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

Development of Soft Skills That Are In Demand by Cybersecurity Employers

February 21, 2018
Poll

1
Travis Smith, Principal Security Researcher, Tripwire
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
Q & A 

10
Employability Skills 

Framework

ROBIN UTZ

11

CHIEF, COLLEGE AND CAREER TRANSITIONS BRANCH

DIVISION OF ACADEMIC AND TECHNICAL EDUCATION

OFFICE OF CAREER, TECHNICAL, AND ADULT EDUCATION (OCTAE)

U.S. DEPARTMENT OF EDUCATION
Poll 
Employer Perceptions

13

Employers cite employability skills 

as the most important skill

Hart Research Associates, 2015

A lack of employability skills 

may contribute to a “talent 

shortage” ManpowerGroup, 

2016

Difficulty filling jobs that require crosscutting skills like critical thinking, 

collaboration, and digital literacy
http://cte.ed.gov

14

16
http://www.cyberseek.org

http://www.ccrscenter.org

Helpful Resources
Email: Robin.Utz@ed.gov or CTE@ed.gov

Website: http://cte.ed.gov

18
Q & A 

19
20
21
22
Q & A 

23
Thank You for Joining Us!

Upcoming Webinar: The Evolution of Federal Government Cybersecurity 

Education and Scholarship Programs

When: Wednesday, March 21, 2018 at 2:00pm ET

Register: https://nist-nice.adobeconnect.com/webinarmar2018/event/registration.html

nist.gov/nice/webinars

24
# United States Court **of Appeals**  **f or the Fifth Circuit** 

**____________** No. 22 - 50630 Summary Calendar

**____________ United States of America,**  Plaintiff
— Appellee **,** versus **Gilberto Marquez -**  **Calzadilla,** Defendant
— Appellant **.**

**______________________________** Appeal from the United States District Court for the Western District of Texas USDC No. 4:22 - CR - 99 - 1

**______________________________** Before **Davis, Smith,** and **Douglas,** Circuit Judges **. Per Curiam**  **:** ***** Gilberto Marquez - Calzadilla appeals his sentence for illegal reentry in violation of 8 U.S.C. § 1326(a) and (b)(2). For the first time on appeal, he contends that his sentence is unconstitutional because the district court enhanced his sentence under § 1326(b) based on facts that were neither alleged in the indictment nor found by a jury beyond a reasonable doubt.

**_____________________** * This opinion is not designated for publication. See **5th Cir . R.**  47.5. United States Court of Appeals Fifth Circuit 

### FILED February 3, 2023

Lyle W. Cayce Clerk Case: 22-50630 Document: 00516633824 Page: 1 Date Filed: 02/03/2023No. 22 - 50630

2 While he acknowledges this argument is foreclosed by Almendarez - Torres v. United States , 523 U.S. 224 (1998), he nevertheless seeks to preserve it for possible Supreme Court review. As such , Marquez - Calzadilla has filed an unopposed motion for summary disposition. See United State v. Pervis , 937 F.3d 546, 553 - 54 (5th Cir. 2019). Subsequent Supreme Court decisions such as Alleyne v. United States , 570 U.S. 99 (2013), and Apprendi v. New Jersey , 530 U.S. 466 (2 000), did not overrule Almendarez - Torres . See United States v. Pervis , 937 F.3d 546, 553 - 54 (5th Cir. 2019). Thus, Marquez - Calzadilla is correct that his argument is foreclosed, and summary disposition is appropriate. See Groendyke Transp., Inc. v. Davi s , 406 F.2d 1158, 1162 (5th Cir. 1969). Marquez - Calzadilla’s motion is **GRANTED** , and the district court’s judgment is **AFFIRMED** . Case: 22-50630 Document: 00516633824 Page: 2 Date Filed: 02/03/2023
#### William M. Green *v.*Lucindia Wilson.

Decedent’s Estates — Personal Property.

The title of personal property of an intestate vests in his personal representative as soon as he qualifies and it becomes his duty upon appraisement to set aside to the widow or infant children articles of personalty exempted from distribution. The widow in such a case has no cause of action to recover property not thus set aside for her.

*637APPEAL PROM RUSSELL CIRCUIT COURT.

March 18, 1876.

*J. F. Montgomery, A. J. James, for appellant.*

*William S. Stone, James E. Hays, for appellee.*

Opinion by

Judge Coper:

The title to the personal estate of one who dies intestate, vests in his personal representative as soon as he qualifies. When appraisers are appointed it is their duty to set apart to the widow, if there be one, or if there be no widow, then to the infant children of the intestate, if any, the articles of personal property exempted from distribution, if on hand; and in lieu of such as are not on hand, to set apart money or other property as directed by the statute. As soon as the designated articles are set apart, or other property is set apart in lieu of them, the title vests in the widow, if there be one, and if not, in the infant children. But when the designated articles are not on hand, the widow acquires no right to other property in lieu of them unless it is set apart to her by the appraisers.

In this case the appraisers seem to have set apart to the widow as many of the designated articles as were found on hand, and in lieu of those not on hand they set apart to her money, and for that she must look to the funds in the hands of the administrator. She, therefore, had no right to recover against the appellant, even though he unlawfully converted the corn in contest in this case. The corn was not set apart to her, and if it belonged to the intestate the title was in the administrator, who alone could sue for its conversion. She is entitled to receive from the administrator the amount of money indicated by the appraisers, in lieu of exempted articles she did not get; and he is liable to her if he has funds, or if there are funds which he ought to get, with which to pay her, but she cannot maintain this action for property not set apart to her.

The court, therefore, erred in overruling the appellant’s demurrer to the petition.

Judgment *reversed*and cause remanded with directions to sustain the demurrer, and dismiss the petition.
same with a step of 0.

Subloop steps _fakemotor

and counts 120s and then 

waits 180s as waitPoint is 

180. Here there is no 

change as start and stop 

are the same with a step 

of 0. Then goes back to

main loop.
EXHIBIT 32.2
 
 CERTIFICATION OF CHIEF FINANCIAL OFFICER
 
 Pursuant to
 18 U.S.C. Section 1350,
 As Adopted pursuant to
 Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002
 
 I, Narsi Narayanan, certify, to my best knowledge and belief, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, as adopted pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that the Quarterly Report of ClearOne Communications, Inc. on Form 10-Q for the quarter ended September 30, 2009, fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) or 15(d)
of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 and that information contained in such Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q fairly presents, in all material respects, the financial condition and results of operations of ClearOne Communications, Inc.
 
 
 
 Date:  November 16, 2009
By:
/s/ Narsi NarayananNarsi NarayananVice President of Finance
##### 



EXHIBIT 31.1
 CERTIFICATION PURSUANT TO RULES 13a-14 AND 15d-14,
AS ADOPTED PURSUANT TO
SECTION 302 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002
  1.
    
    I have reviewed this report on Form 10-Q of Bay View Capital Corporation as of and for the
quarter ended June 30, 2005;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;3.
    
    Based on my knowledge, the financial statements, and other financial information included in
this report, fairly present in all material respects the financial condition, results of
operations and cash flows of the registrant as of, and for, the periods presented in this
report;4.
    
    The registrants other certifying officer and I are responsible for establishing and
maintaining disclosure controls and procedures (as defined in Exchange Act Rules 13a-15(e) and
15d-15(e)) and internal control over financial reporting (as defined in Exchange Act Rules
13a-15(f) and 15d-15(f)) for the registrant and we have:
     5.
    
    The registrants other certifying officer and I have disclosed, based on our most recent
evaluation of internal control over financial reporting, to the registrants auditors and the
audit committee of the registrants board of directors (or persons performing the equivalent
functions):
    /s/ Charles G. CooperCharles G. CooperPresident and Chief
Executive Officer
Exhibit 32.1

                  CERTIFICATION OF PRINCIPAL EXECUTIVE OFFICER
                       PURSUANT TO 18 U.S.C. SECTION 1350


     In  connection  with the  accompanying  Annual  Report on Form  10-K/A-2 of
Paragon Financial Corporation (kna New Market Latin America,  Inc.) for the year
ended December 31, 2005, I, Philip J. Rauch,  Chief Financial Officer of Paragon
Financial  Corporation  (kna New Market Latin  America,  Inc.),  hereby  certify
pursuant to 18 U.S.C.  Section 1350,  as adopted  pursuant to Section 906 of the
Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, to my knowledge, that:

     a)   such Annual Report on Form 10-K/A-2 of Paragon  Financial  Corporation
          (kna New Market Latin  America,  Inc.) for the year ended December 31,
          2005,  fully complies with the  requirements of section 13(a) or 15(d)
          of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934; and

     b)   the  information  contained  in such Annual  Report on Form 10-K/-2 of
          Paragon Financial Corporation (kna New Market Latin America, Inc.) for
          the year ended  December 31, 2005,  fairly  presents,  in all material
          respects, the financial condition and results of operations of Paragon
          Financial Corporation (kna New Market Latin America, Inc.)





                            /s/ Philip J.Rauch
                                ------------
                                Philip J. Rauch, Chief Financial Officer


Date:    October 22, 2008



A        signed original of this written  statement  required by Section 906 has
         been  provided to The Saint  James  Company and will be retained by The
         Saint James  Company  and  furnished  to the  Securities  and  Exchange
         Commission or its staff upon request.
Ex-99.4 Aggregate Statement of Principal and Interest Distribution to
Certificatesholders.

-----------------------------------------------------------------------------
    Class    Interest        Principle        Losses         Ending Balance
---------- --------------- --------------- --------------- ------------------
A1                                                            119,836,278.62
             4,497,623.28    6,397,721.38               -
----------                                                 ------------------
A2                                                             49,650,455.00
             1,799,828.99               -               -
----------                                                 ------------------

A3           1,245,041.91    3,873,642.66               -      31,841,695.34
----------                                                 ------------------

A4             299,316.24               -               -       8,257,000.00
----------                                                 ------------------

A5              81,005.64               -               -       2,234,638.00
----------                                                 ------------------

A6              36,250.02               -               -       1,000,000.00
----------                                                 ------------------

A7              36,250.02               -               -       1,000,000.00
----------                                                 ------------------

B1             377,587.63       41,499.81               -      10,391,800.19
----------                                                 ------------------

B2             159,922.75       17,576.75               -       4,401,323.25
----------                                                 ------------------

B3              93,284.97       10,252.74               -       2,567,347.26
----------                                                 ------------------

B4              53,305.17        5,858.65               -       1,467,041.35
----------                                                 ------------------

B5              35,539.20        3,906.05               -         978,093.95
----------                                                 ------------------

B6              44,426.09        4,882.75               -       1,222,675.25
----------                                                 ------------------

P                       -        2,661.48               -         283,007.14
----------                                                 ------------------

R                    0.66          100.00               -                  -
----------                                                 ------------------

X1             663,198.95               -               -                  -
----------                                                 ------------------

X2             547,021.46               -               -                  -
----------                                                 ------------------
Internet of Things Advisory Board 

U.S. Department of Commerce 

National Institute of Standards and Technology 

Pete Tseronis 

Husband, Father, Washingtonian, Villanovan, Bourbon Steward 

1

Mitigating Risk = The Mission 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

NEFs National Essential 

Functions (NEFs) are the foundation

of all continuity programs and

capabilities and are the primary focus

of the Federal Government before,

during and after a catastrophic

emergency

Primary Mission Essential

Functions (PMEFs) are those

functions that need to be continuous

or resumed within 12 hours after an

event and maintained for up to 30

days or until normal operations can

be resumed

Each day, critical infrastructure

operations ensure that National 

Critical Functions (NCFs), which

serve as the operational backbone

for modern society, are running.

The NCFs are the functions of 

government and the private sector so

vital to the United States that their

disruption, corruption, or dysfunction

would have a debilitating effect on

security, national economic security,

national public health or safety, or

any combination thereof

https://bit.ly/3L14fXP
1/18/23 4
 

 

Challenges | Opportunity 

More than enough tools, not enough integration

Compliance, Compliance, Compliance 

Reskilling, Retaining, and Recruiting 

Constant Transition 
Pete Tseronis 

pete@dotsandbridges.com 

http://dotsandbridges.com 

6
To: cyberframework 

Subject: NIST CSF 2.0 Draft (April 2023) Feedback 

Date: Tuesday, April 25, 2023 9:04:49 AM 

To whom it may concern: 

The updated organization of the document aligns well with 800-53R5 and the updates in SCRM. I 

have the following comment: 

Within the Risk Assessment category, I would suggest to move the following step: 

ID.RA-08: Risks associated with technology suppliers and their supplied products and services are identified, 

recorded, prioritized, and monitored (formerly ID.SC-2 and PR.DS-8) 

To either ID.RA-02 or between ID.RA-03 and 04. The logic being that supply chain risks associated 

with identified hardware and software should be identified early in the risk assessment to avoid 

spending resources on components that may have serious supply chain risks. The corresponding 

supply chain risks can be prioritized and risk responses associated with potential supply chain risks 

can be included and planned for along with traditional vulnerability and threat vectors in IDRA.06/07. 

Thank you for your time. 

Respectfully, 

Adam Jones, MS, CISSP 

Information Assurance Analyst, Security Risk Solutions, Inc. 

www.SecurityRiskSolutions.com
<page>	EXHIBIT 32.02


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




In connection with the Quarterly Report of Dean Witter Diversified
Futures Fund II L.P. (the "Partnership") on Form 10-Q for the
period ended September 30, 2003 as filed with the Securities and
Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the "Report"), I, Jeffrey
D. Hahn, Chief Financial Officer, Demeter Management Corporation,
the general partner of the Partnership, 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:
(1)	The Report fully complies with the requirements of Section
13 or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934; and
(2)	The information contained in the Report fairly presents,
in all material respects, the financial condition and
results of operations of the Partnership.









By:	  /s/	Jeffrey D. Hahn

Name:		Jeffrey D. Hahn
Title:	Chief Financial Officer

Date:		November 14, 2003
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF ALABAMA

SOUTHERN DIVISION

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, )

 )

Plaintiff, )

 )

v. ) CIVIL ACTION 09-0332-WS-B

 )

LYNN CHRISTIE MILLER, etc., et al., )

 )

Defendants. )

JUDGMENT

In accordance with the Court’s order of May 28, 2010, the plaintiff shall have and

recover from the defendant Lynn Christie Miller, a/k/a Carrie Lynn Christie Miller, the

sum of $220,603.40, plus interest and other statutory additions accruing from and after

November 30, 2009, as provided by law pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1961(c)(1) and 26

U.S.C. §§ 6601 and 6602. Pursuant to Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 58, judgment is

hereby entered in favor of plaintiff United States of America and against defendant Lynn

Christie Miller, a/k/a Carrie Lynn Christie Miller.

DONE this 28th day of May, 2010.

s/ WILLIAM H. STEELE

CHIEF UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE

Case 1:09-cv-00332-WS-B Document 51 Filed 05/28/10 Page 1 of 1
Exhibit 23.1

Consent of Independent Registered Public Accounting Firm

The
Board of Directors
MOCON, Inc.:

We
consent to the incorporation by reference in the registration statement (No. 33-49752, 333-58789, 333-90116 and 333-134413) on
Form S-8 of MOCON, Inc. of our reports dated March 31, 2008, with respect to the consolidated balance sheets of MOCON, Inc. as of December 31, 2007 and
2006, and the related consolidated statements of income, stockholders' equity and comprehensive income, and cash flows for each of the years in the three-year period ended
December 31, 2007, and related financial statement schedule, which reports appear in the December 31, 2007, annual report on Form 10-K of MOCON, Inc.

Our
report on the consolidated financial statements refers to the Company's adoption of the provisions of Statement of Financial Accounting Standards No. 123 (Revised 2004), "Share-Based Payment,"on
January 1, 2006.

|                                      |  | /s/ KPMG LLP
|------------------------------------- |  | ------------
|Minneapolis, Minnesota
March 31, 2008 |  |             

---



QuickLinks
## I N T H E C O U R T O F C R I M I N A L A P P E A L S O F T E X A S
NO. WR-40,136-15

IN RE P AUL STURGEON, Re lator

ON AP P LICATION FOR A WRIT OF M ANDAM US CAUSE NO. 1280723 IN THE 248th DISTRICT COURT

F ROM HARRIS COUNTY

Per curiam . O R D E R

Relator has filed a motion for leave to file a writ o f m an damus pursuant to the orig inal jurisdiction of t his Court. I n it, he contends that in May of 2015, he f

iled an ame nded application for a writ of habea s corpus in the 248th District Court of Har ris County , that more than 35 day s have elapse d, and that the a

pplication has not y et bee n forwa rded to this Court.
I n these circ umstances, additional fac ts are neede d. Respondent, the District Clerk of Har ris County , is order ed to f

ile a response , which may be made by submitt ing the rec ord on such habea s corpus application, submitt ing a copy of a timely filed order which desig nates issues to be investiga ted ( see McCree v. Hampton , 824 S.W .2d 578, 579 (Tex. Crim. App. 1992)), or stating that2

Relator has not filed an application for a writ of habea s corpus in Har ris County , other than the three applications previously sent to this Court. Should the response include an order desig nating issues, 1 proof of the date the di strict attorney ’s office was serve d with the habe as application shall also be submitt ed with the response . This a pplication for leave to file a writ of mandamus shall be held in abey ance until Respondent has submitt ed the appropr iat e response . Such response shall be submitt ed within 30 day s of the date of this order.

Filed: June 1, 2016 Do not publish

Relator’s - 13 writ containe d two applications: the first sig ned by Relator on January

7, 1 2015 and filed by

the district cler

k on J anuar

y 12, 2015, and a se cond ame nded application signe d by Relator on May

12, 2015 and filed by

the trial cour

t on J une 8, 2015. Relator’ s -14 writ contained one application, sig ned by Relator on Mar ch 18, 2105 and f iled by the district cler

k on Marc h 27, 2015. The amended 11.07 a pplication that Relator conte nds has not been f orwa rded to this C ourt was sig ned by Relator on May

16, 2015.
<TABLE> <S> <C>


<ARTICLE> 5
<LEGEND>
THIS SCHEDULE CONTAINS SUMMARY FINANCIAL INFORMATION EXTRACTED FROM THE
CONDENSED CONSOLIDATED STATEMENTS OF INCOME AND THE CONDENSED BALANCE SHEETS AND
IS QUALIFIED IN ITS ENTIRETY BY REFERENCE TO SUCH FINANCIAL STATEMENTS.
</LEGEND>
<RESTATED>

<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   12-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          DEC-31-1995
<PERIOD-END>                               DEC-31-1995
<CASH>                                       1,396,718
<SECURITIES>                                 4,133,397
<RECEIVABLES>                                1,909,521
<ALLOWANCES>                                   132,000
<INVENTORY>                                  1,560,360
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                             9,555,174
<PP&E>                                       1,947,060
<DEPRECIATION>                               1,492,224
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                              14,770,411
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                        2,105,498
<BONDS>                                              0
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                       666,162
<OTHER-SE>                                  11,830,751
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                14,770,411
<SALES>                                     12,843,505
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                            12,843,505
<CGS>                                        4,380,295
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                4,380,295
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                             4,580,902
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                15,323
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                                   0
<INCOME-PRETAX>                              3,882,308
<INCOME-TAX>                                 1,312,000
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                          2,570,308
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                 2,570,308
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                     0.38
<EPS-DILUTED>                                     0.38



</TABLE>