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).

U.S. Indo-Pacific CommandUSINDOPACOM

U.S. Indo-Pacific Command

Search

Search
Search

-  Home		 
-  Leadership    -  Commander         
  -  Deputy Commander         
  -  Chief of Staff         
  -  Senior Enlisted Leader 
-  About USINDOPACOM    -  History         
  -  USPACOM Area of Responsibility         
  -  USPACOM Previous Commanders         
  -  Women, Peace and Security 
-  Organization    -  Organization Chart 
-  Media    -  News      -  Spotlight 
  -  Photos         
  -  Speeches / Testimony         
  -  Freedom of Information Act      -  FOIA - Reading Room         
    -  Submit FOIA Request         
    -  Request Status         
    -  FOIA FAQS 
-  Resources    -  Travel Requirements         
  -  Useful Theater Information         
  -  FAQ         
  -  Useful Links 
-  Newcomers		 
-  Contact    -  Directory         
  -  Media Inquiries         
  -  Industry Engagements 
-  JTF - Red Hill		 
-  JTF-Micronesia		 

Home : Media : News : News Article View

PHOTO INFORMATION

** Download

** Details

** Share

# Coast Guard Civil Engineering Unit Honolulu Welcomes New Commanding Officer

By Petty Officer 2nd Class Amanda WyrickU.S. Coast Guard District 14 Hawaii Pacific 

**                    SHARE                

**                    PRINT                

More News
UNPUBLISHED

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

No. 99-7690

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,

Plaintiff - Appellee,

versus

TERENCE DAMISI BROWN,

Defendant - Appellant.

Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Virginia, at Alexandria. Claude M. Hilton, Chief District

Judge. (CR-90-398-A, CA-98-1774-AM)

Submitted: March 9, 2000 Decided: March 16, 2000

Before WILKINS, TRAXLER, and KING, Circuit Judges.

Dismissed by unpublished per curiam opinion.

Terence Damisi Brown, Appellant Pro Se. Brett Alan Sagel, Special

Assistant United States Attorney, Alexandria, Virginia, for

Appellee.

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.

See Local Rule 36(c).
2

PER CURIAM:

Terence Damisi Brown seeks to appeal the district court’s

order denying as untimely his motion filed under 28 U.S.C.A. § 2255

(West Supp. 1999). 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. Brown, Nos. CR90-398-A; CA-98-1774-AM (E.D. Va. Apr. 23, 1999). 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
```

[Federal Register Volume 89, Number 226 (Friday, November 22, 2024)]
[Notices]
[Page 92730]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2024-27391]

=======================================================================
-----------------------------------------------------------------------

DEPARTMENT OF STATE

[Public Notice: 12592]

Notice of Determinations; Culturally Significant Object Being 
Imported for Exhibition--Determinations: ``Mariana: Vel[aacute]zquez's 
Portrait of a Queen From the Museo Nacional del Prado'' Exhibition

SUMMARY: Notice is hereby given of the following determinations: I 
hereby determine that a certain object being imported from abroad 
pursuant to an agreement with its foreign owner or custodian for 
temporary display in the exhibition ``Mariana: Vel[aacute]zquez's 
Portrait of a Queen from the Museo Nacional del Prado'' at the Norton 
Simon Museum of Art, Pasadena, California, and at possible additional 
exhibitions or venues yet to be determined, is of cultural 
significance, and, further, that its temporary exhibition or display 
within the United States as aforementioned is in the national interest. 
I have ordered that Public Notice of these determinations be published 
in the Federal Register.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Reed Liriano, Program Coordinator, 
Office of the Legal Adviser, U.S. Department of State (telephone: 202-
632-6471; email: [email protected]). The mailing address is U.S. 
Department of State, L/PD, 2200 C Street NW (SA-5), Suite 5H03, 
Washington, DC 20522-0505.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The foregoing determinations were made 
pursuant to the authority vested in me by the Act of October 19, 1965 
(79 Stat. 985; 22 U.S.C. 2459), Executive Order 12047 of March 27, 
1978, the Foreign Affairs Reform and Restructuring Act of 1998 (112 
Stat. 2681, et seq.; 22 U.S.C. 6501 note, et seq.), Delegation of 
Authority No. 234 of October 1, 1999, Delegation of Authority No. 236-3 
of August 28, 2000, and Delegation of Authority No. 523 of December 22, 
2021.

Nicole L. Elkon,
Deputy Assistant Secretary for Professional and Cultural Exchanges, 
Bureau of Educational and Cultural Affairs, Department of State.
[FR Doc. 2024-27391 Filed 11-21-24; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4710-05-P
```
No. 90-5515.

#### Smrekar *v.*Illinois.

App. Ct. Ill., 4th Dist. Certiorari denied.
<TABLE> <S> <C>


<ARTICLE>                     5
<LEGEND>
     Worldwide Entertainment & Sports Corp. Quarterly Report on Form 10QSB
</LEGEND>

       
<S>                                            <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                                  3-mos
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                              DEC-31-1998
<PERIOD-START>                                 JAN-01-1998
<PERIOD-END>                                   MAR-31-1998
<CASH>                                         3,409
<SECURITIES>                                   407
<RECEIVABLES>                                  150
<ALLOWANCES>                                   0
<INVENTORY>                                    0
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                               4,534
<PP&E>                                         49
<DEPRECIATION>                                 0
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                 4,597
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                          1,231
<BONDS>                                        0
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                          0
<PREFERRED>                                    0
<COMMON>                                       69
<OTHER-SE>                                     9,881
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                   4,597
<SALES>                                        0
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                               717
<CGS>                                          0
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                  1,051
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                               0
<LOSS-PROVISION>                               0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                             0
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                (325)
<INCOME-TAX>                                   2
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                            0
<DISCONTINUED>                                 0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                0
<CHANGES>                                      0
<NET-INCOME>                                   (326)
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                  (.05)
<EPS-DILUTED>                                  (.05)
        


</TABLE>
OMB Control No. 2070 - 0054; EPA ICR No. 0586.12

Attachment B Display Related to OMB Control #2070 - 0054 Listings of Related Regulations in 40 CFR 9.1.Display Related to OMB Control #2070 - 0054 - Listings of Related Regulations in 40 CFR 9.1 As of May

10, 1993, the OMB approval numbers for EPA regulations in Chapter I of Title 40 of the Code of Federal Regulations (CFR) appear in a listing in 40 CFR 9.1 (58 FR 27472). This listing fulfills the display requirements in section 3507(f) of the Paperwork Reduction Act (PRA) for EPA regulations. The listing at 40 CFR 9.1 displays this OMB Control number for the following regulations: Program Title 40 CFR citation Chemical Information Rules ................................ ................................ ................................ ..... 712.5

................................ ................................ ................................ ........ 712.7

................................ ................................ ................................ ...... 712.20

................................ ................................ ................................ ..... 712.28

................................ ................................ ................................ .... 712.30 Dibenzo -para - dioxin/Dibenzofurans ................................ ................................ ............. 766.35(b)(1)

................................ ................................ ........... 766.35(b)(2)

................................ ................................ ..... 766.35(b)(4)(iii)

................................ ................................ ........ 766.35(c)(1)(i)

................................ ................................ ....... 766.35(c)(1)( ii)

................................ ................................ ..................... 766.38 Good Laboratory

Practice Standards ................................ ................................ ................... Part 792
#### Central Security Company, Appellant, vs. Milwaukee-Waukesha Brewing Company, Respondent.

*October 25*

November *13, 1917.*

*Pleading: Complaint: Refusal to make definite: Dismissal.*

In an action on contract, plaintiffs refusal to comply with an order that the complaint he made inore definite and certain by stating the consideration for defendant’s alleged agreement and whether such agreement was in writing or oral, justified a judgment of dismissal.

Appeal from a judgment of tbe circuit court for Milwaukee county: John J. Gregory, Circuit Judge.

*Affirmed.*

A motion in this case was made to make the complaint more definite and certain, upon the following grounds: (1) By setting forth therein the consideration, if any, for the alleged promise and agreement of the defendant referred to in the complaint. (2) By stating whether the agreement referred to in said complaint was in writing or,oral, and if in writing by setting forth the said agreement in full, or the substance thereof. This motion was granted, and upon refusal of plaintiff to comply with the order the complaint was dismissed and judgment of dismissal entered, from which this appeal was taken.

Fqt the appellant there was a brief by *Glichsman, Gold & Corrigan,*attorneys, and *Floyd F. J enhins,*of counsel, all of Milwaukee, and oral argument by *Mr. J enhins.*

For the respondent there was a brief by *Lenichech, Boesel*& *Wichhem*of Milwaukee, and oral argument by *Franh T. Boesel.*

Per Curiam.

The complaint alleged that the plaintiff at all times mentioned in the complaint was the owner of the premises known as 111 Fourth street; that the defendant was engaged in the business of manufacturing and selling beer. *250and that on or about the 28th day of February, 1916, the defendant

> “for valuable consideration, by it received, promised and agreed to pay towards the cost of changing the front of the premises known as 111 Fourth street, in the city of Milwaukee, a sum not exceeding three hundred and fifty ($350) dollars, and that the plaintiff, relying upon such promises and agreement, did pursuant thereto cause the said front to be changed, and that the changing of the said front cost no less than three hundred and sixty ($360) dollars, and that the defendant, although often requested, has refused and neglected to pay towards said cost of so changing the said front the sum of three hundred and fifty ($350) dollars, but has only paid one hundred and eighty ($180) dollars on account thereof, and that there is now due and owing to this plaintiff from the said defendant by reason of the foregoing the sum of one hundred and seventy ($110) dollars, together with interest as allowed by law, and that a reasonable time has elapsed since your plaintiff caused said changes to be made at the request of the said defendant, and a reasonable time has elapsed since the time the said plaintiff has paid for the cost of such change of said front.”

The court is of opinion that this case is ruled by *Union Nat. Bank v.*Cross, 100 Wis. 174, 75 N. W. 992, therefore the judgment appealed from must be affirmed.

Judgment appealed from is affirmed.
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<ARTICLE> 9
<MULTIPLIER> 1,000

<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   6-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          DEC-31-1999
<PERIOD-END>                               JUN-30-2000
<CASH>                                          10,735
<INT-BEARING-DEPOSITS>                             499
<FED-FUNDS-SOLD>                                     0
<TRADING-ASSETS>                                     0
<INVESTMENTS-HELD-FOR-SALE>                     16,245
<INVESTMENTS-CARRYING>                          36,435
<INVESTMENTS-MARKET>                            35,882
<LOANS>                                        801,395
<ALLOWANCE>                                      4,218
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                 904,875
<DEPOSITS>                                     568,625
<SHORT-TERM>                                    79,410
<LIABILITIES-OTHER>                             13,293
<LONG-TERM>                                    167,943
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                        75,604
<OTHER-SE>                                           0
<TOTAL-LIABILITIES-AND-EQUITY>                 904,875
<INTEREST-LOAN>                                 14,459
<INTEREST-INVEST>                                  996
<INTEREST-OTHER>                                     0
<INTEREST-TOTAL>                                15,455
<INTEREST-DEPOSIT>                               6,443
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                              10,034
<INTEREST-INCOME-NET>                            5,421
<LOAN-LOSSES>                                      165
<SECURITIES-GAINS>                                  10
<EXPENSE-OTHER>                                  3,858
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                  2,494
<INCOME-PRE-EXTRAORDINARY>                       1,720
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                     1,720
<EPS-BASIC>                                        .20
<EPS-DILUTED>                                      .20
<YIELD-ACTUAL>                                    2.56
<LOANS-NON>                                        254
<LOANS-PAST>                                         0
<LOANS-TROUBLED>                                     0
<LOANS-PROBLEM>                                      0
<ALLOWANCE-OPEN>                                 4,062
<CHARGE-OFFS>                                       17
<RECOVERIES>                                         8
<ALLOWANCE-CLOSE>                                4,218
<ALLOWANCE-DOMESTIC>                             4,218
<ALLOWANCE-FOREIGN>                                  0
<ALLOWANCE-UNALLOCATED>                              0


</TABLE>
No. 82-756.

#### Estate of Frock et al. *v.*United States Railroad Retirement Board.

C. A. 7th Cir. Certiorari denied.
Occupational Safety And Health Review Commission
Commissioners’ Monthly Docket Report at Close of Business on January 31, 2018
 
DOCKET
NUMBER
RESPONDENT'S
NAME
DOCKETED

TYPE*

BRIEFING
NOTICE DATE
BRIEFING STATUS
COMMISSIONER NOT PARTICIPATING
1
09-1901
Seward Ship’s Drydock, Inc.
11/14/11
DFR
11/21/11, 04/17/13
Closed

2
08-1774
Angelica Textile Services, Inc.
09/28/12
DFR
10/16/12
Closed

3
11-2395
Kiewit Power Constructors Co.
01/24/13
DFR
03/04/13
Closed

4
11-1734
Calpine Corporation
06/24/13
DFR
06/26/13
Closed

5
10-0637
BP Products North America, Inc., & BP-Husky Refining, LLC
09/16/13
DFR
11/01/13
Closed

6
12-1600
Envision Waste Services
02/10/14
DFR
02/24/14
04/16/14
Closed

7
12-2142
Meadows Construction Company, LLC
06/05/14
DFR
06/24/14
Closed

8
12-1617
Houston Aquarium, Inc.
09/18/14
DFR
10/20/14
Closed

9
13-1022
Mid South Waffles, Inc., d/b/a Waffle House #1283
12/31/14
DFR
02/03/15
Closed

10
14-0948
Florida Gas Contractors, Inc.
01/15/15
DFR
02/06/15
Closed

11
12-1287
CSA Equipment Company, LLC
01/16/15
DFR
02/09/15
Closed

12
13-0224
A.H. Sturgill Roofing, Inc.
03/23/15
DFR
04/08/15
Closed

13
13-1817
Missouri Basin Well Service Inc.
04/23/15
DFR
05/07/15
Closed

14
14-0844
Quick Transport of Arkansas, LLC
07/01/15
DFR
07/28/15
Closed

15
13-1124
Integra Health Management, Inc.
07/21/15
DFR
09/18/15
Closed

16
13-0900
Suncor Energy (U.S.A.) Inc.
08/31/15
DFR
09/18/15
Closed

17
13-1169
North Eastern Precast LLC
10/29/15
DFR
11/02/15
Closed

18
13-1170
Masonry Services Inc. dba MSI
10/29/15
DFR
11/02/15
Closed

19
13-0644
Wynnewood Refining Co., LLC
03/03/16
DFR
03/18/16
Closed

20
13-0791
Wynnewood Refining Co., LLC
03/03/16
DFR
03/18/16
Closed

21
14-1688
Science Applications International Corp., d/b/a SAIC
06/23/16
DFR
10/31/16
Closed

22
15-1121
Clean Fuels of Indiana, Inc.
06/30/16
DFR
11/09/16
Closed

23
14-1268
Dover High Performance Plastics
07/19/16
DFR
11/01/16
Closed

24
15-1347
Gate Precast Company
11/10/16
DFR
12/05/16
Closed

25
 16-1533
Cooper/T. Smith Corporation, d/b/a Blakeley Boatworks, Inc.
 04/27/17
DFR
04/27/17
Closed




26
16-0803
The Lane Construction Corporation 
05/23/17
DFR
09/14/17
Open

27
16-1167
Aerospace Testing Alliance
08/22/17
DFR
11/20/17
Open

28
15-1069
Healy Tibbitts Builders, Inc.
10/27/17
DFR
11/13/17
Open

29
16-0940
Angel Brothers Enterprises, Ltd.
11/17/17
DFR
12/15/17
Open

30
17-0992
Coleman Hammons Construction Co., Inc.
01/25/18
DFR

Open

 *DFR – Direction For Review
  REM – Appellate Remand
  INT REV – Interlocutory Review
Pesticide permit comments

Edward Gertler to: Jack Faulk 01/19/2010 08:41 AM

Jack,

The following are some questions or comments for your consideration

before, during, or after the Dallas meetings. Thanks.

Section 1.1.1: Should we include application done for research

projects?

Section 1.1.2.1: Why limit this to pesticide impaired waters? The

303(d) list identifies some waters as biologically impaired. Seems as if

that status could be regarded as a wild card for pesticides. After all,

whatever the cause of the impairment, adding pesticides would make

things worse. Also, in Maryland, we regulate discharges to *waters of

the State* which includes wetlands, even 100-yr floodplains of

nontidal waterways. How wide ranging is the EPA permit authority?

1.2.2: I am still not clear. Does this regulate individuals treating a

farm pond, their phragmites infestation, etc.?

1.2.4: Second sentence, which says *If you were authorized *.earliest

of:* can cause a real headache, as we have found out the hard way, if

you do not renew the permit in a timely manner. I recommend deleting

this so that the permit is available until the day it is replaced.

2.1: Shouldn*t a prohibition on dumping excess pesticide or

wastewater from washing of containers and equipment be included?

3.0: (I think a similar statement as what follows came up in the

webcast on Jan 14, but I wasn*t satisfied with the answer). So my

comment is that by nature this permit authorization violates this

condition. That is why Maryland has a toxic materials permit, i.e. a

recognition that at times we want to deliberately pollute our waters to

cause an adverse impact. With that in mind, I would qualify this

condition to say that the permittee shall not violate WQS outside the

area authorized by this permit.

Appendix A: I would define *monitoring.* In the NPDES world, this

has traditionally had to do with effluents, and involved either sampling

and testing or visual checks. This permit takes the term to a new and

foreign level. In fact, it almost seems that the permit is using the

term just to sound like it is a discharge permit.

5.1.2.d: What is an *action threshold*?

Ed Gertler

Maryland Department of the Environment

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

The information contained in this communication may be confidential, is 

intended only for the use of the recipient named above, and may be legally 

privileged.

If the reader of this message is not the intended recipient, you are hereby 

notified that any dissemination, distribution, or copying of this 

communication, or any of its contents, is strictly prohibited.

If you have received this communication in error, please re-send this 

communication to the sender and delete the original message and any copy of it 
from your computer system. Thank you.

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

<<<<GWIASIG 0.07>>>>
Electronically Filed Supreme Court SCWC-30432 09-JUL-2014 11:14 AM SCWC-30432

IN THE SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF HAWAI ' I KENNETH L. WALLACE, Trustee of the Kenneth L. Wallace Living

Trust Dated June 20, 2001, Petitioner/Plaintiff-Appellant,

vs. HARLOW BURROWS, Respondent/Defendant/Cross-claimant/ Cross-claim Defendant-Appellee, and LA BAHIA, 1993, INC., a Hawai ' i corporation, Respondent/Defendant/Cross-claim Defendant-Appellee.

CERTIORARI TO THE INTERMEDIATE COURT OF APPEALS (ICA NO. 30432; CIV. NO. 05-1-0141) ORDER REJECTING APPLICATION FOR WRIT OF CERTIORARI (By: Recktenwald, C.J., Nakayama, McKenna, Pollack, and Wilson JJ.) Petitioner/Plaintiff-Appellant Kenneth L. Wallace’s Application for Writ of Certiorari, filed on May 27, 2014, is hereby rejected. DATED: Honolulu, Hawai ' i, July 9, 2014. Peter Van Name Esser for petitioner /s/ Mark E. Recktenwald /s/ Paula A. Nakayama /s/ Sabrina S. McKenna /s/ Richard W. Pollack /s/ Michael D. Wilson Craig G. Nakamura and Erika L. Lewis for respondents