alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
Henry N. Wixon

Chief Counsel

National Institute of Standards and Technology

Gaithersburg, Maryland

Henry.Wixon@nist.gov

301-975-2803

www.nist.gov

Henry Wixon became Chief Counsel for the National Institute of Standards and Technology (NIST) of 

the U.S. Department of Commerce in 2009. The Office of the Chief Counsel for NIST advises the agency 

in programmatic matters including Cooperative Research and Development Agreements (CRADAs), 

Interagency Agreements, Material Transfer Agreements, Nondisclosure Agreements and patenting. In 

addition, Mr. Wixon’s office has significant responsibility for Department of Commerce regulations 

implementing the Bayh-Dole and Stevenson-Wydler Acts, and for appeals under Executive Order 10096 of 

Employee Rights Determinations from all Federal agencies.

As Chief Counsel, Mr. Wixon is actively involved in issues at the intersection of intellectual property 

rights, technology transfer and standards, and represents NIST as an ex officio member of the Intellectual 

Property Rights Policy Committee of the American National Standards Institute.

Prior to joining NIST, Mr. Wixon was a partner with the law firm of Wilmer Cutler Pickering Hale and 

Dorr LLP in Washington, DC, with over twenty years in private practice as a registered patent attorney and 

intellectual property and licensing specialist.

Mr. Wixon was awarded his J.D. degree from George Washington University, where he was a member of 

The George Washington Law Review. He holds a B.S. degree in zoology with a minor in chemistry and a 

M.S. degree in neuropharmacology from the University of Maryland, College Park. A Certified Licensing 

Professional, he is a Past Chair of the Maryland Chapter of the Licensing Executives Society, and has 

served for many years as an LES Professional Development Series Faculty member. He is a member of the 

Board of Visitors of the College of Computer, Mathematical and Natural Sciences of the University of 

Maryland, College Park.
<PAGE>   1



                                                                      EXHIBIT 11

                         EARNINGS PER SHARE COMPUTATIONS
                      (IN THOUSANDS EXCEPT PER SHARE DATA)

<TABLE>
<CAPTION>
                                                           THREE MONTH PERIOD
                                                             ENDED MARCH 31,
                                                         ---------------------
                                                           1998          1997
                                                         ---------     -------
<S>                                                      <C>           <C>    
EARNINGS PER COMMON AND DILUTIVE
  COMMON EQUIVALENT SHARE:
  Net Income                                              $  7,664     $ 5,693
                                                          ========     =======

  Shares:
  Weighted average number of common
      shares outstanding                                    25,504      20,962
  Weighted average number of additional shares
      issuable for common stock equivalents (a)                775       1,398
                                                          --------     -------
         Adjusted common shares                             26,279      22,360
                                                          ========     =======


EARNINGS PER SHARE                                        $   0.29     $  0.25
                                                          ========     =======
</TABLE>

(a)   Shares issuable were derived using the "Treasury Stock Method" for all
      dilutive common stock equivalents.
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<ARTICLE> 5
<MULTIPLIER> 1,000

<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   9-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          DEC-31-2000
<PERIOD-START>                             JAN-01-2000
<PERIOD-END>                               SEP-30-2000
<CASH>                                         679,828
<SECURITIES>                                   423,620
<RECEIVABLES>                                  359,885
<ALLOWANCES>                                     4,261
<INVENTORY>                                    146,228
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                             1,650,625
<PP&E>                                         247,627
<DEPRECIATION>                                 116,930
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                               1,846,188
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                          266,382
<BONDS>                                              0
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                     1,089,356
<OTHER-SE>                                     490,450
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                 1,846,188
<SALES>                                        959,156
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                               959,156
<CGS>                                          415,360
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                  263,476
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                     0
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                     0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                                 524
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                316,658
<INCOME-TAX>                                    98,164
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                            218,494
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                   218,494
<EPS-BASIC>                                     1.74
<EPS-DILUTED>                                     1.64


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

<ARTICLE> 5
<LEGEND>
This schedule contains summary financial information extracted from the
Company's consolidated balance sheet and consolidated statement of operations
and is qualified in its entirety by reference to such consolidated financial
statements together with the related footnotes thereto.
</LEGEND>
<MULTIPLIER> 1,000
<CURRENCY> U.S. DOLLARS

<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                                   12-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          DEC-31-1996
<PERIOD-START>                             JAN-01-1996
<PERIOD-END>                               DEC-31-1996
<EXCHANGE-RATE>                                      1
<CASH>                                         336,600
<SECURITIES>                                    50,300
<RECEIVABLES>                                  205,900
<ALLOWANCES>                                     5,200
<INVENTORY>                                    634,800
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                             1,477,400
<PP&E>                                       2,067,400
<DEPRECIATION>                                 769,500
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                               4,115,700
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                          743,500
<BONDS>                                      1,951,500
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                        300
<COMMON>                                         5,000
<OTHER-SE>                                    (56,100)
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                 4,115,700
<SALES>                                      2,543,300
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                             2,543,300
<CGS>                                        2,085,000
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                2,085,000
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                               327,000
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                     0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                             184,500
<INCOME-PRETAX>                               (12,100)
<INCOME-TAX>                                  (44,900)
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                             22,900
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                    22,900
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                     2.42
<EPS-DILUTED>                                     2.42


</TABLE>
IV

House Calendar No. 189

105TH CONGRESS

2D SESSION H. RES. 435

[Report No. 105–535]

Providing for consideration of the bill (H.R. 3616) to authorize appropriations

for fiscal year 1999 for military activities of the Department of Defense,

to prescribe military personnel strengths for fiscal year 1999, and for

other purposes.

IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

MAY 14, 1998

Mr. SOLOMON, from the Committee on Rules, reported the following resolution; which was referred to the House Calendar and ordered to be printed

RESOLUTION

Providing for consideration of the bill (H.R. 3616) to authorize appropriations for fiscal year 1999 for military activities of the Department of Defense, to prescribe military

personnel strengths for fiscal year 1999, and for other

purposes.

1 Resolved, That at any time after the adoption of this

2 resolution the Speaker may, pursuant to clause 1(b) of

3 rule XXIII, declare the House resolved into the Committee

4 of the Whole House on the state of the Union for consider5 ation of the bill (H.R. 3616) to authorize appropriations
2

HRES 435 RH

1 for fiscal year 1999 for military activities of the Depart2 ment of Defense, to prescribe military personnel strengths

3 for fiscal year 1999, and for other purposes. The first

4 reading of the bill shall be dispensed with. All points of

5 order against consideration of the bill are waived. General

6 debate shall be confined to the bill and shall not exceed

7 two hours equally divided and controlled by the chairman

8 and ranking minority member of the Committee on Na9 tional Security. After general debate the Committee of the

10 Whole shall rise without motion. No further consideration

11 of the bill shall be in order except pursuant to subsequent

12 order of the House.

House Calendar No. 189

105TH CONGRESS

2D SESSION H. RES. 435

[Report No. 105–535]

RESOLUTION

Providing for consideration of the bill (H.R. 3616)

for fiscal year 1999, and for other purposes.fense, to prescribe military personnel strengthsfor military activities of the Department of Deto authorize appropriations for fiscal year 1999

MAY 14, 1998

Referred to the House Calendar and ordered to be

printed
**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 Annual Report of True North Energy Corporation (the
“Company”) on Form 10-KSB for the year ended April 30, 2007 as filed with the
        Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the “Report”), I, John I,
        Folnovic, Chief Executive Officer of the Company, certify, pursuant to 18
        U.S.C.
        Section 1350, as adopted pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act
        of
        2002, 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 results of operations of
                  the
                  Company.
 
 A
        signed
        original of this written statement required by Section 906 has been provided
        to
        the Company and will be retained by the Company and furnished to the Securities
        and Exchange Commission or its staff upon request.
 
 /s/
        John I. Folnovic
 Name:  John
        I.
        Folnovic
 Title:  Chief
        Executive Officer
 Date:  July
        27,
        2007
National Construct

National Construct

Safety Team Act Safety Team Act

Dr. James E. Hill

April 29, 2003
National Construction Safety T

National Construction Safety T

• Funding/Annual Operating Cos• Implementing Procedures• Training• Involvement of Other Organiza
Funding/Annual Operating Co

Funding/Annual Operating Co

• Select/Hire Staff• Equipment (identification, cre

communication, documentatiosafety)

• Training• Involvement of Other Organiz• Internal Operating Procedure• Support of NCST Advisory Co
Implementing Procedures Implementing Procedures

Interim Final Rule in Federal Register Janu

!Covers collection, preservation, and p

evidence collected and information cr

!Comment period closed March 3, 200!Two comments received!Final Rule to be published shortly

Proposed Rule to be Published Shortly

!Covers other implementing procedure
Interim Final Rule Interim Final Rule

Collection of Evidence

! Public voluntarily provide! Written requests; if necessary, negotiations 

Investigator

! Subpoena under the signature of Director! NIST may hold public hearing

Entry and Inspection

! Permission granted voluntarily! Written permission requested; if necessary, 

Lead Investigator

! Written notice of inspection authority by the ! Director seeks assistance from Justice, if ne

enforcement
Interim Final Rule Interim Final Rule

(continued) (continued)

Information Created

!May not be used as evidence in any suit 

damages

Protection of Information

!Evidence collected and information creat

released until the final report is issued

!Voluntarily-provided safety information w

released if that would inhibit the voluntary 

!Information will not be released that migh

public safety 
Proposed Rule: Issues to be A

Proposed Rule: Issues to be A

! Initial reconnaissance by NIST Staff! Criteria for establishing a Team! Size and composition of a Team! Typical tasks in an investigation
Training Training

NIST staff member attended NTSB Academy 

Aircraft Accident Investigations

! Preparation of investigation Teams! On-scene procedures! Participation by other parties! Post on-scene procedures! Responsibility to families of accident victims

! Role of NTSB Board! Role of Office of Public Affairs! Safety at an accident site! Research and engineering functions in supp

investigation
Training (continued) Training (continued)

NTSB Academy Instructor provided one-da

NIST staff

!Interviewing techniques!Dealing with people experiencing psycho

Other training is being pursued

!Investigative techniques used by ATF an!Search and rescue training by FEMA
Involvement of Other Organiza

Involvement of Other Organiz

• MOUs will be established with ATF, FIMA

USGS, NSF, OSHA, NIOSH, EPA, NOAAnumerous private sector organizations
<PAGE>
                                                                    EXHIBIT 99.1

                    CERTIFICATION OF CHIEF EXECUTIVE OFFICER
                                   PURSUANT TO
                             18 U.S.C. SECTION 1350,
                             AS ADOPTED PURSUANT TO
                  SECTION 906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002

I, Koichi Nishimura, Ph.D. certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, as
adopted pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that the
Quarterly Report of Solectron Corporation on Form 10-Q for the three-month
period ended November 29, 2002 fully complies with the requirements of Section
13(a) or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 and that information
contained in such Form 10-Q fairly presents in all material respects the
financial condition and results of operations of Solectron Corporation.

Date:   January 9, 2003

                                          /S/ Koichi Nishimura
                                          ------------------------------
                                          Koichi Nishimura, Ph.D.
                                          President and Chief Executive Officer
1

IN THE 

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF ILLINOIS

EASTERN DIVISION

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA )

 )

vs. ) The Honorable

) Matthew F. Kennelly

DEBRA FAZIO and MARIO GIANNINI )

) 

) No. 20 CR 551

DEFENDANTS DEBRA FAZIO AND MARIO GIANNINI’S UNOPPOSED MOTION TO 

CONTINUE THE TRIAL DATE

Defendants, Debra Fazio and Mario Giannini, by attorneys, HEATHER L. WINSLOW

and Susan Pavlow, move this Court to continue the February 7, 2021, trial date. In further 

support, the defendants state the following:

Both defendants are charged with multiple counts of fraud relating to the operation of 

their business, Bulldog Earth Movers. In preparation for this trial, Ms. Fazio has undertaken a 

detailed review of years of financial and operational records. Ms. Fazio is extremely well 

organized and has maintained detailed business records. Nonetheless, Ms. Fazio’s review has 

been interrupted by the death of her mother, exposure to COVID, and two knee surgeries. Ms. 

Fazio has not fully completed her review of records. 

Ms. Fazio’s record review is essential to the defense, and counsel for both defendants are 

relying on certain results from the review.

In addition to the above, counsel for Mr. Giannini has a trial conflict. Ms. Pavlow

represents one of three defendants in United States v. Williams, 19 CR 932. All three defendants 

Case: 1:20-cr-00551 Document #: 41 Filed: 12/05/21 Page 1 of 2 PageID #:126
2

are in custody. On December 1, 2021, Judge Alonso moved the trial date to January 24, 2022. 

The trial will last at least two weeks. As currently scheduled, counsel’s earlier trial is likely to 

overlap with our February trial date. In addition, counsel will have no time between trials to 

adequately prepare to present this case to the jury.

Based on continued investigation and trial counsel’s scheduling conflict, the defendants

now move this Court to continue the trial date to a mutually convenient date in the future. 

AUSA Christopher Parente has no objection to moving the trial date.

WHEREFORE, for all the reasons stated herein, the defendants move this Court to grant 

the instant motion. 

Respectfully submitted,

s/Heather L. Winlsow 

Heather L. Winslow 

Attorney for Debra Fazio

HEATHER L. WINSLOW

Attorney at Law

53 West Jackson Blvd., Suite 831

Chicago, IL 60604

(312) 721-4212

Case: 1:20-cr-00551 Document #: 41 Filed: 12/05/21 Page 2 of 2 PageID #:127
1 

# In the United States Court of Federal Claims

OFFICE OF SPECIAL MASTERS

No. 15

- 1114 V

Filed: August 2 2 , 2016

* * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * UNPUBLISHED

G LENDA NEHER

, *

* Special Master Hamilton

- Fieldman

Petitioner, *

* Joint Stipulation on Damages;

v. * Influenza ( “ Flu ” ) Vaccine; Guillain

-

* Barré Syndrome (“GBS”).

SECRETARY OF HEALTH *

AND HUMAN SERVICES, *

*

Respondent. *

* * * * * * * * * * * * * * * *

J ohn R. Howie, Jr.

, H owie Law, P.C.

, D all as, TX

, for P etitioner

.

R obert P. Coleman III

, United States Department of Justice, Washington, DC, for R espondent.

DECISION 1

On October 2 , 2015

, G lenda Neher (“Petitioner ”) petitioned for compensation under the

National Childhood Vaccine Injury Act of 1986, 42 U.S.C. §§ 300aa

- 1 to

- 34 (2012). Petitioner

alleged that the administration of the I nfluenza ( “ Flu ” ) vaccine

, on January 11 , 2013 , caused her

to develop Guillain

- Barré Syndrome (“GBS”).

The parties recently filed a stipulation , stating that a decision should be entered awarding

compensation. Respondent denies that the Flu vaccine is the cause of Petitioner ’s alleged GBS

or any other injury . Nevertheless, the parties agree to the joint stipulation, attached hereto as

1 Because this decision contains a reasoned explanation for the undersigned’s action in this case,

the undersigned intends to post this ruling on the w ebsite of the United States Court of Federal

Claims, in accordance with the purposes espoused in the E

- Government Act of 2002. See 44

U.S.C. § 3501 (2012). Each party has 14 days within which to request redaction “of any

information furnished by that par ty: (1) that is a trade secret or commercial or financial in

substance and is privileged or confidential; or (2) that includes medical files or similar files, the

disclosure of which would constitute a clearly unwarranted invasion of privacy.” Vaccine Ru le

18(b).2 Appendix A. The undersigned finds the stipulation reasonable and adopts it as the decision of

the Court in awarding damages, on the terms set forth therein.

The parties stipulate that P etitioner shall receive a “ lump sum payment of $63

, 573 .31 in

the form of a check payable to [P] etitioner

. ” Appendix A at 2. They also specify that this

“ amount represents compensation for all remaini ng damages that would be available under 42

U.S.C. § 300aa

- 15(a).” Id.

The undersigned approves the requested amo unt for P etitioner ’ s compensation.

Accordingly, an award should be made consistent with the stipulation.

In the absence of a motion for review filed pursuant to RCFC App endix B, the clerk of

the court SHALL ENTER JUDGMENT in accordance with the terms of the parties’

stipulation. 2

IT IS SO ORDERED.

s/ Lisa Hamilton

- Fieldman

Lisa Hamilton

- Fieldman

Special Master

2 Entry of judgment is expedited by the parties’ joint filing of notice renouncing the right to seek

review. Vaccine Rule 11(a).
#### Margaret Ellis *v.*Thomas Grider.

Dower — Wife Estopped to Claim — Innocent Purchaser.

The appellant appeared in open court, at tlie term of court at which, the commissioner reported the sale of her husband’s land, and relinquished her right to dower therein.

As a matter of law this relinquishment did not divest her of her right to dower, but it estops her from asserting such right against those who acted upon the faith of it and purchased and paid for the land, under the impression, traceable directly to her voluntary act, that it was free from such incumbrance.

APPEAL FROM RUSSELL CIRCUIT COURT.

December 20, 1872.

OPINION by

Judge Lindsay :

It does not appear that appellant was a party petitioner in the ex-parte proceeding by Robert Higginbothan’s heirs, but it does appear as part of the record in that case that at the same term at which the commissioner reported the sale of the land, she appeared in open court and relinquished her right to dower in the interests therein owned by her deceased husband.

It does not matter whether this relinquishment was based upon a consideration or not, as Lester, the purchaser, had the right to act upon it in accepting the deed of the court, and in paying the purchase price for the land, and his vendee, Grider, had the same right in purchasing from him.

It may be and is true, as a matter of law, that this relinquishment did not divest Mrs. Ellis of her right to dower, but it certainly estops her from asserting such right against those who acted upon the faith of it and purchased and paid for the land, *30under the impression traceable directly to her voluntary act, that it was free from such incumbrance.

*Garnett, Hays, for appellant.*

*Montgomery, for appellee.*

The facts constituting this estoppel are aptly pleaded in appel-lee’s answer and are fully sustained by record evidence.

Judgment affirmed.