alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
[Federal Register Volume 79, Number 228 (Wednesday, November 26, 2014)]
[Notices]
[Page 70575]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2014-28059]


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

NATIONAL AERONAUTICS AND SPACE ADMINISTRATION

[Notice: 14-123]


NASA Advisory Council; Science Committee; Meeting Postponement

AGENCY: National Aeronautics and Space Administration.

ACTION: Notice of postponement of meeting.

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

SUMMARY: In accordance with the Federal Advisory Committee Act, Public 
Law 92-463, as amended, NASA announces a postponement of the previously 
announced meeting of the Science Committee of the NASA Advisory Council 
(NAC). The meeting was originally announced in the Federal Register on 
November 14, 2014. The meeting had been scheduled to be held December 
1-3, 2014. The meeting is being postponed by NASA due to exceptional 
circumstances and schedule conflicts of the NASA top leadership. The 
latter's attendance is required during this period for the NASA Senior 
Management Council meeting and final countdown preparations for launch 
of the Orion Exploration Flight Test-1 (EFT-1) on December 4, 2014, at 
NASA Kennedy Space Center in Florida.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Ms. Ann Delo, Science Mission 
Directorate, NASA Headquarters, Washington, DC 20546, (202) 358-0750, 
or <a href="/cdn-cgi/l/email-protection#bfded1d191dd91dbdad3d0ffd1deccde91d8d0c9"><span class="__cf_email__" data-cfemail="64050a0a4a064a0001080b240a0517054a030b12">[email protected]</span></a>.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The meeting was originally announced as NASA 
Notice 14-115 in the Federal Register on Friday, November 14, 2014 at 
79 FR 68304. The meeting had been scheduled to be held on Monday, 
December 1, 2014, 8 a.m.-5 p.m.; Tuesday, December 2, 2014, 8 a.m.-6 
p.m.; and Wednesday, December 3, 2014, 8 a.m. to 12:30 p.m.; Local 
Time, at NASA Headquarters, 300 E Street SW., Washington, DC 20546.

Patricia D. Rausch,
Advisory Committee Management Officer, National Aeronautics and Space 
Administration.
[FR Doc. 2014-28059 Filed 11-25-14; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 7510-13-P


</pre><script data-cfasync="false" src="/cdn-cgi/scripts/5c5dd728/cloudflare-static/email-decode.min.js"></script></body>
</html>
I 

108TH CONGRESS 

2D SESSION H. R. 4261

To authorize the Secretary of Education to make grants to States to establish 

statewide screening programs for children who are 5 to 7 years of 

age to prevent reading failure. 

IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES 

MAY 4, 2004

Mr. CUMMINGS (for himself, Mr. BISHOP of Georgia, Ms. CORRINE BROWN

of Florida, Mr. CONYERS, Mr. MEEKS of New York, Ms. JACKSON-LEE

of Texas, Ms. KILPATRICK, Mr. RUPPERSBERGER, Mr. WYNN, Mrs. 

JONES of Ohio, Ms. LEE, Mr. VAN HOLLEN, Ms. MILLENDER-MCDONALD, Mr. PAYNE, Mr. RUSH, Mr. HASTINGS of Florida, and Mr. 

BALLANCE) introduced the following bill; which was referred to the Committee on Education and the Workforce 

A BILL

To authorize the Secretary of Education to make grants 

to States to establish statewide screening programs for 

children who are 5 to 7 years of age to prevent reading 

failure.

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 ‘‘Reading Failure Pre5 vention Act of 2004’’. 
2

•HR 4261 IH 

1 SEC. 2. GRANTS FOR SCREENING TO PREVENT READING 

2 FAILURE. 

3 (a) GRANTS.—The Secretary of Education may make 

4 grants to States to establish statewide screening programs 

5 for children who are 5 to 7 years of age for the prevention 

6 of reading failure. 

7 (b) USE OF FUNDS.—The Secretary may not make 

8 a grant to a State under this section unless the State 

9 agrees to use the grant for the following: 

10 (1) Development and implementation of a state11 wide screening program for children who are 5 to 7 

12 years of age to prevent reading failure by screening 

13 such children for traits that indicate the children 

14 have dyslexia or are otherwise at risk of reading fail15 ure. 

16 (2) Providing adequate professional develop17 ment for personnel who administer screening pro18 grams under this section. 

19 (c) DETERMINATION OF TRAITS.—The Secretary, 

20 using reliable, replicated, and scientifically based research, 

21 shall enumerate specific traits that may be screened under 

22 this section to determine whether a child has dyslexia or 

23 is otherwise at risk of reading failure. 

24 (d) APPLICATION.—To seek a grant under this sec25 tion, a State shall submit an application to the Secretary 
3

•HR 4261 IH 

1 at such time, in such manner, and containing such infor2 mation as the Secretary may reasonably require. 

3 (e) DEFINITIONS.—In this section: 

4 (1) The term ‘‘Secretary’’ means the Secretary 

5 of Education. 

6 (2) The term ‘‘State’’ includes the several 

7 States, the District of Columbia, the Commonwealth 

8 of Puerto Rico, the Commonwealth of the Northern 

9 Mariana Islands, American Samoa, Guam, the Vir10 gin Islands, and any other territory or possession of 

11 the United States.

Æ
Exhibit 23

Consent of Independent Accountants

 

We hereby consent to the incorporation by reference in the Registration Statements on Form S-8 (Nos. 333-76817, 333-72841, and 333-41863) and Form S-3 (NO. 333-112464) of Mechanical Technology Incorporated of our reports dated February 13, 2004, relating to the financial statements and financial statement schedule, which appears in this Annual Report on Form 10-K.

 

 

 

 

 

/s/  PricewaterhouseCoopers LLP

 

Albany, New York

March 10, 2004
<PAGE>   1

                                                                   EXHIBIT 3.1.2

                            CERTIFICATE OF AMENDMENT
                                       OF
                          CERTIFICATE OF INCORPORATION
                                       OF
                              RANGER HOLDINGS CORP.

                     (Pursuant to Section 242 of the General
                    Corporation Law of the State of Delaware)


     Ranger Holdings Corp., a corporation organized and existing under the
General Corporation Law of the State of Delaware (the "Corporation"), does
hereby certify as follows:

     FIRST: The name of the Corporation is Ranger Holdings Corp.

     SECOND: The First Article of the Corporation's Certificate of Incorporation
is amended in its entirety to read as follows:

     "The name of the Corporation is LIN Holdings Corp."

     THIRD: A majority of the stockholders of the Corporation entitled to vote
on this amendment executed a written consent in accordance with the provisions
of Section 228 of the General Corporation Law of the State of Delaware.

     FOURTH: Said amendment was duly adopted in accordance with the provisions
of Section 242 of the General Corporation Law of the State of Delaware.

     IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the undersigned has executed this Certificate of
Amendment as of the 9th day of February, 1998.

                                      RANGER HOLDINGS CORP.



                                      By:
                                             -----------------------------
                                             Eric C. Neuman
                                             Vice President and Secretary
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<ARTICLE> 5
<LEGEND>
THIS SCHEDULE CONTAINS SUMMARY FINANCIAL INFORMATION EXTRACTED FROM THE
CONSOLIDATED STATEMENT OF INCOME AND THE CONSOLIDATED STATEMENT OF FINANCIAL
POSITION AND IS QUALIFIED IN ITS ENTIRETY BY REFERENCE TO SUCH FINANCIAL
STATEMENTS.
</LEGEND>
<RESTATED> 
<MULTIPLIER> 1,000
       
<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   YEAR
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          DEC-31-1995
<PERIOD-START>                             JAN-01-1995
<PERIOD-END>                               DEC-31-1995
<CASH>                                          19,259
<SECURITIES>                                         0
<RECEIVABLES>                                  331,710
<ALLOWANCES>                                    13,765
<INVENTORY>                                     71,763
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                               615,496
<PP&E>                                       3,160,554
<DEPRECIATION>                               1,223,808
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                               2,898,640
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                          652,328
<BONDS>                                        993,407
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                           96,449
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                           664
<OTHER-SE>                                     664,112
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                 2,898,640
<SALES>                                              0
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                             1,584,940
<CGS>                                                0
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                1,388,715
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                 2,964
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                13,698
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                              57,378
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                134,708
<INCOME-TAX>                                    37,952
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                             96,756
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                    96,756
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                     1.49
<EPS-DILUTED>                                     1.48
        

</TABLE>
10657.

#### Rimes & Stubbs *v.*National Bank of Savannah.

Smith, J.

'Where a person by accident or mistake sends certain checks or money for deposit to a bank with which he has never opened an account as a depositor, and there is no agreement between him and the bank creating the relation of depositor and banker, and he draws cheeks thereon which the bank fails to pay, he cannot maintain a suit for damages against the bank. In order to create such relationship the minds of the parties must meet; and without this there is no obligation on the part of the bank to honor checks signed by the person making such deposits. Even though the bank actually received the money, it would not be liable for damages for failing to honor such checks, but *480would be liable only as a bailee, for the money so deposited. The court therefore did not err in granting a nonsuit.

*Decided*November 19, 1919.

Action for damages; from city court of Savannah—Judge Rourke. March 20, 1919.

*J. P. Dulces, Columbus E. Alexander,*for plaintiffs.

*Edward 8. Elliott,*for defendant.

*Judgment affirmed.*

*Jenkins, P. J., and Stephens, J., concur.*
DISMISS; Opinion Filed November 13, 2012.

in The

(!nairt uf Apprat

FiftIi Oitrtrt nf Lrxa at Ja1ta

No. 05-12-OI059-C 7

JOSE ROSALES AND SABRINA ROSALES, Appellants

V.

JEFFREY GALLAGhER AND SUSAN GALLAGHER, Appellees

On Appeal from the 380th Judicial District Court

Collin County, Texas

Trial Court Cause No. 380-02266-2011

MEMORANDUM OPINION

Before Justices Moseley, Fillmore, and Myers

Opinion By Justice Moseley

Our jurisdiction is fundamental and, subject to a few mostly statutory exceptions, invoked

only upon the timely filing of a notice of appeal from a final judgment. TEX. R. App. .

25.1(b),

26.1; Lehmann i’. Har-Con Corp., 39 S.W.3d 191, 195 (Tex. 2001); K& Sinterests, Inc. v. Tex. Am.

Bank/Dallas, 749 S.W.2d 887, 890 (Tex .App.—--Dallas 1988, writ denied). The judgment Jose and

Sabrina Rosales challenge in this appeal was signed April 27, 2012. The Rosaleses timely filed a

motion for new trial, making their notice of appeal due July 26, 2012. or with an extension motion,

August 10, 2012. See TEX. R. App. P.26.1(a), 26.3. The notice of appeal was filed July 31, 2012,

hut without an extension motion.

Because a motion for extension of time is necessarily implied when an appellant acting in
good faith flies a notice ofappeal within fifteen days ofthe date it is due. we directed the Rosaleses,

by letter dated October 12. 2012. to file an extension motion that complied with rule of appellate

procedure 10.5(b). See T€x. R. APP. P. i 0.5(b), 26.3(b); Verburgt v. Dorner, 959 S.W.2d 615,617

(1997). We directed the Rosaleses to file the motion by October 22.2012 and cautioned them that

the appeal would be dismissed without further notice ifthey filled to comply. See Id. 42.3(a). To

date, the Rosaleses have not filed an extension motion or otherwise communicated with the Court.

Accordingly, we dismiss the appeal. See Id.

121059F.P05

—2—
!nitrt of 41pra1

FiftI! 1iitrirt of ixai at 1a11ai

JUDGMENT

JOSE ROSALES AND SAI3RINA Appeal from the 30th Judicial District Court

ROSALES, Appellants of Collin County. Texas. (Tr.Ct.No. 380-

02266-2011).

No. 05-1 2-01 059-CV Opinion delivered by Justice Moseley.

Justices Fillmore and Myers participating.

ILFFRI (i&LLAGHER AND SuSAN

GALLAGHER, Appellees

In accordance with this Court’s opinion of this date, we DISMiSS the appeal. We ORDER

that appellees Jeffrey Gallagher and Susan Gallagher recover their costs, if any. of this appeal from

appellants Jose Rosales and Sabrina Rosales.

Judgment cntcrLd Novcmhei 1 3 2012 /

/ II i/•!j/i / / I / 1/ /

/ J /L’

JIM MOSELtY

JUSTICE
Exhibit 12MERCK & CO., INC. AND SUBSIDIARIESComputation of Ratios of Earnings to Fixed Charges($ in millions except ratio data)                           Twelve Months      Ended      December 31,  Years Ended December 31,   2006  2005  2004  2003  2002  2001                          Income from Continuing OperationsBefore Taxes $6,221.4  $7,363.9  $7,974.5  $9,051.6  $9,651.7  $9,948.1                          Add (Subtract):                        One-third of rents  67.8   68.2   71.9   75.6   67.2   64.2 Interest expense, gross  375.1   385.5   293.7   350.9   390.6   463.7 Interest capitalized,net of amortization  29.4   (1.0)  (21.3)  (30.1)  (36.9)  (66.1)Equity (income) loss from affiliates,net of distributions  (362.5)  (615.9)  (421.2)  79.2   (156.1)  (113.7)Preferred stock dividends, net of tax  120.0   120.0   151.0   150.9   164.3   199.6                    Earnings from Continuing Operations $6,451.2  $7,320.7  $8,048.6  $9,678.1  $10,080.8  $10,495.8                                             One-third of rents $67.8  $68.2  $71.9  $75.6  $67.2  $64.2 Interest expense, gross  375.1   385.5   293.7   350.9   390.6   463.7 Preferred stock dividends  166.0   166.7   207.1   215.6   234.7   285.1                    Fixed Charges from ContinuingOperations $608.9  $620.4  $572.7  $642.1  $692.5  $813.0                                             Ratio of Earnings to Fixed Chargesfrom Continuing Operations  11   12   14   15   15   13                    For purposes of computing these ratios, “earnings” consist of income from continuing operationsbefore taxes, one-third of rents (deemed by the Company to be representative of the interest factorinherent in rents), interest expense, net of amounts capitalized, equity (income) loss fromaffiliates, net of distributions, and dividends on preferred stock of subsidiary companies. “Fixedcharges” consist of one-third of rents, interest expense as reported in the Company’s consolidatedfinancial statements and dividends on preferred stock of subsidiary companies.
Still Face Challenge Pro

Multiple Biometric Grand C

Preliminary Results of Ve
Still Face Background• FRVT 2006

– Verification rate =.99 at FAR =0.001– Frontal– Controlled illumination– High resolution (400 pixels between – Large scale laboratory collection – 6 MP camera
MBGC Still Face Goals

• Many applications of still face in

– Unconstrained illumination– Non-frontal

• ICAO Passport Standard

– Low resolution (90-120 pixels betw– Compressed imagery (8KB to 20K
MBGC Still Face Goals

• Many applications of still face in

– Unconstrained illumination– Low resolution– Compressed imagery– Non-frontal

MBGC Still Face challenge 

addresses these constra
Still Face• Two target sets – AY03-04 (FRGC)

– Controlled illumination frontal – Uncontrolled illumination frontal 

• One query set – AY04-05

– Uncontrolled illumination frontal– Uncontrolled illumination non-frontal
Effects of Lower Resolution Compression on FR• Determine effect of

– Lower resolution– Compression 

• Process original images to meet 

requirements

– Scale and crop

• 120 and 90 pixels between the eyes

– Compress images

• 20KB and 8KB
Still Face Processing

Face Still

90 Pixels 

between the eyes

120 Pixels 

between the eyes

Comp

Scale / Crop

Original Image

I
Results from Still Face ChallProblem...
Participants 2009• Dalian University of Technology • L-1 Identity Solutions AG• Pittsburgh Pattern Recognition• NEC Corporation
Controlled

No Compression

Compression

120 pixels 

20 KB

Compression

90 pixels

8 KB

Number of Images

16,028

vs. Unco
Controlled vs. Uncontrolled F
Uncontrolled

No Compression

Compression

120 pixels 

20 KB

Compression

90 pixels

8 KB

Number of Images

8,014

vs. Unco
Uncontrolled vs. Uncontroll
Summary Frontal
2008 to 2009 Summary• Progress since December 2008• Challenge remained the same

– Data– Experiments 
2009 & 2008 Participants• Dalian University of Technology • L-1 Identity Solutions AG• Pittsburgh Pattern Recognition• NEC Corporation• Cogent Inc.• Toshiba Corporation

Cogent

Toshiba

2008

Dalian UT

L1

PittPatt
Summary 2009 / 2008

2009 

Dalian UT Dalian UT To
Frontal

Controlled

Number of Stills

8,014

Num

Number of Stills

16,028

Uncontrolled 

vs. Non
Frontal vs. Non-Frontal ROC

Results from an Open Book Challenge Problem, NOT an Indepe
Frontal vs. Non-Frontal ROC

Results from an Open Book Challenge Problem, NOT an Indepe

Reigning Champions from MB
Summary• Increase in performance.• Smaller uncontrolled effect.• Smaller compression effect.• Cross pose matching is very diffi
#### PLUMMER v. KEARNEY

No. 34P97

Case below: 124 N.C.App. 786

Petition by plaintiff for discretionary review pursuant to G.S. 7A-31 denied 8 May 1997.
EXHIBIT 32.1


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

In connection with the Quarterly Report of DIMENSIONAL VISIONS INCORPORATED (the
"Company") on Form 10QSB for the period ended September 30, 2004, as filed with
the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the "Report"), I,
Preston J. Shea, President and Chief Accounting 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 result of operations of the Company.



/s/ Preston J. Shea
-------------------
Preston J. Shea
President and Chief Accounting Officer



November 26, 2004
Continuing Education Units

VERIFICATION OF ATTENDANCE FORM

Certification Number: ________________

 attended the following professional educational activity. 

(NAME)

Title: National Initiative for Cybersecurity Education (NICE) Webinar: Cybersecurity Considerations for The 

Quantum Information Science Technology (QIST) Workforce

Date(s): April 20, 2022 CEU Hours Earned: 1 hr 

Sponsor(s): National Institute of Standards and Technology (NIST) 

Explanation of Event: During this webinar we will examine the cybersecurity implications of QIST and the impact on 

education, training, and the workforce. Webinar attendees will hear presentations from: 

• Dr. Corey Stambaugh, Senior Policy Advisor and Industrial Liaison, National Quantum Coordination Office, The 

White House Office of Science and Technology Policy

• Dr. Lily (Lidong) Chen, Mathematician and Group Manager, Cryptographic Technology Group, Computer Security 

Division, National Institute of Standards and Technology

Location: Virtual Webinar; www.nist.gov/nice/webinars

Name of Meeting Host: Rodney Petersen, Director of the National Initiative for Cybersecurity Education (NICE)

 

Contact Information:

nist.gov/nice

nice@nist.gov

The Continuing Education Units form is provided as a courtesy. It is the responsibility of the 

attendee to complete and submit with their certifying authority.
---

Exhibit 32.1





Certification


Pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350,


as Adopted Pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002





In connection with the Quarterly Report of Synergetics USA, Inc. (the “Company”) on Form 10-Q for the period ended April 30, 2011, as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the “Report”), I, David M. Hable, President and 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 to my knowledge:





(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.





Dated: June 7, 2011





/s/ David M. HableDavid M. HablePresident andChief Executive Officer
MAYTAG CORPORATION

                                    Exhibit 23

                         Consent of Independent Auditors.


                                         <PAGE>



                          Consent of Independent Auditors





Shareowners and Board of Directors
Maytag Corporation

We consent to the incorporation by reference in Registration Statement Number
33-8249, Registration Statement Number 33-8248, Registration Statement Number
33-6378, Registration Statement Number 33-22228, and Registration Statement
Number 33-26620 on Forms S-8; and Registration Statement Number 33-35219 on Form
S-3 of Maytag Corporation and in the related Prospectuses of our report dated
January 25, 2000, with respect to the consolidated financial statements and
schedule of Maytag Corporation included in this Annual Report (Form 10-K) for
the year ended December 31, 1999.


                         Ernst & Young LLP


                         Chicago, Illinois
                         March 21, 2000<PAGE>