alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<ARTICLE> 5
<MULTIPLIER> 1,000
       
<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   3-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          MAR-31-1998
<PERIOD-END>                               JUN-30-1997
<CASH>                                             225
<SECURITIES>                                         0
<RECEIVABLES>                                      428
<ALLOWANCES>                                         0
<INVENTORY>                                        259
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                                   912
<PP&E>                                            6404
<DEPRECIATION>                                    3733
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                    3837
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                              665
<BONDS>                                              0
<COMMON>                                            31
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          2
<OTHER-SE>                                        2611
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                      3837
<SALES>                                             90
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                                    99
<CGS>                                              115
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                      115
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                   118
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                     0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                                  14
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                      0
<INCOME-TAX>                                         0
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                               (148)
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0                                    
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                      (198)
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                     (.06)
<EPS-DILUTED>                                        0
        

</TABLE>
10126.

#### CANADY *v.*THE STATE.

Decided February 1, 1919.

Although the law of manslaughter should not be gi.ven in charge to the jury in a case in which that grade of homicide is not involved, the giving of instructions thereon is not prejudicial and not cause for a new trial to one convicted of voluntary manslaughter when the evidence for the' State .made a case of murder and none of the evidence nor the statement of the defendant would justify an acquittal.

Indictment for murder—conviction of voluntary manslaughter; from Calhoun superior court—Judge Harrell. August 17, 1918.

*C. J. Taylor,*for plaintiff in error.

*R. C. Bell, solicitor-general, F. A. Hooper,*contra.

*376Bloodworth, J.

The only special ground of the motion for new trial complains that the court erred in charging the jury upon voluntary manslaughter. “Though a charge upon the law of voluntary manslaughter was barely warranted, the fact that such a charge was given does not, in the present case, present any reason for granting the accused, who was convicted of this offense, a new trial; for the State’s evidence made against him a ease of murder, and there was no testimony which would have justified an acquittal. The homicide being manifestly felonious, and the verdict being the most favorable to the accused which could, in any view of the ease, have been rendered, he was not injured by an instruction which afforded the jury an opportunity to thus grade the crime.” *Carver*v. *State,*105 *Ca.*461 (30 S. E. 433). But even if voluntary manslaughter was not involved in this case, neither the evidence of the witnesses nor the statement of the defendant would warrant an acquittal, and the rule is thus laid down in *Robinson*v. *State,*109 *Ga.*506 (34 S. E. 1017) : “If in a trial for murder the law of voluntary manslaughter is not involved, the court should not charge thereon, but so doing will not, in such a ease, be cause for a new trial, if the accused be rightly convicted of murder, or if, though he be convicted of voluntary manslaughter only, a verdict of murder was really demanded. If, however, in such a case, the accused be convicted of voluntary manslaughter when there wa's evidence which would have warranted an acquittal, or when his statement, if believed, wóuld have so warranted, there should he a new trial.” We can say of the verdict in the instant case as was said by Judge Lumpkin of the verdict in the *Robinson*ease, “There was too much of righteousness in it for us to set it at naught.”

*Judgment affirmed.*

*Broyles, P. J., concurs. Stephens, J., concurs dubitante:*
**Annex 2 (Revised Effective August, 2008)****Particular Terms of Employee’s Employment**Title: Effective on October 8, 2007, the Employee shall serve as the **Chief ExecutiveOfficer (“CEO”)**, provided however that in the event that Expedia, Inc. completes a Rule 13e-3Transaction, the Board of Directors shall, in its sole discretion have the right to change theEmployee’s title.Reporting Requirement: The Employee will report to the Board of Directors.Responsibilities: Such duties and responsibilities as are ordinarily associated with theEmployee’s title(s) and such other duties may be specified by the Board of Directors from time totime.Annual Base Salary: The Company will pay Employee a base pay for his services renderedhereunder at an annual gross rate of **RMB 1,700,004**which shall be paid in twelve (12) monthlyinstallments of RMB 141,667 (gross figure) pursuant to the Company’s payroll policies.Number of Days of Paid Vacation per Year: 15 working days.Healthcare: During the Term, the Company will provide the Employee and his spouse andchildren below 18 years of age with medical and dental insurance coverage, provided that alleligibility requirements for plan enrollment and participation are continuously met.Scholarship Fund: Recognizing the CEO’s commitment to improving the skills and leadershipof its Employees, the Company will establish and fund a “CEO Scholarship Fund” in the amount of200,000 RMB per year. The funds of the CEO Scholarship Fund will be disbursed pursuant to the “CEOScholarship Fund Guidelines”, and any change to the Guidelines will require the prior approval ofthe CEO.e-Learning Fund: To further enhance training of Company employees, the Company will devotean additional 200,000 RMB per year to e-learning and similar training and human resourcedevelopment programs.
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF ILLINOIS

EASTERN DIVISION

ISELA CARMINE, )

on behalf of herself and all others )

similarly situated, )

)

Plaintiff, )

) Case No. 20-cv-04589

vs. )

) Honorable Marvin E. Aspen

MACYS RETAIL HOLDINGS, INC., )

)

Defendant. )

MOTION TO CORRECT PARTY NAME AND FILED CORRECTED COMPLAINT 

INSTANTER

Plaintiff Isela Carmean, by and through her attorneys, respectfully requests leave to correct 

the spelling of a party name and file a corrected complaint. In support of this motion, Plaintiff 

states as follows:

1. On August 5, 2020, Plaintiff filed her Complaint [1] in the instant matter. 

2. In error, Plaintiff’s name was misspelled in the Complaint.

3. Plaintiff’s name was listed as “Isela Carmine,” but her name is accurately spelled “Isela 

Carmean.”

4. Plaintiff regrets the error and seeks leave of this Honorable Court to file a corrected 

complaint correcting the misspelling of Plaintiff’s name, instanter. (Exhibit A, Corrected 

Complaint)

WHEREFORE, Plaintiff respectfully requests leave to file her corrected complaint 

instanter and for any further relief this Court deems fair and just.

Case: 1:20-cv-04589 Document #: 6 Filed: 08/11/20 Page 1 of 3 PageID #:22
By: /s/ Michael J. Wood

One of Plaintiff’s Attorneys

Michael Wood

Community Lawyers LLC

20 N. Clark Street, Suite 3100

Chicago, IL 60602

Tel (312) 757-1880

mwood@communitylawyersgroup.com

Case: 1:20-cv-04589 Document #: 6 Filed: 08/11/20 Page 2 of 3 PageID #:23
CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE

I, Michael J. Wood, hereby certify that on August 11, 2020, I caused to be filed the 

foregoing documents via the CM/ECF System, which caused service of the same to be had on all 

attorneys which have appeared in this case, and by service on Defendant, care of its registered 

agent:

Macy's Retail Holdings, Inc.

c/o Corporate Creations Network

350 S. Northwest Hwy-Ste 300

Park Ridge, I L 60068

By: /s/ Michael J. Wood

One of Plaintiff’s Attorneys

Michael Wood

Community Lawyers LLC

20 N. Clark Street, Suite 3100

Chicago, IL 60602

Tel (312) 757-1880

mwood@communitylawyersgroup.com

Case: 1:20-cv-04589 Document #: 6 Filed: 08/11/20 Page 3 of 3 PageID #:24
U.S. District Court for the Northern District Of Illinois

Attorney Appearance Form

Case Title: Case Number: 

An appearance is hereby filed by the undersigned as attorney for:

Attorney name (type or print): 

Firm: 

Street address: 

City/State/Zip: 

Bar ID Number: Telephone Number: 

 Yes No

 Yes No

 Yes No

 Yes No

(See item 3 in instructions)

Email Address:

Are you acting as lead counsel in this case?

Are you acting as local counsel in this case?

Are you a member of the court’s trial bar?

If this case reaches trial, will you act as the trial attorney? 

If this is a criminal case, check your status. Retained Counsel

Appointed Counsel 

If appointed counsel, are you 

a 

 Federal Defender

 CJA Panel Attorney

______________________________________________________________________

In order to appear before this Court an attorney must either be a member in good standing of this Court’s 

general bar or be granted leave to appear pro hac vice as provided for by local rules 83.12 through 83.14. 

I declare under penalty of perjury that the foregoing is true and correct. Under 28 U.S.C.§1746, this 

statement under perjury has the same force and effect as a sworn statement made under oath.

Executed on 

Attorney signature: S/

(Use electronic signature if the appearance form is filed electronically.)

Revised 8/1/2015

Case: 1:20-cv-04699 Document #: 22 Filed: 08/31/20 Page 1 of 1 PageID #:252
#### CONTESSA FOOD PRODUCTS, INC. (formerly known as ZB Industries Inc.), Plaintiff-Appellee, v. CONAGRA, INC. (doing business as Singleton Shrimp Company and as Meridian Products), Meridian Seafood Products, Inc., and Ocean Duke Corporation, Defendants-Appellants.

No. 04-1607.

United States Court of Appeals, Federal Circuit.

Nov. 29, 2004.

Before MICHEL, SCHALL, and GAJARSA, Circuit Judges.

ON MOTION

GAJARSA, Circuit Judge.

*ORDER*

The parties move jointly to stay briefing for 76 days, until February 7, 2005. We consider whether ConAgra, Inc. et al.’s (Conagra) appeal should be dismissed as premature.

ConAgra appealed from the August 6, 2004 decision of the United States District Court for the Central District of California in *Contesssa Food Prods., Inc. v. ConAgra, Inc.,*No. CV 99-04145 (C.D. Cal.) granting Contessa Food Products, Inc.’s motion for summary judgment of infringement and denying ConAgra’s motion for summary judgment of noninfringement.

The parties state that they are in the midst of mediation concerning the entry of final judgment. A review of the district court docket sheet reflects that the district court has not yet entered final judgment. Therefore, we conclude that the appeal is premature and dismiss for lack of jurisdiction. *See*Fed.R.Civ.P. 58(a)(1) (every judgment must be set forth on a separate document).

Accordingly,

IT IS ORDERED THAT:

(1) The parties’ joint motion to stay is denied.

(2) The appeal is dismissed.

(3) Each side shall bear its own costs.
##### 



Exhibit 31.1
 CERTIFICATION OF CHIEF EXECUTIVE OFFICER
PURSUANT TO SECTION 302 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002
      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
disclosures controls and procedures, as of the end of the period covered by this report
based on such evaluation; andc)
    
    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
  a)
    
    all significant deficiencies and material weaknesses in the design or operation
of internal controls over financial reporting which are reasonably likely to adversely
affect the registrants ability to record, process, summarize and report financial
information; andb)
    
    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: April 24, 2007/s/ Carlos E. AgüeroCarlos E. AgüeroChairman, President and Chief Executive Officer
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

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

Eastern Division

D'Andre Bradley, et al.

Plaintiff,

v. Case No.: 1:20−cv−04270

Honorable Ronald A. Guzman

Brendan F. Kelly, et al.

Defendant.

NOTIFICATION OF DOCKET ENTRY

This docket entry was made by the Clerk on Wednesday, September 2, 2020:

 MINUTE entry before the Honorable Ronald A. Guzman: In lieu of an initial

status hearing, the Court directs the parties to confer to discuss the nature and basis of

their claims and defenses, the possibilities for a prompt settlement or resolution of the

case, and a proposed discovery plan, including a proposed deadline for Rule 26(a)(1)

disclosures. The conference shall take place no later than 9/17/2020. Plaintiffs are

responsible for initiating the conference, and all lead counsel for all parties are required to

participate. By 9/24/2020, the parties shall file a joint written initial status report that

addresses the items listed above. Failure or refusal to participate in the conference or in

the preparation of the written report may constitute a basis for sanctions. After receiving

the report, the Court will issue an order setting a schedule for the case. Mailed notice. (kp,

)

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-04270 Document #: 12 Filed: 09/02/20 Page 1 of 1 PageID #:41
EXHIBIT
33.4




March 19,
2009




Fred
Robustelli


CDF
Funding, Inc.


5595
Trillium Boulevard


Hoffman
Estates, IL 60192






Re:GE Dealer Floorplan Master
Trust




Deutsche
Bank Trust Company Americas has delivered a Management Report on Assertion of
Compliance with Applicable Servicing Criteria dated as of February 27, 2009
(“Management Report”) for GE Dealer Floorplan Master Trust (the
“Transaction”).   Deutsche Bank Trust Company Americas reported
material noncompliance with Item 1122 (d) (1) (i) of
Regulation AB in the Management Report, however, the servicing criteria set
forth in Section 1122 (d) (1) (i) of Regulation AB was not a
servicing criteria which Deutsche Bank Trust Company Americas was required to
perform for the Transaction; therefore, such noncompliance by Deutsche Bank
Trust Company Americas with respect to such servicing criteria does not pertain
to the Transaction.




Sincerely,







DEUTSCHE
BANK TRUST COMPANY AMERICAS as Trustee








/s/ Louis BodiLouis
      Bodi
                Vice
      President
**Exhibit 13.7**

 

**CERTIFICATION PURSUANT TO 18 U.S.C. SECTION 1350**

 

In connection with the accompanying Annual Report on Form 20-F of Inmarsat Ventures Limited (the “Company”)for the annual period ended 31 December 2008 (the “Periodic Report”), I, Andrew Sukawaty, Chief Executive Officer of the Company, hereby certify pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, as adopted pursuant to Section 906 of theSarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that, to the best of my knowledge the Periodic Report fully complies with the requirements of section 13(a) or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 and the information contained in the Periodic Report fairlypresents, in all material respects, the financial condition and results of operations of the Company. 

 

 

Date: 29 April 2009
From: Gabriel Martinez <gabriel_ms@hotmail.com>

Sent: Saturday, October 16, 2021 11:31 PM

To: EO-pilots

Subject: Beating the deadline for comments

Some ideas for consideration on the labeling project.

(Whether more criteria are needed, including criteria that 

specifically address 

other components of the product beyond the device)

Software development process? do we want to know if they follow 

security minded processes? 

* Software Development Life Cycle?

* Mitigating the Risk of Software Vulnerabilities by Adopting a 

Secure Software 

Development Framework (SSDF) 

Tamper protection? Can anyone open a box and change things easily? Is 

there a level of 

protection? 

Standards used in IoT?

Thank you,

Gabriel Martinez
November 2000 

Remanufactured Device Task Force Releases Report

By Juana Williams 

In August 2000, the Remanufactured Device Task Force to the NCWM Specifications 

and Tolerances (S&T) Committee released its report and proposals for defining and 

marking remanufactured devices. This issue first appeared on the NCWM Board of 

Directors (BOD) 1996 Agenda (formerly Executive Committee Item 102-8). In 1997, 

discussions about modifying NIST Handbook 44 to address remanufactured devices 

began in a special meeting of the S&T Committee. Weights and measures officials and 

industry representatives worked diligently to reach a consensus on requirements that were 

clear, nonrestrictive, and could be uniformly enforced. The 1999 NCWM BOD agreed to 

the S&T Committee's recommendation to appoint a task force to resolve enforcement and 

NTEP issues surrounding remanufactured devices. 

Copies of the Task Force's report and proposals were made available at the Fall 2000 

regional weights and measures associations and will be included in the 2001 NCWM 

Interim Agenda. 

In summary, the proposal calls for changing the current definition of “manufactured 

device,” in Handbooks 44 and 130, and Publication 14 and adding new definitions for 

“remanufactured device,” “remanufactured element,” “repaired device,” and “repaired 

element.” In addition, the Task Force is proposing that a new marking requirement for 

remanufactured devices and main elements be added to the General Code of Handbook 

44.
ANSI INCITS 377

Fingerprint Pattern Data Form

Fingerprint Standard Update Workshop
Copyright © 2004 by SAFLINK C

ANSI INCITS 377-200

3⁄4 American National Standard for In

Technology – Finger Pattern Data Format

– Approved January 2004

3⁄4 International version at FCD stag

– ISO/IEC 19794-3
Copyright © 2004 by SAFLINK C

ANSI INCITS 377

3⁄4 Based on Robust Commercial Algo

Implementations

3⁄4 Small Area/Slide Format Sensors3⁄4 Data Reduction

– Reduction in Resolution– Cellular Representation

• Pattern broken down into “cells”• Each cell represented by a sinusoid

3⁄4 Data Format Definition
Copyright © 2004 by SAFLINK C

Record Structure
Copyright © 2004 by SAFLINK C

Record header (1 per recor

3⁄4 Format identifier3⁄4 Version number3⁄4 Length of record3⁄4 CBEFF product identifier3⁄4 Number of finger patterns in record3⁄4 Size of finger pattern in X&Y direct3⁄4 Resolution of finger pattern in X&Y 3⁄4 Number of cells in X&Y direction3⁄4 Cellular X&Y offset3⁄4 Bit depth of cell structure: angle, w

phase offset, quality

3⁄4 Cell quality granularity
Copyright © 2004 by SAFLINK C

Finger pattern record header (1 p

3⁄4 Finger location3⁄4 Impression type3⁄4 Number of views in finger pattern 3⁄4 Fingerprint pattern quality3⁄4 Length of data block (bytes), inclu

extended data
Copyright © 2004 by SAFLINK C

Finger pattern data

3⁄4 View number3⁄4 Finger pattern cell data3⁄4 Cell quality data3⁄4 Finger pattern extended data
Copyright © 2004 by SAFLINK C

Step 1 – Reduction in Reso

3⁄4 Pattern-based algorithms gener

image resolution than provided sensors

3⁄4 Cropping & resampling to a low

– Minimum - 200 ppi

Original Do
Copyright © 2004 by SAFLINK C

Step 2 – Cellular represen

3⁄4 Pattern broken down into “cells”

Sample Cell
Copyright © 2004 by SAFLINK C

Cellular representation (c

3⁄4 Each cell is represented as a sinu

waveform

3⁄4 Defined by 3 parameters:

– Ridge angle, 

θ

– Ridge spacing, 

λ

– Phase offset, 

δ

Sample

Cell

δ
Copyright © 2004 by SAFLINK C

Cellular representation (c

Cell structo represe

Local finger patternInformation in cell
Copyright © 2004 by SAFLINK C

Example

3⁄4 Original Image 128x128 x 8 bits3⁄4 Reduction in resolution to 200 dp

bits)

3⁄4 Cellular Representation 14x16 x 

– (280 bytes + 28 bytes of quality i

• ~ 50:1 reduction in data storage • (would be 200:1 for 500 dpi imag

3⁄4 Header Overhead - 43 bytes
Copyright © 2004 by SAFLINK C

Catherine J. TiltonSAFLINK Corp.1875 Campus Commons Dr, Suite 301Reston, VA 20191

ctilt

703CelFax