alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
Current as of December 2017

Learn more at www.nationalguard.mil

Point of Contact: NGB Public Affairs at (703) 601-6767

Highlights

• In its Strategic Imperatives

(2012), the Army National Guard 

Directorate emphasizes critical 

operational need to support 

ongoing unfettered military 

readiness and to enhance 

ARNG’s core strengths, character 

and culture. 

• Those principles are the heart of

ARNG sustainability. In January 

2011, the director of the Army 

National Guard issued the ARNG 

Sustainability Policy, which 

requires every ARNG member to 

embrace a sustainability 

philosophy

• In the fifth Strategic Imperative,

the director calls upon us to 

“sustain our strong and historical 

reputation of being good stewards 

of resources, good neighbors and 

trusted leaders within our 

communities.” 

• These ARNG Policy elements

are the organization’s response to 

Executive Order 13693, the DOD 

Strategic Sustainability 

Performance Plan and the Army 

Sustainability Campaign Plan 

execution targets.

Goals 

• Institionalize sustainability as

an organizing and

management principle

• Increase awareness,

cooperation and support for

sustainable practices

• Instill a sustainability ethic in

Soldiers and Civilians

• Implement sustainability

initiatives across the

organization

Protecting training areas, employing technology and 

improving quality of life

Mission: Empower the Army National Guard (ARNG) to maintain sustainable 

forces and capabilities to protect the nation through global and domestic 

operations. 

Leadership and integration: Through their visibility and influence, ARNG 

leaders can educate Soldiers and Civilians on what sustainability means to our 

organization. Leadership instills the connection between mission and 

sustainability, approves and delegates sustainable projects, sets goals related to 

sustainability and publicly recognizes ARNG sustainability champions.

Integrating a sustainability framework for decision-making into every aspect of 

ARNG doctrine, policy, training, operations and acquisition. Empowers individuals 

to connect our personal actions to our enduring military mission, organizational 

energy use, long-term impacts on the natural environment, the lasting vitality of our 

communities and the continued well-being of our Soldiers, their families, and civilians. Through an effective integration of the sustainability ethic, we can reinforce 

our role and reputation as good stewards, good neighbors and leaders in our 

communities.

Current sustainable initiatives:

• Small and large-scale energy savings and renewable energy projects

• Economically viable recycling and waste management projects

• Vehicle and generator fuel reduction measures

• Pollution prevention in vehicle maintenance

• Unique operational improvements and projects

• Community partnerships for conservation

• Sustainability education partnerships

Army National Guard Sustainability
**Exhibit
      32.1**




**CERTIFICATION
      PURSUANT TO**


**18
      U.S.C. SECTION 1350,**


**AS
      ADOPTED PURSUANT TO**


**SECTION
      906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002**





In
      connection with the amended Annual Report of City Loan, Inc. (the "Company")
      on
      Form 10-KSB/A for the period ended December 31, 2007 as filed with the
      Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the "Report"), I, William
      Atkinson, Chief Executive Officer of the Company, certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C.
      § 1350, as adopted pursuant to § 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that, to
      the best of my knowledge:





(1)
      The
      Report fully complies with the requirements of section 13(a) or 15(d) of the
      Securities Exchange Act of 1934; and





(2)
      The
      information contained in the Report fairly presents, in all material respects,
      the financial condition and results of operations of the Company.






/s/
      William Atkinson





Chief
      Executive Officer


August
      5,
      2008
Vaughn Boyd CARLEY, Appellant, v. STATE of Florida, Appellee.

Case No. 2D17-650

District Court of Appeal of Florida, Second District.

April 4, 2018

**DECISION WITHOUT PUBLISHED OPINION**

Affirmed.
IN RE: MEDICAL REVIEW PANEL PROCEEDINGS

In the Matter of Meagan Boudoin and Sherie Boodoin v. Ochsner Clinic Foundation, Olswale Sulaiman, M.D., Abbas El-Say Ed Abbas, M.D., Donald Gainer, M.D., Melissa Matte, M.D., and Christie DeGrange, M.D.

NO. 2018-C-0594

Supreme Court of Louisiana.

June 1, 2018

Denied.

JOHNSON, C.J., would grant.
<PAGE>

EXHIBIT 32

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

         I, Dennis R. Sheehan, the Chief Executive Officer of The BISYS Group,
Inc. (the "Company"), hereby certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, as
adopted pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that the Form
10-Q of the Company for the fiscal quarter ended December 31, 2003 (the "Form
10-Q"), which this certification accompanies, fully complies with the
requirements of Section 13(a) or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934
(15 U.S.C. 78m or 78o(d)) and information contained in the Form 10-Q fairly
presents, in all material respects, the financial condition and results of
operations of the Company.

Dated: January 28, 2004

                                                     /s/ Dennis R. Sheehan
                                                     ---------------------------
                                                      Dennis R. Sheehan

                                       26

<PAGE>

EXHIBIT 32

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

         I, James L. Fox, the Chief Financial Officer of The BISYS Group, Inc.
(the "Company"), hereby certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, as adopted
pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that the Form 10-Q of
the Company for the fiscal quarter ended December 31, 2003 (the "Form 10-Q"),
which this certification accompanies, fully complies with the requirements of
Section 13(a) or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 (15 U.S.C. 78m or
78o(d)) and information contained in the Form 10-Q fairly presents, in all
material respects, the financial condition and results of operations of the
Company.

Dated: January 28, 2004

                                                      /s/ James L. Fox
                                                      --------------------------
                                                      James L. Fox

                                       27
PROTOCOL SYSTEMS, INC.

                        AMENDMENT TO EXECUTIVE EMPLOYMENT AGREEMENT

PARTIES:    Protocol Systems, Inc. ("Company")
            8500 SW Creekside Place
            Beaverton, OR 97008

            Richard Roa ("Executive")
            7918 SW 189th Avenue
            Beaverton, OR 97007

DATE: March 1, 2000

                                        RECITALS:

     A.    The Company and the Executive have entered into an Executive
Employment Agreement dated as of July 13, 1998 (the "Employment Agreement").

     B.    The Company and the Executive now desire to modify certain
provisions of the Employment Agreement.

     NOW, THEREFORE, for valuable consideration the receipt and sufficiency of
which is hereby acknowledged, the parties agree as follows:

     1.    Capitalized terms used herein but not defined herein have their
defined meanings as set forth in the Employment Agreement.

     2.    Section 2.3 of the Employment Agreement is hereby amended and
restated in its entirety as follows:

     2.3 TERM. This Agreement shall remain in effect until the earlier of (i)
     termination pursuant to Article 4 or Article 6 of this Agreement or (ii)
     three (3) years from the date of this Agreement, provided however that if
     a Change of Control occurs within three (3) years from the date of this
     Agreement, then this Agreement shall remain in effect for two (2) years
     from the date of the first Change of Control event described in Section
     6.1.1.

     3.    Section 6.2.1 of the Employment Agreement is hereby amended and
restated in its entirety as follows:

     6.2.1 Change of Control Termination Payment.  In the event of a Change of
     Control Termination as defined in Section 6.1.2, without further action by
     the Board, the Company shall, within thirty (30) days of such termination,
     make a lump sum payment to the Executive, equal to one (1) years' Base
     Salary.

     4.    Section 6.5 of the Employment Agreement is hereby amended and
restated in its entirety as follows:

     6.5 Vesting of Stock Options. All unvested stock options held by
     Executive, if any, shall vest immediately upon a Change of Control
     Termination as defined in Section 6.1.2. Executive may exercise such
     options in accordance with the terms and conditions of the stock option
     plan and the agreement pursuant to which such options were granted.

     5.    Except as set forth and amended and restated herein, the Employment
Agreement shall remain unchanged and in full force and effect.

     IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the parties have caused this Amendment to Executive
Employment Agreement to be duly executed on the day and year first written
above.

EXECUTIVE                                 PROTOCOL SYSTEMS, INC.


_______________________________________   By:___________________________________
Richard Roa                               Title:________________________________
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<ARTICLE>                     9
<MULTIPLIER>                  1,000
<CURRENCY>                    U.S. Dollars
       
<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   3-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                         DEC-31-1998
<PERIOD-START>                            JAN-01-1998
<PERIOD-END>                              MAR-31-1998
<EXCHANGE-RATE>                                     1
<CASH>                                         50,164
<INT-BEARING-DEPOSITS>                              0
<FED-FUNDS-SOLD>                                    0
<TRADING-ASSETS>                                    0
<INVESTMENTS-HELD-FOR-SALE>                         0
<INVESTMENTS-CARRYING>                              0
<INVESTMENTS-MARKET>                                0
<LOANS>                                     8,667,889
<ALLOWANCE>                                   175,967
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                              9,032,049
<DEPOSITS>                                          0
<SHORT-TERM>                                        0
<LIABILITIES-OTHER>                           679,046
<LONG-TERM>                                 7,115,327
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                         111,550
<PREFERRED>                                         0
<COMMON>                                          585
<OTHER-SE>                                  1,125,541
<TOTAL-LIABILITIES-AND-EQUITY>              9,032,049
<INTEREST-LOAN>                               236,399
<INTEREST-INVEST>                                   0
<INTEREST-OTHER>                                    0
<INTEREST-TOTAL>                                    0
<INTEREST-DEPOSIT>                                  0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                            110,572
<INTEREST-INCOME-NET>                         108,657
<LOAN-LOSSES>                                   9,500
<SECURITIES-GAINS>                                  0
<EXPENSE-OTHER>                                56,958
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                65,578
<INCOME-PRE-EXTRAORDINARY>                          0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                     0
<CHANGES>                                           0
<NET-INCOME>                                   39,077
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                    0.70
<EPS-DILUTED>                                    0.66
<YIELD-ACTUAL>                                    5.4
<LOANS-NON>                                   195,267
<LOANS-PAST>                                        0
<LOANS-TROUBLED>                                    0
<LOANS-PROBLEM>                                     0
<ALLOWANCE-OPEN>                              177,088
<CHARGE-OFFS>                                  13,912
<RECOVERIES>                                      806
<ALLOWANCE-CLOSE>                             175,967
<ALLOWANCE-DOMESTIC>                                0
<ALLOWANCE-FOREIGN>                                 0
<ALLOWANCE-UNALLOCATED>                             0
        

</TABLE>
#### UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff-Appellee v. Sergio PEREZ, Defendant-Appellant

No. 16-10480 Summary Calendar

United States Court of Appeals, Fifth Circuit.

Date Filed: 11/18/2016

Sergio Perez, Pro Se

Before STEWART, Chief Judge, and CLEMENT and SOUTHWICK, Circuit Judges.

PER CURIAM: *

Sergio Perez, federal prisoner # 38176-177, pleaded guilty to conspiracy to possess with the intent to distribute five kilograms or more of cocaine and was sentenced to 235 months of imprisonment to be followed by a five-year term of supervised release. *United States v. Perez,*442 Fed.Appx. 952, 953 (5th Cir. 2011). Perez filed a motion under 18 U.S.C. § 3582(c)(2) for a modification of his sentence in light of Amendment 782 to the Sentencing Guidelines. The district court granted the motion and reduced Perez’s sentence to 188 months in prison. Perez moved under § 3582(c)(2) for another modification of his sentence, this time under Amendment 775 to the Sentencing Guidelines. The district *845court denied relief, determining that Perez was not qualified for a reduction.

Section 3582(c)(2) permits the discretionary modification of a defendant’s sentence “[i]n the case of a defendant who has been sentenced to a term of imprisonment based on a sentencing range that has subsequently been lowered by the Sentencing Commission pursuant to 28 U.S.C. [§ ] 994(o),” so long as the reduction is consistent with the applicable policy statements. § 3582(c)(2); *see United States v. Doublin,*572 F.3d 235, 237 (5th Cir. 2009). Section 3582(c)(2) applies only to retroactive guidelines amendments as set forth in U.S.S.G. § 1B1.10. *Dillon v. United States,*560 U.S. 817, 826, 130 S.Ct. 2683, 177 L.Ed.2d 271 (2010). We review de novo whether a district court has authority to reduce a sentence under § 3582(c)(2). *United States v. Jones,*596 F.3d 273, 276 (5th Cir. 2010).

Perez’s § 3582(c)(2) motion was based on Amendment 775 to the Sentencing Guidelines. Amendment 775 is not included in the list of amendments set forth in § 1B1.10(d). Accordingly, Perez was not eligible for relief under § 3582(c)(2) based on Amendment 775, and the district court did not err in denying his motion. *See Jones,*596 F.3d at 276.

AFFIRMED.

*

 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.
Corey A. MCDOWELL BEY, Appellant, v. Kevin JORDAN, Warden, Union C.I., Appellee.

No. 1D17-3016

District Court of Appeal of Florida, First District.

February 28, 2018

Corey A. McDowell Bey, pro se, Appellant.

Pamela Jo Bondi, Attorney General, and Jennifer J. Moore, Assistant Attorney General, Tallahassee; Kenneth S. Steely, General Counsel, Florida Department of Corrections, Tallahassee, for Appellee.

Per Curiam.

We dismiss this untimely appeal for lack of jurisdiction. *See**Agere Sys. Inc. v. All Am. Crating, Inc.* , 931 So.2d 244, 244 (Fla. 5th DCA 2006).

Roberts, Kelsey, and M.K. Thomas, JJ., concur.
LE SCAMPI CONDOMINIUM ASSOCIATION, INC., Appellant/Petitioner(s), v. CN INDIAN SHORES, LLC, Appellee/Respondent(s).

CASE NO.: 2D17-5108

District Court of Appeal of Florida, Second District.

January 25, 2018

BY ORDER OF THE COURT:

This appeal is dismissed because of the appellant's failure to satisfy this court's December 28, 2017, fee order.

NORTHCUTT, BLACK, and ROTHSTEIN-YOUAKIM, JJ., Concur.
NOT FOR PUBLICATION
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,

Plaintiff

- Appellee,

v. FRANK W. COON,

Defendant

- Appellant. No. 16

- 10517
D.C. No. 2:14

- cr - 00038

- GEB

MEMORANDUM *

Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern District of California Garland E. Burrell, Jr., District Judge, Presiding
Submitted March 13, 2018 **

Before: LEAVY , M. SMITH , and CHRISTEN, Circuit Judges.
Frank W. C oon appeals from the di strict court’s judgment and challenges the

210

- month sentence impose d following his jury

- trial conviction for receipt of child pornography , in violation of 18 U.S.C. § 2252(a)(2). We have jurisdiction under
28 U.S.C. § 1291. We affirm.

* This disposition is not appropriate for publication and is not precedent except as provided by Ninth Circuit Rule 36

- 3.

** The panel unanimously concludes this case is suitable for decision without oral argument. See Fed. R. App. P. 34(a)(2). 

# FILED

MAR 19 2018

M OLLY C. DWYER, CLERK U.S. COURT OF APPEAL S2 16

- 10517

Coon contends that his sentence is substantively unreasonable in light of the alleged disparity between his sentence and the sentences received by similarly
situated defendants . The district court did not abuse its discretion in imposing
Coon’s sentence. See Gall v. Unite d States , 552 U.S. 38, 51 (2007). The low

- end sentence is substantively reasonable in light of the 18 U.S.C. § 3553(a) sentencing factors and the totality of the circumstances. See Gall , 552 U.S. at 51. Moreover,
the district court necessarily considered the issue of unwarranted disparities by properly calculating and reviewing the Guidelines range

. See id. at 54 ( “ Since the District Judge correctly calculated and carefully reviewed the Guidelines range, he necessarily gave signific ant weight and consideration to the need to avoid unwarranted disparities .” ).
Coon’s contention that the manner in which the child pornography

g uidelines were amended violates the separation of powers doctrine is foreclosed

. See United States v. Kiefer , 760 F.3d 926, 929

- 30 (9th Cir. 2014) (rejecting argument that U.S.S.G. § 2G2.2 violates the separation of powers doctrine)

. AFFIRMED.
#### People v Donald Thomas,

No. 90962;

Court of Appeals No. 113708.
Peter Halilu OYIBO, Appellant, v. STATE of Florida, Appellee.

No. 4D17-1298

District Court of Appeal of Florida, Fourth District.

[April 26, 2018]

**DECISION WITHOUT PUBLISHED OPINION**

*Affirmed.*
The files submitted by Domtar in response to Question #3 are modeling files: ASHDOWN-Q3-000001 through ASHDOWN-Q3-000576. For copies of these files please contact Dayana Medina at 214-665-7241 or medina.dayana@epa.gov
or Michael Feldman at 214-665-9793 or feldman.michael@epa.gov

.
Ryan Jay CONNELL, Appellant, v. STATE of Florida, Appellee.

Case No. 2D17-2793

District Court of Appeal of Florida, Second District.

Opinion filed February 21, 2018.

PER CURIAM.

Affirmed.

KELLY, KHOUZAM, and CRENSHAW, JJ., Concur.
Adenike ADEBIYI, Appellant, v. DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH, BOARD OF NURSING, Appellee.

No. 4D17-3852

District Court of Appeal of Florida, Fourth District.

[June 13, 2018]

Adenike Adebiyi, Coral Gables, pro se.

Katelyn R. Boswell, Assistant General Counsel, Florida Department of Health, Tallahassee, for appellee.

Per Curiam.

We reverse the final order of the Board of Nursing suspending appellant's nursing license because the board issued the order pursuant to an informal hearing when a formal hearing was required. When it became apparent in the informal hearing that the appellant disputed the underlying facts of the proceeding, a formal hearing should have been convened. *See* § 120.57(1), Fla. Stat. (2017) ; *DeRosa v. State, Dep't of Fin. Servs.* , 175 So.3d 946 (Fla. 4th DCA 2015) ; *Campbell v. Dep't of Bus. & Prof'l Regulation* , *Div. of Real Estate* , 868 So.2d 1265, 1266 (Fla. 4th DCA 2004). Although appellee *336contends that appellant waived her right to a formal hearing, there is no written or oral waiver from appellant in the record-only emails from appellee's counsel assuming that appellant waived her right to a formal hearing. No election of an informal hearing is in the record, but there is a handwritten note from appellant stating that she wished to have a hearing to present her case; thus, this indicates appellant disputed the facts surrounding the Department's proposed suspension.

*Reversed and remanded for a formal hearing.*

Warner, Gross and Taylor, JJ., concur.
Exhibit 32.1 

 

**CERTIFICATION**

**PURSUANT TO 18 U.S.C.SECTION 1350,**

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

 

I, Thomas E. Mara, as Chief Executive Officer of The FINOVA Group Inc. (the“Company”) certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. ss. 1350, as adopted pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that to my knowledge: 

 

(1) the accompanying Form 10-Q report for the quarterly period ending September 30, 2005 as filed with the U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission (the“Report”) 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. 

 

Date: November 8, 2005
Exhibit
      32.1





**CERTIFICATION
      PURSUANT TO 18 U.S.C. SECTION 1350,**


**AS
      ADOPTED PURSUANT TO SECTION 906 OF**


**THE
      SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002**








In
      connection with the Annual Report on Form 10-KSB of Elephant Talk
      Communications, Inc. and its subsidiaries (the “Company"), for the period ended
      December 31, 2005 as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the
      date hereof (the "Report"), the undersigned, Russelle Choi, President &
Chief Executive Officer of the Company, and Manu Ohri, Chief Financial Officer
      of the Company, each hereby certifies, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350,
      that:





The
      Report fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) or 15(d) of the
      Securities Exchange Act of 1934; and





The
      information contained in the Report fairly presents, in all material respects,
      the financial condition and results of operations of the Company.




Dated May
                  19, 2006
              /s/
                  Russelle Choi-------------------------Russelle
                  ChoiPresident
                  & Chief Executive Officer





Dated
                  May 19, 2006
              /s/
                  Manu Ohri--------------------------Manu
                  OhriChief
                  Financial Officer