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

<ARTICLE> 5
       
<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   9-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          JUN-30-1998
<PERIOD-START>                             JUL-01-1997
<PERIOD-END>                               MAR-31-1998
<CASH>                                           1,828
<SECURITIES>                                         0
<RECEIVABLES>                                        0
<ALLOWANCES>                                         0
<INVENTORY>                                          0
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                                67,240
<PP&E>                                               0
<DEPRECIATION>                                       0
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                               2,227,612
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                        1,215,361
<BONDS>                                              0
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                       659,321
<OTHER-SE>                                     352,930
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                 2,227,612
<SALES>                                        555,967
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                               555,967
<CGS>                                          517,313
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                  517,313
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                               516,799
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                     0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                              22,992
<INCOME-PRETAX>                            (1,233,127)
<INCOME-TAX>                                         0
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                        (1,233,127)
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                               (1,233,127)
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                    (.19)
<EPS-DILUTED>                                    (.19)
        

</TABLE>
United States Court of Appeals

For the First Circuit

No. 01-2541

 01-2603

NEW COMM WIRELESS SERVICES, INC., D/B/A MOVISTAR,

Plaintiff, Appellee,

v.

SPRINTCOM, INC., AND SPRINT SPECTRUM LP,

Defendants, Appellants.

____________________

CENTENNIAL PUERTO RICO LICENSE CORP.,

Intervenor, Appellant.

ERRATA SHEET

The opinion of this Court issued on April 5, 2002 is

corrected as follows:

On page 17, line 17 — delete "fault and the defendant's

damage" and replace with "damage and the defendant's fault"
Electronically Filed Intermediate Court of Appeals CAAP-15-0000909 13-APR-2017 07:50 AM
IN THE SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF MONTANA

No. DA 20-0302

STATE OF MONTANA,

Plaintiff and Appellee,

v.

BRANDON JAMES LEWIS TOLLIE,

Defendant and Appellant.

GRANT

Pursuant to authority granted under Mont. R. App. P. 26(1), the 

Appellant is given an extension of time until January 3, 2022, to 

prepare, file, and serve the Appellant’s reply brief.

No further extensions will be granted.

Electronically signed by:

Mike McGrath

Chief Justice, Montana Supreme Court

November 24 2021

11/24/2021

Case Number: DA 20-0302
Exhibit 21.1

SUBSIDIARIES OF POLYPORE INTERNATIONAL, INC.

Name of Subsidiary

State or jurisdiction of
Incorporation or OrganizationAlnery No. 104 Limited

Hong KongCelgard Acquisition Corporation.

Cayman IslandsCelgard K.K.

JapanCelgard Korea, Inc.

KoreaCelgard, LLC

DelawareDaramic Austria GmbH.

AustriaDaramic NSG Tianjin PE Separator Co., Ltd.

ChinaDaramic (Thailand) Limited

ThailandDaramic Acquisition Corporation.

DelawareDaramic Asia, Inc.

DelawareDaramic Holding S.A.S.

FranceDaramic International, Inc.

DelawareDaramic S.A.S.

FranceDaramic S.r.l.

ItalyDaramic Separadores de Baterias Ltda.

BrazilDaramic, LLC

DelawareMembrana GmbH

GermanyMicroporous Holding Corporation

DelawareMicroporous Products, L.P.

DelawareMPI Acquisition Corporation

DelawarePolypore Acquisition GmbH

GermanyPolypore B.V.

NetherlandsPolypore C.V.

NetherlandsPolypore (Shanghai) Membrane Products Co. Ltd.

ChinaPP Holding, LLC

DelawareDaramic Battery Separator India Private Limited

IndiaSeparatorenerzeugung GmbH

AustriaSeparatorenerzeugung Holding GmbH

Austria


---



QuickLinks
## COURT OF APPEALS SECOND DISTRICT OF TEXAS FORT WORTH NO. 02-17-00095-CV

ANTHONY DWIGHT HEARD APPELLANT

V.

KRISTI DAWN WEISNER APPELLEE

------------ FROM THE 442ND DISTRICT COURT OF DENTON COUNTY TRIAL COURT NO. 2011-70112-431

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

### MEMORANDUM OPINION 1 

### AND JUDGMENT

------------ On March 23, 2017, and April 10, 2017, we notified appellant in accordance with rule of appellate proce dure 42.3(c) that we would dismiss this appeal unless the $205 filing fee was paid. See Tex. R. App. P. 42.3(c). Appellant has not paid the $205 filing fee. See Tex. R. App. P. 5, 12.1(b).

1 See Tex. R. App. P. 47.4.2 Because appellant failed to comply with a requirement of the rules of appellate procedure and the Texas Supr eme Court’s order of August 28, 2015, 2 we dismiss the appeal. See Tex. R. App. P. 42.3(c), 43.2(f). Appellant shall pay a ll costs of this appeal, for which let execution issue.

See Tex. R. App. P. 43.4.

PER CURIAM PANEL: KERR, J.; LIVINGST ON, C.J.; and PITTMAN, J. DELIVERED: April 27, 2017

2 See Supreme Court of Tex., Fees Charged in the Supreme Court, in Civil Cases in the Courts of Appeals, and Before the Judi cial Panel on Multi-district Litigation , Misc. Docket No. 15-9158 (Aug. 28, 2015) (listing courts of appeals’ fees).
NIST and Artificial Intelligence

June 5, 2018

Dr. James K. Olthoff

Acting Associate Director for Laboratory Programs 
Programmatic Priorities

Advanced 

Manufacturing Cybersecurity Disaster Resilience

Documentary 

Standards

Technology 

Transfer

Engineering 

Biology

Internet of 

Things

Quantum 

Science

Artificial 

Intelligence

© Matt DeLorme

Measurement 

Dissemination
Artificial 

Intelligence as a 

Strategic Priority

Emerging applications 

Build confidence and trust
Why AI Now? 

1950’s

“Artificial Intelligence” 

coined by Dartmouth 

professor J. McCarthy

Confluence of big 

data, advanced 

algorithms, and 

computing power

Today 

In today’s landscape, AI is essential to our national security and 

economic health 

Recent Headlines from the Economist, Washington Post, New York Times, Wired, Forbes
Why NIST? 

NIST’s quantum capabilities are in many laboratories, domains, and 

campuses, including Joint Institutes

Our Vision for Success in AI:

NIST’s investigation and deployment of data and AI 

technologies builds confidence and trust that drives 

new measurement research outcomes and an 

expanded commercial marketplace

October 2017 VCAT Meeting
?

Why NIST? 

Credit: Alpha Stock Images

Transportation Manufacturing Healthcare Finance

As a trusted measurement science organization, NIST has a bedrock of 

relevant expertise across all of its laboratories, touching virtually all sectors

• Data analytics and models

• Taxonomy development

• Challenge problems

• Documentary standards

• Smart manufacturing 

• Natural language processing

• Reference datasets

• Image recognition algorithms

• Advanced materials modeling

• Cybersecurity and privacy 

• Statistical engineering 

• Bioengineering, ...

Future topics
AI Projects Across NIST 
AI Community of Interest

EL (11)

ITL (21)

MML (14)

Other 

OUs (6)

ML/AI – Related Projects 

in NIST Laboratories (#)

May 17, 2018: Rapid Fire Speaker Session Featured 44 Projects 
NIST’s Role in AI

Foundational 

Research Applications of AI Standards

NIST will:

(1) build new AI and data methods, for example by developing curated datasets and 

performance metrics to train, test, and quantify AI systems, and 

(2) vet and demonstrate the use of data and AI techniques on research problems 

faced in NIST’s own laboratory programs
Speakers Jim Kurose

White House Office of Science and 

Technology Policy

Chuck Romine

Director, NIST Information Technology 

Laboratory

Eric Lin

Director, NIST Material Measurement 

Laboratory
IN THE SUPREME COURT OF PENNSYLVANIA

MIDDLE DISTRICT

IN THE MATTER OF: J.C.

- M., A MINOR

PETITION OF: H.C., FATHER :

:

:

:

: No. 738 MAL 2018

Petition for Allowance of Appeal from the Order of the Superior Court

IN THE MATTER OF: J.C.

- M., A MINOR

PETITION OF: H.C., FATHER :

:

:

:

: No. 739 MAL 2018

Petition for Allowance of Appeal from the Order of the Superior Court

ORDER

PER CURIAM

AND NOW , this 11th day of December, 2018

, the Petition for Allowance of Appeal

is DENIED

.
<PAGE>   1

                                                                   Exhibit 99(b)

INDEPENDENT AUDITORS' REPORT

To the Board of Directors and Stockholders of
     MAPCO Inc.:

We have audited the consolidated balance sheets of MAPCO Inc. and subsidiaries
as of December 31, 1997 and 1996, and the related consolidated statements of
income, changes in stockholders' equity, and cash flows for each of the three
years in the period ended December 31, 1997 (none of which are presented
herein). These financial statements are the responsibility of the Company's
management. Our responsibility is to express an opinion on these financial
statements based on our audits.

We conducted our audits in accordance with generally accepted auditing
standards. Those standards require that we plan and perform the audit to obtain
reasonable assurance about whether the financial statements are free of
material misstatement. An audit includes examining, on a test basis, evidence
supporting the amounts and disclosures in the financial statements. An audit
also includes assessing the accounting principles used and significant
estimates made by management, as well as evaluating the overall financial
statement presentation. We believe that our audits provide a reasonable basis
for our opinion.

In our opinion, the consolidated financial statements referred to above present
fairly, in all material respects, the financial position of MAPCO Inc. and
subsidiaries at December 31, 1997 and 1996, and the results of their operations
and their cash flows for each of the three years in the period ended December
31, 1997, in conformity with generally accepted accounting principles.

As discussed in Note 16 to the MAPCO Inc. consolidated financial statements
(Note 17 to the supplemental consolidated financial statements), MAPCO Inc. is
a defendant in litigation relating to an LPG explosion in April 1992, that
occurred near an underground salt dome storage facility located near Brenham,
Texas.

Effective October 1, 1997, MAPCO Inc. changed its method of accounting for
business process reengineering activities to conform to the consensus reached 
by the Emerging Issues Task Force in Issue No. 97-13.





Deloitte & Touche LLP
Tulsa, Oklahoma
January 27, 1998
(March 3, 1998, as to Notes 2 and 16
to the MAPCO Inc. consolidated financial statements)




                                       53
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

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

Eastern Division

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA

Plaintiff,

v. Case No.: 1:20−cr−00585

Honorable Maria Valdez

Jacob Mathley

Defendant.

NOTIFICATION OF DOCKET ENTRY

This docket entry was made by the Clerk on Tuesday, October 6, 2020:

 MINUTE entry before the Honorable Maria Valdez: The Government's Motion

For Entry Of Unopposed Protective Order Governing Discovery [27] is granted. Enter

Order. Mailed notice (lp, )

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-cr-00585 Document #: 28 Filed: 10/06/20 Page 1 of 1 PageID #:67
**EXHIBIT32.1**

CERTIFICATION PURSUANT TOSECTION 906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002

The certifications setforth below are hereby submitted to the Securities and Exchange Commissionpursuant to, and solely for the purpose of complying with, Section 1350 ofChapter 63 of Title 18 of the United States Code in connection with the filingon the date hereof with the Securities and Exchange Commission of the QuarterlyReport on Form 10-Q of MAIR Holdings, Inc. and subsidiaries (the “Company”)for the quarter ended June 30, 2006 (the “Report”).

Each of the undersigned,the Chief Executive Officer and Chief Financial Officer, respectively, of theCompany, hereby certifies that, as of the end of the period covered by theReport:

1.               Such Report fullycomplies with the requirements of Section 13(a) or 15(d) of the SecuritiesExchange Act of 1934; and

2.               The informationcontained in the Report fairly presents, in all material respects, thefinancial condition and results of operations of the Company.
| /s/ PAUL F. FOLEY                                      |   |
|--------------------------------------------------------|--------|
|                                                   |
| Paul F. Foley                                          |
| President and Chief Executive Officer                  |
| August 8, 2006                                         |
|                                                   |
|                                                   |
| /s/ ROBERT E. WEIL                                     |   |
|                                                   |
| Robert E. Weil                                         |
| Vice President, Chief Financial Officer and  Treasurer |
| August 8, 2006                                         |

 

1

----
10368.

#### Hemphill *v.*Cohutta Banking Company.

Decided June 12, 1919.

Complaint; from Murray superior court—Judge Wright presiding. January 6, 1919.

*Maddox, McCamy &*Shumate, for plaintiff in error.

*Little, Powell, Smith & Goldstein, H. H.*Anderson, *R. N. Steed, W. E. Mann, W. C. Martin,*contra.

Wade, C. J.

The pleadings and the rulings of the lower court thereon ■ in this case being substantially the same as those in *Leonard*v. *Cohutta Banking Co.,*21 *Ga. App.*777 (95 S. E. 113), the decision there made, that “the court did not err in its rulings on the' pleadings, nor in directing a verdict for the plaintiff,” is controlling, and the judgment of the trial judge is

*Affirmed.*

*Jenkins and Luke, JJ., concur.*
DISMISSED and Opinion Filed December 2, 2016 

# S

In The 

## Court of Appeals Fifth District of Texas at Dallas
No. 05-16-00901-CV IN THE INTEREST OF S.C. AND K.C., CHILDREN On Appeal from the 256th Judicial District Court Dallas County, Texas Trial Court Cause No. DF-11-16417 

### MEMORANDUM OPINION Before Justices Bridges, Lang-Miers, and Whitehill Opinion by Justice Whitehill Appellant has filed a November 8, 2016 unopposed first amended motion to dismiss the appeal. We GRANT the motion and DISMISS the appeal. See T EX

. R. A PP

. P. 42.1(a)(1).
We DENY AS MOOT appellant’s November 9, 2016 unopposed motion to extend the time to file a nunc pro tunc sealing order.

160901F.P05 /Bill Whitehill/ BILL WHITEHILL JUSTICE–2– 

# S

Court of Appeals Fifth District of Texas at Dallas JUDGMENT
IN THE INTEREST OF S.C. AND K.C., CHILDREN

No. 05-16-00901-CV On Appeal from the 256th Judicial District Court, Dallas County, Texas Trial Court Cause No. DF-11-16417. Opinion delivered by Justice Whitehill. Justices Bridges and Lang-Miers participating. In accordance with this Court’s opi nion of this date, the appeal is DISMISSED

. It is ORDERED that appellee QC recover her costs of this appeal from appellant IC.

Judgment entered December 2, 2016
<PAGE>   1
                                                                    EXHIBIT 23.1


                         Independent Auditors' Consent

The Board of Directors
EFTC Corporation:

We consent to the inclusion herein of our report dated May 1, 1998, relating to
the consolidated balance sheets of EFTC Corporation and subsidiaries as of
December 31, 1997 and 1996, and the related consolidated statements of
operations, shareholders' equity, and cash flows for each of the years in the
three-year period ended December 31, 1997, and incorporation by reference herein
of our report dated January 21, 1998, relating to the consolidated balance
sheets of EFTC Corporation and subsidiaries as of December 31, 1997 and 1996,
and the related consolidated statements of operations, shareholders' equity, and
cash flows for each of the years in the three-year period ended December 31,
1997 (which report is no longer applicable), which report appears in the
December 31, 1997 annual report on Form 10-K of EFTC Corporation, and to the
references to our firm under the headings "Summary Consolidated Historical
Financial Information", "Selected Consolidated Historical Financial Data", and
"Experts" in the Prospectus.


                                   /s/ KPMG PEAT MARWICK LLP
                                   KPMG Peat Marwick LLP

Denver, Colorado
May 27, 1998
[Federal Register Volume 79, Number 227 (Tuesday, November 25, 2014)]
[Notices]
[Page 70228]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2014-27951]


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

OFFICE OF PERSONNEL MANAGEMENT


Public Availability of FY 2013 Service Contract Inventories

AGENCY: U.S. Office of Personnel Management.

ACTION: Notice.

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

SUMMARY: In accordance with Section 743 of Division C of the 
Consolidated Appropriations Act of 2010 (Pub. L. 111-117), the U.S. 
Office of Personnel Management is publishing this notice to advise the 
public of the availability of the FY 2013 Service Contract Inventory. 
This inventory provides information on FY 2013 service contract actions 
over $25,000. The information is organized by function to show how 
contracted resources are distributed throughout the agency. The 
inventory has been developed in accordance with guidance issued on 
November 5, 2010, by the Office of Management and Budget's Office of 
Federal Procurement Policy (OFPP). OFPP's guidance is available at 
http://www.whitehouse.gov/sites/default/files/omb/procurement/memo/service-contract-inventories-guidance-11052010.pdf. The U.S. Office of 
Personnel Management has posted its inventory and a summary of the 
inventory on the Office of Personnel Management's homepage at the 
following link: http://www.opm.gov/about-us/doing-business-with-opm/contracting-opportunities/#url=Business-Opportunities.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: William Neal Patterson at (202) 606-
1984 or by mail at U.S. Office of Personnel Management, 1900 E. Street 
NW., Washington, DC 20415. Please cite ``2013 Service Contract 
Inventory'' in all correspondence.

U.S. Office of Personnel Management.
Katherine Archuleta,
 Director.
[FR Doc. 2014-27951 Filed 11-24-14; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6325-44-P
**Exhibit 13(a)(1)**

**Certification Pursuant toSection 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002**

I,Ragnar Norback, the Chief Executive Officer of Concordia Bus Nordic AB (publ),certify that to the best of my knowledge (i) the Form 20-F fullycomplies with the requirements of Section 13(a) or 15(d) of theSecurities Exchange Act of 1934 and (ii) the information contained in theForm 20-F fairly presents, in all material respects, the financialcondition and results of operations of Concordia Bus Nordic AB (publ).
|        | /s/ Ragnar  Norback      |   | Date: May 15, 2007 |
|--------|--------------------------|--------|--------------------|
|   | Ragnar Norback           |   |               |
|   | Chief Executive  Officer |   |               |

 

----
I 

108TH CONGRESS 

2D SESSION H. R. 4065

To amend title 38, United States Code, to increase the maximum amount 

of home loan guaranty available to a veteran, and to provide for annual 

adjustments to such amount. 

IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES 

MARCH 30, 2004

Ms. GINNY BROWN-WAITE of Florida introduced the following bill; which was 

referred to the Committee on Veterans’ Affairs 

A BILL

To amend title 38, United States Code, to increase the 

maximum amount of home loan guaranty available to 

a veteran, and to provide for annual adjustments to 

such amount.

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

3 SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE. 

4 This Act may be cited as the ‘‘Veterans Housing Af5 fordability Act of 2004’’. 
2

•HR 4065 IH 

1 SEC. 2. INCREASE IN, AND ANNUAL INDEXING OF, MAX2 IMUM AMOUNT OF HOME LOAN GUARANTY 

3 FOR CONSTRUCTION AND PURCHASE OF 

4 HOMES. 

5 (a) MAXIMUM LOAN GUARANTY BASED ON 90 PER6 CENT OF THE FREDDIE MAC CONFORMING LOAN

7 RATE.—Section 3703(a)(1) of title 38, United States 

8 Code, is amended by striking ‘‘$60,000’’ each place it ap9 pears in subparagraphs (A)(i)(IV) and (B) and inserting 

10 ‘‘the maximum guaranty amount (as defined in subpara11 graph (C))’’. 

12 (b) DEFINITION.—Such section is further amended 

13 by adding at the end the following new subparagraph: 

14 ‘‘(C) In this paragraph, the term ‘maximum guaranty 

15 amount’ means the dollar amount that is equal to 22.5 

16 percent of the Freddie Mac conforming loan limit limita17 tion determined under section 305(a)(2) of the Federal 

18 Home Loan Mortgage Corporation Act (12 U.S.C. 

19 1454(a)(2)), as adjusted for the year involved.’’.

Æ
#### STATE v. MASON

No. 105P97

Case below: 125 N.C.App. 216

Petition by defendant for discretionary review pursuant to G.S. 7A-31 denied 5 June 1997.
#### JORDAN v. CREW

No. 221P97

Case below: 125 N.C.App. 712

Petition by plaintiffs for discretionary review pursuant to G.S. 7A-31 denied 5 June 1997.
#### Ivan L. COX, Petitioner, v. UNITED STATES POSTAL SERVICE, Respondent.

No. 04-3422.

United States Court of Appeals, Federal Circuit.

Dec. 15, 2004.

ON MOTION

*ORDER*

Ivan L. Cox moves for reconsideration of the court’s September 27, 2004 order dismissing his petition for review for failure to file a Fed. Cir. R. 15(c) statement concerning discrimination, with Rule 15(c) statement attached.

Upon consideration thereof,

IT IS ORDERED THAT:

(1) Cox’s motion for reconsideration is granted.

(2) The court’s September 27, 2004 dismissal order is vacated, the mandate is recalled, and the petition for review is reinstated.

(3) Cox’s brief is due within 21 days of the date of filing of this order.
C OURT OF A PPEALS FOR THE

F IRST D ISTRICT OF T EXAS AT H OUSTON

O RDER

Appellate case name: In re Phillips 66 Company

Appellate case number: 01

- 16

- 00108

- CV

Trial court case number: 2014

- 20601

Trial court: 133rd District Court of Harris County

Relator P hillips 66 Company has filed a petition for writ of mandamus directed at the

trial court’s order granting a motion to compel discovery filed by the Real Parties in Interest.

Phillips 66 has also filed an Opposed Emergency Motion for Temporary Stay, askin g us to stay the trial court’s order pending resolution of the mandamus petition. The motion is

granted ; we stay the trial court’s order compelling discovery pending further order of this Court.

See T EX

. R. A PP

. P. 52.10.

The Court requests a response to the petition from the Real Parties in Interest. The

response shall be filed within 15 days of the date of this order.

It is so ORDERED.

Judge’s signature: /s/ Rebeca Huddle

 Acting individually  Acting for the Court

Date: February 16, 2016