alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
[Federal Register Volume 62, Number 165 (Tuesday, August 26, 1997)]
[Notices]
[Page 45237]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 97-22632]


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

DEPARTMENT OF DEFENSE

Office of the Secretary


Defense Advisory Committee on Women in the Services (DACOWITS); 
Meeting

ACTION: Notice of meeting.

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

SUMMARY: Pursuant to Public Law 92-463, notice is hereby given of a 
forthcoming meeting of the Executive Committee of the Defense Advisory 
Committee on Women in the Services (DACOWITS). The purpose of the 
meeting is to review the current status of recommendations and requests 
for information generated at the 1997 DACOWITS Spring Conference, 
discuss other issues relevant to women in the Services and conduct 
business internal to the Committee. All meeting sessions will be open 
to the public.

DATES: September 8, 1997 8:30 a.m.-4 p.m.

ADDRESSES: SecDef Conference Room 3E869, The Pentagon, Washington, DC.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Lieutenant Colonel Kay L. Troutt, 
USAF, DACOWITS and Military Women Matters, OASD (Force Management 
Policy) The Pentagon, Room 3D769, Washington, DC 20301-4000, Telephone 
(703) 697-2122.

    Dated: August 18, 1997.
L.M. Bynum,
Alternate OSD Federal Register Liaison Officer, Department of Defense.
[FR Doc. 97-22632 Filed 8-25-97; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 5000-04-M
No. 9423.

#### Brown *v.*Ricketts.

(Decided February 20, 1906.)

Error to Circuit Court of Hamilton county.

*427
      *Mr. W. A. Hicks,*for plaintiff in error.

*Mr. Theo. Horstman*and *Mr. George H. Kattenhorn,*for defendant in error.

Judgment affirmed.

Shauck, C. J., Crew and Spear, JJ., concur.
No. 9471.

#### Siebold *v.*The National Acetylene Gas Co. et al.

(Decided May 8, 1906.)

Error to Circuit Court of Cuyahoga county.

*Mr. Herman Pr.eusser,*for plaintiff in error.

*Messrs. McMillin & Ingersoll,*for defendants in error. . -

Judgment affirmed..

Price, Summers and Davis, JJ., concur.
#### Clarence BAKER, Appellant, v. The STATE of Florida, Appellee.

No. 78-482.

District Court of Appeal of Florida, Third District.

May 2, 1978.

Clarence Baker, in pro per.

Robert L. Shevin, Atty. Gen., for appel-lee.

Before HAVERFIELD, C. J., and PEARSON and HENDRY, JJ.

*118PER CURIAM.

Petitioner pursuant to Fla.R.App.P. 9.140(g) having taken this appeal from the summary denial of his motion for post conviction relief under Fla.R.Crim.P. 3.850 and this court having considered the record presented and having further determined that it conclusively appears therefrom that petitioner is entitled to no relief, the denial of his motion is affirmed.
# Troop Support provides religious support during April holidays

/ Published April 13, 2017
PHILADELPHIA, 

Service members who celebrate Passover, Palm Sunday and Easter this month will do so with the help of the Defense Logistics Agency Troop Support. 

Christian service members observing Palm Sunday April 9 received pieces of palm through the Clothing and Textiles supply chain. C&T delivered more than 2,000 fan leaves of palms and 24,900 double strips of palm.

“I am religious myself and see the importance of ordering these particular items for our customers,” said Christopher Gaudio, a customer account specialist with C&T’s ecclesiastical support team. “They are fighting for us and we should be able to support their religious needs.”

The ecclesiastical team also delivered 223 Seder kits for Jewish military members celebrating the eight-day festival of Passover*,*******which began the evening of April 10.The kits contain matzah, a shank bone, bitter herbs, and ceremonial items, such as an ornate plate, grape juice box, packaged dessert and kosher bubble gum. 

“This particular purchase (of Seder kits) has been very meaningful to me,” said Air Force Senior Airman Fernando Cortez, contracting officer with the 379th Expeditionary Contracting Squadron at Al Udeid Air Base in Qatar. “My faith plays a huge role in my life and being able to help facilitate our fellow brothers and sisters in arms in the practicing of their faith has been incredibly fulfilling.

“Being deployed, you miss a lot of things back home, especially around the holidays,” Cortez said. “So being able to make this happen, bringing a little piece of home is huge and greatly appreciated.”

The palms and Seder kits were sent to customers serving in Afghanistan, Kuwait, Europe and the United States.

The Subsistence supply chain provided more than 930 cases of Passover Meals, Ready to Eat to troops in the U.S., Afghanistan, Kuwait, Qatar, Germany, Japan and aboard Navy ships.

The Passover MRE comes in a single, flexible pouch, similar to an MRE, said Joe Zanolle, Subsistence customer account specialist. Those observing Passover receive two cases of MREs, which equal three meals a day for the eight-day observance.  

“DLA wants to ensure that our troops are able to observe their religious holidays with a traditional holiday meal as they would at home,” said Zanolle.

For Easter, Subsistence is providing more than 18,400 pounds of ham, 7,500 pounds of salmon, 16,000 pounds of shrimp and various desserts for dining facilities in Afghanistan, Iraq, Kuwait and Jordan.

C&T delivered 276 bottles of sacramental wine to be used during Easter services April 16.

Due to the nature of the holiday items, it takes several months of preparation and planning to ensure customers have the items in time.

“Pre-planning all of these efforts requires a great deal of coordination among various people,” said Cauvin. “Most of the holiday planning began in the fall of 2016 to ensure all of the items arrived in the region well in advance of the holidays.”
#### Daniel Lopez PINO, Appellant, v. Robert A. LOPEZ et al., Appellees.

Nos. 77-1847, 77-2231.

District Court of Appeal of Florida, Third District.

July 5, 1978.

Rehearings Denied Aug. 25, 1978.

*193Heller & Kaplan and Seymour Kaplan, Miami, for appellant.

Sinclair, Louis, Siegel & Heath and Bay-ard E. Heath, Miami, for appellees.

Before PEARSON, HUBBART and KE-HOE, JJ.

PER CURIAM.

These appeals are from the same summary final judgment for the defendants. This issue involved was whether a check issued and cashed in “Full and final payment for all goods, services and claims to date” was an accord and satisfaction. Plaintiff’s affidavit in opposition to the motion for summary judgment was insufficient as a matter of law because it alleged conclusions of law without supporting facts. Cf. *Freeman v. Equilease Corporation,*346 So.2d 619 (Fla. 3d DCA 1977); and *Sherman v. Weintraub,*132 So.2d 421 (Fla. 3d DCA 1961). The defendant was entitled to a judgment as a matter of law. See *Miller-Dunn Co. v. Green,*154 Fla. 72, 16 So.2d 637 (1944).

Affirmed.
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<PAGE>
<ARTICLE> 5

<S>                             <C>                     <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   9-MOS                   3-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          DEC-31-2000             DEC-31-2000
<PERIOD-START>                             JAN-01-2000             JUL-01-2000
<PERIOD-END>                               SEP-30-2000             SEP-30-2000
<CASH>                                         173,459                       0
<SECURITIES>                                         0                       0
<RECEIVABLES>                                  146,327                       0
<ALLOWANCES>                                     5,000                       0
<INVENTORY>                                          0                       0
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                               324,049                       0
<PP&E>                                         504,080                       0
<DEPRECIATION>                                 174,412                       0
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                 674,590                       0
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                          458,692                       0
<BONDS>                                        650,649                       0
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0                       0
<PREFERRED>                                          0                       0
<COMMON>                                     4,763,331                       0
<OTHER-SE>                                 (5,198,082)                       0
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                   674,590                       0
<SALES>                                        305,378                 175,678
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                               305,378                 175,678
<CGS>                                          642,261                 314,590
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                1,261,044                 436,962
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                     0                       0
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                     0                       0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                              46,338                  23,019
<INCOME-PRETAX>                            (1,644,265)               (598,893)
<INCOME-TAX>                                       800                       0
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                                  0                       0
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0                       0
<CHANGES>                                            0                       0
<NET-INCOME>                               (1,645,065)               (598,893)
<EPS-BASIC>                                      (.12)                   (.04)
<EPS-DILUTED>                                    (.12)                   (.04)


</TABLE>
#### William O. JOHNSON v. William S. LEE.

No. 8439.

Court of Appeal of Louisiana, Fourth Circuit.

Nov. 10, 1977.

*304Band & Hopkins, Leo Jerome Lahey, Gretna, for plaintiff-appellee.

Calvin J. Laiche, Westwego, for defendant-appellant.

Before SAMUEL, REDMANN and BOU-TALL, JJ.

SAMUEL, Judge.

Plaintiff, a certified public accountant, instituted this suit for $750 for professional services rendered to the defendant. He obtained a default judgment for that amount. After the delay for taking an appeal had expired, defendant filed a petition seeking nullity of the judgment and injunctive relief preventing its execution.

Following a hearing of the rule to show cause why a preliminary injunction should not be issued, there was judgment refusing to issue the preliminary injunction. Defendant has suspensively appealed from that judgment. The trial court has heard only the rule for a preliminary injunction.

Our courts will extend injunctive relief only when irreparable injury is imminent1 and, in order for a preliminary injunction to issue, the one seeking such an injunction must make a prima facie showing that he would suffer irreparable injury if the same is not granted.2 In addition, “irreparable injury” such as will warrant the issuance of an injunction is that injury, loss or damage for which damages cannot be measured by a pecuniary standard.3

Here, the evidence offered at the trial of the rule was concerned mainly, and almost exclusively, with the merits of the suit to annul and, as those merits will be heard by the trial court at a later date, we prefer not to discuss or comment upon the same. It suffices to say we agree with the trial court’s conclusion that appellant failed to make the prima facie showing required for issuance of the preliminary injunction he seeks. This is particularly true in view of the fact that the record is devoid of any evidence showing any possible loss or damage to appellant other than satisfaction of the $750 judgment, which amount he admits he is quite capable of paying.

For the reasons assigned, the judgment appealed from is affirmed and the matter is remanded to the trial court for further proceedings in accordance with law.

*AFFIRMED AND REMANDED.*

1

. *Greenberg v. DeSalvo,*254 La. 1019, 229 So.2d 83; *State Board of Ed. v. National Collegiate Ath. Ass’n,*La.App., 273 So.2d 912.

2

. *Schwegmann Bros. G. S. Mkts.*v. *Louisiana Milk Com’n.,*La., 290 So.2d 312; *West Publishing Co. v. Intrastate Pipeline Corp.,*La.App., 254 So.2d 643.

3

*. State Board of Ed. v. National Collegiate Ath. Ass’n, supra,*note 1.
# L_2023047EN.01004901.xml

| 15.2.2023 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | L 47/49 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

15.2.2023

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

L 47/49

---

COMMISSION IMPLEMENTING REGULATION (EU) 2023/337

of 8 February 2023

conferring protection under Article 99 of Regulation (EU) No 1308/2013 of the European Parliament and of the Council on the name ‘Terras do Navia’ (PGI)

THE EUROPEAN COMMISSION,

Having regard to the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union,

Having regard to Regulation (EU) No 1308/2013 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 17 December 2013 establishing a common organisation of the markets in agricultural products and repealing Council Regulations (EEC) No 922/72, (EEC) No 234/79, (EC) No 1037/2001 and (EC) No 1234/2007 (1), and in particular Article 99 thereof,

Whereas:

| (1) | In accordance with Article 97(2) and (3) of Regulation (EU) No 1308/2013, the Commission has examined the application to register the name ‘Terras do Navia’ forwarded by Spain and has published it in the Official Journal of the European Union (2). |
| --- | --- |

(1)

In accordance with Article 97(2) and (3) of Regulation (EU) No 1308/2013, the Commission has examined the application to register the name ‘Terras do Navia’ forwarded by Spain and has published it in the Official Journal of the European Union (2).

| (2) | No statement of objection has been received by the Commission under Article 98 of Regulation (EU) No 1308/2013. |
| --- | --- |

(2)

No statement of objection has been received by the Commission under Article 98 of Regulation (EU) No 1308/2013.

| (3) | In accordance with Article 99 of Regulation (EU) No 1308/2013, the name ‘Terras do Navia’ should be protected and entered in the register referred to in Article 104 of that Regulation. |
| --- | --- |

(3)

In accordance with Article 99 of Regulation (EU) No 1308/2013, the name ‘Terras do Navia’ should be protected and entered in the register referred to in Article 104 of that Regulation.

| (4) | The measures provided for in this Regulation are in accordance with the opinion of the Committee for the Common Organisation of the Agricultural Markets, |
| --- | --- |

(4)

The measures provided for in this Regulation are in accordance with the opinion of the Committee for the Common Organisation of the Agricultural Markets,

HAS ADOPTED THIS REGULATION:

Article 1

The name ‘Terras do Navia’ (PGI) is hereby protected.

Article 2

This Regulation shall enter into force on the twentieth day following that of its publication in the Official Journal of the European Union.

This Regulation shall be binding in its entirety and directly applicable in all Member States.

Done at Brussels, 8 February 2023.

For the Commission,

On behalf of the President,

Janusz WOJCIECHOWSKI

Member of the Commission

---

(1)  
  OJ L 347, 20.12.2013, p. 671.

1

(2)  
  OJ C 397, 17.10.2022, p. 34.

2

---
# Hurry named new DLA Aviation commander

/ Published March 10, 2017
Fort Belvoir, Virginia, The Air Force General Officer Management Office announced March 9 that Air Force Brig. Gen. Linda S. Hurry will replace Air Force Brig. Gen. Allan E. Day as commander of Defense Logistics Agency Aviation at Richmond, Virginia.Since August 2016, Hurry has served as the director of expeditionary support for the Air Force Installation and Mission Support Center at Joint Base San Antonio-Lackland, Texas, where she oversees the delivery of worldwide installation- and mission-support capabilities to customers at the headquarters, major command and installation levels.Hurry has performed as an aircraft maintenance officer at Vance Air Force Base, Oklahoma, and the Oklahoma City Air Logistics Complex, as well as a logistics readiness officer at wing, major command and combatant command levels. She served as the commander of the 92nd Logistics Readiness Squadron at Fairchild Air Force Base, Washington, when it won the Daedalian Award for being the best logistics readiness squadron in the Air Force and the Gerrity Award for being the service’s most effective logistics unit.Hurry was also selected as a Secretary of Defense Corporate Fellow and spent a year with Caterpillar, Inc. before serving as the executive assistant to the commander of U.S. Transportation Command. Prior to her current assignment, Hurry was the commander of the 635th Supply Chain Operations Wing at Scott Air Force Base, Illinois.The change of command ceremony is yet to be determined. Day will continue his career as the director of logistics, civil engineering and force protection for Headquarters Air Force Materiel Command at Wright-Patterson Air Force Base, Ohio.
1 IN THE COURT OF APPEALS OF THE STATE OF IDAHO

Docket No. 38095

STATE OF IDAHO ,
Plaintiff-Respondent ,

v.

TONY GREG CHAVEZ ,
Defendant-Appellant

. ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) 2011 Unpublished Opinion No. 389

Filed: March 15, 2011

Stephen W. Kenyon, Clerk

THIS IS AN UNPUBLISHED OPINION AND SHALL NOT BE CITED AS AUTHORITY

Appeal from the District Court of the Seventh Judicial District, State of Idaho, Jefferson County. Hon. Gregory S. Anderson , District Judge.

Order revoking probation and requiring execution of unified five

- year sentence with one

- year determinate term for possession of methamphetamine

, affirmed

.
Jason R. Rammell, Rexburg, for appellant.

Hon. Lawrence G. Wasden, Attorney General; Lori A. Fleming, Deputy Attorney General, Boise, for respondent.

______________________________________________ Before LANSING, Judge; GUTIERREZ, Judge; and MELANSON, Judge

PER CURIAM
Tony Greg Chavez pled guilty to possession of methamphetamine . I.C. § 37

- 2732(c)(1)

. The district court imposed a unified five

- year sentence with a one

- year determinate term,
suspended the sentence a nd placed Chavez on probation. Subsequently, Chavez
admitted to violating the terms of the probation, and the district court consequently revoked
probation and ordered execution of the original sentence but retained jurisdiction. Chavez
appeals, contending that the district court abused its discretion in revoking probation and
imposing sentence.
It is within the trial court’s discretion to revoke probation if any of the terms and
conditions of the probation have been violated. I.C. §§ 19

- 2603, 20

- 222; State v. Beckett , 122 Idaho 324, 325, 834 P.2d 326, 327 (Ct. App. 1992); State v. Adams , 115 Idaho 1053, 1054, 7722 P.2d 260, 261 (Ct. App. 1989); State v. Hass , 114 Idaho 554, 558, 758 P.2d 713, 717 (Ct. App.
1988). In determining whether to revoke probation a court must examine whether the probation
is achieving the goal of rehabilitation and consistent with the protection of society. State v.
Upton , 127 Idaho 274 , 275, 899 P.2d 984, 985 (Ct. App. 1995); Beckett , 122 Idaho at 325, 834
P.2d at 327; Hass , 114 Idaho at 558, 758 P.2d at 717. The court may, after a probation violation
has been established, order that the suspended sentence be executed or, in the altern ative, the

court is authorized under Idaho Criminal Rule 35 to reduce the sentence. Beckett , 122 Idaho at
326, 834 P.2d at 328; State v. Marks , 116 Idaho 976, 977, 783 P.2d 315, 316 (Ct. App. 1989). A
decision to revoke probation will be disturbed on app eal only upon a showing that the trial court

abused its discretion. Beckett , 122 Idaho at 326, 834 P.2d at 328.
Applying the foregoing standards, and having reviewed the record in this case, we cannot
say that the district court abused its discretion in r evoking probation or in ordering execution of

Chavez ’s original sentence without modification. Therefore, the order revoking probation and
directing execution of Cha vez ’s previously suspended sentence is affirmed.
R[t,l ¡ì',ii:ii - úP{;t

AIR PLA}{I{IHG :;'(

ozJUil |7 Pil | ww

Orrrcn oF THE GovERNoR

RICK PERRY

G'oVERNOR

Ìl'.f.ay 21,200.2

Mr. Robert f. Huston

Chairman

Texas Natural Resource Conservation Commission

P.O. Box 13087

Austin, Texas 7 87 ll-3087

Dear Chairman Huston:

The federal Clean Air Act requiresthat states submit a plan for implementation, maintenance,

and enforcement of the national ambient air quality standards. The associated regulations specify

a certain role for governors and th.eirdesignated representatives with regard to revisions to state

implementation plans (SIPs). Traditionally, Texas governors have submitted, on behalf of the

State of Texas, revisions to the Texas SIP.

Pursuant o the authority vested in me as governor by the Constitution and laws of the State of

Texas, I hereby designate the Chainnan of the Texas Natural Resource Conservation

Commission to sign on my behalf all rrecessary revisions to the SIP for submittal to the United

States Environmental Protection Agency (EPA). This designation is effective until such time as

it is supercrded by subsequent written notification.

For oui records, please provide my office with a copy of each document you sign on my behalf

immediâtely upoÌr ttansmittalto'EPA '¡ I 

:

As always, thank you for your service to Texas.

RP:wwp

cc: Mr. Gregg Cooke, Regional Administrator, Region VI, E?A

Sincerely,
#### Martin FINE, J. I. Kislak and R. W. Johnson, d/b/a Park Towers Associates, Ltd., Arkin Building Corp., a Florida corporation, the First National Bank of Miami, a banking corporation, and the Travelers Indemnity Company, a Connecticut corporation, Appellants, v. CRANE CO., an Illinois corporation, Appellee.

No. 67-507.

District Court of Appeal of Florida. Third District.

May 2, 1969.

Meyer, Weiss, Rose & Arkin and Gerald M. Higier, Miami Beach, for appellants.

Shutts & Bowen and Karl Vance Hart, Miami, for appellee.

Before BARKDULL, HENDRY and SWANN, JJ.

ORDER ON MANDATE

PER CURIAM.

Whereas, the judgment of this court was entered on May 7, 1968 (211 So.2d 219) reversing the summary judgment of the Circuit Court for Dade County, Florida, in the above styled cause; and

Whereas, on review of this court’s judgment, by certiorari, the Supreme Court of Florida by its opinion and judgment filed April 2, 1969, 221 So.2d 145, and mandate now lodged in this court, quashed this court's judgment and remanded the cause for further proceedings ;

Now, therefore, It is Ordered that the mandate of this court heretofore issued on June 26, 1968 is withdrawn, the opinion and judgment of this court filed May 7, 1968 is vacated, the said opinion and judgment of the Supreme Court of Florida is herewith made the opinion and judgment of this court and the summary *judgment*of the circuit court appealed from in this cause is affirmed. Costs allowed shall be taxed in the circuit court (Rule 3.16, subd. b, Florida Appellate Rules, 32 F.S.A.).
# GREEN OPEN

/ Published Feb. 4, 2022

Note: During times of inclement weather or emergencies, DLA Headquarters refers to OPM's status status to determine the DLA headquarters operating status. It can take up to 30 minutes for the DLA homepage to update.