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

# DSCC celebrates opening of Mission Park

By Michael MolinaroDLA Land and Maritime Public Affairs

                COLUMBUS, Ohio  –              

**                    SHARE                

**                    PRINT
ACADEMY OF MODEL AERONAUTICS . 

2015 MEMBER 

HAROLD CARVAJAL 

expi res: 12/31/2015 

853790 

OPEN 

"--- 4• 

coNTEST oiREci uw A "'M\f/ ; TURBINE FIXED · 

ACADEMY OF MODEL AERONAUTICS 

-=------- -- - - ------ - ·-

. 

---
114 STAT. 1910 PUBLIC LAW 106–433—NOV. 6, 2000

Public Law 106–433

106th Congress

An Act

To amend title 31, United States Code, to prohibit the appearance of Social Security

account numbers on or through unopened mailings of checks or other drafts

issued on public money in the Treasury.

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 ‘‘Social Security Number Confidentiality Act of 2000’’.

SEC. 2. OPEN DISCLOSURE OF SOCIAL SECURITY ACCOUNT NUMBERS

ON THE FACE OF GOVERNMENT CHECK MAILINGS

PROHIBITED.

Section 3327 of title 31 of the United States Code (relating

to general authority to issue checks and other drafts) is amended—

(1) by inserting ‘‘(a)’’ before ‘‘The Secretary’’; and

(2) by adding at the end the following new subsection:

‘‘(b) The Secretary of the Treasury shall take such actions

as are necessary to ensure that Social Security account numbers

(including derivatives of such numbers) are not visible on or through

unopened mailings of checks or other drafts described in subsection

(a) of this section.’’.

SEC. 3. EFFECTIVE DATE AND TRANSITIONAL RULE.

(a) IN GENERAL.—The amendments made by this Act shall

apply with respect to all mailings of checks or other drafts issued

on or after the date which is 3 years after the date of the enactment

of this Act.

(b) PHASE-IN OF AMENDMENTS.—Effective on the date of the

enactment of this Act, the Secretary of the Treasury shall commence

procedures to gradually implement the amendments made by this

Act in advance of the effective date described in subsection (a).

Not later than 1 year after the date of the enactment of this

Act, and annually thereafter for each of the next 2 years, the

Secretary shall transmit to each House of the Congress a report

Deadline.

Reports.

Applicability.

31 USC 3327

note.

31 USC 3301

note.

Social Security

Number

Confidentiality

Act of 2000.

Nov. 6, 2000

[H.R. 3218]

PUBLIC LAW 106–433—NOV. 6, 2000 114 STAT. 1911

LEGISLATIVE HISTORY—H.R. 3218:

CONGRESSIONAL RECORD, Vol. 146 (2000):

Oct. 18, considered and passed House.

Oct. 25, considered and passed Senate.

Æ

describing the manner and extent to which the requirements of

the preceding sentence have been carried out.

Approved November 6, 2000.
Before the Third Division,

June 12, 1951

No. 55662.

#### N. E. Parkhurst *v.*United States,

protest 154334-K (San Juan).

Cline, Judge:

This is a protest, arising at the port of San Juan, Puerto Rico, against the collector’s assessment of duty on pineapple slips imported from Cuba at 25 per centum ad valorem under paragraph 755 of the Tariff Act of 1930 less the Cuban preferential of 20 per centum under T. D. 47232. It is claimed that the merchandise is entitled to free entry by virtue of paragraph 560 of the Tariff Act of 1897, the Commercial Convention between the United States and Cuba of 1903, 33 Stat., Part 2, p. 2136 (also known as the Cuban Reciprocity Treaty), section 316 of the Tariff Act of 1930, and the trade agreement with Cuba, T. D. 47232.

At the trial it was stipulated as follows:

That the merchandise involved consists of 8,661 bags of seedlings, pineapple fruit plants covered by consumption entry number 0444, dated September 30, 1946;

That the said plants are plants of a tropical or semitropical nature;

That they are products of the soil and industry of the Republic of Cuba;

That they were imported into Puerto Rico by the importers for, and actually have been used for the purpose of propagation and cultivation.

Pedro Acevado, customs examiner, testified that he examined the merchandise involved herein, entered under consumption entry No. 0444 of September 30, 1946; that it consisted of pineapple slips, a product of the Republic of Cuba and imported from Cuba; and that it was identical for classification purposes with that imported by The Pineapple Growers Cooperative Association of Puerto Rico under consumption entry No. 0594 of October 21, 1946.

Norman E. Parkhurst testified that he was familiar with the merchandise imported under the two consumption entries referred to by Mr. Acevado and that the said merchandise was identical.

The merchandise imported under consumption entry No. 0594, dated October 21, 1946, was involved in *The Pineapple Growers Cooperative Association of Puerto Rico*v. *United States,*24 Cust. Ct. 133, C. D. 1221, where it was held entitled to free entry by virtue of paragraph 560 of the Tariff Act of 1897, the Cuban Reciprocity Treaty (33 Stat., Part 2, p. 2136), section 316 of the Tariff Act of 1930, and the trade agreement with Cuba, T. D. 47232.

On the record herein and on the authority of the case above cited, we hold that the merchandise herein is entitled to free entry by virtue of the above-mentioned provisions of law. The protest is sustained and judgment will be rendered in favor of plaintiff.

CONCURRING OPINION

Ekwall, Judge:

For the reasons set forth in my concurring opinion in *The Pineapple Growers Cooperative Association of Puerto Rico*v. *United States,*24 Cust. Ct. 133, C. D. 1221, I concur in the result.
1 The Honorable G. Thomas Eisele, United St ates District Judge for the Eastern District of Arkansas. 

## United States Court of Appeals FOR THE EIGHTH CIRCUIT

___________ No. 10-1471

___________ United States of America, * * Appellee, * * Appeal from the United States v. * District Court for the * Eastern District of Arkansas. Wallace Graham, * * [UNPUBLISHED] Appellant. *

___________ Submitted: September 7, 2010 Filed: September 30, 2010

___________ Before BYE, BOWMAN, and COLLOTON, Circuit Judges.

___________ PER CURIAM. Wallace Graham appeals the se ntence the District Court 1 imposed after he pleaded guilty to being a felon in possession of a firearm, in violation of 18 U.S.C. § 922(g)(1). His counsel has moved to w ithdraw and has file d a brief under Anders v. California , 386 U.S. 738 (1967), challenging the District Court's determination that Graham had three predicate felony offenses and was thus subject to an enhanced sentence under 18 U.S.C. § 924(e) and U.S.S.G. § 4B1.4. In a pro se brief, Graham argues that the government had the burden of proving three predicate convictions, that-2- sections 922(g)(1) and 924(e) violated the Administrative Procedure Act, and that the presentence report (PSR) contained unspecified factual errors.
We agree with the Distri ct Court that Graham had three predicate felony convictions, which qualified him fo r an enhanced sentence. See18 U.S.C. § 924(e)(1) (stating that a person who violates § 922(g) and has three previous convictions for a violent felony or a serious drug offense that were committed on occasions different from one another, shall be imprisoned for not less than fifteen years). Specifically, we conclude that Graham's convictions for aggravated assault in 1996, attempted robbery in 1999, and second degree battery in 2000 were for violent felonies. See18 U.S.C. § 924(e)(2)(B)(i) (stating that "violent felony" means, inter alia, any crime punishable by imprisonment for term exceeding one year that "has as an element the use, attempted use, or threatened use of physical force against the person of another"); Ark. Code Ann. § 5-13-204 (e lements of aggravated assault), § 5-12-102 (elements of robbery), § 5-3-201 (conduct constituting attempt), § 5-13-202 (elements of second degree battery), § 5-4-401 (listing maximum prison sentences).
Having carefully considered Graham's pr o se arguments, we conclude that they lack merit: Graham did not dispute the PSR's factual statements that he had sustained these three convictions, seeUnited States v. Redding , 16 F.3d 298, 302 (8th Cir. 1994); statutes are not subject to administrative rulemaking requirements; and Graham's claim that the PSR contained factual errors is entirely conclusory. We deny as moot Graham's pending motion regarding his brief.
After reviewing the record i ndependently under Penson v. Ohio , 488 U.S. 75, 80 (1988), we find no nonfrivolous issue. A ccordingly, we grant counsel's motion to withdraw, and we affirm the judgment of the District Court.

______________________________
#### Evelyn M. FIORE, etc., Appellant, v. ROYAL PAINTING CO., INC., et al., Appellees.

Nos. 77-164 and 77-178.

District Court of Appeal of Florida, Third District.

Feb. 21, 1978.

Rehearing Denied March 29, 1978.

Horton, Perse & Ginsberg, Arthur Roth, Miami, for appellant.

Virgin, Whittle & Popper and Thomas J. Morgan, Miami, for appellees.

Before PEARSON, HUBBART and KE-HOE, JJ.

PER CURIAM.

Affirmed. *General Accident Fire and Life Assurance Corp. v. Liberty Mutual In*
      *27
      *surance Co.,*260 So.2d 249, 253 (Fla. 4th DCA 1972); *Kochan*v. *American Fire and Casualty Co.,*200 So.2d 213, 220 (Fla. 2d DCA 1967).
[Federal Register Volume 62, Number 152 (Thursday, August 7, 1997)]
[Notices]
[Page 42604]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 97-20894]


-----------------------------------------------------------------------

NATIONAL AERONAUTICS AND SPACE ADMINISTRATION

[Notice: 97-104]


Agency Information Collection Activities: Proposed Collection; 
Comment Request

AGENCY: National Aeronautics and Space Administration (NASA).

ACTION: Notice of agency report forms under OMB review.

-----------------------------------------------------------------------

SUMMARY: The National Aeronautics and Space Administration, as part of 
its continuing effort to reduce paperwork and respondent burden, 
invites the general public and other Federal agencies to take this 
opportunity to comment on proposed and/or continuing information 
collections, as required by the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 (Pub. 
L. 104-13, 44 U.S.C. 3506(c)(2)(A)). This information is required to 
evaluate bids and process invoices submitted to NASA for the award of 
purchase orders or for bank card actions for goods and services for 
purchases $100k or less in support of NASA's mission.

DATES: All comments should be submitted on or before October 6, 1997.

ADDRESSES: All comments should be addressed to Mr. Richard Kall, Code 
HK, National Aeronautics and Space Administration, Washington, DC 
20546-0001.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
Ms. Carmela Simonson, NASA Reports Officer, (202) 358-1223.
    Title: NASA simplified acquisition for goods and services with a 
value of $100,000 or less.
    OMB Number: 2700-0086.
    Type of review: Extension.
    Need and Uses: Information collection is required to evaluate bids 
and proposals from offerors in order to award purchase orders and to 
use bank cards for required goods and services in support of NASA's 
mission.
    Affected Public: Business or other for-profit, Not-for-profit 
institutions.
    Number of Respondents: 177,013.
    Responses Per Respondent: 2.
    Annual Responses: 216,265.
    Hours Per Request: 30 min.
    Annual Burden Hours: 108,132.
    Frequency of Report: On occasion.
Donald J. Andreotta,
Deputy Chief Information Officer (Operations), Office of the 
Administrator.
[FR Doc. 97-20894 Filed 8-6-97; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 7510-01-M
<PAGE>   1



                                                                    EXHIBIT 23.1



               CONSENT OF ERNST & YOUNG LLP, INDEPENDENT AUDITORS

        We consent to the incorporation by reference in the Registration
Statements (Form S-8) pertaining to the Wall Data Incorporated Amended and
Restated 1983 Stock Option Plan, Wall Data Incorporated Restated 1993 Stock
Option Plan, Wall Data Incorporated 1993 Stock Option Plan for Non-Employee
Directors, Wall Data Incorporated Employee Stock Purchase Plan, and Wall Data
Incorporated Amended and Restated 1994 Nonofficer Stock Option Plan of our
report dated January 19, 1998, except for Note 14 as to which the date is March
12, 1998, with respect to the consolidated financial statements and schedule
included in this Annual Report (Form 10-K) for the year ended December 31,
1997.



Seattle, Washington                                        /s/ ERNST & YOUNG LLP
March 24, 1998
# C_2013108EN.01001402.xml

| 13.4.2013 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 108/14 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

13.4.2013

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 108/14

---

Appeal brought on 4 January 2013 by IDT Biologika GmbH against the judgment delivered by the General Court (Second Chamber) on 25 October 2012 in Case T-503/10 IDT Biologika GmbH v European Commission

(Case C-6/13 P)

2013/C 108/29

Language of the case: German

Parties

Parties

Appellant: IDT Biologika GmbH (represented by: R. Gross and T. Kroupa, Rechtsanwälte)

Appellant:

Other party to the proceedings: European Commission

Other party to the proceedings:

Form of order sought

Form of order sought

| — | Set aside the judgment of the General Court of 25 October 2012, served on the applicant/appellant by fax on 26 October 2012; |
| --- | --- |

—

Set aside the judgment of the General Court of 25 October 2012, served on the applicant/appellant by fax on 26 October 2012;

| — | annul the decision of the Delegation of the European Union to the Republic of Serbia of 1 September 2010 rejecting the tender submitted in respect of Lot No 1 by IDT Biologika GmbH in response to the call for tenders (reference EuropeAid/129809/C/SUP/RS) for the supply of rabies vaccines to the Ministry of Agriculture, Forestry and Water Supply of the Republic of Serbia, and awarding the contract to a consortium of various firms led by ‘Bioveta a.s.’; |
| --- | --- |

—

annul the decision of the Delegation of the European Union to the Republic of Serbia of 1 September 2010 rejecting the tender submitted in respect of Lot No 1 by IDT Biologika GmbH in response to the call for tenders (reference EuropeAid/129809/C/SUP/RS) for the supply of rabies vaccines to the Ministry of Agriculture, Forestry and Water Supply of the Republic of Serbia, and awarding the contract to a consortium of various firms led by ‘Bioveta a.s.’;

| — | order the respondent to pay the costs of the proceedings. |
| --- | --- |

—

order the respondent to pay the costs of the proceedings.

Pleas in law and main arguments

Pleas in law and main arguments

By the judgment under appeal, the General Court erred in law in dismissing the appellant’s application.

The discretion to be exercised by the respondent European Commission in the context of the tendering procedure at issue was — from a factual and technical aspect — not exercised in such a way as to be unimpeachable.

In particular, the General Court erroneously assumed that Bioveta a.s. had, in the tendering procedure, furnished proof of the safety of the product offered by means of corresponding national authorisations, and that separate tests on primates in order to prove the non-virulence to humans of the product offered were not required.

Moreover, Bioveta a.s. has not provided proof that its vaccine is based not on the original but on a modified SAD-Bern virus strain.

---
```

[Congressional Bills 112th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[S. 2401 Introduced in Senate (IS)]

112th CONGRESS
  2d Session
                                S. 2401

  To suspend temporarily the duty on sports footwear for women (other 
 than ski-boots, cross-country ski footwear, snowboard boots and golf 
                          shoes), with spikes.

_______________________________________________________________________

                   IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES

                             April 26, 2012

  Mrs. Murray introduced the following bill; which was read twice and 
                  referred to the Committee on Finance

_______________________________________________________________________

                                 A BILL

 
  To suspend temporarily the duty on sports footwear for women (other 
 than ski-boots, cross-country ski footwear, snowboard boots and golf 
                          shoes), with spikes.

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

SECTION 1. SPORTS FOOTWEAR FOR WOMEN (OTHER THAN SKI-BOOTS, CROSS-
              COUNTRY SKI FOOTWEAR, SNOWBOARD BOOTS AND GOLF SHOES), 
              WITH SPIKES.

    (a) In General.--Subchapter II of chapter 99 of the Harmonized 
Tariff Schedule of the United States is amended by inserting in 
numerical sequence the following new heading:

``     9902.01.00      Sports footwear     Free         No change        No change        On or before 12/  ''.
                        for women (other                                                   31/2015.......
                        than ski-boots,
                        cross-country ski
                        footwear,
                        snowboard boots
                        and golf shoes),
                        with spikes
                        (provided for in
                        subheading
                        6402.19.15)......

    (b) Effective Date.--The amendment made by subsection (a) applies 
with respect to goods entered, or withdrawn from warehouse for 
consumption, on or after the 15th day after the date of the enactment 
of this Act.
                                 <all>
```
II 

109TH CONGRESS 

1ST SESSION S. 1144

To provide military retirement credit for certain service by National Guard 

members performed while in a State duty status immediately after the 

terrorist attacks of September 11, 2001. 

IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES 

MAY 26, 2005

Mrs. CLINTON introduced the following bill; which was read twice and referred 

to the Committee on Armed Services 

A BILL

To provide military retirement credit for certain service by 

National Guard members performed while in a State 

duty status immediately after the terrorist attacks of 

September 11, 2001.

1 Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representa2 tives of the United States of America in Congress assembled,
2

•S 1144 IS 

1 SECTION 1. MILITARY RETIREMENT CREDIT FOR CERTAIN 

2 SERVICE BY NATIONAL GUARD MEMBERS 

3 PERFORMED WHILE IN A STATE DUTY STA4 TUS IMMEDIATELY AFTER THE TERRORIST 

5 ATTACKS OF SEPTEMBER 11, 2001. 

6 (a) RETIREMENT CREDIT.—Service of a member of 

7 the Ready Reserve of the Army National Guard or Air 

8 National Guard described in subsection (b) shall be 

9 deemed to be service creditable under section 

10 12732(a)(2)(A)(i) of title 10, United States Code. 

11 (b) COVERED SERVICE.—Service referred to in sub12 section (a) is full-time State active duty service that a 

13 member of the National Guard performed on or after Sep14 tember 11, 2001, and before October 1, 2002, in any of 

15 the counties specified in subsection (c) to support a Fed16 eral declaration of emergency following the terrorist at17 tacks on the United States of September 11, 2001. 

18 (c) COVERED COUNTIES.—The counties referred to 

19 in subsection (b) are the following: 

20 (1) In the State of New York: Bronx, Kings, 

21 New York (boroughs of Brooklyn and Manhattan), 

22 Queens, Richmond, Delaware, Dutchess, Nassau, 

23 Orange, Putnam, Rockland, Suffolk, Sullivan, Ul24 ster, and Westchester. 

25 (2) In the State of Virginia: Arlington. 
3

•S 1144 IS 

1 (d) APPLICABILITY.—Subsection (a) shall take effect 

2 as of September 11, 2001.

Æ
!(

!(

!(

!(

"}

Ocoee # 3 Dam

3

1

2

£¤64

!(

!(

!(

!(

"}

Ocoee # 3 Dam

3

1

2

£¤64

0 2,000 4,000 6,000 8,00

F

0

eet /

Ocoee Reservoirs

Land Management Plan

Tile: b4

Aug 27, 2007

\\alismurphy\home\mprlm\projects\landplan\Maps\Ocoees_land_plan\Ocoees_land_plan_for_Web.mxd
#### Fred DOSS v. STATE of Mississippi.

No. 49372.

Supreme Court of Mississippi.

March 9, 1977.

Harry L. Kelley, Jackson, for appellant.

A. F. Summer, Atty. Gen. by Catherine Walker Underwood, Sp. Asst. Atty. Gen., Jackson, for appellee.

Appeal from Circuit Court, Alcorn County; Fred Wicker, Judge.

Before SUGG, J.

AFFIRMED.

GILLESPIE, C. J., INZER, P. J., and SMITH, ROBERTSON, BROOM and LEE, JJ., concur.
IN THE SUPREME COURT OF PENNSYLVANIA

EASTERN DISTRICT

COMMONWEALTH OF PENNSYLVANIA,

Respondent

v.

KEVIN CURTIS HILTON,

Petitioner :

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

: No. 285 EAL 2019

Petition for Allowance of Appeal from

the Order of the Superior Court

ORDER

PER CURIAM

AND NOW , this 25th day of September, 2019

, the Petition for Allowance of Appeal

is DENIED

.