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 (1.11 MB)

Tags:Defense Logistics Agency Troop Support, Department of Defense, DLA Troop Support, Defense Logistics Agency, DOD, DLA, Troop Support, Greater Northeast Philadelphia Chamber of Commerce

Photo by:VIRIN: 

Photo Gallery
AFS

- 16

- 9633

- E

April 18 , 2016

Exemption No. 10782C Regulatory Docket No. FAA

- 2013

- 0279

Mr. Mario Cotumaccio Aviation High School
45

- 30 36 th Street Long Island

, NY 11101

Dear Mr. Cotum accio :

This letter is to inform you that we have granted your petition to extend Exemption No. 10782, as amended . It explains the basis for our decision, describes its effect, and lists the
revised conditions and limitations

.

The Basis for Our Decision

By letter dated March 10

, 2016

, you petitioned the Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) on behalf of Aviation High School for an amendment to Exemption No. 10782 , as amended

. That e xemption

, from §147.36 of Title 14, Code of Federal Regulations (14 CFR)

, c urrently
allows Aviation High School to con duct instruction with a student/ instructor ratio greater than
the designated 25 to 1 ratio

. Specifically, t he amendment you have request ed would allow Aviation High School to cond uct instruction with a student/ i n st ructor ratio of 2 8 to 1

.

We are extending the current grant of exe mption from § 147.36 to permit Aviation High
School to conduct FAA

- approved mechanic courses in the 2016

- 2017 and 2017

- 2018 school

years with a student/instructor ratio of 28 to 1, subjec t to the condition that Aviation High School ensures the facilities, instructional equipment, and instructor to student ratio continue to provide a level of safety equivalent to 14 CFR § 147.36.

Our Decision

The FAA has determined the justification for the issuance of Exemption No. 10782, as amended, remains valid and is in the public interest. Therefore, under the authority provided2

AFS

- 13

- 582

- E by 49 U.S.C. §§ 106(f), 40113

, and 44701, which the FAA Administrator has delegated to me, I have amended Exemption No. 10782 , as amended, to allow Aviation High School to
conduct instruction with a student/ inst ructor ratio of up to 28 to 1, which is greater than the
2 5 to 1 requirement specified in 14 CFR § 147.36

.

The Effect of Our Decision

Our decision extends the terminatio n date of Exemption No. 10782, as amended

, to June 30,
201 8 , unless sooner superseded or rescinded.

This letter must be attached to, and is a part of, Exemption No. 10782 , as amended

.

Sincerely,

/s/
John S. Duncan Director, Flight Standards Service
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 (2.08 MB)

Tags:

Photo by:VIRIN: 

Photo Gallery
AMENDMENT TO NON-REVOLVING CREDIT LINE LOAN AGREEMENT

     BY THIS  AMENDMENT,  entered into on the 12th day of October  2001,  to the
AGREEMENT made and entered into as of the 14th day of March,  2001,  AZCO MINING
INC.,  a Delaware  corporation,  whose  address  is 7239  North El Mirage  Road,
Glendale, Arizona (hereinafter called "Borrower"),  and Lawrence G. Olson, whose
address is 7239 North El Mirage  Road,  Glendale,  Arizona  (hereinafter  called
"Lender"),  for  and  in  consideration  of the  recitals  and  mutual  promises
contained herein, confirm and agree as follows:

SECTION 1. GENERAL TERMS

     1.1 Lender  agrees to extend the term of the March 14, 2001,  $800,000 loan
an additional year to March 12th 2003 (the "Loan Extension").

     1.2 The Loan Extension  shall be evidenced by a  Non-Revolving  Credit Line
Note in the form attached hereto as Exhibit A (the "Note") of Borrower, executed
and delivered  simultaneously with the execution of this Amendment,  in the face
amount of $800,000,  payable to Lender upon the terms and  conditions  contained
therein.

     1.3 The note shall take the place of the note executed in conjunction  with
the March 14, 2001 non-revolving credit loan agreement.

     1.4 In  consideration  of the Loan  Extension,  Borrower  shall  provide to
Lender a warrant for the purchase of 700,000  shares of Borrower's  common stock
in the form  attached  hereto as Exhibit B (the  "Warrant"),  and  Borrower  and
Lender shall enter into a Registration  Rights  Agreement in  substantially  the
form attached hereto as Exhibit C.


     IN WITNESS  WHEREOF,  these  presents are executed as of the date indicated
above.


                                    BORROWER

                                    AZCO MINING INC., a Delaware corporation

                                    By:
                                    Its:

                                    LENDER



                                    Lawrence G. Olson
Exhibit
10.34
 AMENDED AND RESTATED
THERMADYNE HOLDINGS CORPORATION
NON-EMPLOYEE DIRECTORS  DEFERRED FEE PLAN
   Establishment
 Purpose
 Effective Date




---



##### 



General Rule
 Timing and Duration of Election
 Form of Election
 Establishment of Stock Unit Account
 Crediting of Dividend Equivalents
 2




---



##### 



Timing of Payment
 Payment Options
 3




---



##### 



Payment Upon Death of a Participant
 Continuation of Dividend Equivalents
   General
 Trust
 4




---



##### 



No Stockholder Rights Conferred
 Changes to The Plan
 Compliance With Laws and Obligations
 Limitations on Transferability
 5




---



##### 



Governing Law
 Plan Termination
 
 THERMADYNE HOLDING CORPORATIONBy:President 6




---



##### 



APPENDIX I
 Board
 Change in Control
 Committee
 Common Stock
 Company
 Deferral Date
 Deferral Election
 Director
 Fair Market Value
 Fees




---



##### 



Non-employee Director
 Participant
 Plan
 Secretary
 Shares
 Stock Units
 Stock Unit Account
 Termination of Service
 8
```

[Congressional Bills 113th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[S. 993 Reference Change Senate (RCS)]

113th CONGRESS
  1st Session
                                 S. 993

 To authorize and request the President to award the Medal of Honor to 
 James Megellas, formerly of Fond du Lac, Wisconsin, and currently of 
 Colleyville, Texas, for acts of valor on January 28, 1945, during the 
                  Battle of the Bulge in World War II.

_______________________________________________________________________

                   IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES

                              May 21, 2013

  Mr. Cornyn introduced the following bill; which was read twice and 
    referred to the Committee on Banking, Housing, and Urban Affairs

                              June 4, 2013

   Committee discharged; referred to the Committee on Armed Services

_______________________________________________________________________

                                 A BILL

 
 To authorize and request the President to award the Medal of Honor to 
 James Megellas, formerly of Fond du Lac, Wisconsin, and currently of 
 Colleyville, Texas, for acts of valor on January 28, 1945, during the 
                  Battle of the Bulge in World War II.

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

SECTION 1. AUTHORIZATION AND REQUEST FOR AWARD OF MEDAL OF HONOR TO 
              JAMES MEGELLAS FOR ACTS OF VALOR DURING BATTLE OF THE 
              BULGE.

    (a) Authorization.--The President is authorized and requested to 
award the Medal of Honor under section 3741 of title 10, United States 
Code, to James Megellas, formerly of Fond du Lac, Wisconsin, and 
currently of Colleyville, Texas, for the acts of valor described in 
subsection (b).
    (b) Action Described.--The acts of valor referred to in subsection 
(a) are the actions of James Megellas on January 28, 1945, in 
Herresbach, Belgium, during the Battle of the Bulge, during World War 
II, when, as a first lieutenant in the 82d Airborne Division, he led a 
surprise and devastating attack on a much larger advancing enemy force, 
killing and capturing a large number and causing others to flee, 
single-handedly destroying an attacking German Mark V tank with two 
hand-held grenades, and then leading his men in clearing and seizing 
Herresbach.
    (c) Waiver of Time Limitations.--The award under subsection (a) may 
be made without regard to the time limitations specified in section 
3744(b) of title 10, United States Code, or any other time limitation 
established by law or regulation with respect to the awarding of 
certain medals to persons who served in the Army.
                                 <all>
```
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  The undersigned hereby certifies, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, as adopted pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that this Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q for the quarter ended September 30, 2012 fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended, and the information contained in such report fairly presents, in all material respects, the financial condition and results of operations of Fresh Medical Laboratories, Inc.   /s/ Steven C. ErorDate: November 16, 2012Steven C. Eror
Chief Executive Officer and Director
##### 



EXHIBIT 10X
 COGNEX CORPORATION
SUMMARY OF ANNUAL BONUS PROGRAM
  
    
    if the operating margin is above the minimum threshold but below the operating margin
target in the annual budget, each employee is eligible to receive a pro-rata portion of
his or her target bonus;
    

    if the operating margin is equal to the operating margin set forth in the annual
budget, each employee is eligible to receive 100% of his or her target bonus; and
    
    if the operating margin is above the operating margin set forth in the annual budget,
all exempt employees are eligible to receive an additional amount depending upon his or
her grade level and up to a maximum level approved by the Compensation/Stock Option
Committee.
#### Blum, Gersen & Stream, Appellant, v 346 East 72nd Street Associates, Inc., Respondent.

Order, Supreme Court, New York County (Harold Tompkins, J.), entered October 24, 1990, denying plaintiff’s motion for summary judgment in lieu of complaint, unanimously affirmed, with costs.

A letter may be considered an instrument for the payment of money only, pursuant to CPLR 3213, so long as the writing unconditionally acknowledges a debt *(Maglich v Saxe, Bacon & Bolán,*97 AD2d 19). Here, the express language of defendant’s letter indicates that its acknowledgement of indebtedness and schedule of repayment were mere proposals, made in *445the course of ongoing negotiations. The letter reflected defendant’s understanding of the agreed upon terms and its "proposal” which it believed essentially mirrored plaintiff’s terms. The letter also invited further comment from plaintiff, apparently in the event plaintiff believed the letter did not conform with what had been agreed. Under these circumstances, defendant’s acknowledgement of an indebtedness was not unconditional, and it cannot be said that the parties had reached an agreement on the terms set forth in the instrument sued upon. *(Supra,*at 21; *Rhee v Meyers,*162 AD2d 397.)

Moreover, defendant executed the letter as an agent on behalf of the party sought to be charged, 346 East 72nd Street Realty Associates Company, which has not been made a party. Service upon defendant, general partner of the limited partnership Realty Associates Company, constitutes jurisdiction over Realty Associates Company, pursuant to CPLR 310. However it would be inappropriate to award judgment in favor of plaintiff against the assets of the general partner agent *(see, Helmsley v Cohen,*56 AD2d 519), especially where plaintiff’s papers did not apprise defendant that it would be held liable in its individual capacity. *(Cf, Albilia v Hillcrest Gen. Hosp.,*124 AD2d 499.) Concur—Murphy, P. J., Carro, Ellerin, Wallach and Asch, JJ.
#### The PEOPLE of the State of Colorado, Plaintiff-Appellant, v. Mark GALLEGOS, Defendant-Appellee.

No. 87SA171.

Supreme Court of Colorado, En Banc.

Nov. 14, 1988.

Roger B. Larsen, Dist. Atty., Edward Rodgers, Deputy Dist. Atty., Canon City, Steven B. Rich, Chief Deputy Dist. Atty., Fairplay, for plaintiff-appellant.

David F. Vela, State Public Defender, Jaydee K. Bachman, Deputy State Public Defender, Denver, for defendant-appellee.

ROVIRA, Justice.

The question presented by the People’s appeal is whether section 18-1-105(9)(a)(V), 8B C.R.S. (1986), requires sentencing beyond the presumptive range when a defendant is convicted of possession of contraband while in a correctional institution. We conclude that the People’s failure to object at the sentencing hearing to the imposition of a sentence within the presumptive range or to request the trial court, pursuant to Crim.P. 35(a), to correct *77the sentence, prevents us from reaching the merits of the case on appeal.

The defendant-appellee, Mark Gallegos, was an inmate at the Fremont Corrections Facility in Canon City when he was charged with possession of contraband, in violation of section 18-8-204.1, 8B C.R.S. (1986), a class 5 felony. The defendant was found guilty and subsequently sentenced on April 17, 1987. The presentence report recommended a sentence of two years, a term within the presumptive range for a class 5 felony. The People concurred in that recommendation. The trial court then sentenced the defendant to a term of eighteen months to the department of corrections to run consecutively to his present sentence. The eighteen-month sentence is also within the presumptive range for a class 5 felony. § 18-l-105(l)(a)(IV), 8B C.R.S. (1986).

Initially the defendant contends that the • People’s failure to object at the sentencing hearing to the imposition of a sentence within the presumptive range, or to move under Crim.P. 35(a) to have the sentence corrected, precludes appellate review of that sentence.

It is a basic principle of appellate procedure that unless the trial court has been given an opportunity to correct an alleged error, it will not be considered on review unless it involves a plain error which deprives a litigant of fundamental rights.

In this case, the People had two alternatives: either contemporaneously object at the sentencing hearing and appeal pursuant to section 16-12-102(1), 8A C.R.S. (1986),1 or, failing that, request the trial court, pursuant to Crim.P. 35(a), to correct an illegal sentence.2 Because neither of these options was taken, we decline to consider the merits of the People’s appeal.

Accordingly, we remand to the district court for further proceedings consistent with this opinion.

1

. Section 16-12-102(1), 8A C.R.S. (1986), provides that "[t]he prosecution may appeal any decision of the trial court in a criminal case upon any question of law."

2

. Crim.P. 35(a) states that "[t]he court may correct an illegal sentence at any time and may correct a sentence imposed in an illegal manner within the time provided herein for the reduction of sentence."
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 (0.15 MB)

Tags:123rd Airlift Wing, DLA Disposition Services, Defense Logistics Agency

Photo by:VIRIN: 

Photo Gallery
NOT FOR PUBLICATION

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT

DONALD RICHARD CHILDS II,

Plaintiff

- Appellant,

v.

BOYD GAMING CORPORATION,

Defendant

- Appellee. No. 19

- 15423

D.C. No. 2:18

- cv

- 00316

- KJD

- VCF

MEMORANDUM *

Appeal from the United States District Court

for the District of Nevada

Kent J. Dawson, District Judge, Presiding

Submitted July 14, 2020 * *

Before: CANBY, FRIEDLAND, and R. NELSON, Circuit Judges.

Donald Richard Childs II appeals pro se from the district court’s judgment

dismissing his 42 U.S.C. § 1981 action alleging racial discrimination . We have

jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. § 1291. We review for an abuse of discretion a

district court ’s dismissal under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 41(b)

. Ferdik v.

* This disposition is not appropriate for publication and is not precedent

except as provided by Ninth Circuit Rule 36

- 3.

** The panel unanimously concludes this case is suitable for decision

without oral argument. See Fed. R. App. P. 34(a)(2). 

# FILED

JUL 17 2020

MOLLY C. DWYER, CLERK

U.S. COURT OF APPEALS2 19

- 15423

Bonzelet , 963 F.2d 1258, 1260 (9th Cir. 1992). We affirm.

The district court did not abuse its discretion by dismissing Childs’s action

with prejudice because Childs failed to comply wi th the district court’s order to file

an amended complaint, and failed to oppose defendant’s motion to dismiss under

Rule 41(b). See id. at 1260

- 63 (setting forth factors for determining whether a pro

se action should be dismissed under Rule 41(b) and req uiring “ a definite and firm

conviction ” that the district court “ committed a clear error of judgment ” in order to

overturn such a dismissal (citation and internal quotation marks omitted) ).

The district court did not abuse its discretion by denying Childs’ s Rule

60(b)(6) motion because Childs failed to demonstrate any basis for relief. See

Latshaw v. Trainer Wortham & Co. , Inc. , 452 F.3d 1097, 1100, 1102

- 03 (9th Cir.

2006) ( setting forth standard of review

, discussing required showing for Rule

60(b)(6) relief

, and explaining that relief may be granted “only where

extraordinary circumstances” are present (citations and internal quotation marks

omitted)).

AFFIRMED.