alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
NWCG Fire Training and Incident Qualifications

Employee Name:

IFPM Position: Wildland Fire Operations Specialist (Moderate Complexity)

NWCG Incident Management Qualifications

Pathway 1:

Primary Core Requirement: Task Force Leader (TFLD)

Secondary Core Requirement: Incident Commander, Type 3 (ICT3) OR Prescribed Fire 

Burn Boss, Type 2 (RXB2)

Pathway 2:

Primary Core Requirement: Helibase Manager Type 1 (HEB1)

Secondary Core Requirement: Incident Commander, Type 3 (ICT3)

The purpose of this form is to help identify required and developmental training for the 

NWCG Incident Management Qualification Standards for this position. The required 

training includes the IFPM “Additional Required Training” and the required training for 

the Incident Command Positions (ICS) and/or the Wildland Fire Positions based on the 

2008 Wildland and Prescribed Fire Qualification System Guide (PMS 310-1). Employees 

should refer to individual agency requirements.

Course 

Number

Course Name Training 

Needed

Training 

Completed

Estimated 

Cost

Required Training

S-215 Fire Operations in the 

Wildland/Urban Interface

S-300 Extended Attack Incident 

Commander

S-330 Task Force/Strike Team Leader 

S-371 Helibase Manager

Suggested Developmental Training

RX-301 Prescribed Fire Implementation

RX-341 Prescribed Fire Plan Preparation

S-336 Tactical Decision Making in Wildland 

Fire

S-390 Introduction to Wildland Fire 

Behavior Calculations

L-380 Fireline Leadership

L-381 Incident Leadership

S-491 Intermediate National Fire Danger 

Rating System

RX-310 Introduction to Fire Effects
NWCG Fire Training and Incident Qualifications

Employee Name:

IFPM Position: Wildland Fire Operations Specialist (Moderate Complexity)

NWCG Incident Management Qualifications

Pathway 1:

Primary Core Requirement: Task Force Leader (TFLD)

Secondary Core Requirement: Incident Commander, Type 3 (ICT3) OR Prescribed Fire 

Burn Boss, Type 2 (RXB2)

Pathway 2:

Primary Core Requirement: Helibase Manager Type 1 (HEB1)

Secondary Core Requirement: Incident Commander, Type 3 (ICT3)

The purpose of this form is to help identify required and developmental training for the 

NWCG Incident Management Qualification Standards for this position. The required 

training includes the IFPM “Additional Required Training” and the required training for 

the Incident Command Positions (ICS) and/or the Wildland Fire Positions based on the 

2008 Wildland and Prescribed Fire Qualification System Guide (PMS 310-1). Employees 

should refer to individual agency requirements.

RX-410 Smoke Management Techniques

ICS-300 Intermediate ICS: ICS for Supervisors 

and Expanding Incidents
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 Kaire Holdings, Inc.. (the "Company")
on Form 10-QSB for the period ending June 30, 2003 as filed with the  Securities
and Exchange  Commission on the date hereof (the  "Report"),  I, Steven Westlund
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 the
best of the undersigned knowledge and belief:

     (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 result of operations of
          the Company.


                                                  /s/ Steven Westlund
                                                  ----------------------------
                                                  Steven Westlund
                                                  Chief Financial Officer
                                                  August 19, 2003
CONSENT OF INDEPENDENT ACCOUNTANTS


We consent to the  incorporation  by  reference in the  Registration  Statement
(Form S-8 No. 33-317553)  pertaining to the Wyatt Stock Purchase Plan of Watson
Wyatt and  Company,  formerly the Wyatt  Company,  of our report dated July 18,
1997,  with respect to the financial  statements  of  Wellspring  Resources LLC
included in Form 10-K/A of Watson Wyatt and Company for the year ended June 30,
1999.



Ernst & Young LLP
-----------------
Ernst & Young LLP
Jacksonville, Florida
May 12, 2000
N O T FO R PUB L ICAT IO N UNITED STATES C OUR T OF APPEALS FOR THE NINTH C IR C UIT
SEAN HAR TFIELD,

Pla i ntiff-Appe lla

nt,
v. OREGON STATE B AR ; DOES, 1-10,

De fe nda nts-Appe lle e s. No. 16-35116 D.C . No. 3:16-c v-00068-ST
M EM O R ANDUM *

Appe a l from

the Unite d

Stat e s Distric t C ourt for the Distric t of Ore gon M arc o A
. He rnande z , Distric t Judge , Pre siding Subm itte d

Nove m b e r 16, 2016 ** B e fore : LEAVY, B ER ZON, a nd M UR GUIA, C irc uit Judge s. Se an Ha rtfie l d a ppe a ls pro sefrom

the distric t c ourt’ s judgm e nt dismissing his 42 U.S.C . § 1983 a c tion a lle ging a Fourte e nth Am e ndm e nt c la im . W e have jurisdic tion under 28 U.S.C
. § 1291. W e re vie w de novo thedistric t c ourt’ s dism issa l of a

n a c tion a s ba

rre d by the sta tute of lim i tations. Luk

ov sk y v . C ity & 

# FIL ED
N OV 23 2016 M OLLY C. DW Y ER, CLERK U
. S. CO URT O F APPEALS

* This disposition is not a ppropria te for public at ion a

nd is not pre c e de nt e xc e pt a s provide d

by Ninth C irc uit R

ule 36-3.

* * The pa

ne l una nim ously c onc lude s this c a se is suita ble for de c ision without oral a

rgum e nt. Se eFe d. R . App. P. 34(a)(2).C

ounty of San Franc isc o , 535 F.3d 1044, 1047 (9th C ir. 2008). W e a ffirm
. The distric t c ourt prope rly dismisse d Ha

rtfie ld’ s a c tion be c a

use it is ba

rre d by the a pplic a ble sta tute of lim i tations. Although Ha rtfie ld m a inta i ns tha

t he should ha ve be e n give n le a

v e to a m e nd with re ga

rd to thesta

tute of lim ita

t ions issue , he sugge sts no spe c ific am e ndm e nt tha t would ha ve a lte re d the a c c rua l da

te on whic h the distric t c ourt re l ie d. Se e Douglas v
. N oe lle , 567 F.3d 1103, 1109 (9th C ir. 2009) (e xpla ining tha t the sta tute of lim ita

tions for § 1983 ac tions is the sta t e la w sta tute of lim ita

tions for pe rsona l injury

a c t ions, a nd tha t Ore gon’ s sta

tute of lim ita tions for suc h a c tions is two ye ars); Bagle y v . C MC Re al Estate

C orp. , 923 F.2d 758, 760 (9th C ir. 1991) (fe de ra l c la im a c c rue s whe n the pla intiff knows or ha s re a son to know of the injury); s e ealso Le v ald, Inc . v . C ity of Palm De

se rt , 998 F.2d 680, 686-87 (9th C ir. 1993) (distric t c ourts m a y sua spontec o nside r the issue of sta tute of lim ita

tions whe re de fe nda

nt ha s not wa ive d the de fe nse an d pla intiff ha s be e n give n a

c ha nc e to a d dre ss the issue ). AFFIRM E D.

1 6
- 3 5 1 1 6 2
Third District Court of Appeal

State of Florida

Opinion filed September 28, 2016.

Not final until disposition of timely filed motion for rehearing.

________________

No. 3D15-2396

Lower Tribunal No. 04-9793-B

________________

Jorge Slaughter,

Appellant,

vs.

The State of Florida,

Appellee.

An Appeal under Florida Rule of Appellate Procedure 9.141(b)(2) from the

Circuit Court for Miami-Dade County, Jose L. Fernandez, Judge.

Jorge Slaughter, in proper person.

Pamela Jo Bondi, Attorney General, and Sandra Lipman, Assistant Attorney

General, for appellee. 

Before SUAREZ, C.J., and WELLS and LOGUE, JJ.

SUAREZ, C.J.

This is an appeal from an order summarily denying Defendant’s postconviction motion to correct his sentence. The Order ostensibly denies the
defendant’s motion pursuant to Florida Rule of Criminal Procedure 3.800(a). On

appeal from a summary denial, this Court must reverse unless the postconviction

record shows conclusively that the appellant is entitled to no relief. See Fla. R.

App. P. 9.141(b)(2) (A) and (D). 

Because the postconviction record now before this Court fails to make the

required showing, we reverse the order and remand for further proceedings

consistent with this opinion. First, the trial court order is facially inconsistent in

that it is captioned “Order Denying” defendant’s motion, but within the body of the

order it states that the court “hereby grants the Defendant’s Motion to Correct

Illegal Sentence by: ....” However, further within the body of the Order, it states

that the motion is “hereby DENIED.”

Additionally, the Order recites some history of Defendant’s sentencing in

this case and makes reference to an affirmation of a later sentence imposed after a

violation and goes on to state: “[t]he defendant is once again incorrect as to his

sentence, as such this motion is legally and factually wrong” but provides no

elaboration of what portion of the motion is incorrect or what impact the

resentencing had with regard to the claims made in Defendant’s present motion. 

Neither the trial court nor the State provided any record documentation to

substantiate the Order. If the trial court again enters an order summarily denying

the post-conviction motion, the court shall attach record excerpts that specifically

2
address the appellant’s sentencing argument and conclusively show that the

appellant is not entitled to any relief. 

Reversed and remanded for further proceedings. 

 

3
WARNING: THE EDGAR SYSTEM ENCOUNTERED ERROR(S) WHILE PROCESSING THIS SCHEDULE.

<TABLE> <S> <C>

<ARTICLE>                     5



<MULTIPLIER>                                                        1
<CURRENCY>                                                        USD

       
<S>                                                       <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                                                   6-mos
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                                         DEC-31-1998
<PERIOD-START>                                            JAN-01-1998
<PERIOD-END>                                              JUN-30-1998
<EXCHANGE-RATE>                                                     1
<CASH>                                                     16,380,005
<SECURITIES>                                                        0
<RECEIVABLES>                                               7,617,684
<ALLOWANCES>                                                5,162,141
<INVENTORY>                                                 9,862,648
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                                           36,900,645
<PP&E>                                                      3,879,641
<DEPRECIATION>                                              3,118,332
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                             42,103,731
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                                       2,954,111
<BONDS>                                                             0
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                               0
<PREFERRED>                                                         0
<COMMON>                                                   25,190,579
<OTHER-SE>                                                 13,959,041
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                               42,103,731
<SALES>                                                    40,765,979
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                                           30,873,609
<CGS>                                                      23,587,341
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                               9,946,577
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                              480,488
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                                    0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                                                  0
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                             2,179,821)
<INCOME-TAX>                                                 (806,534)
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                                        (1,373,287)
<DISCONTINUED>                                                      0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                                     0
<CHANGES>                                                           0
<NET-INCOME>                                               (1,373,287)
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                                   (0.18)
<EPS-DILUTED>                                                   (0.18)
        

</TABLE>
United States Court of Appeals

for the Fifth Circuit

No. 21-10936

In re: Joel Rodriguez, 

Movant.

Motion for an order authorizing

the United States District Court for the

Northern District of Texas to consider

a successive 28 U.S.C. § 2255 motion

Before Stewart, Haynes and Ho, Circuit Judges.

Per Curiam:

Joel Rodriguez, federal prisoner # 42309-177, moves for authorization 

to file a successive 28 U.S.C. § 2255 motion challenging his conviction for 

possession of a firearm by a prohibited person in violation of 18 U.S.C. 

§§ 922(g)(1) and 924(e)(1). He seeks to raise a claim pursuant to Borden 

v. United States, 141 S. Ct. 1817 (2021). 

To obtain authorization to file a second or successive § 2255 motion, 

Rodriguez must make a prima facie showing that his proffered § 2255 motion 

relies on either (1) “newly discovered evidence that, if proven and viewed in 

light of the evidence as a whole, would be sufficient to establish by clear and 

convincing evidence that no reasonable factfinder would have found the 

movant guilty of the offense,” or (2) “a new rule of constitutional law, made 

retroactive to cases on collateral review by the Supreme Court, that was 

United States Court of Appeals

Fifth Circuit

FILED

December 3, 2021

Lyle W. Cayce

Clerk

Case: 21-10936 Document: 00516116683 Page: 1 Date Filed: 12/03/2021
No. 21-10936

2

previously unavailable.” § 2255(h); see 28 U.S.C. § 2244(b)(3)(C); ReyesRequena v. United States, 243 F.3d 893, 897-99 (5th Cir. 2001). Borden does 

not provide a basis on which Rodriguez may obtain authorization under 

§ 2255(h)(2) because it did not announce a new rule of constitutional law but 

instead addressed a question of statutory construction. See Borden, 141 S. Ct. 

at 1825; see also In re Cain, No. 21-13241, 2021 U.S. App. LEXIS 30205 *6 

(11th Cir. Oct. 7, 2021)(“The Supreme Court’s interpretation of a 

substantive criminal statute, using established rules of statutory 

construction, does not announce a new rule of constitutional law . . . .”); In

re Salas, 888 F.3d 150, 150-51 (5th Cir. 2018); Reyes-Requena, 243 F.3d at 900.

Accordingly, because Rodriguez fails to make the requisite showing 

under § 2255(h), IT IS ORDERED that his motion for authorization is 

DENIED.

Case: 21-10936 Document: 00516116683 Page: 2 Date Filed: 12/03/2021
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.                  

###### Department of Agriculture

# AGENCY:

Agricultural Research Service, USDA.

# ACTION:

Notice and request for comments.

# SUMMARY:

                        The notice to seek comments on the Agricultural Research Services (ARS) intent to seek approval from OMB to collect information on the National Program 216 Technology Transfer Project End-users' Inputs was published in the                         **Federal Register**                         on October 20, 2009. The document improperly included the National Agriculture Library in the heading as the issueing agency and did not contain the OMB number and expiration date.                    

# FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

Bryan Kaphammer, (970) 492-7023.

# SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

## Correction

                    In the                     **Federal Register**                     of October 20, 2009, in FR Doc. E9-25228, on page 53697, in the agency heading “National Agriculture Library ” is removed and the correct OMB number and the OMB number and expiration date are corrected to read as follows:                

*OMB Number:*                     0518-XXXX                

*Expiration Date:*                     Three years from the approval date.                

Dated: October 20, 2009.

Yvette Anderson, 

Federal Register Liaison Officer for Agriculture Research Service.

[FR Doc. E9-25603 Filed 10-23-09; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE P
Exhibit 23

            Consent of Independent Registered Public Accounting Firm

The Board of Directors
Anaren, Inc.:

We consent to the incorporation by reference in the Registration Statements (No.
33-36761, No. 333-03193,  No. 333-70397,  No. 333-70427,  No. 333-50390, and No.
333-50392) on Form S-8 and Registration Statement (No. 333-70422) on Form S-3 of
Anaren,  Inc.  of our  reports  dated  August  31,  2005,  with  respect  to the
consolidated balance sheets of Anaren, Inc. and subsidiaries as of June 30, 2005
and 2004, and the related consolidated  statements of operations,  stockholders'
equity and comprehensive  income (loss), and cash flows for each of the years in
the  three-year  period  ended June 30,  2005,  management's  assessment  of the
effectiveness of internal  control over financial  reporting as of June 30, 2005
and the  effectiveness of internal  control over financial  reporting as of June
30, 2005,  which reports  appear in the June 30, 2005 annual report on Form 10-K
of Anaren, Inc.

                                                          /s/ KPMG LLP

Syracuse, New York
September 9, 2005


                                       72
II 

Calendar No. 380 

111TH CONGRESS 

2D SESSION S. 2874 

To designate the facility of the United States Postal Service located at 

2000 Louisiana Avenue in New Orleans, Louisiana, as the ‘‘Roy 

Rondeno, Sr. Post Office Building’’. 

IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES 

DECEMBER 11, 2009 

Ms. LANDRIEU (for herself and Mr. VITTER) introduced the following bill; 

which was read twice and referred to the Committee on Homeland Security and Governmental Affairs 

MAY 18, 2010 

Reported by Mr. LIEBERMAN, without amendment 

A BILL 

To designate the facility of the United States Postal Service 

located at 2000 Louisiana Avenue in New Orleans, Louisiana, as the ‘‘Roy Rondeno, Sr. Post Office Building’’. 

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

3 SECTION 1. ROY RONDENO, SR. POST OFFICE BUILDING. 

4 (a) DESIGNATION.—The facility of the United States 

5 Postal Service located at 2000 Louisiana Avenue in New 


PWALKER on DSK8KYBLC1PROD with BILLS
2 

•S 2874 RS

1 Orleans, Louisiana, shall be known and designated as the 

2 ‘‘Roy Rondeno, Sr. Post Office Building’’. 

3 (b) REFERENCES.—Any reference in a law, map, reg4 ulation, document, paper, or other record of the United 

5 States to the facility referred to in subsection (a) shall 

6 be deemed to be a reference to the ‘‘Roy Rondeno, Sr. 

7 Post Office Building’’. 


PWALKER on DSK8KYBLC1PROD with BILLS

PWALKER on DSK8KYBLC1PROD with BILLS
Calendar No. 380 

111TH CONGRESS 

2D SESSION S. 2874 

A BILL 

To designate the facility of the United States PostSr. Post Office Building’’. New Orleans, Louisiana, as the ‘‘Roy Rondeno, al Service located at 2000 Louisiana Avenue in 

MAY 18, 2010 

Reported without amendment 


PWALKER on DSK8KYBLC1PROD with BILLS
**EXHIBIT
      32**





**CERTIFICATION
      OF THE CHIEF EXECUTIVE OFFICER AND PRINCIPAL FINANCIAL
      OFFICER**







Pursuant
      to 18 U.S.C. § 1350, as created by Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of
      2002, the undersigned officer of Patco Industries, Ltd. (the “Company”) hereby
      certifies that based on his knowledge:




(i)  the
      Quarterly Report on Form 10-QSB of the Company for the quarter ended March
      31,
      2004 (the “Report”) fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) or
      Section 15(d), as applicable, of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as
      amended; and




(ii)  the
      information contained in the Report fairly presents, in all material respects,
      the financial condition and results of operations of the Company as of and
      for
      the periods covered in the Report.







Dated:
                July 14, 2005
            /s/
                William C. Patridge
              Name:William
                C. Patridge
              Title:Chief
                Executive Officer (principal executive officer and principal financial
                officer)








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. The foregoing certification
      is being furnished to the Securities and Exchange Commission as an exhibit
      to
      the Form 10-QSB and shall not be considered filed as part of the Form
      10-QSB.
EXHIBIT 32
                                   ----------


                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 Realmark Property Investors
Limited Partnership - VI A (the "Partnership") on Form 10-Q for the period
ending March 31, 2007 as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on
the date hereof (the "Report"), I, Joseph M. Jayson, Individual General Partner
and Principal Financial Officer, 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(a)
               or 15(d) of the Securities and Exchange Act of 1934; and

         (2)   The information contained in the Report fairly presents, in all
               material respects, the financial condition and result of the
               operations of the Partnership.


           May 15, 2007                /s/ Joseph M. Jayson
           ------------                --------------------
               Date                    Joseph M. Jayson, Individual General
                                        Partner and Principal Financial
                                        Officer
## COURT OF APPEALS

SECOND DISTRICT OF TEXAS

FORT WORTH

NO. 02-16-00308-CR

Pamela Sue Wolfe

v.

The State of Texas §

§

§

§

§ From the 271st District Court

of Wise County (CR17723)

March 1, 2018

Opinion by Justice Pittman

(nfp)



### JUDGMENT

This court has considered the record on appeal in this case and holds that

there was no error in the tria l court’s judgment. It is ordered that the judgment of

the trial court is affirmed.

SECOND DISTRICT COURT OF APPEALS

By _/s/ Mark T. Pi ttman_________________

Justice Mark T. Pittman