alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
# U.S. Airstrikes Target Terrorist Networks in Northern Afghanistan

/ Published Feb. 8, 2018

**NEWS RELEASE**

2018-02-08****

****

**KABUL, Afghanistan (Feb. 8, 2018) —** Airstrikes in northern Afghanistan are targeting Taliban training camps and support networks of the East Turkestan Islamic Movement, a terrorist organization operating near the border with China and Tajikistan.

U.S. strikes in Badakhshan province destroyed Taliban training camps and other fighting positions. These training camps support terrorist operations inside Afghanistan as well as operations conducted by ETIM in the border region with China and Tajikistan. 

The U.S. strikes support Afghanistan in reassuring its neighbors that it is not a safe sanctuary for terrorists who want to carry out cross border operations.

“There will be no safe haven for any terrorist group,” said General John Nicholson, commander, U.S. Forces-Afghanistan. “We continue to strike them wherever we find them. We continue to hunt them across the country.”

ETIM is a terrorist organization with roots in the ethnic Uighur separatist groups in western China. ETIM militants have fought alongside al-Qaida and Taliban forces in Afghanistan, and are responsible for various terrorist acts inside and outside China. In May 2002, two ETIM members were deported to China from Kyrgyzstan for plotting to attack the U.S. Embassy in Kyrgyzstan. They pose a threat to China and enjoy support from the Taliban in Badakhshan and throughout the border region.

Operations in the north by the Afghan National Defence and Security Forces have intensified in recent months against Taliban, IS-K, and other terrorist organizations attempting to secure a foothold in northern Afghanistan. Afghan Commandos, in close coordination with the Afghan National Army 209th Corps, recently defeated the Taliban in their positions north of Kunduz City, securing the provincial capital from insurgent threat. Airfield surveys in Faryab province recently certified those airfields to enable Commando offensive operations against IS-K positions in the surrounding area.

"War is a test of wills,” said Major General James Hecker, deputy commander for USFOR-A air operations, in a press conference Feb. 7. “The Afghan military has resolve and is becoming more capable every day.”

"We are with Afghanistan and we will stay with the Afghan people,” said Nicholson.

-30-

**USFOR-APublicAffairsOffice**

Between 0830-2030 Afghanistan Local: Tel: +93 (0) 700 13-2114 / +93 (0) 700 13-2928

Between 2030-0830 Afghanistan Local: Tel: +93 (0) 700 13-4021

E-Mail:                                 pressoffice@hq.rs.nato.int
§ 80.15 Selection criteria. ( a ) The Secretary shall assign weights as indicated to the following eight selection criteria in evaluating and selecting among eligible projects to receive credit assistance: ( 1 ) The extent to which the project is nationally or regionally significant, in terms of generating economic benefits, supporting international commerce, or otherwise enhancing the national transportation system (20 percent);
( 2 ) The creditworthiness of the project, including a determination by the Secretary that any financing for the project has appropriate security features, such as a rate covenant, to ensure repayment (12.5 percent);
( 3 ) The extent to which such assistance would foster innovative public-private partnerships and attract private debt or equity investment (20 percent);
( 4 ) The likelihood that such assistance would enable the project to proceed at an earlier date than the project would otherwise be able to proceed (12.5 percent);
( 5 ) The extent to which the project uses new technologies, including Intelligent Transportation Systems (ITS), that enhance the efficiency of the project (5 percent);
( 6 ) The amount of budget authority required to fund the Federal credit instrument made available (5 percent);
( 7 ) The extent to which the project helps maintain or protect the environment (20 percent); and
( 8 ) The extent to which such assistance would reduce the contribution of Federal grant assistance to the project (5 percent).
( b ) In addition, 23 U.S.C. 182(b)(2)(B) conditions a project's approval for credit assistance on receipt of a preliminary rating opinion letter indicating that the project's senior debt obligations have the potential to attain an investment-grade rating.
( c ) The Secretary may also give preference to applications for loan guarantees rather than other forms of Federal credit assistance. This preference is consistent with Federal policy that, when Federal credit assistance is necessary to meet a Federal objective, loan guarantees should be favored over direct loans, unless attaining the Federal objective requires a subsidy, as defined by the Federal Credit Reform Act of 1990 (2 U.S.C. 661 *et seq.*), deeper than can be provided by a loan guarantee.
[64 FR 29750, June 2, 1999, as amended at 65 FR 44940, July 19, 2000]
# Houthis Fire Anti-Ship Ballistic Missile Toward USS Carney (DDG 64)

/ Published Jan. 26, 2024

Jan. 26, 2024Release Number 20240126-01FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE**TAMPA, Fla.** - On Jan. 26, at approximately 1:30 p.m. (Sanaa time), Iranian-backed Houthi militants fired one anti-ship ballistic missile from Houthi-controlled areas of Yemen toward Arleigh-Burke class destroyer USS Carney (DDG 64) in the Gulf of Aden. The missile was successfully shot down by USS Carney. There were no injuries or damage reported.
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<ARTICLE> 5
<MULTIPLIER> 1,000
       
<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   6-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          DEC-31-1996
<PERIOD-START>                             JAN-01-1997
<PERIOD-END>                               JUN-30-1997
<CASH>                                          29,984
<SECURITIES>                                         0
<RECEIVABLES>                                   12,633
<ALLOWANCES>                                      (318)
<INVENTORY>                                      1,355
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                                45,525
<PP&E>                                           8,569
<DEPRECIATION>                                  (5,111)
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                  49,018
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                           14,932
<BONDS>                                              0
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                            69
<OTHER-SE>                                      34,017
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                    49,018
<SALES>                                         30,199
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                                30,199
<CGS>                                           11,765
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                   11,765
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                13,108
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                     0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                                 342
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                  4,984
<INCOME-TAX>                                     1,064
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                              6,048
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                     6,048
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                      .47
<EPS-DILUTED>                                      .47
        

</TABLE>
Editorial Note on Part 572
Editorial Notes: 1. For compliance provisions relating to a vehicle's conformance with the performance requirements of Standard No. 208 (§ 571.208) relating to the part 572 test dummy, see the “Effective Date Note” at subpart E of this part. 2. Nomenclature changes to part 572 appear at 69 FR 18803, Apr. 9, 2004.

§ 572.103 Test conditions and instrumentation. ( a ) Headform accelerometers shall have dimensions, response characteristics, and sensitive mass locations specified in drawing SA572-S4 (incorporated by reference; see § 572.100) and be mounted in the headform as shown in drawing 92041-001 (incorporated by reference; see § 572.100).
( b ) The outputs of accelerometers installed in the headform are recorded in individual data channels that conform to the requirements of SAE Recommended Practice J211, OCT 1988, “Instrumentation for Impact Tests,” Class 1000 (incorporated by reference; see § 572.100).
( c ) Coordinate signs for instrumentation polarity conform to the sign convention shown in the Free-Motion Headform User's Manual (incorporated by reference; see § 572.100).
( d ) The mountings for accelerometers shall have no resonant frequency within a range of 3 times the frequency range of the applicable channel class.
[60 FR 43060, Aug. 18, 1995]
----

Action brought on 10 February 2004 by Budějovický Budvar, národní podnik, against the Office for Harmonisation in the Internal Market (Trade Marks and Designs) (OHIM)

(Case T-62/04)

(2004/C 94/153)

Language of the case: French

An action against the Office for Harmonisation in the Internal Market (Trade Marks and Designs) was brought before the Court of First Instance of the European Communities on 10 February 2004 by Budějovický Budvar, národní podnik, established in České Budějovice (Czech Republic), represented by Fabienne Fajgenbaum, lawyer.

Anheuser-Busch, Incorporated, was also a party to the proceedings before the Second Board of Appeal.

The applicant claims that the Court should:

Pleas in law and main arguments:

----

(1)  Council Regulation (EC) No 40/94 of 20 December 1993 on the Community trade mark (OJ 1994 L 11, p. 1).

----
```

[Federal Register Volume 79, Number 130 (Tuesday, July 8, 2014)]
[Notices]
[Page 38519]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Printing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2014-15934]

=======================================================================
-----------------------------------------------------------------------

COMMODITY FUTURES TRADING COMMISSION

Sunshine Act Meetings

TIME AND DATE: 10 a.m., Friday, July 11, 2014.

PLACE: 1155 21st St. NW., Washington, DC, 9th Floor Commission 
Conference Room.

STATUS: Closed.

MATTERS TO BE CONSIDERED: Surveillance, Enforcement Matters, and 
Examinations. In the event that the times, dates, or locations of this 
or any future meetings change, an announcement of the change, along 
with the new time and place of the meeting will be posted on the 
Commission's Web site at http://www.cftc.gov.

CONTACT PERSON FOR MORE INFORMATION: Christopher J. Kirkpatrick, 202-
418-5964.

Christopher J. Kirkpatrick,
Acting Secretary.
[FR Doc. 2014-15934 Filed 7-3-14; 11:15 am]
BILLING CODE 6351-01-P
```
Feb. 19: Military Airstrikes Continue Against ISIL in Syria and Iraq
 By CJTF - Operation Inherent Resolve News Release
  February 19, 2015 Release # 20150219FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE **SOUTHWEST ASIA -** On Feb. 18, U.S. and Coalition military forces continued to attack ISIL terrorists in Syria, using attack, fighter, bomber and remotely piloted aircraft to conduct seven airstrikes. Separately, U.S. and Coalition military forces conducted eight airstrikes in Iraq, using attack and fighter aircraft against ISIL terrorists. All strikes took place between 8 a.m., Feb. 18, and 8 a.m. Feb. 19, local time. The following is a summary of the strikes conducted since the last press release: **Syria***       Near Al Hasakah, two airstrikes struck multiple ISIL oil pump jacks and destroyed an ISIL checkpoint. *       Near Kobani, five airstrikes struck two ISIL tactical units and destroyed eight ISIL fighting positions and two ISIL checkpoints. **Iraq***       Near Al Asad, an airstrike destroyed an ISIL mortar tube. *       Near Bayji, an airstrike struck an ISIL tactical unit and destroyed three ISIL fighting positions. *       Near Hit in Al Anbar Province, two airstrikes struck an ISIL tactical unit, an ISIL weapons storage and staging area and destroyed an ISIL building. *       Near Kirkuk, an airstrike destroyed an ISIL armored vehicle. *       Near Mosul, an airstrike destroyed an ISIL vehicle. *       Near Tal Afar, two airstrikes struck an ISIL tactical unit, an ISIL fighting position and destroyed three ISIL buildings. Airstrike assessments are based on initial reports. All aircraft returned to base safely. The strikes were conducted as part of Operation Inherent Resolve, the operation to eliminate the ISIL terrorist group and the threat they pose to Iraq, Syria, the region, and the wider international community. The destruction of ISIL targets in Syria and Iraq further limits the terrorist group's ability to project terror and conduct operations. Coalition nations which have conducted airstrikes in Iraq include the U.S., Australia, Belgium, Canada, Denmark, France, Netherlands, and the United Kingdom. Coalition nations which have conducted airstrikes in Syria include the U.S., Bahrain, Jordan, Saudi Arabia, and the United Arab Emirates.
IN THE SUPREME COURT OF PENNSYLVANIA

EASTERN DISTRICT

**SETH STEINMAN,**

**Petitioner**

**v.**

**COURT OF COMMON PLEAS OF PHILADELPHIA COUNTY,** 

**Respondent :** 

**:**

**:**

**:**

**:**

**:**

**:**

**:**

**:**

**:**

**:**

**: No. 56 EM 2015** 

ORDER

PER CURIAM

AND NOW **, this 8th day of July, 2015, the Application for Leav e to File Original** 

**Process is** GRANTED **, and the Petition for Writ of Mandamus is** DENIED

**.**
Editorial Note on Subpart A of Part 1
Editorial Note: 89 FR 101463, Dec. 16, 2024, updated the subject matter of Title 2 to “Federal Financial Assistance” (previously “Grants and Agreements”).

§ 1.100 Content of this title. This title contains: ( a ) Office of Management and Budget (OMB) guidance to Federal agencies on government-wide policies for the award and administration of Federal financial assistance; and
( b ) Federal agency regulations implementing that OMB guidance.
----

----

I Information

Commission

----

Summary of Community decisions on marketing authorizations in respect of medicinal products from 15.4.2004 to 30.4.2004

(Decisions taken pursuant to Article 34 of Directive 2001/83/EC (1 2) or Article 38 of Directive 2001/82/EC (1 2))

(2004/C 119/01)

— Issuing, maintenance or modification of a national marketing authorisation

REVISED ANNEX I

LIST OF THE NAMES, PHARMACEUTICAL FORMS, STRENGTHS OF THE MEDICINAL PRODUCTS, ROUTES OF ADMINISTRATION, APPLICANTS, MARKETING AUTHORISATION HOLDERS, PACKAGING AND PACKAGE SIZES IN THE MEMBER STATES

ANNEX II

LIST OF THE NAMES, PHARMACEUTICAL FORM, STRENGTHS OF THE MEDICINAL PRODUCTS, ROUTE OF ADMINISTRATION, APPLICANT, MARKETING AUTHORISATION HOLDER IN THE MEMBER STATES

ANNEX III

LIST OF THE NAMES, PHARMACEUTICAL FORM, STRENGTHS OF THE MEDICINAL PRODUCTS, ROUTE OF ADMINISTRATION, APPLICANT, MARKETING AUTHORISATION HOLDER IN THE MEMBER STATES

ANNEX IV

LIST OF THE NAMES, PHARMACEUTICAL FORM, STRENGTHS OF THE MEDICINAL PRODUCTS, ROUTE OF ADMINISTRATION, APPLICANT, MARKETING AUTHORISATION HOLDER IN THE MEMBER STATES. 

ANNEX V

LIST OF THE NAMES, PHARMACEUTICAL FORM, STRENGTHS OF THE MEDICINAL PRODUCTS, ROUTE OF ADMINISTRATION, APPLICANT, MARKETING AUTHORISATION HOLDER IN THE MEMBER STATES

ANNEX VI

LIST OF THE NAMES, PHARMACEUTICAL FORMS, STRENGTHS OF THE MEDICINAL PRODUCTS, ROUTE OF ADMINISTRATION, MARKETING AUTHORISATION HOLDERS IN THE MEMBER STATES AND NORWAY AND ICELAND

ANNEX VII

LIST OF THE NAMES, PHARMACEUTICAL FORMS, STRENGTHS OF THE MEDICINAL PRODUCTS, ROUTE OF ADMINISTRATION, MARKETING AUTHORISATION HOLDERS IN THE MEMBER STATES AND NORWAY AND ICELAND

ANNEX VIII

LIST OF THE INVENTED NAMES, PHARMACAUTICAL FORMS, STRENGTHS OF THE MEDICINAL PRODUCTS, ROUTE OF ADMINISTRATION, MARKETING AUTHORISATION HOLDERS, PACKAGING AND PACKAGE SIZES IN THE MEMBER STATES

ANNEX IX

LIST OF THE INVENTED NAMES, PHARMACEUTICAL FORMS, STRENGTHS OF THE MEDICINAL PRODUCTS, ROUTE OF ADMINISTRATION, APPLICANTS/MARKETING AUTHORISATION HOLDERS, PACKAGING AND PACKAGE SIZES IN THE MEMBER STATES

ANNEX X

LIST OF THE NAMES, PHARMACEUTICAL FORM, STRENGTHS OF THE MEDICINAL PRODUCTS, ROUTE OF ADMINISTRATION, MARKETING AUTHORISATION HOLDERS IN THE MEMBER STATES

ANNEX XI

LIST OF THE NAMES, PHARMACEUTICAL FORMS, STRENGTHS OF THE MEDICINAL PRODUCTS, ROUTE OF ADMINISTRATION AND MARKETING AUTHORISATION HOLDERS IN THE MEMBER STATES AND NORWAY AND ICELAND

----

(1)OJ L 311, 28.11.2001, p. 67.

(2)OJ L 311, 28.11.2001, p. 1.

----
#### The People of the State of New York, Respondents, v. William A. White, Appellant.

Conviction and judgment reversed and new trial granted. Opinions by

Barnard, P. J., and Dykman, J.
From: Marc Scherf

To: EBSA, E-OHPSCA - EBSA

Subject: RIN 1210-AB41

Date: Wednesday, September 29, 2010 1:51:44 PM

Regarding Adult Child Care under Affordable Care Act

RIN-1210-AB41

One of the provisions of the Affordable Care Act is that "grandfathered" employer health

care plans needn't be made available to adult children who have access to coverage through

their own employment. I have excellent coverage through my employment, and my daughter

has coverage almost useless, at a cost, through her employment.

Does the Act make her ineligible for continued care under my Employer's Plan? Is an adult

child's "access" to coverage in any way defined? Would it include any plan available,

whatever the cost, and irrespective of the level of coverage?

Under the circumstances affecting my daughter and me, I would have to advise her to quit her

job if its very minimal health care plan precludes access to mine. To make matters worse,

she had coverage through my employer prior to the changes in the law, and that access now

is apparently to be revoked by my employer as they seek minimal compliance with the Act.

Please help me to understand this, and/or how I might affect execution/administration of the

Act.
§ 674.21 Withholding of Federal financial assistance for noncompliance. ( a ) In making a decision to impose financial penalties as authorized by 49 U.S.C. 5329(e), and determining the nature and amount of the financial penalties, the Administrator shall consider the extent and circumstances of the noncompliance; the operating budgets of the SSOA and the rail fixed guideway public transportation systems that will be affected by the financial penalties; and such other matters as justice may require.
( b ) If a State fails to establish a SSO program that has been approved by the Administrator within three years of the effective date of this part, FTA will be prohibited from obligating Federal financial assistance apportioned under 49 U.S.C. 5338 to any entity in the State that is otherwise eligible to receive that Federal financial assistance, in accordance with 49 U.S.C. 5329(e)(3).
USNS Rappahannock Fires after Vessel ignores warnings
 By None  , US Naval Forces Central Command
  FIFTH FLEET AREA OF OPERATIONS (July 16, 2012) — An embarked security team aboard a U.S. Navy vessel fired upon a small motor vessel after it disregarded warnings and rapidly approached the U.S. ship near Jebel Ali, United Arab Emirates today. In accordance with Navy force protection procedures, the sailors on the USNS Rappahannock (T-AO 204) used a series of non-lethal, preplanned responses to warn the vessel before resorting to lethal force. The U.S. crew repeatedly attempted to warn the vessel’s operators to turn away from their deliberate approach.  When those efforts failed to deter the approaching vessel, the security team on the Rappahannock fired rounds from a .50-caliber machine gun. The incident is under investigation. -30- *For further questions, please contact U.S. Naval Forces Central Command Public Affairs Office011-973-1785-4027 or navcentpao@me.navy.mil*
<PAGE>  1
                                                                  Exhibit 10.5

                            COGNITRONICS CORPORATION
                           1997 EXECUTIVE BONUS PLAN
Part A

Participants: President and Treasurer

The bonus for each is to be calculated as follows:

                                               Amount Earned
                                               -------------
Range of Operating
    Income(1)                    President                Treasurer
------------------               ---------                ---------
Under $1.0 million         2% of Operating Income    1% of Operating Income

$1.0 million to             $20,000 plus 3% of       $10,000 plus 1 1/4% of
 $1.9 million               Operating Income in      Operating Income in
                            excess $1.0 of million   excess of $1.0 millon

$2.0 million to             $50,000 plus 4% of       $22,500 plus 1 1/2% of
 $2.9 million               Operating Income in      Operating Income in
                            excess of $2.0 million   excess of $2.0 million

$3.0 million and over       $90,000 plus 5% of       $37,500 plus 2% of
                            Operating Income in      Operating Income in
                            excess of $3.0 million   excess of $3.0 million

(1) Operating Income for Part A is consolidated income before income taxes
exclusive of executive bonus expense and special or non-recurring income or
expense.

Part B

Participants: Vice President - Sales, Vice President - Engineering and Vice
President - Manufacturing

The bonus pool is to be calculated as follows:

Range of Operating Income(2)                       Bonus Pool
----------------------------                       ----------
Under $.5 million                         3% of Operating Income

$.5 million to $..99 million              $15,000 plus 5% of Operating Income
                                           in excess of $.5 million

$1.0 million and over                     $40,000 plus 6% of Operating Income
                                           in excess of $1.0 million

The Part B bonus pool is to be allocated among the participants by the
Compensation Committee after reviewing the written recommendations of the
President.

(2) Operating Income for Part B is income before income taxes of domestic
operations exclusive of executive bonus expense and extraordinary, special or
non-recurring income or expense.