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 DLAImages

# DLA Images

Search

Search

                                  - All Images 
                                  - Other 

                                  - Upload Date
                                  - Photo Date
                                  - Title

Share

----

Download Image: Small ()Medium ()Full Size (0.72 MB)

Tags:DLA Aviation, Process Exzcellence, Strategic engagement, People & CUlture, Warfighter First, AOP

Photo by:VIRIN: 

Photo Gallery
COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE

FIRST DISTRICT OF TEXAS AT HOUSTON

AMENDED ORDER ON MOTION

Cause number: 01-19-00280-CV

Style: Ronald Joseph v. Britini Jeavon Jack

Date motion filed*: August 12, 2019

Type of motion: Motion for Extension of Time to File Appellant’s Brief

Party filing motion: Appellant Ronald Joseph

Document to be filed: Appellant’s Brief

Is appeal accelerated? No.

If motion to extend time:

Original due date: August 12, 2019

Number of extensions granted: 0 Current Due Date: August 12, 2019

Date Requested: September 9, 2019

Ordered that motion is:

☒ Granted

If document is to be filed, document due: September 19, 2019.

☐ Denied (motion to abate)

☐ Dismissed (e.g., want of jurisdiction, moot)

☒ Other: _ Appellant’s trial counsel should have requested the district court to make the 

reporter’s record for trial court cause number 2018-10282, a protective order proceeding, 

part of the record for the underlying trial court cause number 2018-91034, a bill-of-review 

proceeding. Absent that, the court reporter, Tish Taffolla, only needed to file a reporter’s 

record if it arose from 2018-91034, not if it arose from 2018-10282. Accordingly, 

appellant’s motion for extension of time to file his brief is granted until September 19, 

2019. See TEX. R. APP. P. 38.6(d).____________________________________________

Judge’s signature: ___/s/ Evelyn V. Keyes____

 Acting individually Acting for the Court

Date: ___August 30, 2019___
Exhibit 23.2

Ryder Scott Company
Petroleum Consultants

1100 Louisiana                                              Fax (713) 651-0849
Suite 3800
Houston, TX  77002-5218                               Telephone (713) 651-9191






                      CONSENT OF PETROLEUM CONSULTING FIRM




      We consent to the  reference to our name included in this Annual Report on
Form 10-K for the year ended December 31, 2004 for Geodyne Instituitonal/Pension
Energy Income Limited Partnership P-3.


                              //s// Ryder Scott Company, L.P.

                              RYDER SCOTT COMPANY, L.P.




Houston, Texas
March 14, 2005
Exhibit




EXHIBIT 10.51


2016 PERFORMANCE GOALS FOR
CEO SHORT-TERM INCENTIVE BONUS


	
			
	

Performance Criteria
	Goals and Minimum and Maximum Thresholds
	Allocation of Target Amount ($) (1)

	San Jose Water Company Capital Additions (2)


	Target Goal:  $117.8M


Minimum Threshold:  $104.7M


Maximum Goal:  $130.9M or more


	$61,533

	Compliance (Environmental) (3)


	Maximum Goal:  No material water quality or environmental violations (Goal and Minimum Threshold are not applicable).


	$61,533

	San Jose Water Company 
Operational Goals


	Target Goal:  Achieve 80% of identified key water industry objectives measured primarily in terms of service, reliability and efficiency. 


Minimum Threshold:  Achieve 70% of identified water industry objectives. 


Maximum Goal:  Achieve 90% of identified key water industry objectives.


	$61,534






		
	1)
	The target 2016 annual cash bonus amount is equal to $184,600, which is 25 percent of Mr. Roth’s 2016 base salary per his employment agreement. The actual bonus attributable to each performance goal may range from 0 to 150 percent of the portion of the target bonus amount allocated to that goal. Based on the Committee determination of the level of achievement of each performance goal, the amount payable with respect to that goal will be as follows:


		
	•
	If the goal is attained at target level, 100 percent of the allocated amount will be paid.  


		
	•
	If the goal is only attained at the minimum level, then 50 percent of the allocated amount will be paid.  


		
	•
	If the goal is attained at or above maximum level, then 150 percent of the allocated amount will be paid.


		
	•
	Should the actual level of attainment of any such performance goal be between two of the designated levels, then the bonus potential with respect to that goal will be interpolated on a straight-line basis.




		
	2)
	“San Jose Water Capital Additions” means San Jose Water Company’s capital expenditures made in 2016, including expenditures for improvements to the Montevina Treatment Plant and the cost to retire facilities. The Target Goal, Minimum Threshold and Maximum Goal are equal to 90%, 80% and 100%, respectively, of the total amount of capital expenditures, including the amount of capital expenditures for planned improvements made to the Montevina Treatment Plant and the amount of expenditures to retire facilities, approved by San Jose Water Company’s Board for the 2016 fiscal year.  




		
	3)
	“No material water quality or environmental violations” means no material fines issued by state or federal environmental regulators in the performance year in connection with water quality or environmental violations that occurred during the performance year or in any of the preceding two years.  A material fine will be deemed to occur if the amount of the fine exceeds $25,000 in any one instance or $100,000 in the aggregate for the year.
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 The Chefs Warehouse, Inc. (the Company) on Form 10-Q for the quarter ended June 29, 2012, as filed with the Securities and Exchange
Commission on the date hereof (the Report), I, Christopher Pappas, Chief Executive Officer of the Company, certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. § 1350, as adopted pursuant to § 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.
| | --- | ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------



|                      |  |                                                                         
|--------------------- |  | ------------------------------------------------------------------------
|Date: August 13, 2012 |  | /s/ Christopher Pappas                                                  
|                      |  | Christopher Pappas Chief
Executive Officer (Principal Executive Officer)

A signed original of this written statement has been provided to the Company and will be retained by the Company and
furnished to the SEC or its staff upon request.
```

[Congressional Bills 113th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[S.J. Res. 18 Introduced in Senate (IS)]

113th CONGRESS
  1st Session
S. J. RES. 18

  Proposing an amendment to the Constitution of the United States to 
     clarify the authority of Congress and the States to regulate 
 corporations, limited liability companies or other corporate entities 
established by the laws of any State, the United States, or any foreign 
                                 state.

_______________________________________________________________________

                   IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES

                             June 18, 2013

Mr. Tester (for himself and Mr. Murphy) introduced the following joint 
 resolution; which was read twice and referred to the Committee on the 
                               Judiciary

_______________________________________________________________________

                            JOINT RESOLUTION

 
  Proposing an amendment to the Constitution of the United States to 
     clarify the authority of Congress and the States to regulate 
 corporations, limited liability companies or other corporate entities 
established by the laws of any State, the United States, or any foreign 
                                 state.

    Resolved by the Senate and House of Representatives of the United 
States of America in Congress assembled (two-thirds of each House 
concurring therein), That the following article is proposed as an 
amendment to the Constitution of the United States, which shall be 
valid to all intents and purposes as part of the Constitution when 
ratified by the legislatures of three-fourths of the several States:

                              ``Article--

    ``Section 1. We the people who ordain and establish this 
Constitution intend the rights protected by this Constitution to be the 
rights of natural persons.
    ``Section 2. The words people, person, or citizen as used in this 
Constitution do not include corporations, limited liability companies 
or other corporate entities established by the laws of any State, the 
United States, or any foreign state, and such corporate entities are 
subject to such regulation as the people, through their elected State 
and Federal representatives, deem reasonable and are otherwise 
consistent with the powers of Congress and the States under this 
Constitution.
    ``Section 3. Nothing contained herein shall be construed to limit 
the people's rights of freedom of speech, freedom of the press, free 
exercise of religion, freedom of association and all such other rights 
of the people, which rights are unalienable.''.
                                 <all>
```
Document Headings

                    Document headings vary by document type but may contain                    the following:                  
                -                       the agency or agencies that issued and signed a document                    
                -                       the number of the CFR title and the number of each part                      the document amends, proposes to amend, or is directly                      related to                    
                -                       the agency docket number / agency internal file number                    
                -                       the RIN which identifies each regulatory action listed in                      the Unified Agenda of Federal Regulatory and Deregulatory                      Actions                    

                    See the                                          Document Drafting Handbook                                        for more details.                  

###### Department of Energy

###### Federal Energy Regulatory Commission

          - [Project No. 13305-002]

                    a.                     *Date and Time of Meeting:*                     Tuesday, February 21, 2012, starting at 2 p.m. and ending at 4 p.m. (Eastern Standard Time).                

                    b.                     *FERC Contact:*                     Dianne Rodman, (202) 502-6077 or                     *dianne.rodman@ferc.gov.*

                    c.                     *Purpose of Meeting:*                     Commission staff will meet with Whitestone Power and Communications (Whitestone) to discuss the need for environmental monitoring for the Microturbine Hydrokinetic River-In-Stream Energy Conversion Power Project (also known as the Whitestone Poncelet RISEC Project), which would be located on the Tanana River near Delta Junction, Alaska.                

d. All local, state, and federal agencies, Indian tribes, and other interested parties are invited to participate by phone. Please call Dianne Rodman by February 16, 2012, to RSVP and to receive specific instructions on how to participate.

Dated: February 10, 2012.

Nathaniel J. Davis, Sr.,

Deputy Secretary.

[FR Doc. 2012-3632 Filed 2-15-12; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 6717-01-P
UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 00-6533

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Plaintiff - Appellee, versus SCOTT DAVID NORTMAN, Defendant - Appellant. Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of Maryland, at Baltimore. Benson E. Legg, District Judge. (CR-96- 484-L, CA-98-2206-L) Submitted: July 13, 2000 Decided: July 25, 2000 Before WIDENER, LUTTIG, and TRAXLER, Circuit Judges. Dismissed by unpublished per curiam opinion. Scott David Nortman, Appellant Pro Se. John Francis Purcell, Jr., OFFICE OF THE UNITED STATES ATTORNEY, Baltimore, Maryland, for Appellee. Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. See Local Rule 36(c).* Although the district court’s order is marked as “filed” on March 31, 2000, the district court’s records show that it was entered on the docket sheet on April 3, 2000. Pursuant to Rules 58 and 79(a) of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure, it is the date that the order was entered on the docket sheet that we take as the effective date of the district court’s decision. See Wilson v. Murray, 806 F.2d 1232, 1234-35 (4th Cir. 1986). 2 PER CURIAM: Scott David Nortman seeks to appeal the district court’s order denying his motion filed under 28 U.S.C.A. § 2255 (West Supp.2000). We have reviewed the record and the district court’s opinion and find no reversible error. Accordingly, we deny a certificate of appealability and dismiss the appeal on the reasoning of the district court. See United States v. Nortman , Nos. CR-96-484- L; CA-98-2206-L (D. Md. Apr. 3, 2000). * 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
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 DLAImages

# DLA Images

Search

Search

                                  - All Images 
                                  - Other 

                                  - Upload Date
                                  - Photo Date
                                  - Title

Share

----

Download Image: Small ()Medium ()Full Size (0.2 MB)

Tags:culture, DLA Aviation, Process excellence, Warfighter First

Photo by:VIRIN: 

Photo Gallery
AD Economic Evaluation

Docket No. FAA - 2011 - 0561 Directorate ID: 2010 - SW - 001 - AD Helicopter Model: Bell Helicopter Textron, Inc. Model 205A, 205A - 1, 205B, 212, 412, 412CF, and 412EP Helicopters Number of Helicopters (U. S. Operators): 263 Helicopters in the US Registry. Reason : to detect corrosion or pitting in the forward spar area of a tail rotor ( T/R) blade in order to prevent a crack in the T/R blade, loss of the T/R blade, and subsequent loss of control of the helico pter. Costs : Parts per Helicopter $ 17,495 for each T/R blade assembly Labor per Helicopter ( 10 x $ 8 5 /work- hour to r emove, inspect, refinish, and re - install ) (6 x $85/work-hour to replace) $ 850 $510 Other (Explain) Total Cost per Helicopter $ 850 to remove, inspect, refinish, and re - install $18,005 to replace Total US Fleet Cost $ 277,565, assuming all affected helicopters are i nspected and three tail rotor blades are replaced in the US fleet Executive Order 12866 : Could the AD be conside red a “significant regulatory action?” Yes ( ) No (  ) DOT Regulatory Policies and Procedures : Is the AD significant? Yes ( ) Explain Below No (  ) Regulatory Flexibility Act : Will the AD have a significant economic impact on a substantial number o f small entities? Yes ( ) No (  ) Project Engineer: Michael Kohner
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 DLAImages

# DLA Images

Search

Search

                                  - All Images 
                                  - Other 

                                  - Upload Date
                                  - Photo Date
                                  - Title

Share

----

Download Image: Small ()Medium ()Full Size (1.1 MB)

Tags:DLA Distribution, Defense Logistics Agency Distribution, BG Dix, Month the Military Child, DLA Distribution Norfolk, dla, cdc, People and Culture, Defense Logistics Agency

Photo by:VIRIN: 

Photo Gallery
Deny and Opinion Filed September 8, 2016

In The 

## Court of Appeals **Fifth District of Texas at Dallas**

No. 05-16-01043-CV
IN RE: WESTERN GENERAL AUTOMO BILE INSURANCE COMPANY, Relator Original Proceeding from the 298th Judicial District Court Dallas County, Texas Trial Court Cause No. DC-16-06845 MEMORANDUM OPINION Before Justices Bridge s, Myers, and Whitehill Opinion by Justice Bridges Before the Court is relator’s petition for wr it of mandamus in which it seeks relief from an order compelling depositions. The facts and issu es are well known to the parties, so we need
not recount them herein. To be entitled to mandamus relief, a relator mu st show both that the trial court has clearly
abused its discretion and that rela tor has no adequate appellate remedy. In re Prudential Ins. Co. , 148 S.W.3d 124, 135–36 (Tex. 2004) (orig. proceedin g). Based on the record before us, we
conclude relator has not shown it is entitled to the relief requested. See T EX

. R. A PP

. P. 52.8(a);
Walker v. Packer , 827 S.W.2d 833, 839-40 (Tex. 1992) (orig. proceeding).Accordingly, we DENY relator’s petition for writ of mandamus and DENY relator’s motion to stay the depositions as moot.

/David L. Bridges/ DAVID L. BRIDGES JUSTICE