES>                                        0
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                               23,778,436
<CGS>                                          0
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                  12,113,736
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                               10,227,418
<LOSS-PROVISION>                               0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                             472,162
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                965,120
<INCOME-TAX>                                   468,241
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                            496,879
<DISCONTINUED>                                 0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                0
<CHANGES>                                      0
<NET-INCOME>                                   496,879
<EPS-BASIC>                                    0.21
<EPS-DILUTED>                                  0.21


</TABLE>
<PAGE>


                                                                   EXHIBIT 10.48

This Note evidences a loan in the principal amount of Forty Nine Thousand Three
Hundred Ten Dollars and Thirty Three Cents ($49,310.33) made by James R.
Rubenstein, M.D. to Radiation Therapy Services, Inc. on _____________, 1998.

$49,310.33                                                   Fort Myers, Florida

                                 PROMISSORY NOTE

         For value received, RADIATION THERAPY SERVICES, INC., a Florida
corporation ("Debtor"), promises to pay to the order of James R. Rubenstein,
M.D. ("Payee"), an individual resident of the state of Florida, at
________________________, Florida, or such address as may be specified from time
to time by the holder hereof, the principal sum of Forty Nine Thousand Three
Hundred Ten Dollars and Thirty Three Cents ($49,310.33). Interest shall accrue
at the rate of eight percent (8%) per annum, compounded monthly.

         Debtor may make prepayments of principal on this Note without penalty.

         Failure of Debtor to make any payment of interest or principal when due
shall be deemed to be an event of default. It shall also be an event of default
if Debtor files a petition seeking relief, or consents to the filing or
instituting of proceedings against him, under any federal or state bankruptcy
law or other similar law, or causes, permits or consents to the appointment of,
or taking possession by, a receiver or similar official of all or substantially
all of Debtor's property. On the occurrence of an event of default, Payee may
declare the entire amount due hereunder immediately due and payable (except that
in the case of an event of default described in the immediately preceding
sentence, the entire amount due hereunder automatically shall become due and
payable), and the interest rate hereunder shall be increased from and after such
default to twelve percent (12%) per annum (but in no event in excess of the
maximum rate permitted by Florida law).

         This Note shall be binding upon Debtor and Debtor's legal
representatives, heirs and assigns. Presentation for payment, notice of
dishonor, protest and notice of protest are hereby waived.

         Debtor agrees to pay and shall pay all documentary stamp tax due on
this Note.

         In the event of any litigation arising under this Note, the
non-prevailing party shall pay the prevailing party's attorneys' fees and costs
incurred in litigation.

         This Note shall be governed by the laws of the State of Florida and may
not be changed or terminated orally.

                                        DEBTOR:
                                        RADIATION THERAPY SERVICES, INC.


                                        By: /s/ David M. Koeninger
                                           -----------------------------------
                                            David M. Koeninger
                                            CFO
1

In The

Court of Appeals

Ninth District of Texas at Beaumont

___________________

NO. 09-13-00059-CR

___________________

RODNEY DWAYNE CLEVELAND, Appellant

V.

THE STATE OF TEXAS, Appellee

_________________________________________________________________ _

On Appeal from the 252nd District Court

Jefferson County, Texas

Trial Cause No. 94049

_________________________________________________________________ _

ORDER

Appellant Rodney Dwayne Cleveland filed a motion for rehearing of our 

opinion of March 6, 2013. The opinion dismissed Cleveland’s appeal because the 

trial court entered a certification of Cleveland’s right to appeal, certifying that this 

is a plea-bargain case and that Cleveland has no right of appeal. See Tex. R. App. 

P. 25.2(a)(2). The Court requested a response from the State. In its response, the 

State indicates that Cleveland’s appeal involved revocation of community 
2

supervision, which is not a plea bargain case, and the State also explains that “there 

is no indication that the defendant waived his right of appeal.” Upon reviewing the 

newly-filed clerk’s record, we agree with the State.

For these reasons, we grant Cleveland’s motion for rehearing, set aside our 

opinion of March 6, 2013, and reinstate Cleveland’s appeal. See Dears v. State, 

154 S.W.3d 610, 614-15 (Tex. Crim. App. 2005) (An appellate court has the ability 

to examine a certification for defectiveness.); Waters v. State, 124 S.W.3d 825, 826 

(Tex. App.—Houston [14th Dist.] 2003, pet. ref’d) (Recitations in a certification of 

the right to appeal must be true and supported by the record.). The reporter’s 

record is due June 3, 2013. 

ORDER ENTERED MAY 2, 2013.

PER CURIAM

Before McKeithen, C.J., Gaultney and Horton, JJ.
9766,

#### Wise *v.*Mohawk Rubber Company.

Decided January 15, 1919.

Complaint; from city court of Sandersville—Judge Jordan. April 23, 1918.

*W. M. Goodwin,*for plaintiff in error.

*Evans & Evans,*contra.

Jenkins, J.

1. Where one holds another out as his special *agent,*the principal is bound by the agent’s apparent authority to do the particular thing thus authorized, as well as to d'o any and all things usual and necessary, and to employ all usual and necessary means that may be reasonably required, in the due, proper, and ordinary performance of the particular purpose of the appointment. Civil Code (1910), § 3595; *Bass Co.*v. *Granite City Co.,*119 *Ga.*124 (45 S. E. 980) ; *Raleigh &c. Railroad Co.*v. *Pullman Co.,*122 *Ga.*700, 705, (50 S .E. 1008). But a person dealing with such an agent takes the risk as to any extension of the agent’s authority beyond that which is thus authorized, and the burden rests upon him to show authority from the principal for any acts of the agent other than such usual and ordinary acts as are reasonably necessary to a due performance of the particular purpose of the agency. *Napier*v. *Strong,*19 *Ga. App.*401 (3), 408 (91 S. E. 579).

2. It not being shown that the collateral contract made by the purchaser with the traveling salesman was a usual and necessary incident to the sale, or that the salesman had authority to make such a contract, it had no binding effect upon the principal; nor would the .fact that the seller, after the buyer had apprised him of such unauthorized agreement, proceeded to sell and furnish to the buyer another consignment of the articles of merchandise, have the effect of ratifying the terms of the original unauthorized agreement, it appearing also that at the time the subsequent sale was made Jhe seller repudiated the agreement in question, and shipped the additional articles without any agreement or understanding, expressed or implied, that the repudiated promise of his agent would be recognized.

*Judgment affirmed.*

*Wade, C. J., and Luke, J., concur.*
Michigan Supreme Court

Lansing, Michigan

Robert P. Young, Jr., Chief Justice

Michael F. Cavanagh

Marilyn Kelly

Stephen J. Markman

Diane M. Hathaway

Mary Beth Kelly

Brian K. Zahra, Justices

I, Corbin R. Davis, Clerk of the Michigan Supreme Court, certify that the

foregoing is a true and complete copy of the order entered at the direction of the Court.

 _________________________________________

 Clerk

July 24, 2012

d0716

Order 

July 24, 2012

145010 & (17)(19)(20)

GE MONEY BANK,

Plaintiff-Counter

Defendant-Appellee,

v SC: 145010

COA: 306506

Ingham CC: 11-000655-AV

CONSTANCE HADDAD,

Defendant-Counter

Plaintiff-Appellant. 

_________________________________________/

On order of the Court, the motion for immediate consideration of the motion to 

quash subpoena and direct the transmission of the record is GRANTED. The motion to 

quash subpoena and direct transmission of the record is DENIED. The motion to waive 

fees and costs and for miscellaneous relief is DENIED; this ruling does not affect the 

Court’s earlier waiver of the defendant’s filing fee. The application for leave to appeal 

the March 16, 2012 order of the Court of Appeals is considered, and it is DENIED, 

because we are not persuaded that the questions presented should be reviewed by this 

Court.
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<ARTICLE> 5
<MULTIPLIER> 1,000

<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   6-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          DEC-31-2000
<PERIOD-START>                             JAN-01-2000
<PERIOD-END>                               JUN-30-2000
<CASH>                                           5,468
<SECURITIES>                                         0
<RECEIVABLES>                                        0
<ALLOWANCES>                                         0
<INVENTORY>                                          0
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                                15,503
<PP&E>                                         952,135
<DEPRECIATION>                                (29,885)
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                 943,221
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                            7,025
<BONDS>                                        508,631
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                           248
<OTHER-SE>                                     294,556
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                   943,221
<SALES>                                              0
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                                25,265
<CGS>                                                0
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                        0
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                 6,002
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                     0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                              10,385
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                  6,345
<INCOME-TAX>                                         0
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                              6,345
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                     6,345
<EPS-BASIC>                                       0.31
<EPS-DILUTED>                                     0.30


</TABLE>
108TH CONGRESS

2D SESSION H. R. 3858

AN ACT

To amend the Public Health Service Act to increase

tation.efforts and information on islet cell transplanand to provide for better coordination of Federalthe supply of pancreatic islet cells for research,

108TH CONGRESS

2D SESSION H. R. 3858

AN ACT

To amend the Public Health Service Act to increase the

supply of pancreatic islet cells for research, and to provide for better coordination of Federal efforts and information on islet cell transplantation.

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

•HR 3858 EH

1 SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE.

2 This Act may be cited as the ‘‘Pancreatic Islet Cell

3 Transplantation Act of 2004’’.

4 SEC. 2. ORGAN PROCUREMENT ORGANIZATION CERTIFI5 CATION.

6 Section 371 of the Public Health Service Act (42

7 U.S.C. 273) is amended by adding at the end the fol8 lowing:

9 ‘‘(c) Pancreata procured by an organ procurement or10 ganization and used for islet cell transplantation or re11 search shall be counted for purposes of certification or re12 certification under subsection (b).’’.

13 SEC. 3. ANNUAL ASSESSMENT ON PANCREATIC ISLET CELL

14 TRANSPLANTATION.

15 Section 429 of the Public Health Service Act (42

16 U.S.C. 285c–3) is amended by adding at the end the fol17 lowing:

18 ‘‘(d) In each annual report prepared by the Diabetes

19 Mellitus Interagency Coordinating Committee pursuant to

20 subsection (c), the Committee shall include an assessment

21 of the Federal activities and programs related to pan22 creatic islet cell transplantation. Such assessment shall,

23 at a minimum, address the following:

24 ‘‘(1) The adequacy of Federal funding for tak25 ing advantage of scientific opportunities relating to

26 pancreatic islet cell transplantation.
3

•HR 3858 EH

1 ‘‘(2) Current policies and regulations affecting

2 the supply of pancreata for islet cell transplantation.

3 ‘‘(3) The effect of xenotransplantation on ad4 vancing pancreatic islet cell transplantation.

5 ‘‘(4) The effect of United Network for Organ

6 Sharing policies regarding pancreas retrieval and

7 islet cell transplantation.

8 ‘‘(5) The existing mechanisms to collect and co9 ordinate outcomes data from existing islet cell trans10 plantation trials.

11 ‘‘(6) Implementation of multiagency clinical in12 vestigations of pancreatic islet cell transplantation.

13 ‘‘(7) Recommendations for such legislation and

14 administrative actions as the Committee considers

15 appropriate to increase the supply of pancreata

16 available for islet cell transplantation.’’.

Passed the House of Representatives October 5,

2004.

Attest:

Clerk.
UNPUBLISHED

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

No. 04-1550

DIRECTV INCORPORATED,

Plaintiff - Appellee,

versus

STAN A. HARRISON,

Defendant - Appellant.

Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern

District of Virginia, at Richmond. James R. Spencer, Chief

District Judge. (CA-03-454)

Submitted: February 5, 2007 Decided: February 15, 2007

Before WILKINSON, NIEMEYER, and MOTZ, Circuit Judges.

Dismissed by unpublished per curiam opinion.

Stan A. Harrison, Appellant Pro Se. Clement Dean Carter, III,

Donald Jay Richardson, WILLIAMS MULLEN, Richmond, Virginia; Stephen

Gerard Test, Robert Henry Burger, WILLIAMS MULLEN, Virginia Beach,

Virginia, for Appellee.

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.
- 2 -

PER CURIAM:

Stan A. Harrison appeals the district court’s order

granting summary judgment in favor of DirecTV, Inc., on its action

seeking damages for satellite signal piracy. Because the

underlying debt has been discharged in Harrison’s Chapter 7

bankruptcy proceeding, we dismiss this appeal as moot. In light of

this disposition, we also deny DirecTV’s motion to vacate the

district court judgment. We dispense with oral argument because

the facts and legal contentions are adequately presented in the

materials before the court and argument would not aid the

decisional process.

DISMISSED
1

Mobile ID Device Features 

Mobile ID September, 2007 

Tom Hopper thopper@leo.gov 

mailto:thopper@leo.gov

2

Mobile ID Device Features 

• Accuracy 

• Security 

• Usability 

• Additional Functions 

3

Accuracy 

• Fingerprints – More fingers 

– Simultaneous capture 

– Image quality feedback 

• Facial Image SAP 40+ 

• Iris Image > 100 pixel diameter 

4

Security 

• Authentication 

• Secure Communication 

5

Usability 

• Return facial image 

• One handed operation 

• Fast response 

• DL / Bar code / magnetic stripe reader 

• Full shift removable battery 

• Rugged 

• Balanced / Small 

6

Additional Functions 

• E-citations  - Additional Fields 

• On Device Search 

• NCIC Access
The NSRL and Video Games

Why I Get to Buy Video Games at the Office
Disclaimer

Trade names and company products are 

mentioned in the text or identified. In no case 

does such identification imply recommendation 

or endorsement by the National Institute of 

Standards and Technology, nor does it imply that 

the products are necessarily the best available 

for the purpose. 
The National Software Reference Library (NSRL)

• The NSRL was established in 1999 to aid in the 

automated filtering of digital evidence

• The three objects of the NSRL

– Collection of physical and digital software

– Database of software meta-information

– Published Reference Data Set (RDS)

• Goal: collect as much useful software as 

possible, and publish data helpful to 

investigations
NSRL Critical Data

• Software metadata

– Application name, version, 

application type

– Manufacturer info

– OS info

– Languages

• Cryptographic hashes

– SHA256, SHA1, MD5

• Over 280 Million 

file hashes 

published across 

NSRL RDS sets
Uses of the NSRL RDS

ANALYSIS

PROGRAM

Acquired

Devices

RDS

FILES

UNKNOWN FILES

KNOWN FILES
Software Collection

• Types of software collected

– Floppy disks, CDs, digital 

downloads, disk prints, 

mobile device applications, 

PC games, and more

• Need popular software

• Need software that’s common on 

an average computer

• Need software that may be used 

criminally
Why the NSRL Collects Games

• Computer games are very popular

• Thousands of games are free across multiple 

platforms

• Games may account for many files on an 

acquired device

• Games may have large amounts of multimedia 

files 
Game Statistics

• 1,799 games collected

• 7,544 distinct versions 

of the 1,799 games

• Over half a million file 

hashes across all 

games collected

• 27% of games are 

larger than 1G

• 27% of games have 

more than 1,000 files
What Games do we Collect?

• We collect games from some of the largest 

gaming market places:

– Blizzard (Activision Blizzard)

– Origin (Electronic Arts)

– Steam (Valve Software)

– And soon, Epic Games

• We focus on games that are most popular now, 

and were popular in the past

– We use publicly available popularity metrics to 

determine game popularity
Games Collection Process

Virus

Scan

Install /

Update

Bag

Game

Normalize

Metadata QC

Database RDS
Impacts of Game Collection

• Additions to the RDS

• Working on games has impacted development 

work in forensic formats, like AFF4

• Working on the games workflow has lead to 

internal NSRL improvements, and moved us 

closer to a new RDS format, which would include 

SHA256 hashes

• Working with games has spurred us to find better 

identifiers for the supply chain of software, in the 

form of SWID tags
We are always open to suggestions for new 

software to collect

Let us know at nsrl@nist.gov
Advanced linear and nonlinear optical metrology in support of next-generation lithography 

We have developed a new concept for improving the resolution capabilities of advanced optical lithography 

systems, based on using high-index, uniaxial-crystal last lens elements (e.g., sapphire) and transverse 

polarized illumination. We showed that high-order nonlinear spatial dispersion effects which could 

compromise this approach, have high symmetries that can be corrected for by standard aberration 

correction techniques. (See Figure 2.1.) Measurements of these effects are in progress. Our project has 

generally now turned to investigating these and other types of nonlinear optical effects relevant to advanced 

193 nm optical lithography, using a unique pump-and-probe laser system capable of scanning down to 

190 nm. One important class of effects is related to high light intensities, which can change the optical 

properties of materials through changes in the electron band/state occupancies. We are exploring these 

effects in oxide nanocrystals as a way to create saturable absorbing materials for potential use as 

lithography image contrast enhancement layers and to create nonlinear resists for multiple-exposure 

lithography. Another type of nonlinear effect is multi-photon absorption, which causes damage in lens 

materials, a serious problem in the industry. We are investigating the mechanisms by pump-and-probe 

measurements, and exploring possible amelioration approaches. A completely uncharacterized class of 

nonlinear effects we are investigating results from short-wavelength (finite-k) combined with high 

intensities. We anticipate that these effects may impact lithography imaging as laser imaging intensities 

increase and resolution is extended. 

Figure 2.1: The calculated three spatial-dispersion-induced anisotropic index distortions in sapphire, with 

the sapphire optic axis vertical. The surfaces represent the magnitude of the index deviations in a given 

direction. Only the third effect represents azimuthal distortions, and due to its high symmetry can be 

corrected for by lens crystal-axis clocking. 

Contact: Dr. John Burnett 

(301) 975-2679 

john.burnett@nist.gov
EXHIBIT 32.1
 
 CERTIFICATION PURSUANT TO
 18 U.S.C. SECTION 1350,
 AS ADOPTED PURSUANT TO
 SECTION 906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002
 
 
 In connection with the Quarterly Report of Cavalry Bancorp, Inc., (the Company) on Form 10-Q for the period ending June 30, 2004, as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the Report), I, Ed C. Loughry, Jr., Chairman of the Board of Directors and Chief Executive Officer of the Company, certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. ss. 1350, as adopted pursuant to ss. 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.
 
 
 
 Date: August 5, 2004
by:Ed C. Loughry, Jr.Chairman of the Board of Directors and Chief Executive Officer