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

DATA & VISUALIZATION CAREERS

SEE YOURSELF IN NGA DATA & VISUALIZATION? APPLY AT intelligencecareers.gov/nga

WHERE STRATEGY, 

ANALYTICS, AND 

VISUAL ART COLLIDE

The National Geospatial-Intelligence Agency 

(NGA) is a U.S. intelligence and combat 

support agency that provides policymakers, 

warfighters, intelligence professionals 

and first responders key information 

and insights. Whether you’re developing 

interactive applications or producing 

innovative products, a career with NGA 

helps protect our nation and our world. 

DATA & VISUALIZATION OPPORTUNITIES

Data Management Occupation

Evaluate, prepare, load, manage, monitor, 

maintain and provide data to make it available for 

analysis while also ensuring it meets standards 

and customer requirements.

Visualization and Web Occupation

Apply various means of visualization, 

presentation or conveyance to make data or 

intelligence available and understandable to 

our customers.

Data Science and Analysis Occupation

Create and apply methods and techniques for 

analyzing big data and complex data sets through 

statistics, scripting and visualization techniques.

Data Engineering Occupation

Design and create the databases, processing 

systems, and data pipelines by which data is loaded, 

maintained, and made available to our customers.

• Database Manager

• Data Steward • Advanced Visualization Specialist 

(3D Animation, 3D Modeling)

• Content Manager

• Imagery Production Specialist

• Model Maker

• Multimedia Specialist

• User Experience Architect

• Visual Information Specialist 

(Graphic Design)

• Web Designer

• Analytic Methodologist

• Data Analyst

• Data Scientist

• Data Engineer 

TO QUALIFY

Relevant degrees may include: applied 

mathematics, computer science, 

engineering, graphic design, photography, 

physical science, statistics, visual 

communication or other related area of 

study.

Relevant experience may include: 

applied mathematics, computer science, 

engineering, graphic design, photography, 

physical science, statistics, visual 

communication or work in a closely 

related area that may be considered in 

lieu of a relevant degree.

KEY COMPETENCIES

Key competencies may include, but 

are not limited to: data analysis, 

data/information processing and 

management, data preparation, graphic 

design, information dissemination, 

quality assurance, researching, scripting 

and coding, technology evaluation and 

visualization.

Approved for Public Release # 20-186
(function ($, Drupal) {

  Drupal.behaviors.toggleclick = {
    attach: function (context, settings) {
      $( document ).ready(function() {
        $(".calendar-button:not(.ready)", context).addClass("ready").each(function(){
          $(this).click(function(){
            /*
             * Compute the top position for the calendar based on the position of the button.
             * Since position() only gives us top and left, add theOuterheight (height including padding)
             * of the button to get the bottom position, then add a couple extra pixels.
             */
            var calendarTop = $(this).position().top + $(this).outerHeight() + 2;
            $(".calendar-container").css('top', calendarTop);
            $(".calendar-container").toggle();
          });
        });
      });

      $(window).resize(function() {
        // Keep the calendar properly positioned when the window resizes.
        if($('.calendar-button').length > 0) {
          var calendarTop = $('.calendar-button').position().top + $('.calendar-button').outerHeight() + 2;
          $(".calendar-container").css('top', calendarTop);
        }
      });
    }
  };

})(jQuery, Drupal);
IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT

No. 08-60867

Summary Calendar

TIMOTHY G PRYER

Plaintiff-Appellant

v.

R. WALKER, Doctor/Health Services Administrator at CMCF III;

SHARON PAIGE, Captain, Central MS Correctional Facility III;

DR. JOSEPH BLACKSTON; CORRECTIONAL HEALTH SERVICE, INC.;

WEXFORD HEALTHCARE RESOURCES; COMMISSIONER

CHRISOPHER EPPS; MARGARET BINGHAM

Defendants-Appellees

Appeal from the United States District Court

for the Southern District of Mississippi

USDC No. 3:06-CV-588

Before GARZA, CLEMENT, and OWEN, Circuit Judges.

PER CURIAM:

*

Timothy G. Pryer, Mississippi prisoner # 115393, appeals the district

court’s dismissal of his 42 U.S.C. § 1983 complaint as frivolous under 28 U.S.C.

§ 1915(e)(2)(B)(i) and for failure to state a claim. Because the district court

United States Court of Appeals

Fifth Circuit

F I L E D

July 20, 2010

Lyle W. Cayce

Clerk

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.

Case: 08-60867 Document: 00511179398 Page: 1 Date Filed: 07/20/2010
No. 08-60867

dismissed Pryer’s claims as both frivolous and for failure to state a claim, review

is de novo. See Geiger v. Jowers, 404 F.3d 371, 373 (5th Cir. 2005).

Pryer’s claim of deliberate indifference to his medical needs was properly

dismissed. Claims of unsuccessful medical treatment are insufficient to give rise

to a claim of deliberate indifference. Varnado v. Lynaugh, 920 F.2d 320, 321

(5th Cir. 1991). Moreover, the question whether certain diagnostic studies or

forms of treatment are indicated is a “classic example of a matter for medical

judgment.” Estelle v. Gamble, 429 U.S. 97, 107 (1976). Although a medical

decision not to order certain testing or alter a treatment regime may form the

basis of a state medical malpractice claim, the decision “does not represent cruel

and unusual punishment.” Id.

Pryer’s claim of sexual abuse was properly dismissed because, even if it is

assumed that a female prison guard rubbed his chest and made comments about

his hair and chest during the performance of his electrocardiogram, Pryer has

not alleged sufficiently serious assaultive behavior or resulting injury to show

a constitutional deprivation. See Boddie v. Schnieder, 105 F.3d 857, 860-61 (2d

Cir. 1997). Isolated, unwanted touchings by prison employees are despicable

and may form the basis of a state tort action, but they “do not involve a harm of

federal constitutional proportions as defined by the Supreme Court.” Id.

Pryer’s claim of retaliation was properly dismissed because he has not

stated a valid claim for retaliation under § 1983 against any defendant. See

Jones v. Greninger, 188 F.3d 322, 324)25 (5th Cir. 1999); Woods v. Smith, 60

F.3d 1161, 1166 (5th Cir. 1995); Ruiz v. United States, 160 F.3d 273, 275 (5th

Cir. 1998).

The district court’s judgment is AFFIRMED.

2

Case: 08-60867 Document: 00511179398 Page: 2 Date Filed: 07/20/2010
IN THE SUPREME COURT OF PENNSYLVANIA

MIDDLE DISTRICT

STEFAN J. STAS AND LORETTA STAS,

Petitioners

v.

SUSQUEHANNA COUNTY BOARD OF ASSESSMENT APPEALS, MOUNTAIN

VIEW SCHOOL DISTRICT AND LENOX TOWNSHIP,

Respondents :

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

: No. 752 MAL 2017

Petition for Allowance of Appeal from

the Order of the Commonwealth Court

ORDER

PER CURIAM

AND NOW , this 21st day of March, 2018

, the Petition for Allowance of Appeal is

DENIED

.
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<PAGE>
<ARTICLE> 5
<LEGEND>
THIS SCHEDULE CONTAINS SUMMARY FINANCIAL INFORMATION EXTRACTED FROM THE
UNAUDITED CONDENSED STATEMENTS OF ASSETS, LIABILITIES AND TRUST CORPUS OF SAN
JUAN BASIN ROYALTY TRUST AS OF MARCH 31, 1997, AND THE RELATED CONDENSED
STATEMENTS OF DISTRIBUTABLE INCOME AND CHANGES IN TRUST CORPUS FOR THE
THREE-MONTH PERIOD ENDED MARCH 31, 1997.
</LEGEND>
       
<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   3-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          DEC-31-1997
<PERIOD-END>                               MAR-31-1997
<CASH>                                       7,129,116
<SECURITIES>                                         0
<RECEIVABLES>                                        0
<ALLOWANCES>                                         0
<INVENTORY>                                          0
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                             7,129,116
<PP&E>                                     133,275,528
<DEPRECIATION>                              72,638,317
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                              67,766,327
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                        7,129,116
<BONDS>                                              0
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                             0
<OTHER-SE>                                  60,637,211
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                67,766,327
<SALES>                                              0
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                            18,498,919
<CGS>                                                0
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                        0
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                               231,502
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                     0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                                   0
<INCOME-PRETAX>                             18,267,417
<INCOME-TAX>                                         0
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                         18,267,417
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                18,267,417
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                        0
<EPS-DILUTED>                                        0
        

</TABLE>
#### In the Matter of William M. Windsor, Appellant, v State of New York et al., Respondents.

Decided September 14, 2010

Appeal transferred, without costs, by the Court of Appeals, sua sponte, to the Appellate Division, Third Department, upon the ground that a direct appeal does not lie when questions other than the constitutional validity of a statutory provision are involved (NY Const, art VI, § 3 [b] [2]; § 5 [b]; CPLR 5601 [b] [2]).
UNPUBLISHED

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

No. 00-6790

ALANON B. GERMANY,

Petitioner - Appellant,

versus

W. J. TOWNLEY; RONALD J. ANGELONE,

Respondents - Appellees.

Appeal from the United States District Court for the Western District of Virginia, at Roanoke. James C. Turk, District Judge.

(CA-00-158-7)

Submitted: August 30, 2000 Decided: September 7, 2000

Before WIDENER, NIEMEYER, and WILLIAMS, Circuit Judges.

Dismissed by unpublished per curiam opinion.

Alanon B. Germany, Appellant Pro Se.

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.

See Local Rule 36(c).
2

PER CURIAM:

Alanon B. Germany appeals the district court’s order signed

May 23, 2000, and entered May 24, 2000 dismissing his petition

filed pursuant to 28 U.S.C.A. § 2254 (West 1994 & Supp. 2000). We

dismiss the appeal for lack of jurisdiction.

Germany failed to sign his notice of appeal. The unsigned

notice of appeal did not confer jurisdiction on this Court. See

Covington v. Allsbrook, 636 F.2d 63, 63-64 (4th Cir. 1980).

Moreover, the thirty-day appeal period prescribed by Federal Rules

of Appellate Procedure 4(a)(1), and the additional thirty-day

period prescribed by Federal Rules of Appellate Procedure 4(a)(5)

for seeking an extension of the filing period, have both expired.

Accordingly, we deny a certificate of appealability and dismiss the

appeal for lack of jurisdiction. We dispense with oral argument

because the facts and legal contentions are adequately presented in

the materials before the Court and argument would not aid the

decisional process.

DISMISSED
#### In the Matter of Claude Nelson Stuart, a Suspended Attorney.

Submitted August 9, 2010;

decided September 14, 2010

*824Motion for reconsideration of this Court’s June 24, 2010 dismissal order denied *[see*15 NY3d 735 (2010)]. Motion for leave to appeal denied.
#### Samee M. Smith, Respondent, v Manhattan and Bronx Surface Transit Operating Authority, Appellant et al., Defendants.

[872 NYS2d 107]

Judgment, Supreme Court, Bronx County (Alexander W. Hunter, Jr., J.), entered October 25, 2007, upon a jury verdict awarding plaintiff $100,000 for past pain and suffering and $800,000 for future pain and suffering, unanimously affirmed, without costs.

The trial evidence established that plaintiff suffered severe damage to her left knee, including tears of the medial and lateral menisci, a torn ligament, torn cartilage in various places, and damage to the patella, with permanent osteochondral defect. She underwent arthroscopic surgery some months after the accident, and, while her knee improved to some degree, it never functioned normally again. Indeed, plaintiff continued to experience chronic pain, swelling and buckling of the knee, and her treating orthopedic surgeon, who testified at trial as her expert witness, recommended a second arthroscopic surgery. The *553surgeon testified that the injuries to plaintiffs knees were permanent and would continue to progress, and that arthritic changes would probably develop, requiring further surgical procedures, including perhaps knee replacement. The damages awarded to plaintiff for past and future pain and suffering in connection with the foregoing injuries do not “ deviate [ ] materially from what would be reasonable compensation” (CPLR 5501 [c]; *see e.g. Urbina v 26 Ct. St. Assoc., LLC,*46 AD3d 268 [2007]; *Nassour v City of New York,*35 AD3d 556 [2006]; *Calzado v New York City Tr. Auth.,*304 AD2d 385 [2003]). Concur—Saxe, J.E, Gonzalez, Sweeny, Renwick and DeGrasse, JJ.
Skip to main content An icon that symbolizes the United States Department of Transportation logo. United States Department of Transportation
        Report a Safety Problem

  Toggle navigation
      National Highway Traffic Safety AdministrationNational Highway Traffic Safety AdministrationHomepage

    Ratings
                                Recalls
                                Risky Driving
                                Road Safety
                                Vehicle Safety
      
            More Info

                      Briefing Room
          
                        
            Importing a Vehicle
          
                                      
            
            Data
          
                        
            Research
          
                        
            Laws & Regulations
          
                    
                      Vehicle Manufacturers
                      State Governments
                      Enforcement & Justice Mercedes-Benz USA Request for Corrected Launch Deadline for MY 2010 Mercedes-Benz C-Class (204 platform) Vehicles


Download file: Mercedes-Benz USA Request for Corrected Launch Deadline for MY 2010 Mercedes-Benz C-Class (204 platform) Vehicles
 NHTSA Information
              
              About NHTSA
          Careers & Internships
          Contact Us
          Recall Information
          Report a Safety ProblemInformation For
              
              Vehicle Manufacturers
          State Governments
          Enforcement & JusticeNHTSA Sites
              
        SaferCar App
          TrafficSafetyMarketing.gov
          EMS.gov
          911.gov
            Website Information
              
        Web Policies & Notices
          Accessibility
          FOIA
          Privacy Policy
          Information Quality
          Vulnerability Disclosure Policy
          No Fear Act Data
          Ethics
          Civil Rights
          Office of Inspector General
          OIG Hotline
          BusinessUSA
          USA.gov
          WhiteHouse.gov

            National Highway Traffic Safety AdministrationNational Highway Traffic Safety Administration
              1200 New Jersey Avenue, SE
                Washington, D.C. 20590
              888-327-4236888-275-9171 (TTY)
              Twitter
                LinkedIn
                Facebook
                Youtube
                Instagram
        Submit Feedback >
<PAGE>   1

                                                                    Exhibit 23.1

                        CONSENT OF INDEPENDENT AUDITORS

We consent to the incorporation by reference in the Registration Statements
(Form S-8, No. 333-51382) pertaining to the 2000 Employee Stock Purchase Plan,
(Form S-8, No. 333-39532) pertaining to the Key Employee Nonqualified Option
Agreements, (Form S-8, No. 333-06419) pertaining to the 1996 Nonqualified Stock
Option Plan, (Form S-8, No. 333-06415) pertaining to Key Employee Restricted
Stock Purchase Plan, (Form S-8 No. 333-28259) pertaining to the Key Employee
Restricted Stock Purchase Plan, (Form S-8, No. 333-46393) pertaining to Key
Employee Options and FocusSoft Stock Option Plan, (Form S-8, No. 333-41321)
pertaining to the 1997 Nonqualified Stock Option Plan and Platinum Software
Corporation Clientele Incentive Plan, (Form S-3, No. 333-38105) pertaining to
the registration of 450,935 shares, (Form S-3, No. 333-46395) pertaining to the
registration of 2,474,794 shares, (Form S-8, No. 333-67841) pertaining to the
1998 Nonqualified Stock Option Plan, (Form S-8, No. 333-70855) pertaining to
DataWorks 1995 Equity Incentive Plan, DataWorks 1995 Non-Employee Directors
Stock Option Plan, Interactive 1997 Nonstatutory Stock Option Plan, Interactive
1995 Stock Option Plan, and Nonstatutory Stock Option Agreements, Nonqualified
Stock Option Agreement, (Form S-8, No. 333-84257) pertaining to the Employee
Stock Purchase Plan, (Form S-8, No. 333-85105) pertaining to the 1999
Nonstatutory Stock Option Plan and 1999 Merger Transition Nonstatutory Stock
Plan, and (Form S-8, No. 333-91505) pertaining to the Key Employee Nonqualified
Option Agreement, of our report dated January 26, 2001, with respect to the
consolidated financial statements and schedule of Epicor Software Corporation,
included in its Annual Report (Form 10-K) for the year ended December 31, 2000.


                                                       /s/ Ernst & Young LLP

Orange County, California
March 29, 2001
<PAGE>
                                                                  EXHIBIT 10.208

                                   DEMAND NOTE

$433,000.00                                                   New York, New York
                                                              October 5, 2001

        FOR VALUE RECEIVED, the undersigned, Wilshire Technologies, Inc. a
California corporation (hereinafter referred to as "Borrower"), hereby
unconditionally PROMISES TO PAY to the order to TRILON DOMINION PARTNERS, LLC, a
Delaware limited liability company ("Lender"), at 245 Park Avenue, 28th Floor,
New York, NY 10167, or at such other place as the holder of this Demand Note may
designate from time to time in writing, in lawful money of the United States of
America and in immediately available funds, the principal amount of Four Hundred
Thirty Three Thousand and 00/100, DOLLARS ($433,000.00), together with interest
on the unpaid principal amount of this Demand Note outstanding from time to time
from the date hereof, at a rate per annum equal to the Prime rate of interest
plus 3.0%, or the highest rate permitted by law, whichever shall be less.

        The principal amount of the indebtedness evidenced hereby shall be
payable on demand. Interest thereon shall be paid when principal is paid from
the date hereof until such principal amount is paid in full at such interest
rate as specified above. Following failure to pay on demand, Borrower agrees to
pay interest on any overdue payment of principal at a rate per annum equal to
the stated interest rate plus 5%, or the highest rate permitted by law,
whichever shall be less. All interest calculations shall be computed on the
basis of a 360 day year.

        Demand, presentment, protest and notice of nonpayment and protest are
hereby waived by Borrower.

        Borrower shall have no right to make any off-set against or deduct from
any payment due under this Demand Note.

        Principal and interest may be prepaid at any time without penalty.

        This Demand Note may not be changed orally, but only by an agreement in
writing and signed by the party against whom enforcement of such change is
sought.

        All covenants of Borrower in this Demand Note and all rights of the
holder under this Demand Note shall bind Borrower and its successors and
assigns, and all such covenants and rights shall inure to the benefit of the
holder of this Demand Note and its successors and assigns.

        This Demand Note has been delivered and accepted at New York, New York
and shall be interpreted, governed by, and construed in accordance with, the
laws of the State of New York.

                                       Wilshire Technologies, Inc.

                                       By: /s/ Kathleen Terry
                                           -------------------------------------
                                           Name:  Kathleen E. Terry
                                           Title: Chief Financial Officer
EXHIBIT 32.2

                                  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 QuantRx  Biomedical  Corporation (the
"Company") on Form 10-QSB for the period ending March 31, 2006 as filed with the
Securities and Exchange  Commission on the date hereof (the "Report"),  I, Sasha
Afanassiev,  Chief  Financial  Officer of the Company,  certify,  pursuant to 18
U.S.C. ss.1350, as adopted pursuant to ss.906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002,
that to my knowledge:

1. the Report fully complies with the  requirements of section 13(a) 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 Company.


                                               /s/ Sasha Afanassiev
                                               -------------------------------
                                               Sasha Afanassiev,
                                               Chief Financial Officer

Date: November 29, 2006

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