alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
Tuesday, October 13, 2020 at 16:55:06 Eastern Daylight Time 

Subject: MITRE Response to Call for Comments on N ISTIR 8312 

Date: Friday, October 9, 2020 a t 10:25:39 AM Eastern Daylight Time 

From: Dr. Mike Hadjimichael 

To: NIST Explainable AI 

CC: Samuel S Visner, Brian Abe, Anne P alm Townsend 

AFachments: MITRE Response to NISTIR 8312.pdf 

Dear NIST Explainable AI Team: 

Thank you for the opportunity to submit comments and feedback in response to NIST’s Call for Comments on 

the DraT “Four Principles of Explainable ArVficial Intelligence” (NISTIR 8312). These comments were 

gathered from several subject ma\er experts across The MITRE CorporaVon in order to represent a variety of 

viewpoints on the topic. 

Please find our response in the a\ached report, “MITRE Response to NIST Call for Comments: NISTIR 8312.” 

Should you have any quesVons on our feedback, please feel free to reach out to me. 

Sincerely, 

-Mike. 

Mike Hadjimichael, Ph.D.

Group Lead / Cyber Tech Futures / NIST Cyber Partnerships (N611) 

The MITRE Corporation / 7515 Colshire Drive, McLean, VA 22102 

Office: 703-983-3399 / Fax: 703-983-6653 / mikeh@mitre.org 

Page 1 of 1
#### J. W. Adams *v.*Commonwealth.

Intoxicating Liquors — Tavern License — Discretion of Court.

The county court has a large discretion in the granting iof a license for'the keeping of a tavern, and such discretion will not be inter-v fered with by the Court of Appeals, in the absence of a is'howin'g of abuse of discretion.

APPEAL FROM MADISON CIRCUIT COURT.

June 3, 1873.

*689
      *Scott & Little, for appellant.*

*Jno. Rodman, for appellee.*

Opinion by

Judge Pryor:

The motion to dismiss the appeal for want of jurisdiction is overruled. An appeal in such cases must be taken from the judgment of the county court to' this court.

The provisions of the Revised Statutes on the subject has been repealed by a provision of the Code of Practice subsequently enacted. *Boehler v. Commonwealth,*1 Duvall 3. The evidence in the case, however, does not show an abuse of discretion by the court below in refusing the license.

The county judge is presumed to have personal knowledge of the necessities of those traveling on the highway for entertainment where this tavern is proposed to be kept as well as the evil results that might follow in its immediate vicinity in the event the license should be granted, and when there is any evidence tending to show that the object in getting the license is more for the purpose of selling liquor than providing food and lodging for the traveler, this court, recognizing the enlarged discretion vested in the county judges of the state with reference to such questions, will not interfere with such a judgment as rendered in this case.

Judgment *affirmed.*
EXHIBIT 32.1

Walter Energy, Inc.
Certification Pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002
18 U.S.C. Section 1350

In connection with the accompanying Quarterly Report of Walter Energy, Inc. (the "Company") on Form 10-Q for
the quarterly period ended March 31, 2009 (the "Report"), I, Victor P. Patrick, Director, Vice Chairman and Director, Chief Financial Officer and General Counsel, Principal Executive and
Financial Officer of the Company, certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, as adopted pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that:



Date:
May 8, 2009

/s/ VICTOR P. PATRICKVice Chairman, Chief Financial Officer
and General Counsel
(Principal Executive and Financial Officer)


---



QuickLinks
EXHIBIT 32.1

Walter Industries, Inc.  Certification Pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002  18 U.S.C. Section 1350

In connection with the accompanying Annual Report of Walter Industries, Inc. (the "Company") on Form 10-Q for
the quarterly period ended September 30, 2008 (the "Report"), I, Victor P. Patrick, Director, Vice Chairman and Director, Chief Financial Officer and General Counsel, Principal Executive and
Financial Officer of the Company, certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, as adopted pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that:



Date:
November 7, 2008

/s/ VICTOR P. PATRICKVice Chairman, Chief Financial Officer
and General Counsel
(Principal Executive and Financial Officer)


---



QuickLinks
#### PETERSON v. HOOPER

No. 216P97

Case below: 126 N.C.App. 221

Motion by defendant for temporary stay allowed 2 May 1997.
<PAGE>   1



                                                                      EXHIBIT 20

FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE


For:     LOT$OFF Corporation                      Contact:     Jeff Seidel, CFO
         1201 Austin Highway, #116                       210-805-9300, ext. 926
         San Antonio, Texas  78209-4859


               LOT$OFF CORPORATION RECEIVES FAVORABLE COURT ORDER


SAN ANTONIO, TEXAS -- MAY 18, 1998 -- San Antonio based LOT$OFF Corporation (OTC
BB:LOTS) announced today that Judge Leif M. Clark has rendered his decision and
entered an order in the Company's favor effectively denying creditors in its
bankruptcy proceeding in the United States Bankruptcy Court for the Western
District of Texas, San Antonio Division leave to file late proofs of claim, or,
alternatively, excuse from filing proofs of claim by finding that the
confirmation of the Company's plan of reorganization, as amended and modified,
operates as res judicata to bar the allowance of any late claims that have been
or might be filed in the Company's bankruptcy case (the "Order"). The Company's
position was supported by the Class 7 Agent (representing unsecured creditors).


Charles "Hop" Fuhrmann, CEO and President of LOT$OFF, stated that "this Order
was a very important one for the Company, its stockholders and the holders of
Class 7 Allowed Claims as it reduces the potential amount of claims the Company
must satisfy (with cash and/or Common Stock to the extent the Company receives
net proceeds from judgments in its favor, or otherwise, from certain important
litigation brought by the Company) to the aggregate face amount of undisputed
claims and allowed claims represented by proofs of claims filed by February 6,
1997." The Company estimates that at least $5.9 million of claims have been
eliminated by the Order.


LOT$OFF, a regional extreme value retailer specializing in close-out
merchandise, currently operates 43 LOT$OFF stores (Texas - 31, Louisiana - 5,
Oklahoma - 3, New Mexico - 3 and Tennessee - 1; a new LOT$OFF store is scheduled
to open in San Angelo, Texas the first week of June) stocked with a broad mix of
products which fluctuates by category, by season and by store based on customer
needs and buying trends, demographics and the availability of products at
close-out prices. This merchandise concept is designed to appeal to
value-conscious shoppers and other bargain hunters.

                                      # # #


                                       6
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE Northern District of Illinois − CM/ECF NextGen 1.6.3

Eastern Division

Samuel Donets

Plaintiff,

v. Case No.: 1:20−cv−03551

Honorable Franklin U. Valderrama

Vivid Seats LLC

Defendant.

NOTIFICATION OF DOCKET ENTRY

This docket entry was made by the Clerk on Friday, June 17, 2022:

 MINUTE entry before the Honorable Franklin U. Valderrama: For the reasons

stated in the motion, Plaintiff's unopposed motion for leave to file a response to

Defendant's objections and suggested changes to the proposed corrective notice [54] is

granted. Plaintiff is permitted to file a four−page response to address Defendant's

objections and suggested changes, and to attach an amended corrective notice. By

6/21/2022, Plaintiff is directed to file the response and amended notice on the docket, and

to send a Word version of the amended corrective notice to the Court's Proposed Order

inbox. Mailed notice (axc).

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-03551 Document #: 55 Filed: 06/17/22 Page 1 of 1 PageID #:468
**** 

** EXHIBIT 10.46**

**EXECUTIVE OFFICER EMPLOYMENT AGREEMENT CHANGES**

On April27, 2005, the Compensation Committee (the "Compensation Committee") of the Boardof Directors of Mentor Corporation (the "Company"), after considering acompetitive market review of total compensation for its executive officers andobtaining guidance from an independent compensation specialist, approved newannual base salaries and target bonus percentages for its executive officers;granted stock options to executive officers; and approved revisions to theCompany's standard executive employment agreement, as follows:

*BaseSalary and Target Bonus Percentages of Executive Officers*:  Thefollowing table sets forth the approved Fiscal Year 2006 annual base salarylevels and target bonus percentages for the Company's executive officers:
I 

108TH CONGRESS 

2D SESSION H. R. 4171 

To amend the Internal Revenue Code of 1986 to ensure that soldiers serving 

in a combat zone do not lose eligibility for the refundable child tax 

credit by reason of receiving nontaxable combat pay. 

IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES 

APRIL 20, 2004 

Mr. RANGEL (for himself and Ms. HOOLEY of Oregon) introduced the 

following bill; which was referred to the Committee on Ways and Means 

A BILL 

To amend the Internal Revenue Code of 1986 to ensure 

that soldiers serving in a combat zone do not lose eligibility for the refundable child tax credit by reason of 

receiving nontaxable combat pay. 

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

3 SECTION 1. NONTAXABLE COMBAT PAY INCLUDED IN DE4 TERMINING REFUNDABLE CHILD TAX CRED5 IT. 

6 (a) IN GENERAL.—Paragraph (1) of section 24(d) of 

7 the Internal Revenue Code of 1986 is amended by adding 

8 at the end the following new sentence: ‘‘For purposes of 
2 

•HR 4171 IH 

1 subparagraph (B), any amount excluded from gross in2 come by reason of section 112 shall be treated as earned 

3 income which is taken into account in computing taxable 

4 income for the taxable year.’’. 

5 (b) EFFECTIVE DATE.—The amendment made by 

6 this section shall apply to taxable years beginning after 

7 December 31, 2002. 

Æ
EXHIBIT 32.1NOVELLUS SYSTEMS, INC.CERTIFICATIONIn connection with the periodic report of Novellus Systems, Inc. (the “Company”) on Form 10-Q forthe period ended October 1, 2005 as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission (the“Report”), I, Richard S. Hill, Chairman of the Board of Directors and Chief Executive Officer ofthe Company, hereby certify as of the date hereof, solely for purposes of Title 18, Chapter 63,Section 1350 of the United States Code, that to the best of my knowledge: (1) the Report fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) or 15(d), as applicable,of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, and (2) the information contained in the Report fairly presents, in all material respects, thefinancial condition and results of operations of the Company at the dates and for theperiods indicated.This Certification has not been, and shall not be deemed, “filed” with the Securities and ExchangeCommission.        Dated: November 4, 2005 By:  /s/ Richard S. Hill    Richard S. Hill    Chairman of the Board of Directors
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<PAGE>
<ARTICLE> 5
<CIK> 0000837290
<NAME> KEY PRODUCTION COMPANY, INC.
<MULTIPLIER> 1,000
       
<S>                                        <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                              3-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          DEC-31-1997
<PERIOD-START>                             JAN-01-1997
<PERIOD-END>                               MAR-31-1997
<CASH>                                           3,394
<SECURITIES>                                         0
<RECEIVABLES>                                    5,825
<ALLOWANCES>                                         0
<INVENTORY>                                          0
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                                 9,850
<PP&E>                                         119,281
<DEPRECIATION>                                  32,052
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                  97,733
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                            7,068
<BONDS>                                         19,000
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                         2,928
<OTHER-SE>                                      55,245
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                    97,733
<SALES>                                         11,039
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                                11,110
<CGS>                                            5,864
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                    5,864
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                   452
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                     0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                                 360
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                  4,629
<INCOME-TAX>                                     1,759
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                              2,870
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                     2,870
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                      .24
<EPS-DILUTED>                                      .24
        

</TABLE>
Order filed, June 30, 2016.

In The

Fourteenth Court of Appeals

____________

NO. 14-16-00116-CV

____________

OSAMA ABDULLATIF AND ALI MOKARAM, Appellant

V.

ALI CHOUNDHRI, Appellee

On Appeal from the 190th District Court

Harris County, Texas

Trial Court Cause No. 2012-27197

ORDER

The reporter’s record in this case was due May 12, 2016. See Tex. R. App. 

P. 35.1. The court has not received a request to extend time for filing the record. 

The record has not been filed with the court. Because the reporter’s record has not 

been filed timely, we issue the following order.

We order Judith Kulhanek, Elizabeth Cordova, and Patricia Palmer, the 

substitute court reporters, to file the record in this appeal within 30 days of the 

date of this order. 

PER CURIAM
EXHIBIT 10.130

CASH COMPENSATION FOR

NON-MANAGEMENT DIRECTORS OF THE REGISTRANT

 

As of February 25, 2005, non-management Directors of Mechanical Technology Incorporated (the "Registrant") receive a cash retainer of $16,000 per year and are reimbursed for reasonable travel and related expenses.  The retainer is paid quarterly.  Non-management Directors also receive 1) options to purchase 20,000 shares of the Company's common stock , 2) the Chairman of the Audit Committee receives 7,500 additional options, 3) members of the Audit Committee each receive 3,750 additional options, 4) the Chairman of the Compensation, Nominating and Governance Committee receives 5,000 additional options, and 5) members of the Compensation, Nominating and Governance Committee each receive 2,500 additional options.  All options are issued to directors on the date of the Annual Meeting and are priced based on the closing price of the Company's stock on the Nasdaq National Market System on the date of grant and are immediately vested.
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<ARTICLE> 5
<LEGEND>
THIS SCHEDULE CONTAINS SUMMARY FINANCIAL INFORMATION EXTRACTED FROM TANDY BRANDS
ACCESSORIES, INC.'S SEPTEMBER 30, 1997 AND 1996, FORM 10-Q (RESTATED AS REQUIRED
BY REGULATION S-K ITEM 601(c)(2)(iii).) AND IS QUALIFIED IN ITS ENTIRETY BY
REFERENCE TO SUCH FORM 10-Q FILINGS. DOLLARS ARE IN THOUSANDS.
</LEGEND>
<RESTATED> 
       
<S>                             <C>                     <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   3-MOS                   9-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          JUN-30-1998             JUN-30-1997
<PERIOD-END>                               SEP-30-1997             SEP-30-1996
<CASH>                                             656                     361
<SECURITIES>                                         0                       0
<RECEIVABLES>                                   22,685                  16,951
<ALLOWANCES>                                     1,650                   1,003
<INVENTORY>                                     35,096                  26,412
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                                59,064                   1,797
<PP&E>                                           9,866                   9,461
<DEPRECIATION>                                   5,053                   4,517
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                  73,742                  66,493
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                            7,720                  11,222
<BONDS>                                         21,100                  16,800
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0                       0
<PREFERRED>                                          0                       0
<COMMON>                                         5,544                   5,417
<OTHER-SE>                                      39,066                  32,738
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                    73,742                  66,493
<SALES>                                         30,865                  23,661
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                                30,865                  23,661
<CGS>                                           19,249                  14,728
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                   19,249                  14,728
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                   437                     446
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                     0                       0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                                 274                     286
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                  3,132                   1,681
<INCOME-TAX>                                     1,200                     618
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                              1,932                   1,063
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0                       0
<CHANGES>                                            0                       0
<NET-INCOME>                                     1,932                   1,063
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                      .35                     .20
<EPS-DILUTED>                                      .35                     .20
        

</TABLE>
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<ARTICLE> 5
<LEGEND>
THIS SCHEDULE CONTAINS SUMMARY FINANCIAL INFORMATION EXTRACTED FROM THE
CONSOLIDATED BALANCE SHEETS AND CONSOLIDATED STATEMENTS OF INCOME AND IS
QUALIFIED IN ITS ENTIRETY BY REFERENCE TO SUCH FINANCIAL STATEMENTS.
</LEGEND>

<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   12-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          DEC-31-1996
<PERIOD-END>                               DEC-31-1996
<CASH>                                       3,617,000
<SECURITIES>                               400,462,000
<RECEIVABLES>                              112,055,000
<ALLOWANCES>                                 1,301,000
<INVENTORY>                                 13,329,000
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                                     0
<PP&E>                                     124,672,000
<DEPRECIATION>                              42,997,000
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                             659,539,000
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                                0
<BONDS>                                     62,470,000
<COMMON>                                       911,000
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<OTHER-SE>                                 158,777,000
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>               659,539,000
<SALES>                                     32,754,000
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                           370,492,000
<CGS>                                       27,179,000
<TOTAL-COSTS>                              362,348,000
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                             3,115,000
<LOSS-PROVISION>                              (75,000)
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                           5,873,000
<INCOME-PRETAX>                              (769,000)
<INCOME-TAX>                               (1,837,000)
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                          1,068,000
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                 1,068,000
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                      .35
<EPS-DILUTED>                                      .35


</TABLE>
No. 96-1187

 

Osceola School District; *

Marianna School District; *

Dorothy Adams, as Next *

Friend of Jonathan Adams, *

a Minor; Janett Billups, *

as Next Friend of *

Jeremiah Billups, a Minor; *

Janice Fraction, as *

Next Friend of Delamar *

Fraction, a Minor; and *

Donald Littleton, as Next *

Friend of Don Littleton, *

a Minor, *

*

 Appellants, *

* Appeal from the United States

 v. * District Court for the Eastern

 * District of Arkansas.

Arkansas Activities *

Association; Lamar Cole, * [UNPUBLISHED]

Executive Director of the *

Arkansas Activities *

Association; and Scott Stone, *

Roy Kirkland, Ed Sellers, *

Bob Evans, Jerry Bush, *

Charlotte Wright, Bobby Harper, *

Richard Blevins, Calvin Estes, *

Bill Barnes, John Selph, and *

Charles Ferriter, Individually *

and in Their Respective Official *

Capacities as Members of the *

Executive Committee of the *

Arkansas Activities Association, *

*

 Appellees, *

*

 and *

*

Arkansas State Board *

of Education and *

Arkansas Department of Education, *

*

 Defendants. *
 The Honorable Susan Webber Wright, United States District

1

Judge for the Eastern District of Arkansas.

-2-

 

Submitted: September 13, 1996

Filed: October 4, 1996

 

Before McMILLIAN, MAGILL, and MORRIS SHEPPARD ARNOLD, Circuit Judges.

 

PER CURIAM.

The plaintiffs appeal from the denial of a preliminary injunction

against the Arkansas Activities Association, its executive director, and

the members of its executive committee. After a two-day hearing, the

district court denied a motion for preliminary injunctive relief that

1

would have allowed two school districts to participate in the AAA

classification for athletic competition.

In determining whether to issue a preliminary injunction, a district

court must consider "(1) the threat of irreparable harm to the movant; (2)

the state of balance between this harm and the injury that granting the

injunction will inflict on other parties litigant; (3) the probability that

[the] movant will succeed on the merits; and (4) the public interest."

Dataphase Systems, Inc. v. CL Systems, Inc., 640 F.2d 109, 114 (8th Cir.

1981) (en banc). Our review of the district court's action in this case

is for "an abuse of discretion or misplaced reliance on an erroneous legal

premise." Modern Computer Systems, Inc. v. Modern Banking Systems, Inc.,

871 F.2d 734, 737 (8th Cir. 1989) (en banc). 

We have read all of the materials submitted by the parties, including

the transcript of the hearing, and have considered the
-3-

arguments made. We grant the motion to supplement the appendix. We

conclude that the district court committed no error in applying the

Dataphase considerations to the case at hand and therefore affirm the order

denying a preliminary injunction. We remand the case for further

proceedings. See 8th Cir. R. 47B.

A true copy.

Attest:

 CLERK, U.S. COURT OF APPEALS, EIGHTH CIRCUIT.