alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
Version 1 / Date of Issue: 10.29.15 / Issuing Authority: Forensic Science Standards Board (FSSB)

OSAC Research Needs Assessment Form

Title of research need: 

Keywords:

Submitting subcommittee(s): Date Approved: 

(If SAC review identifies additional subcommittees, add them to the box above.)

Background information:

1. Description of research need:

2. Key bibliographic references relating to this research need:

3a. In what ways would the research results improve current laboratory capabilities?

Additional objective techniques for identifying human remains

Kieser JA. Human adult odontometrics. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press; 1990

Hillson S. Dental anthropology. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press; 1996

Demirjian A . Dentition. In: Falkner F , Tanner JM, editors. 

Human growth, 2 postnatal growths. New York: Plenum Press; 1978. p. 413–4 

Tucker AS, Sharpe PT. Molecular genetics of tooth morpho-genesis and patterning; the

right shape in the right place. J DentRes. 1999;78:826–34.

Increased accuracy

Phenotyping Of Tooth Shape and Tooth Color

Phenotyping, human identification

Odontology 8/24/16
Version 1 / Date of Issue: 10.29.15 / Issuing Authority: Forensic Science Standards Board (FSSB)

3b. In what ways would the research results improve understanding of the scientific basis for the 

subcommittee(s)?

3c. In what ways would the research results improve services to the criminal justice system?

4. Status assessment (I, II, III, or IV): 

This research need has been identified by one or more subcommittees of OSAC and is being provided as an 

informational resource to the community.

Major gap 

in current 

knowledge

Minor gap 

in current 

knowledge

No or limited

current research 

is being 

conducted

I III

Existing current 

research is being 

conducted

II IV

Used as an additional identification method for unidentified human remains

 
Version 1 / Date of Issue: 10.29.15 / Issuing Authority: Forensic Science Standards Board (FSSB)

// Approval date:

(Approval is by majority vote of subcommittee. Once approved, forward to SAC.)

1. Does the SAC agree with the research need? Yes ⃝ No ⃝ 

2. Does the SAC agree with the status assessment? Yes ⃝ No ⃝

If no, what is the status assessment of the SAC:

Approval date:

(Approval is by majority vote of SAC. Once approved, forward to NIST for posting.)

Subcommittee

SAC
United States Department of Commerce

National Institute of Standards and Technology

Certificate of Metrological Traceability For:

Maine

This laboratory has demonstrated evidence of an unbroken chain of metrological traceability of its standards to the international system of units (SI), documented measurement uncertainties, uses documented measurement procedures, successfully 

completed training and proficiency tests, documented calibration intervals, submitted a quality management system, and 

demonstrated suitable measurement assurance for the Scope listed on this certificate.

The Office of Weights and Measures Program assesses laboratories to NIST Handbook 143 - Program Handbook for State 

Weights and Measures Laboratories and ISO/IEC 17025:2017. 

Scope

Mass Echelon II

30 kg to 1 mg

1000 lb to 0.001 lb 

8 oz to 0.03125 oz 

Mass Echelon III

30 kg to 1 mg

1000 lb to 0.001 lb

8 oz to 0.03125 oz

Weight Carts

7000 lb to 2000 lb

Wheel Load Weighers

20 000 lb to 5000 lb

Volume Gravimetric, I

200 L to 5 L

100 gal to 5 gal

Volume Transfer, II

5000 L to 19 L 

1500 gal to 5 gal

Volume Transfer, II LPG

300 gal to 20 gal 

Length, Special

Shellfish

6 in to 1 in

(Rev.: September 2021)

2022 to 2023

____________________________________

Katrice Lippa, Chief

NIST Office of Weights and Measures

Effective Dates: 2022-02-01 to 2024-02-01
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<ARTICLE> 5
       
<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   9-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          DEC-31-1998
<PERIOD-END>                               SEP-30-1998
<CASH>                                          13,621
<SECURITIES>                                         0
<RECEIVABLES>                                    1,394
<ALLOWANCES>                                         0
<INVENTORY>                                          0
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                                     0
<PP&E>                                         335,139
<DEPRECIATION>                                 160,098
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                 175,041
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                                0
<BONDS>                                              0
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                        35,260
<OTHER-SE>                                         356
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                   211,980
<SALES>                                              0
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                                42,109
<CGS>                                                0
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                   25,681
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                     0
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                     0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                               9,511
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                  4,451
<INCOME-TAX>                                         0
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                              4,451
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                (1,876)
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                     2,575
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                     1.52
<EPS-DILUTED>                                     1.46
        

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

<ARTICLE> 5
       
<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   3-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          JUN-30-1998
<PERIOD-END>                               SEP-30-1997
<CASH>                                         183,930
<SECURITIES>                                   200,000
<RECEIVABLES>                                  632,058
<ALLOWANCES>                                    10,000
<INVENTORY>                                  1,607,157
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                             2,692,921
<PP&E>                                         585,929
<DEPRECIATION>                                 467,667
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                               3,607,307
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                          407,527
<BONDS>                                              0
<COMMON>                                        52,007
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<OTHER-SE>                                   3,147,773
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                 3,607,307
<SALES>                                      1,046,628
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                             1,046,628
<CGS>                                          633,406
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                  364,667
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                     0
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                10,000
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                                   0
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                 48,555
<INCOME-TAX>                                    19,400
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                             29,155
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                    29,155
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                      .01
<EPS-DILUTED>                                      .01
        

</TABLE>
#### John C. MONTUE, Plaintiff-Appellant, v. CALIFORNIA DEPARTMENT OF CORRECTIONS; et al., Defendants-Appellees.

No. 99-15707.

D.C. No. CV-98-01688-GEB.

United States Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit.

Submitted May 14, 2001.*

Decided May 25, 2001.

*535Before PREGERSON, FERNANDEZ, and WARD LAW, Circuit Judges.

*

 The panel unanimously finds this case suitable for decision without oral argument. *See*Fed. R.App. P. 34(a)(2).

MEMORANDUM **

John C. Montue, a California state prisoner, appeals pro se the district court’s judgment dismissing his 42 U.S.C. § 1983 action pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1915A(b) for failure to state a claim. We have jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. § 1291. We review de novo dismissals pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1915A(b)(1), *see Resnick v. Hayes,*213 F.3d 443, 447 (9th Cir.2000), and we affirm.

The district court properly dismissed Montue’s Eighth Amendment claim because Montue failed to allege that he had been exposed to the risk of harm of which he complained. *See Helling v. McKinney,*509 U.S. 25, 35-36, 113 S.Ct. 2475, 125 L.Ed.2d 22 (1993).

Montue contends that the grooming regulation violated his due process rights. We do not consider this issue because it is raised for the first time on appeal. *See Marbled Murrelet v. Babbitt,*83 F.3d 1060, 1063 (9th Cir.1996).

AFFIRMED.

**

 This disposition is not appropriate for publication and may not be cited to or by the courts of this circuit except as may be provided by 9th Cir. R. 36-3.
#### Susan B. Gowan *v.*W. J. Gowan.

Partnership — Paying Partnership Money on Individual Debt — Remedy.

Where one partner, without the consent of his co-partner, paid his individual debt with partnership money, with knowledge on the part of the payee that the money belonged to the partnership, the other partner has his remedy against the person who received the money.

APPEAL FROM SHELBY CIRCUIT COURT.

RESPONSE TO PETITION FOR REHEARING.

April 15, 1874.

OPINION by

Judge Peters :

Each partner has an implied authority to dispose of the property and effects of the firm within the scope of the purpose for which the partnership was formed; and if one partner take's the money of the firm, without the consent of the other, and pays his individual debt with it, and the party to whom he paid it knew that the money thus paid was the money of the firm, the partner whose rights have been violated may have his remedy against the third party to whom the money is paid. But to entitle him to that remedy, the party receiving the money must, at the time he receives it, know it was partnership funds. Daniel v. Daniel et al., 9 B. Mon. 195. Story on Partnerships, Sec. 128.

*672-, *for appellant.*

-, *for appellee.*

In this case it is not alleged in the original or amended petition that appellant knew at the time she received the funds that they were partnership money. If the recitals in the paper signed Au-r gust 9, 1871, be competent evidence as admissions of appellant, there is nothing in it to show that she knew the money was the money of the firm.

So that if there was an allegation of the knowledge on her part, of the fact that the money belonged to the firm, there is no sufficient evidence to sustain it.

The last payment on appellant’s land in Scott, sold to Gale, was $566.66 due March 1, 1869, and was paid December 25, 1869, which, with principal and interest, would amount to about $595, when she handed it to her husband to pay to her vendor for the land — within five dollars of what she had received.

Petition overruled.
#### Commonwealth for Muir *v.*J. S. Coleman.

Guardian and Ward — Settlement With Ward.

A guardian cannot escape liability to the ward, in settlement by turning over to him a note on parties of a doubtful solvency, which can be collected, if at all,, only by the big-best degree of diligence, without notifying the ward of the true condition of the maker.

APPEAL FROM TODD CIRCUIT COURT.

October 10, 1873.

Opinion by

Judge Lindsay:

The note of Hutchings and Browder might have been turned over to Muir as part of his estate without the assignment of Coleman, the guardian, if the payors had been solvent at the time, or if they were solvent when the note was renewed, and the guardian had taken the necessary legal steps to insure its collection within a reasonable time after the solvency of either of them became a matter of doubt. Here it is questionable whether or not the principal could pay his debts when the note was renewed, and it is shown that nothing short of extraordinary diligence could have secured its collection after it was passed to the ward, and of this fact Coleman either was or could have been advised had he taken sufficient interest in his ward’s estate to investigate the condition of Hutchings & Browder.

He was, therefore, in default when he settled with his ward. He had no right to demand that the latter should accept as part of his estate, a note on parties of doubtful solvency and which he had taken no steps to collect. He might, however, have excused himself for this default by assigning the note and notifying the ward to sue at the first term of the court, and prosecute the claim to collection with legal diligence. Instead of doing this he left him to rest under the *179false impression that the note was equal to gold, and he now seeks to escape liability upon the ground that the ward might have obtained from an attorney that information which it was his clear duty to give.

T. *K. Kennedy, Rodman, for appellant.*

*Petrie & Reeves, for appellee.*

As to the note of Hillingsworth and Edwards, it was a manifest breach of duty for appellant to pay it to his ward in any state of case. The ward was entitled to have his own estate, or else .to be paid in money. The debt due to him could not be paid by the guardian with a cash note which could only be collected by the use of the highest degree of diligence.

Petition overruled.
WARNING: THE EDGAR SYSTEM ENCOUNTERED ERROR(S) WHILE PROCESSING THIS SCHEDULE.

<TABLE> <S> <C>

<ARTICLE>                     5
<RESTATED>
[LEGEND]
     THIS SCHEDULE  CONTAINS SUMMARY  FINANCIAL  INFORMATION  EXTRACTED FROM THE
     FINANCIAL STATEMENTS CONTAINED IN THE COMPANY'S FORM 10-KSB FOR THE QUARTER
     ENDED  DECEMBER  31, 1996 AND IS  QUALIFIED IN ITS ENTIRETY BY REFERENCE TO
     SUCH FINANCIAL STATEMENTS.
[/LEGEND]
<MULTIPLIER>                              1
<CURRENCY>                     U.S. DOLLARS
       
<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   YEAR
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>               SEP-30-1997
<PERIOD-START>                  OCT-01-1996
<PERIOD-END>                    DEC-31-1996
<EXCHANGE-RATE>                           1
<CASH>                                9,223
<SECURITIES>                              0
<RECEIVABLES>                       771,458
<ALLOWANCES>                         53,000
<INVENTORY>                         885,936
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                  1,704,271
<PP&E>                            6,011,707
<DEPRECIATION>                    2,229,363
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                    7,216,759
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>             2,141,287
<BONDS>                                   0
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                     0
<PREFERRED>                               0
<COMMON>                             66,850
<OTHER-SE>                        3,056,769
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>      7,216,759
<SALES>                           3,111,222
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                  3,111,222
<CGS>                             2,191,121
<TOTAL-COSTS>                     2,191,121
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                    724,248
<LOSS-PROVISION>                      1,000
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                   82,467
<INCOME-PRETAX>                     112,386
<INCOME-TAX>                          1,250
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                 111,136
<DISCONTINUED>                            0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                           0
<CHANGES>                                 0
<NET-INCOME>                        111,136
<EPS-PRIMARY>                           .02
<EPS-DILUTED>                           .01
        

</TABLE>
**Exhibit
        (23)**
   CONSENT
        OF INDEPENDENT REGISTERED PUBLIC ACCOUNTING FIRM
  We
        hereby
        consent to the incorporation by reference in the Registration Statement on
        Form
        S-3 (No. 33-85142) and Forms S-8 (No. 33-48476, 33-54175, 33-56291, 33-65199,
        333-88907, 333-88923, 333-90167, 333-116053, 333-127081 and 333-127809) of
        Alltel Corporation of our report dated March 10, 2006 relating to the
        consolidated financial statements, management’s assessment of the effectiveness
        of internal control over financial reporting and the effectiveness of internal
        control over financial reporting, which appears in this Form 10-K. We also
        consent to the incorporation by reference of our report dated March 10, 2006
        relating to the financial statement schedule, which appears in this Form
        10-K.
 
  /s/
        PricewaterhouseCoopers LLP
  Little
        Rock, Arkansas
 March
        10,
        2006
IIB 

108TH CONGRESS 

2D SESSION H. R. 4427

IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES 

JULY 7, 2004

Received; read twice and referred to the Committee on Governmental Affairs 

AN ACT

To designate the facility of the United States Postal Service 

located at 73 South Euclid Avenue in Montauk, New 

York, as the ‘‘Perry B. Duryea, Jr. Post Office’’.

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

HR 4427 RFS 

1 SECTION 1. DESIGNATION. 

2 The facility of the United States Postal Service lo3 cated at 73 South Euclid Avenue in Montauk, New York, 

4 shall be known and designated as the ‘‘Perry B. Duryea, 

5 Jr. Post Office’’. 

6 SEC. 2. REFERENCES. 

7 Any reference in a law, map, regulation, document, 

8 paper, or other record of the United States to the facility 

9 referred to in section 1 shall be deemed to be a reference 

10 to the ‘‘Perry B. Duryea, Jr. Post Office’’.

Passed the House of Representatives July 6, 2004. 

Attest: JEFF TRANDAHL, 

Clerk.
IN THE SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF MONTANA No. DA 23
- 0418 STATE OF MONTANA,

Plaintiff and Appellee, v. RYAN CLINTON BLOOMER,

Defendant and Appellant
.

**ORDER** Upon consideration of Appellant’s motion for extension of time, and good cause appearing, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that Appellant is granted an extension of time to and including April 12 , 2024 within which to prepare, file, and serve Appellant’s opening brief on appeal.

Electronically signed by: Mike McGrath Chief Justice, Montana Supreme Court

March 6 2024

03/06/2024

Case Number: DA 23-0418
UN PUBLISHED
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

No. 23
- 7179

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA , Plaintiff

- Appellee ,

v. RODERICK LAMAR WILLIAMS, a/k/a Rox , Defendant

- Appellant

.

Appeal from the United States District Court for the Western District of North Carolina , at Statesville

. Kenneth D. Bell , District Judge. ( 5:03

- cr - 00004

- KDB

- DSC

- 8 )

Submitted : February 27 , 2024 Decided: March 1, 2024

Before WILKINSON , WYNN , and HARRIS , Circuit Judges

.

Affirmed by un published per curiam opinion

. Roderick Lamar Williams, Appellant Pro Se.
Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. USCA4 Appeal: 23-7179 Doc: 9 Filed: 03/01/2024 Pg: 1 of 22 PER CURIAM: Roderick Lamar Williams appeals the district court’s order denying his motion to correct the record under Federal Rule of Criminal Procedure 36 . We have reviewed the
record and find no reversible error. See United States v. Vanderhorst , 927 F.3d 824, 826

- 27 (4th Cir. 2019) (stating standard). Accordingly, we affirm the district court ’s order

. United States v. Williams , No. 5:03

- cr - 00004

- KDB

- DSC

- 8 (W.D.N.C. Nov. 1, 2023) . We dispense with oral argument because the facts and legal contentions are adequat ely presented in the materials before this court and argument would not aid the decisional
process. AFFIRMED USCA4 Appeal: 23-7179 Doc: 9 Filed: 03/01/2024 Pg: 2 of 2
Exhibit 32.2  Certification of Principal Financial Officer Pursuant to 18 U.S.C. 1350 (Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002)  I, Gandolfo Verra, Chief Financial Officer of Cordia Corporation (the "Registrant") do hereby certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350 as adopted pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that, to the best of my knowledge, based upon a review of the Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q for the period September 30, 2008 of the Registrant, as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the "Report"):  (1) The Report fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended; and  (2) The information contained in the Report fairly presents, in all material respects, the financial condition and results of operations of the Registrant.  By: /s/        Gandolfo Verra Chief Financial Officer   November 14, 2008  * A signed original of this written statement required by Section 906 has been provided to Cordia Corporation and will be retained by Cordia Corporation and furnished to the Securities Exchange Commission or its staff upon request.
United States Department of Commerce

National Institute of Standards and Technology

Certificate of Metrological Traceability For:

Kentucky

2023

This laboratory has demonstrated evidence of an unbroken chain of metrological traceability of its standards to the international 

system of units (SI), maintains a documented calibration program, documented measurement uncertainties, uses documented 

measurement procedures, successfully completed training and proficiency tests, submitted a quality management system, and 

has demonstrated suitable measurement assurance for the Scope listed on this certificate.

The Office of Weights and Measures Program assesses laboratories to NIST Handbook 143 - Program Handbook for State 

Weights and Measures Laboratories and ISO/IEC 17025:2017. 

Scope

_____________________________________

Katrice Lippa, Chief

NIST Office of Weights and Measures

(Rev.: September 2021)

Effective Dates: 2023-02-01 to 2024-02-01

Mass Echelon III

2 kg to 1 mg

1000 lb to 0.001 lb

8 oz to 0.03125 oz

Volume Transfer, II

5 gal
<PAGE>   1
                                                                    EXHIBIT 23.1



                        CONSENT OF INDEPENDENT AUDITORS


The Board of Directors
Micro General Corporation:


     We consent to incorporation by reference in the registration statements
(no. 2-85485, 2-94290, 333-22240, 333-64289 and 333-95913) on Form S-8 of Micro
General Corporation of our report dated March 28, 2000, relating to the
consolidated balance sheets of Micro General Corporation as of December 31, 1999
and 1998, and the related consolidated statements of operations, stockholders'
equity and cash flows for each of the years in the three-year period ended
December 31, 1999, and the related schedule, which report appears in the
December 31, 1999 annual report on Form 10-K of Micro General Corporation.




                                          KPMG LLP

Los Angeles, California
March 28, 2000


                                       39
Exhibit 32.2



CERTIFICATION PURSUANT TO

18 UNITED STATES CODE SECTION 1350,

AS ADOPTED PURSUANT TO

SECTION 906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002



I, Anthony E. Applebaum, Chief Executive Officer of Mera Pharmaceuticals, certify that (1) Mera Pharmaceuticals, Inc.s Form 10-QSB for the quarter ended September 14, 2007 fully complies with the requirements of Section 3 (a) or 15 (d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 and (ii) the information contained in the Form 10-QSB for the quarter ended September 14, 2007 fairly presents, in all material respects, the financial condition and the results of operations of Mera Pharmaceuticals, Inc.



Date:   September 14, 2007



/s/ANTHONY E. APPLEBAUM

Anthony E. Applebaum

Principal Financial and Accounting Officer



A signed original of this written statement required by Section 906 has been provided to Mera Pharmaceuticals, Inc. and will be retained by Mera Pharmaceuticals, Inc. and furnished to the Securities and Exchange Commission or its staff upon request.