alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
FIL ED U.S. COURT OF APPEAL S EL EVENTHCI RCUI T J UNE 11, 2012 J OHN L EY CL ERK [DO NOT PUBLISH] IN THE UN ITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE ELE VENTH CIRCUIT
__ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ No. 1 1- 15 25 0 Non -Arg um en t Ca le nd ar
__ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ D.C. Dock etNo. 8 :0 9- cr-0 04 93 -VMC- TBM-1 UNITED STAT ES OF AMERIC A, Plai nt iff -Ap pe ll ee, ve rs us ALMA BORJ A, Defen da nt -Ap pe ll an t.

__ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ App eal fro m

th e Uni te d S ta te s Di st ric t Co urt forth e Mi dd le Dis tri ctof F lo rid a
__ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ (Jun e 1 1, 2 01 2) Befo re HULL, MARCUS an d B LACK, Circ ui t J ud ge s. PER CURI AM: Jo rg e Leo n C ha le la , app oi nt edco un se l fo r Alm a Bo rja, ha s fi le d am ot io n t owithd raw o n app eal supp orte d b y a br ie f pr ep aredpu rs ua ntto Ander s v. Ca li fo rn ia , 38 6 U.S. 7 38 , 87 S.Ct . 13 96 , 18 L.Ed.2d49 3 (1 96 7) . Our i nd ep en de nt rev ie w of the en ti re re co rdrev eal s tha t co un se l’s as se ss m en t o f th e rel at iv e m eri t of th e ap pe al is co rrec t. Bec au se in de pe nd en t ex am in at io n o f th e en ti re re co rd rev eal s n o i ss ue s o f arg uabl e m eri t, co un se l’s m ot io n t o wi th dr aw is GRANTED an d B or ja’ s co nv ic ti on s an d s en te nc es are AFFIRMED.

2
<PAGE>   1
                                                                    Exhibit 23.2



                   CONSENT OF INDEPENDENT PUBLIC ACCOUNTANTS



As independent public accountants, we hereby consent to the use of our report
dated February 6, 1998 (except with respect to the matter discussed in Note 20
as to which the date is March 25, 1998), on the consolidated financial
statements of the Bristol Hotel Company and to the use of our report dated
February 6, 1998 (except with respect to the matter discussed in Note 18 as to
which the date is March 25, 1998), on the consolidated financial statements of
the Bristol Hotel Asset Company (and to all references to our Firm),
incorporated by reference into the Registration Statement on Form S-8 of
Bristol Hotels & Resorts, Inc.



                                        /s/ Arthur Andersen LLP
                                        ----------------------------
                                            Arthur Andersen LLP

Dallas, Texas
July 24, 1998
#### Charles Forstan *v.*Martha E. Forstan.

Husband and Wife — Costs of Suit by Wife.

Under R. ,S., >ch. 25, § 32, the husband, in a suit for alimony or -divorce, must pay the cost of each party, unless the wife is at fault or has ample estate to pay the -cost.

APPEAL FROM NELSON CIRCUIT COURT.

December 24, 1872.

Opinion by

Judge Hardin :

First. So far as this appeal seeks a reversal of the judgment for alimony, the case must be ruled1 by- the -decision rendered May 1, 1872, between the same parties, upon an appeal from a previous order of allowance made on substantially the same grounds as that now sought to be reversed.

Second. But the order allowing and adjudging the payment of attorney’s fees and costs must be affirmed.

As is expressly decided in *Ballard v. Caperton, etc.,*2 Metcalf 412, construing Sec. 32 of Chapter 25 of the Revised Statutes, the husband, in a suit for alimony or divorce must pay the costs of each party, unless the wife is both in fault, and has ample estate to pay the costs.

*151*Muir & Wickliffe, for appellant.*

It does not appear that Mrs. Forstan has such estate; but it is proved, on the contrary, that she is without estate.

The attorney’s fees fixed by the court seem to be reasonable and we see no valid objection to the order directing their payment.

Wherefore the judgment for alimony is reversed and the cause remanded with directions to overrule the motion on which it was rendered.

And the other judgment appealed from is *affirmed.*

-, *for appellee.*
Motor Systems and Neutron 

Detection

Jonathan Gelmann

Walt Whitman High School
Stepper Motor Control System

• Components

• Power Supply

• Motor

• Encoder

• Limits

• Motor Driver

• HMI

• Modbus
CANDOR Neutron Detector

• Helium 3

• Different energies

• Components

• ZnS/Li-6 Compound

• WLS Fiber

• SiPM

• Preamp

• Discriminator
Discrimination

• Neutron vs Gamma vs Thermal Event

uS

mV
ROI

• Prompt window

• Tail window

• Weighting
Threshold 

Study

• SVM

• Noise below threshold
Integration Optimization

• Plot Tail vs 

Prompt 
SiPM Overvoltage

• Increase gain

• Tail signal increase

• Cleaner than Preamp
Conclusions

• SiPM Overvoltage study successful

27V 29.5V
Acknowledgements 

• Julie Borchers

• Yamali Hernandez

• Nick Maliszewskyj

• Kevin Pritchard

• Peter Tsai
COURT OF APPEALS

	SECOND DISTRICT OF TEXAS

	FORT WORTH

	NO. 2-06-276-CV

DR. KAREN LOPEZ MARTIN	APPELLANT

A/K/A DR. KAREN LOPEZ AUSTEN

	V.

TARRANT COUNTY COMMUNITY	APPELLEE

COLLEGE DISTRICT

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

	FROM THE 48TH DISTRICT COURT OF TARRANT COUNTY

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

	MEMORANDUM OPINION1

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

	Appellant Dr. Karen Lopez Martin a/k/a Dr. Karen Lopez Austen filed a notice of appeal, stating her desire to appeal a summary judgment order entered on July 13, 2006.  On August 11, 2006, we sent a letter to Appellant notifying her that we were concerned that this court may not have jurisdiction over her appeal because we had been informed by the trial court clerk that the trial court had not signed any summary judgment order; thus, it appeared that there was no final judgment or order subject to appeal and that Appellant’s notice of appeal was premature.  See Tex. R. App. P. 26.1(a), 27.1(a).  Our letter indicated that the appeal would be dismissed for want of jurisdiction unless by August 31, 2006, the parties furnished this court with a copy of any signed order forming the basis of Appellant’s appeal.  We have not received any order.

	Because there is no final judgment or appealable interlocutory order, we dismiss this appeal for want of jurisdiction.  See Tex. R. App. P. 42.3(a), 43.2(f).

							PER CURIAM

PANEL D: WALKER, J.; CAYCE, C.J.; and MCCOY, J.

DELIVERED: September 21,  2006
108TH CONGRESS

2D SESSION H. R. 4608

AN ACT

To name the Department of Veterans Affairs outOutpatient Clinic’’. ‘‘Bob Michel Department of Veterans Affairs patient clinic located in Peoria, Illinois, as the

108TH CONGRESS

2D SESSION H. R. 4608

AN ACT

To name the Department of Veterans Affairs outpatient clinic located in Peoria, Illinois, as the ‘‘Bob Michel Department of Veterans Affairs Outpatient Clinic’’.

1 Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representa2 tives of the United States of America in Congress assembled,
2

•HR 4608 EH

1 SECTION 1. NAME OF DEPARTMENT OF VETERANS AFFAIRS

2 OUTPATIENT CLINIC, PEORIA, ILLINOIS.

3 The Department of Veterans Affairs outpatient clinic

4 located in Peoria, Illinois, shall after the date of the enact5 ment of this Act be known and designated as the ‘‘Bob

6 Michel Department of Veterans Affairs Outpatient Clin7 ic’’. Any reference to such outpatient clinic in any law,

8 regulation, map, document, record, or other paper of the

9 United States shall be considered to be a reference to the

10 Bob Michel Department of Veterans Affairs Outpatient

11 Clinic.

Passed the House of Representatives July 21, 2004.

Attest:

Clerk.
I 

108TH CONGRESS 

2D SESSION H. R. 4156 

To improve access to physicians in medically underserved areas. 

IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES 

APRIL 2, 2004 

Mr. MORAN of Kansas (for himself, Mr. TOWNS, Mr. OSBORNE, Mr. STENHOLM, and Mr. DOGGETT) introduced the following bill; which was referred to the Committee on the Judiciary 

A BILL 

To improve access to physicians in medically underserved 

areas. 

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

3 SECTION 1. WAIVER OF FOREIGN COUNTRY RESIDENCE RE4 QUIREMENT WITH RESPECT TO INTER5 NATIONAL MEDICAL GRADUATES. 

6 (a) EXTENSION OF DEADLINE.—Section 220(c) of 

7 the Immigration and Nationality Technical Corrections 

8 Act of 1994 (8 U.S.C. 1182 note) (as amended by section 

9 11018 of Public Law 107–273) is amended by striking 

10 ‘‘2004.’’ and inserting ‘‘2009.’’. 
2 

•HR 4156 IH 

1 (b) DESIGNATION OF HEALTH PROFESSIONAL

2 SHORTAGE AREAS BY STATE AGENCIES.—Section 

3 214(l)(1)(D) of the Immigration and Nationality Act (8 

4 U.S.C. 1184(l)(1)(D)) is amended— 

5 (1) by striking ‘‘professionals,’’ and inserting 

6 ‘‘professionals or in other shortage locations speci7 fied by a State department of public health (or its 

8 equivalent),’’; and 

9 (2) by striking ‘‘in a geographic area designated 

10 by the Secretary.’’ and inserting ‘‘in such a geo11 graphic area or other shortage location.’’. 

12 (c) EXEMPTION FROM H1B NUMERICAL LIMITA13 TIONS.—Section 214(l)(2)(A) of the Immigration and Na14 tionality Act (8 U.S.C. 1184(l)(2)(A)) is amended by add15 ing at the end the following: 

16 ‘‘The numerical limitations contained in subsection 

17 (g)(1)(A) shall not apply to any alien whose status is 

18 changed under the preceding sentence, if the alien ob19 tained a waiver of the 2-year foreign residence require20 ment upon a request by an interested State agency.’’. 

Æ
§ 75-27-51. Misrepresentation of price.

 

Whenever any commodity or service is sold, or is offered, exposed, or advertised for sale, by weight, measure, or 

count, the price shall not be misrepresented, nor shall the price be represented in any manner calculated or tending 

to mislead or deceive an actual or prospective purchaser. Whenever an advertised, posted, or labeled price per unit 

of weight, measure, or count includes a fraction of a cent, all elements of the fraction shall be prominently displayed 

and the numeral or numerals expressing the fraction shall be immediately adjacent to, of the same general design 

and style as, and at least one-half (1/2) the height and width of the numerals representing the whole cent; provided, 

however, the provisions of this section shall not apply to signs and requirements enumerated in Section 75-55-9,

Mississippi Code of 1972. A person who is found guilty of the misrepresentation of the price of a commodity or the 

representation of a price in any manner calculated or tending to mislead or deceive an actual or prospective 

purchaser shall be assessed a civil penalty by the director or his designee in the amount of not less than One 

Hundred Dollars ($100.00) for the first offense and not less than One Hundred Dollars ($100.00) nor more than Five 

Hundred Dollars ($500.00) for each subsequent offense. Each violation shall constitute a separate offense. The 

commissioner or his designee shall afford the person an opportunity for a hearing to show cause why the penalty 

should not be assessed. 

 

Sources: Codes, 1942, § 5132-25; Laws, 1964, ch. 221, § 25; Laws, 2000, ch. 326, § 3, eff from and after July 1, 

2000.
I 

108TH CONGRESS 

2D SESSION H. R. 3992

To amend the National Environmental Policy Act of 1969 to require preparation of statements regarding the environmental impacts of legal and 

illegal immigration. 

IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES 

MARCH 17, 2004

Mr. TANCREDO (for himself and Mr. ROHRABACHER) introduced the following 

bill; which was referred to the Committee on Resources 

A BILL

To amend the National Environmental Policy Act of 1969 

to require preparation of statements regarding the environmental impacts of legal and illegal immigration.

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

3 SECTION 1. STATEMENTS DESCRIBING THE ENVIRON4 MENTAL IMPACTS OF LEGAL AND ILLEGAL 

5 IMMIGRATION. 

6 Section 102 of the National Environmental Policy 

7 Act of 1969 (42 U.S.C. 4332) is amended—

8 (1) by inserting ‘‘(a)’’ before the first sentence; 

9 and 
2

•HR 3992 IH 

1 (2) by adding at the end the following: 

2 ‘‘(b) The Secretary of Homeland Security and the 

3 Administrator of the Environmental Protection Agency 

4 shall jointly prepare and publish every 5 years a statement 

5 in accordance with subsection (a)(2)(C) with respect to the 

6 environmental impacts of legal and illegal immigration, for 

7 use in determining and setting appropriate and environ8 mentally sustainable levels for legal immigration and the 

9 most effective measures needed to prevent illegal immigra10 tion.’’.

Æ
#### Matter of the Estate of Charlotte B. Wilbour, Deceased.

(Surrogate’s Court, New York County,

May, 1919.)

Transfer tax — when gift to private institution not exempt under section 221-c of the Tax Law.

A gift to the “ Brooklyn Institute of Arts and Sciences ” from the assets of a decedent, though made by her children within two years after her death, is not exempt from a transfer tax, and an order exempting the same because of the provisions of section 221-e of the Tax Law will be reversed and the report of the appraiser remitted to him for correction.

Appeal from an order assessing the transfer tax.

Thompson, Freedman & Cooke (Henry Thompson, of counsel), for executors and beneficiaries.

Lafayette B. Gleason (Schuyler C. Carlton, of counsel), for state comptroller.

Fowler, S.

The decedent, who was a nonresident of this state, gave all her property by her last will and testament to her children in equal shares. Among the assets of the estate were a collection of Egyptian antiquities and an Egyptological library, which the children of decedent within two years after her death donated to the Brooklyn Institute of Arts and Sciences.

In the proceeding to fix the transfer tax the transfer to the children of the decedent of the property which was the subject of the gift was exempted because of the provisions of section 221-c of the Tax Law.

The state comptroller has appealed from the report of the transfer tax appraiser and the order entered thereon exempting the estate of the decedent, contending that the transfer was taxable.

*316Section 221-e of the Tax Law provides that the transfer of “ antiques ” or *“*hooks ” shall be exempt if within two years after the transfer the beneficiaries “ shall present the same to the state, or to a municipal corporation of the state for educational, scientific, literary, library or historical purposes.” The Brooklyn Institute of Arts and Sciences is concededly not a municipal corporation. A gift to it is not a gift to the city of New York. The Greater New York charter (§ 609) authorizes the city to accept gifts of real or personal property “ upon such trust and conditions as may be prescribed by the grantors or donors thereof, and be accepted by the department (of parks).” The collection and library if offered to the city might not have been accepted by it under the conditions subject to which they were presented to and received by the institute. The order exempting the estate of decedent from the transfer tax is reversed, and the report of the appraiser is remitted to him for correction in accordance with this decision.

Order reversed.
No. 87-1248.

#### Ronek et al. *v.*Gallatin County, Montana.

Sup. Ct. Mont. Certiorari denied.
### D ISTRICT 

### C OURT 

### O F 

### A PPEAL 

### O F 

### T HE 

### S TATE 

### O F 

### F LORIDA F OURTH D ISTRICT

GARY L. REED , Appellant,

v.

STATE OF FLORIDA , Appellee

.

No. 4D 2 3

- 646

[ June 1, 2023 ]

Appeal of order denying rule 3.8 5 0 motion from the Circuit Court for the Nine teenth Judicial Circuit, Martin County ; Sherwood Bauer, Jr.

, Judge; L.T. Case No s

. 432017CF000353D and 432019CF000311A

.
Gary L. Reed

, Indiantown

, pro se

.

N o appearance for appellee

.

P ER C URIAM

.
Affirmed.

D AMOORGIAN , L EVINE and A RTAU , JJ., concur.

* * *

Not final until disposition of timely filed motion for rehearing.
```

                                                                     EXHIBIT 23b

                         CONSENT OF INDEPENDENT AUDITORS

We consent to the  incorporation  by  reference in the  Registration  Statements
(Forms S-8 No. 33-28045,  33-65140,  333-28395 and 333-57873)  pertaining to the
1988  Incentive  and  Non-Qualified  Stock Option Plan,  as amended and the 1988
Joint  Incentive  and  Non-Qualified  Stock  Option  Plan,  as amended of United
Capital  Corp.  of our report  dated  February  14,  2001,  with  respect to the
consolidated  balance  sheet of United  Capital  Corp.  and  subsidiaries  as of
December  31,  2000,  and  the  related   consolidated   statements  of  income,
stockholders'  equity  and cash  flows for each of the two  years in the  period
ended  December 31, 2000  included in the Annual Report (Form 10-K) for the year
ended December 31, 2001.

/s/ ERNST & YOUNG LLP

New York, NY
March 8, 2002
```
Document Headings

                    Document headings vary by document type but may contain                    the following:                  
                -                       the agency or agencies that issued and signed a document                    
                -                       the number of the CFR title and the number of each part                      the document amends, proposes to amend, or is directly                      related to                    
                -                       the agency docket number / agency internal file number                    
                -                       the RIN which identifies each regulatory action listed in                      the Unified Agenda of Federal Regulatory and Deregulatory                      Actions                    

                    See the                                          Document Drafting Handbook                                        for more details.                  

###### Department of Health and Human Services

###### National Institutes of Health

                    Notice is hereby given of a change in the meeting of the Center for Scientific Review Special Emphasis Panel, November 11, 2014, 02:00 p.m. to November 11, 2014, 03:00 p.m., National Institutes of Health, 6701 Rockledge Drive, Bethesda, MD, 20892 which was published in the                     **Federal Register**                     on October 16, 2014, 79 FR 200 Pg. 62166.                

The meeting will be held on December 9, 2014 instead of November 11, 2014. The meeting will start at 12:00 p.m. and will end at 2:00 p.m. The meeting location remains the same. The meeting is closed to the public. 

Dated: November 20, 2014.

Carolyn A. Baum, 

Program Analyst, Office of Federal Advisory Committee Policy.

[FR Doc. 2014-27936 Filed 11-25-14; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 4140-01-P
To: National Institute for Standards and Technology

From: 

Mastercard 

Subject: Proposed Changes to the CSF v2.0 Core

To Whom It May Concern:

We greatly appreciate the opportunity to comment and collaborate on the National Institute for 

Standards and Technology’s (NIST) Discussion Draft of the Cybersecurity Framework (CSF) Core 2.0. 

In its current form, the NIST CSF has proven not only its value in building and maintaining effective 

cybersecurity and risk management programs, but also adaptability to address current and future 

compliance and regulatory requirements. Through the Core 2.0 journey, we share NIST’s commitment to 

update the CSF consistent with the needs of security and risk practitioners, while also helping to inform 

and bridge technology and business stakeholders. 

Mastercard (NYSE: MA) is a global technology company in the payments industry. Our mission is to 

connect and power an inclusive, digital economy that benefits everyone, everywhere by making 

transactions safe, simple, smart and accessible. Using secure data and networks, partnerships and 

passion, our innovations and solutions help individuals, financial institutions, governments and 

businesses realize their greatest potential. With connections across more than 210 countries and 

territories, we are building a sustainable world that unlocks priceless possibilities for all.

Our focus on delivering safe, smart and accessible payments for consumers globally informs our 

endorsement of “Govern” as a function in the next version of the NIST CSF. Mastercard recognizes 

strong governance around security programs is essential for cyber risk management, enabling

organizations to more effectively implement and oversee critical functions and associated controls.

Beyond the addition of supply chain risk management in the CSF 2.0 Core, we further recommend 

formalizing a Supply Chain or “Extend” function, reflecting the growing importance of third-party 

dependencies and risk management to cybersecurity overall. Mastercard holds that this separate 

function covering dependencies supports future implementation as cyber threats adapt and 

technologies advance.

We support the addition of both Govern and Extend functions to NIST CSF Core 2.0 and with the Cyber 

Risk Institute, remain committed to championing NIST CSF as industry benchmark and best-practice.
Fourth Court of Appeals

San Antonio, Texas

January 24, 2018

No. 04-17-00784-CV

ESTATE OF Estella Q. CAMPOS, Deceased

From the Probate Court No. 2, Bexar County, Texas

Trial Court No. 2014PC3884

Honorable Tom Rickhoff, Judge Presiding

ORDER

In accordance with this court’s opinion of this date, this appeal is DISMISSED FOR 

WANT OF JURISDICTION. Costs of court for this appeal are taxed against Appellant Mary Jane 

Campos. See TEX. R. APP. P. 43.4.

It is so ORDERED on January 24, 2018.

_____________________________

Patricia O. Alvarez, Justice

IN WITNESS WHEREOF, I have hereunto set my hand and affixed the seal of the said 

court on this 24th day of January, 2018.

_____________________________

Keith E. Hottle, Clerk of Court