alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
# C_2004155EN.01002601.xml

| 12.6.2004 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 155/26 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

12.6.2004

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 155/26

---

Euro exchange rates (1)

1

11 June 2004

(2004/C 155/02)

1 euro=

1 euro

| | Currency | Exchange rate |
| --- | --- | --- |
| USD | US dollar | 1,2006 |
| JPY | Japanese yen | 132,19 |
| DKK | Danish krone | 7,4336 |
| GBP | Pound sterling | 0,65935 |
| SEK | Swedish krona | 9,1589 |
| CHF | Swiss franc | 1,5120 |
| ISK | Iceland króna | 86,96 |
| NOK | Norwegian krone | 8,2925 |
| BGN | Bulgarian lev | 1,9559 |
| CYP | Cyprus pound | 0,58260 |
| CZK | Czech koruna | 31,407 |
| EEK | Estonian kroon | 15,6466 |
| HUF | Hungarian forint | 253,60 |
| LTL | Lithuanian litas | 3,4527 |
| LVL | Latvian lats | 0,6525 |
| MTL | Maltese lira | 0,4244 |
| PLN | Polish zloty | 4,5838 |
| ROL | Romanian leu | 40 767 |
| SIT | Slovenian tolar | 239,1500 |
| SKK | Slovak koruna | 39,910 |
| TRL | Turkish lira | 1 786 800 |
| AUD | Australian dollar | 1,7334 |
| CAD | Canadian dollar | 1,6428 |
| HKD | Hong Kong dollar | 9,3575 |
| NZD | New Zealand dollar | 1,9084 |
| SGD | Singapore dollar | 2,0602 |
| KRW | South Korean won | 1 397,44 |
| ZAR | South African rand | 7,8339 |

Currency

Exchange rate

USD

US dollar

1,2006

JPY

Japanese yen

132,19

DKK

Danish krone

7,4336

GBP

Pound sterling

0,65935

SEK

Swedish krona

9,1589

CHF

Swiss franc

1,5120

ISK

Iceland króna

86,96

NOK

Norwegian krone

8,2925

BGN

Bulgarian lev

1,9559

CYP

Cyprus pound

0,58260

CZK

Czech koruna

31,407

EEK

Estonian kroon

15,6466

HUF

Hungarian forint

253,60

LTL

Lithuanian litas

3,4527

LVL

Latvian lats

0,6525

MTL

Maltese lira

0,4244

PLN

Polish zloty

4,5838

ROL

Romanian leu

40 767

SIT

Slovenian tolar

239,1500

SKK

Slovak koruna

39,910

TRL

Turkish lira

1 786 800

AUD

Australian dollar

1,7334

CAD

Canadian dollar

1,6428

HKD

Hong Kong dollar

9,3575

NZD

New Zealand dollar

1,9084

SGD

Singapore dollar

2,0602

KRW

South Korean won

1 397,44

ZAR

South African rand

7,8339

---

(1)

1

Source: reference exchange rate published by the ECB.

Source:

---
# NROL-68

Launches
current page

The National Reconnaissance Office, in partnership with U.S. Space Force’s Space Launch Delta 45 (SLD 45), Space Systems Command (SSC), and United Launch Alliance (ULA), successfully launched the second-to-last Delta IV Heavy rocket from Space Launch Complex 37 at Cape Canaveral Space Force Station (CCSFS) with the NROL-68 mission on June 22, 2023, at 5:18 a.m. EDT.

## About the Mission Emblem

The baby dragon illustrates the birth of a new satellite system while the moon with the mother dragon silhouette represent protection of the Five Eyes community, the nation, and its allies. The passage along the bottom, NUSQUAM CELARE is Latin for“Nowhere to Hide.”The baby dragon may be science fiction, but NROL-68’s impact on national security is real! To read more about NRO launches and previous patches, visit www.NRO.gov/launche defense of our freedom. Download the NROL-68 Poster.

## Launch Vehicle

### Delta IV Heavy

 United Launch Alliance’s Delta IV Heavy is a heavy-lift launch vehicle, the largest type of the Delta IV family and one of the world’s most powerful rockets. The Delta IV Heavy configuration is comprised of a common booster core (CBC), a cryogenic upper stage and a 5-meter diameter payload fairing (PLF). The Delta IV Heavy employs two additional CBCs as liquid rocket boosters to augment the first-stage CBC. The Delta IV Heavy can lift 28,370 kg (62,540 lbs) to low Earth orbit and 13,810 kg (30,440 lbs) to geostationary transfer orbit. It is an all liquid-fueled rocket, consisting of an upper stage, one main booster and two strap-on boosters.

### Payload Fairing (PLF)

The PLF encapsulates the spacecraft to protect it from the launch environment on ascent. The 19.8 m (65 ft) long PLF makes the vehicle’s height approximately 71.5 m (235 ft).

### Delta Cryogenic Second Stage (DCSS)

The DCSS is a cryogenic liquid hydrogen/liquid oxygen fueled vehicle, with a single RL10C-2-1 engine that produces 24,750 lbf (110 kN) of thrust.

### Boosters

The Delta IV booster propulsion is provided by three liquid hydrogen and liquid oxygen-burning RS-68A engines. Each RS-68A engine produces 705,250 lbf (3,137 kN) of thrust for a combined total liftoff thrust of more than 2.1 million lbf (9.4 mega-Newtons).

### Site Info 

Space Launch Complex 37 (SLC-37)

NROL-68 will launch from Space Launch Complex-37 (SLC-37) at Cape Canaveral Space Force Station, Florida. SLC-37 was built in 1962 for earlier programs and retrofitted in 1998 to launch Delta IV vehicles. The first Delta IV Heavy launch from SLC-37 was in December 2005. NROL-68 will be the sixth and penultimate Delta IV Heavy launch from Cape Canaveral.

Download the NROL-68 Press KitDownload the NROL-68 Press Release

## Ready to launch your career?

Join our talented and diverse workforce today.
Explore Job Opportunities
```

[Congressional Bills 115th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[H.R. 2258 Introduced in House (IH)]

<DOC>

115th CONGRESS
  1st Session
                                H. R. 2258

  To require that certain standards for commercial driver's licenses 
  applicable to former members of the armed services or reserves also 
      apply to current members of the armed services or reserves.

_______________________________________________________________________

                    IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

                              May 1, 2017

 Mr. Aguilar introduced the following bill; which was referred to the 
             Committee on Transportation and Infrastructure

_______________________________________________________________________

                                 A BILL

 
  To require that certain standards for commercial driver's licenses 
  applicable to former members of the armed services or reserves also 
      apply to current members of the armed services or reserves.

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

SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE.

    This Act may be cited as the ``Active Duty Voluntary Acquisition of 
Necessary Credentials for Employment Act'' or the ``ADVANCE Act''.

SEC. 2. COMMERCIAL DRIVER'S LICENSE STANDARDS FOR SERVICE MEMBERS AND 
              VETERANS.

    Section 31305(d) of title 49, United States Code, is amended--
            (1) in the subsection heading, by striking ``Veteran 
        Operators'' and inserting ``Service Members, Reservists, and 
        Veterans''; and
            (2) in paragraph (2)(B), by inserting ``current or'' before 
        ``former'' each place the term appears.
                                 <all>
```
<PAGE>


                                                                      EXHIBIT 21

                            SUBSIDIARIES OF THE REGISTRANT
                                           
                                           
                                           
1.  Claremont Technology Group Canada, Inc., a Quebec corporation
2.  Claremont Technology Group (U.K.) Limited, a corporation organized
    under the laws of the United Kingdom
3.  Gunford Limited (Claremont Technology (Ireland) Limited), a corporation
    organized under the laws of Ireland
4.  Claremont Retirement Technologies, Inc., an Ohio corporation
5.  Claremont Technology Group (Australia) PTY Limited, a corporation
    organized under the laws of Australia
6.  OpTex, Inc., an Ohio corporation
### Regulatory Evaluation

Docket No. FAA

- 

### 2015

- 0929 Directorate Identifier: 

### 2014

- NM

- 218

- AD

If you make changes to the values in the table below, you must ensure the totals update accordingly. If

they do not, click (or Tab) into a nd then out of the changed cell

.

Estimated Costs:

Action

(e.g., Inspection,

replacement)

Do not include on

condition costs here Costs per Product (e.g., aircraft, engine,

propeller, appliance)

Work

- hours

(include

access, testing,

and close

- up) Labor

c ost

(@$8 5 /h

our) Parts Cost Total Costs

(labor +

parts) Number of

U.S.

Registered

Products Total Cost

for U.S. Fleet



### Inspection and

Rectification 4 $ 340.00 $0 $ 340.00 

### 107 $ 36,380.00

$ 0.00 $ 0.00 $ 0.00

$ 0.00 $ 0.00 $ 0.00

$ 0.00 $ 0.00 $ 0.00

$ 0.00 $ 0.00 $ 0.00

$ 0.00 $ 0.00 $ 0.00

$ 0.00 $ 0.00 $ 0.00

$ 0.00 $ 0.00 $ 0.00

$ 0.00 $ 0.00 $ 0.00

$ 0.00 $ 0.00 $ 0.00

$ 0 .00 $ 0.00 $ 0.00

$ 0.00 $ 0.00 $ 0.00

$ 0.00 $ 0.00 $ 0.00

$ 0.00 $ 0.00 $ 0.00

$ 0.00 $ 0.00 $ 0.00

$ 0.00 $ 0.00 $ 0.00

$ 0.00 $ 0.00 $ 0.00

$ 0.00 $ 0.00 $ 0.00

$ 0.00 $ 0.00 $ 0.00

$ 0.00 $ 0.00 $ 0.00



### The known number of products in compliance:

Total Costs of compliance for U.S. fleet: $ 36,380



### Costs covered under warranty ( if known ) $

On

- Condition Costs:

Action

(e.g., Inspection,

replacement) Work

- hours

(include access,

testing, and close

up) Labor cost

(@ $85/hour) Parts Cost Cost per Product

$ 0.00 $ 0.00

$ 0.00 $ 0.00

$ 0.00 $ 0.00

$ 0.00 $ 0.00



### Special considerations for Economic Anal ysis ( Use this field to explain anything in the Estimated Costs table

that was assumed or might not be obvious. This field can also be used to explain warranty costs) 

### :

### Executive Order 12866:

Could the AD be considered a “significant r egulatory action”?

YES * NO

* Exp lanation:

DOT Regulatory Policies and Procedures:

Is the AD significant?

YES * NO

* Explanation:

Regulatory Flexibility Act:

Will the AD have a significant economic impact on a substantial number of small entities? E xplain for

either a Yes or No answer.

YES NO

Explanation:

Intrastate Aviation in Alaska:

This AD could affect intrastate aviation in Alaska. Is it appropriate to include specific requirements for

aircraft operated in Alaska where aviation might be the only mode of transportation?

YES * NO



### * Explanation 

### :
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<ARTICLE> 5
<CIK>                    0001004539
<NAME>                   AIRPLANES LIMITED
<MULTIPLIER>             1,000,000
       
<S>                                         <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                               3-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                           MAR-31-1998
<PERIOD-START>                              OCT-01-1997
<PERIOD-END>                                DEC-31-1997
<CASH>                                              324
<SECURITIES>                                          0
<RECEIVABLES>                                        24
<ALLOWANCES>                                         11
<INVENTORY>                                           0
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                                    341
<PP&E>                                            4,308
<DEPRECIATION>                                    1,177
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                    3,502
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                               228
<BONDS>                                           3,848
<COMMON>                                              0
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                 0
<PREFERRED>                                           0
<OTHER-SE>                                       (1,108)
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                      3,502
<SALES>                                              36
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                                    162
<CGS>                                                31
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                        72
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                      8
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                     (1)
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                                   96
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                     (44)
<INCOME-TAX>                                         (1)
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                                 (43)
<DISCONTINUED>                                        0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                       0
<CHANGES>                                             0
<NET-INCOME>                                        (43)
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                         0
<EPS-DILUTED>                                         0
        

</TABLE>
Exhibit 32



CERTIFICATION



Each of the undersigned hereby certifies, for the purposes of section 1350 of chapter 63 of title 18 of the United States Code, in his capacity as an
officer of SRI/Surgical Express, Inc. (SRI), that, to his knowledge, the Annual Report of SRI on Form 10-K for the year ended December 31, 2004, fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, and that
the information contained in this report fairly presents, in all material respects, the financial condition and results of operation of SRI.



|                      |  |     |  |                                                             
|--------------------- |  | --- |  | ------------------------------------------------------------
|Date:  March 25, 2005 |  | By: |  | /s/    CHRISTOPHER A.
CARLTON                               
|                      |  |     |  | Christopher A. Carlton Chief Executive Officer              
|                      | 
|                      |  |    
|Date:  March 25, 2005 |  | By: |  | /s/    GREGORY B.
REEVES                                    
|                      |  |     |  | Gregory B. Reeves * Vice President of Finance and Controller
|                      | 

---

|* | Mr. Reeves is acting as the Companys principal financial officer until the Company engages a new Chief Financial Officer to replace its former CFO, who resigned earlier
this year.
|- | ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
March 12, 2013



### JUDGMENT 

## The Fourteenth Court of Appeals

PATRICE MCBRIDE , Appellant

NO. 14

- 12

- 00277

- CV V.

ALBERT MCBRIDE , Appellee

________________________________

This cause, an appeal from the contempt order entered against appellee, Albert McBride , signed October 19, 2011, was heard on the transcript of the record. We have inspected the record and find no error in the order

. The order of the court below is AFFIRMED

. We order appellant, Patrice McBride , to pay all costs incurred in this appeal.

We further order this decision certified below for observance.
Exhibit
32.2





CERTIFICATION


REQUIRED
BY RULE 13a-14(b) or


RULE
15d-14(b) AND 18 U.S.C. SECTION 1350


(AS
ADOPTED BY SECTION 906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002)





I, Richard W. Lucas, as Chief Financial
Officer of KSW, Inc. (the “Company”), certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. §1350, as
adopted by Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002:





(1) the accompanying Quarterly Report
on Form 10-Q for the period ended June 30, 2009 as filed with the U.S.
Securities and Exchange Commission (the “Report”) on the date hereof fully
complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) or 15(d) of the Securities
Exchange Act of 1934, as amended; 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:  August
12, 2009





/s/
      Richard W. LucasRichard
      W. LucasChief Financial
    Officer
#### Kohl and another, Respondents, vs. Nitschke, Sheriff, Appellant.

For the appellant: *Bloodgood, Kemper & Passmore,*attorneys, and *Eric Wm. Passmore*of counsel, all of Milwaukee.

For the respondents: *Eugene A. Clifford*of Juneau.

*By the Court.*

Judgment affirmed.
#### Fluor Brothers Construction Company, Appellant, vs. Hogan, Respondent.

Appeal from a judgment of the county court of Wauke-sha county dated February 4, 1927: David W. Agnew, Judge.

Action for balance due on construction contract. Counterclaim for damages. Judgment in favor of defendant, from which plaintiff appeals.

For the appellant: *Fawsett & Shea,*attorneys, and *C. F.*Mikkelson, of counsel, all of Milwaukee.

For the respondent: *Allen D. Young*of Waukesha.

*By the Court.*—

Judgment affirmed.
*April 12, 1938.*

#### McFadden, Respondent, vs. Hudson, Appellant.

For the appellant: *Lee & Boesel*of Madison.

For the respondent: *George F. Lange*of Madison.

*By the Court.*—

Judgment affirmed.
#### Executors of Rainey *v.*Dunning.

From Cliatham.

in all cases of escape, after a debtor is committed to jail, the Sheriff is liable, however innocent he may be, unless the escape has been occasioned by the act of God, or the public enemies.

The Defendant was a Sheriff, and this was an action on the *case*to recover damages for the escape of one James Wilson, who was in the custody of the Defendant, at the suit of Plaintiff’s testator. Wilson was placed in the prison, and the evidence as to the escape was, that the door of the prison was cut quite across the latch or bolt, and that the prisoner escaped thereby.

The Court instructed the jury as to the fact of the escape, that Wilson being out of the custody of the Defen*387■dant, without having been legally discharged, was ¡prima *facie*evidence against the *Sheriff;*but that he was not liable unless the escape happened by his *actual neglect;*and without such neglect, they should find for the Defendant. There was a verdict for the Defendant, and an appeal to this Court, for misdirection in matter of law.

HaXiTi, Judge.

On the trial of this suit, it appeared to me a great hardship upon Sheriffs, to be made liable for escapes of persons from jails, when they had no authority in ordering the building of them, or in keeping them in order when built, and when it does not appear that they have acted in any respect, otherwise than correctly. Considering how rigid the law of England is against Sheriffs, I had supposed, that in all probability, it gave them a greater power than our Sheriffs possess of keeping the jails in good order. But in this, I was mistaken. They are built there, and kept in order as ours are here.; the Sheriff there accepts of the office at his peril, and in case of an escape, after the debtor is committed to jail, the Sheriff is liable, however innocent he may be, except the escape has been occasioned by the act of God or the King’s enemies — 4 *Co.*84, because the law supposes in all other cases, that the Sheriff and his posse, are sufficient — 1 *Str.*435, and although both the Plaintiff and Defendant may be innocent, yet the law and policy require that the loss should rather fall on Ihe Sheriff, than on the other *party—Cro.*Ja*c.*419. So it is with a common carrier, he is liable in all events, unless he come within the exceptions before given. Therefore, upon further reflection, considering the policy ef the law, and conferring with my brethren, l think I misdirected the jury on the trial below, and for that reason, that a new trial should bo granted.
TEXAS COURT OF APPEALS, THIRD DISTRICT, AT AUSTIN

NO. 03-18-00556-CV

K. J., Appellant

v.

Texas Department of Family and Protective Services, Appellee

FROM THE COUNTY COURT AT LAW NO. 4 OF WILLIAMSON COUNTY 

NO. 17-0102-CPSC1, THE HONORABLE JOHN MCMASTER, JUDGE PRESIDING

O R D E R

PER CURIAM

The reporter’s record in this appeal was originally due to be filed on September 4, 

2018. By request to this Court dated September 6, 2018, Thomas M. McMinn requested an 

extension of 10 days.

The Texas Rules of Appellate Procedure prohibit this Court from granting 

extensions of over 10 days for the filing of reporters’ records in accelerated appeals, including 

those from suits for termination of parental rights. See Tex. R. App. P. 35.3(c). Further, any 

extensions of time granted for the filing of the reporters’ records may not exceed 30 days 

cumulatively. See Tex. R. App. P. 28.4(b)(2). Accordingly, Thomas M. McMinn and Amber 

Kirton are hereby ordered to file the reporters’ record in this case on or before September 20, 
2018. If the record is not filed by that date, McMinn and Kirton may be required to show cause 

why they should not be held in contempt of court.

It is ordered on September 10, 2018.

Before Chief Justice Rose, Justices Pemberton and Field
UNPUBLISHED

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

No. 14-1364

BANORO GARRETT,

 Plaintiff – Appellant,

v.

LIEUTENANT R. H. WEILER; SERGEANT R. D. LEWIS; ROBERT J. 

MCCABE; LIEUTENANT BONILLA; M/DEPUTY A. MEARS; JANEL 

CUMMINGS,

 Defendants – Appellees,

and

THE NORFOLK POLICE DEPARTMENT; THE NORFOLK SHERIFF’S 

OFFICE; THE CITY OF NORFOLK; OFFICER D. A. PACIFICO; 

OFFICER H. G. WHITE; SERGEANT G. SNYDER; DEPUTY TAYLOR; L. 

WILLIS; P. BELL; J. KIDD; DARRELL HILL,

 Defendants.

Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern 

District of Virginia, at Norfolk. Raymond A. Jackson, District 

Judge. (2:12-cv-00295-RAJ-LRL)

Submitted: July 24, 2014 Decided: July 28, 2014

Before FLOYD and THACKER, Circuit Judges, and DAVIS, Senior 

Circuit Judge.

Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion.
2

Banoro Garrett, Appellant Pro Se. Melvin Wayne Ringer, CITY 

ATTORNEY’S OFFICE, Norfolk, Virginia; Lisa H. Leiner, HARMAN, 

CLAYTOR, CORRIGAN & WELLMAN, Richmond, Virginia; Ruth Griggs, 

Joel Mark McCray, SANDS ANDERSON, PC, Richmond, Virginia, for 

Appellees.

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.
3

PER CURIAM:

Banoro Garrett appeals the district court’s order 

denying relief on his 42 U.S.C. § 1983 (2012) complaint. We 

have reviewed the record and find no reversible error. 

Accordingly, we affirm for the reasons stated by the district 

court. Garrett v. Weiler, No. 2:12-cv-00295-RAJ-LRL (E.D. Va. 

filed Mar. 25 & entered Mar. 26, 2014). We dispense with oral 

argument because the facts and legal contentions are adequately 

presented in the materials before this court and argument would 

not aid the decisional process.

AFFIRMED
# Job Listings

National Reconnaissance Office
Launch your CareerDo Business With Us- Home
- About
- Careers
- Launches
- Work With Us
- News & Media
- Resources

- facebook
- twitter
- youtube
- instagram
- linkedin

Contact Us

National Reconnaissance Office

                                    - facebook
                                    - twitter
                                    - youtube
                                    - instagram
                                    - linkedin
Contact Us

Who We Are                                    - Mission Partners & Customers
                                    - Our Leadership
                                    - A Declassified History

Careers                                    - Working at the NRO
                                    - Career Fields
                                    - Job Listings
                                    - Student Opportunities

Launches                                    - Missions
                                    - Launch Vehicles

Do Business With Us                                    - How To Do Business With Us
                                    - Director's Innovation Initiative
                                    - Acquisition Research Center

News & Media                                    - Featured Stories
                                    - Press Releases
                                    - Podcasts
                                    - Speeches and Testimony

Resources                                    - NRO Multimedia
                                    - Request a Speaker
                                    National Reconnaissance Office - Above and Beyond