alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
ARMED SERVICES BOARD OF CONTRACT APPEALS Appeals of

-- ) ) VJ Technologies, Inc. ) ) Under Contract No. SPM4A8-12-C-0023 ) APPEARANCES FORTHE APPELLANT:

APPEARANCES FORTHE GOVERNMENT: ASBCA Nos. 58972, 58973, 59405

Michael A. Gatje, Esq. Steven A. Neeley, Esq.

Husch Blackwell LLP Washington, DC Daniel K. Poling, Esq.

DLA ChiefTrial Attorney Edward R. Murray, Esq. Michael P. Chiffolo, Esq.

Trial Attorneys DLA Aviation Richmond, VA ORDER OF DISMISSAL The dispute has been settled. The appeals are dismissed with prejudice. Dated: 9 April 2015
S, JR. Administrati udge Armed Servic s Board ofContract Appeals I certify that the foregoing is a true copy ofthe Order ofDismissal ofthe Armed Services Board ofContractAppeals in ASBCA Nos. 58972, 58973, 59405, Appeals of VJ Technologies, Inc., rendered in conformance with the Board's Charter. Dated:

JEFFREY D. GARDIN Recorder, Armed Services Board ofContract Appeals
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<ARTICLE> 5
<CIK> 0000225628
<NAME> MEGADATA CORPORATION


       
<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                                   6-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                         OCT-31-1998
<PERIOD-START>                            NOV-01-1997
<PERIOD-END>                              APR-30-1998
<CASH>                                        116,783
<SECURITIES>                                        0
<RECEIVABLES>                                 139,069
<ALLOWANCES>                                        0
<INVENTORY>                                   425,695
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                              735,382
<PP&E>                                      1,397,121
<DEPRECIATION>                                 38,494
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                              2,155,924
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                         386,106
<BONDS>                                             0
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                          32,031
<PREFERRED>                                         0
<COMMON>                                            0
<OTHER-SE>                                  1,095,270
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                2,155,924
<SALES>                                       671,172
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                              676,836
<CGS>                                         448,224
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                 696,283
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                    0
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                    0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                             41,959
<INCOME-PRETAX>                               (61,406)
<INCOME-TAX>                                        0
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                           (61,406)
<DISCONTINUED>                                      0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                     0
<CHANGES>                                           0
<NET-INCOME>                                  (61,406)
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                    (.02)
<EPS-DILUTED>                                    (.02)
        



</TABLE>
No. 10008.

#### The Trustees of German Township *v.*Hines, Treas.

Decided March 17, 1908.

Error to Circuit Court of Harrison county.

*Mr. D. Cunningham*and *Mr. William T. Perry,*for plaintiffs in error.

*Mr. B. W. Rowland,*for defendant in error.

Judgment affirmed.

Price, Crew, Summers and Spear, JJ., concur.
[Federal Register Volume 62, Number 38 (Wednesday, February 26, 1997)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Page 8638]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 97-4774]


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


DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE
50 CFR Part 679

[Docket No. 960502124-6190-02; I.D. 022097B]


Fisheries of the Exclusive Economic Zone Off Alaska; Scallop 
Fishery; District 16 of Registration Area D

AGENCY: National Marine Fisheries Service (NMFS), National Oceanic and 
Atmospheric Administration (NOAA), Commerce.

ACTION: Closure.

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

SUMMARY: NMFS is closing the scallop fishery in District 16 of Scallop 
Registration Area D (Yakutat). This action is necessary to prevent 
exceeding the scallop 1997 total allowable catch (TAC) in this area.

EFFECTIVE DATE: 1200 hrs, Alaska local time (A.l.t.), February 23, 
1997, until 2400 hrs, A.l.t., June 30, 1997.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Mary Furuness, 907-586-7228.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The scallop fishery in the exclusive 
economic zone off Alaska is managed by NMFS according to the Fishery 
Management Plan for the Scallop Fishery Off Alaska (FMP), which was 
prepared by the North Pacific Fishery Management Council under 
authority of the Magnuson-Stevens Fishery Conservation and Management 
Act. Fishing for scallops is governed by regulations appearing at 
subpart F of 50 CFR part 600 and 50 CFR part 679.
    In accordance with Sec. 679.62(b), the 1997 scallop TAC for 
District 16 of Scallop Registration Area D (Yakutat), was established 
by the Final 1996-97 Harvest Specifications of Scallops (61 FR 38099, 
July 23, 1996) as 35,000 lb (15,880 kg) shucked meat.
    In accordance with 679.62(c), the Administrator, Alaska Region, 
NMFS, has determined that the scallop TAC for District 16 of Scallop 
Registration Area D (Yakutat), has been reached. Consequently, NMFS is 
prohibiting the taking and retention of scallops in District 16 of 
Scallop Registration Area D (Yakutat).

Classification

    This action is required by Sec. 679.62 and is exempt from review 
under E.O. 12866.

    Authority: 16 U.S.C. 1801 et seq.

    Dated: February 20, 1997.
Richard W. Surdi,
Acting Director, Office of Sustainable Fisheries, National Marine 
Fisheries Service.
[FR Doc. 97-4774 Filed 2-21-97; 4:51 pm]
BILLING CODE 3510-22-F
<PAGE>   1
                                                                   EXHIBIT 10.26

                                 AMENDMENT NO. 3
                             TO BANCWEST CORPORATION
                           DEFERRED COMPENSATION PLAN


     In accordance with Section 6.1 of the BancWest Corporation Deferred
Compensation Plan (hereinafter the "Plan"):

     1.   The last sentence of Section 3.3(b) of the Plan is hereby amended to
          read in its entirety as follows:

               In addition to Base Interest, as of December 31 of each year the
               Committee may, in its sole discretion, credit Performance
               Interest for such year to a Participant's Base Account based upon
               such performance factors as it shall deem appropriate for such
               year.

     2.   The last sentence of Section 3.3(c) of the Plan is hereby amended to
          read in its entirety as follows:

               In addition to Base Interest and Retirement Interest, as of
               December 31 of each year the Committee may, in its sole
               discretion, credit Performance Interest for such year to a
               Participant's Retirement Account based upon such performance
               factors as it shall deem appropriate for such year.

     The amendments set forth herein shall be effective as of January 1, 1998.

     TO RECORD the adoption of these amendments, BancWest Corporation has
executed this document this 19th day of July, 2001.

                                        BANCWEST CORPORATION

                                        By  /s/ William E. Atwater
                                            ------------------------------------
                                                Its Secretary
<TABLE> <S> <C>


<ARTICLE>                     5
       
<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   3-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                                     DEC-31-1998
<PERIOD-START>                                        JAN-01-1998
<PERIOD-END>                                          MAR-31-1998
<CASH>                                                  2,418,830
<SECURITIES>                                                    0
<RECEIVABLES>                                             379,209
<ALLOWANCES>                                                    0
<INVENTORY>                                             2,425,765
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                                        5,330,063
<PP&E>                                                  1,166,856
<DEPRECIATION>                                            482,744
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                          8,332,732
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                                     564,913
<BONDS>                                                         0
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                           0
<PREFERRED>                                                     0
<COMMON>                                                  247,968
<OTHER-SE>                                             19,231,566
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                            8,332,732
<SALES>                                                 1,311,218
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                                        1,362,194
<CGS>                                                     543,406
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                             543,406
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                          908,207
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                                0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                                              0
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                           (89,419)
<INCOME-TAX>                                                    0
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                                       (89,419)
<DISCONTINUED>                                                  0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                                 0
<CHANGES>                                                       0
<NET-INCOME>                                              (89,419)
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                               (0.00)
<EPS-DILUTED>                                               (0.00)
                                                       


</TABLE>
UNPUBLISHED

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,

Plaintiff-Appellee,

v. No. 00-4080

CLAUDETTE STAPLETON,

Defendant-Appellant.

Appeal from the United States District Court

for the Southern District of West Virginia, at Huntington.

Joseph Robert Goodwin, District Judge.

(CR-99-62)

Submitted: August 10, 2000

Decided: August 28, 2000

Before WIDENER, MICHAEL, and TRAXLER, Circuit Judges.

_________________________________________________________________

Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion.

_________________________________________________________________

COUNSEL

Samuel H. Shamansky, Columbus, Ohio, for Appellant. Rebecca A.

Betts, United States Attorney, Ray M. Shepard, Assistant United

States Attorney, Charleston, West Virginia, for Appellee.

_________________________________________________________________

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. See

Local Rule 36(c).

_________________________________________________________________
OPINION

PER CURIAM:

Claudette Stapleton appeals her jury convictions of conspiring to

distribute and possess with intent to distribute marijuana and conspiring to launder money with intent to promote and carry on a conspiracy to distribute and possess with intent to distribute marijuana.

Stapleton argues her trial counsel operated under a conflict of interest

that adversely affected his performance.

Claims of ineffective assistance of counsel are generally not cognizable on direct appeal. See United States v. King, 119 F.3d 290, 295

(4th Cir. 1997). Rather, such a claim is more properly addressed in

a collateral proceeding in which counsel has the opportunity to

respond to the allegations against him. See United States v. DeFusco,

949 F.2d 114, 120 (4th Cir. 1991). An ineffective assistance of counsel claim may be brought, however, when the record conclusively

establishes counsel's representation was constitutionally ineffective.

See King, 119 F.3d at 295.

We note the record reveals Stapleton waived her Sixth Amendment

right to separate representation after extensive inquiry by the district

court and after the court's admonition that she would be wise to retain

separate counsel. Furthermore, on this record, we do not find counsel's initial representation of Timothy Stapleton and continued representation of Greg Borders (both co-defendants of Appellant) created

an actual conflict of interest or that any potential conflict adversely

affected counsel's representation of Stapleton. Thus, Stapleton should

assert her ineffective assistance claim in a motion pursuant to 28

U.S.C.A. § 2255 (West Supp. 2000).

We therefore affirm Stapleton's convictions. 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.

AFFIRMED

 2
SPECIAL POWER OF ATTORNEY


         KNOW ALL MEN BY THESE PRESENTS,  that the  undersigned  constitutes and
appoints  Jerry C. Moyes and William F. Riley,  III, and each of them,  his true
and  lawful  attorney-in-fact  and agent  with full  power of  substitution  and
resubstitution,  for  him  and in his  name,  place  and  stead,  in any and all
capacities,  to sign the Annual  Report on Form 10-K for the  fiscal  year ended
December 31, 1996,  for filing with the  Securities  and Exchange  Commission by
Swift Transportation Co., Inc., a Nevada corporation,  together with any and all
amendments  to such Form 10-K,  and to file the same with all exhibits  thereto,
and all  documents in connection  therewith,  with the  Securities  and Exchange
Commission,  granting to such  attorneys-in-fact  and agents,  and each of them,
full  power  and  authority  to do and  perform  each and  every  act and  thing
requisite and  necessary to be done in and about the  premises,  as fully and to
all intents and purposes as he might or could do in person, hereby ratifying and
confirming  all that such  attorneys-in-fact  and agents,  or each of them,  may
lawfully do or cause to be done by virtue hereof.

         DATED: March 14, 1997


                                       /s/ Rodney K. Sartor
                                       -----------------------------------------
                                       Rodney K. Sartor
STATE OF ARIZONA                    )
                                    ) ss.
County of Maricopa                  )


         On this 14th day of March,  1997,  before  me, the  undersigned  Notary
Public, personally appeared Rodney K. Sartor, known to me to be the person whose
name is subscribed to the within  instrument and  acknowledged  that he executed
the same for the purposes therein contained.

         IN WITNESS WHEREOF, I hereunto set my hand and official seal.



                                       /s/ Anne Tanner
                                       -----------------------------------------
                                       Notary Public


My commission expires:
April 30, 1999
```

[Congressional Bills 116th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[H.R. 7598 Introduced in House (IH)]

<DOC>

116th CONGRESS
  2d Session
                                H. R. 7598

 To direct the Secretary of Defense to include information on exposure 
to open burn pits in postdeployment health reassessments of members of 
                           the Armed Forces.

_______________________________________________________________________

                    IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

                             July 13, 2020

  Mr. Ruiz (for himself and Mr. Welch) introduced the following bill; 
         which was referred to the Committee on Armed Services

_______________________________________________________________________

                                 A BILL

 
 To direct the Secretary of Defense to include information on exposure 
to open burn pits in postdeployment health reassessments of members of 
                           the Armed Forces.

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

SECTION 1. INCLUSION OF INFORMATION ON EXPOSURE TO OPEN BURN PITS IN 
              POSTDEPLOYMENT HEALTH REASSESSMENTS.

    (a) In General.--The Secretary of Defense shall include in 
postdeployment health reassessments conducted under section 1074f of 
title 10, United States Code, pursuant to a Department of Defense Form 
2796, or successor form, an independent and conspicuous question 
regarding exposure of members of the Armed Forces to open burn pits.
    (b) Inclusion in Assessments by Military Departments.--The 
Secretary of Defense shall ensure that the Secretary of each military 
department includes a question regarding exposure of members of the 
Armed Forces to open burn pits in any electronic postdeployment health 
assessment conducted by that military department.
    (c) Open Burn Pit Defined.--In this section, the term ``open burn 
pit'' has the meaning given that term in section 201(c) of the 
Dignified Burial and Other Veterans' Benefits Improvement Act of 2012 
(Public Law 112-260; 38 U.S.C. 527 note).
                                 <all>
```
I 

116TH CONGRESS 

2D SESSION H. R. 7320 

To amend the Small Business Act to require equitable adjustments to certain 

construction contracts, and for other purposes. 

IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES 

JUNE 24, 2020 

Mr. STAUBER (for himself and Mr. GOLDEN) introduced the following bill; 

which was referred to the Committee on Small Business 

A BILL 

To amend the Small Business Act to require equitable adjustments to certain construction contracts, and for other 

purposes. 

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

3 SECTION 1. EQUITABLE ADJUSTMENTS TO CERTAIN CON4 STRUCTION CONTRACTS. 

5 (a) IN GENERAL.—The Small Business Act (15 

6 U.S.C. 631 et seq.) is amended by inserting after section 

7 15 the following new section: 


pbinns on DSKJLVW7X2PROD with BILLS
2 

•HR 7320 IH

1 ‘‘SEC. 15a. EQUITABLE ADJUSTMENTS TO CONSTRUCTION 

2 CONTRACTS. 

3 ‘‘(a) REQUEST FOR AN EQUITABLE ADJUSTMENT.— 

4 A small business concern performing a construction con5 tract that was awarded by an agency may submit a re6 quest for an equitable adjustment to the contracting offi7 cer of such agency if the contracting officer directs a 

8 change in the work within the general scope of the con9 tract without the agreement of the small business concern. 

10 Such request shall— 

11 ‘‘(1) be timely made pursuant to the terms of 

12 the contract; and 

13 ‘‘(2) comply with Federal regulations regarding 

14 equitable adjustments, including specifying addi15 tional costs resulting from such change in the work 

16 within the general scope of the contract. 

17 ‘‘(b) AMOUNT.—Upon receipt of a request for equi18 table adjustment under subsection (a), the agency shall 

19 provide to the small business concern an interim partial 

20 payment in an amount that is at least 50 percent of the 

21 costs identified in the request for equitable adjustment 

22 under subsection (a)(2). 

23 ‘‘(c) LIMITATION.—Any interim partial payment 

24 made under this section shall not be deemed to be an ac25 tion to definitize the request for an equitable adjustment. 


pbinns on DSKJLVW7X2PROD with BILLS
3 

•HR 7320 IH

1 ‘‘(d) FLOW-DOWN OF INTERIM PARTIAL PAYMENT

2 AMOUNTS.—A small business concern that requests an eq3 uitable adjustment under this section shall pay to a first 

4 tier subcontractor or supplier the portion of the interim 

5 partial payment received that is attributable to the in6 creased costs of performance incurred by the first tier sub7 contractor or supplier due to the change in the work with8 in the general scope of the contract. A subcontractor or 

9 supplier at any tier that receives a portion of an interim 

10 partial payment under this section shall pay its subcon11 tractor or supplier the appropriate portion of such pay12 ment.’’. 

13 (b) IMPLEMENTATION.—The Administrator of the 

14 Small Business Administration shall implement the re15 quirements of this section not later than the first day of 

16 the first full fiscal year beginning after the date of the 

17 enactment of this Act. 

Æ 


pbinns on DSKJLVW7X2PROD with BILLS
#### Delbert ZAHN, Appellant, v. STATE of Florida, Appellee.

No. 77-570.

District Court of Appeal of Florida, Second District.

Nov. 18, 1977.

Jack 0. Johnson, Public Defender, David S. Bergdoll, Asst. Public Defender, Bartow, and Charles M. Johnston, Research Asst., Gainesville, for appellant.

Robert L. Shevin, Atty. Gen., Tallahassee, and Mary Jo M. Gallay, Asst. Atty. Gen., Tampa, for appellee.

PER CURIAM.

We affirm the judgment of the trial court, but we remand this case for the correction' of appellant’s sentence. The present sentence does not specify the amount of credit appellant is to receive for time served as Section 921.161(1), Florida Statutes (1975) requires. *Brooks v. State,*349 So.2d 794 (Fla.2d DCA 1977). Appellant need not be present at resentencing.

HOBSON, Acting C. J., and OTT and DANAHY, JJ., concur.
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 Annual Report of ML Life Insurance Company of New York
(the Company) on Form 10-K for the year ended
December 31, 2008 as filed
with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the Report),
I, Lon J. Olejniczak,
President 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:



| | (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/ LON J. OLEJNICZAK
Lon J. Olejniczak
President
| | -------------------------------------------------

Dated: March 26, 2009

A signed original of this written statement required by Section 906 has been
provided to ML Life Insurance Company of New York and will be retained by ML
Life Insurance Company of New York and furnished to the Securities and Exchange
Commission or its staff upon request.