alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
Here's how you know
 **Official websites use .mil** .mil
 **Secure .mil websites use HTTPS** lock () https://


Skip to main content (Press Enter).
 Toggle navigation
            
            U.S. Central Command
                CENTCOM
        Search
                    Search CENTCOM:
                        Search
                Search CENTCOM:
                    Search
    Home

    ABOUT US
    
        COMMAND PRIORITIES

    LEADERSHIP

    COMPONENT COMMANDS

    HISTORY

    POSTURE STATEMENT

    CENTCOM AOR
    
        CENTCOM COALITION

    OPERATIONS AND EXERCISES
    
        USMTM

    CONTACT
    
        OPERATIONAL CONTRACT SUPPORT

    COMMUNITY RELATIONS

    THEATRE MEDICAL CLEARANCE

    INNOVATION VENDOR PORTAL

    MILITARY MEMBER INNOVATION PORTAL

    MEDIA
    
        SOCIAL MEDIA

    NEWS ARTICLES

    PRESS RELEASES

    STATEMENTS

    IMAGERY

    VIDEOS

    TRANSCRIPTS

    VISITORS AND PERSONNEL
    
        FAMILY CENTER

    FAMILY READINESS

    CENTCOM WEBMAIL

    SOCIAL MEDIA SECURITY

    ACCOUNTABILITY

    EMERGENCY PREPAREDNESS

    USCENTCOM UNCLASSIFIED REGULATIONS

    FOIA LIBRARY

    INNOVATION OASIS

    WELCOME GUIDE  Search
 Search
 All Images All ImagesCommunity RelationsOtherPreviousCommanders
 Upload Date Upload DatePhoto DateTitle
  Share
  
 Small () Medium () Full Size (3.68 MB)
 
 USCENTCOM Tampa food CENTCOM Coalition International holiday cuisine
 Photo Gallery
 About UsCommand PrioritiesLeadershipComponent
   CommandsHistoryPosture Statement
   Area of
   ResponsibilityCENTCOM Coalition
   Operations And
   ExercisesOperation Inherent
   ResolveResolute Support
   MediaSocial MediaNews ArticlesPress ReleasesVideo And Imagery
   Visitors And
   PersonnelFamily ReadinessCENTCOM WebmailSocial MediaSecurityAccountabilityEmergency
   Preparedness
   ContactCommunity Relations
                    Stay Connected
                
                Privacy & Security  Inspector General  FOIA  Privacy Act
            

Hosted by Defense Media Activity - WEB.mil
----

(2004/C 84 E/0987)

WRITTEN QUESTION P-0844/04

by Ulpu Iivari (PSE) to the Commission

(9 March 2004)

Subject:   Aid to shipbuilding in breach of EU legislation

In recent months Finnish shipyards have lost out in several competitive bidding procedures to the Italian state-owned company Fincantieri, which has been able to offer customers markedly lower prices than its rivals. According to various avowed expert opinions, Italy is probably paying state aid to shipping companies that have their vessels built and registered in Italy.

Overseeing the internal market is one of the Commission's prime tasks. What steps will the Commission take to ensure that EU competition legislation is observed in the shipbuilding sector?

Answer given by Mr Monti on behalf of the Commission

(2 April 2004)

The Commission's state aid department is actively following the shipbuilding sector, through the assessment of notified state aid cases and schemes, investigations linked to complaints and through investigations on its own initiatives.

The Commission is not aware of state aid to shipping companies that have their vessels built in Italy, with the exception of a type of aid that has been authorised by the Commission and which could, in principle, be provided by all Member States. This concerns contract related aid (1) for ships contracted until the end of 2000 and delivered before the end of 2003.

The Commission has currently one proceeding according to Article 88(3) of the EC Treaty open concerning state aid to Italian shipbuilding (2). This concerns a guarantee scheme to shipbuilding, but to the knowledge of the Commission no guarantees have yet been provided based on this scheme.

----

(1)  Council Regulation (EC) No 1540/98 of 29 June 1998 establishing new rules on aid to shipbuilding, OJ L 202, 18.7.1998.

(2)OJ C 145, 21.6.2003.

----
Table of Contents

Exhibit32.1

Certification of Chief Executive Officer

I, DomenicGatto, Chief Executive Officer of Atlantic Express Transportation Corp.(the ‘‘Company’’), do hereby certify,pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, as adopted pursuant to Section 906of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that, to the best of myknowledge:

(i) the Quarterly Report on Form10-Q of the Company for the quarter ended March  31,  2006,as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission (the‘‘Report’’), fully complies with therequirements of Section 13(a) or Section 15(d), as applicable, of theSecurities Exchange Act of 1934; and

(ii) theinformation contained in the Report fairly presents, in all materialrespects, the financial condition and results of operations of theCompany.

|  | /s/ Domenic GattoDomenicGattoChief Executive Officer |
|--|------------------------------------------------------|

Date: May12,  2006

The foregoing certification is being furnishedsolely to accompany the Report pursuant to 18 U.S.C Section 1350, andis not being filed for purposes of Section 18 of the SecuritiesExchange Act of 1934, as amended, and is not to be incorporated byreference into any filing of the Company, whether made before or afterthe date hereof, regardless of any general incorporation language insuch filing.

----
#### SAMUEL BARON, APPELLANT, v. LOUIS BARON, RESPONDENT.

Submitted May 12, 1933

Decided July 20, 1933.

Before Justices Parker, Lloyd and Perskie.

For the appellant, *George Rothstein.*

For the respondent, *Marie Townsend.*

Per Curiam.

This ease arises out of an automobile accident. The plaintiff was an invited guest in the ear of the defendant, who was his brother; and as the car approached a street opening to the right and was within about twenty-five or thirty feet of it going at thirty miles an hour, another car emerged from the street at about the same speed, according to the testimony. The defendant swung his car to the left but was unable to escape the other car, which struck defendant’s car and caused the injuries to the plaintiff. Three alleged errors are set up in the specification filed in this cause. The first is that there was error in ordering a nonsuit; the second, that there was *664error in directing the jury to render a judgment of nonsuit; and the third, that there was error on refusing to admit in evidence the judgment record in another case brought apparently by the two parties to this case as plaintiffs against the owner and driver of the other car, the purpose being to show thereby that the negligence of the defendant as respects the plaintiff had been adjudicated.

The record of the case in question is not laid before us so we have no way of judging whether or not it was at all relevant to the present controversy or competent evidence therein. Normally, it would bear merely upon the negligence of the third party, and perhaps, upon the contributory negligence of the present defendant in his own suit, which, of course, would not bind a passenger in his car. However, it is unnecessary to pursue the subject for the fundamental reason that where documentary evidence rejected in the court below is not presented to the appellate court, it is impossible to saj whether there was error in so rejecting it.

With regard to the specification that there was error in directing the jury at the conclusion of the plaintiff’s case to render a judgment of nonsuit, we are confronted with a similar situation. The case, although stenographically reported, shows no instructions whatever to the jury.

We think there was error in directing a nonsuit. As to this, the case certified by the court shows that “at the close of the plaintiff’s case, upon motion of the defendant, a non-suit was granted, to which decision the plaintiff duly excepted.”

We think it clear that the evidence, which was, of course, uncontradicted, presented a jury question. The plaintiff’s ear was proceeding toward the south. It was going at thirty miles an hour when within twenty or twenty-five feet of the intersection of the lane called Isaac’s lane, entering from its right. The other car was in plain sight, there being an unobstructed view, and would presumably have the right of way. This, in our judgment, presented ample evidence of want of care on the part of the defendant in approaching the crossing. For this reason the judgment will be reversed, to the end that a new trial be had.
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<ARTICLE> 5
<LEGEND>
THIS SCHEDULE CONTAINS SUMMARY FINANCIAL INFORMATION EXTRACTED FROM NORWEST
FINANCIAL INC AND IS QUALIFIED IN IT ENTIRETY BY REFERENCE TO SUCH FINANCIAL
STATEMENTS.
</LEGEND>
<MULTIPLIER> 1,000
       
<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   9-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          DEC-31-1996
<PERIOD-END>                               SEP-30-1996
<CASH>                                         108,806
<SECURITIES>                                   804,811
<RECEIVABLES>                                5,899,165
<ALLOWANCES>                                   168,022
<INVENTORY>                                          0
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                                     0<F1>
<PP&E>                                         164,726
<DEPRECIATION>                                  93,472
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                               7,497,567
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                                0<F1>
<BONDS>                                      5,969,116<F2>
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                         3,855
<OTHER-SE>                                   1,017,652
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                 7,497,567
<SALES>                                              0
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                             1,135,770
<CGS>                                                0
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                        0
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                               412,240
<LOSS-PROVISION>                               139,131
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                             279,964
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                304,435
<INCOME-TAX>                                   107,881
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                                  0
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                   196,554
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                        0
<EPS-DILUTED>                                        0
<FN>
<F1>NORWEST FINANCIAL INC HAS A NON-CLASSIFIED BALANCE SHEET
SO THIS INFORMATION IS UNAVAILABLE.
<F2>INCLUDES $1.9 BILLION OF SHORT-TERM LOANS
</FN>
        

</TABLE>
artw20160229_10q.htm


Exhibit 10.1

 



Summary of Compensation Arrangements with Directors

As of February 29, 2016

 

With the exception of the Chairman of the Board and the Vice Chairman of the Board, each of the Company’s directors shall receive a base cash retainer of $30,000 per fiscal year as compensation for services rendered during the fiscal year. The retainer shall be paid quarterly in $7,500 installments. The Chairperson of the Audit Committee and Compensation Committee shall both receive an additional cash retainer of $5,000 per fiscal year, resulting in a total quarterly payment of $8,750. 

 

The Chairman of the Board and Vice Chairman of the Board shall receive a base cash retainer in an amount determined by the Board following a recommendation by the Compensation Committee. The retainer shall be paid in equal quarterly installments. 

 

Directors may, in accordance with certain timing parameters determined by the Board, elect to receive fully-vested restricted common stock in lieu of the aforementioned cash retainers. Any such restricted stock awards shall be granted on the first day of the month in which cash retainer fees would otherwise be paid, and the number of shares subject to such awards shall be calculated by dividing the cash retainer fee otherwise due to the director by the closing price of Company common stock on the trading day preceding the date of grant, with the number of shares rounded to the nearest 10 shares. Any such stock shall be issued under the Company’s 2011 Equity Incentive Plan or, if determined by the Board, an applicable successor plan approved by the Company’s stockholders. 

 

In addition, each director who is elected at an Annual Meeting of the Company’s stockholders (including the Chair and Vice Chair) will be granted 1,000 shares of fully-vested restricted shares of Company common stock on the date of each such Annual Meeting, following his election to the Board. Such restricted stock awards shall be issued pursuant to, and in accordance with the terms of, the Company’s 2011 Equity Incentive Plan or, if determined by the Board, an applicable successor plan approved by the Company’s stockholders.

 

In addition to the base cash retainers and the restricted stock awards above, both of the Chairman of the Board and Vice Chairman of the Board are eligible to receive discretionary cash incentive payments based on their leadership and consulting contributions and actual Company performance (operationally and fiscally) during the applicable fiscal year. The cash incentives, if any, shall be payable in accordance with the amounts and terms recommended by the Compensation Committee and established by the Board. 

 

The Company shall also reimburse all directors for out-of-pocket expenses related to their attendance at board meetings and performance of other services as Board members.

 

If any individual ceases to serve as director for any reason during the fiscal year, or if a new director is elected after the fiscal year has commenced, his or her applicable cash retainer shall be pro-rated accordingly.
TEXAS COURT OF APPEALS, THIRD DISTRICT, AT AUSTIN

JUDGMENT RENDERED JUNE 29, 2021

NO. 03-21-00253-CV

J. L., Appellant

v.

Texas Department of Family and Protective Services, Appellee

APPEAL FROM THE 22ND DISTRICT COURT OF COMAL COUNTY

BEFORE JUSTICES GOODWIN, TRIANA, AND KELLY

DISMISSED FOR WANT OF JURISDICTION -- OPINION BY JUSTICE TRIANA

This is an appeal from the order signed by the trial court on May 27, 2021. Having reviewed 

the record, it appears that the Court lacks jurisdiction over the appeal. Therefore, the Court 

dismisses the appeal for want of jurisdiction. Appellant shall pay all costs relating to this appeal, 

both in this Court and in the court below.
#### Huldah Organ and another, Appellants, v. Coleman Robinson, as Executor, etc., Respondent.

Decree of surrogate affirmed, with costs. Opinion by Dykman, J.
#### In the Matter of the Application to disbar John D. Griffith.

— Order returnable at this term to show cause, continued until the next term of this court.
Exhibit










Exhibit 10.4


2016 STI Umbrella Plan
2016 Performance Goal and Bonus Pool
The performance goal for the STI Performance Period shall be $5.0 million in Net cash provided by operating activities, as reported in the Company’s Statements of Consolidated Cash Flows (“Cash Flow”).  The bonus pool, representing the amount available for payment of bonuses, shall equal 15% of Cash Flow.
Allocation of Bonus Pool to Executives
	
			
	Executive Name
	Executive Title
	Percent of Pool Allocated 
to Executive1

	Jack A. Hockema
	Chief Executive Officer
	37.9755%

	Keith A. Harvey
	President and Chief Operating Officer
	26.2006%

	John M. Donnan
	EVP - Legal, Compliance and Human Resources
	17.1753%

	John Barneson
	SVP - Corporate Development
	10.3076%

	[Other Designated Participant]
	[Designated Participant Title]
	 8.3410%






1 Subject to an aggregate maximum bonus opportunity per executive of $5.0 million per calendar year, pursuant to the Equity Incentive Plan.
Administrative Provisions
The 2016 STI Umbrella Plan only applies to the calculation and award of incentive awards, if any.  There will be no duplication of benefits created by the 2016 STI Umbrella Plan. 


The 2016 STI Umbrella Plan will not increase any benefits that may be payable under any severance and/or change in control agreements.
<PAGE>

                                                                    EXHIBIT 32.1

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

In connection with the Annual Report of United Bancorp, Inc. (the "Company") on
Form 10-K for the period ending December 31, 2007 as filed with the Securities
and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the "Report"), I, James W. Everson,
Chairman, President and Chief Executive Officer of the Company, certify,
pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, as enacted pursuant to Section 906 of the
Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that:

     (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/James W. Everson
-------------------------------------
James W. Everson,
Chairman, President and Chief
Executive Officer

March 28, 2008
Here's how you know
 **Official websites use .mil** .mil
 **Secure .mil websites use HTTPS** lock () https://


Skip to main content (Press Enter).
 Toggle navigation
            
            U.S. Central Command
                CENTCOM
        Search
                    Search CENTCOM:
                        Search
                Search CENTCOM:
                    Search
    Home

    ABOUT US
    
        COMMAND PRIORITIES

    LEADERSHIP

    COMPONENT COMMANDS

    HISTORY

    POSTURE STATEMENT

    CENTCOM AOR
    
        CENTCOM COALITION

    OPERATIONS AND EXERCISES
    
        USMTM

    CIVILIAN CASUALTY REPORT

    CONTACT
    
        OPERATIONAL CONTRACT SUPPORT

    COMMUNITY RELATIONS

    THEATRE MEDICAL CLEARANCE

    INNOVATION VENDOR PORTAL

    MILITARY MEMBER INNOVATION PORTAL

    MEDIA
    
        SOCIAL MEDIA

    NEWS ARTICLES

    PRESS RELEASES

    STATEMENTS

    IMAGERY

    VIDEOS

    TRANSCRIPTS

    VISITORS AND PERSONNEL
    
        FAMILY CENTER

    FAMILY READINESS

    CENTCOM WEBMAIL

    SOCIAL MEDIA SECURITY

    ACCOUNTABILITY

    EMERGENCY PREPAREDNESS

    USCENTCOM UNCLASSIFIED REGULATIONS

    FOIA LIBRARY

    INNOVATION OASIS

    WELCOME GUIDE  Search
 Search
 All Images All ImagesCommunity RelationsOtherPreviousCommanders
 Upload Date Upload DatePhoto DateTitle
  Share
  
 Small () Medium () Full Size (0.37 MB)
 
 Travels JIm Mattis Central Command Centcom SecDef Resolute Support Afghanistan
 Photo Gallery
 About UsCommand PrioritiesLeadershipComponent
   CommandsHistoryPosture Statement
   Area of
   ResponsibilityCENTCOM Coalition
   Operations And
   ExercisesOperation Inherent
   ResolveResolute Support
   MediaSocial MediaNews ArticlesPress ReleasesVideo And Imagery
   Visitors And
   PersonnelFamily ReadinessCENTCOM WebmailSocial MediaSecurityAccountabilityEmergency
   Preparedness
   ContactCommunity Relations
                    Stay Connected
                
                Privacy & Security  Inspector General  FOIA  Privacy Act
            

Hosted by Defense Media Activity - WEB.mil
<PAGE>
                                                                    EXHIBIT 99.2

                            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 Annual Report of Columbia Energy Group (the "Company") on
Form 10-K for the period ending December 31, 2002 as filed with the Securities
and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the "Report"), I, David J. Vajda,
Principal Financial Officer of the Company, certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C.
Section 1350, as adopted pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of
2002, that:

(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/ David J. Vajda
-------------------------------
        David J. Vajda
  Principal Financial Officer

Date: March 3, 2003
Alpharma Inc.
                                
                 Subsidiaries of the Registrant
                                
                                                       EXHIBIT 21
                                                                 

NAME                               JURISDICTION WHICH
                                        ORGANIZED

United States:

A.L. Specialty Chemicals, Inc.          Delaware
Alpharma NW Inc.                        Washington
Alpharma U.S. Inc.                      Delaware
Barre Parent Corporation                Delaware
Alpharma USPD Inc.                      Maryland
G. F. Reilly Company                    Delaware
ParMed Pharmaceuticals, Inc.            Delaware
NMC Laboratories, Inc.                  New York
Odin Pharmaceuticals Inc.               New Jersey
Wade Jones Company, Inc.                Texas
MikJan Corporation                      Arkansas
Alpharma U.K. Holding Inc.              Delaware

Foreign:

A.L-Pharma A/S                          Denmark
Alpharma AS                             Norway
Allabinc de Mexico, S.A. de C.V.        Mexico
Empressa Laboratories De
   Mexico S.A. de C.V.                  Mexico
Dumex-Alpharma A/S                      Denmark
Dumex AG                                Switzerland
Dumex B.V.                              Holland
Dumex-Alpharma AB                       Sweden
Dumex Limited                           United Kingdom
Oy Dumex-Alpharma AB                    Finland
PT Dumex-Alpharma Indonesia             Indonesia
Alpharma do Brazil LTDA                 Brazil
Alpharma SARL                           France
Arthur H. Cox & Co. Limited             United Kingdom
Alpharma Holdings Ltd.                  United Kingdom
Alpharma U.K. Ltd.                      United Kingdom
Cox Investments Ltd.                    United Kingdom
Alpharma Fine Chemicals, Kft.           Hungary
### Faull<, Scott (OST) From: 

### Sent: To: 

### Subject: FYI .............. 

### From: Woody Knebel Woody Knebel <Woody.Knebei@OceanBeauty.com> Monday, May 18, 2015 1:44 PM Faulk, Scott (OST) FW: Alitak Mail Service



### Sent: Monday, May 

### 18, 2015 10:39 AM 

### To: 'scott.fault@dot.gov' 

### Subject: Alitak Mail Service
Good Morning

### Scott, Ocean Beauty Sfds.

**~** Alitak facility has received very dependable mail service from Island Air for quite some time. Notonly are they conducting business in a professional manner .................. they have the propersize equipment to handle the enormous amount of mail 

### & freightthat we receive on a consistent basis. They use a Beaverforthe service which isjam-packed full virtually every trip. When we are at peak capacity there are close to

### 400 people relying ofthe mail service forvarious reasons. Ifind it hard to accept that any smaller ofa plane would be able to accommodate us unless they made more trips. Thank you foryourtime. Woody Knebel Ocean Beauty Sfds. Alitak Facility Kodiak Island, AK. 

### (907) 771-4800

1 ,.)

.. ··i}
>

. ! '