alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
I 

108TH CONGRESS 

2D SESSION H. R. 4583

To amend the Farm Security and Rural Investment Act of 2002 to base 

the counter-cyclical payment rate for the 2003 crop year for producers 

whose farming operations are located in certain declared disaster areas 

on the total of the partial payments for that crop year. 

IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES 

JUNE 15, 2004

Mr. REHBERG (for himself and Mr. PETERSON of Minnesota) introduced the 

following bill; which was referred to the Committee on Agriculture 

A BILL

To amend the Farm Security and Rural Investment Act 

of 2002 to base the counter-cyclical payment rate for 

the 2003 crop year for producers whose farming operations are located in certain declared disaster areas on 

the total of the partial payments for that crop year.

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

•HR 4583 IH 

1 SECTION 1. SPECIAL COUNTER-CYCLICAL PAYMENT RATE 

2 FOR 2003 CROP YEAR FOR PRODUCERS OPER3 ATING IN DECLARED DISASTER AREAS. 

4 Section 1104 of the Farm Security and Rural Invest5 ment Act of 2002 (7 U.S.C. 7914) is amended by adding 

6 at the end the following new subsection: 

7 ‘‘(g) SPECIAL PAYMENT RATE FOR CERTAIN DE8 CLARED DISASTER AREAS.—

9 ‘‘(1) 2003 RATE BASED ON PROJECTED PAY10 MENT RATE.—In the case of the counter-cyclical 

11 payments that were required to be made under this 

12 section for the 2003 crop year to producers on a 

13 farm located in a federally declared disaster area for 

14 any of the 2001 through 2004 crop years, the Sec15 retary shall use as the payment rate for that crop 

16 year the payment rate that was used to make partial 

17 payments under subsection (f) for that crop year, 

18 rather than the final payment rate determined for 

19 that crop year. 

20 ‘‘(2) PROMPT PAYMENT OF ADDITIONAL

21 AMOUNTS.—As soon as practicable after the date of 

22 the enactment of this subsection, the Secretary shall 

23 pay to producers described in paragraph (1) any ad24 ditional counter-cyclical payment amount due the 

25 producers for the 2003 crop year as a result of the 

26 revised payment rate required by paragraph (1). 
3

•HR 4583 IH 

1 ‘‘(3) FEDERALLY DECLARED DISASTER AREA

2 DEFINED.—In this subsection, the term ‘federally 

3 declared disaster area’ means an area—

4 ‘‘(A) covered by a Presidential declaration 

5 of major disaster issued under section 401 of 

6 the Robert T. Stafford Disaster Relief and 

7 Emergency Assistance Act (42 U.S.C. 5170); or 

8 ‘‘(B) determined to be a disaster area by 

9 the Secretary under subpart A of part 1945 of 

10 title 7, Code of Federal Regulations.’’.

Æ
*Pursuant to 5TH CIR. R. 47.5, the court has determined that this opinion should not be

published and is not precedent except under the limited circumstances set forth in 5TH CIR.

R. 47.5.4.

IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT

 

No. 00-41435

Summary Calendar

 

VINCENT LILLY,

Plaintiff-Appellant,

versus

CHUCK BISCOE Etc. ET AL.,

Defendants,

CHUCK BISCOE, Assistant Warden, Beto I; 

DANNY HORTON, Assistant Warden, Beto I; 

BOBBY WARREN, Assistant Regional Director,

Texas Department of Criminal Justice-Institutional Division;

M. TIMMONS, Classification Case Manager, Beto I,

Defendants-Appellees.

____________________________________________

Appeal from the United States District Court

for the Eastern District of Texas

USDC No. 6:00-CV-215

____________________________________________

July 31, 2001

Before POLITZ, WIENER, and PARKER, Circuit Judges.

PER CURIAM:*

Vincent Lilly, Texas prisoner #467486, appeals the dismissal of his 42 U.S.C.

§ 1983 complaint as frivolous and for failure to state a claim pursuant to 28 U.S.C.
1Wilson v. Budney, 976 F.2d 957 (5th Cir. 1992). 

2Farmer v. Brennan, 511 U.S. 825 (1994). 

3Simmons v. Poppell, 837 F.2d 1243 (5th Cir. 1988) (citing Daniels v. Williams, 474 U.S.

327 (1986), and Hudson v. Palmer, 468 U.S. 517 (1984)). 

4Martin v. Dallas County, 822 F.2d 553 (5th Cir. 1987). 

2

§ 1915(e)(2)(B)(i) & (ii). He contends that his due process rights were violated

when he was not given the opportunity to be present at his custody reclassification

hearing. He missed three scheduled hearings; the first two were continued because

of his absence. A prison inmate does not have a protectable liberty or property

interest in custodial classification hearings.1 Lilly therefore has not and cannot state

a cognizable claim under 42 U.S.C. § 1983 on this basis.

Lilly invokes the eighth amendment and contends that prison officials were

deliberately indifferent to his personal property because his return to medium

custody allegedly resulted in the theft of his cell contents by prison gang members. 

Unfortunately for Lilly, he has not and cannot state a claim under the eighth

amendment for deliberate indifference to the security of his property.2 In addition,

his claim fails because "[t]he Due Process Clause is not implicated by a state

official's negligent act causing unintended loss of property, . . . and even intentional

destruction of an inmate's property does not raise a constitutional claim if an

adequate post-deprivation remedy exists."3 Texas provides adequate

postdeprivation remedies.4 This claim also is not cognizable under 42 U.S.C. §

1983. 
3

This appeal is frivolous and accordingly it is DISMISSED. See 5th Cir.

R. 42.2
2

IN THE SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF MONTANA

No. DA 24-0203

JOEY ZAHARA,

Plaintiff/Appellant,

v.

ADVANCED NEUROLOGY SPECIALISTS,

Defendant/Appellee.

_____________________________________________________________

ORDER GRANTING AMERICAN MEDICAL ASSOCIATION AND 

MONTANA MEDICAL ASSOCIATION’S UNOPPOSED MOTION FOR 

LEAVE TO APPEAR AMICI CURIAE

_____________________________________________________________

On Appeal from the Eighth Judicial District of the State of Montana, in and for 

Cascade County, Cause No. CDV-14-093; The Honorable John Kutzman

_____________________________________________________________

Pursuant to the unopposed motion by the American Medical Association 

(“AMA”) and Montana Medical Association (“MMA”) for leave to appear as 

amici curiae in this matter, and good cause appearing,

IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that AMA and MMA’s motion is 

GRANTED. AMA and MMA shall file its amici curiae brief on or before the 

deadline for Defendant-Appellee’s response brief, and shall conform to all 

schedules adopted by this Court.

Electronically signed and dated below.

Electronically signed by:

Mike McGrath

Chief Justice, Montana Supreme Court

June 19 2024

06/19/2024

Case Number: DA 24-0203
**EXHIBIT 31.2**

 

**CERTIFICATIONS**

 

I, John C. Pintozzi, certify that:

 

1. I have reviewed this quarterly report on Form 10-Qof Allstate Life Insurance Company of New York;

 

2. Based on my knowledge, this report does notcontain any untrue statement of a material fact or omit to state a materialfact necessary to make the statements made, in light of the circumstances underwhich such statements were made, not misleading with respect to the periodcovered by this report;

 

3. Based on my knowledge, the financial statements,and other financial information included in this report, fairly present in allmaterial respects the financial condition, results of operations and cash flowsof the registrant as of, and for, the periods presented in this report;

 

4. The registrant’s other certifying officer(s) andI are responsible for establishing and maintaining disclosure controls andprocedures (as defined in Exchange Act Rules 13a-15(e) and 15d-15(e))for the registrant and have:

 

a)                          Designed such disclosure controls and procedures,or caused such disclosure controls and procedures to be designed under oursupervision, to ensure that material information relating to the registrant,including its consolidated subsidiaries, is made known to us by others withinthose entities, particularly during the period in which this report is beingprepared;

 

b)                         Evaluated the effectiveness of the registrant’sdisclosure controls and procedures and presented in this report our conclusionsabout the effectiveness of the disclosure controls and procedures, as of theend of the period covered by this report based on such evaluation; and

 

c)                          Disclosed in this report any change in theregistrant’s internal control over financial reporting that occurred during theregistrant’s most recent fiscal quarter (the registrant’s fourth fiscal quarterin the case of an annual report) that has materially affected, or is reasonablylikely to materially affect, the registrant’s internal control over financialreporting.

 

5. The registrant’s other certifying officer(s) andI have disclosed, based on our most recent evaluation of internal control overfinancial reporting, to the registrant’s auditors and the audit committee ofregistrant’s board of directors (or persons performing the equivalentfunctions):

 

a)                          All significant deficiencies and materialweaknesses in the design or operation of internal control over financialreporting which are reasonably likely to adversely affect the registrant’sability to record, process, summarize and report financial information; and

 

b)                         Any fraud, whether or not material, thatinvolves management or other employees who have a significant role in theregistrant’s internal control over financial reporting.

 

May 8, 2006

 
|   | /s/  JOHN C. PINTOZZI     |   |
|--------|---------------------------|--------|
|   | John  C. Pintozzi         |
|   | Senior Vice President and |
|   | Chief Financial Officer   |

 

E-5

----
Update: 

NIST Cybersecurity Activities

February 7, 2018

Donna F. Dodson
2/07/2018 NIST VCAT 2

Cultivating trust in technology through 

cybersecurity

• Research, development & transition to practice

• Standards & best practices

• Outreach

• Interagency coordination
2/07/2018 NIST VCAT 3

Cryptography

Developing standards, best 

practices, tools & tests  cultivate 

trust in cryptography

• Quantum resistance cryptographic 

standards

• Key management best practices

• Better testing mechanisms

• Blockchain & lightweight

Increased capacity

Shutterstock
2/07/2018 NIST VCAT 4

Risk Management

Building better mechanisms 

to understand & manage 

cybersecurity risks...

• Cybersecurity framework

• Security and privacy controls

• System lifecycle & risk 

management

Shutterstock
2/07/2018 NIST VCAT 5

Internet & Communications 

Infrastructure

Cultivating trust in IoT & 

promote U.S. leadership through:

• Definitions, guidance& best 

practice documentation

• Research (IoT reference data) & 

enabling software tools

• Coordination of standards in the 

digital economy (across sectors) Shutterstock
2/07/2018 NIST VCAT 6

Practical Applications 

& Technology Transfer

Building trust in technology by driving adoption of 

standards-based cybersecurity solutions to address 

business needs
2/07/2018 NIST VCAT 7

Current Mandates

• Federal Information Systems 

Modernization Act

• Cybersecurity Enhancement Act of 

2014 

• OMB Circular A-130: Managing 

Information As a Strategic Resource

• Presidential EO 13800: Strengthening 

the Cybersecurity of Federal Networks 

& Critical Infrastructure

• National Cybersecurity Center of 

Excellence
Current Mandates 

• National Cybersecurity Center of Excellence (P.L. 112-55)

• Help America Vote Act

• Computer Security Research and Development Act of 2002

2/07/2018 NIST VCAT 8
2/07/2018 NIST VCAT 9

Calls for Expanded NIST Role in Cybersecurity

• S.1885, American Vision for Safer Transportation through 

Advancement of Revolutionary Technologies (AV START) Act

• H.R. 1224, NIST Cybersecurity Framework, Assessment, & 

Auditing Act of 2017

• H.R. 1324, Securing the Internet Of Things Act of 2107

• H.R. 1562, Secure America’s Future Elections Act

• H.R. 1981, Cybersecurity Education and Federal Workforce 

Enhancement Act
Calls for Expanded NIST Role in Cybersecurity

•H.R. 2105, NIST Small Business Cybersecurity Act of 

2017

• S.536, Cybersecurity Disclosure Act of 2017

• S.770, MAIN STREET Cybersecurity Act of 2017

• S.2179, Data Security and Breach Notification Act

2/07/2018 NIST VCAT 10
2/07/2018 NIST VCAT 11

Discussion
<TABLE> <S> <C>


<ARTICLE>                     5
<LEGEND>
     This schedule contains summary financial information extracted from the
Balance sheet and Income statement dated September 30, 1996 on Forn 10-QSB, and
is qualified in its entirety by reference to such Form 10-QSB dated September
30, 1996.
</LEGEND>
<CIK>                         0000837987
<NAME>                        Wasatch Education Systems Corporation
<MULTIPLIER>                                   1
       
<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   3-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                              JUN-30-1997
<PERIOD-END>                                   SEP-30-1996
<CASH>                                            110,815
<SECURITIES>                                            0
<RECEIVABLES>                                     742,129
<ALLOWANCES>                                       15,000
<INVENTORY>                                        48,588
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                                  918,171
<PP&E>                                            782,856
<DEPRECIATION>                                    607,020
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                  4,931,597
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                           1,901,122
<BONDS>                                                 0
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                   0
<PREFERRED>                                    10,046,781
<COMMON>                                       11,781,511
<OTHER-SE>                                    (18,797,817)
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                    4,931,597
<SALES>                                           508,858
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                                  508,858
<CGS>                                             391,941
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                     391,941
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                   84,015
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                        0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                                 40,731
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                  (421,415)
<INCOME-TAX>                                            0
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                              (421,415)
<DISCONTINUED>                                          0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                         0
<CHANGES>                                               0
<NET-INCOME>                                     (421,415)
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                        (.12)
<EPS-DILUTED>                                        (.12)
        


</TABLE>
**Exhibit        10(m)10**

**ANNEX      B**

**TO**

**ALLETE**

**EXECUTIVE      LONG TERM INCENTIVE COMPENSATION PLAN**

**PERFORMANCE      SHARE GRANT**

**Effective      2008**

**[Eligible      Executive Employees]**

|   | **TSR                Rank** | **Perf.                Level** | **Payout                %** |
|--------|-----------------------------|--------------------------------|-----------------------------|
|   |                        |                           |                        |
|   | 1                           |                           | 200.0%                      |
|   | 2                           |                           | 200.0%                      |
|   | 3                           | Superior                       | 200.0%                      |
|   | 4                           |                           | 183.3%                      |
|   | 5                           |                           | 166.7%                      |
|   | 6                           |                           | 150.0%                      |
|   | 7                           |                           | 133.3%                      |
|   | 8                           |                           | 116.7%                      |
|   | 9                           | Target                         | 100.0%                      |
|   | 10                          |                           | 83.3%                       |
|   | 11                          |                           | 66.7%                       |
|   | 12                          | Threshold                      | 50.0%                       |
|   | 13                          |                           | 0%                          |
|   | 14                          |                           | 0%                          |
|   | 15                          |                           | 0%                          |
|   | 16                          |                           | 0%                          |
|   | 17                          |                           | 0%                          |

----
**Exhibit 32.1**

 

CERTIFICATIONOF CHIEF EXECUTIVE OFFICER

PURSUANTTO 18 U.S.C. SECTION 1350, AS ADOPTED PURSUANT TO

SECTION906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002

 

In connection with theAnnual Report of MOCON, Inc. on Form 10-K for the fiscal year ended December31, 2004 as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the datehereof (the “Report”), I, Robert L. Demorest, Chief Executive Officer of MOCON,Inc., hereby certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, as adopted pursuantto Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002 that, to the best of myknowledge:

 

(1)          The Report fully complieswith the requirements of Section 13(a) or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Actof 1934; and

 

(2)          The information contained inthe Report fairly presents, in all material respects, the financial conditionand results of operations of MOCON, Inc.

 

 

Date: March 31, 2005

| /s/ Robert L. Demorest  |
|-------------------------|
| Robert L. Demorest      |
| Chief Executive Officer |

 

----
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.                  

###### Federal Accounting Standards Advisory Board

# AGENCY:

Federal Accounting Standards Advisory Board.

# ACTION:

Notice.

*Board Action:*                     Pursuant to 31 U.S.C. 3511(d), the Federal Advisory Committee Act (Pub. L. 92-463), as amended, and the FASAB Rules of Procedure, as amended in October, 2010, notice is hereby given that the Federal Accounting Standards Advisory Board (FASAB) has published The Annual Report for Fiscal Year 2014 and Three-Year Plan. The combined report allows stakeholders to consider FASAB's progress and invites them to advise the Board about its plans. Your views regarding the content of the                           ( print page 70869)                        annual report and the Board's project priorities for the next three years are requested by January 31, 2015.                

                    The Report and Three-Year Plan are available at                     *http://www.fasab.gov/​about/​our-annual-reports/​*.                

# FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

Wendy M. Payne, Executive Director, 441 G St. NW., Mail Stop 6H19, Washington, DC 20548 or call 202-512-7350.

Authority: Federal Advisory Committee Act, Pub. L. 92-463.

Dated: November 21, 2014.

Charles Jackson,

Federal Register Liaison Officer.

[FR Doc. 2014-28058 Filed 11-26-14; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 1610-02-P
DISTRICT COURT OF APPEAL OF THE STATE OF FLORIDA

FOURTH DISTRICT

OLIVER S. STEEL,

Appellant,

v.

STATE OF FLORIDA,

Appellee.

No. 4D17-1851

[September 6, 2017]

Appeal of order denying rule 3.800 motion from the Circuit Court for 

the Seventeenth Judicial Circuit, Broward County; Edward Harold 

Merrigan, Judge; L.T. Case No. 89 26582CF10B.

Oliver S. Steel, Bushnell, pro se.

No appearance required for appellee.

PER CURIAM.

Affirmed.

WARNER, MAY and KUNTZ, JJ., concur.

* * *

Not final until disposition of timely filed motion for rehearing.
Units for Magnetic Properties

Symbol Quantity Conversion from Gaussian and cgs emu to SI 

Φ magnetic flux 1 Mx → 10−8 Wb = 10−8 V·s 

B magnetic flux density, 

magnetic induction 

1 G → 10−4 T = 10−4 Wb/m2 

H magnetic field strength 1 Oe → 103/(4π) A/m 

m magnetic moment 1 erg/G = 1 emu → 10−3 A·m2 = 10−3 J/T 

M magnetization 1 erg/(G·cm3) = 1 emu/cm3 → 103 A/m 

4πM magnetization 1 G → 103

/(4π) A/m 

σ mass magnetization, 

specific magnetization 

1 erg/(G·g) = 1 emu/g → 1 A·m2

/kg 

j magnetic dipole moment 1 erg/G = 1 emu → 4π × 10−10 Wb·m 

J magnetic polarization 1 erg/(G·cm3) = 1 emu/cm3 → 4π × 10−4 T 

χ, κ susceptibility 1 → 4π

χρ mass susceptibility 1 cm3

/g → 4π × 10−3 m3/kg 

μ permeability 1 → 4π × 10−7

 H/m = 4π × 10−7 Wb/(A·m) 

μr relative permeability μ → μr

w, W energy density 1 erg/cm3 → 10−1 J/m3 

N, D demagnetizing factor 1 → 1/(4π) 

Gaussian units are the same as cgs emu for magnetostatics; Mx = maxwell, G = gauss, 

Oe = oersted; Wb = weber, V = volt, s = second, T = tesla, m = meter, A = ampere, 

J = joule, kg = kilogram, H = henry.
This disposition is not appropriate for publication and is not precedent *

except as provided by 9th Cir. R. 36-3.

The panel unanimously concludes this case is suitable for decision **

without oral argument. See Fed. R. App. P. 34(a)(2).

LA/Research

NOT FOR PUBLICATION

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

 FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT

SATNAM SINGH CHANDI,

 Petitioner,

 v.

ERIC H. HOLDER Jr., Attorney General,

 Respondent.

No. 07-74595

Agency No. A095-402-232

MEMORANDUM *

On Petition for Review of an Order of the

Board of Immigration Appeals

Submitted March 16, 2010** 

Before: SCHROEDER, PREGERSON, and RAWLINSON, Circuit Judges.

Satnam Singh Chandi, a native and citizen of India, petitions pro se for

review of a Board of Immigration Appeals’ (“BIA”) order granting his motion to

reconsider and denying his request for voluntary departure. Our jurisdiction is

FILED

MAR 24 2010

MOLLY C. DWYER, CLERK

U.S. COURT OF APPEALS
LA/Research 2 07-74595

governed by 8 U.S.C. § 1252. We review de novo questions of law, including

claims of due process violations in immigration proceedings. Mohammed v.

Gonzales, 400 F.3d 785, 791-92 (9th Cir. 2005). We deny the petition for review. 

Chandi’s due process contentions are not persuasive. The BIA did not

engage in impermissible fact finding, because the immigration judge had already

found Chandi not credible, in part due to contradictions surrounding his date of

arrival. The BIA is permitted to review questions of law and discretion de novo. 

See 8 C.F.R. § 1003.1(d)(3)(ii). Moreover, contrary to Chandi’s contention, the

BIA did not enter an order of removal in the first instance. See Lata v. INS, 204

F.3d 1241, 1246 (9th Cir. 2000) (requiring error for a due process violation).

PETITION FOR REVIEW DENIED.