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

PHOTO INFORMATION

** Download

** Details

** Share

PHOTO INFORMATION

** Download

** Details

** Share

# Strategic Forum Looks to Future of U.S.-South Korea Alliance

**                    SHARE                

**                    PRINT                

More News
Regular Totals (Holders)

Airport = JFK

Season = S

Holder = 0001(Exclude)

Status Date = 01/01/2012 (Current & Future)

04/05/2012 12:20:54

Query Parameters:
04/05/2012 12:20:54

Carrier

Regular Totals (Holders)

Slots Held less than 5 days are Excluded Excludes FAA Held

JFK Season = SUMMER

PF7 Status Date = 01/01/2012 (Current & Future)

JFK

AAL AMERICAN AIRLINES 189 

AAR ASIANA AIRLINES 2 

ABX ABX AIR 1 

AEA AIR EUROPA 2 

AEW AEROSVIT AIRLINES 2 

AFL AEROFLOT 2 

AFR AIR FRANCE 10 

AIC AIR INDIA 6 

AJM AIR JAMAICA 5 

AMX AEROMEXICO 7 

ANA ALL NIPPON AIRWAYS 2 

AUA AUSTRIAN 2 

AVA AVIANCA 4 

AVI L'AVION/OPENSKIES 4 

AZA ALITALIA 6 

BAW BRITISH AIRWAYS 18 

BER AIR BERLIN 2 

BWA CARIBBEAN AIRLINES 5 

CAO AIR CHINA CARGO 2 

CAY CAYMAN AIRWAYS 2 

CCA AIR CHINA 2 

CES CHINA EASTERN AIRLINES 2 

CMP COPA AIRLINES 1 

CPA CATHAY PACIFIC 6 

CSA CZECH AIRLINES 2 

DAL DELTA AIR LINES 407 

DLH DEUTSCHE LUFTHANSA 7 

DYA DYNAMIC AIRWAYS 2 

EIA EVERGREEN 1 

EIN AER LINGUS 6 

ELY EL AL ISRAEL AIRLINES 5 

ETD ETIHAD 2 

FDX FED EX 4 

FIN FINNAIR 2 

IBE IBERIA AIRWAYS 4 

ICE ICELANDAIR 2 

IMP HELLENIC AIRWAYS 2 

JAI JET AIRWAYS 2 

JAL JAPAN AIR LINES 3 

JBU JETBLUE AIRWAYS CORP. 348 

KAC KUWAIT AIRWAYS 1 

KAL KOREAN AIR 3 

KLM KLM ROYAL DUTCH 4 

LAN LAN AIRLINES 6 

LNE LAN ECUADOR 2 

MSR EGYPT AIR 2 

MXA MEXICANA DE AVIACION 3 

QFA QANTAS AIRLINES 2 

QTR QATAR AIRWAYS 2 

RAM ROYAL AIR MAROC 2 

RJA ROYAL JORDANIAN 2 

Page 2
04/05/2012 12:20:54

Carrier

Regular Totals (Holders)

Slots Held less than 5 days are Excluded Excludes FAA Held

JFK Season = SUMMER

PF7 Status Date = 01/01/2012 (Current & Future)

JFK

SAA SOUTH AFRICAN AIRWAYS 2 

SCX SUN COUNTRY AIRLINES, INC. 4 

SIA SINGAPORE AIRLINES LIMITED 2 

SWR SWISS INTERNATIONAL AIRLINES (SWISSAIR 6 

TAI TACA AIRLINES 2 

TAM TAM BRAZILIAN AIRLINES 6 

THY TURKISH AIRLINES, INC. 4 

UAE EMIRATES 4 

UAL UNITED AIRLINES 45 

UPS UNITED PARCEL SERVICE 1 

USA US AIRWAYS 16 

VIR VIRGIN ATLANTIC AIR 6 

VRD VIRGIN AMERICA 19 

Page 3
#### Edith R. Hurtado, Appellant, v Sheik Shakur, Respondent.

[772 NYS2d 838]

In an action to recover damages for personal injuries, the plaintiff appeals from an order of the Supreme Court, Queens County (Price, J.), dated May 15, 2003, which granted the defendant’s motion for summary judgment dismissing the complaint on the ground that the plaintiff did not sustain a serious injury within the meaning of Insurance Law § 5102 (d).

Ordered that the order is reversed, on the law, with costs, the motion is denied, and the complaint is reinstated.

The defendant made a prima facie showing that the plaintiff did not sustain a serious injury within the meaning of Insurance Law § 5102 (d) as a result of the subject motor vehicle accident *(see Toure v Avis Rent A Car Sys.,*98 NY2d 345 [2002]; *Gaddy v Eyler,*79 NY2d 955 [1992]). However, the affirmation of the plaintiffs physician submitted in opposition to the defendant’s motion, when considered with the plaintiffs medical records submitted to the Supreme Court by the defendant *555
      *(see Pech v Yael Taxi Corp.,*303 AD2d 733 [2003]), was adequate to raise a triable issue of fact as to whether the plaintiff sustained a serious injury within the meaning of Insurances Law § 5102 (d).

Accordingly, the Supreme Court erred in granting the defendant’s motion for summary judgment dismissing the complaint. Prudenti, P.J., Florio, H. Miller, Schmidt and Cozier, JJ., concur.
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<ARTICLE> 5
<LEGEND>
THIS SCHEDULE CONTAINS SUMMARY FINANCIAL INFORMATION EXTRACTED FROM ADVANCED
LIGHTING TECHNOLOGIES, INC. CONDENSED CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL STATEMENTS FOR THE
THREE MONTHS ENDED SEPTEMBER 30, 1999 AND IS QUALIFIED IN ITS ENTIRETY BY
REFERENCE TO SUCH FINANCIAL STATEMENTS.
</LEGEND>
<MULTIPLIER> 1,000

<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   3-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          JUN-30-2000
<PERIOD-START>                             JUL-01-1999
<PERIOD-END>                               SEP-30-1999
<CASH>                                           4,259
<SECURITIES>                                         0
<RECEIVABLES>                                   36,656
<ALLOWANCES>                                     1,186
<INVENTORY>                                     41,100
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                                77,667
<PP&E>                                         120,150
<DEPRECIATION>                                  18,111
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                 288,932
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                           51,930
<BONDS>                                        158,891
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                               20
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                             0
<OTHER-SE>                                      77,664
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                   288,932
<SALES>                                         56,180
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                                56,180
<CGS>                                           34,844
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                   34,844
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                18,380
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                     0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                               3,790
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                  (564)
<INCOME-TAX>                                       218
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                              (782)
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                     (782)
<EPS-BASIC>                                     (0.04)
<EPS-DILUTED>                                   (0.04)


</TABLE>
EXHIBIT 31.2
 
 CERTIFICATION OF PRINCIPAL FINANCIAL OFFICER
 
 I, John L. Petersen , Chief Financial Officer of Win or Lose Acquisition Corporation certify that:
 
 I have reviewed this report on Form 10-K of Win or Lose Acquisition Corporation; Based on my knowledge, this report does not contain any untrue statement of a material fact or omit to state a material fact necessary to make the statements made, in light of the circumstances under which such statements were made, not misleading with respect to the period covered by this report; Based on my knowledge, the financial statements, and other financial information included in this report, fairly present in all material respects the financial condition, results of operations and cash flows of the registrant as of, and for, the periods presented in this report; The registrant's other certifying officers and I, are responsible for establishing and maintaining disclosure controls and procedures (as defined in Exchange Act Rules 13a-14 and 15d-14) for the registrant and we have: designed such disclosure controls and procedures to ensure that material information relating to the registrant, including its consolidated subsidiaries, is made known to us by others within those entities, particularly during the period in which this report is being prepared; evaluated the effectiveness of the registrant's disclosure controls and procedures as of a date within 90 days prior to the filing date of this report (the "Evaluation Date"); and presented in this report our conclusions about the effectiveness of the disclosure controls and procedures based on our evaluation as of the Evaluation Date; The registrant's other certifying officers and I have disclosed, based on our most recent evaluation, to the registrant's auditors and the audit committee of registrant's board of directors (or persons performing the equivalent function): all significant deficiencies in the design or operation of internal controls which could adversely affect the registrant's ability to record, process, summarize and report financial data and have identified for the registrant's auditors any material weaknesses in internal controls; and any fraud, whether or not material, that involves management or other employees who have a significant role in the registrant's internal controls; and The registrant's other certifying officers and I have indicated in this report whether or not there were significant changes in internal controls or in other factors that could significantly affect internal controls subsequent to the date of our most recent evaluation, including any corrective actions with regard to significant deficiencies and material weaknesses. 
 /s/ John L. Petersen
 John L. Petersen, Chief Financial Officer
 Dated: March 29, 2004
```

[Federal Register Volume 77, Number 85 (Wednesday, May 2, 2012)]
[Notices]
[Page 26004]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Printing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2012-10318]

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

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY

[EPA-HQ-OPP-2010-0968; FRL-9345-7]

Issuance of an Experimental Use Permit

AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).

ACTION: Notice.

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

SUMMARY: EPA has granted an experimental use permit (EUP) to the 
pesticide applicant, Valent USA Corporation. An EUP permits use of a 
pesticide for experimental or research purposes only in accordance with 
the limitations in the permit.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Autumn Metzger, Registration Division 
(7505P), Office of Pesticide Programs, Environmental Protection Agency, 
1200 Pennsylvania Ave. NW., Washington, DC 20460-0001; telephone 
number: (703) 305-5314; email address: metzger.autumn@epa.gov.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: 

I. General Information

A. Does this action apply to me?

    This action is directed to the public in general. Although this 
action may be of particular interest to those persons who conduct or 
sponsor research on pesticides, the Agency has not attempted to 
describe all the specific entities that may be affected by this action. 
If you have any questions regarding the information in this action, 
consult the person listed under FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT.

B. How can I get copies of this document and other related information?

    EPA has established a docket for this action under docket 
identification (ID) number EPA-HQ-OPP-2010-0968. Publicly available 
docket materials are available either in the electronic docket at 
http://www.regulations.gov, or, if only available in hard copy, at the 
Office of Pesticide Programs (OPP) Regulatory Public Docket in Rm. S-
4400, One Potomac Yard (South Bldg.), 2777 S. Crystal Dr., Arlington, 
VA. The hours of operation of this Docket Facility are from 8:30 a.m. 
to 4 p.m., Monday through Friday, excluding legal holidays. The Docket 
Facility telephone number is (703) 305-5805.

II. EUP

    EPA has issued the following EUP:
    59639-EUP-16. Issuance. Valent USA Corporation, P.O. Box 8025, 
Walnut Creek, CA 94596. This EUP allows the use of 2,500 pounds of the 
insecticide etoxazole on up to 20,000 acres of field corn, pop corn or 
corn grown for seed to evaluate the control of mites over larger scale 
and commercial plots. The program is authorized only in the State of 
California. The EUP is effective from March 15, 2012 to March 14, 2013.

    Authority:  7 U.S.C. 136c.

List of Subjects

    Environmental protection, Agricultural commodities, Experimental 
use permits, Pesticides and pest.

    Dated: April 18, 2012.
Lois Rossi,
Director, Registration Division, Office of Pesticide Programs.
[FR Doc. 2012-10318 Filed 5-1-12; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6560-50-P
```
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

# Readout of Secretary of Defense Lloyd J. Austin III Call With Philippines Senior Undersecretary and Officer in Charge of the Department of National Defense Jose Faustino, Jr.

DoD Release

WASHINGTON -- Pentagon Press Secretary Air Force Brig. Gen. Pat Ryder provided the following readout:Secretary of Defense Lloyd J. Austin III spoke with Philippines Senior Undersecretary and Officer in Charge of the Department of National Defense Jose Faustino, Jr. on the phone today to discuss opportunities to further modernize and strengthen the U.S.-Philippines alliance. This was their first phone call since Senior Undersecretary Faustino assumed his current roles.The two leaders reaffirmed the importance of the U.S.-Philippines alliance, especially in light of changing regional dynamics in the Indo-Pacific. Secretary Austin noted that the U.S. commitment to Philippine security is ironclad, and that U.S. Mutual Defense Treaty commitments extend to Philippine armed forces, public vessels, and aircraft in the South China Sea. Secretary Austin and Senior Undersecretary Faustino agreed to continue close operational coordination in the region.Both leaders noted the importance of enhancing the posture of the alliance to address new and emerging challenges, including by deepening cooperation under the Visiting Forces Agreement and the 2014 Enhanced Defense Cooperation Agreement. Secretary Austin also expressed his thanks for the Philippines’ support for the people of Ukraine.The Secretaries closed the call by underscoring the importance of a free, open, and prosperous Indo-Pacific.

**                    SHARE                

**                    PRINT
#### Gordon and Jack, Appellant, v Royal Indemnity Co., Respondent, et al., Defendants. (And a Third-Party Title.)

[631 NYS2d 392]

In an action, *inter alia,*to recover damages for breach of contract, the plaintiff appeals (1) from an order of the Supreme Court, Nassau County (Molloy, J.), dated March 2, 1994, which, *inter alia,*denied its motion for partial summary judgment against the defendant Royal Indemnity Co. and *sua sponte*granted summary judgment in favor of that defendant dismissing the complaint insofar as it is asserted against it, and (2) as limited by its brief, from so much of an order of the same court, dated June 9, 1994, as, upon reargument, adhered to the original determination.

Ordered that the appeal from the order dated March 2, 1994, is dismissed, as that order was superseded by the order dated June 9, 1994, made upon reargument; and it is further,

Ordered that the order dated June 9,1994, is affirmed insofar as appealed from; and it is further,

Ordered that the defendant Royal Indemnity Co. is awarded one bill of costs.

Jean Marrapodi fell and was injured on a driveway located on real property owned by the plaintiff. The plaintiff sought coverage and legal representation from its insurance carrier, the defendant Royal Indemnity Co. (hereinafter Royal). However, Royal disclaimed coverage and refused to defend the plaintiff on the ground that the accident location was not covered under the policy. Thereafter, the plaintiff commenced this action claiming, *inter alia,*that Royal had erred in disclaiming coverage.

Contrary to the plaintiff’s contention, the policy only covered the building located at 1221-1247 Wantagh Avenue, and not *618the driveway to an adjacent uninsured parking lot where the accident occurred. Therefore, Royal had no duty to defend or indemnify the plaintiff *(see, John Hancock Prop. & Cas. Ins. Co. v Warmuth,*205 AD2d 587).

The issue raised by the plaintiff that the policy terms conflict with the policy application was not raised at the Supreme Court and will not be addressed on this appeal. O’Brien, J. P., Santucci, Joy and Goldstein, JJ., concur.
No. 86-5939.

#### Thomas *v.*Lincoln University.

C. A. 8th Cir. Certiorari denied.
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<PAGE>
<ARTICLE> 5
<LEGEND>
THIS SCHEDULE CONTAINS SUMMARY FINANCIAL INFORMATION EXTRACTED FROM THE
CONSOLIDATED BALANCE SHEET AS OF JUNE 30, 1999 AND THE CONSOLIDATED STATEMENT OF
OPERATIONS FOR THE SIX MONTHS ENDED JUNE 30, 1999 AND IS QUALIFIED IN ITS
ENTIRETY BY REFERENCE TO SUCH FINANCIAL STATEMENTS.
</LEGEND>
<MULTIPLIER> 1,000

<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   6-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          DEC-31-1999
<PERIOD-START>                             JAN-01-1999
<PERIOD-END>                               JUN-30-1999
<CASH>                                           8,316
<SECURITIES>                                         0
<RECEIVABLES>                                      973
<ALLOWANCES>                                     (211)
<INVENTORY>                                          7
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                                10,129
<PP&E>                                           3,268
<DEPRECIATION>                                 (2,443)
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                  11,529
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                            5,754
<BONDS>                                              0
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                         4,241
<OTHER-SE>                                       1,534
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                    11,529
<SALES>                                          3,598
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                                 3,815
<CGS>                                            1,915
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                    9,804
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                 (206)
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                     0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                                   0
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                (5,783)
<INCOME-TAX>                                        44
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                            (5,827)
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                   (5,827)
<EPS-BASIC>                                     (0.46)
<EPS-DILUTED>                                   (0.46)


</TABLE>
I 

115TH CONGRESS 

1ST SESSION H. R. 1388 

To enact House Resolution 895, One Hundred Tenth Congress, (establishing 

the Office of Congressional Ethics) into permanent law. 

IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES 

MARCH 7, 2017 

Mr. O’HALLERAN introduced the following bill; which was referred to the 

Committee on House Administration, and in addition to the Committee 

on Rules, for a period to be subsequently determined by the Speaker, in 

each case for consideration of such provisions as fall within the jurisdiction of the committee concerned 

A BILL 

To enact House Resolution 895, One Hundred Tenth Congress, (establishing the Office of Congressional Ethics) 

into permanent law. 

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

3 SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE. 

4 This Act may be cited as the ‘‘Clean Legislating and 

5 Ethical Accountability Now Act’’ or the ‘‘CLEAN Act’’. 


SSpencer on DSK4SPTVN1PROD with BILLS
2 

•HR 1388 IH

1 SEC. 2. ENACTING HOUSE RESOLUTION 895 INTO PERMA2 NENT LAW. 

3 House Resolution 895, One Hundred Tenth Con4 gress, is hereby enacted into permanent law, except that— 

5 (1) the Office of Congressional Ethics shall be 

6 treated as a standing committee of the House for 

7 purposes of section 202(i) of the Legislative Reorga8 nization Act of 1946 (2 U.S.C. 4301(i)); 

9 (2) references to the Committee on Standards 

10 of Official Conduct shall be construed as references 

11 to the Committee on Ethics; 

12 (3) the second sentence of section 1(b)(6)(A) 

13 shall not apply; 

14 (4) members subject to section 1(b)(6)(B) may 

15 be reappointed for a second additional term; 

16 (5) any individual who is the subject of a pre17 liminary review or second-phase review by the board 

18 shall be informed of the right to be represented by 

19 counsel and invoking that right should not be held 

20 negatively against them; 

21 (6) the Office may not take any action that 

22 would deny any person any right or protection pro23 vided under the Constitution of the United States; 

24 and 

25 (7) the Office of Congressional Ethics shall 

26 have the same subpoena power as a standing comVerDate Sep 11 2014 03:31 Mar 11, 2017 Jkt 069200 PO 00000 Frm 00002 Fmt 6652 Sfmt 6201 E:\BILLS\H1388.IH H1388

SSpencer on DSK4SPTVN1PROD with BILLS
3 

•HR 1388 IH

1 mittee of the House of Representatives has under 

2 clause 2(m) of rule XI of the Rules of the House of 

3 Representatives and all references to the committee 

4 or to the chair of the committee in such clause shall 

5 be deemed to be references to the Office of Congres6 sional Ethics or to the cochairmen of the board for 

7 purposes of this paragraph. 

Æ 


SSpencer on DSK4SPTVN1PROD with BILLS