alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
# Vietnam opens new school and shelter built with Oregon National Guard

/ Published Oct. 23, 2015

HANOI, Vietnam - Brig. Gen. Michael E. Stencel, the adjutant general of Oregon, participated as the senior U.S. representative during an Oct. 21 ribbon cutting ceremony  for the grand opening of an intermediate school in Phu Tinh Village in the Quang Nam Province of Vietnam.

The school was built in cooperation between the U.S. and Vietnam and has a secondary-use as a shelter during natural disasters.

The U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, U.S. Pacific Command, and the U.S. Embassy in Vietnam collaborated in efforts to help make the new school project possible. 

The school's dual-use function as an emergency shelter has special significance to the Oregon National Guard as a State Partner with Vietnam's National Committee for Disaster, Incident Response, and Search and Rescue (VINASARCOM) through U.S. Pacific Command and Vietnam Bilateral Defense Dialog.

As state partners, the Oregon National Guard works closely with VINASARCOM to mutually bolster disaster response capabilities in Vietnam.

Since 2009, the U.S. Government, through the Overseas Humanitarian Disaster Assistance and Civic Action Program, has spent more than $16 million in constructing schools, clinics and bridges in many towns and villages throughout Vietnam. 

In the same period, the U.S. Agency for International Development has provided more than $8 million for disaster risk-reduction activities. This year, the United States has committed to spend $5 million to continue humanitarian assistance projects like this school in Vietnam.

The relationship between VINASARCOM and the Oregon National Guard as state partners and the lead military agencies for emergency management in their respective country and state was established in September 2011 with a memorandum of understanding to advance bilateral defense cooperation through U.S. Pacific Command (USPACOM) and Vietnam Bilateral Defense Dialogue (BDD).

The relationship recognizes that building and maintaining capabilities as emergency managers in times of Humanitarian Assistance and Disaster Relief (HADR) is for the benefit of all countries and promotes stability, prosperity and domestic resiliency in the entire region.

This year marks the 20th Anniversary of normalized diplomatic relations between Vietnam and The United States.
Exhibit 32

                                             CERTIFICATION PURSUANT TO
                                             18 U.S.C. SECTION 1350,
                                              AS ADOPTED PURSUANT BY
                                   SECTION 906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002


         In  connection   with  the  Quarterly   Report  of  Green  Clover  Luck
Corporation,  on Form 10-QSB for the period  ending  September 30, 2003 as filed
with the Securities and Exchange  Commission on the date hereof (the  "Report"),
the  undersigned,  Daniel L.  Hodges,  Chief  Executive  Officer  and  Principal
Accounting Officer of the Company,  certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350,
as adopted  pursuant to ss. 906 of the  Sarbanes-Oxley  Act of 2002, that to the
best of my knowledge and belief:

         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 result of  operations of the
Company.


Date: April 19, 2004

/s/ Daniel L. Hodges
Daniel L. Hodges
President
(Principal Executive & Accounting Officer)


A signed  original of this written  statement  required by Section 906, or other
document authenticating, acknowledging, or otherwise adopting the signature that
appears in typed form within the  electronic  version of this written  statement
has been  provided  to the  Company  and will be  retained  by the  Company  and
furnished to the Securities and Exchange Commission or its staff upon request.
```

                                                                    EXHIBIT 24.4

                                POWER OF ATTORNEY

          KNOWN ALL MEN BY THESE PRESENTS, that the undersigned hereby
constitutes and appoints each of Damien M. Sullivan, Bobby G. Jenkins and Barry
F. Schwartz or any of them, each acting alone, his true and lawful
attorney-in-fact and agent, with full power of substitution, for him and in his
name, place and stead, in any and all capacities, in connection with the
PANAVISION INC. (the "Corporation") Annual Report on Form 10-K for the year
ended December 31, 2004 under the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended,
including, without limiting the generality of the foregoing, to sign the Form
10-K in the name and on behalf of the Corporation or on behalf of the
undersigned as a director or officer of the Corporation, and any amendments to
the Form 10-K and any instrument, contract, document or other writing, of or in
connection with the Form 10-K or amendments thereto, and to file the same, with
all exhibits thereto, and other documents in connection therewith, including
this power of attorney, with the Securities and Exchange Commission and any
applicable securities exchange or securities self-regulatory body, granting unto
said attorneys-in-fact and agents, each acting alone, full power and authority
to do and perform each and every act and thing requisite and necessary to be
done in and about the premises, as fully to all intents and purposes as he might
or could do in person, hereby ratifying and confirming all that said
attorneys-in-fact and agents, each acting alone, or his substitute or
substitutes, may lawfully do or cause to be done by virtue hereof.

          IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the undersigned has signed these presents this
30th day of March, 2005.

                                        /S/ EDWARD GREBOW
                                        ----------------------------------------
                                        EDWARD GREBOW
```
*Pursuant to 5TH CIR. R. 47.5, the Court has determined that

this opinion should not be published and is not precedent except

under the limited circumstances set forth in 5TH CIR. R. 47.5.4.

IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT

_______________

m 02-20029

_______________

RUSSELL S. BUCSANYI,

Plaintiff-Appellant,

VERSUS

JO ANNE B. BARNHART,

Commissioner of Social Security,

Defendant-Appellee.

_________________________

Appeal from the United States District Court

for the Southern District of Texas

(H-01-CV-2406)

_________________________

December 4, 2002

Before SMITH, BARKSDALE, and EMILIO M. GARZA, Circuit Judges.

PER CURIAM:*

IT IS ORDERED that the “Commissioner’s Unopposed Motion To

Reverse and Remand for Further Administrative Proceedings” is
2

GRANTED. Specifically, the judgment of the district court is

VACATED, and this matter is REMANDED to the district court, which

is directed to enter final judgment remanding this matter to the

Commissioner of Social Security for further administrative proceedings, pursuant to the fourth sentence of 42 U.S.C. § 405(g).

This court appreciates the candor of the Commissioner’s attorney in acknowledging, albeit only a few days before oral argument,

that counsel “does not believe the [administrative law judge’s]

decision is defensible.”
H. R. 3593 

One Hundred Eleventh Congress 

of the 

United States of America 

AT THE FIRST SESSION 

Begun and held at the City of Washington on Tuesday, 

the sixth day of January, two thousand and nine 

An Act 

To amend the United States International Broadcasting Act of 1994 to extend 

by one year the operation of Radio Free Asia, and for other purposes. 

Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representatives of 

the United States of America in Congress assembled, 

SECTION 1. ONE YEAR EXTENSION OF OPERATION OF RADIO FREE 

ASIA. 

Section 309(f) of the United States International Broadcasting 

Act of 1994 (22 U.S.C. 6208(f)) is amended by striking ‘‘2009’’ 

and inserting ‘‘2010’’. 

Speaker of the House of Representatives. 

Vice President of the United States and

President of the Senate.
<TABLE> <S> <C>


<ARTICLE>                     5
<MULTIPLIER>                  1,000

<S>                                   <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                         9-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                     DEC-31-1999
<PERIOD-END>                          SEP-30-2000
<CASH>                                     81,762
<SECURITIES>                                    0
<RECEIVABLES>                              96,026
<ALLOWANCES>                                6,736
<INVENTORY>                                     0
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                          182,430
<PP&E>                                     11,826
<DEPRECIATION>                              2,339
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                            195,806
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                      46,504
<BONDS>                                         0
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                           0
<PREFERRED>                                     0
<COMMON>                                       41
<OTHER-SE>                                141,042
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>              195,806
<SALES>                                   203,649
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                          203,649
<CGS>                                     151,077
<TOTAL-COSTS>                             151,077
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                             (889)
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                          1,017
<INCOME-PRETAX>                             9,801
<INCOME-TAX>                                4,310
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                         2,045
<DISCONTINUED>                                  0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                 0
<CHANGES>                                       0
<NET-INCOME>                                2,045
<EPS-BASIC>                                0.06
<EPS-DILUTED>                                0.05




</TABLE>
3Jn tbe Wniteb $1ates <!Court of jfeberal <!Claitns 

No. 19-97C 

(Filed February 11, 2019) 

NOT FOR PUBLICATION 

* * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * 

* 

* 

GENE EDWARD SCOTT II, * 

* 

Plaintiff, * 

* 

v. * 

* 

THE UNITED STATES, * 

* 

Defendant. * 

* 

* * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * 

ORDER 

On February 7, 2019, the clerk's office received a document from plaintiff 

Gene Scott entitled "Plaintiff's Amended Supplement to the Plaintiff's Filed 

Complaint." Because our rules do not provide for the filing of such documents, and 

the court had already dismissed his complaint for lack of subject-matter 

jurisdiction, the document was not filed when received. Given Mr. Scott's prose 

status, this submission shall be treated as a motion for reconsideration under Rule 

59(a)(l) of the Rules of the United States Court of Federal Claims, and filed 

accordingly. 

Plaintiff's paper contends that our court has jurisdiction over his case under 

28 U.S.C. § 1505 (also known as the Indian Tucker Act), which provides the 

following: 

The United States Court of Federal Claims shall have jurisdiction of 

any claim against the United States accruing after August 13, 1946, in 

favor of any tribe, band, or other identifiable group of American 

Indians residing within the territorial limits of the United States or 

Alaska whenever such claim is one arising under the Constitution, 

laws or treaties of the United States, or Executive orders of the 

President, or is one which otherwise would be cognizable in the Court 

of Federal Claims if the claimant were not an Indian tribe, band or 

group. 
Plaintiff alleges that he is "part Cherokee Indian" and that his heritage provides 

our court with jurisdiction over his case. PL 's Mot. for Recons. at 3. 

Even if plaintiff is part Cherokee Indian, however, that fact would not 

establish jurisdiction since the statute he invokes concerns claims brought by a 

"tribe, band, or other identifiable group" of American Indians, but not by individuals 

within those groups. See 28 U.S.C. § 1505. Moreover, the Indian Tucker Act is a 

"companion statute" to the Tucker Act, and both statutes are interpreted as having 

the same "jurisdictional frame-works." Spengler v. United States, 688 F. App'x 917, 

921 n.2 (Fed. Cir. 2017) (citing United States v. White Mountain Apache Tribe, 537 

U.S. 465, 472 (2003)). In other words, for the Indian Tucker Act to grant 

jurisdiction over a matter, a party must also identify a substantive moneymandating right to damages against the United States. Id.; see also United States 

v. Mitchell, 445 U.S. 535, 538- 40 (1980). Plaintiff has still failed to identify any 

money-mandating law that allows him to invoke our jurisdiction. His motion for 

reconsideration is therefore DENIED. 

IT IS SO ORDERED. 

- 2 -
**Exhibit 32.2**

**CERTIFICATION OF CHIEF FINANCIALOFFICER OF TRAMMELL CROW COMPANYPURSUANT TO 18 U.S.C. § 1350**

In connection with the accompanying report on Form 10-Kfor the period ending December 31, 2005 and filed with the Securities andExchange Commission on the date hereof (the “Report”), I, Derek R.McClain, Chief Financial Officer of Trammell Crow Company (the “Company”),hereby certify that:

1.                The Report fullycomplies with the requirements of Section 13(a) or 15(d) of theSecurities Exchange Act of 1934; and

2.                Theinformation contained in the Report fairly presents, in all material respects,the financial condition and results of operations of the Company.
|        | /s/ DEREK R. MCCLAIN    |
|--------|-------------------------|
|   | Name: Derek R.  McClain |

 

Date: March 15, 2006

----
Exhibit 23.1


                         CONSENT OF INDEPENDENT AUDITORS

We consent to the incorporation by reference in the Registration Statement (Form
S-3 No. 333-57810, Form S-3 No. 333-79407, Form S-8 No. 33-99914, and Form S-8
No. 333-32646) of Westell Technologies, Inc. of our report dated May 21, 2002,
except for Notes 2 and 3, as to which the date is June 28, 2002, with respect to
the consolidated financial statements and schedules of Westell Technologies,
Inc. included in this Annual Report (Form 10-K) for the year ended March 31,
2002.





Chicago, Illinois
July 15, 2002
# 370th birthday painting captures Guard’s history since 9/11

/ Published Dec. 21, 2006

JEFFERSON CITY, Mo. - “It’s a gift to Soldiers in the Guard and their families,” said Springfield native John Fulton, creator and artist of a watercolor painting presented to the Missouri National Guard during a ceremony Dec. 13 at the Missouri Military Museum commemorating the National Guard’s 370th birthday.

The painting is titled “Our Legacy is Freedom.” It is currently on display at the museum.

“The painting is a series of small vignettes of Guard stories since 9/11,” Fulton added. “The collage technique tells the big picture – the heart and soul of the Guard and its history.”

Represented in the 26-inch by 41-inch watercolor are events from Iraq and Afghanistan, including an image of women voting indicated by the purple ink on their fingers, to Hurricane Katrina recovery efforts, shown by Soldiers providing fresh water and supplies to victims. Other significant events and support operations around the world are also portrayed. There are also 54 patches in the painting, representing the National Guard’s joint headquarters in the 50 states, Puerto Rico, the U.S. Virgin Islands, Guam and Washington, D.C.

“The scenes are interwoven which, to me, is really how the Guard functions. Everyone is trained specifically, but they work together to accomplish the mission. It just flows,” added Fulton.

Chaplain (Lt. Col.) Gary Gilmore, former Missouri National Guard state chaplain, is shown praying with a fellow Soldier in the painting.

Fulton said he and his wife Billie came up with the idea during a casual conversation with a Guardsman while flying to New Mexico. Fulton decided he could use his artistic abilities to help honor Guard members and their families.

“They deserve the recognition and to be thanked for their help in natural disasters and overseas. The sacrifices made by the families deserve to be recognized as well,” Fulton said.

Brig. Gen. Larry Kay, Missouri National Guard assistant adjutant general, offered many words of thanks to the Fultons during the unveiling ceremony.

“It’s a wonderful compilation of recent events. So many stories told. You can clearly see all the different actions and events of the Guard,” said Kay.

The Fultons worked on the painting for about 18 months. Fulton said he put in approximately 300 hours of actual painting. His wife was instrumental in gathering the information, he added.

“She was very involved. She gathered the information and images, got the stories and met with Lt. Col. Les’ Melnyk for details,” Fulton said. Melnyk is chief of Command Information at the National Guard Bureau.

“I want this to be a way for Americans to see what Guard members are doing and how they support and protect the nation,” said Fulton, “This isn’t about the artist. It’s about the Guard.”
# Fourth Court of Appeals

San Antonio, Texas

October 3, 2018

No. 04

- 18

- 00512

- CR

Ex Parte Steven ROBLES

, Appellant

From the 175th Judicial District Court, Bexar County, Texas

Trial Court No. 2015CR1302

- W1

Honorable Catherine Torres

- Stahl, Judge Presiding



### O R D E R

Appellant’s brief was due September 27, 2018. On that day, appellant filed an Application for Extension of Time to File Brief, requesting an extension of time until Saturday, November 24, 2018 to file his brief. After consideration, we GRANT appellant’s request for an
extension, and ORDER appellant to file his brief in this court on or before Nov ember 26, 2018

, which is a Monday. See T EX

. R. A PP

. P. 4.1(a).

_________________________________ Marialyn Barnard, Justice

IN WITNESS WHEREOF, I have hereunto set my hand and affixed the seal of the said

court on this 3rd day of October, 2018

.

___________________________________ K eith E. H ottle

Clerk of Court
Gross Per Unit

Heat Input Heat Input Power Output Output

Unit (MMBtu/hr) (MMBtu/hr) (MW) (lb/hr) (tons/hr) (lb/hr) (tons/hr) (lb/hr) (tons/hr) (lb/hr) (tons/hr) (lb/MWh)

(7FA.05) LHV HHV

100% Load, 59 F, 60% Relative Humidity (ISO), Natural Gas-Firing, CT Only

CT1 1,923 2,135 218 118.9 253,796 126.9 2.20E-04 0.5 0.0002 2.2E-03 4.7 0.0024 254,040 127

CT2 1,923 2,135 218 118.9 253,796 126.9 2.20E-04 0.5 0.0002 2.2E-03 4.7 0.0024 254,040 127

3,846 4,269 435.8 507,591 253.8 1 0.0005 9 0.005 508,081 254 1,166

Design Margin 5%

Performance 

Degradation Margin 3%

1,261

100 % Load, ISO, Oil-Firing, CT Only

CT1 2,117 2,265 223 162.3 367,640 183.8 1.32E-03 3.0 0.0015 6.6E-03 15.0 0.0075 368,883 184

CT2 2,117 2,265 223 162.3 367,640 183.8 1.32E-03 3.0 0.0015 6.6E-03 15.0 0.0075 368,883 184

4,234 4,530 445.3 735,281 367.6 6 0.0030 30 0.015 737,767 369 1,657

Design Margin 5%

Performance 

Degradation Margin 3%

1,792

Annual Operating Scenario No. 1

Annual Average Case Baseload, 59 F, 3390 Hours per Year of Natural Gas Firing and Zero Hours per Year of Oil Firing.

(Short TPY) (lb/MWh)

CT1 430,598 1,261

CT2 430,598 1,261

Total (2 CTs) 861,196

Annual Operating Scenario No. 2

Annual Average Case Baseload, 59 F, 2890 Hours per Year of Natural Gas Firing and 500 Hours per Year of Oil Firing.

(Short TPY) (lb/MWh)

CT1 459,309 1,339

CT2 459,309 1,339

Total (2 CTs) 918,618

Annual Operating Scenario No. 3

Annual Average Case Baseload, 59 F, 1640 Hours per Year of Natural Gas Firing and 750 Hours per Year of Oil Firing.

(Short TPY) (lb/MWh)

CT1 Total (1 CT) 346,644 1,434

CT Maximum Annual Emissions (Scenario No. 2) 918,618 Short TPY

Emergency Generator 398 Short TPY

Fuel Gas Heater 5,123 Short TPY

Total Annual CO2e Emissions (Incudes Startup and Shutdown Emissions)(e) 924,139 Short TPY

PSD Review Threshold 75,000 Short TPY

(a) Appendix G - Determination of CO2 Emissions, 40 CFR Part 75. Natural gas-firing CO2 lb/MMBtu = 1040 scf/MMBtu(HHV) x (1/385) scf CO2/lb-mole x 44 lb/lb-mole = 118.9 lb/MMBtu.

 Appendix G - Determination of CO2 Emissions, 40 CFR Part 75. Oil-firing CO2 lb/MMBtu = 1420 scf/MMBtu(HHV) x (1/385) scf CO2/lb-mole x 44 lb/lb-mole = 162.3 lb/MMBtu.

(b) Table C-2, Subpart C, 40 CFR Part 98. Emission factors in kg/MMBtu were converted to lb/MMBtu by multiplying by 2.204.

(c ) CO2e = CO2 + (21 x CH4) + (310 x N2O)

(d) Assumes 5% margin for design basis and 3% margin for degradation between major overhauls and the life of unit. 

(e) TPY CO2e conservatively based on 100 % utilization at maximum load at an annual average operating case based on ISO conditions, 100% load @ 59 deg. F, 60 % relative humidity. 

Source: Golder, 2012. Revised 4/1/13.

Adjusted lb/MWh for Margin(d)

CO2e Emissions (c)

Emission Emission Emission

Factor Emission Rate Factor Emission Rate Factor Emission Rate Emission Rate

(lb/MMBtu) (lb/MMBtu) (lb/MMBtu)

Adjusted lb/MWh for Margin(d)

TABLE 1. GHG Emissions for the Proposed Shady Hills Expansion Project Compared to PSD Review Threshod

CO2 Emissions (a) N2O Emissions (b) CH4 Emissions (b)
#### Nancy Boyd, *per. pro. am.*vs. John Boyd.

*When a wife applies to this court for alimony, her own conducl ■■ must not he impeachable with such violence or scevitia as might ■ provoke the husband to retaliate.*

The testimony which may be necessary to the understanding of this case is sufficiently referred to iii the decree of the piesiding chancellor.

Chancellor *James.*The complainant has placed her claim to alimony, upon two grounds-: 1st. violence committed on her person by the husband; 2nd. adultery on his part: in *the last*she has failed, having adduced only a few suspicious circumstances. The first ground depends principally upon the testimony offered by the first witness, her daughter. She did not gee the blow given, but only heard the quarrel, and saw the defendant have a piece of board in his hand, and saw a cut or' bruise on complainant’s head- — other witnesses saw *the same*cut. Defendant in his answer, denies that he struck her, and says that he pushed her and she fell into her chair, and her head struck the corner of a table, hut that she had struck him the day before and called him a liar at that time. The answer is not controverted, and it is plain from the whole evidence that complainant has been much to blame. The defendant is a poor waggoner it seems, of rude manners and given to intoxication, hut I do not think his conduct evinces so much *continued cruelty*as to entitle complainant to alimony. A decree for alimony, I find from experience, amounts commonly to a separation for life, and if allowed, it must come out of defendant’s daily labor, and the wife appears to be as able to work as the husband. It is true the defendant, besides the implements of his trade, has some land, hut that is of trifling value. Let complainant seek to make her peace with him, and let him he bound, if necessary, to keep the peace towards *her¿-*The bill must be dismissed; *each to*pay his and her own -costs.

*On appeal*

*chancellor James*

*delivered the opinion of the court.'*

The complainant brought her bill in the circuit court for alimony; which was refused, on the ground tfcat her own conduct was impeachable, and that the violence offered by the husband *145had been provoked by her, and had not been proved as grejU as was alledged. And now it becomes necessary to lay down as a general rule, that in all cases where a wife applies for alimony in this court, her own conduct must not be impeachable with such violence or *scevitia*as might provoke the husband to retaliate. The present case will afford an instance to elucidate the rule; the day before the violence alledged against the husband was offered, the wife had struck hi a, and at the time it was offered she called him a *liar.*These are considered sufficient reasons for refusing the complainant alimony. Therefore the decree of the circuit court is affirmed.

*Gaillard, Desaussure*and *Thompson,*concurred.