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 (0.5 MB)

Tags:Accountability, DLA Aviation, Lines of Effort, Strong Partnerships, Marine Corps, AVLGO

Photo by:VIRIN: 

Photo Gallery
#### J. E. Grady *et al.,*Plaintiffs in Error, v. T. D. Johnson *et al.,*Defendants in Error.

Division A.

Writ of error to Circuit Court, Franklin county; John W. Malone, Judge.

*615H. C. Hicks and Geo. P. Raney for plaintiffs in error.

W. B. Sheppard and C. H. B. Eloyd for defendants in error.

This action was brought by the defendants in error against the plaintiffs in error. There was judgment for the plaintiffs and the defendants take writ of error. The judgment is affirmed.

Decision *Per Curiam.*
### Substantive Requirements

### #2 Copy of Permit Requirements See Attachment: 

# + GRIC Air Quality Management Program Plan (Part 11, Permit Requirements)
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 (1.48 MB)

Tags:Joint Task Force-Bravo, SPMAGTF-SC, Hurricane matthew, RELIEF, Haiti, Support, Humanitarian Assistance

Photo by:VIRIN: 

Photo Gallery
#### Thomas Jesse WARD, Appellant, v. STATE of Oklahoma, Appellee.

No. F-85-804.

Court of Criminal Appeals of Oklahoma.

May 20, 1988.

*124Joseph Wrigley, Seminole, for appellant.

Robert H. Henry, Atty. Gen., M. Caroline Emerson, Asst. Atty. Gen., Oklahoma City, for appellee.

OPINION

BUSSEY, Judge:

Thomas Jesse Ward was convicted in Pontotoc County District Court of Robbery with a Dangerous Weapon, Kidnapping, and Murder in the First Degree. He received sentences of twenty (20) years’ imprisonment, ten (10) years’ imprisonment, and the death penalty, respectively. Also tried and convicted was codefendant, Karl Fontenot. *Fontenot v. State,*742 P.2d 31 (Okl.Cr.1987). As with Fontenot’s convictions, we find Ward’s convictions must be reversed and the case remanded for new trial.

At the joint trial of Ward and Fontenot, the pretrial confessions of each which inculpated the other were admitted though neither defendant testified at trial. The trial judge followed the plurality opinion of the United States Supreme Court in *Parker v. Randolph,*442 U.S. 62, 99 S.Ct. 2132, 60 L.Ed.2d 713 (1979), which held that it was not error in admitting the confession of a codefendant which incriminates the defendant even though the codefendant did not testify if the defendant’s “interlocking” confession is also admitted. The Supreme Court has since repudiated this rule in *Cruz v. New York,*— U.S. -, 107 S.Ct. 1714, 95 L.Ed.2d 162 (1987). Because of the violation of the defendant’s right to confront the witnesses against him, *Bruton v. United States,*391 U.S. 123, 88 S.Ct. 1620, 20 L.Ed.2d 476 (1968), this Court reversed codefendant Fontenot’s convictions. *Fontenot, supra.*Because this same error occurs in appellant’s case, we hold that appellant’s convictions must also be reversed. While the ban on the use of a codefendant’s incriminating statements is not absolute, *see Cruz,*codefendant Fonte-not’s statement does not fall within an exception.

For the foregoing reasons, we reverse appellant’s convictions and remand for new trial.

BRETT, P.J., and PARKS, J., concur.
**EXHIBIT 31**

 

**CERTIFICATION**

**PURSUANT TO SECTION 302 OF THE**

**SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002**

 

I, Atara Dzikowski, certify that:

 

1.       Ihave reviewed this Amendment No. 1 to the Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q of Samsara Luggage, Inc.

 

2.       Basedon my knowledge, this report does not contain any untrue statement of a material fact or omit to state a material fact necessaryto make the statements made, in light of the circumstances under which such statements were made, not misleading with respect tothe period covered by this report.

 

 

Date: July 7, 2020

 

By: */s/ Atara Dzikowski*

Atara Dzikowski,

Chief Executive Officer

and Principal Financial and Accounting Officer
Dismiss and Opinion Filed July 20, 2015

In The 

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

No. 05-15-00842-CR No. 05-15-00843-CR No. 05-15-00844-CR

BRADLEY THOMAS CHANEY, Appellant

V.

THE STATE OF TEXAS, Appellee

On Appeal from the County Criminal Court No. 3 Dallas County, Texas Trial Court Cause Nos. MA13-13389-C, MA13-13390-C, MA13-13391-C



### MEMORANDUM OPINION Before Justices Francis, Lang-Miers, and Whitehill

Appellant has filed motions to dismiss the appe als. Appellant’s couns el has approved the

motions. The Court GRANTS the motions and ORDERS that the appeals be DISMISSED and

this decision be certified be low for observance. See T EX

. R. A PP

. P. 42.2(a).

PER CURIAM

Do Not Publish
T EX

. R. A PP

. P. 47 150842F.U05S 

## Court of Appeals Fifth District of Texas at Dallas

JUDGMENT

BRADLEY THOMAS CHANEY, Appellant

No. 05-15-00842-CR V.

THE STATE OF TEXAS, Appellee On Appeal from the County Criminal Court No. 3, Dallas County, Texas
Trial Court Cause No. MA13-13389-C. Opinion delivered per curiam before Justices Francis, Lang-Miers. and Whitehill.

Based on the Court’s opin ion of this date, we DISMISS the appeal.

Judgment entered July 20, 2015.S 

## Court of Appeals Fifth District of Texas at Dallas

JUDGMENT

BRADLEY THOMAS CHANEY, Appellant

No. 05-15-00843-CR V.

THE STATE OF TEXAS, Appellee On Appeal from the County Criminal Court No. 3, Dallas County, Texas Trial Court Cause No. MA13-13390-C. Opinion delivered per curiam before Justices Francis, Lang-Miers, and Whitehill.

Based on the Court’s opin ion of this date, we DISMISS the appeal.

Judgment entered July 20, 2015.S 

## Court of Appeals Fifth District of Texas at Dallas

JUDGMENT

BRADLEY THOMAS CHANEY, Appellant

No. 05-15-00844-CR V.

THE STATE OF TEXAS, Appellee On Appeal from the County Criminal Court No. 3, Dallas County, Texas Trial Court Cause No. MA13-13391-C. Opinion delivered per curiam before Justices Francis, Lang-Miers, and Whitehill.

Based on the Court’s opin ion of this date, we DISMISS the appeal.

Judgment entered July 20, 2015.
-86 -84 -82 -80 -78 -76 -74 -72 -70

 32

 34

 36

 38

 40

 42

★

▲

▲

▲

▲

★

▲ ▲ ▲ ▲

 500

 1000

 1500

 500

18 12 06 00

09/26

NOAA HYSPLIT MODEL

 Backward trajectory ending at 2300 UTC 26 Sep 07

 EDAS Meteorological Data

Source

★ at 38.90 N 76.65 W Meters AGL
Exhibit 32.1





CERTIFICATION




Pursuant to 18 U.S.C. 1350




(Section 302 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002)




In connection with the Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q of SCG Financial Acquisition Corp. (the “Company”) for the quarter ended March 31, 2011, as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the “Report”), James D. Dunning, Jr., Chief Executive Officer of the Company, hereby certifies, 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.




Dated: May 20, 2011

/s/ Gregory H. Sachs.Gregory H. SachsChief Executive Officer, Chairman and President(Principal executive officer)
III 

113TH CONGRESS 

2D SESSION S. RES. 446 

Recognizing the 50th anniversary of the Congressional declaration of bourbon 

whiskey as a distinctive product of the United States. 

IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES 

MAY 15, 2014 

Mr. MCCONNELL (for himself and Mr. PAUL) submitted the following 

resolution; which was considered and agreed to 

RESOLUTION 

Recognizing the 50th anniversary of the Congressional declaration of bourbon whiskey as a distinctive product of 

the United States. 

Whereas on May 4, 1964, Congress declared bourbon whiskey 

a distinctive product of the United States that is unlike 

other types of alcoholic beverages, whether foreign or domestic; 

Whereas to be designated as ‘‘bourbon,’’ a product must conform to high standards and be manufactured in accordance with the laws and regulations of the United States, 

which prescribe Federal Standards of Identity for ‘‘bourbon whisky’’; 

Whereas bourbon whiskey has achieved recognition and acceptance throughout the world as a distinctive product of 

the United States; 


tjames on DSK6SPTVN1PROD with BILLS
2 

•SRES 446 ATS 

Whereas Kentucky, the birthplace of bourbon, produces 95 

percent of the world’s supply; 

Whereas Kentucky’s iconic bourbon brands are reaching farther than ever, with more than 30,000,000 gallons 

shipped to 126 countries, making bourbon the largest export category among all United States distilled spirits 

and a source of national pride; 

Whereas bourbon production has increased by more than 120 

percent since 1999, contributing to the development of a 

vibrant bourbon tourism industry in Kentucky; 

Whereas bourbon is a vital part of American culture and the 

economy, generating close to 9,000 jobs in Kentucky and 

almost $2,000,000,000 in gross Kentucky product in 

2010; and 

Whereas the bourbon industry continues its efforts to promote the responsible and moderate use of its product, 

and to curb drunken driving and underage drinking: 

Now, therefore, be it 

Resolved, That the Senate recognizes the 50th 1 anni2 versary of the Congressional declaration of bourbon whis3 key as a distinctive product of the United States. 

Æ 


tjames on DSK6SPTVN1PROD with BILLS
#### W. H. H. Gleason, Plaintiff in Error, v. Marshall Kingsbury and E. L. White, Defendants in Error.

Division B.

Writ of error to Circuit Court, Dade county; Minor S. Jones, Judge.

George M. Robbins for plaintiff in error.

No appearance for defendants in error.

This action was brought by the plaintiff against the defendants. There was judgment for the defendants, and the plaintiff takes writ of error. The judgment is affirmed.

Decision *Per Curiam.*
**Exhibit 31.2**

**CERTIFICATION OF CO-CHIEF EXECUTIVE OFFICER**

**PURSUANT TO SECTION 302 OF THESARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002**

** **

I, Mark Gatto, certify that:

1.     I have reviewed this Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q ofCĪON Investment Corporation;

2.     Based on my knowledge, this report does not contain any untruestatement of a material fact or omit to state a material fact necessary to makethe statements made, in light of the circumstances under which such statementswere made, not misleading with respect to the period covered by this report;

3.     Based on my knowledge, the financial statements, and otherfinancial information included in this report, fairly present in all materialrespects the financial condition, resultsof operations and cash flows of theregistrant as of, and for, the periods presented in this report;

4.     I am responsible for establishing and maintaining disclosurecontrols and procedures (as defined in Exchange Act Rules 13a-15(e) and15d-15(e)) for the registrant and have:

(a)    Designed such disclosure controls andprocedures, or caused such disclosure controls and procedures to be designedunder my supervision, to ensure that material information relating to theregistrant, including its consolidatedsubsidiaries, is made known to me byothers within those entities, particularly during the period in which this reportis being prepared;

(b)   Evaluated the effectiveness of the registrant’sdisclosure controls and procedures and presented in this report my conclusionsabout the effectiveness of the disclosure controls and procedures, as of theend of the period covered by this report based on such evaluation; and

(c)    Disclosed in this report any change in theregistrant’s internal control over financial reporting that occurred during theregistrant’s most recent fiscal quarter (the registrant’s fourth fiscal quarterin the case of an annual report) that has materially affected, or is reasonablylikely to materially affect, the registrant’s internal control over financialreporting; and

5.     I have disclosed, based on my most recent evaluation of internalcontrol over financial reporting, to the registrant’s auditors and the auditcommittee of the registrant’s board of directors (or persons performing theequivalent functions):

(a)    All significant deficiencies and materialweaknesses in the design or operation of internal control over financialreporting which are reasonably likely to adversely affect the registrant’sability to record, process, summarize and report financial information; and

(b)   Any fraud, whether or not material, that involvesmanagement or other employees who have a significant role in the registrant’sinternal control over financial reporting.

Date:August 13, 2013

 

|   | /s/ Mark Gatto

Mark  Gatto  Co-Chief Executive Officer and Co-President

*(Principal  Executive Officer)* |
|--------|------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|
|   | CĪON  Investment Corporation                                                                          |

 

 

----
Addendum to international assignment letter agreement



 Exhibit 10.42 

February 9, 2010 
 Eric Schwartz

 Dear Eric: 
 This letter is an
addendum to the international assignment letter you executed with Equinix Operating Co., Inc. (the “Company”) dated April 15, 2008, as amended on December 19, 2008 (“Assignment Letter”). The Company hereby agrees to
extend your international assignment to August 1, 2012. Please note that you and your family will not receive another familiarization visit, temporary living assistance, moving costs – household good assistance (except the Company will
continue to pay for any temporary warehousing of your furnishings), settlement allowance, or driver training as discussed in the Assignment Letter, as these benefits were one time benefits offered only during your and your family’s initial move
to the United Kingdom. 
 All other terms and conditions of the Assignment Letter will remain in effect through August 1, 2012. 

Please signify your acceptance of the extension of your international assignment under these terms and conditions by signing the duplicate enclosed copy
of this letter and returning to me by February 19, 2010. 
  

	
	Yours sincerely,
	
	/s/ Steve Smith
	
	Equinix Operating Co., Inc.
	Steve Smith
	CEO & President

 Enclosure 

Accepted and Agreed 
  

					
	   /s/ Eric Schwartz
	 		 	       17-Feb-2010

	Eric Schwartz	 		 	Date
Filed 5/29/14 by Clerk of Supreme Court

IN THE SUPREME COURT

STATE OF NORTH DAKOTA

2014 ND 109

In the Matter of the Application for Disciplinary Action Against 

Henry H. Howe, a Member of the Bar of the State of North Dakota

Disciplinary Board of the Supreme 

Court of the State of North Dakota, Petitioner

v.

Henry H. Howe, Respondent

No. 20140035

INTERIM SUSPENSION VACATED.

[¶1]On January 31, 2014, we interim suspended Henry H. Howe until further order of this Court and ordered Disciplinary Counsel to apply to the district court for a professional trustee as provided for in N.D.R. Lawyer Discipl. 6.4.  A professional trustee was appointed by the Grand Forks district court on January 31, 2014.  On May 22, 2014, and in light of the dismissal of the criminal charges against Howe that formed the basis for the interim suspension, Disciplinary Counsel filed a Motion to Vacate Order of Interim Suspension.  On May 23, 2014, David C. Thompson, counsel for Howe, filed a response to Disciplinary Counsel’s motion.  The Court considered the matter, and 

[¶2]ORDERED, that the Motion to Vacate the Interim Suspension entered in this matter on January 31, 2014, is granted.  See Disciplinary Board v. Howe, 2014 ND 17, 842 N.W.2d 646.

[¶3]IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that Howe remains on suspension in a separate matter based on our opinion filed March 11, 2014, in Disciplinary Board v. Howe, 2014 ND 44, 843 N.W.2d 325.

[¶4]IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that Disciplinary Counsel apply to the Grand Forks district court to conclude the professional trusteeship and to release the trustee from the duties and obligations imposed by N.D.R. Lawyer Discipl. 6.4.

[¶5]Gerald W. VandeWalle, C.J.

Lisa Fair McEvers

Carol Ronning Kapsner

Dale V. Sandstrom

[¶6]The Honorable Daniel J. Crothers was unavoidably absent and did not participate in this order.
From: Jordan, Ronald

To: Schroeder, Cuc ; Flanders, Phillip ; Yan Zhuang ; Thomas Finseth ; Dan-Tam Nguyen

Subject: FW: EPA questions for upcoming call with We Energies (P4 data)

Date: Wednesday, June 11, 2014 2:40:45 PM

Attachments: 2014-06-11 Answers to EPA_s Questions about P4 Data for ELG Rulemaking.PDF

From: Castronovo.Alison [mailto:Alison.Castronovo@we-energies.com]

Sent: Wednesday, June 11, 2014 2:32 PM

To: Jordan, Ronald

Subject: RE: EPA questions for upcoming call with We Energies (P4 data)

Ron,

Attached is the written response from We Energies relaying the answers to EPA’s questions about

P4 data.

If you have any other questions or require further clarification, please do not hesitate to contact

Dave Lee or me.



### Alison Castronovo

Environmental Engineer

We Energies

333 W. Everett Street, A231

Milwaukee, WI 53203

Office: (414) 221-4337

From: Jordan, Ronald [ mailto:Jordan.Ronald@epa.gov ]

Sent: Wednesday, May 28, 2014 11:36 AM

To: Lee.David; Thomas Finseth; Dan-Tam Nguyen; Yan Zhuang; Schroeder, Cuc; Flanders, Phillip

Subject: EPA questions for upcoming call with We Energies (P4 data)