alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
# LOAC - Logistics Operations Applications Course

/ Published Feb. 16, 2022

## General Information

The Logistics Operations Applications Course (LOAC) course is intended to provide the logistician with an overview of DLA Logistics Operations and instructions on logistics applications. The logistician becomes familiar with the DLA mission and the resources available for logistics planning.  An overview of Federal Logistics Data (FED LOG), Federal Logistics Information System via the World Wide Web (WebFLIS), Federal Mall (FedMall), Web Visual Logistics Information Processing System (WebVLIPS) and the Integrated Data Environment (IDE)/Global Transportation Network (GTN) Convergence (IGC) applications are demonstrated to assist the student in conducting logistics research.

## Course Description

LOAC is intended to provide the student with a broad overview and demonstrations of DLA Logistics Operations applications.  Students will become familiar with FED LOG, WebFLIS, FedMall, WebVLIPS and IGC applications and learn how to apply them in conducting Logistics planning or research.

## Target Audience

DLA, military services, Other Government Agencies, and United States (U.S.) Government sponsored contractors doing business with the U.S. Government.

## Delivery Methods

Classroom Instruction (16 Hours)Webinar (3 hours)

## Contact Us

**Scheduling Program Manager**Commercial/Federal Telecommunication System (FTS): **269-961-4829DSN: **312-661-4829**J31CT Training Office Fax Line**Commercial/Federal Telecommunications System (FTS)/FAX: **269-961-5035DSN: **312-661-5035E-mail: **dla.tng@dla.mil
#### R. C. BURSE v. BOH BROTHERS CONSTRUCTION CO. and Collins Thibodeaux.

No. 60795.

Supreme Court of Louisiana.

Nov. 4, 1977.

In re: R. C. Burse applying for certiorari, or writ of review, to the Court of Appeal, Fourth Circuit, Parish of Orleans. 349 So.2d 438.

Writ denied.

TATE, J.,

concurs in the denial until such time as we overrule the authorities relating to the issue discussed in *Broussard v. Heebe’s Bakery,*263 La. 561, 268 So.2d 656 (1972).
```

[106th Congress Private Law 10]
[From the U.S. Government Printing Office]

<DOC>
[DOCID: f:pvtl010.106]

[[Page 114 STAT. 3103]]

Private Law 106-10
106th Congress

                                 An Act

 
  For the relief of Sepandan Farnia and Farbod Farnia. <<NOTE: Nov. 9, 
                          2000 -  [H.R. 848]>> 

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

SECTION 1. PERMANENT RESIDENT STATUS FOR SEPANDAN FARNIA AND FARBOD 
            FARNIA.

    (a) In General.--Notwithstanding subsections (a) and (b) of section 
201 of the Immigration and Nationality Act, Sepandan Farnia and Farbod 
Farnia shall each be eligible for issuance of an immigrant visa or for 
adjustment of status to that of an alien lawfully admitted for permanent 
residence upon filing an application for issuance of an immigrant visa 
under section 204 of such Act or for adjustment of status to lawful 
permanent resident.
    (b) Adjustment of Status.--If Sepandan Farnia or Farbod Farnia 
enters the United States before the filing deadline specified in 
subsection (c), he shall be considered to have entered and remained 
lawfully and shall, if otherwise eligible, be eligible for adjustment of 
status under section 245 of the Immigration and Nationality Act as of 
the date of the enactment of this Act.
    (c) Deadline for Application and Payment of Fees.--Subsections (a) 
and (b) shall apply only if the application for issuance of an immigrant 
visa or the application for adjustment of status is filed with 
appropriate fees within 2 years after the date of the enactment of this 
Act.

SEC. 2. REDUCTION OF IMMIGRANT VISA NUMBER.

    Upon the granting of an immigrant visa or permanent residence to 
Sepandan Farnia and Farbod Farnia, the Secretary of State shall instruct 
the proper officer to reduce by two, during the current or next 
following fiscal year, the total number of immigrant visas that are made 
available to natives of the country of the aliens' birth under section 
203(a) of the Immigration and Nationality Act or, if applicable, the 
total number of immigrant visas that are

[[Page 114 STAT. 3104]]

made available to natives of the country of the aliens' birth under 
section 202(e) of such Act.

    Approved November 9, 2000.
```
UNPUBLISHED

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

No. 05-6833

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,

Plaintiff - Appellee,

versus

LEVY JOHNSON,

Defendant - Appellant.

Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of

Maryland, at Baltimore. Marvin J. Garbis, Senior District Judge.

(CR-99-352-MJG; CA-04-3852-MJG)

Submitted: November 17, 2005 Decided: November 23, 2005

Before WILKINSON, LUTTIG, and WILLIAMS, Circuit Judges.

Dismissed by unpublished per curiam opinion.

Levy Johnson, Appellant Pro Se. Jamie M. Bennett, Assistant United

States Attorney, Baltimore, Maryland, for Appellee.

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.

See Local Rule 36(c).
- 2 -

PER CURIAM:

Levy Johnson seeks to appeal the district court’s order

denying relief on his motion filed under 28 U.S.C. § 2255 (2000).

The order is not appealable unless a circuit justice or judge

issues a certificate of appealability. 28 U.S.C. § 2253(c)(1)

(2000). A certificate of appealability will not issue absent “a

substantial showing of the denial of a constitutional right.” 28

U.S.C. § 2253(c)(2) (2000). A prisoner satisfies this standard by

demonstrating that reasonable jurists would find that the district

court’s assessment of his constitutional claims is debatable and

that any dispositive procedural rulings by the district court are

also debatable or wrong. See Miller-El v. Cockrell, 537 U.S. 322,

336-38 (2003); Slack v. McDaniel, 529 U.S. 473, 484 (2000); Rose v.

Lee, 252 F.3d 676, 683 (4th Cir. 2001). We have independently

reviewed the record and conclude that Johnson has not made the

requisite showing. Accordingly, we deny a certificate of

appealability and dismiss the appeal. We dispense with oral

argument because the facts and legal contentions are adequately

presented in the materials before the court and argument would not

aid the decisional process. 

DISMISSED
#### Howard A. HAMPTON, Appellant, v. STATE of Florida, Appellee.

No. 77-1197.

District Court of Appeal of Florida, Second District.

June 2, 1978.

Jack 0. Johnson, Public Defender, W. C. McLain, Asst. Public Defender, and Ken Glover, Research Asst., Bartow, for appellant.

Robert L. Shevin, Atty. Gen., Tallahassee, and Charles Corees, Jr., Asst. Atty. Gen., Tampa, for appellee.

PER CURIAM.

We relinquished jurisdiction of this cause to the trial court with directions that it hear and consider the testimony of two police officers concerning the voluntariness of appellant’s confession. *Hampton*v. *State,*354 So.2d 443 (Fla. 2d DCA 1978). We have received and reviewed the testimony of the officers and the findings of the court based on the evidence formerly taken as supplemented by this additional testimony. We find no error in the trial court’s holding that appellant’s confession was voluntarily given. We therefore affirm appel*43lant’s conviction for robbery and the sentence imposed pursuant thereto.1

SCHEB, Acting C. J., and RYDER and DANAHY, JJ., concur.

1

. We note that the trial court has deleted the “hard labor” provision from appellant’s judgment and sentence.
```

[Congressional Bills 109th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[S. 1338 Referred in House (RFH)]

109th CONGRESS
  1st Session
                                S. 1338

_______________________________________________________________________

                    IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

                           November 17, 2005

                 Referred to the Committee on Resources

_______________________________________________________________________

                                 AN ACT

 
To require the Secretary of the Interior, acting through the Bureau of 
Reclamation and the United States Geological Survey, to conduct a study 
    on groundwater resources in the State of Alaska, and for other 
                               purposes.

    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 ``Alaska Water Resources Act of 
2005''.

SEC. 2. DEFINITIONS.

    In this Act:
            (1) Secretary.--The term ``Secretary'' means the Secretary 
        of the Interior.
            (2) State.--The term ``State'' means the State of Alaska.

SEC. 3. ALASKA WATER RESOURCES STUDY.

    (a) Study.--The Secretary, acting through the Commissioner of 
Reclamation and the Director of the United States Geological Survey, 
where appropriate, and in accordance with this Act and other applicable 
provisions of law, shall conduct a study that includes--
            (1) a survey of accessible water supplies, including 
        aquifers, on the Kenai Peninsula and in the Municipality of 
        Anchorage, the Matanuska-Susitna Borough, the city of 
        Fairbanks, and the Fairbanks Northstar Borough;
            (2) a survey of water treatment needs and technologies, 
        including desalination, applicable to the water resources of 
        the State; and
            (3) a review of the need for enhancement of the streamflow 
        information collected by the United States Geological Survey in 
        the State relating to critical water needs in areas such as--
                    (A) infrastructure risks to State transportation,
                    (B) flood forecasting,
                    (C) resource extraction; and
                    (D) fire management.
    (b) Report.--Not later than 2 years after the date of enactment of 
this Act, the Secretary shall submit to the Committee on Energy and 
Natural Resources of the Senate and the Committee on Resources of the 
House of Representatives a report describing the results of the study 
required by subsection (a).

SEC. 4. AUTHORIZATION OF APPROPRIATIONS.

    There are authorized to be appropriated such sums as are necessary 
to carry out this Act.

            Passed the Senate November 16, 2005.

            Attest:

                                             EMILY J. REYNOLDS,

                                                             Secretary.
```
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

# Preparedness and Security Expo asks employees to ‘Be Ready’

By Christine BornDLA Public Affairs

                Fort Belvoir, Virginia  –              

**                    SHARE                

**                    PRINT                

securityDLAHQC Emergency ManagementAtHocantiterrorismpreparednessJames Johnston
<PAGE>
 
                                                                 EXHIBIT 21.01

                      LIST OF WHOLLY OWNED SUBSIDIARIES
                        RATIONAL SOFTWARE CORPORATION


NAME                                    JURISDICTION OF INCORPORATION
-------------------------------------   --------------------------------------
Pure Atria Corporation                  Delaware

Rational SQA, Inc.                      Delaware

Integrity QA Software, Inc.             Delaware

Pure Atria Software Ltd                 Canada

Rational Software Corporation Ltd       United Kingdom

Rational SARL                           France

Rational GmbH                           Germany

Rational Software Holdings BV           Netherlands

Rational Software Benelux BV            Netherlands

Rational Software Scandinavia AB        Sweden

Softlabs AB                             Sweden

                                     63
<PAGE>
 
Rational Software Switzerland GmbH      Switzerland

Rational Software Corp Pty Ltd.         Australia

Rational Software Korea Limited         Korea

Rational Software Do Brasil Ltda.       Brazil

Rational Software Corporation Pvt.      India

Rational Software New Zealand Limited   New Zealand

Rational Software China Ltd             Hong Kong

Nihon Rational KK                       Japan

Rational International                  California

Rational Software FSC, Inc.             Barbados

                                     64
VI 

109TH CONGRESS 

1ST SESSION S. 1187 

For the relief of James Symington. 

IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES 

JUNE 7, 2005 

Mr. ALLEN introduced the following bill; which was read twice and referred 

to the Committee on the Judiciary 

A BILL

For the relief of James Symington.

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

3 SECTION 1. PERMANENT RESIDENT STATUS FOR JAMES SY4 MINGTON. 

5 (a) IN GENERAL.—Notwithstanding subsections (a) 

6 and (b) of section 201 of the Immigration and Nationality 

7 Act, James Symington shall be eligible for issuance of an 

8 immigrant visa or for adjustment of status to that of an 

9 alien lawfully admitted for permanent residence upon fil10 ing an application for issuance of an immigrant visa under 

11 section 204 of that Act or for adjustment of status to law12 ful permanent resident. 
2

•S 1187 IS

1 (b) ADJUSTMENT OF STATUS.—If James Symington 

2 enters the United States before the filing deadline speci3 fied in subsection (c), James Symington shall be consid4 ered to have entered and remained lawfully and shall be 

5 eligible for adjustment of status under section 245 of the 

6 Immigration and Nationality Act as of the date of enact7 ment of this Act. 

8 (c) DEADLINE FOR APPLICATION AND PAYMENT OF

9 FEES.—Subsections (a) and (b) shall apply only if the ap10 plication for issuance of an immigrant visa or the applica11 tion for adjustment of status is filed with appropriate fees 

12 within 2 years after the date of enactment of this Act. 

13 (d) REDUCTION OF IMMIGRANT VISA NUMBERS.—

14 Upon the granting of an immigrant visa or permanent res15 idence to James Symington, the Secretary of State shall 

16 instruct the proper officer to reduce by 1, during the cur17 rent or next following fiscal year, the total number of im18 migrant visas that are made available to natives of the 

19 country of birth of James Symington under section 203(a) 

20 of the Immigration and Nationality Act or, if applicable, 

21 the total number of immigrant visas that are made avail22 able to natives of the country of birth of James Symington 

23 under section 202(e) of that Act.

Æ
[Federal Register Volume 62, Number 158 (Friday, August 15, 1997)]
[Notices]
[Page 43719]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 97-21611]


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

DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY

Federal Energy Regulatory Commission
[Docket No. CP97-681-000]


Florida Gas Transmission Company; Notice of Request Under Blanket 
Authorization

August 11, 1997.
    Take notice that on August 4, 1997, Florida Gas Transmission 
Company (FGT), 1400 Smith Street, Houston, Florida 77002, filed in 
Docket No. CP97-681-000 a request pursuant to Sections 157.205 and 
157.212 of the Commission's Regulations under the Natural Gas Act (18 
CFR 157.205 and 157.212) for authorization to construct and operate a 
delivery point in Levy County, Florida under FGT's blanket certificate 
issued in Docket No. CP82-553-000 pursuant to Section 7 of the Natural 
Gas Act, all as more fully set forth in the request that is on file 
with the Commission and open to public inspection.
    FGT proposes to construct, operate, and own an additional delivery 
point for West Florida Natural Gas Company (West Florida) at or near 
mile post 53.2 on its existing Inglis Lateral in Levy County, Florida. 
FGT states that the subject delivery point will include a tap, a valve, 
minor connecting pipe, electronic flow measurement equipment, and other 
related appurtenant facilities necessary for FGT to deliver up to a 
maximum of 200 MMBtu per day and 73,000 per year. FGT will be 
reimbursed for the construction costs which is estimated at $57,000. 
FGT further states that West Florida will construct, own, and operate 
the meter and regulation station.
    FGT states that the delivery point is not prohibited by its 
existing tariff and that it has sufficient capacity to accomplish 
deliveries without detriment or disadvantage to other customers. The 
proposed delivery point will not have an effect on FGT's peak day and 
annual deliveries and the total volumes delivered will not exceed total 
volumes authorized prior to this request.
    Any person or the Commission's staff may, within 45 days after 
issuance of the instant notice by the Commission, file pursuant to Rule 
214 of the Commission's Procedural Rules (18 CFR 385.214) a motion to 
intervene or notice of intervention and pursuant to Section 157.205 of 
the Regulations under the Natural Gas Act (18 CFR 157.205) a protest to 
the request. If no protest is filed within the time allowed therefor, 
the proposed activity shall be deemed to be authorized effective the 
day after the time allowed for filing a protest. If a protest is filed 
and not withdrawn within 30 days after the time allowed for filing a 
protest, the instant request shall be treated as an application for 
authorization pursuant to Section 7 of the Natural Gas Act.
Linwood A. Watson, Jr.,
Acting Secretary.
[FR Doc. 97-21611 Filed 8-14-97; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6717-01-M
No. 99-7957.

#### Stucky *v.*United States.

C. A. 9th Cir. Cer-tiorari denied.
**CERTIFICATION      PURSUANT TO**

**18      U.S.C. SECTION 1350,**

**AS      ADOPTED PURSUANT TO**

**SECTION      906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002**

|   | (1) | The                Report fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) or 15(d)                of                the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 (15 U.S.C. 78m(a) or 78o(d));                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/ ROBERT                T. FABER                                                                                          |
|--------|----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|
|   | Robert                T. Faber*President                and Chief Executive Officer and**Chief                Financial Officer* |

----
### TEXAS COURT OF APPEALS, THIRD DISTRICT, AT AUSTIN

JUDGMENT RENDERED MA RCH 17, 2015

NO. 03

- 14

- 00727

- CV

Naomi Jefferson, Appellant

v.

Nate the Great Trust, Appellee

APPEAL FROM COUNTY COURT AT LAW NO. 1 OF TRAVIS COUNTY

BEFORE CHIEF JUSTICE ROSE, JUSTICES GOODWIN AND FIELD
DISMISSED FOR WANT OF PROSECUTION

-- OPINION BY JUSTICE GOODWIN

This is an appeal from the judgment signed by the tr i a l court on October 13, 2014. Hav ing

reviewed the record , the Court holds that Naomi Jefferson has not prosecuted her a ppeal and did

not comply with a notice from the Clerk of this Court. Therefore, the Court dismisses the appeal

for want of prosecution. The appellant shall pay all cost s relating to this appeal, both in this

Court and the court below.
<PAGE>
                                                                 Exhibit 3.23(a)


                      CONSENT OF INDEPENDENT ACCOUNTANTS
                      ----------------------------------

     We consent to the incorporation by reference in the registration statements
of Microfluidics International Corporation on Form S-8 (File Nos. 33-6300,
33-19372, 33-38928, 33-38925, 33-86726, 333-14607 and 333-29949) of our report
dated February 12, 1997, on our audits of the consolidated financial statements
of Microfluidics International Corporation as of December 31, 1996, and
for each of the two years ended December 31, 1996, which report is included in
this Annual Report on Form 10-K, for the year ended December 31, 1997.

                                                        COOPERS & LYBRAND L.L.P.

Boston, Massachusetts
March 27, 1998
Exhibit
32.1





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 Quarterly Report of Balchem Corporation (the “Company”) on
Form 10-Q for the period ended June 30, 2008 as filed with the Securities and
Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the “Report”), I, Dino A. Rossi,
Chairman, President and Chief Executive 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 to my knowledge:





(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/ Dino
A. Rossi


Dino A.
Rossi


Chairman,
President and Chief Executive Officer


(Principal
Executive Officer)


August
5, 2008





This
certification accompanies the above-described Report on Form 10-Q pursuant to
Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002 and shall not, except to the
extent required by such Act, be deemed filed by the Company for purposes of
Section 18 of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended.




37
No. 99-7966.

#### Stradwick *v.*United States.

C. A. 4th Cir. Certiorari denied.