alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
<TABLE> <S> <C>
 
<ARTICLE>                                                           5 

        
<S>                                                       <C> 
<PERIOD-TYPE>                                                  12-MOS 
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                                         FEB-28-1997 
<PERIOD-START>                                            MAR-01-1996 
<PERIOD-END>                                              FEB-28-1997 
<CASH>                                                              0 
<SECURITIES>                                                        0
<RECEIVABLES>                                                       0 
<ALLOWANCES>                                                        0
<INVENTORY>                                                         0 
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                                                    0 
<PP&E>                                                              0 
<DEPRECIATION>                                                      0 
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                                      0 
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                                         768,912 
<BONDS>                                                             0 
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                               0 
<PREFERRED>                                                         0 
<COMMON>                                                       50,000
<OTHER-SE>                                                  1,141,299
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                                (768,912)
<SALES>                                                             0 
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                                                    0 
<CGS>                                                               0 
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                                       0
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                                    0 
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                                    0 
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                                                  0 
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                                     0
<INCOME-TAX>                                                        0 
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                                                 0
<DISCONTINUED>                                                      0 
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                                     0
<CHANGES>                                                           0 
<NET-INCOME>                                                        0      
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                                       0 
<EPS-DILUTED>                                                       0 

         

</TABLE>
# 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 T EX

. R. A PP

. 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
pg. 1

MEP Advisory Board Meeting

Wednesday, June 30, 2021

10 a.m. – 4:30 p.m. 

Virtual Meeting

Connection Info Sent Under Separate Cover

AGENDA 

10 a.m.–10:05 a.m.

5 minutes

Meeting Opening/Logistics Cheryl Gendron, NIST MEP

10:05 a.m.–10:35 a.m.

30 minutes

Welcome and Introductions

Opening Remarks

Welcome from NIST and NIST MEP Leadership

Board and Audience Introductions

Matt Newman, Chair, MEP 

Advisory Board 

Mojdeh Bahar, NIST 

Rob Ivester, NIST MEP

10:35 a.m.–11:20 a.m.

45 minutes

NIST MEP Senior Management Update 

Board Feedback and Discussion

Rob Ivester

11:20 a.m.–11:40 a.m.

20 minutes

Presentation: 

Legislative Update

Board Feedback and Discussion

Chancy Lyford, NIST MEP

11:40 a.m.–12:00 p.m.

20 minutes

Working Group Update:

MEP National NetworkTM Strategic Plan 2023-2028 

Overview – Key Aspects for Future Growth

Board Feedback and Discussion

Rob Ivester

12 p.m.–1 p.m.

1 hour

Meeting Break

1 p.m.- 1:30 p.m.

30 minutes

Working Group Update, Extended:

MEP National NetworkTM Strategic Plan 2023-2028 

Focus Group – Overarching Resilience

Board Feedback and Discussion

David Stieren, NIST MEP 

LaDon Byars, MEP Advisory 

Board

Bernadine Hawes, Ex-Officio -

MEP Advisory Board

1:30 p.m. – 2 p.m.

30 minutes

Working Group Update, Extended:

MEP National NetworkTM Strategic Plan 2023-2028 

Focus Group – Reshoring 

Board Feedback and Discussion

Rob Ivester 

Don Bockoven, MEP Advisory 

Board

George Spottswood, MEP 

Advisory Board 

2 p.m. – 2:30 p.m.

30 minutes

Working Group Update, Extended:

MEP National NetworkTM Strategic Plan 2023-2028 

Focus Group – National Supply Chain 

Board Feedback and Discussion

Mark Schmit, NIST MEP 

Matthew Newman

Mary Isbister, MEP Advisory 

Board

Agenda Subject to Change

Times are estimated
pg. 2

2:30 p.m.–2: 45 p.m.

15 minutes

Meeting Break

2:45 p.m.- 3:15 p.m.

30 minutes

Working Group Update, Extended:

MEP National NetworkTM Strategic Plan 2023-2028 

Focus Group – Workforce 

Board Feedback and Discussion

Mary Ann Pacelli, NIST MEP 

Jose Anaya, MEP Advisory 

Board

Mitchell Magee, MEP Advisory 

Board 

3:15 p.m. – 3:45 p.m.

30 minutes

Working Group Update:

Supply Chain Development Working Group 

Board Feedback and Discussion

Don Bockoven, MEP Advisory 

Board

Dave Stieren, NIST MEP

3:45 p.m.- 4:05 p.m.

20 minutes

Working Group Update:

Executive Committee Working Group

Board Feedback and Discussion

Mary Isbister, MEP Advisory 

Board

Cheryl Gendron

4:05 p.m.-4:30 p.m.

25 minutes

Public Comments/Wrap Up Matt Newman

Rob Ivester

Meeting Open to the Public/Registration Required

All attendees will be participating via webinar; please contact Ms. Cheryl Gendron at 301-975-2785 or 

cheryl.gendron@nist.gov for detailed instructions on how to join the online meeting. All registration requests 

must be received by 5 p.m. EST, Friday, June 26, 2021. 

Rev. 6/28/2021
FOR PUBLICATION

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT

OLAKUNLE OSHODI, AKA Bode 

Okeowo, AKA Olakunle Akintola

Oshodi, AKA Olakunle Akintola

Akinbayo Oshodi, AKA Isaac

Oliver Alger, AKA Curtis Evans, No. 08-71478

AKA Bode Olacune Okeowo, Agency No.

AKA Isaac Okeowo,  A023-484-662

Petitioner,

ORDER

v.

ERIC H. HOLDER Jr., Attorney

General,

Respondent. 

Filed May 3, 2012

ORDER

KOZINSKI, Chief Judge:

Upon the vote of a majority of nonrecused active judges, it

is ordered that this case be reheard en banc pursuant to Circuit

Rule 35-3. The three-judge panel opinion shall not be cited as

precedent by or to any court of the Ninth Circuit.

4937
Digital & Identification Forensics

Barbara Guttman

November 8, 2016
Primary Focus Areas

• Digital Forensics

• Understanding devices and software

• Understanding forensic tool abilities

• Digital Identification

• Latent Prints

• Other biometrics

2
Today’s Talks

• Digital Forensics

• New Data Collections in the NSRL: The NSRL Goes Mobile –

Michael Ogata

• StegoDB: An Image Dataset for Benchmarking Steganography 

Detection Algorithms – Jennifer Newman

• Statistical Methods for Change Detection Over Time in Digital 

Forensics Data – Padhraic Smyth

• Digital Identification

• Quantifying the Weight of Friction Ridge Evidence: Scorebased Likelihood Ratio for Fingerprints – Elham Tabassi

• Fingerprint Science – Joseph Kadane

3
No. 87-6116.

#### Penson *v.*Ohio.

Ct. App. Ohio, Montgomery County. [Certiorari granted, 484 U. S. 1059.] Motion for appointment of counsel granted, and it is ordered that Gregory L. Ayers, Esq., of Columbus, Ohio, be appointed to serve as counsel for petitioner in this case.
<PAGE>



                                                                    Exhibit 10.1

                              MILLIPORE CORPORATION
                         2000 DEFERRED COMPENSATION PLAN
                              FOR SENIOR MANAGEMENT

                                 Amendment No. 1

     WHEREAS Millipore Corporation (the "Company") established the Millipore
Corporation 2000 Deferred Compensation Plan for Senior Management (the "Plan"),
effective September 1, 2000; and


     WHEREAS the Company retained the right to amend the Plan from time to time
and to interpret its provisions; and

     WHEREAS the Company now desires to amend the Plan to provide for the
transfer to the Mykrolis Corporation 2001 Deferred Compensation Plan for Senior
Management of certain assets and liabilities attributable to Participants whose
employment is transferred to Mykrolis Corporation;

     NOW, THEREFORE, the Company adopts the following amendments, effective
April 1, 2001:

     1. Article 5 is amended to add a new Section 5.5 to read as
        follows:

        "5.5 Mykrolis Corporation Employees. Effective April 1, 2001 (or such
        later date on which the Participant's employment is transferred from
        Millipore Corporation to Mykrolis Corporation), each Participant who
        becomes an employee of Mykrolis Corporation on or after such date
        shall cease to participate in the Plan and shall not be permitted to
        defer any further Compensation pursuant to the Plan. In addition and
        subject to the consent of each affected Participant, effective as of
        such date the Accounts of all Participants who become employees of
        Mykrolis Corporation shall be transferred to the Mykrolis Corporation
        2001 Deferred Compensation Plan for Senior Management ("Mykrolis
        Plan") and after such transfer, the affected Participants shall be
        entitled to benefits only from the



                                       -1-

<PAGE>

        Mykrolis Plan and shall not be entitled to any benefits from this
        Plan. The transfer of employment from Millipore Corporation to
        Mykrolis Corporation shall not be deemed a termination of employment
        for purposes of this Plan and after the transfer of such Accounts to
        the Mykrolis Plan, Participants whose employment is transferred to
        Mykrolis Corporation shall not be entitled to a distribution
        hereunder."

     IN WITNESS WHEREOF, MILLIPORE CORPORATION has caused this document to be
executed this 31st day of March, 2001.

                                           MILLIPORE CORPORATION



                                           By:/s/ Jeffrey Rudin
                                              --------------------------------
                                              Jeffrey Rudin
                                              Vice President, General Counsel

                                       -2-
Exhibit 31.2

CERTIFICATION PURSUANT TO 
                        RULE 13a-14(a) OF THE SECURITIES EXCHANGE ACT OF 1934, 
                                       AS ADOPTED PURSUANT TO 
                        SECTION 302 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002

I, Jeff T. Wilson, certify that:

1.     I have reviewed this annual report on Form 10-K/A  for the period ended
December 31, 2008 of Microvision, Inc.; and

2.     Based on my knowledge, this report does not contain any untrue statement of a
material fact or omit to state a material fact necessary to make the statements made, in light of the
circumstances under which such statements were made, not misleading with respect to the period
covered by this report.

Date: April 30, 2009

| |  | /s/JEFF T. WILSON
    Jeff T. Wilson
    Chief Financial Officer
| |  | ----------------------------------------------------------------

---
<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>
<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>                               8,469
<SECURITIES>                             0
<RECEIVABLES>                      188,353
<ALLOWANCES>                        13,250
<INVENTORY>                         40,191
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                   404,344
<PP&E>                           2,413,120
<DEPRECIATION>                   1,151,160
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                   1,798,493
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>              470,125
<BONDS>                            516,564
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                    0
<PREFERRED>                              0
<COMMON>                            10,300
<OTHER-SE>                         479,521
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>     1,798,493
<SALES>                                  0
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                 1,080,813
<CGS>                                    0
<TOTAL-COSTS>                      924,526
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                     5,409
<LOSS-PROVISION>                    14,205
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                  42,873
<INCOME-PRETAX>                    112,727
<INCOME-TAX>                        41,004
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                 71,723
<DISCONTINUED>                           0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                          0
<CHANGES>                                0
<NET-INCOME>                        71,488
<EPS-PRIMARY>                            0
<EPS-DILUTED>                            0
        

</TABLE>
<PAGE>   1
                                                                     EXHIBIT 5.1


                                                (214) 740-8416
   
June 4, 1998
    

   
    

Hastings Entertainment, Inc.
3601 Plains Blvd.
Suite #1
Amarillo, TX 79102

         Re:     Registration Statement on Form S-1 (No. 333-47969)

Dear Sirs:

         We have acted as counsel for Hastings Entertainment, Inc., a Texas
corporation (the "Company"), in connection with the registration under the
Securities Act of 1933, as amended (the "Act"), of an aggregate of 3,377,333
shares of the Company's Common Stock, $.01 par value per share (the
"Securities"). We have examined such documents and questions of law as we have
deemed necessary to render the opinion expressed below.

         Based upon the foregoing, we are of the opinion that the Securities,
when issued and sold as described in the above-referenced Registration
Statement, will be legally issued, fully paid and nonassessable.

         We consent to the filing of this opinion as an exhibit to the
Registration Statement and to the reference to our firm in the prospectus under
the caption "Legal Matters." In giving this consent, we do not thereby admit
that we come within the category of persons whose consent is required under
Section 7 of the Act or the rules and regulations of the Securities and
Exchange Commission promulgated thereunder.


                                        Sincerely,
 
                                        LOCKE PURNELL RAIN HARRELL
                                        (A Professional Corporation)

   
                                         By: /s/ KENT JAMISON
    
                                             -----------------------
                                                 Kent Jamison
Sample Mounting for 15T

342mm

Bottom wall is 

7mm thick

300mm

208mm

247mm

39mm

Golden IVC 

use with 15T magnet

14 mm OD

570mm

• Sample holder needs to be made from OFHC copper

• Sample diameter <=10 mm

• Sample length <= 100 mm

• Sample center is ~40mm below the mounting surface

• Active sample length <=15mm (the split between the 

magnet coils is 20mm)

Golden finger

40mm

M6 tapped hole 10mm deep 

The Lakeshore 370 relay box has 

some magnetic materials inside it. 

Please make sure it is located as far 

from the magnet as possible 

otherwise lakeshore 370 will read 

some weird temperature values at 

high B fields.
Consent to Assignment and Amendment



 Exhibit 10.48 
  
 CONSENT TO ASSIGNMENT 
 and 
 AMENDMENT 
  
 WHEREAS, Hewitt Associates LLC (“Associates”) and FORE Holdings LLC (formerly known as Hewitt Holdings LLC) (“FORE”)
entered into the attached Services Agreement effective as of June 1, 2002 (the “Services Agreement”); and 
  
 WHEREAS, FORE has assigned the Services Agreement to the FORE Holdings Liquidating Trust (the “Trust”) effective September 29, 2005; and 
  
 WHEREAS, Associates is willing to accept the assignment of
the Services Agreement; and 
  
 WHEREAS,
Associates and the Trust wish to amend the Services Agreement; 
  
 NOW THEREFORE, 
  

	 	1.	Associates hereby consents to the assignment of the Services Agreement to the Trust. 

  

	 	2.	The Services Agreement is amended as follows. Since the extent of required services is not known, there shall be no minimum annual fee (Section 1.2) or Basic Services (Section 1.1).
Rather, the fee for any services provided by Associates to the Trust shall be based on the actual time spent by Associates’ employees at their standard billing rates. 

  
 Dated this 29th day of September, 2005. 
  

							
	 Hewitt Associates LLC
	 	 FORE Holdings Liquidating Trust

				
	 By:
	 	 /s/: C. Lawrence Connolly, III

	 	 By:
	 	 /s/: Dave L. Hunt


	 	 	 C. Lawrence Connolly, III
	 	 	 	 David L. Hunt

	 	 	 Secretary
	 	 	 	 Trustee
Ref. 17-023
SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF NEW YORK

Appellate Division, Fourth Judicial Department

91 

KA 15-01824 

PRESENT: CENTRA, J.P., LINDLEY, NEMOYER, CURRAN, AND TROUTMAN, JJ. 

 

THE PEOPLE OF THE STATE OF NEW YORK, RESPONDENT, 

V MEMORANDUM AND ORDER

DIONTE CARROLL, DEFENDANT-APPELLANT. 

 

FRANK H. HISCOCK LEGAL AID SOCIETY, SYRACUSE (JOHN GILSENAN, OF THE

PENNSYLVANIA AND MICHIGAN BARS, ADMITTED PRO HAC VICE, OF COUNSEL),

FOR DEFENDANT-APPELLANT.

WILLIAM J. FITZPATRICK, DISTRICT ATTORNEY, SYRACUSE (JAMES P. MAXWELL

OF COUNSEL), FOR RESPONDENT. 

 

Appeal from a judgment of the Onondaga County Court (Thomas J.

Miller, J.), rendered February 27, 2014. The judgment convicted

defendant, upon his plea of guilty, of criminal possession of a weapon

in the second degree and criminal possession of a controlled substance

in the third degree. 

It is hereby ORDERED that the judgment so appealed from is

unanimously affirmed. 

Memorandum: Defendant appeals from a judgment convicting him

upon his plea of guilty of criminal possession of a weapon in the

second degree (Penal Law § 265.03 [3]) and criminal possession of a

controlled substance in the third degree (§ 220.16 [1]). We agree

with defendant that the waiver of the right to appeal is invalid

because “ ‘the minimal inquiry made by County Court was insufficient

to establish that the court engage[d] the defendant in an adequate

colloquy to ensure that the waiver of the right to appeal was a

knowing and voluntary choice’ ” (People v Jones, 107 AD3d 1589, 1589,

lv denied 21 NY3d 1075). Contrary to the People’s contention, the

written waiver of the right to appeal, which was not signed until

sentencing, does not serve to validate the otherwise inadequate oral

waiver where, as here, “there is no indication that [the court]

obtained a knowing and voluntary waiver of that right at the time of

the plea” (People v Sims, 129 AD3d 1509, 1510, lv denied 26 NY3d 935;

see People v Lawson [appeal No. 7], 124 AD3d 1249, 1250). We

nevertheless conclude that the sentence is not unduly harsh or severe. 

Entered: March 24, 2017 Frances E. Cafarell

Clerk of the Court
EDWARD A. BARTOLOMEI BARTLAW2003@YAHOO.COM



### February 17.2015 Law Offices Of 

## WARD A. BARTOLOMEI, RL.L.C. Attorney and Counselor at Law 530 Lexington Avenue San Antonio, Texas 78215 ROXANA REYES Paralegals BARTLAW2003LA@YAHOO.COM Telephone (210) 225-0393 Facsimile (210) 227-8529 SYLVIA ALMAGUER Firm Investigator

(210) 523-0505

Mr. John Brown 

### ChiefDeputy Clerk 

### Court ofCriminal Appeals PO Box 12308. Capitol Station Austin, Texas 78711
RE: IN THE MATTER OF THE STATE OF TEXAS vs. MICHAEL ERIC RENDON 

### CCA NO. PD-0015-15, COA NO. 13-13-00666-CR TRIAL COURT CASE NO. 12-8-26806-D Dear Mr. Brown, 

### Pursuant to your instruciions this morning regarding your letter ofFebruary 6, 2015 concerningthe above referenced matter; please be advisedthat I will not be representing Mr. 

### Rendon on PDR in this case. Mr. Rendon has retained Mr. Edward Shaughnessyto represent him in this matter. Mr. Shaughnessy will beentering his appearance by a separate notice of appearance. 

### Very truly yours, THE LXW OFFICE 

## EDWAR0A. BA^fOLQMEl/P.L.L.C.

EAB/rr cc: file ARTOLOMEI



### Concerned, Committed,Qualified, CriminalDefense 

### PD-0015-15 COURT OF CRIMINAL APPEALS

AUSTIN, TEXAS Transmitted 2/17/2015 4:53:53 PM Accepted 2/18/2015 7:33:48 AM

ABEL ACOSTA CLERK
**UN PUBLISHED** 
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

**No. 12**  **- 7418** 

CEDRIC DAVIS , Petitioner

– Appellant ,
v. WARDEN ANTHONY PADULA, Lee Correctional Institution , Respondent

- Appellee
.

Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of South Carolina , at Orangeburg
. Timothy M. Cain , District Judge. ( 5:11

- cv - 02256

- TMC )

Submitted : December 19, 2012 Decided: December 26, 2012

Before WYNN and THACKER , Circuit Judges, and HAMILTON, Senior Circuit Judge.

Dismissed by un published per curiam opinion
. Cedric Davis, Appellant Pro Se. James Anthony Mabry, Assistant Attorney General, Donald John Zelenka, Senior Assistant Attorney General, Columbia, South Carolina, for A ppellee.
Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.2 PER CURIAM: Cedric Davis seeks to appeal the district court’s order accepting the recommendation of the magistrate judge and denying relief on his 28 U.S.C. § 2254 (2006) petition . The order is not appealable unless a circuit justice or judge issues a certificate of appealability. 28 U.S.C. § 2253(c)(1) (A) (2006) . A certificate of appealability will not issue absent “a substantial showing of the denial of a constitutional right. ” 28 U.S.C. § 2253(c)(2) (2006)
. When the district court denies relief on the merits, a prisoner satisfies this standard by demonstrating that reasonable jurists would find that the district court’s assessment of the constitutional claims is debatable or wrong. Slack v. McDaniel , 529 U.S. 473, 484 (2000); see Miller

- El v. Cockrell , 537 U.S. 322, 336

- 38 (2003). When the district court denies relief on procedural grounds, the prisoner must demonstrate both that the dispositive procedural ruling is debatab le, and that the petition states a debatable claim of the denial of a constitutional right. Slack , 529 U.S. at 484

- 85. We have independently reviewed the record and conclude that Davis has not made the requisite showing. Accordingly, we deny a certific ate of appealability , deny leave to proceed in forma pauperis and dismiss the appeal. We dispense with oral argument because the facts and legal contentions are adequately3 presented in the materials before th is court and argument would not aid the decisio nal process.

DISMISSED