alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
II

103D CONGRESS

2D SESSION S. 1905

To improve the processing of benefits claims by the Department of Veterans

Affairs.

IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES

MARCH 8 (legislative day, FEBRUARY 22), 1994

Mr. ROCKEFELLER (for himself, Mr. DECONCINI, Mr. GRAHAM, Mr. AKAKA,

Mr. DASCHLE, and Mr. CAMPBELL) introduced the following bill; which

was read twice and referred to the Committee on Veterans’ Affairs

A BILL

To improve the processing of benefits claims by the

Department of Veterans Affairs.

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

3 SECTION 1. ELIMINATION OF REQUIREMENT FOR ANNUAL

4 INCOME QUESTIONNAIRES.

5 Section 1506 of title 38, United States Code, is

6 amended—

7 (1) in paragraph (2), by striking out ‘‘shall’’

8 and inserting in lieu thereof ‘‘may’’; and
2

•S 1905 IS

1 (2) in paragraph (3), by striking out ‘‘file a re2 vised report’’ and inserting in lieu thereof ‘‘notify

3 the Secretary’’.

4 SEC. 2. STATEMENTS TO BE ACCEPTED AS PROOF OF RELA5 TIONSHIPS.

6 Notwithstanding any other provision of law, the Sec7 retary of Veterans Affairs shall accept the written state8 ment of a claimant as proof of the existence of a marriage,

9 the dissolution of a marriage, the birth of a child, or the

10 death of any family member for the purpose of acting on

11 such individual’s claim for benefits under any law adminis12 tered by the Secretary. The Secretary may require the

13 submission of documentation in support of such statement

14 if the statement on its face raises a question as to its

15 validity.

16 SEC. 3. ACCEPTANCE OF PRIVATE PHYSICIAN EXAMINA17 TIONS.

18 Notwithstanding any other provision of law, for pur19 poses of establishing a claim for disability compensation

20 under chapter 11 of title 38, United States Code, or a

21 claim for pension under chapter 15 of such title, a medical

22 examination report of a private physician provided by a

23 claimant in support of a claim for benefits shall be accept24 ed without confirmation by an examination by a physician

25 employed by the Veterans Health Administration if such
3

•S 1905 IS

1 report contains sufficient clinical data to support the diag2 nosis of a disability or to provide a reliable basis for an

3 evaluation of the degree of any such disability.

4 SEC. 4. TRANSFER OF MILITARY SERVICE MEDICAL

5 RECORDS.

6 Not later than 90 days after the date of the enact7 ment of this Act, the Secretary of Veterans Affairs shall

8 submit to the Committees on Veterans’ Affairs of the Sen9 ate and House of Representatives a report setting forth

10 the status of an agreement between the Secretary and the

11 Secretary of Defense to provide for the immediate transfer

12 from the Department of Defense to the Department of

13 Veterans Affairs of the medical records of members of the

14 Armed Forces upon the separation of such members from

15 active duty.

Æ
#### The People of the State of New York, Respondent, v Cecilio Lopez, Appellant.

[52 NYS3d 902]

Appeal by the defendant from a judgment of the Supreme Court, Kings County (Mangano, Jr., J.), rendered June 27, 2013, convicting him of manslaughter in the first degree, upon a jury verdict, and imposing sentence. The appeal brings up for review the denial, after a hearing, of that branch of the defendant’s omnibus motion which was to suppress his statement to law enforcement officials.

Ordered that the judgment is affirmed.

The Supreme Court properly denied suppression of the defendant’s statement to law enforcement officials. “ ‘The credibility determinations of the Supreme Court, which saw and heard the witnesses at the suppression hearing, are entitled to great weight on appeal, and will not be disturbed unless they are unsupported by the record’ ” *(People v Reaves,*112 AD3d 746, 747 [2013], quoting *People v Timmons,*54 AD3d 883, 885 [2008]). Based on the evidence presented at the hearing, the defendant’s statement, made after his arrest but before administration of *Miranda*warnings *(see Miranda v Arizona,*384 US 436 [1966]), was not triggered by any police questioning or other conduct which reasonably could have been expected to elicit a declaration from him (see *People v Rivers,*56 NY2d 476, 480 [1982]; *People v Tavares-Nunez,*87 AD3d 1171 [2011]; *People v Dunn,*195 AD2d 240 [1994], *affd*85 NY2d 956 [1995]).

Viewing the evidence in the light most favorable to the prosecution (see *People v Contes,*60 NY2d 620 [1983]), we find that it was legally sufficient to establish the defendant’s guilt beyond a reasonable doubt (see *People v Danielson,*9 NY3d 342, 349 [2007]). Moreover, in fulfilling our responsibility to conduct an independent review of the weight of the evidence (see CPL *1267470.15 [5]; *People v Danielson,*9 NY3d 342 [2007]), we nevertheless accord great deference to the jury’s opportunity to view the witnesses, hear the testimony, and observe demeanor *(see People v Mateo,*2 NY3d 383, 410 [2004]; *People v Bleakley,*69 NY2d 490, 495 [1987]). Upon reviewing the record here, we are satisfied that the verdict of guilt was not against the weight of the evidence.

The defendant challenges certain comments made by the prosecutor during summation. Most of the challenged remarks were fair comment on the evidence, responsive to defense counsel’s summation, or permissible rhetorical comment *(see People v Ashwal,*39 NY2d 105, 109-110 [1976]; *People v Hatcher,*130 AD3d 648, 649 [2015]). To the extent that some of the remarks were improper, they were not so flagrant or pervasive as to deprive the defendant of a fair trial *(see People v Almonte,*23 AD3d 392, 394 [2005]; *People v Crimmins,*36 NY2d 230, 237 [1975]).

Chambers, J.P., Roman, Miller and Connolly, JJ., concur.
No. 12-8800.

#### Johnson *v.*United States.

C. A. 8th Cir. Certiorari denied.
# 2020 Ohio State University Spring Career Fair

/ Published Jan. 30, 2020
COLUMBUS, Ohio, 
Defense Logistics Agency Land and Maritime participated in the Ohio State University Spring Career and Internship Fair Jan. 21.

Students were interested in internships, recent graduate programs, the Pathways to Career Excellence program, DLA locations, mission, training opportunities, tuition assistance and the organizational culture. Recruiters shared the good news about the careers DLA has to offer, as well as the great benefits, flexible work schedule, fitness time and retirement plan.

Ninety students visited the DLA booth from 11:30 to 2:30. The students’ college majors included public policy, security/intelligence, political science, engineering, environmental, statistics, mathematics, international relations, earth sciences, geographical information systems, data analytics, economics, computer science and logistics.

Additional employers, including the U.S. Navy and OSU faculty members, stopped by the DLA table for information on job opportunities and mission details.
# Troop Support Commander visits local Hardware vendor to gain insight, strengthen partnership 

/ Published Feb. 7, 2020
PHILADELPHIA, 
The Defense Logistics Agency Troop Support Commander Army Brig. Gen. Gavin Lawrence joined Industrial Hardware supply chain leaders on a visit to SPS Technologies Feb. 5 in Jenkintown, Pennsylvania, to strengthen partnerships and gain insight into IH’s industrial base.

Lawrence, alongside IH Director Air Force Col. Adrian Crowley and members of his team, toured SPS Technologies, a trusted industry partner, Crowley said. The group toured the 64,000 square foot facility that designs, manufactures and tests hardware items the company has under contract with Troop Support, other federal agencies and commercial customers.

“It was a great tour,” Lawrence said. “I have a much greater appreciation for the technology, know-how and hard work that goes into what you do [at SPS], as well as an appreciation for the pride I noticed [SPS] employees have in what they do.”

Joseph DiGiacomo, Sales Manager for SPS’ Jenkintown facility, cited that the 117-year-old company has a long history of support to the Warfighter dating back to World War II, and its staff knows the importance of what they do.

“Every single part we make here holds something important together – it has to perform,” DiGiacomo said.

During the tour, Lawrence and DiGiacomo shared their mutual appreciation for the joint willingness to make time for engagements such as this to improve the understanding of each other’s roles in the government logistics and acquisitions process.

“We appreciate your partnership as we support our Warfighters,” Lawrence said.
160 A.3d 703

#### JADE APPAREL, INC., A NEW JERSEY CORPORATION, AND AMERICOAT LIMITED CORP., A NEW JERSEY CORPORATION, PLAINTIFFS-PETITIONERS, v. UNITED ASSURANCE, INC., A NEW JERSEY CORPORATION, DEFENDANT, AND JOSEPH MARINO, INDIVIDUALLY, DEFENDANT, AND CONTINENTAL INDEMNITY COMPANY, AN IOWA CORPORATION, APPLIED UNDERWRITERS, INC., A NEBRASKA CORPORATION, AND APPLIED UNDERWRITERS CAPTIVE RISK ASSURANCE COMPANY, INC. A BRITISH VIRGIN ISLANDS CORPORATION, DEFENDANTS-RESPONDENTS.

February 13, 2017

ON PETITION FOR CERTIFICATION

To the Appellate Division, Superior Court:

*152A petition for certification of the judgment in [ A-XXXXXX-XX ] having been submitted to this Court, and the Court having considered the same;

It is ORDERED that the petition for certification is denied, with costs.
# L_2011281EN.01002701.xml

| 28.10.2011 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | L 281/27 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

28.10.2011

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

L 281/27

---

COUNCIL DECISION 2011/705/CFSP

of 27 October 2011

repealing Decision 2010/145/CFSP renewing measures in support of the effective implementation of the mandate of the International Criminal Tribunal for the former Yugoslavia (ICTY)

THE COUNCIL OF THE EUROPEAN UNION,

Having regard to the Treaty on European Union, and in particular Article 29 thereof,

Whereas:

| (1) | On 8 March 2010, the Council adopted Decision 2010/145/CFSP (1) renewing measures in support of the effective implementation of the mandate of the International Criminal Tribunal for the former Yugoslavia (ICTY). That Decision expires on 16 March 2012. |
| --- | --- |

(1)

On 8 March 2010, the Council adopted Decision 2010/145/CFSP (1) renewing measures in support of the effective implementation of the mandate of the International Criminal Tribunal for the former Yugoslavia (ICTY). That Decision expires on 16 March 2012.

| (2) | The aim of Decision 2010/145/CFSP is to prevent the entry into, or the transit through the territories of the Member States by persons who are engaged in activities which help persons at large to continue to evade justice for crimes for which the ICTY has indicted them or are otherwise acting in a manner which could obstruct the ICTY’s effective implementation of its mandate. |
| --- | --- |

(2)

The aim of Decision 2010/145/CFSP is to prevent the entry into, or the transit through the territories of the Member States by persons who are engaged in activities which help persons at large to continue to evade justice for crimes for which the ICTY has indicted them or are otherwise acting in a manner which could obstruct the ICTY’s effective implementation of its mandate.

| (3) | On 22 July 2011, Goran HADZIC was transferred into the custody of the ICTY. He was the last ICTY indictee still at large. |
| --- | --- |

(3)

On 22 July 2011, Goran HADZIC was transferred into the custody of the ICTY. He was the last ICTY indictee still at large.

| (4) | Decision 2010/145/CFSP should therefore be repealed, |
| --- | --- |

(4)

Decision 2010/145/CFSP should therefore be repealed,

HAS ADOPTED THIS DECISION:

Article 1

Decision 2010/145/CFSP is hereby repealed.

Article 2

This Decision shall enter into force on the date of its adoption.

Done at Luxembourg, 27 October 2011.

For the Council

The President

J. MILLER

---

(1)  
  OJ L 58, 9.3.2010, p. 8.

1

---
#### Broadway Bretton, Inc., Matter of, v New York State Div. of Hous. & Community Renewal

1st Dept: 146 AD3d 406

denied
159 A.3d 884

#### STATE OF NEW JERSEY, PLAINTIFF-RESPONDENT, v. BOYCE SINGLETON, DEFENDANT-PETITIONER.

February 1, 2017

ON PETITION FOR CERTIFICATION

To the Appellate Division, Superior Court:

A petition for certification of the judgment in [ A-XXXXXX-XX ] having been submitted to this Court, and the Court having considered the same;

It is ORDERED that the petition for certification is denied.
#### Com. v. Crise10

04/06/2016

485 WAL (2015)

10

. Justice WECHT did not participate in the consideration or decision of this matter.

Denied

Pa.Super., 134 A.3d 490
UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT
No. 96-6697
PATRICIA ANN FOWLER, Petitioner - Appellant, versus PARKER EVATT; ATTORNEY GENERAL OF THE STATE OF SOUTH CAROLINA, Respondents - Appellees.
Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of South Carolina, at Col umbia. C. Weston Houck, Chief District Judge. (CA-94-2807-3-2BC) Submitted: January 9, 1997 Decided: January 21, 1997 Before HALL and MICHAEL, Circuit Judges, and PHILLIPS, Senior Circuit Judge. Dismissed by unpublished per curiam opinion. Patricia Ann Fowler, Appellant Pro Se. Donald John Zelenka, Chief Deputy Attorney General, Charles Molony Condon, OFFICE OF THE ATTORNEY GENERAL OF SOUTH CAROLINA, Columbia, South Carolina, for Appellees. Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. See Local Rule 36(c).2 PER CURIAM: Appellant seeks to appeal the district court's order denying relief on her petition filed under 28 U.S.C. § 2254 (1994), amended by Antiterrorism and Effective Death Penalty Act of 1996, Pub. L. No. 104-132, 110 Stat. 1214. We have reviewed the record and thedistrict court's opinion accepting the recommendation of the magistrate judge and find no reversible error. Accordingly, we deny acertificate of appealability and dismiss the appeal on the reasoning of the district court. Fowler v. Evatt , No. CA-94-2807-3-2BC (D.S.C. Apr. 3, 1996). We dispense with oral argument because thefacts and legal contentions are adequately presented in the materials before the court and argument would not aid the decisional process.

DISMISSED
<PAGE>


                                  Exhibit 32.2


     CERTIFICATION PURSUANT TO SECTION 906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002
     -----------------------------------------------------------------------

         I, Kenneth L. Hignett, Senior Vice President, Chief Financial Officer
and Secretary of Morgan's Foods, Inc. (the "Company"), hereby certify, pursuant
to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that:

         (3) The Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q of the Company for the period
             ended August 17, 2003 (the "Report"), which this certification
             accompanies, fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a)
             of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934; and

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




                              /s/ Kenneth L. Hignett
                              --------------------------------------------------
                              Kenneth L. Hignett, Senior Vice President,
                              Chief Financial Officer and Secretary
October 1, 2003



                                       18
Exhibit 15.15




CONSENT




We hereby consent to the reference to our “Valuation of options granted by Elbit Imaging Ltd. during the year ended December 31, 2011, under the Elbit Medical Option Plan and re-pricing valuation for the year ended December 31, 2012", appearing in this Annual Report on Form 20-F of Elbit Imaging Ltd. and to the incorporation by reference of this Annual Report in the Registration Statement on Form F-3 (Registration No. 333-172122) and in the Registration Statements on Form S-8 (Registration No. 333-117509, No. 333-130852, No. 333-136684 and No. 333-152820) filed by Elbit Imaging Ltd.




This consent is not to be construed as an admission that we are an expert or that we are a person whose consent is required to be filed under the provisions of the Securities Act of 1933, as amended.




/s/ Giza Zinger Even Ltd


Giza Zinger Even





Tel Aviv, Israel


November 26, 2013
# L_2011345DE.01003501.xml

| 29.12.2011 | DE | Amtsblatt der Europäischen Union | L 345/35 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

29.12.2011

DE

Amtsblatt der Europäischen Union

L 345/35

---

Berichtigung des Durchführungsbeschlusses 2011/630/EU der Kommission vom 20. September 2011 über die Einfuhr von Rindersperma in die Europäische Union

(
  Amtsblatt der Europäischen Union L 247 vom 24. September 2011
  )

Amtsblatt der Europäischen Union L 247 vom 24. September 2011

Seite 43, Abschnitt C, erste Zeile der Überschrift:

anstatt:

„Ausfuhr“

muss es heißen:

„Einfuhr“.

---
Granite Construction Company 1900 Glendale Avenue Sparks, NV 89431 January 14, 2016 U.S. Department ofTransportation Docket Management System 1200 NewJersey Ave., SE Washington, DC 20590 Re: Amendment to Exemption 12541 issued pursuantto Section 333 ofthe FAA Reform Act and Part II ofthe Federal Aviation Regulations inRegulatory DocketNo. FAA-2015-1644. DearMadam, Sir, Granite Construction Company currently holds an Exemption numbered 12541 (hereinafter the Exemption) issued for the purpose of performing aerial imaging and data collection. Granite Construction Company herby requests an amendment to that Exemption to include additional small unmanned aircraft systems (sUAS) that fully complies with the conditions ofthe Exemption to support clientrequests (public interest). The requested system (to be used under the same terms and conditions contained in the original Exemption) to be added to our existing Exemption is citedbelow.

• senseFly

- eBee The eBee system has been previously approved for numerous entities through the 333 exemption process and manuals are on file. Granite Construction Company states that no conditions or limitation from our original requesthave changed and all operations ofthe additional UAS will be in full compliance with the terms and condition ofthe Exemption. Please contact Sergio Callegari, Construction Technologies Engineer, 775-352-5417, Sergio.callegari@gcinc.com should you have any questions concerning this request for an amendment to the Exemption. 

# 4~

Sergio Callegari ConstructionTechnologies Engineer
[Federal Register Volume 63, Number 105 (Tuesday, June 2, 1998)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Page 29958]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 98-14600]



[[Page 29958]]

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

FEDERAL COMMUNICATIONS COMMISSION

47 CFR Part 1

[WT Docket No. 97-82, ET Docket No. 94-32; FCC 97-413]


Competitive Bidding Proceeding

AGENCY: Federal Communications Commission.

ACTION: Final rule; correction.

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

SUMMARY: This document corrects a portion of the Commission's 
competitive bidding rules for auctions that were published in the 
Federal Register of January 15, 1998 (63 FR 2315).

EFFECTIVE DATE: June 2, 1998.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Mark Becker, Auctions and Industry 
Analysis Division, Wireless Telecommunications Bureau, at (202) 418-
7532.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The Federal Communications Commission 
published a document adopting uniform competitive bidding rules for all 
future auctions in the Federal Register of January 15, 1998 (63 FR 
2315). This document makes a minor correction to the final rules 
adopted in the Third Report and Order, Amendment of Part 1 of the 
Commission's Rules--Competitive Bidding Procedures, Allocation of 
Spectrum Below 5 GHz Transferred from Federal Government Use, 4660-4685 
MHZ, as it appeard in the Federal Register of January 15, 1998.
    1. On page 2341, in the third column, Sec. 1.2105 is corrected to 
add paragraph (a)(2)(x) before ``Note to paragraph (a)'' to read as 
follows:


Sec. 1.2105  Bidding application and certification procedures; 
prohibition of collusion.

    (a) * * *
    (2) * * *
    (x) Certification that the applicant is not in default on any 
Commission licenses and that it is not delinquent on any non-tax debt 
owed to any Federal agency.
* * * * *
Federal Communications Commission.
Amy J. Zoslov,
Chief, Auctions and Industry Analysis Division, Wireless 
Telecommunications Bureau.
[FR Doc. 98-14600 Filed 6-1-98; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6712-01-P
II

103D CONGRESS

2D SESSION S. 2015

To provide for daylight saving time on an expanded basis, and for other

purposes.

IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES

APRIL 13 (legislative day, April 11), 1994

Mr. SIMPSON introduced the following bill; which was read twice and referred

to the Committee on Commerce, Science, and Transportation

A BILL

To provide for daylight saving time on an expanded basis,

and for other purposes.

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 ‘‘Daylight Saving Time

5 Extension Act of 1994’’.

6 SEC. 2. DAYLIGHT SAVING EXTENDED TO START IN MARCH

7 AND END IN NOVEMBER.

8 Section 3(a) of the Uniform Time Act of 1966 (15

9 U.S.C. 260a(a)) is amended—
2

•S 2015 IS

1 (1) by striking out ‘‘first Sunday of April’’ and

2 inserting in lieu thereof ‘‘third Sunday of March’’;

3 and

4 (2) by striking out ‘‘last Sunday of October’’

5 and inserting in lieu thereof ‘‘first Sunday of

6 November’’.

7 SEC. 3. EFFECT ON EXISTING STATE ELECTIONS.

8 Any law in effect on the date of the enactment of

9 this Act—

10 (1) adopted pursuant to section 3(a)(2) of the

11 Uniform Time Act of 1966 by a State with parts

12 thereof in more than one time zone, or

13 (2) adopted pursuant to section 3(a)(1) of such

14 Act by a State that lies entirely within one time

15 zone,

16 shall be held and considered to remain in effect as the

17 exercise by that State of the exemption permitted by such

18 Act unless that State, by law, provides that such exemp19 tion shall not apply.

20 SEC. 4. ADJUSTMENT OF OPERATING HOURS OF DAYTIME

21 BROADCASTERS.

22 (a) Notwithstanding any other law or any regulation

23 issued under any such law, the Federal Communications

24 Commission shall, consistent with any existing treaty or

25 other agreement, make such adjustment by general rules,
3

•S 2015 IS

1 or by interim action pending such general rules, with re2 spect to hours of operation of daytime standard amplitude

3 modulation broadcast stations, as may be consistent with

4 the public interest, including the public’s interest in receiv5 ing interference-free service.

6 (b) Such general rules, or interim action, may include

7 variances with respect to operating power and other tech8 nical operating characteristics.

9 (c) At any time subsequent to the adoption of such

10 general rules, such general rules may be varied with re11 spect to particular stations and areas because of the ex12 igencies in each case.

13 SEC. 5. EFFECTIVE DATE.

14 This Act shall take effect 60 days after the date of

15 the enactment of this Act, except that if such effective

16 date occurs in any calendar year after March 1, this Act

17 shall take effect on the first day of the following year.

Æ