alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
An official website of the United States government         Here's how you know         
**Official websites use .mil**
A **.mil** website belongs to an official U.S. Department of Defense organization in the United States.
**Secure .mil websites use HTTPS**
 A **lock (lock )** or **https://** means you’ve safely connected to the .mil website. Share sensitive information only on official, secure websites.

Skip to main content (Press Enter).

Defense Logistics AgencyThe Nation's Combat Logistics Support Agency

Search
Search

Search

-  Home		 
-  What DLA Offers    -  Excess Property Disposal             
  -  Document Services             
  -  Products             
  -  Services             
  -  Programs 
-  Working With DLA    -  Applications             
  -  Small Business             
  -  Federal and International Cataloging             
  -  Defense Data Standards             
  -  Events             
  -  Procurement Policies             
  -  Government Programs             
  -  Forms 
-  Organizations    -  DLA Headquarters             
  -  DLA Aviation             
  -  DLA Disposition Services             
  -  DLA Distribution             
  -  DLA Energy             
  -  DLA Land and Maritime             
  -  DLA Troop Support             
  -  DLA CENTCOM & SOCOM             
  -  DLA Europe & Africa             
  -  DLA Indo-Pacific 
-  Customer Support    -  Self Help Tools             
  -  How to Order             
  -  Find Your Order             
  -  Customer Facing Offices             
  -  Training             
  -  Brochures             
  -  Warfighter Support             
  -  Customer Service Management 
-  Careers		 
-  About DLA    -  Contact Us             
  -  Locations             
  -  Leaders             
  -  News             
  -  History             
  -  Media Gallery             
  -  DLA Campaigns 

HomeAbout DLANewsNews Article View

PHOTO INFORMATION

** Download

** Details

** Share

PHOTO INFORMATION

** Download

** Details

** Share

PHOTO INFORMATION

** Download

** Details

** Share

# Mentoring Without End

By NAVSUP Business Systems Center

                MECHANICSBURG, Pa.  –              
Rear Adm. Kevin M. Jones, commander, Defense Logistics Agency Distribution, held a mentoring session at NAVSUP Business Systems Center in Mechanicsburg, Pa., Aug. 3.

The session was part of a series, “Mentoring Without End,” which brings together senior and junior Supply Corps officers in the Mechanicsburg area to share experiences, provide guidance, network, and collaborate.

**                    SHARE                

**                    PRINT                

NAVSUPDLADLA DistributionDistribution HeadquartersmentoringLeadership
**Exhibit 31.1**
**CERTIFICATION**
     I, Edward A. Keible, Jr., certify that:
1. I have reviewed this quarterly report on Form 10-Q of Endwave Corporation; 2. Based on my knowledge, this report does not contain any untrue statement of a material fact oromit to state a material fact necessary to make the statements made, in light of the circumstancesunder which such statements were made, not misleading with respect to the period covered by thisreport; 3. Based on my knowledge, the financial statements, and other financial information included in thisreport, fairly present in all material respects the financial condition, results of operations andcash flows of the registrant as of, and for, the periods presented in this report; 4. The registrant’s other certifying officer and I are responsible for establishing and maintainingdisclosure controls and procedures (as defined in Exchange Act Rules 13a-15(e) and 15d-15(e)) forthe registrant and have:
(a) designed such disclosure controls and procedures, or caused suchdisclosure controls and procedures to be designed under oursupervision, to ensure that material information relating to theregistrant, including its consolidated subsidiaries, is made knownto us by others within those entities, particularly during theperiod in which this report is being prepared; (b) evaluated the effectiveness of the registrant’s disclosure controlsand procedures and presented in this report our conclusions aboutthe effectiveness of the disclosure controls and procedures, as ofthe end of the period covered by this report based on suchevaluation; and (c) disclosed in this report any change in the registrant’s internalcontrol over financial reporting that occurred during theregistrant’s most recent fiscal quarter that has materiallyaffected, or is reasonably likely to materially affect, theregistrant’s internal control over financial reporting.; and
5. The registrant’s other certifying officer and I have disclosed, based on our most recentevaluation of internal control over financial reporting, to the registrant’s auditors and theaudit committee of registrant’s board of directors (or persons performing the equivalentfunctions):
(a) All significant deficiencies and material weaknesses in the designor operation of internal control over financial reporting which arereasonably likely to adversely affect the registrant’s ability torecord, process, summarize and report financial information; and (b) any fraud, whether or not material, that involves management orother employees who have a significant role in the registrant’sinternal control over financial reporting.   Date: November 8, 2004 /s/ EDWARD A. KEIBLE, JR.   Edward A. Keible, Jr. President and Chief Executive Officer (Principal Executive Officer)
```

[115th Congress Public Law 216]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]

[[Page 132 STAT. 1545]]

Public Law 115-216
115th Congress

                                 An Act

 
To designate the facility of the United States Postal Service located at 
 111 Market Street in Saugerties, New York, as the ``Maurice D. Hinchey 
     Post Office Building''. <<NOTE: July 24, 2018 -  [H.R. 4722]>> 

    Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representatives of the 
United States of America in Congress assembled,
SECTION 1. MAURICE D. HINCHEY POST OFFICE BUILDING.

    (a) Designation.--The facility of the United States Postal Service 
located at 111 Market Street in Saugerties, New York, shall be known and 
designated as the ``Maurice D. Hinchey Post Office Building''.
    (b) References.--Any reference in a law, map, regulation, document, 
paper, or other record of the United States to the facility referred to 
in subsection (a) shall be deemed to be a reference to the ``Maurice D. 
Hinchey Post Office Building''.

    Approved July 24, 2018.

LEGISLATIVE HISTORY--H.R. 4722:
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

CONGRESSIONAL RECORD, Vol. 164 (2018):
            May 7, considered and passed House.
            June 28, considered and passed Senate.

                                  <all>
```
No. 54975.

#### The Bowater Paper Company, Inc. *v.*United States,

protest 157942-K (New York).

Opinion by

Johnson, J.

From an examination of the papers in the case, the court was unable to find any evidence sufficient to overcome the action of the collector, which was presumptively correct. The protest was therefore overruled.
No. 96-7847.

#### Eckerson *v.*United States.

C. A. 5th Cir. Certiorari denied.
```

[Federal Register Volume 76, Number 187 (Tuesday, September 27, 2011)]
[Notices]
[Page 59767]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Printing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2011-24809]

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

DEPARTMENT OF STATE

[Public Notice 7611]

Culturally Significant Objects Imported for Exhibition 
Determinations: ``Contested Visions in the Spanish Colonial World''

SUMMARY: Notice is hereby given of the following determinations: 
Pursuant to the authority vested in me by the Act of October 19, 1965 
(79 Stat. 985; 22 U.S.C. 2459), Executive Order 12047 of March 27, 
1978, the Foreign Affairs Reform and Restructuring Act of 1998 (112 
Stat. 2681, et seq.; 22 U.S.C. 6501 note, et seq.), Delegation of 
Authority No. 234 of October 1, 1999, Delegation of Authority No. 236-3 
of August 28, 2000 (and, as appropriate, Delegation of Authority No. 
257 of April 15, 2003), I hereby determine that the objects to be 
included in the exhibition ``Contested Visions in the Spanish Colonial 
World'' imported from abroad for temporary exhibition within the United 
States, are of cultural significance. The objects are imported pursuant 
to loan agreements with the foreign owners or custodians. I also 
determine that the exhibition or display of the exhibit objects at the 
Los Angeles County Museum of Art, Los Angeles, CA, from on or about 
November 6, 2011, until on or about January 29, 2012, and at possible 
additional exhibitions or venues yet to be determined, is in the 
national interest. I have ordered that Public Notice of these 
Determinations be published in the Federal Register.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: For further information, including a 
list of the exhibit objects, contact Julie Simpson, Attorney-Adviser, 
Office of the Legal Adviser, U.S. Department of State (telephone: 202-
632-6467). The mailing address is U.S. Department of State, SA-5, L/PD, 
Fifth Floor (Suite 5H03), Washington, DC 20522-0505.

    Dated: September 19, 2011.
J. Adam Ereli,
Principal Deputy Assistant Secretary, Bureau of Educational and 
Cultural Affairs, Department of State.
[FR Doc. 2011-24809 Filed 9-26-11; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4710-05-P
```
IN THE SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF DELAWARE

DEMETRIUS DEMBY,

Defendant Below,

Appellant,

v.

STATE OF DELAWARE,

Plaintiff Below,

Appellee.

§

§ 

§ No. 124, 2017

§

§ Court Below—Superior Court

§ of the State of Delaware

§ 

§ Cr. ID. No. 0604011029 (N)

§

§

§

Submitted: May 17, 2017

 Decided: June 14, 2017

Before STRINE, Chief Justice; VALIHURA and VAUGHN, Justices.

O R D E R

This 14th day of June 2017, after careful consideration of the appellant’s 

opening brief, the State’s motion to affirm, and the record below, we find it 

manifest that the judgment below should be affirmed on the basis of the Superior 

Court’s well-reasoned order dated February 28, 2017.

1

 

NOW, THEREFORE, IT IS ORDERED that the motion to affirm is 

GRANTED and the judgment of the Superior Court is AFFIRMED.

BY THE COURT:

/s/ Karen L. Valihura

Justice

 

1 Demby v. State, 2017 WL 880892 (Del. Super. Ct. Feb. 28, 2017).
Auctionomics,  Inc.
     18226  Ventura  Boulevard,  Suite  103
     Tarzana,  CA  91346


     July  1,  1999

Mr.  Larry  Makowski:
ClassifiedAuctions.com,  LLC

Re:     Agreement  between  ClassifiedAuctions.com,  LLC  and Auctionomics, Inc.

Dear  Mr.  Makowski:

     This  letter  will  evidence  the  provisions  of  the  agreement  between
Auctionomics,  Inc.  ("Auctionomics")  and  ClassifiedAuctions.com,  LLC
("Classified").  In  consideration of the mutual covenants contained herein, and
other  good  and  valuable  consideration,  the receipt and adequacy of which is
hereby  acknowledged,  we  hereby  agree  as  follows:

1.     Classified  will  provide  an  operational online auction site for use by
Auctionomics  in  the  Auctionomics online internet mall.  Auctionomics will use
the  classifiedauctions.com  web  site as the exclusive online aucction site for
     ----------------------
its  online  Internet mall and Classified will not allow any other Internet mall
to  use  said  site  or  its  platform  during  the  term  hereof.

2.     This  agreement will have a term of 2 years commencing on the date hereof
and  will  automatically  renew at the end of the initial two year period for an
additional  two  years  unless proper notice is given.  Proper notice is written
notice  of  the  desire to terminate the agreement received no less than 90 days
before  the  end  of  any  two  year  period.

3.     Classified  will  award  a  20% referral fee to Auctionomics for any fees
that  Classified  charges  to  customers  that  are  referred  to  the
classifiedauction.com  web  site  through  the  efforts  of  Auctionomics.
                  ---

     If  the  foregoing correctly states our understanding, please evidence your
acceptance  and  approval in the space below and return a fully executed copy of
the  letter  agreement  to  me.

     Very  truly  yours,

     AUCTIONOMICS,  INC.


     By:  /s/  Harvey  A.  Turell
        -------------------------
     Harvey  Turell,  President


<PAGE>
AGREED  AND  APPROVED

CLASSIFIEDAUCTIONS.COM,  LLC

By:   /s/  Larry  A.  Makowski
    --------------------------
No. 74-5953.

#### Tipler *v.*California.

Ct. App. Cal., 2d App. Dist. Certiorari denied.
# C_2013233EN.01000602.xml

| 10.8.2013 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 233/6 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

10.8.2013

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 233/6

---

Judgment of the General Court of 3 July 2013 — GRE v OHIM — Villiger Söhne (LIBERTE brunes)

(Case T-78/12) (1)

1

(Community trade mark - Opposition proceedings - Application for the Community figurative mark LIBERTE brunes - Earlier Community word and figurative marks La LIBERTAD - Relative ground for refusal - Likelihood of confusion - Article 8(1)(b) of Regulation (EC) No 207/2009)

2013/C 233/10

Language of the case: German

Parties

Parties

Applicant GRE Grand River Enterprises Deutschland GmbH (Kloster Lehnin, Germany) (represented by: I. Memmler and S. Schulz, lawyers)

Applicant

Defendant: Office for Harmonisation in the Internal Market (Trade Marks and Designs) (represented by: G. Schneider and D. Walicka, Agents)

Defendant:

Other party to the proceedings before the Board of Appeal of OHIM, intervener before the General Court: Villiger Söhne GmbH (Waldshut-Tiengen, Germany) (represented by: H. McKenzie and B. Pikolin, lawyers)

Other party to the proceedings before the Board of Appeal of OHIM, intervener before the General Court:

Re:

Re:

Action brought against the decision of the First Board of Appeal of OHIM of 1 December 2011 (Case R 2109/2010-1), relating to opposition proceedings between Villiger Söhne GmbH and GRE Grand River Enterprises Deutschland GmbH.

Operative part of the judgment

Operative part of the judgment

The Court:

| 1. | Dismisses the action; |
| --- | --- |

1.

Dismisses the action;

| 2. | Orders GRE Grand River Enterprises Deutschland GmbH to pay the costs. |
| --- | --- |

2.

Orders GRE Grand River Enterprises Deutschland GmbH to pay the costs.

---

(1)  OJ C 109, 14.4.2012.

1

---
```

[Congressional Bills 112th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[S. 1612 Introduced in Senate (IS)]

112th CONGRESS
  1st Session
                                S. 1612

 To provide the Department of Justice with additional tools to target 
              extraterritorial drug trafficking activity.

_______________________________________________________________________

                   IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES

                           September 22, 2011

Mrs. Feinstein (for herself, Mr. Grassley, Mr. Schumer, Mr. Blumenthal, 
   Mr. Casey, Mr. Udall of New Mexico, and Mr. Wyden) introduced the 
 following bill; which was read twice and referred to the Committee on 
                             the Judiciary

_______________________________________________________________________

                                 A BILL

 
 To provide the Department of Justice with additional tools to target 
              extraterritorial drug trafficking activity.

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

SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE.

    This Act may be cited as the ``Targeting Transnational Drug 
Trafficking Act of 2011''.

SEC. 2. POSSESSION, MANUFACTURE OR DISTRIBUTION FOR PURPOSES OF 
              UNLAWFUL IMPORTATIONS.

    (a) Possession, Manufacture or Distribution for Purposes of 
Unlawful Importations.--Section 1009 of the Controlled Substances 
Import and Export Act (21 U.S.C. 959) is amended--
            (1) by redesignating subsections (b) and (c) as subsections 
        (c) and (d), respectively; and
            (2) in subsection (a), by striking ``It shall'' and all 
        that follows and inserting the following: ``It shall be 
        unlawful for any person to manufacture or distribute a 
        controlled substance in schedule I or II or flunitrazepam 
        intending, knowing, or having reasonable cause to believe that 
        such substance will be unlawfully imported into the United 
        States or into waters within a distance of 12 miles of the 
        coast of the United States.
    ``(b) It shall be unlawful for any person to manufacture or 
distribute a listed chemical--
            ``(1) intending or knowing that the listed chemical will be 
        used to manufacture a controlled substance; and
            ``(2) intending, knowing, or having reasonable cause to 
        believe that the controlled substance will be unlawfully 
        imported into the United States.''.
    (b) Attempt and Conspiracy.--Section 1013 of the Controlled 
Substances Import and Export Act (21 U.S.C. 963) is amended by adding 
at the end the following: ``For a conspiracy to commit such an offense 
that requires the person to intend, know, or have reasonable cause to 
believe that a controlled substance will be unlawfully imported into 
the United States, it is sufficient to prove a conspiracy to commit the 
offense that only 1 member of the conspiracy intended, knew, or had 
reasonable cause to believe that the controlled substance would be 
unlawfully imported into the United States.''.
                                 <all>
```
United States Court of Appeals 

For the Seventh Circuit 

Chicago, Illinois 60604 

January 4, 2021 

Before 

FRANK H. EASTERBROOK, Circuit Judge 

DANIEL A. MANION, Circuit Judge 

AMY J. ST. EVE, Circuit Judge

No. 19-3362 

JERRY JELLIS, 

Plaintiff-Appellant, 

v. 

LARRY HALE, et al., 

 Defendants-Appellees.

 Appeal from the United States District 

Court for the Southern District of Illinois. 

No. 3:15-cv-00630-GCS 

Gilbert C. Sison, 

Magistrate Judge. 

O R D E R 

All members of the panel have voted to deny the petition for rehearing filed on 

December 29, 2020. The petition therefore is DENIED. 

Page 3, paragraph 3, of the order issued on December 8, 2020, is amended to 

read: 

On appeal, Jellis argues that the district court abused its discretion 

in ruling against him on the motions in limine. But our review of these 

rulings is hindered by Jellis’s failure to order a transcript of the final 

pretrial conference, in which the district court stated its reasons. Jellis filed 

in the district court a motion requesting “free transcripts,” but after the 
No. 19-3362 Page 2 

judge ordered him to demonstrate how any particular transcript would be 

material to a proposed appeal, Jellis did not try to make that showing. We 

cannot review a decision without knowing the district court’s reasons. See 

FED. R. APP. P. 10(b)(2); Hicks v. Avery Drei, LLC, 654 F.3d 739, 743–44 (7th 

Cir. 2011) (review not possible when appellant did not request 

transcription of oral arguments or bench ruling on motion in limine).
- All
            - Title
            - Author
            - Subject
            - Date
            - Full-Text

            -                              Explore                            ******                - Educational Resources
              - Archival Collections
              -                                      Themes                                    ******                  - Economic Data
                - Federal Reserve
                - View all 
              - Timelines 
            -                              Browse                            ******                - Titles
              - Authors
              - Subjects
              - Dates 
            -                              About                            ******                - About FRASER
              - FAQ
              - Contact Us
              -                                      FRASER API                                    ******                  - REST API
                - OAI-PMH 
            - Inside FRASER Blog

            - **

Home                 > Browse by Title > State Hour Laws for Women

              																	United States. Women's Bureau. 						*State Hour Laws for Women : Women's Bureau Bulletin, No. 277*,												Washington: 								Govt. Print. Off., 										1961,									https://fraser.stlouisfed.org/title/5544,			accessed on September 25, 2024.						    

        - **FRASER**
        - About
        - FAQ
        - Legal and Privacy
        - FRASER API

          -                              @FedFRASER 
          - ** Contact Us
          -  **  What's New  
          -  **  Inside FRASER
<TABLE>
<CAPTION>

   Schedule of Year-To-Date Principal and Interest Distributions
                           to
                  Certificateholders

                                                                    Ending
Class            Interest             Principal    Losses           Balance
<S>               <C>                  <C>            <C>           <C>
A1               6311752.31      10444349.76                0        98796650.25
A2                6265870.7       9560833.16                0        98630166.85
A3               1489583.37                0                0           25000000
APO                       0          5129.11                0          326441.12
AR                   482.96                0                0                100
B1                178489.43         27571.02                0         2980428.98
B2                 44622.34          6892.76                0          745107.24
B3                 29728.46          4592.11                0          496407.88
B4                 22311.19          3446.39                0          372553.62
B5                  22343.6          2761.38           689.98          373094.97
M                 171072.14          26425.3                0         2856574.71


</TABLE>
# C_2015073EN.01003401.xml

| 2.3.2015 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 73/34 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

2.3.2015

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 73/34

---

Order of the General Court of 9 January 2015 — Internationaler Hilfsfonds v Commission

(Case T-482/12) (1)

(Action for annulment - Access to documents - Regulation (EC) No 1049/2001 - Implied refusal of access - Compliance with a judgment of the General Court - Application initiating proceedings - Disregard of formal requirements - Article 44(1)(c) of the Rules of Procedure - Inadmissibility)

(2015/C 073/44)

Language of the case: German

Parties

Applicant: Internationaler Hilfsfonds eV (Rosbach, Germany) (represented by: H.-H. Heyland, lawyer)

Defendant: European Commission (represented by: P. Costa de Oliveira and T. Scharf, acting as Agents, assisted initially by R. Van der Hout and A. Krämer, and subsequently by R. Van der Hout, lawyers)

Re:

Application for annulment of the implied decision of the Commission refusing to grant the applicant full access to the documents in the file relating to the contract LIEN 97-2011 and, in the alternative, application for partial annulment of the Commission’s decision of 28 August 2012 in response to the applicant’s letter of 27 July 2012 requesting that the Commission comply with the judgment of 22 May 2012 in Internationaler Hilfsfonds v Commission, T-300/10, EU:T:2012:247.

Operative part of the order

| 1. | The action is dismissed. |
| --- | --- |

1.

The action is dismissed.

| 2. | Internationaler Hilfsfonds eV shall bear its own costs and pay those incurred by the European Commission. |
| --- | --- |

2.

Internationaler Hilfsfonds eV shall bear its own costs and pay those incurred by the European Commission.

---

(1)  OJ C 26, 26.1.2013.

---
No. 96-5646.

#### Jefferson *v.*Tennessee.

Ct. Crim. App. Tenn. Certiorari denied.
No. 74-5973.

#### Johnson *v.*Vincent, Correctional Superintendent.

C. A. 2d Cir. Certiorari denied.