alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
# U.S. Air Forces Central conducts Bomber Task Force mission

/ Published March 13, 2023
AL UDEID AIR BASE, Qatar , 
U.S. Air Forces Central conducted a Bomber Task Force mission, March 12.

“This Bomber Task Force mission is aimed at building partner capacity,” said Maj. Gen. Mark Slocum, Ninth Air Force (Air Forces Central) deputy commander. “The Coalition conducts these integration events over partner nation airspace to expand our combined global reach and military power projection capabilities.”

The B-52H Stratofortress aircraft integrated with several coalition fighter escort aircraft from 7 nations  as they traversed portions of the CENTCOM area of responsibility, showcasing the ability to rapidly deploy integrated airpower across the region.

AFCENT regularly conducts BTFs centered on strengthening regional partnerships, but the planning and execution of each iteration is unique.  

“Each mission of this length and complexity succeeds by the efforts of our professional Airmen around the globe,” said Slocum. “From those who maintain or fly these bomber, tanker and fighter aircraft, to those behind the scenes who provide the weather forecasts and mission planning for this intricate sequence of escort and refueling across the region, each BTF we execute allows us to cooperate and practice key operational tasks with our partners. This BTF, like many others, continues and deepens a trajectory of collaboration and solidarity with Coalition and Partner forces.”
WARNING: THE EDGAR SYSTEM ENCOUNTERED ERROR(S) WHILE PROCESSING THIS SCHEDULE.

<TABLE> <S> <C>


 
<ARTICLE>          5
<CIK>              0001035789

<NAME>             HEALTHCORE MEDICAL SOLUTIONS, INC.
<MULTIPLIER>       1
<CURRENCY>         U.S. DOLLARS
                   
<S>                <C>                                          

<PERIOD-TYPE>     9-MOS

<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                                                SEP-30-1998
<PERIOD-END>                                                     JUN-30-1998
<CASH>                                                             4,697,519
<SECURITIES>                                                               0
<RECEIVABLES>                                                              0
<ALLOWANCES>                                                               0
<INVENTORY>                                                                0
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                                                   4,891,884
<PP&E>                                                               324,961
<DEPRECIATION>                                                      (105,907)
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                                     5,112,008
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                                                204,955
<BONDS>                                                                    0
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                                      0
<PREFERRED>                                                                0
<COMMON>                                                              32,340
<OTHER-SE>                                                         4,847,217
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                                       5,112,008
<SALES>                                                               32,948
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                                                      32,948
<CGS>                                                                 20,460
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                                         20,460
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                                     637,605
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                                           0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                                                     8,934
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                                     (570,356)
<INCOME-TAX>                                                               0
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                                                 (570,356)
<DISCONTINUED>                                                             0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                                            0
<CHANGES>                                                                  0
<NET-INCOME>                                                        (570,356)
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                                          (0.25)
<EPS-DILUTED>                                                          (0.25)
        


</TABLE>
```

[Congressional Bills 107th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[H. Res. 391 Agreed to House (ATH)]

107th CONGRESS
  2d Session
H. RES. 391

 Designating majority membership on certain standing committees of the 
                                 House.

_______________________________________________________________________

                    IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

                             April 18, 2002

Mr. Armey submitted the following resolution; which was considered and 
                               agreed to

_______________________________________________________________________

                               RESOLUTION

 
 Designating majority membership on certain standing committees of the 
                                 House.

    Resolved, That the following Members be, and are hereby, elected to 
the following standing committees of the House of Representatives:
    Committee on Education and the Workforce: Mr. Wilson of South 
Carolina.
    Committee on Transportation and Infrastructure: Mr. Sullivan of 
Oklahoma.
                                 <all>
```
#### ATLANTIC COAST LINE RAILROAD CO. et al. *v.*UNITED STATES et al.

No. 247.

Decided October 8, 1962.

*Albert B. Russ, Jr., C. Baxter Jones, Herman Heyman, W. L. Grubbs, Prime F. Osborn*and *Homer S. Carpenter*for appellants.

*Solicitor General Cox, Assistant Attorney General Loevinger, Robert B. Hummel, Elliott H. Moyer*and *Robert W. Ginnane*for the United States et al.

*Charles J. Bloch, Henry J. Karison*and *R. Granville Curry*for appellee carriers.

Per Curiam.

The motions to affirm are granted and the judgment is affirmed.

Mr. Justice Goldberg took no part in the consideration or decision of this case.
<TABLE> <S> <C>


<ARTICLE>                             5
<MULTIPLIER>                          1,000

       
<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                               YEAR
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                    JAN-31-1998
<PERIOD-START>                       FEB-02-1997
<PERIOD-END>                         JAN-31-1998
<CASH>                                       680
<SECURITIES>                                   0
<RECEIVABLES>                             22,326
<ALLOWANCES>                                 765
<INVENTORY>                               57,036
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                          79,944
<PP&E>                                    39,153
<DEPRECIATION>                             5,038
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                           115,990
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                     28,448
<BONDS>                                        0
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                          0
<PREFERRED>                                    0
<COMMON>                                     100
<OTHER-SE>                                20,795
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>             115,990
<SALES>                                  237,021
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                         237,021
<CGS>                                    202,368
<TOTAL-COSTS>                            228,420
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                               0
<LOSS-PROVISION>                               0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                         6,875
<INCOME-PRETAX>                            2,339
<INCOME-TAX>                                 803
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                        1,536
<DISCONTINUED>                                 0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                0
<CHANGES>                                      0
<NET-INCOME>                               1,536
<EPS-PRIMARY>                               0.15
<EPS-DILUTED>                               0.15
        


</TABLE>
[if !vml]>[endif]>

[if !vml]>[endif]>

You have reached the FederalDepository Library Program Electronic Collection (FDLP/EC) Archive. Thisarchive assures ongoing access to publications in the FDLP/EC. Access topublications in the archive is available through GPO's suite of cataloging andlocator services, including the Catalog of U.S. Government Publications(CGP).  Archived copies of publications are retrieved in the event thatpublications are no longer available from the original publishing agency site. 
**Title:**CancerConsortium: a periodic update of progress and events
 
2001 | 2002 | 2003 | 2007 (Spring) | 2008 (Spring)
 
Available viaFTP (as of Oct 2020) at following address: ftp://ftp.loc.gov/pub/nls/newsletters
 
SuDoc Number: HE20.3199:
Item Number: 0507-G-57(online)
CGP systemNumber:000548592
October 21, 2020
From: Roger & Florence

To: E-OHPSCA2713.EBSA

Subject: Preventive Health Care Coverage

Date: Thursday, August 11, 2011 4:47:53 PM

I join with the American Association of University Women (AAUW) in asking you to

accept the recommendations of the Institute of Medicine as pertain to coverage of

preventive care under the new health care law, and to reject any exemptions for

“religious employers.” These preventive services are a critical element of the new law

and would provide countless women better access to necessary health care.

While AAUW believes that “religious refusal” exemptions unjustly deny women access

to contraceptive services, others, driven by an ideological distaste for all contraceptive

services, are pushing the government to make exemptions even larger. Indeed, some

groups are pushing for the exemption to apply to religiously-run health providers, so

hospitals with religious affiliations would be exempt from the coverage requirement,

even though they employ people of all faiths and ideologies. If granted, this larger

exemption would deny access to thousands of women just because of where they work.

I urge you to ensure women have access to quality preventive care by accepting IOM’s

recommendations and rejecting the proposed religious refusal exemption provisions.

Women should have ready and easy access to contraceptive services. Lack of access

because of where you work is not in the best interest of working women or our nation.

Thank you for the opportunity to express my strong feelings on this issue.

Florence Vining
#### Chapman v. Gaines.

(Decided October 5, 1920.)

Appeal from Russell Circuit Court.

Schools and School Districts—Election of Chairman of Division Board.—This is a companion of the appeal of Pierce v. Sullivan, decided at the same time, and is affirmed for the reasons set forth in the syllabus and opinion of that case.

J. H. STONE for appellant.

LILBUR.N PHELPS for appellee.

Opinion op the Court by

Judge Settle

Affirming.

In this case the appellee sued for and, by the judgment of the circuit court, recovered the office of chairman of the division board of trustee of educational division No. 2, Russell county, claimed by him under an election held March 1st, 1920, and which the petition alleged to be wrongfully in the possession of the appellant. The latter prosecutes this appeal from the judgment of the circuit court.

The only questions at issue in this case were and are as to the validity of the election of March 1st, 1920, in the absence of the county superintendent of schools, and whether a quorum of the subdistrict trustees of educational division No. 2 was present at the election. The only evidence heard in the court below was that sent up with the record on the appeal in Pierce v. Sullivan, this day decided, and it was agreed that it should be considered in this case. The two cases were submitted and so considered together, and the opinion in Pierce v. Sullivan being conclusive of this case, it is hereby affirmed.
### Page 1 of 3 **Disposition Comments Docket No:**  

### FAA - 2012 - 0036 These comments are in **Directorate ID:** 

### 2011 -NM - 142 - AD response to an SNPRM Originating Office Tracking No.: **Next Step:** FRAN SNPRM 

### N o C omments/Only

Supportive Comments Received

– If this box is checked, no signatures are required. No 

### Has the reference d service information been revised since the NPRM was issued? I f ye s, lis t latest revision and attach a cop y. Note that changes beyond the scope of the previously published NPRM will require a new notice. Contact the Directorate focal point for guidance. Instructions: Summarize all comments **by issue** (not by commenter) and provide your recommended resolution of each issue. **All comments relating to the sam e issue should be discussed together.**  Do not list all of the issues from one commenter togeth er. If changes to the AD are required based on the comments received, explain why and describe in detail what change(s) you recommend. Reference FAA - IR- M - 8040.1C Chapter 9. **ISSUE 1:** Select one o

f the following : If other, explain : Commenter(s): What change to the AD action is requested? Why is the change requested or how is it justified? Do we agree? If **YES,** we agree because Make the following changes to the AD: If **PARTIALLY AGREE** , we agree with because We disagree with because

Make the following changes to the AD: If **NO** , we don’t agree because **ISSUE 2**  **:** Select one of the following :

If other, explain : Commenter(s): What change to the AD action is requested? Why is the change requested or how is it justified? Do we agree? If **YES,** we agree because Make the following changes to the AD: If **PARTIALLY AGREE** , we agree w ith because We disagree with because Make the following changes to the AD:

### Page 2 of 3

If **NO** , we don’t agree because **For additional issues, do uble**  **- click**  **here**

### Page 3 of 3 **S ignature Section**  Signature indicates concurrence with this action. Originating Office Tracking No.: **ASE** Printed Name **: Date** 

**Branch M anager**  **Date**
From: William G. Gonzalez

To: E-OHPSCA2713.EBSA

Date: Friday, August 12, 2011 4:50:03 PM

join with the American Association of University Women (AAUW) in asking you to

accept the recommendations of the Institute of Medicine as pertain to coverage of

preventive care under the new health care law, and to reject any exemptions for

“religious employers.” These preventive services are a critical element of the new law

and would provide countless women better access to necessary health care.

While AAUW believes that “religious refusal” exemptions unjustly deny women

access to contraceptive services, others, driven by an ideological distaste for all

contraceptive services, are pushing the government to make exemptions even

larger. Indeed, some groups are pushing for the exemption to apply to

religiously-run health providers, so hospitals with religious affiliations would be

exempt from the coverage requirement, even though they employ people of all

faiths and ideologies. If granted, this larger exemption would deny access to

thousands of women just because of where they work.

I urge you to ensure women have access to quality preventive care by accepting

IOM’s recommendations and rejecting the proposed religious refusal exemption

provisions.

-- _________________________________________________

Quieres saber que busca los latinos en Internet?

Prueba el nuevo servicio de Buscar de Univision.com
Final Listing of Questionnaire Files for Steam Electric Rulemaking Record

Plant ID 04280

Removed 

from Public 

(Non-CBI) 

Docket1

Copyright 

Flag2

File Name Description

04280\04280_HardcopyLog.doc EPA log of hardcopy documents submitted

x 04280\04280_PartA.xls Plant submitted survey file

x 04280\04280_PartE.xls Plant submitted survey file

x 04280\04280_PartH.xls Plant submitted survey file

04280\Certification Statement Plant ID 04280.pdf Plant certification statement

x 04280\Supplemental Documents\04280_KW_A5-3_Water Balance Diagram.pdf Plant submitted supplemental files to the survey

x 04280\04280_Checklist_092810_version34.xls EPA Technical Review Checklist Workbook

04280\04280_Completeness_Checklist.xls EPA Completeness Review Checklist

1

 Final reviewed survey responses are located in the Steam Electric Technical Questionnaire Database . 

2

 Copyright documents are available from the docket.
|        |
|--------|
|        |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |
| Coupon | Interest | Maturity | Callable | Survivor's Option | Price | CUSIP |   |
| 1.8%   | Semi-Annual(†††) | 5/15/2019 | No | Yes § | 100.00 | 14912HPX2 |   |
UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT
No. 97-7234
LUIS ALDAMA SANCHEZ, Plaintiff - Appellant, versus UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Defendant - Appellee.Appeal from the United States District Court for the Western District of North Carolina, at Charlotte. Robert D. Potter, Senior District Judge. (CR-89-33-C, CA-97-239-3-P) Submitted: December 11, 1997 Decided: December 31, 1997 Before HALL and WILLIAMS, Circuit Judges, and PHILLIPS, Senior Circuit Judge. Dismissed by unpublished per curiam opinion.Luis Aldama Sanchez, Appellant Pro Se. Harry Thomas Church, Assistant United States Attorney, Charlotte, North Carolina, for Appellee. Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. See Local Rule 36(c).2 PER CURIAM: Appellant seeks to appeal the district court's orders denying his motion filed under 28 U.S.C.A. § 2255 (West 1994 & Supp. 1997), and denying his motion for reconsideration. We have reviewed the record and the district court's opinions and find no reversibleerror. Accordingly, we deny a certificate of appealability and dismiss the appeal on the reasoning of the district court. Sanchez v. United States , Nos. CR-89-33-C; CA-97-239-3-P (W.D.N.C. July 14, 1997 & Aug. 15, 1997). We dispense with oral argument because thefacts and legal contentions are adequately presented in the materials before the court and argument would not aid the decisional process.

DISMISSED
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<ARTICLE> 5
<LEGEND>
This schedule contains summary financial information extracted from National
Property Investors 7 1998 Year-End 10-KSB and is qualified in its entirety by
reference to such 10-KSB filing.
</LEGEND>
<CIK> 0000732439
<NAME> NATIONAL PROPERTY INVESTORS 7
<MULTIPLIER> 1,000
       
<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   12-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          DEC-31-1998
<PERIOD-END>                               DEC-31-1998
<CASH>                                           1,074
<SECURITIES>                                         0
<RECEIVABLES>                                        0
<ALLOWANCES>                                         0
<INVENTORY>                                          0
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                                     0<F1>
<PP&E>                                          45,829
<DEPRECIATION>                                  25,796
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                  22,497
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                                0<F1>
<BONDS>                                         20,246
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                             0
<OTHER-SE>                                       1,633
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                    22,497
<SALES>                                              0
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                                 7,319
<CGS>                                                0
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                        0
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                 7,177
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                     0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                               1,636
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                      0
<INCOME-TAX>                                         0
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                                  0
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                       142
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                     2.33<F2>
<EPS-DILUTED>                                        0
<FN>
<F1>Registrant has an unclassified balance sheet.
<F2>Multiplier is 1.
</FN>
        

</TABLE>
IN THE SUPREME COURT OF PENNSYLVANIA

EASTERN DISTRICT

COMMONWEALTH OF PENNSYLVANIA,

Respondent

v.

JUAN TORRES,

Petitioner :

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

: No. 55 EAL 2023

Petition for Allowance of Appeal

from the Order of the Superior Court

COMMONWEALTH OF PENNSYLVANIA,

Respondent

v.

JUAN TORRES,

Petitioner :

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

: No. 56 EAL 2023

Petition for Allowance of Appeal

from the Order of the Superior Court

COMMONWEALTH OF PENNSYLVANIA,

Respondent

v.

JUAN TORRES,

Petitioner :

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

: No. 57 EAL 2023

Petition for Allowance of Appeal

from the Order of the Superior Court

ORDER

PER CURIAM[ 55 EAL 2023, 56 EAL 2023 and 57 EAL 2023 ]

- 2

AND NOW , this 17th day of August, 2023

, the Petition for Allowance of Appeal is

DENIED

.
**EXHIBIT
      32.1**





**Certification
      of Periodic Report by the Chief Executive Officer**


**Pursuant
      to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350**


**As
      adopted pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of
      2002**





Pursuant
      to, and for purposes only of, 18 U.S.C. § 1350, the undersigned hereby certifies
      that (i) the Quarterly Report of Shore Bancshares, Inc. on Form 10-Q for the
      quarter ended March 31, 2008 filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission
      (the “Report”) fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) or 15(d) of
      the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, and (ii) information contained in the
      Report fairly presents, in all material respects, the financial condition and
      results of operations of Shore Bancshares, Inc.




Date:
                May 8, 2008
            /s/
                W. Moorhead VermilyeW.
                Moorhead VermilyePresident/Chief
                Executive Officer